South Pasadena commission denies delisting request for 1818 Mission Street after contested hearing

The South Pasadena Cultural Heritage Commission voted April 16 to deny an owner-initiated request to remove 1818 Mission Street from the city’s inventory of historic resources.

The motion to deny, made by Commissioner Lopez and carried in a roll call vote, concluded a public hearing in which staff and a paid consultant recommended further analysis while the property’s project team argued the house had lost integrity and required substantial repair. Michael Donovan, the city’s associate planner, summarized the staff position and the Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE) that concluded the 1911 Craftsman bungalow is a non-contributor to the Garfield Park historic district.

Chronicle Heritage consultant Scott Torres told the commission the HRE found “no substantial evidence to suggest that the property was associated with a single event or a pattern of events” and that alterations have compromised its integrity. The homeowners’ project architect, Patrick Serpiki, countered that the front porch and foundation were structurally compromised and that “demolition and reconstruction of the compromised elements are necessary, not discretionary.” He asked the commission to support delisting to allow rehabilitation and an addition that would meet planning standards.

Former commission member Mark Gallatin and several preservation professionals and neighbors urged the commission to deny the request. Gallatin warned approving multiple delistings would set a precedent and “jeopardize South Pasadena’s standing as a certified local government,” and urged staff and the commission to pause delisting until the city updates its survey and procedures. Nearby homeowner Jennifer Kale told commissioners she believed the application contained inaccuracies about adjacent properties and warned delisting could enable “mansionization” and erode the district’s character.

Commissioners framed the decision around two concerns: the HRE’s treatment of district context and the long-term precedent of using delisting as an alternative to the certificate-of-appropriateness (COA) process. Chair Severson and other commissioners said they were reluctant to remove the property from the inventory without clearer district-level analysis and emphasized that delisting is a “nuclear option.”

Commissioner Lopez moved to deny the delisting application on the grounds that it did not meet the requirements for approval; the motion was seconded and adopted in roll call: Lopez — yes; Ding — yes; Chair Severson — yes. The commission’s recommendation will be transmitted to city council as part of the record.

Next steps: the commission directed staff and applicants to pursue further district-level analysis or consider the COA process for compatible changes and restoration work. The public hearing for the item was closed.