WIXLIB

The City will continue toconduct bicycle countsannually, with the ultimate goalof installing automated bicyclecounters throughout the City.ResultsComparing bicycle countsfrom 2006 to those collectedin 2007 and 2008 allowsthe SFMTA to identifychanges in bicycle volumes,safety behavior and otherdemographic information.Volume TrendsA comparison of bicyclingvolumes between 2006, 2007and 2008 indicates:Bicycling is increasing inSan Francisco.Between 2006 and 2008San Francisco experienceda statistically significant 43percent overall increase in thenumber of bicyclists countedat 33 intersections.Bicycling is on the riseduring the eveningcommute.The highest cyclist volumeswere recorded at: Embarcadero at Broadway(458 cyclists) 5th/Cyril Magnin at Market(443 cyclists) 11th at Market (419 cyclists) 17th at Valencia (360cyclists) Embarcadero at Broadway(326 cyclists) 5th/Cyril Magnin at Market(322 cyclists)Natural Variation in theNumber of Bicycles at aLocationThe number of cyclists counted at alocation may vary by 10 percent ( /-)The same four locationsaccounted for 38 percentof the total cyclistvolumes counted duringthe evening commute in2008:from one day to the next. This meansthat what may seem like an importantincrease or decrease in bicycle volumescould be just part of the natural variation.The changes in bicycle volumes listed inTable 1 are statistically significant changes outside of this normal daily variation. 11th at Market (522 cyclists) 17th at Valencia (485cyclists)As more data is collected, the City will beable to determine a more accurate dailyvariation at each count location and willbe able to develop a better understandingof what changes in bicycle volumes arestatistically significant.Table 1: Locations with Statistically Significant Changesin Bicycle Volumes during the Evening Commute (2006 to2008)Between 2006 and 2007,San Francisco experienceda statistically significant 12percent increase in citywidecyclist volumes during theevening commute. From2007 to 2008, there was a 39percent increase in citywidecyclist volumes during theevening commute.LocationFour of 33 locationsaccounted for 39 percentof the total cyclistvolumes counted duringthe evening commute in2007.20062008Bicycle CountsBicycle Counts% Change11th at Market39052234%11th at Howard15623249%8th at Townsend12319155%Sutter at Stockton3269116%Polk at McAllister16921427%5th/Cyril Magnin at Market31444341%Illinois at Mariposa264365%17th at Valencia32548549%23rd at Potrero2450108%Scott at Fell14722251%Scott at Page29241843%Marina at Cervantes18335292%Embarcadero at Townsend13124083%Embarcadero at Broadway23645894%7th at 16th5910578%Randall at San Jose2476217%Geneva at Alemany822175%Source: Bicycle Counts 2006 and 2008.Note: Percent change is statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level.S a n Fr a n c i sc o S t ate of C ycling 2008 5

Safety Trends**From 2006 to 2007, twolocations exhibitedstatistically significantdecreases in sidewalkriding:Masonic at Golden Gate(-86 percent) and 14th atFolsom (-88 percent). Mostother locations exhibited aslight decrease in sidewalkriding that was not statisticallysignificant.From 2006 to 2007,downtown locationsshowed a statisticallysignificant decrease inwrong-way riding (-28percent), while nondowntown sites showeda statistically significantincrease in wrong-wayriding (120 percent).These trends should bemonitored closely when theinstallation of new bicyclelanes and shared lanemarkings—both of which areintended to decrease wrongway riding—resumes after theBike Plan injunction is lifted.Figure 2: San Francisco Bicycle Counts 2006-08Number of CyclistsTotal 7,884*80007000Total 6,4156000Downtown3,375Total wn4,509From 2007 to 2008, helmetwearing showed a fivepercent decrease from 72percent to 67 percent.These percentages are basedon total reported helmet/no helmet riders, not onthe total number of cyclistscounted citywide. As notedbelow, these percent changeswere not tested for statisticalsignificance.Gender Trends**From 2006 to 2007, thepercentage of femalebicyclists showed a veryslight decrease from 25percent to 24 percent.Sutter at Polk, Polk atMcAllister, 5th /Cyril Magninat Market, 7th at 16th andArguello at Lake all sawstatistically significantincreases in the number offemale riders counted. Thisanalysis is based on gendercounts at 18 locations, sincethe remaining locations onlyhad gender counts availablefor one year.From 2007 to 2008, theshare of female ridersincreased from 24 percentto 27 percent.These percentages are basedon total reported female/maleriders, not on the total numberof cyclists counted citywide.As noted below, these percentchanges were not tested forstatistical significance.10000Year 2006Year 2007Year 2008* For comparison purposes, totals exclude some count locations which were changedfrom 2007 to 2008. Please see Table 2 in the “2008 San Francisco Bicycle Count Report”for more detailed information.Source: 2006-08 San Francisco Bicycle Counts6 S an Francisco M u n i c i p a l Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ag e n c y** A statistical analysis was not performed forthe 2008 data pertaining to safety or gendertrends because this data was not collected ata consistent number of locations from 2007 to2008 (due to the high volume of bicyclists andlocation changes). However, general trends from2007 to 2008 were observed.

