AR 11 CORRESPONDENCE — Pasadena City Council, May 18, 2026

CORRESPONDENCE
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

TAOWAJOU < . - ..

Wednesday, May 6, 2026 2:39 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Re: Opposition to Proposed Development at 600 N. Rosemead Blvd (DHP2026-00073) Some people who received this message don't often get email fromi. Learn why this is important [ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Dear Pasadena City Council Members,
I am a nearby resident who Lives within a five-minute walking distance of the proposed development at 600 N.

Rosemead Boulevard, and I am writing to respectfully express my opposition to the current proposal.

I understand Pasadena's need for additional housing, including affordable housing, and I support responsible development that aligns with community needs. However, I believe this current proposal is too large and too intense for this specific location.

The proposed project would create 133 residential units while providing only 55 parking spaces. In East Pasadena, many residents rely heavily on personal vehicles, and this parking ratio appears unrealistic. Overflow parking will Likely spill into surrounding residential streets and create long-term challenges for nearby homeowners and residents.

I am also deeply concerned about traffic congestion on Rosemead Boulevard and nearby neighborhood streets.

This area already experiences significant traffic, and adding a project of this scale may worsen congestion and reduce neighborhood safety for drivers, pedestrians, and local families.

Additionally, I am concerned about the project's proposed height. The current zoning for this area allows a maximum height of 38 feet (approximately three stories), yet this proposal seeks approval for a six-story building through the use of Density Bonus provisions.

Based on publicly shared community concerns, there appears to be legitimate questions regarding whether this project truly qualifies for the additional height under California Density Bonus Law, particularly regarding whether the property actually meets the required proximity and pedestrian access standards to a major transit stop. I strongly encourage the City Council to carefully review whether the project fully complies with these legal requirements before granting additional concessions.

This project is also directly adjacent to Lower-density residential neighborhoods, including singte-family homes.

A six-story building would be significantly out of scale with the surrounding community and may permanently alter the character of the neighborhood.

As someone who Lives very close to this site, I am also concerned about the long-term construction impacts, including noise, dust, traffic disruptions, and quality-of-life issues for nearby residents.

I respectfully ask the City Council to either deny this proposal in its current form or require meaningful revisions that better align with neighborhood infrastructure, parking realities, and existing zoning standards.

Thankyouforyourtime and consideration.

Sincerely,
Nicole's family
Pasadena, CA 91107
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Crystal Shen •
Wednesday, May 6, 2026 9:55 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Opposition to the Proposed Development at 600 N. Rosemead Boulevard Some people who received this message don't often get email from •.earn whv.this is important [ ! ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Dear Pasadena City council members:

I am writing to formally express my strong opposition to the proposed 133-unit affordable housing project at 600 N. Rosemead Boulevard. While I recognize the city's need for affordable housing, the scale and density of this specific proposal are fundamentally incompatible with the surrounding East Pasadena and Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhoods.

As a local resident, I am deeply concerned about several critical issues:

Incompatible Scale and Height: The proposed building is significantly taller than the current local zoning Limit of 38 feet (three stories). At 68 to 71 feet (five to six stories), it will tower over the adjacent single-family homes and one-to-two-story commercial buildings. This massive structure will permanently alter the neighborhood's character and disrupt the privacy and light of nearby residents.

Severe Parking Shortage: The plan provides only 55 parking spaces for 133 units—a ratio of roughly 0.4 spaces per unit. In this car-dependent area of East Pasadena, this is grossly inadequate. It will inevitably lead to significant overflow parking on surrounding residential streets, creating congestion and safety hazards.

Public Safety and Evacuation Concerns: The project site is located in a high-fire-hazard zone. Rosemead Boulevard is a critical evacuation route for the community. Adding this level of density with such limited parking could dangerously impede emergency vehicles and resident evacuation during a wildfire or other emergencies.

Transit Distance Dispute: Many residents have raised valid concerns regarding the "half-mile" distance measurement used to qualify for the State Density Bonus. A professional survey suggested the site exceeds this distance from major transit stops, yet the city is applying a "straight-Line" interpretation to bypass local height and parking requirements.

I urge the City Council to listen to the voices of the hundreds of residents who have testified against this project.

We are not against housing, but we are against "over-development" that ignores public safety and local neighborhood integrity. We request that the Council require a fundamental redesign that scales down the building to three stories and provides adequate on-site parking.

Thankyouforyourtimeandforconsideringthe concerns of your constituents.

Sincerely,
Roy's Family
Pasadena, CA91107
/IcMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
rom:
ent:
b:
ubject:
commentsDC
Friday, May 8, 202612:26 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
FW: Approve the Rosemead Family Apartments!
'ublic comment For 600 Rosemead on 5/18
rom: Nelson Rivas <[email protected]>
ent: Wednesday, May 06, 2026 4:49 PM
o: commentsDC <[email protected]>
lUbject: Approve the Rosemead Family Apartments!
; ,fc ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report Dhish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Design Commission Members,
i am writing in support of the Rosemead Family Apartments project at 600 N. Rosemead Boulevard, which is before the Design Commission on April 14.

