When discussing Streetsblog in New York, it is important to highlight the connections between Streetsblog NYC, Transportation Alternatives, Riders Alliance, Tri-State Transportation Campaign, etc. I'm the VP of Passengers United, real grassroots advocates for safe, equitable, and accessibility transit who actually listen to and speak up on behalf of everyday commuters.
Doesn't this literally just mean that Streetsblog is a pretty standard nonprofit? Most organizations I know of get funding from larger organizations, often in the form of grants. I certainly don't agree with everything Streetsblog says (and they've had a few pretty bad pieces), but their own writers often have differing opinions. Just like news outlets like CNN and Washington Post, there are a wide variety of columnists who comment on different things. Some of the articles are purely technical (ex. talking about different subway construction techniques, analyzing data on roadway designs, etc.), while others are more political in nature, but there's such a wide range of articles that you can pick and choose which ones to read. As for the bike infrastructure that purportedly makes cyclists more unsafe (aka door zone bike lanes) - pretty much every cycling advocate would actually agree with you that those types of bike lanes aren't optimal. Modern painted bike lanes often include a 3' buffer where the door zone is (this buffer exists whether the bike lane is between the road and the parked cars, or between the parked cars and sidewalks). I've been involved with getting traffic calming & bike infrastructure installed in my city, and I can tell you that everyone working on installing new bike lanes agrees that the door zone bike lanes are a bad idea, and that a buffer is needed (and PBLs are ideally the best choice).
When discussing Streetsblog in New York, it is important to highlight the connections between Streetsblog NYC, Transportation Alternatives, Riders Alliance, Tri-State Transportation Campaign, etc. I'm the VP of Passengers United, real grassroots advocates for safe, equitable, and accessibility transit who actually listen to and speak up on behalf of everyday commuters.
Doesn't this literally just mean that Streetsblog is a pretty standard nonprofit? Most organizations I know of get funding from larger organizations, often in the form of grants. I certainly don't agree with everything Streetsblog says (and they've had a few pretty bad pieces), but their own writers often have differing opinions. Just like news outlets like CNN and Washington Post, there are a wide variety of columnists who comment on different things. Some of the articles are purely technical (ex. talking about different subway construction techniques, analyzing data on roadway designs, etc.), while others are more political in nature, but there's such a wide range of articles that you can pick and choose which ones to read. As for the bike infrastructure that purportedly makes cyclists more unsafe (aka door zone bike lanes) - pretty much every cycling advocate would actually agree with you that those types of bike lanes aren't optimal. Modern painted bike lanes often include a 3' buffer where the door zone is (this buffer exists whether the bike lane is between the road and the parked cars, or between the parked cars and sidewalks). I've been involved with getting traffic calming & bike infrastructure installed in my city, and I can tell you that everyone working on installing new bike lanes agrees that the door zone bike lanes are a bad idea, and that a buffer is needed (and PBLs are ideally the best choice).