3 Bicycle SurveyAs part of the 2008 survey effort, over 800 people were asked aboutbicycling in San Francisco. This survey answered important questionsthat will direct the SFMTA’s Bicycle Program in the future: Whatpercentage of San Franciscans are cyclists? How often do people ride?What motivates someone to ride? What barriers are there to bicyclingin San Francisco and how can people be encouraged to ride more?How do cyclists feel about San Francisco’s bicycle facilities? What arethe differences between frequent cyclists and occasional cyclists? Howmany cyclists obey traffic laws? What are attitudes and behaviors towardcyclists? Some of these questions have not been answered before, andthe answers are surprising.S a n Fr a n c i sc o S t ate of C ycling 2008 7

Purpose of the BicycleSurveyThe survey was developed fortwo reasons: first, to identifytrends in bicycling habits andcyclists’ perceptions of thebicycling environment; second,to estimate the number ofbicycle trips taken on anaverage day and the purposeand duration of those trips.How the Survey WasConductedSurvey data was collectedusing two methods:1. Phone surveyA phone survey wasconducted during Spring2007 of randomly selectedSan Francisco residents. Theresponses collected fromthis survey represent all SanFranciscans, not just thosewho bicycle and include thosewho do not engage in anyform of cycling activity. In all,408 usable responses werecollected.2. Intercept surveyAn intercept survey of“practicing cyclists” wascollected during May 2008.Fifteen locations distributedthroughout San Franciscowere used as survey collectionpoints.Surveys were collectedduring 24 collection times, witha quarter of these collectiontimes scheduled at “EnergizerStations” during Bike to WorkDay.After agreeing to participatein the survey, a cyclist wasgiven two ways to participate:in-person at the time of theintercept or via an onlinesurvey. A total of 416 usableresponses were collected.Intercept surveys wereconducted in English, Spanishand Chinese.All survey respondents wereasked to complete trip diaryinformation for the prior day.The sampling methods andthe number of responsescollected were designed toprovide responses that wouldbe statistically significant witha five percent margin of errorand 95 percent confidencerate.Figure 3: Intercept Survey LocationsMarina & CervantesPacific OceanFerry Building3rd & Clement12th & ClementCyril Magnin & MarketPolk & MarketScott & Fell4th & KingJFK & Transverse9th & Brannan19th & IrvingSunset & Judah17th & Valencia19th & JudahSanFranciscoBayHarrison & Cesar ChavezTable 2: Location and Day of Intercept SurveysDay of Week of InterceptLocationBike toWorkDayOtherWeekdayNon-native SpeakersWeekendSurveyconductedin Chinese19th and IrvingXXX19th and Judah(N-Judah Station)XXXSunset and Judah(N-Judah Station)XXClement Street (3rd to 5th Ave)XClement Street (9th to 12thAve)Surveyconductedin SpanishXXX9th and BrannanXHarrison at Cesar ChavezXXX5th/Cyril Magnin at MarketXXXXXXScott at FellXXSan Francisco Civic Center(Market and Polk)XSan Francisco Ferry BuildingMarina at CervantesXValencia at 17thXJFK at TransverseFourth and King (CaltrainStation)8 S an Francisco M u n i c i p a l Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ag e n c yXXXXXX

ResultsFigure 4: Measures of Bicycle Ridership in San FranciscoHow much do peoplebicycle in San Francisco?San Francisco continues tohave a high rate of bicycling.The City should capitalizeon this high level of bicyclingand continue to support itthrough infrastructure andprogrammatic improvements. Nearly 16 percent ofphone survey respondentsreported bicycling anaverage of two or moredays per week for all trippurposes (Figure 5). It is estimated that thereare approximately 128,000bicycle trips made each dayin San Francisco. Approximately six percent ofall trips in San Francisco arecompleted via bicycle.Percentage of Trips6.0%6%5%4%3%2.7%2.0%2%1%0%2000 U.S. Census - Work Trips2007 ACS - Work Trips2008 SFMTA Survey - All TripsSources: 2000 U.S. Census, 2007 U.S. Census - American Community Survey, 2008 SFMTA citywide surveyNote: The U.S. Census only measures work trips for those 16 years or older. The SFMTA survey number represents alltrips in San Francisco made by bicycle.Frequent and InfrequentCyclistsTo analyze the survey results, respondents were grouped into two categories:Figure 5: Proportion of Frequent Cyclists to InfrequentCyclists in San FranciscoPercentage of Respondentsfrequent cyclists — those who selfreported that they bicycle two or moretimes per week, and infrequent cyclists —those who self-reported that they bicycle100 %one or zero times per week. Infrequent84%80 %cyclists include people who never bicycle.TripsA “trip” is defined as travel from onedestination to another. Any stop along a60 %journey is considered a destination. Forexample, a journey from work to the grocery store to home would count as two40 %trips: one from work to the grocery storeand one from the grocery store to home.20 %16%Trip DiarySurvey respondents were asked to complete trip diaries. Trip diaries are a list of0%all trips that a person makes in a set timeFrequent CyclistsInfrequent CyclistsSource: Phone (self-reported frequency of bicycling)Note: Frequent cyclists are those who reported bicycling 2 or more times per week. Infrequent cyclists are those whoreported bicycling less than 2 times per week, including those who didn’t bicycle.period. Trip diaries for the San FranciscoState of Cycling Report asked respondents to report the trip purpose and modefor all trips they made the day before.S a n Fr a n c i sc o S t ate of C ycling 2008 9

