Office of the City ManagerAppeal of BZA DecisionCompleteness Determination615 South Catalina AvenueCity CouncilJune 10, 2024 Planning & Community Development DepartmentOverview•Issue before Council is a completeness determination.•The appellant has attempted to proceed through the Design Review process out of order.•The City will continue to process the application when the required items are provided.•The Builder’s Remedy does not apply because the City’s adopted Housing Element was in substantial compliance with State law when the SB330 preliminary application was submitted.2 Planning & Community Development DepartmentBackground•What is before the Council is an appeal of a BZAdetermination that an application for ConceptDesign Review is incomplete for processing :>On March 4, 2024, a Concept Design Review application was filed for a new multi-family project located at 615 S. Catalina Ave.>The application was reviewed for completeness against the requiredsubmittal checklist for Concept Design Review.>Required items from the checklist were not provided and staff deemed theapplication incomplete for processing.>Project Notes:•7-story, 49 rental units (10 affordable)•Single-family zone•Builders Remedy3 Planning & Community Development DepartmentBackground: Board of Zoning Appeals•On May 16, 2024, the Board of Zoning Appeals heardthe appeal at a scheduled public meeting:>At the conclusion of the public hearing, a motion was made to deny the appeal and uphold the determination that the submitted Concept Design Review application is incomplete by a vote of 3-0. >The decision was based on the fact that not all the required items from the checklist for Concept Design Review were submitted for the application.>On May 28, 2024, the applicant filed an appeal application citing adisagreement with the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals.4 Planning & Community Development DepartmentAppeal of Incomplete Notice•Appeal:>The appellant asserts that the City violated State law:Senate Bill 330 (the Housing Crisis Act)The Housing Accountability ActThe Permit Streamlining Act, andOther unspecified State laws that preempt the city’s Zoning Code.>The only issue before the Council is whether or not the Concept DesignReview application was incomplete.>The staff report does address all but one of the points raised in the appellantsletter(s)and concludes that the City has not violated state law and the Citywill continue to process the Concept Design Review when the requesteditems are provided.5 Planning & Community Development DepartmentIncompleteness DeterminationApplicant has submitted various applications related to the project>SB330 Preliminary application - in effect>PPR - Finished, comments provided>Preliminary Consultation- Finished at staff level, comments provided>Concept Design Review- status under appeal tonight6 Planning & Community Development DepartmentBackground-Concept Design Review•Completeness Review:>Under the Permit Streamlining Act, a public agency is required to review adevelopment application and determine its completeness within 30 days ofsubmission and notify the applicant of missing items. The application wassubmitted on March 4, 2024.>On April 3, 2024, the application was deemed incomplete due to missing threerequired items and an incomplete notice was sent to the applicant.>The Permit Streamlining Act requires that an appeal be heard and provided witha final written determination within 60 days (June 8, 2024, Saturday) by thegoverning agency.>A City Council appeal hearing date of June 3, 2024 (within 55 days), was offeredto the appellant. However, due to scheduling conflicts, the appellant waived the60-days and requested the date of June 10, 2024 (within 62 days).>In addition, the Code of Civil Procedure provides that when a deadline lands ona weekend, the deadline extends to the next business day, also June 10, 2024.7 Planning & Community Development DepartmentIncomplete Notice – Current Status•Deemed incomplete for missing these requiredsubmittal items:1.Payment of application fees;Fees were paid after the BZA meeting (May 17, 2024)This item has been addressed and is no longer outstanding2.Design Evolution– Address comments provided in Preliminary Consultation;andThis item is still outstanding3.Compliance with the Zoning Code: Density, Height, Setbacks, FAROr obtain a Variance, Zoning Map and General Plan Diagram AmendmentThis item is still outstanding8 Planning & Community Development DepartmentIncompleteness DeterminationDesign Evolution– Address comments provided in Preliminary Consultation>Preliminary Consultation is the first step in the design review process andinforms the second step, Concept Design Review. The steps cannot beskipped or taken out of sequence (Pasadena Muni Code Section17.61.030.C.1):Preliminary ConsultationConcept Design ReviewFinal Design Review>The applicant is required to address the comments from the PreliminaryConsultation in the Concept Design Review application and to explain howthe design has evolved.>The applicant submitted the Concept Design Review prior to the completionof the Preliminary Consultation and comments being provided.9
Planning & Community Development DepartmentDesign Evolution – Address comments provided in Preliminary Consultation 10 Incompleteness DeterminationSTEP 1PRELIMINARY CONSULTATIONSTEP 2 CONCEPT DESIGN REVIEWSTEP 3 FINAL DESIGN REVIEWDesign Review ProcessCurrent Application Submittals by AppellantSTEP 2 CONCEPT DESIGN REVIEWSTEP 1 PRELIMINARY CONSULTATION Planning & Community Development DepartmentDesign Evolution – Address comments provided in Preliminary Consultation 11 Incompleteness Determination
Planning & Community Development DepartmentIncompleteness DeterminationCompliance with the Zoning Code: Density, Height, Setbacks, FAR, orobtain a Variance, Zoning Map and General Plan DiagramAmendment>On the Concept Design Review application, the applicant stated that themulti-family project was utilizing the “Builder’s Remedy”, based on theirSB330 preliminary application submitted to the City on February 15, 2023.>The “Builder’s Remedy” arises from the Housing Accountability Act(Government Code Section 65589.5; the HAA). If a city has not adopted ahousing element in substantial compliance with state law, developers maypropose housing development projects that do not comply with either thezoning or the general plan.>The SB330 preliminary application was submitted under the assumption thatthe City of Pasadena did not have a compliant housing element; thus,attempting to vest rights to a “Builder’s Remedy” project not compliant withthe existing zoning or the City’s general plan.12 Planning & Community Development DepartmentIncompleteness DeterminationTimeline 13 Jul. 18, 2022
City Council Adopted Housing ElementJan. 11, 2023
Submitted final Housing Element to HCD. HCD determined that this Housing Element was in substantial complianceFeb. 15, 2023 Builder’s Remedy Preliminary Application submitted (SB 330)>The City had an adopted housing element in conformance with state lawbefore the SB330 preliminary application was submitted, the “Builder’sRemedy” does not apply to the project.>Therefore, the project must comply with the Zoning Code.
Planning & Community Development DepartmentIncompleteness DeterminationCompliance with the Zoning Code: Density, Height, Setbacks, FAR, or obtain aVariance, Zoning Map and General Plan Diagram Amendment>Regardless of whether the project is eligible for the “Builder’s Remedy,” theproject must either comply with the Zoning Code or apply for a Zoning Mapand General Plan Diagram amendment or Variance (PMC 17.60.060.A.5.a)>Zoning Map Amendment:To change zoning to allow multi-family>General Plan Diagram Amendment:To change the General Plan designation to allow a higher densityresidential14 Planning & Community Development DepartmentCompliance with the Zoning Code: Density, Height, Setbacks, FAR, or obtain a Variance, Zoning Map and General Plan Diagram Amendment 15 Incompleteness Determination
Planning & Community Development DepartmentConclusion and Recommendation•Uphold the BZA’s decision and the determination that the Concept Design Review application No. DHP2024-00099 is incomplete, for the reasons described in detail in the staff report and in oral and written testimony and elsewhere in the record, in that the application does not contain the following information required on the City’s application form and listed in the incompleteness letter:1.Design Evolution – Address comments provided in Preliminary Consultation; and 2.Compliance with the Zoning Code: Density, Height, Setbacks, FAROr obtain a Variance, Zoning Map and General Plan Diagram Amendment•Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal. 16 Office of the City ManagerAppeal of BZA DecisionCompleteness Determination615 South Catalina AvenueCity CouncilJune 10, 2024 Planning & Community Development DepartmentConcept Design Rendering 18 Planning & Community Development Department
Street View – Context Photos
19 Single-FamilySubject SiteMulti-Family
Planning & Community Development DepartmentSite Plan
20 N
Planning & Community Development Department
Response to Supplemental Letter-Point 1
21 •The Permit Streamlining Act requires that an appeal be heard and provided with a final written determination within 60 days by the governing agency (June 8th)•April 11: Email from the applicant preferring that the appeal be heard on June 10th (62 days).
Planning & Community Development DepartmentDesign Review Steps - Process 22 •Step 1: Preliminary Consultation (non-entitlement) >An informal discussion between the Director and the applicant toexplain to the applicant the applicable design guidelines, findings,and procedures that will apply to the project, and to discusscompliance of the project with the design guidelines.•Step 2: Concept Design Review (entitlement) >Addressed the basic design of a project, including compatibility withsurroundings, massing, proportion, siting, solid-to-void relationships,and compliance with applicable design guidelines. Applicants needto demonstrate visually and in writing how the revised designaddresses the comments provided during Preliminary Consultation.•Step 3: Final Design Review (entitlement) >Focuses on construction details, finishes, materials, and landscaping,and on consistency of the project with the design and compliancewith the conditions of the approved during Concept Design Review.
