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 18 November 2025 Newtown Planning Commission agenda lists several items, including the approval of minutes and reports from various township committees, but specifically mentions five Zoning Hearing Board (ZHB) matters, including one for Community Veterinary Partners at 228 N. Sycamore Street and another for Vecchia Osteria at 20A Richboro Road.
The extensive documentation for Community Veterinary Partners reveals the applicant is seeking a special exception and multiple variances to convert a vacant residential dwelling into an expansion of the existing, nonconforming veterinary hospital, which would increase the floor space of the use by over 61% and requires relief for parking requirements. Historical documents included in the application show the veterinary clinic's nonconforming status was originally approved by the ZHB in a 1978 Opinion and Order allowing for a change of use and a variance for lot size and coverage.
The owner of 826-828 Newtown-Yardley Rd seeks a variance to install two double-sided free standing, internally illuminated signs to replace existing nonconforming free standing signs.
The brief excerpt for the Vecchia Osteria application merely indicates relevant dates, suggesting its review will also occur around the time of the Planning Commission meeting.
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.
