stop sign question

I am calling this question the "Stop Sign Question".

City has to have on the property that is maintained by the city a dirt ring around the stop signs due to replace issues. Issues like not hitting underground water, gas and power lines. Also when the sign needs to be replaced it is easier to find the spot. So toxic gick is used. What is the permaculture answer to this problem? Answers need to keep in mind that upkeep is an issue, cost needs to be low and must be better than toxic gick.

Would a thick layer of wood chips be acceptable?

Are you saying there's a blast zone around the base of the signs, where they use herbicide to keep the spot marked and bare? I think I know what you mean. Where I live, the power company does that around their poles; I have one right next to my garden. They sprayed once, so I blanketed a 20' radius with woodchips and they haven't bothered it again (yet).

Imagine if the city (or power company) was doing their annual tree trimming, and spreading the chips at stop signs as they go, instead of taking the whole truckload of resulting chips miles away for disposal. That sounds like stacking functions to me!

Another permie solution: In my region, if I wanted to mark a spot permanently I'd plant comfrey there. Ha! Bocking 14 of course. It would only get stronger each time they dig a hole to replace the sign. A less potent biological marker could be a dense ring of Echinacea, Black Eyed Susan, or similar clumping perennials. Self-regenerating infrastructure.

Some cities are using steam or flame tools to replace herbicide. I think this makes sense along city sidewalks, where the worker is trading one backpack sprayer (herbicide) for another slightly more complicated backpack sprayer (e.g. water+fuel=steam). Not a perfect solution, but feels like an easy transition for bureaucrats to implement.

However, if we're talking about stop signs scattered all over town, these folks might just be driving around with a handheld bottle of herbicide. We'd have to match that for portability.

Pseudo-toxic-gick compromise: A thick ring of recycled rubber is sometimes used to make fake mulch rings around trees. I've seen cities use ones that resemble wood chips. Any city worker can carry a stack in their truck, go wedge them around sign posts, no training required. It's toxic gick, but one application will last years and they can be picked up, moved, reapplied, just like traffic cones.

I ran into that situation once regarding light poles. The organization I was with volunteered to maintain the spot around the light poles that ran along their property.   The idea was not presented as an ecology concern but rather one of being civic minded.

I imagine that permaculture would ask how to stop the signs needing replacing so often.   Less than 20 years seems short.  If cars damage the sign, then redesigning the intersection might be needed.

Or a roundabout.

I like the wood chips suggestions.

I don't know how or what is done nowadays though when we lived in the big city, I never saw much maintenance in the residential areas except by the homeowner.

One homeowner planted a shrub that I had to call the city about as this made it hard to see ongoing traffic.

Where are the problems causing the stop sign question?

John F Dean wrote:the organization I was with volunteered to maintain the spot around the light poles

When I called the power company, I couldn't get anyone on the phone who had even heard of the "vegetation management" described on their website. It was very frustrating.

r ranson wrote:how to stop the signs needing replacing so often

Yeah! Sounds like another reason to switch to bikes. I doubt most cyclists could plow down a stop sign. :)

Are the signs really replaced so frequently that the city is routinely patrolling every single one? Maybe they have additional reasons, like my power company; they don't want to risk vines or tall vegetation obscuring the sign. If the team mowing the area is using those big highway mowers, maybe the dirt patch gives them adequate clearance and keeps them from hopping out with a string trimmer at each signpost. Now I'm thinking the woodchips or rubber pad would get chewed up by passing mowers.

Mike Barkley wrote:Would a thick layer of wood chips be acceptable?

Short answer no. It would interfere with replacement.

Aaron Pate wrote:Are you saying there's a blast zone around the base of the signs, where they use herbicide to keep the spot marked and bare?

Yes

Aaron Pate wrote:Another permie solution: In my region, if I wanted to mark a spot permanently I'd plant comfrey there. Ha! Bocking 14 of course. It would only get stronger each time they dig a hole to replace the sign. A less potent biological marker could be a dense ring of Echinacea, Black Eyed Susan, or similar clumping perennials. Self-regenerating infrastructure.

I like that idea. I would like to try that out.

Aaron Pate wrote:Some cities are using steam or flame tools to replace herbicide.

Yes, fire good! I have one and it is a great tool. One issue I have is when it is dry or if there is a burn ban. Another issue is around wood posts. In my area wood is used on the highway stop signs.

Aaron Pate wrote:Pseudo-toxic-gick compromise: A thick ring of recycled rubber is sometimes used to make fake mulch rings around trees.

I think people may not like that look but who knows.

r ranson wrote:I imagine that permaculture would ask how to stop the signs needing replacing so often.   Less than 20 years seems short.  If cars damage the sign, then redesigning the intersection might be needed.
Or a roundabout.

I think street signs are designed so if a car was to hit it, would break and not cause damage to a car. I need to check on this just to be sure. Also weather can damage a sign and ground movement can cause a sign to move too. No on the roundabouts I do not like them at all!

Aaron Pate wrote:Now I'm thinking the woodchips or rubber pad would get chewed up by passing mowers.

Good point!

I do think a bunch of this comes down to costs and controlling sight lines, almost as much as replacement issues. Our verges need to be mowed to both keep the sight lines intact and to help drivers more easily see deer. The Municipality doesn't mow more than they have to and the mower they use is on a boom so they can do some pretty cool things with it, including going around fairly close, but not taking out our many signs and markers. I'm pretty sure they send around a guy on foot with a whipper-snipper periodically also. Pesticides are frowned upon, so I don't see any evidence of them being used.

However, even Gov't offices sometimes respond to problems with intelligent replacement ideas! Most of our newer signs now use this nifty square pipe with holes in it. I comes in two sizes. The larger size gets planted in the ground, and unless the ground shifts, it's good for decades. The smaller pipe slides nicely inside and although it's strong enough to cope with wind etc, if something hits it, it either bends or breaks off, rather than damaging the larger permanent pipe. So they come along, unbolt the bottom, salvage the sign itself it it wasn't pretzeled, put in a new small pipe, and all is well. It makes repairs after an ice storm when they have lord knows how many needing repair, much faster than if they have to dig out a wood base and replace. Since not all the signs are the same height, I suspect that if a tall one is damaged, they chop out any straight parts to use for the short signs.

So as much as I'm generally in favor of biodegradable, this simple tech seems to be working really well here on the Wet Coast!