Green River Road/
Foothill Parkway
Study
Rosalva N. Ureño
Transportation Manager
City Traffic Engineer
August 6, 2025
The Ask
Provide the City Council an update on the
Green River Road/Foothill Parkway
Traffic Study
2 03 Green River Road /Foothill Parkway Studies
04 Summary of Results
02 Eastern Corridor Operations Project
01 SR91/241 Express Connector Project
Agenda
Image Source: Google Maps
3 241/91 Express
Connector Project
Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA)
Image Source: TCA
4 241/91 Express
Connector Project
• Median-to-median, direct, tolled
connector
• New tolled facility
Milestone Schedule
Begin Construction – Early 2026
Open to traffic – Late 2028/Early 2029
Image Source: TCA
5 Eastern Corridor
Operations Project
Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC)
Image Source: RCTC
6 Eastern Corridor Operations Project (ECOP)
• Proposing to add a general-purpose
lane to eastbound SR-91 from the 241
Toll Road connector to SR-71
• Intended to help improve traffic
operations on eastbound 91, especially
during afternoon and evening hours
• Ramp improvements at Green River Rd
eastbound off ramp
Milestone Schedule
2025: Environmental Revalidation
2026 – 2027: Final Design (PS&E)
2028 – 2030: Construction
Image Source: RCTC
7 Image Source: Advance Your Placement
Green River Road /
Foothill Parkway Study
Initial Study Performed in 2024
8 Why a study?
What are the city’s
concerns?
More vehicular traffic traversing the
city roadways to access I-15
Increase in cut-through traffic
Longer queueing: SR-91 at Green River off ramp
and southern end of city approaching I-15
Traffic congestion
Increased wait times along Foothill Parkway
and Masters Drive, causing more delay
Travel time delay
To reduce the effects on the impacted
intersections.
Identify necessary mitigation measures
9 What did this
study evaluate
and identify?
The study evaluated
Determined Level of Service (LOS) and
delay for the following scenarios:
• Existing Condition
• 2030 No project
• 2030 With Project
• 2050 No Project
• 2050 With Project
The study identified
Impacts to key intersection and
recommendations to mitigate these
impacts
10 Study – Purpose and Scope
• Included all signalized intersections
on Green River Road/ Foothill Pkwy
corridor from SR-91 to I-15 ramps
• Modeling software was utilized to
determine LOS and delay
• Analysis focused on Eastbound PM
traffic
• Traffic distribution model and
assumptions using big data
(StreetLight Data) Aerial Image Source: Nearmap
11 Green River Road Off-Ramp Improvements (ECOP)
• Green River Eastbound Off-Ramp
will be modified from a single lane
off ramp to dual lane leading to a
single left and triple right turn
configuration
• Study evaluated “Right Turn on
Red” and “No Right Turn on Red”
scenarios
• Both scenarios operate at
acceptable 95% queueing
lengths
Image Source: RCTC
12 Level of Service
• Traffic Signal Level of Service (LOS) is
a standardized way to evaluate how
well a signalized intersection
operates.
