The Houston Planning Commission voted to approve the Bustamante Tracts general plan, including requested variances, after a contested discussion about the proposed alignment of Mason Road.

Staff planner Araceli Rodriguez presented the proposal and the requested variances, saying the general plan “proposes multiple land uses” and that staff recommended granting the variances and approving the general plan subject to standard CPC-101 conditions. The planning commission took public testimony from project proponents and nearby developers before voting.

Jennifer Curtis, representing the applicant and Meta Planning and Design, described efforts to reach a practical compromise on the alignment and urged approval so the owner could proceed with entitlements. “We are just trying to make sure that this property can be entitled,” Curtis said.

Tracy Youngblood, speaking for BGE and the developer of the adjacent Grand Mason project to the north, urged the commission to reject the Bustamante alignment. She cited the city ordinance and the earlier Grand Mason approvals, saying the prior general plan established Mason Road’s alignment and that approving Bustamante’s alignment would “nullify the original approval of the Grand Mason General Plan” or the roadway alignment adopted in 2019. Youngblood referenced City of Houston Code of Ordinances, chapter 42, section 24 in arguing the alignment must follow the major thoroughfare and freeway plan unless the subdivider shows the ordinance’s requirements can be met without the extension.

Rodriguez told the commission staff had coordinated with Harris County and had come to the view that the alignment shown on the Bustamante submittal provided a viable solution given floodplain constraints and land already designated for drainage. County staff and planners present said they had been working with the parties; a county memorandum of understanding was under legal review, staff said.

Commissioners pressed both sides for more detail but ultimately moved to approve. Commissioner Mandapaka moved to grant the variances and approve the general plan; Commissioner Sigler seconded. The motion carried.

The commission’s approval does not by itself construct the road or resolve outstanding intergovernmental agreements. Commissioners and staff noted ongoing coordination among the city, Harris County, and the adjacent developers would continue as later design and legal steps (including any county approvals and memoranda of understanding) proceed.

Votes and next steps: the commission approved the variances and the general plan; staff will continue coordination with Harris County and the adjacent developers as alignment details and required intergovernmental agreements are worked out.