2005-2006 San Francisco Bicycle Injury Collision Report

City and County of San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Planning Division

February 8, 2008 1 South Van Ness Avenue, 7th Floor San Francisco CA 94103 (415) 701-4500

REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

• While non-fatal injury collision totals have declined overall since 1998 by approximately 19.3%, the collision total for 2006 was 343, the same number as 2005. This reflects a nearly 8 percent increase from the 2004 figure of 316.

• Approximately 31% of bicycle collisions involved drivers from outside the City in both 2005 and 2006.

• Males were involved in collisions nearly 3 times more often than females in both 2005 and 2006, consistent with recent national data that males commute by bicycle 3 times as often as females, as noted in the Thunderhead Alliance “Bicycling and Walking in the US” Benchmarking Report in August, 2007.

INTRODUCTION

This inaugural collision report includes data from 1998 through 2006 for identification of recent trends in bicycle injury collisions, but focuses in more detail on 2005 and 2006 calendar year data. Data to analyze ten year trends is not available due to bicycle injury collision reporting omissions by the San Francisco Police Department in 1996 and 1997.

Long-term collision trends are summarized and intersections and street segments with the highest bicycle injury collision totals in San Francisco are listed. This information is used to help identify locations and collision trends that may need special attention and evaluate the efficacy of previous mitigation measures.

The intersections and street segments with the highest annual bicycle injury collision totals in this report are not to be construed as a list of the "most dangerous" intersections for bicycles in San Francisco. Motorized traffic, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic all play significant roles in determining injury collision totals: the more people that use an intersection, the higher the likelihood of collisions at those locations. Similarly, streets with bike lanes typically have significantly more

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 2 of 25 bicycle traffic than streets that have shared lanes or no bicycle facility at all, and are more likely to have bicycle-related injury collisions. While it may be true that more bicycles on a given street can make that street safer for bicycling by requiring greater motor vehicle driver awareness and understanding of bicycle traffic, the additional bicycle traffic volume also increases the potential conflicts on the street and may result in higher numbers of annual injury collisions. The high collision intersections and street segments listed in this report include some of the busiest locations in the city for bicycles. An increase

in bicycle collisions at an intersection or on a given segment of street could also be the result of random yearly fluctuations. Of the hundreds of intersections and thousands of blocks in San Francisco, in any one year some will have more collisions than usual, while other intersections and blocks will have lower collisions than their expected annual average.

The source of the collision data is the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records Systems (SWITRS) maintained by the California Highway Patrol (CHP). The California Vehicle Code (CVC) requires that local governments send their police collision reports to the State. The CHP provides electronic summaries of these reported collisions, which are then processed by local jurisdictions. The data used in this report excludes collisions that occurred on San Francisco freeways or private property, but includes collisions on city streets that are classified as state highways (such as 19th or Van Ness Avenues). There is typically a 6 month delay between the end of any calendar year and the official release of the composite SWITRS database by the CHP.

Due to the vast number of property damage-only collisions and limited Police Department resources, in San Francisco non-injury bicycle collisions are typically not reported in SWITRS. While all bicycle collisions are of significant concern, property damage-only, or non-injury collisions involving bicycles are not consistently reported to police, and the data produced by such reports is also not consistent or reliable since it is typically self-reported by one or more of the parties involved without investigation by a neutral third party. Injury and fatal collisions are reported more consistently over time, however. This report focuses on collisions that involve an injury to at least one of the parties involved in order to minimize the influence that changes in reporting procedures can have on collision trend analysis.

PART 1: CITYWIDE BICYCLE INJURY COLLISION TRENDS

Overall, San Francisco has experienced a significant decline in bicycle-related injury collisions over the past decade. It is also worth noting that there has been a significant increase in bicycling on San Francisco streets. However, this increase in bicycling has only recently been systematically measured and cannot

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 3 of 25 yet be linked or compared to injury collision trends in a statistical manner. The City of San Francisco began to systematically collect and analyze bicycle traffic volumes at 33 discreet locations around the city in calendar year 2006. In future years this citywide bicycle traffic count will provide valuable data to demonstrate annual increases or decreases in bicycle ridership. This data will then be used to further analyze bicycle injury collision trends and high-incident locations.

