Why Chicago must vote against raising the speeding ticket threshold

On Wednesday, July 20, the Chicago City Council will vote on whether to raise the threshold at which speed cameras start issuing tickets to speeding drivers from 6 mph above the posted speed limit to 11 mph over.

While supporters of raising the ticketable speed threshold argue the City is making an unfair and inequitable money grab, the lower limit – and speed cameras generally – have proven an effective tool for reducing driving speeds and increasing road safety for all users. The benefits of speed cameras are clear, but many opponents are correct to call out ongoing challenges. 

We hear and understand the arguments of many people who oppose the speed cameras. Many are right to raise questions about their deployment and the disproportionately negative impact fines can have on low-income and working class people, particularly in Black and Brown communities. We agree that the City should not be deploying traffic cameras as a means of raising revenue rather than focusing on public safety benefits, but we do not agree that the solution is to raise the threshold at which tickets begin being issued to speeding drivers.

Higher speeds result in a higher likelihood of death

It is well-established that two factors play a significant role in whether a traffic crash turns deadly:

1. The size and weight of a vehicle

2. The speed it is being driven

The bigger and heavier a vehicle is and the faster it is being driven significantly increases the likelihood that a pedestrian, cyclist, or other vehicle passengers will be seriously injured or killed upon impact.

The Institute of Transportation Engineers has visualized this point clearly with the chart below.

Image source: San Francisco MTA Vision Zero Action Plan, February 2015

The chart illustrates how fatalities increase at an exponential rate as speed increases:

• Drivers are unlikely to cause a fatality to a pedestrian or cyclist when traveling at or below 20 mph.

• Increasing driving speeds from 20 to 30 mph increases the rate of crash fatalities of pedestrians and cyclists from 10% to 40%.

• Increasing speeds from 30 mph to 40 mph, the fatality rate jumps from 40% to 80%.

None of this takes into account serious injury rates or the impact on drivers hit by other reckless drivers.

Who the increased ticket threshold hurts most

Raising the ticketable threshold from 6 mph to 11 mph over the posted speed limit will encourage drivers to operate vehicles fatally fast on almost any Chicago street. The posted speed limit on most City streets is 30 mph, which is moderately dangerous as-is; raising the ticketable threshold in practice raises the speed limit to the dangerously high speed of 40 mph.

Inequities can also be found in who is most impacted by traffic crashes. Black Chicagoans are killed by traffic violence at a rate five times higher than White residents and three times higher than Hispanic residents, according to City data. This is further reflected by the fact that 60% of all traffic crash related emergency room visits are made by Black residents.

It is disappointing that the City Council is considering this change as the City is experiencing a significant increase in traffic violence including the recent deaths of six residents walking or biking, including four Chicago youth ages 2 to 16 killed this summer. This disappointment is compounded considering traffic enforcement cameras are shown to work. According to a study reported on by WBEZ, the number of tickets issued by speed cameras has reduced over time, although the average ticketed speed has remained consistently over 11 mph. ProPublica has reported traffic enforcement cameras reduced injurious or fatal crashes by 15%. Likewise, Streetsblog Chicago has reported extensively on safer behavior shown by most drivers near traffic cameras.

Why the City should not raise the current speeding ticket threshold

We call on the City Council to retain the current threshold of issuing speeding tickets at 6 mph above the posted limit.

We do not do this lightly: we are well aware of the negative impact the current system has on communities – especially low-income, working class, and/or Black and Brown communities. We also recognize that Black and Latinx residents statistically face a significantly higher risk of traffic fatalities.

In addition to retaining the current threshold, we call on the City Council, CDOT, and Mayor Lightfoot to make a number of corresponding changes to how traffic enforcement cameras are used and funds are allocated, focusing on reducing the inequities of the current model while implementing changes to the makeup of our streets.

We call on the City Council to enact the following:

• Establish a lower city-wide speed limit. 

• Guarantee all revenue generated from traffic enforcement cameras is dedicated to funding infrastructure that improves traffic safety and user behavior in high infraction and crash corridors through design – including building a city-wide network of dedicated barrier-protected bike lanes and connecting off-street trails and on-street paths, widening sidewalks, street pedestrianization, transit expansion, transit prioritization, and road diets that reduce traffic speed.

• Establish transparent and consistent guidelines to be codified by ordinance governing when and where traffic enforcement cameras are used and how they are added or removed. This includes universal deployment near schools, parks, and other defined areas of concern; establishing clear metrics to determine the success or failure of a camera in improving desired safety outcomes; outlining improvements communities can pursue that would result in cameras being removed.

