Bellaire planning commission disapproves Mulberry site plan after hours of public opposition

The Bellaire Planning and Zoning Commission on Aug. 14 voted to disapprove a site plan for the Mulberry, a proposed redevelopment of the Ponte Alba apartments at 4301 Bissonnette Street that would replace the existing complex with 242 dwelling units on about 3.39 acres.

The decision followed more than an hour of public comment and a staff recommendation that the plan be rejected because it does not comply with the city's minimum site area per dwelling unit for the Residential Multifamily (RMF) district. Travis Tanner, Bellaire director of development services, told the commission: "Staff recommends that Planning and Zoning Commission disapprove the site plan due to non compliance with the minimum site area per dwelling units in section 20-4-5-35 C1 C." He said the required minimum site area is 1,200 square feet per dwelling unit (equivalent to 36.3 dwelling units per acre), while the proposal would result in roughly 71.4 units per acre.

Residents who spoke at the public-comment period cited traffic, safety, tree loss and neighborhood character as primary concerns. Jonathan Goh, a Lambton Street resident, said he was not opposed to redevelopment in general but objected to the "size and density" proposed, warning it would increase noise, strain shared amenities and add traffic. Multiple speakers who live on or near Mulberry Lane and Compton Circle described crime, maintenance problems at the existing complex, and flooding or foundation concerns for nearby homes if impervious cover increases.

Daniel Box, a zoning attorney representing the applicant, disputed the staff interpretation of the density standard and urged approval. Box told the commission his client "fundamentally" disagrees with the development standard staff says applies and argued the property was vested by a December 2023 plat. He characterized prior changes to the code as a "scrivener's error" and warned of legal implications if the commission denied the plan.

Travis Tanner explained the developer would have two options after disapproval: reduce density to meet the 1,200‑square‑foot minimum site area per dwelling unit (36.3 units per acre) so the plan could be approved administratively, or pursue a planned development application that would be considered by Planning & Zoning and City Council following required public hearings. The commission made a motion to disapprove the site plan and the motion passed; the chair declared the item disapproved after the vote.

Commissioners and staff thanked residents for attending and speaking. The meeting packet and staff report, which were referenced repeatedly during the public comment and staff presentation, remain the official record of the submittal and staff analysis.

The developer may choose to revise the plan and resubmit or pursue the planned-development route, both of which would return the matter to the city for further review and public hearings.