South Pasadena, CA · Cultural Heritage

Appeals and Council Review

Code Citation
SPMC 2.65(e)(13)
In One Sentence
Any person aggrieved by a Cultural Heritage Commission decision on a Certificate of Appropriateness has 15 calendar days to file a written appeal — within the same window, any two members of City Council can independently request review.

The 15-Calendar-Day Window

SPMC 2.65(e)(13)(A) sets the appeal window. Within 15 calendar days from the effective date of the Cultural Heritage Commission’s decision, an appellant files a written letter of appeal with the city clerk and pays the filing fee established by Council resolution.

“Any person aggrieved by the commission’s approval or denial of a certificate of appropriateness” may appeal — applicants whose projects are denied or conditioned, neighboring property owners who object to a project’s approval, or other interested third parties. The 15-day clock runs on calendar days, not business days. An appeal letter that arrives on day 16 is untimely.

The Two-Member Council Review Path

SPMC 2.65(e)(13)(B) establishes a parallel review path that does not require an aggrieved third party. Within the same 15-day window, any two members of the City Council may independently request review of a Commission decision. The request is filed in writing with the city clerk.

By design of the ordinance, the request cannot state that the Commission erred or that the two requesting members have predetermined the matter to be heard by Council; it simply triggers review. This is a structural feature, not a procedural quirk — it preserves the Council’s ability to take a second look at consequential decisions without prejudging them.

Grounds for Appeal

The written letter of appeal must “set forth the grounds relied on by the appellant.” Per SPMC 2.65(e)(13)(C), upon receipt of the appeal letter and payment of the filing fee, the city clerk places the matter on the City Council agenda for a regularly scheduled meeting under the same notice procedures that apply to the Commission’s underlying hearing — public notice no later than 10 days before the meeting, with notice to the applicant, property owners and legal occupants within 300 feet, and (for projects in a historic district) all property owners and occupants of every parcel in the district.

The 60-Day Council Hearing

SPMC 2.65(e)(13)(D) requires the City Council to conduct a public hearing within 60 days following the filing of the written appeal, or as soon as practicable. Council provides written notice by certified mail to the property owner at least 10 days before the hearing. At the hearing, the appellant and any other interested parties are given a reasonable opportunity to be heard in order to show cause why the Commission’s decision should be reversed or modified.

Council may at any time prior to its final decision refer the matter back to the Commission for further consideration. Council may also continue the hearing from time to time if needed. Per SPMC 2.65(e)(13)(E), Council may reverse, affirm wholly or partly, or modify the Commission’s decision, and may impose such conditions as the facts warrant. Council’s decision is final.

Practical Consequences

For applicants planning closer-call projects

The 15-day window is short for serious appeals work. For projects where the Commission vote is likely to be split, or where conditions imposed by the Commission may be more restrictive than the applicant can accept, appeals planning has to start before the Commission’s decision rather than after. Waiting until day 14 to consult counsel and file a written letter of appeal compresses an already tight timeline.

For opponents of an approval

Third parties who object to a Certificate of Appropriateness approval also have only 15 calendar days to file. The appeal letter has to set forth specific grounds — not just dissatisfaction with the outcome. Preparing the substantive grounds while the Commission process is still active is the only way to file a complete appeal letter inside the window.

For projects with planning interests beyond the applicant

The two-Council-member review path means a Commission decision on a higher-profile project — a designated landmark, a contributing resource in a historic district, a project with district-wide visibility — can be brought before Council without an appellant filing. Applicants should plan project narratives and design materials assuming Council review may follow Commission review.

Practical Implication

The 15-day calendar-day window is a hard deadline. Any applicant or interested third party who anticipates appealing a Commission decision should retain counsel and begin drafting grounds during the Commission proceeding, not after. Council’s decision after the 60-day hearing is final under the ordinance — there is no further administrative review path.

Source: South Pasadena Municipal Code Chapter 2, Article IVH (Cultural Heritage Ordinance, Ord. No. 2315 § 2, 2017, amended Ord. No. 2400, 2025), § 2.65(e)(13). SPMC Chapter 36, § 36.630.020 (public hearing notice procedures).

Request a Review

Considering work on a South Pasadena historic property?

Design 1 Studio reviews the Cultural Heritage Commission process, the discretionary review thresholds, and the project-specific design requirements before submission. We work the framework, not against it.