The Port Arthur Planning and Zoning Commission voted to deny a rezoning request for two parcels at 105 Highway 365 that the applicant said would be developed as an RV park.

At a Nov. 3, 2025 public hearing, Larry (planning staff) described case Z25‑O7 as a request to change Lots 15 and 27 of the Peak Addition (parcel numbers 82206 and 82225) from Commercial General to Light Industrial. The combined site totals 9.59 acres, and staff said the city’s future land‑use map lists the area as low‑density residential.

Larry (planning staff) told the commission that the application was filed on or about Sept. 11, 2025, that a community meeting was held Oct. 1, 2025, and that the city mailed 42 notices to property owners within 200 feet and published notice in the Port Arthur newspaper. "No residents attended the meeting," Larry said, but staff received phone calls from two nearby property owners who "didn't really want another RV park in their area." Larry also reported that several adjacent property owners who contacted staff were elderly.

A member of the public told the commission at length that Port Arthur already has too many RV sites and that the city’s ordinance setting standards for new RV parks — written, the speaker said, roughly seven years ago — requires a minimum of five acres, a stone wall around the property, laundry facilities and playgrounds. The speaker said developers previously proposed larger resort projects that later fell through and added, "We don't want another RV park in our area." That comment is recorded in the hearing transcript under the label Resident (public commenter).

Commissioners asked planning staff to clarify what uses the existing Commercial General district allows. Larry explained that Commercial General permits a range of retail and heavier commercial activities — including automotive repair and, in some cases, wrecking yards — and that Light Industrial zoning would also allow a variety of industrial and storage uses. Commissioners discussed the difference between approval criteria for plats and for zoning cases and noted that a commission denial can be appealed to the City Council; staff noted that council could overturn a commission denial with a three‑fourths vote.

The developer or applicant did not appear at the community meeting and was not present at the public hearing, according to staff.

After closing the public hearing (motion and second; vote recorded by voice), a commissioner made a motion — seconded by another commissioner — "that we deny the rezoning of case number Z25DashO7." The motion carried by voice vote and the commission’s recommendation to deny the rezoning was recorded in the minutes.

What happens next: because the commission denied the rezoning, the applicant may take the matter to City Council. As staff explained at the meeting, a council decision could differ from the commission’s recommendation if a three‑fourths council vote is achieved.

Clarifying facts from the hearing: the proposed rezoning covered 9.59 acres at 105 Highway 365 (Lots 15 and 27, Peak Addition); notices to 42 adjacent property owners were mailed; two nearby property owners contacted staff to oppose the proposal; the community meeting on Oct. 1, 2025 drew no attendees and the applicant did not appear at either the community meeting or the Nov. 3 public hearing.

The commission’s action was limited to the rezoning request; staff said any development would still have to meet applicable city ordinances if the zoning were changed.