Why are people bicyclingin San Francisco?are successfully using theirbicycle to get to work andschool and to shop.Specific findings from thesurvey include:Bicycling rates in SanFrancisco are distinct fromnational trends. While nearlya third of bicycle trips arefor leisure or exercise, themajority of bicycle trips inthe City are for utilitarianpurposes, particularlycommuting to work and schooland shopping (Figure 6).This is notably different fromnational trends, which indicatethat 52 percent of bicycle tripsare recreational and only fivepercent are school or workcommute related.1 Bicyclingin San Francisco is clearlya viable means of everydaytransportation as evidencedby the number of people who 36 percent of bicycle tripsare for leisure or fitness/exercise. 28 percent of bicycle tripsare for work or are workrelated. 25 percent of bicycle tripsare shopping related. Eight percent of bicycle tripsare school or educationrelated.1 The 2002 National Survey of Pedestrian andCyclists Attitudes and Behaviors conducted bythe Bureau of Transportation Statistics and theNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration.Figure 6: Trip Purpose as a Percentage of All Trips Made in a DayPercentage of Trips35 %Bicycle Trips33%All Trips30 %27%28%25%25 %20 %18%18%16%15 %12%10 %8%7%5%5%5%0%ShoppingWork or Work RelatedLeisureFitness/ExerciseSource: 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 S an Francisc o M u n i c i p a l Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ag e n c yPickup/Drop offSchool/Education

What motivates cycliststo bicycle?Specific findings from thesurvey include:San Francisco’s bicyclistsare motivated to bicycle formany reasons, but the mostcommonly cited reason is“exercise.” Approximatelyone-third of all respondentscited environmental reasons,enjoying time outdoors andthe low cost of bicyclingcompared to driving or transitas motivations to bicycle(Figure 7). This suggeststhat programs to encouragepeople to bicycle shouldfocus on health and fitness,environmental benefits andthe cost benefits of bicycling. Regardless of the purposeof the trip, 51 percent ofrespondents cited “exercise”as a motivation to bicycle. 20 percent of respondentswere motivated to bicyclebecause bicycling was“faster than driving.” People who identify as amember of the bicyclingcommunity and bicyclebecause it is faster thantransit and cheaper thandriving and transit aresignificantly more likely tobicycle two or more timesper week.Figure 7: Cyclists’ Motivation to RidePercentage of Respondents60 %51%50 %39%40 %38%35%30%30 %20%18%20 %15%10 %0%ExerciseEnvironment/air qualityEnjoytime outdoorsCheaperthan driving/transitFasterthan transitFaster thandrivingIdentify asmember ofbicyclingcommunityAlone time/downtimeSource: Phone and Intercept, all respondents who bicycled at least once in the last year.Note: Respondents could choose more than one answer.S a n Fr a n c i sc o S t a t e of C ycling 2008 11

Who is bicycling and whois not?While people of all ages,races and genders bicyclein San Francisco, frequentbicyclists are more likely to bemale, Caucasian and betweenthe ages of 26 and 35 (Figure7 and Table 3). This suggeststhat San Francisco shouldcustomize outreach efforts toaddress the bicycling needs ofthose who are less likely to bebicyclists, i.e., women, minoritygroups and older people.Specific findings from thesurvey include: African Americans makeup seven percent of SanFranciscans but only twopercent of frequent cyclists. Hispanics make up 14percent of San Franciscansbut only 10 percent offrequent cyclists.Table 3: Ethnic and Racial Comparisonof Survey Data to San Francisco mericanOther Women make up 49 percentof San Franciscans, butonly 23 percent of frequentcyclists. Asians make up 32 percentof San Franciscans, butonly 12 percent of ranciscoPercentage(2006 ACS)Margin ofError(2006 ACS)FrequentCyclistsInfrequentCyclists53%32%7% /- 8% /- 4% /- 3%70%12%2%53%25%6%0% /- 2%1% 1%8%n/a11%15%10%80%11%82%14%86%Source: 2006 American Community Survey, 2008 Phone and Intercept SurveysNote: Percentages for the intercept and phone surveys have been recalculated to account for those who did notanswer the question.Figure 8: Reported Gender of Frequent vs. Infrequent CyclistsFrequent CyclistsInfrequent t Know/Decline to Answer72%0.2%Source: Phone and InterceptNote: 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 S an Francisc o M u n i c i p a l Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ag e n c y

