The Observation Deck

Re-reading my post it sounds as though I am advocating CSU buying the stops... as a former student I do not and agree it's not a good investment. Students will find the stops! I was really saying it was sold pretty cheap for the number of bus stops and traffic along Clifton every day.

You are right that there was a vote ... CSU students passed it, TriC students voted it down, thus one gets it and one does not.

Pssssssssssssssst,

Pssssssssssssssst

Ahemmmmm...

While we were talking, and the Mayor was reportedly getting upset, and a senior member of
council was wondering how it all happened, RTA was busy putting up more signs, a lot more
signs, so many signs, it has to be a cruel joke on Lakewood City Hall and rubbing it in the face
of Lakewoodites. I get upset when residents are wronged, but to make our City Leaders look
impotent and without any control in the city "they run!"

Introducing RTA WayFinding, as needed as other Lakewood Way Finding.



They are being worked in perfectly with both bus shelters and stops.

The easiest way to see the 2 new RTA 55 B and C Route signs at each stop...



Just look behind the two signs for RTA 55 F!!!!

Tell me there are not calling Lakewood out on this?

.

Jim,

I would like to see some signs that provide information/direction for the RTA W. 117 - Madison Highland Rapid Station.

Just saying.

Scott

Jim O'Bryan wrote:Pssssssssssssssst,

Pssssssssssssssst

Ahemmmmm...

While we were talking, and the Mayor was reportedly getting upset, and a senior member of
council was wondering how it all happened, RTA was busy putting up more signs, a lot more
signs, so many signs, it has to be a cruel joke on Lakewood City Hall and rubbing it in the face
of Lakewoodites. I get upset when residents are wronged, but to make our City Leaders look
impotent and without any control in the city "they run!"

Introducing RTA WayFinding, as needed as other Lakewood Way Finding.



They are being worked in perfectly with both bus shelters and stops.

The easiest way to see the 2 new RTA 55 B and C Route signs at each stop...



Just look behind the two signs for RTA 55 F!!!!

Tell me there are not calling Lakewood out on this?

.

Board of Trustees:
http://www.riderta.com/board

Those signs are typical of public transportation signage around the world. Signs like them have helped me find my way in many countries where I didn't know more than a few words of the local language. They are a great improvement. I think I read that RTA plans to add electronic signs that pick up the buses current location and displays the time at which it will arrive at the stop. That too is a useful thing.

I think it is far from certain that the CSU money paid for naming the route came from the students, or ever will come from the students. CSU, like any state school, gets a lot of money from the state. But if anyone has the facts, I'm open to looking at them.

I drive down Euclid often, and, at least from East 55 to University Circle, it is a thriving neighborhood and a pleasant drive. Perhaps I'll start taking a bus; they look clean and comfortable, and I can afford the 25 cents.

I don't know that I have ever seen a bus line with wayfinding signs. Subways/rail, yes, but buses ... don't think so. Wouldn't it be better to place it somewhere inside the shelter, so riders could see it in comfort, and without the possibility of obstruction from snow? Anyway, that is a mess of uncoordinated signage.

Paul Schrimpf wrote:I don't know that I have ever seen a bus line with wayfinding signs. Subways/rail, yes, but buses ... don't think so. Wouldn't it be better to place it somewhere inside the shelter, so riders could see it in comfort, and without the possibility of obstruction from snow? Anyway, that is a mess of uncoordinated signage.

Paul,

They used to be inside the bus doors, at it is a tad hard to read the signs while driving by, 72 point
type at 35 mph becomes very problematic. But in this day and age...

As both Will Brown and Val Molinski love the new signage, or possibly just taking the anti-O'Bryan view
which would follow their history, I took a drive to find out that yes, RTA uses the signs in other locations
but not many.


Although at some point one might start to wonder why they place so much clutter at interesections
when drivers need to see other cars and pedestrians.


It also occurred to me that RTA does not care what signs they block. Kind of like Lakewood and
wayfindng . Throwing up signs that point people to the committee's favorite spot, not most used
facilities. Example 2 signs showing us how to get to St. Eds, none pointing out School Board, LHS,
LHS Auditorium or Stadium. Of course no one on the committee had any children in public schools.
But I digress, they are hung in from to business signs and traffic signs so that it just becomes a
total mess. Campbells hangs big sign, "illegally" it gets blocked by new poles, goes to awnings signs
also not in the rules, and those are soon blocked. Madness.


