2008 SAN FRANCISCO State of Cycling Report 2008 SAN FRANCISCO State of Cycling Report Table of Contents 1 Introduction 2 Purpose of the State of Cycling Report 3 History of the State of Cycling Report 3 Bicycle Counts 4 Purpose 4 How the Counts Were Conducted 5 Results 7 Bicycle Survey 8 Purpose 8 How the Survey Was Conducted 9 Results 19 Improving Bicycling in San Francisco 20 Rating Bicycling in San Francisco 21 Recommendations 22 Plans for Future Reports List of Figures 4 Figure 1. Bicycle Count Locations 6 Figure 2. San Francisco Bicycle Counts 2006-2008 8 Figure 3. Intercept Survey Locations 9 Figure 4. Measures of Bicycle Ridership in San Francisco 9 Figure 5. Proportion of Frequent Cyclists to Infrequent Cyclists in San Francisco 10 Figure 6. Trip Purpose as a Percentage of All Trips Made in a Day 11 Figure 7. Cyclists’ Motivation to Ride 12 Figure 8. Reported Gender of Frequent vs. Infrequent Cyclists 13 Figure 9. Ratings of Barriers to Bicycling 14 Figure 10. Percentage of Respondents who Identifie d E a c h B a r r i e r a s a H i n d r a n c e t o Bicycling 1 5 F i g u r e 1 1 . F r e q u e n t a n d I n f r e q u e n t C y c l i s t s ’ F a m i l i a r i t y w i t h S a n F r a n c i s c o ’ s B i c y c l i n g Resources 16 Figure 12. All Cyclists’ Ratings of San Francisco’s Bicycling Infrastructure 1 6 F i g u r e 1 3 . F r e q u e n t a n d I n f r e q u e n t C y c l i s t s ’ P e r c e p t i o n s o f S a n F r a n c i s c o ’ s B i c y c l i n g Infrastructure 17 Figure 14. Agreement with Statement “Cyclists have a legal right to use the road” 17 Figure 15. Commonly Witnessed Unsafe Cycling Behaviors 18 Figure 16. Commonly Witnessed Unsafe Motorist Behaviors Toward Cyclists 18 Figure 17. Unsafe Driving and Cycling Behavior: Differences in Perception 18 Figure 18. Safety and Cyclist Behavior List of Tables 5 Table 1. Locations with Statistically Significant Changes in Bicycle Volumes during the Evening Commute 8 Table 2. Location and Day of Intercept Surveys 12 Table 3. Ethnic and Racial Comparison of Survey Data to San Francisco Population 20 Table 4. Rating Bicycling in San Francisco City of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom San Francisco Board of Supervisors San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) Nathaniel P. Ford Sr., Executive Director/CEO Board of Directors: James McCray, Jr. Tom Nolan Cameron Beach Shirley Breyer Black Malcolm A. Heinicke Jerry Lee Bruce Oka Bicycle Advisory Committee: Dr. Andrew Bindman Richard Tilles Marc Brandt Susan King Hitesh Soneji Bert Hill Jerry Ervin Rufus J. Davis, Jr. Casey Allen Technical Advisory Committee: Michael Radetsky Faiz Khan Melissa Pelkey Travis Fox Dr. Andrew Bindman San Francisco Bicycle Coalition

CONSULTING TEAM Alta Planning + Design Brett Hondorp, Principal Lauren Ledbetter, Associate Holly Dabral, Designer Henne Group Jeff Henne, Principal 1 Introduction Over the past several years the number of people bicycling in San Francisco has surged. Bike to Work Day has seen dramatic increases since its inception in 1994, with bicycles outnumbering cars two to one on Market Street at Van Ness Avenue during 2008’s Bike to Work Day. Bicycle usage has increased on roadways where the City has installed bicycle lanes including Valencia Street, Polk Street and Fell Street.1 San Francisco voters asked for and received car-free Saturdays in Golden Gate Park. The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) recognizes and supports the increased popularity of bicycling and the associated environmental, health and transportation benefits. At the same time, the Agency acknowledges the potential for safety issues and road user conflicts that may arise as more cyclists—and more people new to urban bicycling—take to the streets. This first State of Cycling Report has been developed to provide a snapshot of cycling in San Francisco and to identify ways that the SFMTA can increase safe bicycling.

1 See evaluation reports for these three streets on the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency’s website: http://www.sfmta.com/cms/rbikes/3172.html

San Francisco State of Cycling 2008 | 1 Purpose of the In addition to this State of State of Cycling Report Cycling Report, the SFMTA has published two companion This first State of Cycling technical documents that Report is intended to give a provide detailed descriptions snapshot of cycling in San of the count and survey Francisco. The report provides methodologies along with a baseline analysis of bicycling additional analysis, and from information gathered via include summary tables of bicycle counts and surveys count and survey results. conducted during 2006, 2007 and 2008. This report responds to the questions: History of the State of Cycling Report • How have bicycle volumes changed between 2006 and In August 2006, the SFMTA 2008? Bicycle Program conducted its first citywide bicycle count to • How much do people provide a baseline for future bicycle in San Francisco? bicycle count comparisons. • Who is bicycling in San Thirty-three locations were Francisco and who is not? selected for bicycle counts. In August 2007 and in August • Why are people bicycling 2008, the City conducted and what motivates them to follow-up bicycle counts, do so? which were compared to the • What are the differences, if 2006 counts to determine any, between people who changes in cycling volumes bicycle and people who do and patterns. not? In spring 2008, the City • What barriers prevent conducted two survey efforts including a random phone people from bicycling in San survey of San Francisco Francisco? residents and cyclist intercept • How satisfied are cyclists surveys at 15 locations. Both with San Francisco’s surveys included a “trip diary” bicycling infrastructure? component. Approximately 400 usable responses were • How safe and comfortable received from each survey. do people feel when These 800 responses were bicycling in San Francisco? analyzed and compared to • How well do cyclists and determine characteristics of motorists share the road? bicycling trips, characteristics of cyclists, behavior of cyclists • How well-known are the and attitudes toward bicycling. SFMTA’s bicycling outreach programs?

