Gomes: Keep Signs Away From Residential Areas

Statement from Democratic mayoral candidate John Gomes at Monday night’s Planning & Zoning Commission public hearing:

MY NAME IS JOHN GOMES, I LIVE AT 150 ALPINE STREET IN BRIDGEPORT AND I AM HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING REGULATIONS WHICH WOULD ALLOW INAPPROPRIATE SIGNAGE ON COMMERCIALLY USED PROPERTY ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

IT IS NO SECRET THAT THE LAND USE BODIES IN THE CITY OF BRIDGEPORT HAVE, FOR MANY YEARS, EFFECTIVELY SPOT-ZONED MANY PROPERTIES, NOT ON THE BASIS OF SOUND LAND-USE POLICIES BUT BASED UPON THE DESIRES OF A PARTICULAR APPLICANT.

WE CANNOT UNDO PAST MISTAKES; BUT YOU AS A COMMISSION MUST NOT USE THE AUTHORITY YOU HAVE TO WRITE ZONING REGULATIONS WHICH WILL FURTHER COMPROMISE THE INTEGRITY OF OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND FURTHER DEVALUE THE PROPERTIES OF TAX-PAYING CITIZENS WHO LIVE IN THOSE AREAS.

SOME OF THESE PROPERTIES ARE WHAT ARE KNOWN AS “NON-CONFORMING USES.”

IT IS THE POLICY OF THE LAW TO REDUCE THESE USES AND BRING THEM INTO CONFORMITY WITH OUR ZONING REGULATIONS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

ALLOWING A NON-CONFORMING USE TO EMPLOY SIGNS, WHICH ARE ONLY APPROPRIATE TO A COMMERCIALLY ZONED PROPERTY, FLIES IN THE FACE OF THAT PUBLIC POLICY AND GIVES THESE NON-CONFORMING USES A SENSE OF PERMANENCY, WHICH THEY SHOULD NOT ENJOY.

SOME OF THESE PROPERTIES IN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS ARE COMMITTED TO COMMERCIAL USES BECAUSE VARIANCES HAVE BEEN GRANTED BY YOUR COLLEAGUES ON THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. A VARIANCE, AS ALL OF YOU KNOW, ALLOWS A PROPERTY OWNER TO USE HIS PROPERTY IN A MANNER NOT PERMITTED BY THE ZONING REGULATIONS BECAUSE OF SOME UNIQUE HARDSHIP. THAT HARDSHIP, IN ORDER TO BE LEGALLY VALID, MUST ARISE OUT OF THE OPERATION OF THE ZONING REGULATIONS THEMSELVES, AND CANNOT BE A HARDSHIP WHICH IS PERSONAL TO A PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL.

AMENDING YOUR REGULATIONS TO PERMIT COMMERCIAL SIGNS ON A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY WHICH HAS BEEN GRANTED A VARIANCE, IS POOR PLANNING, POOR POLICY AND INCONSISTENT WITH YOUR OWN MASTER PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT AND WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

I AM THE ONLY CANDIDATE FOR MAYOR WHO CURRENTLY OPERATES A BUSINESS, MAKES A PAYROLL AND PAYS TAXES IN CONNECTION WITH AN ONGOING COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISE. I UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO INCREASE OUR NON-RESIDENTIAL TAX BASE SO THAT OUR MIDDLE CLASS TAXPAYERS DO NOT SHOULDER THE ENTIRE BURDEN OF FINANCING MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT.

HOWEVER, YOUR REGULATIONS MUST NEVER COMPROMISE THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS IN ORDER TO SATISFY THOSE WHO OWN COMMERCIALLY USED PROPERTY.

SPOT ZONING, AS ALL OF YOU KNOW, SHOULD BE AVOIDED AT ALL COST BECAUSE IT ALLOWS A PROPERTY OWNER TO USE A SMALL PIECE OF PROPERTY IN A MANNER THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND YOUR REGULATIONS.

DON’T MAKE SPOT ZONING WORSE BY PERMITTING SIGNS WHICH WILL ONLY ADVERTISE A USE WHICH IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.

0
Share

11 comments

  1. We need to bring the U.S. Marshals back to remove the more violent elements of the criminal class. A shooting in Marina Village, a suspicious fire on Ellsworth Street, two murder suspects rounded up … Not bad for Wednesday’s issue of the Connecticut Post.

    0
  2. Signs of the times.

    Mr. Gomes is correct on some of his statements. However the solution is to allow signage that would be appropriate to that neighborhood. This could be implemented in the design portion review to include signage stipulation approval. After all, “A business with no sign is a sign of no business.”

    0
    1. And a business in a residential zone, courtesy of spot zoning by ZBA, is a sign of a declining residential zone. Grin, if you were at the TPZ hearing you know one of the neighbors suggested signage appropriate to a neighborhood. Why did the bank go into a Res zone if they did not wish to be governed by those regulations, unless they thought or believed they had a good chance to get a change? That is their RISK. Zoning boards need to toughen up or Master Plans don’t mean much.

      0
  3. I wasn’t at the meeting and was just commenting on Mr. Gomes’ comments which did not speak to a solution. Would today’s Master Plan allow a Harborview Market? Hardly an example of a declining residential zone.

    0

Leave a Reply