New data shows people on bikes have returned to Valencia
The following is a guest post by Kyle Grochmal, volunteer with Friends of Valencia
It’s been named “the most controversial bike lane in America”. Why has Valencia's new center-running bike lane been so controversial? The design is novel to San Francisco. It’s imperfect because it’s trying to balance competing needs – safety, loading, parklets, parking, driving, and more. With all of the opinions and vibes, how do we determine if this novel and imperfect lane is successful?
What’s been missing from the debate about Valencia Street is an agreement about the facts, transparency from SFMTA about the bike lane’s performance, and clarity of vision for how the street can reach its potential.
We offer a three-part framework for moving forward:
SFMTA must follow the data and define success.
Advocates and others must give the new configuration time and not rush to judgment. However, if the data shows that the new bike lane is not working, SFMTA should be willing to change strategies quickly.
And finally, we need to remember that the center-lane should be a short-term safety fix on the way to the real end goal: a vibrant street that prioritizes more space for people.
SFMTA must follow the data and define success
So far, most commentary about Valencia has been based almost entirely on preconceived opinions. A thorough, data-driven evaluation of the bike lane should include both bike counts as well as safety indicators–collisions, near-misses, driver compliance, and injuries. Data from the controller’s office about sales tax performance is another important input to determining how the bike lane may or may not be affecting businesses. In fact, initial sales tax data has already helped to show that the pressing challenges facing small business in the Mission are so far not related to the bike lane.
Now, new data from Friends of Valencia and KidSafe SF shows that people on bicycles have returned to Valencia Street following the chaotic and drawn-out construction of the center-running bike lane. Weekday ridership has risen 47% since the bike lane was completed in August, based on data from a traffic-counting sensor on Valencia between 20th and 21st Streets. More than 2,400 cyclists a day are riding on Valencia Street during daylight hours, up from around 1,600 and 1,800 in August and September, respectively.
This third-party data is in line with SFMTA data - released via a public records request - indicating that September bicycle ridership dropped 53% post-implementation of the center-running bike lane. However, our data also substantiates SFMTA’s subsequent blog post stating that bicycle ridership has rebounded since September and is now 3% higher than ridership levels in the prior door-zone bike lane. While this increase is not yet impressive, there is a rapid trajectory of improvement from September through December, and it’s likely that this trend will continue in coming months.
The community needs complete data, ongoing transparency, and a commitment to outcomes
Friends of Valencia believes the future of Valencia Street should be determined by data, not preconceived notions or the loudest voices. Bicycle ridership on the corridor is one component of that data. However, the most crucial data is crash and injury data for Valencia Street, which should be regularly reported by SFMTA, with collaboration from SFPD and the public health department.
Friends of Valencia views the center-running bike lane as an interim safety solution. If the current design turns out not to be safe, SFMTA must go back to the drawing board. However, most street safety projects like this are measured for ridership and safety changes at the six-month or one-year mark.
As the data from the past several months shows, it takes time for people to adjust their travel habits to new infrastructure, and early data can be unreliable. SFMTA’s analysis of the parking protected bike lanes on Valencia from 15th Street to Market Street showing a 49% increase in peak commute traffic was completed after the lanes had been in place for one year–long enough for behavior to meaningfully adjust.
Citizens should expect meaningful improvements in both ridership and safety from any new bike lane project. For their part, SFMTA should be transparent not only in releasing data, but also in defining the thresholds for success up front. How many fewer crashes should we expect? What’s the target bike ridership improvement? So much friction on Valencia seems to be the result of a lack of transparency on the part of SFMTA — advocates, businesses, and neighbors want the best outcome, but getting a good outcome is difficult or impossible if the agency isn’t transparently measuring progress.
Getting to a safe, vibrant Valencia for the community
We are hopeful that the current design will show meaningful safety improvements over the prior unprotected lanes, so we all can focus on an ambitious long term design for Valencia Street. There is work to do with merchants to move forward, but we believe that reimagining Valencia to prioritize people, outdoor dining, shopping, and public space will ultimately be a win-win for everyone. San Francisco has shown that we can reimagine our streets to help small businesses and create great public spaces – from the Buchanan Mall in Japantown to Maiden Lane near Union Square.
We hope this new ridership data can help reset the conversation about Valencia, and we call on SFMTA to be timely and transparent in the release of data regarding the success — or failure — of the center-running bike lane to help us achieve our shared safe streets objectives.
Our vision is a vibrant street that prioritizes more space for people. A street that becomes a destination for residents and visitors alike. And a street that benefits all stakeholders: merchants, residents, pedestrians and cyclists. We can only get there with data, transparency, and a commitment to working in good faith toward real solutions.
This post was authored by Kyle Grochmal, a volunteer with KidSafe SF and Friends of Valencia.
Additional note on data and methods
This data comes from a network of Telraam devices deployed by KidSafe SF. Telraam is a camera-based automated sensor for measuring vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian volumes and speeds. There is a Telraam device on private property on Valencia Street between 20th and 21st Streets. The sensor has been counting traffic since August 2023, when the center bike lane was completed.
December bike counts were 47% higher than August and 35% higher than September, which aligns with SFMTA’s claim that cyclists returned to Valencia Street after the construction concluded. Some cyclists might have moved up their evening commutes in the winter months, but I’d expect to also have seen some increase in drivers if commute habits changed by season. However, vehicle volumes remained relatively constant throughout. The Telraam data shows that cyclists are returning to Valencia Street en masse.
SFMTA’s additional claim that bikes increased 3% from the pre-implementation 3,400 – 3,500 daily bike counts is much harder to verify with the Telraam data. However, in August, 7:00 am – 5:00 pm bike volumes made up 79% of total daylight (6:00 am – 8:00 pm) bike volumes. Therefore, we can extrapolate that December’s average weekday bike count from 6:00 am to 8:00 pm was around 3,050. It’s completely reasonable to assume there could be another 350 – 450 cyclists between the hours of 8:00 pm and 6:00 am or missed by the Telraam due to an obstruction.
Telraam devices, which use cameras to determine vehicle volumes and speeds, are less precise than the pneumatic tubes that SFMTA uses for their counts. However, Telraam devices capture data over longer periods and provide continuous monitoring of street conditions. Since the Telraam devices are camera-based, they don’t capture any data during night hours. The Telraam data is less accurate than the pneumatic tube data since the cameras are sometimes obstructed by parked trucks, objects or the sun. Due to these constraints, the Telraam counts are meaningfully lower than actual volumes.
The daytime limitation for Telraam devices makes any analysis of August to December data very difficult due to diminishing daylight hours in the winter months. Therefore, the analysis of Valencia traffic levels is restricted to daylight hours from 7:00 am to 5:00 pm. Weekends are also excluded, as the Saturday street closures on Valencia significantly increased bike rates, but ended on November 18th.
