Support the Timberjay by making a donation.
TOWER- The city’s planning commission handed a controversial rezoning proposal back to the city council on Monday, after providing answers, but no recommendations, to three questions that had …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
To continue reading, you will need to either log in to your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free website account and connect your subscription to it by clicking here.
If you are a digital subscriber with an active, online-only subscription then you already have an account here. Just reset your password if you've not yet logged in to your account on this new site.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
TOWER- The city’s planning commission handed a controversial rezoning proposal back to the city council on Monday, after providing answers, but no recommendations, to three questions that had blocked a final decision by the council on the issue back on March 15. The commission, meeting in a packed council chamber, also heard more testimony from residents of Mill Point, many of whom are strongly opposed to the rezoning, which could allow a proposed RV park to be built along the river.
Mill Point residents say the RV park would generate additional traffic, noise, and potential nuisance activity and would drive down property values in the Mill Point area, home to some of city’s priciest real estate.
The city council, after hearing the complaints from Mill Point residents, asked the planning commission to look into the claims of local residents, as well as benefits of the rezoning plan, and provide answers back to the council.
As for property values, City Clerk-Treasurer Linda Keith said she consulted with the St. Louis County Assessor, who said a 200-foot buffer between the proposed RV park and the first adjacent residential property would eliminate any effect on the property values for tax purposes. At the same time, commission members agreed that the park would increase traffic and noise on Hoodoo Point Road.
But some commission members questioned whether the noise impact for Mill Point residents couldn’t be mitigated through the conditional use process. The proposed rezoning to convert three parcels, two of which are zoned residential (R-1), with the other zoned commercial, to a new Tower Harbor North zone, would allow an RV park only as a conditional use. “I still have some faith in the CUP process,” said commission chair John Niemiste. “That has the potential to address a lot of stuff we’re discussing here. That’s one more layer of protection for all of us.”
Commission member Steve Altenburg noted that the Hoodoo Point Road has a long history of commercial activity, including a fuel depot, commercial storage buildings, the airport and the Hoodoo Point campground. “I want the board to look at the big picture,” said Altenburg. “Rezoning makes the land more usable.”
Some commission members echoed the sentiments of some city councilors, who say there is strong support for the RV park among Main Street business owners, even though they haven’t shown up at public meetings to advocate for the proposal, or the rezoning.
Mill Point residents urged the commission to listen to the concerns of those who have taken the time to show up. Dan Schultz, who moved to Mill Point full-time in June, said he would have made different decisions if he had known his neighborhood would not remain a residential area.
Only one of the parcels, however, borders Mill Point, a C-shaped lot that borders a 5.8-acre commercially-zoned parcel currently owned by the city of Tower.
Dave Rose, who has proposed the RV park, said he has amended his plans to eliminate any RV slots on the portion of his parcel that abuts Mill Point.
The council had also asked the commission to consider the benefits of rezoning the same three lots to a residential classification. While the commission had no objection to such a rezoning, Keith indicated that the city already has an abundance of R-1 available for development. “What we really need is R-3 zoning,” she said, which would allow more multi-family type units. “That serves the greater need based on the calls we get for more rental housing,” she said.
Altenburg agreed. “The city could build a nice Section 8 housing development. It would be a good location, with a nice view,” he said.
In the end, the commission approved a motion to forward answers to the city council, including that the rezoning would benefit development, would not decrease property values, although it would increase traffic and noise in the area. The motion also included that the council could consider the area for R-3 classification with an emphasis on low and moderate-income housing.
The council will take up the rezoning issue at their regular monthly meeting on April 11.