6.15. Transit Strategy for the Core The transportation investments described in this chapter will not, by themselves, be sufficient to support the AOS growth vision. A Core Area with nearly 200,000 residents and 400,000 jobs by 2050 will generate a volume of trips that cannot be accommodated through roadway investment alone. High-quality, high- frequency transit is both a complement and, over time, a prerequisite for the compact, walkable, economically active downtown Fort Worth aspires to become. Today, Fort Worth’s transit mode share is among the lowest of any comparable city in the country. Current commute transit share for Downtown Fort Worth stands at approximately 0.29%, well below the 1% common in cities with only commuter rail service and far below the 8% to 18% achieved in cities with light rail or heavy rail systems. This gap reflects both the current state of transit supply and the lower- density, auto-oriented development pattern of the Core Area. Limited transit discourages density, and limited density discourages transit investment. Breaking this cycle requires a deliberate, phased approach that grows transit supply in step with growing Core density.
6.15.1. Transit Mode Share Benchmarking A benchmark review of transit commute share was conducted across 18 peer cities with comparable downtown geographies, categorized by the type of rail transit service available. The results confirm a strong relationship between the level of rail investment and transit mode share achieved. Downtowns served by intercity and commuter rail only achieve transit shares of roughly 1%. Those served by light rail reach between 2% and 14%, with Portland, Minneapolis, and Seattle at the higher end. Downtowns with heavy rail or subway service achieve 8% to 22%. For the scenario analysis, mode share targets were set at three tiers: a Core-High target of 18% reflecting heavy rail and commuter rail service; a Core-Medium target of 8% reflecting light rail and commuter rail; and a Core-Low target of 3% reflecting intercity and commuter rail only. These targets were applied to origin- destination pairs in the transit priority areas at the lower of the two endpoint TAZ targets, ensuring adjustments reflect the least-served end of each trip.
Figure 6.30: Transit Commute Share, Select Downtowns by Rail Service Type
225
Multimodal Gap Analysis | Fort Worth Master Transportation Plan
Made with FlippingBook Annual report maker