• Make fines for violators more equitable by scaling fines to reflect potential risk (i.e., higher fines for higher speeds and more dangerous vehicle models), scale fines and fees based on number of violations, issuing warnings for the first two violations (three strike rule), scaling fees based on income, capping late fees on unpaid tickets or eliminating them entirely for low-income residents.

• Establish a municipal bike, walk, and transit fund that ensures a dedicated and consistent amount of money is spent on maintaining and expanding pedestrian, bike, and transit infrastructure and services. 

• Install speed recorders to better inform drivers of their speed in areas where cameras are used to provide fair opportunities to adhere to driving rules. 

Many of these recommendations are based on or taken directly from a UIC study to understand the impact of speed cameras, which the City commissioned. The City Council, Mayor’s office, and CDOT should act on these recommendations instead of passing policies that will make our streets more dangerous. 

Chicagoans are understandably fed up with taxes, fines, and fees. Despite them going up and being expanded, we rarely see any public benefits through improved services or infrastructure. It is time for the City Council, Mayor’s Office, and CDOT to step up and act as leaders on this issue. Speed cameras can and should play an important role in maintaining safe streets for all users, but this must be met with fundamental reforms and investments in redesigning our streets to prioritize people and safety first.

How your alderperson voted

We launched an email campaign in response to this vote, and because of the collective advocacy of those fighting for safe streets many alders flipped their projected votes and we were successful in defeating this ordinance. Below you can take a look at who that campaign reached and how they voted.

A Statement on Chicago’s Youth Curfew Expansion

Chicago is a beautiful city with remarkable downtown public spaces and parks. It’s also a city that has a long, well-known history with violence, and is routinely regarded as the most segregated city in the USA. Chicagoans are no strangers to these realities, which City Hall routinely fails to fully acknowledge and address. When these realities come in conflict, the response always feels more draconian and more reliant on increased policing. It is a tale of two cities with no end in sight. The past couple of weeks have been no different.

In response to the killing of Seandell Holliday, Mayor Lori Lightfoot has responded with two executive orders targeting Chicago’s youth, one banning all unaccompanied minors from Millennium Park after 6 pm, and another attempting to modify a city ordinance from 1992 issuing a curfew on minors, changing the age from 16 to 18 and the time from 11pm to 10pm on the weekends. The latter ultimately failed, because the Mayor does not have the authority to modify city ordinances by executive order. Instead, Lightfoot’s administration decided to push the change through the City Council. We engaged with alders through an email campaign for constituents to be able to urge them to vote ‘No', but unfortunately, the amendment passed today.

We condemn this encroachment upon young Chicagoans’ access to our city and all its public spaces and to call on City Hall to invest in sustainable and evidenced-based solutions to the challenges we face.

Mayor Lightfoot’s heavy-handed response to Seandell’s killing will do nothing to keep Chicago’s youth safe, but it will further reinforce the marginalization many of them already experience every day. Curfew laws open the door for cops to excessively police young people regardless of their actions. We know this is disproportionately applied to Black and Brown, LGBTQ, and low-income youth. This is a form of violence.

The city must be open and available to everybody regardless of their race, class, or neighborhood. We know from the record of CPD and the city this policy will not be equitably enforced and it will only result in further marginalization of already marginalized communities. Violence is a symptom of a government and services that are not adequately addressing the needs of residents. 

Whether you’re participating in an activity at a local park, taking selfies at the Bean, or just enjoying a bike ride on your neighborhood street, all Chicago’s public spaces must be made accessible and safe to use and enjoy by all Chicagoans in all corners of the city. Expanding police powers and punishable rules will not make Chicago’s public spaces safer and accessible. Only community-centered, thoughtful, and sustained investments in public spaces and public services will stop the violence. 

The killing of Seandell should be a wake up call for the Mayor and the City Council to heavily invest in services and activities that support Chicago’s youth. This must include maintaining and expanding high-quality park facilities, fully staffing and funding Chicago parks and park programs, and supporting diverse activities that Chicago’s youth want to participate in. The city should be partnering with our youth to ensure the city government is meeting the needs of all residents. We can no longer tolerate our tax dollars being used in a way that prioritizes tourists and downtown corporations over the health and well-being of all communities.  

We are at a moment where we need to be transforming our municipal infrastructure and expanding public space in the forms of parks, plazas, and streets safe for gathering and all travel modes. The challenges that are ahead of us are immense. We need to build a robust civic culture that brings the whole city and region together. This cannot happen when the government fails to invest in residents' well-being and quality of life.

