[IL-Talk] Audio Pedestrian Signal Consent Decree

Mon Dec 15 07:31:59 UTC 2025

Kelly,
Some of the information you posted has been on IL Talk, including where people can go to suggest signals. I was asked to be on the advisory committee in mid-November by MOPD. But I haven't heard back about any meetings. You should also be aware that even before the decree, I and others have given comments to city officials about the installation of the signals (placement, consistent operation ETC). A few of us have also participated in media interviews. Since there are signals in my area, I have also reported outages to MOPD as well. I will report a problem with one of the signals at Pinegrove and Diversy, which does not seem to be working.

-----Original Message-----
From: IL-Talk <il-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org> On Behalf Of Kelly Pierce via IL-Talk
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2025 5:52 PM
To: NFB of Illinois Mailing List <il-talk at nfbnet.org>
Cc: Kelly Pierce <kellytalk at gmail.com>
Subject: [IL-Talk] Audio Pedestrian Signal Consent Decree

At the recent NFB of Chicago meeting, the consent decree in the audible pedestrian signal case was mentioned. Below is a copy of the decree. The court requires the City of Chicago to install APS at 71 percent of intersections by the end of 2035. Then the court will develop a plan for what is described as meaningful access for installations until the end of 2040. The city has created a website at chicagoaps.org for blind persons to request an APS installation or track a request. Be sure to select the menu display to find all the options.

Section 7(a) requires the City of Chicago to create what the order identifies as a “APS Community Advisory Committee.” The order states “The Committee shall include representatives from CDOT (those responsible for implementing the remedial plan), MOPD, and Chicago’s blind community, including

organizations that serve the blind community. The Committee should meet quarterly and provide feedback to City of Chicago on all issues relating to the remedial plan.”

The court order uses the word “should,” which means the advisory committee is a required mandate and not optional. The order was entered In May 2025 so the committee should have met twice. Has anyone from the Federation attended these meetings? If so, who? Has the Federation been formally invited to be a member of the committee? The NFB of Illinois is an organization that delivers services to the blind as stated in the court order and of course represents blind people and their interests. The NFB has a different perspective toward blind independence than the ACB, whose members brought the lawsuit.

Something not mentioned yesterday was the free OKO iPhone app that identifies when the walk signal at an intersection is on and also when the countdown starts before the walk cycle ends. The app can be used on any iPhone running iOS 17 or later, meaning all new iPhones from 2018 or later.
This list includes the iPhone XR, XS, SE second generation or later, and the 11 series or later. OKO is only on iPhone and only traffic lights with the hand for don’t walk and the walking man for walk can be recognized by the app. Intersections whose walk signals just display the words walk or don’t walk cannot be recognized by the app. The app is currently owned and maintained by *Synapse ITS, a private equity owned transportation technology company. Synapse ITS owns Polara Enterprises*, a major manufacturer of Accessible Pedestrian Signals. The app used to be available only through a paid subscription. Shortley after *Synapse ITS* acquired OKO in July 2025, the company made the app free without any subscription.

Kelly

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 1 of 15 PageID
#:11340

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

AMERICAN COUNCIL OF THE

BLIND OF METROPOLITAN

CHICAGO, et al.,

Plaintiff,

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Intervenor,

Case No. 19 C 6322

Hon. LaShonda A. Hunt

v.

THE CITY OF CHICAGO,

Defendant.

REMEDIAL PLAN ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the parties’ respective motions for entry of a remedial

plan. (Dkts. 279, 285, 292). The motions are resolved as set forth herein.

I. Background

A. Complaint

On September 23, 2019, Plaintiffs American Council of the Blind of Metropolitan Chicago

(“ACBMC”), Ann Brash, Maureen Heneghan, and Ray Campbell, on behalf of themselves and all

others similarly situated, commenced this action against Defendant City of Chicago 1 by filing a

Complaint alleging, among other things, that City of Chicago violated Title II of the Americans

with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-34, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act

of 1973 (“Section 504”), 29 U.S.C. § 794, by failing to equip signalized street intersections with

accessible pedestrian signals (“APS”). (Dkt. 1). On April 14, 2021, the Court entered an order

granting Plaintiff-Intervenor United States of America’s unopposed motion to intervene as a

plaintiff. (Dkt. 77).

The Complaint also named Chicago Department of Transportation (“CDOT”), Lori Lightfoot, in her official

capacity as Mayor of the City of Chicago, and Thomas Carney, in his official capacity as Acting Commissioner of the

Chicago Department of Transportation, as Defendants. (Dkt. 1). On March 9, 2020, the Court entered a Memorandum

Opinion and Order granting in part Defendant’s partial motion to dismiss terminating CDOT, Lightfoot, and Carney

as parties. (Dkt. 43).

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 2 of 15 PageID
#:11341

B. Liability Order

On March 31, 2023, the Court 2 entered a Memorandum Opinion and Order, among other

things, finding City of Chicago liable for violating the ADA and Rehabilitation Act by failing to

provide meaningful access to its network of pedestrian signals. (Dkt. 248).

