Agenda packet — Costa Mesa City Council, September 3, 2024 (part 2 of 2)

181

NON-EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
FOR

DISCARDED MATERIALS MANAGEMENT

FOR MULTI-FAMILY AND COMMERCIAL GENERATORS

AND FOR PROVIDING

TEMPORARY SOLID WASTE HANDLING SERVICES

BETWEEN

CITY OF COSTA MESA
AND
[NAME
]
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2022
ATTACHMENT 1
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316

FIRST AMENDMENT TO NON-EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
FOR

DISCARDED MATERIALS MANAGEMENT

FOR MULTI-FAMILY AND COMMERCIAL GENERATORS

AND FOR PROVIDING

TEMPORARY SOLID WASTE HANDLING SERVICES

BETWEEN
CI

TY OF COSTA MESA
AND
[Contractor Name]
2024
This First Amendment to Non -Exclusive Franchise Agreement for Discarded Materials Management for Commercial Generators and for Providing Temporary Solid Waste Services (“First Amendment”) is made and entered into this ____th day of _______, 2024 by and between the City of Costa Mesa (“City”) and [ Contractor Name ] (“Contractor”) (collectively, the “Parties”).

RECITALS
WHEREAS, on or about ________, 20__, the City and the Contractor entered into that certain Non -Exclusive Franchise Agreement for Discarded Materials Management for Commercial Generators and for Providing Temporary Solid Waste Services (“Agreement”) , compliance with the operative requirements was to commence January 1, 2022; WHEREAS, the Parties wish amend the compensation and billing provisions of the Agreement pursuant to the provisions of this First Amendment, which amended compensation provisions shall become effective on _________, 2024.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereto agree as follows:

1. Section 13.1 of the Agreement entitled “Compensation; Billing” shall be amended to add sub-section 13.1.2, Charges and Penalties Related to Contracts with Customers, to read as follows in bold italicized text:

13.1 Compensation; Billing
Contractor shall provide services pursuant to this Agreement at rates it sets, charges to, and collects from Customers and Responsible Customers. Contractor shall provide all Customers, or Responsible Customers, where applicable, with itemized Bills, detai ling charges for all services, including charges for late payments, as well as the period of service to which the Bill applies.

Contractor acknowledges that it, and not Customers nor Responsible Customers, is to pay a Franchise Fee and the other fees noted herein to City as consideration for this Agreement.

ATTACHMENT 2
317
Accordingly, Contractor’s Bills shall not include separate itemization of a “Franchise Fee” or other similar designation relating to fees which Contractor is required to pay to City.

Billings may be made on a monthly basis for all Customers and Responsible Customers.

Premises ordering service after the first of the month or canceling service prior to the end of the month shall be charged on a prorated per-pickup basis.

A. General Billing Requirements.

1. Contractor Responsible. Contractor shall bill all Customers and be solely responsible for collecting payment from Customers. Billing shall be performed on the basis of services rendered and this Agreement shall create no obligation on the part of any Person on the sole basis of the Ownership of property. Contractor shall be responsible for collecting bad debt.

2. Bill Inserts. Contractor shall include bill inserts in accordance with Section 8.4.

3. Records. Contractor shall maintain copies of all billings and receipts, each in chronological order, for the Term of this Agreement, for inspection and verification by the City Contract Manager at any reasonable time but in no case more than ten (10) calendar days after receiving a request to do so.

B. Rates for Waivers. Contractor shall establish Rates for any Customers that have been granted de minimis, physical space constraint, Collection frequency, low population, elevation, disaster, and/or emergency waivers pursuant to Sections 8.7 and 8.8. Contractor shall ensure that accurate records are maintained for such waivers and Customers are billed properly.

C. Application of Contamination Surcharges. In accordance with Section

8.3.1.C.4, the Contractor is required to assess contamination Processing fees on Customers with repeated occurrences of excess contamination. Any contamination Processing fees to be assessed for a Customer shall be included and itemized on the Customer’s invoice for the billing period in which the Contractor notified the Customer of the assessment of the contamination Processing fee.

D. Universal Enrollment Process. City requires that Generators are enrolled in Collection services pursuant to Chapter IV of Title 8 of the Municipal Code.

Contractor shall assist the City in ensuring that the enrollment of Generators occurs in a timely and efficient manner. City and Contractor shall cooperatively develop and agree to a process no later than insert date.

Contractor shall maintain records and provide reports necessary for the City to verify the City-wide enrollment of Generators.
318

13.1.1 Suspension of Service Due to Non-Payment.

Contractor may discontinue service to any Customer, or Responsible Customer, where applicable, as set forth in this Section. Customers or Responsible Customers who have not remitted required payments within sixty (60) days after the date of Billing shall be notified on forms approved by the Director. Said forms shall contain a statement that services may be discontinued fifteen (15) days from the date of the notice if payment is not made before that time. If payment is not made by the expiration of said fifteen (15) day period, Contractor must contact City and advise of the delinquency and may discontinue service to that Customer or Responsible Customer, forty- eight (48) hours thereafter with City’s prior written consent. Contractor shall resume Solid Waste Collection on the next regularly scheduled Collection day for any Customer or Responsible Customer whose service is discontinued upon receipt of payment of delinquent fees and any related service restart charges, or at such sooner time as directed to do so by City. Contractor may not charge for service during any period in which service was suspended. Any delinquent fees or service charges to be imposed in connection with delinquent accounts shall be set by Contractor and be subject to Director approval. A deposit may be required of accounts which have been discontinued for non-payment prior to re-instituting service at such accounts. Notwithstanding the above, in the event of a Billing dispute and/or to avoid negatively impacting public health or safety, Contractor shall not suspend service to any Customer or Responsible Customer without the City’s prior written consent, and shall continue to provide service to any Customer or Responsible Customer if directed to do so by City without regard to the status of said Customer’s or Responsible Customer’s account.

13.1.2 Charges and Penalties Related to Contracts with Customers Contractor may negotiate service contracts with Customers provided such contract terms are consistent with this Agreement. Existing Customer contracts shall remain effective and without change through October 1, 2024. After that date, all Contractor Customers are free to cancel service for any reason and retain another franchised Contractor by providing six (6) months’ notice; provided, however, that any Customer who has contracted with the Contractor for twenty-four (24) months or longer may cancel any ser vice contract with three (3) months’ notice. Any contract issued after October 1, 2024 must allow a Customer to cancel with no more than six (6) months’ notice, and without limitation or penalty, regardless of the remaining agreement term. The Contractor is required to coordinate bin removals to reasonably coincide with service end dates and is not allowed to charge any bin removal fees in instances where a cancellation notice has been duly provided by the Customer. The only permissible charge would be for any months remaining, within that six (6) month or three (3) month notice period, as the case may be, should a C ustomer wish to replace the Contractor prior to the required six (6) month or three (3) month notice period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this First Amendment to be executed as of the day and year first set forth above.

[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
319

Dated: ______________________________
“City”

CITY OF COSTA MESA

By:

Lori Ann Farrell Harrison, City Manager

ATTEST:

By:

Brenda Green, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Kimberly Hall Barlow, City Attorney

Dated: ______________________________

Dated: ______________________________
“Contractor”
[COMPANY NAME]
By:
[Name, Title]

By:
[Name, Title]

320

CITY OF COSTA MESA
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 24-320 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
TITLE:

RESPONSES TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT - TALKING TRASH:

RECYCLABLES AND ORGANIC WASTE
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/GENERAL SERVICES

DIVISION
PRESENTED BY: RAJA SETHURAMAN, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
CONTACT INFORMATION: PATRICK BAUER, DEPUTY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, (714) 754-5029
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve the draft responses to Findings 1-9 and Recommendations 1-7 in the Orange County (OC) Grand Jury Report titled “Talking Trash:

Recyclables and Organic Waste.”
BACKGROUND:

On June 5, 2024, the City received a copy of the 2023-2024 OC Grand Jury Report titled “Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste”(Attachment 1). The report outlines the status and obstacles for implementing various deliverables required by Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383). These deliverables include education and outreach, procurement of organic material, contamination monitoring, funding, and enforcement. The Grand Jury report was released to the public on June 11, 2024.

Senate Bill 1383 Lara, Chapter 395, Statutes of 2016 is a state-wide effort to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants (SLCP). SB 1383 directed local governments to incorporate its significant regulations and requirements into their code of ordinances prior to January 2022. Among these adopted regulations is the City’s requirement to enforce mandatory recycling and organic waste recycling programs for all generators, and to enforce mandatory programs through penalties for non-compliance entities. Failure to enforce SB 1383 in this manner opens the City to State enforcement action and penalties of up to $10,000 per day. By 2025, CalRecycle aims to reduce 75% of organic material that enters landfills in an effort to combat greenhouse gas emissions.

In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05 (Attachment 2), the 2023-2024 OC Grand Jury requires responses to the nine (9) Findings and seven (7) Recommendations outlined in the report by September 10, 2024.

Page 1 of 7 ends

321
File #: 24-320 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
ANALYSIS:

The City oversees the solid waste program services for commercial accounts and multi-family dwellings of five (5) units or more under the City’sNon-Exclusive Franchise Hauler system. The Costa Mesa Sanitary District (CMSD) provides solid waste services for residential accounts and multi-family dwellings of four (4) units or less. Staff has prepared draft responses based on the current status and experiences gained during SB 1383 implementation. The draft letter to the Grand Jury with the City’s responses to the Findings and Recommendations is provided as Attachment 3.

The City coordinated with CMSD staff while preparing the following responses to the Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations:

Findings
F1. The majority of Orange County jurisdictions have not yet required their haulers to distribute residential containers that meet the CalRecycle standardized colors, leaving legacy and often incorrect or illegible labeling and embossing in place.

The City of Costa Mesa does not oversee residential waste services.

Residential waste service is provided by Costa Mesa Sanitary District (CMSD). CMSD is in the process of transitioning from a two-container system to a three-container system. Beginning October 7, 2024, through - December 2024, CMSD will be delivering blue recycling containers to all CMSD customers. The new, blue recycling container meets CalRecycle’s color and labeling requirements (blue lid and sticker label on the lid that explains which materials are allowed and prohibited). When the District implemented their Organics Recycling Program in 2015, customers received organics carts with green lids. The franchise hauler currently distributes organics carts that meet CalRecycle’s color and labeling requirements (green lid and sticker label on the lid that explains which materials are allowed and prohibited). During the three-cart rollout, existing mixed- waste containers will be relabeled as landfill carts. Existing mixed-waste carts that do not meet CalRecycle’s color requirements will be replaced with black-lid landfill carts when container replacements are requested by residents (and all prior to 2036).

F2. While a jurisdiction may not delegate its overall responsibility for compliance with State requirements to a hauler, some jurisdictions have designated the task of imposing and collecting fines from residents to the hauler in accordance with State law. However, not all jurisdictions are clear on who ultimately receives and retains the collected fines.

Commercial generators may be fined for non-compliance. However, franchised haulers may level contamination fees after two instances of non-compliance are noted. Therefore, it is unlikely non- compliance would continue to the point where the City would have to step in. The City prioritizes educating all constituents on proper waste disposal and recycling habits rather than issuing fines.

CMSD has yet to determine if the District will issue fines for residential non-compliance. If the

Page 2 of 7 ends

322
File #: 24-320 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
CMSD has yet to determine if the District will issue fines for residential non-compliance. If the CMSD Board of Directors elects to move forward with a fee/fine structure, the franchise waste hauler may issue contamination fees and the District may issue administrative fines. The District would retain administrative fine revenue and 80% of contamination fee revenue, to be placed in the District’s Solid Waste Fund. The franchise waste hauler would retain 20% of contamination fee revenue.

F3. All jurisdictions will eventually start collecting fines from residents for noncompliance, but some have not yet determined whether the revenues will go into a waste and recycling enterprise fund or into the jurisdiction’s general fund.

Any waste related fine revenue received by Costa Mesa will go into the general fund as does all other franchise waste hauler revenue currently received by the City. The City prioritizes educating all constituents on proper waste disposal and recycling habits rather than issuing fines.

If CMSD opts to assess fees/fines for residential customers, fee/fine revenue will be placed into CMSD’s Solid Waste Fund, as they are not a City per se and do not have a “General Fund.” F4. In most jurisdictions, education and outreach is a joint effort between jurisdiction, hauler, and sometimes consultants, with the jurisdiction reviewing the materials before publication.

The methods of dissemination vary by jurisdiction and hauler but frequently rely on a resident actively seeking the information, which requires the resident to have some awareness of the new mandates in the first place. Most efforts primarily revolve around intermittent hard-copy paper mailings.

Education material is provided by haulers and the City in numerous ways to multi-family and commercial customers via direct mailers, recycling related web pages, bill inserts, social media, and public outreach events. The City holds sustainability efforts in high regard and hosts an annual Earth Day event. This event includes education on proper waste disposal and recycling practices.

CMSD residential customers receive outreach via the District’swebpage, flyers, postcards and letter mailings, Mesa Water District bill inserts, social media, emails to subscribers, press releases, newsletters, CMSD’s annual Compost Giveaway & Shredding Event and Eco Expo, booths at community events, and town hall meetings. CMSD continues to find mailings effective for residents, since a 2023 Community Survey conducted by CMSD found that 62% of CMSD customers prefer to receive information from CMSD in the mail.

F5. Most jurisdictions currently have no way to accurately determine the effectiveness of their respective education and outreach efforts other than the eventual inspections or audits that will take place.

The City of Costa Mesa agrees with the finding. As organics recycling becomes the norm for jurisdictions throughout Orange County, disposal and diversion reports will determine how effective outreach efforts are. Moreover, in the City for the commercial and multi-family accounts of 5 units and above, the Community Relations Manager, Constituent Services Team, Public Information

Page 3 of 7 ends

323
File #: 24-320 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
and above, the Community Relations Manager, Constituent Services Team, Public Information Officer and other key personnel will be working to enhance outreach efforts as necessary to help ensure proper outreach.

F6. There is some concern that there are not enough composting facilities in Orange County to process all organic waste, forcing some jurisdictions/haulers to transport it long distances for processing.

The City of Costa Mesa agrees with the finding and will work with the County of Orange, CMSD and other regional entities to help identify alternative sites, if available.

F7. There is currently no infrastructure in the county that is a State-approved source of Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) and energy from organic waste. Jurisdictions that use vehicles running on RNG procured from non-approved sources cannot count that RNG towards fulfillment of their procurement requirement.

The City of Costa Mesa agrees with the finding.

F8. The formula used by the State to calculate a jurisdiction's procurement target does not account for a jurisdiction’s population density or geographic size (square miles). As such, meeting the annual procurement target presents a significant challenge for most jurisdictions.

The City of Costa Mesa agrees with the finding.

F9. Many Orange County jurisdictions were unable to meet the requirement in SB 1383 to reduce organic waste sent to landfills by the 2020 deadline. It is unlikely the required seventy -five percent reduction will be achieved by the 2025 deadline.

The City of Costa Mesa disagrees partially with the finding. Although State models have shown an increase in organics diversion in recent years, forecasting 2025 diversion rates is difficult. Outreach and contamination monitoring will play a role in meeting the 75% percent reduction goal.

F10. The current procurement requirements mandated by SB 1383 are unrealistic and likely unachievable by most jurisdictions.

The City of Costa Mesa agrees with the finding. The demographics of Costa Mesa pose a challenge to the City meeting its procurement target due to the high number of multifamily properties and limited space; however, every attempt will be made to do so.

Below is the City of Costa Mesa status on recommendations made within the Talking Trash:

Page 4 of 7 ends

324
File #: 24-320 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
Below is the City of Costa Mesa status on recommendations made within the Talking Trash:

Recyclables and Organic Waste, dated June 11, 2024.

RECOMMENDATIONS
R1. All jurisdictions should expedite the acquisition and distribution of residential containers that meet the CalRecycle standardized colors. Additionally, until the compliant containers can be distributed, all jurisdictions should ensure the distribution of labeling for non- compliant containers that explain the current SB 1383 requirements applicable to their jurisdiction by June 30, 2025.

The recommendation will be implemented as CMSD has started the roll-out of its three-container system by asking residents to submit preferred cart sizes. By the end of 2024, residents will have SB-1383 compliant recycling (blue lid) containers and organics (green lid) containers. Mixed-waste containers will be relabeled as landfill containers during the three-cart rollout (October - December 2024). Non-functional legacy landfill (mixed-waste) containers will be replaced with SB-1383 compliant (black lid) containers as residents request replacements. The District has not yet determined a deadline to replace any remaining legacy containers (non-compliant color) still in circulation.

Additionally, all jurisdictions should ensure that any fines collected by a hauler are forwarded to the jurisdiction.

The recommendation has been implemented. The City of Costa Mesa updated its franchise waste haul agreements to align with State mandates. These updated agreements went into effect January 2022.

Costa Mesa Sanitary District updated its franchise waste hauler agreement, effective January 2023, to align with State mandates. If CMSD elects the franchise waste hauler to collect contamination fees, 80% of the revenue will be forwarded to CMSD. Any administrative fines would be issued by and retained by CMSD.

R3. The OCGJ recommends that all jurisdictions utilize a dedicated waste and recycling enterprise fund for collection of fines for non-compliance with SB 1383 by December 31, 2024.

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. In the event fines are assessed, Costa Mesa will not have a specific fund dedicated to the collection of fines for non- compliance, but will track and monitor revenue generated by fines.

If CMSD opts to assess fines for residential customers, fine revenue will be placed into CMSD’s

Page 5 of 7 ends

325
File #: 24-320 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
If CMSD opts to assess fines for residential customers, fine revenue will be placed into CMSD’s Solid Waste Fund, which is considered an enterprise fund.

R4. By December 31, 2024, all jurisdictions should diversify the methods and media used for education and outreach to include, among others, various social media platforms, emails to residents, newspaper, television, flyer mailings, community events, and appearances at other public gatherings.

The recommendation has been implemented. The City of Costa Mesa provides print and electronic education materials via hauler contracts, public website, social media, and outreach events, such as its annual Earth Day event.

R5. By December 31, 2024, and in order to gauge the effectiveness of their education and outreach efforts, all jurisdictions should develop new methods to engage residents directly to help determine their awareness of the requirements associated with SB 1383, such as surveys, online quizzes, and door-to-door polling.

The City implemented education and outreach programming utilizing diverse methods. We believe further actions, such as contamination notices and related outreach material, will prove effective in raising awareness.

CMSD conducts a biennial Community Survey. The most recent survey conducted in 2023 assessed residents’ awareness of SB 1383, how often residents put food waste into their organics cart, if they think separating organic waste to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is important, and if they support the implementation of the Three-Cart Collection System. The District plans to continue assessing these topics in the 2025 survey. CMSD plans to continue exploring new methods of outreach and education. The 2023 survey results, along with past survey results, are available for public viewing on CMSD’s website at:
<https://www.cmsdca.gov/news___publications/customer_survey.php>.

R6. By June 30, 2025, the OCGJ recommends that all jurisdictions participate in the OCW&R- led efforts to develop a coordinated county-wide approach to the organics recycling infrastructure and programs as well as procurement requirements associated with SB 1383, working towards creating circular economy as a long-term goal.

The recommendation has been implemented. A Costa Mesa City representative attends all meetings and discussions hosted by OC Waste & Recycling. In addition, a CMSD representative attends all meetings and discussions hosted by OCW&R.

R7. By December 31, 2024, the Orange County Board of Supervisors and all Orange County

Page 6 of 7 ends

326
File #: 24-320 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
R7. By December 31, 2024, the Orange County Board of Supervisors and all Orange County cities should lobby appropriate members of the State Legislature and/or CalRecycle to revise the organic waste diversion targets to better reflect Orange County’swaste amounts, revise the jurisdictions’procurement requirements to better represent the limited options currently available for procurement, the jurisdictions’ varying populations, population densities, and geographic size, and to delay associated enforcement actions by the State.

The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be considered as City staff develops its legislative priorities for 2025.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may decline to approve the proposed responses. However, failure to provide responses by the September 10, 2024 deadline will result in violation of California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05. Staff does not recommend this option. The City Council could propose modifications to the responses. Staff will incorporate City Council recommendations in the City’s response to the OC Grand Jury Report.

FISCAL REVIEW:

There is no fiscal impact to the City for the approval of the recommended action.

LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed the draft responses and approves them as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item supports the following City Council Goal:
· Maintain and Enhance the City’s Infrastructure, Facilities, Equipment, and Technology · Advance Environmental Sustainability and Climate Resiliency CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

Approve the draft responses to Findings 1-9 and Recommendations 1-7 in the OC Grand Jury Report titled “Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste.”

Page 7 of 7 ends

327
ATTACHMENT 1
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
California Penal Code Sections §933 and §933.05
933.
(a) Each grand jury shall submit to the presiding judge of the superior court a final report of its findings and recommendations that pertain to county government matters during the fiscal or calendar year. Final reports on any appropriate subject may be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court at any time during the term of service of a grand jury. A final report may be submitted for comment to responsible officers, agencies, or departments, including the county board of supervisors, when applicable, upon finding of the presiding judge that the report is in compliance with this title. For 45 days after the end of the term, the foreperson and his or her designees shall, upon reasonable notice, be available to clarify the recommendations of the report. (b) One copy of each final report, together with the responses thereto, found to be in compliance with this title shall be placed on file with the clerk of the court and remain on file in the office of the clerk. The clerk shall immediately forward a true copy of the report and the responses to the State Archivist who shall retain that report and all responses in perpetuity.
(c) No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body, and every elected county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and recommendations. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the mayor when applicable, and shall remain on file in those offices. One copy shall be placed on file with the applicable grand jury final report by, and in the control of the currently impaneled grand jury, where it shall be maintained for a minimum of five years.
(d) As used in this section “agency” includes a department. 933.05.
(a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following:

ATTACHMENT 2
363
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor.
(b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report.
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor.
(c) However, if a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the board of supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. (d) A grand jury may request a subject person or entity to come before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and discussing the findings of the grand jury report that relates to that person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the findings prior to their release.
(e) During an investigation, the grand jury shall meet with the subject of that investigation regarding the investigation, unless the court, either on its own determination or upon request of the foreperson of the grand jury, determines that such a meeting would be detrimental.
(f) A grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two working days prior to its public release 364
and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report.