• At signalized intersections LOS
primary performance measure is
vehicle delay and volume to capacity
ratio
• We use these performance metrics to
identify areas needing improvement,
and plan for future infrastructure
projects
• Standard aimed for is LOS D or better
Level of
Service Description
Signalized
Delay
(Seconds)
Unsignalized
Delay
(Seconds)
A Free flow; minimal delay < 10.0 < 10.0
B Slight delays; good progression. > 10.0 to
20.0 >10.0 to 15.0
C Moderate delays; fair progression > 20.0 to
35.0 >15.0 to 25.0
D Noticeable delays; approaching
unstable flow
> 35.0 to
55.0 >25.0 to 35.0
E high delay; poor progression,
operating near capacity
> 55.0 to
80.0 >35.0 to 50.0
F Breakdown flow; excessive delays;
poor progression > 80.0 >50.0
13 Study Results -
Existing Intersection LOS
and Delay Results
• Most intersections operate at an acceptable
Level of Service (LOS) D or better
• Existing condition - Eastbound approach at
Rimpau and California operate at LOS D
Image Source: RCTC
Intersection Traffic
Control
Existing Conditions
PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS
1. GRR at SR 91 WB Ramps Signal 14.5 B
2. GRR at SR 91 EB Ramps Signal 15.6 B
3. GRR at Dominguez Ranch Rd Signal 11.1 B
4. GRR at Palisades Dr Signal 4.4 A
5. GRR at Ridgeline Dr (E) Signal 11.0 B
6. GRR at Serfas Club Dr Signal 22.7 C
7. GRR at Paseo Grande Signal 7.2 A
8. Foothill at Lincoln Ave Signal 25.2 C
9. Foothill at Main St Signal 27.3 C
10. Foothill at Fullerton Ave Signal 31.6 C
11. Foothill at Rimpau Ave Signal 33.7 C
12. Foothill at California Ave Signal 38.5 D
13. Foothill at Via Gunnoe Ct* Signal 17.6 B
14. Foothill at Bedford Cyn Rd Signal 53.3 D
15. El Cerrito at I 15 SB Ramps Signal 12.2 B
16. El Cerrito at I 15 NB Ramps Signal 18.0 B
*Queuing issues not fully captured by LOS/delay
14 91 Eastbound Off-Ramp Volume Distribution
• “StreetLight Data” captured
origin-to-destination data from
cell phone and connected
vehicle data
• Noticeable trips on
Lincoln/Upper corridor
towards I-15
• Assumption of distribution
from data model
Aerial Image Source: Nearmap
15 2024 Study Results
• Methodology combines peak hour of traffic volume with peak hour cut-through traffic along Green River Rd and Foothill Parkway for worst-case scenario • SR-91 River Rd Off-Ramp to be revised to include triple right turn lanes • Restricting a Right Turn on Red movement (NRTOR) is best option • Intersection delay and LOS are noticeably impacted at the following intersection:
• California Ave at Foothill Pkwy with LOS E (2050 Build) • Returns to LOS D with signal timing improvements
• Bedford Canyon Rd at Foothill Pkwy with LOS E (2050 Build and No Build) • Returns to LOS D with signal timing improvements
• Queues at closely spaced intersections can be mitigated with signal timing improvement and signal coordination 16
Image Source: Advance Your Placement
Updated
Green River Road /
Foothill Parkway Study
Revised Study Performed in 2025 17
Why an updated
study?
Staff had concerns with data used to
establish volume and direction of travel from
GRR ramp to I-15
Big data used for modeling
Modeling suggested increase to traffic
on the Lincoln/Upper/Masters corridor
Traffic diversion
New study used 2% growth factor on traffic for
future build out scenario
Traffic growth factor