2 | San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency 2 Bicycle Counts

The bicycle counts collected during 2006, 2007 and 2008 provide a valuable snapshot of the level of cycling in San Francisco. These counts serve as baseline measurements for the SFMTA Bicycle Program. An analysis of these counts identified several statistically significant trends in ridership, including a 14 percent increase in overall bicycle ridership from 2006 to 2007, a 24 percent increase in overall bicycle ridership from 2007 to 2008 and a 43 percent increase in overall bicycle ridership from 2006 to 2008. Future counts are planned so that the City can continue to track changes in bicycle ridership.

This chapter provides a brief overview of the 2006-08 bicycle count data. For a more detailed report on the latest data, please see the “2008 San Francisco Bicycle Count Report.”

San Francisco State of Cycling 2008 | 3 Purpose of the Bicycle How the Counts Were Counts were collected at Counts Conducted three general locations: 1) in the downtown core, 2) at a The SFMTA has established Bicycle counts were secondary cordon established regular bicycle counts for conducted at 33 intersections midway across the City along several reasons. First, these during August of 2006, key bicycle routes, and 3) in counts document baseline 2007 and 2008. A total of outlying neighborhoods. Most bicycling activity at key 35 counts were conducted count locations were at the locations and allow the City to each year, with 31 counts intersection of two bicycle measure changes in bicycle occurring during the evening routes. Figure 1 shows the volumes over time. Second, peak period from 5:00-6:30 count locations from 2006-08. correlating count data with p.m. Three counts took changes in the environment place in the morning peak At each count location, such as installation of bicycle period from 8:00-9:00 a.m., observers recorded the lanes, increased publicity and one during the midday number of cyclists, the around cycling or economic period from 1:00-2:00 p.m. direction of the cyclist and changes, such as increased Bicyclists at 5th and Market whether cyclists were riding gas prices, may assist the streets were counted during on sidewalks or riding against SFMTA in understanding how all three periods. The evening the designated flow of traffic. these changes affect travel peak period was chosen At locations where bicycle behavior. With additional data, as the focus, as there is a volumes were low, observers forecasting models can be greater mix of trips than in the also recorded if a cyclist was improved to better predict morning when most trips are wearing a helmet and noted changes in cycling rates. work-related. the perceived gender of the cyclist.

Figure 1. Bicycle Count Locations

Count Locations a.m. a.m./p.m./Midday p.m. New 2008 Locations Bicycle Network Bike Routes Bike Lanes Bike Paths

C R IS S INA Y MAR POINT F NORTH IE L ASON D M

RA BAY LINCOLN B T M C H A O LH O E S A C L H CISCO U E N T ER FRA M M L A B B Y ID V U A O H S A WIC I R W EEN A A N N GR C S A H D IN E G ON T R PT O O OM N WAY CIFIC S C AD A T P B BRO T A P O A

W R Y T C

L E E E T K O E

S B T M R I S R

O D O

C

T Y I N S

HE O E N

R A

R AY S CL S R T

E ER D Y TT 2 SU R I O D L MAR 5 N A EL CAMIN E T LAKE E W H ST O R PO T E H K R P A

3 O A M W 2 0 N

R L T E D K

G H B

2 T U EARY S CLEMEN 3 G M

E M T R O L 1 S L E S D A A O 5 L L B R S 8 T R O LO O T F T H O N K I 3 H TER N S O LI I 4 L P MC A N I T TE C GA K EN S H TUR GOLD OVE D G C GR N IN 5 E K N O T S 3 LTO H R

