HomeMy WebLinkAboutBakersfield BTP Ch 3 Needs AnalysisNeeds Analysis
Alta Planning + Design | 3-1
3. Needs Analysis
The needs of Bakersfield bicyclists are diverse and depend on the individual level of experience, confidence,
age, trip type and many other factors. This examination begins with a review of the types of bicyclists and
typical trip purposes. It is followed by a review of trip attractors and generators to identify potential bicycle
trip origins and destinations. Travel mode choice and typical travel time are then reviewed to understand the
current and potential rates of bicycling. Bicycle related collisions are also reviewed to understand locations
likely in need of bicycle related improvements. A closer look at the existing gaps in the bicycle network will
help inform network development. The needs analysis concludes with a summary of community input
gathered from a community survey and a workshop.
3.1. Types of Bicyclists
This Plan seeks to address the needs of current and potential bicyclists and therefore it is important to
understand the needs and preferences of all types of bicyclists. Bicyclists’ needs and preferences vary between
skill levels and their trip types. Generally, bicycling typologies fall into four categories.1 Figure 3-1 illustrates
these bicyclist types in a bar chart relating to the proportion of the public estimated from surveys to identify
with each typology.
Strong and Fearless bicyclists will ride on almost any
roadway despite the traffic volume, speed and lack
of bikeway designation and are estimated to be less
than 1% of the population.
Enthused and Confident bicyclists will ride on most
roadways if traffic volumes and speeds are not high.
They are confident in positioning themselves to
share the roadway with motorists and are
estimated to be 7% of the population.
Interested but Concerned bicyclists will ride if bicycle
paths or lanes are provided on roadways with low
traffic volumes and speeds. They are typically not
confident cycling with motorists. Interested but
Concerned bicyclists are estimated to be 60% of the
total population and the primary target group that
will bicycle more if encouraged to do so.
No Way, No How are people that do not consider
cycling part of their transportation or recreation
options and are estimated to be about one-third of
the population.
Typical Distribution of Types of Bicyclists
Figure 3-1: Typology of Existing and Potential
Bicyclists
1
Source: Roger Geller, Bicycle Coordinator, City of Portland, Oregon
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-2 | Alta Planning + Design
The needs of bicyclists also vary between trip purposes. For example, people who bicycle for performance or
recreational purposes may prefer long, straight, and un-signalized roadways while bicyclists who ride with
their children to school may prefer direct roadways with lower vehicular volumes and speeds. The different
types of bicyclists and their trip purposes include:
Commuters: regularly bicycle between their residences and work
Enthusiasts: ride for fitness or sport, and generally (but not always) have confidence and skills for
riding in traffic
Casual / Family / Elderly: people who use bicycles for running errands, leisure, or as a family activity
Children: bicycle to school, activities and to visit friends
An effective bicycle network accommodates bicyclists of all abilities. Casual bicyclists generally prefer
roadways with low traffic volumes and low speeds. They also prefer paths that are physically separated from
roadways. Because enthusiasts typically ride to destinations or to achieve a goal, they generally choose the
most direct route, which may include arterial roadways with or without bike lanes. Commuters generally
prefer increased separation from automobile traffic, but will ride on arterial roadways if they need to in order
to reach their destinations. Children are more comfortable riding on very low volume residential streets and
separated pathways.
Bicyclists of all abilities and purposes ride every day in Bakersfield. Parents bicycle with their children to
school, people bicycle to work in Bakersfield and adjacent unincorporated Kern County, community members
bicycle to GET stations, and recreational bicyclists ride through Bakersfield on extended bicycle trips.
Bicyclists of all abilities and purposes ride every day in Bakersfield.
Needs Analysis
Alta Planning + Design | 3-3
3.2. Bicycle Attractors and Generators
3.2.1 Parks and Community Centers
Bakersfield has 59 park facilities including playgrounds, ball fields, courts, and picnic areas that serve as
recreational destinations for the community. These outdoor amenities attract individuals, families, local
residents and tourists. Bakersfield’s larger park destinations are described below and shown on Figure 3-2.
Aera Park and Baseball Fields: Aera Park is located at the intersection of Stockdale Highway and Jewetta
Avenue, close to the Kern River. The park’s 11 baseball fields host Bakersfield Southwest youth leagues. In
addition, Aera Park has wi-fi available.
Centennial Park: Located on Montclair north of Stockdale Highway, Centennial Park has a wide variety of
amenities, including playground equipment; picnic areas; facilities for basketball, volleyball, tennis, baseball,
and soccer; and a no-leash zone for dogs.
Centennial Plaza: The Centennial Plaza is located at Truxton Avenue and N Street, near to the Rabobank
Arena Theatre and Convention Center. It includes a fountain, waterfall, and stage.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Community Center and Park: This park is located at the intersection of East
California and South Owens and has a pool, summer spray park, basketball and tennis courts, and a full gym.
The adjacent community center has a large multipurpose room with a kitchen, after school program for
children, and free lunch program during the summer months.
Jastro Park: Located between Truxtun Avenue and 18th Street, Jastro Park has a bandstand, shade canopy,
two picnic areas, facilities for a variety of sports, horseshoe pits, playground equipment, and a summer spray
park.
Jefferson Park: Amenities at Jefferson Park include a spray park, sandlot style play area, amphitheater, and
pool. It is located at Bernard Street and Beale Avenue.
Kern River Parkway Bike Path: The Kern River Bike Path covers more than 30 miles along the Kern River
through Bakersfield. There are more than 6,000 acres of trails, parks, and waterways, including the paved
shared-use path previously discussed.
McMurtrey Aquatic Center: Located in Downtown at the corner of 14th and Q Streets, this aquatic facility
features a large recreation pool and a 50-meter competition pool, as well as a double water slide.
The Park at River Walk: A 32 acre park adjacent to the Kern River at the junction of Stockdale Highway and
Buena Vista Road, The Park at River Walk has an amphitheater, swimming facilities, and wi-fi access. It is
behind The Shops at River Walk.
