If Union Savings was looking for a challenge last week, it found one in the undefeated Ricci's Salon. But Union Savings met that challenge and with an 8-1 win over Ricci's captured the Babe Ruth Softball League U10 Division championship.

By KIM HARMON

Published: Jun 24, 2002 12:00 am

If Union Savings was looking for a challenge last week, it found one in the undefeated Ricciâs Salon. But Union Savings met that challenge and with an 8-1 win over Ricciâs captured the Babe Ruth Softball League U10 Division championship.

Kate Bowen banged out a pair of hits while Ally Modzelewski, Ashley Soucar, Krista Brassard, Danielle Rubino, Cristin Carlin and Erin Fish collected one hit apiece to power the offense. In the field, Emma Kelly-Knickerbocker made two outstanding catches at second space to spark the defense.

On the rubber, Bowen whiffed 11 batters in four innings out work while Brassard whiffed four in two innings of work to lead Union Savings to its 11th win of the season against just two defeats.

Ricciâs might have lost the championship game, but it had an outstanding season nevertheless, finishing up 9-1-1. In the game, Elissa Robertson and Anne Marie Davis both collected doubles while Robertson also added a fine pitching performance.

U12 Nationals

My Place Pizza 15

Lakeshore Deli 11

Jen Legros went 2-for-2 and Jen Blauvelt went 2-for-3 to lead My Place Pizza to a tough win over Lakeshore Deli in the championship game of the Babe Ruth Softball U12 National League championship.

Nicole Beatty, Renee Solheim and Katie Caulfield played a strong defensive game for My Place while Legros was solid on the pitching rubber, whiffing 11 batters in four innings of work while walking four and allowing just three hits.

Sarah Greenfield sparked the Lakeshore effort by banging out a single and a triple. Jaclyn Van Waalwijk and Mariele Renna both played very well.

Clarity on Reservoir Road and the Rochambeau Trail

Who is Calling Newtowners Stupid?

Gratitude For Pickleball Support

Replies To Pisani

Superman Woke?

Thank you for pointing out the trail access provisions included in the BOS motion—it’s an important clarification that deserves more attention in this conversation. If the development is, in fact, required to provide permanent free public access and commit to ongoing maintenance of this section of the Rochambeau Trail, that is a remarkably beneficial outcome for the town. oIt’s not every day that a private project shoulders the long-term burden of preserving and caring for a public historical corridor at no taxpayer cost—especially one that previously had no formal access, upkeep, or visibility. Let’s be honest: the idea that the only way to protect history is by preventing any development nearby is a rigid and unworkable standard. What’s being proposed here appears to strike a rare balance—historic preservation, public access, and smart development all rolled into one. That’s not a loss its a win. So rather than allowing a handful of voices to derail progress under the banner of “historic purity,” maybe it’s time to acknowledge the reality: this trail is better off with structured stewardship and visibility than remaining an overgrown ghost on old maps. Let’s move forward. Bring in the easement, bring in the public access—and yes, bring in the bulldozers!!! Progress and preservation can coexist. Let’s not let the NIMBY use fear or nostalgia keep us stuck in the past.

Discusses Rochambeau Trail And 6 Commerce Road

I've heard that several people are under the impression that the public might be banned from the Rochambeau Trail. Points 2 and 3 from the BOS motion (included in full below) make it clear that public access to the trail is part of the requirements for the developer. From what I understand, it requires free public access to the trail in perpetuity. Technically, this could be argued to be a "payment-in-kind," that attempts to balance public good with overall town growth. We can argue about weather that balance is acceptable and how the trail may be affected, but with the understanding that the trail is expected to be maintained as a publicly accessible trail regardless. July 15, 2024 Board of Selectmen approved motion: Discontinuance of Reservoir Road: Selectman Cruson moved the resolution: Resolved, that the Newtown Board of Selectmen, in accordance with Section 2-115(d)(8) of the Town Charter and Conn. Gen. Stat. §13a-49, and subject to the conditions set forth below, hereby discontinues an unimproved portion of Reservoir Road described as “Portion of Reservoir Road to be Discontinued “on that certain survey map which will be recorded on the Newtown Land Records titled “Map Showing Portion of Reservoir Road to be Discontinued” dated August, 2023 and revised September 15, 2023, and certified substantially correct by Gregory Szyszowski of SLR (the “Survey Map”), said discontinuance contingent and effective only upon the completion of the following: 1. The approval of an application for the development of land in the manner described in a letter from Attorney Thomas W. Beecher to First Selectman A. Jeffrey Capeci and Members of the Board of Selectmen dated May 30, 2024, pursuant to the “Residential Open Space Development” regulations of the Borough of Newtown by the Borough of Newtown Zoning Commission, and construction of that approval project within the timeframes required for special exception approval; 2. The inclusion of the discontinued portion of the road as part of the final Declaration of Conservation Restriction; 3. The conveyance of a mutually agreeable public easement to the Town of Newtown for pedestrian, bicycling, equestrian, and all other passive recreational uses (to exclude the use of motorized vehicles except as may be necessary by the Town or its designee to effectuate the purpose of the easement), and for municipal utility purposes; Be it further resolved, that Castle Hill Real Estate Holdings, LLC., its successors and assigns, shall not use any portion of the discontinued road as a vehicular road or access way to and from any developed portions of the property. Be it further finally resolved, that should any of the foregoing contingencies not occur, then the discontinuance contemplated herein shall not become effective and this resolution will become null and void. From: https://www.newtown-ct.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif12216/f/minutes/bos_7-15-24_min-_att_final.pdf

Is this paper road (roads that only exist on paper map but not in reality) even owned by the Town? Many roads that predate the Town's road standards are privately owned and were never accepted by the Town, such as many of the nonconforming roads around the lake communities where the property owners own right to the center line. That is something we had to deal with when working on the Roads Ordinance a few years back. We also had to deal with a private road to run the utilities to the new SHS.

For anyone who wants to know, I cant post a link here, but Housatonic Resources Recovery Authority has an entire website. Look up "HRRA whats in whats out"

I Get It!

PLEASE NOTE that the Panacea Reunion on August 31st is not "AN ALL CLASS Reunion." This event has been hosted by members of Panacea band for the past 12 years as a town-wide event, and all from Newtown are invited to attend. Any Newtown High School classes are welcome to meet and organize their own gatherings, too.

NHS Class Of 1975 50-Year Reunion Celebration Planned For Labor Day Weekend

<< Jul 2025 >>
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
29	30	1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31	1	2

Log In

If Union Savings was looking for a challenge last week, it found one in the undefeated Ricci's Salon. But Union Savings met that challenge and with an 8-1 win over Ricci's captured the Babe Ruth Softball League U10 Division championship.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply