Date: Fri 13-Dec-1996

By ANDY GOROSKO

Published: Aug 11, 1999 12:00 am

Publication: Bee

Author: ANDYG

Quick Words:

Borough-zoning-revisions

Full Text:

P&Z Endorses Proposed Regulations Changes For The Borough

B Y A NDREW G OROSKO

The Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) has unanimously endorsed the Borough

Zoning Commission's proposed revisions to the borough zoning regulations.

Borough Zoning Commission member Gregory O'Brien summarized the proposed

changes at a December 5 P&Z session.

The last overhaul of the borough zoning rules came in the early 1970s.

Borough zoners have adopted the town's zoning regulations as borough zoning

regulations wherever applicable, Mr O'Brien said. The borough is a

governmental and tax district in central Newtown, which has its own zoning

commission.

The borough zoning rule changes include proposed new rules, revised

regulations and some deleted rules, Mr O'Brien said.

The proposed new borough rules incorporate the various zoning amendments which

have been made since the regulations were last revised.

The proposed new regulations exclude restaurant drive-throughs due to traffic

safety concerns, Mr O'Brien said. The proposed rules also seek to foster

harmonious commercial signs, he added. The proposals prohibit neon signs, he

said. An applicant would need Borough Zoning Board of Appeals approval to

erect an internally-lit commercial sign.

The Borough Zoning Commission also has added references to the Americans With

Disabilities Act to its proposed regulations. The act specifies rules on

providing physically disabled people with access to buildings.

The borough zoning changes would: specify rules on landscaping; more

explicitly define the term "personal services"; and update the zoning

application fee schedule to bring it into conformity with the P&Z's fee

schedule.

Mr O'Brien said the borough zoners' proposed rules eliminate the bulk storage

of paint and tobacco as permitted land uses.

Also, the proposed rules delete a provision which allows an applicant to use

the more liberal of two sets of zone rules when the applicant's property lies

within two different land use zones.

The regulation change proposal: modifies the definition of the "minimum

square" for lot planning purposes; alters the list of permitted land uses;

changes building setback distances and lot coverage requirements for new

construction; changes the rules on commercial signs; alters parking

requirements for non-residential land uses; changes buffering requirements;

alters the separating distances among alcoholic beverage outlets; provides for

interior building lots; modifies the requirements for the reconstruction of

non-conforming buildings after damage or destruction; and makes various

technical revisions, among other changes.

James Gaston of Main Street, a borough burgess, told P&Z members "The Borough

Zoning Commission has done a great job" in revising the regulations. Mr Gaston

said he supports the revisions because the changes seek to protect the

borough's character.

P&Z Chairman John DeFilippe told Mr O'Brien "You did a fine job."

Similarly, P&Z member Thomas Paisley complimented the borough zoners for their

efforts.

The Borough Zoning Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing on its

proposed revisions to the regulations on Wednesday, December 18, at 7:30 pm at

Town Hall South.

Next HRRA Household Hazardous Waste Drop-Off Event Scheduled In Newtown

Genealogy Club's Next Program To Dig Into 'Dissecting A Civil War Pension Record'

Choral Society Planning ‘Voices Of America’ Performance

Newtown Earth Day Festival Was A Success

Local Fourth Grader To Host ‘Gaming For Change’ On May 16

The editorial took no position on the budget going up or down so you're reading things into the editorial that simply aren't there. The turnout is tied to the lack of passage, in that people who came out to vote last time did not this time, indicating a lack of support on their part. Perhaps it wasn't spelled out clearly enough, but that's what the editorial was driving at, people showing lack of support by not casting a vote. The editorial did address likely concerns among voters that may have led to lack of support and lack of turnout. This lower turnout also follows increasing turnout over the past four referendums in three years (meaning it is an aberration from that), and increased turnout is something that I do push for regularly in editorials. Any disappointment you might be seeing is at the break in that trend, not at whether the budget passed or not. I'd rather see more people come out and vote "no" then not vote at all.

Lower Turnout Results In Two Budget Defeats

Clearly, property owners no longer want to bear the burden of expenses while the state does not meet it’s responsibilities. Rising costs must be addressed by actions that do not include yearly increases of property owners’ taxes. The state of CT must meet its share of the educational costs, and other costs.

Town And School Budgets Fail At Referendum

This feels like an oddly misleading headline and narrative, particularly coming from the Editorial Board. The headline "Lower Turnout Results in Two Budget Defeats" pushes a misleading narrative regarding voter turnout, and then seeks to tie the outcome of the referendum to that misleading narrative. Sure, voter turn out for this year's referendum, 18%, was lower than last year's. However, last year's turnout, 25.4%, represented the highest turnout in the most recent 10 budget referendums. If you take the time to examine turnout percentages between 2017 and 2026 (2017: 19.9, 2018: 15.7, 2019: 17, 2020: 0, 2021: 8.98, 2022: 7.7, 2023: 8.8, 2024: 15.1/17.49, 2025: 25.4, 2026: 18), this year's turnout was actually the third highest in the past 10 cycles. Perhaps the headline of this article should say "Lower Voter Turnout Than Last Year", which is more accurate, rather than creating an impression that this year's turnout is some type of aberration - a narrative that the turnout numbers, in all their binary glory, simply do not support. Further, the headline of this article appears to tie the "lower turnout" to the defeated budgets. Sure, that could be true. But, perhaps, its more likely that Newtown residents are feeling the squeeze of multiple economic influences. In Newtown, we've experienced property revaluations and increased municipal spending. Eversource continues to raise rates. The state legislature gives PURA the authority to impose Public Benefit charges that benefit a tiny percentage of the public (and subsequently burdening the rest of us). At the national level, inflation has run rampant for years and many of those costs remain high to this day. In short, the data tells a far less dramatic—and far more honest—story than the headline suggests. This wasn’t an electorate vanishing in apathy; it was a fairly typical turnout delivering an verdict that, perhaps, some at the Editorial Board didn't like. At some point, it’s worth considering that residents aren’t confused, disengaged, or misled by turnout; they’re simply doing math at their kitchen tables and concluding that “no” is the only responsible answer left.

Enjoyed the forum which only confirmed my support for Brandon Moore as the Democratic candidate to run for the state representative position. Brandon Moore did not waiver about his duty to all the people, if elected, when an issue presents itself that requires that he voice a difference of opinion for the wellbeing of Newtown residents. If Michelle Ku’s 16 years have led to her loyalty being to other elected officials, as she implied, then Newtown is going to continue to witness actions that do not protect its residents. She could not unseat republican, Mitch Bolinsky, during a Blue Wave, and once again, will not do it now. Winning that seat is critical for all. That explains why her previous campaign committee now campaigns for Brandon Moore. It explains all the endorsements he has received from local elected democratic officials. It’s why we need Brandon Moore to be the democratic candidate to run for state representative.

Second Newtown DTC, League Of Women Voters Candidates Event Planned

Appreciated the opportunity to hear from both candidates as we were present for the College Dems forum but only heard from Brandon Moore. It was an opportunity to see who can unseat the Republican incumbent and there is no doubt that Brandon Moore should be the Democratic candidate. One concerned parent posed a question about discrimination unaddressed by the school district and interestingly enough, Michelle Ku, who proudly speaks of her Board membership years, said little, while Brandon Moore passionately addressed the issue along with his experience as an Apache Helicopter Commander. This family is supporting Brandon Moore. We need change and someone who is not afraid to disagree, especially about the rising costs of living in Newtown.

Log In

Date: Fri 13-Dec-1996

Leave a Reply Cancel reply