The sources for this Deep Dive podcast detail the specifics and subsequent rejection of a zoning variance request submitted by the Newtown Athletic Club (NAC). to the Newtown Zoning Hearing Board (ZHB) on 4 December 2025 . The request was to legalize an improperly located sign.
The NAC was seeking relief to allow a wall sign, installed in 2019, to remain in its current location facing the Newtown Bypass, violating size restrictions and the distance requirements stipulated in the municipal code.
According to the briefing document, the NAC claimed the placement was due to an "inadvertent installation error" that contradicted a previous 2014 decision, which led to a zoning violation notice issued in 2025.
During the hearing where the application was ultimately denied, the board chair expressed concern on the record about the Township's unusual silence on the matter, suggesting a potential issue with selective enforcement of sign ordinances.
All content for Mack's Newtown Voice is the property of Mack's Newtown Voice and is served directly from their servers
with no modification, redirects, or rehosting. The podcast is not affiliated with or endorsed by Podjoint in any way.
The sources for this Deep Dive podcast detail the specifics and subsequent rejection of a zoning variance request submitted by the Newtown Athletic Club (NAC). to the Newtown Zoning Hearing Board (ZHB) on 4 December 2025 . The request was to legalize an improperly located sign.
The NAC was seeking relief to allow a wall sign, installed in 2019, to remain in its current location facing the Newtown Bypass, violating size restrictions and the distance requirements stipulated in the municipal code.
According to the briefing document, the NAC claimed the placement was due to an "inadvertent installation error" that contradicted a previous 2014 decision, which led to a zoning violation notice issued in 2025.
During the hearing where the application was ultimately denied, the board chair expressed concern on the record about the Township's unusual silence on the matter, suggesting a potential issue with selective enforcement of sign ordinances.
The sources provided for this podcast focus on the Newtown Bucks County Joint Municipal Authority (NBCJMA) board meeting held on 18 November 2025, detailing the proceedings, agenda items, and public discourse.
The agenda confirms routine matters like approving minutes, reviewing finances, and receiving various reports (Engineer’s, Solicitor’s, Manager’s, and Field), while also highlighting the motion to terminate the authority's controversial plan to construct a wastewater treatment plant.
Public comments and an associated document reveal specific concerns, including a complex technical question regarding the discrepancy in Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) calculation standards between NBCJMA and the Bucks County Water & Sewer Authority (BCWSA).
Furthermore, the meeting addressed the significant consequences of terminating the proposed waste water treatment plant plan, particularly the process for offering the condemned land back to the original owners and the potential impact on resident sewer rates that had been raised to finance the land acquisition. The board ultimately voted to terminate the plan and discussed the legal process regarding the future of the land.
Mack's Newtown Voice
The sources for this Deep Dive podcast detail the specifics and subsequent rejection of a zoning variance request submitted by the Newtown Athletic Club (NAC). to the Newtown Zoning Hearing Board (ZHB) on 4 December 2025 . The request was to legalize an improperly located sign.
The NAC was seeking relief to allow a wall sign, installed in 2019, to remain in its current location facing the Newtown Bypass, violating size restrictions and the distance requirements stipulated in the municipal code.
According to the briefing document, the NAC claimed the placement was due to an "inadvertent installation error" that contradicted a previous 2014 decision, which led to a zoning violation notice issued in 2025.
During the hearing where the application was ultimately denied, the board chair expressed concern on the record about the Township's unusual silence on the matter, suggesting a potential issue with selective enforcement of sign ordinances.
