Spring Street Bike Counts 2012-2013

SPRING STREET BICYCLE COUNT 2012 / 2013

PARKLET STUDIES for LADOT and LACBC APRIL 2013

CONTENTS

List of Figures......................................................................................................... 3

Background............................................................................................................ 4

Executive Summary ...............................................................................................6

Cyclist and Pedestrian Ratios ................................................................................8

Bicycle Volumes .................................................................................................... 11

Bicycling Behavior.................................................................................................13

Bicyclist Gender ....................................................................................................14

Bicycle Parking..................................................................................................... 16

Methodological Summary................................................................................... 19

About Parklet Studies.......................................................................................... 20

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

2

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Downtown Bicycle Facilities, Existing and Proposed.......................................... 5 Figure 2: Cyclist and Pedestrian Totals, Peak Hours 2012 and 2013 ................................... 8 Figure 3: Cyclist and Pedestrian Totals, Weekday Peak Hours 2012.................................. 9 Figure 4: Cyclist and Pedestrian Totals, Weekday 2013 .................................................... 9 Figure 5: Cyclist and Pedestrian Totals, Weekend Peak Hours 2012................................10 Figure 6: Cyclist and Pedestrian Totals, Weekend 2013 ...................................................10 Figure 7: Cyclist Volumes, Weekday 2012/2013 ................................................................. 11 Figure 8: Cyclist Volumes, Weekend 2012/2013 ................................................................. 11 Figure 9: Percent Change, Weekday Peak Hour Cyclist Volumes 2012/2013 ................... 12 Figure 10: Percent Change, Weekend Peak Hour Cyclist Volumes 2012/2013 ................. 12 Figure 11: Bicycling Behavior 2013 ...................................................................................... 13 Figure 12: Cyclist Gender 2013 ............................................................................................14 Figure 13: Cyclist Gender, Weekday 2013 ..........................................................................15 Figure 14: Cyclist Gender, Weekend 2013..........................................................................15 Figure 15: Bicycle Parking, Formal and Informal Percentages, 2012.................................16 Figure 16: Bicycle Parking, Formal and Informal Counts, 2012.........................................16 Figure 17: Bicycle Parking between 6th and 7th Streets, Percentages, 2012 .................. 17 Figure 18: Bicycle Parking between 6th and 7th Streets, Percentages, 2013.................. 17 Figure 19: Bicycle Parking between 6th and 7th, Counts 2012.........................................18 Figure 20: Bicycle Parking between 6th and 7th Streets, Counts 2013 ...........................18

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

3

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

BACKGROUND In November 2011, LADOT installed Los Angeles’ first green Class-­‐II bicycle lane on Spring Street between Cesar Chavez Avenue and 9th Street. The Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council’s Complete Streets Working Group and the LACBC, in coordination with LADOT, partnered with Councilmembers Perry (District 9) and Huizar (District 14) to implement this landmark infrastructure (Figure 1).

In April 2011 the FHWA issued an interim approval for the use of green colored pavement as a traffic control device in response to multiple inquiries by traffic agencies across the United States. 1 According to the FHWA, research from various jurisdictions show green bike lanes have demonstrable performance for increasing cyclist safety including accurate bicyclist positioning when traveling through intersections and conflict areas. Bicyclists are also more likely to be positioned within a green bike lane when riding. The FHWA found green bike lanes increase visibility and perceived safety of bicyclists while improving motorist awareness of non-­‐vehicular road users.

The 2011 L.A. Bicycle Count, conducted in September 2011, shows there has been significant increase in the number of people who bicycle in Los Angeles. Additionally, bicycle infrastructure has a positive effect on overall rate of bicycle ridership with the highest numbers of riders observed on streets with bicycle infrastructure.2 The study demonstrates the preponderance of bicycle infrastructure in encouraging bicycle ridership.

The Spring Street bike lane was implemented two months after data was gathered for the 2011 L.A. Bicycle Count. As a result its impact was not evaluated in LACBC’s final report. Information provided by the 2012/2013 Spring Street Public Life Surveys augments existing bicycle count datasets by presenting primary research of cyclist behavior on Spring Street subsequent to green bike lane implementation.

The March 2012 Spring Street Public Life Survey – coordinated by Parklet Studies with the support of the DLANC Complete Streets Working Group and the USC School of Architecture – recorded the volume of cyclists passing through Spring Street between 4th and 8th Streets. The 2012 Public Life Survey also recorded bicycle parking along the Spring Street corridor, distinguishing between bicycles secured to LADOT-­‐installed bike racks (“Formal”), or other fixtures such as signposts, fences, or parking meters (“Informal). One year later in March 2013, another Public Life Survey – coordinated by Parklet Studies with additional support from the UCLA Lewis Center – again recorded the volume of cyclists and bicycle parking in the corridor.

