Mansionization Could Come Back to Planning Commission for Public Hearing

The thorny issue of mansionization in Pasadena will come back before the city’s Planning Commission for discussion next month, said Planning Director David Reyes.

For at least five years, local residents have railed against mansionization home remodeling projects that turn suburban dwellings into mansion-sized homes that don’t fit their lots or neighborhoods.

The concerns have centered on potentially inappropriate size, scale, massing, on-site location, design and style.

The preservation group Pasadena Heritage has been vocal about these concerns over the years. The nonprofit has been saying that new developments were continuing in Pasadena “at an aggressive pace” and have presented a constant challenge to maintaining the historic character of the city’s residential neighborhoods.

During last Wednesday’s Planning Commission meeting, city staff reviewed a summary of prior concerns and possible ways to address them regarding mansionization. The commissioners and the public had questions about how such a proposal would be implemented, what kind of review a single-family housing project would receive, what types of notifications neighbors would receive, and details about an appeal or complaint process.

The item is scheduled for Monday’s City Council meeting, but it will be recommended to come back to the council in October after the Planning Commission holds a public hearing.

“Addressing issues related to mansionization, including out of scale additions and remodels, can have very real impacts on established residential neighborhoods in our city,” Reyes told Pasadena Now. “Over the last several years, staff has worked with the community and the Planning Commission to develop regulations that have been adopted by the City Council to strengthen rules in single-family neighborhoods across the city, including Hastings Ranch and the Hillside areas. Additionally, Pasadena’s long-standing Historic District regulations provide compatibility for the homes within existing and newly established districts.  

“Given the outstanding issues raised by the Planning Commission and the community at a recent commission meeting, this item will be re-agendized for the Planning Commission’s consideration anticipated to be held at its meeting of Sept. 9,” Reyes said.

Five years and counting

Serious discussions about mansionization at the city level began in 2015. when the Planning and Community Development Department held citywide community meetings focused on single-family home neighborhood issues.

Other meetings were also held focusing on Lower Hastings Ranch and on Hillside Overlay District areas, which helped the department learn of neighborhood concerns about mansionization from a wider cross-section of the community.

The meetings led to design guidelines that could eventually cover all other single-family home residential zones in the city.

In 2018, the Planning Department submitted a draft of “single-family residential design” guidelines that were the result of those community and consultation meetings. The guidelines were intended to provide enough guidance for homeowners and applicants for new housing construction to ensure that their projects, new or accessory, were appropriate for the surrounding neighborhood.

Since then, the Planning Commission and the Planning and Community Development Department have been exchanging notes to determine which provisions in the draft guidelines needed to be refined in order to address concerns by members of the community about the potential for “mansionization” in Pasadena’s single-family residential neighborhoods.

“Mansionization is an important issue in the city, especially to preserve a sense of community, stability, and single-family affordability,” said Felicia Williams, who chairs the Planning Commission. “Some new issues and concerns have come up since the commission reviewed this in 2019, and the Planning Department is being very responsive to the commission and the public by bringing this back for a public hearing.”  

Not on our block

In public comments, one local resident took the Planning Department to task for not notifying neighbors about the scope of a project. Michael Gottlieb said his neighbor built a large home, grossly incompatible with neighboring homes and the character of the Linda Vista neighborhood.

However, the posted sign for the project only said “second story/remodel.”

“Nothing was shared with us before construction,” Gottlieb said. “In fact, my neighbor tore down the existing structure and built a house that towers over my own [admittedly in part due to a rise in the elevation of the street]. Its porch extends nearly to the sidewalk and the house occupies the whole street side of the lot. “Neighbors stop and stare and shake their heads. Yes, it

is their property. But even if within code shouldn’t the Planning Department take into account compatibility with neighboring structures and preservation of the character of neighborhoods?”

Other neighbors called for signs accurately describing projects and an effort to make sure that projects are compatible with the neighborhood.

Andrew Oksner said a notice posted across the street from his house said there would be an “addition of 583 square feet to extend the living, dining and family rooms” to his neighboring home.

“My reaction was ‘great,’ as such would be a clear investment and improvement to the neighborhood,” Oksner said.

But that reaction turned into displeasure and the feeling that the neighbor had gamed the system.

“Improvements of far more than 583 [square feet] seem to be being built — there is a new facade, roof, second-floor deck, chimney, and additional and/or significantly enlarged rooms.”

The Linda Vista-Annandale Association said it supports the adoption of mansionization rules to limit and control out-of-character and out-of-scale neighborhood development in most of Pasadena’s single-family neighborhoods.

However, the group questioned the review process, and the compatibility and design standards.

“Although we are perceived as a hillside area, in fact, a significant percentage of our neighborhood is considered ‘flat’

[about 15-20 percent] and is being altered in accordance with underlying zoning in a manner that is out of scale, out of character, and with unacceptable impacts on adjacent neighbors and potential historic resources and streets. And, the time is now  — we have several streets at a tipping point where character,

scale, and valuable architecture and design are about to be lost forever,” wrote Nina Chomsky, association president.