Oak Brook makes offer to avoid red light cameras near Oakbrook Center mall

[Brandon]

Oak Brook makes offer to avoid red light cameras near Oakbrook Center mall

Well, this is interesting.  One municipality versus another.

The Illinois Department of Transportation recently issued Oakbrook Terrace a permit to install red light cameras at the intersection, and a move Oak Brook officials have opposed. The shopping mall is in Oak Brook but the intersection is in Oakbrook Terrace.

Oak Brook Village President Gopal Lalmalani said he would be happy to help with costs by having the Oak Brook Police Department handle traffic enforcement without red light cameras.

"If this really is about safety and not about generating additional revenue from red light violations, I don't see why Oakbrook Terrace wouldn't be in favor of us taking over enforcement there if they no longer can handle it," Lalmalani said. "This is a cash grab by them."

Lalmalani said he and village staff are continuing to reach out to state legislators in hopes of having the red light cameras put on hold, while some concerns are addressed. He has called issuance of the red light camera permit "suspicious," and village manager Rick Ginex said "The circumstances are too strange."

The permit was issued Oct. 28, giving Oakbrook Terrace 180 days to complete installation for southbound traffic on Route 83 and for eastbound traffic on 22nd Street.

Oak Brook officials have issue with the fact that IDOT originally determined red light camera enforcement was not supported at the intersection.

A March 3 IDOT justification report review denied the camera request and noted that data for 2015-2017 could be submitted for another review. Then, a May 20 letter from IDOT stated approval was granted, based on video files dated November 2015, which "demonstrated a pattern of violations at the intersection."

Oak Brook officials also are upset because they said they never received a letter of notification from Oakbrook Terrace that was part of the installation submittal review process. Oak Brook recently received a copy of the letter, dated July 20, from IDOT.

Most interesting.  Oak Brook has also threatened to put up very large warning signs should Oakbrook Terrace follow through and install the cameras.

[Jericho That]

Pretty suspicious that IDOT vetoed cameras on the Oak Brook side. In my experience, westbound to southbound left turners are by far the most egregious violators.

[kphoger]

Pretty suspicious that IDOT vetoed cameras on the Oak Brook side. In my experience, westbound to southbound left turners are by far the most egregious violators.

I'd say my limited experience says the same.

[Crash_It]

I approve of red light cameras as long as they are implemented properly. Don't get why people hate them, don't want a ticket, just stop at the light...it's that simple.

[hotdogPi]

I approve of red light cameras as long as they are implemented properly. Don't get why people hate them, don't want a ticket, just stop at the light...it's that simple.

The problems are that sometimes the yellow phase is intentionally too short, and sometimes the cameras malfunction. In addition, they don't actually improve safety.

[jeffandnicole]

I approve of red light cameras as long as they are implemented properly. Don't get why people hate them, don't want a ticket, just stop at the light...it's that simple.

Welcome to the forums, although your first post isn't going to get you much endearment from the fellow forumers.

Please note that when the CEO of a large red-light camera corporation gets sentenced to 2.5 years in jail for "making millions of dollars on a product that abuses the people" as the judge said, it strongly indicated these cameras have not been properly implemented.

[quickshade]

Problem is that besides what was listed above as problems they also catch people not fully stopping when turning right. It creates dangerous situations in which people fully stop and get rear ended. Around Lakemoor, IL we have the cameras on 120/12 intersection and it generates a couple million each year for the city. Did the city invest any of that money to put a proper turn lane from 120 to 12. Of course not, they built the new city hall with the money.

I hate red light cameras, but if your going to make money off of me driving, it better go back into our roads to improve them. Just my 2 cents.

[AlexandriaVA]

Problem is that besides what was listed above as problems they also catch people not fully stopping when turning right. It creates dangerous situations in which people fully stop and get rear ended. Around Lakemoor, IL we have the cameras on 120/12 intersection and it generates a couple million each year for the city. Did the city invest any of that money to put a proper turn lane from 120 to 12. Of course not, they built the new city hall with the money.

I hate red light cameras, but if your going to make money off of me driving, it better go back into our roads to improve them. Just my 2 cents.

Illinois (along with all other states, to my knowledge) requires a full stop at a red light. Then you may proceed to make a right-hand turn if the conditions are safe.

If your concern is about rear-end collisions, then your beef should be with motorists who do not properly allow enough space and wind up hitting the car in front of them.

[AlexandriaVA]

Red light camera opposition tends to verge on the hysterical (conspiracy theories about light timing manipulation, evil boogeyman cameras "causing" accidents).

What's so hard about stopping at a stop bar at a red light? I can gaurantee that nothing in Oak Brook Indiana is so important that it can't wait the 5 seconds it takes to stop and then make a safe right-hand turn.

[jeffandnicole]

Red light camera opposition tends to verge on the hysterical (conspiracy theories about light timing manipulation, evil boogeyman cameras "causing" accidents).

What's so hard about stopping at a stop bar at a red light? I can gaurantee that nothing in Oak Brook Indiana is so important that it can't wait the 5 seconds it takes to stop and then make a safe right-hand turn.

When proper engineering calls for a yellow light of a certain length based on signed and/or 85th percentile speeds, but the yellow light is shortened to catch people going thru the very beginning of a red light.

If you designed a curve for 30 mph on a 75 mph highway without any signage, similar results will occur.

[AlexandriaVA]

You seem to have really low standards for motorists, based on your presumption that they're too unskilled to watch for a light being either red or yellow/green. I've never driven in the Midwest so maybe people aren't as attentive to detail as they are elsewhere, but again I can't speak to that.

Based on your example, it seems that you assume that motorists anticipate if a light will be green, yellow, or red. That's very dangerous because drivers should be looking if a light is a certain color, not anticipating.

Again, I don't know why it's too much to ask drivers to come to a stop when a light is red. It's pretty elementary.

[jeffandnicole]

You seem to have really low standards for motorists, based on your presumption that they're too unskilled to watch for a light being either red or yellow/green.

Based on your example, it seems that you assume that motorists anticipate if a light will be green, yellow, or red. That's very dangerous because drivers should be looking if a light is a certain color, not anticipating.

Again, I don't know why it's too much to ask drivers to come to a stop when a light is red. It's pretty elementary.

So if I see a light is green from 1,000 feet away, I don't need to anticipate the light will turn?  I can be assured that when I reach the light in 20 seconds, the light will still be green?

And when a typical driving test is approximately 50 questions, along with a driving test that lasts approximately no more than 10 minutes, then yes, not only do I have really low standards, but so does everyone else.  Having high standards would mean we wouldn't need signs for everything. 

[kalvado]

Quick question...do you support coming to a complete stop (zero MPH) at a red light?

Quick question in return: what is the accuracy of that "0 MPH"? Typical scientific understanding of "0 MPH" notation is that speed is below 0.5 MPH rounding error.

[AlexandriaVA]

Quick question...do you support coming to a complete stop (zero MPH) at a red light?

Quick question in return: what is the accuracy of that "0 MPH"? Typical scientific understanding of "0 MPH" notation is that speed is below 0.5 MPH rounding error.

Zero miles per hour means your car isn't moving.

I'm sure there are some books at your local high school about basic concepts of speed and motion if you need more explanation.

[kalvado]

You seem to have really low standards for motorists, based on your presumption that they're too unskilled to watch for a light being either red or yellow/green.

Based on your example, it seems that you assume that motorists anticipate if a light will be green, yellow, or red. That's very dangerous because drivers should be looking if a light is a certain color, not anticipating.

Again, I don't know why it's too much to ask drivers to come to a stop when a light is red. It's pretty elementary.

So if I see a light is green from 1,000 feet away, I don't need to anticipate the light will turn?  I can be assured that when I reach the light in 20 seconds, the light will still be green?

And when a typical driving test is approximately 50 questions, along with a driving test that lasts approximately no more than 10 minutes, then yes, not only do I have really low standards, but so does everyone else.  Having high standards would mean we wouldn't need signs for everything.

Talking about standards.. There are also enforcement standards - which are not really higher than driving standards. Common problem with red light cameras is not that it requires full stop, but that entire thing is set up to produce revenue, not improve safety. So does a lot of manned enforcement, and there are plenty of well-documented cases of such approach....

[AlexandriaVA]

You seem to have really low standards for motorists, based on your presumption that they're too unskilled to watch for a light being either red or yellow/green.

Based on your example, it seems that you assume that motorists anticipate if a light will be green, yellow, or red. That's very dangerous because drivers should be looking if a light is a certain color, not anticipating.

Again, I don't know why it's too much to ask drivers to come to a stop when a light is red. It's pretty elementary.

So if I see a light is green from 1,000 feet away, I don't need to anticipate the light will turn?  I can be assured that when I reach the light in 20 seconds, the light will still be green?

And when a typical driving test is approximately 50 questions, along with a driving test that lasts approximately no more than 10 minutes, then yes, not only do I have really low standards, but so does everyone else.  Having high standards would mean we wouldn't need signs for everything.

The great thing about lights are you don't need to anticipate or be assured of anything. Go the posted speed limit and stop or go depending on the color of the light. Since you apparently don't have much confidence in your knowledge of motoring laws, I'll gladly send you my old driver's education material. For what it's worth, we did discuss the concept of stopping at red lights, and I believe everyone passed the section, although that was when we were in high school so it's been a while.

[AlexandriaVA]

You seem to have really low standards for motorists, based on your presumption that they're too unskilled to watch for a light being either red or yellow/green.

Based on your example, it seems that you assume that motorists anticipate if a light will be green, yellow, or red. That's very dangerous because drivers should be looking if a light is a certain color, not anticipating.

Again, I don't know why it's too much to ask drivers to come to a stop when a light is red. It's pretty elementary.

So if I see a light is green from 1,000 feet away, I don't need to anticipate the light will turn?  I can be assured that when I reach the light in 20 seconds, the light will still be green?

And when a typical driving test is approximately 50 questions, along with a driving test that lasts approximately no more than 10 minutes, then yes, not only do I have really low standards, but so does everyone else.  Having high standards would mean we wouldn't need signs for everything.

Talking about standards.. There are also enforcement standards - which are not really higher than driving standards. Common problem with red light cameras is not that it requires full stop, but that entire thing is set up to produce revenue, not improve safety. So does a lot of manned enforcement, and there are plenty of well-documented cases of such approach....

Earlier in the thread, I was told that forcing people to come to a stop at a red light was dangerous.

DC is replete with red light cams but I've never gotten a ticket. Of course, I come to a complete stop at the stop bar. I must be doing something wrong.

[kalvado]

Quick question...do you support coming to a complete stop (zero MPH) at a red light?

Quick question in return: what is the accuracy of that "0 MPH"? Typical scientific understanding of "0 MPH" notation is that speed is below 0.5 MPH rounding error.

Zero miles per hour means your car isn't moving.

I'm sure there are some books at your local high school about basic concepts of speed and motion if you need more explanation.

Thank you. I don't know if they told you about that in high school, but there will be detectable motion even if you shift to "park" and turn off ignition. You just need proper tools to measure that. There is still wind, motion associated with tires temperature and backlash in drivetrain just to name a few.

Which is not to say that stopping is not needed, I would prefer to steer discussion towards understanding the purpose of that requirement. 3, or better 5 seconds often brought up seem to indicate some people consider stopping is required for the sake of stopping and revenue generation, not for safety reasons...

[kalvado]

Earlier in the thread, I was told that forcing people to come to a stop at a red light was dangerous.

DC is replete with red light cams but I've never gotten a ticket. Of course, I come to a complete stop at the stop bar. I must be doing something wrong.

If people made no mistakes, world would be a much better and safer place. Unfortunately we do make mistakes.
And you need to consider what is the ultimate goal here. Making people stop? Replace red light cameras with red light machine guns. I promise you, EVERYONE will stop once first few drivers are shot. Would it make our world a better place to be?
There are many instances when red light cameras actually increase crash rate - which means they defeat their own purpose...

[AlexandriaVA]

Sounds like you need a "safe space" from the traffic rules..."the rulez are mean! they hurt my feeling I'm not perfect!"

Seriously, man up. Try to avoid mistakes, if you make a mistake pay the fine and move on.

[kalvado]

Sounds like you need a "safe space" from the traffic rules..."the rulez are mean! they hurt my feeling I'm not perfect!"

Seriously, man up. Try to avoid mistakes, if you make a mistake pay the fine and move on.

This is not about safe space, this is about purpose of what is done.
Main purpose of most road regulations is to enable safe and reliable mode of transportation. And key question here is if read light cameras and 5 second stops recommended by authorities running those cameras actually improve safety. Everything else is pretty much irrelevant - including statements like "it is The Law! Obey it!"

[AlexandriaVA]

So it sounds like that the only hang up people here have is the method of enforcement.

Thus I propose a perfectly-calibrated, non-misleading red-light camera. All of you support it, right?

[jeffandnicole]

You seem to have really low standards for motorists, based on your presumption that they're too unskilled to watch for a light being either red or yellow/green.

Based on your example, it seems that you assume that motorists anticipate if a light will be green, yellow, or red. That's very dangerous because drivers should be looking if a light is a certain color, not anticipating.

Again, I don't know why it's too much to ask drivers to come to a stop when a light is red. It's pretty elementary.

So if I see a light is green from 1,000 feet away, I don't need to anticipate the light will turn?  I can be assured that when I reach the light in 20 seconds, the light will still be green?

And when a typical driving test is approximately 50 questions, along with a driving test that lasts approximately no more than 10 minutes, then yes, not only do I have really low standards, but so does everyone else.  Having high standards would mean we wouldn't need signs for everything.

The great thing about lights are you don't need to anticipate or be assured of anything. Go the posted speed limit and stop or go depending on the color of the light. Since you apparently don't have much confidence in your knowledge of motoring laws, I'll gladly send you my old driver's education material. For what it's worth, we did discuss the concept of stopping at red lights, and I believe everyone passed the section, although that was when we were in high school so it's been a while.

Can you please send me the driving records of everyone in your class to see if anyone has ever been cited for failing to stop/yield at a red light.

[kalvado]

So it sounds like that the only hang up people here have is the method of enforcement.

Thus I propose a perfectly-calibrated, non-misleading red-light camera. All of you support it, right?

As long as revenue from the camera - after payment of fixed charge to service provider - is donated to an independent charity instead of being included in next year budget for municipality.
If  safety is the major goal, that should be perfectly acceptable solution.

[AlexandriaVA]

You seem to have really low standards for motorists, based on your presumption that they're too unskilled to watch for a light being either red or yellow/green.

Based on your example, it seems that you assume that motorists anticipate if a light will be green, yellow, or red. That's very dangerous because drivers should be looking if a light is a certain color, not anticipating.

Again, I don't know why it's too much to ask drivers to come to a stop when a light is red. It's pretty elementary.

So if I see a light is green from 1,000 feet away, I don't need to anticipate the light will turn?  I can be assured that when I reach the light in 20 seconds, the light will still be green?

And when a typical driving test is approximately 50 questions, along with a driving test that lasts approximately no more than 10 minutes, then yes, not only do I have really low standards, but so does everyone else.  Having high standards would mean we wouldn't need signs for everything.

The great thing about lights are you don't need to anticipate or be assured of anything. Go the posted speed limit and stop or go depending on the color of the light. Since you apparently don't have much confidence in your knowledge of motoring laws, I'll gladly send you my old driver's education material. For what it's worth, we did discuss the concept of stopping at red lights, and I believe everyone passed the section, although that was when we were in high school so it's been a while.

Can you please send me the driving records of everyone in your class to see if anyone has ever been cited for failing to stop/yield at a red light.

Sure what's your mailing address?