Commission approves museum roof repairs after debate over fire‑hardening options

The Ojai Historic Preservation Commission on May 22 voted to approve Minor Work Permit WP2502, authorizing a city‑led roof maintenance and repair project at the Ojai Valley Museum. Commissioners pressed Public Works staff to investigate fire‑hardening measures and underlayment options before the work proceeds to contract approval.

Why it matters: the museum structure was described at the hearing as a designated City landmark; commissioners expressed concern about ember‑borne wildfire risk and sought confirmation that the repair would include appropriate underlayment and other mitigations while retaining the existing mission tile character.

Staff described the work as removal of the existing two‑piece mission roof tiles (to be saved for reinstallation), inspection and repair of the underlying wood decking where necessary, replacement of the underlayment, installation of new flashing, and reinstallation of the existing tiles. Maura (Community Development staff) noted that under Municipal Code §4.815 the minor work permit is subject to criteria in the draft resolution and that the director had referred this project to the commission for review. The staff recommendation was approval of the repair as scoped.

Joseph Padilla, Public Works project manager, said Public Works had solicited contractor bids and intends to remove the tile, inspect and repair decking as needed, replace underlayment and reinstall the tiles. When commissioners asked whether fire‑hardening had been discussed earlier, Padilla initially said, "There was no discussion about fire hardening the roof for this project." Minutes later he described specific measures the department was considering, including cement at roof ridges and discussion of bird stops at the eaves, and said underlayment selections could include more fire‑resistant products. Padilla said the department would review options for underlayment and flashing and pursue practical, visually unobtrusive measures.

Commissioners debated whether to defer action so they and Public Works could meet and review potential historic‑appropriate fire‑hardening treatments (for example, filling tile hollows or using a peel‑and‑stick asphalt underlayment beneath the tiles). Commissioner Levitt moved to defer and requested a site meeting; after discussion commissioners were reminded that substantive design changes would trigger a requirement for a historian and a historic resources report. A subsequent motion to approve the permit with a specific direction that Public Works evaluate fire‑hardening options before contract award carried 3‑2.

The commission’s recorded votes on the final approval were: Chair McCatton — yes; Commissioner Akins — yes; Commissioner Walker — yes; Commissioner Moore — no; Commissioner Levitt — no.

Procedural and scheduling notes from the hearing: Public Works said it had already solicited bids and planned to present a contract award to City Council in mid‑June; the department also said funding for the project is expected to be moved into the next fiscal year CIP and that contractor availability will determine the start date. Commissioners asked staff to consider options that would increase the roof’s resistance to fire embers while retaining the existing tile character. Staff reminded commissioners that if the project design changed substantially the city would require a historic resources report before returning the revised design to the commission.

Next steps: Public Works will review underlayment and ember‑protection options and report back; staff will track timing for the City Council contract award and any required historic resources reporting. The permit as framed was approved by the commission 3‑2.