Laserfiche WebLink
CHAPTER 4: ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION CRITERIA <br />Figure 4-1 Tier 1 Evaluation Summary by Alternative -Weighted Score <br />80.0 <br />70.0 <br />60.0 <br />50.0 <br />40.0 <br />30.0 <br />20.0 <br />10.0 <br />0.0 <br />■ Relative Cost of Alternatives <br />• Equity/Inclusion <br />s Resiliency <br />E Environmental <br />■ Freight Mobility <br />r Safety <br />■Transportation Demand <br />■ Transportation Demand <br />Alt 1 <br />Alt 2 <br />3.3 <br />3.3 <br />6.7 <br />8.3 <br />9A <br />9.4 <br />&0 <br />9.0 <br />6.7 <br />6.7 <br />21.0 <br />2L0 <br />8.6 <br />8.6 <br />•Safety 8 Freight Mobility <br />Aft 3 <br />3.3 <br />$.3 <br />9.4 <br />9.0 <br />6.7 <br />24.0 <br />8.6 <br />f Environmental <br />AIt4A <br />Alt48 <br />0A <br />0.0 <br />5.0 <br />6.7 <br />1.9 <br />1.9 <br />1.5 <br />1.5 <br />1.7 <br />1.7 <br />18.0 <br />18.0 <br />4.3 <br />4.3 <br />Resiliency ■fquity/Inclusion <br />Alt 5 <br />AR 6 <br />1.7 <br />6.7 <br />5.0 <br />5.0 <br />1.9 <br />0.0 <br />0.0 <br />1.5 <br />5.0 <br />0.0 <br />12.0 <br />0.0 <br />2.9 <br />0.0 <br />■ Relative Cost of Alternatives <br />VOLUME 1: FEASIBILITY REPORT 1-90 Corridor - Easton to Cle Elum Feasibility Study 1 62 <br />