UnGovr Words

Planning Commission Regular Meeting

Planning Commission Regular MeetingAugust 5, 2026

Switch meeting
BodyPlanning Commission
MeetingRegular Meeting
Date📅 August 5, 2026

Click any transcript line to jump the video there.

Meeting Summary

  1. PendingQueued for transcription.
  2. AIYou are hereAuto-transcribed and summarized; not yet human-verified.
  3. VerifiedReviewed and corrected by a person.

Present: Murphy, Chesley, Steward, Rice-Schmidt · Absent: Hanson

This summary was AI-generated to save you time. It may miss or misstate details, so verify against the official recording and the transcript.

At a glance

Conditions of Approval Resolution (July 15th Appeal)

  • The Commission revised original tree planting requirements to substitute two sycamores for Coast Live Oaks due to drought tolerance concerns.
  • A licensed arborist will determine the specific placement of the new trees on the site.
  • The resolution was passed with these modifications following public comment and staff confirmation.

Ojai Roots MCUP Modification Request

  • Staff recommended maintaining existing limits on occupancy, operating hours, and amplified entertainment due to three verified violations.
  • Commissioners debated expanding hours for coffee service but expressed concern regarding early morning delivery noise.
  • The application was continued to an uncertain date to allow the applicant and neighbors to collaborate on revised conditions.
  • Condition 2 was updated to remove specific ABC license type references while requiring ABC approval for any new license.

Hotel El Roblar Health Spa Project

  • Staff presented a finalized Historic Resources Report indicating the building is eligible for historic listing but not currently designated.
  • The Commission voted to refer the project and report to the Historic Preservation Commission for review on August 13th.
  • The Planning Commission will reconvene on August 19th to incorporate HPC comments into its final recommendation to City Council.

Closed Session

  • No closed session items were reported during this meeting.

Full summary

Call to Order and Administrative Matters

  • The Planning Commission meeting for August 5, 2026, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chair Judy Murphy. A roll call confirmed the presence of Commissioners Murphy, Chesley, Stewart, and Rice-Schmidt; Commissioner Hanson was absent. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

Consent Calendar

  • The consent calendar included approval of the minutes from the July 15th meeting and a resolution regarding conditions of approval (Item 2). A motion was made to remove Item 2 from the consent calendar for separate discussion, as it had not received a unanimous vote at the previous meeting. The motion was seconded and passed. Subsequently, a motion was made to accept the minutes from the July 15th meeting. The motion was seconded and passed via roll call vote.

Item 2: Conditions of Approval Resolution (July 15th Appeal)

  • The Commission discussed a resolution regarding conditions of approval for an appeal heard on July 15th. Original conditions required the planting of two 24-inch box Coast Live Oaks, payment of a $225 tree fee, and supervision by a licensed arborist. Public comment was received; one speaker supported the resolution as written, while another representing the applicant requested substituting two sycamores for the Coast Live Oaks due to survival concerns and drought tolerance. A third speaker expressed support for the resolution. Following discussion confirming that an arborist would determine tree placement, a motion was made to pass the resolution with a revision replacing the Coast Live Oak requirement with two sycamores. The motion was seconded and passed via roll call vote.

Item 3: Request for Modifications to Existing Minor Conditional Use Permit (MCUP 23-001) – Ojai Roots

