Screening criteria are developed to determine if an alternative is reasonable. The criteria listed below are the first test that the project team uses to narrow down the identified alternatives. The H2H screening criteria were based on the ability to solve the problems identified in the purpose and need, and other factors such as economic, environmental, and engineering criteria.

The alternatives that are identified as reasonable go through even more evaluation in the EIS. To see what is evaluated in the EIS process, click here.

Alternatives Screening Process Memo (approved for public distribution on 12/24/2009)

Alternatives Screening Process Graphic

Criteria (Each proposed alternative is compared to a "No Action" Alternative.)

Purpose and Need Criteria

1. Congestion:
   How well would the new facility reduce congestion in 2035?
   How well would the new facility reduce congestion on adjacent roads?
   
2. Travel Efficiency:
   How well will the alternative improve travel times ?
3. Neighborhood Connectivity:
   How well will the alternative affect neighborhood connectivity?
   Measures include:
   • How long is each facility in residential areas?
   • How many residential relocations are necessary?
   • How many streets must be removed from residential areas?
   • How many "safe routes to schools" are impacted?
4. Safety:
   How will the alternative reduce the number of crashes compared to the No Action Alternative?
5. Modal Interrelationships:
   How well does this alternative improve travel times for public transportation and provide greater access to public transit?
   How well does this alternative reduce the wait time for transit?
   How well does this alternative improve the efficiency of freight movement?
   How well does this alternative reduce the amount of single occupant vehicles using the corridor?

Other Factors

1. Technical or Environment Considerations:
   How difficult will it be to build or permit this alternative compared to other alternatives?
2. Impacts to the Natural, Physical, Biological, or Human Environment:
   How will the alternative impact parks, cultural resources, environmental justice groups, wetlands, and habitat for threatened or endangered species?
3. Consistency with Locally Adopted Plans:
   Is the proposed alternative consistent with the Municipality of Anchorage's Anchorage 2020 Plan and Long Range Transportation Plan?

<-- Previous

Next -->