Ojai Planning Commission upholds removal of orange bench outside Ohio Ice Cream, urges staff to help find compliant replacement

The City of Ojai Planning Commission voted July 16 to uphold a Community Development directordetermination that an orange metal bench placed in the downtown arcade in front of 210 East Ojai Avenue violates the arcade design guidelines and must be removed.

The case came before the commission as an appeal of the directordetermination. Maura Macaluso, principal planner for the City of Ojai, told commissioners the bench was installed without meeting the arcade design guidelines adopted by the City Council in 02/2008 and cited the municipal code provision used to support the directordetermination. "This is an appeal of a director determination upholding section 10.2.2005 of the OHAI municipal code that refers to any design guidelines or policies that have been adopted by the council or commission," Macaluso said.

The bench was the subject of a complaint filed with code compliance in August 2024; staff re-opened the matter in May 2025 after staffing changes. City staff issued a notice of violation in June 2025 and later a citation for failure to remove the bench; a citation was paid and further citations were paused when the owner filed the appeal.

John (owner of Ohio Ice Cream) told the commission he and his family support Ojai and asked for an opportunity to keep the bench, saying itmatches his storebranding and provides seating for customers. "We love owning and operating the ice cream store to be a part of the Ojai experience," he said. He said the bench is not permanently bolted and that his business collected 340 petition signatures in support.

Public commenters were split. Several speakers argued the bench fits the shop and the towncharacter and urged leniency; others said the commission should enforce the existing color, material and bench standards in the arcade so the public space remains visually consistent. Brian Akins, a member of the Historic Preservation Commission, noted the historic guidelines and that the Historic Preservation Commission had separately considered an orange sign in a prior vote.

Commission discussion focused on two points: whether the commission should apply the existing design guidelines consistently, and whether enforcement should be handled comprehensively across the arcade rather than singling out one business. Commissioners said the dispute centers on the benchdesign choices, not the functional presence of a bench. As Commissioner Robert (surname not specified on the record) summarized, "it's not the functional aspect of having a bench. That's not the problem. It's the color, the material, right?"

Rather than granting an exception, the commission voted to uphold the director's decision requiring removal of the orange metal bench from the public right-of-way. The motion included a friendly amendment directing staff to work with the applicant on purchasing a wooden bench that complies with the arcade design guidelines and to explore an artistically appropriate city site or donation option for the existing orange bench. The roll call vote was recorded as: Chesley approved; Graham yes; Murphy yes; Trent yes. The motion passed.

Next steps: staff will coordinate with the applicant on sourcing a guideline-compliant wooden bench, and discuss potential relocation or donation of the existing bench to a city-appropriate site or public art placement. Commissioner comments made clear the commission expects consistent enforcement of the arcade guidelines as city code compliance transitions from complaint-driven to a more proactive enforcement model.

The action closes the current appeal at the commission level; the applicant retains the right to appeal the commissiondecision to City Council under the administrative appeal procedures, as discussed by staff during the hearing.