ES.6. Project Evaluation & Prioritization With an understanding of available funding and delivery capacity, the City next evaluated how candidate projects contribute to system performance and adopted priorities. This screening process provides a consistent basis for comparing projects across corridors and modes.
ES.6.1. Project Screening Framework Candidate projects were screened using a consistent, data-driven framework to provide a common basis for comparison across system needs and adopted priorities. The screening focused on relative contribution to key outcomes—such as congestion relief, safety, multimodal connectivity, economic access, and plan alignment.
As shown in Figure ES.18 , inputs representing existing conditions, future growth, and adopted plans were evaluated across a defined set of performance criteria, with most measures derived through GIS-based analysis to create consistency. Screening results were summarized using contribution tiers—high, moderate, low, or no contribution—to support clear comparison and inform development of the prioritized project list.
System Efficiency Projects intersecting congested LOS F corridors within areas of heavy congestion score highest; Partial overlap receives proportionate credit. Safety and Vision Zero Score based on share of project length on the HIN; ≥50% overlap scores highest. Cost Effectiveness Projects ranked relative to cost per mile; Lower-cost projects score higher. Travel Choice Connectivity score derived from gap-density analysis; Higher scores reflect greater network completion. Economic Development Direct connections to major employers or plan-defined growth areas score higher. Plan Alignment Projects included in adopted plans score higher.
Congested Corridors (2036 LOS + Visually Congested Segments)
High Contribution Top-third of non-zero scores for that criterion.
High-Injury Network (HIN)
Cost per Mile Estimates
Moderate Contribution Middle-third
Multimodal Gap Density (Connectivity Hexagons)
Low Contribution Bottom-third
Major Employers and Growth Areas
No Contribution Score of Zero or “-”
Adopted Plans (Mobility 2050, Safety Action Plan)
Figure ES.18: Project Scoring Framework
xxii
Fort Worth Master Transportation Plan | Introduction
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker