Signs - The "All Opinions are Welcome, but Sorry no Instigators" Board

BR · Status: Offline

RE: Signs

rockres23yrs · Status: Offline

I also noticed that the signs are back. If they're posted on CC property I suppose that's fine. If they're posted on public property then presumably, they're posted their illegally. If that's the case is CC littering and do citizens have the right to remove litter from public property? Does anyone know? Any attorneys out there?

Rational · Status: Offline

Quoting BR:

"Perhaps it should be part of Ratology's ministry to find an alternate use for that land that will actually benefit residents."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would be an advocate for cleaning up the toxic mess there first and then converting the property into a community center for the citizens of RT. Perhaps, it could be a multiple - use property including the town garage and re-cycling center, the library annex, board of education, etc. I envision putting in some indoor and outdoor sports facilities for both our kids and the adults. It could also house meeting rooms and facilities for our senior citizens.

There are a myriad of possibilities that infinitely exceed the usefulness of the present situation there.

Rat

ps - I do not know why the signs are back. The folks at town hall are sick and tired of my petitions. They all know me now. It started with the electrical sub-code violations, and then extened to the formal request for a new township ordinance, and then this situation. They really do not like being bothered, probably because most of the staff there do not live in RT, and thus they really do not care about it.

ChuckMueller · Status: Offline

Dont give up Rev. Rat. This Twp has never done anything for anyone unless forced to do so or unless it makes them $. Too bad if they get tired of hearing about it. Yes, it was always my understanding that all of the property from the stream to the road is Twp. and that the property owner only has an access right of way with the driveway and the courtesy of having a sign like the previous owners. Maybe we just have to go ahead and put up our own signs to force the issue.

That also brings to mind the traffic light plans, assumably using a combo of county right of way from the road and Twp land. Regardless of whether the circus plans include the idea of a traffic light or not, wouldnt the county/twp have to secure DEP permits/exceptions of their own for any kind of construction that close to a C1 waterway? C.

Rational · Status: Offline

Quoting Chuck:

" - - - wouldnt the county/twp have to secure DEP permits/exceptions of their own for any kind of construction that close to a C1 waterway?"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I do not know the legal minutae concerning this. I do know and have seen and have posted verbatim a transcript of the C1 waterway dispensation that was given to cc. I have not only seen that document but own a copy of it and published it here some time back.

So, the precise question probably is "does the cc C1 Stream dispensation provide the legal cover required for the township and/or the county to widen that roadway and encroach the stream?"