Solicitações em aberto: 40 Questões Encerradas: 20 Solicitações Reconhecidas: 0
Watching issues created after: 2010-12-31

I am appaled at Norristown period! it should be better handled then it is! i grew up in west norriton and beauty was the middle name! we have to change this ev 1!

Notificado sobre

  • 700 Block Of West Elm Norristown, Pennsylvania - Norristown
    Content blocked by rejections
  • 304 W.Freedley St Norristown, Pennsylvania - Norristown
    my neighbor at 304 W.Freedley st has people that don't fit profile of who lives in the house some days there are a lot of cars that stop and go for no more then 5mins. go inside come out an leave. the lady also has a child ( who lives somewhere else) her father lives in basement when there is company or activity going on Father will leave then come back when they leave, I also have issues with them not keeping property clean grass not being cut, weeds growing in alley, broken storm door and a broken window pane out front this as been like this for awhile now I saw the child clime in the door instead of opening it , and sometimes from the hrs. of 10pm to 3am. the noise ! child screaming banging doors I some times call 911 also lately when the child is over she is unsupervised I have seen her clime onto the hood of a vehicle that was parked also the father started a tomato garden out front the vegitation is out of control help KW.
  • Markeley And Brown Sts. Norristown, Pennsylvania - Norristown
    Is there anything that can be done at this intersection that faces Eisenhower Middle School? A tree or two were planted and some grass seed put down, but this large grassy area is not at all attractive. This street was rebuilt and new trees planted, but this patch really needs some good landscaping.
  • 1416 Markley St. Norristown Pennsylvania - Norristown
    This property has had a black shower curtain at the base of the bushes in the front with panes of glass holding it down. There are also items such as a window pane and building materials along the pathway. This has been this way for many months.
  • 600 Sandy Steet Norristown, Pa - Norristown
    Many drivers are turning onto sandy street and drive down towards Walnut street, to get to the Sandy Hill Terrace apartments building. Sandy street iis an one way street. These drivers do this to save a minute of driving, but one day we will have an acicident because of these careless ldrivers.
  • Sandy St And Tremont Avenue Norristown, PA 19401, USA - Norristown
    drivers traveling up Sandy st to the intersection with Tremont avenue, DO NOT stop at the stop sign. These drivers blow right through it going straight ahead or when making a left hand turn onto Tremont avenue.
    Police won't do anything to assist the tax paying homeowners who live on the 700 block of Sandy street.
  • 1651-1699 Powell St Norristown, PA 19401, USA - Norristown
    Anywhere along Powell or any of the cross streets, or for that matter, parallel streets the stop signs appear to be optional.
  • 100-132 Stanbridge Street Norristown, Pennsylvania - Norristown
    On the 100 block of Stanbridge Street, potholes have become more present then the actual street. The one outside 106-108 is very large and becoming deeper. It was temporarily filled but now has just become a rock deposit. I understand there are many streets needing to be repaved, but I am curious how dangerous the pothole needs to be before something is done?
  • 700 Chain Street Norristown, PA - Norristown
    There are so many pot holes on chain street! They are deep and ruining my car
  • 1034 Dekalb St Norristown, PA - Norristown
    many cars are being hit and left for the owners to pay out of pocket
  • Kohn norristown, 19401 - Norristown


    Bulkmatic is Tops in Quality

    We are proud to report that we have been named as one of the top five bulk carriers in quality in the U.S. by “Logistics Magazine”. “Logistics” surveys over 6,000 logistics and supply chain decision makers each year, and they informed us that we are in the top 5 Quality Bulk Carriers for 2010. We will have to wait until the magazine comes out to see where we rank among the top 5. This is the 10th year of the last 12 years that we have been so named. It is a terrific honor, and we recognize that we have to keep improving for you if we want to continue to be so honored.
    Deadly Diesel Fumes

    Published Feb. 24, 2005

    The deadly effects of breathing diesel fumes came into sharp focus this week when the Clean Air Task Force (CATF) released a report[1] estimating that diesel fumes kill about 21,000 U.S. citizens each year.