365

CITY OF COSTA MESA
CALIFORNIA 92628-1200 P.O. Box 1200

FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

77 FAIR DRIVE
PHONE: (714) 754-5343 FAX: (714) 754-5028 www.costamesaca.gov

September XX, 2024
To: The Honorable Judge Maria Hernadez
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
700 Civic Center Drive West
Santa Ana, CA 92701

From: Mayor John Stephens
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626

Dear Honorable Judge Hernandez,

Below is the City of Costa Mesa response to findings within the Grand Jury Report, Talking Trash:

Recyclables and Organic Waste, dated June 11, 2024.

FINDINGS
F1. The majority of Orange County jurisdictions have not yet required their haulers to distribute residential containers that meet the CalRecycle standardized colors, leaving legacy and often incorrect or illegible labeling and embossing in place.

The City of Costa Mesa does not oversee residential waste services.

Residential waste service is provided by Costa Mesa Sanitary District (CMSD). CMSD is in the process of transitioning from a two -container system to a three-container system. Beginning October 7, 2024, through – December 2024, CMSD will be delivering blue recycling containers to all CSMD customers. The new, blue recycling container meets CalRecycle’s color and labeling requirements (blue lid and sticker label on the lid that explains whic h materials are allowed and prohibited). When the District implemented their Organics Recycling Program in 2015, customers received organics carts with green lids . The franchise hauler currently distributes organics carts that meet CalRecycle’s color and labeling requirements (green lid and sticker label on the lid that explains which materials are allowed and prohibited ). During the three -cart rollout, existing mixed-waste containers will be relabeled as landfill carts. Existing mixed-waste carts that do not meet CalRecycle’s color requirements will be replaced with black-lid landfill carts when container replacements are requested by residents (and all prior to 2036).

F2. While a jurisdiction may not delegate its overall responsibility for compliance wit h State requirements to a hauler, some jurisdictions have designated the task of imposing and 366
collecting fines from residents to the hauler in accordance with State law. However, not all jurisdictions are clear on who ultimately receives and retains the collected fines.

CMSD has yet to determine if the District will issue fines for residential non -compliance. If CMSD Board of Directors elects to move forward with a fee/fine structure, the franchise waste hauler may issue contamination fees and the District may issue administrative fines. The District would retain administrative fine revenue and 80% of contamination fee revenue , to be placed in the District’s Solid Waste Fund . The franchise waste hauler would retain 20% of contamination fee revenue.

Any waste related fine revenue received by Costa Mesa will go into the general fund. The City prioritizes educating all constituents on proper waste disposal and recycling habits rather than issuing fines.

If CMSD opts to assess fees/fines for residential customers, fee/fine revenue will be placed into CMSD’s Solid Waste Fund.

F4. In most jurisdictions, education and outreach is a joint effort between jurisdiction, hauler, and sometimes consultants, with the jurisdiction reviewing the materials before publication.

CMSD residential customers receive outreach via the District’s webpage, flyers, postcards and letter mailings, Mesa Water District bill inserts, social media, emails to subscribers, press releases, newsletters, CMSD’s annual Compost Giveaway & Shredding Event and Eco Expo, booths at community event s, and town hall meetings. CMSD continues to find mailings effective for residents, since a 2023 Community Survey conducted by CMSD found that 62% of CMSD customers prefer to receive information from CMSD in the mail. 367

The City of Costa Mesa agrees with the finding.

F7. There is currently no infrastructure in the county that is a State -approved source of Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) and energy from organic waste. Jurisdictions that use vehicles running on RNG procured from non -approved sources cannot count that RNG tow ards fulfillment of their procurement requirement.

The City of Costa Mesa agrees with the finding.

F9. Many Orange County jurisdictions were unable to meet the requirement in SB 1383 to reduce organic waste sent to landfills by the 2020 deadline. It is unlikely the required seventy- five percent reduction will be achieved by the 2025 deadline.

The City of Costa Mesa disagrees partially with the finding. Although State models have shown an increase in organics diversion in recent years, f orecasting 2025 diversion rates is difficult.

Outreach and contamination monitoring will play a role in meeting the 75% percent reduction goal.

F10. The current procurement requirements mandated by SB 1383 are unrealistic and likely unachievable by most jurisdictions.

368
Below is the City of Costa Mesa status on recommendations made within the Talking Trash:

Recyclables and Organic Waste, dated June 11, 2024.

RECOMMENDATIONS
R1. All jurisdictions should expedite the acquisition and distribution of residential containers that meet the CalRecycle standardized colors. Additionally, until the compliant containers can be distributed, all jurisdictions should ensure the distribution of labeling for non -compliant containers that explain the current SB 1383 requirements applicable to their jurisdiction by June 30, 2025.

The recommendation will be implemented as CMSD has started the roll-out of its three-container system by asking residents to submit preferred cart sizes. By the end of 2024, residents will have SB-1383 compliant recycling (blue lid) containers and organics (green lid) containers. Mixed- waste containers will be relabeled as landfill containers during the three -cart rollout (October – December 2024). Non-functional legacy landfill (mixed -waste) containers will be replaced with SB-1383 compliant (black lid) containers as residents requ est replacements. The District has not yet determined a deadline to replace any remaining legacy containers (non-compliant color) still in circulation.

R2. By December 31, 2024, all jurisdictions should ensure their waste hauling agreements are in compliance with State statute so that haulers may be designated to perform certain required tasks but are not improperly delegated overall responsibility for compliance. Additionally, all jurisdictions should ensure that any fines collected by a hauler are forwarded to the jurisdiction.

The recommendation has been implemented. The City of Costa Mesa updated its franchise waste haul agreements to align with State mandates. These updated agreements went into effect January 2022.

Costa Mesa Sanitary Distric t updated its franchise waste hauler agreement , effective January 2023, to align with State mandates. If CMSD elects the franchise waste hauler to collect contamination fees, 80% of the revenue will be forwarded to CMSD. Any administrative fines would be issued by and retained by CMSD.

R3. The OCGJ recommends that all jurisdictions utilize a dedicated waste and recycling enterprise fund for collection of fines for non-compliance with SB 1383 by December 31, 2024.

If CMSD opts to assess fines for residential customers, fine revenue will be placed into CMSD’s Solid Waste Fund, which is considered an enterprise fund. 369

The City implemented education and outreach programming utilizing diverse methods . We believe further actions, such as contamination notices and related outreach material, will prove effective in raising awareness.

CMSD conducts a biennial Community Survey. The most recent survey conducted in 2023 assessed residents’ awareness of SB 1383, how often residents put food waste into the ir organics cart, if they think separating organic waste to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is important, and if they support the implementation of the Three -Cart Collection System. The District plans to continue assessing these topics in the 2025 survey. CMSD plans to contin ue exploring new methods of outreach and education. The 2023 survey results, along with past survey results, are available for public viewing on CMSD’s website at
https://www.cmsdca.gov/news___publications/customer_survey.php.

R6. By June 30, 2025, the OCGJ recommends that all jurisdictions participate in the OCW&R-led efforts to develop a coordinated county-wide approach to the organics recycling infrastructure and programs as well as procurement requirements associated with SB 1383, working towards creating circular economy as a long-term goal.

R7. By December 31, 2024, the Orange County Board of Supervisors and all Orange County cities should lobby appropriate members of the State Legislature and/or CalRecycle to revise 370
the organic waste diversion targets to better reflect Orange County’s waste amounts, revise the jurisdictions’ procurement requirements to better represent the limited options currently available for procurement, the jurisdictions’ varying populations, population densities, and geographic size, and to delay associated enforcement actions by the State.

The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be considered as City staff develops its legislative priorities for 2025.

Should you have any questions or require further information p lease do not hesitate to contact the City of Costa Mesa ’s Solid Waste Coordinator, Kevin Gaxiola, at 714 -754-5303 or [email protected].

Sincerely,

Mayor John Stephens
City of Costa Mesa

Cc: Costa Mesa City Council
Lori Ann Farrell Harrison, City Manager
Raja Sethuraman, Public Works Director
Patrick Bauer, Deputy Public Works Director
Kevin Gaxiola, Solid Waste Coordinator
Scott Carroll, General Manager, Costa Mesa Sanitary District

371

CITY OF COSTA MESA
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 24-322 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
TITLE:

RESPONSE TO 2023-2024 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT “LAW ENFORCEMENT’S RESPONSE TO MENTAL HEALTH CALLS FOR SERVICE”
DEPARTMENT: POLICE DEPARTMENT
PRESENTED BY: JOYCE LAPOINTE, POLICE DEPUTY CHIEF
CONTACT INFORMATION: JOYCE LAPOINTE, 714-754-5663
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve and file the response letter to the 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury (OCGJ) Report “Law Enforcement’s Response to Mental Health Calls for Service”.

BACKGROUND:

On May 30, 2024, the City was sent a copy of the 2023-2024 OCGJ report, the title being “Law Enforcement’sResponse to Mental Health Calls for Service”(Attachment 1). The focus of the report was law enforcement’sresponse to mental health calls for service in Orange County. The attached report is marked "Confidential," however, it was only confidential until June 5, 2024, when the report was released to the public.

Due to litigation resulting from negative outcomes from law enforcement’sresponse to mental health calls for service, the Orange County Grand Jury felt it vital to research how Orange County assists individuals who suffer from mental health illness. Their research included interviews with law enforcement leaders, law enforcement educators, and mental health professionals throughout Orange County.

The report identifies five findings and one recommendation (p. 14 of 20 of report). California Penal Code Section 933 requires the city to provide a response to each of the findings and recommendations in the report. California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the exact manner in which the responses and comments on the findings and recommendations are to be made. The responses must be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court by September 4, 2024.

Costa Mesa’s Comprehensive System of Care
In addition to the City’slaw enforcement personnel who respond to mental health calls for service, the City of Costa Mesa has developed a comprehensive system of care to address homelessness, including resources and services for those facing mental health challenges. This system of care can be broken down into the three (3) distinct focus areas: Outreach and Engagement, Emergency

Page 1 of 4 ends

372
File #: 24-322 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
Shelter, and Supportive Housing.

1. Outreach and Engagement - The City employs a team of eight (8) Community Outreach Workers to meet people where they are and assist in the removal of barriers to health (including behavioral health), employment, and housing. The Outreach Team annually engages approximately 200 unhoused individuals and, since 2019, has successfully housed over 200 clients. Outreach Workers are highly skilled in de-escalation and trauma-informed care techniques, which are proven to reduce negative encounters. · On August 12, 2024, the City became the second municipality in Orange County to implement CalOptima Health’sinnovative Street Medicine Program, which brings primary and behavioral health care to the unhoused members of our community. Celebrating Life Community Health Center (CLCHC), the agency selected by CalOptima Health to administer Street Medicine in Costa Mesa, will operate their mobile medical office Monday through Friday, from 9 am to 3 pm. Enrollees will have direct access to behavioral health clinicians, medications, individual/group therapy, and case management services to improve overall outcomes for the unhoused.

2. Emergency Shelter - The City owns and operates a 100-bed emergency and navigation shelter known as the Costa Mesa Bridge Shelter. The Shelter provides emergency housing and associated services to over 200 individuals annually. Since opening its doors in April 2021, the Shelter has successfully housed 125 individuals.
· On March 27, 2024, the City executed an MOU with the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA) for an award of $3.5 million to add 15 more beds to the shelter and augment behavioral health care services provided at the Shelter. The award also funded a new full-time Case Worker with expertise in managing both mental health and substance use challenges, plus implementation of weekly visits from an OCHCA behavioral health clinician to address mental health and substance use challenges.

3. Permanent Supportive Housing - Over the past two (2) years, the City Council has allocated $9,850,000 from Federal American Rescue Plan funds, and restricted housing funds to assist in the development of permanent housing for people experiencing homelessness, many of whom face mental health challenges.
· In 2022, the City Council awarded $5,850,000 to Community Development Partners to convert the Motel 6 at 2275 Newport Blvd into 86 units of supportive and affordable housing. Ten (10) of these units are set-aside for occupancy by individuals eligible to receive care under the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA). Phase 1 of this project was completed in early 2024 and all ten (10) MHSA units are currently occupied.
· In 2023, the City Council awarded $4,000,000 to American Family Housing to convert the Travelodge at 1400 Bristol Ave into 76 units of supportive housing for people experiencing homelessness.

When complete, the project will provide permanent housing and a robust system of wrap-around services, including assistance for those facing mental health challenges. This project is estimated to be completed in the fourth quarter of 2025.

Page 2 of 4 ends

373
File #: 24-322 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
ANALYSIS:

Staff has prepared draft responses below for the City Council's consideration. The draft response letter to the Grand Jury is provided as Attachment 2.

OCGJ Findings and City Responses
F1 Mental health training for law enforcement officers in Orange County exceeds the State’s requirements, resulting in law enforcement applying these skills to better evaluate and handle mental health calls for service.

Response - Agree
F2 Law enforcement agencies in Orange County have developed unique ways to deal with mental health calls in their communities based on their needs and budgets, enabling law enforcement to better serve their communities.

Response - Agree
F3 Law enforcement collaboration with County PERT clinicians and Be Well mobile response units has been an effective tool when responding to mental health calls for service.

Response - Agree
F4 People with mental illness respond more positively to “soft uniformed” police personnel, which can be effective in de-escalating situations.

Response - Agree
F5 Providing follow-up case management is not only necessary but critical for the wellbeing of people experiencing mental health issues.

Response - Agree
Recommendation
R1 Based on its investigation, the 2023-2024 OCGJ has determined that law enforcement agencies throughout Orange County have developed unique techniques to adequately address mental health calls, thus this report does not contain recommendations.

Response: Agree with findings - no recommendations.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council has the options to receive and file the Police Department’s response to the recommendations or provide alternative direction.

Page 3 of 4 ends

374
File #: 24-322 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
FISCAL REVIEW:

There are no fiscal impacts associated with this item.

LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed this report and the agreement and approved them as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item supports the following City Council Goal: Strengthen the Public’sSafety and Improve the Quality of Life.

CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve the response to findings and recommendation in the 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Report “LawEnforcement’sResponse to Mental Health Calls for Service” which would authorize the City to send a response letter to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court.

Page 4 of 4 ends

375
ATTACHMENT 1
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
1 GUTIERREZ, FATIMA
From: Grand Jury Support <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2024 10:00 AM
To: gjsupport
Subject: Orange County News Release
Attachments: GJ News Release 060524.pdf

The 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury has released the report titled, “ Law Enforcement’s Response to Mental Health Calls for Service ” Please see the attached news release. This report can be found on the Orange County Grand Jury’s website at www.ocgrandjury.org.

Thank you,

Joyce Mwangi
Grand Jury Coordinator
Orange County Grand Jury
| 714-834-3320

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
400
401
ATTACHMENT 2
402
403

CITY OF COSTA MESA
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 24-318 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
TITLE:

SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT (DA-20-05) TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA-94-01) BETWEEN THE CITY OF COSTA MESA AND THE INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE AUTOMOBILE CLUB ALLOWING FOR A 20-YEAR TIME EXTENSION THAT WOULD EXPIRE OCTOBER 31, 2044; AMENDING PROVISIONS

PERTAINING TO THE RATE AND METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES; AND, AMENDING PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SETBACK OF A FUTURE PARKING STRUCTURE; FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3333 FAIRVIEW ROAD DEPARTMENT: ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT/

PLANNING DIVISION
PRESENTED BY: CHRISTOPHER ALDANA, ASSISTANT PLANNER
CONTACT INFORMATION: CHRISTOPHER ALDANA, ASSISTANT PLANNER, (714) 754- 4868
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Find, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, that the project is within the scope of the June 20, 1994-certified Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) #1045 (State Clearing House No. 94021036) for the Auto Club Expansion project. The effects of the project were examined in the 1994 FEIR, and all feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the 1994 FEIR are incorporated into this project, and no new mitigation measures are required. Therefore, the 1994 FEIR for the Automobile Club Expansion project is determined to be adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for this project, that no further environmental review is required, and that all requirements of CEQA are satisfied.

2. Give second reading to and adopt, by title only, Ordinance 2024-XX approving the First Amendment (DA-20-05) to the Automobile Club of Southern California Development Agreement (DA-94-01) to allow for a 20-year time extension that would expire October 31, 2044; to amend provisions pertaining to the rate and methodology for calculating traffic impact fees; and to amend provisions related to the setback of a future parking structure.

Page 1 of 1 ends

404

Page 1 of 3 ends

City of Costa Mesa
Agenda Report

77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Item #: 24-318 Meeting Date: 09/03/2024
TITLE: SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT (DA-20- 05) TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA-94-01) BETWEEN THE CITY OF COSTA M ESA AND THE INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE AUTOMOBILE CLUB ALLOWING FOR A 20-YEAR TIME EXTENSION THAT WOULD EXPIRE OCTOBER 31, 2044; AMEND ING PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO THE RATE AND METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES;

AND, AMEND ING PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SETBACK OF A FUTURE PARKING STRUCTURE; FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3333 FAIRVIEW ROAD

DEPARTMENT: ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT/ PLANNING

DIVISION

PRESENTED BY: CHRISTOPHER ALDANA, ASSISTANT PLANNER

CONTACT INFORMATION: CHRISTOPHER ALDANA, ASSISTANT PLANNER, (714) 754 -4868 RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Find, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, that the project is within the scope of the June 20, 1994 -certified Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) #1045 (State Clearing House No. 94021036) for the Auto Club Expansion project. The effects of the project were examined in the 1994 FEIR, and all feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the 1994 FEIR are incorporated into this project, and no new mitigation measures are required. Therefore, the 1994 FEIR for the Automobile Club Expansion project is determined to be adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for this project, that no further environmental review is required, and that all requirements of CEQA are satisfied.

2. Give second reading to and adopt , by title only, Ordinance 2024 -XX approving the First Amendment (DA-20-05) to the Automobile Club of Southern California Development Agreement (DA-94-01) to allow for a 20 -year time extension that would expire October 31, 2044; to amend provisions pertaining to the rate and methodology for calculating traffic impact fees; and to amend provisions related to the setback of a future parking structure.

APPLICANT OR AUTHORIZED AGENT:

The applicant and authorized agent is Jennifer J. Farrell, Esq., representing the property owner, Interinsurance Exchange Automobile Club of Southern California.

405

Item #: 24-318 Meeting Date: 09/03/2024

Page 2 of 3 ends

BACKGROUND:

At the August 6, 2024, City Council meeting, the Council considered the proposed amendments to the above noted Ordinance, considered the Planning Commission recommendation, heard public comment, and passed the Ordinance to a second reading by a 7-0 vote.

The August 6, 2024, City Council report and video are linked below:

August 6, 2024, City Council Agenda Report (also provided as Attachment 3):
https://costamesa.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=6816050&GUID=783400DD-5790-4172- B7CD-B9A8C26E0A7C

August 6, 2024, City Council Video:
https://costamesa.granicus.com/player/clip/4159?view_id=14&redirect=true

ANALYSIS:

In voting to introduce the ordinance for first reading, the City Council found that the proposed first amendment to the development agreement is consistent with General Plan policies and objectives, and that the proposed development associated with the Development Agreements is compatible with the nearby existing land uses located north of Interstate 405 which includes larger development such as South Coast Plaza, Metro Pointe, IKEA and the Segerstrom Center for the Arts.

Based on local and State development agreement review provisions/requirements, t he City Council found that the extension of the Development Agreement will provide additional time to complete buildout of the Automobile Club’s corporate campus; would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare; and will not adversely affect the orderly development of the subject or surrounding properties. City Council support for the first amendment was generally based on retention of a large and high-quality local employer, and the preservation and generation of local employment opportunities.

Additionally, the project will contribute additional funding for road improvement and circulation projects citywide through the payment of enhanced traffic impact fees.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, this project remains within the scope of the June 20, 1994 certified Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) #1045 (State Clearinghouse No. 94021036) for the A AA Expansion project. The effects of the project were examined in the 1994 FEIR, and all feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the 1994 FEIR are incorporated into this project, and no new mitigation measures are required. Therefore, the 1994 FEIR for AAA Expansion project is determined to be adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for this project, no further environmental review is required, and that all requirements of CEQA are satisfied.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may give second reading and adopt the Ordinance as proposed, modify the Ordinance, or not adopt the Ordinance. If the City Council wishes to make substantive modifications to the Ordinance at second reading, those changes would first need to be negotiated with the applicant and re-introduced for first reading at a future City Council meeting. 406

Item #: 24-318 Meeting Date: 09/03/2024

Page 3 of 3 ends

FISCAL REVIEW:

The overall impact to the City from Traffic Impact Fee revenue under the revised calculation from $228 to $235 per net trip, if AAA expands to the maximum allotted 250,000-square-foot building, would be an additional one-time estimated increase of $160,000 in revenue to the Traffic Impact Fees Fund (Fund 214).

LEGAL REVIEW:

The draft Ordinance and staff report have been prepared in conjunction with and reviewed by the City Attorney’s Office.

PUBLIC NOTICE:

Pursuant to Government Code Section 36933, a summary of the proposed ordinance was published once in the newspaper no less than five days prior to the September 3, 2024, second reading. A summary of the adopted ordinance will also be published in the newspaper within 15 days after adoption.

Public comments received prior to the September 3, 2024, City Council meeting may be viewed at this link:

CITY OF COSTA MESA - Calendar (legistar.com)

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item is administrative in nature.

CONCLUSION:

The proposed amend ment does not modify the development pla n beyond extending the date of expiration, updating the rate and method of calculating traffic impact fees, and modifying language pertaining to increasing the setback of a future parking structure. The City Council voted in favor of the proposed Development Agreement first amendment in that the extended term would support the retention of a long-term, large and high-quality local employer, allow the City the opportunity to benefit from the remaining traffic impact fees which would be used on road improveme nt projects, and the development will create additional quality local employment opportunities. Finally, the proposal is in conformance with the City’s General Plan.