FIGURE 1 San Francisco Injury Collisions Involving Party Type Bicyclist 1998-2006

450 400 350 300 250 200 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

In Figure 1, the bicycle injury collision trends for the past nine years are shown. There was an 8% increase in collisions from 2004 to 2005, reversing a downward trend which stretched from 1998 to 2003. Reported non-fatal injury collisions in San Francisco totaled 343 in both the 2005 and 2006 calendar years. While these figures represent a nearly 8% increase over 2004 totals, they still represent a 19.3% drop from the 425 bicycle injury collisions reported in 1998.

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 4 of 25 FIGURE 2 Bicycle Injury Collisions Involving Ages 5 to 17 2000-2006

45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Though the total injury collision totals for bicyclists aged 5 to 17 years reflect a 55.1% decrease from 1998 to 2006, this is not consistent with overall bicycle injury collision trends in San Francisco and may be a reflection of a decrease in youth bicyclists on our streets. Increased levels of youth bicycle safety education at the middle and high school levels in the past several years are not wide- spread enough at this point to be a significant factor in collision reduction or commonly perceived notions of safety for bicyclists on the streets, but may influence future trends in youth ridership and bicycle injury collisions as educational programming is expanded.

TABLE 1 Non-Fatal Bicycle Injury Collisions by Gender 1998-2006 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Percent Total 425 429 364 360 307 311 316 343 343 3198 100% Collisions Male 333 340 307 282 241 235 242 265 250 2495 78% Female 89 89 55 74 65 75 69 73 92 681 21% Not Stated 3 0 2 4 1 1 5 5 1 22 1%

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 5 of 25 Since 2000, more than 3 times as many male as female cyclists were involved in injury collisions. This is consistent with current local bicycle injury collision data trends and recently reported national trends on bicycle commuting rates, as reported by the Thunderhead Alliance in their “Bicycling and Walking in the US” Benchmarking Report of August, 2007. It is worth noting that 2006 saw the highest percentage of female bicyclists involved in injury collisions that has yet to be recorded in San Francisco, with 26.8% of the annual bicycle-related injury collisions involving females. This may be another indication that more women are riding bicycles on San Francisco streets, another trend that will be examined in the annual City-wide Bicycle Counts study that was launched in 2006.

TABLE 2 Fatal Bicycle Injury Collisions with Age, Gender, and Lighting conditions 2000-2006 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 2 4 1 1 1 2* 2** Collisions 1) M- age 1) F-24 yrs, M-47 M-31 M-40 1) M- age 1) F-26 Gender, unknown, daylight yrs, yrs, yrs, unknown, yrs, dark Age, and daylight daylight daylight daylight daylight 2) F-40 yrs, Lighting **2) F-64 2) M-48 daylight *2) M- yrs, dawn yrs, age daylight 3) F- age unknown, unknown, dark daylight

4) M-58 yrs, dark

* includes solo fall while riding from sidewalk into crosswalk **includes a bicycle-bicycle collision

As shown in Table 2, there were 8 male and 5 female fatal bicycle collisions in the period, with almost 70% occurring during daylight hours.

TABLE 3 Bicycle Injury Collision Severity 2000-2006 (Percentage of annual total bicycle injury collisions) Extent 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Fatal <1% 1% <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Severe 4% 5% 4% 6% 8% 7% 7% Other visible 51% 50% 57% 44% 43% 48% 47% injury

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 6 of 25 Complaint of 41% 36% 39% 44% 44% 41% 47% pain Table 3 lists the previous seven-year injury collisions according to the three non- fatal injury severity categories used by all police departments in the State. The percentage of severe injuries increased slightly along with the “complaint of pain” injuries. The “other visible injury” category increased with a high in 2002 but has seen an overall decline by 2006.