Additional traffic counts were collected for
Friday traffic, including license plate reader
data (5 locations)
Friday traffic
18 What
additional
information
will this study
evaluate and
identify?
The study evaluated • Same 5 scenarios as initial study plus: o +2% annual growth of cut
-
through traffic
o +330 vph at Green River Road
offramp
• New scenarios for Friday PM traffic • Lincoln/Upper/Masters corridor • Confirm cut-through assumption The study identified
Impacts to all intersections and
provide recommendations to
mitigate these impacts
19 2025 Study Area
• All signalized intersections from SR-91
at Green River Road Eastbound Off
Ramp to Foothill Parkway/ I-15 ramps
• Additional evaluation of
Lincoln/Upper/Masters
• Modeling software will be utilized to
determine LOS, delay and v/c
• Analysis of Eastbound PM peak
(including Fridays)
• Data and assumptions in prior study will
be validated using License Plate
Readers (LPR) Aerial Image Source: Nearmap
20 • Traffic data used includes
historical counts (provided by
CoC), PM counts for Eastbound
Foothill Parkway travel
• Turning movement counts
• License plate readers and 24-hr
(tube counts)
Data Collection
Aerial Image Source: Nearmap
21 2025 Study Results - Project Volume Distribution
• LPR data collected compared to “StreetLight
Data”
• Percentages were similar along Foothill Pkwy
• LPR data was much lower along Upper/Masters
• 16% of trips making right-turn show up east of
California Ave
• 15% show up north of Eagle Glen Pkwy
• Approximately 400 vph total during PM peak
hour
• Data comparison confirms that the StreetLight
data is suitable for modeling trip distribution
and origin/destination trips
22 2025 Study Results –
Project Volume Distribution
at Study Intersections
• Volume impact due to ECOP assumed at 330
vehicles per hour (highest 1-hr impact per
modeling software VISSIM)
• Streetlight Data suggests impact should
dissipate throughout the city
• GRR at EB Off Ramp
• 1660 vph is baseline, 330 vph is approx. 20%
added traffic volume
• Foothill at California
• 980 vph is baseline, 50 vph is approx. 5%
added traffic volume
Intersection
Approach Project
Volume Data Total
EBL EBT EBR
1. GRR at SR 91 WB Ramps* - - - +36
2. GRR at SR 91 EB Ramps** 36 0 294 +330
3. GRR at Dominguez Ranch Rd 0 279 12 +291
4. GRR at Palisades Dr 17 259 0 +276
5. GRR at Ridgeline Dr (E) 21 238 0 +259
6. GRR at Serfas Club Dr 0 208 0 +208
7. GRR at Paseo Grande 6 179 0 +185
8. Foothill at Lincoln Ave 5 90 69 +164
9. Foothill at Main St 10 64 0 +74
10. Foothill at Fullerton Ave 0 53 4 +57
11. Foothill at Rimpau Ave 1 45 9 +55
12. Foothill at California Ave 5 45 0 +50
13. Foothill at Via Gunnoe Ct 0 47 0 +47
14. Foothill at Bedford Cyn Rd 0 46 1 +47
15. El Cerrito at I 15 SB Ramps 0 6 41 +47
16. El Cerrito at I 15 NB Ramps 0 6 0 +6
17. Upper at Masters 0 0 44 +44
18. Masters at Eagle Glen Pkwy 42 0 2 +44
*Approach volumes increase in WB direction
**NB movement volumes shown at this intersection 23
Intersection
Approach Project
Volume Data Total
EBL EBT EBR
1. GRR at SR 91 WB Ramps* - - - +46
2. GRR at SR 91 EB Ramps** 46 0 284 +330
3. GRR at Dominguez Ranch Rd 0 272 12 +284
4. GRR at Palisades Dr 11 256 0 +267
5. GRR at Ridgeline Dr (E) 22 234 0 +256
6. GRR at Serfas Club Dr 0 203 0 +203
7. GRR at Paseo Grande 4 172 0 +176
8. Foothill at Lincoln Ave 8 86 67 +161