C. Remedial Phase

Between July 2023 and February 2024, the parties engaged in supplemental discovery and

briefing regarding the appropriate remedy. (Dkt. 256). On November 7, 2024, the Court held a

status hearing during which the parties stated their respective positions concerning whether the

Court would need to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the appropriate remedy. (Dkt. 344).

After considering the partes’ positions, briefs, evidence, and applicable law, the Court found an

evidentiary hearing unnecessary and issued a proposed remedial plan order on March 10, 2025

(Dkt. 350). Having reviewed the parties’ joint statement with proposed revisions to the remedial

plan filed on April 9, 2025 (Dkts. 351, 351-1), and held a hearing on May 28, 2025 to resolve any

remaining issues and consider the recommended independent monitor and objections thereto (Dkt.

361), the Court finalizes the remedial plan as follows:

II.

General Provisions

A. Governing Law

This Remedial Plan Order is governed by all applicable law, rules, and regulations,

including Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-34, as amended, Section 504, 29 U.S.C. § 794,

28 C.F.R. Part 35, and 49 C.F.R. Part 27.

B. Applicable Standards

City of Chicago shall install and maintain APS in compliance with the then-current Manual

on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (“MUTCD”) (“then-current” defined to be the version of the

MUTCD adopted by the State of Illinois at a given time), including all APS installed and

maintained by third-party contractors.

C. Scope

Subject to the yearly minimum requirements set forth below, City of Chicago shall install

APS at a minimum of approximately 71% of signalized intersections with pedestrian signals by

December 31, 2035 (“Phase I”), and at the remaining signalized intersections with pedestrian

signals but without APS by December 31, 2040 (“Phase II”). Upon the completion of Phase I, City

of Chicago may file a motion to eliminate or extend Phase II based on a showing that meaningful

access has been achieved.

This case was reassigned from Judge Bucklo to Judge Hunt on June 2, 2023.
(Dkt. 251).

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 3 of 15 PageID
#:11342

D. Priority

City of Chicago shall prioritize the installation of APS at certain categories of signalized

intersections with pedestrian signals, as set forth below.

E. Discretion

City of Chicago shall have the right to use reasonable and good faith discretion in

implementing the terms of this Remedial Plan Order including to (i) create efficiencies in the

design, approval, bidding, and construction of APS installations, (ii) respond to material and/or

labor shortages, (iii) group similar intersections when placing projects for bid; (iv) re-prioritize

intersections for construction to respond to delays arising from approvals issues, underground

utility review issues, redesign issues, and a lack of acceptable bids; and
(v) exercise engineering

judgment and discretion in designing and installing APS to the extent permitted by the MUTCD.

When City of Chicago exercises “engineering judgment” to deviate from MUTCD

Guidance in a manner provided for by the MUTCD, it shall contemporaneously document in

writing the reason and support for such engineering judgment and deviation.
In addition, City of

Chicago shall, on at least a monthly basis, provide the Certified Orientation and Mobility Specialist

(“COMS”), as defined in Section VIII.A.1, infra, with identification of all instances where

engineering judgment was used to deviate from MUTCD Guidance, with supporting

documentation, and the COMS shall review, provide feedback, and levy objections when

appropriate. Should the City and/or the COMS identify conditions where engineering judgment is

repeatedly exercised, the City shall adopt written procedures and criteria established by an

engineer and in consultation with the COMS to be applied in the exercise of such engineering

judgment.

Such discretion may not serve to otherwise excuse the City from non-compliance with the

requirements of this Order, including those requirements regarding prioritization and yearly

minimum requirements, as set forth below.

F. Continuing Obligation

To stay in compliance and avoid further violations of the ADA and Section 504, barring

any changed circumstances, the policies set forth in this Remedial Plan Order shall remain in place

after the completion of Phases I and II, as described below.

III.

Implementation

A. Priority

Within six (6) months, City of Chicago, in consultation with Plaintiffs, United States, the

Independent Monitor, and the APS Community Advisory Committee, shall establish a mechanism

that utilizes criteria set forth in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (“NCHRP”),

Accessible Pedestrian Signals: A Guide to Best Practices for APS Location Selection, and

considers the complexity of intersections, to prioritize the installation of APS at signalized

intersections with pedestrian signals consistent with the priority categories set forth below. City of

Chicago is not required to score each individual intersection. For all intersections that do not fall

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 4 of 15 PageID
#:11343

within these priority provisions, City of Chicago has discretion to select the order of APS

installation to meet its minimum yearly requirements. City of Chicago shall make reasonable

efforts to install APS equitably across the city.

1. Newly Pedestrian Signalized Intersections.

City of Chicago shall install APS at all newly signalized intersections (i.e., any time that

an intersection is provided with pedestrian signals that did not previously have pedestrian signals).

