Executive Summary of the Alternatives Analysis
A ugust 12, 2025
Document Title
Page 0
This page was intentionally left blank.
Alternatives Analysis
Page 1
Alternatives Analysis
After two rounds of extensive community outreach and analysis, the Fort Worth City Council adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) cross-sections for East Lancaster Avenue, Bridge Street, and Brentwood Stair Road, and the LPA transit mode for Route 89 on January 23, 2024. The alternatives analysis process used to determine the LPA is summarized in this memo. It is important to note that the final roadway configuration is subject to NCTCOG and TxDOT design and environmental review. Long-term capacity improvements and needs will be determined by TxDOT. Purpose and Need East Lancaster Avenue has been identified as a corridor for high-capacity frequent and reliable transit due to current ridership along existing routes, the connectivity the corridor would provide, existing pedestrian activity and potential for implementation with minimal ROW acquisitions (corner clips at intersections). The project is needed to provide solutions for increased safety for passenger vehicles and vulnerable road users as well as create a walkable environment for short trips by providing adequate space to increase pedestrian comfort. Relocation of franchise utilities to multi-use duct banks may be required to achieve the space needed to accommodate safe, high comfort pedestrian elements, and fiber optic cables. This project is needed to make transit more desirable through improved efficiencies in transit service and by creating opportunities for a more economically desirable corridor for equitable transit-oriented development that alleviates barriers to social and economic opportunities.
Alternatives Analysis
Page 2
Alternatives Analysis Process The alternatives analysis in this plan was driven by the objective to select a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) for the following three components:
1. Route 89 2. East Lancaster Avenue 3. Bridge Street and Brentwood Stair Road
For each component, the alternatives analysis followed a five-step process to identify an LPA.
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 1: Alternatives Analysis Process
Alternatives Analysis
Page 3
Route 89 Mode
A screening analysis was completed to select the optimum mode to provide high-capacity transit within the framework of the purpose and need to the plan. The mode screening analysis compared the attributes of local bus service, high-capacity bus, Light Rail (LTR), and Streetcar against the mode alternatives screening criteria to determine the optimum transit mode for the corridor.
Existing Service
High-Capacity Bus
Screening Criteria
Light Rail
Streetcar
Service Justified by Future Ridership Demand & Density Can Efficiently Accommodate Future Ridership Demand
Cost Effectiveness
Flexibility to Implement Incrementally (“Future Proofing”) Increases Safety Along the Corridor Accommodates Regional and Local Tips
Performance Against Criteria
High
Medium
Low
Not Viable
Alternatives Analysis
Page 4
Locally Preferred Alternative: Tech-Based Rapid Transit Based on the mode screening, high-capacity bus provides the greatest benefits for Route 89. In keeping with the goals of the plan to provide a reliable, safe, and comfortable transit service, it is envisioned that technology can be leveraged to implement high-capacity bus in the form of a Tech- Based Rapid Transit solution along Route 89 which utilizes managed lanes and transit signal priority to provide high frequency and higher speed transit service. The service will also include upgraded shelters and other premium amenities. Route A transit route analysis was also conducted to determine the optimum route for a transit connection between the existing Route 89 and the future express line along IH-30 and Eastchase Retail Area. The two routes examined include the following:
Handley Route ( Green ) Dottie Lynn Route ( Red )
Locally Preferred Alternative: Dottie Lynn Route (Red) Based the route analysis, the Dottie Lynn Route is favored due to the ability to provide a more direct connection to IH-30, available ROW for improvements, and higher development potential along the route. Figure 2: Route 89 Alternatives
Alternatives Analysis
Page 5
East Lancaster Avenue Upon selection of an LPA for the mode and route for transit service along Route 89, a screening analysis was conducted to determine the optimal cross section and roadway operations for East Lancaster Avenue from Main Street to Dottie Lynn Parkway. Corridor Segments Like most corridors, East Lancaster Avenue varies in width, cross-section, and ROW. It also has different land uses developed at different intensities throughout the corridor. The existing land use and roadway contexts create logical ways to organize the analysis and recommendations. When considering East Lancaster Avenue, four unique context segments were identified for individual analysis:
Main Street to Riverside Drive Riverside Drive to IH-820
Historic Handley
Chilton Street to Dottie Lynn Parkway
Figure 3: East Lancaster Avenue – Corridor Segments
Alternatives Analysis
Page 6
Alternative Development and Screening The alternatives development process generated 158 options across the four corridor segments. These options were screened for feasibility and reasonableness using ROW and constructability constraints and performance metrics that align with the goals of the plan. The expectation for a safe, multi-modal corridor required viable options to accommodate all forms of travel including walking, biking, driving, freight, and transit. The following elements were among those evaluated in the alternatives analysis:
Number of Lanes (4 or 6)
Transit Lane Dedication (Full, Partial, or Shared) Type of Bicycle Facility (On or Off-Street) On-Street Parking Pedestrian Space Medians
Figure 4: Alternatives Screening
Alternatives Analysis
Page 7
The alternatives screening criteria resulted in 15 reasonable cross section alternatives for East Lancaster Avenue. These alternatives were analyzed as groups based on common characteristics such as number of lanes and lane treatment for transit. The reasonable alternatives were then analyzed as groups and scored based on performance in safety, traffic operations, and transit service.