9. Foothill at Main St 15 63 4 +82
10. Foothill at Fullerton Ave 0 53 9 +62
11. Foothill at Rimpau Ave 0 47 7 +54
12. Foothill at California Ave 0 48 0 +48
13. Foothill at Via Gunnoe Ct 0 45 0 +45
14. Foothill at Bedford Cyn Rd 0 45 0 +45
15. El Cerrito at I 15 SB Ramps 0 10 35 +45
16. El Cerrito at I 15 NB Ramps 0 0 0 +10
17. Upper at Masters 0 0 34 +34
18. Masters at Eagle Glen Pkwy 34 0 0 +34
*Approach volumes increase in WB direction
**NB movement volumes shown at this intersection
2025 Study Results –
Project Volume Distribution
at Study Intersections Friday
• Friday volume assumes same ramp
volume as weekdays (+330 vph)
• GRR at EB Off Ramp
• Approach volume is 1370 vph, 330 vph
is approx. 24% added traffic volume
• Foothill at California
• Approach volume is 1170 vph, 48 vph is
approx. 4% added traffic volume
24 2025 Study Results -
Existing Intersection LOS
and Delay Results
• Highest delay modeled at California Ave
and Bedford Canyon Dr
• Friday results show LOS E and F at
California and Bedford Canyon Rd
• Masters/California shown as All Way Stop
Intersection Traffic
Control
Weekdays
(Existing)
Fridays
(Existing)
PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1. GRR at SR 91 WB Ramps Signal 14.6 B 15.5 B
2. GRR at SR 91 EB Ramps Signal 16.0 B 13.3 B
3. GRR at Dominguez Ranch Rd Signal 11.2 B 11.5 B
4. GRR at Palisades Dr Signal 4.4 A 4.3 A
5. GRR at Ridgeline Dr (E) Signal 11.2 B 15.0 B
6. GRR at Serfas Club Dr Signal 22.7 C 23.7 C
7. GRR at Paseo Grande Signal 7.2 A 10.8 B
8. Foothill at Lincoln Ave Signal 25.2 C 28.5 C
9. Foothill at Main St Signal 27.1 C 29.9 C
10. Foothill at Fullerton Ave Signal 32.6 C 42.8 D
11. Foothill at Rimpau Ave Signal 38.9 D 50.6 D
12. Foothill at California Ave Signal 56.3 E 80.4 F
13. Foothill at Via Gunnoe Ct Signal 15.8 B 22.4 C
14. Foothill at Bedford Cyn Rd Signal 40.1 D 65.7 E
15. El Cerrito at I 15 SB Ramps Signal 13.3 B 20.2 C
16. El Cerrito at I 15 NB Ramps Signal 18.8 B 17.9 B
17. Upper at Masters AW Stop 21.4 C 28.3 D
18. Masters at Eagle Glen Pkwy Signal 13.9 B 16.3 B 25
2025 Study Results –
2030 Intersection
LOS with Mitigation
Weekday
• Build conditions increases delay to
several intersections
• California Ave is improved to LOS D
with timing improvements
• Signal optimization mitigate most
delays
• Upper/Masters improves to LOS C
in 2030 due to signalization
Intersection Traffic
Control
2030 No Build 2030 Build
Project
Volume
Delta
2030 Build w/
Signal Opt. Delay
Delta
(Opt-NB)
PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
1. GRR at SR 91 WB Ramps Signal 14.9 B 14.9 B +36 13.0 B -1.9
2. GRR at SR 91 EB Ramps* Signal 20.9 C 16.0 B +330 16.0 B -4.9
3. GRR at Dominguez Ranch Rd Signal 11.7 B 13.2 B +291 12.3 B 0.6
4. GRR at Palisades Dr Signal 4.4 A 4.4 A +276 4.4 A 0.0
5. GRR at Ridgeline Dr (E) Signal 12.1 B 13.5 B +259 12.9 B 0.8
6. GRR at Serfas Club Dr Signal 24.1 C 27.7 C +208 27.7 C 3.6
7. GRR at Paseo Grande Signal 7.6 A 8.1 A +185 7.2 A -0.4
8. Foothill at Lincoln Ave Signal 29.0 C 37.0 D +164 25.8 C -3.2
9. Foothill at Main St Signal 28.1 C 28.7 C +74 28.7 C 0.6
10. Foothill at Fullerton Ave Signal 35.9 D 39.4 D +57 34.0 C -1.9
11. Foothill at Rimpau Ave Signal 46.6 D 53.9 D +55 35.8 D -10.8
12. Foothill at California Ave Signal 53.3 E 62.3 E +50 40.9 D -14.4
13. Foothill at Via Gunnoe Ct** Signal 16.1 B 16.0 B +47 15.3 B -0.8
14. Foothill at Bedford Cyn Rd Signal 43.2 D 49.4 D +47 44.6 D 1.4
15. El Cerrito at I 15 SB Ramps Signal 13.1 B 13.5 B +47 13.5 B 0.4
16. El Cerrito at I 15 NB Ramps Signal 19.3 B 19.7 B +6 19.7 B 0.4
17. Upper at Masters AW Stop 25.7 C 26.4 C +44 26.4 C 0.7
18. Masters at Eagle Glen Pkwy Signal 14.8 B 15.8 B +44 15.3 B 0.5 *Build condition assumes 3-RT lanes and No RTOR. **Queuing issues not fully captured by LOS/delay 26 2025 Study Results –
2030 Intersection
LOS with Mitigation
Friday
• Several intersections worsen to LOS E/F
but improve to LOS D with timing
improvements
• Bedford Canyon Rd maintains a LOS E in
all scenarios
• Signal optimization mitigate most
delays
• Upper/Masters improves to LOS C in
2030 due to signalization
Intersection Traffic
Control
2030 No Build 2030 Build
Project
Volume
Delta
2030 Build w/
Signal Opt. Delay
Delta
(Opt-NB)
PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
1. GRR at SR 91 WB Ramps Signal 15.7 B 15.7 B +46 13.8 B -1.9
2. GRR at SR 91 EB Ramps* Signal 15.7 B 13.8 B +330 13.8 B -1.9
3. GRR at Dominguez Ranch Rd Signal 11.8 B 12.8 B +284 11.4 B -0.4
4. GRR at Palisades Dr Signal 4.2 A 4.2 A +267 3.8 A -0.4
5. GRR at Ridgeline Dr (E) Signal 15.6 B 16.6 B +256 14.9 B -0.7
6. GRR at Serfas Club Dr Signal 24.6 C 26.2 C +203 25.9 C 1.3
7. GRR at Paseo Grande Signal 11.9 B 13.0 B +176 11.0 B -0.9
8. Foothill at Lincoln Ave Signal 32.3 C 40.8 D +161 27.6 C -4.7
9. Foothill at Main St Signal 31.1 C 31.8 C +82 31.8 C 0.7
10. Foothill at Fullerton Ave Signal 49.9 D 57.5 E +62 41.2 D -8.7
11. Foothill at Rimpau Ave Signal 60.5 E 69.8 E +54 39.0 D -21.5
12. Foothill at California Ave Signal 75.7 E 84.6 F +48 54.3 D -21.4
13. Foothill at Via Gunnoe Ct** Signal 18.8 B 29.6 C +45 23.8 C 5.0
14. Foothill at Bedford Cyn Rd Signal 65.3 E 66.5 E +45 67.1 E 1.8
15. El Cerrito at I 15 SB Ramps Signal 20.4 C 23.8 C +45 23.8 C 3.4
16. El Cerrito at I 15 NB Ramps Signal 18.2 B 18.1 B +0 18.1 B -0.1
17. Upper at Masters AW Stop 30.4 C 31.2 C +34 31.2 C 0.8
18. Masters at Eagle Glen Pkwy Signal 17.3 B 18.4 B +34 18.4 B 1.1 *Build condition assumes 3-RT lanes and No RTOR. **Queuing issues not fully captured by LOS/delay 27 • Resulted with LOS E and F and
several intersections
• Serfas Club Dr impacted and
worsens to LOS E
• Modeling identified areas may need
signalization downstream of
Upper/Masters
• Signal optimization improves most
intersections
2025 Study Results -
2050 Intersection
LOS with Mitigation
Weekday
Intersection Traffic
Control
2050 No Build 2050 Build
Project
Volume
Delta
2050 Build w/
Signal Opt. Delay
Delta
(Opt-NB)
PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
1. GRR at SR 91 WB Ramps Signal 15.7 B 15.7 B +36 13.6 B -2.1
2. GRR at SR 91 EB Ramps* Signal 65.5 E 35.3 D +330 35.3 D -30.2
3. GRR at Dominguez Ranch Rd Signal 14.2 B 16.8 B +291 12.8 B -1.4
4. GRR at Palisades Dr Signal 4.6 A 4.6 A +276 4.6 A 0.0
5. GRR at Ridgeline Dr (E) Signal 14.0 B 16.0 B +259 16.3 B 2.3
6. GRR at Serfas Club Dr Signal 35.6 D 62.1 E +208 37.0 D 1.4
7. GRR at Paseo Grande Signal 9.0 A 10.7 B +185 8.8 A -0.2
8. Foothill at Lincoln Ave Signal 49.1 D 62.7 E +164 59.3 E 10.2
9. Foothill at Main St Signal 30.7 C 31.3 C +74 31.3 C 0.6
10. Foothill at Fullerton Ave Signal 63.0 E 72.3 E +57 43.5 D -19.5
11. Foothill at Rimpau Ave Signal 85.3 F 96.8 F +55 44.5 D -40.8
12. Foothill at California Ave Signal 94.4 F 103.3 F +50 53.5 D -40.9
13. Foothill at Via Gunnoe Ct** Signal 36.7 D 44.6 D +47 18.8 B -17.9
14. Foothill at Bedford Cyn Rd Signal 66.2 E 67.2 E +47 63.4 E -2.8
15. El Cerrito at I 15 SB Ramps Signal 21.4 C 24.4 C +47 24.4 C 3.0
16. El Cerrito at I 15 NB Ramps Signal 22.2 C 22.2 C +6 22.2 C 0.0
17. Upper at Masters AW Stop 33.8 C 38.3 D +44 31.9 C -1.9
18. Masters at Eagle Glen Pkwy Signal 20.4 C 23.6 C +44 19.7 B -0.7 *Build condition assumes 3-RT lanes and No RTOR. **Queuing issues not fully captured by LOS/delay 28 • LOS F expected at several
intersections
• Lincoln Ave worsens to LOS E
• Signal optimization improves a
few LOS F to LOS E
2025 Study Results -
2050 Intersection
LOS with Mitigation
Friday
Intersection Traffic
Control
2050 No Build 2050 Build
Project
Volume
Delta
2050 Build w/
Signal Opt. Delay
Delta
(Opt-NB)
PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
1. GRR at SR 91 WB Ramps Signal 16.6 B 16.6 B +46 14.5 B -2.1
2. GRR at SR 91 EB Ramps* Signal 23.0 C 18.5 B +330 18.5 B -4.5
3. GRR at Dominguez Ranch Rd Signal 13.2 B 14.9 B +284 12.9 B -0.3
4. GRR at Palisades Dr Signal 4.3 A 4.3 A +267 3.9 A -0.4
5. GRR at Ridgeline Dr (E) Signal 16.8 B 18.5 B +256 17.8 B 1.0
6. GRR at Serfas Club Dr Signal 31.0 C 47.2 D +203 35.9 D 4.9
7. GRR at Paseo Grande Signal 14.0 B 15.7 B +176 11.6 B -2.4
8. Foothill at Lincoln Ave Signal 49.7 D 62.5 E +161 55.4 E 5.7
9. Foothill at Main St Signal 34.0 C 34.8 C +82 34.8 C 0.8
10. Foothill at Fullerton Ave Signal 80.2 F 89.7 F +62 44.7 D -35.5
11. Foothill at Rimpau Ave Signal 98.7 F 110.6 F +54 49.7 D -49.0
12. Foothill at California Ave Signal 120.6 F 130.8 F +48 76.3 E -44.3
13. Foothill at Via Gunnoe Ct** Signal 21.3 C 27.0 C +45 16.0 B -5.3
14. Foothill at Bedford Cyn Rd Signal 72.3 E 71.6 E +45 66.3 E -6.0
15. El Cerrito at I 15 SB Ramps Signal 40.9 D 47.1 D +45 47.1 D 6.2
16. El Cerrito at I 15 NB Ramps Signal 20.6 C 20.6 C +10 20.6 C 0.0
17. Upper at Masters AW Stop 37.6 D 39.3 D +34 39.3 D 1.7
18. Masters at Eagle Glen Pkwy Signal 25.5 C 29.9 C +34 23.8 C -1.7 *Build condition assumes 3-RT lanes and No RTOR. **Queuing issues not fully captured by LOS/delay 29 2025 Study Results – Eastbound Travel Time & Average Speed • Travel time from Lincoln
to I-15 ramps reduced to
No Build conditions with
signal optimization
Image Source: RCTC 30
2025 Travel Time
Average (Friday):
9:45 (min:sec)
2025 Study Results
• Updated methodology includes Friday PM analysis and Upper/Masters corridor • Intersection delay and LOS E or F following intersection:
• Serfas Club Dr at Green River Rd with LOS E (2050 Build) • Returns to LOS D with signal timing improvements
• Lincoln Ave, Fullerton Ave, Rimpau Ave, and California Ave at Foothill Pkwy with LOS E or F (2050 Build and No Build)
• Signal timing may return to LOS D for Fullerton, Rimpau, and California • Lincoln Ave maintains at a LOS E even with signal timing modifications • Bedford Canyon Rd at Foothill Pkwy with LOS E (2050 Build and No Build) • Maintains LOS E with signal timing improvements
• Signal optimization should improve operations to No Build conditions, or close to them, at most intersections 31
Summary
Initial (2024) vs.
