Historic Preservation Commission approves storefront restoration for downtown contributor

The Ojai Historic Preservation Commission on May 22 approved Work Permit 25004 for façade restoration at a building identified as a contributor to the Downtown Ojai Historic District, including reopening original transom windows and replacing the current metal storefront with a wood, multi‑pane system.

Staff said the proposal — based on an analysis prepared by Page & Turnbull — would expose an original wood transom that had been covered with plywood and would replace the existing non‑original metal storefront with operable, wood, six‑pane windows to better match the building’s historic character. Maura (Community Development staff) told commissioners that the property lies in the East Avenue design guideline area and that the project will subsequently go to the Planning Commission because the parcel is in a commercial zone.

Why it matters: the building is listed as a contributor to the California Register‑listed Downtown Ojai Historic District, and the commission’s decision advances work that proponent says will restore original fabric and improve street activation while preserving character‑defining materials.

In a staff presentation, Maura summarized the work permit application and the Page & Turnbull analysis received April 17, 2025. The specific scope described to the commission included reopening the covered transom windows that were discovered behind interior finishes; replacing the existing storefront glazing and framing with new wood framed, multi‑pane, operable windows; and adding a window on the east side of the building to match existing openings. Maura told the commission that staff recommended approval of the major work permit before them.

The project applicant, identified in the hearing as Mr. Becker, said crews discovered the transoms after removing an interior dropped ceiling and that the team repaired and primed several damaged transom lights. "I exposed it right away because I thought it was ridiculous that they were covered over," Mr. Becker said, adding that the goal was to return the façade to its earlier appearance and to bring light into the interior.

Commissioners discussed several design details. Commissioners disclosed brief site visits (ex parte contacts) and confirmed none reported substantive meetings with the applicant. Commissioners pressed the applicant on how far the new sash would be inset, whether the existing header/profile would be preserved, whether the new double‑hung sash would match the existing horns and arch details, and whether the new side window would match the pair on the east elevation. Mr. Becker and his architect said the header and main profile would remain and that the new double‑hung windows would include matching horns and trim; they also said the new sash would sit slightly more inset than the current mid‑20th century metal storefront because of the double‑hung frame.

Some commissioners queried whether the proposed six‑pane, operable double‑hung system would read as a modern "farmhouse" look rather than a more continuous historic storefront. Commissioner Walker and others emphasized that the recently uncovered transoms were a significant historic discovery and that the Page & Turnbull analysis concluded the wood transom is original and that the proposed work would not detract from the building’s historic character.

After discussion a motion to approve the work permit passed unanimously. The commission recorded five affirmative roll‑call votes from the members present: Chair McCatton, Commissioner Akins, Commissioner Walker, Commissioner Moore and Commissioner Levitt.

Next steps: the approved work permit will be followed by the required planning‑level review because the site is in a commercial zoning district; the applicant will still need a separate sign permit if signage is installed. Staff told the commission the Planning Commission will review the project under regular calendar procedures.

Votes at a glance: Work Permit 25004 — outcome: approved (roll call recorded five yes votes).