After a site visit to 159 Spring St., the Planning Commission devoted the May 14 meeting to consideration of a construction project proposed for that vacant lot.
Before commissioners considered construction details, they convened as the Board of Zoning Adjustment to consider a request to cut trees on the property. Building Inspector Bobby Ray had already turned down the request, and a motion to approve the application died for lack of a second.
Michael and Melissa Brooks asked to build a cottage as a part-time residence for themselves. They also proposed two long-term rental units, with the possibility of adding three units in the future. During public comments, opposition to the project focused primarily on the size and number of trees affected, especially a 33-inch pecan tree.
Trella Laughlin borrowed a page from The Lorax in defense of the pecan tree. “I’m here speaking for the tree,” she said. “Please don’t let it be cut down.” She reminded the commission that visitors come to Eureka Springs because of its natural beauty. The community can progress without sacrificing its trees, she said. “That tree was here before us, and it will be here after we’re gone.”
Mark Hughes said the project would affect him directly, with water runoff and added traffic. He had more general opposition, too. “Commercialism is no longer creeping, but moving at an alarming pace into the residential neighborhoods of Eureka Springs,” he said. Current regulations allow a property owner to cut a percentage of trees, and then come back and repeat that process. He said the Historic District Commission protects 50-year-old buildings, and 100-year-old trees deserved the same protection. Hughes also suggested a committee to consider tree-cut applications, including an architect and an arborist.
Steve Beacham, a former chair of Planning, suggested tagging significant trees, and keeping a record of their health, approximate age, and “any encroachment issues.” He delivered a litany of objectionable practices, including “replacing a 100-year-old tree with a $30 tree from Walmart.” Some property owners top a tree, then apply to cut it down when it becomes diseased, he said. “Not every tree should be saved, but each tree removal application should have a professional thought process involved,” he concluded.
After those comments, a long silence followed, before Chair Ann Sallee asked, “Is there any other way to do this construction, to work around these trees?” Melissa Brooks described the pecan as “overgrown” and “right in the center of the lot.” A 31-inch post oak is in the area which would become parking for the project, on Cushing Street, on the lower side of the lot.
Commissioners also noted that Brooks planned to cut almost half the trees on the lot, well over the 30 percent allowed. Commissioner Fergie Stewart moved to approve the application, but no one seconded his motion. In closing comments, Stewart elaborated on what he called his pro-business stance. “I believe the community needs to grow, and we need more people,” he said. “We need to evaluate how we do things.”
As Sallee explained appeal options, Brooks said the previous owner had received approval to remove the pecan tree. Sallee promised to look into that claim, but commissioner James Mitchell doubted that it would transfer upon sale of the property. Mitchell, a retired architect, expressed “surprise” that Brooks’ architect had not investigated zoning regulations here.
Commissioners reconvened as Planning to consider the other aspects of the project, although the lack of a tree-cut approval rendered the discussion hypothetical. Another round of public comments followed, and Beacham said cutting into the slope for parking would add to runoff problems. Vehicles would have to back out onto Cushing Street “just over the top of a blind hill.” Although Cushing is zoned commercial on one side, the other side of the street is residential, and water will flow toward the residential side of the street. He asked commissioners to invite input from the Public Works director and the building inspector. “It will be easier and cheaper before the project begins,” he said.
Brooks came back to the microphone to point out that everyone else parking on Cushing has to back into the street. She said her architect and engineer had planned for drainage without affecting neighbors below, including some terracing on the lot. Only the parking area will require excavation, because the structures will be built on piers.
Although the Brooks would have new sewer lines on their property, the main might not accommodate a significant new load, and commissioners would need that information before proceeding.
The Brookses can appeal to circuit court, or they can submit another plan that works around the trees. They cannot resubmit a tree-cut application for a year without a three-fourths vote of the full membership. That would mean six votes, and the commission currently has only four members.
The agenda had included several other items, all of which will move to the agenda for May 28. Commissioners will consider an ordinance to restrict car-wash fundraisers to the location of car washes, because of pollution. The agenda will also include revision of the tree ordinance and regulation of bed & breakfast operations.