Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

It's 6 o'clock, and I'm calling the Planning Commission meeting of August 5, 2026 to order. Could we please have a roll call?

Chair Murphy? Here. Vice Chair Chesley?

Present.

Commissioner Stewart? Present. Commissioner Reich-Schmidt? Here. Commissioner Hansen is absent.

Thank you. Would you please lead us in the pledge this evening, Katrina?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you.

Do we have approval of the agenda?

I would like to make a recommendation. We received a letter from Craig Walker, a local historian, and he's also on the Historic Preservation Commission. He pointed out that the Historic Preservation Commission was bypassed from receiving a historic resources report for item number four. He said the report and the project should have come before the Historic Preservation Commission. The report identified that it was potentially eligible for the California Register of Historic Resources. For that reason, I agree with him. So I think that should go to the Historic Preservation Commission before it comes to the Planning Commission as a public hearing item. And their next meeting, the Historic Preservation Commission, is August 13th. And it potentially could go on that agenda and then come back to the Planning Commission on August 19th. So I'm making a motion to postpone the public hearing on item four. to postpone item number four to August 19th, regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting, and direct staff to take the project and historic resources report to the Historic Preservation Commission for their regularly scheduled meeting of August 13th for review and comment prior to the Planning Commission hearing on this project. Is that a motion? Yes.

A long one. Is there a second?

I have a question, either staff or any of the fellow commissioners. How is this reflective of the 50 year standard in place? Does this property meet a standard

Well, do you wanna second the motion for a discussion purposes? We can't discuss it.

I'll second the motion for discussion purposes, yes.

Okay. Okay, your question? So I'm not understanding the 50-year.

My understanding is that in order for us to consider that issue as a historical issue, there needs to be kind of a 50-year establishment of the PL status there.

Oh, no, there's an informal, and the staff can talk about this too, but there's an informal 50-year guideline that is used when a project comes in to the city. And if the property's not listed on any historic list or landmark list before a discretionary project, you would have an assessment done.

Yeah, the year is one litmus test. There's a number of criteria that come into play on that. There has been a historic resources report provided, and it was a part of item number four. I will admit, when this item came before this body on July 15th, that historic resources report had not been finaled. That report has been finaled, and it was provided to this body. The specific piece that Commissioner Reichmitt was referring to, does allow for this body to refer items to the Historic Preservation Commission. This body has done that in the past, looking for comments. Both the City Council and the Planning Commission have that authority to do that through that specific provision. From a historic preservation standpoint or historic resources report standpoint, the year is one litmus test. And here, if you look in the historic resources report provided as a part of the staff report, it does identify that it's eligible for local and state but not national given the age. So that's just like a very surface discussion. It was certainly more information provided than staff report. This body has the opportunity to either push this item to Historic Preservation Commission, providing that opportunity for comment. There's other alternatives, but that is the motion that's on the table at the moment.

Could you give us the alternatives?

Yeah, so the alternative is to still hold the item and take public comment as this is item number four tonight, the very last item for tonight. By doing that, you're allowing the public to provide comment and then the commission to weigh that option and then still kick it back to the Historic Preservation Commission for comment. This body acts as a recommendation body for this item going forward to city council. So there are a couple different ways in which this could be handled. If this body is looking to review those comments from the Historic Preservation Commission, then this would be the appropriate measure. The other appropriate measure would be to hear the item, make a recommendation within those recommendations, include that the item go before the Historic Preservation Commission before going to city council.

So we wouldn't have the opportunity to see it again if we listened to it. Recommended it goes to historic.

That would be another option where you could hear the item and still ask and leave the public comment period open to allow the opportunity for the public to continue to respond once those comments come in.

And is it realistic that it can be on the next? Meeting for the historic preservation.

Do we have yes because we were made aware of this early on Yes, we believe that we can make the 13th and we believe we can make the 19th as well Okay What I would caution this Commission staying away from is pulling the item and not allowing for it to be continued date certain By doing that we got the re notice because this is a change to the code There's new provisions as of January 1st of this year that basically have a 20-day rollout versus a 10-day notification period which is It adds more time and effort to what we're doing.

So do I understand that we could... keep the item on the agenda tonight. We do have, I assume, people from the hotel here to make a presentation and people from the public who have opinions that they would like to express. So if we do that, then we can just continue the item to enable the comments from the HPC to come in after the 13th. and then finalize the item on the 19th here back at the Planning Commission. Correct. Is that correct?

That is an option.

Do we have other comments or questions?

my only comment would be that in my belief we should take the opportunity to have people comment while they are here today and i do like the logic of you know bumping it down the line a little bit but we should gather information you know while people are here and we can learn something

But our decision doesn't have to be made until the 19th, correct? So that we can take tonight's information as well as the information from the AHPC on the 13th.

Yes, if this body decides that, correct.

Okay. Okay. If we have no other questions or comments, OK. I would like a shortened review of what that motion was.

The motion was to postpone the public hearing for item number 4 to August 19 and directing staff to take it to Historic Preservation Commission on August 13.

Thank you.

Could we have a roll call, please, Sherry? Rye Schmidt? Yes. Stewart? No. Chesley?

No.

Murphy? No.

Okay. We have public communications.

Hold on. Yeah, we need to footnote that.

The item will be heard as number four. I'm sorry. Yes, so the item will be heard as number four, and there are no changes aside from the one that was just brought up to the agenda tonight.

Thank you.

So we're not having it go to the Historic Preservation Commission?

No.

We're going to listen to it.

We're going to listen to who is here tonight to present. And we're going to listen to the public comments. And we are going to, we can then ask for the HPC to study the issue for the 13th and bring their comments back to us for a final decision on the 19th. Got it.

We're still getting to the committee. We're taking a longer road while we have people here who can give us feedback.

We would love to hear from everybody who's here.

Okay.

We have public communications time. This is the time set aside for the Planning Commission to hear the members of the public for business that is other than those items on the agenda tonight. I don't have any cards for that. Is there anyone here tonight who needs to speak to the Planning Commission on topics not on the agenda? Sherry, is there anyone online? No. Thank you. Then we will close public communications. The consent calendar is next. We have the minutes for the regular meeting of July 15th. Could I have a motion to accept them?

I would like to take item number two off the consent, because it wasn't a unanimous vote. So I don't want to. approve the resolution by consent because it's not unanimous.

Right now, we're talking about the minutes of the July meeting.

Well, we're talking about the consent calendar, right? Well, the first part is the minutes. All right.

Well, I want to take the second one off the consent. OK. Can we just get the minutes approved first?

So the way in which this works is once the consent calendar has been identified, there is two items on the agenda. Commissioner Reichman has identified one of the items that she would like to pull off the agenda. Now, you can still continue to talk about the minutes themselves, but the item number two.

Two has to come first? No?

Well, it would be pulled off, and then there would be.

Well, if it's approved.

correct so it would require it would require those to I believe it would be a majority in order for that to come off the agenda correct or am I wrong on that yes it would be a majority okay and what would that mean so you'd be able to discuss the item beyond yeah beyond just simply having reviewed it before so if you have questions regarding the So remember, that is a resolution that came before this body on the 15th. We carefully crafted those terms before this body, and you voted on it. It wasn't a majority, so.

It wasn't a majority, and it's not clear to me if we're adopting it as an approved resolution based on last discussion or if we're approving it as to form. So if we're approving it as to form only, That's different because even though I voted no as to form, I would vote yes on this vote. But if it's regarding the actual decision that was made, I want to vote no because that was my vote.

Yeah so it would be as to form and that's that's really that's really the point with this is we we've taken those those carefully crafted words put those on within the resolution itself typically those don't actually come before this body because of the sensitivity of that particular item we thought it was necessary to bring it back.

Okay. So I still want to take it off as to form because it doesn't have the record of the vote. I think that probably has to be a motion. Okay. I make a motion to take item number two off the consent calendar. Is there a second?

Can I ask a question? So then how would we proceed with item number two?

We would discuss it in more detail. Today? Yes, right now.

Just to check our understanding, we're effectively, because I think you're right, procedurally we have to pull it out of there, but it doesn't necessarily preclude us from having all of the public input we want. We're just not considering the specific pieces.

You're considering it at the very moment. It's just, as consent, they're meant to be non-controversial, so you're just looking at little typos here. Instead, we'll be having a full-on discussion about it. I'll give you a very brief presentation, and then we can go from there.

Okay. I didn't, yeah.

You seconded?

I didn't. Didn't, okay.

This is gonna be a long night.

It's complicated.

There's no harm in taking it off consent.

But we can still, we still go ahead and discuss it. Yes.

I mean, I'll second, I'm open to listening, so. But I think you said we all have to agree anyway, so, okay.

Yep, okay. So let's take, that item has been taken off the agenda, so let's first address the consent. So the minutes.

Okay, the minutes. Is there a motion to accept the minutes?

I'll make a motion to accept the minutes from the July 15, 2026 meeting.

I'll second.

Roll call, please. Ray Schmidt? Yes. Stewart? Yes. Chesley? Yes. Murphy?

Yes. OK. Moving on to disclosure.

No, hold on. Now we're moving on to the item that was pulled from the agenda. So now we must discuss that item before we can go on to disclosure of sites. Yes. So the item before you for discussion tonight now is the conditions of approval for planning commission resolution that was heard before and voted by this body July 15th. At that meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the appeal and considered testimony from both the applicant and city staff, revised the penalties required by the director, and required the following, and it was threefold. One is that the applicant shall plant two new 14-inch box coast live oaks, And two, the applicant shall pay an additional fee or tree fee of $225. And then three, the planting of the replacement coast live oaks shall be under the supervision of a licensed arborist.

I believe that that was a 24 inch.

Yeah, that's what I have here. Number one, the applicant should plant two new 24-inch boxes. 24, thank you. They went back and forth between the 15-gallon versus the 24. Yes, they did.

Yes. Okay.

Discussion or questions?

Okay, so I guess it's just a technical thing, but if we are approving this as to form – I was hoping to see the vote in there that there was four commissioners that voted yes and one that voted no and then because it has today's date on it so if it has today's date then it's the vote today that we're talking about in the resolution right because the resolution is dated with today's date

True, it is for today's date, correct.

So it really is the vote today to approve the resolution, correct? Yes, that's correct.

I agree with that.

OK. Is there any further discussion of this resolution? Mr. Miley, you had I sent a card in for item two.

This is item two.

OK. I was taking that for this as item two. OK. Come forward.

Hello. Thank you. At the last meeting when this was an issue on the agenda, I spoke strongly in favor of the appellant based on their willingness initially and ongoing to follow the rules. The communication failure which kind of caused the problem unintentionally. The value and completeness of the Katrona arborist report and the willingness of the Katrona to do the right thing. So I certainly support this resolution as it is and to indicate that Katrona is, I'm just an observer, is really thankful for this, thank you.

Thank you, Bill. The next speaker is Bill Mellet.

Thank you. I believe the applicant sent a letter to the city requesting a change of the two oak trees that they be substitute two sycamores in their place and I don't know if that's a problem for the city and the reasoning behind that is that they've had problems in the past with planting small oaks and getting them to be able to reach maturity and the sycamores are more drought tolerant in the sense they have a more robust root system and are more easily established. So they're requesting that we change those two oaks to sycamores.

Thank you. We did ask for the advice of an arborist on the selection of where the plants would or the trees would go.

Yes.

Makes sense that we would also take your advice regarding the type of tree.

I think it's an appropriate tree.

Do we need to have a motion in order to?

For the revision, yes.

Okay, thank you. Yes. Okay, do you have anything else, Bill? No. Okay. I have one other card here that says two, but it didn't, there's no name on it.

I just wanted to take the chance to say thank you to Chair Judy and the commissioners and Director Seibert, the staff, Maura, and our city attorney for your kind consideration of our appeal and so far what seems to be a favorable resolution to our problem.

Is there anyone else in the audience who needs to speak on this item? Yes, I see a hand wave. Nothing, okay. Is there anyone online?

No.

Thank you. Okay, it's back to the Planning Commission. We will close the public hearing. And do we have any questions or comments?

I'm okay with the sycamores as a recommendation if that's being proposed by the arborist. And you said the location is also being chosen.

By the arborist for the tree's best survival is what I remember us discussing.

Number three says the planting of the replacement. It does say Coast Life Oaks. If you do end up going with the sycamores, it'll be the sycamores. under the supervision of a licensed arborist. So that arborist will determine the appropriate location.

Okay.

Okay. All right, then I think we are ready for a motion.

I'll make a motion to change... Oh, to pass the resolution with the revision of replacing the requirement for the planting of coastal live oaks with two sycamores.

Is there a second?

I'll second that.

Any further discussion? OK. Could I have a roll call, please?

Roy Schmidt?

Yes. Stewart?

Yes.

Chesley?

Yes. Murphy?

Yes. OK. Moving on to the disclosure of site visits. and ex parte contacts. Are these for all the items now tonight?

Correct. Thank you. The next two items, yes.

Katrina? Are there any site visits or ex parte?

I went out to both sites and I met with the applicant for item number three, Ojai Roots. Brad?

No recent contact. Bruce and I did do a site visit a few weeks ago to Ojai Roots but nothing since that last meeting.

I went to the Ojai Roots site and met with the owner, applicant.

I also met with the owner of Roots. I also had a conversation with the applicant on item 4 as I had requested a tour and time got away from us so instead we had a conversation. Public hearings. The next item is request for modifications to an existing MCUP 23-001. Could we have the staff report please?

Yes thank you. My name is Maura Macaluso. I'm the principal planner here at the city of Ojai. Thank you chair and commissioners. This is a request for modifications to an existing conditional minor conditional use permit. The exists sorry it's modifications to the conditions of approval for an existing minor CUP. and the original CUP was approved by the Planning Commission in 2021 for an outdoor dining facility that included a type 42 alcoholic beverage license and the property is located at 315 North Montgomery Street. The current tenant received director approval of the transfer from those 2021 conditions of approval back in 2024, so that was for the current business Ojai Roots from the previous tenant, Tiplin Ramble. Your staff report includes the current conditions of approval that are being requested to be modified, the requested modifications, and then staff's discussion. And at the end there's a little discussion from staff or by staff that is also going to identify two added conditions that are being recommended that the commission adopt that are shared for other outdoor venues like this one. So right now what I'm going to do is go through those conditions of approval, just the ones that are being requested for modification. So original condition or current condition number one states that the approval allows for the configuration and number of patrons and that number is 35. The applicant's request is, the request is for removal of the fixed occupancy limit or base occupancy on maximum established by life safety requirements. The request also includes a request to remove the numerical limits on umbrellas and furniture configuration. So staff recommends that the Planning Commission maintain the existing condition of approval regarding the number of seats in the outdoor dining facility as well as the basic configuration, not like exact. While the project site is in the VMU zone, that's Village Mixed Use, it's bordered to the northwest and west by residential uses in a mixed use zone and although the site adjacent to the south is in the C1 zone, it's also developed with a single family residence. Occupancy limits and other approval conditions ensure that the outdoor dining facility remains compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Regarding the configuration of seating, staff believes that the intent was really more for the number and general layout and not like to the T of the furniture. Current condition of approval number two states that the approval allows the outdoor dining facility with the exception of minors for an alcohol beverage license 42 for the consumption of beer and wine for 35 patrons. The applicant is requesting to remove the reference to minors and replace with their own specific language. So staff's discussion includes that the applicant has requested to the ABC for a type 41 license. The applicants also discussed the possibility of a type 47 license in the future. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission revise the existing condition of approval to include reference to the currently requested 41 and include the ABC language describing the license as part of the approval. That sounds confusing. What staff is recommending is that the Planning Commission recommend that we allow the 42, which will allow minors. Right now, they have a 41, which does not. Is it the other way around? Yeah. Okay, sorry. Staff recommends that you approve a 41, which will allow minors. Currently, they have a 42, which does not. Okay. But I want to go further to say that the director will not consider 47, which is for distilled spirits, in the future. That's not currently on the table, but it's something that has been discussed by the applicant and that we're not in favor of, and that's due to the potential impacts on the surrounding sensitive uses. So as far as the language in the conditions of approval, the specific ABC license language is critical for the commission's consideration because it specifies how the outdoor dining space will function. The details of the different types of licenses are included in your staff report for information while considering which one to approve. And the conditions of approval so therefore like the difference between a 41 and a 42 is whether minors are allowed And so having that information in the condition in the conditions of approval staff feels is is appropriate Current condition number three states that the approval allows the applicant to include a host a hosted event a maximum of once a month within the current permitted conditions including seating capacity hours of operation and noise restrictions Types of events include community meetings pop-up shops with local makers trivia night and a guest chef or winemaker education class the applicant is requesting that the monthly limitation be removed and to allow normal restaurant and community events consistent with the approved hours occupancy and noise standards. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider maintaining the monthly limitation on outdoor events due to the surrounding uses and in this case, as you know, they're residential which are considered sensitive uses. Staff also recommends adding language indicating that a hosted event is one where the venue is closed to the public and also including weddings or other events as determined by the director to be appropriate in the types of events that are permitted, which are listed in the staff report. the next condition of approval that's being requested for modification is number four and that is the hours of operation approved by this minor conditional use permit and directors exemption shall be as follows it's Wednesday through Friday from 4 p.m. to 9 p.m. Saturday from 12 p.m. to 9 p.m. and Sunday from 12 p.m. to 9 p.m. the applicant is requesting to expand the approved hours to allow seven days a week from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. The applicant has indicated that they may not be open all of those hours but would like to be flexible and to operate within that range. Staff is recommending that the commission consider maintaining the existing conditions of approval related to the hours of operation for this facility. The limitation on hours is an attempt at an effective measure to ensure compatibility with the surrounding sensitive uses. The next condition of approval, current condition that they're requesting to modify is condition number five. And that is, as a condition of receiving and maintaining the director's exemption and minor conditional use permit, the applicant shall remove the existing trailer And the trailer has been removed. It belonged to the previous occupant. And so staff is recommending that that condition of approval be removed. And that's also what the applicant is requesting. The next condition of approval is current number 7 and the condition is that amplified entertainment is not permitted as part of the existing permits and the applicant would like this to be open for discussion. They're requesting flexibility and also clarification regarding limited amplified uses if appropriate. Staff's discussion here is that staff recommends the Planning Commission maintain the existing condition of approval not to allow amplified entertainment. Staff also recommends adding the word live music as not permitted and recommend, or I'm sorry, and also that background speaker music be permitted subject to the noise standards of the municipal code. The next condition of approval that they're looking to modify is condition number 14, and that is that director verified violations to conditions of approval shall require planning commission resolution 2303 that was the original one to be rescheduled Before the Planning Commission for reviewing consideration of the violations within 60 days from the third verified violation the director shall provide written information as to the specific violation and if available the approximate time and date of the violations to the conditions of approval and And also note that sound monitoring be taken at the northern property line directly across the driveway from the rear outdoor seating. The matter shall be scheduled before the Planning Commission with notification to include property owners within 300 feet. So the applicant is requesting that this condition be deleted in its entirety and staff's discussion includes that staff is recommending that the Planning Commission maintain this condition of approval that the item be returned to the Planning Commission if there are three verified violations and outdoor dining facilities are conditionally permitted and this particular site is located adjacent to sensitive uses and also has history of violations and if there are multiple violations, three, It's prudent for staff and the Planning Commission to evaluate the use and its appropriateness for the conditionally approved location. While we're talking about this condition, staff currently has three verified violations. It just so happens that we have them right now and it's within 60 days and we're here tonight. We had already planned on being here tonight with the request for modification. It looks like you had a question. So conditions of approval are being discussed tonight and violations, I mean, the conditions of approval can be discussed this evening. That's what we're here to do. If the commission wished to revoke, for instance, the CUP, that would have to be at a separate hearing. That's noticed specifically for that. So the three current violations that have been verified are parking on the required ADA parking spaces with a coffee serving vehicle during an event, and also two times having outdoor seating outside of the approved area of seating, which also happens to be within the public right-of-way. And then going on. As established outdoor dining facilities on private property may be allowed subject to a minor conditional use permit in 2021 it was discovered due to complaints that a bar had been open there or wine bar since 2013 ultimately the director chose to forward that Director approval to the Planning Commission due to its sensitivity and there being complaints and in 2022 the The Planning Commission approved the permits for the facility and created the existing conditions of approval because the site is surrounded by sensitive uses. So that's why the conditions of approval are what they are. The property itself is located in a C1 zone. Oh. I'll hear about this later. The fact that I didn't open this up. I have a picture for you here. Thank you. So here you have a slide that shows you the location of Ojai Routes at 315 North Montgomery and the uses to the north, west, and south, all being residential. The uses that are residential, however, to the north and west are in the VMU zone, and to the south is an existing single-family residence. that's just what I was going to describe and so there that is there's a history of code compliance concerns related to the outdoor facility previously and currently and staff recommends the Planning Commission maintain the majority of conditions as they're written currently with the exception of the ones that I've stated and that are in your staff report and resolution I also want to note that in the current Resolution for this evening that's attachment a page two of four the first whereas There is a correction there I Third line, it says here that for the minor conditional use permit for dining facilities, it says with no minors, it should be with minors permitted. And then type 41 would be correct. But it's with minors, not without minors. So with that, I know there are people here to speak tonight. And I'm also here to answer any questions. The applicant is here and will want to speak. And she has her own presentation that she brought in this evening.

Thank you. Rihanna. The audience will remain quiet or leave. Thank you. Go ahead, Brianna.

I'll just keep it here in the presentation. Thank you all so much for being here. My name is Brianna, and I'd like to take the opportunity to provide context about the history and origins of Ojai Roots. I started this business with a friend many years ago in the backyard of a family spot in Ojai. It's funny as I reflect back because I never really set out to build a business. We had a love for gardening, nature, and community that was fostered by our experience of growing up in Ojai and attending schools like Topatopa, Miramani, Matalaha, Nordhoff, and Ojai Valley School. This love for nature started a mission of planting the first seeds in an abandoned patch of dirt. As I reflect here tonight, I realize that in many ways those first seeds are what brings us here almost a decade later. The original garden provided our family and neighbors with all the organic bounty that Ojai had to offer. This ranged from vegetables of all shapes and colors to stone fruit, citrus, avocados, and eventually more refined products such as avocado oil, olive oil, fresh juices, and so much more. The garden became so abundant that its abundance became a problem for us. We were growing more food than we knew what to do with, and we realized that to keep this project going, we would have to begin serving a community larger than our own neighborhood. The first sales of produce were to places like Rainbow Bridge, Ojai Valley Inn, Noshola, and Farmer and the Cook. While we ended up serving what feels like so many restaurants, stores, and food businesses in the Valley, we will always be grateful to those first initial businesses that got us started so long ago. Over the years, the community requested more from us. This was never more clear than during the years of the pandemic when food processors, grocery stores, and supply chains all broke down. Suddenly, everyone seemed to realize the value of local food production rather than relying on large-scale food the large-scale food industry. And this planted an idea to serve the community at a larger scale. The project would have to become more of a business and the community would guide its direction. And thankfully, as it always had, they spoke clearly. We began delivering farm boxes to approximately 350 addresses in Ojai, Miramani, Oakview, and even a community drop in Ventura. As COVID ended, community desires shifted slightly away from the farm box deliveries and more back towards real world experiences. For Ojai Roots, this culminated in our time as a vendor at the Ojai Community Farmers Market. Here, I met so many people that we had not had a chance to meet by dropping off a farm box at their doorstep. The farmers' market taught the value of experiences and the community's demands for it. Finally, Ojai Roots could provide samples, interact with their community, and share a passion. But this all ended at 7 p.m. each Thursday, when we had to hurriedly repack delicate peaches and unsold lettuce heads that had been misted for hours attempting to keep them fresh. and it was in the Ojai summer heat just so they wouldn't go to waste. These first years were difficult for the business financially and involved very long days in the dirt, sun, wind, and rain. Just like it had done throughout childhood, the community encouraged through these times and continued showing a desire for a long-term food, hospitality, and farm business. I hope that Ojai Roots may serve as an example of how complex systems involving farming, water, food, and environment can be thoughtfully integrated with and supported by neighbors, visitors, community, businesses, and local government. In many ways, Ojai already serves this example and we are all fortunate to call it home. Bringing things back to this evening, what actually brings us here now is neither the beginning nor the end of the Ojai Roots story. We are all here tonight for far more technical and slightly more boring reasons. Here's a little history on the technical stuff that brings us here. In setting out to open a farm shop, Ojai Roots had already had many years of experience and a sense of the community's desires. However, even for an established business, there were many uncertainties in opening a permanent farm shop. No business plan can fully predict with complete accuracy the customer demands, community desires, and real world logistics of operating. Because of this, because we would be operating at a location where a previous business had existed before, that meant inheriting an existing permit. looking over the permit it wasn't tailored specifically to our business and It had existed before so that meant inheriting an existing permit and It would work, looking over the permit, it wasn't tailored specifically to our business, but it would work to launch the business and operate within its requirements. But beyond being a business owner, I knew that I was first and foremost a neighbor. In fact, I grew up just down the street from Montgomery Street. More important than technical details, were our core values as members of the community and neighbors to so many for so long. Respect, courtesy, and professional conduct. These are the core values of Ojai Roots and the values we instilled in each and every one of our employees who I am so proud of and immensely grateful for, some of which are here. The employees make this business possible and watching them develop responsibilities, skills, lasting relationships with so many members of our community has been one of the greatest sources of pride. So before getting to the exact request up for discussion tonight, if I could just take a couple more minutes, I'd love to show you some of the photos collected over the years which document the transformation of those first seeds planted as kids and the journey of building Ojai Roots into what it is today.

I can walk over and show it to you.

This is a little presentation. We had this crazy idea of turning this backyard into a patch working farm.

Is it possible to put this on a screen so that everybody can see it? What we could do is take public comments and then come back to the presentation. How would that work out? I will open the public hearing at this time. And I only have one card. And that is from Bill Miley.

I don't have them. OK, I asked everyone to fill cards. Oh, thank you.

OK, you have lots of time to do that.

Mr. Miley.

Hello. I've been involved in this for a long time. I've been here 55 years. And I saw that first building 20 or so years ago when they built the first story tried to build the second story, stopped, became a derelict. And I don't know how many months it was there. So somehow, when the city worked out a deal with somebody to complete the second story, and it became a little business. And they got a commercial zoning, spot zoning, in an area that was residential with businesses like retirement homes and such and multi-zoning for the Oaks. I do want to recognize, because I've read all the material and the public comments, the positive comments from families and children about the services that OI Roots is providing and is developing and adding. It's wonderful. So OI Roots suffers from a conflicted past planning zoning decisions. The first building I just told you about became a derelict. City's effort, triple and ramble experience, and the neighbor conflicts, that was a mess. I was involved in that. Right now this request is designed to make the neighborhood disturbance even worse. There are no buffers as required from businesses to other zoned areas to residential areas, walls, distances, trees, whatever. They want to expand the hours from 7 in the morning to 10 PM. It's a residential zone. Adding up to 35 guests outdoors, it's a residential zone neighborhood. It tells me the applicant has not placed themselves in the position of the neighbors to look at it from their point of view. And they want to add liquor? 40% alcohol? People, when they drink, also lose their hearing. So they speak louder. So it seems to me that in your resolution, under whereas, whereas, whereas, number three is 100% wrong. It says, would not create significant noise, traffic, or other conditions or situations. I don't know where the people were, planners, when they wrote that. There's a history of noise, traffic, and conditions that are disturbing, lights, smoke. And number two, it says, are there any objectionable or detrimental issues that would be affecting others in the area? Sure there are. There's a history of it. Thank you for the notice. Anyway, the resolution is wrong. It was written by somebody who writes fiction. Thank you.

Thank you, Bill. We have discovered a great many cards. Based on that, I would ask of you to not repeat other people who are speaking. You can just say that you agree with them or agree on a certain point just for the amount of time this is going to take. So we appreciate brevity. The first person whose card I have Is Trent Bastolio maybe? What did I do to your name, Trent?

Oh, you didn't butcher it that bad.

Bartolio.

But it's okay. I'll take whatever you say. The first name is all that matters, right?

That's right.

