Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Design Guidelines topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lompoc delays architectural review guideline amendments to Nov. 6 after commissioners request more review time
Summary
Planning staff proposed amending architectural review guidelines to add objective design standards and remove subjective language to comply with state housing laws; commissioners said they needed more time to review the redline document and moved the item to a special meeting on Nov. 6.
Planning staff presented proposed amendments to the City of Lompocs architectural review guidelines designed to align local standards with recent state housing laws and clarify objective design criteria. Staff said the changes respond to state requirements such as SB 35, SB 330 and AB 211 and would make qualifying residential projects eligible for streamlined ministerial review if they meet objective standards.
The proposed edits would remove vague subjective language (phrases like "strong visual relationships" and "visually interesting"), add objective standards for residential projects (section 3), delete Old Town sign criteria that duplicate the zoning code, add definitions (for example, "compatible" and "major facade improvement"), and replace images that conflict with code. Staff said the updated document is shorter (reduced from 80 to 54 pages) and intends to make the guidelines more user-friendly.
Multiple commissioners said they had insufficient time to digest the redline draft and asked for additional review time. According to staff, state deadlines and public-notice timelines make scheduling tight, but staff offered a special meeting option. The assistant city attorney confirmed that scheduling a continuance to a future agendized date is legally appropriate.
The commission voted to continue the item to a special meeting on November 6 at 6:30 p.m. so commissioners can review the revisions and return with red-line comments before the commission makes a recommendation to the city council.
Staff said their recommendation remains to forward a resolution recommending approval of the amendments to city council after the commissions review.