FIGURE 3 Top Three Primary Collision Factors 2000-2006

80 Improper Turning 70 Improper Passing 60 50 Other Hazardous Movement 40 Traffic Signs/Signals 30 20 Auto R/W Violation 10 Unsafe Speed 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Figure 3 lists the top three Primary Collision Factors for bicycle injury collisions from the years 2000 to 2006. There is consistency over this period in that motor vehicle Right-of-Way violations against bicyclists accounted for the highest number of collisions each year, while Traffic Signs/Signal violations on the part of both parties, with the exception of 2002, appeared as the second most common collision factor. Other recurring factors are Unsafe Speed –by both parties, Improper Turning –by both parties, and Other Hazardous Movement violations. Of note is that Unsafe Speed emerged in 2005 and 2006 as significant factor in bicycle injury collisions.

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 7 of 25

FIGURE 3A Assignment of Fault in Top Three Primary Collision Factors 2000-2006 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Violation Fault Fault Fault Fault Fault Fault Fault Assigned Assigned Assigned Assigned Assigned Assigned Assigned Driv Cycl Driv Cycl Driv Cycl Driv Cycl Driv Cycl Driv Cycl Driv Cycl Auto R/W 52% 48% 57% 43% 70% 30% 48% 52% 57% 43% 52% 48% 80% 20%

Traffic 33% 67% 20% 80% 31% 69% 24% 76% 33% 67% 22% 78% 23% 77% Signs/Sign als Other Haz. 72% 28% 76% 24% n/a n/a 73% 27% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Movement Improper n/a n/a n/a n/a 24% 76% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Passing Improper n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 86% 14% n/a n/a n/a n/a Turning Unsafe n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 24% 76% 14% 86% Speed Note: “n/a” denotes that the category was not within the top three violations for that specific year.

Figure 3A lists percentages of the assignment of fault for each of the top three primary collision factors for each year between 2000 and 2006. For certain violations, such as Unsafe Speed and Other Hazardous Movement, the percentage of the time when the driver and cyclist are assigned fault remained nearly constant. The Traffic Signs and Signals violation shows the cyclist more often at fault for each of the years, though the ratio of fault assignment varies between 2:1 and 4:1. The most variable fault assignment relates to the Auto Right of Way violation. Drivers were found to be at fault for all years except 2003, but the ratio of fault assignment swung widely between close to even, as in 2000 and 2005, to a 4:1 ratio of the driver at fault in 2006.

TABLE 4 Bicycle vs. Pedestrian Injury Collisions 2000-2006 No. of No. of Primary Collision Factor Collisions Pedestrian Fatalities Ped Violation Unsafe Speed Traffic Signs/Signals Other

2000 16 0 9 1 2 4 (1)*

2001 15 1 8 1 3 3 (1*)

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 8 of 25 2002 12 0 5 1 2 4 (1*)

2003 14 0 11 0 0 3 (1*)

2004 18 1 12 1 1 4 (1*)

2005 20 0 10 2 3 5

2006 12 0 6 1 1 4

Total 107 2 61 7 12 27 (5*) * Wrong Side of Road

Table 4 shows reported bicycle-pedestrian injury collisions from 2000 through 2006. The highest percentage of the primary collision factors involves pedestrian violations. Given the regularity with which bicycle-pedestrian collisions are anecdotally reported in San Francisco, the numbers in Table 4 may not reflect all pedestrian injuries that result from bicycle collisions.

PART 2: BICYCLE INJURY COLLISION VICTIM IDENTIFICATION

While bicycling for transportation in a dense and challenging urban environment is commonly viewed as a transportation mode practiced only by the physically strong, by the young and fully-able bodied, or by the economically or politically marginalized, this section will examine who is involved in bicycle injury collisions.