    Furthermore, diesel fumes cause 27,000 nonfatal heart attacks and 410,000 asthma attacks in U.S. adults each year, plus roughly 12,000 cases of chronic bronchitis, 15,000 hospital admissions, 2.4 million lost-work days, and 14 million restricted activity days.

    And that is almost certainly not the worst of it. The Clean Air Task Force report cites numerous studies revealing that diesel soot:

    Degrades the immune system (the system that protects us all from bacteria, viruses and cancers);
    Interferes with our hormones, reducing sperm production, masculinizing female rats, altering the development of baby rats (changing their bones, thymus, and nervous systems), modifying their adrenal and reproductive hormones;
    Causes serious, permanent impairment of the nervous system in diesel-exposed railroad workers;
    Induces allergic reactions, not limited to asthma, causing children to miss thousands upon thousands of school-days — a primary cause of school dropout, consequent low self-esteem, and subsequent life- failure.

    The new report is based on the most recent available data from the federal EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) combined with EPA risk models, with calculations carried out by Abt Associates, a consulting firm that frequently performs contract studies for the EPA.[2]

    The key findings of the report should come as no surprise. The dangers of breathing diesel fumes have been known for at least two decades.

    More than 20 years ago, numerous researchers confirmed and reconfirmed that they could cause lung cancer in laboratory animals breathing air laced with diesel fumes.

    To anyone taking a precautionary approach, this confirmed knowledge of diesel's ill effects on animals would have jump-started a search for alternative ways to power on-road and off-road machines, to phase out diesel in an orderly step-wise fashion.

    But the National Academy of Sciences did not take a precautionary approach. The New York Times reported Dec. 23, 1981, that the Academy acknowledged that diesel soot is known to contain suspected cancer- causing substances. But the Academy said, "no convincing epidemiological evidence exists" that there is "a connection between diesel fumes and human cancer." In other words, let's not act on the animal evidence -- let's hunker down and wait until we can line up the dead humans. This is the risk-based approach to public health. It is the opposite of a precautionary approach.

    Twenty years ago, in the spring of 1985, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) issued a scientific report about the dangers of diesel fumes in New York. The New York Times reported May 18, 1985: "Diesel emissions are probably the single most important air-quality threat in New York City today," said Eric A. Goldstein, a lawyer for the environmental group and an author of the report. "But city, state and Federal agencies have not yet mounted a broad-based counterattack."

    The Times reported then that a spokesperson for the New York State Environmental Conservation Department acknowledged that diesel fumes cause lung cancer in humans but, he said, the state was "not yet sure"

    how big the problem was. The state had no plan for dealing with diesel because "we have not identified the extent of the problem," he said.

    This is a classic example of the risk-based approach. Ignore the evidence so long as it is not 100% airtight. Use uncertainty as an excuse to delay. Wait for the dead bodies to pile up, then slowly acknowledge the need for action.

    By 1985, there was no doubt that dead bodies were piling up. But the exact number of corpses remained uncertain, so the risk-based approach allowed "business as usual" to continue.

    From a precautionary perspective, knowing that a technology causes lung cancer, and knowing that hundreds of millions of people are exposed to it, just naturally kicks off a search for less-harmful alternatives. But no one in 1985 was taking a precautionary approach.

    In 1988 the federal government's Robert A. Taft Laboratory in Cincinnati published NIOSH report 88-116, officially confirming that exposure to diesel fumes causes lung cancer in humans.

    At this point the precautionary principle would insist that a search for alternatives begin. Other fuels? Other kinds of engines? Filters for trapping the fumes and soot? Innovative modes of transportation for moving goods and people? Other ways of planning city growth, to reduce reliance on trucks and buses? Electrified steel-rail mass transit? Maglev trains? Hydrogen? Steam? Compressed air? The alternatives are many.

    A precautionary approach would focus attention on eliminating the problem rather than arguing over the exact body count. Is a diesel- free world possible? Working backward from the vision of a diesel-free world, what steps could we be taking today to achieve the vision? That is the essence of a precautionary approach.

    But the risk-based approach serves the purposes of "business as usual," and therefore has the backing of powerful special interests.

  • Noble Street Norristown, PA - Norristown
    How can you report for mini vans and trucks parking on your block when the sign says no truck parking