O^^S
it
z10
<ol^^^^0
^s^
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
December 30, 2025
The Honorable Gavin Newsom
Governor, State of California
1021 0 Street, Suite 9000
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: SB 677 Wiener) Transit-oriented Development - Comments for Amendment Dear Governor Newsom,
It is our understanding that SB 677 (Wiener) will be amended to become a clean-up bill for SB 79 (Wiener). The City of Pasadena writes again to express our strong opposition to SB 79 and to request that the following amendments related to historic preservation and exemptions be considered as part of the clean-up bill.
Pasadena, a Certified Local Government, is synonymous with our rich cultural resources and decades-long commitment to historic preservation. This commitment is rooted in our community's genuine desire to protect its most cherished resources. The City remains very concerned that SB 79 and the current draft of SB 677 do not appropriately protect historic resources. The "transit-oriented development alternative plan" in SB 79 provides certain exemptions for sites with a "historic resource designated on a local register". However, this does not adequately protect historic resources in Pasadena. In Pasadena we have resources listed on a state or national register that are not on a local register. It is of vital importance to Pasadena that any eUsibIe historic resources and any historic resource listed on a local, state or National register be expressly protected as part of SB 677.
The attached map shows the impact of this bill on existing historic districts that are within Vi- mile of an A Line Metro Station. The following comments are provided for inclusion in the clean-up bill:
It is not clear if historic districts, mcluding local landmark districts, as a whole are considered historic resources as part of the "sites" criteria. The clean-up bill should clearly state that historic districts, including local landmark districts, are considered historic resources;
100 North Garfield Avenue • Pasadena, CA 91109
(626) 744-4311 Fax (626) 744-3921
Attachment C
SB 79 does not protect eligible resources that have not been designated. The clean-up bill should clearly state that eligible resources are subject to the same rules as designated resources. For the last two years, the City of Pasadena has been undertaking a citywide historic resource survey where unknown resources could be uncovered that are significant to the history of the region, State, or nation; SB 79 only protects historic resources that are registered at the local level. The clean-up bill should expand that to include all historic resources registered at the state or national level. The Old Pasadena, Playhouse and Civic Center historic districts for example are only in the National Register and not on a local register; SB 79 provides a cutoff off date of January 1, 2025 for designating a historic resource to be eligible for the exemptions in the bill. The clean-up bill should eliminate the cutoff date to account for future resources that become known that qualify for designation; and For a transit-oriented development alternative plan, the combmed area of historic resources registered at the local level that can be exempted from SB 79 cannot exceed 10% of the total area the alternative plan. The clean-up bill should eliminate this threshold and should exempt all historic resources registered at the local, state or national level.
SB 79 treats every city the same with mandates that do not recognize local efforts to produce housing. Pasadena is not against adding housing or density, m areas with or without light rail stations, and understands that each community must do its fair share to accommodate the need for new and affordable housing and continues to work towards that goal.
The clean-up bill should exempt SB 79 on sites between 14-mile and l/2-mile of a tier II transit stop for Pasadena and other medium sized cities (those with a population less than 200,000) when:
SB 79 already exempts sites further than !4-mile of a tier II transit stop for cities with a population less than 35,000. This should also apply to medium sized cities that meet the same service ratio- where there is no more than one transit stop per 35,000 people. For example, Pasadena exceeds this ratio with a population of 138,000 and six tier II transit stops, or one transit stop per 23,000 people;
It is demonstrated that a majority of the area greater than y4-mile of a tier II transit stop currently allows a density higher than what is mandated by SB 79. Many areas in Pasadena already allow a density of 87 du/ac, which is higher than mandated by the bill; It is demonstrated that the city has increased housing capacity over the past 10 years for areas greater than l/2-mile of a tier II transit stop. Since 2015, Pasadena has upzoned properties throughout the central district and along major corridors. While these areas are not necessarily within '/2-mile of a tier II transit stop, they are very waUcable and well served by transit; and/or
The city has a Housing Element that was certified as of the effective date of SB 79.
Pasadena is acutely aware of the statewide housing crisis and acknowledges that significant steps must be taken to address housing production. However, the provisions of SB 79 will undermine the many efforts that Pasadena has undertaken in recent years to increase housing supply near transit as part of a more holistic community planning strategy, whUe protecting our historic resources. For these reasons, the City of Pasadena continues to strongly oppose SB 79 and appreciates serious considerations that these recommended changes be incorporated in the clean-up bill.
Sincerely,
(^.Kf
Victor M. Gordo
Mayor
ec: City Council Members, City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney and Director of Planning and Community Development
The Honorable Sasha Renee Perez, California State Senator The Honorable John Harabedian, California State Assembly League Regional Public Affairs Manager Jennifer Quan, [email protected] League of California Cities, cityletters(%cacities.org
Kyra Ross, Emanuels Jones & Associates