A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge on Monday granted a developer’s petition challenging the City of Pasadena’s handling of a proposed seven-story apartment project at 615 S. Catalina Ave.
Judge Curtis A. Kin granted a petition for writ of mandate filed by 615 S. Catalina Ave LLC, according to a July 27 minute order obtained by Pasadena Now. The petition, filed Sept. 5, 2024, represented the first cause of action in the developer’s lawsuit against the city.
“Once again, the City acts in wanton disregard of State law and private property rights, and once again it lost in court,” said local attorney Richard McDonald. “First the State Department of Community Development told the City my client has the right to a Builder’s Remedy project under the Housing Accountability Act. Now the Court has too. We intend to vigorously prosecute this matter.”
The court’s brief minute order does not detail the legal reasoning behind the decision or specify what action Pasadena must take. It refers to a separate written ruling signed and filed Monday that was incorporated into the order but was not included with the minute order.
“The City is disappointed by the ruling and believes it took appropriate action regarding this project,” said Lisa Derderian, chief communications officer for the city. “The City is proud of its pro-housing record and has done its best to comply with state mandates regarding housing. The City has at all times acted in good faith in attempting to comply with applicable state laws. We decline to comment further on this pending litigation.”
The ruling stems from a dispute that began in 2024 over the developer’s application for concept design review of a 49-unit multifamily development proposed in an RS-6 single-family residential zone.
City officials determined the application was incomplete after finding that the developer had not submitted all materials required under the city’s application checklist. Pasadena requested payment of application fees, information showing the evolution of the project’s design and documentation demonstrating compliance with the Zoning Code or an application for a zoning map amendment, General Plan amendment or variance.
The developer appealed the determination to the Board of Zoning Appeals, which voted 3-0 on May 16, 2024, to uphold the city’s finding. The developer paid the outstanding application fees the following day and later appealed to the City Council.
The developer argued that the city’s actions violated the Housing Crisis Act, the Housing Accountability Act, the Permit Streamlining Act and other state housing laws that it maintained took precedence over Pasadena’s zoning requirements.
Pasadena contended that the application remained incomplete because the developer had not provided design evolution information or addressed the project’s lack of compliance with the zoning designation.
The city also maintained that the project did not qualify for the Housing Accountability Act’s “builder’s remedy,” which can limit a city’s authority to reject certain housing developments when its state-mandated housing plan is out of compliance.
In addition to granting the writ petition, Kin lifted a stay that had prevented the developer from pursuing its second and third causes of action, which seek declaratory relief and allege inverse condemnation.
The judge scheduled a status conference for Aug. 27 at the Stanley Mosk Courthouse. At that hearing, the developer must tell the court whether it still intends to pursue the remaining claims following the ruling on the writ petition.
Get our daily Pasadena newspaper in your email box. Free.
Get all the latest Pasadena news, more than 10 fresh stories daily, 7 days a week at 7 a.m.
