Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Concerns And Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge council to fix zoning, speed up variances and enforce codes during general comment
Summary
Multiple residents used general comment to urge action on zoning rework, local landmark protection, code enforcement and nuisance uses in residential neighborhoods; speakers described long delays in variance processes and urged clearer code and quicker remedies.
During the council—s general comment period on Oct. 21, 2025 several residents described long-running struggles with the city—s zoning and permitting processes, asked for stronger code enforcement against a tow-truck business operating from a residence, and thanked council members and staff for assistance in pursuing landmark or code remedies.
Cindy Cromer, speaking as a property owner in RMF-35 zones and a longtime participant in zoning matters, recounted her experience with the 1995 zoning rewrite and described how nonconforming density rules affected building options in RMF zones. She urged clarity and cited a former planner—s statement that RMF zones were not "anti-density" and explained how property owners made improvements where rebuilding was limited.
Annie Isaacson thanked council members for intervening on behalf of the Sampson Altadena building and said city staff and council facilitated progress toward local landmark status. She thanked specific council members and planning staff for meetings and a corrected schedule that allowed a vote to occur earlier.
Josh Schuerman asked the council to press code enforcement to address a tow-truck business operating from a rental home near the Mill Creek neighborhood, listing multiple departments he and neighbors had contacted and requesting timely enforcement to restore the residential character of the block. He said vehicles and mechanical work were occurring at all hours and asked the council to pursue stronger enforcement or code updates to prevent similar uses in residential zones.
Jason Seaton and other commenters described a three-year variance process and urged the council to ensure the variance process functions as intended so property owners can align front setbacks and build in keeping with neighboring properties.
Why it matters: Public comment highlighted recurring themes: lengthy entitlement and variance timelines, the persistence of nuisance commercial uses in residential areas, and the interaction of local landmark protections with city code. Councilors and staff referenced these themes across agenda items and in later decisions.