2. Existing Signalized Intersections

City of Chicago shall install APS at all signalized intersections with pedestrian signals but

without APS based on the following priorities.

a. Public Requests

Within twelve (12) months of the date of this Order, City of Chicago shall install APS at

all intersections for which there was an outstanding public request to install APS as of March 9,

2025. Before doing so, City of Chicago shall attempt to confirm that each such requestor still

desires APS installation to occur (such that City of Chicago does not prioritize installation where

there is no unique, immediate need, as where the requestor has moved). This 12-month timeframe

is contingent upon City of Chicago’s evaluation of the adequacy of existing infrastructure at each

intersection to support APS installation without other significant additional upgrades, including,

but not limited to, full traffic signal modernization (“TSM”) (defined as the simultaneous

replacement of all or substantially all of the traffic signal infrastructure at the intersection); in such

cases a 12-month timeframe may be impossible. If the request cannot be fulfilled within 12 months,

City of Chicago must consult with the COMS to consider ways to minimize the impact for blind

pedestrians.

City of Chicago shall review and respond to public requests to install APS at a signalized

intersection with pedestrian signals received during the pendency of this Remedial Plan Order

within six (6) months of receipt. Where possible to do so, City of Chicago must install APS at the

intersection within twelve (12) months of receipt of the request. If City of Chicago believes that

the installation cannot be completed within twelve (12) months of receipt of the request, it must

install APS at the intersection within twenty-four (24) months of receipt of the request. This 24-

month timeframe is contingent upon City of Chicago’s evaluation of the adequacy of existing

infrastructure at each intersection to support APS installation without other significant additional

upgrades, including, but not limited to, full TSM; in such cases a 24-month timeframe may be

impossible. If the request cannot be fulfilled within 24 months, City of Chicago must consult with

the COMS to consider ways to minimize the impact for blind pedestrians.

If City of Chicago receives more than twenty-five (25) requests during a calendar year, it

may file a motion seeking relief from the requirement to prioritize such requests exceeding twentyfive

(25) per calendar year if such prioritization would impair meeting the other targets and goals

set in this Remedial Plan Order.

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 5 of 15 PageID
#:11344

b. New Signal Equipment

City of Chicago shall install APS at all signalized intersections with pedestrian signals that

undergo a TSM, defined as the simultaneous replacement of all or substantially all of the traffic

signal infrastructure at the intersection.

If City of Chicago modifies a signalized intersection to install exclusive pedestrian phases

(“EPP”), it shall not begin using or otherwise “turn on” that feature before the APS at that

intersection are installed and operating.

c. Particularly Dangerous Conditions

Along with public requests, City of Chicago shall first prioritize installation of APS at all

signalized intersections with pedestrian signals that are equipped with EPP, mid-block pedestrian

crossings (“MPS”), T-shaped intersections (“TSI”), three or more distinct streets or have other

complex geometry (as defined to be the 100 most complex intersections in the City of Chicago’s

Complex Intersection Study, a list of which are attached as Appendix A hereto). After APS is

installed at all intersections with EPP, MPS, TSI, and those with intersections of three or more

distinct streets and other complex geometry, City of Chicago must prioritize installing APS at

intersections with LPI and PTP as early in Phase I as possible.

If there is a public request for APS at an intersection with EPP or leading pedestrian

intervals (“LPI”), and the request cannot be immediately fulfilled, City of Chicago must consult

with the COMS to consider ways to minimize the impact for blind pedestrians until APS are

installed and MUTCD compliant.

d. Public Transportation

City of Chicago shall prioritize signalized intersections with pedestrian signals within 1/8

mile of public transportation, specifically CTA stations, Metra stations, PACE stations, bus route

to bus route transfer points, and streets that pass under elevated train lines.

e. Public Facilities

City of Chicago shall prioritize signalized intersections with pedestrian signals within 1/8

mile of public facilities such as hospitals, police stations, major pedestrian attractions (e.g., major

shopping areas, major cultural venues, and educational campuses), organizations serving people

with visual disabilities and seniors, and government buildings, including those facilities

specifically listed in Appendix B attached hereto. Should City of Chicago require assistance

prioritizing within this category, it shall consult with the COMS and the APS Community

Advisory Committee.

B. Phase I

1. Scope

Subject to the yearly minimum requirements set forth below, City of Chicago shall install

APS at a minimum of approximately 71% of signalized intersections with pedestrian signals by

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 6 of 15 PageID
#:11345

December 31, 2035. Signalized intersections at which APS is already installed and are MUTCD

compliant at the time of installation (but not including audio-only APS) shall count towards this

requirement.

2. Priority

During Phase I, City of Chicago shall install APS pursuant to the Priority provisions of this

Remedial Plan Order, specifically including intersections subject to public requests, new signal

equipment, particularly dangerous conditions, public transportation, and public facilities.

3. Yearly Minimum Requirements

During Phase I, City of Chicago shall install APS on, at minimum, the following number

of signalized intersections with pedestrian signals. To the extent that City of Chicago fails to meet

a given year’s total despite having acted in good faith, any underperformance shall be made up in

the subsequent year. To the extent that City of Chicago exceeds the minimum requirement in a

given year, the excess may be applied to the following years’ minimum totals. APS installations

at newly signalized intersections with pedestrian signals shall be counted in calculating the APS

installations for any given year.

