On 3/6/2014 3:40 PM, Liam O'Connor wrote:

> But, such misuse is precisely why the MUTCD says not to misuse
> STOP signs.

Right, they say to not misuse them. But it's not illegal for a city to
misuse them.

> Nobody who knows anything about the purpose of STOP signs
> would treat them with anything other than sheer disdain.

I would obey them because the alternative is worse. Fighting a ticket is
almost always a hopeless endeavor no matter how sure you are that you
are right. Telling a judge "yes I ran the stop sign but the MUTCD says
not to misuse stop signs and I feel that this installation is misusing
them" would not be successful.

> The question is what do I do to get them removed?

I know only of instances where residents lobbied to have stop signs
installed, and it required the collection of signatures of those on the
affected streets, then a study of the impact and need for the stop sign.
Later they removed it because they reconfigured the problem area making
a street one-way, and eliminating the need for the sign.

I would ask the Campbell Public Works director what the procedure is to
try to install new, or remove existing, traffic control devices. But
it's extremely hard to get a stop sign removed, even when it's no longer
needed. City councils feel that if they remove a stop sign and then
there's a serious accident at the intersection, that the city will have
liability.

I used to live in Campbell and still own property there. Campbell is one
of the better smaller cities in terms of responsiveness to resident's
concerns. The police are also pretty good compared to cities like
Cupertino and Saratoga that lack their own police departments.