Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Rezoning Motel6 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors and businesses oppose proposed conversion of Motel 6 to long‑term housing; case continued to May 6
Summary
Residents, business owners and callers told the Zoning Commission that a proposed conversion of Motel 6 near the airport is unsuitable for long‑term family housing; the item was continued to the May 6 meeting.
The Zoning Commission heard a string of voice mails and in-person public comments opposing a proposed rezoning to allow long‑term residential use at a Motel 6 property near the airport (case number referenced ending in 063). Multiple speakers described the motel site as unsuitable for permanent housing because of heavy airport noise, surrounding industrial land uses, limited neighborhood amenities and concerns about crime.
Callers and speakers said the site lacks grocery stores, parks, and safe routes for children, and lies in a flight path. One speaker, Joseph A. Carrion, said the Warehouse 5 rezoning (a separate consent item) "has become part of the broader West Commerce Buena Vista corridor of business incubators" and supported that rezoning; others commenting on the motel conversion urged denial or asked the commission to postpone action. A number of callers cited police‑reported incidents in the motel area from November through March, including arrests and other incidents; one caller said, "There is more than enough low income housing in our area for sure, and we don't want any more of it in our neighborhood."
Speakers who addressed the motel proposal in person included Sam Mendez (resident) and Montgomery Howard (architect and member of the Greater Harmony Hills Neighborhood Association, speaking as a private citizen). Mendez described the location as surrounded by freeway and airport noise and said, "Where are your kids gonna play?" Howard told commissioners the existing zoning and the City's planning work should be respected and said the applicant had not made "a compelling case to make this change that would benefit the community immediately surrounding the building." Several voicemail commenters and callers echoed those concerns.
The Commission's docket listed the motel conversion among several items noted for a continuance discussion. After hearing the voice mails and public speakers, the Commission voted to continue four items — listed by staff as items 8, 14, 204 and 28 — to the May 6 hearing. Commissioner Taylor Watson moved for the continuance and Commissioner Marco Barros seconded; roll call vote was recorded as unanimous.
No formal zoning decision on the motel conversion was made at the hearing; the item will be discussed again on May 6 and the commission encouraged continued engagement between applicants, staff and neighbors.