This project will create 133 new affordable homes in Pasadena serving working families, special needs residents, and community members displaced by the Eaton Fire. It's exactly the kind of development our city needs right now.

Rosemead Family Apartments is a thoughtful project. It adapts an existing office building into 51 homes and builds a new structure over a surface parking lot, adding desperately-needed housing to an underutilized commercial street without displacing anyone or encroaching on the surrounding neighborhood.

Pasadena has a legal and moral obligation to provide affordable housing to the people and families who live or work in our community but cannot afford to live there. Especially as our area continues to recover from the Eaton Fire, we should be saying an enthusiastic yes to well-designed affordable housing that prioritizes the return of fire-affected community members.
i urge the Commission to approve the Rosemead Family Apartments and help bring 133 affordable homes to our community.

Nelson Rivas
Downey, California 90241
^4cMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:
ro:

Subject:

Siyu Wang
Saturday, May 9, 2026 7:19 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Opposition to Proposed Development at 600 N. Rosemead Boulevard Some people who received this message don't often get email fromLearn why this is important [ A ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
am a nearby resident living within afive-minutewalkofthe proposed development at 600 N. Rosemead Boulevard, and I respectfully oppose the current proposal. tA/hile I support responsible housing development, this project appears too large and intense for this location. A 133-unit building with only 55 parking spaces is unrealistic for East Pasadena, where many residents rely on cars, and will likely create overflow parking on surrounding residential streets.

I am also concerned about increased traffic, pedestrian safety, and construction impacts, as well as the proposed six-story height in an area currently zoned for approximately three stories. Given the project's proximity to lower-density residential neighborhoods, the scale feels inconsistent with the surrounding community.

I respectfully ask the City Council to deny the proposal as currently designed or require meaningful revisions that better address parking, traffic, neighborhood scale, and zoning concerns.

Thankyou foryourtime and consideration.

Best,
Chris Wang (3416 Roy's Family)
VlcMilIan, Acquanette (Netta)
-rom:
>ent:
ro:
iubject:

SUSAN MARKLE
Monday, May 11, 2026 11:28 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Regarding the Design Commission decision of 500 N Rosemead Blvd.

Some people who received this message don't often get email fromirn why this is important [ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

To all concerned:
\4y residence is at 410 Cliff Drive in Pasadena which is adjacent to the apartments on Cliff. (I am the 3rd house from tvhere the apartments end). Street parking on Cliff is always full in the apartment area. The apartment residents have 3ne parking space per unit assigned to them within their complex, so roughly 170 to 200 units with one car per imt. 600 N Rosemead is a block away. The design commission just approved 135 more housing units with 55 assigned parking spaces. I can imagine what that is going to do with the street parking.

Fhe other aspect of this project that I need clarification on is regarding the California State Density Bonus Law that this 3roject supposedly qualifies for. The law is being abused, when the straight line or "as the crow flies" is within a half nile to the nearest transit that qualifies. But in reality, residents will have to walk more than a half mile. The second point is the bus stop at Foothill and Rosemead is not listed on the Transit oriented Development (TOD) map as a major jansit stop and actually falls outside the half mile radius when measured correctly. The city approved it based on their 3wn measurement (can this trump over the State measurements?) Lastly, the bus stop at Foothill and Rosemead does not run every 20 minutes or less during peak hours to qualify as a major transit. It runs about every 35 minutes.

This project will impact our neighborhood in negative ways, changing the character of our neighborhood, adding noise md congestion and scant available parking areas.

Thank you allowing me to voice my concerns,
Kind Regards,
Susan
Susan Markle, D.C.

Susan Markle, D.C.

Health Wavs Chiropractic
Brea, CA 92821
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:
< Sabrinajimenez
Monday, May 11, 2026 5:11 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Council Member,
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
I am writing in support of approving the affordable housing development at 600 NORTH ROSEMEAD BLVD which will bring a total of 133 affordable housing units to east Pasadena.

We desperately need this affordable housing because we are still experiencing an affordable housing crisis. More than 45% of Pasadena renters are considered cost-burdened, spending over 30% of their income on housing. The city's median home price exceeds $1 million, making homeownership unattainable for many residents. The Point In Time homeless count continues to show over 500 unhoused individuals in Pasadena, while the Annual Count shows over 1,000 individuals to be experiencing homelessness, with about a quarter of them experiencing homelessness for the first time.

East Pasadena has almost no affordable housing. Almost all affordable housing is in the western part of the city. This proposal will bring 1 33 units of affordable housing to an area that has not had it. The history of housing in the U.S., including Pasadena, has been one of racial and economic segregation. Segregation by class and race has made us a weak and divided society. We need to structure our city in a way that integrates our population and helps us to become a strong and united community.

