Historic Preservation

A design review board member speaking for herself, she said even discounted fees are outrageously expensive — her own Mills Act application would cost about $30,000 — and the city needs to clarify 'like for like' standards.

He said the program isn't working — commission meetings are canceled for lack of cases, the one application was deemed incomplete, and fees remain too high even with discounts; he suggested an informal interim process or greater city subsidy.

Speaking for the Alhambra Preservation Group, he compared Alhambra's $3,000 evaluation fee to Pasadena's $124 and South Pasadena's $700, calling the fees outrageous for a city with an $88,000 median income and urging a re-evaluation.

A longtime preservation advocate joining by Zoom, she recommended a further short-term fee cut paired with free public workshops run with the Historical Society and Preservation Group, noting zero completed applications in a year.

The first Historic Preservation Commission president said she and her husband abandoned their own designation plans over $5,000-$10,000 in fees, and offered concrete fixes: fee waivers for early applicants, sliding scales, assessment mini-grants, workshops, and Mills Act fee rebates.

Agreed that the 50% fee cut is a positive first step to help residents navigate historic preservation.

Expressed support for the Mills Act adoption and raised concerns regarding water billing issues and street pavement inequities.

Supported the 50% fee discount but raised practical questions about how Certificates of Appropriateness and Mills Act contracts will work in practice.

Questioned whether the fee subsidy has a budget cap and raised concerns about police armored vehicle acquisition.

Praised the front-loaded fee reductions for historic preservation and supported the CLG application.

Expressed dissatisfaction with planning department notification and due process regarding a development project at 110 South Chapel Avenue.