> according to pre-pandemic traffic counts from the City of Cambridge data, nearly half of the people traveling on Hampshire Street during rush hours are riding bikes, one-third are riding in cars, and the remainder are transit riders.

That’s insane.

I’m sure it matters what part of the year you are looking at. No way it’s that high in January, like not even close. But in the fall when schools in session I can believe it.

Edit (copying the my response to someone below who wanted data):

None of the articles that quote that number provide a source, but if you need some support, here's what I found with 10mins of googling, TL;DR: the data they used is clearly biased towards pro bike usage because they used a peak bike usage month (September). It also looks like they compared rush hour cycling usage to average car usage (although you can't tell that for certain from the source). I think this is the source of the numbers in the article, and guess what? The numbers cited in the article are perhaps unsurprisingly pro-cycling biased from the get go, note the qualification about the different time periods from when the data was collected "Bike counts taken on a weekday evening in mid-September 2019. Car counts from February 2018. Transit data from 2018 " :

https://www.cambridgema.gov/-/media/Files/Traffic/2023/hampshirest/hampshirestreetprojectbrochureonline.pdf Proof of bias because of seasonal effects: p. 3 (showing January counts falling to less than a third of peak trips in September) . Note this data isn't specific to Hampshire St., but the seasonal trends are clear enough https://www.cambridgema.gov/-/media/Files/CDD/Transportation/Bike/EcoCounter_Trends.pdf

Present your data if you're so sure.

Either way, it shows that it’s an extremely popular bike route that needs protection

None of the articles that quote that number provide a source, but if you need some support, here's what I found with 10mins of googling, TL;DR: the data they used is biased towards pro bike usage because they used a peak bike usage month (September). It also looks like they compared rush hour cycling usage to average car usage (although you can't tell that for certain from the source).

I think this is the source (page 2) of the numbers in the article, and guess what? The numbers cited in the article are perhaps unsurprisingly pro-cycling biased from the get go, note the qualification about the different time periods from when the data was collected "Bike counts taken on a weekday evening in mid-September 2019. Car counts from February 2018. Transit data from 2018 " Further, it looks like they compared rush hour cycling usage to average car usage (although you can't tell that for certain from the source) : https://www.cambridgema.gov/-/media/Files/Traffic/2023/hampshirest/hampshirestreetprojectbrochureonline.pdf

Proof of bias because of seasonal effects: p. 3 (showing January counts falling to less than a third of peak trips in September) . Note this data isn't specific to Hampshire St., but the seasonal trends are clear enough Jhttps://www.cambridgema.gov/-/media/Files/CDD/Transportation/Bike/EcoCounter_Trends.pdf

Don't forget to downvote for increased visibility! I know facts are scary to the mob.

Yah, but maybe official project plans shouldn't overstate their case with biased data? Decisions should be made with the best possible info, not trumped up stats. It's called science. Otherwise you end up making bad decisions.

Is it biased though? It’s simply true that at rush hours in peak season, bikes make up half of the traffic on the road. Also, it’s far beyond any reasonable threshold for getting protected bike lanes. Even if the bike numbers went to zero in the winter (which they don’t), it would warrant protection here.

> It’s simply true that at rush hours in peak season, bikes make up half of the traffic on the road.

No that's not necessarily true. If you read my comments, above (edited to include data). Looks like they used peak hour bike usage from September and compared to to average usage from February for cars, and full year averages for transportation. So you have month of year bias, and peak versus average bias.

Which isn't very surprising if you spend a significant amount of time on Hampshire street.

Even if you think that that’s enough to make it show that bikes are a vast minority, it’s still enough people per hour to justify protection.

Everything is a cost benefit. So while you might be correct, you can't know for certain unless you have real data.

700+ bikers in an hour is real data.

Yes, I understand you don’t care how many cars actually use the road. You’ve made this quite clear.

What? This isn’t about the cars at all. The space for bikes has already been allocated years ago, the oldest image on Google StreetView for Hampshire St is in 2007 and it has the same lanes. This is a conversation about whether that space gets protection, it’s not taking any road space from cars. Do you even know what we’re talking about here?

Unless I am mistaken, they are narrowing the vehicle travel lanes, as well as getting rid of parking and some loading zones. And to be clear, I'm not even set against the changes on Hampshire st., I am for being forthright in the presentation of relevant data to the community.

You are mistaken.

> “We’re just doing an introduction to the project tonight, looking for broad feedback on safety issues, parking and loading needs, and things like that. There’s no specific design yet,” said Elise Harmon-Freeman, communications manager for the Traffic, Parking, and Transportation Department of the City of Cambridge, on Tuesday evening.

They have been forthright with their data. They say exactly when and where they collected it. Not sure what more you want.

My first post explained how the statement about % of travel modes in OP's article is potentially misleading (i then demonstrated how it is misleading by referring to additional data--at some other commenters request). And here is the project plan that notes the impact on vehicle lanes, parking and loading. https://www.cambridgema.gov/-/media/Files/Traffic/2023/hampshirest/hampshirestreetprojectbrochureonline.pdf

My work here is done, unless you can think of something else to argue about. Cheers.

The city has had explicit policy since the early naughts to reduce car usage.

[deleted]

I don’t think the city did a cost benefit analysis before ripping out the trolleys and making everything for cars back in the 40s/50s/60s.

“I agree with this post and everyone who disagrees with me is toxic” - says an incredibly toxic person

Love the guy in here starting shit about bike lanes on Hampshire Street as if its even remotely controversial whether or not there is enough bike traffic on that road to justify separated bike lanes.

Meanwhile a guy in Cambridge was arrested yesterday on Hampshire St for crashing his car while drunk, high, open bottle of vodka, no license, and three children in the back seat. “BuT iT Is SO sAfE!!!!!111”.

A few days ago in North Cambridge some clown crashed the car into a house in clear conditions.

But yea, bike lanes are so awful.

So you are arguing that we have a tradition of stupidity that we should maintain? Brilliant.

You found one poor comparison in the cities brochure and then deduce we need to stop all construction because maybe there aren't as many bikes as cars on this stretch of road, which totally definitely for sure isn't completely meaningless because it isn't even up for debate if there is data that support this is a heavily trafficked route by bikes in general.

How many people drive around with a living room set taking up 6 times as much road space as a bike while spewing pollution

>You found one poor comparison in the cities brochure and then deduce we need to stop all construction

I made no such claim/deduction.

Right, you just took the time to do all that research because you have a passion for urban data analytics

>Right, you just took the time to do all that research because you have a passion for urban data analytics

I did it because another commenter asked me to--after I noted that the numbers cited in the news article seemed highly suspect.

You just have to remember Reddit isn't reality. People sit on reddit whining and complaining about everything (myself included). But there's a lot more people out there doing the work to make the city safer and nicer for everyone.