Ojai planning commission advances objective design standards process, forms ad hoc committee

The Ojai City Planning Commission on May 6 discussed a draft of multifamily and mixed‑use objective design standards intended to be codified into the city’s zoning code and took a formal step to form an ad hoc committee to guide next steps.

Planning staff member Lucas, who presented the draft, described objective standards as measurable rules — for example a 25‑foot height limit or a 10‑foot setback — that remove discretionary interpretation. Lucas said the standards respond to the city’s housing element requirement and to state housing laws and compared sample approaches from Temecula, Gilroy and Solvang to show a range of detail and scale.

The commission’s discussion focused on how prescriptive the rules should be and how to protect Ojai’s character. Commissioners and members with design backgrounds urged the commission to identify a clear town identity before locking in a wide set of allowed materials and styles. One commissioner recommended selecting a small number of local precedent buildings and testing whether they could be built under the draft standards as a practical check.

Several commissioners proposed creating a short‑term design advisory group composed of two planning commissioners and outside design professionals to advise staff and the commission. Lucas said an ad hoc committee (two commissioners plus invited professionals) can gather focused design advice and then report back to the full commission, noting that a permanent board would require council action. Commissioners agreed the ad hoc approach would balance concentrated design review without creating additional formal decision‑making bodies.

Public speakers urged preserving the downtown’s pedestrian scale and historic feel. Resident Larry (called forward by the chair) warned that inconsistent building materials and permitting could erode the town’s character, and another commenter urged staff to use digital visualization tools (for example SketchUp and GIS‑based models) so the public can see how proposed changes would look in context.

During the meeting commissioners also discussed related legal context. Staff answered questions about state housing laws, saying SB 330 remains in effect and noting that SB 35 and other state statutes create streamlined ministerial pathways in particular circumstances; staff cautioned that many objective standards required by housing law are meant to produce ministerial approvals when projects meet the objective criteria.

At the end of the item a commissioner moved to create an ad hoc committee consisting of two planning commissioners and outside design professionals to assist with development of the objective standards. The motion named two commissioners to serve; the commission approved the motion on roll call (Murphy, Chesley, Rice, Stewart voted yes). Staff and commissioners discussed Brown Act constraints and agreed the ad hoc group would collect advice and return recommendations to the full commission rather than act as a deliberative voting body.

The commission asked staff to return suggested ad hoc membership, a short work program, and a limited set of comparative materials on form‑based codes for review at a future meeting. Staff also agreed to prepare a map showing parcels likely to be affected by the proposed standards and to include examples that test the draft’s implications for preferred neighborhood buildings.

The commission did not adopt the draft ordinance at the meeting; the action was limited to forming the ad hoc committee and directing follow‑up work. The planning staff emphasized that the draft will continue to be refined in subsequent meetings and will be brought back for further public discussion and formal action.