## 3 A Model for the Evaluation and Selection of the Railroad Route
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Criteria (\%)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Sub-Criteria**} \\ \cline{3-4}  & & **Full Name** & **Value** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Economic} & \multirow{4}{*}{21\%} & Costs of route construction & 26\% \\  & & Costs of maintenance & 13\% \\  & & Costs of management & 17\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Influence of the land depreciation of the local population & 16\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Development of tourism in the zone of influence & 11\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Development of economic activities in the region & 17\% \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Transport} & \multirow{4}{*}{27\%} & Integration into the city railway system & 6\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Integration into the intermodal traffic system & 9\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Proximity of passenger aprons with regard to other & 6\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & traffic terminals & 6\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Route position at the facilities & 7\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Route length & 13\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Capacity of railway line & 16\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Train-journey duration & 13\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Transport reliability and speed & 11\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Transport safety & 19\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Technical-technological complexity of the construction of & 35\% \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-2} \multirow{4}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} Constructional- \\ technical \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{12\%} & \multirow{2}{*}{Terrain geology and seismology} & 17\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Passing of the route through common infrastructure & 27\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & corridors (yes/no) & 21\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Availability of land or free space & 21\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Criteria and sub-criteria for evaluation and selection of a railroad route. The importance of the sub-criteria were compared, and the weighting coefficients were normalized so that their sum was 100%. In addition, the weighting coefficients of the sub-criteria within a thematic group of criteria were normalized so that the sum within each group of criteria was 100%. The defined model for the evaluation and selection of the railroad route was applied to create a ranking list of railroad variants for the construction of the Rijeka-Zagreb railroad route. Application of the PROMETHEE Multi-Criteria Method for the Evaluation and Selection of the Railroad Route Rijeka-Zagreb as Part of the Mediterranean Corridor  
For the connection of central Croatia, Gorski Kotar, and the northern littoral, the main railway line, i.e., the national railway line Rijeka-Zagreb-Botovo, plays a significant role, which was also perceived by the European Commission as this route was categorized as a part of the priority Axis 3 of the TEN-T transport network. This route connects the port of Rijeka with central and eastern Europe including the southern section of the Baltic-Adriatic Route and has been evaluated as part of the former transversal Vb corridor. A multi-criteria ranking of variants as well as the method PROMETHEE II and the computer software \"Visual PROMETHEE\" for multi-criteria optimization were used for the selection of the railroad route that would connect the stations of Rijeka, Zagreb, and Botovo on the border between Croatia and Hungary. Analysis of the application of the multi-criteria method for the evaluation and selection of the railway route was carried out in several stages, which proceeded in the following order:  
* Identification of variant solutions for the railway route;
* Evaluation of individual variants according to the established criteria and sub-criteria;
* Estimation and ranking of variants;
* Selection of the optimal variant. For the analysis of potential route corridors of the railway route Rijeka-Zagreb, several variants stood out among the route corridors. By identification alternative routes of the