407
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 1 of 15

ORDINANCE NO. 2024-xx

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT (DA -20-05) TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA-94-01) BETWEEN THE CITY OF COSTA MESA AND THE INTERINSURANCE

EXCHANGE OF THE AUTOMOBILE CLUB

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA , CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY FIND AND DECLARE AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, public hearings were held on May 23, 1994 before the Planning Commission pursuant to the Procedures and Requirements for Consideration of Develop ment Agreements set forth in City Council Resolution No. 88 -53 and Government Code 65867 , regarding the proposed Development Agreement DA -94-01 (hereinafter, the “Agreement”), at which time the Planning Commission considered testimony presented by the publ ic and applicant (hereinafter, “Developer”) and thereafter made a recommendation to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was subsequently held before the City Council on June 6, 1994 and June 20, 1994 pursuant to the requirements of Resolution No. 88 -53 and Government Code 65867 , at which time the City Council considered testimony presented by the public and the Developer and the recommendation of the Planning Commission regarding the proposed Agreement; and
WHEREAS, EIR No. 1045 and Addendum No. 1 were prepared for the project and were certified on June 20, 1994, in accordance with Sections 15090 and 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, on behalf of the property owner, the applicant, Jennifer J. Farrell of Rutan, submitted application De velopment Agreement DA -20-05 in August 2023 requesting amendments to several terms of Development Agreement DA-94-01; and WHEREAS, the proposed First Amendment (DA -20-05) to Development Agreement (DA-94-01) between the City of Costa Mesa and the Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club requests approval of the following:
 A 20-year time extension that would expire on October 31, 2044,  Update to the rate and methodology for calculating traffic impact fees,  Update to the setback of a future parking structure, and ATTACHMENT 1
408
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 2 of 15

WHEREAS, a duly-noticed public hearing was held on July 22, 2024, before the Planning Commission pursuant to the Procedures and Requirements for Consideration of Development Agreement s set forth in City Council Resolution No. 88 -53 and Gover nment Code Section 65867 , regarding the proposed First Amendment (DA -20-05) to Development Agreement (DA-94-01), attached hereto as Exhibit “B” (hereinafter, the “Agreement”), at which time the Planning Commission considered testimony presented by the publ ic and applicant and property owner Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club (hereinafter, “Developer”) and thereafter recommend ed by a vote of 4 -1-2 that the City Council approve the proposed Agreement; and
WHEREAS, a duly-noticed public hearing wa s subsequently held on August 6 , 2024, before the City Council pursuant to the Procedures and Requirements for Consideration of Development Agreements set forth in City Council Resolution No. 88 -53 and Government Code 65867, regarding the proposed First Amendment (DA-20-05) to Development Agreement (DA-94-01), at which time the City Council considered testimony presented by the public and the Developer and the recommendation of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the First Amendment to the Development Agreement is:
(a) Consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan;
(b) Compatible with the uses authorized in, and the existing land use regulations prescribed for, the zoning district in which the real property is and will be located; and
(c) Is in conformity with and will promote public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice.

WHEREAS, the First Amendment to the Development Agreement will not:
(a) Be detrimental to the health and safety and general welfare; or (b) Adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values.

WHEREAS, the First Amendment to the Development Agreement will promote and encourage the development of the proposed project and will ensure the public b enefits promised therein, by providing stability and certainty to Developer; and 409
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 3 of 15

WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 , the project is within the scope of the June 20, 1994 -certified Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) #1045 and Addendum No. 1 (State Clearinghouse No. 94021036) for the Auto Club Expansion project.

The effects of the project were examined in the 1994 FEIR, and all feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the 1994 FEIR are incorporated into this project and no new mitigation measures are required. Therefore, the 1994 FEIR for the Automobile Club Expansion project is determined to be adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for this project, that no further environmental review is required, and th at all requirements of CEQA are satisfied.

WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.

Now, therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA , CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1: Findings and Declarations. The above stated findings and declarations are true and correct.

Section 2: Approval. The City Council hereby approves, adopts, and enters into the First Amendment (DA-20-05) to Development Agreement (DA-94-01) in the form attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporates the First Amendment (DA-20-05) to the Development Agreement (DA-94-01) herein by this reference.

Section 3: Recordation. Upon execution of the Agreement by all parties, the City Clerk is directed to record the First Amendment (DA-20-05) pursuant to Resolution No. 88-53.

Section 4: Environmental Compliance. Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and State CEQA guidelines, a Final EIR and Addendum No. 1, State Clearing House No. 94021036, including a mitigation monitoring program and statement of overriding consideration, was certified for the project on June 20, 1994 , and the City has determined that the effects of th is project were examined in the 1994 FEIR, and all feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the 1994 FEIR are incorporated into this project and no new mitigation measures are required.

Therefore, the 1994 FEIR for the Automobile Club Expansion project is determined to be adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for this project, that no further environmental review is required, and that all requirements of CEQA are satisfied.

Section 5: Inconsistencies. Any provision of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this ordinance, to the extent o f such inconsistencies 410
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 4 of 15

and or further, is hereby repealed or modified to the extent necessary to affect the provisions of this ordinance.

Section 6: Severability. If any chapter, article, section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, word, or portion of this Ordinance, or the application thereof to any person, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of t his Ordinance or its application to other persons. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each chapter, article, section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, word, or portion thereof, irrespective of t he fact that any one or more subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions of the application thereof to any person, be declared invalid or unconstitutional. No portion of this Ordinance shall supersede any local, State, or Federal law, regulation, or codes dealing with life safety factors.

Section 7: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect 30 days after adoption.

Section 8 : Certification. The City Clerk shall certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall caus e the same to be published or posted in the manner as required by law.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___day of _____, 2024.

______________________
John Stephens
Mayor of the City of Costa Mesa

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

________________________ _____________________________ Brenda Green, City Clerk Kimberly Hall Barlow, City Attorney

411
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 5 of 15

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss

CITY OF COSTA MESA )

I, BRENDA GREEN, City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing Ordinance No. 2024-xx was duly introduced for first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 6th day of August, 2024, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the ___ day of _________, 2024, by the following roll call vote, to wit:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of Costa Mesa this 4th day of September, 2024.

__________________________
Brenda Green, City Clerk

412
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 6 of 15

EXHIBIT A

FINDINGS

DA-20-05 is a request for 20-year time extension that would expire on October 31, 2 044, and to also amend provisions of Development Agreement DA -94-01 pertaining to the rate and methodology for calculating Traffic Impact Fees and the setback for a future parking structure.

The requested amendments do not change the previously approved pr oject plans. Therefore, the findings, and the facts in suppor t of those findings, contained in the Ordinances and Resolutions for Final Environmental Impact Report #1045, General Plan Amendment (GP -94- 01A), Rezone (R -94-01), Planning Action (PA -94-15), Tentative Parcel Map (S -94-120), and Development Agreement (DA -94-01) remain true and in effect. The following findings, and facts in support of those findings, pertain only to the scope of the proposed amendments.

Pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 88 -53, Development Agreement Procedures and Requirements, and Go vernment Code Section 65865(c), staff recommends approval of the requested amendments, based on the following assessment of facts and findings:

 The Development Agreement between the City of Costa Mesa and Developer is:
o Consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and with the General Plan as a whole;

o Compatible with the uses authorized in, and the existing land use regulations prescribed for, the zoning district in which the real property is and wi ll be located; and

o Is in conformity with and will promote public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice.

The proposed amendment to the DA is consistent with General Plan polic ies and objectives, primarily objective LU-6C, in that the long-term build-out of the AAA office campus will support the retention and expan sion of the City’s employment base with diverse and quality employment opportunities. Additionally, the City’s Land Use Element specifies that the “Urban Center Commercial” Land Use District is intended to “allow for high -intensity mixed -use commercial development within a limited area”, and identifies that one of the four major developments located within the Urban Cen ter Commercial Land Use District is the “Automobile Club of Southern California”. The proposed development is also compatible with the existing land uses located North of Interstate 405 which includes larger developments such as The South Coast Plaza, Metro Pointe, IKEA and the Segerstrom Center for the Arts. Lastly , AAA has operated from this site since 1980 without any impacts to surrounding uses, including the nearby residential developments.

 The Development Agreement between the City of Costa Mesa and Developer will not:
o Be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare; and 413
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 7 of 15

o Adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values.

This AAA headquarters has operated at th e site since 1980 and there have been no incompatibilities with the surrounding uses. The proposed use, size, and intensity of the project is consistent with the existing development within the general area located north of the 405 freeway, and would not be detrimental to th e health, safety, a nd general welfare of the community. There are no modifications proposed to the site’s previously entitled development intensity and only minor considerations are proposed to improve the site’s physical layout to avoid potential impacts to nearby residenti al development. As such, the extension of the DA will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare , or adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values.

414
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 8 of 15

EXHIBIT B

FIRST AMENDMENT (DA-20-05) TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE

CITY OF COSTA MESA AND INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE AUTOMOBILE CLUB (DA-94-01)

415
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 9 of 15

RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN
RECORDED MAIL TO:

City of Costa Mesa
PO Box 1200
Costa Mesa, CA 92628-1200
Attn: City Clerk
Space Above This Line for Recorder’s Use (Exempt
from Recording Fee per Gov’t Code §6103 and §27383)

FIRST AMENDMENT TO

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

THE CITY OF COSTA MESA
AND

THE INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE

AUTOMOBILE CLUB

698/037947-0002
19250070.11 a05/30/24
416
698/037947-0002
19250070.11 a05/30/24
1 Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 10 of 15

FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This First Amendment to Development Agreement (the “Amendment”) is entered into as of the day of , 2024 (“First Amendment Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF COSTA MESA (“Cit y”), and the INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE AUTOMOBILE CLUB, formerly known as the Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club of Southern California (“Owner”). Each party may be referred to i ndividually as “Party” or together as the “Parties”.

RECITALS
A. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code and the City’s adopted rules and procedures, the Parties entered into that certain Development Agreement dated October 5, 1994 a nd recorded in the official records of Orange County, Califor nia on November 1, 1994, as instrument number 94-0641379 (the “Development Agreement”); and B. WHEREAS, among other purposes, the City entered into the Development Agreement in furtherance of the City’s policy to support the retention and expansion of businesses located in the City in order to increase employment, maintain a stable tax base, attract new businesses, and promote a diversified, stable, and healthy local economy; and C. WHEREAS, the assuran ces provided by the Development Agreement were and remain nec essary to provide the certainty which will allow the Owner to make the long -term commitments involved in consolidating its facilities and operations in the City; and D. WHEREAS, the Project on the P roperty (as defined and described in the Development Agreement) has not been completed based, in part, by the interruption starting in early 2020 in the Owner’s development and planning caused by the COVID -19 pandemic, uncertainty in space needs caused by the changing trends in remote and hybrid work, uncertainty in the configuration of spaces in buildings due to safety protocols and other changing trends, and the evolving business needs of the Owner, all of which merit additional time to complete the development of the Project; and
E. WHEREAS, extending the term of the Development Agreement and updating specified City fees, with all of the terms and conditions in the Development Agreement otherwise remaining the same, continue to further the City’s policy to support the retention and expansion of businesses located in the City in order to increase employment, maintain a stable tax base, attract new businesses, and promote a diversified, stable, and healthy local economy; and F. WHEREAS, the best interests of the citizens of Costa Mesa, and the public health, safety and welfare, are served by extending the term of the Development Agreement as provided herein; and
G. WHEREAS, the Amendment and the Project are consistent with the City’s General Plan; and
417
698/037947-0002
19250070.11 a05/30/24
2 Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 11 of 15
H. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 65868 of the Government Code and the City’s adopted rules and procedures, this Amendment has been reviewed by City Staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council; and
I. WHEREAS, the City and Owner have a mutual interest, based on the Reci tals in the Agreement and as set forth herein above, to extend the term of the Development Agreement.

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions set forth herein, and for good and valuable consideration, the Parties do hereby agree as follows:

1. Except as expressly defined in this Amendment, all capitalized words and phrases shall have the same meaning ascribed to them in the Development Agreement.

2. The term of the Development Agreement shall be extended for an additional twenty (20) years (“Extension Term”), commencing on November 1, 2024, which is the first day after the last day of the 30-year term set forth in Section 2.3 of the Development Agreement. For purposes of the Agreement, the “term” or “Term” of the Agreement shall include the entire period for which the Development Agreement is operative, including the initial 30-year term and Extension Term.

3. To correct duplicative numbering in Article 2 of the Development Agreement, the second Section numbered “2.4” shall be renumbered to “2.5”, and the Section numbers thereafter in Article 2 shall likewise be renumbered, so that the Sections numbered “2.5” and “2.6” shall be renumbered to “2.6” and “2.7”, respectively.

4. The Owner notice addresses in the Development Agreement in Section 2.7(b), as modified by this Amendment, shall be deleted in their entirety and replaced with the following:
“If to OWNER:

Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club
3333 Fairview Road, A410
Costa Mesa, California 92626
Attn: Vice President, Administrative Services
with copies to:

Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club
3333 Fairview Road, A491
Costa Mesa, California 92626
Attn: General Counsel”

5. The proposed Phase II parking structure location shall be addressed in Section 3.7 of the Development Agreement, relating to changes to the Existing Development Approvals which 418
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 12 of 15

shall be deemed “minor,” by adding a new clause as clause (e) and renumbering clause (e) to (f) in the last sentence of Section 3.7, to read as follows:
“Unless otherwise required by law, a change to the Existing Development Approvals shall be deemed ‘minor’ and not require an amendment to this Agreement provided such change does not:

(e) Decrease the setback distance requirements for the proposed Phase II parking structure from the northern property boundary, as set forth in Item #5 (Shade and Shadows) of the Inventory of Mitigation Measures, attached as part of Exhibit “B” to City Council Resolution No. 94 -54. (Relocation of the Phase II parking structure shall be proposed further away from the existing residential uses north of the smaller parcel to improve compatibility and to minimize potential adverse impacts of the parking structure proximate to residential units); or,

(f) Constitute a project requiring a subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report pursuant to Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code.”

Except as amended above, all of the terms and conditions set forth in Section 3.7 of the Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

6. The Development Exactions in Section 3.9(b), clauses (i) and (iii), of the Development Agreement shall be amended as follows:
(a) During the Extension Term as defined above, the first sentence of clause (i) of Section 3.9(b) is amended such that the ADT generated by the second phase of development shall be calculated by multiplying .00989 times the number of square feet of building area to be constructed under the building permit, to read as follows:

“The ADT generated by new development shall be calculated by multiplying .00718 times the number of square feet of building area to be constructed under the building permit; provided, however, that during the Extension Term, the ADT generated by the second phase of development shall be calculated by multiplying .00989 times the number of square feet of building area to be constructed under the building permit.”
Except as amended above, all of the terms and conditions set forth in clause (i) of Section 3.9(b) of the Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
698/037947-0002
19250070.11 a05/30/24 3 419
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 13 of 15

(b) During the Extension Term as defined above, clause (iii) of Section

3.9(b) of the Development Agreement shall be amended by adding the following sentences at the end of the paragraph, to read as follows:
“Commencing on the Extension Term, the traffic impact fee shall be adjusted to two hundred thirty -five dollars ($235.00) per ADT.

For any building permit issued during the Extension Ter m, the traffic impact fee shall be the lesser of either $235 per ADT or the amount per ADT then in effect in accordance with Section 13-274 of the CITY Planning, Zoning and Development Code or any successor CITY ordinance.”
Except as amended above, all of the terms and conditions set forth in clause (iii) of Section 3.9(b) of the Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

7. The Development Exactions in Section 3.9(c), clauses (ii) and (iii), of the Development Agreement shall be amended as follows:
(a) During the Extension Term as defined above, the last sentence of clause (ii) of Section 3.9(c) shall be amended so that the modified traffic impact fee of two hundred thirty-five dollars ($235.00) and provisions applicable during the Extension Term are incorporated into this clause (ii), to read as follows:
“Any such payment by OWNER or refund by CITY shall be made within thirty days of submittal of such traffic study and shall be based on the lesser of either two hundred twenty -eight dollars ($228.00) (or, during the Extension Term, two hundred thirty -five dollars ($235.00)) per ADT or the amount per ADT then in effect under Section 13-326 (or, during the Extension Term, Section 13 - 274) of the CITY Planning , Zoning and Development Code or any successor CITY ordinance.”
Except as amended above, all of the terms and conditions set forth in clause (ii) of Section 3.9(c) of the Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
(b) During the Extension Term as defined above, the last sentence of clause (iii) of Section 3.9(c) of the Development Agreement shall be amended so that the modified traffic impact fee of two hundred thirty-five dollars ($235.00) and provisions applicable during the Extension Term are incorporated into this clause (iii), to read as follows:

698/037947-0002
19250070.11 a05/30/24 4
420
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 14 of 15

“Any such payment by OWNER or refund by CITY shall be made within thirty (30) days of submittal of such second traffic study and shall be based on the lesser of two-hundred twenty-eight dollars ($228.00) (or, during the Extension Term, two hundred thirty -five dollars ($235.00)) per ADT or the amount per ADT then, in effect under Section 13-326 (or, during the Extension Term, Section 13- 274) of the CITY Planning, Zoning and Development Code or any successor CITY ordinance.”
Except as amended above, all of the terms and conditions set forth in clause (iii) of Section 3.9(c) of the Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

8. Except as expressly modified by this Amendment, all of the terms and conditions set forth in the Development Agreement shall remain the same and shall be in full force and effect.

698/037947-0002
19250070.11 a05/30/24

5 421
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 15 of 15

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Developer and City have executed this Amendment as of the First Amendment Effective Date.

“CITY”

CITY OF COSTA MESA
Dated: By:

Name:

Its:

ATTEST:

CITY CLERK
By:

Name:

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Name:

Its:

“OWNER”

INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF

THE AUTOMOBILE CLUB
Dated: By:

Name:

Its:

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Name:

Its:

698/037947-0002
19250070.11 a05/30/24 6
422
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF COSTA MESA
and

THE INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF

THE AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ATTACHMENT 2

FOR REFERENCE ONLY
423
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This Development Agreement (hereinafter “Agreement”) is entered into effective on the date it is recorded with the Orange County Recorder (hereinafter the “Effective Date”) by and between the CITY OF COSTA MESA (hereinafter “CITY”), and the INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA (hereinafter “OWNER”).

RECITALS
WHEREAS, CITY is authorized to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such pr operty, pursuant to Section 65864, et seq. of the Government Code; and, WHEREAS, CITY has adopted rules and regulations for consideration of development agreements, pursuant to Section 65865 of the Government Code; and, WHEREAS, OWNER has requested CITY to enter into a development agreement and proceedings have been taken in accordance with the rules and regulations of CITY; and, WHEREAS, by electing to enter into this Agreement, CITY shall bind future City Councils of CITY by the obligations specified herein and limit the future exercise of certain governmental and proprietary powers of CITY; and,
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the CITY to support the retention and expansion of businesses located in the CITY in order to increase employment, maintain a stable tax base, attract new businesses, and promote a diversified, stable, and healthy local economy; and, WHEREAS, the assurances provided by this Agreement are necessary in order to provide the certainty which will allow OWNER to make the long -term commitments involved in consolidating its facilities and operations in the CITY; and, WHEREAS, the retention and expansion of OWNER ’s business pursuant to this Agreement will substantially promote a diversified, stable, and healthy local economy, serving to retain approximately twelve hundred jobs in the CITY and ultimately producing an additional thirteen hundred fifty local jobs; and,
WHEREAS, the terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone extensive review by CITY, its Planning Commission and City Council and have been found to be fair, just and reasonable; and,
WHEREAS, the best interests of the citizens of Costa Mesa and the public health, safety and welfare will be served by entering into this Agreement; and, WHEREAS, all of the procedures of the Califo rnia Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) have been met with respect to the Project and this Agreement; and,
424
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -2-
WHEREAS, this Agreement and the Project (as hereinafter defined) are consistent with the CITY General Plan; and,
WHEREAS, all actions taken and approvals given by CITY have been duly taken or approved in accordance with all applicable legal requirements for notice, public hearings, findings, votes, and other procedural matters; and,
WHEREAS, development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement will provide substantial benefits to CITY and will further important policies and goals of CITY; and, WHEREAS, this Agreement will eliminate uncertainty in planning and provide for the orderly development of the Proper ty, ensure progressive installation of necessary improvements, provide for public services appropriate to the development of the Project, and generally serve the purposes for which development agreements under Sections 65864, et seq. of the Government Code are intended; and,
WHEREAS, OWNER has incurred and will in the future incur substantial costs in order to assure development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement.

COVENANTS
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals and of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

1. DEFINITIONS AND EXHIBITS.

1.1 Definitions. The following terms when used in this Agreement shall be defined as follows:

1.1.1 “Agreement” means this Development Agreement.

1.1.2 “CITY” means the City of Costa Mesa, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California.

1.1.3 “Development”, “development”, and “develop” mean the improvement of the Property for the purposes of completing the structures, improvements and facilities comprising the Project including, but not limited to: grading; the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the Project whether located within or outside the Property; the construction, demolition, reconstruction and redevelopment of buildings and structures; and the installation of landscaping.

1.1.4 “Development Approvals” means all permits and other entitlements for use subjec t to approval or issuance by CITY in connection with development of the Property including, but not limited to:
(a) Tentative and final subdivision and parcel maps;
425
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -3-
(b) Conditional use permits, final development permits and variances; (c) Zoning;
(d) Grading and building permits.
(e) Occupancy permits.

1.1.5 “Development Exaction” means any requirement of CITY in connection with or pursuant to any Land Use Regulation or Development Approval for the dedication of land, the construction of public improvements or public facilities, or the payment of fees in order to lessen, offset, mitigate or compensate for the impacts of development on the environment or other public interests.

1.1.6 “Development Plan” means the Existing Development Approvals and the Existing Land Use Regulations applicable to development of the Property.