Planz Park: This park is located at Planz Road and South H Street, and provides three picnic areas, a baseball
diamond, a basketball court, a spray park, and a pool. Silver Creek Community Center and Park: Located at
Harris Road and Reliance Drive, the park and community center include a pavilion, a swimming pool, a multi-
purpose room, a stage, lighted tennis courts, a disc golf course, horseshoe pits, an exercise course, two play
areas, a multi-use sports field, and two large picnic areas.
Wayside Park: This park is located at Ming Ave and El Toro Drive. It offers two picnic areas, a softball
diamond, basketball and tennis courts, and a spray park.
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-4 | Alta Planning + Design
3.2.2 Schools
Children below driving age are a large population of existing and potential bicyclists. Schools in Bakersfield
are listed in Table 3-1 and shown in Figure 3-2. Elementary and junior high/middle schools in Bakersfield are
managed by the Bakersfield City School District, while high schools are managed by the Kern High School
District.
Table 3-1: Bakersfield Public Schools
School Names
Elementary Schools
Almondale Evergreen Loudon Planz
American Franklin McAuliffe Quailwood
Berkshire Frank West McKinley Reagan
Bill Williams Fremont Mount Vernon Roosevelt
Bimat Garza Munsey San Lauren
Buena Vista Granite Pointe Nichols Sandrini
Casa Loma Harding Noble Sandstone
Castle Harris Norris Seibert
Chavez Hart Old River Sing Lum
College Heights Hills Owens Primary Stine
Columbia Horizon Owens Intermediate Stockdale
Del Rio Horace Mann Palla Suburu
Discovery Jefferson Patriot Thorner
Douglas Johnson Children’s Center Pauly Valle Verde
Downtown Kendrick Penn Valley Oaks Charter
Eissler Laurelglen Pioneer Veterans
Endeavour Longfellow Plantation Wayside
Junior High / Middle Schools
Actis Freedom Sierra Valley Oaks Charter
Chipman Greenfield Stiern Warren
Compton Ollivier Stonecreek Washington
Curran Rafer Community Day Tevis
Emerson Sequoia Thompson
High Schools
Bakersfield Frontier Liberty South
Centennial Golden Valley Mira Monte Stockdale
East Bakersfield Highland North West
Foothill Independence Ridgeview
In addition to elementary, middle, junior high, and high schools, Bakersfield is also home to California State
University (CSU) Bakersfield and Bakersfield College. As of the fall quarter 2012, CSU Bakersfield enrolled
8,520 total students2. Established in 1913, Bakersfield College is one of the nation’s oldest continually-
operating community colleges, today serving 15,000 students on the 153-acre main campus in northeast
Bakersfield, at the Weill Institute in downtown Bakersfield, and at the Delano Center 35 miles north of
Bakersfield3.
2
http://www.calstate.edu/as/stat_reports/2012-2013/f12_01.htm
3
http://www.bakersfieldcollege.edu/about/facts/
Needs Analysis
Alta Planning + Design | 3-5
3.2.3 Retail Centers
Located in the central portion of the city, Downtown Bakersfield is comprised of several blocks and features
restaurants, retail shops, and entertainment uses, including the Rabobank Arena, Theatre, and Convention
Center. There are Class II bike lanes on Chester Avenue, Q Street, and 21st Street that serve the downtown.
There are two major shopping centers in Bakersfield: Valley Plaza Mall and Northwest Promenade. Located in
southwest Bakersfield adjacent to Highway 99, the Valley Plaza Mall has a wide variety of shops and
restaurants, as well as a movie theatre. It can be accessed by Wible Road, which has Class II bike lanes. The
Northwest Promenade is an outdoor shopping center located on the northwestern side of the Kern River. The
Promenade fronts Rosedale Highway, which lacks bicycle facilities, but there are Class II bike lanes on Coffee
Road, which runs along the property’s eastern edge. The East Hills Mall, located in the northeast portion of
the city, contains a United Artists Theatre. There are Class II bike lanes on Columbus Street to the north and
Bernard Street to the south of the mall.
Smaller shopping and lifestyle centers, such as the Shops at Riverwalk and the Marketplace, are scattered
throughout Bakersfield and are home to major chain stores and restaurants, such as Target, Costco, Wal-Mart,
Family Dollar, P.F. Chang’s, and BJ’s Restaurant and Brewhouse.
3.2.4 Top Employers
Nearly 25,000 people are employed by Bakersfield’s top ten employers. Making bicycling to work convenient
through increased access to employment centers and City and privately sponsored encouragement programs
would target this large pool of potential bicyclists. Table 3-2 lists the top ten employers, their location, and
number of employees. They are also shown on Figure 3-2. This Plan’s recommendations consider large
employer locations.
Table 3-2: Top 10 Employers (2010)
3.2.5 Transit
Public transit riders often face the “first mile, last mile” dilemma of how to connect their home and final
destination with the actual transit route. For instance, a transit bus may take a passenger to within a mile of
Employer Address
Number of
Employees
County of Kern 1115 Truxtun Avenue 7,475
Giumarra Farms PO Box 1969 4,200
Grimmway Farms N/A 3,500
Wm. Bolthouse Farms, Inc. 7200 E. Brundage Lane 2,000
Bakersfield Memorial Hospital 420 30th Street 1,400
City of Bakersfield 1600 Truxtun Avenue 1,300
Mercy Hospital 2215 Truxtun Avenue 1,200
ARB, Inc. PO Box 1559 1,200
Kern Medical Center 1830 Flower Street 1,200
State Farm Insurance 900 Old River Road 1,045
Total 24,520
Source: Greater Bakersfield Chamber of Commerce
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-6 | Alta Planning + Design
their employment site, but that might be outside the range of their walking capability or tolerance. Bicycle
racks on buses and bicycle parking at transit stops ensure that bicycling is a complementary solution to the
transit connectivity issue.