Furt:hermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair hlousing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Many of the opponents of this development are saying that the residents will park in the Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood. However, many of the low income people who choose to live in this building will likely not own cars. Furthermore, to park on the street will require the residents to get overnight parking permits from the city. These permits will require them to park within 500 feet of the building. The Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood is more than 500 feet away and there is plenty of parking along Rosemead Blvd.

We need to move toward being a community that makes car-free living possible. Becoming a city that makes car-free living possible improves the quality of life for everyone by drastically reducing air pollution, reducing noise pollution, creating safer streets, freeing up space for green areas and community interaction, promoting active, healthier lifestyles through walking and cycling, reducing traffic stress, and fostering a stronger sense of community connection.

Sabrinajimenez
Pasadena, California 91103
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Ruth Landsberger ' --'*•-"^>ri/nrn^
Monday, May 11, 2026 5:52 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair h-lousing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Many of the opponents of this development are saying that the residents will park in the Lower hlastings Ranch neighborhood. However, many of the low income people who choose to live in this building will likely not own cars. Furthermore, to park on the street will require the residents to get overnight parking permits from the city. These permits will require them to park within 500 feet of the building. The Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood is more than 500 feet away and there is plenty of parking along Rosemead Blvd.

Ruth Landsberger
Pasadena, California 91101
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Joseph Bearer
Monday, May 11, 2026 5:56 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
J>
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

East Pasadena has almost no affordable housing. Almost all affordable housing is in the western part of the city. This proposal will bring 133 units of affordable housing to an area that has not had it. The history of housing in the U.S., including Pasadena, has been one of racial and economic segregation. Segregation by class and race has made us a weak and divided society. We need to structure our city in a way that integrates our population and helps us to become a strong and united community.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Joseph Bearer
Los Angeles, California 90042
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Monica Abakar ....--...^,...^.g>
Monday, May 11, 2026 5:56 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Monica Abakar
Pasadena, California 91103
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:
tasha
Monday, May 11, 2026 5:58 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Council Member,
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
I am writing in support of approving the affordable housing development at 600 NORTh-1 ROSEMEAD BLVD which will bring a total of 133 affordable housing units to east Pasadena.

East Pasadena has almost no affordable housing. Almost all affordable housing is in the western part of the city. This proposal will bring 133 units of affordable housing to an area that has not had it. The history of housing in the U.S., including Pasadena, has been one of racial and economic segregation. Segregation by class and race has made us a weak and divided society. We need to structure our city in a way that integrates our population and helps us to become a strong and united community.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Lilly Huang <[email protected]>
Monday, May 11, 2026 5:59 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

East Pasadena has almost no affordable housing. Almost all affordable housing is in the western part of the city. This proposal will bring 133 units of affordable housing to an area that has not had it. The history of housing in the U.S., including Pasadena, has been one of racial and economic segregation. Segregation by class and race has made us a weak and divided society. We need to structure our city in a way that integrates our population and helps us to become a strong and united community.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Lilly Huang
Los Angeles, California 90042
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Bailey Payne <[email protected]>
Monday, May 11, 2026 6:01 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable hocusing at 600 N Rosemead
|[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report iphish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

East Pasadena has almost no affordable housing. Almost all affordable housing is in the western part of the city. This proposal will bring 133 units of affordable housing to an area that has not had it. The history of housing in the U.S., including Pasadena, has been one of racial and economic segregation. Segregation by class and race has made us a weak and divided society. We need to structure our city in a way that integrates our population and helps us to become a strong and united community.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Many of the opponents of this development are saying that the residents will park in the Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood, h-lowever, many of the low income people who choose to live in this building will likely not own cars. Furthermore, to park on the street will require the residents to get overnight parking permits from the city. These permits will require them to park within 500 feet of the building. The Lower blastings Ranch neighborhood is more than 500 feet away and there is plenty of parking along Rosemead Blvd.

Bailey Payne
.. _. I
Pasadena, California 91107
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Denise Larsen <[email protected]>
Monday, May 11, 2026 6:20 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

East Pasadena has almost no affordable housing. Almost all affordable housing is in the western part of the city. This proposal will bring 133 units of affordable housing to an area that has not had it. The history of housing in the U.S., including Pasadena, has been one of racial and economic segregation. Segregation by class and race has made us a weak and divided society. We need to structure our city in a way that integrates our population and helps us to become a strong and united community.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair hlousing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Many of the opponents of this development are saying that the residents will park in the Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood, hlowever, many of the low income people who choose to live in this building will likely not own cars. Furthermore, to park on the street will require the residents to get overnight parking permits from the city. These permits will require them to park within 500 feet of the building. The Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood is more than 500 feet away and there is plenty of parking along Rosemead Blvd.

Denise Larsen
i
Pasadena, California 91104
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Jacqueline Kandalaft <[email protected]>
Monday, May 11, 2026 6:23 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Many of the opponents of this development are saying that the residents will park in the Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood, hlowever, many of the low income people who choose to live in this building will likely not own cars. Furthermore, to park on the street will require the residents to get overnight parking permits from the city. These permits will require them to park within 500 feet of the building. The Lower hlastings Ranch neighborhood is more than 500 feet away and there is plenty of parking along Rosemead Blvd.

Jacqueline Kandalaft
Monrovia, California 91016
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Lisa Hoxter <[email protected]>
Monday, May 11, 2026 7:22 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Lisa Hoxter
Los Angeles, California 90042
Mc^4illan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Everett Deiner <[email protected]>
Monday, May 11, 2026 9:38 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

East Pasadena has almost no affordable housing. Almost all affordable housing is in the western part of the city. This proposal will bring 133 units of affordable housing to an area that has not had it. The history of housing in the U.S., including Pasadena, has been one of racial and economic segregation. Segregation by class and race has made us a weak and divided society. We need to structure our city in a way that integrates our population and helps us to become a strong and united community.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

As someone who is a former student at Pasadena City College and spends several hours each week volunteering, shopping, and driving through Pasadena, I can say that the affordable housing crisis is an urgent problem that needs to be addressed immediately across the city. Building affordable and equitable housing for all residents would vastly improve the safety and quality of life for every Pasadena resident and make great strides towards ending the economic injustice faced by many residents. Safe, affordable housing for all is not only a perfectly accomplishable goal, but a necessity that every resident should have access to. The city of Pasadena has the opportunity to be an example and show other cities across the county and southern California how a community can grow and thrive once affordable housing is made available to all residents.

Everett Deiner
Los Angeles, California 90042
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Iris Chen <[email protected]>
Tuesday, May 12, 2026 10:51 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[ t ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Council Member,
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
I am a resident and homeowner in District 1, Tyron Hampton's district.

I am writing in support of approving the affordable housing development at 600 NORTH ROSEMEAD BLVD which will bring a total of 133 affordable housing units to east Pasadena.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair hlousing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

I ask that you approve this affordable housing development.

Sincerely,
Iris Chen
Iris Chen
v
Pasadena, California 91103
VlcMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
:rom:
>ent:
ro:

Subject:
scott
Tuesday, May 12, 2026 3:18 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
FW: 600 North Rosemead Blvd and all other hligh Density housing projects Some people who received this message don't often get email fromLearn why this is important [ A ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you /mow the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Im writing this in support of NOT APPROVING the proposed housing projects at 600 North Rosemead, 1756-1776 East Colorado Blvd, and others that are affected by the California high density housing laws until LEGITIMATE environmental, traffic, evacuation, and other quality of life studies have been completed.
am NOT against affordable housing, I'm against non-common sense, substandard 'affordable housing" that lacks adequate parking and other amenities that will create negative impacts for the neighborhoods AND the proposed future renters. I think we can all agree that not having a safe place to park one's car is not an ideal living situation for anyone. This will create safety and convenience issues for current and future residents in the affected areas. In addition, although rapid transit is improving, it is woefully inadequate For most people to get to where they need to.
^\s you are aware, the residents that will be affected by these changes were not informed that any of these projects was even being proposed until the approval process was well underway and thus did not have enough time to make our voices heard. Hopefully, the appeals that have been filed will at least slow things down until ALL the issues have been adequately addressed.
\f\le understand that the cities are placed in a tough situation by the language of the laws, but the legislators at the state level of California are not the ones that need to live with the consequences of these ill-advised, substandard housing projects that override the local codes that the City of Pasadena has enacted to make our city a great place to live.

The City of Pasadena needs to unite with other cities that are facing similar situations and tell the state of California that these density bonus laws are simply WRONG in the way they are written and at least PAUSE the implementation of any projects until the deficiencies are identified and revisions to the laws can be amended to fix the problems caused by the law in its current state.

Please reject or at least pause these projects in Pasadena until a more suitable plan can be implemented.

Fhankyou
Scott Shimamoto
3asadena, CA 91107
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Mark Baker
Tuesday, May 12, 2026 5:12 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Appeal of 600 N Rosemead Project
Some people who received this message don't often get email fromorg. Learn why this is important [ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Dear City Council,
I run a nonprofit counseling center across the street from the proposed 600 N Rosemead project for low income housing. We have over 30 therapists on staff who have been serving Pasadena for 40 years in this location. If this project goes in we will have to shut down this location, and likely move out of Pasadena.I am aware of the project on Los Robles and Orange Grove, and how businesses in the area suffered significantly from the Lack of parking. Low income residents have cars, and will be forced to park on the street. There is barely enough street parking for out therapists and clients now. Hopefully, it is not too late to stop this project, or our much needed services will certainly have to leave our home of 40 years, and likely leave Pasadena.