1.1.7 “Effective Date” means the date this Agreement is recorded with the Orange County Recorder.

1.1.8 “Existing Development Approvals” means all Development Approvals approved or issued prior to the Effective Date. Existing Development Approvals includes the Development Approvals incorporated herein as Exhibit “C” and all other Development Approvals which are a matter of public record on the Effective Date.

1.1.9 “Existing Land Use Regulations ” means all Land Use Regulations in effect on t he Effective Date. The Existing Land Use Regulations are listed on Exhibit “D” and incorporated herein by reference.

1.1.10 “Index” means the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index for Los Angeles published monthly in the Engineering News -Record by McGraw-Hill, Inc. The Index for January 1994 was 6474.60. In the event the publication of the Index is discontinued or the basis of calculating the Index is modified, then CITY and OWNER shall jointly select an alternative index of construction costs which is most nearly the same as the Index.

1.1.11 “Land Use Regulations” means all ordinances, resolutions, codes, rules, regulations and official policies of CITY governing the development and use of land, including, without limitation: the permitted use of land; the density or intensity of use; subdivision requirements; the maximum height and size of proposed buildings; Development Exactions; regulations regarding the rate, time or sequence of development; and the design, improvement and construction standards and spe cifications applicable to the development of the Property. “Land Use Regulations” includes any CITY ordinance or regulation adopted by initiative or referendum.

1.1.12 “OWNER” means the Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club of Southern California, a reciprocal insurer organized under the California Insurance Code to serve the members of the Automobile Club of Southern California, a California non-profit mutual benefit corporation, and its successors in interest to all or any part of the Property. 426
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -4-

1.1.13 “Mortgagee” means a mortgagee of a mortgage, a beneficiary under a deed of trust or any other secured lender, and their successors and assigns.

1.1.14 “Project” means the development of the Property as provided by the Development Plan as such Development Plan may be further defined, ‘enhanced or modified pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.

1.1.15 “Property” means the real property described on Exhibit “A” and shown on Exhibit “B” to this Agreement.

1.1.16 “Resolution No. 88-53” means the CITY resolution adopted on July 19, 1988 titled “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA,

CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.*

1.1.17 “Subsequent Development Approvals ” means all Development Approvals required subsequent to the Effective Date in connection with development of the Property.

1.1.18 “Subsequent Land Use Regulations” means any Land Use Regulations adopted and effective after the Effective Date of this Agreement.

1.2 Exhibits. The following documents are attached to, and by this reference made a part of, this Agreement:

Exhibit “A” —
Legal Description of the Property.

Exhibit “B” —
Map showing Property and its location.

Exhibit “C” —
Existing Development Approvals.

Exhibit “D” —
Existing Land Use Regulations.

2. GENERAL PROVISIONS.

2.1 Binding Effect of Agreement . The Property is hereby made subject to this Agreement. Development of the Property is hereby authori zed and shall be carried out in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.

2.2 Ownership of Property. OWNER represents and covenants that it is the owner of a legal or equitable interest in the Property.

2.3 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue for a period of thirty (30) years thereafter unless this term is modified or extended 427
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -5-
pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. The term of the Development Agreement shall be extended for an a dditional twenty (20) years (“Extension Term”), commencing on November 1, 2024, which is the first day after the last day of the 30-year term set forth in Section 2.3 of the Development Agreement. For purposes of the Agreement, the “term” or “Term” of the Agreement shall include the entire period for which the Development Agreement is operative, including the initial 30-year term and Extension Term.

2.4 Assignment. OWNER shall have the right to sell, assign or transfer the Property in whole or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall violate the Subdivision Map Ac t, Government Code Section 66410 et seq.) to any person, partnership, joint venture, fir m or corporation at any time during the term of this Agreement. Any such sale, assignment or transfer may
include the assignment of those rights, duties and obligations arising under or from this Agreement which are applicable to the Property or part thereof being assigned, transferred or sold; provided, however, that no such assignment of this Agreement shall be effective without the prior written approval of the CITY, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.

OWNER shall
give written notice to CITY of its intent to assign this Agreement, in whole or in part, at least thirty (30) days prior
to making such assignment, and CITY shall give written notice to OWNER approving or disapproving such proposed assignment, within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notice of intent to assign. If CITY fails to give notice to OWNER approving or disapproving any proposed assignment within thirty (30) days of receipt of the notice of intent to assign, such failure shall be deemed approval of the proposed assignment. No sale, transfer, or assignment of any right or int
erest under this Agreement shall be made unless made together with the sale, transfer, or assignment of all or a part of the Property. The express written assumption of any or all of the obligations of OWNER under this Agreement by such assignee, transferee or purchaser shall relieve OWNER of its legal duty to perform such obli gations under this Agreement. Any purchaser, assignee or transferee of OWNER shall have all of the rights, duties and obligations of OWNER under this Agreement insofar as such rights, duties and obligations are applicable to the Property or part thereof purchased, assigned or transferred.

2.5 2.4 Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or cancelled in whole or in part only by written consent of all parties in the manner provided for in Government Code Section 65868. This provision shall not limit any remedy of CITY or OWNER as provided by this Agreement.

2.6 2.5 Termination. This Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of the following events:
(a) Expiration of the stated term of this Agreement as set forth in Section 2.3.
(b) Entry of a final judgment setting aside, voiding or annulling the adoption of the ordinance approving this Agreement or otherwise invalidating this Agreement.
(c) The adoption of a referendum measure overriding or repealing the ordinance approving this Agreement.
428
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -6-
(d) Completion of the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement including issuance of all required occupancy permits. Termination pursuant to this paragraph shall not be deemed to occur until OWNER provides written notice to CITY of completion of the Project.

Termination of this Agreement shall not constitute termination of any other Development Approvals approved for the Property.

2.7 2.6 Notices.
(a) As used in this Agreement, “notice” includes, but is not limited to, the communication of notice, request, demand, approval, statement, report, acceptance, consent, waiver, appointment or other communication required or permitted hereunder. (b) All notices shall be in writing and shall be considered given either:
(i) when delivered in person to the recipient named below; or (ii) on the date of delivery shown on the return receipt, after deposit in the United States mail in a sealed envelope as either registered or certified mail with return receipt requested, and postage and postal charges prepaid, and addressed to the recipient named below; or (iii) on the date of delivery shown in the records of the telegraph company after transmission by telegraph to the recipient named below. All notices shall be addressed as follows:

If to CITY:

City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, California 92626
Attn: City Manager
with a copy to:

City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, California 92626
Attn: City Attorney
If to OWNER:

Interinsurance Exchange of the
Automobile Club of Southern California
2601 South Figueroa Street
Los Angeles3333 Fairview Road, A410
Costa Mesa, California 90007-3294 92626
Attn: Director ofVice President, Administrative Services with copies to:

Interinsurance Exchange of the
429
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -7-
Automobile Club of Southern
3333 Fairview Road, A491
Costa Mesa, California 92626
2601 South Figueroa Street
Los Angeles, California 90007-3294
Attn: General Counsel
and
Pillsbury Madison & Sutro
600 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1100
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Attention: Robert L. Klotz
(c) Either party may, by notice given at any time, require subsequent notices to be given to another person or entity, whether a party or an officer or representative of a party, or t o a different address, or both. Notices given before actual receipt of notice of change shall not be invalidated by the change.

3. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY.

3.1 Rights to Develop. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, OWNER shall &aye a vested right to dev elop the Property in accordance with, and to the extent of, the Development Plan. The Project shall remain subject to all Subsequent Development Approvals required to complete the Project as contemplated by the Development Plan. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation and dedication of land for public purposes shall be those set forth in the Development Plan.

3.2 Effect of Agreement on Land Use Regulations. Except as otherwise provided under the terms of this Agreement, the Land Use Regulations applicable to development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations, and no Subsequent Land Use Regulation shall be applicable to the Project. If there is any conflict between any Existing Land Use Regulation and any other provision of this Agreement, such other provision of this Agreement shall be controlling.

3.3 Timing of Development. The parties acknowledge that OWNER cannot at this time predict when or the rate at which phases of the Project will be developed. Such decisions depend upon numerous factors which are not within the control of OWNER, such as business demand, interest rates, competition and other similar factors. Since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo (1984) 37 Cal.3d 465, that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later adopte d initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties ’ agreement, it is the parties’ intent to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that OWNER shall have the right to develop the Property in such increments and in such order and at such rate and at such times as OWNER deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment, subject only to any timing or phasing requirements set forth in the Development Plan. In the event any Subsequent Land Use Regulation is enacted which relates to the rate, timing or sequencing of development of property 430
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -8-
within the CITY, CITY agrees that such Subsequent Land Use Regulation shall not apply to the Project. In addition to and not in limitation of the foregoing, CITY agrees that no moratorium or other limitation affecting subdivision maps, building permits or other entitlements for use within the CITY or any part of the CITY shall apply to the Project.

3.4 Environmental Review . CITY certifies that Environmental Impact Re port No. 1045 (“EIR”), prepared in conjunction with the Project, is a complete and accurate document which satisfies all the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”, Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations 15000 et seq.) with respect to the Project and this Agreement. CITY agrees that no mitigation measures arising out of environmental concerns that are not incorporated in the Existing Development Approvals shal l be imposed on the Project except as otherwise provided in this Section. CITY has reviewed the Development Plan and determined that all Subsequent Development Approvals required to implement the Existing Development Approvals are “ministerial” as defined in CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and therefore exempt from review under Section 21080 of the Public Resources Code. Accordingly, CITY shall not require any further review pursuant to CEQA for any Subsequent Development Approval unless OWNER applies for a Subsequent Development Approval amending the Development Plan which requires discretionary action by the CITY and unless one or more of the events set forth in Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code occurs.

3.5 Duration of Development Approvals. Notwithstanding any provision of the Existing Land Use Regulations (including without limitation the provisions of Sections 13-254 and 13-349 of the CITY Planning, Zoning and Development Code), all Existing Development Approvals and all Subsequ ent Development Approvals shall remain valid and effective for all purposes during the term of this Agreement unless OWNER consents in writing to earlier termination.

3.6 Subsequent Development Approvals Implementing the Development Plan . In addition to the existing Development Approvals, completion of development. in accordance with the Development Plan will require the approval and issuance by the CITY of Subsequent Development Approvals including without limitation grading permits, building permits, and occupancy permits. CITY acknowledges and agrees that all such Subsequent Development Approvals required to implement and complete development in accordance with the Development Plan are ministerial in nature. In acting on such Subsequent Development Approvals, CITY shall act promptly, reasonably and in accordance with the Development Plan. CITY shall approve and issue any such Subsequent Development Approval within one hundred twenty (120) days after CITY accepts an application therefor as complete, provide d such application complies with the Development Plan. No later than thirty (30) days after receipt of an application for any such Subsequent Development Approval, City shall notify OWNER in writing whether the application is complete, specifying any information required to make the application complete.

3.7 Changes and Amendments to Existing Development Approvals . The parties acknowledge that refinement and further development of the Project may require Subsequent Development Approvals which change the Exist ing Development Approvals. In the event OWNER finds that a change in the Existing Development Approvals is necessary or appropriate, OWNER shall apply for a Subsequent Development Approval to effectuate such change and CITY 431
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -9-
shall promptly process and act on such application in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations, except as otherwise provided by this Agreement. If approved, any such change in the Existing Development Approvals shall be incorporated herein as an addendum to Exhibit “C”, and may be further changed from time to time as provided in this Section. Unless otherwise required by law, a change to the Existing Development Approvals shall be deemed “minor” and not require an amendment to this Agreement provided such change does not:
(a) Alter the permitted uses of the Property as a whole; or, (b) Increase the density or intensity of use of the Property as a whole; or,
(c) Increase the maximum height and size of permitted buildings; or, (d) Delete a requirement for the reservation or dedication of land for public purposes within the Property as a whole; or,
(d)(e) Decrease the setback distance requirements for the proposed Phase II parking structure from the northern property boundary , as set forth in Item #5 (Shade and Shadows) of the Inventory of Mitigation Measures , attached as part of Exhibit “B” to City Council Resolution No. 94-54. (Relocation of the Phase II parking structure shall be proposed further away from the existing residential uses north of the smaller parcel to improve compatibility and to minimize potential adverse impacts of the parking structure proximate to residential units); or,
(e)(f) Constitute a project requiring a subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report pursuant to Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code.

3.8 Reservations of Authority. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the following Subsequent Land Use Regulations shall apply to the development of the Property. (a) Generally applicable processing fees and charges imposed by CITY to cover the actual costs to CI TY of processing applications for Development Approvals or for monitoring compliance with any Development Approvals granted or issued. Such processing fees and charges shall not exceed the reasonable estimated costs of providing such services.
(b) Regulations which are not in conflict with the Development Plan.

Any Development Exaction, any Land Use Regulation which increases the costs of development and any Land Use Regulation, whether adopted by initiative or otherwise, limiting the rate or timing or sequen cing of development of the Property shall be deemed to conflict with the Development Plan and shall therefore not be applicable to the development of the Property.
(c) Regulations which are in conflict with the Development Plan provided OWNER has given written consent to the application of such regulations to development of the Property.
432
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -10-

3.9 Development Exactions.
(a) All Development Exactions applicable to the Project are included in the Existing Development Approvals incorporated herein as Exhibit “C”. CITY shall not impose any Development Exaction on development in accordance with the Development Plan except as set forth in Exhibit “C.” In approving any Subsequent Development Approval amending the Development Plan as provided in Section 3.7 of this Agreement, CITY shall not impose any Development Exaction which would exceed the Development Exactions included in the Existing Development Approvals provided such Subsequent Development Approval does not alter the permitted uses of the Property as a whole or increase the density or intensity of use of the Property as a whole. CITY acknowledges and agrees that OWNER would not proceed with the Project but for the foregoing limitation on Development Exactions and the other assurances provided by this Agreement.

CITY has determined that the maintenance and expansion of a diverse employment base within the CITY, the direct and indirect contributions to overall economic activity within the CITY, and the positive fiscal impact associated with the Project substantially contribute to the public welfare notwithstanding the limitation on Development Exactions contained in this Agreement.
(b) OWNER shall pay a traffic impact fee for each new average daily vehicle trip end (“ADT”) generated by all new development on the Pr operty. This traffic impact fee shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for each phase of the Project and shall be determined as follows:
(i) The ADT generated by new development shall be calculated by multiplying .00718 times the number of squar e feet of building area to be constructed under the building permit ; provided, however, that during the Extension Term, the ADT generated by the second phase of development shall be calculated by multiplying .00989 times the number of square feet of buildi ng area to be constructed under the building permit. The number of square feet of building area shall not include any building area within any parking structure. If any phase of the Project involves both the demolition of an existing building and the con struction of a new building, the determination of the number of square feet of new building area shall be reduced by the building area to be demolished. CITY acknowledges and agrees that construction of the first phase of the Project will produce a decrea se of sixty -three (63) ADT as a result of the elimination of that number of trips between the Property and other offices of OWNER, and CITY therefore agrees that the number of ADT calculated for the first building permit for the first phase of the Project shall be reduced by sixty-three (63). This reduction shall be subject to confirmation and adjustment as described in paragraph (c) of this Section. (ii) For any building permit issued within three (3) years of the Effective Date, the traffic impact fee shall be the lesser of either two hundred twenty-eight dollars ($228.00) per ADT or the amount per ADT then in effect under Section 13-326 of the CITY Planning, Zoning and Development Code or any successor CITY ordinance. (iii) For any building permit issued more than three (3) years after the Effective Date, the traffic impact fee of two hundred twenty -eight dollars 433
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -11-
($228.00) per ADT shall be adjusted for inflation in accordance with the Index by multiplying two hundred twenty -eight dollars ($228.00) by a fraction, the numerator of which is the Index on the date of issuance of the building permit and the denominator of which is the Index on the Effective Date. For any building permit issued more than three (3) years after the Effective Date, the traffic impact fee shal l be the lesser of either such inflation-adjusted amount per ADT or the amount per ADT then in effect under Section 13- 326 of the CITY Planning, Zoning and Development Code or any successor CITY ordinance. Commencing on the Extension Term, the traffic imp act fee of two hundred thirty-five dollars ($235.00) per ADT. For any building permit issued during the Extension Term, the traffic impact fee shall be the lesser of either $235 per ADT or the amount per ADT then in effect in accordance with Section 13-274 of the CITY Planning, Zoning and Development Code or successor CITY ordinance.
(c) The ADT generated by new development on the Property and the traffic impact fee payable as a r esult of such ADT shall be subject to confirmation and adjustment in accordance with the following procedures:
(i) No earlier than thirty (30) months and no later than thirty-six (36) months after the issuance of certificate(s) of occupancy for new development totalling 200,000 square feet of building area or more, OWNER shall submit a traffic study to the CITY. This traffic study shall be prepared under the direction of the CITY Director of Public Services at OWNER’s expense by a professional traffic consulta nt selected by OWNER, and shall provide actual daily vehicle trip counts for the Property for a period consisting of not less than two twenty -four hour days, which days shall not include any holiday or weekend day. The traffic study shall calculate ADT by averaging the actual daily vehicle trip counts over the number of days studied. (ii) If the ADT counted pursuant to such traffic study exceeds the sum of 3353 and the ADT calculated pursuant to paragraph (b)(i) of this Section, OWNER shall pay to CITY an additional traffic impact fee for each such additional ADT.

If the ADT counted pursuant to such traffic study is less than the sum of 3353 and the ADT calculated pursuant to paragraph (b)(i) of this Section, CITY shall pay to OWNER a refund of traffic impact fees for each such reduced ADT. Any such payment by OWNER or refund by CITY shall be made within thirty days of submittal of such traffic study and shall be based on the lesser of either two hundred twenty-eight dollars ($228.00) (or, during the Extension Term, two hundred thirty-five dollars ($235.00)) per ADT (adjusted for inflation as provided in paragraph (b)(iii) of this Section) or the amount per ADT then in effect under Section 13-326 (or, during the Extension Term, Section 13 -274) of the CIT Y Planning Zoning and Development Code or any successor CITY ordinance. (iii) No earlier than thirty (30) months and no later than thirty-six months after the issuance of certificate(s) of occupancy for new development totalling 450,000 square feet of building area or more, OWNER shall submit a second traffic study to CITY prepared in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (c)(i) of this Section. If the ADT counted pursuant to such second traffic study exceeds the sum of the ADT counted in the first traffic study prepared pursuant to paragraph (c)(i) of this Section and the ADT calculated pursuant to paragraph (b)(i) above for all new development occupied 434
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -12-
subsequent to the preparation of such first traffic study, OWNER shall pay to CITY an additional traffic impact fee for each such additional ADT. If the ADT counted pursuant to such second traffic study is less than the sum of the ADT counted pursuant to paragraph (c)(i) of this Section and the ADT calculated pursuant to paragraph (b)(i) of this Section for all new development occupied subsequent to the preparation of such first traffic study, CITY shall pay to OWNER a refund of traffic impact fees for each such reduced ADT. Any such payment by OWNER or refund by CITY shall be made within thirty (30) days of submittal of such second traffic study and shall be based on the lesser of two- hundred twenty-eight dollars ($228.00) (or, during the Extension Term, two hundred thirty- five dollars ($235.00)) per ADT (adjusted for inflation as provided in paragraph (b)(iii) of this Section) or the amount per ADT then . in effect under Section 13-326 (or, during the Extension Term, Section 13 -274) of the CITY Planning, Zoning and Development Code or any successor CITY ordinance.
(d) Notwithstanding any provision of the Existin g Land Use Regulations (including without limitation the provisions of Section 13-326 of the CITY Planning, Zoning and Development Code), CITY may utilize the traffic impact fees received pursuant to this Agreement for the construction or improvement of an y road, street, on-ramp, off-ramp or intersection within the CITY. (e) Notwithstanding any provision of the Existing Land Use Regulations, the Project shall not be subject to any requirement of the CITY with respect to a conditional use permit for a transportation demand management program.

3.10 Regulation by Other Public Agencies. It is acknowledged by the parties that other public agencies not within the control of CITY possess authority to regulate aspects of the development of the Property separately from or jo intly with CITY and this Agreement does not limit the authority of such other public agencies. OWNER agrees that the traffic -related development fees imposed by the joint powers authority known as the San Joaquin Hills Corridor Agency shall not be limited by this Agreement. CITY shall not oppose any application by OWNER to any other public agency for any permit or approval which is required for the Project.

CITY shall provide to OWNER or to such other public agencies information possessed by CITY and necessary for processing such applications, and OWNER shall reimburse CITY for the actual and reasonable costs of providing such information.

4. CONFLICTS OF LAW.

4.1 Conflict with State or Federal Laws . In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations, enacted after the Effective Date of Agreement, prevent or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State or Federal laws or regulations; provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent’ with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce.

4.2 Notice. Any party which determines that it cannot perform any act authorized or required by the Agreement due to a conflict described in Section 4.1 shall, within fifteen (15) days 435
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -13-
of making such determination, provide all other parties with written notice of such State or Federal law or regulation and a statement of the conflict with provisions of this Agreement.

4.3 Modification Conference. The parties shall, within thirty (30) days after notice is provided in Section 4.2, hereof, meet and confer in good faith in an reasonable attempt to modify this Agreement to comply with such law or regulation.

4.4 City Council Hearing. Within thirty (30) days after the modification conference, regardless of whether the parties reach an agreement on the effect of such law or regulation upon this Agreement,, the matter shall be scheduled for hearing before the City Council. Notice of such hearing shall be given pursuant to Section 65090 of the Government Code. The City Council, at such hearing, shall determine the exact modification or suspension which shall be necessitated by such law or regulation. OWNER shall have the right to offer oral and written testimony at. the hearing. No modification or suspension of this Agreement shall be effec tive unless approved by the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the authorized voting members of the City Council and by OWNER.

4.5 Cooperation in Securing Permits or Approvals . CITY shall use its best efforts to assist OWNER in the timely securin g of any permits or approvals which may be required as a result of such modifications to, or suspensions of, all or any part of this Agreement.