“Year 1” is defined to commence as of the date of the entry of this Order and last for one

full calendar year.

Year 1:

Year 2:

Year 3:

Year 4:

Year 5:

Year 6:

Year 7:

Year 8:

Year 9:

Year 10:

70 Intersections

110 Intersections

135 Intersections

154 Intersections

185 Intersections

220 Intersections

235 Intersections

245 Intersections

245 Intersections

245 Intersections

4. Meaningful Access

At the completion of Phase I, City of Chicago may file a motion to eliminate or extend

Phase II based on a showing of meaningful access.

C. Phase II

1. Scope

Subject to the yearly minimum requirements set forth below, City of Chicago shall install

APS at all remaining signalized intersections with pedestrian signals without APS by December

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 7 of 15 PageID
#:11346

31, 2040, unless that deadline has been eliminated or extended based on a showing of meaningful

access.

2. Prioritization

During Phase II, City of Chicago shall install APS pursuant to the Priority provisions of

this Remedial Plan Order, specifically including intersections subject to public requests, new

signal equipment, public transportation, and public facilities.

3. Yearly Minimum Requirements

During Phase II, City of Chicago shall install APS at signalized intersections with

pedestrian signals at a rate sufficient to ensure that, when installed at a consistent rate over five

years, City of Chicago will have equipped all signalized intersections with pedestrian signals with

APS by the end of Phase II.

IV.

Compliance

To ensure that all APS are installed and maintained in compliance with MUTCD standards,

City of Chicago shall promptly establish and implement an APS compliance program that proves

effective at ensuring that APS are installed and maintained in compliance with the MUTCD and

any succeeding standards, regulations, or changes in the law setting forth the required

specifications. An effective compliance program in this context is one that contains at least the

following material elements:

i. An effective, on-site inspection system to assess, at the time of installation, whether

each APS unit has been installed and programmed in compliance with the MUTCD;

ii.

iii.

iv.

An annual, post-installation inspection program that is effective to identify

maintenance and programming issues that arise post-installation and confirm

continued compliance with the MUTCD;

An effective system to solicit, compile, analyze, and generate reports on complaints

and repair requests made by members of the public with regard to existing APS

installations; and

An effective system to promptly repair and correct the maintenance and compliance

issues identified by members of the public and City of Chicago’s own inspectors.

V. Maintenance

A. Routine Maintenance

City of Chicago shall routinely perform maintenance inspections of all APS to a degree

and on a schedule not less than what is performed with respect to visually based pedestrian signals.

City of Chicago shall repair or replace APS that are not functioning as intended within five (5)

business days after inspection or another reasonable period thereafter if extenuating circumstances

prevent the repair or replacement from being completed.

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 8 of 15 PageID
#:11347

B. Requests for Maintenance or Repair

City of Chicago shall establish a centralized system for members of the public or City of

Chicago officials or employees to submit a request for maintenance or repair of an APS device.

City of Chicago shall ensure that requests are logged and accessible to the public through the APS

website. City of Chicago shall repair or replace APS that are not functioning as intended within

five (5) business days after a request is submitted or another reasonable period thereafter if

extenuating circumstances prevent the repair or replacement from being completed. Extenuating

circumstances may include, without limitation, where major damage has occurred, where there are

prolonged materials shortages, where there is a report of an over-loud APS device that does not

implicate safety concerns, or where spoken messages cannot be added or fixed without technical

assistance. Should City of Chicago determine extenuating circumstances prevent the repair or

replacement form being completed within five (5) business days, it shall include that determination

and the reason for the delay within its tracking system accessible on the APS website.

VI.

Communication

City of Chicago shall regularly maintain and update an accessible APS website, consistent

with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (“WCAG”) 2.1 Level AA, listing intersections with

APS, providing contact information of City of Chicago official(s) to contact regarding APS, and

permitting community members to make public requests for APS installation, maintenance, or

repair and track the progress of such requests.

On the accessible APS website, City of Chicago shall track each request, post the request

under a Public Request List for APS within thirty (30) days of the request, and review and respond

within six (6) months of receipt, giving an approximate timeline of when the request will be

completed and the relative priority of the requested intersections as compared to other requested

intersections.

The public must be permitted to submit a request for APS installation in several ways,

including online, by telephone, and in person at aldermanic offices or the Mayor’s Office for

People with Disabilities (“MOPD”). City of Chicago shall ensure that all requests are processed

through a centralized review system.

VII.

Community Involvement

A. APS Community Advisory Committee

City of Chicago shall create and regularly communicate with an APS Community Advisory

Committee. The Committee shall include representatives from CDOT (those responsible for

implementing the remedial plan), MOPD, and Chicago’s blind community, including

organizations that serve the blind community. The Committee should meet quarterly and provide

feedback to City of Chicago on all issues relating to the remedial plan.