Traffic Operations
Alternative Grouping
Safety
Transit Service
6 Vehicle Lanes with Shared Transit
4-6 Lane Managed Technology Corridor (Right-Running Transit) 4 Vehicle Lanes + 2 Transit Lanes (Center-Running Dedicated)
Performance Against Criteria
High
Medium
Low
Locally Preferred Alternative: Four to Six-Lane Managed Technology Corridor (Right-Running Transit) Based on the results of the screening process and input from project partners and stakeholders, the locally preferred alternative for East Lancaster Avenue from Riverside Drive to IH-820 is a six-lane managed technology corridor. Due to ROW constraints, the locally preferred alternative for the segments between Main Street and Riverside Drive and from IH-820 to Dottie Lynn Parkway is four- lanes with shared transit that incorporates all the other elements of Tech-Based Rapid Transit. The locally preferred alternatives were selected due to their ability to reduce crashes, maintain acceptable traffic operations, and accommodate a flexible tech-based rapid transit service. Please note that the final roadway configuration is subject to NCTCOG and TxDOT design and environmental review. Long-term capacity improvements and needs will be determined by TxDOT.
Alternatives Analysis
Page 8
Context Segment
Locally Preferred Cross-Section Alternative
Main St to Riverside Dr
• 4 Lanes • Shared-Use Path • Shared Transit Riverside Dr to IH- 820 • 6 Lanes • Shared-Use Path • Managed Technology Corridor
Please note that the final roadway configuration is subject to TxDOT design and environmental review.
Alternatives Analysis
Page 9
Context Segment
Locally Preferred Cross-Section Alternative
Malcom St to Forest Ave
Historic Handley • 4 Lanes • Shared-Use Path (North Side) • On-Street
Parking (North Side – East of Forest Ave)
Segments east of IH 820 are unfunded and require additional study and design by NCTCOG and TxDOT. The cross-sections are illustrative and meant to demonstrate
ideas heard from the public. Forest Ave to Handley Dr
• Managed Technology Corridor • Safety and operational improvements requested by stakeholders • Cross-Section fits within existing right- of-way.
Segments east of IH 820 are unfunded and require additional study and design by NCTCOG and TxDOT. The cross-sections are illustrative and meant to demonstrate ideas heard from the public.
Alternatives Analysis
Page 10
Context Segment
Locally Preferred Cross-Section Alternative
Handley Dr to Dottie Lynn Pkwy • 4 Lanes • S hared-Use Path (North Side) • M anaged Technology Corridor
Segments east of IH 820 are unfunded and require additional study and design by NCTCOG and TxDOT. The cross-sections are illustrative and meant to demonstrate ideas heard from the public.
P lease note that the final roadway configuration is subject to TxDOT design and environmental review.
Alternatives Analysis
Page 11
Bridge Street & Brentwood Stair Road The final component of the Alternatives Analysis was the exploration of options for improvements to Brentwood Stair Road and Bridge Street as it pertains to the future TxDOT widening of IH-30. In order to evaluate the optimal and preferred street configurations, an alternatives analysis was conducted for these road segments.
Figure 5: Bridge St & Brentwood Stair Rd Study Area
The alternatives analysis evaluated the following four scenarios:
No-Build: No changes to existing lane configuration, intersection control, or ROW. Four Lane/Two-Way with Direct Ramps: Existing two-way frontage road configuration with direct ramp improvements. One-Way Frontage Roads: Conversion of existing two-way roadways with one-way frontage roads and ramp improvements. Two Lane/Two-Way: One-way frontage roads that run parallel to the modified two lane/two-way collectors of Brentwood Stair Road and Bridge Street, with ramp improvements.
Alternatives Analysis
Page 12
Each alternative was given a score from 1-4 based on assumptions, pros and cons, and goal achievement for the study area. 1=Scenario achieves the goal the least and 4=Scenario achieves the goal the most.
Goal Achievement Score
Alternative
No-Build
1.6
Four Lane/Two-Way with Direct Ramps
3.2
One-Way Frontage Road
1.8
Two Lane/Two-Way with Direct Ramps
3.4
Locally Preferred Alternative: Two Lane/Two-Way Road Based on the results of the Alternatives Analysis, the preferred alternative for Bridge Street & Brentwood Stair Road is the Two Lane/Two-Way Road scenario. This scenario will maintain existing connections to local businesses, improve mobility and safety, and promote commercial growth in the area.
Bridge St
Mainlanes
Brentwood Stair Rd
BY OTHERS
Figure 6: Preferred Alternative - Two Lane/Two-Way
Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs