Despite stiff community opposition, underscored by a protest rally attended by several prominent Bronx politicians and the teachers union, developers say they will follow through on plans to build a five-story, 42-room Comfort Inn on Webster Avenue.

Critics contend that the community has no need for a motel that community activists and elected officials say will become a “hot sheet” motel and a breeding ground for illegal and unsavory activity, including prostitution and drug abuse. 

Across the Bronx River in Wakefield there are already a dozen such motels, which offer hourly rates and no questions asked. Opponents are especially concerned about the location of the planned motel, which is a half block from a school, PS/MS 20, and will neighbor private residences.

“The borough president is unalterably opposed to this development,” said Deputy Borough President Earl Brown at the Aug. 2 protest, which was poorly attended by residents, partly due to temperatures reaching triple digits.

“There are a million worries, no one wants this,” said Andy Pallotto, a representative for the United Federation of Teachers.

Meanwhile, officials at Choice Hotels, Comfort Inn’s parent company, and a lawyer for the developer, McSam LLC, said they had no idea there would be this much opposition. They insisted that a new Comfort Inn will, in time, actually benefit the run-down commercial corridor on Webster Avenue.

Officials from Choice and McSam said the Comfort Inn would not offer short-stay or hourly room rentals. “The belief is that the hotel will be successful in that area,” said Pat Jones, a lawyer for McSam, two weeks after the protest.

David Piekin, a spokesman for Choice Hotels, echoed Jones, saying his company would not put the Comfort Inn name on a development that could possibly be considered “hot sheet” lodging.

“We have what we feel are very lofty standards,” Piekin said in a phone interview. “We go through a rigorous process of researching and making sure a site is viable.”

According to Jones, McSam officials assumed there would be no complaints from the community because the Webster Avenue corridor is zoned for heavy commercial building, which includes hotel developments. When they learned about the adverse reaction, first reported by the Norwood News in June, Jones said they did their best to engage the community.

Board 7 Chair Greg Faulkner disagrees. Before the protest, Jones twice sat down with community representatives, once with the Community Board and then again at borough president’s office. Both times, Faulkner said, Jones failed to adequately address the community’s concerns.

Instead of sending a proxy like Jones, an in-house lawyer with McSam, Faulkner said he would have preferred to hear from McSam’s principal, Sam Chang.

“Because the developer [Chang] has refused to come talk to the community, they are basically saying, ‘to hell with them,’” Faulkner said.

Jones said he often represents Chang in front of community groups. With more than 30 hotels in the New York area currently in the works, the prolific developer can’t be everywhere, he said. Jones points to Chang’s successful track record of building hotels in other working-class neighborhoods, in Queens and Brooklyn, as proof that a Comfort Inn can thrive on Webster Avenue.

Specifically, Jones mentioned the welcome reception McSam’s new Holiday Inn Express received in the Park Slope section of Brooklyn. But over the past year, Brooklyn has been written up as a tourist destination in both USA Today and the Los Angeles Times, which would warrant new hotel developments. The same is not true for Webster Avenue, opponents say. Also, Brooklyn residents complained that the Holiday Inn Express was forced on them without their knowledge or approval, according to an article in the brooklyn papers.

The Comfort Inn on Webster is hoping to attract business travelers not tourists, Jones said.

Every elected official at the Aug. 2 rally, including Brown, Assemblyman Jose Rivera, Council member Joel Rivera and Assemblywoman Naomi Rivera, all said they would continue to fight the development.

Undaunted by nearly unanimous opposition, Jones said he understands the area has been burned by sleazy hotel developments before. But he maintains that the new Comfort Inn will not be more of the same.

“Certainly, the great hope is that once this is constructed and you have a new building and it’s lit up and it’s safe, then the community will see the benefits,” Jones said.

Protest organizer Barbara Stronczer doesn’t doubt the developer’s intentions; she just thinks they’re wrong about how successful it will be.

Piekin, from Choice Hotels, says the company signed a franchise contract with McSam that allows for mutual escape options every five years — meaning that if either the developer or the hotel company decides they aren’t making enough profit, they can sell it.

Community leaders like Stronczer say it’s not the Comfort Inn that troubles them, but what it could potentially turn into if Choice Hotels and McSam abandon it.

“Our concern that if it doesn’t work out as motel/hotel, and they don’t get long-term guests, then it’ll get sold,” Stronczer said.