  • Staff presented a report regarding a request by Ojai Roots (315 North Montgomery Street) to modify conditions of an existing MCUP approved in 2021. The applicant requested: removal of the fixed occupancy limit (currently 35 patrons) and numerical limits on umbrellas/furniture; revision of alcohol license language from Type 42 (no minors) to Type 41 (minors permitted); removal of monthly limitations on hosted events; expansion of operating hours to seven days a week, 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; deletion of the condition requiring removal of an existing trailer; clarification regarding amplified entertainment; and deletion of the condition requiring Planning Commission review after three verified violations. Staff recommended maintaining most existing conditions, including the 35-patron limit, monthly event limit, current operating hours, and prohibition on amplified entertainment, noting three current verified violations involving parking and outdoor seating.
  • Public testimony was extensive. Supporters highlighted the business's community role and family-friendly atmosphere, arguing that complaints regarding noise were exaggerated. Opponents raised concerns about the site's location in a residential zone, citing potential increases in noise, traffic, and disturbance if hours and capacity were expanded. Commissioners discussed technical details including zoning context (C-1 district adjacent to Mixed Village Use), the distinction between ABC license types, fire department occupancy standards, and definitions of "events."
  • Discussion focused on specific conditions:
  • Events: Staff proposed clarifying "unusual events" to include weddings and closed events, with final determination by the Community Development Director. Commissioners debated the vagueness of the term and suggested a Temporary Use Permit (TUP) process for better visibility.
  • Occupancy: The Commission noted that without a new site plan, establishing a specific cap was difficult but agreed some limit based on life safety codes is necessary.
  • Alcohol License: Discussion occurred regarding specifying license types versus allowing flexibility.
  • Hours: Staff recommended maintaining current hours (closed Monday/Tuesday, 4 p.m. to 9 p.m.). Commissioners debated expanding hours for coffee service and lunch but raised concerns regarding early morning noise from deliveries.
  • Violations: Staff presented three verified violations: outdoor dining in the public right-of-way, parking in an ADA spot, and a trailer placement issue.
  • A motion was made to continue the application to a date uncertain (suggested within 90 days) to allow time for the applicant and neighbors to collaborate on revised conditions regarding hours of operation and occupancy limits. The motion also included updating Condition 2 to remove specific references to ABC license types, allowing the applicant to apply for either Type 41 or Type 47 licenses subject to ABC approval. The motion was seconded. The Commission voted on the motion. Outcome: Passed.

Item 4: Design Review Permit / Historic Resources (Hotel El Roblar Health Spa Project)

  • The meeting addressed a continued item regarding a proposed health and wellness center for the Hotel El Roblar, involving a zone change from Public/Quasi-Public (PL) to Village Mixed Use (VMU), a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), design review, and a General Plan Amendment. Staff presented a finalized Historic Resources Report (HRR) indicating the building is eligible for state or local historic listing but not currently designated.
  • The applicant presented modifications including: agreement to proceed with a lot merger; operations as an ancillary use to the hotel with expanded access for locals during off-peak hours; changes to courtyard fencing to maintain visual permeability; and wayfinding adjustments. Commissioners discussed zoning permanence, parking calculations based on hotel room counts, and concerns regarding future scenarios where the property might operate independently.
  • A significant portion of discussion focused on whether to refer the project and HRR to the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) for comments before the Planning Commission makes its final recommendation. Staff noted that while code allows for such review, it is not mandatory. Two competing motions were presented: 1. Motion A: Approve staff recommendations as written but mandate HPC review with a report delivered directly to City Council, bypassing a return to the Planning Commission. 2. Motion B: Approve the resolution to move forward to City Council with the exception of referring the project and HRR to the HPC for their August 13th meeting, followed by a return to the Planning Commission on August 19th to review HPC comments and incorporate them into the final recommendation.
  • The Commission voted on Motion B. Outcome: Passed. The project will be reviewed by the HPC on August 13th, and the Planning Commission will reconvene on August 19th to finalize its recommendation.

Other Business

  • Permit Clarification: Discussion occurred regarding a specific property application for a single-story, single-family residence requiring only a tree permit. It was noted that a two-story structure would require a Development Review Permit (DRP).
  • Director's Report: Director Lucas Seibert reported no items.
  • Commission Member Reports: A brief discussion took place regarding the rotation schedule for future reports. Technical difficulties prevented a listed attendee from providing a report before disconnecting.

Adjournment

  • The Chair adjourned the meeting at 11:16 p.m.