F FU N T R O D U

T 1 W E C N O 4

CABRILLO 0 T T K T T S H H

4 A A 4 3 3 T 7 3 LL 7 0

6 E

V T B F O

R N H T T T I N A O D

H H H I S 8 R AGE T ZA P IS H E M 11 T K T R H K LE A A CE S O JF MIDD N DUB DIVISION K S H

A V B 14TH N

E U

S

S R R

A

A S Y

S N 16TH E HUGO NASSUS C 6 PAR H

T IRVING E C H Z MARIPOSA L 17TH A

YT

O

N H KIRKHAM V

A A

I

N P

R L C E

7 O D O E R U

T

T I R N

I A H R

S B R I C

N L E E O

E

Pacific Ocean I L San Francisco Bay T A K

A

N T R I

N A

O 22ND O

I

M S

L 23RD K IN A S G A

T G RD N 23 N R 2

U E

0

E S

N S 3

T

A A 4 A O

H

T T H Y S JERSE T H O H A N G

W D CLIPPER U 26TH CESAR CHAVEZ Y A E

R

W R

O S A E D OD PORTOL S A L Y I R E DE N E W O E C V E D H E

E N R O Z R O S A H H A H S B 1 30T U E 6 Y V GH A T A O NS B S A H N I KD 1 E VICENTE 4 M AL S T S P H SY O E L O IAL E

H L R H ST P

T Y DU 5 R E IN 3 N E B E S SLOAT O H O SW C J CRESC OR N ENT O TH A T E E I S S

E

N N I U

S

L 2 E

N

S

Y G 0 EY B ER R B S E K T E L T ON E S L M LV A E E I P N HEA N RST R H S AL T Y IN T A N S O N S E U E H S

G Y O N RE WINST A H ON T N M D I

A E E R 3 K L L

E A S O

K H D OC H E Y A P F A N L O T N

I 9 N N C 1 U P E T AU A L HOLLO L R WAY R O

D LL

E

Y LL S

L E ANS A RC R M N J E E B O V H H M R

N E C M T

E U U B I IR 1 F K 9 N

A T G O H

S H L E Y N U K N E A V N Y EM A T

L L

S A E

I

E N BROTHERHOOD R

L

E J A S R SAGAMORE M P A E E O R L H S T O E I C O N 00.51 H N Y W T E T S N N

N N

I Y U R Mile A A T A B H

S

4 | San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency The City will continue to The highest cyclist volumes • Embarcadero at Broadway conduct bicycle counts were recorded at: (458 cyclists) annually, with the ultimate goal • 11th at Market (419 cyclists) of installing automated bicycle • 5th/Cyril Magnin at Market counters throughout the City. • 17th at Valencia (360 (443 cyclists) cyclists) Results • Embarcadero at Broadway Comparing bicycle counts (326 cyclists) from 2006 to those collected Natural Variation in the • 5th/Cyril Magnin at Market Number of Bicycles at a in 2007 and 2008 allows Location the SFMTA to identify (322 cyclists) The number of cyclists counted at a changes in bicycle volumes, safety behavior and other location may vary by 10 percent (+/-) demographic information. The same four locations from one day to the next. This means accounted for 38 percent that what may seem like an important Volume Trends of the total cyclist increase or decrease in bicycle volumes volumes counted during could be just part of the natural variation. A comparison of bicycling The changes in bicycle volumes listed in volumes between 2006, 2007 the evening commute in Table 1 are statistically significant chang- and 2008 indicates: 2008: es outside of this normal daily variation. Bicycling is increasing in • 11th at Market (522 cyclists) As more data is collected, the City will be San Francisco. • 17th at Valencia (485 able to determine a more accurate daily Between 2006 and 2008 cyclists) variation at each count location and will San Francisco experienced be able to develop a better understanding a statistically significant 43 of what changes in bicycle volumes are percent overall increase in the statistically significant. number of bicyclists counted at 33 intersections. Table 1: Locations with Statistically Significant Changes Bicycling is on the rise in Bicycle Volumes during the Evening Commute (2006 to 2008) during the evening commute. 2006 2008 Between 2006 and 2007, Location Bicycle Counts Bicycle Counts % Change San Francisco experienced 11th at Market 390 522 34% a statistically significant 12 11th at Howard 156 232 49% percent increase in citywide 8th at Townsend 123 191 55% cyclist volumes during the Sutter at Stockton 32 69 116% evening commute. From Polk at McAllister 169 214 27% 2007 to 2008, there was a 39 5th/Cyril Magnin at Market 314 443 41% percent increase in citywide Illinois at Mariposa 26 43 65% cyclist volumes during the 17th at Valencia 325 485 49% evening commute. 23rd at Potrero 24 50 108% Four of 33 locations Scott at Fell 147 222 51% accounted for 39 percent Scott at Page 292 418 43% of the total cyclist Marina at Cervantes 183 352 92% volumes counted during Embarcadero at Townsend 131 240 83% Embarcadero at Broadway 236 458 94% the evening commute in 7th at 16th 59 105 78% 2007. Randall at San Jose 24 76 217% Geneva at Alemany 8 22 175%

Source: Bicycle Counts 2006 and 2008. Note: Percent change is statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level.

San Francisco State of Cycling 2008 | 5 Safety Trends** From 2006 to 2007, From 2007 to 2008, helmet wearing showed a five From 2006 to 2007, two downtown locations percent decrease from 72 locations exhibited showed a statistically percent to 67 percent. statistically significant significant decrease in These percentages are based decreases in sidewalk wrong-way riding (-28 percent), while non- on total reported helmet/ riding: no helmet riders, not on Masonic at Golden Gate downtown sites showed the total number of cyclists (-86 percent) and 14th at a statistically significant counted citywide. As noted Folsom (-88 percent). Most increase in wrong-way below, these percent changes other locations exhibited a riding (120 percent). were not tested for statistical slight decrease in sidewalk These trends should be significance. riding that was not statistically monitored closely when the significant. installation of new bicycle Gender Trends** lanes and shared lane markings—both of which are From 2006 to 2007, the intended to decrease wrong- percentage of female way riding—resumes after the bicyclists showed a very Bike Plan injunction is lifted. slight decrease from 25 percent to 24 percent. Figure 2: San Francisco Bicycle Counts 2006-08 Sutter at Polk, Polk at McAllister, 5th /Cyril Magnin Number of Cyclists at Market, 7th at 16th and Total 7,884* 8000 Arguello at Lake all saw statistically significant increases in the number of 7000 female riders counted. This Total 6,415 analysis is based on gender Downtown counts at 18 locations, since 6000 3,375 the remaining locations only Total 5,626 had gender counts available for one year. Downtown 5000 2,706 From 2007 to 2008, the Downtown share of female riders 2,479 increased from 24 percent 4000 to 27 percent. These percentages are based 3000 on total reported female/male Outside riders, not on the total number Outside Downtown of cyclists counted citywide. Outside 4,509 2000 Downtown As noted below, these percent Downtown 3,709 changes were not tested for 3,147 statistical significance. 1000

0 Year 2006 Year 2007 Year 2008 ** A statistical analysis was not performed for * For comparison purposes, totals exclude some count locations which were changed the 2008 data pertaining to safety or gender trends because this data was not collected at from 2007 to 2008. Please see Table 2 in the “2008 San Francisco Bicycle Count Report” a consistent number of locations from 2007 to for more detailed information. 2008 (due to the high volume of bicyclists and location changes). However, general trends from Source: 2006-08 San Francisco Bicycle Counts 2007 to 2008 were observed.