4.6 Challenge Regarding New Law or Regulation . OWNER or CITY shall have the right to challenge by appropriate judicial proceedings any such new law or regulation preventing compliance with the terms of this Agreement or the modification or suspension of this Agreement.

In the event that such challenge is successful, this Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect.

5. RESTRICTION ON SPECIAL DISTRICTS.

During the term of this Agreement, CITY and OWNER agree that no assessment district or special tax district including all or any part of the Property, will be created by the CITY or any agency or instrumentality of the CITY, unless OWNER expressly then grants such authority and concurs in the creation of such district and the terms and conditions of any assessments or special taxes to be levied thereunder. The provisions of this Section 5 shall apply only to assessment districts and special tax districts including developed property. The Property shall be considered developed property provided building permit(s) for a first phase of development comprising at least 200,000 square feet of building area are i ssued within three (3) years of the Effective Date.

The provisions of this Section 5 shall not be applicable to the levy or collection by CITY of any tax which is paid to the general fund of the CITY, including, but not limited to, any CITY general tax on utility service.

6. PERIODIC REVIEW.

6.1 Procedure. CITY shall, at least every twelve (12) months during the term of this Agreement, review the extent of good faith substantial compliance by OWNER with the terms of this Agreement in accordance with Government Code Section 65865.1 and Resolution No. 88-53 and as further provided in this Section. OWNER shall have the duty to demonstrate its good faith substantial compliance with the terms of -this Agreement at such periodic review. OWNER shall 436
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -14-
furnish such evidence of good faith substantial compliance as the CITY in the exercise of its reasonable discretion may require. Either party may address any requirements of this Agreement during the review. However, ten (10) days’ written notice of any requirement to be addressed shall be made by the requesting party. If at the time of review an issue not previously identified in writing is required to be addressed, the review at the request of either party shall be continued to afford sufficient time for anal ysis and preparation. CITY shall not terminate or modify this Agreement except upon failure of OWNER to perform a material duty or obligation under this Agreement which has not been cured by OWNER as provided under Section 8.3 of this Agreement.

6.2 Information to Be Provided OWNER. CITY shall deposit in the mail to OWNER a copy of -all staff reports, exhibits and other evidence concerning Agreement performance a minimum of ten (10) calendar days prior to any such review or action upon this Agreement by the Planning Commission or the City Council.

6.3 Failure to Perform Periodic Review . The failure of the CITY to review at least annually OWNER ’s compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall not constitute or be asserted by either party as a breach by the other party of this Agreement.

7. ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATES.

Either party may at any time, and from time to time, deliver written notice to the other party requesting that the other party certify in writing that to the knowledge of the certifying party:
(a) This Agreement is in full force and effect and is a binding obligation of the parties.
(b) This Agreement has not been amended or modified and, if so amended, identifying the amendments.
(c) No default in the performance of the requesting party ’s obligations under this Agreement exists or, if in default, the nature and extent of any default.

A party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return the certificate within thirty (30) days following receipt thereof. The City Manager shall have the right to exe cute any certificate requested by OWNER on behalf of CITY.

8. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES.

8.1 Cumulative Remedies. Subject to the provisions of Section 8.6 of this Agreement, each of the parties hereto may pursue any remedy at law, excluding damages, or equity availab le for the breach of any provision of this Agreement. Any party may initiate arbitration to cure, correct or remedy any default, to enforce any covenant or agreement herein, or to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation of this Agreement, including w ithout limitation arbitration requesting declaratory relief, specific performance and relief in the nature of mandamus. All remedies shall be cumulative and not exclusive of one another, and the exercise of any one or more of the remedies shall not constitute a waiver or election with respect to any other available remedy. 437
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -15-
The parties acknowledge and agree that specific performance and other non -monetary relief are appropriate remedies for the enforcement of this Agreement and shall be available to all parties.

8.2 Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge . In the .event of any legal action instituted by a third party, including without limitation any. other governmental entity or official, challenging the validity of this Agreement or any Development Approval granted pursuant to this Agreement, the parties agree to cooperate fully with each other in defending such action; provided, however, that each party shall bear its own costs and legal expenses in defending such action.

8.3 Termination of Agreement for Def ault of OWNER . CITY may terminate this Agreement for any failure of OWNER to perform any material duty or obligation of OWNER under this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as “default”); provided, however, CITY may terminate this Agreement only after prov iding written notice to OWNER of default setting forth the nature of the default and the actions, if any, required by OWNER to cure such default and, where default can be cured, OWNER has failed to take such actions and cure such default within sixty (60) days after the effective date of such notice or, in the event that such default cannot be cured within such sixty (60) day period but can be cured within a longer time, has failed to commence the actions necessary to cure such default within such sixty (60 ) day period and to diligently proceed to complete such actions and cure such default.

8.4 Termination of Agreement for Default of CITY . OWNER may terminate this Agreement in the event of a default by CITY in the performance of a material duty or obligation of CITY under this Agreement and only after providing written notice to CITY of default setting forth the nature of the default and the actions, if any, required by CITY to cure such default and, where the default can be cured, CITY has failed to take such actions and cure such default within sixty (60) days after the effective date of such notice or, in the event that such default cannot be cured within such sixty (60) day period but can be cured within a longer time, has failed to commence the actions nece ssary to cure such default within such sixty (60) day period and to diligently proceed to complete such actions and cure such default.

8.5 Attorneys’ Fees and Costs . In any action or proceeding (including arbitration) brought by any party to interpret or enforce any provision of this Agreement, or otherwise arising under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys ’ fees and all costs, expenses and disbursements in connection with such action or proceeding, including the cost of reasonable investigation, preparation and professional expert consultation and arbitration fees and costs, which sums may be included in any judgment or decree entered in such action in favor of the prevailing party.

8.6 Arbitration. Any dispute or controv ersy arising from . any provision of this Agreement, including without limitation any action or proceeding brought by any party to interpret or enforce any provision of this Agreement, shall be submitted to arbitration under the provisions of this Section 8.6.
(a) The arbitration shall be held in Orange County, California before a single arbitrator acceptable to both parties. If the parties are unable to agree on an arbitrator within seven (7) days after either party gives a written notice to the other party r equesting arbitration, the Orange County office of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service 438
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -16-
(“JAMS”) shall be requested by either party to submit a list of arbitrators.(all of whom must have had at least 5 years experience as a California superior court judge) from which the arbitrator shall be selected by agreement between the parties within seven (7) days after the parties receive that list. If the parties still fail to agree on an arbitrator within that time, they shall within seventy-two (72) hours after the expiration of that time each strike off the names of potential arbitrators who are unacceptable and shall indicate the order of preference of those remaining; each party must leave at least one name on its list. They, or either of them, shall thereupon immediately request JAMS to appoint an arbitrator from the names remaining, after considering preference, qualification, and availability. The parties shall thereafter use their best efforts and diligence to see that the appointment of the arbitrator by JAMS is made as rapidly as possible, and in no event more than fourteen (14) days after the date the list is submitted to JAMS. If at the time arbitration is requested JAMS is no longer in operation, then its successor by sale, acquisition or me rger (if applicable) shall take the place of JAMS under this provision. If there is no such successor, then the presiding judge of the Orange County Superior Court shall be requested to submit a list of qualified arbitrators (who shall be retired superior court judges) from which the parties will choose a single arbitrator in the manner provided above. (b) Upon the appointment of an arbitrator, the parties shall immediately use their best efforts and due diligence to begin the arbitration hearing at the earliest possible date, and in no event more than thirty (30) days after the appointment of the arbitrator, and to thereafter diligently pursue it to completion. The parties agree to promptly sign a JAMS Submission Agreement upon institution of the arbitration process to the extent the provisions of that Submission Agreement are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Section .8.6. Upon a showing of a lack of good faith and due diligence by a party in expediting the arbitration proceedings within the time limits described above, the aggrieved party shall be entitled to all damages suffered by that party as a result of any delay in the arbitration proceedings. This item of damages shall be a separate matter to be decided by the arbitrator at the arbitration hearing.
(c) Subject to the above thirty (30) day limitation, the arbitration shall be governed by the discovery procedures in California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1283.05 as presently existing (or, if not materially changed, as existing at the time the arbitration notice is given). The arbitrator shall apply California substantive law and the California Evidence Code to the arbitration proceeding. The arbitrator shall have the power to grant all legal and equitable remedies provided by California law but shall not have the power to award compensatory or punitive damages except as provided in paragraph (b) of this Section 8.6. The arbitrator shall prepare in writing and provide to the parties a decision including factual findings and the reasons on which the decision is based.

The arbitrator shall not have the power to commit errors of law or legal reasoning, and the decision may be vacated or corrected for those or other grounds pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1286.2, 1286.4, 1286.6, or 1282.8 as presently existing for any such error. The arbitrator shall be bound by all legal principles under California statutory and case law. The arbitrator shall decide the case in the same manner as the case would be decided in a California court of law.
439
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -17-
(d) The decision may be judicially enforced (confirmed, corrected, or vacated) pursuant to Section 1285, et seq. of the California Code of Civil Procedure. It is final and binding and there is no direct appeal from the decision other than as expressly provided to the contrary in this Section 8.6. The arbitrator shall award reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs to the prevailing party in its arbitration.

9. MORTGAGEE PROTECTION.

The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit OWNER, in any manner, at OWNER ’s sole discretion, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to the Property. CITY acknowledges that the lenders providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with OWNER and representatives of such lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. CITY will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of this Agreement. Any Mortgagee of the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges:
(a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any mortgage on the Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. (b) The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the Property, or any part thereof, which Mortgagee, has submitted a request in writing to the CITY in the manner specified herein for giving notices, shall be entitled to receive written notification from CITY of any default by OWNER in the performance of OWNER ’s obligations under this Agreement.
(c) If CITY timely receives a request from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given to OWNER under the terms of this Agreement, CITY shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to OWNER. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the default during t he remaining cure period allowed such party under this Agreement.
(d) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such foreclosure, shall take the Property, or part thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform any of OWNER’s obligations or other affirmative covenants of OWNER hereunder, or to guarantee such performance; provided, however, that to the extent that any covenant to be performed by OWNER is a condition precedent to the performance of a covenant by CITY, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to CITY’s performance hereunder.

10. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
440
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -18-

10.1 Recordation of Agreement . This Agreement and any amendment or cancellation thereof shall be recorded with the Orange County Recorder by the City Clerk within the peri od required by Section 65868.5 of the Government Code.

10.2 Entire Agreement. This Agreement sets forth and contains the entire understanding and agreement of the parties, and there are no oral or written representations, understandings or ancillary covenants, undertakings or agreements which are not contained or expressly referred to herein. No testimony or • evidence of any such representations, understandings or covenants shall be admissible in any proceeding of any kind or nature to interpret or determine the terms or conditions of this Agreement.

10.3 Severability. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be determined invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in full force and effect unless amended by mutual written consent of the parties.

10.4 Interpretation and Governing Law . This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

This Agreement shall be construed as a whole according to its fair language and common meaning to achieve the objectives and purposes of the parties hereto, and the rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Agreement, all parties having been represented by counsel in the negotiation and preparation hereof.

10.5 Section Headings. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement.

10.6 Rules of Construction. As used herein, the singular of any word includes the plural and the masculine gender includes the feminine.

10.7 Consent. Where a consent or approval of a party is required or necessary under this Agreement, such consent or approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.

10.8 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement as to which time is an element.

10.9 Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a representative of the party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought. No waiver of any right or remedy in respect of any occurrence or event shall be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy in respect of any other occurrence or event.

10.10 No Third-Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement.

10.11 Force Majeure. Neither party shall be deemed to be in default where failure or delay in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused by floods, earthquakes, other Acts of Go d, fires, wars, riots or similar hostilities, strikes and other labor 441
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -19-
difficulties beyond the party ’s control, (including the party ’s employment force), government regulations, court actions (such as restraining orders or injunctions), or other causes beyo nd the party’s control. If any such events shall occur, the time for performance by either party of any of its obligations hereunder shall be extended by the parties for the period of time that such events prevented such performance.

10.12 Mutual Covenants. The covenants contained herein are mutual covenants and also constitute conditions to the concurrent or subsequent performance by the party benefitted thereby of the covenants to be performed hereunder by such benefitted party.

10.13 Successors in Interest. The burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of this Agreement shall inure to, all successors in interest and assigns of the parties to this Agreement.

10.14 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed by the parties in counterparts, which counterparts shall be construed together and have the same effect as if all of the parties had executed the same instrument.

10.15 Project as a Private Undertaking . It is understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that the development of the Projec t is a private development, that neither party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect hereunder, and that each party is an independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Agreement.

No partnership, joint venture or other association of any kind is formed by this Agreement. The only relationship between CITY and OWNER is that of a government entity regulating the development of private property and the owner of such property.

10.16 Further Actions and Instruments . Each of the parties shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to the other to the extent contemplated hereunder in the performance of all obligations under this Agreement and the satisfaction of the conditions of this Agreeme nt.

Upon the request of either party at any time, the other party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit if reasonably required, and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any actions as may be reasonably necessary under the terms of this Agreement to carry out the intent and to fulfill the provisions of this Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

10.17 Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Domain. Neither party shall do anything which shall have the effect of harming or injuring the right of the other party to receive the benefits of this Agreement. Each party shall refrain from doing anything which would render its performance under this Agreement i mpossible or impracticable. Each party shall do everything which this Agreement contemplates that such party shall do to accomplish the objectives and purposes of this Agreement.

10.18 Releases. CITY hereby covenants and agrees that upon completion of the Project as provided under this Agreement, or any portion thereof, CITY shall execute and deliver to the Orange County Recorder an appropriate release of OWNER of further obligations under this Agreement.
442
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -20-

10.19 Integrated Project . CITY acknowledges, by executing this Agreement for the Project as a whole, that the Project is and shall be considered a single, integrated development project and that each component of the Project is dependent upon the completion and occupancy of each other component, and that the via bility of each component of the Project is and shall be dependent of the completion and occupancy of each other component and the full performance of this Agreement.

10.20 Authority to Execute.

10.20.1 CITY. By the execution hereof, CITY confirms and acknowledges that CITY, acting through its City Council and the City Planning Commission, have complied in full with the requirements of Section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code and Resolution No. 88- 53 for public hearing and the giving of notice of intention to consider adoption of this Agreement, and that this Agreement has been approved by ordinance as required by Section 65867.5 of the Government Code. CITY warrants and represents that the CITY has given all notices, held all hearings and complied with all other leg al requirements and procedures required to make this a valid Agreement.

10.20.2 OWNER. Persons executing this Agreement on behalf of OWNER warrant and represent that they have the authority to execute this Agreement and represent that they have the authority to bind OWNER to the performance of its obligations hereunder.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year set forth below.

Dated:

CITY OF COSTA MESA
By:

Mayor
ATTEST:

CITY CLERK
By:

Deputy
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Attorney
443
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 -21-
Date:

OWNER:

INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE

AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN

CALIFORNIA
By: ACSC Management Services, Inc.,
Attorney-in-Fact
By:

Name:

Its:
444
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 EXHIBIT A

DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
Parcel 1:

That portion of the land allotted to James McFadden in decree of partition of the Rancho Santiago De Santa Ana, recorded in Book “B” of Judgments of the 17th Judicial District Court of California, in the City of Costa Mesa, County of Orange, State of California, described as follows:

Beginning at the northeast corner of the land conveyed to Horace Kent by deed recorded January 28, 1878 in Book 58, Page 417 of Deeds of Los Angeles County, California; thence north 89° 36’ 27” west, 1100.00 feet to the northwest corner of said land of Kent; thence south 0° 23 ’ 33” west, 4.41 feet along the west line of laid land to the southerly line of the north one-half of the land conveyed to the J. J. Maxwell by deed recorded February 15, 1876 in Book 43 Page 2 of Deeds of said Los Angeles County; thence south 89° 48 ’ 26” west, 1102.02 feet to the southwest corner of said north one-half; thence north 0° 27’ 51” west 0.11 feet along the westerly line of said north one-half to the southerly li ne of the land described in a deed to the Orange County Flood Control District recorded October 31, 1959 in Book 4468, Page 441 of official records of said Orange County; thence easterly, northeasterly and northerly along the southerly, southeasterly and easterly line of said described land the following courses; north 89° 25 ’ 40” east, 156.80 feet to the beginning of the tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius 1384.00 feet; thence northeasterly 2168.55 feet along said curve through a central angle of 89° 46’ 30”; thence tangent from said curve north 0° 20’ 50” west, 197.36 feet to the northerly line of said land of J. J. Maxwell, thence north 89° 25 ’ 45” east, 687.25 feet to the northeast corner of said land of J. J. Maxwell; thence south 0° 23’ 33” west 1597.66 feet to the point of beginning.

Parcel 2:

That portion of the land allotted to James McFadden in Decree of Partition of the Rancho Santiago De Santa Ana, recorded in Book “B” of Judgments of the 17th Judicial District Court, in the City of Costa Mesa, all in the County of Orange, State of California, described as follows:

Beginning at the northeast corner of the 160 acres parcel conveyed to J. J. Maxwell by deed recorded February 15, 1876 in Book 43, Page 2 of Deeds, in the Office of the C ounty Recorder of Los Angeles County, California; thence south 1584.00 feet along the east line of said Maxwell land to the northeast corner of the land conveyed to Horace Kent by deed recorded January 28, 1878 in Book 58, Page 417 of said deeds; thence west 1099.96 feet to the northwest corner of said Kent land being also the southeast corner of the land conveyed to Charles H. Stanley of deed recorded July 27, 1897 Book 32, Page 145 of deeds, in the office of the County Recorder of said County, thence north 1584.00 feet along the east line of said Stanley land to the north line of said Maxwell land; thence east 1089.00 feet to the point of the beginning.

Except that portion thereof lying southeasterly of the northwesterly line of the land described in the deed to the Orange County Flood Control District, recorded October 31, 1959 in Book 4469,

Page 441 ends

445
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 EXHIBIT B

MAP SHOWING THE PROPERTY AND ITS LOCATION
446
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 EXHIBIT C

EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS

COPIES OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS LISTED BELOW ARE ON

FILE IN THE CITY OF COSTA MESA PLANNING DIVISION AND ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE:

1. General Plan Amendment GP -94-01A, approved Ju ne 20, 1994, by Resolution No. 94-54;

2. Rezone Petition R-94-01, adopted July 5, 1994, by Ordinance No. 94-10;

3. Planning Action PA-94-15, approved June 20, 1994, by Resolution No. 94-55; and

4. Parcel Map S-94-120, approved June 20, 1994, by Resolution No. 94-56.

THE ABOVE DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS ARE SUBJECT TO ALL MITIGATION MEASURES INCLUDED IN FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NUMBER 1045, CERTIFIED JUNE 20, 1994, BY RESOLUTION NO. 94-53.
447
698/037947-0002
19932284.8 a07/26/24a05/29/24a01/01/00a05/11/24 EXHIBIT D

EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS

1. City of Costa Mesa General Plan as amended through Resolution No. 94-54;

2. Title 13 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code (Planning, Zoning, and Development Codes) as amended through Ordinance No. 94-10; and

3. Resolution No. 88-53, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, California Establishing Procedures and Requirements for Consideration of Development Agreements.

COPIES OF THE EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS LISTED ABOVE ARE ON FILE IN

THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE.
448

Page 1 of 8 ends

City of Costa Mesa
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Item #: 24-302 Meeting Date: 08/06/2024
TITLE: INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE APPROVI NG THE FIRST AMENDMENT (DA-20-05) TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA-94-01) BETWEEN

THE CITY OF COSTA ME SA AND THE INTERINSU RANCE EXCHANGE OF TH E AUTOMOBILE CLUB ALLOWING FOR A 20 -YEAR TIME EXTENSION THAT WOULD EXPIRE OCTOBER 31, 2044; AMENDING PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO THE RATE AND METHODOLOGY FOR CALC ULATING TRAFFIC IMPA CT FEES; AND, AMEND ING PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SETBACK OF A F UTURE PARKING STRUCTURE; FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3333 FAIRVIEW ROAD
DEPARTMENT: ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT/ PLANNING

DIVISION
PRESENTED BY: CHRISTOPHER ALDANA, ASSISTANT PLANNER
CONTACT INFORMATION : CHRISTOPHER ALDANA, ASSISTANT PLANNER, (714) 754-4868
RECOMMENDATION:

On July 22, 2024, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the proposed development agreement amendments and Ordinance adoption by a vote of 4-1-2 to:

1. Find, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, that the project is within the scope of the June 20, 1994-certified Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) #1045 (State Clearing House No. 94021036) for the Auto Club Expansion project. The effects of the project were examined in the 1994 FEIR, and all feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the 1994 FEIR are incorporated into this project and no new mitigation measures are required. Therefore, the 1994 FEIR for the Automobile Club Expansion project is determined to be adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for this project, that no further environmental review is required, and that all requirements of CEQA are satisfied.

2. Introduce for first reading, by title only, Ordinance 2024-XX approving the First Amendment (DA-20-05) to the Automobile Club of Southern California Development Agreement (DA - 94-01) to allow for a 20-year time extension that would expire October 31, 2044; to amend provisions pertaining to the rate and methodology for calculating traffic impact fees; and to amend provisions related to the setback of a future parking structure.

ATTACHMENT 3
449
Item #: 24-302 Meeting Date: 08/06/2024

Page 2 of 8 ends

APPLICANT OR AUTHORIZED AGENT:

The applicant and authorized agent is Jennifer J. Farrell, Esq., representing the property owner, Interinsurance Exchange Automobile Club of Southern California.

BACKGROUND:

The Automobile Club of Southern California (AAA) has operated at 3333 Fairview Road since the 1980s. The site operates and is developed with AAA office and support services that were approved pursuant to Development Review (DR -80-05). The AAA site is a 29.5 -acre lot subdivided in 1979 as Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 79-381 and an adjacent 9.7-acre site to the west that was later subdivided in 1994 as Parcel 2 of Parcel Map No. 94 -120 (see the below Exhibit 1).

