Agenda packet — Costa Mesa City Council, September 15, 2026 (part 2 of 7)

Opportunities for the July Pop-up Event:
• Continue to build awareness for the CAAP and its project benefits • Solicit additional feedback about challenges that participants face when reducing their GHG emissions
• Learn more about the incentives that community members would be interested in to change their behaviors
• Gain a deeper understanding of the community’s priorities for a more sustainable and resilient Costa Mesa
Feedback Summary
-239-
369

APPENDIX C -2
C-2 COMMUNITY
POP-UP EVENT #2,

CONCERT IN

THE PARK
-240-
370

COSTA MESA CAAP
Concerts in the Park Event Feedback Takeaways
TMt GBUHHOUSf EI»KTt
jnt Costa MesaILet's Envision a More Clime'
p con «1Omo1

PARKS & COMMUNITY SERVICESES
4UM1V1 i
i
~’Y I®‘
-241-
371
The Event was held on Tuesday, July 29th from 5:00 pm – 7:00 pm at the Fairview Park. The purpose of the event was to:
• Raise awareness for the City’s climate action planning efforts • Communicate the objectives of the Costa Mesa CAAP and highlight its benefits
• Prioritize feedback on the online survey to understand current barriers faced by the community
• Build consensus on a sustainable vision for Costa Mesa At the community event, over 40 participants shared a vision for a more sustainable Costa Mesa that emphasized the following:
o Enhanced landscaping and access to parks and green space o Improved transportation options as alternatives to car travels, such as biking, walking, and public transit
o Increase efforts to compost and recycle to reduce waste in the community
Community Pop-Up #2: Concerts in the Park
-242-
372
Community Pop-Up #2: Concerts in the Park
-243-
373
Community Pop-Up #2: Concerts in the Park
-244-
374
Community Pop-Up #2: Concerts in the Park
-245-
375
The event featured education-focused boards with the following objectives:
• Introducing the community to common terms and topics that will be used during the planning process • Sharing the goals and benefits of the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan • Informing participants about additional opportunities to provide feedback Outreach materials were provided in both English and Spanish.

Education Focused Materials

COSTA MESA CLIMATE ACTION AND ADAPTATION PLAN
El Plan de Accion y Adaptacion Climatica de Costa Mesa
The City of Costa Mesa is developing its first-ever Climate Action and Adaptation Pion (CAAP) to meet greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction goals while also adapting to the impacts of climate change.

La Ciudad de Cotta Mesa esta desarrollando su primer Plan de Accion y Adaptacion Climatica (el Plan CAAP) para cumplir con los objetivos de reduction de emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero (GEI) y al mismo tiempo adaptarse a los impactos del cambio climatico.

ACTION VS ADAPTATION - the d^eA^oe?
Accion vs Adaptacion - gCual es la Diferencia?

WHAT ARE GHG EMISSIONS AND
THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT?
gOue son las Emisiones de GEI y el Efecto
Invernadero?
GHGs trap heat in the earth's atmosphere and
create a warming effect. GHGs are emitted into
the atmosphere from natural processes and human
activities.

Las emisiones GEI trapan el color en la atmosfera terrestre y crean un efecto de calentamiento. Las emisiones GEI
se emiten a la atmosfera a partir de procesos naturales y actividades humanas.

GHG EMISSION SOURCES AND CLIMATE HAZARDS

GHG EMISSION SOURCES
On-Road Transportation Emissions are from vehicle travel, including vehicles such as cars, trucks, and buses using gasoline, diesel, or are electrically powered.

Building Energy Emissions are from burning fossil fuels to provide power to buildings for heating, cooling, lighting, and cooking.

Off-Road Emissions are generated by construction, industrial, and other off-road equipment as well as gas or diesel-powered landscaping equipment such as lawn mowers or leaf blowers.

Water and Wastewater Emissions are from energy used to pump, treat, and distribute water to residents and businesses and from the City's wastewater collection system.

IlIII Solid Waste Emissions are primarily from the greenhouse gases released when organic waste breaks down in landfills.

WHAT ARE CLIMATE HAZARDS?
Climate hazards are climate-related factors that impact communities. Costa Mesa's climate hazards include heat, air pollution, drought, and also flooding.

WHAT IS HEAT VULNERABILITY?
Heat vulnerability is determined by social and environmental indicators that influence how a community is impacted by extreme heat. For example, income or being a renter can influence a household's access to air conditioning, while a neighborhood's tree canopy influences how much heat is
experienced.

COSTA MESA CAAP
WHAT IS A CAAP?
A Climate Action & Adaptation Plan (CAAP) is a road map to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and prepare our community for the impacts of climate change. The City's CAAP seeks to:

Evaluate the City's GHG emissions and climate vulnerabilities. (2^ Identify City-specific GHG reduction and adaptation goals. z-yj Develop tailored actions to guide the City to align with statewide GHG reduction kLz targets and build community resilience.
(2$ Outline an implementation framework for long-term success.

PROJECT BENEFITS
Improves Air Quality
Improves Mobility
Improves Public Health and
Safety
Enhances Natural
Environment
e
Supports Economy /
Job Creation
We Want to Hear From You!
Scan me to take the survey
Email [email protected] to be added Io
the CAAP e-mail list.
-246-
376
Through a community collage exercise, community members contributed to a shared vision for Costa Mesa’s sustainable future. Participants answered the following question:
“A More Climate Friendly and Resilient Costa Mesa Is…”
Sustainable Costa Mesa Visioning
Let's Envision a More Climate Friendly and Resilient Costa Mesa! jlmaginemos una Costa Mesa Mds Resiliente y Respetuosa con el Clima! A More Climate Friendly and
Resilient Costa Mesa Is...

A More Climate Friendly and
Resilient Costa Mesa Is...

A More Climate Friendly and
Resilient Costa Mesa Is...
-247-
377
Kids Activity
The event included a kid-friendly
activity where kids could draw their
vision for a sustainable Costa Mesa.

Over 40 children responded to the
following prompts :
• “Draw a picture of an Earth Friendly
Costa Mesa”
• “Draw how you would help the Earth
and create a greener Costa Mesa”
Various artistic mediums were provided:
markers, paint sticks, colored pencils,
etc.

Need more time? Scan your picture and email it to sust.unabiktyficostamesaoa.gov a ©0 Soma S©d3© W®asj
Name:_MX(^ Age:_.Z.—
Need more time? Scan your picture and email it to sustainabilityfioostamesaca.gov a ©toazd ©J a® ‘Ja/Zb ^©sOa Wada
Need more time? Scan gour picture and email it to sxstainabiUtg0costamesaca.gov ®?a$7 a ©*] aa 3atz?!h (MaoiSJQa £©dtfa
Name:...^tMkZ Age ...J...

Need more time? Scan gour picture and email it to sustainabilitg0costarnesaca.gov -248-
378
Kids Activity
3lottos ©J 33 ©asitej Maaa
Name:,?*AJ - .-J&W Age:„\0
Need more time? Scan gour picture and enail it to sustainabilitg0costarnesaca.gov Earth Friendly Costa Mesa
Age
Need more time? Scan gour picture and email vt to [email protected] a ©J a® Ua^Uj trJ^a
Name:eua -Age:^....

Need more t>me? Scan your picture and e*ad kt to [email protected] 2X73^ a jfews ©J aa aatf-Zi) S®89a Mosa
Nane:_4*u£*U-— Age _/L— .

Need more tine? Scan gour picture and enail it to [email protected] 2>j<a^ a ©J a® Sasjda Kksda
Name Age -Et
Need more tine? Scan gour picture and email it to [email protected] a swafKacQ ©J aa ^©aJa tfJ©aa
Name: Age:

Need more tine? Scan gour pvcture and email it to [email protected] 'Dza^ a ij-J^ja
Need more time? Scan gour picture and email it to [email protected] -249-
379
What We Heard
Energy
Trees / Urban Greening
Transportation
Solid Waste
Water
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Trees / Urban Greening
Transportation
Solid Waste
Energy
Economic Incentives
Development
Public Health / Resilience
Water
Many participants shared a vision
for a more sustainable Costa
Mesa that included the following:
• Expand access to green
spaces, such as parks,
playgrounds and community
gardens
• Improved transportation
options as alternatives to car
travels, such as biking,
walking, and public transit
• Increase efforts to compost
and recycle to reduce waste
in the community
-250-
380
"Less concrete
wherever
possible!"
"1,000 parks!"
“Plant more trees”
Trees / Urban Greening
Key Takeaways:
• Participants showed a
strong interest in more new
trees and native
landscaping, as well as
more parks and
community gardens.
-251-
381
"Protected bike
lanes"
“Better public transit,
particularly buses”
Transportation
"Bigger bike lanes
for bike safety"
Key Takeaways:
• There was a strong interest in
improved bike infrastructure and
safety such as protected bike
lanes.
• Community members also showed
support for improved public
transportation.
• Community members emphasized
a desire for accessible modes of
transportation as alternatives to
car travel.
-252- 382
Solid Waste
"Sharing information for
how to dispose of
electronics"
"Stop food
waste, more
composting"
"Pick up trash.

Volunteer clean
up opportunities"
Key Takeaways:
• Participants showed a
strong interest in increasing
compost and recycling
efforts in the City, as well as
reducing litter.
• Community members also
expressed a desire for more
accessible information on
electronic waste disposal.
-253-
383
Community Priorities for Energy
"Subsidizing solar.

Solar parking in
commercial areas."
Key Takeaways:
• Community members were
interested in solar energy.
• Other energy-related
comments emphasized the
need to make solar
infrastructure more accessible
and affordable.
"Less money for
solar panels so more
people use them"
-254-
384
Public Health and Resilience
"Cooling stations
for older people."
Key Takeaways:
• Community members
showed an interest in
resiliency centers to
protect during extreme
heat events.
• They also emphasized
more vulnerable groups,
such as older adults.
"More
greenways"
-255-
385
The second Costa Mesa CAAP outreach successfully builds upon the previous effort to engage the Costa Mesa community in the planning process. The visioning activity provided clear feedback on community sustainability priorities while the kids station allowed community member of all ages to join the conversation on how to build a sustainable and resilient Costa Mesa.

Opportunities for the GHG Strategies Event:
• Emphasize multiple outreach touchpoints and how community feedback is shaping the CAAP • Identify solutions to address challenges in reducing GHG emissions • Share municipal measures and actions for City emission sectors. • Present measures and actions for community emissions sectors for feedback and refinement.

Feedback Summary
-256-
386

APPENDIX C -3
C-3 COMMUNITY

SURVEYS
-257-
387
Online Community Survey
Summary of Responses

CITY OF COSTA MESA CLIMATE ACTION

AND ADAPTATION PLAN (CAAP)
-258-
388
Community Survey Overview
A total of 158 surveys were completed by community members where they shared their feedback through two online surveys*, designed to better understand the community’s current behavior, as well as current barriers to adopting more sustainable behaviors.

To support participating, both a long-form version and condensed version were offered. • The long survey was available from 22nd of April to 3rd of October • The condensed version was available from 29th of July to 3rd of October Surveys were marketed through multiple channels, including in-person pop-up events, the project webpage, posters at City facilities, existing City communication channels such as the City’s Newsletter, and social media campaign.
*A total of 226 survey responses were received, of which 158 were fully completed.

COSTA MESA
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
It's getting hotter!
By 2050, Costa Mesa could experience four times as
many extreme heat days as we've seen in the past.

COSTA MESA
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
Small Steps Make a Big Difference!
If 28 Costa Mesa households replace just 1 car trip
with walking, it would save the same amount of
emissions as what 1 mature tree captures in 1 year!
-259-
389
Purpose & Topics
Survey Purpose: Understand community
members’ barriers to behavioral change and
their priorities to take climate-friendly actions.

Sector Question Topics:
• Transportation - Walking, biking, transit
use, EV ownership
• Energy - Energy efficiency upgrades, opt-in to
alternative energy supplier
• Water - Drought-tolerant landscaping,
graywater/rainwater capture
• Solid Waste - Composting
• Extreme Heat - Cooling center use
Purpose and Topics

COSTA MESA CLIMATE ACTION AND ADAPTATION PLAN

CITY OF COSTA MESA CAAP
The City of Costa Mesa is creating its first-ever Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) to reduce greenhouse gas (CHG) emissions and prepare for the impacts of climate change.

The CAAP will:
• Measure current GHC emissions from the City and community • Identify local climate risks and how they may affect Costa Mesa • Set climate goals and outline actions to reduce emissions and increase resilience • Recommend policies, programs, and funding strategies
• Track progress with clear metrics
To learn more about the Costa Mesa CAAP, you can visit the City webpage:
www.costamesaca.gov/CAAP
This short survey will help us understand your priorities, challenges, and preparedness to take climate-friendly actions.

WATER AND WASTEWATER
Water and wastewater emissions come from the energy used to deliver and treat water and sewage. Using less water and improving water efficiency can help reduce these emissions.

Have you used any of the following water saving strategies? (Select all that apply) Q| Drought-tolerant landscaping (replace lawn with xeriscape,etc.) Q] Low flow fixtures (e.g., faucets, shower head, and toilets) Q Take shorter showers
Q| Cray water for lawn and landscaping (gray water is the lightly used water from showers, bathtubs, sinks, and washing machines in the home, which can be reused for landscape or lawn irrigation.) Captured rainwater for lawn and landscaping
Q| Other (please specify)
-260-
390
• Almost all those who responded
are residents of Costa Mesa
• More than 60% of survey
respondents own their home in
Costa Mesa, while about 30% rent
• About 15% own a property (but
do not live in the city)
24%
48%
12%
4%
12%
I live here (rent)
I live here (own)
I own residential property
here
I own a business here
Other (please specify)
Who Responded?
What is your relationship to Costa Mesa?
-261-
391
Transportation Sector - Key Takeaways
How do you get around Costa Mesa?
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Motor vehicle (car, motorcycle, etc.)
Walk
Bike or electric bike
Scooter or electric scooter
Public transit (e.g., bus and Let’s Go
Costa Mesa rideshare)
Other (please specify)
The primary challenges to each mode
of transportation were:
• Walking destinations are too far
• Biking lack of bike lanes, fast/busy
car traffic
• Public transit inconvenient
routes/stops, long wait times
A total of 71 participants responded to this question.
-262-
392
Does your household have an electric vehicle? One-third of respondents’ households have an electric vehicle.

For those that do not, the biggest barrier
to EV ownership is cost followed by
preference for non-electric vehicles.

Lack of access to a charger at home
and range anxiety are two other major
concerns.
25%
3%
72%
Yes, one
Yes, more than one
No
A total of 170 participants responded to this question.

Transportation Sector - Key Takeaways
-263-
393
What challenges do you face with making energy upgrades? Cost is the biggest challenge for
making energy upgrades.

Similarly, for switching from gas to
electric appliances, cost is a major
factor, along with preference for gas
appliances (e.g., stoves)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Upgrades are too expensive
I rent and do not have control over
upgrades
I do not have time to make upgrades
No challenges
Other (please specify)
Energy Sector - Key Takeaways
A total of 66 participants responded to this question.
-264-
394
Would you consider opting into an alternative energy supplier if cost is similar?When asked if they would opt into an alternative energy supplier, responses
were mixed:
• About 30% would opt into a basic
(50% renewable) package on both
surveys
• 20-30% would opt into a premium
(100% renewable) package
• 20-30% would not opt in*
* Responses varied between short- and long-form surveys 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%100%
Yes, I would consider opting in with a basic
package (e.g., 50% renewable energy)
Yes, I would consider opting in with a
premium package (e.g., 100% renewable
energy)
No, I would not consider opting in
I don’t understand this question
Energy Sector - Key Takeaways
A total of 67 participants responded to this question.
-265-
395
Which of these water saving strategies have you used?
The most common strategy
respondents use to save water is
taking shorter showers followed by
using low-flow fixtures and drought-
tolerant landscaping.

However, several barriers exist for
draught-tolerant landscaping,
including:
• Cost and time
• Tenant status (renter) with no
control over landscaping
For graywater or captured rainwater
systems, lack of knowledge is the
biggest challenge.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%100%
Drought-tolerant landscaping (replace
lawn with xeriscape, etc.)
Low flow fixtures (e.g., faucets, shower
head, and toilets)
Take shorter showers
Gray water for lawn and landscaping
(gray water is the lightly used water…
Captured rainwater for lawn and
landscaping
Other (please specify)
Water Sector - Key Takeaways
A total of 58 participants responded to this question.
-266-
396
Do you compost your food scraps and yard waste into the green organics bin?More than 55% of respondents
compost.

The greatest barriers to composting
are concerns about vermin, odor,
and food waste storage and lack of
supplies, like compost bins.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
I don’t know enough about what can and
cannot be composted
I don’t have the supplies or equipment
(e.g., compost bins)
I am concerned with issues with
composting process (e.g., vermin, storing
food waste, odors, etc.)
Other (please specify)
Solid Waste Sector - Key Takeaways
A total of 65 participants responded to this question.
-267-
397
What would encourage you to go to a cooling center?
Proximity, entertainment/ activities,
and a place where pets are
allowed are the most important
factors for cooling center use.

Additionally, on the short-form
survey a larger percent of
respondents (almost 30%) would
prefer a business instead of a
community center.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
If it was located closer to where I live
Entertainment / Activities
A space my pet is allowed
Food or kitchen facilities
I’d prefer to visit a business instead of a
community center
I would go to a cooling center regardless
of amenities available
Other (please specify)
Extreme Heat- Key Takeaways
A total of 158 participants responded to this question. -268-
398

APPENDIX C -4
C-4 COMMUNITY

OPEN HOUSE
-269-
399

COSTA MESA CAAP
Community Open House Overview and Takeaways
-270-
400
• On Thursday, April 30, 2026, from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00
p.m. approximately 30 community members
participated in feedback-sharing activities at a
joint community open house for the Climate
Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) and the
Environmental Justice Element update.
• The event began with a presentation from City
staff and consultants, which provided an
overview of each project and instructions for
sharing feedback. The CAAP stations of the open
house included six educational poster boards,
with information on the benefits and goals of the
CAAP, climate hazards, and the difference
between mitigation and adaptation, and seven
strategies boards, which listed draft objectives
and sample actions for each of eight sectors.

Open House Overview
-271-
401
Open House Overview
-272-
402
• Participants were invited to leave feedback in
two forms on the strategies boards:
• Dot stickers to indicate an objective or
sample action is a priority, or important, to
them;
• Post-it notes to share substantive input.
(Participants also had the option to leave
more detailed feedback via larger comment
cards.)
• The largest number of comments were received
on the transportation, energy and the built
environment, and natural and urban lands sectors.

Furthermore, several objectives and sample
actions were indicated as a priority, as
summarized in the “What We Heard” section.

Feedback Overview
-273-
403
Education-focused poster boards summarized key information about the CAAP, climate mitigation and adaptation, and climate hazards that could affect the Costa Mesa community. Specifically, the boards:
• Introduced common terms and topics pertinent to the CAAP, such as climate mitigation, adaptation, climate hazards, and greenhouse gas emissions;
• Outlined the goals and ancillary benefits of the CAAP (e.g., improved air quality, cost-savings) • Informed participants about the project webpage and how to stay updated on the project.

Education-focused Materials

COSTA MESA CLIMATE ACTION AND ADAPTATION PLAN
El Plan de Accion y Adaptacion Climatica de Costa Mesa
The City of Costa Mesa is developing its first-ever Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) to meet greenhouse gas (GHG| emission reduction goals while also adapting to the impacts of climate change.

La Ciudad de Costa Mesa esta desarrollando su primer Plan de Accion y Adaptacion Climatica (el Plan CAAP) para cumplir con los objetivos de reduction de emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero (GEI) y al mismo tiempo adaptarse a los impactos del cambio climatica.

ACTION VS ADAPTATION - ‘Whoththe cLi^berbce?
Accion vs Adaptacion - gCual es la Diferencia?

WHAT ARE GHG EMISSIONS AND
THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT?
^Que son fas Emisiones de GEI y el Efecto
Invernadero?
GHGs trap heat in the earth's atmosphere and
create a warming effect. GHGs are emitted into
the atmosphere from natural processes and human
activities.
los emisiones GEI trapan el color en la atmosfera terrestre y crean un efecto de calenfamiento. Las emisiones GEI
se emiten a la atmosfera a partir de procesos naturales y actividades humanas.

Mapping and Projecting Climate Hazards
CAtroGtAF/A r PnorfccidN de peligios cumaticos
toch City Hwr o*" vnaqve a* dmah-wtatod haronH Thou? haxwO, are rho-garg diHerwrdy baaed o" local a*»»wanowf*c^ toc*on Gwii M aidbMo oiuiwwyan miko Ha polgma wiixoiwaoirm ei tttwi f ;w4g*oa satinri^dlwdo da «wr**U dfarms1« as Rwcidn At mi ItXtorei ondiweiUs bcoAri IXVRtMt HtAT / CAlOt fXrttMO HOODING / IHUMMCION WlLOMII / IMCtNDlO FOmMl

COSTA MESA CAAP

Evaluate the City's GHG emissions and climate vulnerabilities. (2^ Identify City-specific GHG reduction and adaptation goals.

Develop tailored actions to guide the City to align with statewide GHG reduction kLz targets and build community resilience.
(2$ Outline an implementation framework for long-term success.

PROJECT BENEFITS
Improves Air Quality
Improves Mobility
Improves Public Health and
Safety
Enhances Natural
Environment
Cost Savings
Supports Economy /
Job Creation
Promotes Equity
Provides Education
We Want to Hear From You!
Scan me to take the survey
Email [email protected] to be added Io
the CAAP e-mail list.
-274-
404
CAAP Strategies Boards
Strategy boards listed draft objectives and sample
actions for each of the eight CAAP sectors. Space
was provided below each objective for participants
to place comments and dot stickers.
• Introduced common terms and topics pertinent
to the CAAP, such as climate mitigation,
adaptation, climate hazards, and greenhouse
gas emissions;
• Outlined the goals and ancillary benefits of the
CAAP (e.g., improved air quality, cost-savings)
• Informed participants about the project
webpage and ways to get involved.

COSTA MESA CAAP
Transportation
Transports
Objectives
Objetivos
Tl. Transition to Electric Vehicles
Transition a vehiculos electricos
T2. Promote Walking and Biking
Promover la caminata y el tidismo
T3. Reduce Single-Occupancy Vehicle Trips
Reducir los viajes en vehiculos con un solo ocupante
60/^4 a
imir1 wt J
»> "
i< forth
T4. Increase Public Transportation Use
Aumentar el uso del transporte publico
Accomplished through
actions related to:

Loarado a traves de acciones
relacionadas con:

EV Chargers
Cargodores para
vehiculos electricos
Sidewalks
and bike lanes
Aceras y carriles
bici
Rideshare
and carpooling
Viajes compartidos
y uso compartido
del automdvil
Improved transit
and reliability
Mejora del transitu
y la fiabilidad
T5. Support Smart Growth
Apoyar el crecimiento inteligente Mixed-use
development
Desarrollo
de uso mixto

COSTA MESA CAAP

COSTA MESA CAAP
nergy and the Built Environment
Energia y el entorno construido
Objectives
Objetivos
E 1. Reduce Energy Demand in Buildings
Redoor la demondo encegeAco en los edificios
loorodo a de oceiones
re^cionada* CO*
Building
retrofits and
weatherixabon
RetoMUscxiny
Wmuco de eaVcot
Passive cooling
(cool roofs, cool
walls)
♦efnge'OCC^
C-3S-.O i'^cAos fnos.
powdei triad
E2. Decarbonize Building Energy Use
Descarbonttor ef uso enarpeftco de k>s edVcioi
E3- Increase Carbon-Free Energy Supply
Aumentar tri tuemMo de energto W» ccrbo-o
-275-
405
Participants shared the most
feedback on Transportation,
Natural/Urban Lands, and Energy
and the Built Environment.

Objectives and sample actions
with at least three dot stickers
included:
• Recycled water irrigation systems
• Recycling solid waste
• Resilient urban design
• Sustainable business practices and
green workforce development
• Green spaces and tree canopy,
and
• Restoring and enhancing soil
What We Heard
Energy
Trees / Urban Greening
Transportation
Solid Waste
Water
0 5 10 15 20 25
Offroad
Solid Waste
People & Community
Water/Wastewater
Natural/Urban Lands
Energy and the Built
Environment
Municipal
Transportation
Dot Stickers Comments
-276- 406
What We Heard: Energy & the Built Environment
Accelerate programs
that incentivize
…construction of solar.

Key Takeaways:
• Several participants were in
favor of expanding solar panel
use and incentives for new
construction w/ solar
• At least two community
members cautioned against
cool roofs due to insurance
company requirements More solar panels
-277-
407
What We Heard: Transportation
Safer bike paths
Make Circuit [Let’s Go
Costa Mesa] a
permanent program
Key Takeaways:
• Participants were strongly in
favor of promoting walking
and biking (e.g., safer and
expanded bike lanes) and
supporting smart growth (e.g.,
mixed-use development)
• At least one community
member suggested Let’s Go
Costa Mesa should be
expanded and made into a
permanent program
Bike lanes that
connect east side
to central…
-278-
408
Free cisterns
Incentivize
permeable
landscaping/
construction
What We Heard: Water/Wastewater
Key Takeaways:
• Several community
members were in favor of
water re-use
• Some participants
advocated for low-tech
water conservation
methods, such as
collecting water at home
-279-
409
So happy you
started recycling!
What We Heard: Off-road Equipment/Solid Waste
Key Takeaways:
• At least two community members
marked electrification of
landscaping and construction
equipment as a priority
• Participants indicated that actions
to support or expand recycling
were a priority
• One community member
suggested the City launch a free
woodchip program tied to tree
removal to reduce water demand
for yards
-280-
410
What We Heard: Natural & Urban Lands
Plant more
food/fruit trees for
free food and
vegetation …conservation efforts to
protect and expand
natural and bio-diverse
species are critical
Key Takeaways:
• Several community members
indicated the following actions
were a priority:
• Expand green spaces and
tree canopy
• Restore and enhance soil
• Some participants requested
stronger promotion of tree
programs and expanded tree
planting (including fruit trees),
• Advocates for
education/support for native,
wildlife-friendly planting.

Advertise existing
parkway tree
planting program
-281-
411
What We Heard: People & Community
School sites +
heat zones?
Expand Green
Business Program
Key Takeaways:
• Resilient urban design
(e.g., tree canopy,
stormwater capture) and
sustainable business
practices/green
workforce development
were high-priority
• Two participants
indicated cooling center
amenities were a priority,
too
-282-
412
What We Heard: Municipal
Street lights should be
activated by motion
sensor…
Park equipment:
water stations,
solar coverings
Why are
emergency
vehicles excluded
from the EV
conversation?
Key Takeaways:
• Community members
were in favor of
• Zero-emission landscape
equipment for public
landscaping
• Public EV infrastructure
• One participant suggested
that emergency vehicles
should transition to EV if
feasible
-283-
413
Feedback Recap & Key Takeaways
The Community Open House successfully engaged approximately 30 community members, who shared feedback through 37 Post-it notes and 80 prioritization stickers to inform revisions to draft CAAP objectives and actions.

Community feedback showed support for:
• Expanding solar
• Water reuse
• Recycling
• Green infrastructure
• Rainwater capture
• Drought-tolerant landscaping
• Safer, connected biking and walking
• Smart growth
• Expanded urban greening
• Education and awareness of
City programs
• Shade and cooling features
• Municipal electrification
• EV infrastructure
-284-
414

APPENDIX D

GREENHOUSE GAS

REDUCTION

SUPPORTING

MATERIAL
-285-
415

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-1 Appendix D – Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Supporting Material
To address the local emissions gap within the City of Costa Mesa (City or Costa Mesa) and achieve the action and adaptation goals for 2030 and 2045, a suite of 8 sectors, 23 objectives, and 106 actions were identified. Where possible, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions were quantified using industry-standard methods and assumptions, as outlined below. Some actions were not quantified in the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan due to limitations in data availability or calculation methodologies. However, future improvements in data and methods may enable the quantification of these actions at a later date. This appendix discusses only those objectives and actions for which emissions reductions have been quantified.

On-Road Transportation
The methodology and assumptions for estimating emissions reductions from the on-road transportation sector are provided below for all objectives and quantified actions, as appropriate. Except for Objective T1 (Transition to Electric Vehicles (EVs), the GHG reductions associated with the on-road transportation actions were estimated using the associated vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reductions. VMT reductions were quantified using the projected VMT estimates in conjunction with calculation methodologies detailed in the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity report,1 which provides a statewide standard for quantifying VMT and GHG reductions from general mitigation strategies. A weighted average emissions factor calculated using EMFAC2025 was then applied to the reduced VMT to estimate total GHG emissions reductions for 2030 and 2045. Duplicative dampening was calculated using TDM+, a tool developed by Fehr & Peers that leverages regional data to estimate percent reductions in VMT from mitigation measures while accounting for decreased effectiveness when similar measures are implemented together. Relevant assumptions used are provided below by objective and action.

1 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2024. Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity. October 2024. https://www.caleemod.com/documents/handbook/full_handbook.pdf. -286-
416

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-2 T1: Transition to Electric Vehicles
The goal of Objective T1 is to encourage the community to transition to EVs. Collectively, the actions to support Objective T1 are anticipated to facilitate and encourage car owners in Costa Mesa to transition to EVs, increasing the total amount of vehicles in Costa Mesa that are zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) to 25% by 2030 and 30% by 2045. To estimate the ZEV portion of the fleet under this objective, the ZEV performance goals for each future year were applied to the total citywide VMT apportioned to battery EVs and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) based on the projected ratios from EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2025. Emission factors for battery EVs and PHEVs were estimated for future years and account for the increasing renewables in the carbon intensity of the local electricity provider (Southern California Edison). The average GHG emission factor for non-EVs was calculated in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) per mile using EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2025. The GHG emissions reduction was then estimated for each analysis year by determining the GHG benefit of shifting VMT from non-EVs to ZEVs.

The percentage of PHEVs and battery EVs was obtained using an average portion for Orange County in EMFAC2021 and EMFAC2025. The Costa Mesa VMT was provided by Fehr & Peers, consistent with the adjusted business-as-usual (ABAU) forecasts for 2030 and 2045.2 The percentage of PHEV miles in electric mode was consistent with findings from the California Air Resources Board Advanced Clean Cars Mid-Term Report, which indicates that PHEV owners can reach 80% electric VMT with access to adequate supportive charging infrastructure.3 The fuel efficiency of a PHEV in gasoline mode was calculated as 66.7% of the fuel consumption rate of a gasoline vehicle, based on the assumption that a gasoline hybrid vehicle has 50% higher fuel economy than a comparable gasoline vehicle, based on a comparison of the gasoline and hybrid Toyota Camry and Corolla models.4 Energy efficiency of EVs in electric mode was scaled from a light-duty automobile gasoline equivalent fuel economy of 30.3 miles per gallon,5 an energy efficiency ratio of 2.5,6 and an assumption of 33.7 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity per gallon of gasoline.4

2 Fehr & Peers. 2026. “Costa Mesa Climate Action Plan VMT Methodology Memorandum.” 3 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2017. California’s Advanced Clean Cars Midterm Review. January 18, 2017. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-01/ACC%20MTR%20Summary_Ac.pdf. 4 U.S. Department of Energy. 2021. “Download Fuel Economy Data.” January 2021. https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/download.shtml.
5 CARB. 2020. EMFAC2017 v1.0.3. August 2020. https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory. 6 CARB. 2020. Unofficial Electronic Version of the Low Carbon Fuel Standard Regulation. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/2020_lcfs_fro_oal-approved_unofficial_06302020.pdf. -287-
417

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-3 T2: Promote Walking and Biking
The goal of Objective T2 is to encourage the use of alternative modes of travel throughout Costa Mesa to reduce VMT. Relevant assumptions used are provided below. • VMT reductions related to the installation of enhanced end-of-trip bike facilities were calculated using the T-10: Provide End-of-Trip Bicycle Facilities equation provided by CAPCOA. The bike mode adjustment factor for facilities with showers, lockers, and bike parking was used, which assumes commuters are 4.86 times more likely to commute by bike with these amenities.7 The average one-way bicycle and vehicle trip lengths (in miles) for the Los Angeles–Long Beach–Anaheim region were assumed for existing bicycle and vehicle trip lengths.8 The average bicycle and vehicle mode share for work trips in the Los Angeles–Long Beach–Anaheim core-based statistical area were assumed for existing bicycle and vehicle mode share for work trips.9 • VMT reductions related to expanding Costa Mesa’s sidewalk network were calculated using the T-18: Provide Pedestrian Network Improvement equation provided by CAPCOA, which assumes a 0.05% decrease in vehicle travel occurs for each 1% increase in sidewalk to street ratio.10 Land coverage of pedestrian opportunity zones was assumed to be 22% of Costa Mesa’s area, as detailed in the City’s Pedestrian Master Plan.11 The proportion of vehicle trips in the Pacific region that are less than 0.5 miles was assumed to be 4%, consistent with National Household Travel Survey data.12 • VMT reductions related to the construction of new bike facilities were calculated using the T-20: Expand Bikeway Network equation provided by CAPCOA. Bicycle and vehicle mode share (%) in Costa Mesa was estimated using 2024 American Survey 1-Year Estimate data.13 Average one-way bicycle and vehicle trip length (miles per trip) for the Los Angeles–-Long Beach–Anaheim core-based statistical area were assumed.14 Existing and planned bikeway miles within Costa Mesa were obtained from the Costa Mesa Active Transportation Plan.15 GHG reductions assume 15% of proposed bicycle facility

7 Buehler, R. 2012. “Determinants of Bicycle Commuting in the Washington, DC Region: The Role of Bicycle Parking, Cyclist Showers, and Free Car Parking at Work.” Transportation Research Part D, 17, 525–531. http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/cms/downloads/DeterminantsofBicycleCommuting.pdf. 8 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2017. “National Household Travel Survey.” 2017 Table Designer. Travel Day PT by TRPTRANS by HH_CBSA. https://nhts.ornl.gov/.
9 FHWA 2017.
10 Frank, L., M. Greenwald, S. Kavage, and A. Devlin. 2011. An Assessment of Urban Form and Pedestrian and Transit Improvements as an Integrated GHG Reduction Strategy. WSDOT Research Report WA-RD 765.1, Washington State Department of Transportation. April 2011. www.wsdot.wa.gov/research/reports/fullreports/765.1.pdf. 11 City of Costa Mesa. 2024. Pedestrian Master Plan. Accessed May 2026. https://www.costamesaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/57278/638548232589530000. 12 U.S. Department of Transportation and FHWA. 2022. National Household Travel Survey (NHTS), Version 2.1. https://nhts.ornl.gov.
13 U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Department of Commerce. "Commuting Characteristics by Sex." 2024. American Community Survey, 2024: ACS 1-Year Estimates Subject Tables, Table S0801. Accessed May 2026. https://data.census.gov/table?q=S0801:+Commuting+Characteristics+by+Sex&g=160XX00US0616532. 14 FHWA 2017.
15 City of Costa Mesa. 2018. Active Transportation Plan. April 2018. http://ftp.costamesaca.gov/costamesaca/council/agenda/2018/2018-06-05/PH-3-Attach-3.pdf. -288-
418

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-4 length in Costa Mesa by 2030 (approximately 8 miles) and 50% by 2045 (approximately 27 miles) from the Active Transportation Plan.

T3: Reduce Single-Occupancy Vehicle Trips
The goal of Objective T3 is to encourage the use of shared vehicles and transition away from long-distance single-occupancy vehicles. Relevant assumptions used are provided below. • VMT reductions related to a voluntary citywide commute trip reduction program were calculated using the T-5: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program (Voluntary) equation provided by CAPCOA. Reductions are based on the goal of providing voluntary commute trip reduction programs for 2% of employees in Costa Mesa. A 4% reduction in commute VMT from eligible employees was assumed per CAPCOA.16 • VMT reductions related to educating commuters on travel options to reduce trips were calculated using the T-7: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing equation provided by CAPCOA. Reductions are based on the goal of implementing commute trip reduction marketing that targets 2% of employees in Costa Mesa. A 4% reduction in employee commute vehicle trips was assumed per CAPCOA.17 • VMT reductions related to an employer program to facilitate ridesharing were calculated using the T-8: Provide Ridesharing Program equation provided by CAPCOA.

For the rideshare program, the reduction in employee commute VMT was assumed to be 4%, consistent with the suburban place type default provided by the San Diego Association of Governments.18 Reductions are based on the goal of providing the rideshare program for 2% of employees in Costa Mesa.

T4: Increase Public Transportation Use
The goal of Objective T4 is to improve Costa Mesa’s public transit to encourage transit use and decrease vehicle trips. Relevant assumptions used are provided below. • VMT reductions resulting from the enhancement of school bus programs were calculated using the T-40: Establish a School Bus Program equation provided by CAPCOA. Because the City does not have direct control over school bus operations, a conservative reduction was assumed to reflect a collaborative approach with the school district. The percentage of student school bus mode share was obtained from

16 Boarnet, M., H. Hsu, and S. Handy. 2014. Impacts of Employer-Based Trip Reduction Programs and Vanpools on Passenger Vehicle Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. September 2014. Available:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/Impacts_of_Employer- Based_Trip_Reduction_Programs_and_Vanpools_on_Passenger_Vehicle_Use_and_Greenhouse_Gas_Emissions_T echnical_Background_Document.pdf
17 Transportation Research Board (TRB). 2010. “Chapter 19, Employer and Institutional TDM Strategies.” In Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition. June 2010. http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/163781.aspx.
18 San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 2019. Mobility Management VMT Reduction Calculator Tool–Design Document. June 2019. https://www.icommutesd.com/docs/defaultsource/planning/tool-design- document_final_7-17-19.pdf?sfvrsn=ec39eb3b_2.
-289-
419

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-5 the Costa Mesa Safe Routes to School Modal Tally data.19 The average distance to school was assumed to be 4.14 miles (round trip), consistent with National Household Travel Survey data. 20 The percentage of the population enrolled in a K –12 public school was assumed to be 14.9%, estimated using 2024 American Survey 1-Year Estimate data.21
• VMT reductions resulting from expanding local transit coverage were calculated using the T-25: Extend Transit Network Coverage or Hours equation provided by CAPCOA.

Because the City does not have direct control over OC Bus operations, a conservative reduction is based on the goal of increasing transit route coverage in Costa Mesa by 10% (6.2 miles). CAPCOA default assumptions for elasticity of transit demand22 and statewide mode shift factor23 were assumed. Total existing transit service miles in Costa Mesa were obtained from the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) GIS Open Data Portal.24
• VMT reductions resulting from increased transit frequency were calculated using the T- 26: Increase Transit Service Frequency equation provided by CAPCOA. Reductions are based on the goal of increasing transit frequency by 20% across 50% of route/service hours. The CAPCOA default assumption for elasticity of transit demand25 was assumed.

Transit and vehicle commute mode share (%) in Costa Mesa was estimated using 2024 American Survey 1-Year Estimate data,26 and statewide mode shift factor was provided by the Federal Highway Administration.27
• VMT reductions resulting from roadway improvements to improve transit service and reliability were calculated using the T-27: Implement Transit-Supportive Roadway Treatments equation provided by CAPCOA. Reductions are based on the goal of implementing roadway improvements to 15% of transit routes throughout Costa Mesa.

CAPCOA default assumptions for change in transit travel time, elasticity of ridership,28 and statewide mode shift factor29 were assumed. The percentage of transit and vehicle mode share in Costa Mesa were based on the 2024 American Survey 1-Year Estimate data.30

19 City of Costa Mesa. Safe Routes to School Student Modal Tally. December 18, 2025. 20 U.S. Department of Transportation and FHWA 2022.
21 U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Department of Commerce 2024. 22 Handy, S., K. Lovejoy, M. Boarnet, and S. Spears. 2013. “Impacts of Transit Service Strategies on Passenger Vehicle Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” October 2013. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020- 06/Impacts_of_Transit_Service_Strategies_on_Passenger_Vehicle_Use_and_Greenhouse_Gas_Emissions_Technic al_Background_Document.pdf.
23 FHWA. 2017. National Household Travel Survey – 2017 Table Designer. Average Vehicle Occupancy by HHSTFIPS. https://nhts.ornl.gov/.
24 Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). 2023. OCTA GIS Open Data Portal. https://data- octagis.opendata.arcgis.com/.
25 Handy et al. 2013.
26 U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Department of Commerce 2024. 27 FHWA 2017.
28 TRB. 2007. Transit Cooperative Research Program Report 118: Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide. https://ssti.us/wp-content/uploads/sites/1303/2012/04/tcrp118_BRT_Practitioners_Guide.pdf. 29 FHWA 2017.
30 U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Department of Commerce 2024. -290-
420

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-6 • VMT reductions resulting from implementing a subsidized transit pass program were calculated using the T-9: Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program equation provided by CAPCOA. Reductions are based on the goal of providing subsidized transit passes to 2.5% of residents by 2030 and 5% of residents by 2045. CAPCOA default assumptions for elasticity of transit boardings31 and percentage of transit trips that would otherwise be in a vehicle32 were assumed. The percentage of transit mode share in Costa Mesa was based on default average mode share percentages for the Los Angeles–Long Beach–Anaheim core-based statistical area.33 Average transit fare with and without the subsidy was assumed to be the cost of an OCTA Wave monthly pass.34 T5: Support Smart Growth
The goal of Objective T5 is to reduce travel distances and overall VMT through higher-density development. The associated reductions in VMT and GHG emissions from T5-related actions are already reflected in the ABAU forecast scenarios. These scenarios incorporate the City’s current upzoning initiatives, including Neighborhoods Where We All Belong, with resulting growth assumptions embedded in the demographic and VMT projections used to estimate future emissions. Accordingly, any GHG reductions attributable to these efforts are captured within the City’s 2030 and 2045 ABAU forecasts. As a result, no additional emissions reductions are attributed specifically to Objective T5.

Energy and Buildings
The methodology and assumptions for estimating emissions reductions from the energy and the buildings sector are provided below for the quantified objectives and actions.

E1: Reduce Energy Demand in Buildings
The goal of Objective E1 is to reduce the overall energy use of residential and commercial buildings, thereby reducing energy-related GHG emissions. The GHG emissions reductions associated with Objective E1 actions were quantified using calculation methodologies detailed in CAPCOA’s Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity report.35 For the installation

31 Taylor, B., D. Miller, H. Iseki, and C. Fink. 2008. “Nature and/or Nurture? Analyzing the Determinants of Transit Ridership Across U.S. Urbanized Areas.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 43(1): 60–77. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.367.5311&rep=rep1&type=pdf. 32 Handy, L. and S. Boarnet. 2013. “Impacts of Transit Service Strategies on Passenger Vehicle Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020- 06/Impacts_of_Transit_Service_Strategies_on_
Passenger_Vehicle_Use_and_Greenhouse_Gas_Emissions_Technical_Background_Document.pdf. 33 FHWA 2017.
34 OCTA. 2026. “Regular Fare.” https://www.octa.net/getting-around/bus/oc-bus/fares-and-passes/overview. 35 CAPCOA 2024.
-291-
421

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-7 of energy-efficient appliances, guidance and methodology for the E-2: Require Energy Efficient Appliances equation was used. Reductions were based on the goal of encouraging the replacement of existing appliances (i.e., refrigerator, clothes washer, dishwasher, and ceiling fan) with ENERGY STAR alternatives in single-family and multifamily residential units within Costa Mesa. The percent reduction in electricity for ENERGY STAR appliance use compared to conventional appliances was provided by ENERGY STAR, whereas the percentage of total building electricity by appliance was based on average default values from the California Energy Commission’s 2019 Residential Appliance Saturation Study for the City’s Electricity Demand Forecast Zone of 7.36
For cool roof installation, the methodology associated with Objective E-4: Install Cool Roofs and/or Cool Walls in Residential Development was applied. Annual fractional building energy savings were estimated using the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory’s Cool Surface Savings Explorer. 37 Results were developed for both multifamily (apartment) and single-family residences, using weighted averages by building vintage based on Costa Mesa’s housing stock. Model assumptions included default roof areas (669.2 m² for multifamily and 111.5 m² for single-family), a base roof albedo of 0.1, base wall albedo of 0.25, and mean building orientation. Housing stock age distributions for each residential type were derived from the American Community Survey “Year Structure Built” dataset for Costa Mesa. 38 E2: Decarbonize Building Energy Use
The goal of Objective E2 is to encourage the adoption of appliances powered by lower- emission energy sources. The GHG emissions reductions associated with Objective E2 actions were quantified using calculation methodologies detailed in CAPCOA’s Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity report,39 specifically, guidance and methodology for the E-15:

Require All-Electric Development equation. Reductions are based on the goal of electrifying 20% of new development by 2030, 30% of new development by 2045, 20% of existing buildings by 2030, and 30% of existing buildings by 2045.

36 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2020. Excel database with the 2019 Residential Appliance Saturation Study, provided to ICF. November 13, 2020.
37 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. 2018. “Cool Surfaces Savings Explorer” [web tool]. Accessed May 2026. https://basc.pnnl.gov/library/cool-surfaces-savings-explorer. 38 U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Department of Commerce. 2023. "Physical Housing Characteristics for Occupied Housing Units." American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Subject Tables, Table S2504. Accessed May 2026. https://data.census.gov/table/ACSST5Y2023.S2504?t=Year+Structure+Built&g=160XX00US0616532. 39 CAPCOA 2024.
-292-
422

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-8 Existing fuel consumption for natural gas end uses (therms per year) was consistent with the 2030 and 2045 natural gas projections used for the ABAU forecasts. The carbon intensity of the local electricity provider (pounds CO2e per megawatt-hour) was consistent with the 2030 and 2045 values for Southern California Edison used for the ABAU forecasts. The additional electricity use for equivalent electrified end uses for residential land use types was based on average default values from the California Energy Commission Residential Appliance Saturation Study for the City’s Electricity Demand Forecast Zone of 7.40 The additional electricity use for equivalent electrified end uses for commercial land use types was based on average default values from the California Energy Commission’s Uncalibrated Commercial Sector Forecast for the City’s Electricity Demand Forecast Zone of 7.41 E3: Increase Carbon-Free Energy Supply
The goal of Objective E3 is to increase the electricity generation from on-site solar photovoltaic (PV) systems to reduce demand from local electricity providers and to increase community participation in electricity options that provide 100% renewably sourced energy.

The GHG emissions reductions associated with Objective E3 actions were quantified using calculation methodologies detailed in CAPCOA’s Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity report.42 Guidance and methodology for estimating GHG reductions from PV solar installation was obtained from the E10-B: Establish On-Site Renewable Energy Systems—Solar Power, equation. Reductions are based on the goal of installing solar PV on 2,850 rooftops by 2030 (10% of the total existing installation potential) and 8,550 rooftops by 2045 (30% of the total existing installation potential).

Existing rooftop solar arrays in Costa Mesa and potential additional rooftop solar PV capacity were estimated using satellite imagery, 3D modeling, shade calculations from Google, and weather data from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Installed solar PV systems were assumed to be 400 watts with 20.3% efficiency, a 30-year lifetime, and a 0.5% annual degradation rate. Electricity provided by the installed rooftop solar PV systems was estimated by assuming each panel receives at least 75% of the maximum annual sunlight in Costa Mesa.43 Total electricity demand per year for 2030 and 2045 reflects the ABAU projected

40 CEC 2020.
41 CEC 2020.
42 CAPCOA 2024.
43 Google Environmental Insights Explorer. 2026. “City of Costa Mesa Rooftop Solar Potential.” https://insights.sustainability.google/places/ChIJK11gE_Qr3YARJf7ozeXun80. -293-
423

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-9 consumption, accounting for the increased kWh usage with implementation of all-electric development, consistent with Objective E2.

GHG reductions associated with switching to an energy provider that offers 100% renewable energy were estimated for each land use type as the difference between ABAU electricity GHG emissions and adjusted GHG emissions, assuming achievement of the percentage enrollment goals for 2030. GHG emissions associated with the remaining energy consumption not sourced from a 100% renewable option (i.e., the residual energy usage) and the average energy intensity factor of the existing energy mix were assumed. ABAU GHG emissions used to calculate Objective E3 reductions reflect the increased kWh usage with the implementation of all-electric development, consistent with Objective E2.

Off-Road Equipment
The methodology and assumptions for estimating emissions reductions from the off-road equipment sector are provided below for Objective OR1: Accelerate Zero-Emission Off-Road Equipment Adoption.

OR1: Accelerate Zero-Emission Off-Road Equipment Adoption The goal of Objective OR1 is to increase the adoption of electric and zero-emission off-road and landscaping equipment, thereby displacing fossil-fuel powered equipment use in Costa Mesa. The GHG emissions reductions were estimated for each off-road equipment type as the difference between ABAU off-road GHG emissions and the adjusted GHG emissions, assuming achievement of the percentage electrification goals for 2030 and 2045. Electricity consumption for the zero-emission equipment was estimated using default fossil fuel energy densities44 to convert to kWh equivalent usage. GHG emissions from electric equipment usage were calculated using the estimated kWh consumption and the GHG emissions intensity factors for the forecasted ABAU Southern California Edison power mix in 2030 and 2045.

Water and Wastewater
The methodology and assumptions for estimating emissions reductions from the water and wastewater sector are provided below for the quantified objective (W1: Reduce Water Use).

44 CARB. 2020. “Table 4: Energy Densities and Conversion Factors for LCFS Fuels and Blendstocks.” In Low Carbon Fuel Standard Regulation. June 2020. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/2020_lcfs_fro_oal- approved_unofficial_06302020.pdf.
-294-
424

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-10 W1: Reduce Water Use
The goal of Objective W1 is to reduce the community’s use of water by encouraging the use of low-flow appliances and drought-tolerant landscaping. GHG emissions reductions associated with Objective W1 actions were quantified using calculation methodologies detailed in CAPCOA’s Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity report,45 specifically, guidance and methodology for the W-4: Require Low-Flow Water Fixtures equation.

Reductions are based on the goal of installing low-flow water fixtures in 50% of new and existing development in 2030 and 2045.

Existing indoor water use was consistent with the 2030 and 2045 indoor water use projections used for the ABAU forecasts and the ratio of indoor to outdoor water use for residential uses in the region.46 The carbon intensity of the local electricity provider (pounds CO2e per megawatt-hour) was consistent with the 2030 and 2045 values for Southern California Edison used for the ABAU forecasts. The percentage of indoor water used for each end use (i.e., toilets, faucets, clothes washers, and dishwashers) was based on default values provided by the Water Research Foundation47 and Pacific Institute48 for residential and nonresidential land uses. The current State standard water flow rate for each end use was based on default values provided by the California Green Building Code49 and EnergyStar50 for residential and nonresidential land uses. Reduced flow rate for each end use was consistent with CAPCOA default values for residential and nonresidential uses.

Solid Waste
The methodology and assumptions for estimating emissions reductions from the solid waste sector are provided below for Objective SW1: Reduce Waste Generation.

45 CAPCOA 2024.
46 Next 10. 2021. The Future of California’s Water-Energy Climate Nexus. September 2021. https://www.next10.org/ sites/default/files/2021-09/Next10-Water-Energy-Report_v2.pdf. 47 The Water Research Foundation. 2016. “Residential End Uses of Water, Version 2.” https://www.waterrf.org/ research/projects/residential-end-uses-water-version-2. 48 Pacific Institute. 2003. Waste Not, Want Not: The Potential for Urban Water Conservation in California.

November 2003. https://pacinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2003/11/waste_not_want_not_full_report.pdf. 49 California Building Standards Commission. 2019. California Green Building Standards Code. Title 24, Part 11. https://codes.iccsafe.org/.content/CAGBSC2019.
50 ENERGY STAR. “Clothes Washers Key Product Criteria.” https://www.energystar.gov/products/appliances/ clothes_washers/key_product_criteria.
-295-
425

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-11 SW1: Reduce Waste Generation
The goal of Objective SW1 is to reduce the community’s waste generation (e.g., through reuse and repair programs) and diversion of material (e.g., recycling and composting). Collectively, the actions to support Objective SW1 are anticipated to reduce landfill waste by 25% in 2030 and 50% in 2045. GHG emissions reductions associated with Objective SW1 actions were quantified using calculation methodologies detailed in CAPCOA’s Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity report,51 specifically, guidance and methodology for the S1: Institute or Extend Recycling Services equation. Annual waste disposal rates were consistent with the 2030 and 2045 ABAU forecasts for residential and commercial uses. GHG reductions from recycling were calculated using landfill emission factors for each waste type provided by the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency Waste Reduction Model.52 The landfill gas collection efficiency and oxidation rates were assumed to be 75% and 10%, respectively, consistent with the U.S. Community Protocol assumptions.53
Natural and Urban Lands
The methodology and assumptions for estimating emissions reductions from the natural and urban lands sector are provided below for Objective NU1: Increase Carbon Sequestration through Urban Greening.

NU1: Increase Carbon Sequestration through Urban Greening The goal of Objective NU1 is to enhance sequestration through support for urban greening, tree planting, and nature-based solutions in Costa Mesa’s natural and urban spaces. GHG emissions reductions are based on the City’s goal for tree planting in suitable areas of Costa Mesa, which was obtained from the City’s Urban Canopy and Land Assessment.54 The maximum number of possible tree plantings within Costa Mesa’s suitable acreage was estimated using average canopy cover for the recommended trees listed in the City’s list of

51 CAPCOA 2024.
52 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2023. “Documentation Chapters for Greenhouse Gas Emission, Energy and Economic Factors Used in the Waste Reduction Model.” December 2023. https://www.epa.gov/warm/documentation-chapters-greenhouse-gas-emission-energy-and- economic-factors-used-waste.
53 International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives. 2019. U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of GHG Emissions. July 2019.
54 City of Costa Mesa. Urban Canopy and Land Assessment. https://www.costamesaca.gov/home/ showdocument?id=62998&t=639120334753200070.
-296-
426

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-12 approved trees for the Parkway Tree Planting Program.55 The total suitable acreage, maximum number of possible trees, and target plantings for 2030 and 2045 by land use type are provided in Table 1.

Table 1. Tree Planting Goals
Land Use
Type
Suitable
Acreage
Possible
Trees
Goal by
2045
Total Trees
2030 2045
City 78 13,412 25% 671 2,682
Residential 279 47,933 10% 959 3,835
School 16 2,743 10% 55 220
Commercial 37 6,277 10% 126 502
Other 38 6,498 10% 130 520
Total 448 76,863 13% 1,940 7,760

Reductions were quantified as sequestered carbon dioxide using average rates obtained from the iTree Planting Calculator (Version v2.8.4).56 Tree species from the City’s approved trees for the Parkway Tree Planting Program were used to calculate the average sequestration rate.

Default assumptions for project parameters were used for iTree inputs assuming Costa Mesa as the project location. All species were assumed to have an initial diameter at standard height of 1 inch and a tree condition of “good,” and crown light exposure was assumed to be partial sun. The average sequestration rate was divided by 40 years (project lifetime) for an average annual rate per tree planted.

Community Emissions Reduction Summary
Table 2 presents a summary of the City’s objectives, underlying performance assumptions, and corresponding GHG reduction outcomes for 2030 and 2045. Under the assumed achievement levels for each objective, Costa Mesa is projected to achieve the necessary GHG emissions reductions of 154,711 metric tons (MT) CO2e in 2030 and 198,642 MT CO2e in 2045 to achieve the State-aligned targets.

55 City of Costa Mesa. “Appendix A: Recommended Tree & Plant List.” https://www.costamesaca.gov/home/ showpublisheddocument/53420/638308123496870000.
56 iTree. 2026. iTree Planting Calculator. v2.8.4. Accessed May 2026. https://planting.itreetools.org/. -297-
427

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-13 Table 2. Community Greenhouse Gas Reduction Summary
Objective
Performance Indicators
GHG Reductions (MT
CO2e)
Metric 2030 2045 2030 2045
On-Road Transportation Sector
T1: Transition to
Electric Vehicles
Targeted

BEV/PHEV
population %
25% 30% 84,970 115,216
T2: Promote Walking
and Biking
Provide secure
bike parking
and repair
stations
At all new
workplaces
At all new
workplaces
99 64
Fill sidewalk gap
identified in
Pedestrian
Master Plan
Opportunity
Zones
25% of
sidewalk
gaps
50% of
sidewalk
gaps
Fill proposed
bicycle facility
length identified
in Active
Transportation
Plan
15% of
bicycle
facility length
50% of
bicycle
facility
length
T3: Reduce Single-
Occupancy Vehicle
Trips
Provide
voluntary
commute trip
reduction
programs for
employees in
City
2% of
employees in
City
2%
employees
in City
258 114
Implement
commute trip
reduction
marketing
2% of
employees in
City
2% of
employees
in City
Provide
rideshare
program for
employees in
City
2% of
employees in
City
2% of
employees
in City
-298-
428

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-14 Table 2. Community Greenhouse Gas Reduction Summary
Objective
Performance Indicators
GHG Reductions (MT
CO2e)
Metric 2030 2045 2030 2045
T4: Increase Public
Transportation Use
Implement
subsidized
transit voucher
For 2.5% of
residents in
City
For 2.5% of
residents in
City
398 158
Increase school
bus
neighborhood
coverage
By 10% By 10%
Increase transit
route coverage
in Costa Mesa
By 10% (6.2
miles)
By 10% (6.2
miles)
Increase transit
frequency
By 20%
across 50% of
routes/
service hours
By 20%
across 50%
of routes/
service
hours
Implement
transit-
supportive
roadway
improvements
On 15% of
transit routes
in Costa
Mesa
On 15% of
transit
routes in
Costa
Mesa
T5: Support Smart
Growth
Reductions accounted for in ABAU forecasted emissions
Energy and the Built Environment Sector
E1: Reduce Energy
Demand in Buildings
% of households
replacing
appliances with

ENERGY STAR
50% — 1,633 —
% of households
that install cool
roofs
50% single
family
25%
multifamily
—
E2: Decarbonize
Building Energy Use
% of new
development
all-electric
20% 30% 25,331 52,655
-299-
429

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-15 Table 2. Community Greenhouse Gas Reduction Summary
Objective
Performance Indicators
GHG Reductions (MT
CO2e)
Metric 2030 2045 2030 2045
% of existing
development
all-electric
20% 30%
E3: Increase Carbon-
Free Energy Supply
% of available
existing roof
space installed
with PV solar
10% 30% 33 —
% of accounts
enrolled in 100%
renewable
choice plan
75% single-
family
50%
multifamily
30%
commercial
30% industrial
— 38,893 —
Off -Road Equipment Sector
OR1:

Accelerate Zero-
Emission Off-Road
Equipment Adoption
% of equipment
electrified
50% 60% 3,692 24,742
Water and Wastewater Sector
W1: Reduce Water
Use
% of
development
install low-flow
appliances
50% — 1,253 —
W2: Increase Water
Reuse
Supporting measure
Solid Waste Sector
SW1: Reduce Waste
Generation
% reduction in
waste to landfill
25% 50% 2,697 5,448
Natural and Urban Lands Sector
NU1: Increase
Carbon Sequestration
Number of trees
planted
1,940 7,760 63 317
-300-
430

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-16 Table 2. Community Greenhouse Gas Reduction Summary
Objective
Performance Indicators
GHG Reductions (MT
CO2e)
Metric 2030 2045 2030 2045
through Urban
Greening
Total Reductionsa 159,173 198,646
Target Reductions 154,711 198,642
Remaining Gap −4,462 −5
Note: GHG = greenhouse gas; MT CO2e = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent ; BEV = battery electric vehicles ; PHEV = plug-in hybrid electric vehicles; ABAU = adjusted business-as-usual, PV = photovoltaic. a Because multiple VMT reduction measures may influence the same travel behavior, the total reduction value accounts for overlapping effects and is less than the absolute sum of the individual action reductions.

Municipal
GHG emissions reductions from municipal operations were calculated following the methodology outlined in the Local Government Operations Protocol, developed by the California Air Resources Board and The Climate Registry. Where applicable, additional methodologies from the CAPCOA Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity were applied.

The following sections detail the assumptions and methods used to quantify emissions reductions from municipal objectives and actions.

M1: Reduce City Vehicle Emissions
The goal of Objective M1 is to reduce transportation-related GHG emissions by transitioning the municipal fleet to EVs and encouraging commute trip reductions. VMT reductions were quantified using forecasted VMT estimates in conjunction with calculation methodologies detailed in the CAPCOA Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity report.57 A weighted average emissions factor calculated using EMFAC2025 was then applied to the reduced VMT to estimate total GHG emissions reductions for 2030 and 2045. Duplicative dampening was calculated using TDM+, a tool developed by Fehr & Peers that leverages regional data to estimate percent reductions in VMT from mitigation measures while accounting for decreased

57 CAPCOA 2024.
-301-
431

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-17 effectiveness when similar measures are implemented together. Relevant assumptions used are provided below.

The transition of City light-duty gasoline- and diesel-fueled vehicles to EVs assumes that the City will transition to EVs as part of its regular vehicle replacement schedule. The GHG reduction calculations assume that 31 gasoline- or diesel-fueled light-duty vehicles will be replaced with EVs by 2030, and 61 light-duty passenger cars and trucks will be replaced with EVs by 2045. The 2030 and 2045 emissions reduction estimates are based on the annual fuel consumption of the oldest light-duty vehicles recommended for retirement based on age, odometer mileage, and ease of replacement. Emissions calculations were performed using default vehicle emission factors from EMFAC.58
VMT reductions related to a City employee program to facilitate ridesharing were calculated using the T-8: Provide Ridesharing Program equation provided by CAPCOA. For the rideshare program, the reduction in employee commute VMT was assumed to be −7.28%, with an additional −4% VMT reduction associated with program marketing.59 Average one-way vehicle commute trip length was estimated based on the results of the employee commute survey.

The City will offer incentives to employees who commute using EVs, primarily by granting access to City-owned EV charging stations at City facilities. Participation rates were estimated using EV market trends and the influence of City-provided EV charging infrastructure.

Reductions from the employee EV incentive program were based on the goal of 5% of employees switched to EVs by 2030 and 20% switched by 2045.

M2: Reduce City Energy Use
The goal of Objective M2 is to reduce GHG emissions associated with municipal energy use in City-owned buildings, facilities, and operations. Emissions reductions were quantified using projected changes in electricity and natural gas consumption based on the ABAU forecast, combined with emissions factors consistent with the municipal GHG inventory. Electricity emissions reductions reflect both reductions in energy demand and changes in electricity procurement, including increased reliance on renewable energy sources. Consistent with statewide policy, electricity emissions are assumed to decline to zero by 2045 due to

58 CARB. 2025. EMFAC2025 (v2.0.0) Emission Inventory. https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/. 59 SANDAG 2019.
-302-
432

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-18 compliance with the Renewables Portfolio Standard. Relevant assumptions used are provided below.

Energy efficiency improvements in existing City-owned buildings were estimated based on the results of recurring energy audits, which are assumed to identify opportunities to reduce energy use by at least 5% by 2030 and approximately 20% by 2045. Reductions were applied to forecasted electricity consumption to estimate associated GHG reductions.

Reductions associated with new City-owned buildings were based on the assumption that all new construction will be all-electric (i.e., no natural gas), with limited exceptions for essential emergency operations. Avoided emissions were calculated using projected growth in municipal building energy demand in the ABAU 2030 and 2045 forecasts.

Electrification of existing City-owned buildings was assumed to occur over time through major renovations and equipment replacement cycles. GHG reduction calculations assume that 10% of facilities will be fully electrified by 2030 and that all eligible facilities will be electrified by 2045, resulting in the elimination of most natural gas consumption in municipal operations.

Solar PV installations at City-owned facilities were quantified assuming a total of 600 kilowatts (kW) of installed capacity across parking areas and building rooftops. Electricity generation was estimated using the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s PVWatts Calculator,60 and emissions reductions were calculated based on avoided grid electricity use through 2030. By 2045, electricity emissions are assumed to be zero due to compliance with the Renewables Portfolio Standard, at which point benefits of PV solar will be cost savings and energy reliability.

Battery energy storage system installations were assumed to total 4,800 kW of capacity at key City facilities. Emissions reductions were estimated based on the ability of a battery energy storage system to shift electricity demand and increase use of on-site renewable energy, thereby reducing reliance on grid electricity during peak-demand periods.

Finally, emissions reductions from renewable electricity procurement were calculated based on the City’s participation in Orange County Power Authority or a similar Community Choice Aggregation program. The analysis assumes that all municipal electricity accounts will be enrolled in a 100% renewable electricity program by 2030. Reductions were estimated using the difference between the forecasted blended utility emission factor and the emissions intensity associated with 100% renewable electricity.

60 National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). 2026. PVWatts Calculator. https://pvwatts.nlr.gov/. -303-
433

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-19 M3: Zero-Emissions Off-Road and Landscaping Equipment
The goal of Objective M3 is to reduce GHG emissions associated with City-owned and contracted off-road equipment by transitioning to zero-emission alternatives. Emissions reductions were quantified based on avoided gasoline and diesel consumption from the replacement of fossil fuel–powered landscaping equipment, construction equipment, and backup generators. Reductions were estimated using equipment-level fuel consumption data and emissions factors for off-road sources consistent with the municipal GHG inventory. The relevant assumptions used are provided below.

Reductions associated with landscaping equipment were estimated using representative equipment-level fuel consumption and emissions factors. Based on the City’s inventory, a typical gasoline-powered landscaping unit was assumed to consume approximately 187 gallons of fuel annually, reflecting 208 operating hours and a fuel efficiency of 0.075 gallons per hour. Emissions reductions were calculated using California Air Resources Board off-road emission factors applied to the ABAU forecasted emissions for 2030 and 2045.

Reductions associated with off-road construction and operational equipment were estimated using a detailed inventory of City-owned equipment, including loaders, excavators, tractors, trenchers, and other machinery. Total annual fuel consumption across the City’s equipment inventory was estimated at approximately 1,584 gallons of gasoline and 666 gallons of diesel, based on equipment-specific horsepower ratings, fuel efficiencies, and operating assumptions. Emissions reductions were calculated using off-road emissions factors consistent with the forecasted ABAU inventory compared with an equipment fleet that is fully transitioned to zero-emission alternatives. Consistent with implementation assumptions, this transition is assumed to occur primarily during the 2030–2045 period, resulting in no quantified reductions by 2030 and full reductions realized by 2045.

Reductions associated with backup generators were estimated using the inventory of eight diesel-powered generators located at City facilities, with individual unit capacities ranging from approximately 25–600 kW. Annual fuel consumption across all generators was estimated at approximately 1,269 gallons of diesel, reflecting limited operational hours that would be used primarily for maintenance testing and emergency preparedness. Emissions reductions were calculated using off-road diesel emission factors consistent with the forecasted ABAU inventory compared with generators that are fully transitioned to zero-emission alternatives.

Similar to other off-road equipment categories, generator replacements are assumed to occur primarily during the 2030–2045 timeframe, resulting in no quantified reductions by 2030 and full -304-
434

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-20 reductions realized by 2045. Actual emissions reductions could be higher in years with extended generator use during emergency events.

M4: Reduce City Facility Water Use
The goal of Objective M4 is to reduce GHG emissions associated with municipal water use by improving water efficiency in City-owned buildings and facilities. Emissions reductions were quantified based on decreased energy required for water conveyance, treatment, and distribution, using the ABAU forecast and emissions factors consistent with the municipal GHG inventory. Consistent with statewide policy, electricity emissions associated with water use are assumed to decline over time and reach zero by 2045 due to compliance with the Renewables Portfolio Standard. The relevant assumptions used are provided below.

Reductions associated with water-efficient appliances in new City-owned buildings are assumed to be achieved through compliance with Title 24 building standards, which already require installation of water-efficient fixtures. As such, these reductions are accounted for in the ABAU forecast and are not separately quantified in the GHG reduction analysis.

Reductions associated with retrofitting existing City-owned buildings and facilities were estimated based on the installation of water-efficient appliances during renovations or as funding becomes available. GHG reduction calculations assume indoor water use reductions consistent with WaterSense- and ENERGY STAR-certified appliances, resulting in an approximately 45% improvement in water efficiency relative to baseline conditions.

M5: Reduce City-Generated Solid Waste
The goal of Objective M5 is to reduce GHG emissions associated with solid waste generated by City operations through waste prevention, sustainable purchasing practices, and improved materials management. Because these actions primarily influence upstream waste generation and procurement decisions, GHG reductions were not directly quantified. However, these actions are expected to reduce landfill disposal and associated methane emissions over time.

Municipal Emissions Reduction Summary
Table 3 presents a summary of the City’s municipal objectives, underlying performance assumptions, and corresponding GHG reduction outcomes for 2030 and 2045. Under the assumed achievement levels for each objective, Costa Mesa is projected to achieve the necessary GHG emissions reductions of 911 MT CO2e in 2030 and 1,516 MT CO2e in 2045 to achieve the State-aligned targets.
-305-
435

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-21 Table 3. Municipal Greenhouse Gas Reduction Summary
Objective
Performance Indicators
GHG Reductions (MT
CO2e)
Metric 2030 2045 2030 2045
M1: Reduce City
Vehicle Emissions
Replace fleet
vehicles with
EVs
31 vehicles 61 vehicles 341 1,130
Implement a
voluntary
commute trip
reduction
program
All
employees
All
employees
Employees
purchase EVs
5% 20%
M2: Reduce City
Energy Use
Energy retrofits,
energy use
reductions
5% 20% 1,045 345
Buildings all-
electric
All new
buildings,
10% of
existing
All new
buildings,
all existing
PV solar shade
structures
800 kW
capacity
—
PV solar roof
top installation
800 kW
capacity
new
buildings,
600 kW
capacity
existing
buildings
—
Battery energy
storage system
installation
4,800 kW
capacity
—
Enrollment in
100%
renewable
choice plan
All City
accounts
—
-306-
436

APPENDIX D / GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION SUPPORTING MATERIAL

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 D-22 Table 3. Municipal Greenhouse Gas Reduction Summary
Objective
Performance Indicators
GHG Reductions (MT
CO2e)
Metric 2030 2045 2030 2045
M3: Zero-Emissions
Off-Road and
Landscaping
Equipment
% of equipment
electrified
— All off-road
equipment
— 37
M4: Reduce City
Facility Water Use
Upgrade
existing City
buildings with
water-efficient
appliances
All buildings
or as
funding
allows
All buildings
or as
funding
allows
20 16
M5: Reduce City-
Generated Solid
Waste
Supporting measure
Total Reductions 1,408 1,528
Target Reductions 911 1,516
Remaining Gap -497 -12
Note: GHG = greenhouse gas ; MT CO 2e = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent ; EV = electric vehicle ; PV = photovoltaic; kW = kilowatt.
-307-
437

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-i

APPENDIX E
Implementation Plan
-308-
438

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-1 Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
AB 2766 Motor Vehicle Subvention Fund Program
AFV Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Tax Credit
AHSC Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities
ATP Active Transportation Program
BIA Building Industry Association
BRIC Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Program BUILD-CA Building Initiative for Low-Emissions Development Program BUILD-US Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development C-BEST Commercial Building Energy Solutions and Technologies Program CAAP Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
CACE Community Assistance for Climate Equity
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CALGreen California Green Building Standards
CALeVIP California Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Project CalRecycle California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAP Consumer Assistance Program
CARB California Air Resources Board
CARE California Alternate Rates for Energy
CC4A Clean Cars 4 All
CCA Coastal Corridor Alliance
CEDA California Energy Design Assistance
CFI Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Discretionary Grant Program City City of Costa Mesa
CHEEF California Hub for Energy Efficiency Financing
CMABS Costa Mesa Alliance for Better Streets
CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program CMO Clean Mobility Options Voucher Program
CMSD Costa Mesa Sanitary District
CoMFI Comprehensive Multifamily Incentive Program
Commercial SEM Commercial Strategic Energy Management Program CORE Clean Off-Road Equipment Voucher Incentive Project CRC Community Resilience Centers
CWDG Community Wildfire Defense Grants
CWSRF Clean Water State Revolving Fund
DAC-GT Disadvantaged Communities – Green-Tariff
DAC-SASH Disadvantaged Communities – Single-Family Solar Homes EBD Equitable Building Decarbonization Program
ECAA Energy Conservation Assistance Account
-309-
439

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-2 Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
ECJ Environmental and Climate Justice Program
EECBG Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program EECBP Energy Efficient Commercial Building Deduction
EEHIC Energy Efficient Home Improvement Credit
EE&R Energy Efficiency & Rehabilitation Program
EJ environmental justice
EMSD Enhanced Mobility for Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Grant Program
EV electric vehicle
EV HOME Electric Vehicle Hub, Outreach, Messaging, and Equipment GRRP Green and Resilient Retrofit Program
HEEHRA Home Electrification and Appliance Rebates
HMGP Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
HOMES Home Efficiency Rebates
INVEST CLEAN INVEST CLEAN Project
IRWD Irvine Ranch Water District
ISEF Innovative Small e-Fleet Pilot Program
ISTAR Industrial Savings, Training, Assistance, Rebate Program kW kilowatt
LIHEAP Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program
LIWP Low-Income Weatherization Program
LPS Large Public Section Program
MEA Multifamily Energy Alliance Program
MFES Multifamily Energy Savings Program
MIP Microgrid Incentive Program
MWD Metropolitan Water District
NEVI National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program NGO non-governmental organization
OBF On-Bill Financing
OCCF Orange County Community Foundation
OCPA Orange County Power Authority
OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority
PACE Property Assessed Clean Energy
PDIP Public Direct Install Program
PDM Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program
Prop 1B Goods Movement Emission Reduction Projects
PROTECT Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost- saving Transportation
PV photovoltaic
RACE Residential Advanced Clean Energy Program
RCC Regional Climate Collaboratives Program
RCP Reconnecting Communities Pilot Grant Program
-310-
440

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-3 Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
REAP Regional Early Action Planning Grants
RECI Resilient and Efficient Codes Implementation
RES-BCT Renewable Generation Self-Generation Bill Credit Transfer RMDZ Recycling Market Development Zone
RRGP Regional Resilience Planning and Implementation Grant RSF Revolving Savings Fund
RYR Replace Your Ride Program
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD Southern California Air Quality Management District SCE Southern California Edison
SGC Strategic Growth Council
SCP Sustainable Communities Program
SGIP Self-Generation Incentive Program
SMART Strengthening Mobility and Revolutionizing Transportation SoCalGas Southern California Gas Company
SoCalREN Southern California Regional Energy Network
SRTS Safe Routes to School Program
STBG Surface Transportation Block Grant
STIP State Transportation Improvement Program
TA Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside Program
TCC Transformative Climate Communities
UCF Urban and Community Forestry Program
VIP Voucher Incentive Program
WAP Weatherization Assistance Program
WRFP Water Recycling Funding Program
WSIP Water Savings Incentive Program

-311-
441

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-4 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
On-Road
Transportation
T1. Transition to
Electric Vehicles
a. Develop a citywide
education program that
educates residents and
businesses on the
advantages of EVs.

Education/
Marketing
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
CALSTART, SCE 2 Targeted BEV/PHEV
population %
25% 30% CAP, CC4A, Charge Ready
Program, Charge Ready Home
Program, Charge Smart, EV HOME,
EV Rebates Program, RYR, SCP,
Sustainable Transportation Planning
Grants, VIP
On-Road
Transportation
T1. Transition to
Electric Vehicles
b. Install EV charging
stations at non-
residential public
parking areas.

Infrastructure Public Works SCE 1 AB 2766, AFV, Alternative Fuel Vehicle Refueling Property Credit,
CALeVIP, Charge Ready Program,
CFI, Clean Transportation Program,
Clean Vehicle and Energy Credits,
CMAQ, ECAA, Fast and Available
Charging for All Californians,
GoGreen Financing, NEVI,
Sustainable Transportation Planning
Grants
On-Road
Transportation
T1. Transition to
Electric Vehicles
c. Partner with regional
agencies (e.g., Orange
County Transportation
Authority, South Coast
Air Quality
Management District) to
co-promote EV
infrastructure incentives
for buildings.