6 | San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency 3 Bicycle Survey

As part of the 2008 survey effort, over 800 people were asked about bicycling in San Francisco. This survey answered important questions that will direct the SFMTA’s Bicycle Program in the future: What percentage of San Franciscans are cyclists? How often do people ride? What motivates someone to ride? What barriers are there to bicycling in San Francisco and how can people be encouraged to ride more? How do cyclists feel about San Francisco’s bicycle facilities? What are the differences between frequent cyclists and occasional cyclists? How many cyclists obey traffic laws? What are attitudes and behaviors toward cyclists? Some of these questions have not been answered before, and the answers are surprising.

San Francisco State of Cycling 2008 | 7 Purpose of the Bicycle All survey respondents were Survey asked to complete trip diary information for the prior day. The survey was developed for The sampling methods and two reasons: first, to identify the number of responses trends in bicycling habits and collected were designed to cyclists’ perceptions of the provide responses that would bicycling environment; second, be statistically significant with to estimate the number of a five percent margin of error bicycle trips taken on an and 95 percent confidence average day and the purpose rate. and duration of those trips.

How the Survey Was Figure 3: Intercept Survey Locations Conducted Survey data was collected Marina & Cervantes using two methods: Pacific Ocean 1. Phone survey Ferry Building A phone survey was conducted during Spring 3rd & Clement 2007 of randomly selected 12th & Clement Cyril Magnin & Market

San Francisco residents. The Polk & Market 4th & King Scott & Fell responses collected from JFK & Transverse this survey represent all San 9th & Brannan Franciscans, not just those 19th & Irving 17th & Valencia 19th & Judah who bicycle and include those Sunset & Judah who do not engage in any San Francisco form of cycling activity. In all, Harrison & Cesar Chavez Bay 408 usable responses were collected. 2. Intercept survey An intercept survey of “practicing cyclists” was Table 2: Location and Day of Intercept Surveys collected during May 2008. Day of Week of Intercept Non-native Speakers Fifteen locations distributed Location Bike to Other Survey Survey throughout San Francisco Work Weekday Weekend conducted conducted were used as survey collection Day in Chinese in Spanish points.Surveys were collected 19th and Irving X X X 19th and Judah XX X during 24 collection times, with (N-Judah Station) a quarter of these collection Sunset and Judah XX times scheduled at “Energizer (N-Judah Station) Stations” during Bike to Work Clement Street (3rd to 5th Ave) X X Clement Street (9th to 12th XX Day. Ave) After agreeing to participate 9th and Brannan X X in the survey, a cyclist was Harrison at Cesar Chavez X X X given two ways to participate: 5th/Cyril Magnin at Market X X X in-person at the time of the San Francisco Ferry Building X X X intercept or via an online Scott at Fell X X San Francisco Civic Center X survey. A total of 416 usable (Market and Polk) responses were collected. Marina at Cervantes X X Intercept surveys were Valencia at 17th X X conducted in English, Spanish JFK at Transverse X Fourth and King (Caltrain XX and Chinese. Station)

8 | San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Results Figure 4: Measures of Bicycle Ridership in San Francisco Percentage of Trips How much do people 6.0% bicycle in San Francisco? 6 % San Francisco continues to have a high rate of bicycling. 5 % The City should capitalize on this high level of bicycling and continue to support it 4 % through infrastructure and programmatic improvements. • Nearly 16 percent of 3 % 2.7% phone survey respondents 2.0% reported bicycling an 2 % average of two or more days per week for all trip purposes (Figure 5). 1 % • It is estimated that there are approximately 128,000 0 % bicycle trips made each day 2000 U.S. Census - Work Trips 2007 ACS - Work Trips 2008 SFMTA Survey - All Trips Sources: 2000 U.S. Census, 2007 U.S. Census - American Community Survey, 2008 SFMTA citywide survey in San Francisco. Note: The U.S. Census only measures work trips for those 16 years or older. The SFMTA survey number represents all • Approximately six percent of trips in San Francisco made by bicycle. all trips in San Francisco are completed via bicycle. Frequent and Infrequent Cyclists To analyze the survey results, respon- dents were grouped into two categories: Figure 5: Proportion of Frequent Cyclists to Infrequent frequent cyclists — those who self- Cyclists in San Francisco reported that they bicycle two or more times per week, and infrequent cyclists — Percentage of Respondents those who self-reported that they bicycle 100 % one or zero times per week. Infrequent 84% cyclists include people who never bicycle. 80 % Trips A “trip” is defined as travel from one destination to another. Any stop along a 60 % journey is considered a destination. For example, a journey from work to the gro- cery store to home would count as two 40 % trips: one from work to the grocery store and one from the grocery store to home.

20 % 16% Trip Diary Survey respondents were asked to com- plete trip diaries. Trip diaries are a list of 0 % all trips that a person makes in a set time Frequent Cyclists Infrequent Cyclists period. Trip diaries for the San Francisco Source: Phone (self-reported frequency of bicycling) State of Cycling Report asked respon- Note: Frequent cyclists are those who reported bicycling 2 or more times per week. Infrequent cyclists are those who dents to report the trip purpose and mode reported bicycling less than 2 times per week, including those who didn’t bicycle. for all trips they made the day before.