TABLE 5 Bicycle Injury Collisions by Gender 2005-2006 2005 % 2006 %

Males 265 77.3% 250 72.9%

Females 73 21.8% 92 26.8%

Not Stated 5 1.5% 1 0.2%

Total 343 100% 343 100%

In San Francisco for both 2005 and 2006, roughly 3 times as many male as female cyclists were involved in injury collisions. This is consistent with local bicycle injury collision trends (see Table 1 above) and recently reported national

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 9 of 25 trends on bicycle commuting rates, as reported by the Thunderhead Alliance in their “Bicycling and Walking in the US” Benchmarking Report of August, 2007. It is worth noting that 2006 saw the highest percentage of female bicyclists involved in injury collisions yet to be recorded in San Francisco, with 26.8% of the annual collisions involving females.

FIGURE 4 Bicycle Injury Collisions by Gender and Age 2005

70% 60% 50% 40% Males 30% Females 20% 10% 0% <18 18- 31- 41- 51- 61- 71 + 30 40 50 60 70

FIGURE 4A Bicycle Injury Collisions by Gender and Age 2006

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 10 of 25 80% 70% 60% 50% Males 40% Females 30% 20% 10% 0% <18 18- 31- 41- 51- 61- 71 + 30 40 50 60 70

Figures 4 and 4A show a breakdown of cyclists’ ages and genders for 2005 and 2006. In both 2005 and 2006, 18-30 year old bicyclists accounted for the majority of both male and female injury collision victims, followed by the 31-40 year old group and the 41-50 year old group for both genders. In both years, 18-30 year olds made up approximately 2/3 of the total bicycle injury collisions involving females.

BICYCLISTS AND MOTORISTS INVOLVED IN INJURY COLLISIONS BY RESIDENCE The residence of parties involved in injury collisions are broken down in the following sections to establish a baseline for comparison in future years. As the metropolitan center of the Bay Area, San Francisco experiences a daily influx of commuters and business traffic that includes both motor vehicle and bicycle traffic from around the 10 Bay Area counties.

FIGURE 5 Bicyclists and Motorists Involved in Collisions by Residence 2005

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 11 of 25 16%

Bicycle and SF Car

Bicycle and Non-SF Car Bicycle and 27% Unknow n

57%

2005 Statistics shown in Figure 5 indicate that the majority of bicycle-related injury collisions involve San Francisco cyclists (286) and San Francisco drivers (140), and more than half of the collisions involved San Francisco bicyclists and San Francisco drivers (57%). Included in the percentage breakdowns on this chart is data for non-San Francisco cyclists, which amount to 10% of the total number of bicycle injury collisions. The majority of the non-San Francisco drivers involved in collisions with San Francisco cyclists are from the Bay Area; 40% reside in the South Bay, 22% are residents of the North Bay, and 18% are from the East Bay. In 2005 10% of bicycle injury collisions involved cyclists from outside San Francisco, and the cyclists’ origin are unknown in 2% of all collisions. Most (49%) non-San Francisco cyclists involved in collisions in San Francisco are residents of the East Bay.

FIGURE 5A Cyclists and Motorists Involved in Collisions by Residence I2006

18%

Bicycle and SF Car

Bicycle and Non-SF Car Bicycle and 30% Unknow n 52%

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 12 of 25 2006 data shows nearly the same percentage breakdowns as did 2005. There were small changes from 2005 data regarding the origin of non-San Francisco drivers involved in collisions with San Francisco cyclists: 83% are from the Bay Area; 42% reside in the South Bay, 14% are residents of the North Bay, and 27% are from the East Bay. The number of non-San Francisco residents involved in bicycle-related injury collisions highlights a need for a regional approach to educating both motorists and bicyclists regarding their rights and responsibilities while operating a vehicle on the roadway, and seemingly serves to reinforce San Francisco’s emerging role as innovators (and champions of State and National approval) of new bicycle–related traffic control devices, such as Shared Roadway Markings, Bike Boxes, contra-flow bike lanes, “floating” bikes lanes, and left side bike lanes, as well as colored pavement applications. Such leadership is fostering standardization both in the Bay Area and throughout the state. This standardization of bicycle facilities will serve to provide more consistency in the street environment that bicyclists use, and to which motor-vehicle operators must acclimate.