Partnerships Building Division OCTA, SCAQMD 2 AB 2766, AFV, Alternative Fuel Vehicle Refueling Property Credit,
Charge Ready Program, Clean
Vehicle and Energy Credits, CMAQ,
Communities in Charge, EV Rebates
Program, Fast and Available
Charging for All Californians,
GoGreen Financing, OBF,
Residential EV Charging Incentive
Program
On-Road
Transportation
T1. Transition to
Electric Vehicles
d. Host EV-Ready
Building Roundtables
with local builders,
architects, and
contractors to highlight
best practices and
available funding
sources.

Education/
Marketing
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
CALSTART, SCE 3 Charge Ready Program, Charge
Ready Home Program, Charge
Smart, EV HOME, OBF, Residential EV
Charging Incentive Program, SCP,
Sustainable Transportation Planning
Grants
On-Road
Transportation
T1. Transition to
Electric Vehicles
e. Develop and
implement a
communitywide zero-
emission vehicle action
plan to guide strategic
EV charging
deployment, assess grid
capacity and upgrade
needs, evaluate public
charging corridors,
support the transition of
Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Public Works
CALSTART 1 AB 2766, Charge Ready Program,
CMAQ, SCP, Sustainable
Transportation Planning Grants
-312-
442

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-5 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
light, medium, and
heavy-duty fleets, and
expand equitable
access to zero-emission-
vehicle transportation.

On-Road
Transportation
T1. Transition to
Electric Vehicles
f. Apply for state grants
to fund the installation
of EV chargers.

Investment/
Funding
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Public Works
CALSTART 2 AB 2766, AFV, Alternative Fuel
Vehicle Refueling Property Credit,
CALeVIP, Carl Moyer Program,
Charge Ready Program, CFI, Clean
Vehicle and Energy Credits, CMAQ,
Communities in Charge, ECAA, EV
HOME, Fast and Available Charging
for All Californians, GoGreen
Financing, NEVI, SCP, Sustainable
Transportation Planning Grants
On-Road
Transportation
T1. Transition to
Electric Vehicles
g. Promote voluntary
upgrades of electric
plug-in infrastructure for
Transport Refrigeration
Units and Auxiliary Power
Units at loading docks
through incentives,
technical assistance,
pilot projects, and/or
partnerships with utilities
and regional agencies.

Plan/Program Community
Development
SCE, SCAQMD 3 AFV, Alternative Fuel Vehicle
Refueling Property Credit, Carl
Moyer Program, CORE, Clean
Vehicle and Energy Credits,
GoGreen Financing, ISEF, INVEST
CLEAN, Prop 1B
On-Road
Transportation
T2. Promote
Walking and Biking
a. Explore bicycle
parking requirements
that incentivize or allow
for shared bicycle
parking hubs.

Partnerships Community
Development

CMABS, OCTA,
SCAG
2 Provide secure bike
parking and repair
stations
At all new
workplaces
At all new
workplaces

ATP, AHSC, BUILD-US, CMO, CACE,
Low Carbon Transportation
Incentives and Air Quality
Improvement Program, Planning
and Capacity Building Grants, RCP,
RCC, SMART, SCP, Sustainable
Transportation Planning Grants
On-Road
Transportation
T2. Promote
Walking and Biking
b. Implement the
Pedestrian Master Plan
and Active
Transportation Plan to
identify pedestrian,
bicycle, and roadway
circulation gaps and
opportunities; update
existing plans and the
zoning code as needed
to support active
transportation, including
Infrastructure Public Works Caltrans, CMABS,
SCAG
1 Fill sidewalk gap
identified in
Pedestrian Master
Plan Opportunity
Zones
25% of
sidewalk
gaps
50% of
sidewalk
gaps
AB 2766, ATP, AHSC, BUILD-US,
CMAQ, CMO, Planning and
Capacity Building Grants, RCP, SCP,
SMART, SRTS, STBG, STIP, Sustainable
Transportation Planning Grants,
TCC, TA Fill proposed
bicycle facility
length identified in
Active
Transportation Plan
15% of
bicycle
facility
length
50% of
bicycle
facility
length
-313-
443

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-6 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
tiered bike facilities and
amenities on private
property based on
development scale.

On-Road
Transportation
T2. Promote
Walking and Biking
c. Continue to explore
feasibility and
identification of
corridors with excess
roadway capacity, such
as South Coast Drive,
and consider reducing
the number of vehicle
lanes to improve safety,
and provide space for
bicyclists, pedestrians,
transit amenities,
landscaping, or parklets.

Plan/Program Public Works Caltrans, CMABS,
SCAG
Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting AB 2766, ATP, AHSC, BUILD-US,

CMAQ, RCP, STBG, STIP
On-Road
Transportation
T3. Reduce Single-
Occupancy
Vehicle Trips
a. Develop voluntary
citywide commute trip
reduction program for
employers to opt into
that provides active
travel options to/from
work (e.g., carpool,
transit, walking/biking).

Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
Costa Mesa
Chamber of
Commerce
3 Provide voluntary
commute trip
reduction
programs for
employees in City
2% of
employees
in City
2% of
employees
in City

CMO, CACE, SMART, SCP
On-Road
Transportation
T3. Reduce Single-
Occupancy
Vehicle Trips
b. Via marketing
campaigns building on
current efforts, continue
to educate the
community on travel
options for commuters
to reduce commute
trips.

Education/
Marketing
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager

CMABS, OCTA,
SCAG
Ongoing Implement
commute trip
reduction
marketing
Targeting
2% of
employees
in City
Targeting
2% of
employees
in City.

CMO, OCCF Environment Fund,

SRTS, SCP
On-Road
Transportation
T3. Reduce Single-
Occupancy
Vehicle Trips
c. Develop program to
facilitate ridesharing/
carpooling for
employees.

Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
Costa Mesa
Chamber of
Commerce
3 Provide rideshare
program for
employees in City
2% of
employees
in City
2% of
employees
in City

CMO, CACE
On-Road
Transportation
T3. Reduce Single-
Occupancy
Vehicle Trips
d. Review and explore
reducing parking
minimums, consistent
with Assembly Bill 2097,
while maintaining City
flexibility to manage
parking impacts through
tools such as shared
Regulations Community
Development, Public
Works
SCAG 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting SCP
-314-
444

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-7 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
parking, valet parking,
and other parking
management strategies.

On-Road
Transportation
T3. Reduce Single-
Occupancy
Vehicle Trips
e. Offer impact-fee
credits for multifamily
residential projects that
voluntarily unbundle
residential parking costs
from property costs.

Incentives Community
Development
SCAG 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting SCP
On-Road
Transportation
T4. Increase Public
Transportation Use
a. Develop program for
residents and/or
employees to receive
subsidized/discounted
transit passes.

Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
OCTA, SCAG 2 Implement
subsidized transit
voucher
For 2.5% of
residents in
City
For 2.5% of
residents in
City

AHSC, EMSD
On-Road
Transportation
T4. Increase Public
Transportation Use
b. Expand the Let’s Go
Costa Mesa voucher
program to support
local transit services.

Plan/Program Public Works SCAG 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting AHSC, EMSD, Community Based Circulators Program
On-Road
Transportation
T4. Increase Public
Transportation Use
c. Continue working
with OCTA to monitor
ridership and focus
available resources for
efficient frequency of
transit service.

Partnerships Public Works OCTA Ongoing Increase transit frequency
By 20%
across 50%
of routes/
service
hours
By 20%
across 50%
of routes/
service
hours

CMAQ, EMSD, STBG, STIP
On-Road
Transportation
T4. Increase Public
Transportation Use
d. Continue to construct
roadway improvements
to improve transit
service and reliability,
including boarding
islands, queue jump
lanes, transit signal
priority, dedicated
transit lanes, business
access or transit lanes,
and enhanced bus
stops, and work with
OCTA to pursue support
of capital projects,
where feasible.

Infrastructure Public Works OCTA 1 Increase transit
route coverage in
Costa Mesa
By 10%
(6.2 miles)
By 10%
(6.2 miles)
AB 2766, AHSC, BUILD-US, CMAQ,
EMSD, Regional Capacity Program,
Regional Traffic Signal
Synchronization, Community Based
Circulators Program, RCP,
Rubberized Pavement Grant
Program, STBG, STIP
Implement transit-
supportive
roadway
improvements
On 15% of
transit
routes in
the City
On 15% of
transit
routes in
the City
On-Road
Transportation
T4. Increase Public
Transportation Use
e. Work with the
Newport–Mesa Unified
School District to
enhance and
coordinate school bus
programs within the
Partnerships Public Works Newport-Mesa
Unified School
District
3 Increase school bus
neighborhood
coverage
By 10% By 10% Reliable Electric Charging for
Eligible School-Bus Sites, STBG
-315-
445

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-8 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
school districts serving
Costa Mesa, as feasible,
with a focus on
providing service for
middle and high school
students living in low-
income neighborhoods.

On-Road
Transportation
T5. Support Smart
Growth
a. Implement rezoning
efforts, such as the
Neighborhoods Where
We All Belong plan, that
allow for increased
residential and job
density.

Regulations Community
Development
SCAG 2 * * * AHSC, REAP, SCP
On-Road
Transportation
T5. Support Smart
Growth
b. Explore potential
incentives for mixed-use
development within 0.5
miles of major transit
stations and priority
transit-oriented
development corridors,
especially the Fairview
Road corridor, by
examining benefits such
as expedited permitting,
height incentives,
density/floor area ratio
bonuses, and targeted
infrastructure
improvements that
support walkability and
transit access.

Incentives Community
Development
SCAG, SGC 2 * * * AHSC, REAP, SCP
On-Road
Transportation
T5. Support Smart
Growth
c. Continue to
implement the City’s
Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance, which
incentivizes and/or
requires the inclusion of
below-market-rate or
affordable units.

Incentives Community
Development
SCAG, SGC Ongoing * * * AHSC, Factory-Built Housing
Regional Pilot Program, REAP, SCP
Energy and
Buildings
E1. Reduce Energy
Demand in
Buildings
a. Support energy audits
for homes and
businesses through
partnership with the
Green Business Program,
Education/
Marketing
Community
Development
SCE, SoCalGas,
SoCalREN
2 Supporting Supporting Supporting Building Codes Implementation for Efficiency and Resilience, C-BEST,
CEDA, CoMFI, EECBG, EE&R, Home
Energy Tax Credits, Home
Performance Plus, IEP, ISTAR, ITI SEM,
-316-
446

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-9 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
providing resources,
technical assistance,
and targeted social
media outreach and
collateral.

LIHEAP, MEA, Multifamily Program,
Multifamily Residential Direct Install
Program, RACE, SoCalREN, TECH
Clean California, WAP
Energy and
Buildings
E1. Reduce Energy
Demand in
Buildings
b. Partner with utilities to
connect property
owners with available
rebates and discounted
energy-efficient
appliances, supported
by targeted social
media outreach and
collateral.

Partnerships City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
SCE, SoCalGas,
SoCalREN
2 % households
replace appliances
with ENERGY STAR
50% — Business Energy Efficiency Surveys
Program, C-BEST, CARE, CEDA,
CHEEF, Clean Vehicle and Energy
Credits, CoMFI, Commercial SEM,
Comprehensive Manufactured
Homes Program, Energy Assistance
Fund, EBD, Energy Efficiency
Financing, EECBP, EEHIC, EE&R,
Energy Savings Assistance Program,
Family Electric Rate Assistance
Program, Food Desert Energy
Efficiency Equity Program, GoGreen
Financing, Golden State Rebates
Program, GRRP, Hard-To-Reach
Commercial Direct Install, HEEHRA,
Home Energy Tax Credits, Home
Performance Plus, IEP, ISTAR, ITI SEM,
LIHEAP, LIWP, MEA, MFES, Midstream
Water Heating Program, Multifamily
Program, Multifamily Residential
Direct Install Program, OBF, PACE,
RACE, Smart Energy Program,
SoCalREN, TECH Clean California,
WAP
Energy and
Buildings
E1. Reduce Energy
Demand in
Buildings
c. Seek grants to offer
incentives for passive
cooling and heating
systems (such as cool
roofs and walls) during
roof replacements or
renovations.

Investment/
Funding
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Building
Division
SCE, SoCalGas,
SoCalREN
2 % of households
that install cool
roofs
50% single
family 25%
multifamily
— CEDA, CHEEF, Clean Vehicle and
Energy Credits, CoMFI, Commercial
SEM, EBD, Electric Homes Program,
Extreme Heat and Community
Resilience Program, GRRP, Home
Performance Plus, MEA, MFES,
Multifamily Program, RACE
Energy and
Buildings
E2. Decarbonize
Building Energy Use
a. Explore providing
incentives for projects
that commit to installing
all zero-emission
appliances, such as
expedited plan review
(e.g., accelerated 10-
day timeline).

Incentives Community
Development
BIA 1 % of new
development all-
electric
20% 30% BUILD-US, Building Codes
Implementation for Efficiency and
Resilience, BUILD-CA, Building
Electrification Program, California
Electric Homes Program, CEDA,
Clean Vehicle and Energy Credits,
EBD, Electric Homes Program,
GoGreen Financing, HEEHRA,
-317-
447

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-10 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
HOMES, Home Energy Tax Credits,

EEHIC, RECI
Energy and
Buildings
E2. Decarbonize
Building Energy Use
b. Promote and
facilitate existing rebate
vouchers for gas-to-
electric swaps during
permitted remodels.

Incentives Community
Development
SCE, SoCalREN 2 % of existing
development all-
electric
20% 30% Building Electrification Program,
Bright Futures Grant Program, CEDA,

CHEEF, EBD, EECBG, LIHEAP, TECH
Clean California
Energy and
Buildings
E2. Decarbonize
Building Energy Use
c. Provide education
and technical
assistance on gas-to-
electric appliance
swaps, highlighting
economic and health
benefits and addressing
common concerns
through demonstrations.

Education/
Marketing
Community
Development
SCE, SoCalREN 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting Building Electrification Program, Bright Futures Grant Program, CEDA,
EECBG, Electric Homes Program,
LIHEAP, OCCF Environment Fund,
TECH Clean California
Energy and
Buildings
E2. Decarbonize
Building Energy Use
d. Develop and
implement a Green
Builder Program to
highlight and honor
green builders in the
community.

Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
BIA 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting Building Electrification Program, CEDA, SoCalREN, TECH Clean
California
Energy and
Buildings
E3. Increase
Carbon-Free
Energy Supply
a. Offer voluntary
development incentives
(e.g., fee reductions,
dedicated staff review,
expedited processing)
for projects that
incorporate on-site
renewable energy
systems capable of
producing at least 95%
of total annual load.

Incentives Community
Development
BIA 1 % of available
existing roof space
installed with PV
10% 30% Clean Electricity Low-Income
Communities Bonus Credit Amount
Program, DAC-GT, DAC-SASH,
EECBG, GoGreen Financing,
HOMES, Home Energy Tax Credits,
INVEST CLEAN, LIWP, Renewable
Electricity Production Tax Credit,
RES-BCT, SGIP, Solar for All
Energy and
Buildings
E3. Increase
Carbon-Free
Energy Supply
b. Provide education
and technical
assistance for paired
solar and battery
systems.

Education/
Marketing
Community
Development
SCE, SoCalREN 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting Bright Futures Grant Program, MIP, SGIP
Energy and
Buildings
E3. Increase
Carbon-Free
Energy Supply
c. Consider joining
OCPA, or other clean
energy provider or
program, and launch a
voluntary Clean Energy
Enrollment Support
Program that uses
Partnerships City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Finance,
Community
Development
OCPA 1 % of accounts
enrolled in 100%
renewable choice
plan
75% single-
family 50%
multifamily
30%
commercial
30%
industrial
— Bright Futures Grant Program
-318-
448

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-11 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
targeted outreach,
community partnerships,
and incentives such as
bill savings comparisons,
enrollment assistance,
and recognition or
rebate style perks to
encourage households
and businesses to opt
into the 100% renewable
energy tier.

Energy and
Buildings
E3. Increase
Carbon-Free
Energy Supply
d. Identify areas where
grid infrastructure
upgrades are needed
to meet the City’s
existing and future
decarbonization,
transportation, and
building electrification
needs in coordination
with Southern California
Edison and other
potential future electric
utilities.

Infrastructure Community
Development
SCE 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting CACE, EECBG, REAP, Regional Climate Collaboratives Program,
SoCalREN
Water and
Wastewater
W1. Reduce Water
Use
a. Continue to establish
drought-tolerant
landscape
demonstration sites in
public rights-of-way.

Promote these practices
with an educational
campaign using virtual
tours to showcase
locally appropriate
designs, plant
combinations, and
irrigation best practices.

Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Public Works
IRWD, MWD Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting Community Partnering Program, OCCF Environment Fund, WSIP
Water and
Wastewater
W1. Reduce Water
Use
b. Promote existing
MWD and IRWD rebates
for water-efficient
appliances across new
and existing
development by
training City staff and
using City
Education/
Marketing
Community
Development
IRWD, MWD 2 % of development
install low-flow
appliances
50% — GRRP, PACE, RECI, WSIP
-319-
449

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-12 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
communication
channels, including the
website, social media,
utility bills, and
permitting touchpoints,
to direct residents and
developers to available
MWD and IRWD
programs.

Water and
Wastewater
W1. Reduce Water
Use
c. Develop and
promote a voluntary
drought-tolerant
landscape resource
program that provides
design templates, native
plant palettes, and
irrigation best practice
guidance tailored to the
City’s climate to support
residents, landlords, and
businesses in
transitioning to low-
water landscapes.

Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Community
Development, Public
Works
IRWD, MWD 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting Community Partnering Program, OCCF Environment Fund, WSIP
Water and
Wastewater
W2. Increase Water
Reuse
a. Educate residents on
the benefits and
practical application of
rain barrels and gray-
water systems for
landscape irrigation
through hands on
workshops, step-by-step
installation guides, and
demonstrations of
appropriate plants,
irrigation layouts,
maintenance practices,
and pest management.

Education/
Marketing
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
IRWD, MWD 3 Supporting Supporting Supporting Community Partnering Program, OCCF Environment Fund, WRFP,
WSIP
Water and
Wastewater
W2. Increase Water
Reuse
b. Promote rebates or
provide financial
assistance for
homeowners to install
rain barrels and gray-
water systems by
offering rebates for
Investment/
Funding
Community
Development
IRWD, MWD 3 Supporting Supporting Supporting CWSRF, Community Partnering Program, On-Site Retrofit Program,
WSIP
-320-
450

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-13 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
system design and
installation.

Water and
Wastewater
W2. Increase Water
Reuse
c. Evaluate feasibility of
recycled water for
residential and
commercial irrigation in
partnership with MWD
and IRWD.

Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
IRWD, MWD 3 Supporting Supporting Supporting On-Site Retrofit Program, WRFP, WSIP
Solid Waste SW1. Reduce
Waste Generation
a. Maintain construction
and demolition waste
diversion per CALGreen.

During annual
budgeting, consider
anticipated
development and
adjust staffing and/or
cross-train staff
accordingly to respond
to increased need for
construction and
demolition inspections.