B. Public Requests

City of Chicago shall maintain a program to accept and respond to public requests for the

installation of APS as described in Section III.A.2.a of this Remedial Plan Order.

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 9 of 15 PageID
#:11348

VIII. Oversight, Monitoring, and Reporting

A. City of Chicago

1. Personnel

City of Chicago must appoint and maintain (1) a single point person within CDOT

responsible for overseeing implementation of the Remedial Plan Order, and
(2) a single point

person within CDOT responsible for assuring City of Chicago’s comprehensive pursuit of funding

to support installation of APS.

City of Chicago must also engage a Certified Orientation and Mobility Specialist

(“COMS”) who has demonstrated experience with and knowledge of the technical standards for

APS, and is familiar with Chicago, to consult with City of Chicago and provide expertise on

installation and maintenance of APS, including the reasons MUTCD standards are critical for the

safety of travelers with vision disabilities.

City of Chicago personnel appointed pursuant to this paragraph must consult regularly

with the APS Community Advisory Committee and COMS.

2. Reporting

City of Chicago must submit regular reports at least every six (6) months (or another period

agreeable to the parties) addressing compliance with this Remedial Plan Order to counsel for

Plaintiffs and United States, the COMS, and the Independent Monitor. Upon request of the

Independent Monitor for relevant documents or information, City of Chicago shall promptly

provide such documents and information regarding its compliance with this Remedial Plan Order.

B. Independent Monitor

1. Selection and Appointment

Plaintiffs, United States, and City of Chicago shall jointly select and recommend and the

Court shall appoint an Independent Monitor to oversee City of Chicago’s compliance with this

Remedial Plan Order.

2. Authority

The Monitor shall have the power and right to retain consultants, consult with City

personnel and COMS, and inspect APS installations. The Independent Monitor shall have access

to City records and information about City of Chicago’s APS program. The Independent Monitor

may identify any deficiencies and attempt to resolve them in consultation with the parties,

including by recommending corrective action. The Independent Monitor shall report to the Court,

City of Chicago, the Plaintiffs, and the United States to the extent that they identify material issues

with City of Chicago’s performance under this Remedial Plan Order.

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 10 of 15 PageID
#:11349

3. Communication

The Independent Monitor may communicate ex parte with any party and the COMS.

4. Duties

a. Oversight

The Independent Monitor shall proceed with all reasonable diligence to oversee City of

Chicago’s compliance with this Remedial Plan order.

b. Reporting

The Monitor shall file with the Court annual written reports regarding City of Chicago’s

performance under this Remedial Plan Order. Such reports, at a minimum, must include the

following information:

i. The number of APS installations conducted in the prior twelve (12) months;

ii.

iii.

iv.

Whether those installations complied with the MUTCD;

Whether installations complied with the prioritization required under the Remedial

Plan Order;

Whether City of Chicago complied with the Communication, Community

Involvement, and Maintenance provisions of this Remedial Plan Order; and

v. Recommendations for improving implementation of the Remedial Plan Order.

c. Meetings

The Independent Monitor shall meet semiannually with the APS Community Advisory

Committee, CDOT personnel, and COMS.

5. Fees and Expenses

Independent Monitor shall submit annual budgets and applications for fees and expenses

for approval. City of Chicago shall pay the Independent Monitor’s reasonable fees and expenses.

Within thirty (30) days of entry of this Order, counsel for Plaintiffs, the United States, and City of

Chicago shall submit a joint proposed order setting forth procedures for approval of the

Independent Monitor’s budgets, fees, and expenses.

6. Term

The Independent Monitor shall serve for a term of five (5) years, subject to requests for

extension, replacement, or termination.

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 11 of 15 PageID
#:11350

IX.

Modification

City of Chicago, Plaintiffs, and/or the United States may seek modification of this

Remedial Plan Order on any grounds specified in this Remedial Plan Order, as well as to address

unforeseen circumstances, changing standards governing APS and/or pedestrian signals, new

technology, and impossibility.

X. Dispute Resolution

If Plaintiffs or the United States believe that City of Chicago has not complied in any

material respect with this Remedial Plan Order, they shall provide written notice to all parties and

the Independent Monitor outlining the ways they believe City of Chicago is in non-compliance.

Following notice of potential non-compliance, the parties must confer in good faith for a period of

up to 30 days to resolve the dispute, with assistance from the Independent Monitor. If the parties

are unable to resolve a dispute, any Party may make a motion to the Court to enforce the Remedial

Plan Order.

XI.

Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

Plaintiffs are deemed to be prevailing parties in this litigation and are thus entitled to

reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses for work performed in connection with this

litigation, including those incurred monitoring or enforcing City of Chicago’s implementation

obligations under the Remedial Plan Order. If Plaintiffs’ counsel and City of Chicago are unable

to negotiate a mutually agreeable resolution as to attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses within thirty

(30) days, Plaintiffs’ counsel may move or apply to the Court for an award of attorneys’ fees, costs

and expenses for the work performed in connection with this litigation or monitoring.