What are the barriers tobicycling?Respondents were askedto rate a list of potentialbarriers to bicycling on a oneto five scale. Respondentsrated nearly all barriers tobicycling at three or lower(Figure 9). Infrequent cyclistsare slightly more likely thanfrequent cyclists to considerbarriers a greater deterrenceto bicycling (Figure 9). Thisis not surprising; however,it is interesting to note thatboth frequent cyclists andinfrequent cyclists identifiedsimilar highest ranked barriersto bicycling, including: “notcomfortable biking with cars,”“too difficult to cross majorstreets” and “not enough bikelanes.”This suggests that whilethe barriers are an issuefor frequent cyclists andinfrequent cyclists alike,frequent cyclists have beenable to overcome the barriersmore easily than infrequentcyclists.Key findings from the surveyinclude: Between 71 and 79 percentof respondents were notcomfortable biking with cars. Between 75 and 80 percentof respondents felt there arenot enough bike lanes. Between 68 and 73 percentof respondents feel that it istoo difficult to cross majorstreets.Figure 9: Ratings of Barriers to BicyclingGreatBarrier 543.032.92.92.52.52.42.42.32.22.121.8Not aBarrier 1Not enoughNotToo difficultbikecomfortable to crosslanesbikingmajorwith carsstreetsSource: Phone and Intercept.Notenoughlight atnightI havethingsto carryPlaces aretoo farawayI needto travelwith smallchildrenHills/Don'twantto getsweatybefore workNotenoughtimefor bikingI amworriedaboutcrimeWork hourschange/are too early/lateS a n Fr a n c i sc o S t a t e of C ycling 2008 13

What predicts if one is afrequent bicyclist?Survey responses wereanalyzed to determine whichfactors might be statisticallysignificant predictors ofwhether someone is afrequent bicyclist or not.Seven factors were shownto be statistically significantpredictors. These aresummarized in the side bar tothe right.Factors Shown to PredictWhether One is a FrequentCyclist or NotYou are more likely to bicycletwo or more times per week if:Your motivation for bicycling is: It’s faster than transit It’s cheaper than driving/transit You identify as a member ofthe bike communityYou feel that: You have enough time forbicycling You are comfortable bikingwith carsYour demographics are: Male Under the age of 56Figure 10: Percentage of Respondents who Identified Each Barrieras a Hindrance to Bicycling (Frequent vs. Infrequent Cyclists)Percentage of Respondentsthat Rated Each Item as a BarrierFrequent CyclistsInfrequent Cyclists71%Not comfortable biking with cars79%68%Too difficult to cross major streets73%80%Not enough bike lanes75%61%Places are too far away64%63%Not enough light at night70%67%I have things to carry64%19%I need to travel with small children34%55%Hills/ don't want to get sweaty before work59%34%Work hours change/ are too early/ late44%010Source: Phone and intercept.14 S an Francisc o M u n i c i p a l Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n Ag e n c y20304050607080

What is the overallawareness of the SFMTA’sbicycling resources?Key findings from the surveyinclude: Frequent cyclists are mostaware of the City’s bicyclemaps (53 percent) and thepublic outreach campaign(43 percent). Infrequent cyclists aremost aware of the publicoutreach campaign (26percent) and the City’sbicycle maps (20 percent). Respondents are leastaware of the City’sresearch and reports(11 percent of frequentcyclists and four percentof infrequent cyclists) andhotline (five percent).Within the generalpopulation, there is not muchfamiliarity with the SFMTA’sbicycling resources (Figure11). The resources that thepublic are most familiarwith are the public outreachcampaigns and the bicyclemaps. Frequent bicyclistsare much more aware of theCity’s bicycling resources,and infrequent bicyclistsare less aware of the City’sresources. Very few peopleare familiar with the City’sresearch, reports and bicyclehotline. The City may want toincrease efforts to advertisethese resources or reevaluate existing outreachefforts.Figure 11: Frequent and In

Bicycle Program conducted its first citywide bicycle count to provide a baseline for future bicycle count comparisons. Thirty-three locations were selected for bicycle counts. In August 2007 and in August 2008, the City conducted follow-up bicycle counts, which were compared to the 2006 counts to determine changes in cycling volumes and patterns.