But compared to how RTA does most of their signage, maybe we got off lucky!

City can't, RTA won't, yet another indication that this city needs something that represents people,
residents, and quality of life. Cause City Hall just doesn't care about quality of life for residents.

,

Drivers don't need to see the signs, right?

Going down Clifton, my 21 year old daughter says to me, unprompted, "what's with all the signs? This is ridiculous. You should post something on the Deck!"

Please, someone in City Hall take an objective view of the signs. It's literally like we gave RTA right of way.

Paul Schrimpf wrote:Drivers don't need to see the signs, right?

Going down Clifton, my 21 year old daughter says to me, unprompted, "what's with all the signs? This is ridiculous. You should post something on the Deck!"

Please, someone in City Hall take an objective view of the signs. It's literally like we gave RTA right of way.

Paul

Word out of City Hall not happy, not sure what to do.

I believe we set the tone for these conversations years ago. When we folded on other RTA issues so quickly.

After reading...
"You have just touched on a big problem in this city and on this particular website. Revisionist History! When the discussions were occurring, it was all "how dare the city let RTA change Clifton!" Now today it is "why didnt the city fight hard enough to get all of these goodies from RTA?" I digress..."

Well yes, everyone suffers from revisionist history. I winder what the enhancements were really.
Others did mention access. I also saw a note from Fire Chief Scott Gillman wondering aloud about
getting fire trucks down Clifton, and fighting fires on Clifton. And some just loving the idea! Of
course no one really knew what it was going to be.

It is my recollection that it was not Lakewood saying no, as much as the "tunnel" on the Shoreway
needing an extra $8 Million dollars, that ended the dream. I could be wrong, but I think that was the
death of Clifton "Enhancement" in Lakewood.

However did anyone see mentioned, "If we do not give 1.5 lanes to trees, we have to give 2 lanes
to RTA? Cleveland has no "bus lane," River has no "bus lane" just 2.9 miles of the 3,3 miles of Clifton
in Lakewood.

I am willing to bet, had RTA mentioned to Mayor Summers, Dru Siley, Joe Beno, or even council,
Well we decided to trash you town instead, putting up wall of signs, even they would have said,
WTF? Well Dru might have asked what 5 gallons of beer they were going to brew this year. I kid.

While talking with a senior member of city council last week who will remain nameless mentioned,
that she thought (yes I know) they would only be up for a year or two to "train us"
into the new traffic patterns. No comment on the new advertising that had been not allowed for
since Anthony Sinagra said, "NO MORE!"

Off the record, the mayor doesn't like it, council doesn't like it, police and fire do not like it, and we
have only found 2 residents Will and Val, that like it enough to at least wait and see how many more
signs will be going up before they make their final decision. Bill doesn't like the trees in Cleveland,
what I don;t like is RTA ghettoizing* Lakewood, while working to make surrounding communities better.

* Ghettoizing - my definition, anything I don't like that I perceive as bringing down the value
of entire neighborhoods. Not based on race or religion, but large assaults on a community that
can affect quality of life in the area.

Perhaps I should, but I don't have a gripe really with the new shelters or the shelter related signage. Although it seems odd to only have them on one side of the street.

And frankly, I'd like to know what variety of salt-tolerant trees they've planted so I can get some myself. I really don't want the planter boxes on this side of 117. Just ditch the signs. A Sawzall and a couple hours fixes everything. Do we not have ultimate sign jurisdiction in our own city?

Paul Schrimpf wrote:Perhaps I should, but I don't have a gripe really with the new shelters or the shelter related signage. Although it seems odd to only have them on one side of the street.

And frankly, I'd like to know what variety of salt-tolerant trees they've planted so I can get some myself. I really don't want the planter boxes on this side of 117. Just ditch the signs. A Sawzall and a couple hours fixes everything. Do we not have ultimate sign jurisdiction in our own city?

I believe, because it is a State Route it gets tricky, though not impossible. When Madeline Cain was
at the state level Ohio, and she agreed, wanted to put an 8' high small link, black chain around the
canyon. It was pointed out for "safety reasons" and she was not bending. Also out of that meeting
was, besides, their is "nothing to see on Riverside Drive!"