DATED: May 29, 2025

ENTERED:

LASHONDA A. HUNT

United States District Judge

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 12 of 15 PageID
#:11351

APPENDIX A

100 Most Complex Intersections: (i) N. Francisco Avenue, W. Fullerton Avenue, N. Milwaukee

Avenue, and N. Sacramento Avenue, (ii) N. Southport Avenue, W. Webster Avenue, and N.

Clybourn Avenue, (iii) N. Sheffield Avenue, W. Willow Street, and N.
Clybourn Avenue, (iv) N.

Canal Street, W. Lake Street, and N. Milwaukee Avenue, (v) N. Halsted Street, W. North Avenue,

and N. Clybourn Avenue, (vi) N. California Avenue, W. Belmont Avenue, and N. Elston Avenue,

(vii) N. Western Avenue, W. Diversey Parkway, and N. Elston Avenue, (viii) Ashland Avenue,

W. Fullerton Avenue, and N. Clybourn Avenue, (ix) N. Ogden Avenue, W.
Randolph Street, and

W. Washington Boulevard, (x) S. Wentworth Avenue, W. Cermak Road, S. Clark Street, and I90

Feeder Ramp, (xi) S. Narragansett Avenue, W. 55 th Street, and W. Archer Avenue, (xii) S.

California Avenue, W. 40 th Place, and S. Archer Avenue, (xiii) N. Halsted Street, W. Fullerton

Avenue, and N. Lincoln Avenue, (xiv) S. South Shore Drive, E. 71 st Street, S. Exchange Avenue,

and S. Yates Boulevard, (xv) S. Exchange Avenue. E. 79 th Street, E.
Cheltenham Place, (xvi) S.

Exchange Avenue and E 83 rd Street, (xvii) S. Stony Island Avenue, E. 79 th Street, S. South Chicago

Avenue and I90 Feeder Ramp, (xviii) S. Yates Boulevard, E. 87 th Street, and S. South Chicago

Avenue, (xix) S. Vincennes Avenue and W. 99 th Street, (xx) N. Damen Avenue, W. Diversey

Parkway, and N. Clybourn Avenue, (xxi) S. Oakley Avenue, Roosevelt Road, and W. Ogden

Avenue, (xxii) N. Sacramento Boulevard and W. Grand Avenue, (xxiii) N.
Hoyne Avenue, W.

George Street, and N. Clybourn Avenue, (xxiv) N. Halsted Street, W. Grand Avenue, and N.

Milwaukee Avenue, (xxv) N. Halsted Street, W. Barry Avenue, and N. Clark Street, (xxvi) N.

Carpenter Street, N. Milwaukee Avenue, W. Huron Street, and N. Morgan Street, (xxvii) S.

Avenue Lane, E. 95 th Street, and S. Ewing Avenue, (xxviii) S. Vincennes Avenue and W. 119 th

Street, (xxix) N. Nagle Avenue, N. Avondale Avenue, and W. Somerset Avenue,
(xxx) N. Lehigh

Avenue, W. Devon Avenue, N. Caldwell Avenue, and N. Central Avenue, (xxxi) Ashland Avenue,

W. Madison Street, N. Ogden Avenue, and W. Monroe Street, (xxxii) S. Canal Street, W. 23 rd

Street, and S. Archer Avenue, (xxxiii) S. Ashland Avenue and S. Archer Avenue, (xxxiv) S. Canal

Street, W. Cermak Road, and S. Grove Street, (xxxv) S. Damen Avenue, W.
Harrison Street, W.

Ogden Avenue, and W. Polk Street, (xxxvi) N. Clark Street, W. Diversey Parkway, and N.

Broadway, (xxxvii) N. Sheridan Road, W. Diversey Parkway, N. Cannon Drive, and N. Stockton

Drive, (xxxviii) N. Halsted Street, W. Grace Street, and N. Broadway,
(xxxix) N. Kedzie Avenue,

W. Addison Street, N. Elston Avenue, and N. Sawyer Avenue, (xl) S. Morgan Street, W. Cermak

Road, and S. Canalport Avenue, (xli) N. Pulaski Road, W. School Street, and N. Milwaukee

Avenue, (xlii) N. Larrabee Street, W. Webster Avenue, and N. Lincoln Avenue, (xliii) S. Cottage

Grove Avenue, E. 71 st Street, and S. South Chicago Avenue, (xliv) S. Ellis Avenue, E. 73 rd Street,

and S. South Chicago Avenue, (xlv) N. Milwaukee Avenue, W. Lawrence Avenue, W. Higgins

Avenue, and W. Ainslie Street, (xlvi) S. Halsted Street, W. 85 th Street, and S. Summit Avenue,

(xlvii) N. Central Avenue, W. Foster Avenue, N. Milwaukee Avenue, N.
Northwest Highway, and

W. Farragut Avenue, (xlviii) Cicero Avenue and W. Grand Avenue, (xlix) N.
Kostner Avenue, W.

North Avenue, and W. Grand Avenue, (l) S. Hoyne Avenue, W. 35 th Street, and S. Archer Avenue,

(li) N. Ashland Avenue, W. Division Street, and N. Milwaukee Avenue, (lii) S. Martin Luther

King Drive, E. Marquette Road, and S. South Chicago Avenue, (liii) N.
Western Avenue, W.

Armitage Avenue, and N. Milwaukee Avenue, (liv) S. Racine Avenue, W. 14 th Street, and S. Blue

Island Avenue, (lv) S. Loomis Street, W. 18 th Street, and S. Blue Island Avenue, (lvi) N. Central

Avenue, W. Higgins Avenue, and W. Edmunds Street, (lvii) S. Princeton Avenue, W. Cermak

Road, and S. Archer Avenue, (lviii) N. Monticello Avenue, W. Irving Park Road, and N. Elston

Avenue, (lix) S. Ashland Avenue, W. Cermak Road, and S. Blue Island Avenue,
(lx) S. Rockwell

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 13 of 15 PageID
#:11352

Street, W. Pershing Road, and S. Archer Avenue, (lxi) N. Monticello Avenue, W. Division Street,

W. Grand Avenue, and Central Park Avenue, (lxii) S. Pulaski Road, W. 87 th Street, and South

West Highway, (lxiii) S. Western Avenue, W. 37 th Place, and S. Archer Avenue, (lxiv) N.

Rockwell Street, W. Bryn Mawr Avenue, and N. Lincoln Avenue, (lxv) N.
Kenneth Avenue, W.

Lawrence Avenue, and N. Elston Avenue, (lxvi) N. Octavia Avenue, Irving Park Road, and W.

Forest Preserve Avenue, (lxvii) N. Harlem Avenue and W. Grand Avenue,
(lxviii) S. Pulaski Road,

W. 50 th Street, and S. Archer Avenue, (lxix) S. Martin Luther King Drive and E. 51 st Street, (lxx) S.

Lawndale Avenue, W. 83 rd Place, and W. Columbus Avenue, (lxxi) N.
Elizabeth Street, W. Grand

Avenue, and N. Ogden Avenue, (lxxii) N. Racine Avenue, W. Cortland Street, N. Clybourn

Avenue, and W. Armitage Avenue, (lxxiii) S. Sacramento Avenue, W. 42 nd Street, and S. Archer

Avenue, (lxxiv) N. Harlem Avenue, W. Palatine Avenue, and N. Avondale Avenue, (lxxv) N.

Kedzie Avenue, W. Walton Street, and W. Grand Avenue, (lxxvi) N. Clark Street, W. Rosehill

Drive, N. Ashland Avenue, W. Victoria Street, W. Edgewater Avenue, (lxxvii) N. Clark Street,

W. Peterson Avenue, N. Ridge Avenue, and N. Paulina Street, (lxxviii) S.
Ashland Avenue, W.

111 th Street, and W. Chelsea Place, (lxxix) S. Torrence Avenue and E. 100 th Street, (lxxx) N.

Racine Avenue, W. Erie Street, N. Ogden, and W. Ohio Street, (lxxxi) N.
Paulina Street, W. Adams

Street, and W. Ogden Avenue, (lxxxii) S. Jefferson Street, W. Cermak Road, and S. Lumber Street,

(lxxxiii) S. Albany Avenue, W. 43 rd Street, and S. Archer Avenue, (lxxxiv) N. Leclaire Avenue,

W. Armitage Avenue, W. Grand Avenue, and N. Lawler Avenue, (lxxxv) S.
Woodland Avenue,

E. 75 th Street, S. South Chicago Avenue, (lxxxvi) S. Loomis Street, W.
Fuller Street, and S. Archer

Avenue, (lxxxvii) S. Avenue L, E. 100 th Street, and S. Indianapolis Avenue, (lxxxviii) S. Western

Avenue, W. Pershing Road, and S. Western Boulevard, (lxxxix) South State Street, E. Marquette

Road, I94 Feeder Ramp, S. Wabash Avenue, (xc) S. Pulaski Road, W. Harrison Street, W. 5 th

Avenue, and W. Flournoy Street, (xci) N. Austin Avenue, W. Lawrence Avenue, and N. Mason

Avenue, (xcii) S. Damen Avenue and W. 37 th Street, (xciii) N. Melvina Avenue, N. Elston Avenue,

N. Milwaukee Avenue, and W. Holbrook Street, (xciv) N. Nagle Avenue, W.
Devon Avenue, and

N. Milwaukee Avenue, (xcv) S. Normal Avenue, W. 18 th Street, S. Canalport Avenue, S. Clinton

Street, (xcvi) S. Mackinaw Avenue, S. DuSable Lake Shore Drive, S. Ewing Avenue, and S.

