Laserfiche WebLink
<br />5. Institutional Considerations <br /> <br />The institutional considerations are actions or proceedings which must be undertaken to <br />obtain compliance from governmental agencies or other parties to allow project <br />implementation. They include permits, court actions, and contracts. Each of the major <br />institutional considerations should be described in the study report. For purposes of <br />evaluation, it is also recommended that the institutional considerations be displayed in a <br />summary table format to show the type of action required, (permit, court action, contract, <br />etc.) and the status of the activity. <br /> <br />6. Special Considerations <br /> <br />For most planning studies, the major technical considerations w:ill be outlined in the <br />description of the alternatives. Extraordinary situations expected to be encountered during <br />design and/or construction will generally be incorporated in the cost estimates. <br /> <br />There may, however, be situations where special technical considerations should be <br />provided as a separate item in the evaluation of an alternative. These considerations may <br />relate to the need for further investigations, the uncertainty or risk associated with demand <br />projections or cost estimates or the possibility of new or emerging technologies which <br />would impact a proposed project Any such factors which appear to be significant for a <br />particular alternative should be identified and described in the study report. <br /> <br />C. Comparative Evaluation <br /> <br />The results of the alternatives evaluation should be described and displayed in such a <br />manner that the differences between alternatives are apparent. In addition, the study <br />report should include a comparative evaluation which compares each alternative with all <br />of the other proposed alternatives. <br /> <br />Example: Assume that three alternatives A, B and C have been evaluated using <br />costs, impacts and institutional considerations as evaluation factors. The <br />comparative evaluation then might show that Altemative A would cost 25 percent <br />more than Alternative B and 30 percent more than Alternative C but it would <br />entail a lower level of impacts and would be easier to implement from an <br />institutional standpoint than either of the other two alternatives. The same type <br />of comparison is then made for Alternative B vis-a-vis Alternatives A and C and <br />for Alternative C vis-a-vis Alternatives A and B. <br /> <br />Each study report should include a set of conclusions and recommendations based upon <br />the evaluation and comparison of alternatives described above. The report should identify <br />a recommended alternative or should state the reasons why none of the alternatives appear <br />to be feasible. In the case of a reconnaissance study, the recommendations should <br />indicate whether a feasibility study (or further analysis) appears to be justified. <br /> <br />B-7 <br />