Sidewalk debate divides officials

The county planning agency sees safety value in a sidewalk requirement.
By TIM YOVICH
VINDICATOR TRUMBULL STAFF
HUBBARD -- While Trumbull County is attempting to make sidewalks mandatory in new housing developments, Hubbard is leaning in the other direction.
Raymond Farcas, D-at-large, chairman of city council's planning and zoning committee, said sidewalks shouldn't be required because they aren't maintained by property owners.
What's the use in making them mandatory if they just deteriorate, Farcas reasoned.
The Trumbull County Planning Commission, which has jurisdiction in townships, only "encourages" the construction of sidewalks, said Alan Knapp, commission deputy director.
Proposed revisions to the commission's subdivision regulations will require sidewalks in developments that have sewer and water service, Knapp explained.
Gary Newbrough, commission director, said lots with sewer and water service are smaller because they don't require septic systems, which take up a lot of space.
Because of the smaller lots, Newbrough said, people tend to park their vehicles on the streets rather than in driveways.
"Where are people going to get exercise?" Newbrough asked, noting joggers and mothers pushing strollers are forced into the streets.
Newbrough and Knapp are convinced that having more people in the streets is a safety issue.
'Worth every penny'
Newbrough said that developers don't want to include sidewalks in their developments because of the added cost but that it's minimal, explaining that 100 feet of sidewalk will increase the cost of a $100,000 house by about $3,000.
"It's worth every penny," Newbrough said.
As in Hubbard, sidewalks are required in other cities.
Walkways are a must in Girard, explained Rex Funge, assistant city engineer and zoning inspector.
"Sidewalks are for the public safety," Funge said. "Do you want people in the streets?"
John Farcas, a member of the Hubbard Zoning Board of Appeals and Raymond Farcas' brother, says sidewalks are a requirement in the city.
City regulations call for final development plans to include, among other things, sidewalks. He believes that if sidewalks aren't included in the plans, they shouldn't be approved by the city planning commission.
"It's never been an issue. Maybe we are lax," John Farcas said.
He agrees with his brother that property owners are not maintaining their sidewalks, similar to houses' being allowed to deteriorate and grass left unmowed on vacant lots.
Hasn't been an issue
James Polumbo, a member of the city planning commission, said the sidewalk requirement has never been an issue at commission meetings.
"It doesn't come up so it's not a concern," Polumbo said, noting the issue will probably be discussed now since questions have been raised.
Tim Keenan, planning commission chairman, said the sidewalk requirement isn't enforced. It would be enforced, however, if an existing street with sidewalks was extended to build more houses.
Hubbard isn't the only community in which walkways are mandatory but not enforced.
William D'Avignon, Youngstown's deputy director of planning, pointed to Castle Court, a development off Canfield Road that got an exemption.
Castle Court, the city's last development, has lots that are wider than they are deep and no sidewalks, providing homeowners with larger front lawns.
Dan Notar, Warren's planning coordinator, said the tendency is to require sidewalks because of the safety factor, but Country Club South, a housing development off East Market Street in that city, doesn't have them because of short front setbacks from the street to the houses.
yovich@vindy.com