After a robust round of public participation at a previous meeting, Newtown Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) started its August 18 meeting promptly at 7 pm to continue discussing a warehouse moratorium application.

P&Z members Dennis Bloom, Corrine Cox, Roy Meadows, and Gregory Rich, as well as alternate members Brian Leonardi and Connie Widmann were present at the Municipal Center’s council chambers. Land Use Agency Director of Planning George Benson also attended.

During the previous August 4 meeting, Application 22.20 by Doreen Trimarchi, proposed a text amendment to §8.18.101 of the town’s zoning regulations for a moratorium or waiting period on the acceptance of applications for warehouses and distribution centers. While Trimarchi was the spokesperson for the application, she noted that it was backed by members of a group called Newtown Neighbors Alliance, LLC.

The group’s goal is to put a pause on all new warehouse applications in order to have time to make changes and updates to Newtown zoning regulations.

On August 18, Trimarchi started off saying, “We would like to address the question that came up at the last meeting and some research we did. It’s not complete, but as you can see there were and are several moratoriums throughout our state.”

She listed examples, including that South Windsor currently has a warehouse moratorium for one year, and Norwalk has a self-storage, warehouse, and distribution facilities moratorium for one year. Enfield considered a warehouse moratorium but chose to expedite a text amendment that was collaboratively made with their P&Z, Land Use Department staff, and residents.

“Moratoriums do happen and are accepted by the State of Connecticut and throughout the country,” Trimarchi said. She added that warehouses pose a threat to Newtown residents’ quality of life and negatively impact the town due to roadway congestion, noise, and diesel pollution.

Trimarchi went on to cite that in Newtown’s Zoning Regulations, the term “warehouse” is brought up more than half a dozen times and “distribution centers” are mentioned four times.

Warehouses are listed in those sections as, “Storage in bulk of and warehouses for such materials as building materials, clothing, cotton, drugs, dry goods, feed, food, furniture, hardware, ice machinery, paint and painting supplies, pipe, rubber, shop supplies, tobacco, or wood,” according to Trimarchi.

Her request is that the text change include terms such as “long-term, cold, or self-storage” for warehouses and that “distribution center or distribution facility [be] removed from the regulations completely.”

Additional details she would like to add are set operation hours, limitations on maximum square footage, number of truck bays and trailer parking spaces, and increased setbacks if there are neighboring residential properties.

“Our recommendation is to adopt a moratorium, only for six months, to fairly assess and revise our regulations in a thoughtful manner and respond to the growing opposition expressed by the town residents,” Trimarchi said. “Newtown Neighbors Alliance, LLC, and I would like to take part in helping facilitate these amendments.”

‘Way Too Broad’

Commissioner Leonardi echoed his comments from the last meeting and said, “While I believe that there is an opportunity to discuss potential text amendments to the regulations for purposes of the M-2A zone, I still believe that what is being proposed is too broad in nature.” He added that he appreciated the research examples they presented, but the way the application is drafted, it is “way too broad.”

Commissioner Widmann agreed with Leonardi about it being too broad but that there is an opportunity for a text amendment. While Benson noted this decision would be about the moratorium — and that the specifics of the text amendment would be discussed later.

Chairman Bloom reiterated what he said at the last meeting, reasserting he “doesn’t think it’s right to take away the rights of a landowner … they should be able to do with them what they want.”

Commissioner Rich voiced that he agreed with Leonardi, and asked Benson what the process would entail for making possible regulation changes. Benson said that the P&Z would make a subcommittee and it would invite the public to talk with them.

Vice Chairman Meadows said he would “welcome input” for updating the regulations, but he does not see how a six-month moratorium would have a purpose.

“We don’t need a moratorium to have a subcommittee,” Benson said.

Protest Petition

Attorney Peter Olson, of Land Use & Conservation Counsel in Bethel, said he was representing M Newtown Associates Limited Partnership, who are the owners of 10 Hawleyville Road that was recently denied an application from the P&Z.

