What is the process to have an illegal STOP sign removed?

On Thu, 06 Mar 2014 16:53:19 -0800, sms wrote:

> But it's not illegal for a city to
> misuse them.

Is that really true?

I had simply *assumed* that the "rule" for misuse was an
actual legal one.

Are you sure it's not?

On Thu, 06 Mar 2014 16:53:19 -0800, sms wrote:

> I used to live in Campbell and still own property there.

I met you once. You don't remember probably, but it was
at the Pool Guys, in Saratoga. Buying yellow stuff.

On Fri, 07 Mar 2014 18:26:20 -0500, Arif Khokar wrote:
>> Such arrogance is astounding.
>> Stop at the damn sign before you kill someone.
> No one is going to get killed, so calm down Beavis.

It's not arrogance.

It's intelligence.

Big difference.

As Arif has astutely noted, not stopping at these stop signs
isn't gonna get anyone hurt, simply because these stops signs
serve no purpose (other than to annoy drivers).

On Fri, 7 Mar 2014 08:28:13 -0500, David L. Martel wrote:

> I don't find "it's illegal" to be a very credible argument.

This was good advice, from someone who knows.
So I appreciate your time, David.

I must admit, to you anyway, that my real reason is that
these signs *are* illegally placed. They erode trust in
government. And, they deserve no respect. Nor, since they
don't serve the purpose for which they were intended, are
they the correct implement of traffic control.

Moreso, there have been plenty of changes on those streets
since the 1990s, e.g., Hamilton has had a concrete barrier
emplaced, a traffic light was installed at Llewellyn and
Hamilton, the roads were widenened, turn lanes were added,
etc..

So, I might have to approach it as that they're no longer
"needed". Do you think that would be a good approach?

On Fri, 07 Mar 2014 18:33:43 -0500, Arif Khokar wrote:

> Maybe you can find out what your neighbors think about the
> stop sign. If most of them have the same viewpoint

On this, I doubt that the neighbors will be of like mind.
Most people in California are sheep. This isn't a political
ng, so, I really shouldn't delve deeper.

But, most people I've met here in California are of the
ilk "If you don't like it, go back to where you came from".

They have no concept of civic duty.

On Fri, 7 Mar 2014 03:55:57 +0000 (UTC), Brent wrote:

> Once enough nonsencical stop signs are used people stop respecting the
> nonsensical ones and occasionally the ones that make sense.

That's the entire point!

I don't disagree with you.

These are so egregious that nobody in their right mind,
who understands such things, would respect them *as* a
stop sign.

They're merely irritants. Purposefully placed for that
purpose of irritating the traffic, instead of actually
stopping the traffic.

On 03/08/2014 10:30 PM, Liam O'Connor wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Mar 2014 18:33:43 -0500, Arif Khokar wrote:
>
>> Maybe you can find out what your neighbors think about the
>> stop sign. If most of them have the same viewpoint
>
> On this, I doubt that the neighbors will be of like mind.
> Most people in California are sheep. This isn't a political
> ng, so, I really shouldn't delve deeper.

I don't think there would be any harm in asking in an informal manner.
Maybe you could phrase it as why do we need this stop sign here.
There's hardly any traffic and it's quite easy to make a turn without
having to stop. And then see what the response is.

If no one is in favor, then you may be able to count on the relative
apathy most people have regarding this issue. That is, you go to the
appropriate government agency (make an appointment to speak with the
correct official) and then claim that the stop sign isn't necessary.
You can outline your reasoning as you have in numerous posts in this and
the other thread (though I wouldn't go into you ignoring the stop sign
part of it), and ask for it to be removed.

Assuming no one in your neighborhood raises an objection, then it may
just get removed and your neighbors will just think they removed it for
a "reason."

On 03/08/2014 10:21 PM, Liam O'Connor wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Mar 2014 16:53:19 -0800, sms wrote:
>
>> But it's not illegal for a city to
>> misuse them.
>
> Is that really true?
>
> I had simply *assumed* that the "rule" for misuse was an
> actual legal one.
>
> Are you sure it's not?

I took a quick look through the CVC and couldn't find a requirement that
a traffic and engineering study was a prerequisite for installing a stop
sign at an intersection. What I could find that is a state or local
official can designate any roadway as a highway and erect a stop sign.

I was actually surprised that the law was so vague on that. Perhaps
there's more detail in relevant court rulings pertaining to this
section, but I didn't take time to go through those.

"Liam O'Connor" > wrote

> On this, I doubt that the neighbors will be of like mind.
> Most people in California are sheep. This isn't a political
> ng, so, I really shouldn't delve deeper.

Bull****. A small group of people lobby their local city or county
politician for a stop sign. Stop signs are easy political capital because
they're cheap to put up and they gain the vote of the people who wanted the
sign.

The fact that others in the community don't bother to weigh in on the matter
is because they have enough on their plates already and they tend to ignore
things that don't affect them much.

Liam,

> I must admit, to you anyway, that my real reason is that
> these signs *are* illegally placed.

You have demonstrated that the stop signs do not follow a set of
guidelines. You have not shown that the signs are illegal. Let's not waste
time on this.


> Moreso, there have been plenty of changes on those streets
> since the 1990s, e.g., Hamilton has had a concrete barrier
> emplaced, a traffic light was installed at Llewellyn and
> Hamilton, the roads were widenened, turn lanes were added,
> etc..
>
> So, I might have to approach it as that they're no longer
> "needed". Do you think that would be a good approach?

I like this approach. I'd look into how you can demonstrate that they are
"no longer needed". So you'll need a traffic study. Find out how to get the
city to do this. Find out what is done with this data and how the decision
process works. This sort of information is something that the staff of a
local elected official will usually help you to get. There are lawyers who
specialize in dealing with local government but this will be expensive.
Understand that if the data supports the signs, yu won't get them
removed, barring serious graft and corruption.

Good luck,
Dave M.