Exhibit 1 – Vicinity Map
In 1994, the City of Costa Mesa approved the following applications for the development of the subject property:
1) Final Environmental Impact Report #1045 (State Clearinghouse No. 94021036); 450
Item #: 24-302 Meeting Date: 08/06/2024

Page 3 of 8 ends

2) General Plan Amendment (GP -94-01A) to redesignate the subject property and the adjacent 9.7-acre parcel from Industrial Park and Medium Density Residential to Urban Center Commercial;
3) Rezone (R-94-01) to change the subject property from Industrial Park (MP) and Planned Development Reside ntial-Medium Density (PDR -MD) to Planned Development Commercial (PDC);
4) Planning Action (PA -94-15) for a final development plan for a 500,000 -square-foot expansion of the existing Automobile Club facility with a four-level parking structure; 5) Tentative Par cel Map (S -94-120) to divide the northerly portion of the Segerstrom Home Ranch site into three parcels to accommodate the proposed project; and 6) Development Agreement (DA -94-01) an agreement between the applicant and the City pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65864, et seq. that guarantees project approvals for 30 years from its effective date, in exchange for certain public benefits.

Exhibit 2 – DA-94-01 Approved AAA Site Plan
451
Item #: 24-302 Meeting Date: 08/06/2024

Page 4 of 8 ends

The 1994 entitlements included a 500,000-square-foot expansion that was planned to occur in two phases . E ach phase was to consist of an approximate 250,000-square-foot building .

Additionally, a four-level 1,840 space parking structure is approved on the adjacent 9.7 -acre parcel. To date, AAA has completed Phase I improvements, which total 235,825 square feet of the 500,000 -square-foot expansion. Including the aforementioned addition (Phase I), the AAA total site floor area is approximately 702,825 square feet. Additionally, the 9.7-acre parcel to the west, which has a driveway along Susan Street, has been improved and is utilized as a surface parking lot for AAA employees. This surface parking lot is accessed internally by a 40- foot-wide bridge that connects the main AAA facility. The remaining Phase II improvements are shown in yellow-shading on the above Exhibit 2.

The original development agreement (DA-94-01) provided for a 30-year timeframe in which to develop the project. This term will expire on October 31, 2024 unless extended . AAA is in full compliance with all terms of the development agreement for the square footage that has been constructed to date, which includes payment of traffic impact fees and Transportation Corridor fees.

In recent years, AAA management has contemplated consolidating their southern California regional operations to their Costa Mesa facility. The square footage that remains to be built pursuant to the development agreement is believed to be adequate to accommodate this consolidation. In 2023, AAA approached the City with a request to extend the development agreement by 20 years , starting on November 1, 2024 to October 31, 2044 , in order to accommodate their consolid ation plans . During conversations with the applicant, City staff requested additional updates to the terms of the development agreement that include the payment of traffic impact fees, and consideration of the setback of the future parking structure from t he adjacent residential community, which was contemplated in the original project approval. The applicant was amenable to these updates and has included them in their application.

Requested Amendments
In support of their long-term plans to consolidate regional business operations in Costa Mesa, AAA proposes the following revisions to the development agreement (see Attachment 2):

1. Page 2, Section 2: Change the expiration year from 2024 to 2044. This will extend the development agreement for an additional 20 years, commencing on November 1, 2024 and terminating on October 31, 2044.

2. Page 3, Section 6 (a): Update the average daily vehicle trip “ADT” multiplier from .00718 to .00989. This change reflects the current Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation factor for office land uses.

3. Page 4, Section 6 (b): Update the Traffic Impact Fee from $228 to $235 , or the current rate at time of development , whichever is less. This change is necessary to reflect the City’s current adopted fee.
452
Item #: 24-302 Meeting Date: 08/06/2024

Page 5 of 8 ends

4. Page 3, Section 5(e): Specify that the Phase II parking structure shall be proposed a minimum of 60 feet from the existing residential uses located to the north of the smaller parcel to improve land use compatibility.

5. Other non-substantive numbering, reference, and/or formatting edits to clarify intent and implement the proposed changes.

Refer to the appli cant’s letter in Attachment 3 for a detailed description of the applicant’s requests.

Public Comments
One comment letter was received prior to the Planning Commission meeting. The letter requested additional information from staff relating to the proposed parking structure location.

Staff spoke with the commenter by phone and addressed their questions. The commenter then indicated to staff that they had no concerns. At the Planning Commission meeting held on July 22, 2024, no members of the general public spoke either in support or opposition to the project.

Planning Commission Recommendation
On July 22, 2024, the Planning Commission considered the request and reviewed the proposed DA modifications/updates. After considering staff’s presentation, the applicant’s presentation, and opening the hearing for public comments, the Planning Commission deliberated and voted 4-1-2 to find that the project is within the scope of the June 20, 1994 certified Final Environmental Impact Report, and to adopt a Resolution that recommends City Council approval of the First Amendment (DA -20-05) to the Automobile Club of Southern California Development Agreement (DA -94-01) by adopting an ordinance to allow for a 20 - year time extension until October 31, 2044; to amend provisions pertaining to the rate and methodology for calculating traffic impact fees; and, to amend provisions related to the setback of a future parking structure. Planning Commissioner Martinez voted to not recommend project approval to the City Council, and Chair Ereth and Commissioner Andrade recused themselves from the project review.

Planning Commissioner comments supporting the motion for approval included that “the AAA is an excellent local business”, “the AAA facility is very well maintained” and the “AAA facility has great employee amenities that attracts high quality jobs to the City”. Commissioner Martinez did not support the motion and provided comments that the project was generally not consistent with certain General Plan Polices that encouraged multi-modal transportation, and that the site was over-parked. The July 22, 2024, Planning Commission staff report and video is linked below:

The July 22, 2024 Planning Commission staff report (also provided as Attachment 8) can be viewed at this link:
https://costamesa.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=6790093&GUID=D41EA24A- 9362-496E-B877-A33BB700B732
453
Item #: 24-302 Meeting Date: 08/06/2024

Page 6 of 8 ends

The July 22, 2024 Planning Commission meeting video can be viewed at this link:
https://costamesa.granicus.com/player/clip/4155?view_id=14&redirect=true ANALYSIS:

Pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 88 -53, Development Agreement Procedures and Requirements, and Government Code Section 65865(c), the proposed amendments are subject to the following two determinations:

1. The Development Agreement between the City of Costa Mesa and Developer is:
o Consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and with the General Plan as a whole; o Compatible with the uses authorized in, and the existing land use regulations prescribed for, the zoning district in which the real property is and will be located; and
o Is in conformity with and will promote public convenience, g eneral welfare, and good land use practice.

In making its recommendation to the City Council, the Planning Commission found that t he proposed first amendment to the development agreement is consistent with General Plan policies and objectives, primarily o bjective LU-6C, in that the long-term build-out of the AAA office campus will support the retention and expansion of the City’s employment base with diverse and quality employment opportunities. Additionally, the City’s Land Use Element specifies that the “Urban Center Commercial” Land Use District is intended to “allow for high - intensity mixed-use commercial development within a limited area” and identifies that one of the four major developments located within the Urban Center Commercial Land Use District is the “Automobile Club of Southern California”. The proposed development is also compatible with the existing land uses located north of Interstate 405 which includes larger developments such as South Coast Plaza, Metro Pointe, IKEA and the Segerstrom Center for the Arts. Lastly, AAA has operated from this site since 1980 without any impacts to surrounding uses, including the nearby residential developments.

2. The Development Agreement between the City of Costa Mesa and Developer will not:
o Be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare; and o Adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values.

In making its recommendation to the City Council, the Planning Commission also found that the AAA headquarters has operated at th e site since 1980 and there have been no incompatibilities with the surrounding uses. The proposed use, size , and intensity of the project is consistent with the existing development within the general area located north of the 405 freeway, and would not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. There are no modifications proposed to the site’s previously entitled development 454
Item #: 24-302 Meeting Date: 08/06/2024

Page 7 of 8 ends

intensity and only minor considerations are proposed to improve the site’s physic al layout to avoid potential impacts to nearby residential development . As such, the extension of the Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare , or adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values.

Project Effective Date
The current development agreement provides that it may be amended or canceled in whole or in part only by written consent of all parties in the manner provided for in Government Code Section 65868. If the City Council approves this request prior to the expiration date of the existing development agreement, this first amendment will become effective on November 1, 2024 and be valid through October 31, 2044.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, this project remains within the scope of the June 20, 1994 certified Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) #1045 (State Clearinghouse No. 94021036) for the A AA Expansion project. The effects of the project were examined in the 1994 FEIR, and all feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the 1994 FEIR are incorporated into this project , and no new mitigation measures are required. Therefore, the 1994 FEIR for AAA Expansion project is determined t o be adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for this project, no further environmental review is required, and that all requirements of CEQA are satisfied.

ALTERNATIVES:

Other than the recommended action, the City Council may:

1. Introduce the Ordinance for First Reading with Modifications. The City Council may suggest specific changes that are appropriate to address concerns or improve the project. Please note that Development Agreements are, effectively, contracts between the City and the applicant and, as such, the applicant would need to agree to any proposed modifications.

2. Continue the Ordinance for First Reading to a date certain. The City Council may continue the item to a date certain with direction for staff to return with additio nal information, changes, and/or clarifications. Please note that any continuation should have the item return to the City Council for final action before September 30, 2024 , so that an approval will occur prior to the expiration of the existing agreement.

3. Deny the project. If the City Council believes there are insufficient reasons to support the determinations for approval, the City Council must deny the application.

FISCAL REVIEW:

The overall impact to the City from Traffic Impact Fee revenue under the revised calculation from $228 to $235 per net trip, if AAA expands to the maximum allotted 250,000 -square-foot building, would be an additional one -time estimated increase of $160,000 in revenue to the Traffic Impact Fees Fund (Fund 214).
455
Item #: 24-302 Meeting Date: 08/06/2024

Page 8 of 8 ends

LEGAL REVIEW:

The draft Ordinance and staff report have been prepared in conjunction with and reviewed by the City Attorney’s Office.

PUBLIC NOTICE:

Pursuant to CMMC Section 13 -29(d), three types of public notification have been completed no less than 10 days prior to the date of the public hearing:

1. Mailed notice. A public notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 500-foot radius of the project site. The required notice radius is measured from the external boundaries of the property.

2. On-site posting. A public notice was posted on each street frontage of the project site.

3. Newspaper publication. A public notice was published once in the Daily Pilot newspaper.

Any public comments received prior to the August 6 , 2024 City Council meeting, may be viewed at this link: CITY OF COSTA MESA - Calendar (legistar.com) CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item is administrative in nature.

CONCLUSION:

An Ordinance for DA 94-01 was adopted by the City Council in 1994 and included a 30-year time frame for completion. Unless extended, the DA will expire on October 31, 2024. As approved, the AAA development consists of two phases of which only Phase I has been completed. AAA is now interested in completing the second phase of the approved entitlements to consolidate regional operations in Costa Mesa. Beyond extending the date of expiration, updati ng the rate and method of calculating traffic impact fees, and modifying language pertaining to the location of a future parking structure, there are no changes to the DA agreement. The Planning Commission voted in favor of the proposed first amendment because the extended term will retain a large and high-quality local employer, allow the City the opportunity to benefit from the remaining traffic impact fees which would be used on road improvement projects, and the development will create additional quality local employment opportunities. Finally, the proposal is in conformance with the City’s General Plan.
456

CITY OF COSTA MESA
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
TITLE:

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (PSCR-24-0004) SCREENING FOR A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON A 6.125 ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 3150 BEAR STREET DEPARTMENT: ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

DEPARTMENT/PLANNING DIVISION
PRESENTED BY: CHRIS YEAGER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
CONTACT INFORMATION: CHRIS YEAGER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER, (714) 754-4883 RECOMMENDATION:

Provide direction regarding an applicant requested General Plan Amendment associated with the proposed development of 146 residential units at 3150 Bear Street. In addition to the General Plan Amendment, the application would also include a related change to the property’szoning designation to support residential development, and a density bonus in conjunction with providing eight very-low- income units. All of the units in the development are proposed for individual ownership.

Page 1 of 1 ends

457

Page 1 of 14 ends

City of Costa Mesa
Agenda Report

77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (PSCR-24-0004) SCREENING FOR A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON A 6.125 ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 3150 BEAR STREET

DEPARTMENT: ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT/PLANNING

DIVISION

PRESENTED BY: CHRIS YEAGER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER

CONTACT INFORMATION: CHRIS YEAGER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER, (714) 754-4883

RECOMMENDATION:

Provide direction regarding an applicant requested General Plan Amendment associated with the proposed development of 146 residential units at 3150 Bear Street . In addition to t he General Plan Amendment, the application would also include a related change to the property’s zoning designation to support residential development, and a density bonus in conjunction with providing eight very -low- income units. All of the units in the development are proposed for individual ownership.

BACKGROUND:

General Plan Amendment Screening

City Council Policy 500-2 establishes a procedure for processing privately initiated General Plan Amendments. This procedure requires that the City Council screen the request prior to its acceptance for formal processing. If the City Council does not reject the proposal, the applicant can submit a formal application package that will include several other entitlement requests for review by the Planning Commission who will make a recommendation to the City Council.

Affordable Housing Ordinance

Ordinance 2024-02 was adopted by City Council on August 6, 2024, with the purpose of establishing an inclusionary affordable housing program in the City. The ordinance exempts specific projects from its requirements including residential ownership projects. The proposed project is an ownership development and therefore, is exempt from the requirements of the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance. As indicated above, the applicant is requesting to provide eight ownership housing units pursuant to a five-percent State density bonus proposal. By comparison, a residential rental development of this size would have a very-low-income unit requirement of four-percent very-low- income units, or six units.

458

Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024

Page 2 of 14 ends

PROJECT SITE:

The project site is located on the east-side of Bear Street, south of the I-405 freeway. The project is proposed on a 6.125-acre parcel that is developed with the former Trinity Broadcasting Network Headquarters (see Exhibit 1 below). The site is designated “General Commercial” in the Land Use Element of the General Plan and zoned “Administrative Professional” (AP). The primary building is a three-story 65,924-square-foot structure that was constructed in 1978. An accessory structure, located near the southeast corner of the property houses the property’s on-site electric energy production facility. The remainder of the property is improved with 241 surface parking spaces, decorative hardscape, and landscaping.

The project site is bounded by Bear Street to the west with Shiffer Park located beyond; the I-405 Freeway to the north; two-story single-family residential properties to the south, and one-story single family residential property to the east; and an office building that fronts on Bear Street to the south.

The property is in close proximity to South Coast Plaza and Metro Pointe are located north of the I- 405 Freeway.

The site is currently being used as office space, including a social media studio, storage, professional office, and temporary assembly. In addtion, the City Council granted a Conditional Use Permit (PA-22- 37) approval on April 16, 2024 to operate an event center with valet parking services.

The project site is not identified as a Candidate Housing Site in the General Plan Housing Element; however, this site is a “Measure K” site. “Measure K” was passed by Costa Mesa voters on November 8, 2022, for the purpose of revitalizing commercial corridors by encouraging new housing in commercial and industrial areas while preserving the character of existing residential neighborhoods.

Exhibit 1 – Aerial Site Photo

459

Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024

Page 3 of 14 ends

ANALYSIS:

The project site’s “General Commercial” land use classification and “AP, Administrative and Professional” zoning classification do not support residential uses of the property, but instead allow for institutional, office, and professional uses. Because the current zoning does not allow for residential development, the applicant is requesting a general plan amendment to establish a “High Density Residential“ land use designation and to rezone the property to “R3, Multiple Family Residential“, to allow for residential development. If approved, the applicant would develop 146 for-sale residential units that includes 20 single-family residential dwellings and 126 townhomes.

The current AP zoning district is intended to establish areas where public, administrative, professional, and business offices may be located. It is the further purpose of this district to limit the intensity of use within the district to be compatible with the types of activities generally associated with office developments. Conversely, the proposed R3, Multiple-Family Residential District is intended to promote the development of multi-family rental as well as ownership dwelling units.

The following entitlements are required for the proposed project:

General Plan Amendment

The existing Land Use designation of “General Commercial” is proposed to be changed to “High Density Residential” to allow for the residential project. The proposed Land Use designation would enable residential development on the property of up to 20 dwelling units per acre.

Rezone

A rezone is required to update the City’s Zoning Map with the R3, High Density Residential District, to allow for residential development on the site. The “High Density Residential” Zoning District would permit approximately 122 units on the 6.125 Acre site.

Density Bonus

The project proposes to include eight “Very-Low” income, deed restricted affordable units. Pursuant to the California State Density Bonus provisions, the proposed affordable unit percentage proposed by the applicant (five-percent) would allow for a density bonus of 20 percent over the allowable density of 20 du/ac, which would allow for 24 dwelling units per acre. As proposed, the project includes a total density of 23.8 dwelling units per acre (146 units). Pursuant to State Density Bonus Law, the provision of five-percent affordable units also allows for the project to request concessions and waivers to development standards, and reduced parking requirements.

Pursuant to State law, a “concession” is defined as:
 A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code or architectural design requirements, such as a reduction in setback or minimum square footage requirements;  Approval of mixed-use zoning; or
 Other regulatory incentives or concessions which actually result in identifiable and actual cost reductions.

460

Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024

Page 4 of 14 ends

Pursuant to State Law, a “waiver” is defined as a reduction or modification of a development standard and other regulations that physically precludes the construction of the project, including any density bonus units. The primary difference between a concession and a waiver is that a concession is defined as a local standard or provision that would “result in identifiable and actual cost reductions” for an affordable housing project, whereas a waiver is a development standard or provision that “physically precludes the construction of the affordable housing project, including any density bonus units”.

California Density Bonus law (Government Code Sections 65915 – 65918) allows one concession for the requested five percent very-low affordable housing unit proposal and does not limit the number of requested waivers. The applicant is requesting a concession in the form of an exception to the maximum building height limit (maximum 27 feet/two-stories) to allow for townhomes to be built at 50 feet, 6 inches/four stories. A waiver is requested to deviate from open space requirements (minimum 40% of the lot) to allow for a reduced overall open space area of approximately 27%.

State Law allows a City to deny an incentive, concession, or waiver if the granting of the incentive, concession, or waiver would either:

1. Not result in an identifiable and actual cost reduction to providing affordable units (incentive/concession only);

2. Have a specific, adverse, and unavoidable impact on public health and safety;

3. Have an adverse impact on a property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources; or

4. Be contrary to state or federal law.

The applicant is also requesting a parking reduction pursuant to State Density Bonus Law, which is described further below under the Parking, Circulation and Trip Generation section of this report.

Tentative Tract Map

A tentative tract map subdivision is necessary to establish a condominium map to allow for individual ownership of each unit.

Design Review

Any construction that results in three or more dwelling units in any residential zone, except planned development, is subject to design review and associated findings.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:

The applicant proposes 146 residential units ranging from 1,065 square feet to 2,218 square feet.

Twenty of the units are proposed to be developed as detached single-family dwellings and located along the south and east property lines, with the remainder of the units proposed as attached units to be located in eight, four-story buildings.

Detached Units

The project proposes two detached unit types. As shown in Exhibit 2 below, the detached units are proposed to include a two-car garage with ground floor living space. Plan D1 proposes to include three bedrooms on the second floor as well as a laundry room and two bathrooms. Plan D2 proposes to 461

Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024

Page 5 of 14 ends

include one bedroom on the ground floor and three additional bedrooms on the second floor. Each unit would have its own private open space on the ground floor.

Exhibit 2 – Detached Unit Floor Plans

PLAN D1

PLAN D2

462

Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024

Page 6 of 14 ends

Attached Units - Flats

The majority of the units (126) are proposed within eight, four-story buildings. Each unit is accessed via a ground floor entry and would include an attached, tandem, two-car garage. The project proposes four attached unit types referred to as flats. As shown in Exhibit 3 below, units S1 and S2 include an entry on the first-floor with the remainder of the living space being located on the second-floor. Plan S1 includes two bedrooms, two bathrooms, an open main living space, and a private balcony. Plan S2 includes three bedrooms, two full bathrooms, one half bathroom, open living space, and a private balcony. Plan S3 and S4 include an attached, tandem, two-car garage and ground floor entry. The main living space for the units is located on the third and fourth floor and includes an open living area and multiple balconies. Plan S3 proposes to have three bedrooms and three bathrooms, and Plan S4 proposes to have four bedrooms and three bathrooms.

Exhibit 3 – Flats Floor Plans

463

Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024

Page 7 of 14 ends

The detached single-family dwelling units are proposed to be located adjacent to the established single- family neighborhoods along the south and east property lines. The homes to the east along Canadian Drive and Olympic Avenue consist of single-story residences constructed in 1962, and the homes to the south consist of two-story residences constructed in 1996.

464

Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024

Page 8 of 14 ends

Exhibit 4 – Site Plan

Proposed Building Height and Architecture

Maximum building height in the R3 Zoning District is limited to two-stories/27 feet. As previously indicated in this report, the provision of five-percent "very-low“ income units allows the project to request one concession to the City‘s Development Standards. As proposed, the project requests a concession to allow for the maximum building height to exceed the CMMC standard. Specifically, the townhome portion of the project would have a maximum height of four stories/50.5-foot (two stories and 23.5 feet above the CMMC maximum allowed height), and the detached units are proposed with a maximum height of two stories/30 feet (three feet above the CMMC maximum allowed height). The 465

Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024

Page 9 of 14 ends

taller townhome component has been located as far as possible (greater than 120 feet) from the established residential units to reduce any privacy or shade impacts. The applicant has also indicated that they will attempt to retain all existing mature screening vegeation to provide an additional buffer.

Exhibit 6 – Project Renderings

The applicant submitted several exhibits that include modern craftsmen architectural styles for the proposed development. The project designs incorporate various offsets, articulations, and construction materials to enhance the buildings' aesthetic qualities. Details regarding the architectural style, materials used, building facades, as well as shade and shadow analysis, will be required and thoroughly reviewed with the future project application submission. In addition, staff will work with the applicant to further refine the architecture.

Circulation, Parking and Trip Generation

The site plan (see Exhibit 4 above) proposes that vehicular access to the site would be provided by a driveway with access from Bear Street (similar to existing site access). Emergency vehicle access will also continue to be provided through Olympic Avenue. In addition, sidewalks are proposed to be connected to Bear Street to allow for pedestrian circulation. The internal private streets are generally 466

Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024

Page 10 of 14 ends

proposed in a grid pattern with additional pedestrian connections throughout the proposed open space areas.

Parking
The Costa Mesa Municipal Code requires 477 parking spaces for the proposed development. However, pursuant to California Density Bonus Law, the City may not require more than the following parking ratios for the proosed affrodable housing project (see Table 1 below).

Table 1: Density Bonus Parking Requirments

As indicated in Table 2 above, the maximum on-site parking that the City can require for the proposed development is 228 spaces (205.5 spaces for the two/three bedroom units, and 22.5 spaces for the four bedroom units). As proposed, each unit includes a two-car garage for a total of 292 parking spaces.

An additional 80 open parking spaces are proposed throughout the project site. The 372 total parking spaces proposed exceeds the 228 parking spaces required pursuant to State Density Bonus Law.

Pursuant to State Law, onsite parking spaces may be provided through on-site tandem or uncovered parking. The State Density Bonus Law parking provisions are in addition to any allowed concessions.

Bus Routes
The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) operates the 55 and 57 bus routes approximately

0.6 miles walking distance from the project site at the intersection of Bristol Street and Paularino Avenue. The 55 bus operates north-south through Costa Mesa with termini in Santa Ana and the Newport Transportation Center. The 57 bus also operates generally north-south through Costa Mesa with termini at the Newport Transportation Center and the Brea Mall.

Bike Lanes
An existing Class-2 bike lane is provided on Bear Street. The bicycle lane is interconnected with the regional bicycle trail system and provides connections between Costa Mesa, Huntington Beach, Newport Beach, and Santa Ana.

Trip Generation
CMMC Section 13-275(e) indicates that any increase in traffic generation by a change of use that is required to obtain a discretionary permit, shall be subject to review by the appropriate reviewing authority, which may impose fees to address increased trip generation. If required, the fee collected is used to fund the City’s comprehensive transportation system improvement program. The purpose of the program is to ensure that the City’s transportation system has the capacity to accommodate additional trips. The Citywide Traffic Impact Fee related to new and expanding developments is determined using estimated Average Daily Trips (ADT), which is the combined total number of vehicular trips both in and out of a development generated throughout an average weekday. The City’s Transportation Division has conducted a preliminary trip generation study which indicates that the project would result in approximately 1,009 daily trips, and would generate more trips compared to the 467

Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024

Page 11 of 14 ends

existing uses. Therefore, a traffic impact fee will be required if the project proceeds. The fee calculation would be finalized during the building permit plan check process and be paid prior to building permit issuance.

Lastly, CMMC Section 13-275(a), specifies that “a traffic impact study shall be required for all development projects estimated by the Public Works Department to generate one hundred (100) or more vehicle trip ends during a peak hour.” The highest peak hour trips in either the AM or PM is used to estimate the number of vehicular trips generated both in and out of a new or expanded development, known as vehicle trip-ends during a peak hour. The City’s Transportation Services staff determined that the proposed project would result in approximately 66 AM and 80 PM net peak hour trips and thus a traffic study would not be required.

Open Space

New residential development proposed in the R3 Zoning District is required to provide a minimum of 40% open space on the project site. The project is proposing approximately 46,000 square feet of shared open space, including a central recreation area that includes shade structures, BBQ area, play equipment, and casual seating areas (see Exhibit 5 below). An additional passive recreational area is proposed on the west side of the property. In addition to the proposed common open space areas, each unit is proposed to include private open space. The detached single-family dwellings are proposed to include private rear yards with approximately 600 square feet of open space. Each townhome is provided with at least one balcony. The total open space proposed onsite is 72,906 square feet, or approximately 27% of the lot. Pursuant to State Density Bonus Law, the applicant is proposing a “waiver” to deviate from the CMMC open space requirements.

Exhibit 5 – Main Recreation Area

468

Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024

Page 12 of 14 ends

Fire and Emergency Access

If the project is accepted for processing, firefighter and apparatus access will be required throughout the project, and the applicant will work with the Fire Marshal to develop an acceptable project safety plan. The project’s incremental impact to fire/life safety resources will also be evaluated. Based on the Fire Department’s preliminary review of the project, there does not appear to be any significant issues that would preclude the project from moving forward.

Off-site Improvements

As indicated in the attached project applicant letter, the applicant is currently working with City staff for development of certain off-site improvements in conjunction with the proposed new residential development. As currently conceived, the applicant would provide certain public benefits, at no cost to the City, such as a pedestrian access easement through the project site from the neighboring existing residential development (via a gate on Olympic Avenue), and upgrades to Bear Street that include, but not limited to, a signalized pedestrian crosswalk that connects the easterly (project) side of Bear Steet to Schiffer Park. If the project continues, details regarding the off-site improvements will be refined and thoroughly reviewed with the future project application submission.

General Plan Consistency

The following project-applicable General Plan goals and policies can be reviewed and considered by the City Council in the context of the overall project as the Council considers whether or not to allow the proposed General Plan application to proceed:

Goal LU-1: A balanced community with a mix of land uses to meet resident and business needs.

The project will contribute to a balanced mix of uses in the area that includes providing additional ownership housing opportunities. The project would remove approximately six-acres from the City’s inventory of commercial properties to allow for residential uses. According to the applicant, current market demand supports the conversion of the property to residential use because of the reduced demand in office space coupled with the increased residential demand from the Statewide shortage in housing. However, if the project proceeds, staff will require a fiscal impact study that addresses potential City economic or other impacts related to the proposed change in land use.

Policy LU-1.3: Strongly encourage the development of residential uses and owner-occupied housing (single-family detached residences, condominiums, townhouses) where feasible to improve the balance between rental and ownership housing opportunities.

In 2018, owner-occupied housing units accounted for 40.4 percent of the housing stock and 59.6 percent were rental occupied units. The project proposes 146 new ownership housing units including eight very low-income units. As encouraged by this General Plan Policy, the inclusion of 146 additional ownership units will improve the imbalance of rental-to-ownership housing in the City.

469

Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024

Page 13 of 14 ends

Policy LU-2.8: Limit building height to four stories above grade south of the I-405 Freeway, except for special purpose housing such as elderly, affordable, or student housing, unless otherwise approved by a General Plan amendment.

The project, which proposes an affordable housing component, is located south of the 1-405 Freeway and would not exceed a maximum height of four stories.

Policy C-6.12: Require that every new development project pay its share of costs associated with the mitigation of project generated impacts.

The project will be subject to the payment of development impact fees including transportation impact fees, drainage fees, and parkland fees.

Policy HOU-3.4: Consider the potential impact of new housing opportunities and their impacts on existing residential neighborhoods when reviewing development applications affecting residential properties.

Two established single-family residential neighborhoods are located adjacent to the subject site to the south and east. The project is not anticipated to negatively impact the adjacent residential uses in that site planning and design considerations (including building massing, location and height) are included to protect privacy of adjacent residents and balance their exposure to air, sun, shade and other potential impacts.

Policy HOU-3.5: Encourage residential and mixed-use development along transportation routes and major commercial/mixed use corridors.

If accepted for processing, the project would be situated near the I-405 freeway. Additionally, the site is located adjacent to Bear Street and nearby Bristol Street, both identified as “major arterials“ in the Master Plan of Streets Highways (MPSH). Bus routes are located approximately ½ mile from the subject site and the project site is adjacent to an existing Class II bikeway.

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)

The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). If the General Plan application is accepted for processing, staff will ensure compliance with CEQA. An initial study will be prepared to determine whether the project would result in environmental effects. The appropriate environmental document, which could be a mitigated negative declaration (MND), negative declaration (ND), or an environmental impact report (EIR) will then be prepared. If necessary and applicable, appropriate environmental studies will recommend necessary and appropriate mitigation measures, to support the requisite environmental document.

ALTERNATIVES:

Because the screening process allows the applicant to consider the City Council’s initial comments and to refine the development concept based on Council feedback prior to submit tal of a land use application for review, and no decisions are made, there are no alternative actions for the City Council to consider.
470

Item #: 24-321 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024

Page 14 of 14 ends

FISCAL REVIEW:

There is no fiscal impact to the City associated with this item. However, approval of this request and the potential development of the 146 ownership residential units will generate revenue such as property tax, sales tax, franchise tax, etc. If the City Council directs staff to proceed with the project, a comprehensive project-specific fiscal analysis would be completed and would include an identification of both positive and negative fiscal impacts.

LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney has reviewed this report and has approved it as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item supports the following City Council Goal:

● Diversify, stabilize, and increase housing to reflect community needs.

CONCLUSION:

The General Plan Screening is a preliminary project review requirement necessary to initiate processing of an application for the proposed land use change and associated development. Staff recommends that the City Council provide direction as to whether to proceed with a General Plan Amendment request to implement the “High Density Residential” land use for the subject property, and other associated entitlements. If the City Council allows the project to proceed to an entitlement application, submittal of applications for a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, Density Bonus, Design Review, and Tentative Tract Map, would be processed. Entitlement processing would also include a comprehensive environmental review with associated technical studies such as infrastructure studies, noise study, water supply study, and a fiscal analysis. Lastly, staff will work with the City Attorney and the applicant to prepare the necessary affordable housing documents for the affordable units which set maximum income for the respective owners and affordability terms.

471
ATTACHMENT 1
-1-
472
-2-
473
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
A0.0COVER SHEET
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
A0.0COVER SHEET
3150 BEAR STREET
City of Costa Mesa, CA
General Plan Amendment Preview
July 2024
ATTACHMENT 2
474
Table of Contents

1. Neighborhood Context

2. Existing Streetscape Photos

3. Existing Sit Photos

4. Illustrative Site Plan

5. Elevations - Stacked Flats

6. Floor Plans - Stacked Flats

7. Floor Plans - Stacked Flats

8. Detached Homes

9. Floor Plans - Motor Courts

10. Common Recreation Area

PROJECT SITE

SOUTH COAST PLAZA SOUTH COAST PLAZA
Site Location Map
(Not to Scale)

P R I V A T E D R I V E C

P R I V A T E D R I V E B

B E A R S T R E E T

P R I V A T E D R I V E A

P R I V A T E D R I V E E
KEYMAP
LEGEND
Lawn Area
Overhead Structure
BBQ and Picnic
Play Equipment
Casual Seating
Bench
Transformer
1 1
2 3
4 6
4 5
7 BLDG 3
BLDG6
BLDG5
BLDG8
BLDG4
BLDG7
BLDG 2
BLDG 1
BLDG 1
BLDG 8
BLDG 2
BLDG 7
BLDG 3
BLDG 6
BLDG 4
BLDG 5
4 0 5 F R E E W A Y
7 5
2 3
6 P R I V A T E D R I V E D

P R I V A T E D R I V E B

P R I V A T E D R I V E C

06.24.24 COSTA MESA, CA
L-3
3150 BEAR STREET -
Collaborative

OPEN SPACE ENLARGEMENT PLAN
0 5’ 10’ 20’
Scale: 1”= 10’-0”
7CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19334

FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES
1ST SUBMITTAL - PREPARED 6/25/2024
PREPARED BY:

AS SHOWN

DEVELOPER

CIVIL ENGINEER
OWNER

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER

BENCHMARK

BASIS OF BEARINGS

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

SHEET INDEX

UTILITIES
LEGEND

ABBREVIATIONS
ZONING

TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUMMARY

SITE PLAN
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 19334

FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES
3150 BEAR STREET

IN THE CITY OF COSTA MESA,

COUNTY OF ORANGE,

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

TITLE SHEET
C-1

PRIVATE DRIVE A

PRIVATE DRIVE C

PRIVATE DRIVE B

PRIVATE DRIVE E

PRIVATE DRIVE D
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1218 17 16 15 14 13
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120126
125
124
123
122
121
68 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 58 5751 52 53 54 55 56 84 83 82 81 80 79 78 77 76 75 74 7369 70 71 72 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 2319 20 21 22
35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 4650 49 48 47
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
101
100
99 98
97 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96
127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146BLDG 1
BLDG 2
BLDG 3
BLDG 4 BLDG 5
BLDG 6
BLDG 7
BLDG 8

BEAR STREET
INTERSTATE 405

OLYMPICAVENUE
Costa Mesa, California
July 2024
3150 Bear Street
N
-2-2
475
Neighborhood Context

PROJECT SITE
Costa Mesa, California
July 2024

Page 1 ends

3150 Bear Street
N
Shiffer ParkShiffer Park
EX. EX.

TOWNHOMESTOWNHOMESCANVAS CANVAS
(OFFICE (OFFICE

PARK)PARK)

SOUTH SOUTH

COAST COAST

PLAZAPLAZA
Bristol StreetBristol StreetBear StreetBear Street
Bear StreetBear Street Canadian Ave.Canadian Ave.

S Smith AveS Smith Ave

METRO METRO

POINTPOINT

PACIFIC PACIFIC

ARTS ARTS

PLAZAPLAZA

HOTEL & HOTEL &

RETAILRETAIL

HOTEL HOTEL
EX. SINGLE-EX. SINGLE-

FAMILYFAMILY
EX. SINGLE-EX. SINGLE-

FAMILYFAMILY
Paularino Ave.Paularino Ave.Bear StreetBear Street
ROUTE 73ROUTE 73
405405
7373
Yukon AveYukon Ave
Olympia Ave.Olympia Ave.

LIFESTYLES LIFESTYLES

SINGLE FAMILY SINGLE FAMILY

HOMESHOMES

OFFICEOFFICE
Bristol StreetBristol Street
476
Existing Streetscape Photos

1. View from From 405 Freeway

2. View from Bear Street

2. View from Bear Street
2 3
1 Costa Mesa, California
July 2024

Page 2 ends

3150 Bear Street
N
477
Existing Site Photos

1. Eastern Edge

2. Western Edge

3. Northern Edge
2 5
3 1

4. Southern Edge
4 5. Center of Site from Upper Floor
Costa Mesa, California
July 2024

Page 3 ends

3150 Bear Street
N
478
Stacked Flats
• Three story building with a fourth
story pop-up
•
2-3 bedroom condominiums with
private tandem garage
•
+1065-2218 Sq.Ft.
• Private open space in the form of
a porch and/or deck
0 50 100
1” = 50’
405 Freeway405 Freeway
Bear StBear St
Olympic AveOlympic Ave
Existing Single Family Homes Existing Single Family Homes (PRD-LD)(PRD-LD)
Existing Office Existing Office
BuildingBuilding
Community Entry
•
New Signalized intersection
with continental style crosswalk
and yield line (shark’s teeth) to
provide improved pedestrian
access to Shiffer Park
•
Entry enhanced with textured
paving, accent trees and
landscaping, and project
signage
•
Currently proposed as ungated
to promote walkability and a
welcoming community
Single Family Homes
•
Detached two-story homes with
traditional 15-foot rear yards
provide a compatible interface
to adjacent single family homes
•
3-4 bedrooms homes
• + 1,440 - 1,891 Sq.Ft.
• 2-car garage in a side-by-side
configuration
Project Summary
Project Area: 6.11 acres
Total Homes: 146 Homes
• (20) Two Story Detached Condos
• (11) Plan D1: 1440 SF, 3 Bed, 2.5 Bath
• (9) Plan D2: 1891 SF, 4 Bed, 3 Bath
• (126) Four Story Stacked Flats1
• (47) Plan S1: 1,065 SF, 2 Bed, 2 Bath
• (16) Plan S2: 1,379 SF, 3 Bed, 2.5 Bath
• (47) Plan S3: 1,753 SF, 3 Bed, 3 Bath
• (16) Plan S4: 2,218 SF, 4 Bed, 3 Bath
Density: 23.91 du/ac
Parking Spaces Required2: 228 Spaces
• 2-3 Bedroom: 1.5 Spaces x 137 = 205.5
• 4 Bedroom: 2.5 Spaces x 9 = 22.5
• Guest: N/A
Parking Spaces Provided3: 372
• Garages: 292 (2 per unit):
• Guest: 80 Spaces (0.5 per unit)
Open Spaces Required4: +111,784 SF
• 42% of total site area
• At least 50% shall be designed as common
(+55,892 SF)
Open Space Provided: +78,392 SF
• Common Areas: +56,593 SF
• Private Area: +21,799 SF
•
Rear Yards: 12,675 SF
• Porches & Decks6: +9,124 SF
Notes:

1. Assumes 5% very low income affordable units for
a 20% density bonus allowance

2. Required parking per Density Bonus Law

3. Guest spaces are 8.5’ x 18’

4. Required open space to be adjusted through
State density bonus waiver

5. Private open space minimum dimension of 5’

6. Existing General Plan: General Commercial

7. Proposed General Plan: High Density Residential

8. Multiple-Family Residential (R3) Zoning District.

9. Existing Zoning: AP - Administrative & Professional

10. Proposed Zoning: Multiple-Family Residential (R3)

11. Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 141-521-48
Bear Street Frontage
• Existing slope and mature trees
to be preserved
•
Tubular steel fence to remain
in place to maintain visibility of
trees and a “green” frontage
•
Stucco pilasters and fence
will be painted and powder
coated to renew and refresh it’s
appearance
•
City property located behind the
existing fence will be maintained
by the HOA pursuant to the
existing maintenance agreement
•
Flat areas may be used for
passive recreation
•
New striping and other
improvements installed to
promote bicycle and pedestrian
comfort
OCSAN Access
•
Provides improved access to
OCSAN Sewer Trunk Line
Utilities
•
Protect and improve OCSAN
access to existing 33-inch sewer
•
Realign Costa Mesa Sanitation
District sewer in private streets
•
Reroute existing Mesa Water line
within loop road
Emergency Access Only
•
Maintain existing emergency
vehicle access
•
Meets Costa Mesa Fire Dept
Turning Radii requirements
•
Optional pedestrian gate to allow
existing neighborhood more direct
route to Shiffer Park
Neighborhood Interface
•
Protect existing wall in place
• Protect overhead SCE utilities and
poles in place (Rule 16)
•
Install screening hedge as
permitted by SCE
•
15-foot private rear yard and
detached two-story homes used
to provide a complementary
edge condition
Neighborhood Interface
•
Protect existing wall in place
• Protect existing ficus trees if
possible or install new screening
trees to preserve neighbor privacy
•
15-foot private rear yard and
detached two-story homes used
to provide a complementary
edge condition
Existing Sewer Line
•
Preserve existing connection
• Reroute to private street
Main Recreation Area
•
+ 12,370
• Landscaped paseos and
sidewalks connect all homes to
central recreation area
•
Potential programming such as
pool with restroom, BBQ with
shade structure and seating, turf
area for passive lawn play or
similar.

Private Drive
•
25-foot Private Street provides
vehicular access to all homes
•
5-foot sidewalk on one side to
promote walkability
•
Parking distributed throughout
• Landscaping on both sides to
provide shade and an improved
streetscape
Illustrative Site Plan
15’
26’
44’
15’
26’
34’
26’
32’
20’
28’
78’
50’
7’to PL
40’ (flat)
26’
32’
26’
32’
20’
28’
26’
62’
45’
70’

P R I V A T E D R I V E C

P R I V A T E D R I V E B

B E A R S T R E E T

P R I V A T E D R I V E A

P R I V A T E D R I V E B

P R I V A T E D R I V E C

06.24.24 COSTA MESA, CA
L-3
3150 BEAR STREET -
Collaborative

OPEN SPACE ENLARGEMENT PLAN
0 5’ 10’ 20’
Scale: 1”= 10’-0”
Costa Mesa, California
July 2024

Page 4 ends

3150 Bear Street
N
479
Stacked Flat Renderings
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
NTS AA2.0B1200 - 12-PLEX

PERSPECTIVES
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
NTS AA2.0B1200 - 12-PLEX

PERSPECTIVES
Costa Mesa, California
July 2024

Page 5 ends

3150 Bear Street
480
Stacked Flat Elevations
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
0 8 16 32 AA2.1B1200 - 12-PLEX

ELEVATIONS

MATERIAL LEGEND

1. FLAT TILE ROOFING

2. STUCCO

3. BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING

4. TRIM

5. FAUX VENT

6. DECORATIVE AWNING

7. TRELLIS

8. METAL RAILING

9. SECTIONAL GARAGE DOOR

10. WALL LIGHT WITH SIGNAGE

11. ENTRY DOOR

12. VINYL WINDOW

13. UTILITY CLOSET

14. FIRE RISER
Costa Mesa, California
July 2024

Page 6 ends

3150 Bear Street
481
142'-0"
2" 22'-0" 2" 22'-0" 2" 22'-0" 2" 22'-0" 2" 12'-0" 14'-5" 58'-6"
17 UP
17 UP
17 UP
17 UP
17 UP
17 UP
12'-0"2"14'-5"
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 DN
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
0 4 8 16 AA2.2B1200 - 12-PLEX

BUILDING PLANS
142'-0"
2" 22'-0" 2" 22'-0" 2" 22'-0" 2" 22'-0" 2" 12'-0" 14'-5" 58'-6"
17 UP
17 UP
17 UP
17 UP
17 UP
17 UP
12'-0"2"14'-5"
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 DN
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
0 4 8 16 AA2.2B1200 - 12-PLEX

BUILDING PLANS
First Floor
Second Floor
17 UP
17 UP
17 UP
17 DN
17 DN
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
22'-0"
56'-7"
22'-0"
56'-7"
54'-1"
22'-0"
PLAN 3 ( 3 BED / 3 BATH )
FIRST FLOOR 125 SQ. FT.

SECOND FLOOR 92 SQ. FT.

THIRD FLOOR 1024 SQ. FT.

FOURTH FLOOR 513 SQ. FT.

TOTAL NET 1,753 SQ. FT.

DECK 158 SQ. FT.

GARAGE 488 SQ. FT.

PLAN 1 ( 2 BED / 2 BATH )
FIRST FLOOR 101 SQ. FT.

SECOND FLOOR 964 SQ. FT.

THIRD FLOOR 0
FOURTH FLOOR 0
TOTAL NET 1,065 SQ. FT.

DECK 55 SQ. FT.

GARAGE 456 SQ. FT.

Plan 1 Plan 3
Plan 1Plan 3
22'-0"
Plan 3
41'-2"

FIRST FLOORSECOND FLOORTHIRD FLOOR

BALCONY
9'-11"x5'-7"
55 SQ. FT.

PLAN 3
GARAGE
11'-0"x42'-7"
PLAN 1
GARAGE
10'-2"x43'-8"

FOURTH FLOOR

BALCONY
14'-2"x6'-0"
85 SQ. FT.

GREAT ROOM
13'-9"x24'-4"

PRIMARY BED
11'-2"x13'-0"
BED 2
10'-0"x10'-4"
W.I.C.

PRIMARY
BATH
ENTRY
BED 3
10'-1"x10'-8"
BATH 3

BONUS ROOM
10'-10"x25'-4"

BALCONY
13'-10"x5'-3"
73 SQ. FT.

ROOF BELOW
W.H.

Plan 3
ENTRY
W.H.

LINEN
W/D
BATH 2

KITCHEN
PANTRY
REF.GREAT ROOM
14'-2"x24'-4"

PRIMARY BED
11'-2"x13'-0"
BED 2
10'-0"x10'-4"
W.I.C.

PRIMARY
BATH
LINEN
FAU
BATH 2

KITCHEN
PANTRY
REF.

FAU

ROOF BELOW
W/D
T
R
ORG.

ORG.

T
R
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
AA5.0UNIT PLANS
PLANS 1 & 30 2 4 8
17 UP
17 UP17
DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN17
DN
PLAN 4 ( 4 BED / 3 BATH )
FIRST FLOOR 169 SQ. FT.

SECOND FLOOR 90 SQ. FT.

THIRD FLOOR 1267 SQ. FT.

FOURTH FLOOR 691 SQ. FT.

TOTAL NET 2,218 SQ. FT.

DECK 213 SQ. FT.

GARAGE 510 SQ. FT.

PLAN 2 (3 BED / 2.5 BATH )
FIRST FLOOR 168 SQ. FT.

SECOND FLOOR 1211 SQ. FT.

THIRD FLOOR 0
FOURTH FLOOR 0
TOTAL NET 1,379 SQ. FT.

DECK 74 SQ. FT.

GARAGE 615 SQ. FT.

FIRST FLOORSECOND FLOORFOURTH FLOOR THIRD FLOOR
26'-7"
58'-6"
Plan 4 Plan 2Plan 2Plan 4Plan 4
26'-7"26'-7"26'-7"
60'-0"
60'-0"
51'-3"
Plan 4
PLAN 2
GARAGE
13'-11"x43'-8"
PLAN 4
GARAGE
11'-5"x42'-6"
ENTRY
W.H.

ENTRY
W.H.

PDR.

BALCONY
13'-5"x5'-7"
74 SQ. FT.

GREAT ROOM
18'-2"x22'-1"

PRIMARY BED
12'-8"x11'-8" BED 2
12'-11"x10'-3"
W.I.C.

PRIMARY
BATH
LINEN

LAUNDRY
BATH 2

KITCHEN
REF.

FAU

BALCONY
15'-6"x5'-6"
85 SQ. FT.

GREAT ROOM
18'-7"x22'-1"

PRIMARY BED
12'-8"x11'-8" BED 2
12'-9"x10'-3"
W.I.C.

PRIMARY
BATH
LINEN

LAUNDRY
BATH 2

KITCHEN
PANTRY
REF.

FAU
BED 3
11'-6"x10'-1"
BED 3
11'-6"x10'-1"
BED 4
10'-6"x11'-0"
BATH 4

BONUS ROOM
22'-11"x13'-8"
DECK
10'-0"x12'-9"
127 SQ. FT.

W.I.C.

LINEN

ROOF BELOW
ELEC. / PHONE / CATV
FIRE

RISERROOF BELOW
PANTRY
T
R
ORG.

T
R
ORG.

Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
AA5.1UNIT PLANS
PLANS 2 & 40 2 4 8
17 UP
17 DN
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 DN
17 DN
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
0 4 8 16 AA2.3B1200 - 12-PLEX

BUILDING PLANS
Stacked Flat Floor Plans
PLAN S3 (3 BED / 3 BATH)
PLAN S4 (4 BED / 3 BATH)
PLAN S1 (2 BED / 2 BATH)
PLAN S2 (3 BED / 2.5 BATH)
Costa Mesa, California
July 2024

Page 7 ends

3150 Bear Street
482
Stacked Flat Floor Plans
17 UP
17 DN
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 DN
17 DN
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
0 4 8 16 AA2.3B1200 - 12-PLEX

BUILDING PLANS
17 UP
17 DN
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 DN
17 DN
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
0 4 8 16 AA2.3B1200 - 12-PLEX

BUILDING PLANS
Third Floor
Fourth Floor
17 UP
17 DN
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 UP
17 DN
17 DN
17 DN
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
0 4 8 16 AA2.3B1200 - 12-PLEX

BUILDING PLANS
Costa Mesa, California
July 2024

Page 8 ends

3150 Bear Street
483
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date:

6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date:

06.25.2024
0 2
4 8
AB3.1
PLAN 3522

ELEVATIONS

MATERIAL LEGEND

1. FLAT TILE ROOFING

2. STUCCO

3. BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING

4. DECORATIVE SHUTTERS

5. STONE VENEER

6. DECORATIVE TRIM

7. SECTIONAL GARAGE DOOR

8. LIGHT FIXTURE

9. ENTRY DOOR

10. VINYL WINDOW
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date:

6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date:

06.25.2024
0 2
4 8
AB3.1
PLAN 3522

ELEVATIONS

MATERIAL LEGEND

1. FLAT TILE ROOFING

2. STUCCO

3. BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING

4. DECORATIVE SHUTTERS

5. STONE VENEER

6. DECORATIVE TRIM

7. SECTIONAL GARAGE DOOR

8. LIGHT FIXTURE

9. ENTRY DOOR

10. VINYL WINDOW
PLAN 2 (4 BED / 2.5 BATH )
FIRST FLOOR 759 SQ. FT.

SECOND FLOOR 1133 SQ. FT.

THIRD FLOOR 0
FOURTH FLOOR 0
TOTAL NET 1,891 SQ. FT.

DECK 0
GARAGE 403 SQ. FT.

FIRST FLOORSECOND FLOOR
17 UP
WH
17 DN

LAUNDRY
LINEN

PRIMARY BED
14'-0"x14'-6"
W.I.C

GREAT ROOM
10'-2"x14'-8"
BATH 2

PRIMARY
BATH
BED 2
12'-6"x11'-10"
BED 3
12'-0"x12'-8"
PLAN 2
GARAGE
20'-1"x20'-2"

KITCHEN
PANTRY
REF.

GREAT ROOM
16'-7"x16'-5"
BED 4
9'-11"x10'-1"
BATH 3
PORCH
3'-8"x6'-0"
35'-0"
35'-0"
35'-0"
35'-0"
35'-0"2'-0"
T
R
ORG.

COAT
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.4.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
AB4.1PLAN 3522
UNIT PLANS0 2 4 8
PLAN 2 (4 BED / 2.5 BATH )
FIRST FLOOR 759 SQ. FT.

SECOND FLOOR 1133 SQ. FT.

THIRD FLOOR 0
FOURTH FLOOR 0
TOTAL NET 1,891 SQ. FT.

DECK 0
GARAGE 403 SQ. FT.

FIRST FLOORSECOND FLOOR
17 UP
WH
17 DN

LAUNDRY
LINEN

PRIMARY BED
14'-0"x14'-6"
W.I.C

GREAT ROOM
10'-2"x14'-8"
BATH 2

PRIMARY
BATH
BED 2
12'-6"x11'-10"
BED 3
12'-0"x12'-8"
PLAN 2
GARAGE
20'-1"x20'-2"

KITCHEN
PANTRY
REF.

GREAT ROOM
16'-7"x16'-5"
BED 4
9'-11"x10'-1"
BATH 3
PORCH
3'-8"x6'-0"
35'-0"
35'-0"
35'-0"
35'-0"
35'-0"2'-0"
T
R
ORG.

COAT
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.4.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
AB4.1PLAN 3522
UNIT PLANS0 2 4 8
PLAN 2 (4 BED / 2.5 BATH )
FIRST FLOOR 759 SQ. FT.

SECOND FLOOR 1133 SQ. FT.

THIRD FLOOR 0
FOURTH FLOOR 0
TOTAL NET 1,891 SQ. FT.

DECK 0
GARAGE 403 SQ. FT.

FIRST FLOORSECOND FLOOR
17 UP
WH
17 DN

LAUNDRY
LINEN

PRIMARY BED
14'-0"x14'-6"
W.I.C

GREAT ROOM
10'-2"x14'-8"
BATH 2

PRIMARY
BATH
BED 2
12'-6"x11'-10"
BED 3
12'-0"x12'-8"
PLAN 2
GARAGE
20'-1"x20'-2"

KITCHEN
PANTRY
REF.

GREAT ROOM
16'-7"x16'-5"
BED 4
9'-11"x10'-1"
BATH 3
PORCH
3'-8"x6'-0"
35'-0"
35'-0"
35'-0"
35'-0"
35'-0"2'-0"
T
R
ORG.

COAT
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.4.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
AB4.1PLAN 3522
UNIT PLANS0 2 4 8
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date:

6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date:

06.25.2024
0 2
4 8
AB2.1
PLAN 3060

ELEVATIONS

MATERIAL LEGEND

1. FLAT TILE ROOFING

2. STUCCO

3. BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING

4. DECORATIVE SHUTTERS

5. STONE VENEER

6. DECORATIVE TRIM

7. SECTIONAL GARAGE DOOR

8. LIGHT FIXTURE

9. ENTRY DOOR

10. VINYL WINDOW
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date:

6.24.2024
1st Submittal Date:

06.25.2024
0 2
4 8
AB2.1
PLAN 3060

ELEVATIONS

MATERIAL LEGEND

1. FLAT TILE ROOFING

2. STUCCO

3. BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING

4. DECORATIVE SHUTTERS

5. STONE VENEER

6. DECORATIVE TRIM

7. SECTIONAL GARAGE DOOR

8. LIGHT FIXTURE

9. ENTRY DOOR

10. VINYL WINDOW
PLAN 1 ( 3 BED / 2.5 BATH )
FIRST FLOOR 591 SQ. FT.

SECOND FLOOR 849 SQ. FT.

THIRD FLOOR 0
FOURTH FLOOR 0
TOTAL NET 1,440 SQ. FT.

DECK 0
GARAGE 404 SQ. FT.

FIRST FLOORSECOND FLOOR
WH
17 UP
17 DN
30'-0"
35'-0"
PLAN 1
GARAGE
20'-1"x20'-2"
PORCH
9'-2"x3'-6"
32 SQ. FT.

PRIMARY BED
13'-8"x14'-4"
BED 2
11'-6"x10'-10"
BATH 2
W/D
W.I.C PRIMARY
BATH
LINEN
BED 3
11'-5"x10'-10"
ENTRY
PDR.

KITCHEN
PANTRY
REF.

GREAT ROOM
20'-1"x14'-0"
2'-0"
30'-0"
29'-8 1/2"3'-9 1/2"
T
R
ORG.

AB4.0PLAN 3060
UNIT PLANS0 2 4 8
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.10.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
PLAN 1 ( 3 BED / 2.5 BATH )
FIRST FLOOR 591 SQ. FT.

SECOND FLOOR 849 SQ. FT.

THIRD FLOOR 0
FOURTH FLOOR 0
TOTAL NET 1,440 SQ. FT.

DECK 0
GARAGE 404 SQ. FT.

FIRST FLOORSECOND FLOOR
WH
17 UP
17 DN
30'-0"
35'-0"
PLAN 1
GARAGE
20'-1"x20'-2"
PORCH
9'-2"x3'-6"
32 SQ. FT.

PRIMARY BED
13'-8"x14'-4"
BED 2
11'-6"x10'-10"
BATH 2
W/D
W.I.C PRIMARY
BATH
LINEN
BED 3
11'-5"x10'-10"
ENTRY
PDR.

KITCHEN
PANTRY
REF.

GREAT ROOM
20'-1"x14'-0"
2'-0"
30'-0"
29'-8 1/2"3'-9 1/2"
T
R
ORG.

AB4.0PLAN 3060
UNIT PLANS0 2 4 8
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.10.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
PLAN 1 ( 3 BED / 2.5 BATH )
FIRST FLOOR 591 SQ. FT.

SECOND FLOOR 849 SQ. FT.

THIRD FLOOR 0
FOURTH FLOOR 0
TOTAL NET 1,440 SQ. FT.

DECK 0
GARAGE 404 SQ. FT.

FIRST FLOORSECOND FLOOR
WH
17 UP
17 DN
30'-0"
35'-0"
PLAN 1
GARAGE
20'-1"x20'-2"
PORCH
9'-2"x3'-6"
32 SQ. FT.

PRIMARY BED
13'-8"x14'-4"
BED 2
11'-6"x10'-10"
BATH 2
W/D
W.I.C PRIMARY
BATH
LINEN
BED 3
11'-5"x10'-10"
ENTRY
PDR.

KITCHEN
PANTRY
REF.

GREAT ROOM
20'-1"x14'-0"
2'-0"
30'-0"
29'-8 1/2"3'-9 1/2"
T
R
ORG.

AB4.0PLAN 3060
UNIT PLANS0 2 4 8
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

BEAR STREET
COSTA MESA, CA # 2024-0264
Plot Date: 6.10.2024
1st Submittal Date: 06.25.2024
Detached Homes
PLAN D1 (3 BED / 2.5 BATH) PLAN D2 (4 BED / 3 BATH)
Costa Mesa, California
July 2024

Page 9 ends

3150 Bear Street
484
Common Recreation Area

P R I V A T E D R I V E C

P R I V A T E D R I V E B

B E A R S T R E E T

P R I V A T E D R I V E A

P R I V A T E D R I V E B

P R I V A T E D R I V E C

06.24.24 COSTA MESA, CA
L-3
3150 BEAR STREET -
Collaborative

OPEN SPACE ENLARGEMENT PLAN
0 5’ 10’ 20’
Scale: 1”= 10’-0”

P R I V A T E D R I V E C

P R I V A T E D R I V E B

B E A R S T R E E T

P R I V A T E D R I V E A

P R I V A T E D R I V E B

P R I V A T E D R I V E C

06.24.24 COSTA MESA, CA
L-3
3150 BEAR STREET -
Collaborative

OPEN SPACE ENLARGEMENT PLAN
0 5’ 10’ 20’
Scale: 1”= 10’-0”
Costa Mesa, California
July 2024

Page 10 ends

3150 Bear Street
N
485

CITY OF COSTA MESA
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 24-323 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
TITLE:

CITY COUNCIL FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE TO INCREASE CITY COUNCIL

COMPENSATION
DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE- HUMAN RESOURCES DIVISION PRESENTED BY: KASAMA LEE, HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER
CONTACT INFORMATION: KASAMA LEE, HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER (714) 754- 5169
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council introduce for first reading, by title only, Ordinance No. 2024-XX increasing the City Council compensation effective after the general election, with the new City Council in December 2024.

BACKGROUND:

In January 2021, the City Council and City leadership team participated in a Strategic Planning workshop and identified Three-Year Goals and Objectives and key priorities for the subsequent six months through July 2021. The City Council developed five goals, one of which is to “Recruit and Retain High Quality Staff.” On September 27, 2021, the City Council and City leadership team conducted a second workshop to revisit the Three-Year Goals and Objectives and identify the key priorities for the next six months through March 2022. The City Council Goal to “Recruitand Retain High Quality Staff”was re-affirmed and new six-month objectives were created to better achieve this goal. One of the new objectives was to “Performa market analysis of City Council compensation for comparable agencies and special districts within the county and report results to the City Manager.” The City Council’scurrent salary rate of $904.40 per month was last set by Ordinance No. 09-5 in May 2009. The City Council approved a reduction in its salary by 5% in 2009 due to the impacts of the State budget on local government and economic conditions at the time.

California Government Code section 36516 was recently amended to allow city councils to enact an ordinance providing that each member of the city council receive a salary based on the population of the city. In cities with over 75,000 up to and including 150,000 in population, the city council salary may be set at up to $1,900 per month. Prior to the amendment, this amount was set at $600 per month. California Government Code section 36516(a)(4) previously allowed for up to a 5% increase per year from the date of the last adjustment. The code was recently amended to state:

Page 1 of 4 ends

486
File #: 24-323 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
“Thesalary of council members may be increased beyond the amount provided in this subdivision by an ordinance or by an amendment to an ordinance, but the amount of the increase shall not exceed the greater of either of the following:
(A) An amount equal to 5 percent for each calendar year from the operative date of the last adjustment of the salary in effect when the ordinance or amendment is enacted. (B) An amount equal to inflation since January 1, 2024, based upon the California Consumer Price Index, which shall not exceed 10 percent for each calendar year.” The code also states that “No ordinance shall be enacted or amended to provide automatic future increases in salary.”
In addition, staff conducted a market analysis of City Council compensations utilizing data from comparable agencies and special districts within the county.

ANALYSIS:

Below is a summary of salary and benefits for our five contiguous agencies:

Utilizing the 5% annual calculation and based on the last adjustment of salary in May of 2009, which took effect in December 2010, would equate to an increase of $45.22 per month ($20.88 per payroll period) for each calendar year since 2010 (5% per year for 13 years from 2011 through 2023). This would result in an increase of $587.86 per month for a new salary of $1,492.26 per month.

By increasing the City Council salary to $1,492.26 per month, the total compensation package would be closer in alignment with the Cities of Huntington Beach and Newport Beach, which are full service (Police and Fire) and more similar in structure to Costa Mesa.

Page 2 of 4 ends

487
File #: 24-323 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
In comparison, if an employee works 22 hours per week at the current minimum wage of $16.00 per week, they would receive an approximate monthly salary of $1,525 per month.

Staff has prepared the necessary documents for City Council consideration of an increase to its compensation to $1,492.26 per month. An ordinance increasing City Council compensation is attached for the first reading. If approved at this meeting, the second reading and adoption would be scheduled for the City Council meeting of September 17, 2024. California Government Code section 36156.5 states that: “A change in compensation does not apply to a council member during the council member’s term of office. This prohibition shall not prevent the adjustment of the compensation of all members of a council serving staggered terms whenever one or more members of the city council becomes eligible for a salary increase by virtue of the council member beginning a new term of office.” City Council compensation adjustments can only be made effective following the next general election. If approved, the new City Council salary would go into effect when the new City Council terms begin after the next general election in 2024.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council has the following alternatives:

1. Give first reading: The City Council may give first reading to the draft Ordinance setting City Council compensation at $1,492.26 per month.

2. Give first reading with modifications: The City Council may modify the draft Ordinance setting City Council compensation at $1,900 per month and give first reading.

3. Not adopt changes to City Council compensation: The City Council may choose to not adopt the proposed increase to Council Compensation.

4. Provide alternative direction to staff.

FISCAL REVIEW:

The proposed increase is estimated to be effective in December 2024, after the next general election in 2024. The pro-rated fiscal impact in FY 2024/25 is $3,527.16 for six months per member. There are sufficient salary savings citywide to cover the increase.

Page 3 of 4 ends

488
File #: 24-323 Meeting Date: 9/3/2024
LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed the ordinance and the report and approved them as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item supports City Council Goal:
· Recruit and Retain High Quality Staff
CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends the City Council introduce for first reading, by title only, Ordinance No. 2024-XX increasing the City Council Compensation effective after the general election, with the new City Council in December 2024.

Page 4 of 4 ends

489
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 1 of 3

ORDINANCE NO. 2024-xx

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA AMENDING TITLE 2, CHAPTER II, SECTION 2 -21 OF THE COSTA MESA MUNICIPAL CODE INCREASING SALARIES OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA M ESA, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY FIND AND DECLARE AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, State law allows the Council to increase its salary; and WHEREAS, the City Council salary has not been changed since May 2009; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to increase the Counc il salary to be effective upon the time a new Council Member assumes office.

NOW, THEREFORE , THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA , CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 2-21 of Title 2, Chapter II, of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

2-21 Salaries. Each member of the Council shall be paid a salary of $1492.26 per month for serving on the Council.

Section 2. Inconsistencies. Any provision o f the Costa Mesa Municipal Code or appendices thereto inc onsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to affect the provisions of this Ordinance.

Section 3. Severability. If any chapter, article, se ction, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance, or the application thereof to any person, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decis ion of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance or its application to other persons. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each chapter, article, section, subsection, subdivision, sentence , clause, phrase or portion thereof, 490
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 2 of 3
irrespective of the fact that any one or more subsections, subdivi sions, sent ences, clauses, phrases, or portions of the application thereof to any person, be de clared invalid or unconstitutional. No portion of this O rdinance shall supersede any local, State, or Federal law, regulation, or codes dealing with life safety factors.

Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final passage, and will apply to all council members wh en the next council member is sworn into office.

Section 5. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the pas sage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted in the manner required by law.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this __ day of September, 2024.

_____________________________
John Stephens, Mayor

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

________________________ _____________________________ Brenda Green, City Clerk Kimberly Hall Barlow, City Attorney

491
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. 2024-xx Page 3 of 3

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss

CITY OF COSTA MESA )

I, BRENDA GREEN, City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing Ordinance No. 2024-xx was duly introduced for first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 3rd day of September, 2024, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the ___ day of ________, 2024, by the following roll call vote, to wit:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of Costa Mesa this ____ day of ________, 2024.

__________________________
Brenda Green, City Clerk

492

Costa Mesa City CouncilSeptember 3, 2024

Costa Mesa City Council
September 3, 2024