The Planning Commission held a long meeting Oct. 14, with discussions on several topics veering off into deeper questions about property rights and the commission’s limits.
Commissioner Mike Welch led a discussion about a proposed fence ordinance by reading a prepared letter. He expressed concerns about intruding on property rights and questioned the need for an ordinance about fences. Welch said uniform requirements would restrict the choices of property owners, and those choices create the diversity that makes Eureka Springs special. He also raised questions about imposing financial burdens on residents.
Welch said he understands the need for the Historic District Commission to impose regulations in certain areas, but opposes the notion of setting fence restrictions to cover the entire city. He said such regulations might be needed in larger cities but, “I don’t want to be the government telling people what to do.”
Commissioner David Buttecali said he understood Welch’s concerns about property rights, but he saw a fence ordinance as a tool to help protect property values. He said unregulated fences could quickly “get out of hand and become an eyesore.” He also noted that the city would not require anyone to erect a fence, and existing fences could be maintained.
Speaking in support of the ordinance, commissioner Scott Price said he has seen eight-foot privacy fences in front of properties in Houston.
Building Inspector Paul Sutherland complimented Cassie Dishman, director of Planning and Community Development, for work in preparing a draft ordinance. Dishman said she had sent the draft to Mayor Butch Berry for review.
The commission voted to send the draft ordinance to city council for passage, with Welch voting against it.
Tree removals
Commissioners had discussed their concerns about someone requesting to cut trees for future construction without any clear plan to build on the site. Dishman explained that she had not noticed an existing provision requiring building plans to accompany a tree-cut application. Sutherland agreed and noted that the commission agenda in November will include a tree-cut application with accompanying building plans.
Dishman asked commissioners if they were comfortable with the number of tree-cut permits issued. Some specific approvals have provoked public response. Buttecali agreed with removing trees for objective reasons, such as disease or threat to structures. He cautioned against approving tree cuts for more subjective reasons.
Commissioner Ann Tandy-Sallee said those who object to some tree removals often cite the city’s status as a “Tree City.” She said that designation concerns trees on public property. On private property, she agreed that “people should not cut any tree they want to.” She complimented commissioner Tom Buford on his work preparing a tree ordinance.
Commissioner Susan Harman mentioned tree-cut applications the commissioners had approved that evening and in previous meetings, and said that none of those applications included replacement trees. Dishman explained that the Board of Zoning Adjustment may require planting replacement trees when approving an application, but there is no standing requirement for replacement trees.
Harman suggested that the tree-cut application should include a provision that BOZA may require replacement plantings, although Chair Fergie Stewart suggested a more general statement that the commission could impose conditions on any approval.
Commissioners agreed that some sites may not have a suitable location to re-plant trees, and each case should be evaluated on its own merits.
Vacant properties
Price had initiated a discussion about vacant properties, and Sutherland said he has looked into the subject. He explained the problems of determining whether a property is vacant, or whether someone uses it occasionally as a second home. He also pointed out that a business or individual could buy a house and hold it off the market until prices rise. Sutherland said he has identified eight to 10 vacant properties of concern, but those houses are secured, and their owners are working on them.
With commercial property, Sutherland identified about 10 spaces for rent, for sale, or under construction. He said two motels on the highway are being remodeled as apartments.
Sutherland said a lack of licensed contractors in town exacerbates the problems of owners of vacant buildings.
Price asked about a long-vacant property on Spring Street. He asked if such properties could become fire hazards, but Sutherland said the owner of the property has invited him to look over the building to determine what work would be required before re-occupation.
Discussion turned from vacant properties to nuisance properties, and Tandy-Sallee said she would like to return to this subject in the coming year. Nuisance properties may look worse than vacant properties. Harman gave the example of the Queen Anne properties, which were “perfectly maintained” even when the property was vacant.
Adult-oriented businesses
Harman had previously initiated a discussion about adult-oriented businesses, and that continued last week. She had discovered that the state classifies businesses based upon their product, not their advertising, so a bed-and-breakfast with adult-oriented advertising would still be classified as a B&B.
Letters go out to neighbors before the commission approves a Conditional-Use Permit, and Tandy-Sallee asked about including specific details about a proposed business in those letters.
Discussion will continue at the Nov. 13 meeting. That meeting would ordinarily fall on the second Tuesday of the month, but that would fall on Veterans’ Day.
Other business
- The commission voted to send a draft ordinance on metal buildings to city council. Dishman said metal buildings are permitted by right in industrial or agricultural zones, although the façade cannot have ribbed or corrugated material if the building is visible from a public street.
- A workshop on the city’s Vision Plan will precede the Nov. 13 meeting. Tandy-Sallee asked commissioners to research the subject prior to the workshop and bring in two or three areas of interest.
- Sitting as BOZA, commissioners approved the removal of two trees at 2 Ridgeway Ave. Arborist Mike Larrew explained that one threatened a retaining wall, and the other had a cracked trunk and threatened power lines.
At 110 Wall St., three trees were approved for removal. One tree disrupted the driveway, and a tree with a hollow trunk touched the house. Aaron Grogan, with Apex Arboriculture, represented that application.