PART 3: PRE- COLLISION MOVEMENTS AND PRIMARY COLLISION FACTORS

TABLE 6 Motorist and Cyclist Movements Preceding Collisions 2005

Number of % Motorist Cyclist Movements Collisions Change Movements

2005 2006

Straight Straight 86 94 9%

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 13 of 25 Left Turn Various 45 56 24%

Right Turn Various 46 43 -7%

Parked Various 26 23 * - 12%

Various Wrong way driving 11 8 - 27%

Backing Various 5 6 20%

U turn Various 6 7 17%

Changing lanes Various 5 3 -40%

Various Changing lanes 7 4 -43%

Entering traffic Various 6 3 -50%

Various Entering traffic 12 6 -50%

*May include “dooring” collisions, where a bicyclist collides with the opened door of parked motor vehicle. It is worth noting that several of motorist and bicyclist movements prior to collisions are linked to a variety of types of collisions. For example, the row that identifies collisions preceded by “straight” movements by both motorists and bicyclists could include such diverse collisions as those in which a motorist and bicyclist collide in an intersection when coming from perpendicular streets, or collisions in which a motorist and bicyclist are traveling the same direction on the same street and the collision occurs while the motorist is overtaking the bicyclist. Other movements such as wrong way bicycling indicate a need for direct counter-measures the educate bicyclists, and possibly break down historic but outdated (and sometimes dangerous) cultural norms, such as riding on the left, facing traffic, riding on the sidewalk, or ignoring traffic controls.

PRIMARY COLLISION FACTORS CITED FOR BICYCLE INJURY COLLISIONS

FIGURE 6 Most Common Motorist Violations 2005 and 2006

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 14 of 25 80 70 60 50 2005 40 2006 30 20 10 0 t t f r r s d s e h d g g g f n e o e d u s n n y e g l n n n c a e r p p i i a i o i a o e a f a s e o

i o e o s f n o d t r m R d r r s p n n r r i s h a W a e t R p p l r n g u a o S W a f U i S v t z g o T O T m m i i P o u O S I I a V S A M H

While the two most common Primary Collision Factors (“Motor-Vehicle ROW Violations” against bicyclists and “Traffic Signs and Signals” violations by both parties) for both 2005 and 2006 are consistent with recent local and national trends, it is surprising that “Unsafe Speed” emerged in both years as a leading factor in bicycle collisions. The emergence of unsafe speed as leading injury collision factor suggests the need for counter-measures such as traffic calming and additional outreach and enforcement to mitigate speeding.

TABLE 7 Most Frequently Reported CA Vehicle Code (CVC) Violations Noted* in Bicycle Injury Collisions 2005 and 2006 CVC Violations 2005 2006 Percent Violations Violations Change

22350 (speeding) 51 44 -14%

21453 A (not stopping at a red light) 41 27 -34%

21801 A (u-turn right of way violation) 30 34 13%

22107 (turning violation) 28 18 -36%

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 15 of 25 22517 (unsafe door opening) 26 27 +4%

21804 A (yielding right of way) 18 8 -56%

21650.1 (passing violation) 17 14 -18%

21750 (overtaking violation) 7 10 43%

21801 B (u-turn signaling violation) 5 4 -20%

21200 (improper bicycle operation) 4 6 +50%

21703 (tailgating) 4 2 -50%

21453 B (right turn on red violation) 3 2 -33%

21461 A (failure to obey sign or signal) 2 1 -50%

21657 (wrong-way driving) 2 4 +100%

21457 A (flashing red/yellow signal) 1 1 0% *It should also be noted that CVC violations reported in injury collision report do not always result in citation of the noted violations.

The fact that speeding was the most-commonly reported violation of the CVC involved in bicycle injury collisions (Table 7,) and has emerged in 2005-2006 as a leading Primary Collision Factor (Figure 6 above) reinforces the apparent need for the City to address unsafe speeds on San Francisco streets.

PART 4: BICYCLE INJURY COLLISIONS BY TIME OF DAY, LIGHTING, DAY, AND MONTH The tables and charts below show when the 2005 and 2006 bicycle injury collisions occurred - what time of day, what day of the week, and what month of the year. The time of day and day of week are generally consistent with peak hour commute times and days, but are seasonally impacted by local weather. The months of the year in which collisions occur is more linked to weather and the fluctuating duration of daylight hours associated with the seasons and changes resultant from the change between Standard Time and Daylight Savings Time.

FIGURE 7 Bicycle Involved Collisions by Time of Day 2005 – 2006

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 16 of 25 50 45 40 35 30 2005 25 20 2006 15 10 5 0

Figure 7 shows the time of day when bicycle injury collisions occurred. It is not surprising that in 2005 and 2006, the highest incidence of bicycle injury collisions occurred during the P.M. peak, from 4 pm to 7 pm (12 %.) In 2006, bicycle injury collisions occurring in the a.m. peak were closer to the number of collisions occurring in the p.m. peak than in the previous year. The lowest incidences of collisions occurred between 3 A.M. and 6 A.M. in both 2005 and 2006 and, when fewer cyclists and motorists are on the road.

TABLE 8 Bicycle Injury Collisions by Lighting Conditions 2005-2006 Lighting Conditions 2005 Collisions 2006 Collisions Daylight 248 233 Dusk/Dawn 9 19 Dark with lighting 83 82 Dark with no lighting 2 1 Dark, lights not 1 0 functioning

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 17 of 25 Dark, Total 96 102

Table 8 shows that 72% of the total 2005 collisions occurred during daylight hours, while in 2006, 69.5% of 2006 collisions occurred during daylight hours. The annual City-wide Bicycle Counts Study (launched in 2006) will provide necessary data in the future to examine whether the ratio of daytime injury collisions to those which occur in the dark is consistent with the bicycle traffic volumes on San Francisco streets during those hours. This may point to a need for more wide- spread bicycle light campaigns, like the highly successful outdoor transit advertising spots and free bicycle light distribution conducted in Fall 2007 as a collaboration between the MTA Bicycle Program and the Bicycle Coalition, with Proposition K funding through the San Francisco County Transportation Authority (TA).

FIGURE 8 Bicycle Collisions by Day of the Week 2005 – 2006

70 60 50 40 2005 30 2006 20 10 0 Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun

Figure 8 shows predictable results: fewer bicycle injury collisions occur on weekends when not as many transportation bicyclists are commuting to/from work. Recreational bicyclists do not typically face as challenging traffic interactions or conflict with as large volumes of motor-vehicle traffic.

FIGURE 9 Bicycle Injury Collisions by Month 2005 – 2006

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 18 of 25

50

40

30 2005 20 2006

10

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

Figure 9 shows that the fewest injury collisions occurred during the rainy winter months of December and January when less people choose to commute by bicycle, and more collisions occurred during the drier and warmer months of April, May, June, September, and October. The decrease in collisions during July and August of each year is worth noting, but cannot currently be explained.

PART 5: HIGHEST BICYCLE INJURY COLLISION LOCATIONS

The majority (58% in 2005 and 52% in 2006) of all collisions did not occur at intersections. It is notable that the large majority of intersection collisions noted in TABLES 10 and 11 occurred on streets with bicycle facilities (nearly 83%), as did the collisions occurring at segments (75%) in 2005. Tables 10 through 12 note the intersections and segments for 2005 and 2006 where most bicycle injury collisions occurred. In 2005, the Market/Gough intersection incurred the highest number of collisions, as did the Market and Gough Street segment for that year.

TABLE 10 BICYCLE INJURY COLLISIONS AT INTERSECTIONS 2005-2006

2005 % 2006 %

Intersections 143 41.7% 162 47.2%

Non-intersection Street Segments 198 57.7% 181 52.8% Even though bicyclists spend significantly less time riding through intersections

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 19 of 25 than on non-intersection spans of street, the somewhat equal distribution of intersection and non-intersection injury collisions shown for both years in TABLE 10 is consistent with longer term trends, and can likely be attributed to the numerous conflict points and complex dynamics of traffic at intersections versus non-intersection segments of street.

