Date: Fri 13-Dec-1996

By ANDY GOROSKO

Published: Aug 11, 1999 12:00 am

Publication: Bee

Author: ANDYG

Quick Words:

P&Z-zone-change-Hawleyville

Full Text:

Hearing Set On Zone Change For Hawleyville

B Y A NDREW G OROSKO

A public hearing is scheduled for December 19 on the North Newtown Homeowners

Association's proposal for a change of zone for approximately 175 acres in

Hawleyville. The association hopes the move will prevent that land from being

put to uses that its membership considers undesirable.

The hearing is slated for 8 pm at Newtown Middle School auditorium.

The association is seeking a change of zone from R-2 (Farming/Residential) to

P-1 (Professional) for land bounded on the east by Hawleyville Road, bounded

on the west by Farrell Road, and bounded on the south by the Maybrook railroad

tracks right-of-way. The land is composed of 19 separate properties.

P-1 zones allow the presence of single-family houses, but are intended for

office buildings used solely by professional persons, including real estate

sales, insurance agencies, and medical and dental laboratories. Such

facilities may contain a maximum of five offices and a maximum of 10,000

square feet of gross floor area. Larger professional office buildings are

allowed by special exceptions to the regulations. Also allowed in P-1 zones

are single-family homes containing professional offices.

In pursuing a change of zone, the association is "seeking to fall in line with

the (town) plan of development," according to Lilla Dean, homeowners

association president.

The town's 1993 plan of development calls for the economic development of

Hawleyville to broaden the town's property tax base. The plan of development

is a planning tool which identifies the town's land use goals and objectives.

Land in Hawleyville with P-1 zoning might be marketed through the town's

Economic Development Commission (EDC), according to Ms Dean.

The proposed change of zone is intended to foster the type of development that

association members believe the environmentally fragile land can support, she

said.

Association members say that getting P-1 zoning in the area offers the best

compromise between generating additional property taxes for the town and

protecting the area's environment.

The property proposed for the zone change is vacant except for about a dozen

houses on Hawleyville Road and Farrell Road.

The long-dormant homeowners association became active last year when a

development group proposed a change of zone in Hawleyville to prepare the way

for construction of an exposition center. Connecticut Expo Development wanted

a change of zone from R-2 (Farming/Residential) to M-5 (Industrial) for the

Connecticut Exposition and Performance Events Center (CEPEC). The developers

wanted to build a 100,000-square-foot hall to stage a variety of trade shows,

public shows and exhibitions.

Hawleyville residents loudly protested the plans, charging that such a

facility's presence would generate intolerable traffic and damage the

character of the area.

P&Z members rejected the change of zone proposal for the exposition hall,

preventing further planning work on the project.

The exposition hall would have been built on a section of the 175-acre tract

proposed for the change of zone by the homeowners association.

The CEPEC proposal was a project Hawleyville couldn't tolerate, Ms Dean has

said. She has stressed that the area doesn't have sanitary sewers or a public

water supply.

A state-backed planning study is underway to determine what transportation

facilities will be needed to foster Hawleyville's future economic development.

In a letter to the P&Z, Ms Dean writes the homeowners group has approximately

150 members who live in Hawleyville. The group proposes the zone change "to

attract desirable investment" to the area, she said.

Having P-1 zoning in Hawleyville would be the basis for attractive and

structured growth and would be an asset for the Exit 9 area of Interstate-84,

according to Ms Dean.

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