So I'm here to speak on behalf of Ohio Roots. I've worked for this family in particular for the past four years not directly but through my own business and I really enjoy working for these people. They've really Their mentality is something I don't see in every business owner. I've been doing pest control for 12 years and I have a lot of people I want to fix their issues but they're not really willing to do so. And these people are willing to If they see anything of concern, the smallest thing, they want to point it out, make sure I'm aware of it, and make sure we're nipping a button as soon as possible. They take very good care of their property. They have workers out there, I mean, man, I think at least twice a week. I call it the Ojai Valley Inn mentality. You know, keeping things nice, looking pristine all the time, which is also important. gonna keep pests at bay, right? So, I just think they're a great business. I love working for Ree and Evan and other family members of theirs. They're amazing people. I think that they're great neighbors, you know? I find that, being I'm a 32-year-old young man, and I've recently moved into a house myself, three years ago that most of my neighbors I have great relationships with, but man, if I do something wrong just a little bit, maybe they'll judge me a little bit too much, and I'm not gonna really go out of my way to explain myself, but I'll be there to help them out if they ever ask for it. i believe that evan and reed carry this mentality and i i believe their workers carry this mentality i really think their business that if we were to remove them or to hamper their existence in this valley it would be a detriment to the valley in my opinion they are the definition of ohio valley i grew up personally I've been to school with her since high school. I just met Evan recently these last three years, but Ri has always been a beautiful person, extremely empathetic. She thinks about everyone. And I know if there was ever somebody who had an issue with something going on, if they just took the time, just like how we should here, and communicate these issues, they would probably be willing to work for a solution. know that's not the world we live in today unfortunately but I believe that we are Ohioans and I still believe we can get back to that and that's something I'm trying to do in my own community also I'm a neighbor to a business myself I have a business on my right side it's a little bit different you know they're not open on the weekends I got two businesses across the street from my house they are open on the weekends one's a gym and They get a little crazy. I'm a young man, so it's a lot harder for me to complain. So I completely understand the concerns when it comes to noises and things like that. But again, these two individuals, I believe that they're very important members of the community and they're continuing to grow and do so if you allow them to. I really believe that. I just don't think, that's pretty much it right there. Right on time. All right, thank you so much, guys.

Jeffrey Booz.

Hello.

My name is Jeff Booz. I'm a resident of Ojai. My family and I actually evacuated here after the Eaton fire in Altadena. We chose Ojai because it reminded us a lot of the community that we had. And I have to say, My family and I have found such a home at Ojai Roots. We have found friends, community. I also think hindering this expansion and just modification will hinder so many other things and have a detrimental aspect to the community, jobs, tax revenue, you name it. So I am in full support of the modification, thank you.

Thank you, Jeffrey. We could do without the applause. Jody Chapman, Chapman?

Good evening, my name's Jody Chapman, and I'm a resident here in Ojai. I'm a mother of two, I just had a beautiful daughter three weeks ago, and I wanted to make it out to support my good friends and now family, Ree and Evan. I had the pleasure of working with them in the early stages of their brand, their business. I helped them with their logo designs, their early website, some of the packaging, the farm boxes, and I've really seen the passion and vision that they've brought to the table. And from the beginning, it's always been about bringing fresh farm produce and really marrying that with the community. And as a mother, I'm in this community every day. I'm going to get emotional because of my hormones. But as a young mother, we crave community. There's a lot of mothers here that are nursing in public and want a safe space for us to take our babies in the morning to get coffee and to get smoothies. And unfortunately, now we can't even enjoy burgers with our family. meeting up with, you know, young families, and I think that's what the beauty of Ojai brings is, you know, being able to bring your family to have nourishing, beautiful food, sharing it with the community, and I think Ray and Evan have done that beautifully every week. Not only are they bringing us their produce and their beautiful burgers and their food, but they're also bringing in, you know, other businesses, pop-ups, things where we can show, you know, young artisans and being able to have a place for conversation and just to enjoy each other, and I think that's what Ojai's about, and I really hope that you can kind of see it and see all these people here that are supporting just to bring that community back to Ojai, so thank you.

Thank you, Jody. Again, we're trying to get through this quickly, not drag it out. Okay.

What do you think?

Mr. Brown. Ms. Brown?

What's your first name? My name's Dwyer Brown.

Dwyer.

I was too young to complain about it, so. Thank you. My name's Dwyer Brown. I've lived in the Ojai Valley for 35 years. My wife's been here for 47 her whole life. I've been active in the fight against Weldon Canyon dump and the tower up on Sulphur Mountain. And as we all know, there's been a lot of things have intruded on our little life here in Ojai. But I think Ojai Roots is one of those that is not in that category. So I'm in favor of the modification of their permit. And, yeah, and I guess I don't have much more to say than that. But I think they're a good down-home business, and they're creating a good atmosphere here in town. Thank you.

Thank you, Dwyer. Larry Steingold?

and good evening I think it's great that the owner has all these people here supporting them I think it's really important that everybody get involved and care but I think this is more about a technical like removing more tables going from 35 to an unknown number going from 9 30 or 8 7 30 to 10 o'clock to more not necessarily better but just more having more events making that unlimited and i think there's a way that we can accomplish both by saying okay you want it you want more than 35 make it 40 do something different because it's going to be inch by inch like they want to come in the future to have a liquor license and that's how it starts out we're surrounded by residential which is not unlike uh three birds or before that with the backing up to the house with the 20 feet and the 10 feet with the sound uh issues regarding a vmu and residential so here it's more of a not i want to call it encroaching but an expansion of an ongoing business and there's maybe a way to generate more income and not make it so open-ended where it's unlimited people because it says life safety. I don't know what life safety means in the backyard. Is it 100 people? Is it 50 people? Is it 300 people? Don't know. Unlimited events. you know it's just more and then you're gonna parking and then you get into other issues but they need a way to find generate more income to keep their business going so maybe there's a match here somewhere but I don't think it's removing all the tape you know unlimited numbers unlimited events 10 o'clock at night it's still a residential neighborhood even though it bumps up it's maybe it shouldn't have been there before but here here this is where we are and you got to deal with it so help them a little next maybe as they progress next year three years they'll come back we want more we can do this we've proven ourselves and sort of make it happen but to say completely no i don't know about that but to completely yes is the other way which doesn't work either so thank you

Thank you, Larry. Angus Beverly.

All right.

All right. Good evening, commissioners. My name is, as you know, Angus Beverly. And yeah, I go back with Ojai. I'm a proud Spud alumni. Student body president, by the way. But you know, we don't want to count about that. And my parents still live in Ojai. And my wife and I, we take our little girl up here as much as we can. Ojai is my home, and it's always going to be like that. I provided a more detailed comment letter. I'm an attorney with a significant background in land use and municipal law, which I discuss kind of more the nitty gritty of my comments, but I totally support Ojai Roots and I really just think it's a shame because I thoroughly enjoyed just spending time at Ojai Roots, and now I can't bring my seven-month-old with my wife and see our friends. We don't have a big house in Ojai. We don't have space, but space is sacred, and we need a place to be together as a community. It's just really important for us to have that, and I wholly support Rihanna and the business. They're very thorough and detailed, and they do things right. And I don't know, I just, driving over here today, I saw a guy walking a doodle, and he had a shirt that said, support live music. And I just thought that was funny, you know? And we really need a place to have community, and I think live music's gonna be a part of that. So I thoroughly support having um clarification as to what's amplified music and what's allowed there because Ojai needs space and we need community and that's what keeps you know the lights on so I thoroughly support Ojai roots um and I think you'd see more detail in my comment letter about some of the planning documents but yeah thank you so much thank you Angus Keila Merritt

I typed mine up because I'm really nervous but my name is Kayla I'm a third generation Ojai local I have two children and I live directly behind Ojai roots I'm here to express my strong support for the business because my experience is one of its closest neighbors differs significantly from the clump complaints you've received oh my god I'm so nervous I'm sorry don't be nervous we're all we've all had to get up there for the first time Ohio Roots has been a respectful, family-friendly neighbor that brings fresh food to our community and provides a welcoming gathering place for local families. The emphasis placed on leaf blowers, noise, odors, and other everyday neighborhood activities in the letter submitted against Ohio Roots does not reflect the reality of what neighboring residents experience. The neighbors directly bordering the Ohio Roots parking lot regularly use a leaf blower and a shop vac at 6.30 in the morning to remove oak leaves from the tree that is in my backyard. Every day, at least twice a day, there is a leaf blower from not Ojai roots. The concerns raised about the barbecue smells and the music are also difficult to reconcile with the reality of living in the neighborhood. Most of us have barbecues, enjoy meals outside, and play music in our own backyard. I think that's called living in a neighborhood, not creating a nuisance. To portray normal neighborhood activities as disruptions while attributing them to Ojai roots is not an accurate representation of what is actually occurring in our community. From my perspective, the greatest source of tension in our neighborhood has not been Ohio Roots, but the ongoing disputes involving members of the condos to the left of Ohio Roots and surrounding neighbors. I have personally witnessed members of those condos repeatedly filing complaints, contacting landlords, photographing patrons on the sidewalk, and yelling at Ohio Roots employees, customers, and fellow neighbors. These repeated confrontations have created far more disruption in my day-to-day experience than anything associated with Ohio Roots. While respectful disagreement is a natural part of any community, repeatedly confronting employees, customers, and neighbors crosses the line from civic engagement to harassment and intimidation. I ask the council to look beyond repeated complaints and consider the experiences of those who live alongside this business every day. Ojai Roots has been a good neighbor and deserves to be evaluated based on its actual impact, not on conflicts driven by a small number of individuals. Thank you.

Thank you, Kayla. Paul Graham.

Hi, hello. I was kind of there when Ojai Roots started. I'm Evan's brother. So I was able to experience it grow and become this wonderful thing. And it is hard not to repeat all the fantastic things you've already heard. But I do want to say, everyone who's in support of Ojai Roots, can you raise your hands just so then You guys can see from the community of what this place actually means. And living outside of Ojai, I can even understand how much of an impact Ojai Roots has made. My gardener told me one day when I was trying to think of some way in order to get their wonderful sandwiches all the way up to Carpinteria. And the gardener's like, oh, I'm familiar with Ojai Roots. I would love to do that because I love to visit it. Restricting Ojai Roots is not just restricting this one business. It's restricting what Ojai can do as a community, the impact that it has greater beyond it. And allowing Ojai Roots to be able to expand the way that it is and what it's doing is also a way for Ojai to be more connected to a larger group and a larger world. So I want to say thank you so much for listening to me, listening to all these wonderful people. And hopefully we can have more respectful ways for all of the people of Ojai to actually understand and believe in Ojai roots. I've been mortified hearing about how, you know, this business, this wonderful business is being harassed by these few specific people. And I just don't understand why or how when you heard of how many people here, you've seen it, love this place and want it to grow and want it to be valuable. They really want all of you guys to come over and enjoy how wonderful this place is. It's truly fantastic. And as someone who's not really a fan of Ojai, it actually reminded me of how great Ojai is and changed my mind. So I hope that Ojai Roots can change your mind too and you can allow it to be what it is and to talk to them responsibly. As you can hear from all these people that a lot of these other people that are complaining about Ojai Roots are not talking to Ojai Roots responsibly and might have a different idea of what it is. If you allow Ojai Roots to be what it is, you'll find that it's willing to compromise. It's willing to grow and it's willing to be respectful. Maybe more respectful than some neighbors are to it. Thank you.

Thank you, Paul. OK, we have Robert Glover next. Let's just bring your children to Planning Commission night, isn't it?

I apologize, my other child needed to use the restroom, so I'm left with the baby. Greetings to you, members of the City Council. My name is Robert Glover. I'm an Ojai resident and an active member of the Ojai community. I live in Ojai and I work for Ojai Roots. I took this job because I wanted to work for a business that supports local agriculture and provides healthy food for families. I'm extremely proud of the work that we do, providing healthy produce and food to locals. I am however disappointed to not be able to serve families and people of all ages. It's also disappointing to not be able to have my family and my two small children be able to come visit me at work. It saddens my wife and children that they cannot visit me and it takes away from the time that we could potentially be able to spend with one another. I've come here today to humbly ask that you grant Ojai Roots the ability to change their license type so that people of all ages can be allowed on the premises. In addition to the way these rules affect me personally, I believe that they negatively affect our local community. This neighborhood would be much better served by a family gathering place with healthy local food than a bar that is only for people who are 21 and over. Please help us change this rule so we can better serve Ojai families. I'd like to say that we strive to be incredibly respectful of our neighbors And we go to great lengths to ensure that we're not a disturbance. We have noise monitors, things that measure decibel levels to make sure that our noise is not over the appropriate levels. There is actually a large barrier next to us, a large cement wall that separates us from many of our neighbors. And I just know the great lengths that we go to be respectful and consider it my personal responsibility to do that. And so I can promise you guys that we will be as respectful as possible and respect all of the rules and just ask that we be able to allow families and change to that type 41 license. As especially my concern, I guess I'd like to quickly speak on the limitation of events. I would just like you all to know that by limiting the events, you limit the things that we're able to do for the community. Normally, when we're doing an event, it's because we're approached by community members. want to do something to promote their local businesses their things that they make the businesses they start things like that it's not just because we want to throw a party it's normally because we're trying to support a local person in the community who's trying to promote their business or trying to create a local gathering in a positive way and it's not just a money grab it's normally in support of other members of the community who want to make a gathering or promote their business or things like that so I just want to suggest to you that we not limit the amount of events that we do because these are events that are for the community and by the community and not just things that we put on ourselves it's mostly coming from others that we want to help thank you Robert thank you for your time Brett Neiman

I'm the president of the homeowners association next door to Ohio roots this property was once a cooking school about 20 years ago which was allowed wine tasting to be paired with meals the next owner Tipple and ramble came along a few years later ripped out the herb garden put in a patio and She applied for a business license to be a specialty food store with wine tasting She applied for an ABC license to do wine tasting and beer tasting I guess they do beer and little shots or something, but she opened really one of the largest backyard bars surrounded by homes illegally and operated for seven years illegally without an M cup and when it was found out the city made her apply for an M cup because of all the complaints of amplified music and loud parties and I mean there were parties to one in the morning the restrictions were put in place wisely by city staff and by the Planning Commission at the time four years ago to restrict hours of operation, days of operation wisely, and it's very wise for this city staff to be recommending you not to change those restrictions to protect the neighborhood. When Rihanna applied, Ria?

Rihanna.