Thankyouforyour efforts in this matter,
Dr. Mark Baker
Mark W. Baker, PhD
Executive Director, La Vie Counseling Center
650 Sierra Madre Villa Ave, Suite 110
Pasadena, Ca. 91107
626-351-9616x107
www.LaVieCounseling.org
www.DrMarkBaker.com
Please be aware that e-mail communication can be intercepted in transmission or misdirected. Please consider communicating any sensitive information by telephone, fax, or US mail. The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential. If you are NOT the intended recipient, please notify La Vie immediately at pnyacy@lavi^^ and destroy this message.

McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Dave H - " "—
Tuesday, May 12, 2026 10:44 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse; Gordo, Victor; Hampton, Tyron; Bernard, Nicole (Dist1); Cole, Rick; DerBoghossian, Megheti;[email protected]; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Madison, Steve; Chapman, Justin; Lyon, Jason
600 N. Rosemead Blvd Housing Development Plans
ISome people who received this message don't often get email fromI.Learn why this is important [ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Dear City of Pasadena Representatives,
I'm writing this in support of NOT APPROVING the proposed housing projects at 600 North Rosemead, 1756- 1776 East Colorado Blvd, and others that are affected by the California high density housing laws until LEGITIMATE environmental, traffic, evacuation, and other quality of life studies have been completed.

I am NOT against affordable housing, I'm against non-common sense, substandard "affordable housing" that Lacks adequate parking and other amenities that will create negative impacts for the neighborhoods AND the proposed future renters. I thinkwe can all agree that not having a safe place to park one's car is not an ideal Living situation for anyone. This will create safety and convenience issues for current and future residents in the affected areas. In addition, although rapid transit is improving, it is woefully inadequate for most people to get to where they need to.

As you are aware, the residents that will be affected by these changes were not informed that any of these projects was even being proposed until the approval process was well underway and thus did not have enough time to make our voices heard. Hopefully, the appeals that have been filed will at Least slow things down until ALL the issues have been adequately addressed.

We understand that the cities are placed in a tough situation by the language of the laws, but the Legislators at the state Level of California are not the ones that need to live with the consequences of these ill-advised, substandard housing projects that override the local codes that the City of Pasadena has enacted to make our city a great place to live.

Please reject or at least pause these projects in Pasadena until a more suitable plan can be implemented.

Thankyou
David Hamano
Pasadena, CA 91107
McMiIlan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

John Williams <[email protected]>
Wednesday, May 13, 2026 5:09 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable hlousing at 600 N Rosemead
;[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report iphish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair hlousing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

We need to move toward being a community that makes car-free living possible. Becoming a MlcMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Michael Rodgers
Thursday, May 14, 2026 7:39 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
600 N Rosemead Project
Some people who received this message don't often get email from. Learn why this is important [ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

To whom it may concern: Regarding the proposed large housing project at 600 North Rosemead Blvd - as a neighbor, I thinkthis is not a good idea because the building will have multiple noise-producing air conditioning units not far from the houses at the west edge of our neighborhood, adversely affecting the experience of homeowners as they sit in their yards or possibly even while inside their homes. Although housing is necessary, I recommend buildingthistype of complex in a partof Pasadena that already has multi-unit housing, such as along Walnut or Green. If the project goes forward, at Least please ensure that any machinery is the quietest possible.

Michael Rodgers
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
Subject:FW: Opposition to 600 N. Rosemead Boulevard Affordable Housing Project From: Marty Kasbarian
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2026 8:11 AM
To: PublicComment-AutoResponse <[email protected]> Subject: Opposition to 600 N. Rosemead Boulevard Affordable Housing Project I
Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important [ t ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to formally oppose the proposed 133-unit development at 600 N. Rosemead Boulevard in East Pasadena.

While I understand the need for housing solutions in California, this project is far too dense and incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood and infrastructure. The proposal for 133 units with only 55 parking spaces is simply unrealistic for this area and will create severe spillover parking problems on nearby residential streets.

This portion of East Pasadena is not a transit-oriented urban core where residents can realistically rely on public transportation for daily life. Many households will still require vehicles for work, school, childcare, and daily activities. The resulting overflow parking will negatively impact nearby homeowners, businesses, emergency access, and overall neighborhood livability.

In addition, many residents have raised legitimate concerns regarding:
wildfire evacuation and emergency access,
increased traffic congestion,
excessive building height and massing compared to surrounding properties, strain on local infrastructure and public services,
loss of neighborhood character,
and inadequate community outreach during the review process.

The current proposal appears to prioritize maximizing unit count while ignoring the long-term consequences on the surrounding community. A project of this scale should be redesigned to better fit the neighborhood, include substantially more parking, and address public safety and infrastructure concerns before moving forward.

I respectfully urge the City Council and all relevant departments to reconsider this project in its current form and require meaningful revisions that better protect existing residents and the character of East Pasadena.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Marty Kasbarian
Pasaden CA
proud homeowner in this neighborhood for 15 years!
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Mike G
Thursday, May 14, 2026 9:50 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ]
Learn why this is important at
[ A ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Dear Mayor and Council Members,
I am writing in support of approving the affordable housing development at 600 N. Rosemead Blvd which will bring a total of 133 affordable housing units to east Pasadena.

