Frost Law Rip Off

The city posted the following information on it’s website in an attempt to inform of the 2015 Seasonal
Frost Law.

• Start Date – March 13, 2015 AT 7:00AM.
• City Ordinance 514 Sec. 21‐211 (E)
• Schafer, Rialto, Seaway Drive and Francis.

The city’s’ posting failed to comply with the requirements of 257.722 (8)(b), which stated that the
following must be posted: The names of the highways and streets and portions of highways and streets
to which the seasonal restrictions apply.

The city did not post the applicable portions of the roadways.

MCL 257.726 (2), clearly states: Any prohibitions, limitations, or truck route designations established
under subsection (1) shall be designated by appropriate signs placed on the highways or streets. The
design and placement of the signs shall be consistent with the requirements of section 608.

The City of Melvindale did not comply with MCL 257.726 (2).

1. Officer Slaughter erroneously believes that signage is not required.
2. This belief is not based on any rule or law.
3. The signs placed by the city do not conform to requirements of section 608.
4. Section 608 references and obligates the state to: adopt a manual and specifications for a uniform system of traffic‐control devices (The MMUTCD)
5.  The City of Melvindale adopts the UTC in Ordinance 21‐186.
6. MMUTCD Section 1A.07(04) states: Traffic control devices placed and maintained by the State County, City or other local officials are required by Michigan Law to conform to this Manual. Also, this Manual is required by Michigan Law to be in substantial conformance to the National Manual. 23 CFR 655.603 also states that traffic control devices on all streets and highways open to public travel in each State shall be in substantial conformance with standards issued or endorsed by the Federal Highway Administrator
7. MMUTCD Section 1A.04 states: Placement of a traffic control device should be within the road user’s view so that adequate visibility is provided. To aid in conveying the proper meaning, the traffic control device should be appropriately positioned with respect to the location, object, or situation to which it applies. The location and legibility of the traffic control device should be such that a road user has adequate time to make the proper response in both day and nightconditions.
8. MMUTCD Section 5B.04(02) If used, signs for traffic prohibitions or restrictions shall be placed in advance of the prohibition or restriction so that traffic can use an alternate route or turn around.
9. MMUTCD Section 5B.04(03) states: Signs should be used on low‐volume roads to indicate traffic prohibitions and restrictions such as road closures and weight restrictions.
10. Section 1A.06 Uniformity of Traffic Control Devices: (01) Uniformity of devices simplifies the task of the road user because it aids in recognition and understanding, thereby reducing perception/reaction time. Uniformity assists road users, law enforcement officers, and traffic courts by giving everyone the same interpretation. Uniformity assists public highway officials through efficiency in manufacture, installation, maintenance, and administration. Uniformity means treating similar situations in a similar way. The use of uniform traffic control devices does not, in itself, constitute uniformity. A standard device used where it is not appropriate is as objectionable as a non‐standard device; in fact, this might be worse, because such misuse might result in disrespect at those locations where the device is needed and appropriate.