I guess I'd need to see the signs to really get a good criticism going, because maybe the "Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board" is in small text below the more useful text. But if not, it sounds like they're tooting their own horns at the expense of not mentioning useful data like east/west and Scenic Byway.
Chris Johnson Fulton
Annie Young wrote:
AS you point out, the new signs are appearing thanks to Federal IS-TEA money and our Scenic Byways designation. This Federal Pot of money is the only safe/positive money we have for doing information and marketing of the Scenic Byways (aka the Regional Parks system and the Grand Rounds). And we have been able to keep at least a couple of more jobs because of this Federal money because they have allowed us to make the signs with our own carpenters and painters on staff - no outside contracts.
All of your points may or may not be valid, so will ask staff for an answer to those concerns. But my first response is WHY NOT?
For the moment,
Annie Young
citywide Park Commissioner
At 05:57 PM 6/25/03 -0500, Karen Cooper wrote:
But I have two comments. First, East Minnehaha Parkway and West Minnehaha Parkway are different roads, according to addresses along them. The house numbers count up in each direction from Nicollet and you can find the same house number on East Minnehaha and on West Minnehaha and these will be different places. The old signs told you which you were on, which had to have been helpful. Sure, the street signs are correct, but these decorative parkway signs are less helpful than the old ones. I consider that a mistake.
TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. 2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject (Mpls-specific, of course.)
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