This proposal will bring 133 units of affordable housing to an area that has not had it. The history of housing in the U.S., including Pasadena, has been one of racial and economic segregation. Segregation by class and race has made us a weak and divided society. We need to structure our city in a way that integrates our population and helps us to become a strong and united community. Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities. Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Many of the opponents of this development are saying that the residents will park in the Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood.

However, many of the low income people who choose to live in this building will likely not own cars. Furthermore, to park on the street will require the residents to get overnight parking permits from the city. These permits will require them to park within 500 feet of the building. The Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood is more than 500 feet away and there is plenty of parking along Rosemead Blvd.

We need to move toward being a community that makes car-free living possible. Becoming a city that makes car-free living possible improves the quality of life for everyone by drastically reducing air pollution, reducing noise pollution,creating safer streets, freeing up space for green areas and community interaction, promoting active, healthier lifestyles through walking and cycling, reducing traffic stress, and fostering a stronger sense of community connection.

Best,
Michael Gibilisco
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Thomas Lahoz <[email protected]>
Thursday, May 14, 2026 10:04 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[A] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you /mow the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Councii Member,
Dear Mayor and Councii Members,
I am writing in support of approving the affordable housing development at 600 NORTH ROSEMEAD BLVD which will bring a total of 133 affordable housing units to east Pasadena.

East Pasadena has almost no affordable housing. Almost ali affordable housing is In the western part of the city. This proposal will bring 133 units of affordable housing to an area that has not had it. The history of housing in the U.S., including Pasadena, has been one of racial and economic segregation. Segregation by class and race has made us a weak and divided society. We need to structure our city in a way that Integrates our population and helps us to become a strong and united community.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Many of the opponents of this development are saying that the residents will park in the Lower blastings Ranch neighborhood. However, many of the low income people who choose to live in this buiidlng will iikely not own cars. Furthermore, to park on the street will require the residents to get overnight parking permits from the city. These permits will require them to park within 500 feet of the building. The Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood is more than 500 feet away and there is plenty of parking along Rosemead Blvd.

Thomas Lahoz
Pasadena, Caiifornia 91101
McMillan^Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Lillian Sun <[email protected]>
Thursday, May 14, 2026 10:10 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[A ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Councii Member,
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
I am writing in support of approving the affordable housing development at 600 NORTH ROSEMEAD BLVD which will bring a total of 133 affordable housing units to east Pasadena.

We desperately need this affordable housing because we are still experiencing an affordable housing crisis. More than 45% of Pasadena renters are considered cost-burdened, spending over 30% of their income on housing. The city's median home price exceeds $1 million, making homeownership unattainable for many residents. The Point In Time homeless count continues to show over 500 unhoused individuals in Pasadena, while the Annual Count shows over 1,000 individuals to be experiencing hometessness, with about a quarter of them experiencing homeiessness for the first time.

East Pasadena has almost no affordable housing. Almost all affordable housing is in the western part of the city. This proposal wiil bring 133 units of affordable housing to an area that has not had it. The history of housing in the U.S., including Pasadena, has been one of racial and economic segregation. Segregation by class and race has made us a weak and divided society. We need to structure our city in a way that integrates our population and helps us to become a strong and united community.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

We need to move toward being a community that makes car-free living possible. Becoming a city that makes car-free living possibie improves the quality of life for everyone by drastically reducing air pollution, reducing noise pollution, creating safer streets, freeing up space for green areas and community interaction, promoting active, healthier lifestyles through walking and cycling, reducing traffic stress, and fostering a stronger sense of community connection.

Lillian Sun
Pasadena, California 91101
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Bob Miller
Thursday, May 14, 2026 10:18 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Barbara Miller
LHRA City Council Appeal 600 N. Rosemead Project - May 18,2026 Some people who received this message don't often get email from. Learn why this is important [ A ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

To whom it may concern:

Please see below as provided to the Design Commission. Further, since that hearing, it has been reported that approximately 39% of the units developed would be allocated to homeless individuals or families. We are not opposed to affordable housing in compliance with state law within reasonable density and height restrictions. We are opposed to the developer securing funding that mandates homeless occupancy at this high ratio — approximately 51 out of 132 units.

We are also greatly concerned that this information was not publicly shared by the developer or city staff to consider and discuss in the appropriate forums. The needs of homeless are quite different then those needing affordable housing who work in Pasadena or neighboring communities. This topic needs and deserves a full public vetting as well as advising the public if the intent of this project was ever to include homeless housing which often brings with it a raft of public safety, crime, sanitation, mental health and other issues. What is the plan and cost to provide these additional services? What will be the impact on the residential as well as office, retail, biotech, design and other commercial entities in the Lower hlastings and surrounding areas? Have all these entities as well as residents had an opportunity to consider the proposed development in the context of 51 homeless housing units and what potential impact this would have on their places of business and homes? To say we are disappointed in City staff is an understatement. We would hope that the City Councilwill act as needed to require a full hearing on all of the facts regarding this development and consider reasonable, rationale, and appropriate design adjustments in the best interest of future occupants as well as businesses, retailers, and residents.

