FW_MTP_Appendices 20260519

Master Transportation Plan Task 4: Gap Analysis and Needs Network

Table 13. Project Selection and Scoring Criteria (Detailed)

Weight (%)

Criteria

Description

Scoring Rubric

Score

Road and Freight Criteria

Transit Criteria

System Efficiency

30

Improves travel times, reduces congestion, increases throughput

30

Proximity (0.5 mile) to a parallel congested (LOS below D, E, F) corridor AND in area of heavy congestion. Proximity (0.5 mile) to a parallel congested corridor AND in area of sparser congestion. Proximity (0.5 mile) to a parallel congested corridor BUT not in area of heavy congestion. Located in an area of heavy congestion BUT NOT in proximity to congested corridor. Located in an area of sparser congestion BUT NOT in proximity to congested corridor. NOT located in proximity to a congested corridor nor in an area of congestion.

High score in the Transit Propensity Index (Jenks natural breaks). Medium-High score in the Transit Propensity Index (Jenks natural breaks). Medium score in the Transit Propensity Index (Jenks natural breaks). Medium-Low score in the Transit Propensity Index (Jenks natural breaks). Low score in the Transit Propensity Index (Jenks natural breaks).

24

18

12

6

NOT in the Transit Propensity Index.

0

Score

Criteria

Safety and Vision Zero

20

Improves safety for vulnerable users; prevents crashes through proactive design

20 Project is on the high-injury network AND will implement corridor-wide or location-specific countermeasures identified in the Safety Action Plan. 10 Project is NOT on the high-injury network BUT it will implement corridor-wide or location-specific countermeasures identified in the Safety Action Plan. 10 Project is on the high-injury network AND will implement other evidence-based countermeasures NOT identified in the Safety Action Plan. 0 No evidence provided demonstrating the project will result in potential crash reduction or improvements to safety.

Score

Criteria

Cost Effectiveness

10

Yields high return on investment, is feasible for near-term delivery

10 Project has identified match or local funds in near term (5 years) AND project planned in existing ROW AND current design status greater than or equal to 10 percent AND project does not require structures. 7 Project planned in existing ROW AND current design status greater than or equal to 10 percent AND project does not require structures. 5 Project current design status greater than or equal to 10 percent AND project does not require structures.

3

Project does not require structures.

Project requires structures OR does not meet any criteria above.

0

Score

Criteria

Travel Choice

10

Expands walking, biking, and transit options; reduces access disparities; improves mobility for underserved communities

10 Project connects walking and biking facilities (length of connectivity High score by Jenks Natural Breaks) OR a transit route in a high transit propensity area. 7 Project connects walking and biking facilities (length of connectivity Medium-High score by Jenks Natural Breaks) OR a transit route in medium-high transit propensity area. 5 Project connects walking and biking facilities (length of connectivity Medium score by Jenks Natural Breaks) OR a transit route in medium transit propensity area.

www.MovingaMillion.org | transportation@fortworthtexas.gov page 121

Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online