This report compares findings from both the 2012 and 2013 Spring Street Public Life Surveys.

This report is being presented to the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition, Los Angeles Department of Transportation Bicycle Program, and the Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council.

1 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, 15 April 2011. “Interim Approval for Optional Use of Green Colored Pavement for Bike Lanes (IA-­‐14). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.

2 Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition, 2011. L.A. Bike Count 2011.

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

4

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

Figure 1: Downtown Bicycle Facilities, Existing and Proposed. This map synthesizes information from the LADOT Bicycle Services online bicycle map; the 2010 Bicycle Plan (Los Angeles Department of City Planning 2010); and the 2011 L.A. Bike Count (Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition 2011).

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

5

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The 2012/2013 counts indicate a marked increase in bicycle ridership in the Spring Street corridor during the year subsequent to bike lane installation.

PEDESTRIAN to CYCLIST RATIOS While the number of peak-­‐hour pedestrians on Spring Street remained relatively constant between 2012 and 2013, the number of cyclists increased from 320 to 450 (Figure 2). This 40% increase underscores the importance of Spring Street as a bicycle corridor, and surpasses the 32% overall increase measured by the 2009/2011 L.A. Bike Count for seventeen other locations throughout the City.3 Figure 1 illustrates how a 1/18 cyclist-­‐pedestrian ratio shifted to 1/13 in 2013.

In general across all peak hours, the ratio of cyclists to pedestrians in the right-­‐of-­‐way changed between 2012 and 2013, showing greater proportions of cyclists (Figures 3 – 6). The greatest proportion of cyclists (88/564) was observed during the 11 am weekend hour, while the smallest proportion during the weekend 8am hour (8/172, Figure 6).

CYCLIST VOLUMES In general, weekday cyclist volumes on Spring Street are highest during morning peak hours and lowest during the midafternoon (Figures 7 and 8). Weekends see an inverse pattern, with cyclist activity peaking at the midday. Both weekday and weekend days saw dramatic increases in bicycle ridership on Spring Street, with changes exceeding one hundred percent.

Whereas in 2012, total ridership between the weekday and weekend day was fairly balanced (156/164), in 2013 the weekend day saw a significantly greater proportion of cyclists (300/452).

Cyclist volumes increased dramatically between March 2012 and March 2013 (Figures 8 and 9).

Five out of six peak hour periods saw increases ranging from 7% to 122%. Weekday mornings saw the largest increase, up 122% (from an average of eighteen to forty cyclists) in the 8am hour; followed by an increase of 100% (from an average of twenty-­‐two to forty-­‐four cyclists) in the 9am weekday hour. Weekends also see significant jumps; for example 100% during the 9am hour (twenty-­‐eight to fifty-­‐six riders) and 82% in the 1pm hour (forty-­‐four to eighty riders).

BICYCLING BEHAVIOR A significant proportion of cyclists on Spring Street were observed traveling the ‘wrong way’ (Figure 11), or northbound against traffic (as Spring Street is a one-­‐way street). This percentage is significantly higher than the four-­‐percent citywide figure captured by the 2011 L.A. Bike Count.4

3 4

Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition, 2011. L.A. Bike Count 2011, Page 24 Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition, 2011. L.A. Bike Count 2011, Page 26

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

6

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (cont’d)

BICYCLING BEHAVIOR (cont’d) A small minority (approximately 5 – 7%) of cyclists were observed travelling in other traffic lanes besides the bike lane itself.

Twenty-­‐seven to twenty-­‐eight percent of cyclists were observed riding on Spring Street sidewalks, which roughly concurs with the same behavior recorded by the 2011 L.A. Bike Count in other locations throughout the City.

Helmet use of cyclists on Spring Street is somewhat lower than documented levels elsewhere in the City. The 2011 L.A. Bike Count saw forty-­‐seven percent helmet usage by cyclists, whereas on Spring Street, only thirty-­‐five percent of cyclists were observed using a helmet.

CYCLIST GENDER Of all cyclists observed on Spring Street during the March 2013 counts, approximately fourteen percent appeared to be female (Figure 12). This falls below the citywide percentage of fifteen percent recorded in the 2011 L.A. Bike Count; and even further behind the 2009 L.A. Bike Count.5

The highest proportion of female cyclists on Spring Street was observed during the weekend midday peak, accounting for approximately thirty-­‐six percent of riders (32/89) in the eleven o’clock hour. The next largest proportion was observed during the weekend midday peak, at approximately twenty percent (16/80, Figure 14).

BICYCLE PARKING Bicycle parking was systematically counted on Spring Street sidewalks between 4th and 8th Streets during peak weekday and weekend hours in March 2012. These counts reveal that forty percent of bicycles parked in the right-­‐of-­‐way are secured to fixtures other than LADOT-­‐ installed bicycle racks. These fixtures include signposts, parking meters, fences, and other elements in the streetscape.

In March 2013, bike parking was counted only on the sidewalks between 6th and 7th streets.

Overall, the documentation shows how this particular block is highly impacted in terms of bicycle parking, with higher percentages of Informal occurrences than in the rest of the corridor (compare Figures 17 and 18 with Figure 15). Although the Informal proportion of parked bikes decreased in 2013 (Figures 17 and 18), raw counts (Figures 19 and 20) show a much higher number of bicycles parked on the block. This greater number of Informal occurrences in 2013 demonstrate the escalating demand for bicycle parking in the corridor.

5

Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition, 2011. L.A. Bike Count 2011, page 25.

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

7

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

CYCLIST and PEDESTRIAN RATIOS: 2012-­‐2013

While the number of peak-­‐hour pedestrians on Spring Street remained relatively constant between 2012 and 2013, the number of cyclists increased from 320 to 450 (Figure 2). This 40% increase underscores the importance of Spring Street as a bicycle corridor, and surpasses the 32% overall increase measured by the 2009/2011 L.A. Bike Count for seventeen other locations throughout the City.6 Figure 1 illustrates how a 1/18 cyclist-­‐pedestrian ratio shifted to 1/13 in 2013.

Figure 2: Cyclist and Pedestrian Totals, Peak Hours 2012 and 2013

In general across all peak hours, the ratio of cyclists to pedestrians in the right-­‐of-­‐way changed between 2012 and 2013, showing greater proportions of cyclists (Figures 3 – 6). The greatest proportion of cyclists (88/564) was observed during the 11 am weekend hour, while the smallest proportion during the weekend 8am hour (8/172, Figure 6).

6

Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition, 2011. L.A. Bike Count 2011, Page 24

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

8

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

Figure 3: Cyclist and Pedestrian Totals, Weekday Peak Hours 2012

Figure 4: Cyclist and Pedestrian Totals, Weekday 2013

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

9

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

Figure 5: Cyclist and Pedestrian Totals, Weekend Peak Hours 2012

Figure 6: Cyclist and Pedestrian Totals, Weekend 2013

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

10

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

CYCLIST VOLUMES

In general, weekday cyclist volumes on Spring Street are highest during morning peak hours and lowest during the midafternoon (Figures 7 and 8). Weekends see an inverse pattern, with cyclist activity peaking at the midday. Both weekday and weekend days saw dramatic increases in bicycle ridership on Spring Street, with changes exceeding one hundred percent.

Whereas in 2012, total ridership between the weekday and weekend day was fairly balanced (156/164), in 2013 the weekend day saw a significantly greater proportion of cyclists (300/452).

Figure 7: Cyclist Volumes, Weekday 2012/2013

Figure 8: Cyclist Volumes, Weekend 2012/2013 Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

11

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

BICYCLE VOLUME CHANGES: 2013-­‐2013

Cyclist volumes increased dramatically between March 2012 and March 2013 (Figures 8 and 9).

Five out of six peak hour periods saw increases ranging from 7% to 122%. Weekday mornings saw the largest increase, up 122% (from an average of eighteen to forty cyclists) in the 8am hour; followed by an increase of 100% (from an average of twenty-­‐two to forty-­‐four cyclists) in the 9am weekday hour. Weekends also see significant jumps; for example 100% during the 9am hour (twenty-­‐eight to fifty-­‐six riders) and 82% in the 1pm hour (forty-­‐four to eighty riders).

Figure 9: Percent Change, Weekday Peak Hour Cyclist Volumes 2012/2013

Figure 10: Percent Change, Weekend Peak Hour Cyclist Volumes 2012/2013

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

12

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

BICYCLING BEHAVIOR

A significant proportion of cyclists on Spring Street were observed traveling the ‘wrong way’ (Figure 11), or northbound against traffic (as Spring Street is a one-­‐way street). This percentage is significantly higher than the four-­‐percent citywide figure captured by the 2011 L.A. Bike Count.7

A small minority (approximately 5 – 7%) of cyclists were observed travelling in other traffic lanes besides the bike lane itself.

Twenty-­‐seven to twenty-­‐eight percent of cyclists were observed riding on Spring Street sidewalks, which roughly concurs with the same behavior recorded by the 2011 L.A. Bike Count in other locations throughout the City.

Helmet use of cyclists on Spring Street is somewhat lower than documented levels elsewhere in the City. The 2011 L.A. Bike Count saw forty-­‐seven percent helmet usage by cyclists, whereas on Spring Street, only thirty-­‐five percent of cyclists were observed using a helmet.