We will continue to demand better of our city leaders because our City deserves better.

Better Streets for Buses: What You Missed During CDOT and CTA’s First Virtual Meeting

The Chicago Department of Transportation (CDOT) and the Chicago Transportation Authority (CTA) recently launched an initiative to improve bus service called Better Streets for Buses (gotta say, we love the name). The two agencies have launched a campaign website with several avenues of public input available, including a survey and the option for individuals to share their comments on maps.

Additionally, they’re hosting a series of three virtual public meetings, the first of which occurred on Wednesday, May 4th. Better Streets Chicago attended the meeting to learn more about what they have in mind for improvements, but walked away with a number of questions unanswered.

What we learned during the first Better Streets for Buses virtual meeting

With TSP, if a bus is behind schedule, it sends a message to the the traffic signal to request several extra seconds of green light time. With queue jumps, a bus enters the queue jump lane to bypass general traffic, then a separate bus-only signal phase gives the bus a head start.

During the meeting, CDOT and the CTA highlighted three main categories of improvements:

1. Getting to/from the bus

2. Waiting for/boarding the bus

3. Riding the bus

Though much of the information provided was general in nature, we were encouraged by some of what we learned.

Getting to/from the bus

There was mention of sidewalk condition and quality, including accessibility. The agencies also mentioned including bicycle parking at bus stops to expand first/last mile travel options.

Waiting for/boarding the bus

CDOT highlighted features new to Chicago, like bus stop bump-outs and boarding islands, and briefly mentioned features like level boarding and pre-paid/all-door boarding.

Riding the Bus

Improvements to ridership experience included improving bus frequency/throughput utilizing dedicated bus lanes and establishing bus priority at intersections using transit signal priority (TSP) technology and queue jumps.

The agencies also briefly spoke to planning corridors. However, they specifically stated that the goal of this community input period is not to identify corridors/networks, but to instead build a toolbox that can be implemented during future projects. Click here to see the list they’ve released showing initial corridors identified for improvement.

Notably missing from the presentation were mention of bus rapid transit or mode-shift away from private cars to buses and transit. There was also no discussion of making transit work more symbiotic with zero-emissions transportation like walking, rolling, and biking.

Our questions about Better Streets for Buses

However, given the vagueness of parts of the meeting, here are a few questions we walked away with:

1. Is mode shift away from private motor vehicles something that the agencies are targeting in their efforts, and if so what kind of metrics are they using? Are they referencing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in any specific corridors?

2. What kind of lessons have the agencies learned from previous failed attempts at bus lanes? Thinking of ones that can be found on Clark St. and Chicago Ave., both have been deemed parking at certain times but instead are treated as parking permanently by the public and never available for bus use. (It’s worth noting we don’t blame the public for doing this. It’s on CDOT and the CTA to design and build better infrastructure.)

   We’ve seen these agencies fail to implement large-scale plans in the past, most relevant being the “Chicago Streets for Cycling Plan 2020.” CDOT failed to execute 85% of that plan by its 2020 due date. We’d love to know what lessons they’ve learned from that, and how they will prevent repeating such poor execution.

3. Speaking of cycling infrastructure, very little mention of it was given. The one bit that was pictured demonstrated a bike lane protected by a bus boarding island, but the bike lane was routed back to the street-side of parking instead of the preferred option of parking-protected bike lanes.

   Given that CTA has been a force in opposing much needed cycling routes in the past, what ways are CTA & CDOT working to improve cycling infrastructure in conjunction with bus infrastructure? Given they often share similar struggles and solutions – and go hand-in-hand with reducing car-dependency – we’d love to see a fresh start here.

4. During the meeting, the need for more shelters was brought up. CDOT expressed some limitations in capacity due to the existing contract with JCDecaux. What wasn’t clarified is when the contract is up for renewal and how it impacts CDOT’s ability to build more shelters now. Is this something where increased capacity can be considered in a new contract with them, or should the City be exploring alternative partners?

5. It’s unclear in what capacity IDOT and the Mayor’s Office are involved, and whether they are supportive of this effort. We’ve seen recently that the Mayor referred to CTA ridership as not existing within the realm of reality and living on a different planet, and that Chicago is a “car city.” We’re curious how that has impacted CDOT/CTA’s ability to push for transit improvements. Additionally, IDOT is notoriously and historically resistant to non-car infrastructure, and many of CTA’s bus routes depend on streets in their jurisdiction. Are they open to being a partner?
   

Something that was brought up more than once was the way CTA has handled scheduling and arrival times during the pandemic, which has created signifcant difficulty for their ridership over the past two years. Initially, they simply stated that they’ve addressed this through service announcements at stations, but this isn’t a satisfactory answer in our view. We reiterated our frustrations and concerns, stating that CTA needs to seriously consider publishing a schedule that current staffing can fulfill. 

We also explicitly requested an apology be issued to their ridership. A CTA representative did extend an apology directly to us in the meeting, and while we appreciate that the apology was given, it is their ridership at large who has been harmed. We believe it would be appropriate for the agency (preferably the President) to extend an apology to all ridership in a formal capacity, as well as a commitment to better transparency in the future.

How to attend the next Better Streets for Buses meetings

Did you attend the May 4th meeting? If so, we’d love to hear your thoughts!

If you missed this one, there are two more ahead on May 12th and May 17th. You can RSVP here: https://betterstreetsforbuses.com/virtual-public-meetings

Access Living Joins the #WalkableWinters Campaign

One night last February, Better Streets Chicago organizers Kyle Lucas and Michael Podgers trudged out into fast accumulating snow. With shovels in hand, Lucas and Podgers began clearing sidewalks, bus stops, and crosswalks determined to make a point: the city’s current sidewalk snow clearance policy, which places the responsibility for clearing all sidewalks on the adjacent property owner, is insufficient and ineffective. Every year, haphazard sidewalk snow and ice clearance renders the city’s sidewalks—a critical piece of municipal infrastructure—extremely dangerous for pedestrians. This is unacceptable. We are here to bring about a change. Fortunately, we’re no longer alone in our efforts. 

The Better Streets Chicago team is thrilled to announce that Access Living, Chicago’s leading force advocating for and providing services to Chicago’s disability community, has joined the #WalkableWinters campaign. Since 1980, Access Living has ignited the power and pride of Chicago’s disability community providing the services and advocacy needed to ensure we live in a world free from barriers and discrimination against our neighbors living with disabilities. We are honored and humbled to have such a powerful organization joining the #WalkableWinters campaign and providing Better Streets Chicago with critical support needed to ensure this campaign succeeds. 

We couldn’t think of a better partner for this campaign. When the campaign first started, initially as Twitter posts and growing into a petition (which you can still sign here), we heard from many neighbors with disabilities who shared their stories about dealing with the massive challenge of navigating sidewalks poorly cleared of snow and ice. Since beginning our partnership with Access Living, we received confirmation that these are not just anecdotal problems. Snow and ice covered sidewalks is Access Living’s constituents’ number one winter related transportation issue. With this campaign we aim to make sure that changes for good. Nobody should be inhibited from getting around during the winter months, because of poor sidewalk snow clearance policy. 

Better Streets Chicago is joined by Access Living transportation policy analyst Laura Saltzman. Laura is providing Better Streets Chicago organizers and volunteers working on the campaign material and organizing support needed to make this campaign a winner. We are grateful for this and look forward to great success in the coming months as we take the #WalkableWinters campaign to the next level.

If you have any questions or are interested in getting involved in the campaign, please contact: winter@betterstreetschicago.org or Laura Saltzman at lsaltzman@accessliving.org.

Reimagining Our Streets: Inspiration for Safer, More Enjoyable Streets in Chicago

One of the reasons I chose to move to Chicago was the desire to live car-free. In high school I had made the connection between the United States car-centric “transportation system” and climate change. I grew tired of feeling guilty for getting in my car for basic trips I knew could be achieved by mass transit or biking. My hometown of Little Rock, Arkansas essentially required a car to get around conveniently. While researching cities that favored car-free living, Chicago ranked pretty high. I’ve lived here for 8 years and consider Chicago to be home. It is the love I have for this city and ultimately the Earth that I dream and advocate for city planning that puts the environment and its inhabitants first.

One of the primary elements of a city is its streets. Similar to a city’s budget, our streets reflect our values. Currently, our streets seem to value storing cars that sit for most of the day vs enabling neighbors to get to know one another or facilitating safe play for children. Our streets value cars, typically transporting only one person, over a bus full of people. When I ride my bike, I am constantly reminded that our city values car storage over providing safe biking infrastructure.

In the summer of 2020, the city of Chicago rolled out Shared Streets in response to the coronavirus pandemic in an attempt to provide safe spaces for walking, biking, and rolling since our sidewalks are too narrow to allow for proper social distancing. Shared streets are supposed to restrict through traffic in order to allow for a safer walking, rolling, and biking environment. It’s important to note that Better Streets Chicago (BSC) was instrumental in soliciting the public to voice their desire for these streets. BSC thinks the city can be more ambitious with shared streets. Signs, such as the ones pictured below, and traffic cones that can easily be moved will not be enough to achieve slow speeds on neighborhood streets, a necessary ingredient to increasing the amount of people choosing to walk and bike.