San Francisco State of Cycling 2008 | 9 Why are people bicycling are successfully using their in San Francisco? bicycle to get to work and school and to shop. Bicycling rates in San Francisco are distinct from Specific findings from the national trends. While nearly survey include: a third of bicycle trips are • 36 percent of bicycle trips for leisure or exercise, the are for leisure or fitness/ majority of bicycle trips in exercise. the City are for utilitarian purposes, particularly • 28 percent of bicycle trips commuting to work and school are for work or are work and shopping (Figure 6). related. This is notably different from • 25 percent of bicycle trips national trends, which indicate that 52 percent of bicycle trips are shopping related. are recreational and only five • Eight percent of bicycle trips percent are school or work- are school or education commute related.1 Bicycling related. in San Francisco is clearly a viable means of everyday transportation as evidenced by the number of people who

1 The 2002 National Survey of Pedestrian and Cyclists Attitudes and Behaviors conducted by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Figure 6: Trip Purpose as a Percentage of All Trips Made in a Day

Percentage of Trips Bicycle Trips 35 % 33% All Trips

30 % 28% 27% 25% 25 %

20 % 18% 18% 16%

15 % 12%

10 % 8% 7% 5% 5% 5 %

0 % Shopping Work or Work Related Leisure Fitness/Exercise Pickup/Drop off School/Education

Source: Phone Trip Diary. N=1,195 total trips and 80 bicycle trips. Note: Return to home trips are included in all categories. Numbers may not add up to 100% due to rounding.

10 | San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency What motivates cyclists Specific findings from the to bicycle? survey include: San Francisco’s bicyclists • Regardless of the purpose are motivated to bicycle for of the trip, 51 percent of many reasons, but the most respondents cited “exercise” commonly cited reason is as a motivation to bicycle. “exercise.” Approximately one-third of all respondents • 20 percent of respondents cited environmental reasons, were motivated to bicycle enjoying time outdoors and because bicycling was the low cost of bicycling “faster than driving.” compared to driving or transit • People who identify as a as motivations to bicycle member of the bicycling (Figure 7). This suggests that programs to encourage community and bicycle people to bicycle should because it is faster than focus on health and fitness, transit and cheaper than environmental benefits and driving and transit are the cost benefits of bicycling. significantly more likely to bicycle two or more times per week.

Figure 7: Cyclists’ Motivation to Ride Percentage of Respondents 60 %

51% 50 %

39% 40 % 38% 35%

30% 30 %

20% 20 % 18% 15%

10 %

0 % Exercise Environment/ Enjoy Cheaper Faster Faster than Identify as Alone time/ air quality time outdoors than driving/ than transit driving member of downtime transit bicycling community Source: Phone and Intercept, all respondents who bicycled at least once in the last year. Note: Respondents could choose more than one answer.

San Francisco State of Cycling 2008 | 11 Who is bicycling and who • African Americans make is not? up seven percent of San While people of all ages, Franciscans but only two races and genders bicycle percent of frequent cyclists. in San Francisco, frequent • Hispanics make up 14 bicyclists are more likely to be male, Caucasian and between percent of San Franciscans the ages of 26 and 35 (Figure but only 10 percent of 7 and Table 3). This suggests frequent cyclists. that San Francisco should customize outreach efforts to address the bicycling needs of Table 3: Ethnic and Racial Comparison those who are less likely to be of Survey Data to San Francisco Population bicyclists, i.e., women, minority San groups and older people. Francisco Margin of Frequent Infrequent Specific findings from the Percentage Error Cyclists Cyclists survey include: (2006 ACS) (2006 ACS) Race • Women make up 49 percent of San Franciscans, but Caucasian 53% +/- 8% 70% 53% only 23 percent of frequent Asian 32% +/- 4% 12% 25% cyclists. African- 7% +/- 3% 2% 6% American • Asians make up 32 percent Native- 0% +/- 2% 1% <1% of San Franciscans, but American only 12 percent of frequent Other 8% n/a 11% 15% cyclists.

Ethnicity Hispanic 14% 10% 11% Non-Hispanic 86% 80% 82% Source: 2006 American Community Survey, 2008 Phone and Intercept Surveys Note: Percentages for the intercept and phone surveys have been recalculated to account for those who did not answer the question.

Figure 8: Reported Gender of Frequent vs. Infrequent Cyclists Frequent Cyclists Infrequent Cyclists

4% 2%

Male 23% Transgender 44% 54% Female 0.2% Don't Know/ 72% Decline to Answer

0.2%

Source: Phone and Intercept Note: Frequent cyclists reported bicycling an average of two or more times per week. Infrequent bicyclists reported bicycling and average of one or zero times per week.

12 | San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency What are the barriers to This suggests that while bicycling? the barriers are an issue for frequent cyclists and Respondents were asked infrequent cyclists alike, to rate a list of potential frequent cyclists have been barriers to bicycling on a one able to overcome the barriers to five scale. Respondents more easily than infrequent rated nearly all barriers to cyclists. bicycling at three or lower (Figure 9). Infrequent cyclists Key findings from the survey are slightly more likely than include: frequent cyclists to consider • Between 71 and 79 percent barriers a greater deterrence of respondents were not to bicycling (Figure 9). This comfortable biking with cars. is not surprising; however, it is interesting to note that • Between 75 and 80 percent both frequent cyclists and of respondents felt there are infrequent cyclists identified not enough bike lanes. similar highest ranked barriers • Between 68 and 73 percent to bicycling, including: “not comfortable biking with cars,” of respondents feel that it is “too difficult to cross major too difficult to cross major streets” and “not enough bike streets. lanes.”

