Click image to enlarge
The Planning Board approved new "welcome" signs Thursday, despite some concerns about the design. The image above shows the front and back of a sign.
What do you think? If a sign lasts ten years or so and a mayor's term is four years, should a mayor's name and slogan be on the sign? Are there too many words? Should the City Seal be on it?
The signs are not expected to be placed at gateways to the city until Spring, so if you have any thoughts about the proposed design, let the administration know early on.
--Bernice
The Mayor's campaign slogan should not be on the sign.
ReplyDeleteIf Plainfield is going to have a motto we should have a contest. When they had a contest to pick one for New Jersey, the best entry was "New Jersey - We Don't Need No Stinking Motto."
ReplyDeleteThey are a bit blah. How about gold lettering instead of white? Remove Adrians name from the body. Its not needed. Otherwise we have to update it when he or any other, at some point, may no longer be the mayor. His name could be added as a separate panel above the sponsors name. The slogan stinks too. Put the founding date at the bottom as has been suggested by others. Have any been sponsored yet?
ReplyDeleteTo late, the planning board already approved the sign with the slogan. But I agree it should not be included.
ReplyDeleteRB.
About 2 years ago the Planning Board approved keeping the bump outs on South Ave when the road was to be repaved. The plan was to retain them but scale them back as they served as a vehicle calming device.
DeleteThe vote was 9 to Zero in favor of keeping them.
Well we all know what happened to that unanimous approval by the board . . . .
Actually, I may be wrong here but the city doesn't have to follow planning and zoning rules for themselves do they (i.e. Sharon's sign in front of police station)?
DeleteNo need for mayor's name or slogan; keep the seal. Just be glad Sharon isn't mayor. Her name tended to use the largest size font on any signs she put up. The sign announcing the intersection improvement at Prospect/Park/Ninth comes to mind, for one.
ReplyDeleteThe sign should be about Plainfield. The slogan traps Plainfield into an eternal search for the future and it will negate any present improvement. And if at the next election we elect someone else then the signs will become obsolete and a thing of the past. Not a very good business investment.
ReplyDeleteThese look like they are going to be somewhat expensive, given their size. Why the need for all the extra wording? Can't the sign be a smaller size with: Welcome to Plainfield (Who uses City Of), Est XXXX? The mayors name can be on a plaque below the sign and just above the sponsors name. Visitors don't care what our seal looks like, nor is it really visible when driving by it at 25+ mph. As for the slogan - that is a campaign slogan, nothing wrong with it but it isn't the city motto as far as I have heard. Smaller, simpler equals less expensive which equals easier to get sponsors.
ReplyDeleteOff with the mayor's name. Off with the slogan, and off with Queen City. Replace with Plainfield.
ReplyDeleteIf the mayor's name is left on, will we need to update it every time there is a change? If yes, no need for the expense. I don't see mayors names on any sign that welcomes or thanks people for being in the city.
Going into New York, there was a sign that said, "Fugadebodit" and it had Mayor Bloomberg's name on it . . . (or was it Cuomo?) Anyway. . . it has been approved
ReplyDelete