Manvel commission votes 5-1 not to recommend SUP for proposed 24-hour freestanding ER on Highway 6

The Manvel Planning, Development and Zoning Commission voted 5-1 on March 24 not to recommend approval of a special use permit (SUP) for a proposed 24-hour freestanding emergency room on Highway 6, following lengthy public comment from neighbors and a presentation from the applicant.

The proposal, sited west of the under-construction AutoZone and adjacent to the Bluewater Lake subdivision, drew opposition from residents who said a 24-hour emergency facility immediately behind homes would increase noise, lights and traffic and could harm property values. Supporters and the applicant defended the project as providing local access to emergency care and economic benefits.

Staff told the commission the property is zoned light commercial and that the city’s SUP rules for medical uses include three predetermined conditions, one of which limits hours of operation. Staff said Texas law requires freestanding emergency departments to operate 24 hours a day, creating a conflict with the city’s current predetermined-hours condition; the staff report recommends approval with eight conditions but notes the city attorney wants an amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow state requirements to dictate hours for medical uses. A staff member summarized the change as allowing a facility to operate 24 hours “if the current zoning ordinance is amended by the city council to allow state requirements to dictate hours of operation for medical and personal care uses.”

Residents who spoke at the meeting included Myra Garza, who said she is a health-care professional and lives at 19214 Lake Ridge Drive, and argued the facility “will negatively affect the well-being of local residents” because of noise, light and increased traffic. Rick Gutierrez of 19210 Lake Ridge Drive said some neighbors were told the facility would not operate 24/7 and called recent outreach by the applicant and broker a “total lack of transparency.” Several other neighbors mailed or brought written comments opposing the project; speakers cited children’s safety in neighborhood streets and potential declines in home values.

The applicant’s team, led in public remarks by the medical director identified as Dr. Thomas and a commercial broker, said the facility would be a roughly 7,000-square-foot, single‑story building with eight exam rooms and would operate as a freestanding emergency room affiliated with the applicant’s South Shore/League City operations. Broker Jason Suchecki said the applicant had collected 16 neighbor signatures in support and that the facility must be open 24/7 under state rules, adding “we've always said we are 24‑seven.” Staff confirmed the applicant has preliminary TxDOT comments for a proposed curb cut alignment and that a final traffic study would be required at the construction-plan stage if site layout triggers it.

Several staff and applicant witnesses described how the facility operates and how often ambulances use their existing sites. Nurse practitioners and employees who work for the applicant described lower self-pay rates compared with other freestanding ERs and said the operation produces local tax revenue and jobs; the applicant said the combined cost of land and construction is roughly $6 million (approximately $5 million for construction and $1.5 million for land) and estimated typical full-time staffing at about 28 employees with 14 part-time roles.

After discussion the commission considered a motion to approve and forward a recommendation to City Council for ordinance 2025‑O‑07 (the SUP for the ER on Highway 6) with the eight conditions included in the staff report. The motion was seconded and failed on a 5‑to‑1 vote. Commissioners who spoke said they weighed resident opposition, proximity to an existing proposed ER further down Highway 6, and long-term planning goals for the corridor; staff reiterated that City Council is the final deciding body and that an ordinance amendment to reconcile city hours with state law would likely be brought forward.

Following the vote, commission members directed staff to provide applicants written statements of conditions and reasons for disapproval where applicable, under state law; that procedural motion passed separately later in the meeting.

The council-level public hearing for the item already occurred earlier in the process, and staff advised the commission that amending the zoning ordinance would require additional public hearings and potentially a joint meeting with City Council.

The commission’s recommendation (or lack thereof) will be transmitted to City Council for final action; the applicant may also withdraw and seek another site. The record includes multiple written comments submitted by nearby residents and statements from employees and company representatives who said the facility would limit external lighting and have no drive‑through or external speakers.

Votes and next steps The commission’s motion to recommend approval of the SUP failed 5‑1. Staff indicated it will pursue a zoning-ordinance amendment to allow state-mandated operating hours for freestanding ERs to control city predetermine-hours conditions, and City Council will have the final decision on the SUP.