Figure 9: Ratings of Barriers to Bicycling

Great Barrier 5

4

3.0 2.9 3 2.9

2.5 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1

2 1.8

Not a Barrier 1 Not enough Not Too difficult Not I have Places are I need Hills/Don't Not I am Work hours bike comfortable to cross enough things too far to travel want enough worried change/ lanes biking major light at to carry away with small to get time about are too early/ with cars streets night children sweaty for biking crime late before work Source: Phone and Intercept.

San Francisco State of Cycling 2008 | 13 What predicts if one is a Factors Shown to Predict frequent bicyclist? Whether One is a Frequent Survey responses were Cyclist or Not analyzed to determine which factors might be statistically You are more likely to bicycle two or more times per week if: significant predictors of whether someone is a Your motivation for bicycling is: frequent bicyclist or not. • It’s faster than transit Seven factors were shown • It’s cheaper than driving/transit to be statistically significant • You identify as a member of predictors. These are the bike community summarized in the side bar to the right. You feel that: • You have enough time for bicycling • You are comfortable biking with cars

Your demographics are: • Male • Under the age of 56

Figure 10: Percentage of Respondents who Identified Each Barrier as a Hindrance to Bicycling (Frequent vs. Infrequent Cyclists)

Percentage of Respondents that Rated Each Item as a Barrier Frequent Cyclists Infrequent Cyclists 71% Not comfortable biking with cars 79% 68% Too difficult to cross major streets 73% 80% Not enough bike lanes 75% 61% Places are too far away 64% 63% Not enough light at night 70% 67% I have things to carry 64% 19% I need to travel with small children 34% 55% Hills/ don't want to get sweaty before work 59% 34% Work hours change/ are too early/ late 44%

0 1020304050607080

Source: Phone and intercept.

14 | San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency What is the overall Key findings from the survey awareness of the SFMTA’s include: bicycling resources? • Frequent cyclists are most Within the general aware of the City’s bicycle population, there is not much maps (53 percent) and the familiarity with the SFMTA’s public outreach campaign bicycling resources (Figure (43 percent). 11). The resources that the • Infrequent cyclists are public are most familiar with are the public outreach most aware of the public campaigns and the bicycle outreach campaign (26 maps. Frequent bicyclists percent) and the City’s are much more aware of the bicycle maps (20 percent). City’s bicycling resources, • Respondents are least and infrequent bicyclists aware of the City’s are less aware of the City’s resources. Very few people research and reports are familiar with the City’s (11 percent of frequent research, reports and bicycle cyclists and four percent hotline. The City may want to of infrequent cyclists) and increase efforts to advertise hotline (five percent). these resources or re- evaluate existing outreach efforts.

Figure 11: Frequent and Infrequent Cyclists’ Familiarity with San Francisco’s Bicycling Resources Percentage of Respondents that are Familiar with Each Bicycling Resource Infrequent Cyclists Frequent Cyclists 60 %

53%

50 %

43%

40 %

30 % 28% 26% 24% 20% 20 %

12% 11% 9% 10 % 4% 5% 5%

0 % City bicycling City bike maps Cyclist safety Research Hotline Public outreach website training classes and reports campaigns

Source: Phone and intercept.

San Francisco State of Cycling 2008 | 15 How satisfied are cyclists Figure 12: All Cyclists’ Ratings of San Francisco’s with San Francisco’s Bicycling Infrastructure bicycling infrastructure? Strongly 5 Agree San Francisco’s bicycling environment received mixed

reviews. Survey respondents 4 3.9 agree that San Francisco’s bicycle facilities are easy 3.4 3.4 to access from home and 3.0 Neutral 3 that they take cyclists where 2.7

they need to go. However, 2.3 cyclists do not feel that there 2.2 is enough room on most 2 streets to bicycle; they don’t feel safe from traffic; and they Strongly Disagree 1 don’t think the pavement is in If there were Facilities are Facilities take Facilities are There is enough I feel safe The pavement is good condition (Figures 12, more bike lanes easy to get to me where well-marked with room on most from traffic in good condition I would bike more from my home I need to go signs & stencils streets to bicycle

13). Cyclists generally agree Source: Phone and Intercept. that they would bicycle more if Note: Those who did not bicycle at least once in the past year were not asked this question. there were more bike lanes. Key findings from the survey include: • Only 16 percent of frequent cyclists and 11 percent of infrequent cyclists feel safe Figure 13: Frequent and Infrequent Cyclists’ Perceptions from traffic. of San Francisco’s Bicycling Infrastructure • Nearly two-thirds of cyclists Percentage who “Agree” or “Strongly Agree” with the Statement Infrequent Cyclists Frequent Cyclists agree or strongly agree that 80 % more bike lanes would allow them to ride more. 70 % 67% 62% 60 % 54% 54% 53%

50 % 44% 40% 40 % 37% 34% 31% 30 % 27%

21% 20 % 16% 11% 10 %

0 % There is enough I feel safe Facilities are The pavement Facilities Facilities take If there were room on most from traffic well-marked with is in good are easy to me where more bike lanes streets to bicycle signs & stencils condition get to from I need to go I would bike more my home Source: Phone and intercept. Note: Those who did not bicycle at least once in the past year were not asked this question.