The good news is that our streets are not static and they can be more than a place for vehicles to move through or be stored.

Here are a few of my favorite sources of inspiration that fuel my desire to see our streets as places for connection and play.

1. Duth Woonerfs

A Dutch woonerf. Photo credit: Northeastern University

Dutch woonerfs (living streets) are streets that prioritize an efficient use of street space, offering space for socialization among residents, play or creation, and increased safety over vehicular movements. Cars are still allowed on these streets, but it’s clear to drivers that they are guests -- unlike the American street design that sees people walking and biking as guests and cars as the “rightful owners” of streets.

Photo credit: Northeastern University

As you can see, this woonerf has some car storage/parking. The narrow  lanes discourage speeding.

2. Barcelona Superblocks

In 2016 Barcelona began to carve out islands of mostly car-free spaces where people of all ages could enjoy their city without the noise and dangers of cars. Cars are allowed on many of the superblocks but they are limited to 10km/5-6 MPH. 

The city recognized that cars totaled 20% of the movement within the city yet they occupied 60% of the space. Barcelona wanted to reclaim their streets from cars and prioritize people. I first learned about Barcelona superblocks through Streetfilms, a NYC-based organization that produces short films showing how smart transportation design and policy can result in better places to live, work and play. 

I highly encourage you to watch Streetfilms’ coverage of the superblocks and imagine Chicago’s streets being places for connection, play, and rest. Given that we have a grid street system, just like Barcelona, we could easily create superblocks in Chicago as well.

If videos aren’t your thing, here are a few photos of Barcelona’s superblocks

Photo credit: Centra de Cultura Contemporania de Barcelona

Image credit: TransportXtra

This photo illustrates how through-traffic is limited through a superblock area. The space for people expands while the space dedicated to moving vehicles decreases. This signals to drivers that the space is meant to be traveled through slowly. Most of the vehicles entering the space will be residents, delivery vehicles, and service workers like plumbers, electricians, etc.

3. London’s Low Traffic Neighborhoods

Rendering of a potential set-up of a Low Traffic Neighborhood Photo credit: Jericho Low Traffic Neighbourhood

In 2020, London started to roll out low-traffic neighborhood projects as part of their Streetspace for London campaign aimed at creating more space for walking and biking.

Low traffic neighborhoods are just as they sound: neighborhoods with low levels of outside vehicular traffic Oftentimes bollards or planters with cameras attached are placed at key entry points. The cameras detect whether a particular car is registered within that neighborhood. If a car is not registered, its owner is fined for entering the neighborhood. 

Better Streets Chicago is not advocating for such a setup in Chicago yet recognizes how important traffic diverting measures are. The main principle is that every resident can drive onto the street, get deliveries, etc. but it’s hard or impossible to drive straight through from one main road to the next. 

An image taken in a low-traffic neighborhood in London. Image credit: Forbes

In the image above, notice the metal bollards and the planters which make it clear cars are not allowed. However, people walking, rolling, and biking can easily move through this space.

Reimagining Wilson Avenue

As a resident of the Far Northside closer to the lake, I would love to see Wilson Avenue transformed into a low traffic street. As someone who primarily gets around by bike, I have a different experience of Wilson than someone who drives on it. 

Wilson is less stressful to bike on compared to Lawrence Avenue given the traffic volumes and general speeds, but there’s still a lot that can be done to make Wilson Avenue more inviting for people who bike and walk. Traffic diverters along main entry points like Sheridan Rd., Clark St., Ashland, Western, etc. Diverters would allow for traffic to be restricted in such a way that non-residents could not enter Wilson Ave from these major streets but people could exit Wilson on to these streets. Wilson also needs traffic calming, which could be accomplished using infrastructure such as raised crosswalks and chicanes.  

What other streets can you imagine receiving this treatment?

By reducing the number of cars on neighborhood streets, you better enable residents to utilize their streets for socialization, play, rest, and much more. Low-traffic neighborhoods also reduce the amount of noise pollution, air pollution, and risk of being injured or killed in a car crash, a leading cause of death in America. Over time, fewer people opt to travel by car which results in a win for the environment, public health, and our urban fabric. 

If this blog post has inspired you to want something similar in Chicago, Better Streets Chicago encourages you to email your alderman about the need for low-speed residential.