Harbor Avenue, (xcvii) S. Wentworth Avenue, W. 73 rd Street, and S.
Vincennes Avenue,

(xcviii) N. Ravenswood Avenue, W. Addison Street, and N. Lincoln Avenue,
(xcix) S. Pulaski

Road, W. Cermak Road, W. Ogden Avenue, and S. Harding Avenue, and (c) N.
Western Avenue,

W. Logan Boulevard, and West Jones Street.

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 14 of 15 PageID
#:11353

APPENDIX B

Centers for People with Visual Disabilities: (i) The Chicago Lighthouse at
1850 W Roosevelt

Road, (ii) Second Sense at 65 E Wacker Place, (iii) Friedman Place at 5527 N Maplewood Avenue,

(iv) Access Living at 115 W Chicago Avenue, (v) Equip for Equality at 20 North Michigan

Avenue, (vi) Blind Service Association at 17 N State Street, (vii) Harold Washington Library

Assistive Resources and Talking Book Center at 400 S State Street, (viii) Illinois Center for

Rehabilitation and Education-Wood at 1950 W Roosevelt Road, (ix) National Federation of the

Blind Illinois at 5128 N Oak Park Avenue, (x) JVS Chicago - Disability Services at 216 W Jackson

Boulevard, (xi) JVS Chicago - Disability Services at 909 W Wilson Avenue,
(xii) JVS Chicago –

Disability Services at 6639 N Kedzie Avenue, and (xiii) UIC Institute on Disability and Human

Development (IDHD) at 1640 W Roosevelt Road

Senior Centers: (i) Central West Center at 2102 W. Ogden Avenue, (ii) Northeast (Levy) Senior

Center at 2019 W. Lawrence Avenue, (iii) Northwest (Copernicus) Senior Center at 3160 N.

Milwaukee Avenue, (iv) Renaissance Court at 78 E. Washington, (v) Southeast
(Atlas) Senior

Center at 1767 E. 79th Street, (vi) Southwest Center at 6117 S. Kedzie Avenue, (vii) Abbott Park

Satellite Senior Center at 49 East 95th Street, (viii) Auburn Gresham Satellite Senior Center at

1040 West 79th Street, (ix) Austin Satellite Senior Center at 5071 W.
Congress Parkway, (x)

Chatham Satellite Senior Center at 8300 S. Cottage Grove, (xi) Edgewater Satellite Senior Center

at 5917 N. Broadway, (xii) Englewood Satellite Senior Center at 653-657 West 63rd Street, (xiii)

Garfield Ridge Satellite Senior Center at 5674B South Archer Avenue, (xiv) Kelvyn Park Satellite

Senior Center at 2715 N. Cicero Avenue, (xv) North Center Senior Satellite at 4040 N. Oakley,

(xvi) Norwood Park Senior Satellite at 5801 N. Natoma, (xvii) Pilsen Satellite Senior Center at

2021 South Morgan, (xviii) Portage Park Satellite Senior Center at 4100 North Long, (xix)

Roseland Satellite Senior Center at 10426 South Michigan Avenue, (xx) South Chicago Satellite

Center at 9233 South Burley, and (xxi) West Town/Logan Square Satellite Senior Center at 1615

West Chicago Avenue.

Other: (i) the intersection of E Lower Wacker Drive, N Lakeshore Drive, N Breakwater Access,

and N Lake Front Drive, (ii) the intersection of E Lake Street and N Columbus Drive, (iii) the

intersection of S Indiana Avenue and E Roosevelt Road, (iv) the intersection of W Jackson Street

and S Jefferson Street, (v) the intersection of W Jackson Street and S Desplaines Street, (vi) the

intersection of W Adams Street and S Desplaines Street, (vii) the intersection of W Monroe Stret

and S Jefferson Street, (viii) the intersection of W Monroe Street and S Desplaines Street, (ix) the

intersection of W Monroe Street and S Halsted Street, (x) the intersection of W Madison Street

and S Jefferson Street, (xi) the intersection of N Halsted Street and W Erie Street, (xii) the

intersection of W Division Street and N Clybourn Avenue, (xiii) the intersection of W Division

Street and N Wells Street, (xiv) the intersection of E Division Street and N Lakeshore Drive, (xv)

the intersection of E Cedar Street, N Rush Street, and N State Street,
(xvi) the intersection of N

Rush Street and E Bellevue Place, (xvii) the intersection of N Rush Street and E Oak Street, (xviii)

the intersection of N Rush Street and E Walton Place, (xix) the intersection of Kinzie Street and N

State Street, (xx) the intersection of W Wrightwood Avenue and N Clark Street, (xxi) the

intersection of N Clark Street and W Wellington Avenue, (xxii) the intersection of N Clark Street

and N Southport Avenue, (xxiii) the intersection of N Ashland Avenue and W Berteau Avenue,

(xxiv) the intersection of N Clark Street and W Albion Avenue, and (xxv) the intersection of N

Clark Street and W North Shore Avenue.

Case: 1:19-cv-06322 Document #: 365 Filed: 05/29/25 Page 15 of 15 PageID
#:11354

Centers for People with Visual Disabilities: (i) The Chicago Lighthouse at
1850 W Roosevelt