Changes

==Cost Summary Tables==

==Cost Summary Tables==

Total life cycle cost estimates for the three [[Bioretention]] configurations vary substantially with the [[Bioretention: Partial infiltration| Partial Infiltration]] design being highest ($113,800.83), followed closely by [[Stormwater planter| No Infiltration]] design ($109,113.76), and [[Bioretention: Full infiltration| Full Infiltration]] design being the lowest ($80,392.33).<br>

Total life cycle cost estimates for the three [[Bioretention]] configurations vary substantially with the [[Bioretention: Partial infiltration| Partial Infiltration]] design being highest ($184,691.47), followed closely by [[Stormwater planter| No Infiltration]] design ($177,978.85), and [[Bioretention: Full infiltration| Full Infiltration]] design being the lowest ($149,422.69).<br>

It is notable that a sensitivity analysis was conducted in 2019 to compare construction cost estimates generated by the tool to actual costs of implemented projects. '''The analysis found that tool estimates were typically within ±14% of actual construction costs'''<ref>Credit Vally Conservation (CVC). 2019. Life-cycle costing tool 2019 update: sensitivity analysis. Credit Valley Conservation, Mississauga, Ontario. https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2020/04/LCCT-Sensitivity-Analysis_March2020.pdf</ref>

It is notable that a sensitivity analysis was conducted in 2019 to compare construction cost estimates generated by the tool to actual costs of implemented projects. '''The analysis found that tool estimates were typically within ±14% of actual construction costs'''<ref>Credit Vally Conservation (CVC). 2019. Life-cycle costing tool 2019 update: sensitivity analysis. Credit Valley Conservation, Mississauga, Ontario. https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2020/04/LCCT-Sensitivity-Analysis_March2020.pdf</ref>