Today’s Headlines for Tuesday, January 22

Get national headlines at Streetsblog USA

wide banner copy

  • Tooscrapps

    Streetsblog often takes umbrage with articles and comments about cyclists “blowing” through reds, and yet applies that same misnomer to all motorists?

    Some motorists blow reds, as do some cyclists, but many do not.

  • johnaustingreenfield

    I don’t follow you. These nearly 400K drivers blew (or “ran” if you prefer) red lights but got their tickets refunded due to a technicality — the city failed to send them a second notice of violation. There’s photographic proof that these motorists broke the law.

    Are you making the argument that some of these drivers were ticketed for treating stoplights like stop signs, which is generally a safe practice when cyclists do it, according to a recent DePaul University study?
    https://chi.streetsblog.org/2016/12/12/idaho-stop-in-the-name-of-love-depaul-study-endorses-rational-cycling/

    If so, sorry, but there’s no such thing as an “Idaho Stop” when you’re piloting a 3,000-pound vehicle with blind spots.

  • Lock Em Up

    Safe or not, it’s against the law. Cyclists are not above the law. Time to start ticketing.

  • Tooscrapps

    When you use the turn “blew”, it makes it sound like someone recklessly bombed the intersection. It’s irritating when people use it for cyclists and I don’t think it should be used in this situation, though no doubt some motorists did it.

    I’m sure many of these red light tickets are for turning on red (either when prohibited 24/7 or due to ped/time constraints), or not coming to a complete stop when turning on red if allowed. Other times it’s been safer to go through the changing light when stopping may be dangerous. Do you equate someone who entered the intersection 0.1 second after red with someone who recklessly ran one?

    Illegal yes, “blowing” through a red? Nope.

  • johnaustingreenfield

    OK, feel free to sub in “ran” for “blew” if you like. As you may know, the current Chicago red light grace period is 0.3 seconds.

  • Tooscrapps

    Will do.

    There’s nothing like building an understanding between motorists and cyclists by portraying anyone who got a red-light camera (a system that was mired in corruption and poor execution) as a person who runs red lights with abandon.

  • Kevin M

    We live in a world of finite resources. Wisdom says that calls for prioritizing. In the context of law enforcement (which is a finite resource), please tell me you agree that prioritizing bigger public safety risks over small ones makes sense, and then also please tell me you agree that a 3,000-lb vehicle poses a bigger public safety threat than a 200-lb bicycle/list.

  • Jeremy

    0.1 seconds (or 0.3 as John points out) after the light turns red is still a couple of seconds after the light turns yellow. That is plenty of warning for someone to reduce speed and stop safely, provided he/she was driving at a legal speed.

  • Jeremy

    Is it time to start ticketing speeding and turning/changing lanes without signaling? What about blocking crosswalks and not shoveling sidewalks? Driving while holding a phone?

  • Carter O’Brien

    CDOT drawings are up for the Logan Square/Milwaukee Ave project meeting tonight:

    http://www.chicagocompletestreets.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/NMIL_PM2_ExhibitBoards.pdf

    I initially favored the oval, but the idea that the bus will have an easier time with “the Bend” is worth considering, great creativity by CDOT on display here.

  • Carter O’Brien

    * Still favoring the oval after a more in-depth look at the plans and speaking with the CDOT staff. The plans for making Milwaukee Ave north of Logan Boulevard are also appealing.