On 3/6/2014 3:47 PM, Liam O'Connor wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2014 23:20:51 +0000 (UTC), Brent wrote:
>
>> They feel, they don't think.
>
> I must say that was a surprisingly eloquent description of
> *why* the signs were placed there. I don't disagree.
>
> It felt good to them to inconvenience traffic on that
> road, so as to discourage traffic on that road.
>
> They used an artificial STOP sign because most people inherently
> resepect such signs, more so than they respect speed limit &
> caution signs.
>
> However, they used the wrong sign for the wrong purpose.
> And they know it.
>
> The question now, is how to reverse that decision.

Stop signs are often used for traffic calming even when other traffic
calming measures would be more appropriate. Stop signs are relatively
cheap to install while proper traffic calming is not cheap.

I would phrase any discussion with the city as follows: "how can we
replace these stop signs with another type of traffic calming device
that don't inconvenience local residents but that still discourage the
use of these streets by non-residents?"