Incentives Public Works CalRecycle, CMSD Ongoing % reduction in waste to landfill
25% 50% Solid Waste Infrastructure for
Recycling Grant Program,
Rubberized Pavement Grant
Program
Solid Waste SW1. Reduce
Waste Generation
b. Develop a facilitation
program that connects
local reuse yards and
nonprofits with
contractors interested in
building deconstruction,
helping coordinate the
collection, sorting, and
resale of salvaged
materials.

Plan/Program Public Works CalRecycle, CMSD 3 CACE, Culture of Repair, RMDZ, RCC
Solid Waste SW1. Reduce
Waste Generation
c. Evaluate the potential
to offer cost-effective
bulk composting to
residents.

Incentives Public Works CalRecycle, CMSD 2 CACE, Community Composting for Green Spaces Grant Program,
Consumer Recycling Education and
Outreach Grant Program, Food
Waste Prevention and Rescue
Grants
Solid Waste SW1. Reduce
Waste Generation
d. As part of Parks and
Community Services
afterschool program,
teach students proper
waste sorting and
composting.

Partnerships City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Public
Works, Parks and
Community Services
CMSD, Newport-
Mesa Unified
School District
2 CACE, Community Composting for
Green Spaces Grant Program,
Consumer Recycling Education and
Outreach Grant Program, Food
Waste Prevention and Rescue
Grants
Solid Waste SW1. Reduce
Waste Generation
e. In conjunction with
franchise waste haulers,
Education/
Marketing
Public Works CMSD Ongoing Consumer Recycling Education and Outreach Grant Program, Food
-321-
451

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-14 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
continue to provide
multiunit and
commercial properties
with clear waste sorting
guidance.

Waste Prevention and Rescue
Grants
Solid Waste SW1. Reduce
Waste Generation
f. Build partnerships and
assess the feasibility of
an urban wood-reuse
program.

Partnerships Public Works CalRecycle 3 CACE, Culture of Repair, RMDZ, RCC
Solid Waste SW1. Reduce
Waste Generation
g. Share information
with the community,
including through the
City’s website, on
proper e-waste disposal,
reuse and repair
resources, donation and
material exchange
programs, community
swap events, and other
waste reduction
programs and
resources, as available.

Education/
Marketing
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
CMSD 2 CACE, Community Composting for
Green Spaces Grant Program,
Consumer Recycling Education and
Outreach Grant Program, Food
Waste Prevention and Rescue
Grants
Off-Road
Equipment
OR1. Accelerate
Zero-Emission Off-
Road Equipment
Adoption
a. Promote the transition
from gas- and diesel-
powered landscaping
equipment to zero-
emission models among
residents and businesses
by providing resources
on the City’s website,
including information
about the South Coast
Air Quality
Management District
Residential Electric Lawn
Mower Rebate Program
and the Commercial
Electric Lawn and
Garden Equipment
Exchange Program.

Education/
Marketing
Community
Development
SCAQMD 1 % of equipment
electrified
50% 60% Carl Moyer Program, Commercial
Electric Lawn & Garden Equipment,
HEEHRA, INVEST CLEAN, Residential
Electric Lawn & Garden Rebate
Program
Off-Road
Equipment
OR1. Accelerate
Zero-Emission Off-
Road Equipment
Adoption
b. Support adoption of
zero-emission off-road
equipment during
construction by
promoting contractors
Incentives Community
Development
CARB, SCAQMD 2 Carl Moyer Program, Commercial
Electric Lawn & Garden Equipment,
INVEST CLEAN, Prop 1B
-322-
452

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-15 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
who have zero-emission
off-road equipment
within their fleet.

Off-Road
Equipment
OR1. Accelerate
Zero-Emission Off-
Road Equipment
Adoption
c. Establish a voluntary
zero-emission off-road
equipment transition
program that helps
contractors and
landscaping companies
evaluate electric
equipment, access
available incentives,
and participate in field
testing or demonstration
events.

Plan/Program Community
Development
CARB, SCAQMD 2 Carl Moyer Program, CORE, INVEST
CLEAN, Prop 1B
Natural and Urban
Lands
NU1. Increase
Carbon
Sequestration
through Urban
Greening
a. Build upon and
implement the City's
Urban Canopy and
Land Assessment to
encourage equitable
tree canopy expansions
and native plantings.

Infrastructure Public Works CAL FIRE, CCA,
TreePeople
1 Trees planted 1,940 7,760 Extreme Heat and Community
Resilience Program, UCF, Urban
Greening Grant Program
Natural and Urban
Lands
NU1. Increase
Carbon
Sequestration
through Urban
Greening
b. Educate the
community on carbon
sequestration and on
native and drought-
tolerant landscaping
through informative
materials and exposure
to ongoing campaigns
and organizations.

Education/
Marketing
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager

CCA, IRWD, MWD,
TreePeople
3 Supporting Supporting Supporting Community Partnering Program, OCCF Environment Fund, WSIP
Natural and Urban
Lands
NU1. Increase
Carbon
Sequestration
through Urban
Greening
c. Continue to offer the
parkway tree planting
program.

Plan/Program Public Works — Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting CWSRF, Community Partnering Program, UCF, WSIP
Natural and Urban
Lands
NU1. Increase
Carbon
Sequestration
through Urban
Greening
d. Promote Low Impact
Development and
nature-based solutions
such as bioswales,
shaded parking,
permeable surfaces,
and green roofs.

Education/
Marketing
Community
Development
CCA, TreePeople 1 Supporting Supporting Supporting CWSRF, Community Partnering Program, UCF, Urban Greening
Grant Program, WSIP
-323-
453

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-16 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
Natural and Urban
Lands
NU1. Increase
Carbon
Sequestration
through Urban
Greening
e. Partner with schools
and community
organizations to
implement green
schoolyards, urban
farms, rain gardens, and
tree plantings. Provide
urban greening
education as part of
Parks and Community
Services afterschool
programs.

Partnerships City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Parks and
Community Services
Newport-Mesa
Unified School
District, NGOs
2 Supporting Supporting Supporting Community Partnering Program, Extreme Heat and Community
Resilience Program, OCCF
Environment Fund, Urban Greening
Grant Program
Natural and Urban
Lands
NU1. Increase
Carbon
Sequestration
through Urban
Greening
f. Consider demand for
additional community
garden plots. If new
plots are desired,
prioritize sites in
disadvantaged
neighborhoods.

Infrastructure Parks and Community
Services
Solutions for Urban
Agriculture
3 Supporting Supporting Supporting Community Partnering Program, Extreme Heat and Community
Resilience Program, UCF, Urban
Greening Grant Program
Natural and Urban
Lands
NU1. Increase
Carbon
Sequestration
through Urban
Greening
g. Establish a voluntary
urban greening
incentive program that
offers rebates or grants
for tree planting, shade-
creating vegetation,
and climate-
appropriate
landscaping on private
property, prioritizing
multifamily residences
and heat-vulnerable
neighborhoods.

Incentives Community
Development

CAL FIRE, CCA,
TreePeople
2 Supporting Supporting Supporting Extreme Heat and Community Resilience Program, UCF
Natural and Urban
Lands
NU1. Increase
Carbon
Sequestration
through Urban
Greening
h. Amend the municipal
code to limit the
removal of mature trees
and incorporate tree
and landscaping
replacement standards.

Regulations Community
Development
— 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting Extreme Heat and Community Resilience Program, UCF
People and
Community
PC1. Prepare
Community
Members for
Hazards
a. Educate community
members about the
health risks of extreme
heat and wildfire smoke
and the resources
available during these
hazard events. Use
Education/
Marketing
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Office of
Emergency
Management
— 1 Supporting Supporting Supporting BRIC, Critical Care Backup Battery Program, EJ Action Grants Program,
ECJ, Extreme Heat and Community
Resilience Program, HMGP, OCCF
Environment Fund
-324-
454

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-17 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
communication
methods, such as social
media, that reach a
broad audience in
addition to targeted
campaigns that reach
older adults and people
experiencing
homelessness, such as
handouts at key
locations like the Senior
Center or Bridge Shelter.

People and
Community
PC1. Prepare
Community
Members for
Hazards
b. Share resources and
facilitate discussions with
local landscaping and
construction businesses
and outdoor sports
leagues to prevent heat
illness.

Education/
Marketing
Office of Emergency
Management
Landscaping and
construction
businesses
3 Supporting Supporting Supporting BRIC, Critical Care Backup Battery Program, EJ Action Grants Program,
ECJ, Extreme Heat and Community
Resilience Program, HMGP, OCCF
Environment Fund
People and
Community
PC1. Prepare
Community
Members for
Hazards
c. Continue to educate
property owners on fire
hazard severity zone
requirements and
regulations.

Education/
Marketing
Fire and Rescue CAL FIRE Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting CWDG, EJ Action Grants Program,

HMGP, PDM, PROTECT, RRGP,
Wildfire Prevention Grants
People and
Community
PC1. Prepare
Community
Members for
Hazards
d. Promote agency cost
assistance programs for
utilities, air purifiers, or
similar programs as they
become available.

Education/
Marketing
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager

SCAQMD, SCE,
SoCalGas,
Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting Adaptation Planning Grant, Community Air Protection
Incentives, On-Site Retrofit Program
People and
Community
PC2. Limit Hazard
Impacts
a. Develop facility plans
to increase the
accessibility of public
spaces as cooling
centers when necessary.

Consider the potential
for pre-planned
programming,
expanded hours, and
temporary spaces for
pets.

Plan/Program Parks and Community
Services
— 1 Supporting Supporting Supporting Extreme Heat and Community Resilience Program, BRIC,
Community Development Block
Grant, CRC, TCC
People and
Community
PC2. Limit Hazard
Impacts
b. Consider the
incorporation of
recreational water
features, such as splash
pads, during park
Infrastructure Public Works — 3 Supporting Supporting Supporting Extreme Heat and Community Resilience Program
-325-
455

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-18 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
master planning and
infrastructure updates.

People and
Community
PC2. Limit Hazard
Impacts
c. Continue to conduct
feasibility assessments
for solar and battery
backup systems at key
critical facilities within
the City, prioritizing
public facilities that do
not already have
backup power, such as
the City community
centers and Senior
Center.

Infrastructure Public Works — 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting BRIC, CRC, Critical Care Backup Battery Program, TCC
People and
Community
PC2. Limit Hazard
Impacts
d. Continue to regularly
review cool and
permeable pavement
technology
effectiveness and
consider incorporating
pilot programs into City
maintenance and
Capital Improvement
Plan programs.

Infrastructure Public Works — Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting CACE, EECBG, Extreme Heat and Community Resilience Program
People and
Community
PC2. Limit Hazard
Impacts
e. Continue to
coordinate with the
Costa Mesa Fire
Department for
development plan
review.

Plan/Program Community
Development, Fire and
Rescue
— Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting —
People and
Community
PC2. Limit Hazard
Impacts
f. Continue to conduct
regular vegetation
management activities
to reduce fire hazard
risks in parks, open
spaces, rights-of-way,
and other areas where
vegetation could
become fuel for fires.

Infrastructure Public Works — Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting CACE, CWDG, HMGP, PDM,

PROTECT, RRGP
People and
Community
PC2. Limit Hazard
Impacts
g. Preplan for post-
wildfire debris flow
potential.

Plan/Program Office of Emergency
Management
— 3 Supporting Supporting Supporting CACE, CWDG, HMGP, PDM,

PROTECT, RRGP
People and
Community
PC3. Build City and
Regional Capacity
a. Hold quarterly
working meetings with
Investment/
Funding
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
— 1 Supporting Supporting Supporting —
-326-
456

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-19 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
for CAAP
Implementation
City staff to facilitate
CAAP implementation.

People and
Community
PC3. Build City and
Regional Capacity
for CAAP
Implementation
b. Include staff time in
annual budgets for
CAAP funding pursuits.

Investment/
Funding
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Finance
— 1 Supporting Supporting Supporting —
People and
Community
PC3. Build City and
Regional Capacity
for CAAP
Implementation
c. Prioritize grant pursuits
that benefit low-income
households, small local
businesses, and the
City’s disadvantaged
communities.

Investment/
Funding
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
— Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting —
People and
Community
PC3. Build City and
Regional Capacity
for CAAP
Implementation
d. Coordinate with the
following agencies on
dam operational
planning and related
flood risks:
▪ U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers
Los Angeles District
▪ Irvine Ranch Water
District
▪ County of Orange
Partnerships Office of Emergency
Management
County of Orange,
IRWD, US Army
Corps of Engineers
Los Angeles District
Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting —
People and
Community
PC3. Build City and
Regional Capacity
for CAAP
Implementation
e. Communicate with
the County of Orange
and City of Newport
Beach during their sea-
level rise planning and
mitigation efforts and
contribute public
comments when
appropriate.

Partnerships Community
Development, Office
of Emergency
Management
City of Newport
Beach, County of
Orange
Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting —
People and
Community
PC3. Build City and
Regional Capacity
for CAAP
Implementation
f. Continue to provide
support and planning
input for the City’s water
and energy providers’
efforts to provide safe,
cost-effective, and
reliable water and
energy.

Partnerships City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager

IRWD, MWD, SCE,
SoCalGas
Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting —
People and
Community
PC3. Build City and
Regional Capacity
for CAAP
Implementation
g. Participate in
discussions with the
Southern California
Association of
Partnerships City Council SCAG
Representative, City
Manager
Orange County
Council of
Governments,
SCAG
3 Supporting Supporting Supporting —
-327-
457

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-20 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
Governments and the
Orange County Council
of Governments
regarding regional
climate migration
planning.

People and
Community
PC4. Foster Local
Sustainable
Practices
a. Market less-carbon-
intensive practices and
resources, including
natural and sustainably
sourced building
materials (when
feasible), to residents
and promote
responsible
consumption.

Education/
Marketing
City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
— 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting —
People and
Community
PC4. Foster Local
Sustainable
Practices
b. Reassess the City’s
Green Business Program,
outlining the existing
process and benefits;
considering adjustments
to the marketing,
certification process, or
incentives offered;
weighing the benefits of
possible expansions to
the program; and
identifying staff and
budgetary needs.

Incentives City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Community
Development
Costa Mesa
Chamber of
Commerce
1 Supporting Supporting Supporting RMDZ, One Water Awards People and
Community
PC4. Foster Local
Sustainable
Practices
c. Assess the feasibility
and desire for cooling
centers hosted by
businesses and local
organizations. Feasibility
considerations should
include legal
implications, existing city
programs that could
incorporate this initiative
(such as the Green
Business Program), and
incentives for
participating
organizations. If
determined to be
Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
NGOs, local
businesses
3 Supporting Supporting Supporting Extreme Heat and Community Resilience Program
-328-
458

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-21 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
feasible, develop the
initiative.

People and
Community
PC4. Foster Local
Sustainable
Practices
d. Engage with
education providers
such as Coastline
Regional Occupation
Program and the
Newport-Mesa Unified
School District to
advance local green
industry workforce
opportunities.

Partnerships City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
Coastline Regional
Occupation
Program, Newport-
Mesa Unified
School District,
SoCalREN, Orange
Coast College,
Vanguard
University
1 Supporting Supporting Supporting California Climate Investments Workforce Training and
Development
People and
Community
PC4. Foster Local
Sustainable
Practices
e. Engage local Non-
Governmental
Organizations and
compile a list relative to
their interests and
capabilities on a variety
of topics related to
climate action and
adaptation, such as
distributing related news
or grant opportunities, or
participating in or
facilitating volunteer
events such as clean
ups or tree plantings.

Partnerships City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
NGOs 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting —
Municipal M1. Reduce City
Vehicle Emissions
a. Develop and
implement a municipal
fleet zero-emission
transition plan that
evaluates the
implications for vehicle
transition and prioritizes
purchasing, phasing, EV
charging infrastructure
appropriately based on
feasibility and
availability, , and
considers other electric
vehicles like e-bikes and
e-scooters.

Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Public Works
SCE, SoCalREN 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting AB 2766, AFV, Alternative Fuel Vehicle Refueling Property Credit,
CALeVIP, Carl Moyer Program,
Charge Ready Program, Charge
Ready Transport Program, Clean
Transportation Program, Clean
Vehicle and Energy Credits,
Communities in Charge, ECAA, Fast
and Available Charging for All
Californians, GoGreen Financing,

INVEST CLEAN, VIP
Municipal M1. Reduce City
Vehicle Emissions
b. Transition the City’s
non-emergency light-
duty gasoline- and
Infrastructure Public Works, Police,
Fire and Rescue
City Manager 1 Replace fleet
vehicles with EVs
31 vehicles 61 vehicles AB 2766, AFV, Carl Moyer Program, Clean Transportation Program,
Clean Vehicle and Energy Credits,
-329-
459

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-22 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
diesel-powered fleet to
EVs, with exceptions for
emergency and life
safety vehicles.

Climate Incentives Bridge Loans,
Commercial Clean Vehicle Credit,
Grants for Buses and Bus Facilities
Program, ISEF, Low Carbon
Transportation Incentives and Air
Quality Improvement Program, VIP
Municipal M1. Reduce City
Vehicle Emissions
c. Install EV charging
stations at City facilities
to facilitate the use of
City-owned EVs.

Infrastructure Public Works SCE, SoCalREN 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting AB 2766, AFV, Alternative Fuel Vehicle Refueling Property Credit,
CALeVIP, Carl Moyer Program,
Charge Ready Program, Charge
Ready Transport Program, Clean
Transportation Program, Clean
Vehicle and Energy Credits, Climate
Incentives Bridge Loans,
Communities in Charge, ECAA, Fast
and Available Charging for All
Californians, GoGreen Financing,

INVEST CLEAN
Municipal M1. Reduce City
Vehicle Emissions
d. Implement a
voluntary commute trip
reduction program,
including providing
commute trip reduction
marketing materials to
City employees.

Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Human Resources
SCAG 1 Implement a
voluntary commute
trip reduction
program
All
employees
All
employees
ATP, CMAQ, Community Based
Circulators Program, Low Carbon
Transportation Incentives and Air
Quality Improvement Program
Municipal M1. Reduce City
Vehicle Emissions
f. Continue to promote
employee use of the
Let’s Go Costa Mesa
rideshare service and
consider expansions or
regional partnerships.

Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Human Resources
SCAG Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting CMO
Municipal M1. Reduce City
Vehicle Emissions
g. Implement an
employee EV incentive
program.

Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Human Resources
SCAG 2 Employees
purchase EVs
5% 20% CAP, CC4a, EV Rebates Program,
RYR
Municipal M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
a. Continue to conduct
energy audits of existing
City buildings and
facilities at regular
intervals to determine
energy-saving
opportunities.

Plan/Program Public Works SCE, SoCalGas,
SoCalREN
Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting C-BEST, Commercial SEM, EECBG, EE&R, LPS, Local Government
Challenge, Long-term Energy
Planning
Municipal M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
b. Implement energy-
efficiency retrofits of
existing City-owned
buildings and facilities
Infrastructure City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Public Works
SCE, SoCalGas,
SoCalREN
2 Energy retrofits,
energy use
reductions
5% 20% Building Codes Implementation for
Efficiency and Resilience, CHEEF,
Clean Vehicle and Energy Credits,
Climate Incentives Bridge Loans,
-330-
460

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-23 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
based on the results of
energy audits.

