Jack's Hill Road, Oxford

By PAM ASHBAHIAN

Published: Sep 17, 2004 12:00 am

Jackâs Hill Road, Oxford

William Wilson, Jr, purchased property at 98 Jackâs Hill Road in Oxford from Joan Dembek.

Lorraine Fuchs of Advanced Real Estate sold the property, which was listed by Joy Ginnow of Coldwell Banker.

The seller was represented by attorney Steven Reilly of Oxford and the buyer was represented by attorney Ray Yamin of Danbury.

Berkshire Road

Charles Ferris, Sr, recently purchased a home at 329 Berkshire Road from Sandra Guilbord.

John Klopfenstein, owner/broker of Curtiss & Crandon Realtors, listed the property, which was sold by Prudential Connecticut Realty of Danbury.

Attorney Tim Holian represented the seller and attorney James represented the buyer.

Great Hill Road

Yili Zhang Hammer sold her home at 23 Great Hill Road to Lawrence and Stacey Schumer, formerly of Fairfield.

Susan McNulty of Flagpole Realty, Inc sold the property, which was listed by Rita Hammer of Gooseboro Realty.

Attorney Tracey C. Hammer represented the seller and attorney Michael S. Rosten represented the buyers.

Swim And Dive Team Begins Season With Visit To Masuk

NHS Wrestling Team Wins Matches

The Way We Were

Early Deadlines, Holiday Closings For New Year

Hendrik Bagmeyer

Head on a swivel at all times - especially in grocery parking lots! Keep an eye out for folks turning at the flagpole - it befuddles them at times.

Please Drive Safe In 2025

How do you propose tapping the brakes, Dave? 8-30g already trumps any local regulations- you don't have a brake pedal to push. Brookfield, Trumbull and now Ridgefield have a clear case for a moratorium based on the development (thanks to 8-30g) that has already occurred. I don't see a clear case for Newtown to request a moratorium... yet.

Backs Moratorium On Dense Development Applications

Nobody is suggesting shutting the doors on new neighbors. What neighboring towns are doing, and what we should be doing too, is to tap the brakes on all of the multi-family residential development proposals so that we can spend 6 months updating our regulations such that if you want to build dense residential housing here, XX percent of it needs to be affordable (we will never make any headway on increasing our percentage of affordable housing otherwise, short of 8-30g), and the rest needs to be done in as low an impact manner as possible. Low impact on traffic, health & safety, the environment and on the cost of town services.

Hey, there you go! Richard solved it. Thanks, that seems so easy- we'll just get rid of the 2nd amendment and the Supreme Court. Seriously, the 2nd amendment doesn't create violent criminals or mental illness. The Supreme Court doesn't create violent criminals or mental illness. The problem is not the tools, but the criminals & the mental illness. The state of Connecticut seems to be focused on the tools, like Richard, while ignoring the users of those tools.

Why Gun Violence Is Higher In The US

Ned, please familarize yourself with 8-30G, and then please share the unique flaws that may be helpful in formulating a denial An 8-30g project can be denied only on very narrow grounds – i.e., if it presents health, safety or other concerns that exceed a town’s need for affordable housing. According to the TOG website, “projects cannot be rejected for incompatibility with a Town’s Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD); density; traffic congestion; height; aesthetics; concerns of neighbors or the community; and failure to comply with local zoning regulations.” 8-30g proposals are rarely denied by planning and zoning officials because the burden of proof on appeal is on the town. Appeals are costly, but a municipality can be successful in a court case if it has sufficiently established that the concerns leading to denial are factual and substantive.

P&Z Should Reject Vessel Proposal

<< Dec 2024 >>
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
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	3	4

Log In

Jack's Hill Road, Oxford

Leave a Reply Cancel reply