DEVELOPMENT Hubbard council wants say in look of downtown

The board chairman said he didn't know what was on the agenda.
By TIM YOVICH
VINDICATOR TRUMBULL STAFF
HUBBARD -- City council members want some authority in dealing with downtown's development and its ultimate appearance.
"Maybe its time to straighten this out," says Councilman Douglas Rohrer, D-at-large.
How council will get some oversight in the process, however, is up in the air.
Lawmakers expressed displeasure after finding out last week that seven variances were granted by the Hubbard Zoning Board of Appeals for two planned stores.
Walgreen Co. intends to build a drugstore at South Main and East Liberty streets, while Family Video is planning an outlet at West Liberty and Stewart streets.
"I've never seen a variance turned down," Councilman William Williams, D-at-large, said of the appeals board.
'Excessive'
Williams characterized the variances granted Walgreens as "excessive."
Rohrer asserted that it "isn't life or death" that the city have another pharmacy.
Councilwoman Bonnie Viele, D-1st, explained that representatives of Walgreens and Family Video first presented their plans to the city's Architectural Review Committee.
Although the committee doesn't have an established plan for redeveloping downtown as yet, Viele said, it has a concept of constructing brick buildings and not using concrete blocks to simulate stone. The concept also includes the use of decorative lighting for pedestrians rather than bright lighting on poles and landscaping.
Can't force changes
The dilemma, the councilwoman explained, is that the review committee can only recommended rather than force a change in plans.
"We hope to change that," Viele noted.
The zoning appeals board met Oct. 12 and granted the seven variances that were recommended by Robert Toth, city assistant engineer.
Viele, who attended the meeting, said that Walgreens representatives, not the board, seemed to be in charge of the meeting.
The board approved variances that allow less parking spaces than required in the zoning regulations at the Walgreens and Family Video stores. Also, the board allowed Walgreens to have a larger sign and smaller setback.
"It sounds like they're putting something in where it doesn't belong," Williams said.
But council has no jurisdiction over the appeals board, and can't reverse its decisions.
John Farcas, appeals board chairman, didn't attend the Oct. 12 meeting because he was on vacation.
However, Farcas said, the board was unaware of the variances being sought. Farcas explained that he had asked Toth the nature of the variances and received an ambiguous response.
"We don't go in [meetings] blindly. In this case, we did," Farcas said, adding that there seemed to be a lack of communication.
Viele countered that the appeals board should have tabled the variances because members didn't have time to review them.
Law director Gary Gilmartin and auditor Michael Villano said at first they believed that implementing the variances could be delayed on the Walgreens project because it hadn't paid the city the $75 that is required for each variance request.
Paid assistant engineer
But Gilmartin found out that Toth received the appropriate fee from a Walgreens representative Oct. 11 -- the day before the board meeting -- and hadn't turned it over to the auditor until last Tuesday.
Viele complained that "everybody is pulling in different directions," noting that the zoning appeals board members don't see the requests for variances until the meeting.
The zoning board is also unaware of the concept that is being developed for downtown revitalization.
Although the variance requests were not on the agenda for the Oct. 12 meeting, Farcas said, the requests are generally on the agenda.
Williams asserted that council should have a representative in the process so the zoning appeals board is made aware of the downtown development concept.
yovich@vindy.com