Updated (2025)
32 Comparison of the Initial (2024) and Updated (2025) Study 2024 Green River Road/Foothill Study 2025 Green River Road/Foothill Study Traffic data used includes historical counts and data provided by CoC Additional traffic counts collected for Friday traffic Included license plate reader data
Establish volume of travel from GRR ramp to I-15 (end-to-end) Analysis for EB movement in the PM peak hour Included analysis for EB movement Friday PM Scenarios include:
• Existing conditions 2024
• 2030 No Build (0.5% annualized growth)
• 2030 Build (0.5% annualized growth, +300 VPH at GRR ramp) • 2050 No Build (0.5% annualized growth)
• 2050 Build (0.5% annualized growth, +300 VPH at GRR ramp) Scenarios include:
• Existing conditions 2025
• 2030 No Build +2% annual growth of cut-through traffic • 2030 Build +2% annual growth of cut-through traffic +330 VPH at GRR ramp
• 2050 No Build +2% annual growth of cut-through traffic • 2050 Build +2% annual growth of cut-through traffic +330 VPH at GRR ramp
Build condition include Green River off-ramp scenarios allowing and prohibiting RTOR
No change
Volumes distributed utilizing “Streetlight Data” and existing count data
Used license plate reader to compare distribution data
Synchro model of signalized intersections along GRR/Foothill Pkwy from SR-91 to I-15
Added Lincoln/Upper/Masters corridor
33 Summary of Results
2024 (Initial) Green River Road/Foothill Study 2025 (Revised) Green River Road/Foothill Study No ECOP Project:
• In 2050 scenario, Bedford Canyon Rd operates at LOS E No ECOP Project:
• High demands and right turns to Bedford Canyon and SB 15 • Upper/Masters intersections delays are due to downstream stop-controlled intersection
With ECOP Project and No Mitigation:
• In 2030 scenario, Bedford Canyon Rd operates at LOS E • In 2050, California Ave and Bedford Canyon Dr resulted with LOS E
With ECOP Project and No Mitigation:
• Intersections that will be impacted are (Weekday)
• Serfas Club Dr – (2050: LOS E)
• Lincoln Ave – (2050: LOS E)
• Fullerton Ave – (2050: LOS E)
• Rimpau Ave – (2030: LOS D & 2050: LOS F)
• California Ave – (2030: LOS E& 2050: LOS F)
• Bedford Canyon Dr– (2030: LOS D & 2050: LOS E)
• Incremental ECOP related volume impacts at California Ave and Bedford Canyon Rd, especially on Fridays
With ECOP Project AND Signal Optimization Mitigation:
• Mitigating with signal optimization reduces delay at all intersections (LOS D or better) (2050 Build)
• California Ave is improved to LOS D
• Bedford Canyon Rd operates at acceptable LOS D
(2030 and 2050)
With ECOP Project AND Signal Optimization Mitigation:
• Mitigating with signal optimization reduces delay at
intersections (similar to No-Build levels)
• California/Masters similar to No-Build 2030
• Note this signal will be signalized, resulting with LOS C 34 Conclusion
• Staff is satisfied with how the updated study validated the StreetLight Data with License Plate Readers, utilized more conservative information, and confirmed its suitability for modeling trip distribution and origin/destination trips. • There will be more cars on the streets as a result of this project, which will impact calls for service, infrastructure, enforcement, etc.
• Signal optimization is an acceptable mitigation, as proposed in the study • However, staff will advocate and recommend that RCTC mitigate impacts in the following ways:
• Funding for signal optimization and implementation
• Funding for additional street rehabilitation and maintenance • Funding for additional public safety enforcement efforts • Funding and implementation of infrastructure upgrades such as LPR’s, speed feedback signs, and traffic signalization installation
• Additional resources and funding to monitor signal operations 35 The Ask
Provide the City Council an update on the
Green River Road/Foothill Parkway
Traffic Study
36 Questions
?