Approximately 1.2% of Bakersfield’s working population report taking transit to work daily4. Three public
transit agencies operate within the City: Golden Empire Transit (GET), Kern Regional Transit, and Amtrak.
GET has annual boardings of 7.2 million passengers.5 There are two GET transit centers; one is downtown on
22nd Street between Eye Street and Chester Avenue, and the other is in southwest Bakersfield on Wible Road.
GET operates bus routes throughout the City and provides front-loading bicycle racks. The racks can carry up
to two bicycles, and bicycles are also allowed inside the bus if the rack is full and room is available.
Kern Regional Transit operates bus routes throughout Kern County. Nine of 12 bus routes traverse
Bakersfield. Some Kern Regional Transit buses are equipped with bicycle racks that are available on a first-
come first-served basis. The City has installed bicycle lanes and routes along major bus routes, including
Chester Avenue.
Amtrak offers inter-city train and bus service to and from Bakersfield. The Bakersfield Amtrak station is
located off Truxtun Avenue and S Street. Some buses are equipped with front bicycle racks, while others
allow bicycles to be stored in luggage compartments below the vehicles. Most Amtrak trains permit bicycles
to be walked onto train cars and secured to onboard bicycle racks. On older trains not equipped with racks,
bicycles must be stored in a container and checked. There are no bikeways adjacent to the Amtrak station,
though there are several nearby facilities through the downtown, such as Class II bike lanes to the east on Q
Street.
4
American Community Survey, United States Census, 2007-2011.
5
www.getbus.org/about/
Needs Analysis Alta Planning + Design | 3-7
Figure 3-2: Bicycle Attractors and Generators
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-8 | Alta Planning + Design
3.3. Commuter Travel
Monitoring the number of commuter bicyclists in the City provides a way to track the use of bicycle facilities.
As bicycle facilities are built and education and encouragement programs are implemented, the data can be
revisited to monitor changes in bicycling rates. The proportion of Bakersfield residents that bicycle to work is
about 0.4%, which is slightly lower than Kern County and the United States as a whole, and less than half
that of California (Table 3-3).
Table 3-3: Work Commute Mode Share by Geography
Mode Bakersfield Kern County California United States
Bicycle 0.4% 0.5% 1.1% 0.6%
Carpool 13.5% 15.4% 11.1% 9.7%
Drive Alone 79.4% 76.2% 73.3% 76.4%
Public Transit 1.2% 1.2% 5.2% 5.0%
Walked 2.2% 1.7% 2.8% 2.8%
Other 1.1% 2.1% 1.3% 1.2%
Worked from Home 2.3% 2.9% 5.3% 4.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011 American Community Survey, SFB08301
Review of travel time to work is important to estimate the potential number of bicycle commuters. Generally,
a commute time of 15 minutes or less is equivalent to a 30 minute bicycle commute, assuming flat topography
and light to moderate traffic. The example of communities nationwide demonstrates that it is possible for
Bakersfield to shift a portion of the 31.5 % of the 15 minute or less commuters to bicycling. Table 3-4 compares
average Bakersfield commute times with Kern County, California, and the United States.
Table 3-4: Travel Time to Work
Travel Time to Work Bakersfield Kern County California United States
Less than 15 minutes 31.5% 32.7% 24.5% 27.8%
15 to 29 minutes 43.0% 37.9% 35.8% 36.4%
30 to 44 minutes 14.8% 16.8% 21.6% 20.2%
45 to 59 minutes 4.9% 5.1% 8.0% 7.5%
60 minutes or more 5.8% 7.5% 10.1% 8.1%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011 American Community Survey, SF B08303
Needs Analysis
Alta Planning + Design | 3-9
3.4. Bicycle Counts
As part of this Bicycle Transportation Plan effort, the City of Bakersfield with assistance from Bike Bakersfield
volunteers conducted bicycle counts at 14 sites geographically dispersed throughout the city to gather
information on the number and characteristics of existing bicyclists. The counts were conducted from 6:30am
to 9:00am and 3:30pm to 6:00pm on Tuesday September 18, 2012 and 8:00am to 12:00pm on Saturday
September 22, 2012, for a total of 9 hours of observations per site. Table 3-5 presents a summary of the data
gathered as part of this effort.
Table 3-5: Summary of Bicycle Counts by Site
Location
Total Count Avg. Count / Hour
AM PM Weekend Total Weekday Weekend
Chester Ave & Class 1 Bike Path 118 121 382 621 48 96
Kern River Trail & Stockdale Hwy 134 103 371 608 47 93
Baker St & Sumner St 47 60 83 190 21 21
4th St & P St 30 65 94 189 19 24
Stockdale Highway & Don Hart (Near Cal State) 44 46 66 156 18 17
Paladino Dr & Morning Dr 41 9 86 136 10 22
21st St & Oak St 30 37 47 114 13 13
S. Chester Ave & Ming Ave 24 38 41 103 12 10
Riverlakes & Hageman 31 26 28 85 11 7
Brimhall Ave & Calloway 16 13 34 63 7 9
Ming Ave & Ashe Rd 22 19 18 59 8 5
Columbus St & Union Ave 19 10 23 52 6 6
Chester Ave & Truxtun Ave 14 14 19 47 6 5
University Ave & Mt Vernon Ave 4 11 5 20 3 1
Total for all sites 574 572 1297 2443 - -
Average for each measure 41 41 93 175 16 23
Proportion of all observed bicyclists 23% 23% 53% 100% - -
The top two sites both featured an intersection with a bike path. This is likely due to the community
preferences for bike paths, as described further in Section 3.8.
Across all sites, women and youth riders accounted for only 16% and 6% of the total bicyclists observed,
respectively. Both of these measures suggest that the environment is not perceived by the general public as
comfortable enough for bicycling.
This summary of the data should be regarded as indicative measures of bicycling activity levels. As with
bicycle collision analysis, manual bicycle counting has high statistical variability due to low sample size (9
hours out of the 4380 daylight hours of the year) and observation numbers (average 16 riders per hour across
all sites). Ideally, future comparisons should utilize rolling five year averages to minimize the effect of random
variation in the data. Should Bakersfield adopt permanent automatic counting technology at some sites
(whether stand-alone or as part of traffic signal detection), it would be possible to develop locally specific
seasonal, day of the week, and time of day expansion factors for any future short-term manual count efforts.
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-10 | Alta Planning + Design
3.5. Estimated Commuter and Utilitarian Bicyclists
A key goal of this Plan is to maximize the number of bicyclists in order to realize multiple benefits, such as
improved health, less traffic congestion, and maintenance of ambient air quality levels. In order to achieve
this, a better understanding of the number of existing bicyclists is needed. The US Census collects only the
primary mode of travel to work and it does not consider bicycle use when bicyclists ride to transit or school.
Alta Planning + Design has developed a bicycle model that estimates usage based on available empirical data.
This model uses Bakersfield specific data from the US Census American Community Survey (ACS); National
Safe Routes to School survey; and Federal Highway Administration College Commute Survey. The calculation
steps are outlined below.
Bicycle to work mode share:
Number of bicycle commuters, derived from the ACS
Work at home bicycle mode share
Number of those who work from home and likely bicycle, derived from assumption that five percent
of those who work at home make at least one bicycle trip daily.
Bicycle to school mode share:
Number of students biking to school, derived from multiplying the K-8 student population by the
national bike to school average rate of two percent
Number of college students biking to the CSU Bakersfield and Bakersfield College, derived from an
assumption that one percent of those students living in Bakersfield bike.
Number of those who bike to transit:
Number of people who bicycle to GET and Kern Regional Transit Stations, assuming that five percent
of transit patrons use bicycles to access the station and/or their destination.
As shown on Table 3-6, there are an estimated 5,564 existing daily bicycle commute trips in Bakersfield. This
is an order-of-magnitude estimate based on available data and does not include recreational trips. Table 3-7
presents the estimated air quality benefits.
Needs Analysis
Alta Planning + Design | 3-11
Table 3-6: Existing Bicycling Demand (Estimated)
Variable Figure Source
Existing study area population 352,429 2011 ACS, B01003 1-Year Estimates
Existing employed population 139,907 2011 ACS, B08301 1-Year Estimates
Existing bike-to-work mode share 0.4% 2011 ACS, B08301 1-Year Estimates
Existing number of bike-to-work commuters 560 Employed persons * by bike-to-work mode share
Existing work-at-home mode share 2.3% 2011 ACS, B08301 1-Year Estimates
Existing number of work-at-home bike commuters 161 Assumes 5% of population working at home makes at
least one daily bicycle trip
Existing transit-to-work mode share 1.2% 2011 ACS, B08301 1-Year Estimates
Existing transit bicycle commuters 84 Employed persons multiplied by transit mode share.
Assumes 5% of transit riders access transit by bicycle
Existing school children, ages 5-14 (grades K-8) 58,856 2011 ACS, S0101 1-Year Estimates
Existing school children bicycling mode share 2.0% National Safe Routes to School surveys, 2003.
Existing school children bike commuters 1,177 School children population multiplied by school
children bike mode share
Existing number of college students in study area 8,002 CSU Bakersfield 2011 Fast Facts
Existing estimated college bicycling mode share 10.0%
Review of bicycle commute share in seven university
communities (source: National Bicycling & Walking
Study, FHWA, Case Study No. 1, 1995).
Existing college bike commuters 800 College student population multiplied by college
student bicycling mode share
Existing total number of bike commuters 2,782 Total bike-to-work, school, college and utilitarian bike
trips. Does not include recreation.
Total daily bicycling trips 5,564 Total bicycle commuters x 2 (for round trips)
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-12 | Alta Planning + Design
Table 3-7: Bicycling Air Quality Impact
Existing Vehicle Trips and Miles Reduction
Vehicle Trips per Weekday 1,734
Assumes 73% of vehicle trips replaced by bicycle trips for adults/college
students and 53% for school children
Vehicle Trips per Year 452,574
Reduced number of weekday vehicle trips multiplied by 261 (weekdays
in a year)
Vehicle Miles per Weekday 9,505
Assumes average round trip travel length of 8 miles for adults/college
students and 1 mile for schoolchildren
Vehicle Miles per Year 2,480,775
Reduced number of weekday vehicle miles multiplied by 261 (weekdays
in a year)
Existing Emissions Reduction
Hydrocarbons (lbs/weekday) 28 Daily mileage reduction multiplied by 1.36 grams per reduced mile
PM10 (lbs/weekday) 0 Daily mileage reduction multiplied by 0.0052 grams per reduced mile
PM2.5 (lbs/weekday) 0 Daily mileage reduction multiplied by 0.0049 grams per reduced mile
NOX (lbs/weekday) 20 Daily mileage reduction multiplied by 0.95 grams per reduced mile
CO (lbs/weekday) 260 Daily mileage reduction multiplied by 12.4 grams per reduced mile
C02 (lbs/weekday) 7,732 Daily mileage reduction multiplied by 369 grams per reduced mile
Hydrocarbons (lbs/year) 7,438 Yearly mileage reduction multiplied by 1.36 grams per reduced mile
PM10 (lbs/year) 28 Yearly mileage reduction multiplied by 0.0052 grams per reduced mile
PM2.5 (lbs/year) 27 Yearly mileage reduction multiplied by 0.0049 grams per reduced mile
NOX (lbs/year) 5,196 Yearly mileage reduction multiplied by 0.95 grams per reduced mile
CO (lbs/year) 67,818 Yearly mileage reduction multiplied by 12.4 grams per reduced mile
C02 (lbs/year) 2,018,125 Yearly mileage reduction multiplied by 369 grams per reduced mile
Source: Emissions rates from EPA report 420-F-05-022 "Emission Facts: Average Annual Emissions and Fuel Consumption for
Gasoline-Fueled Passenger Cars and Light Trucks." 2005.
Needs Analysis
Alta Planning + Design | 3-13
3.6. Collision Analysis
Analysis of bicycle related collision data provides the city with a basis for infrastructure and programmatic
recommendations that can improve safety. Collision data comes from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Report
System (SWITRS). Because SWITRS is a repository for all police departments to submit traffic records, data
is sometimes incomplete due to varying reporting methods. While collision data is sometimes incomplete and
does not capture the “near misses,” it does provide a general sense of the safety issues facing bicyclists in
Bakersfield.
This chapter reviews collision data from the years 2006 through 2010 to identify where collisions frequently
occur and what factors influenced the collisions.
Table 3-8: Annual Reported Bicycle Related Collisions
(2006-2010)
Year Total Collisions
2006 56
2007 54
2008 54
2009 43
2010 49
Total 256
Source: SWITRS
3.6.1 Annual Collision Totals
In this time period, there were 256 total reported
collisions involving bicyclists. The number of bicycle
related collisions remained fairly constant throughout
the five-year period (Table 3-8) dipping slightly in 2009
and rising again in 2010. It should be noted, however,
that many bicycle collisions go unreported and the true
number may be higher than shown.
Compared to other California cities with populations
over 250,000, Bakersfield ranked the lowest by average
population.6
Figure 3-7 maps these collisions. The vast majority of
collisions occurred in downtown Bakersfield or adjacent
to downtown to the east and south.
Figure 3-3: Type of Collision
3.6.2 Collision Types
Figure 3-3 breaks down the collision types by
percentage The most typically reported collision type is
a broadside collision. A broadside collision is a collision
where the bicycle and the car were traveling at right
angles to each other before the crash. .
This indicates those involved were either not obeying
traffic control devices (e.g. signals, stop signs) or
ensuring it was safe to cross. While SWITRS data does
not note if the collision included sidewalk riding,
sidewalk bicycling puts the bicyclist at risk because
drivers do not expect a faster (relative to a pedestrian)
bicyclist, particularly those riding against traffic.
6
http://www.ots.ca.gov/media_and_research/Rankings/default.asp#what
Head-On,
5%
Sideswipe,
6%
Rear-End,
5%
Broadside,
69%
Hit Object,
1%
Overturned,
<1%
Vehicle/
Pedestrian,
6%
Other, 8%
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-14 | Alta Planning + Design
3.6.3 Time of Day
As shown in Figure 3-4, the majority of collisions
have historically occurred between 2pm and 8pm.
Approximately 26% of the collisions occurred
during typical school dismissal and after school
activities times. This was only surpassed by
collisions during the evening peak period (29% of
collisions).
While most of the collisions occurred in the
afternoon and evening, records show collisions
typically occur during daylight hours (Figure 3-5)
3.6.4 Parties Involved
The most common age group involved in reported
bicycle related collisions were children under 18
years old (Figure 3-6, 40%). Over 50% of reported
collisions involved people under 25 years old.
While these age groups may bicycle more than
their seniors, collision rates are not possible to
determine without more detailed exposure data.
However, this may indicate a need for focused
bicycling education for younger riders.
Night: 12am-
6am, 1%Morning
School and
Work: 6am-
10am, 13%
Mid-Day:
10am-2pm,
19%
Typical
School
Dismissal:
2pm-5pm,
26%
Evening
Peak: 5pm-
8pm, 29%
Night: 8pm-
12am, 13%
Daylight
70%
Dusk-Dawn
4%
Dark-Street
Lights
21%
Dark-No
Street Lights
5%
Under 18
40%
18-24
13%
25-34
11%
35-44
10%
45-54
15%
55-64
6%
Over 65
5%
Figure 3-5: Bicycle Collisions - Lighting
Figure 3-6: Age of Party Involved
Figure 3-4: Time of Day
Needs Analysis
Alta Planning + Design | 3-15
3.6.5 Common Violations
Identification of the most common violations in bicycle-related collisions and the locations where they
occurred can inform the City of possible engineering or education needs7. A specific recurring violation can be
the result of unclear traffic controls or roadways not designed for bicycle use. It can also be the result of
bicyclists not aware of or complying with the “rules of the road” or not feeling comfortable riding with traffic.
Table 3-9 lists the top five most
common reported traffic violations
and the specific locations where
these violations most frequently
occur.
Frequent traffic violations include
riding on the wrong side of the road,
automobile right of way, disobeying
traffic signals and signs, and
improper turning.
These violations suggest the need for
bicycle and motorist education and
direct and logical bikeways on or
parallel to busy roadways.
Table 3-9: Common Collision Related Violations and Location
Violation % of CollisionsFrequently Occurs At
Wrong Side of
Road
32.0% Akers Road
California Avenue
Columbus Street
Automobile
Right of Way
23.8% 21st Street
30th Street
California Avenue
Disobeying
Traffic Signals
and Signs
10.9% Baker Street (at Truxtun
Avenue and Sumner Street)
Brundage Lane
Ming Avenue
Improper
Turning
10.5% Gage Street
Ming Avenue
Unknown 5.9% 34th Street
Table 3-10 lists the traffic violations
by the at fault party. Bicyclists were
most commonly cited at fault for
bicycle related collisions between
2006 and 2010. They were most at
fault for riding on the wrong side of
the road, disobeying traffic signals
and signs, and failing to yield to
right-of-way. Motorists, including
truck drivers, were at fault for 18%
of collisions, mostly for disobeying
bicyclist right of way.
Table 3-10: Traffic Violation by Party at Fault
Violation Bicycle Vehicle Not Stated Total
Wrong Side of Road 781 382
Vehicle Right of Way 4017 461
Other or Unknown 123 1530
Traffic Signals and Signs 233 228
Improper Turning 146 727
Under the influence 55 10
Unsafe Starting / Backing7 18
Unsafe Speed 32 27
Improper Passing 11 2
Pedestrian Right of Way 1 12
Unsafe Lane Change 11
Lights / Brakes 11 2
Total 17847 31256
% Party at Fault 70%18% 12%100%
Wrong way riding may be due to a number of factors. Table 3-11: Corridors Where Bicycle Related Collisions
7
The violation data may be subject to systemic officer judgment biases.
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-16 | Alta Planning + Design
Violators may not know the rules of the road or may
not feel comfortable bicycling with traffic or crossing
major roadways. For example, Columbus Street is a
five-lane roadway with limited controlled
intersections. Many bicyclists will ride against traffic
for short distances rather than navigate complex
intersections. Table 3-11 lists the most frequent
corridors where wrong way riding was listed as a
factor in the reported bicycle involved collision.
Involved Wrong Way Riding
Corridor No. of Collisions
Columbus Street 4
Union Avenue 3
California Avenue 3
Old River Road 3
S H Street 3
White Lane 3
Ming Avenue 3
3.6.6 Frequent Collision Locations
Table 3-12 lists the corridors with the most collisions as well as roadway and bikeway descriptions.
Table 3-12: Top Collision Corridors
Corridor No. of
Collisions
Roadway Type Speed
Limit8
No. Travel
Lanes9
Bikeway Type
White Lane 11 Arterial 55 8 Bike lanes
Ming Avenue 9 Arterial 45 8 Bike lanes
California Avenue 9 Arterial 45 8 Bike lanes
21st Street 7 Local 35 5 Bike lanes
Union Avenue 7 Arterial 45 8 None
S H Street 6 Arterial 45 3 None
H Street 6 Collector 40 5 None
RT 178 5 Freeway varies 4 Shoulder
New Stine Road 5 Arterial 45 8 Bike Lanes
34th Street 5 Collector 40 6 Wide curbside lane
Baker Street 5 Collector 40 5* None
Brundage Lane 5 Arterial 40 6 None
* with parallel parking
These roadways may have more collisions than others because they:
May carry more bicycle traffic as they provide logical and direct north/south connections, and are
near attractor or popular destinations.
Have higher traffic volumes and speeds, leading many bicyclists to ride either on sidewalks or against
the flow of traffic (like runners often do, to observe oncoming vehicles) because they don’t feel
comfortable taking the lane. Both behaviors increase crash risk.
Table 3-13 lists the intersections with the most collisions as well as roadway and bikeway types. With a few
exceptions (e.g. Gage Street / Kentucky Street), bicycle-involved collisions were more often at intersections
with higher speed limits and numbers of travel lanes.
8
Highest speed limit is listed when this criteria differs along the corridor.
9
The number of lanes identified is the highest number along the corridor.
Needs Analysis
Alta Planning + Design | 3-17
Table 3-13: Top Collision Intersections
Intersection No. of
Collisions
Roadway Type10 Speed
Limit11
No. Travel
Lanes12
Bikeway Class13
1. Ming Avenue / New Stine Road 4 Arterial / Arterial 45 / 45 8 / 8 2 / 2
2. Monitor Street / White Lane 3 Collector / Arterial 40 / 40 4 / 5 2 / 2
3. 19th Street / Union Avenue 2 Local / Arterial 25 / 50 2 / 7 None / None
4. 24th Street / Beech Street 2 Arterial / Local 40 / 25 5 / 2 None / None
5. 30th Street / Union Avenue 2 Local / Arterial 30 / 45 3 / 0 3 / None
6. 34th Street / Chester Avenue 2 Collector / Arterial 40 / 35-40 5 / 6 None / 2
7. 34th Street / Union Avenue 2 Collector / Arterial 40 / 45 6 / 7 None / None
8. Akers Road / White Lane 2 Collector / Arterial 45 / 50 4 / 7 3 / 3
9. Ashe Road / White Lane 2 Arterial / Arterial 50 / 50-55 7 / 8 2 / 2
10. Baker Street / E Truxtun Avenue 2 Collector / Arterial 25 / 40 4 / 6 None / None
11. Baker Street/ Sumner Street 2 Collector/Collector 25/35 4 / 3 None / None
12. Benton Street / Ming Avenue 2 Local / Arterial 25 / 45 2 / 5 None / None
13. Brundage Lane / H Street 2 Arterial / Collector 40 / 40-45 5 / 5 3 / None
14. Brundage Lane / P Street 2 Arterial / Collector 40 / 40 5 / 4 3 / 2
15. California Avenue / Chester Lane 2 Arterial / Local 40 / 25 6 / 3 None / None
16. California Avenue / Oak Street 2 Arterial / Arterial 40 / 40 8 / 7 None / 2
17. California Avenue / Stockdale
Hwy / New Stine Road
2 Arterial / Arterial /
Arterial
40 / 45 /
45
9 / 8 / 9 2 / 2 / 2
18. East California Avenue / Haley
Street
2 Arterial / Collector 40 / 35 7 / 4 None / None
19. Gage Street / Kentucky Street 2 Local / Local 25 / 25 2 / 3 None / None
20. Golden State Avenue / M Street 2 Highway / Local 45 / 25 7 / 2 None / None
21. Kyner Avenue / Monitor Street 2 Local / Collector 25 / 40 2 / 3 None / 2
22. McDonald Way / Ming Avenue 2 Local / Arterial 25 / 45 2 / 7 None / None
For both corridors and intersections, no obvious correlation exists between collisions and the presence of
bikeways.
10
The highest roadway type is listed when this criteria differs on either side of the intersection
11
Highest speed limit is listed when this criteria differs on either side of the intersection
12
The number of lanes identified is the maximum number at the approach/departure of the intersection (i.e., thru +
right turn + left turn lanes)
13
When bikeway class changes on either side, the class with this highest level of separation is noted
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-18 | Alta Planning + Design
This page intentionally left blank.
Needs Analysis Alta Planning + Design | 3-19
Figure 3-7: Reported Bicyclist-Involved Collision Map
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan 3-20 | Alta Planning + Design This page intentionally left blank.
Needs Analysis
Alta Planning + Design | 3-21
3.7. Gap Analysis
This section describes the five types of gaps that can occur in a bikeway network and organizes gaps in
Bakersfield into these categories. The gaps are then mapped and help inform the network recommendations.
3.7.1 Gap Types
Spot Gaps
Spot gaps refer to point-specific locations lacking
dedicated bicycle facilities or other treatments to
accommodate safe and comfortable bicycle travel. Spot
gaps primarily include intersections and other
vehicle/bicycle conflict areas posing challenges for riders.
Examples include bike lanes on a major street “dropping”
to make way for right turn lanes at intersection, or a lack
of intersection crossing treatments for bicyclists on a
bikeway as they cross a major street.
Figure 3-8: Bikeway Gap Types
Connection Gaps
Connection gaps are missing segments (1/4 mile long or less) on a clearly-defined and otherwise well-
connected bikeway. Major barriers standing between bicycle destinations and clearly defined routes also
represent connection gaps. Examples include bike lanes on a major street “dropping” for several blocks to
make way for on-street parking; a discontinuous off-street path; or a freeway standing between a major
bikeway and a school.
Lineal Gaps
Similar to connection gaps, lineal gaps are 1/4 mile to one-mile long missing link segments on a clearly defined
and otherwise well-connected bikeway.
Corridor Gaps
On clearly-defined and otherwise well-connected bikeways, corridor gaps are missing links longer than one
mile. These gaps will sometimes encompass an entire street corridor where bicycle facilities are desired but do
not currently exist.
System Gaps
Larger geographic areas (e.g., a neighborhood or business district) where few or no bikeways exist are
identified as system gaps. System gaps exist in areas where a minimum of two intersecting bikeways would be
required to achieve the target network density. Gaps typically exist where physical or other constraints
impede bicycle network development.
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-22 | Alta Planning + Design
3.7.2 Gap Analysis Findings
Bakersfield’s bikeway network gaps fall into all five types presented above. Gaps are mapped in Figure 3-9.
Additional gaps not included in the tables are system gaps in southwest, southeast, and northeast Bakersfield,
where bikeways are generally not present.
Needs Analysis Alta Planning + Design | 3-23
Figure 3-9: Bikeway Gaps
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan 3-24 | Alta Planning + Design This page intentionally left blank.
Needs Analysis
Alta Planning + Design | 3-25
3.8. Community Identified Needs
Community input was sought through an online survey, direct liaison with advocacy groups, and an
advertised public workshop.
3.8.1 Community Survey
The City of Bakersfield solicited community input through an online survey on desired types and locations of
bicycle improvements. The survey was open from September 24 to December 20, 2012. A total of 431
community members responded.
Respondent Characteristics and Behaviors
As shown in Figure 3-10, the
majority of respondents
(approximately one-fourth)
were between the ages of 45-
54; the next highest age range
was 25-34 years (one-fifth of
respondents). Gender
equality has been shown to be
an indicator of the perceived
safety of bicycling in a given
transportation system14. The
survey respondents were 62
percent male and 38 percent
female.
Figure 3-10: Age Distribution of Survey Respondents
Almost half of survey
respondents typically drive
alone for distances less than
one mile (Figure 3-11). This
group could potentially shift
their drive alone trips to
bicycle trips as this is a
reasonably easy distance to
commute by bike. About one-
fourth of survey respondents
walk and bike respectively for
distances less than one mile.
Figure 3-11: Mode Share for Trips Under 1 Mile
14
http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher/irresistible.pdf
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
18‐2425‐3435‐4445‐5455‐6465 and
over
Drive
alone BicycleWalkCarpoolTransit
Mode 42%28%27%4%0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-26 | Alta Planning + Design
The proportion of
respondents that drive alone
jumps up to two-thirds when
trips are up to five miles
(Figure 3-12). Bicycling and
carpooling mode shares
remain constant, but the
proportion of people walking
declines.
Figure 3-12: Mode Share for Trips Under 5 Miles
Two-thirds of respondents do not take children to school, but of the respondents that do, most drive their
children to school and then continue on to another location. The next largest group of respondents drives to
school and then back home.
Figure 3-13: Respondents’ Reasons for Bicycling
Three-fourths of respondents reported that they ride bicycles for pleasure and exercise/health (Figure 3-13).
These were the most frequently selected reasons by a large margin as compared with other reasons for biking.
The next most popular reason to bike was to get to work (28% of respondents). With additional educational
programs for commuters, it is likely that recreational bicyclists may shift some of their commute trips to
Drive aloneBicycleCarpool
Other
(please
specify)
Walk
Mode67.6%25.7%5.5%2%0.7%
67.6%
25.7%
5.5%2%0.7%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
Exercise/
health
For
pleasure
To get to
work
Personal
Business
(visiting
friends,
etc)
For
shopping/
errands
I don't
bike
To get to
school
To get to
transit
Why Bike 73.0%71.6%28.0%25.1%21.6%14.7%9.7%5.9%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
Needs Analysis
Alta Planning + Design | 3-27
bicycle trips. Providing existing recreational bicyclists with route planning tips and information about gear,
such as panniers to carry large loads, may give them the tools they need to try commuting by bike.
In the month prior to the survey, the majority of respondents (30%) biked one to five times, which averaged to
approximately once a week or so, and about one-fifth of respondents bike 11 to 20 times per month. 37% of
respondents ride 11 miles or more on average while 16% don’t ride, suggesting that respondents have a wide
range of bicycling abilities.
Community Identified Challenge and Opportunity Areas
Survey respondents identified
specific problem areas they avoid
when bicycling. These challenge
areas are shown in Figure 3-14.
The largest words are the
challenge areas that respondents
identified the most and include
Rosedale, Stockdale, Coffee,
Calloway, California, Gosford, and
Ming. With the exception of the
latter two and the addition of
downtown, these same streets
were nominated when asked
where they would ride if facilities
were available.
Figure 3-14: Location Bicyclists Avoid in Bakersfield
The survey also asked respondents what prevents them from bicycling more often (Figure 3-15). The most
common responses included too many/too fast cars, no bikeways, and poor road conditions. This indicates
that survey respondents aren’t comfortable biking on higher volume and higher speed roads and the existing
bikeways may not connect them to their destinations.
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-28 | Alta Planning + Design
Figure 3-15: Issues that Prevent Respondents from Riding More Often
Bicycling Preferences
Most respondents would prefer off-street paved bike paths and low volume, traffic-calmed bicycle boulevards
(Figure 3-16), reiterating that vehicle volumes and speeds are of a concern to residents. This is in line with
respondent’s favorite places to bike, which include the Kern River Bike Path, Panorama, and Downtown
Bakersfield.
Figure 3-16: Bicycle Facility Preferences
Too many
cars/ cars
drive too
fast
No bikeways Poor road
conditions
Destinations
are too far
away
I have to
carry things
No bike
parking
Insufficient
lighting
I travel with
small
children
Health
reasons
Response62%52%46%35%31%28%26%12%3%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
% of Respondents
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Off-street paved
bike paths
On-Street striped
bike lanes
Unstriped bike
routes
Bicycle
Boulevards
Number of ResponsesUndesirable
Somewhat Undesirable
Somewhat Desirable
Desirable
Needs Analysis
Alta Planning + Design | 3-29
Respondents noted that more bike paths and improved safety from cars are the most important methods of
encouraging them to bicycle more often (Figure 3-17).
Figure 3-17: Ways to Encourage More Bicycling in Bakersfield
Bikeway destination and route signage is also a priority. As shown in Figure 3-18, more Bakersfield residents
would bike to work, parks, community centers, libraries, grocery stores, and for other errands if these
improvements were implemented.
Figure 3-18: Driving Trips Perceived to be Feasible by Bike with Existing Facilities
More bike
paths
Improved
safety from
cars
More bike
routes
More on-
street bike
lanes
More
bikeway
destination
/ route
signage
Improved
bicycle
storage
security/
parking
Improved
personal
safety (e.g.
lighting)
Education
and
outreach
programs
Response 78%77%69%59%53%45%40%30%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Travel to city
parks,
community
centers and
libraries
Commuting
to and from
work
Other
errands
Grocery
Shopping
Downtown
Shopping
Other
(please
specify)
School drop-
offs Other
Trip63%57%52%46%36%16%15%10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-30 | Alta Planning + Design
3.8.2 Public Workshop
A public workshop was held on December 12, 2012 to solicit input on the Bicycle Transportation Plan
development. Themes identified in the workshop included:
Existing bicycle lanes are too narrow for safety or comfort, and frequently “drop” whenever additional
motor traffic lanes are squeezed in
Due to the high motor vehicle travel speeds in Bakersfield, members of the public interested in
bicycling will only be convinced to ride by providing facilities with greater separation
There are many routes which regular bicycling enthusiasts know to ride, especially routes utilizing
less trafficked local streets. These routes are not apparent to the general public who otherwise might
be inclined to try riding. Several such routes were identified through neighborhoods, especially in the
southwest
The southeast is a social justice area which features many people who are “captive bicyclists” without
access to motor vehicles. This area has few bicycle facilities yet high existing and possibly latent
demand for bicycling. Future efforts should consider Spanish language outreach to engage this
community.
The workshop attendees were given markers and pens to highlight and write on large format maps of the city.
Community comments are summarized in Figures 3-19 through 3-23. The “Planned Bikeways” shown on these
figures are those from the General Plan and adopted Specific Plans. These were included to determine the
community’s support for these facilities and are not necessarily the recommendations of this Plan.
Needs Analysis Alta Planning + Design | 3-31
Figure 3-19: Community Priorities - Downtown
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan 3-32 | Alta Planning + Design
Figure 3-20: Community Priorities - Northeast
Needs Analysis Alta Planning + Design | 3-33
Figure 3-21: Community Priorities Northwest
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan 3-34 | Alta Planning + Design
Figure 3-22: Community Priorities Southeast
Needs Analysis Alta Planning + Design | 3-35
Figure 3-23: Community Priorities Southwest
City of Bakersfield | Bicycle Transportation Plan
3-36 | Alta Planning + Design
3.9. Summary of Bicyclist Needs
Infrastructure improvements such as bikeways are needed to
connect attractors and generators, improve safety at high
collision areas and provide a greater measure of protection for
interested but concerned bicyclists. Other infrastructure
improvements including signage and parking will support the
on-street network. Programmatic improvements such as
education, outreach and encouragement may help reduce
conflict and encourage more bicycling.
Bicycle attractors and generators such as parks, schools, event
centers, retail and major employers need better connections to
bikeways. While the City of Bakersfield has invested in its
arterial roadway bicycle network, additional routes on lower
speed collectors and neighborhood streets are needed to
improve access to community destinations.
The collision analysis suggests the need for additional
investment in bikeways and/or reductions in vehicle operating
speeds in the downtown area and at major intersections through
increased enforcement. The analysis reveals a need for bicycle
education for both drivers and bicyclists about rights,
responsibilities and the rules of the road. As Bakersfield’s
bikeway network is developed, a bikeway map and distinctive
wayfinding signage program will help bicyclists travel on less
heavily travelled bicycle priority streets.
Identified Needs and Sources
Connections to commercial
centers (collision analysis)
Connections to parks,
community centers, and
libraries (community survey)
Bikeway improvements on
major corridors including:
White Lane, Ming Ave,
California Ave, 21st St, and
Union Ave (collision analysis)
Bikeway connections on local
roadways (collision
analysis/community surve
y)
Bikeway gap closures (gap
analysis)
Bike paths and bike boulevards
(community survey)
Education programs (collision
analysis)
Wayfinding signage (community
survey)