16 | San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency What are the perceptions Figure 14. Agreement with Statement regarding cyclist and “Cyclists have a legal right to use the road” motorist road manners? Percentage of Respondents Who Selected Each Answer Frequent Cyclists Infrequent Cyclists What are common unsafe 80% behaviors? 80 % The majority of respondents 70 % agree that cyclists have a legal right to use the road (Figure 60 % 57% 12). However, respondents 50 % feel that cyclists and drivers

do not follow the rules of the 40 % road or respect each other (Figure 15 and Figure 16). 30 %

There is a large difference 20 % 18% in perception of behavior 15% 9% between those who bicycle 10 % 4% 4% 4% 5% 2% frequently and those who 1% 1% do not (Figure 17). Frequent 0 % Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree Don’t Know/ cyclists are more likely than Decline to Answer infrequent cyclists to have Source: Phone and intercept. seen unsafe cyclist behavior and dangerous motorist behavior toward cyclists. The majority of respondents have Figure 15. Commonly Witnessed Unsafe Cycling witnessed unsafe bicycling Behaviors behavior. Self-reported Percentage of Respondents behavior also shows that Who Have Witnessed the Behavior cyclists are not universally 80 % wearing helmets and the 70 % 67% majority of bicyclists do not

always follow traffic laws 60 % (Figure 18). Clearly, behavior 54% on both sides can be improved 50 % 45% and the City should continue 40% 40 % 38% to promote safe behavior on 35% 34% 34% 32% 31% the streets. 30 %

20 %

11% 10 %

0 % Running Riding on Riding Darting out Riding Generally Failure to Falure to Altercation Swerving Have not stop the sidewalk against into traffic in the riding yield to yield to with (not riding witnessed sign/ light traffic crosswalk recklessly or motorists pedestrians motorist in a straight unsafe unpredictably (physical line) riding Source: Phone and Intercept. or verbal) Note: Respondents could choose more than one answer.

San Francisco State of Cycling 2008 | 17 Key survey findings include: Figure 16: Commonly Witnessed Unsafe Motorist • A majority of respondents Behaviors Toward Cyclists

agree or strongly agree that Percentage of Respondents cyclists have a legal right to Who Have Witnessed the Behavior 50% use the road. 50 % 47% 46% 45% • 95 percent of frequent 43% cyclists and 85 percent of 41% 40 % 37% infrequent cyclists have 35% witnessed unsafe cycling 32% 31% behavior. 30 % • 79 percent of frequent 21% cyclists and 61 percent of 20 % infrequent cyclists have witnessed driving behavior that endangers a cyclist. 10 % • 71 percent of frequent cyclists always wear a 0 % Failure to Unsafe Driver Driving or Driver Opening Generally Altercation Running Swerving Have not helmet, while only 55 yield to passing turning parking not using car door driving with cyclist stop sign/ witnessed cyclist right in in the signals into recklessly (verbal or light driving that percent of infrequent cyclists front of bicycle lane cyclist's or physical) endangered cyclist path unpredictably a cyclist wear a helmet. Source: Phone and Intercept. Note: Respondents could choose more than one answer. • Only 30 percent of frequent cyclists always obey traffic laws, while approximately 50 percent of infrequent cyclists obey traffic laws.

Figure 17: Unsafe Driving and Cycling Figure 18: Safety and Cyclist Behavior Behavior: Differences in Perception Percentage of Respondents Frequent Cyclists Infrequent Cyclists Percentage of Respondents Frequent Cyclists Infrequent Cyclists 80% 100% 95% 71% 70% 83% 79% 80% 60% 55% 55% 50% 50% 61% 60% 40% 30% 32% 30% 40%

20%

20% 10%

0% Always wear Always stop Always obey 0% Have Witnessed Unsafe Cycling Behavior Have Witnessed Unsafe Motorist Behavior a helmet at traffic lights other traffic laws Source: Phone and Intercept. and stop signs Source: Phone and Intercept.

18 | San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency 3 Improving Bicycling in San Francisco

The count and survey results from this first State of Cycling Report provide valuable guidance to the City of San Francisco on bicycling improvements. While San Francisco has a high number of people who bicycle frequently and a high proportion of trips are made by bicycling, survey results show that the City can improve on several fronts. In particular, the City should focus on constructing additional bicycle facilities, understanding and meeting the needs of people who are not yet bicycling in large numbers and continuing to improve relations between cyclists and motorists through education, outreach and enforcement.

San Francisco State of Cycling 2008 | 19 Rating Bicycling in San Francisco Table 4 provides a summary evaluation of how well the SFMTA is meeting the needs of San Francisco’s cyclists. This evaluation will be revised in future years as new survey and count data are acquired.

