My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution No. 4793
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Resolutions
>
2004 No. 4782-4819
>
Resolution No. 4793
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/10/2010 4:49:14 PM
Creation date
7/7/2004 4:37:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Recorder
CMO_Document_Type
Resolutions
Document_Date
6/28/2004
Document_Number
4793
CMO_Effective_Date
6/28/2004
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
322
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
N~WMC FACiLiTIES PLAN <br /> <br /> Site impact <br /> Ease/impact of construction <br /> Flexibility for phased implementation <br /> <br />For each identified unit process a fact sheet was developed that rated each unit process <br />alternative against these criteria. A numerical score was assigned for each criteria and t,he <br />total score for each unit process was added up. The unit processes with the highest scores <br />were identified as preferred solutions, alternatives with intermediate scores were identified <br />as acceptable solutions, and some alternatives with the lowest scores were etim2nated from <br />consideration. <br /> <br />A subsequent discussion and screening process narrowed the scope of unit processes <br />further. Although the identified preferred and acceptable solutions scored high in meeting <br />the staff's criteria, some of the solutions were not easily implemented, did not work well <br />with the existing infrastructure to meet future needs, or were simply cost-prohibitive. Unit <br />process solutions in these categories were eliminated from further consideration. <br /> <br />A final short list of unit process solutions to be considered for a more comprehensive <br />analysis was developed. Technical memorandums provide a detailed discussion of each <br />evaluation, and alternative comparisons. The remainder of this chapter summarizes those <br />alternatives analyses and provides insight into the selection of a systemwide alternative that <br />addresses all the facility needs. Each alternative analysis includes a monetary and identical <br />non-monetary evaluation. Non-monetary evaluations are based on the criteria shown in <br />Table 6.0-2. For each criterion, the alternative was given a score of I to 5, I being negative or <br />difficult, and 5 being beneficial. A total maximum score of 30 points is possible and a <br />minimum score of 6 points is possible. <br /> <br />TABLE 6.0-2 <br />Example of Non-Monetary Evaluation <br />MWMC Facilities Plan, Eugene-Springfield <br /> <br /> Alternative I Alternative 2 <br />Siting 5 I <br />Constructability 5 <br />Performance 5 1 <br />Effect on Performance of Downstream Equipment 5 <br />Operational Flexibility 5 1 <br />Maintenance 5 t <br />Total Score (30 points maximum) 30 <br /> <br />Scoring: 1 = Negative/Difficult <br /> 5 = Beneficial <br /> <br /> 6-2 MWMC_6.0_REV11 DOC <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.