Planning & Community Development DepartmentResponses to Supplemental Letter Submitted to BZA•Point No. 1: The appellant claims that the City positioned itself to deprive the owner of the rights provided by the SB330 Preliminary Application. >The City has never taken the position that the SB330 preliminary applicationhas expired. The preliminary application remains in effect.•Point No. 2: The appellant disagrees with the finding that the “Builder’s Remedy” does not apply to the project. >HCD found on March 10, 2023, that the City’s adopted housing elementsubmitted on January 11, 2023 was in substantial conformance with state law;the SB330 preliminary application was submitted in February.>The Builder’s Remedy does not apply to the project.>Regardless of whether the project is eligible for the “Builder’s Remedy,”applications for a Zoning Map amendment, with concurrent amendment tothe General Plan diagram, or Variance, are required for the application to bedetermined to be complete.23 Planning & Community Development DepartmentResponses to Supplemental Letter Submitted to BZA•Point No. 3: The appellant asserts that notification of inconsistencies with the zoning code and general plan needs to be provided to an applicant within 30 days of the date that a SB330 preliminary application is submitted. If the notice is not sent, that application is “deemed consistent.” Because the City did not send this notice, the applicant asserts that the project has been “deemed consistent” with the existing zoning and general plan, and so no application for a Zoning Code or general plan amendment is needed. >No statute requires the City to review the completeness of an SB 330preliminary application within any time period or to notify the applicant ofinconsistencies with the Zoning Code and General Plan within 30 days.24 Planning & Community Development DepartmentResponses to Supplemental Letter Submitted to BZA•Point No. 4: The appellant states that subjective design standards cannot be applied to the project. Furthermore, the appellant states that the Design Evolution information provided for Preliminary Consultation should suffice for Concept Design Review. >The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 also allows use of subjective standardsestablished before January 1, 2020. The City’s subjective design standardswere adopted 2015 and have not been amended since that date.>Separate design evolution submittal information is required for the PreliminaryConsultation application and the Concept Design Review application. Theapplicant is expected to use the comments on the Preliminary Consultation tomodify the application for Concept Design Review and to explain how thedesign has evolved.>Preliminary Consultation is the first step in the design review process andinforms the second step, Concept Design Review. The steps cannot beskipped or taken out of sequence.25 Planning & Community Development DepartmentResponses to Supplemental Letter Submitted to BZA•Point No. 5: The appellant states that the City has violated the Permit Streamlining Act by requiring design evolution information for Concept Design Review when the Preliminary Consultation was not complete, and by not providing an invoice at an earlier date. >The City’s design review ordinance establishes a strict three-step design reviewprocess: 1) Preliminary Consultation; 2) Concept Design Review; and 3) FinalDesign Review.>The conflict the appellant raises is a result of the applications being submitted outof sequence, i.e., the Concept Design Review application was submitted prior tothe completion of the Preliminary Consultation application.>Separate design evolution submittal information is required for the PreliminaryConsultation application and the Concept Design Review application.>Now that the Preliminary Consultation has been completed, the applicant cancomplete the Concept Design Review application.26 Planning & Community Development DepartmentResponses to Supplemental Letter Submitted to BZA•Point No. 6: The appellant states that the City violated the PSA by not notifying the applicant of inconsistencies with the Zoning Code in the incomplete letter for the Preliminary Consultation application, dated August 24, 2023, or at any other time prior to April 3, 2024. >Zoning Code compliance is not a required item on the PreliminaryConsultation submittal checklist.•Point No. 7: The appellant reiterates that notification of inconsistencies with the zoning code and general plan needs to be provided to the applicant within 30 days of the submittal of an SB330 preliminary application containing all required information. >Same response as to Point No. 3 - No statute requires the City to review thecompleteness of an SB 330 preliminary application within any time period or tonotify the applicant of inconsistencies with the Zoning Code and General Planwithin 30 days•Point No. 8: The appellant states that the City violated the PSA by not notifying them of their rights to appeal an incomplete letter. >State law does not require notification, only that a process is required to beprovide to an appeal.27 Planning & Community Development DepartmentResponses to Supplemental Letter Submitted to BZA•New Point No. 9: The appellant states that the HCD letter to Compton is not the law, and inconsistency with zoning standards is not a basis for finding an application incomplete under the PSA and HAA. >Neither the PSA nor the HAA state that zoning consistency cannot be requiredto find an application complete, nor do they proscribe a requirement toapply for a zoning amendment. Pasadena’s Municipal Code and ConceptDesign Review application require zoning consistency to find an applicationcomplete. 28 Planning & Community Development DepartmentSB330 Preliminary Application•SB 330 Preliminary Application:>The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) created a preliminary applicationthrough which an applicant for a residential project may obtain assurancesfor continued review under the ordinances, standards, and policies in effectwhen a complete preliminary application is submitted.>Once an SB330 preliminary application containing all required information issubmitted to the City, the housing project is vested under the rules in effect atthe time of submittal.>The SB330 preliminary application was submitted to the City on February 15,2023 .29 Planning & Community Development DepartmentLocation Map 30 Planning & Community Development DepartmentZONING MAP 31 RM-32Tournament Field Landmark District Polytechnic SchoolRS-6 Planning & Community Development DepartmentZoning Map
Central District Specific Plan Multi-FamilyMulti-FamilyMulti-FamilySingle-FamilySingle-FamilyTournamentField LD CommercialPSPSCal TechPolytechnicSchool
Planning & Community Development DepartmentGeneral Plan Map 33 InstitutionalInstitutional
Low DensityResidentialMedium-High DensityResidentialMedium-High DensityResidential High DensityResidentialMediumMixed-UseLowMixed-Use
Planning & Community Development DepartmentHCD Letter
34 Planning & Community Development DepartmentHCD Letter 35 Planning & Community Development DepartmentHCD Letter 36