Commercial SEM, ECAA, EECBG,
EE&R, GoGreen Financing,
Infrastructure State Revolving Loan
Fund, LPS, Local Government
Challenge, Long-term Energy
Planning, Midstream Water Heating
Program, PDIP, RSF, TECH Clean
California
Municipal M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
c. Require new City
facilities to be all-
electric (i.e., no natural
gas) where feasible.

Coordinate with the
Office of Emergency
Management to
incorporate fail-safe
measures for electrical
outages, such as
backup power.

Infrastructure City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Public Works
SCE, SoCalGas,
SoCalREN
2 Buildings all-electric All new
buildings,
10% of
existing
All new
buildings,
all existing
Building Codes Implementation for
Efficiency and Resilience, Clean
Vehicle and Energy Credits, Climate
Incentives Bridge Loans, GoGreen
Financing, Infrastructure State
Revolving Loan Fund, Long-term
Energy Planning, RECI, RSF, TECH
Clean California
Municipal M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
d. During major
redevelopment of
existing City-owned
buildings, retrofit
facilities to remove
natural gas and install
all-electric end uses
(where feasible).

Coordinate with the
Office of Emergency
Management to
incorporate fail-safe
measures for electrical
outages, such as
backup power.

Regulations City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Public Works
SCE, SoCalGas,
SoCalREN
1 Supporting Supporting Supporting Building Codes Implementation for Efficiency and Resilience, CHEEF,
Clean Vehicle and Energy Credits,
Climate Incentives Bridge Loans,
ECAA, GoGreen Financing,
Infrastructure State Revolving Loan
Fund, Long-term Energy Planning,
PDIP, RECI, RSF, TECH Clean
California
Municipal M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
e. Install PV systems as
shade structures at City-
owned parking lots and
facilities.

Infrastructure City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Public Works
SCE, SoCalGas,
SoCalREN
1 PV solar shade
structures
800 kW
capacity
— Climate Incentives Bridge Loans,
ECAA, Extreme Heat and
Community Resilience Program,
GoGreen Financing, Infrastructure
State Revolving Loan Fund, Local
Government Challenge, RES-BCT,
SGIP
Municipal M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
f. Include solar panel
installation and cool
roofs in the design of all
Infrastructure City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Public Works
SCE, SoCalGas,
SoCalREN
2 PV solar roof top
installation new
buildings
800 kW
capacity
Supporting Building Codes Implementation for
Efficiency and Resilience, Climate
Incentives Bridge Loans, ECAA,
GoGreen Financing, Infrastructure
-331-
461

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-24 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
new City-owned
buildings where feasible.

State Revolving Loan Fund, Local
Government Challenge, RES-BCT,

RECI, SGIP
Municipal M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
g. During roof
replacements, retrofit
City-owned buildings
and facilities to include
PV solar and cool roofs
where feasible.

Regulations City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Public Works
SCE, SoCalGas,
SoCalREN
2 PV solar roof top
installation existing
buildings
600 kW
capacity
— Building Codes Implementation for
Efficiency and Resilience, Climate
Incentives Bridge Loans, ECAA,
GoGreen Financing, Infrastructure
State Revolving Loan Fund, Local
Government Challenge, RES-BCT,
SGIP
Municipal M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
h. Install battery energy
storage systems at key
City facilities to
supplement PV solar.

Infrastructure City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Public Works
SCE, SoCalGas,
SoCalREN
3 Battery energy
storage system
installation
4,800 kW
capacity
— Climate Incentives Bridge Loans,
ECAA, GoGreen Financing,
Infrastructure State Revolving Loan
Fund, Local Government
Challenge, MIP, RES-BCT, SGIP
Municipal M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
i. Pursue participation in
OCPA or another
available Community
Choice Aggregator to
enroll municipal energy
accounts in a 100%
renewable energy
procurement program.

Partnerships City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
OCPA or other
CCA
2 Enrollment in 100%
renewable choice
plan
All City
accounts
— Bright Futures Grant Program
Municipal M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
j. Develop a Microgrid
Feasibility Plan for City-
owned emergency
response and critical
facilities.

Plan/Program Public Works, Office of
Emergency
Management, Police,
Fire and Rescue
City Manager 3 Supporting Supporting Supporting BRIC, ECAA, HMGP, Local Government Challenge, MIP, RRGP,
SGIP
Municipal M3. Zero-Emission
Off-Road and
Landscaping
Equipment
a. Transition City-owned
landscaping equipment
to zero-emission, as
feasible. Continue to
contract with
landscape
maintenance
contractors who use
zero-emission
equipment, as feasible.

Infrastructure City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Public Works
CARB, SCAQMD 2 % of equipment
electrified
— All off-road
equipment
Carl Moyer Program, Commercial
Electric Lawn & Garden Equipment
Municipal M3. Zero-Emission
Off-Road and
Landscaping
Equipment
b. At replacement and
as commercially
available, transition City-
owned and -contracted
fossil-fueled off-road
equipment used during
construction or
Infrastructure Public Works, Police,
Fire and Rescue
CARB, SCAQMD 3 Carl Moyer Program, CORE,
Commercial Electric Lawn &
Garden Equipment, INVEST CLEAN
-332-
462

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-25 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
operation to zero-
emission.

Municipal M3. Zero-Emission
Off-Road and
Landscaping
Equipment
c. Accelerate
replacement of diesel-
or natural-gas-powered
backup generators at
City facilities to zero-
emission options.

Infrastructure Public Works CARB, SCAQMD 3 Carl Moyer Program, ECAA, Local Government Challenge, SGIP
Municipal M4. Reduce City
Facility Water Use
a. Continue to require
use of water-efficient
appliances in new City
buildings.

Regulations Public Works IRWD, MWD, SCE,
SoCalREN
Ongoing Supporting Supporting Supporting Building Codes Implementation for Efficiency and Resilience, ECAA,

EECBG, RSF, WSIP
Municipal M4. Reduce City
Facility Water Use
b. Upgrade existing City
buildings with water-
efficient appliances
during renovations or
when funding allows.

Infrastructure Public Works IRWD, MWD, SCE,
SoCalREN
2 Upgrade existing
City buildings with
water-efficient
appliances
All
buildings or
as funding
allows
All
buildings or
as funding
allows
CHEEF, Clean Vehicle and Energy
Credits, ECAA, EECBG, Infrastructure
State Revolving Loan Fund, RSF,

WRFP, WSIP
Municipal M4. Reduce City
Facility Water Use
c. When funding allows,
replace non-
programmed turf at
City-owned buildings
and facilities with native,
drought-tolerant
landscaping. Consider
creative opportunities
for turf replacement,
such as volunteer events
and local organization
partnerships.

Infrastructure Public Works IRWD, MWD, SCE,
SoCalREN
2 Supporting Supporting Supporting WSIP
Municipal M4. Reduce City
Facility Water Use
d. When available,
pursue grants to install
gray-water systems at
City-owned buildings
and facilities.

Infrastructure Public Works IRWD, MWD, SCE,
SoCalREN
3 Supporting Supporting Supporting CWSRF, Infrastructure State Revolving Loan Fund, On-Site
Retrofit Program, WRFP, WSIP
Municipal M5. Reduce City-
Generated Solid
Waste
a. Develop guidelines
for food waste
prevention planning for
City food service
operations and large
events at City facilities.

Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Sustainability
Manager, Public
Works, Parks and
Community Services
CalRecycle 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting Food Waste Prevention and Rescue Grants
Municipal M5. Reduce City-
Generated Solid
Waste
b. Evaluate
opportunities to revise
and expand the City’s
Sustainable Purchasing
Plan/Program City Manager's Office,
Sustainability Manager
CalRecycle 2 Supporting Supporting Supporting Consumer Recycling Education and Outreach Grant Program, Culture of
Repair, OCCF Environment Fund,
RMDZ
-333-
463

APPENDIX E IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

City of Costa Mesa | Climate Action & Adaptation Plan | 2026 E-26 Implementation Matrix
Sector Objective Action Type
Lead City
Department Partners Phase
Performance
Indicators
2030 2045
Funding/ Financing
Opportunities Tracking Metrics
Policy to minimize
waste, including the use
of single-use plastics,
paper, and other
disposable or
non-recyclable
materials.

Notes:
* The associated reductions in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from Objective T5–related actions are already reflected in the adjusted business-as-usual (ABAU) forecast scenarios. These scenarios incorporate the City’s current upzoning initiatives, including Neighborhoods Where We All Belong, with resulting growth assumptions embedded in the demographic and VMT projections used to estimate future emissions. Accordingly, any GHG reductions attributable to these efforts are captured within the City’s 2030 and 2045 ABAU forecasts. As a result, no additional performance indicators or tracking metrics are attributed specifically to the Objective T5 actions. -334-
464
1 APPENDIX F
Cost-Effectiveness
Analysis
-335-
465
1 August 2026

Prepared by
James Fine and Richard McCann
M.Cubed

-336-
466

2 Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................ 3 FINDINGS ..................................................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION .............................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

SCREENING OF CAAP ACTIONS FOR COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS ................... 4 COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS INFORMATION COLLECTION .................................................... 4 DESCRIPTION OF COSTS, BENEFITS, AND EXTERNALITIES .................................... 5 LIMITATIONS OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS ...................................................................... 6 COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS METHOD .................................................................................. 8 Transportation Objectives and Actions ................................................................................... 9 Energy Objectives and Actions .............................................................................................. 10 Landscaping Equipment Objective and Action ...................................................................... 11 Carbon Sequestration Objective and Action ......................................................................... 12 SUMMARY OF RESULTS ..................................................................................... 12 ENERGY ...................................................................................................................................... 15 TRANSPORTATION ..................................................................................................................... 16 APPENDIX A: COMMON DATA AND FORECAST SOURCES AND
METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES ..................................................................... 17 CAPITAL COSTS AND FINANCIAL INDICATORS ................................................... 17 UTILITY RATES FORECASTS ................................................................................ 18 SOLAR POWER AND MICROGRID COSTS ............................................................ 18 BUILDING ELECTRIFICATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY ...................................... 18 VALUATION OF EXTERNALITIES ......................................................................... 19 SOCIAL COST OF CARBON .......................................................................................................... 19

-337-
467

3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This City of Costa Mesa Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) Cost-effectiveness Analysis describes at a high level the estimated costs and benefits to City residents, businesses, community organizations, and government agencies associated with implementing climate actions in the CAAP.

CAAP identifies greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets and details a list of sectors, objectives, and actions that could be implemented to achieve GHG emission reduction goals. The Cost-effectiveness Analysis provides information to help to prioritize CAAP actions and pursue State, federal, and regional funding to that might be paired with local funds to implement priority actions.

Findings
The CAAP Cost-effectiveness Analysis estimates the GHG emissions and total social cost per metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent1 emissions ($/MT CO2e) for a short list of priority CAAP actions. Findings are summarized as both qualitative cost-effectiveness and as high and low-cost ranges for thirteen CAAP actions. Our findings about each action include estimated GHG reduction or carbon sequestration, payback rapidity, net lifetime benefit or cost, and societal cost-effectiveness. We can also refer to this analysis as cost-benefit study because it encompasses costs and benefits to arrive at net cost- effectiveness estimates.

The cost-effectiveness estimates include the total direct financial costs and benefits of GHG emissions reductions as well as the total social value of benefits of avoiding GHG emissions. The total social cost per ton of GHG reductions gives an indication of the cost effectiveness of each climate action from a social perspective.2 That is, the total social cost per ton of GHG reductions includes all costs and benefits, even those that accrue to society at large and cannot be assigned to participating residents, businesses, community organizations, and government agencies. For example, the value of avoided health impacts from reduced emissions would reduce the total social cost per ton of GHG reductions.

When the overall cost of reductions is negative, it indicates that climate action results in a net benefit to society. Many actions have net benefits rather than costs, sometimes dependent on the range of forecasted energy prices that determine the value of future expenses and savings. For actions with cost- effectiveness ranges that span from negative to positive, this is due to the wide range of factors that determine both reductions achieved and associated costs.

Each of these terms are described as follows:
• GHG reduction is the quantified projected reductions for 2030 and 2045.3 Actions with potential for large reductions are highlighted in green, whereas moderate and low potential reductions are highlighted in yellow and blue, respectively.

1 The equivalence is used as a standard unit of measure to be inclusive of all global warming emissions, including carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide.
2 All values are presented in 2026 dollars.
3 These projections are shown in Appendix D of the CAAP. -338-
468

4 • Rapid payback net benefits refer to the relative likelihood the action will result in both private and public net savings, because benefits exceed costs, resulting in a net benefit to Costa Mesa while recovering initial investment costs quickly. The net benefit is calculated to be greater than $1,000 per MT CO2e ton.
• Lifetime benefit refers to the relative likelihood that the action will result in both private and social net savings and benefits per ton of GHG reduction, resulting in a net benefit to the City over the life of the action. The net benefit is expected to range between $100 to $1,000 per MT CO2e ton.
• Societally cost-effective refers to the likelihood the action will result in positive net private costs that are offset by the collection of social benefits identified in the analysis. The private costs are typically less than $100 per CO2e MT CO2e and the social value benefits are larger than $100 per MT CO2e.
• Moderate net cost refers to the likelihood the action will result in positive net private costs that are not offset by the collection of social benefits identified in the analysis. The net costs range from $100 to $1,000 per MT CO2e.
• High net cost refers to the likelihood the action will result in substantial private costs well beyond the collection of social benefits identified in the analysis. The costs for these actions exceed $1,000 per MT CO2e. However, actions such as reducing emissions from vehicles and off- road equipment considered in this cost range are mandated by State regulations and the City has little or no discretion regarding implementation.

Table ES-1 summarizes the results of the cost effectiveness analysis. Actions specific to City of Costa Mesa operations are denoted with black font and community-wide actions are denoted in blue font. The costs per MT CO2e are categorized as ranges to account for inherent uncertainties related to initial costs, energy price forecasts, technology performance and adoption rates, emission impacts, and various public policies. The 2030 and 2045 estimated GHG emissions reductions or sequestration are from Tables 2 and 3 in CAAP Appendix D, Greenhouse Gas Reduction Supporting Material.

The legend below describes the symbols in Table ES-1 for each of the definitions provided above.

Table ES-1 Legend
Rapid Payback Net Benefit >$1,000/ton $$-
Lifetime Net Benefit $100-$1,000/ton $-
Societally Cost-Effective $=/=
Moderate Net Cost $100-$1,000/ton $+
High Net Cost >$1,000/ton $$+

-339-
469
5 Table ES-1: Costa Mesa CAAP Objectives and Actions Cost Effectiveness Avoided or Sequestered Greenhouse Gas Emissions Climate Action and
Adaptation Plan Objective Action
Rapid Payback Net
Benefit
>$1,000/MTCO2e
Lifetime Net
Benefit $100-
$1,000/MTCO2e
Societally
Cost-
Effective
Moderate Net
Cost $100-
$1,000/MTCO2e
High Net Cost
>$1,000/MTCO2
e
2030 GHG
Reduction
2045 GHG
Reduction
T1. Transition to Electric
Vehicles
T1.b. Transition City’s non-
emergency light duty fleet to
electric
$$-

84,970 115,216
T2. Promote Walking and
Biking
T2.b. Implement Pedestrian
Master Plan & Active
Transportation Plan to
support active
transportation
$- $=/= $+ $$+ 70 64
T4. Increase Public
Transportation Use
T4.d. Roadway
improvements for transit
service and reliability
$$- $-

398 158
E2. Decarbonize New
Building Energy Use
E2.a. Incentives for new
projects to install
zero‑emission appliances
$- $=/= $+ 1,633 0
E2. Decarbonize Retrofit
Building Energy Use
E2.b Incentives for retrofit
projects to install
zero‑emission appliances
$+ 25,331 52,655
E3. Increase Carbon-Free
Energy Supply
E3.a. Incentives for on-site
renewable energy systems

33 0
E3. Increase Carbon-Free
Energy Supply
E3.c. Join OCPA and launch
Clean Energy Enrollment
Support Program to
encourage opting into the
100% renewable energy
$+

38,893 0
OR1. Accelerate Zero-
Emission Off-Road
Equipment Adoption
OR1.a. Promote the
transition from gas- and
diesel-powered landscaping
equipment to zero-emission
models
$- $=/= $+ 1,524 2,825
NU1. Increase Carbon
Sequestration through
Urban Greening
NU1.a. Build on Urban
Canopy & Land Assessment
equitable tree canopy $$- $- $=/= $+

63 317
M1. Reduce City
Vehicle Emissions
M1.b. Transition City’s non-
emergency light duty fleet to
electric
$$-

341 1,130
-340-
470

6 Climate Action and
Adaptation Plan Objective Action
Rapid Payback Net
Benefit
>$1,000/MTCO2e
Lifetime Net
Benefit $100-
$1,000/MTCO2e
Societally
Cost-
Effective
Moderate Net
Cost $100-
$1,000/MTCO2e
High Net Cost
>$1,000/MTCO2
e
2030 GHG
Reduction
2045 GHG
Reduction
M1. Reduce City
Vehicle Emissions
M1.d. Commute trip
reduction program for City
employees
$-

See M1.b See M1.b
M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
M2.d. Retrofit City-owned
buildings to all-electric end
uses and fail-safe backup
power
$$- $-

1,045 345
M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
M2.e. Install solar
photovoltaic as shade
structures on City parking
lots and facilities
$$-

See M2.d See M2.d

-341-
471

0 INTRODUCTION
This CAAP Cost-effectiveness Analysis describes high-level, estimated costs and benefits accrued to City residents, businesses, community organizations, and government agencies by implementing a subset of the most promising actions in the City of Cost Mesa CAAP. The CAAP identifies GHG emission reduction targets and describes the hierarchy of sectors, objectives, and actions the City and partners could implement to achieve GHG emission reduction goals for 2030 to 2045. In addition to informing decisionmakers about the economic consequences of climate actions for which there is sufficient information, helping to prioritize climate actions, and guiding budgeting processes, the City can use the CAAP Cost-effectiveness Analysis as a baseline to manage and measure economic and financial performance of CAAP implementation.

The analysis provides information about the financial impact each climate action may have on local jurisdictions and private individuals, business, organizations or agencies. The findings can help to inform priority setting and the policy designs. Most actions will require further analysis to identify the preferred policy option to facilitate implementation through financial incentives or other programs.

The State’s climate action programs and Proposition 4 (2024) climate action bond create opportunities to leverage local funding with other funding sources to implement priority CAAP actions.4 A separate report on funding opportunities discusses these and other options in more detail.5 The CAAP identifies over 100 actions to reduce GHG emissions, sequester carbon, or increase resilience to the impacts of climate change. The strategies span eight sectors: this CAAP Cost-effectiveness Analysis Study is intended to report at a high level on the estimated costs, benefits, and externalities (positive and negative)6 of implementing 13 of the identified CAAP actions. Many of the actions have great potential to reduce significant GHG emissions and/or are net economically beneficial. However, those actions require private or public financial investments, including new and improved infrastructure and vehicle fleet turnover, switching to less GHG-intensive technologies, and associated government agency staff time and resources. Each CAAP climate action has the potential to achieve GHG emission reductions while some actions create ancillary benefits, such as lower fuel costs and reduced criteria and toxic air pollutant emissions. When beneficial externalities are included in the accounting of benefits it improves the cost-effectiveness balance, thereby providing more economic support for the action.