Well the residents banded together from all over the city, and we had them stop it. Of course we were
also promised a river rock veneer on the front of the concrete wall by State Rep Cain, that was soon
forgotten when she became Mayor, that the state still owes Lakewood. The residents had said behind
the scenes "we will cut down anything they put up," but it never came to that.

.

Jim,

I know how you like to put words in people's mouths that they did not say and love to attribute comments to folks erroneously and pass it off as fact... so I definitely do not think I am immune to that treatment as well. Did your 'sources' tell you that I said I liked the signage? I don't recall saying that once in this thread or anywhere.

Valerie Molinski wrote:Jim,

I know how you like to put words in people's mouths that they did not say and love to attribute comments to folks erroneously and pass it off as fact... so I definitely do not think I am immune to that treatment as well. Did your 'sources' tell you that I said I liked the signage? I don't recall saying that once in this thread or anywhere.

Actually, you were the one "I am witholding judgment on the medians and plantings in Cleveland."
which I did misread, so used the full quote here. I was thinking you were talking of the entire
Clifton "Enhancement" Project. As you were recounting that people on the Deck change their minds.

So that means only Will Brown sees the signs as a plus? Or do we all think it is just hideous and abusive?

.

I did say I like the new signs; I did not say I was waiting for all the signs to go up before making a decision. I would hope that everywhere you can catch a bus, you will find fully informative signs.

In one of your clearer paragraphs, you said that, off the record, the mayor doesn't like it (it apparently being the new signs) and since you said that, it must be true. You said council doesn't like it, and since you said that, it must be true. You said police and fire do not like it, and since you said that it must be true. You said that two residents like it, and since you said that it must be true.

But no one has actually heard from the mayor, the council, and police and fire. And the two residents seem to say that what you said about their statements was not true.

There's a reason the word Blarney came to be part of our language as reflecting a lack of credibility.

Will Brown wrote:I did say I like the new signs; I did not say I was waiting for all the signs to go up before making a decision. I would hope that everywhere you can catch a bus, you will find fully informative signs.

In one of your clearer paragraphs, you said that, off the record, the mayor doesn't like it (it apparently being the new signs) and since you said that, it must be true. You said council doesn't like it, and since you said that, it must be true. You said police and fire do not like it, and since you said that it must be true. You said that two residents like it, and since you said that it must be true.

But no one has actually heard from the mayor, the council, and police and fire. And the two residents seem to say that what you said about their statements was not true.

There's a reason the word Blarney came to be part of our language as reflecting a lack of credibility.

Will

You can take what I post anyway you want to. I have not spoken with the mayor on this, but I have
spoken with members of council, and people at City Hall. What I post matters little to you anyway.

If you talked with 5 members of city council and they all claimed they were upset, what should I say
Will? If you talked with two people that had just left the Mayor's office and they said, "The Mayor is
not pleased over the signs." I said the sign thread? they "no the amount of signs." If the City
Council President says to you, "I think they will only be up for a year or two, to train us." Do I just
go back to my house and say, oh my oh my oh my, or do I place it out there for discussion? You
know, the discussion we have been having for over 12 years now. You know the ones where anyone
can place in it what they want. Should I have called them LIARS, and tell them your blarney bit?
Should I have checked each one, even the ones I was sitting with to make sure they were
not robots from the Czech Republic? Or do I bring it back here, throw it in the "mosh pit of
word jazz?"

People can go back and read both of the "residents'" comments, and other comments over the
course more than a decade so they can decide for themselves if "The Deck" changes it opinion? Or
who is wrong on wild comments. Or even if people who speak, have changed their stance and take
from it what they wish. Between here and on FB, it would seem you two residents are the only ones
so outspoken as to defend the project in even the smallest way. Excuse me for finding that amusing
enough to point out.

Of course if you think council and the mayor love the signs, or are even unmoved by them, then
why on earth did they crack down on residents giving them one garage sale, and one sign for
that sale not to be larger than 18" x 24"? A lack of consistency on their part? Business over people?
A general lack of respect for residents living on Clifton or near any business district? A sleep at the
switch? All reason for conversation, which is what we were having. Perhaps they wanted to keep the
garage sign cluttter down for RTA, and there was actually some planning at City Hall? Naaaaaahhhhhhhh.

.