TABLE 11 INTERSECTIONS WITH HIGHEST BICYCLE INJURY COLLISIONS 2000-2006

Street Cross Street No. of Collisions

Market Street Gough Street 9 6th Street Folsom Street 8 Market Street McCoppin Street 7 Masonic Avenue Fell Street 7 Market Street Valencia Street 7 Polk Street McAllister Street 7 3rd Street Brannan Street 6 16th Street Harrison Street 6 Market Street Polk Street 6 Valencia Street 16th Street 6 6th Street Howard Street 5 7th Street Townsend Street 5 16th Street Dolores Street 5 16th Street South Van Ness Avenue 5 Division Street Potrero Avenue 5 Market Street 2nd Street 5 Market Street 8th Street 5 Valencia Street 17th Street 5

TABLE 12 STREET SEGMENTS WITH HIGHEST BICYCLE INJURY COLLISIONS 2000-2006

Street A Between No. of Collisions

Market Street 5th Street and 4th Street 17 Market Street 5th Street and 6th Street 9 Market /Kearny Street 3rd Street and 4th Street 7

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 20 of 25 Market Street New Montgomery Street and 2nd Street 6 Masonic Street Fell Street and Oak Street 5 16th Street Guerrero Street and Dolores Street 4 Haight Street Divisadero Street and Broderick Street 4 JFK Drive Transverse Drive and 30th Street 4 Market Street 7th Street and 8th Street 4 Market Street 8th Street and 9th Street 4 Market Street Sutter Street and Montgomery Street 4 Ocean Avenue San Jose Avenue and Geneva Street 4

In looking at high-collision locations from 2000 to 2006 data in TABLES 11 and 12 above, Market Street stands out prominently, with 6 intersections and 8 street segments on these lists. This is predictable because of commute patterns to and from downtown that empty onto or originate from Market Street. The high- collision intersections of Market and 2nd Streets and Market and 8th Streets border a section of Market that experienced high numbers of bicycle injury collisions during this period. It is interesting to note that the intersections within this stretch of Market Street (3rd – 7th Streets) did not register on the high-incident intersection list. It is to be expected that most of the locations on these two lists are in the downtown core of the City, where volumes of both motor vehicle and bicycle traffic are higher. It is also worth noting that South of Market (SOMA) shows up regularly in the high collision intersections but does not appear in the high collision street segments. This may merit further study to determine if and how the prevalence of one-way streets in SOMA is a significant factor in collision patterns there. It is also worth noting that 16th Street shows up on both lists, showing a concentration of collisions in the Mission District.

PART 6: BICYCLE INJURY COLLISIONS BY PARTY TYPE INVOLVED

TABLE 13 Non-Fatal Injury and Fatal Bicycle Collisions by Parties Involved 2005

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 21 of 25 Total Percent Total Bicyclist Involved With Injury of Injury Fatal Collisions Collisions

Motor Vehicle 285 84% 1

Parked Car, Object, Other 20 6% 0

Non-Collision 15 4% 1

Not Stated 6 2% 0

Pedestrian 15 4% 0

Other Bicyclist 0 0% 0

TABLE 14 Non-Fatal Injury and Fatal Bicycle Collisions by Parties Involved 2006 Total Percent Total Bicyclist Involved With Injury of Injury Fatal Collisions Collisions

Motor Vehicle 288 84% 1

Parked Car, Object, Other 18 5% 0

Non-Collision 15 4% 0

Not Stated 15 4% 0

Pedestrian 7 1% 0

Other Bicyclist 5 1% 1

It is not surprising that the vast majority of reported injury collisions shown in TABLES 15 and 16 occurred between bicycles and motor vehicles. The crash dynamics of bicycle-motor vehicle collision are much more likely to result in significant injury, and non-motor vehicle-involved bicycle collisions or crashes are

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 22 of 25 less likely to be reported through SFPD.

