46031 Airport Road

The applicant proposed to rezone the property from R1-A to CS2 Tourist Commercial to build an 11-unit motel apartment catering to tourists, business travelers, and small families. The development would replace an existing house currently used as a licensed bed and breakfast. The proposal also included a variance request to reduce parking requirements and modify setback regulations.

Applicant's Justification

The applicant argued that the site, which has operated successfully as a bed and breakfast since 1999, is ideally suited for the proposed motel. They emphasized the location’s proximity to key amenities like Chilliwack Airport, the downtown core, and several bus stops, making it a convenient choice for visitors. The project was also presented as an opportunity to create local employment and enhance the accommodation options in Chilliwack. Furthermore, the applicant cited recent zoning precedents in the area, particularly along Young Road, to argue that their project aligned with ongoing urban development trends.

City Staff Recommendation

Despite the applicant's rationale, city staff recommended denying the proposed rezoning and Official Community Plan (OCP) amendments. The staff's primary concern was that the project did not align with the Official Community Plan’s vision, which emphasizes locating hotel developments within commercial cores, close to amenities and public transit. The proposed site was not situated within an appropriate core area or a major traffic corridor, which contradicted the city’s goal of reinforcing community cores as business centers and main street areas.

Outcome

The applicant ultimately abandoned two portions of the application:

1. OCP Amendment: The request to redesignate the property from “Commercial Thoroughfare” to “Medium Density Residential” was abandoned.
2. Zoning Amendment: The proposal to rezone the property from R1-A to R5 (Medium Density Multi-Family Residential) was also abandoned.

The remaining portion of the application, a separate OCP amendment to redesignate the property from “Commercial Thoroughfare” to “General Commercial,” was denied by the council. This decision concluded that the project did not meet the strategic goals of the city's long-term urban planning vision.