Figure 11: Bicycling Behavior 2013

7

Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition, 2011. L.A. Bike Count 2011, Page 26

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

13

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

CYCLIST GENDER

Of all cyclists observed on Spring Street during the March 2013 counts, approximately fourteen percent appeared to be female (Figure 12). This falls below the citywide percentage of fifteen percent recorded in the 2011 L.A. Bike Count; and even further behind the 2009 L.A. Bike Count.8

Figure 12: Cyclist Gender 2013

The highest proportion of female cyclists on Spring Street was observed during the weekend midday peak, accounting for approximately thirty-­‐six percent of riders (32/89) in the eleven o’clock hour. The next largest proportion was observed during the weekend midday peak, at approximately twenty percent (16/80, Figure 14).

8

Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition, 2011. L.A. Bike Count 2011, page 25.

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

14

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

Figure 13: Cyclist Gender, Weekday 2013

Figure 14: Cyclist Gender, Weekend 2013

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

15

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

BIYCLE PARKING

Bicycle parking was systematically counted on Spring Street sidewalks between 4th and 8th Streets during peak weekday and weekend hours in March 2012. These counts reveal that forty percent of bicycles parked in the right-­‐of-­‐way are secured to fixtures other than LADOT-­‐ installed bicycle racks. These fixtures include signposts, parking meters, fences, and other elements in the streetscape.

Figure 15: Bicycle Parking, Formal and Informal Percentages, 2012

Figure 16: Bicycle Parking, Formal and Informal Counts, 2012 Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

16

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

In March 2013, bike parking was counted only on the sidewalks between 6th and 7th streets.

Overall, the documentation shows how this particular block is highly impacted in terms of bicycle parking, with higher percentages of Informal occurrences than in the rest of the corridor (compare Figures 17 and 18 with Figure 15).

Figure 17: Bicycle Parking on Spring Street between 6th and 7th Streets, Formal and Informal Percentages, 2012

Figure 18: Bicycle Parking on Spring Street between 6th and 7th Streets, Formal and Informal Percentages, 2013

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

17

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

Although the Informal proportion of parked bikes decreased in 2013 (Figures 17 and 18), raw counts (Figures 19 and 20) show a much higher number of bicycles parked on the block. This greater number of Informal occurrences in 2013 demonstrate the escalating demand for bicycle parking in the corridor.

Figure 19: Bicycle Parking on Spring Street between 6th and 7th, Formal and Informal Counts, 2012

Figure 20: Bicycle Parking on Spring Street between 6th and 7th, Formal and Informal Counts, 2013

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

18

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

METHODOLOGICAL SUMMARY

Screenline Counts were conducted on the 600 block of Spring Street (between 6th and 7th Streets) in March 2012 and March 2013 (Figure 1).

Counts were conducted on two weekdays and one weekend day. In March 2012, counts were conducted on Tuesday the 6th, Wednesday the 7th, and Saturday the 10th. In March 2013, counts were conducted on Sunday the 24th, Tuesday the 25th, and Wednesday the 26th. For each year, the two raw weekday counts were averaged to arrive at a single weekday figure.

The 2012 counts were conducted during peak hours: 8am, 9am; 12pm, 2pm; 5pm, and 6pm (six hours total).

The 2013 counts were conducted at the top of each hour between 8am and 7pm (eleven hours total).

Fifteen-­‐minute count intervals were conducted at the top of each hour. A formula is used to extrapolate the average hourly volumes presented here. Unless otherwise noted, all values presented in this report are average hourly volumes extrapolated from the 15-­‐minute counts.

The 2013 counts also recorded the ‘Bicycling Behavior’ categories (whereas 2012 counts did not):

• Direction of Travel (Southbound: with traffic, or Northbound: against-­‐traffic) • In Bike Facility (green bike lane) vs. Out of Bike Facility (other traffic lane) • On Sidewalk • Helmet Usage • Gender • Age (Under 16 or Over 65)

Both the 2012 and 2013 surveys included hourly surveys of bicycles parked on Spring Street sidewalks. The 2012 surveys were conducted on the corridor between 4th and 8th Streets. The 2013 surveys were conducted between 6th and 7th Streets only.

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

19

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012

ABOUT PARKLET STUDIES

‘Parklet Studies’ has been in operation since September 2011. The collaborative focuses on evaluating experimental urban interventions in the public right-­‐of-­‐way. As of April 2013, its range of involvements include: the 2012 Parklet Impact Study with the Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council (DLANC); design and implementation of the Lewis Center Pilot Parklet Evaluation with UCLA (also for Spring Street); a partnership with Streets for People (S4P) to produce the Sunset Triangle Impact Study; and a contract with LADOT to author site selection criteria and project evaluation methodologies for future parklet and plaza sites throughout the City.

parkletstudies.carbonmade.com

dlanc.com/completestreets

livingstreetsla.org/streets-­‐for-­‐people

Spring Street Bicycle Counts 2012 / 2013

20

Parklet Studies for LACBC and LADOT, April 2012