“I have submitted for the record a protest petition … under the statute if the owner of 20% of the land that is the subject of a proposed change in zoning regulations submits a protest petition, then the protest can only be adopted by a two-thirds vote,” he said.

Olson explained that M Newtown Associates Limited Partnership owns approximately 44% of land in Newtown’s M-2A zoning district.

“We sincerely hope that you don’t take a vote to adopt the moratorium and instead vote to deny it,” he said. Olson expressed that he feels this moratorium is directed to their property and feels it is “not an appropriate exercise of zoning authority.”

He spoke about land use permits and text amendments before ultimately saying that the applicant “lacks standing to apply” for the moratorium, because she does not own property in the zone it would impact. Olson also brought up that he found issues with the public notice that was published about the moratorium application.

“The right way to deal with situations like this where you think your regulations need to be adjusted based on public input, property owner input, whatever the reasons, is set up a subcommittee,” Olson said. “The subcommittee can have meetings, provide notice to the property owners that will be affected by what you’re doing, invite them to come talk to you and hear their concerns about the proposed amendments, come up with a draft, and hear their comments of the proposed draft.”

He added that those who he is representing would be happy to provide input.

Benson told the commission to consider if they need a moratorium to stop applications from coming in while looking to make any text amendments.

“A moratorium is really done in extreme cases when you have a lot of applications coming in for a specific project,” he said. “My original thought when the applicant came to me was to rewrite the regulations right there and to start working on them, but instead the applicant wanted to go for a moratorium, which we accepted.”

Benson said the applicant may consider focusing efforts on the M-2A zone, but that after hearing from attorney Olson, Benson said, “I don’t think that’s fair.” He explained the text amendments would have to apply to the town and not just the M-2A.

When it comes to adding specific term meanings, he said, “It has to be the same definitions for all zones … it has to be universal.

Public Participation

Newtown resident Gary Tannenbaum said when the recent warehouse application in Hawleyville was being discussed, he investigated the zoning regulations in Newtown.

He said, “What I’m asking is when you reconsider the zoning definitions, you might also look at the special exceptions and what you’re allowing in an M-2A district or any business district, because special exceptions kind of create conflict and conflict with the surrounding areas.”

Tannenbaum continued, “Really we need a whole revisiting — you may laugh, George, but the laugh is on you, because you are the one who didn’t provide us with regulations that were consistent.”

Newtown resident and attorney Michael Driscolo spoke about property owner rights and that zoning regulations limit their rights.

“Every property owner, especially for commercial property, when they buy it there is always a chance either the State of Connecticut, the planning and zoning board, some other entity, will do something to restrict that right,” he said about the risk of owning property.

Newtown resident Mark D’Amico said it is important to note that the moratorium requested is to take time to thoughtfully do this work without the pressure of an application coming in. “We need to make some changes,” he said.

D’Amico requested that the commission consider passing this moratorium as it is only asking for a short six months.

Sandy Hook resident Bryan Atherton identified himself as a real estate broker.

“I really firmly believe that this body has a good grasp on all applications and that people really don’t understand … the importance of warehouse distribution and the many categories we could restrict that could be good stewards in the community,” he said, adding that he was opposed to any moratorium.

Newtown resident Pat Napolitano voiced that “not all warehouses fit all properties … and yet we have no definition of what a warehouse is.”

He added that the moratorium and text amendments would be for “the betterment of the whole community.”

Newtown resident Carrie Kugler emphasized that they are only asking for six months, and they could realistically decide on the definitions in even just one or two months if given the chance.

After closing the public hearing, the commission voted on a motion to approve the proposed Application 22.20, and it was unanimously denied.

The next P&Z meeting will be Thursday, September 1, at 7 pm, in the Newtown Municipal Council Chambers. To learn more about the P&Z, visit newtown-ct.gov/planning-zoning-commission.

Reporter Alissa Silber can be reached at alissa@thebee.com.