Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning And Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chester planning director pushes zoning changes to unlock infill housing, proposes one-parking-space compromise
Summary
At a June 10 Planning Commission meeting, the planning director proposed a focused package of zoning amendments aimed at reducing barriers to housing — including removing a ground-floor commercial mandate in corridor zones, rescinding an 800-foot interstate restriction, lowering density controls and simplifying parking to one space per unit — and said the package will be refined before council consideration.
The City of Chester Planning Commission on June 10 heard a presentation of a narrowed zoning amendment package intended to reduce regulatory barriers to housing and encourage infill on the city’s major corridors.
The planning director, Mr. Fritz, told the commission the draft — called “reduction of zoning barriers to housing” — is tied to the comprehensive plan and aims to make redevelopment more feasible by removing overlapping rules that can make projects financially unworkable. “We should pull back some of those restrictions,” he said, arguing density formulas, minimum unit sizes and a ground-floor commercial requirement have combined to block feasible housing proposals.
Mr. Fritz laid out several principal changes in the draft: remove an asterisk in the C1 and C2R mixed-use districts that currently requires commercial uses on the first floor of multifamily buildings; limit the commercial-first requirement in the central business district to a smaller central core or relax it to a 50 percent frontage minimum; eliminate a rule barring new housing within 800 feet of Interstate 95; and replace or simplify the existing units-per-square-foot density formula by relying on minimum dwelling size and adjusted height limits (a suggested reduction moving C1R from five stories to three and C2R from six to four).
On parking, Mr. Fritz proposed a significant change intended as a compromise between no parking and the current, more prescriptive rules. He said the central business district currently lacks a parking standard and that the draft would relax parking requirements in C1/C2R for multifamily development. After discussion, he described the compromise he would advance to council as “one per unit” citywide for dwelling units, with the ability to count on-street parking adjacent to a property and to allow tandem parking where dimensions meet standards.
The director illustrated the trade-offs with conceptual sketches for small infill lots and said reducing required parking can materially lower upfront development costs — a rough figure of about $10,000 per parking space was cited during the discussion — and could make small multifamily projects financially viable. He also described adaptive-reuse incentives that would relax parking thresholds for conversions of existing buildings, while noting other regulatory hurdles (building code, fire suppression, ADA, stormwater) would still apply.
Commission members raised concerns about potential parking stress on existing residential blocks and the difficulty of relying on on-street or tandem spaces for families with multiple cars. One commissioner urged caution about reducing parking “in the middle of the block,” warning of weekend event and neighborhood spillover. Mr. Fritz repeatedly framed the proposal as reversible: if unanticipated problems emerge, the commission could amend the ordinance.
A downtown resident, Michael Lewis, spoke during public comment to urge balance and local input. He said the draft should account for nontraditional and multigenerational households and cautioned that single-space parking requirements could be insufficient for many residents who own more than one car. “We have to make this system and this city work for our younger nieces, nephews, and grandkids,” Lewis said, urging consideration of utility costs and livability alongside development incentives.
No formal vote on the zoning amendments was taken at the meeting. The planning director said he will revise the draft to reflect the commission’s feedback and present it to City Council’s Community and Economic Development committee; the zoning amendment process will include public hearings and first and second readings before any change becomes law.
Administrative items: the commission approved the May 13, 2026 minutes by roll-call vote; staff reported two subdivision application extensions (611–619 West 7th Street and 3308 West 2nd Street) were granted through the end of September and an interactive public zoning-permits map is being developed. The Planning Commission’s next regular meeting was scheduled for July 8.
What’s next: staff will circulate a revised draft that incorporates the commission’s suggested edits and clarifications, then the city will follow the standard public-notice and council-reading process for zoning amendments.