Rihanna, Ri. She wrote to Maura two years ago, I plan to run the same type of business currently running on the property. my project description is a wine and beer bar with a type 42 license operating under the same hours same restrictions and same entitlements currently in place with the existing cup but she didn't do that for the last two years there's been multiple code violations M cup violations A type 42 license has no children in the bar. For two years she's had probably hundreds of children in the bar. She had a very small sign on the front door that said no minors allowed, but they let minors in. And then finally ABC made them put big signs up that said no one under 21 allowed. She's now trying to change, it's like if I went through town, running through stop signs and speeding, and then I came to you and said, I want you to take out the stop signs and raise the speed limit to 60 miles an hour. This is what they're asking you to do tonight in changing all those very wise rules that were put in place to protect the neighborhood and the neighbors, thank you.

Thank you, Brett. The next speaker is Jeff Eide.

Most people don't get it right the first time, so thank you very much.

I had multiple possibilities.

Yes, my name is Jeff Eide and my wife Mary and I live at 403 North Montgomery. Good evening everyone. Great to be here. We're right adjacent to Ojai Roots and we have been customers of Ojai Roots and continue to be. We love the farm box and we find it a very good service to the community. Mary and I purchased our home two years ago before Ojai Roots opened. And at the time, we carefully reviewed the permits for Ohio Roots as part of our purchase decision. And we found that there was an M cup and a type 42 alcohol license, that it was put together with a great deal of thought, and it was also very reasonable for us to live comfortably with a farm store and a wine business embedded basically in the residential community. Our concern at this point is really that expanding the permanent uses and hours of operation beyond what's in the current MCUP would have a substantial negative impact on the neighborhood. Over the past 18 months or so, we've observed Ojai Roots operating what we understand to be outside the conditions of that February 24 permit and having seen and documented these expanded uses we've we've already been experiencing some of the intrusive sound and intrusive light and smoke impacts if the M cup were to be expanded We can understand why Ohio Roots would like to expand the existing M Cup. Expanding food service and welcoming minors seems like it's a natural step in order to grow the business. And it's, as you're hearing tonight, understandable that many people in the broader community would think similarly. Certainly because they can come and visit and enjoy it for a little while and be entertained and then return to their homes. But the justification to expand the business really breaks down when we factor in the residential impact on those of us who live nearby. That is our home. We are at home and we're without a buffer from the business. We have to repeatedly and increasingly now experience intrusive impacts like escalating sound pollution from amplified music and crowd noise, which Bill was talking about, and it's exacerbated by alcohol consumption. It disrupts not just our backyard use, but also our inside living, even if we close the windows. smoke from barbecuing forces us also to close our windows reduced parking for visiting family and friends is has certainly become an issue the intrusive outdoor lights that get left on occasionally and shine through our windows Wow loud morning deliveries that wake us up as early as as 515 and just stress about what can happen next so it's thank you Jeff okay let me just ask one thing that of the Planning Commission to please give equal consideration to the interests of the residents to preserve the conditions established thank you very much Javier Rangel

Hello.

Good evening, Commission. My name is Javier Arango. I am the vice chair of the board of a nonprofit located in Los Angeles called Hollywood Food Coalition. We're in the business of food rescue and providing food for the food insecure. We have received donations from Ojai Roots, and so can sort of account to them as positive agents. I will say that this has given me some exposure to sort of food systems in Southern California, and I've learned that organic farming is very difficult. The margins are very slim, but yet they produce a product that we value, that I think communities value in organic, regenerative agriculture. And so I think the least that can be done to demonstrate the value of that kind of product to a community is to extend to farm shops like Ojai Roots the minimum sort of rights that would be given to comparable businesses. the ability to welcome children and families, the ability to host events and to operate at sort of normal operating hours. I think that's what we can do to demonstrate the value that is given to this community. I think large factory farms will never have a problem because they have economies of scale putting lettuce in supermarkets and so they don't need this kind of support. But I think if we want to recognize the value as a community of The local agriculture that Ojai Roots provides, I think what can be done is to extend to them the rights that would be given to other businesses. Thank you.

Thank you, Javier. Michelle Bosch.

Hello. I'm going to try not to repeat, so I'm going to shorten my remarks. I am both a customer and a fan of Ojai Roots. I'm also a former owner of 409 North Montgomery and live next to Tipple and Ramble. I'm here today just to give you a sense of what it's like to live in a mixed village use. And most importantly, I'm not against Ojai roots. I'm really just talking about mixed village use and what that means when you're changing the line, I think that everybody has due diligence. When they buy a property, when they invest in a business, and I think, and I'm not gonna butcher your name and have everybody shout at me, it's Rheon. She said in her opening remarks, she did her due diligence to find out what the MCUP was. and to make sure that her business could do it. And she did her due diligence, just like property owners. When I purchased my property, I did my due diligence to find out what the properties and the mixed village use was. the due diligence was it was a wine tasting tipple and ramble operated outside of that and we had a lot of problems with amplified music and depending on where you are in the neighborhood it's impactful at different places in the neighborhood. I know one neighbor sat up here and said it didn't impact her, but I know where I lived, it absolutely impacted my outside use. And as you go into different places, it impacts your inside use and your outside use. But we all have due diligence. And so we worked with the city, we got the MCUP in place that worked. And it barely worked. It's not fair to move the line. But she did her due diligence. We did our due diligence. And if you're changing the liquor license from a type 41 to 42 or 42 to 41, whatever it is, You're moving the line again and you're moving the line for a business that unfortunately she knew the rules to begin with and she hasn't chosen to follow it. And I say that with such sincerity because she has so much support and she's running a business and a small business that provides a great service to OI. And I'm a fan of hers and I'm a customer of hers. But she may have chosen the wrong location to really do a wine and bar business. place where we're expanding out to 40, 50, 60 people. And it's not like when you're in a neighborhood and somebody throws a party. You know, it's a one-off. It's Saturday night. You deal with the noise, right? But we're talking about night after night. It's consistent. It's every weekend. That's not fair. Thank you.

David Berry?

Hi. I'm here to support Ojai Brutes. I'm not going to repeat too many people, but I am Evan's cousin. We're a very, very close-knit family. They took me in during a tricky time in my youth when I briefly attended Ojai Valley School, and so Ojai means a lot to me. I've been coming out here for a long time. And I'd like to briefly speak on the character and intentions of Evan and Ree. I know that we have very strong values. We're the third generation of a really close family. We've done a lot of great things together. We do lots of things together, even involved in some businesses together. And the family has really strong values, and I have no doubt that family values are really important to them and what they do here. And I know that when the time is right, my wife and I would like to have children and make them a part of this community as well. So at the very least, allowing children at Ojai roots is a no-brainer. Thank you.

Thank you. David. Lee Sher. Actually, everybody just said it, and not allowing children is just crazy.

Could you just come up and say that one sentence?

We need you on the microphone is the problem. Would you like to say that to the microphone?

I'm so sorry. It's already been said so eloquently by the father and his baby and the young mom here and just write the no-brainer to allow minors. We talk a lot in Ohio about making the community friendly for young families and accessible. And there's not that many places where children can run around outside and have after school snacks. So that's all you all.

Thank you, Lee. Brad Hall.

uh... hi i'm brad hall i actually live directly next to high roots at three ninety one north montgomery and i just want to say this is a an opportunity for me to turn around and say hello i'm not against or hybrids as a concept. I'm not against Ojai Roots as a strong sense of community. Clearly there are a lot of people here that really love what that business does. I love the explanation of regenerative farming and produce. Those are all things that I can get behind. The truth is, though, that business, as great as it is to operate, is in fact a wine bar that has operated for many years prior to Ojai Roots coming onto the scene. There may be a juice component, a coffee component, produce component, but at the end of the day, it is the meeting place where many people go to drink wine and to enjoy themselves and that is what i have to wake up to every day and hear and i will say that as much as i want to support this business i also know that every night that i go to bed i have to think to myself what's it going to be tonight is it going to be a surprise monday night wedding reception that is going to happen outside of my windows that i have to close Do I have to close my windows tonight so that I don't have to be awakened at 6 a.m. by a delivery truck that is delivering that early in the morning? Last Tuesday, there were four deliveries that started at 6 a.m., and it is a business that is growing beyond what maybe I think was intended for when it was first started, I really, honest to goodness, from the moment that they moved in, we wanted them to be a success. We wanted to support it. We actually sent really bad, and forgive me, bottles of champagne to you with a card that said, welcome to the neighborhood. It's not that we are not wanting to do this, but we wanna do it in the proper way that really respects the space that is there, that had been there for years before they even got there, that was in contention years prior to them being there. Everybody can show up and love Ojai roots. I love that it would be a family place Maybe take the alcohol out and then have it be a family place that might be contentious, too But I think that ultimately at the end of the day Everybody that enjoys that space they can go home They enjoy it for a couple of hours. They go home and I don't go home. I have to live with the music coming out of there. I have to live with the smoke that blows into my home, not just the smoke from the barbecue that they have on a weekly Thursday night barbecue, but the people that come outside the business in the alley between our buildings and will smoke cigarettes and smoke. And I've actually seen them even carrying glasses of wine outside. So I'm not saying that's a common occurrence, but it is a recurring occurrence, and it's part of the footprint that they're leaving that I feel really should not be expanded. And I can love them, and I want to know them, and I want to be their neighbors, and it's a two-way street. So thank you.

Thank you, Brad. Next we have Lori Brown. Okay, no Lori Brown, all right. Randy, is it Chapman?

Yeah. Hi.

My name is Randy Chapman. I have grown up in Ojai, five generations of family in this community. I think there's a couple key points that seem to be missed in some of the things that I've heard people talking about. One, I feel like there's a lot of past transgressions from a previous business being held against Ojai roots, which I don't think is fair. Secondly, this town has shifted in such a way over the last 15, 10, 15 years where there's nearly nowhere for families to go. These restaurants are chasing, you know, Michelin nods here and there and catering towards tourism. You know, people with kids who grow up here and live here feel ostracized, like we can't go out on the weekends. And Roots has been a place where we've been able to bring our family, have a burger, not smothered in seed oil, talk. 80% of the people there during those family times aren't drinking. I don't drink wine. I like to spend time there because it's a beautiful place, it's a great ambiance, and my kid's happy being outside. We don't have much of that in this town, and I think it's a shame that we would even question whether that should be allowed for this community. I don't know how many of you have started businesses and had to struggle through what it means to take a risk to invest capital and then be told that that door is closed for you, you can't do that, will limit how many patrons you can have. All of the things that they're trying to do today are diversifying away from alcohol. They're opening doors for the community to participate in their business away from the things that people are most spiteful about. when you serve food and families come, my kid's not drinking. I'm not drinking. I'm watching my child and having a burger. When we have a farm market where you can buy produce and I need pasta for the dish I'm about to go cook and I can go swing by and grab that on the way home from the gym. These are all good things that are allowing that business to sustain itself, diversify away from the alcohol and create something that's making an impact in the community. And I think a lot of that hasn't really like been hammered home from my perspective, and I hope you guys take that into consideration.

Thank you, Randy. We have come to the end of the blue cards. No, we haven't. OK, come on up.

My name is Ariel Laura Moore.

Could you bring me the card, please?

Oh, sure.

Thank you.

I don't have prepared comments. One thing while I think of it is mentioning about not drinking and so forth. This is a wine bar, and from our experience of being neighbors, there's drinking every night that they are open. And I believe I understood that they were actually perhaps in the future looking to have hard alcohol as well. So that doesn't quite support that view. I totally feel for the young people that are speaking tonight about wanting a family place and community. And I think that is what every age would like to have up here. I just feel that this particular place with the MCOP that was in place when this business started was not meant to be, they didn't intend it to be like a community center for people. I'm not against children. Children can come. But this is really a wine bar. And I love the idea they do organic farming and boxes and so forth. That's where I've been in the last 50 years. But I do think it's a little, for us, like living next to Libby Park, Libby Bowl, where you are restricted to the amount of, you know, venues that there are. And in this case, we have them four or five nights of, not events, but noise and potential events. and to extend that to seven days a week and the hours till 10 o'clock at night. And I also will note that there have been violations of the MCUC, which doesn't lend us confidence that increasing these, you know, you know, lessening the restrictions that they will be abided by either. And we have tried to speak and not really, we've not found ourselves able to have, or they have not willingly met with us in person to talk over our complaints. And I do wish them well. I've known this girl, actually, from the time she was quite young. And I think she's a beautiful person, and her family is. I just think somehow this has grown like Topsy in a place that it's not meant to be, really, in a way, for what their vision is. I think their vision is wonderful. I'm not sure this is the location for it.

Thank you, Arianna. OK, have we got all the blue cards in from the audience? All right. Is there anyone online, Sherry? Yes, two people. I just put Nori Harn.

Hi. Good evening, Madam Chair and commissioners. Can you hear me OK?

Yes, we can. Thank you.

OK, great. So I'm here. I'm legal representative for La Amistad Villa Owners Association. Um, you've already heard from a ton of folks about their personal experiences, both for and against this business. Um, I'm not really here to speak on any of that. I'm here to speak on the law. Um, and I'll make this very brief. Um, so these requested changes to the M cup, they are major, you know, they, they substantially expand the approved use and that's fine. And that's great from a business perspective, but there are procedures in place as required by the code. One of those procedures is that. for major changes to conditional use permits, a new entitlement application is required. Okay. And then beyond that, this commission is required to make specific findings. And those findings are kind of itemized under 10-2-2406. So I won't get into the nitty gritty of all that, but I just want to bring that to this commission's attention that this request, although it has a ton of community support, it just simply hasn't followed the proper procedures. There's no data, there's no studies, there's nothing for this commission to base any kind of decision on as to how the surrounding sensitive uses will be impacted. And so with that, I will close and kind of respectfully reiterate what our position is, which is that this commission ought to retain the existing conditions as recommended by its staff and disapprove of you know, the remaining proposed changes until at least more data is presented and the proper procedures are followed.

Thank you, Nori. We have Mark. Mark, are you there?

He's on, but he might be muted.

Mark Begbie? Okay, let's move on to Andy. Is there an Andy?

No, it's Andy Whitman, and he did not have his hand raised. I think I accidentally put him on, so never mind.

Never mind, okay. In that case, we will close the public hearing. We will bring it back to the commissioners for your questions and your comments. Who would like to start?

So I'm sorry, excuse me. We don't have the laptop ability. However, the applicant did have a presentation that she was going to show on her laptop. So perhaps we would go back to the way she was starting to do it to begin with, which is showing it to you but turning your microphones around so you can actually hear what she's saying. Is that appropriate?

I think it's okay. I really wanted to just tell the story of my business, Ojai Roots, and I appreciate all the comments from our community. And at the end of the day, I think the ask is just to modify the current CUP because the business that was there previously is just so different from what I have. and what I want to do there and what I'm doing. So that's really the ask. I think a lot of you guys have been so open to the public. You've seen what we do. I've explained as much as I can in a couple minutes on where, how it started a decade ago. So I think it's not necessary to talk. Thank you.

Thank you, Rhianna. Okay, back to the commissioners. Who would like to start? I see pages of notes.

me first i guess well there's a lot happening here um i i think in some ways we're becoming the charm versus harm committee you know how much charm and how much harm uh can happen here in town a little bit and uh i think what i would mention off the top too thank you to everyone speaking on all sides of the issue and i think for all of us I know when a couple of us who went to the site and did a site visit we're trying to consider the the issue carefully and I think we understand in broad terms what's happening I have a little bit of a different viewpoint on a couple of things that I just want to mention I knew the previous operator. I think the current operator should have zero responsibility for anything that happened on that property and I think that's a it's both a principle we should operate with going forward and it's not meant to be a derogatory comment toward the prior owner or operator. So I think our viewpoint needs to start there. I have a little bit of a question and I wanna make sure I'm not confused. On the staff side, I'm seeing that we are both VMU and C1. In the report, page one says we're C1, page two says we're VMU, what are we here?

So the 315 North Montgomery is C1 and adjacent to the north is VMU. Okay. Adjacent to the south is C1 existing residential.

Okay. And then the other thing to my knowledge, again checking some facts here, type 41 does allow kids and that is out of the purview actually of our committee. That's an ABC regulation, correct?

Whether they allow children or not is an ABC thing, yes. Yes. Yes, however.

So that's a little bit off the table, would be my understanding of that, unless we condition something.

director's exemption is required for a for the abc license so that's going along with the whole permit process here and so the conditions of approval right now say that they have a 42 which does not allow minors and that's in the conditions of approval stating that that's the abc license that they have so they're asking they're asking to change their abc license And the ABC is okay with it as long as they get their conditional approval from the city of Ojai.

Yeah, and I understand that inside the C-1, everyone who has a liquor license in the C-1 is required to have a director's exemption? For outdoor, for the outdoor activity. Okay, so our purview is the patio. Yes. Just to be clear, one way of seeing this, our purview is the patio, it actually isn't the people or the operation or the community that it builds or anything. Specifically, we can really only condition what happens on that patio.

The activity outside, yes.

I have a couple of questions that I think the operator would probably be the best person to answer those, but do we know if the kitchen requirements for a Type 41 are met?

Yeah. Yes, after speaking with the ABC in Ventura County, it's just that we go through a discussion of what our menu is, and they have approved that. We are a bonafide eating place.

So today you have documentation from them that you do have the kitchen for the Type 41? Correct. Okay, yeah. And the real question there that I'm asking is do we have our sequencing correct? Are we getting ready to make a decision or have a viewpoint about something where the Type 41 permit from the ABC, the evaluation in their kitchen, may not be met yet? So I'm just checking my way through this because there's a lot of energy around this one. I have a question about the proximity of the complaint specific to this operator. So my understanding is you have been in business for two years, is that correct? In that property, yes, but the business. Within that two-year period, what is the actual, and let's separate that a complaint and a violation are actually two different things? Yes. Okay, and we need to be sure we don't conflate those two items. So first, if we consider complaints, how many complaints have been in this two-year period? I'm sorry, but I don't have the number of exact complaints Okay, so that would and that kind of goes to our email that we would want to know something about there And then is it also that same case on the violations? Do we know the number of?

violations in that two-year period we have three verified Violations, okay in the two-year period In the last 60 days in the last 60 days okay, and then I

Maybe it's just me, but I'll just do something radical and inject a little bit of common sense. I'm always concerned when complaints come close to hearings. And that's just me. And so my concern is that there's an attempt to paint an impression. And I would say one way or the other, actually. Just neutrally, when people know we're going to come to the dais here and have a discussion, that I'm leery of complaints that come in hot within that window of discussion. And I'm just mentioning that, actually. There's no follow on. And then I'm going to make one more comment, and then I'm going to pause. there was a comment made that let's, kind of what I would call, let's test and learn here. Let's do a little and see what we learn. And from knowing the prior operator, that's been happening since 2013. And I actually disagree, usually in everything in business, I believe test and learn so that you don't make a mistake. And everything in planning we should do should be kind of test and learn. In this case, I actually think we owe the operator a hard cap. what is the maximum terminal state of this piece of property so that when you do your due diligence, you know that's C1, here's the terminal destination of that property, here's what's gonna happen. Not that you wake up surprised that somebody has a campfire and a glass of wine in their hand right out your window celebrating a community event. So I actually believe that we do owe this operator and this is a unique property so we have to have a unique solution for you. Here is the cap and I believe we should either approve or disapprove up to the cap that we decide so that this person can make the basic decisions of being in business. Should I have a longer lease? Should I invest in the things that I need to invest in or should I find another location? And so that's my early viewpoint open to learning more. And sorry to be lengthy there, but given the volume of comments, I just want to check my understanding as we go through here.

Thank you. Jonathan?

I'll continue just to maybe dig into some of the clarifications because I do think that the, yeah, just to better understand. So can you guys help us paint a clear picture of sort of the zoning and land use intents of this site and around it? You know, it seems like, so we have a mixed use zone. So what's allowed in the mixed use zoning, generally speaking? I wish I had the computer available here.

So in the mixed-use zone, you can have commercial use and residential use. You can have both. That's the VMU. Okay.

And so then we have commercial. It's a transitional use. Transitional use. And right below it, which is this site as well as the sites to the south are commercial.

Correct. Zoned commercial.

Zoned commercial, even though they are, several of them are residential. Yes. Pre-existing the zoning. Okay, can you help clarify this thing that's come up throughout, which is the idea of the surrounding sensitive uses and how that sort of factors into this because I think if you look at it that way I think it's a little bit unclear what we're talking about because it feels like it's a mixed use zone and there's like commercial use here in a commercial use this kind of seems like pretty pretty expected even

So when we have a mixed use zone or a residential zone, or even a commercial zone, you've got the zoning and then you have the use. And so the fact is that there are residential uses to the north and the west and the south. Whether they're zoned for residential or not, they are existing. And none of them are non-conforming, actually. They're allowed uses. And we consider residential uses to be sensitive. I actually think they are the non-conforming is the not not the VMU however perhaps the c1 to immediately to the south yes but it is an existing single-family residence correct the c1 would does not allow for a residential right I would also like to read if I could the the VMU mixed-use district

Basically the description so the VMU zoning district is applied to areas suitable for the development of mixed-use residential and commercial land uses that support pedestrian or bicycle transportation modes and Community interaction the VMU zoning district is consistent with the village muse mixed-use land use designation of the general plan So it's basically identifying at the very end Consistency between the general plan and and the zone itself.

Well, you also read the the c1 and

Yes, above that is the C1 district. The C1 district is applied to areas appropriate for a range of community and tourist serving retail and service land uses. Typical land uses include general retail and personal services, hotels and motels, etc. The C1 zoning district is consistent with the general plan land use designation of the general plan. So at the end it's showing consistency.

I don't know if I have a ton of other questions around that.

You know, I think... Do you want me to move it on and come back?

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

I think that helps. Thank you, guys.

Katrina, what do you got?

I don't have any questions in particular, but I... One question is, I don't remember ever for any other restaurant... in town Deciding what particular I don't think it's ever gone to the Planning Commission before What ABC license they could have? It's usually it's alcohol sales. They can have alcohol. I don't know what the difference between two glasses of wine and a margarita like what do we It to me. It's the same So it's either you have alcohol or you don't. So I guess that's where I'm coming from. I think this is kind of an anomaly for us to talk about the ABC type. I mean, have we done this before?

Well, the reason that you're talking about the ABC type is because you're also talking about the director's exemption and a minor conditional use permit. And the reason you're doing that is because it was contentious and sensitive. And so the municipal code gives the director the ability to move it up to the planning commission, which we did in 21. And so that's why the planning commission is looking at it. And when it comes to the ABC license, we do look at the ABC license because the ABC needs our approval for the zone that it's going in, and we're looking at an outdoor use, which needs the minor conditional use permit, and an ABC license, if it's a 41, or between the 41 and the 42, you're looking at a place that allows children versus doesn't, so is it more of a family environment or not? A 47 allows hard liquor, which generally speaking, turns it into, generally speaking you know a different type of venue and put and there's I can't think of the word right now but you know there's there's there's potentially a different venue there if there's going to be hard alcohol and how and hard alcohol use so we look at the whole picture and we look at every place individually and most of the uses in the city of Ojai are not surrounded by residential uses and We have one that I see in my mind that has one residential use next to it, but the rest is commercial You know, it's got more space around it, but all the others for the most part are downtown So they're not literally surrounded. So we have We look at every one individually every minor conditional use permit for outdoor use and this is It's definitely a different location

But to that point, with the way that we want to see this as commissioners neutralizing, actually, for the different opinions in the room, neutralizing for that, really, what this is is a decision over the patio. Whether the applicant has a 41 or a 43 is a business decision, actually, as I would see that. That's not necessarily in our purview, because in the C-1, they would be allowed to have either one of those, technically. Wouldn't they?

Yes. However, the outdoor use is a discretionary permit. And so where that alcohol goes is tied to that.

Do you have anything else that you'd like to?

Well, I guess this highlights the idea that we need to look at our land use map because right now this is not spot zoning. As Bill Miley said, it's not. It's C1 zoning from the corner of Aliso North to those condos. So that's, I don't know, seven or eight parcels on the west side of Montgomery and probably an equal number on the east side of C1 zone. I'm looking at the map. Maybe we don't want C1 there in the future. Maybe we want that to be VMU as a transition zone from our downtown C1 area north to the VMU and the residential beyond that. But right now, It's C1, and the house to the south of it is nonconforming. And we've discussed amongst ourselves about VMU that we think it could be a mistake to have solely residential. the VMU zone because of this very reason seems counter counterproductive yeah I mean the VMU is supposed to be mixed-use it's supposed to have retail businesses housing incorporated so it's VMU is not working if there's complaints about business To me. I mean, I'm just saying this is a big picture land use issue we have to address.

The general plan states that the mixed use is the desired direction of Ojai. So to then limit by creating a residential use totally negates that ability. So that's what's tricky for us because we just somehow reconcile that, which is clearly where the first MCUP sort of was born out of.

Right. And, and I think the type of business that they have is kind of, um, a retail it's evolving. It's, it's a newer way that people, you know, people don't eat the same way they did 20 years ago. They, you know, we're eating better. It's more casual. We want our families, their hotels change. The Ojai Valley Inn used to be basically adult only, and now they built a kid pool. They want kids and families because that's who's spending the money. People want their families to be there. So I can tell you this, I am supportive of the change to allow for the 41. to allow the kids, because it's a restaurant that goes with a restaurant. So a 42 is like a bar. It's like the hub or the hut in my mind. This is no hub. This is no hut. This operation is very different from that. And so I am supportive of that change. If you go down each of the different issue areas, the 35 patrons, to me that doesn't seem very much, but there's been complaints, noise complaints. I don't know if we allowed more what that would be. I'm curious what the actual occupancy limit is there.

Right, yeah.

A consideration on parking would really be the issue there. I mean, the only thing that's clear is being a parent and consuming alcohol is good and watching everything. But the parking actually, to me, is what drives whether they're 35 or 45 or whatever. But again, even in the way that we wrote this up, there's a ton of ambiguity. And that's why I'm just arguing for whatever the cap is here, let's have the courage to set it high or low, whichever way we go there.

related can you guys help us I guess with this there was discussion of buffer earlier on from some of the community members is that can you shed any light on sort of any restrictions or things that might be really important what type of buffer are you talking about for between the use I guess I think they were maybe misunderstanding the relationship with uses weren't they talking about a buffer

on the north side of the buffer, the driveway and a cement wall between the condos and the business.

There is a wall there currently. How tall is it?

I've forgotten.

It's at least, it's six feet at least.

At least, yes. It's north of six feet. And I just wanted to add that the majority of what North Montgomery Street is, is majority of it are businesses, not residences. And the license that we're asking for is simply the same license, alcohol license, that a restaurant has, like a restaurant like Rory's Place, for example, or, you know. that allows families.

Do you have more? Questions?

Yeah, I don't have any more.

I have no more questions, I guess. Two questions. We've talked about verified complaints. Could you define what that is verified is versus none?

So a verified complaint is something that city staff code compliance has actually seen, witnessed, and date stamped, you know, a photograph. And I want to add something in. And that is the reason for the conditions of approval initially and continue is for compatibility in the neighborhood, not to get rid of the existing use. It's to try to make it compatible, try to make it work.

Could you tell me what life safety requirements are? The applicant has requested removal of the fixed occupancy limit or base occupancy on maximum established by life safety requirements. The request also includes a request to remove numerical limits on umbrellas and furniture configuration. But I didn't know what life safety meant.

I'm going to let you ask that question to the applicant. That's her language specifically.

Okay. The life safety is just fire department. I just want to abide by what the city rules are instead of like this. 35 number so if the occupancy like here it says capacity 74 I would just like to understand what that like that's what I'm talking about life safety does the fire department give you an occupancy rate I believe so but I can research that and get back to you I think that would be a good idea okay I will research

Any more discussion? I have a few discussion points, but if there are any more questions or... Well, I just, two quick questions.

I'm thinking, you've mentioned you were thinking of a business that had alcohol permits open till 10 p.m. and so on. Is that business still in operation, and what's different between this business and that business? I'm sorry. I'm trying to be polite and not name a business that I can think of that backs right up to.

Oh, I don't know of a business that is open until 10 o'clock. It's not in the city of Ohio.

No, I was just thinking there's a business on Ohio Avenue that backs straight up to Holmes and is open until 10 and has lights and live music and so on. Okay, I didn't know what time they were open to actually. Is there a difference between this business and that business?

we're talking about the same business I think this one is much closer to the north to the residents that are north additionally the property that's to the north has two stories and sound traveling up is kind of different than sound traveling directly out and there's a buffer wall there for the first story but I I don't have scientific evidence of that it's just experience and

If you're talking about Noshola, it is similar in a sense that it's right next to a residential.

Have you guys all met as neighbors and talked? It was a little surprising to me that one of the comments was, have you guys sat down? Because I do think an operating principle for you is that you actually have to be a better neighbor than the code requires, actually.

Not everyone.

Just in the interest, you're on the seams. To Katrina's comment, you're right on the seam where daily life meets commerce.

Right. So not everyone here I've met with at the same time, but for instance, there's people here that we actually work together, like an event in Ohio bigger. So there was a lot of communication that was relayed to me and i understand it and follow what the city rules are and so we have had many conversations in the back and forth and on top of that not even discussions about the complaints or you know concerns but also open

discussions on the food system of Ojai so I think that it would be a really good idea if you did have a meeting with all of the concerned neighbors and discuss those complaints it seems to me that you should be able to work out get a solution to meet everybody's needs Okay, the hours. You have requested that the hours be expanded. Staff, in your reply to that, you suggested that we maintain the current hours. You did not mention whether that included being closed on Monday and Tuesday. When you say maintain the hours, are you including that Monday and Tuesday closure?

Staff was recommending that the days and hours remain the same, that the condition remain the same.

Monday and Tuesday closed.

Yes. Okay.

The 35 people, it seems, was a number that a previous planning commission came to. I would certainly want to know what the fire department has to say about that. the the parking is related to that number as well and of course parking on montgomery is a problem now that the trailer is out you have a little more space to put people but i would like to know if giving you a few more people in your in your cap would impact the parking and the

Fire requirements so chair if I could yes, just wanted to clarify a statement You just made yes in the parking situation. So the parking is tied to the building and to the use It's not tied to the outdoor dining the outdoor dining actually has a requirement for zero. I That is... And so the other piece is the occupancy piece you just mentioned. There is no tie to parking as it relates to occupancy. Okay. So if the fire department comes back and says occupancy is 70, then occupancy is 70. Now we can come back and limit that to 35. Right. Certainly within this minor conditional use permit, we have that authority. This body has that authority.

I would certainly like to express my opinion once again that having a parking requirement relating to an outdoor venue at zero is insane. But here we are. We're going to work within the rules we have at the moment.

Just so if I could, one of the reasons why that outdoor dining went to zero was to encourage those businesses to have basically outdoor dining. So it was taking those businesses that were primarily indoors and allowing for those businesses to also have outdoor. So in order to do that, when that provision came forward in really 1997 and then revised throughout the years uh council and the community recognized that importance at that time now obviously there have been some changes over time in terms of opinions and conversations and certainly that that can be explored at some point but for tonight's conversation it's zero it's zero okay um

The amplified sound is one of my primary concerns. The way sound affects the neighbors is a really big deal.

when i came to visit you i was under the impression that you said there was no amplification did i get that wrong it's no um it's unclear about the amplification definition so i showed you um the speaker it's a sonos speaker that we put out like any other businesses in ohio and that's the only amplified or speaker music system that's out there.

But there's no amplification allowed in your MCUP.

But it specifically says that I can have a speaker playing background music.

So amplification is from an amplifier, like if you have a guitar and a band that's hooked up to an amplifier. And so that's one of the reasons why staff is recommending that we also put in the word live music. But it would be hooked into an amplifier. And the condition also, we wanted to specify that speaker music coming from the restaurant would be OK. It's different than an amplifier.

And I think, besides an amplifier or a speaker, I think I am very well aware that I have to follow the city noise decibels.

Someone mentioned that you are currently checking the DB levels.

Do you have?

I do. Where do you have your equipment?

We have it by the register, and my manager, Rob, who is here, who mentioned that. We inform all of our employees to continuously check, especially when there are.

Take it outside when you have a party and take that reading from the northern border?

Correct. And not even a party. I think it's just regular operations when we have it. really don't have parties. It's a business, a market, and a restaurant, and so regular operating hours, we do check it on a daily basis and make sure that we're under that limit.

Okay. Next to the register doesn't cut it. It needs to be out.

It's a device that I could take everywhere, so the manager always has it, and you just have to walk out and constantly check. It's mobile, yeah, exactly.

Listening to the audience tonight, and I really do appreciate everyone coming here and explaining their point of view, and there were quite a few interesting novel points of view expressed tonight for me. The one that really hit home for me was you want your children to be able come to the restaurant to the to ohio roots i approve of that completely i think that people should be able to bring their children to an area where they're going to be sitting visiting with friends um so i am very supportive of your request to put a 40 uh 41 into the into our documents. Condition of approval.

Thank you.

Do you have any other questions?

There's a couple of quick questions for Rihanna. There was a lot of kind of going back to this question, I guess, of the actual interactions. There's a lot of conversation in the documents from the neighbors saying that you're very aware of some issues and that you're ignoring those issues. And I guess I'm curious, because it seems like there's a little bit of a question of trust that's happening. Um, and I'm just wondering, I think maybe to Brad's point as well, like, so do you feel like you're like you have, like, do you feel like, I mean, they can't really speak to it, but can you speak to that? That's accurate that you, you know, you feel like you've been, these issues have been made clear to you and you've discussed that with them. And do you feel like you've done what you can to, and to rectify those things, and do you feel like it's been successful? Because there was a lot of talk about you guys are trying to do the right thing, and I kind of want to know from you, do you feel like you've done that to get a better job? Because I think that's a big part of what I'm hearing from the other side is like, You know, because I have questions about how the mechanics of the thing, but when it comes down to the fact that these are, you know, we're all people living next to each other, there are questions about, it seems like, oh, well, let's say, it seems like there's a fear in it. You give more, and then now we're really, you know, now we really, we can't even trust them to stay at that. They're going to go, like, a step further or something like that.

Well, I have talked to a lot of my neighbors. And like I've said before, I grew up in this neighborhood. So I don't want to be in a position where I'm running a business that I'm breaking any city rules or neighborhood rules. I want my business to succeed. So I do follow all those rules. And I have spoken to a lot of the neighborhood, like my right next door neighbor behind us. And some of them are here. to understand what their concerns are. The one opposite of the condos, I've spoken to them almost every time I see them outside, just to make sure everything, like, you guys are okay. They had some concerns about people maybe walking on their property or parking in front, and we made sure that we told our customers not to do that. I am open ears and I'm always there to listen to these concerns and to the point like at the end of the day I am here because I'm listening to these concerns and I want to make sure I'm following the rules. My point of being here is just that the rules that are set in place in this minor conditional use permit just does not apply to my business. or the business that is Ojai Roots now. It was put in place for a wine bar. And I wanna reiterate that Ojai Roots is not just a wine bar. It never started as a wine bar. So it's a completely different business.

Anything else, Brad?

Relationships are better than rules. Is your microphone on? relationships are better than rules and cheaper to operate. And in that spirit, I do think sitting and trying to work things out, I understand it's been a multi-year conflict and probably the other side of that coin is that you are not responsible for everything that's happened from 2013. And So yeah, it's a tricky one. Vines are being pulled up. Wine consumption is changing. The Ohio Valley Inn used to be a recuperation center for soldiers. Businesses change. So I don't think it's possible to just say because you said something two years ago in a letter to the city that your business is always going to stay in that format. But how we sew this up, and I do think the way you were approaching it, can we go line by line here, step by step, and see what we each give permission to the other to accept a little bit? And I don't know if that's the right approach or not, but that's my instinct.

I like that approach.

Pardon me? I like that approach. Is your speaker on? I'm not sure if this is the best venue or not for that, but I think we can help you get to that.

Is there a site plan or something? Do you have a configuration of what your idealized outdoor patio would look like?

From what it currently is right now?

Yeah.

I want it to run the way it is running, and I think the couch seating mixed with the metal dining chairs, I think I'm just taking it literally that if it's 35 is the number, there's a couch. like how many seats it's just like there's just a lot of i'm just trying to understand what i need to do um to follow the rules and the 35 i've seen like 35 people in the patio and i think when we some of us met There was a good amount of people on there that may have suppressed 35, and I think we talked about how it was really quiet. It's very calm. It's not a bar where people are going there to drink and get rowdy. it's really just a place that people can order an alcoholic beverage. But as you see, like in the morning, like early hours of the day, a lot of people just want to grab a coffee and read their book right there, write their art piece or draw or any of that. And that's also part of why I would want the expansion of the hours of operation and Mondays and Tuesdays as an option to open because it's, The use of the community, when I see what the community wants from that place, it's really to be able to hang out and eat and have their cup of coffee or alone time. So that's it.

Can you talk about the special events that you've had? The neighbors talked about wondering if there was gonna be a big event that night. How many, you're allowed to have one a month. So what is that looking like for you? What is actually happening?

Yeah, you know, I don't even look at that as a really high point of contention because I think even from the inspector who came in and will take photos, there's been mistakes that, like what defines an event. So I think that when there's a reservation for 10 people to sit at a table, it might get confused as an actual event. We really, I've only sold a ticketed event once for like 15 people to be able to create flower arrangements. That was the one time in the whole two years that I've been in this property. A lot of the events that I do talk about on social media or maybe my website happen on the farm, which is not on the Montgomery property. So I think there's a big confusion there and it would be nice to not be limited to one event per night or per month because the events like what one of the commentators said was it's really hard to define an event. Like a 10 person or a 15 person party if they're with their whole family will come and reserve like an area to eat food and

Think some of the neighbors or community members may see that as an event a Quick question for staff, so I have a big family At least 35 people in my family so if I wanted to have a family dinner and I called and say can you accommodate 35 people and The restaurant's not necessarily shut down to just my party, but I take up the whole area. Would the city consider that an event?

So we talked about that in the staff report. And we wanted to clarify what an event is. And that was one of the things that we were asking for some language to be put into that condition. And so that would be where the restaurant or the venue is closed to the public, that would be part of it. It would be an unusual use, right? Not just a regular, like maybe a car show or a wedding, a pop-up event. So there's an example in here of what events are. So we wanted to add to that, we wanted to add the word wedding, and we also wanted to add that it would be closed to the public, I believe. And so that would help define it a little bit because, let's see, that would be condition number three.

Yeah, is there a cost to enter?

That would be another thing.

Those are all like ticklish subjects that lean into the event versus it just reserving, right?

So outside of normal restaurant or business operation.

Right. And so and part of the part of the added language on in condition number three would be weddings or other events as determined by the community development director as appropriate. And so for one thing. So what he just added was a ticketed event. That would be an event. A wedding would be an event close to the public would be an event.

What does the word unusual mean in the term unusual events?

Okay, I guess that is perhaps vague. It's tricky. If I'm in the car club, if I'm in the car club. What do we go to a restaurant for? We go to a restaurant to sit down and eat and drink. Right. We don't usually go to a restaurant to have a car show or to have a wedding or to create a flower arrangement. Those are classes and special events. They're not like quote unquote normal restaurant activities. Okay.

Yeah, I guess the big watch out is Ojai is built on unusual nurses. And that's a tricky one. I understand why the language is in there. I'm not saying that to be demeaning at all, but it's just a bit of a red... flag because people come here to do exceptional and unique things and so your words count so we need to be Careful around that if I'm in the car club and Jay Leno is holding dinner at a cafe in town That's not unusual. That might be something I want to go to also if there is a breathing event In town that I want to go learn something about somatic breathing and I'm into that. That's not unusual to me so I just think we need to be

Super if I may I would just add that unusual I think is Defined as a deviation from standard food and beverage service question you get I mean we're in Ruth Gator Binsberg territory here But what's the definition of this is of whose standard are we deviating from?

I'm not a Marilyn Manson fan Marilyn Manson probably has different standards of deviation than I might but anyways, it's a Just I think we need to be very precise about that. A lot of people come to Ohio, I would argue a core value of the town is the right to be unusual and different in a unique and innovative way. To me that's a core value of Ohio, so I would just mention that.

And part of it too is a lot of these events maybe that you would define. are not even something I am aware of sometimes. So meaning to say, if there's a group of 35 bicyclists that use the Ojai Routes as a stopping point to be able to get juices, they all park their bikes on the parking lot and they have a gathering, it looks like an event. that I think has been a complaint before or that has been a verified complaint, but it's just the community gathering without even letting us know or our management team know that that's what's happening. I'm not selling tickets, it's just everyone's talking about where to meet and there's 35 of them, let's say, and they use Ojai Roots as a meeting point.

Okay, do we have any more questions for Rhianna?

Thank you, Rhianna.

Thank you. I would like the commissioners to discuss the hours of operation and see if there are any changes that you need to make from the staff recommendation.

Well, should we start at the top?

Where's the top? Condition number one?

Usually.

Oh, okay. I was going to go just right to the hours of operation, but we'll get there.

Let's just be organized.

Okay.

So the applicant wants to remove fixed occupancy limits. So right now it's at 35. She also wants to remove numerical limits on umbrellas and furniture configuration. So I think in the staff report it was stated that the configuration is not necessarily locked into place. You know, and I would remove umbrellas because in the Ojai hot sun, unless if, you know, we put a limit on the size, like a nine foot market umbrella. I mean, if she added a few more market umbrellas, nine foot market umbrellas, I think that would be okay to shade her customers. So I don't want to lock in, she can only have four umbrellas. You know, I think that's ludicrous. But I do think that, you know, we can limit the type, you know. market umbrellas or something so it doesn't turn into a big huge thing but that's just one comment the 35 patrons was probably based on originally based on the floor plan or the site plan showing the the configuration of the furniture yeah i think it was the configuration of the seating yes yeah it was literally the number of seats and when it came to a couch

The definition allowed I believe the 18 inches per person and so staff literally went out there and counted seats and Well added multiplied and divided Okay, so without without so without us a floor plan or site plan Using her existing furniture.

I think that is right 35. I mean if she had come in with a proposed floor plan with different configuration That's something for us to consider, but all we have is what the existing furniture.

Yeah, we either need some sort of occupant per square foot sort of information or based on the furniture or something to reference to be able to make an assumption. Because as Brad's saying, we can't just say loosely whatever life safety requirements are. We kind of have to see those because this is a condition.

yeah so it can't just be anything it'd be nice to give it a hard number maybe it could be more but I think it's hard for us to really assess that I agree with that yeah so so my recommendation on that one is either continue it to allow the applicant to some information about that but I I doubt that we would uncap it

I would like to see a number, whatever that might be. Because otherwise you could just have wall-to-wall people standing around drinking.

Well, you can't do that in any space. There's always some sort of regulation. There's got to be a cap. The code dictates. Yeah, of course.

OK, but 70, I mean, you were making up that number, I assume.

Related to the use and the square footage. But we need something to kind of base it on, I think.

That one's interesting, because I'm sorry I didn't mean to interrupt the conversation, but the fire department does set that occupancy standard, and I don't remember offhand what that number was, but we can find that number, so it at least gives what that cap would be at this site. A reference, yeah.

So on that one, I think we need more information.

More information. The lights, though, I think that that's also a part of this.

Oh, yeah, the Tivoli lights with covers.

I guess they don't have covers right now.

Oh, I thought.

But they do, and this is just keeping it in the.

Yeah, I would keep the Tivoli lights because that's part of our outdoor dining ordinance. So I would definitely keep the Tivoli lights.

Yeah.

But as far as just the number.

It also says it's indicated on the site plan. Oh, it's the approved site plan.

So you don't have the site plan because the site plan was actually approved through Tipple and Ramble. The current applicant can provide a separate site plan.

And you're not recommending anything on the lights?

No. And the detail shows.

Meaning it shouldn't be maintained.

Maintained.

The current?

Yes.

OK. Yeah. I was just going to say, it has a detail with the. Great. Yeah.

Couldn't see it.

So that's number one, right?

Yeah.

So do we go on to number two? Sure. Okay. So they said remove reference to minors, replace with generic ABC requirements, remove reference to a specific ABC license type, 41 beer, wine, restaurant. So I'm actually okay with that request. I think that we, it's a C1 zone, It's a restaurant with outdoor dining. That would be a license 42. That's not our purview. That's ABC licensing. So we're, in my mind, we're approving the outdoor dining related to a restaurant, which is an approved use there. So I'm okay with their request on item two. Which is to just say that they have to comply with the ABC requirements. Um, have no restrictions on minors or no discussion about minors. It's a restaurant. kids can go to a restaurant so we don't restrict kids so i would take out any reference to minors i think the main thing there is whether it can go to this 47 which allows distilled alcohol they're not asking for that now so i think we should what they're looking for is the ability to have children and that means

going to a Type 41.

But I think removing any reference to a specific ABC license allows that in the future.

Yeah, so it would allow it. It may be fine.

We have to decide that.

Yes.

As long as she has an ABC-approved kitchen for a Type 41 operation, and we approve it for the patio, right okay and we approve it for the patio she is allowed to have children there yes it's it's kind of half in our purview and half out actually I mean I mean the community development director does have to write to ABC they ask the city and say is this approved so are there any distinctions we need to be aware of and regarding children inside the building versus on the patio no okay

So that's number two, right? Can we move on to three?

You want to remove any, just as long as they have an ABC license and not worry about whether it's 41 now and 47 in the future? That's what I'm saying. You all agree?

I'm sorry, I missed that.

What Katrina is suggesting, yes. Shame on you. What Katrina is suggesting is removing, is just saying an ABC license without defining whether it's a 41 or a 47. Okay, understood. Yep. I personally like defining 41, and if and when the business decides it wants a 47, they can come back and ask.

Walk me through why we would not do that. Just let me understand that side, or what's the counter argument to the way we may be leaning?

I think it, well, alcohol is a whole lot stronger when you take it out of a bourbon bottle than it is out of a wine bottle. And I think that that's probably the whole thing.

More like a bar. I think specifics help us. Pardon? I think specifics help us. They eliminate ambiguity for people.

Yeah, I think what's hard, Brad, is like there's, it's, as we've kind of heard from the start, it's sort of like intrinsically ambiguous because we could also say, whatever, Ojai Pub, these other, that are commercial with residential right behind them, which can have liquor, that's based on the zoning and everything. Here, this mixed use, which has a residential use, seems to have a sensitivity to it, and I think that's why we're talking about it, I don't still necessarily know. You know, if I was just looking at this, I would say, well, yeah, I would say we should just say if you're going to have a liquor license, then that's up to you because that's sort of how this reads. But there seems to be a layer that we need to be sensitive to. So that's kind of, I think, the trick.

Yeah, I think what we're learning tonight is that there are these businesses on the seams where one zoning meets another, where you have people who are impacted. And so specificity, I think.

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, Lucas, though, like in a way this is less on the seams because the VMU is supposed to be a transition to another space as opposed to along East Ojai where it's actually a seam.

Right. I would also note that if you're looking for, like, a red herring in terms of how you would kind of address whether a 47 or a 41 is more appropriate, I think you almost have to say yes to the 47 and then basically have them be the ones messing it up through... selling to minors or drunken in public or something like that that tips the scales and suddenly has police reports that follow them, essentially. A lot of times when we end up removing the use of a type 47, 41, any of those alcohol uses, which by the way, in the seven years I've been here, we've never done that. But I'm saying if you were to do that and you were to go down that path, it would be life safety types of things such as that. So verifiable police reports that have identified that are linking it directly to that particular patron either operating outside the boundaries of the ABC regulation. A lot of times what ends up happening is ABC will just cut the feed out underneath a business of that nature anyway. I've seen in other cities, it's not here.

Okay. Number three.

What's the defense?

The applicant would like to remove the monthly limitation and staff is recommending maintaining it. Do you have?

I would go with staff recommendation and keep it at one.

I mean, that does seem, especially hearing that maybe the idea of events is more of a- Would you speak into the microphone? Sorry. Especially since hearing that potentially the idea of an event is maybe more of a misconception than a reality of what's happening. It seems like it allows them to do something unique and special here and there while operating. So that's probably a pretty fair one. It also relates to the neighbor's needs and wants.

Again, this is one where I think we really have to be conscious of the neighbor's needs. And it does open it up to the applicant to go to the director. and define what kind of event they're planning and to be advised.

You said a very important piece there, which is planning. A lot of times when events happen, and this is for this business as well as others, when an event is planned, what happens? there's usually advertising. We have a way in which we can find that information. If you're advertising something, that's clearly not something where you're inviting your friends to come over, even if there isn't a ticket involved in what we're talking about here. That feels much more engaged and planned and thought out versus some of these other pieces that she's mentioned, and I think the complaints that we've seen otherwise. Might I offer something? Keeping the one event monthly, but then exploring the option of a temporary use permit to allow for events not necessarily on the weekly, but it allows for her to plan and for us to then notify. So rather than it just being a pop-up event once a month, that there is some forethought into what she's wanting to do.

Yeah, that's nice.

Suggestion as I've been kind of here.

I think there's a nice idea about some sort of visibility on events You know, that's gonna be a nice thing for the neighbors also to know, you know that something's happening So I think visibility accountability. I think all those pieces come into play Yeah, because in the end, I mean even the mixed-use, you know pretty clearly says it's to promote community interaction. So I think that it's aligned with the C1 and the surrounding uses. Just to wait for it to be done, I guess, respectfully as possible sounds smart.

And just to note, I know we've talked about the VMU and the fact that there is residential, that's an allowed single-family residential, which is an allowed use within VMU. You want to take a guess how many of the cities I've worked in where that has been allowed? The answer is zero. This is the only community I've ever worked in where residential single family is allowed within a VMU. It feels less like a mixed use. While it allows for that component to be expanded upon, it still says yes to single family within that zone. C1 does not.

I wonder if the operator would consider a little bit of a limitation there. And you could set the parameters. But for example, events are only Wednesday through Sunday.

I guess the only thing is if it's like for a local nonprofit that wants to do some little thing. We haven't gotten to the hours of operation yet. So at this point, it can only be those days anyways. I guess we have to go there first. Maybe that's the more important one.

Yeah, and maybe it's a middle ground between the operator accepting, hey, I'll only do events Wednesday through Sunday, because that's sort of PICO. And then if there were an exception, there would be a TUP applied for so that they are flagged. And then you're probably in a position to say to whoever wants to hold that special event, by the way, guys, you have to pay the fee for a permit. I need to know 45 to 60 days in advance, and you go through that. That TUP process and I do think the notifications to the neighbors and everything would be great there.

So So Lucas they can do that. Anyway, right they can do the temporary use permit.

We don't have to address it We do not but we have the ability to do that This body has that ability to do that through this CUP so you can put limitations on that and that's within your authority Absolutely

I mean, there's a certain, having, you know, ran a lot of events in Ojai, there's a certain on-the-ground reality to the kind of people who come to events in the given time that they come. Typically, there are not big Monday night events. And if there is something that's community-oriented, or Monday or Tuesday, if it's community-oriented, you know, Wednesday Wednesday on is kind of when you do that and that relates to chasing labor to work these events and all sorts of you know different things there but

Chair, I would say if someone else is going to come up and speak, you've got to open the public hearing to everybody.

I'm sorry. I made a mistake once. I let this happen, and then the whole room wanted to also come up and talk all over again. So I'm going to say no, and I'm sorry.

OK. I think we're moving on to the next item, the hours.

Staff is recommending that we maintain the current condition of approval relating to hours, which is including the Monday and Tuesday being closed. It also includes having it open from four until nine. My opinion on that is the four, I think that they could be open before four because it sounds like a lot of people are coming for coffee and a donut, a little conversation or lunch. So I think we need to play with these numbers a little bit or days of opening. 7 a.m. is, I'm not a morning person, but 7 a.m. is, if I lived next door, I'd have a lot of problems with those delivery trucks at six in the morning.

Well, they're not supposed to be there at 6. I mean, our noise ordinance is very clear about that. So, I mean, I... That would be a code case that we'd be addressing. Yeah, so I would encourage neighbors to report that when it's happening because there is a clear ordinance that prohibits deliveries. I mean, Amazon comes... in the middle of the night now, so I mean, it's hard to tell Amazon not to come, but we have to deal with that somehow. I am for opening up the the availability of this business to open every day, seven to ten. I'm okay with that.

Seven to ten?

I am. But I do agree that the noise issue is a big one, you know, and is there a way um our ordinance our noise ordinance it just struck me it says outdoor dining section 5 1105 there's special noise sources in our noise ordinance that specifically mentions outdoor dining and what it says is outdoor dining is prohibited between the hours of 11 30 p.m and 6 a.m so i mean That, you know, that's what our noise, yeah, like why are we, so anyway. I understand the neighbors and their concern for the noise, the deliveries before 7 a.m. That's terrible. In a commercial zone, though, I find it really difficult to try to handcuff our businesses. We want successful businesses. it's just difficult because we've got housing that's there that existed before the zoning but the zoning intent is to make that area more commercial we've got VMU which happens to have only residential I understand that conflict. I'm wanting to know a way we can deal with the violations of what makes that incompatible, which is basically noise. It's the main issue is noise. So I don't think, if you walk into that business, there's no reason why there couldn't be a customer coming in at 7 AM.

The tricky one is the noise ordinance is what it is. 7 AM, you can hit your blower in some parts of town. And then going under the principle of you have to be a better neighbor than the code requires, if you're backing trucks up at 7 a.m., You're not you know, you're not operating and in a way that's gonna be Good for you in the end. You're gonna have a business filled with conflict, you know, and so It's a it's a tricky one, you know We can't really do anything about the noise ordinance. But on the other hand you you have to Operate a business around it and you all have to live a life around it and I think 7 a.m. Beepers are tough, you know

Yeah. I think 4 to 9 p.m. Wednesday through Friday is too restrictive. I agree. I think that's unreasonable for a commercial business.

But I don't like the idea of going to 7 to 10. I think there's a middle ground that could be found.

I guess something that Brad said was, you know, And, I mean, something that was said by it was, along with it, I guess, is Brad said businesses change, you know. So, you know, what are the positives and negatives about providing the seven to 10? You know, obviously it provides more flexibility for something that is also maybe like, sounds like a store for the neighborhood. You know, there's other things where waiting until four in the afternoon is like, why would you ever go there to do that thing? So in fact, these hours push it more into a, as the liquor license more towards a bar. So we want to, I think we want to actually pull it away from that.

So, you know the hours are a big play on that, you know, I Don't know if there's some way of like I just noticed something in the code so if this is truly a Restaurant because it has a commercial kitchen now and the restaurant is now justifying the 41 The code says that restaurant, cafe, outdoor dining is a full CUP. Just FYI. Not a minor.

In the C1.

In the C1 zone.

In the C1 zone? Yeah. OK. Well, minor CUP would remain at staff level. Here we've brought it forward. So it's a technicality at this point.

yeah it is same notification that we're doing and it is here yeah no I know but I mean we all should be aware of that what I was looking up was restaurant it's very reasonable that we're looking at this yes it is reasonable and I don't know if there's a technical you know we're not approving an M CUP we should be approving a full-on CUP

If we continue this and it comes back to us, is that an opportunity to correct that?

Yeah, I think there's, if I could just, I think there's a couple of pieces that I think you're finding and seeing some nodding heads for agreement to. We've gone through one through four. I think there's more information that's needed on one, so obviously we do need to return with some information there. Two, you're identifying just a full removal of the restriction. Three is really no change, however, recognizing the opportunity for TUPs to be included and explored. Four is hours of operation is where we're at right now. Yes. And then an expansion, but what does that look like? So I think what I'm getting at here is one is already tripping us into more than likely a continuance.

I am trying to put myself into the shoes of the neighbors, which is typically how I do approach these applications. And since the business typically closes at 8, I was told, I think that Maintaining the closing at 9 is fine. And I would not want to extend that to 10. But I would want to push the 4 PM down maybe to 10 AM. think we need hours I think we need as you said earlier to put caps on things so that the business knows exactly what is and is not acceptable yes so how do we you know because how do we come to those those hours I think you know I think to Katrina's points she's looking at the code and saying well he's looking at code I'm looking at neighbors

No, no, for sure. I know, but no, and I think we want to take care of the neighbors too, absolutely. But so we just have to come up with a way of understanding what.

But I'm also open to the Monday, Tuesday opening. I mean, I don't know that that, I don't see a really good reason to have it closed down on those two days. So the business can expand in terms of the number of days. and some of the hours earlier in the morning, in my opinion. So.

Yeah, one way of thinking about it would be to work backwards. So again, just injecting a little bit of operating experience, nine o'clock, things are pretty quiet. So if you do have something going after 9 p.m., it's usually a special event, and then you get into the gray zone of who you're impacting and how you're impacting them a little bit. So if we kind of said, well, 9 p.m. feels like an okay stopping point now, and then rationally for the business to serve lunch, probably somebody has to be in there doing something at around 9.30 a.m., 9 a.m., I don't know.

But they're inside. Yeah, yeah. I mean, they're not serving on the patio. Right. So that's where the noise level is going to begin to affect the neighborhood.

Mm-hmm.

Yeah, at 9 a.m., everything's going everywhere in town, generally speaking.

But they don't open until 10 quite often.

Yeah, that's more to be...

I mean, people working in the kitchen, 7 o'clock is fine. Just do not go out on the patio and make noise. This is a really unique property and a really unique problem. And all of these are hard questions. I hope that we're giving you enough to revise and revamp and perhaps have a conversation with Rihanna about what's important to her in terms of these decisions.

I think we've got enough for number four, condition. Yeah. Yeah, let's move on to the fifth condition.

What do you have for four?

Well, I have that there's a consensus for seven days a week. Yeah. And I see that there's a consensus for 9 p.m., potentially 10, but definitely 9. I know you're the one that's definitely shaking no, but I'm seeing the possibility for it potentially going as... But before noon is, I think, where there's a bit of a squishiness. So I think it's a conversation with the applicant to sort out what the business model is and how that potentially influences what their big goal is.

What if we did something like no alcohol before noon? So if it's a coffee shop, you want to go get your coffee in the morning and go sit out.

What difference is it going to make if somebody has a glass of wine versus a cup of coffee?

Like Bill Miley said, you know.

Well, no, but I think Bill was worried about the alcoholic content.

Yeah, he was worried about noise. Noise. When someone's sitting having a coffee, it was quiet. Someone sitting having a glass of wine, he would argue it was loud.

Right. So I think that's what Katrina's saying. Yeah, I mean, alcohol on the patio, so you're not having Bloody Marys first thing in the morning. I can see this place just like Three Birds. I go by that every morning. There's people there. The Duchess, there's people there. I think it opens at 7. People have coffee and pastries and they're mellow. They go in the back and they're on their computer. They're sitting there having conversation. It's mellow in the morning. I would be very surprised if there was just chaotic noise in the morning.

I agree.

So that's why I think, you know, let them have the morning. And then I'm just saying as a potential, you know, what are the noise generators and limit those hours till the afternoon.

Yeah, and every restaurant has what I would call the Lord of Flies effect, too, that when you get a bunch of kids and alcohol and people in a place, the operator steps in and issues a certain amount of control. Having witnessed some of the earlier bars getting going with families and alcohol and everything, it reels back in pretty quick. So I do think there's gonna be some organic solutions there. Have kind of a radical idea and I don't I don't know if it's in our purview. I like what we're doing here I think this is super valuable and I think using your words if I put myself in the shoes of the people in the neighborhood could I feel like piece by piece my lifestyle is getting he wrote it here as we go down the line and Then you know on her side. We're not really giving her a manual or well, we're not giving her direction in that capped form that that I'm thinking is needed here and And then the larger issue, the real question in the room is, what do you do with these properties that are on the seams of these neighborhoods? Because we're going to have more of them, and they get a little trickier. Because on one hand, you could say, well, this is just like Joplin's. Joplin's can stay open till 10. Joplin's can have music. There's a house right behind Joplin's. There's an auto parts store, a neighborhood, and man, they have full green light, you know? I forget that they're not operating anymore, but they had full green light. And so part of me thinks as a planning commission, really the best thing to do here is to say that from our perspective, we're actually not going to make a decision because what we're gonna do is we're gonna put a bunch of rules in place that might serve one party or the other somehow. But what we are going to do is ask you guys to get together and come to us with a collective solution. because you can walk out of this meeting and guess what? You guys gotta live with each other. We could give you a green light on everything and then tomorrow morning you gotta open the doors and you're gonna walk through the parking lot and one of these guys is gonna come up to you. We could give you everything you want And then a bunch of young families are actually not really going to have a whole lot of options to go into a place in Ojai. There isn't much in Ojai for that family. And then you guys aren't going to feel good being customers of this business. And I don't know if that's an approach we can take, but I feel we're in a little bit of a mediation role here almost, where we can forge a solution, but it may not fit. I don't know.

Earlier you said they need caps. We need a business that knows the parameters. And yes, I think that business and the neighborhood should sit down and perhaps staff can mediate some of that and come back to us with a cap that everybody can live with, caps that everybody can live with.

Yeah, and there's always a question of who owns the problem. Ultimately the city does own the problem. It's our zoning map and even the little wrinkle of do we have an M here or not an M? We own the problem a little bit and so I don't wanna shove the solution off on the parties because it seems like there's been a lot of acrimony. But I do think we could help them get there. And I know, not speaking for Bruce, but both Bruce and I volunteered the time we met you We urged you, make this your last stop for a solution, not your first stop. Make this your last stop where you guys come in and you've chatted and you've had a bunch of dialogue and everything. And I'm aware of what that discussion and the difficulty could be, so we're happy to step into it. There are different dynamics in this discussion that I think deserve assistance from our part

Yes, I would really like to know what Rihanna's priorities are. I would like to know what the, not now. And the same from the neighbors. So if we can have that discussion, that will help staff revise this proposal and bring it back to us in a format that everybody agrees with.

We would love that. I would. That would really be great. And I'm glad you called it out.

Same with us. There is a consensus on the children and any kind of hours. Those are my two main priorities right now due to the ABC.

Come on up.

OK. Talk to me about hours. Wait. I'm sorry. I don't want to interrupt you. But I do want to acknowledge something here. And I'm just going to use plain words because it's already a complicated issue. There are power dynamics here that I think the neighborhood is not aware of. You have a young woman running a business, and when people hit her with heat in the parking lot, that's not gonna get a solution for anybody. I don't know if that's true. I don't know if that's the real dynamic or not, but it is a little bit of a perception issue, and I do think you guys need to be aware of that. And that's not accusatory in any way at all, but I think it's part of the equation for how you guys reach a solution here. And again, I'm not using that word to accuse you of causing heat. What I'm telling you is there is a power imbalance here that I think we should just acknowledge and find a way through. And then I actually believe we can find a solution here. I truly do.

Okay. Rihanna, could you talk to us about, I mean, you've heard us all struggle with the hours, and can you tell us what is most important to you?

The most important is for me to be able to have the ABC license be approved to whatever type of license they will approve us for. 41. 41 or 47. which allows minors on the property operations. Hours-wise, I simply just want to be able to serve coffee. It basically is a coffee shop that they can get pastries from a local baker, and that's the expansion of the early morning hours and Mondays and Tuesdays as well so that we can open as the business needs on those hours and days.

Can I interject another question? Your lunch menu, what is that? Do you have a lunch menu already set up and ready to go?

We have breakfast, lunch, and dinner. A whole menu that I've turned in. And I can provide that again. Thank you.

Okay, we have some issues around the later hours. Can you talk to us about that?

I believe it's a 9 p.m. right now restriction. It was just an addition 10 p.m. because I've looked at different restaurants, and I just wanted to consider Ojai Roots as a restaurant, so that was the ask. It's really about the early morning operations, and if it's at 9 p.m., I'm willing to work with that. As it is, like you mentioned, we're limited to a 9 p.m. close, and... especially in the wintertime, we are closed well before 8. It's just tricky in the Ojai summer where people eat at like 7.45, and then I close right now at 8 p.m., and so I'm not even reaching that limit right now, but in the seasons when there's longer days, I would like that option.

But you're willing to... Work with the neighbors. Work with your neighbors on that one. Correct. Well, I just think that your needs and the neighbors' needs are more important than the numbers that we assign up here. And so I would really like you all to have a conversation and bring those numbers to staff and let them work it into a new proposal for us.

one thing you guys might consider when you think about hours of operation is having summer hours that are longer that's a good idea and then having the rest of the year I'm willing to work with to come up with a new proposal the one thing that is timely is this mind like the ABC license in place so if we can if there is a consensus on that and we can get an answer

Can we cut that out and act on that this evening? Or is it better to do the whole thing?

You as a body have that opportunity and then to continue the rest of it to a date uncertain. So we have to re-notice and... But I think that's important because you're going to need the conversation that's going to happen between the neighbors and the business owner is not going to happen overnight. It may happen with one conversation. It may take more than one.

And can the city facilitate those and help?

We have before.

Yeah. We would like that. So the walk away for all parties is what's worse? That's a question I would be asking myself walking out the door. What's worse, for the planning commission to set these caps or for us collectively to set it? Because as a planning commission, we don't know. Well, we know, but we might not set a solution that fits you or you. And so what's worse? That's the walk away question here, I think.

Okay, more questions, more comments?

Can we just get through two more?

Okay, let's move on.

Real quick, the trailer language, deleting the trailer language.

Makes sense.

Seems reasonable.

Yeah, we're all okay with that? Absolutely. Okay, good. Pull that out, and then seven, no amplified music.

Or live.

Well, that's what it is. Amplified music is live music.

So amplified, well, you can have a guitarist singing not amplified. And is that terrible? Is that really loud? Depends on what time of the day it is. I mean, I don't want to limit live music. I think I'm okay with no amplified music at all.

So yes to acoustic, no to amplified.

That's what I would say.

Yes to what it currently is, basically. It sounds like she's allowed one speaker. She can't amplify music, which is defined more as an instrument that's plugged into an amplifier and performed.

Yeah.

Seems fine.

But I would not add the addition of no live music.

No, no. I wouldn't add that.

Yeah.

Yeah. OK.

I, you know, good.

It's a little more clear.

OK. Number 14.

I'm okay with keeping it as staff recommended I'm just reading through here I mean I look at this like I look at elections within 60 days of the hearing there should be no it should be a gray period where no party can issue anything that influences the other party

That's kind of past tense if I could interject that just happened to be a it was just it was a coincidence that we were having this hearing And so generally speaking it wouldn't be that way that there would be complaints within 60 days Because there wouldn't be a hearing normally we just happen to be having this today, but is there something I mean I

I guess it's a question, you know, sometimes you have to have things cleared before you can, you know, bring things to a body. Maybe that's kind of what you're saying. It's like the slate should sort of be clean before you're having a discussion at this level. Is that kind of what you're thinking a bit, Brad?

What were those three things one was Outdoor dining on the public right-of-way It was actually on the property it's not on the sidewalk actually The public right-of-way on Montgomery goes all the way up to the face of the building, right? So it looks it's landscaped. It looks like it's part of the property, but it's actually It's actually part of the public right-of-way and it's outside of the seating area that you see in the um site plan that's in your application or that's that's in your packet that's out of the wall right so that's something that so there was the seating and then there was the the ada parking that was um covered with the coffee uh vendor which i think that um i would also like to understand the official like process of the conditional 14 because like that could be a verified

thing against the business, but I was not aware of that. I was not told it was, I just need to understand like if we're at three or five and really what comes down to the line of these verifications from what I understand is that my business could get shut down for violating these rules and it may not be, I may not even be aware of them.

Do you provide the complaints, the verified complaints to the business immediately?

absolutely and I just along with being your principal planner I'm the supervisor for code compliance and yes absolutely and there are numerous complaints it's just those three were like literally verified and the applicant was provided with the conditions of approval and the site plan that has the seating plan back in whatever year it was that they took over the existing conditions of approval, and they were provided again with the seating issue that happened recently. Whether it was told to them that it was the public right-of-way, I'm not sure, but outside of their approved seating area, absolutely.

That sounds like an issue that we can just all

learn about and figure out what we need to do to comply and there's always communication with the either with the tenant okay so what's the I mean I'm assuming I could be wrong the table is no longer in the location that it was maybe it is still there the table's been removed been removed clearly the car is not parked in the ADA spot any longer so what is the event is over the police were there and had to move So the violations, what does it mean for these three violations to exist? It sounds like they've been rectified or what's the?

Yes, and so if there's a code violation.

It's just like for record.

Well, well initially it's like okay. This is this is a code violation Pursuant to such-and-such code you can't do this right and then and then we put it in writing Yeah, and then if it happens again, it's like okay, you know, it's happened again if it happens again You know if it's a removal situation will give you a date upon which to remove something Otherwise if it's just something that you're doing if you do it again, you may receive a citation Yeah, and so then if then it's gonna happen if it were to happen a third time then they're gonna receive a citation and And if they do it again, there's gonna be another citation. I mean, citations can keep going.

Well, I guess, yeah, what's the reason of it coming back here then?

Well, to be fair, so, but if it's, well, because the reason they're, so the reason they're coming back here is because in this situation, there's a conditional use permit. These people are conditionally allowed to be having this outdoor dining. If it wasn't, if we were talking about something that didn't have a conditional use permit, like, you know, somebody doing something at their residence, They wouldn't come here. They would just receive citations. We just get three verified violations and come right back here. Why? Because it's a conditional use permit. It's a conditionally allowed use, and it's sandwiched between sensitive uses. I'm going back to that question of verification is is it does it actually have to be a citation to know that they did not receive a citation they just received a warning you can't do this right and there's also a difference between so these violations well the seating violation were violations of a conditional use permit They weren't as opposed to a code violation. But then of course the parking on handicap parking spaces, that's another story. So anyway, there is a difference between Just your average code complaint or code compliance Violation and getting a citation after a few warnings and a conditional use permit Which has been provided or you know given by the Planning Commission? We don't want to wait until they do it several times to get start getting cited I'm gonna take it back here and let you evaluate what's going on the use compatible for the for the location that it's in I

Okay, so the one where they had a, I guess it crosses over, where they had a trailer in the handicap spot, because that wasn't part of their CUP and they were violating the ADA standards or ADA code.

It's also, it is part of their site plan though, but correct, so it's overlapping. We're talking about two different things.

Yes, it's two different things. That trailer is two different things.

The trailer is part of their site plan. I mean, sorry, the handicapped parking spaces are part of their site plan and their handicapped parking spaces. It's part of the required planning on site.

Right, but there's never been, to Jonathan's point, there's never been an approval for having any kind of trailer in the handicapped spot at all. No. Ever, no. We were talking about that special event, the special event where they pulled in something into the handicapped spot to facilitate their event, correct? Yes. And that was a violation. But there was item number five, Dealing with the trailer. Oh, that's a separate, right? Yes.

So the previous tenant had a cute little trailer that was always planted in the back. Yes.

Okay.

Cute trailer gone. So I guess I'm still not totally clear, but the point is that with these three things, you would then bring these forward to us and say, this has been happening, even though they've been rectified or whatever, but this has been happening, so we're going to reassess the CUP, right?

It's an opportunity for the Planning Commission to reassess or to evaluate the conditions of approval. Do you want to leave them alone? Do you want to modify them? Do you want to revoke the CUP? I mean, you have options.

We have this in other businesses in town, right? Yes.

It's a conditionally allowed use.