Thakyouforyour consideration and please see below.

Bob and Barbara Miller
From: Bob Miller
Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2026 2:17 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>
Cc: Barb Miller
Subject: Proposed Development - 600 North Rosemead, Pasadena CA To Whom it May Concern:

My name is Bob Miller. My wife Barbara and I reside at 630 Rim Road, Pasadena, CA, 91107. With the exception of nine years, we have resided in three homes in Upper and Lower Hastings Ranch since 1969 when our families moved to Pasadena. Barbara was twelve and I was fourteen. We have resided in this home since 2013 and expect to age in place.

We write today to state our concerns regarding the construction of the proposed six-storyGOO North Rosemead multifamily housing project. Our concerns relate to the size and number of stories. We are fully supportive of the need for additional housing, but the size of this development—height, 68', six stories—as opposed to the current 38', three stories allowable —, 55 parking spaces for 132 units, and the added height, noise, and other pollution associated with rooftop equipment and structures — is of major concern.

We understand the City's position is that its "hands are tied" as regards the state Density Bonus Law if the property is within one-half mile of a "major transit stop". The issue seems to be "straight Line" vs. "path of a pedestrian" distance. We will not speak to the method of measurement definitions but will state other communities have concluded that Local zoning codes take precedent when ambiguity as to statute interpretation exists. Given this is the situation as regards this development, we believe the Design Commission and by extension the City, should take the position that consistent with Pasadena Zoning Code and the East Pasadena Specific Plan, the proposed housing development should be limited to three-stories and the requisite number of parking spaces.

As others at the hearing will speak in much greater detail—and there will be many others commenting via correspondence—I will not speak further on the merits of this request. My wife and I are planning to attend the hearing and look forward to the proceedings.

In closing, a six-story building is too large for this site and inconsistent with our neighborhood. Instead, please protect our neighborhood, challenge the City staff's interpretation, and work with state agencies and legislators to further refine the needed definitions that protect people and communities. Do not accept vague interpretations. Fight and protect East Pasadena as the City Council does regularly for other neighborhoods and the City as a whole.

No one is against affordable housing. It's needed. We only ask that you provide this housing consistent with existing neighborhood attributes. In the case of the hlastings Ranch area, for over 70 years.

Thankyouforyourconsideration.

Respectfully,
Bob and Barbara Miller
Pasadena, CA
Robert B. Miller, DPA
' ? - ^
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Robert B i>
Thursday, May 14, 2026 10:33 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
600 N. Rosemead Affordable Housing Project
Some people who received this message don't often get email fromwhy this is important [I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you (mow the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Dear Pasadena City Council Members,
I am writing to express my concern regarding the proposed affordable housing development at 600 N.

Rosemead Boulevard. While I support the need for affordable housing, I believe the current proposal does not adequately address the impact that insufficient parkingwill have on the surrounding neighborhood and local businesses.

The project proposes over 1 30 residential units while providing substantially fewer parking spaces. This imbalance creates a significant risk that residents and visitors will rely heavily on street parking in surrounding areas. Nearby businesses already depend on available parking for customers, and overflow parking from this project could negatively impact their operations and accessibility.

Additionally, increased competition for street parking will likely create more congestion and traffic as drivers circle surrounding streets searching for available spaces. This may also negatively affect the quality of life for nearby residents and could impact neighborhood desirability and property values over time.

I respectfully ask the City Council to carefully reconsider the parking component of this project and require a more realistic parking plan that better reflects the needs of future residents while protecting surrounding neighborhoods and businesses.

Thankyouforyourtimeand consideration.

Sincerely,
Robert Borodian
Lower Hastings Ranch Resident
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Priscilla Calderon <[email protected]>
Thursday, May 14, 2026 11:08 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[A] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you frnowthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

We desperately need this affordable housing because we are still experiencing an affordable housing crisis. More than 45% of Pasadena renters are considered cost-burdened, spending over 30% of their income on housing. The city's median home price exceeds $1 million, making homeownership unattainable for many residents. The Point In Time homeless count continues to show over 500 unhoused individuals in Pasadena, while the Annuai Count shows over 1,000 individuals to be experiencing hometessness, with about a quarter of them experiencing homelessness for the first time.

East Pasadena has almost no affordable housing. Almost all affordable housing is in the western part of the city. This proposal will bring 133 units of affordable housing to an area that has not had it. The history of housing in the U.S., including Pasadena, has been one of racial and economic segregation. Segregation by class and race has made us a weak and divided society. We need to structure our city in a way that integrates our population and helps us to become a strong and united community.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Many of the opponents of this development are saying that the residents wilt park in the Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood. However, many of the low income people who choose to live in this building will likely not own cars. Furthermore, to park on the street will require the residents to get overnight parking permits from the city. These permits will require them to park within 500 feet of the building. The Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood is more than 500 feet away and there is plenty of parking along Rosemead Blvd.

Priscilla Calderon
Pasadena, California 91101
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Maral Derkrikorian
Thursday, May 14, 2026 11:44 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Maral Derkrikorian
LHRA Appeal /600 N Rosemead
B
Some people who received this message don't often get email from.earn why this is imBO.rt.ant [ A ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Aiert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

I am in favor of the appeal of the 600 N Rosemead project. When we moved into this area it was with the understanding that it would be a single family dwelling residential neighborhood. That having been said, I feel safer with the "no overnight parking" on our streets that may be abolished with the excess of vehicle parking needs in the immediate area. Not to mention the strain of our water and sewer and power needs. I am not happy with the amount of growth that is planned.

Thank you for listening and your consideration.

Respectfully,
Maral Derkrikorian
Besnah Mermerian
Pasadena CA 91107
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:
; [email protected] >
Thursday, May 14, 2026 1:43 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[A] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click [inks or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Council Member,
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
I am writing in support of approving the affordabie housing development at 600 NORTH ROSEMEAD BLVD which will bring a total of 133 affordable housing units to east Pasadena.

We desperately need this affordable housing because we are stiil experiencing an affordable housing crisis. More than 45% of Pasadena renters are considered cost-burdened, spending over 30% of their income on housing. The city's median home price exceeds $1 million, making homeownership unattainable for many residents. The Point In Time homeless count continues to show over 500 unhoused individuals in Pasadena, while the Annuai Count shows over 1,000 individuals to be experiencing homelessness, with about a quarter of them experiencing homelessness for the first time.

East Pasadena has almost no affordable housing. Almost all affordable housing is in the western part of the city. This proposal will bring 133 units of affordable housing to an area that has not had it. The history of housing in the U.S., including Pasadena, has been one of racial and economic segregation. Segregation by class and race has made us a weak and divided society. We need to structure our city in a way that integrates our population and helps us to become a strong and united community.

Furthermore, the state PoSicy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtualiy no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Many of the opponents of this development are saying that the residents will park in the Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood. However, many of the low income people who choose to iive in this building will likely not own cars. Furthermore, to park on the street wiEI require the residents to get overnight parking permits from the city. These permits will require them to park within 500 feet of the building. The Lower Hastings Ranch neighborhood is more than 500 feet away and there is plenty of parking along Rosemead Blvd.

We need to move toward being a community that makes car-free living possible. Becoming a city that makes car-free living possible improves the quality of life for everyone by drastically reducing air poilution, reducing noise poilution, creating safer streets, freeing up space for green areas and community interaction, promoting active, healthier !ifesty!es through walking and cycling, reducing traffic stress, and fostering a stronger sense of community connection. vlathrop
»
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Rachel Orfila <[email protected]>
Thursday, May 14, 2026 1:59 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Yes to Affordable Housing at 600 N Rosemead
[ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

Furthermore, the state Policy of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing obligates the city to take meaningful actions that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.

Denying affordable housing in an area of the city that has had virtually no affordable housing would almost certainly be viewed by the courts as an action that is inconsistent with this obligation.

Rachel Orfila
Pasadena , California 91107
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Arthur Bislamyan
Thursday, May 14, 2026 2:06 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
NOT APPROVING 600 N Rosemead
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ]
Learn why this is important at
[ A ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.

I'm writing this in support of NOT APPROVING the proposed housing projects at 600 North Rosemead, 1756-1776 East Colorado Blvd, and others that are affected by the California high density housing laws until LEGITIMATE environmental, traffic, evacuation, and other quality of life studies have been completed.

I am NOT against affordable housing, I'm against non-common sense, substandard "affordable housing" that lacks adequate parking and other amenities that will create negative impacts for the neighborhoods AND the proposed future renters. I think we can all agree that not having a safe place to park one's car is not an ideal living situation for anyone. This will create safety and convenience issues for current and future residents in the affected areas. In addition, although rapid transit is improving, it is woefully inadequate for most people to get to where they need to.

Hopefully, the appeals that have been filed will at least slow things down until ALL the issues have been adequately addressed.

We understand that the cities are placed in a tough situation by the language of the laws, but the legislators at the state level of California are not the ones that need to live with the consequences of these ill-advised, substandard housing projects that override the local codes that the City of Pasadena has enacted to make our city a great place to live.

Please reject or at least pause these projects in Pasadena until a more suitable plan can be implemented.

Thank you
Arthur Bislamyan
Pasadena Ca 91107

Pasadena City CouncilMay 18, 2026

Pasadena City Council
May 18, 2026