The Barnettization of Scottville

[XLFD]

Balkanization is a geopolitical term, originally used to describe the process of fragmentation or division of a region or state into smaller regions or states that are often hostile or non-cooperative with each other  (Wikipedia)

Barnettization is a geopolitical term, originally used to describe the process of fragmentation or division of all regions in one city and exporting that fragmentation into neighboring cities with policies that are hostile to common sense. (Xlfdipedia)

 

Earlier this month, Scottville welcomed their new Police Chief, Mark Barnett, as part of a consolidation of services with Ludington   8-2 2011 LDN.  The prior month on July 18th, the Scottville City Commission took on his services, at the same time that this claim was made: 

"New stop signs will be placed at railroad crossings, as required by law. The city commission agreed Monday to place them not only at South Columbia and Bean streets as previously planned but also on Reinberg Avenue."   7-19-2011 LDN

 

Even though these stop signs have been attributed to outgoing Chief Nichols, it is more likely their placement was urged by the incoming Chief, and the statement above definitely has a Barnett certainty to it.  Stop signs are not required by law to be put at railroad crossings, in fact they are not even the default traffic control device.  The voluminous 2009 MUTCD says that the yield sign is the default device at such crossings, and MI law codifies it as   MCL 257.668   which gives state rules for installing a stop or yield sign.  Only Reinberg had a stop sign (after the tracks) before this change was thought up.

Now there's two when you go towards First Street on Reinberg, one before and one after the tracks.  Given the sight lines you have looking up the tracks and First Street when travelling that way, the first sign is superfluous.  I would dare say a single "yield" at the intersection would be what the MUTCD manual would suggest for this area to make it safest.   You are already in a residential 25 mph zone, and the first useless sign may make road-users think the second one is also. 

 

This way also would be better served by a yield sign.  It has gone forever without any sign other than the RR crossing sign, with no accidents.  Now, it provides a new hazard and a total time-waster when you consider traffic coming from both sides of First Street simultaneously arriving at it.  Perhaps, that's why Scottvillians are scratching their head at this.

 

This is the crossing at Columbia Avenue.  Residential speeds, good sight distances down both ways, and two stop signs that are nothing more than nuisances.  How many car/train collisions have we had here recently?   This works only for helping law enforcement traffic ticket quotas, as those who go by here will roll through these babies.

 

 

Bean Street Crossing.  A handful of houses are at the far end of this dead end road.  No train traffic on the southmost tracks for years.  Going south, the usual arguments indicate against a sign.  Going north, a building blocks sight to the west until you get near where the stop sign is.  This would be the best argument for a stop sign, among the ones already discussed, but the MUTCD would likely indicate nothing more than a 'yield'.

 

So you have to stop a lot more around Scottville thanks to the new Chief, pretty much the same as you have to do around Ludington, which is costly and unsafe as was detailed in  unwarranted-stop-signs-are-bad

 

But the August 31, 2011 LDN article called Scottville Citizens, Police Talk , Chief Barnett describes the warrant moving process and how the new set-up will allow more availability for the Scottville police.  It was more illustrative of how much wasted effort had been used in the past in administrative tasks. 

More thrilling was the initiative he plans to enact on Scottville's landlords.  Just like in Ludington, he wishes to fully abrogate the local police's responsibility to monitor the Registered Sex Offenders (RSOs) by having those who rent out their property in school safety zones (SSZ)do the checking on them, just like they've done in Ludington over the last three years.

How's that working out for you?

Well, when I originally checked it out a couple years ago after Chief Barnett declared at a City Council meeting that the RSOs were all moved out of SSZs, we actually had five RSOs therein, and he acknowledged this mistake after we called him out on the Torch.  Three months ago we checked the RSO list and found three new RSOs living in the City's SSZs  Landlords on Patrol

As of now, two of those new ones are still living where they were and a new one has been found in the SSZ:

 

The landlords of Ludington are doing what you might expect as unwilling, deputized police officers.  In Scottville, there appears to be at most 1 RSO in the SSZ at this point, we'll see whether Chief Barnett can keep it that way or less.

[Marty Redman]

I find it hard to believe that these stop signs will make the streets more dangerous.  Be that as it may, I do believe that RSO business is a farce.  Anybody with an internet hook-up and a link to google maps can figure out some of these guys are living too close to schools.  The question is why does the LPD, a force of 15 or more strong, make landlords take the fall for their own avoidance of duty? 

[XLFD]

Marty, contrary to popular belief, ill-placed stop signs do not equate with safety.  My link on "unwarranted stop signs" above do not deal with RR crossings, but this ten-year study that covered RR crossings and the traffic control devices used at them found that stop signs were the worst form of control as far as safety   mass-transit-accidents/surprising-study-reveals-that-stop-signs-mak...

 

A new mystery though has also developed.  Today's newspaper has the MI Dept. of Transportation as the impetus for putting the stop signs up at the RR crossings   9-2-11 LDN, whereas previous editions have said the outgoing chief had thought of this, and I'm pretty sure the incoming chief had his hand on this.  I really don't see the MI DOT forcing a City to put up unneeded stop signs, particularly when it goes against all tenets of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices.  I bet a little digging would find the MI DOT had no such order to put these signs up.