PART 7: CONCLUSION

INJURY COLLISION TRENDS IN SAN FRACNISCO VERSUS CALIFORNIA

FIGURE 1 San Francisco Injury Collisions Involving Party Type Bicyclist 1998-2006

450 400 350 300 250 200 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

FIGURE 10 California Injury Collisions Involving Party Type Bicyclist 1998-2006

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 23 of 25 12,500 12,000 11,500 11,000 10,500 10,000 9,500 9,000 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

A comparison of Figures 1 and 10 shows that during the period 1999-2005, San Francisco’s bicycle injury collision trend roughly mirrored the statewide pattern, with a significant decrease in injury collisions between 2000 and 2004, and a subsequent increase from 2004 to 2005. During the period 1998-2006 California experienced an overall 14.1% decline in total bicycle injury collisions and San Francisco saw a similar decline of 19.3%. San Francisco saw a large (14.3%) drop in bicycle injury collisions in 2001 from the 2000 total. California also experienced a significant decrease (5.6%) in bicycle injury collisions in the 2005 calendar year. While an over-average number of rainy days could impact the total bicycle injury collisions, none of the winters involved in those calendar years saw prolonged days of rain that might reduce bicycle riding and the resultant collisions. The fact that San Francisco experienced a more dramatic percentage rise in injury collisions from 2003-2005 may in part be a result of significant increases in bicycle traffic volumes on SF streets. City wide Bicycle Count data from 2006 and 2007 measured a 15% increase in bicycle trips during that year. Anecdotal evidence indicates that this kind of increase may be a longer term trend that has stretched back several years, so that while SF bicycle injury collision totals have seen a slight increase since 2001, the actual collision rate (collisions in relation to total number of bicyclists) for bicycling may even have decreased during the period 2003-2006.

Bicycle injury collision trends can be influenced by numerous factors that are not easily identifiable. San Francisco is yet unable to definitively link bicycle injury trends to growth or decline in bicycle traffic volumes on our streets. Beginning in 2006 the SFMTA Bicycle Program began systematically measuring bicycle traffic volume at 33 locations throughout the city. While initial indications from a 2006 and 2007 Citywide Bicycle Count Report show an overall average increase of 15% in bicycling at the measured locations, this cannot yet be statistically linked to annual collision data in a meaningful way aside from noting that recent increases in bicycle injury collisions may be partially influenced by an increase in bicycle traffic on San Francisco streets. Among some of the other key factors that can influence long-term collision trends are:

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 24 of 25  Irregularities in annual weather patterns, such as drought or steady winter rains, that allow for increased or decreased bicycle use  Incentives that change the amount of bicycling individuals engage in (such as growing concern about climate change, higher gas prices, or added perception of safety while cycling.)  Improvements in bicycle facilities, roadway conditions and traffic controls (for example: additional bicycle lanes, shared roadway markings, bicycle related signage.)  Impacts of bicycle safety education and outreach focusing on key issues that contribute to bicycle injury collisions.  Changes in local enforcement levels or fines, making bicyclists less or more willing to engage in risky riding practices. Coupled with enhanced enforcement for bicycle safety (targeted enforcement at high bicycle injury collision locations,) the establishment of a Bicycle Citation Diversion Program (a bicycle violator “traffic school”) would provide a forum to educate bicycle traffic violators and potentially reduce injury collisions.  Cultural changes and educational efforts that lead to fewer injuries (increased awareness of bicycles by drivers, increased awareness of safe cycling practices by bicyclists, through both education and exposure) or more injury collisions (increased motorists aggression, cell phone usage or other distracted driving, use of fixed gear bicycles without brakes or with limited braking capacity, and social trends that foster influxes of novice bicyclists.)

The bicycle injury collision totals reported in any one year are a result of an unknown and fluctuating combination of these factors. With a projected increase in bicycle use in San Francisco it is reasonable to assume that there will be a subsequent increase in injury collisions as well, but growing bicycle safety programming, construction of more and better bicycle facilities, better driver training, systematic bicycle education at several age levels and more constant bicycle safety outreach in the public realm may serve to offset the additional volume of bicycles in impacting annual bicycle injury collision totals.

San Francisco 2005-06 Bicycle Collision Report Page 25 of 25