Table 4: Rating Bicycling in San Francisco

Category Rationale Rating (max = 5 bikes) How much do people bicycle in San Francisco has high rates of bicycling that are comparable to other bicycle- San Francisco? friendly cities in the United States. Who is bicycling in San Francisco San Francisco cyclists do not proportionally represent San Francisco’s racial, and who is not? ethnic, gender and age mix. Women, minority groups and older people are underrepresented as cyclists. What barriers prevent people Respondents identified many barriers, but did not rate them as very severe. Out from bicycling in San Francisco? of nine possible barriers, seven of them were cited as a barrier by more than half of the respondents. However, when asked to rate the barriers, most of them were rated as “somewhat of a barrier” or less. How satisfied are cyclists with Frequent cyclists are more satisfied with the City’s bicycling infrastructure than San Francisco’s bicycling infrequent cyclists. Out of seven measures of satisfaction, frequent cyclists felt infrastructure? that the City met four and infrequent cyclists felt that the City met only one. How safe and comfortable do Only 10 percent of respondents agree or strongly agree that they “feel safe from people feel when bicycling in San traffic.” Francisco? How well do cyclists and motorists Cyclists and motorists are not sharing the road as well as they could be. Only “share the road.” 24 percent of respondents agree that “most motorists respect the rights of cyclists.” Only 28 percent agree that most cyclists obey traffic laws. A majority of respondents have witnessed unsafe cycling behavior or driving behavior that endangers a cyclist. Less than half of the respondents always follow traffic rules when bicycling. However, a majority of respondents agree that bicyclists have a legal right to use the road. How well known are The SFMTA’s Out of six public outreach efforts, two were identified by more than a quarter of bicycling outreach programs? respondents.

20 | San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Recommendations Develop outreach Provide bicycling areas Based on the results of programs to that are separated from this first annual State of underrepresented groups. cars. Cycling Report, the SFMTA Women, minority groups Being uncomfortable riding on recommends the following and older people are roads with motor vehicles was steps to improve bicycling in underrepresented as frequent the highest rated impediment San Francisco: cyclists. Women make up 49 to bicycling for both frequent Focus on improving percent of San Franciscans, and infrequent cyclists and but only 23 percent of frequent nearly two-thirds of cyclists cyclist and motorist cyclists. Asians make up 32 do not feel safe from traffic. behavior. percent of San Franciscans, In addition to providing Unsafe cyclist and motorist but only 12 percent of frequent education for cyclists, the City behavior is very commonly cyclists. African Americans should consider providing witnessed. Only 30 percent make up seven percent of standard bike paths as well of frequent cyclists and 50 San Franciscans but only two as innovative alternatives to percent of infrequent cyclists percent of frequent cyclists shared roadways, such as report that they always obey and Hispanics make up 14 cycle tracks, separated bicycle stop signs, traffic signals and percent of San Franciscans lanes and car-free streets. but only 10 percent of frequent other traffic laws, while 79 Improve bicycle crossings percent of frequent cyclists cyclists. The City should work have witnessed drivers with these groups to identify of major roadways. behaving in a way that ways in which infrastructure, Over 70 percent of all endangers cyclists. The City education, encouragement respondents feel that it is “too should continue its marketing and enforcement programs difficult to cross major streets.” campaigns to improve the can encourage members of The City should consider behavior of both groups these groups to bicycle more. a program to identify and and consider additional Provide safety education improve problematic roadway enforcement programs. crossings, particularly those for all cyclists. on bicycle routes. Stripe more bicycle lanes. Seventy-six percent of all All respondents feel that lack respondents cited “not Continue administering of bicycle lanes was a strong comfortable biking with cars” and refining counts and impediment to bicycling. as a barrier to bicycling and surveys. “Not enough bike lanes” was both frequent and infrequent These counts and surveys cited as a barrier to bicycling cyclists rated this as the represent a first step in an by 75 to 80 percent of all highest barrier to bicycling. ongoing process of evaluation respondents and was rated as These concerns can be for the City. The team has one of the top three barriers alleviated to some degree identified ways to improve to bicycling. Two-thirds of through bicycle education, future counts and surveys. cyclists agreed that they would particularly training to teach Specific improvements should ride more if there were more cyclists how to “drive” their focus on year to year count bicycle lanes. bicycles in traffic. Safety and survey comparisons. The education can also help SFMTA should continue to improve helmet use. Only evaluate, refine and administer 55 percent of infrequent these counts and surveys— cyclists and 71 percent of ideally on an annual basis. frequent cyclists “always” wear a helmet when bicycling. The City should continue to support bicycle training and safety education programs and promote them to all cyclists.

San Francisco State of Cycling 2008 | 21 Plans for Future Reports Ways to Improve Future Survey Efforts The SFMTA will continue to • Reduce the number of questions and conduct bicycle counts and length of the survey form surveys on a regular basis • Re-evaluate the decision to conduct and will publish the results intercept surveys on Bike to Work Day of these efforts in future State of Cycling Reports. • Reformat answers so that respondents Specific recommendations are required to choose from a series of for improving these surveys options for trip length and duration are listed in the sidebar on • Ask about what makes an individual this page. Future counts and stop riding a bicycle surveys will incorporate these recommendations. • Ask about barriers to utilitarian bicycling and barriers to recreational bicycling separately

• Require an answer for all on-line survey questions

• Rephrase questions to include informa- tion that is useful for decision-makers

• Re-evaluate intercept locations to include underrepresented populations

Ways to Improve Future Count Efforts

• To improve the accuracy of counts, to ensure that the counts provide a representative sample and to allow for comparison from year to year, it is recommended that the City:

• Improve counter training and quality control efforts

• Calculate the average daily variation for each count location as more count data becomes available

• Change the count date to September to take advantage of better weather, the increase in the number of students and national count efforts

• Collect traffic count data at all bicycle count locations

• Collect bicycle count data at Golden Gate Transit Ferry terminals and adja- cent BART stations

• Work with bicycle messenger compa- nies to maintain data about number of active messengers and operating routes

• Work with bicycle rental companies to maintain data about the number of rentals and typical routes

22 | San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency

San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency 1 South Van Ness San Francisco, CA 94103 www.sfmta.com

Alta Planning + Design 2560 9th Street Berkeley, CA 94618 www.altaplanning.com

Henne Group 116 New Montgomery Street Suite 640 San Francisco, CA 94105