Planning Commission Regular Meeting

Zoning Definitions and Code Accuracy

• Staff will research neighboring cities to adopt definitions for missing use categories.
• GIS administrative updates will correct zoning map errors between MPD and M1 zones.
• These code changes require acknowledgment before implementation without further Commission direction.

M1 Zone Integrity

• Retail and commercial sales uses will move from permitted to Conditional Use Permit status.
• Exterior alterations in the M1 zone must undergo Design Review to control visual standards.
• This approach protects manufacturing land while allowing flexibility for attached retail operations.

VMU Zone Transition

• Members debated moving single-family dwellings to CUP status to enforce mixed-use standards.
• Some members argued market forces naturally drive conversion without creating non-conforming issues.
• The concept of moving single-family to CUP was added for further discussion.

Commercial Setbacks and Design

• Staff will create a discussion piece to address non-conformity issues with front yard setbacks.
• Commissioners considered a 1.5 FAR overlay district to allow zero lot-line buildings in downtown areas.
• The goal is to support pedestrian activity and maintain eyes on the street.

Historic Project Scheduling

• Staff must vet the 242 East Ojai Avenue item for Historic Preservation Commission clearance.
• This ensures proper protocol before the item moves to the Planning Commission agenda.
• Agenda scheduling for 102 North Signal Street was also clarified by the HPC.

• # Planning Commission Meeting Summary: Proposed Solutions & Action Items
• The following summary outlines the key zoning challenges identified during the meeting and the corresponding solutions or actions proposed by Commission members and staff.
• ### 1. Zoning Definitions & Code Accuracy
• Issue: Numerous uses listed in Table 2-4 (e.g., agriculture processing, vegetable packaging, clothing production, cosmetics/pharmaceuticals) lack specific definitions within the current zoning code. Additionally, some map discrepancies exist (e.g., MPD zone displaying as M1).
• Proposed Solution:
• Staff Action: Research neighboring cities (Oxnard, Ventura, Ventura County) to adopt pre-packaged definitions for missing categories.
• Staff Action: Correct zoning map errors (MPD vs. M1) through GIS administrative updates, as these require no Commission direction once the code change is acknowledged.
• ### 2. M1 (Light Industrial) Zone Integrity
• Issue: The M1 zone currently permits commercial/retail uses (gun shops, meat markets, pet stores) which may encroach on industrial land and conflict with the zone's intent. Existing 500-foot residential proximity rules create barriers for industrial uses.
• Proposed Solution:
• Restrict Retail: Move retail and commercial sales uses (gun shops, meat markets, restaurants) from "Permitted" to Conditional Use Permit (CUP) status within the M1 zone. This protects the land for manufacturing and R&D while allowing flexibility for attached retail (e.g., a pottery shop attached to manufacturing).
• Design Review: Ensure any exterior alterations in M1 (even for CUPs) are subject to Design Review to maintain visual standards and control noise/smell impacts near residential areas.
• ### 3. VMU (Village Mixed Use) Zone Transition
• Issue: Single-family dwellings are permitted by right in the VMU zone, which contradicts the urban planning intent of a transitional mixed-use area. This limits the ability to foster true mixed-use development.
• Proposed Solutions (Debated):
• Option A (Restriction): Move Single-Family Dwellings in VMU to CUP status. This would force vetting of the residential use against mixed-use standards and encourage eventual conversion to commercial/mixed-use.
• Option B (Market Driven): Maintain Single-Family as "Permitted." Some members argue the market naturally drives conversion to mixed-use over time (e.g., examples on Kenyatta/Matilija) and CUPs could create non-conforming headaches for property owners.
• Consensus: The concept of moving VMU single-family to CUP was added to the list of items for further discussion to control the transition process.
• ### 4. Commercial Setbacks & Design (C-1 Zone)
• Issue: The current code requires a 10-foot front yard setback for C-1 zones, but many existing buildings have zero setbacks ("lot-line buildings"). This is causing confusion and non-conformity issues.
• Proposed Solution:
• Policy Review: Create a discussion piece to address lot-line buildings and setbacks.
• Overlay District: Consider creating a 1.5 FAR overlay district that allows for zero lot-line buildings in specific intensified downtown areas to support "eyes on the street" and pedestrian activity.
• ### 5. Public Comment & Project Updates
• Jacob Acosta: Submitted an "Eco-Living Village" proposal (85 units for homeless/housing) and "Ojai Dam Project" ideas.
• Staff Note: The Dam project falls outside city limits; the Housing proposal is noted as a public comment item.
• Brian Akins (HPC): Clarified agenda scheduling for 242 East Ojai Avenue and 102 North Signal Street.
• Action: Staff must vet the 242 East Ojai item to ensure it has been properly cleared through Historic Preservation Commission before moving to the Planning Commission agenda.
• ### 6. Administrative Actions
• Director’s Exemptions: Commission members were reminded to review emailed Director’s Exemptions to maintain the two-step process for concerns.
• Scheduling: Next meetings confirmed (Jan 21). Joint meeting with City Council anticipated for Q2 2026.
• ***

Immediate Next Steps

• Staff to research definitions from neighboring cities.
• Staff to redline the zoning code changes (M1 CUPs, Map corrections) for the next meeting.
• Commission to finalize the VMU Single-Family CUP discussion.
• Staff to verify the 242 East Ojai Avenue Historic status before scheduling.