The total social cost is usually measured in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalence (MT CO2e) and is an estimate of cost effectiveness from a social perspective. That is, it includes all costs and benefits,

4 The federal government has rescinded or hastened the expiration of many of the funding opportunities and incentives that had been previously available for many of these actions. 5 See the accompanying Costa Mesa Environmental Funding Landscape that describes the funding situation in more detail
6 Market transactions have prices associated with them that allow a monetary value to be easily assessed. An externality is an economic cost or benefit that occurs outside of market transactions and can be either positive or negative; it is an unpriced consequence of market transactions. Without a clear market price, placing a value on an externality is a complex and uncertain process. However, the lack of a market price does not mean that the externality has a value of zero—in fact the value might be infinite, such as presence of oxygen in our atmosphere. -342-
472

1 even those that accrue to society at large and cannot be assigned to individual actors or government agencies. Example values include avoided asthma cases, agricultural productivity effects, or reduced haze.

When the overall cost of CO2e reductions in negative, it indicates that the action results in a net benefit to society. The community net cost of reductions reflects the costs and benefits absorbed by private individuals and businesses in the City, excluding costs or benefits to government agencies, or broadly to society. Again, a negative cost per ton indicates the action results in a net benefit to community interests.

The following climate actions, ordered as they appear in the CAAP, are analyzed in this cost- effectiveness study.

1. Objective T1: Transition to Electric Vehicles: The CAAP Action T1.b. is “Install EV charging stations at non-residential public parking areas.”
Installing EV charging stations at non-residential public parking areas supports private adoption of electric vehicles. It also aligns with the City action M1.b, replacing non-emergency City fleet vehicles with electric. To the extent that Federal or State funds can be paired with local investment, this action becomes more attractive economically.

2. Objective T2: Promote Walking and Biking: The CAAP Action T2.b is “Implement the Pedestrian Master Plan and Active Transportation Plan to identify pedestrian, bicycle, and roadway circulation gaps and opportunities; update existing plans and the zoning code as needed to support active transportation, including tiered bike facilities and amenities on private property based on development scale.”
Implementing the City’s Pedestrian Master Plan and Active Transportation Plan to support active transportation can be a low cost or very costly action, depending on the activity. For example, marketing and education can provide small reductions at low net cost, while options such as changing four-way intersections into roundabouts can be very costly in terms of GHG reductions although this change can make traffic flow more efficient. The cost range can be narrowed as more specificity and details are provided on the exact actions that will be undertaken.

3. Objective T4: Increase Public Transportation Use: The CAAP Action T4.d. is “Construct roadway improvements to improve transit service and reliability, including queue jump lanes, transit signal priority, dedicated transit lanes, business access or transit lanes, and enhanced bus stops, and work with OCTA to pursue support of capital projects, where feasible.” Roadway improvements for transit service and reliability enhancements can be low cost and can provide significant social benefits. Public transit use displaces vehicle use but the displacement is a small fraction of all transportation-related GHG emissions.

4. Objective E2: Decarbonize Building Energy Use: The CAAP Action E2.a. is “Explore providing incentives for projects that commit to installing all zero‑emission appliances, such as expedited plan review (e.g., accelerated 10-day timeline).”
Incentives for new projects to install zero‑emission appliances are a set of the actions with moderate potential for reductions but a very wide cost-effectiveness range. Projects that design -343-
473

2 zero-emissions appliances from the outset and paired with, for example, low-cost on-site generation, will have negative net cost, i.e., net benefit. At the other end of the range, projects with site-specific challenges (e.g., power delivery constraints, major redesign requirements) will have net costs that exceed benefits.

5. Objective E2: Decarbonize Building Energy Use: The CAAP Action E2.b is “Promote and facilitate existing rebate vouchers for gas-to-electric swaps during permitted remodels.” Incentives for retrofit projects to install zero‑emission appliances have a tighter net benefit range that remains positive at the low-cost end. Retrofit projects that can incorporate zero- emissions appliances without significant additional design or installation costs and the appliances will be lower to operate over their lifetime compared to conventional options.

6. Objective E3: Increase Carbon-Free Energy Supply: The CAAP Action E3.a is “Offer voluntary development incentives (e.g., fee reductions, dedicated staff review, expedited processing) for projects that incorporate on-site renewable energy systems capable of producing at least 95% of total annual load.”
This is an actionable step to be taken by private individuals or companies who will get net economic benefits over the long run. Site-specific constraints, such as shading or need for distribution system upgrades, can increase costs and reduce net benefits of on-site renewable energy systems. While state law (SB 100) requires 60% of delivered electricity in 2030 to come from generation qualified under the renewable portfolio standard (RPS), the California Public Utilities Commission has adopted a policy to reach 85% carbon-free electricity by 2030.7 This accelerated schedule creates uncertainty around the cost effectiveness, which also may be limited due to the short duration of the likely emission reductions given the 100% carbon-free goal in 2045.

7. Objective E3: Increase Carbon-Free Energy Supply: The CAAP Action E3.c. is “Consider joining OCPA and launch a voluntary Clean Energy Enrollment Support Program that uses targeted outreach, community partnerships, and incentives such as bill savings comparisons, enrollment assistance, and recognition or rebate style perks to encourage households and businesses to opt into the 100% renewable energy tier.”
Joining the Orange County Power Authority (OCPA) and launching Clean Energy Enrollment Support Program to encourage opting into 100% renewable energy is moderately cost-effective.

As with Action E3.a, the cost effectiveness may be limited due to projected rapid reductions in emissions to meet the 2045 goal.

8. Objective OR1: Accelerate Zero-Emission Off-Road Equipment Adoption: The CAAP Action OR1.a is “Promote the transition from gas-and diesel-powered off-road and landscaping equipment to zero-emission models among residents and businesses by providing resources on

7 “CPUC Advances Clean and Affordable Electricity with New Procurement Decision ,” https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/news-and-updates/all-news/cpuc-advances-clean-and-affordable-electricity-with-new- procurement-decision, March 2, 2026. The CPUC is proposing that all load serving entities (LSEs) including Southern California Edison exceed the SB 100 target for 2030. Whether that target is achieved is uncertain. -344-
474

3 the City’s website, including information about the South Coast Air Quality Management District Residential Electric Lawn Mower Rebate Program and the Commercial Electric Lawn and Garden Equipment Exchange Program.”
For landscaping equipment, the state has banned the sale of new gasoline-powered equipment, so the net reductions will be short-lived with only electric-powered equipment operating by 2045.8 This action can provide significant co-benefits of cleaner air and less noise pollution that are captured in the societal benefits which makes this measure moderately cost-effective.

9. Objective NU1: Increase Carbon Sequestration through Urban Greening: The CAAP Action NU1.a. is “Build upon and implement the Urban Canopy and Land Assessment to encourage equitable tree canopy expansions.”
Building upon and implementing the Urban Canopy and Land Assessment to encourage an equitable tree canopy has high social net benefits that include helping to support clean air, reducing urban heat island effects, and providing shade. It is a potentially very low cost or net beneficial GHG mitigation strategy.

10. Objective M1: Reduce City Vehicle Emissions: The CAAP Action M1.b. is “Transition the City’s non-emergency light duty gasoline- and diesel-powered fleet to electric vehicles, with exceptions for emergency and life safety vehicles.”
Transitioning Costa Mesa’s non-emergency light duty fleet to electric vehicles is a highly beneficial action because operating electric cars is lower cost than gasoline or diesel. It takes time to recoup the higher initial upfront cost, and there is a need for charging infrastructure and access to low-cost, renewable electricity. The charging infrastructure costs [Action T.1.b] are included in the overall fleet conversion costs. Furthermore, electrifying the City on-road, and off-road is required under State regulation.9

11. Objective M1: Reduce City Vehicle Emissions: The CAAP Action M1.d. is “Implement a voluntary commute trip reduction program including providing commute trip reduction marketing materials to City employees.”
A voluntary commute trip reduction program for City employees has merit as a net beneficial option. This action is well-worth doing, as both a symbol of commitment and a financially rewarding program for participants.

12. Objective M2: Reduce City Energy Use: The CAAP Action M2.d. is “During major redevelopment of existing City-owned buildings, retrofit facilities to remove natural gas and install all-electric end uses. Coordinate with the Office of Emergency Management to incorporate fail-safe measures for electrical outages, such as backup power.” Retrofitting City-owned buildings to all-electric end uses with fail-safe backup power is a net beneficial action with potentially large financial payback if the end use replacements are add-

8 CARB, Lawn, Garden & Landscape Equipment, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/topics/lawn-garden-landscape- equipment.
9 CARB, Advanced Clean Fleets, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-fleets. -345-
475

4 ons to existing retrofit projects and designed into future retrofits. Net benefits are lower where site-specific costs, such as upgrades to electrical service and rewiring, are higher.

13. Objective M2: Reduce City Energy Use: The CAAP Action M2.e. is “Install solar photovoltaic (PV) systems as shade structures at City-owned parking lots and facilities.” Installing solar photovoltaic as shade structures on City parking lots and facilities can be economically attractive when paired with the appropriate rate structures. The addition of electric vehicle charging infrastructure can increase the cost effectiveness and enhance the adoption and use of EVs for further emission reductions.

Cost effectiveness findings for each action can help decision makers select preferred policy approaches.

For example, where the externalities show large social benefits, but the community net costs are significant, actions would best be enabled through public incentives such as grants, subsidies, fees or taxes that compensate for those net costs. Where both the social and community benefits are positive, yet the action is not widely adopted, the action may require a market transformation that changes the apparent relative attractiveness of the choice among other market options. For example, energy efficiency in rental housing presents a case where the market decisionmaker (the landlord) is separate from the beneficiary (the tenant), so the beneficial investment may not occur. During implementation, decisionmakers can match the appropriate incentives and financing mechanisms with each action to reflect social and community benefits balanced with private interests.

All of these cost-effectiveness estimates have significant uncertainties that arise both from ranges in commodity and product forecasts and performance, and unknowns about housing and vehicle stocks and new technology characteristics and evolutions. The values here are for comparative purposes: an action that has a very high cost is unlikely to deliver strong economic benefits and vice versa. Perhaps the most interesting result of this exercise is that a significant proportion of these actions show potential to both decrease direct financial costs and to deliver positive environmental benefits.

SCREENING OF CAAP ACTIONS FOR COST-EFFECTIVENESS

ANALYSIS
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Information Collection
A cost-effectiveness analysis requires an inventory of potential climate actions for each sector, estimates of current and forecasted sectoral emissions, estimated emission reductions or carbon sequestration and the net cost (or benefit) of each action. Additional information is desirable on (1) the expected costs of actions the City will implement within municipal government operations, (2) the scale of action, such as the number of either units acquired or constructed (e.g., vehicles, number of EV charging stations) or households and businesses acting on the measure. The 13 actions evaluated in this analysis have sufficient information in the literature to develop cost-effectiveness results. M.Cubed developed other data and forecast inputs for climate actions, such as baseline and reduced energy consumption per unit or household/business, technology and energy price forecasts, and projected consumers’ responses to actions such as government incentives or informational campaigns. These inputs and analyses are described in more detail in Appendix A. The City can use the cost-effectiveness findings as a decision-making tool for staff and elected officials during the implementation phase of the plan. -346-
476

5 Based on the information requirements and the stage of development for each action, these actions were then rated through professional judgement and available analyses from previous CAAPs on a five- tier hierarchy of relative cost-effectiveness on a cost per metric ton of CO2e: Rapid Payback Net Benefits, Lifetime Net Benefits, Societally Cost-Effective, Moderate Net Costs, and High Net Costs.

DESCRIPTION OF COSTS, BENEFITS, AND EXTERNALITIES
The three main types of values considered in this analysis are costs, benefits, and externalities. In examining GHG reductions from CAAP actions, the analysis incorporates broad societal costs that EPA defines in a metric “social cost of carbon” as
“a comprehensive estimate of climate change damages and includes changes in net agricultural productivity, human health, property damages from increased flood risk, and changes in energy system costs, such as reduced costs for heating and increased costs for air conditioning” 10 For specific CAAP measures, “private” costs of implementation are compared against benefits for the individuals who take actions (e.g., building owners). Similarly, community-scale costs include CAAP action implementation costs incurred by government agencies. Private and community costs and benefits are carried by residents or businesses, such as the financial cost of performing energy efficiency upgrades or the benefit of a reduced electricity bill from installing solar generation on commercial buildings. The analysis uses the following definitions:

Costs generally include implementation expenditures, both for private investment and operations, and government staffing, incentive payments, infrastructure or purchasing. Also included are any additional energy costs in the case of switching from one fuel or energy source to another. In some cases, these are presented at the net costs of the difference between conventional technology and lower or zero emission options. For example, the net costs of building electrification and electric vehicles are presented in this analysis. These net costs are often negative, meaning they are economically beneficial because in the long run they save homeowners or drivers money. Often new technology has a higher initial investment cost than conventional technology (e.g., heat pumps versus furnaces or electric versus gasoline cars).

Benefits include any costs (e.g., energy, fuel or other) that are avoided or reduced with implementation of the action. The benefits occur during operations when new technologies use less or lower cost fuels. The lifetime operational savings from fuel switching and lower maintenance costs (compared to the conventional alternatives) depend on anticipated prices for electricity, natural gas, and petroleum products, as well as use intensities. Other benefits included the avoided societal costs associated with GHG emissions impacts. Reducing the risks of changes in weather affecting agricultural production or extreme weather is a benefit that has

10 The US EPA defines the social cost of greenhouse gas emissions as “ a comprehensive estimate of climate change damages and includes changes in net agricultural productivity, human health, property damages from increased flood risk, and changes in energy system costs, such as reduced costs for heating and increased costs fo r air conditioning”. https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/climatechange/social-cost-carbon.html -347-
477

6 been quantified by US EPA.11 We use EPA’s estimate to determine the economic benefits of each metric ton of avoided or sequestered GHG.

Externalities include benefits or costs that do not accrue to particular or identifiable individuals but may impact on the community and society at large. These include the avoided social cost of carbon and the avoided health impacts of air pollution caused by the same activities that produce GHG emissions. For example, burning gasoline in cars produces gases that cause urban smog and regional haze and carcinogens such as benzene, in addition to GHG emissions. In addition to cancer, health impacts from companion pollutants include higher rates of premature death, onset of asthma or other illnesses. This report has not quantified these additional environmental benefits from reduced pollutants, but they provide additional economic value not included here.

The social cost of carbon is a value used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and other federal agencies to estimate the value to society of GHG reductions based on the impacts of human-induced climate change on agricultural productivity, human health, and flood risk.12 Not all externalities are included in this analysis, though the most significant are identified and quantified where possible.

Operational savings recoup upfront costs over time. To reflect the difference in the timing of costs and benefits, a common metric of net present values is developed. Future values are discounted to reflect present values and enable comparison of cost-effectiveness metrics for actions with different timelines.

This study uses a range of cost-effectiveness results to reflect inherent uncertainties, and they are shown as high and low cost-effectiveness.

This analysis depends in large part on the data and assumptions for each action developed in the CAAP.

Following the methodology developed in that analysis, costs, benefits, and externalities are estimated on an annualized basis for the years 2030 through 2050.

Limitations of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
The results of the cost-effectiveness analysis should be used to inform decision-making with consideration of limitation. Cost-effectiveness is intended to be indicative, not definitive, of relative costs across proposed climate actions. The following list provides some of the most important aspects limiting the accuracy of the analysis.

1. The cost-effectiveness metrics are for comparison among actions on a relative basis— they do not represent the expected absolute costs and benefits per se.

Most of the actions are directed toward sectors that have a wide variety of characteristics. For example, this is a diversity of housing in Costa Mesa, ranging by number of occupants, building age and attributes, and activities within the home. Such diversity is not easily captured in an economic analysis. Available

11 Ibid 12, US EPA, Social Cost of Carbon.
12 The social cost of carbon is an estimate of the cost translated to a monetary value of the damage done by each additional MT CO2e emissions. Conversely, it also is an estimate of the benefit of any action taken to reduce a MT CO2e of emissions.
-348-
478

7 economic studies are not tailored with specific local characteristics for Costa Mesa. Some studies use archetypes or prototypes (e.g., particular building configuration or vehicle type) and averages to estimate the costs and benefits of certain actions. For example, the assumptions for decarbonization strategies for new home construction are based on studies of standard house configurations and estimated costs to build and operate that house, adjusted for the City’s Climate Zone.13 The extent to which Costa Mesa’s actual housing stock deviates from these configurations will impact the expected absolute costs for the specified actions.

2. Net cost estimates exclude 2021 through 2023 federal and State incentives and funds recently made available.

Significant State incentive funding is available for a host of household, business, and public sector climate-related investments. The Fiscal Year 2022-2023 State of California Budget allocated $39 billion over five years toward climate resilience and integrated climate, equity, and economic opportunities.

However, the FY 2023-2024 budget scaled back State spending by $2.9 billion.14 The FY 2025-2026 budget incorporated further budget reductions for climate actions.15 The accompanying report Costa Mesa Environmental Funding Landscape describes the funding situation in more detail.

At the federal level, the Investment and Recovery Act (IRA) adopted by the Biden Administration would have directed between $390 billion and $1 trillion to renewable energy assets primarily through tax credits and grants. Though not cancelled, the Trump administration has gutted and defunded the IRA so it is no longer a significant reliable funding source.

Eligibility rules and implementation guidelines are frequently updated and revised for a number of the state and federal incentives and programs. Further, many funding programs set income eligibility standards that require more detailed socio-economic data on a geographic basis than is readily available for this study. There is little or no research estimating how many people or businesses would adopt particular technologies in response to the available incentives.

3. Total cost assessments rely on estimated equipment and building populations and the assumed effectiveness of the actions both to be implemented and to change the emission profiles of those populations.

The most salient example is building electrification that replaces natural gas stoves with induction cooktop and convection ovens, as well as furnaces and air conditioners with heat pumps. The rate of building retrofits could vary widely in both numbers and timing. It is also largely unknown how automobile drivers might respond to the option of switching from gasoline-fueled to electric vehicles given changed circumstances.

13 California Energy Commission, California Building Climate Zones, https://cecgis- caenergy.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/CAEnergy::california-building-climate-zones/explore 14 “2023–24 California State Budget Finalized—At Least for Now,” JD Supra, https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/2023-24-california-state-budget-1576852/, July 5, 2023. 15 Legislative Analyst’s Office, “The 2025-26 Budget: Overview of the Spending Plan,” https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/5079, October 16, 2025. -349-
479

8 Given uncertainties about the rates of adoption for each action, policymakers and stakeholders should focus their attention on the relative costs of actions and not the cost of a single action in isolation.

Uncertainties worsen as policy adoption forecasts span further into the future as it is hard to predict game-changing technology introduction and innovation, energy prices and utility electricity rates, and sources and magnitudes of government funding and incentives.16 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Method
In this section, we summarize the analytical tools and techniques used for the cost-effectiveness analysis, including data inputs and other information necessary to replicate the results and findings.

M.Cubed developed a range of cost-effectiveness estimates for each CAAP action. Economic values used include initial investments, ongoing expenditures, and non-market costs such as environmental and transaction costs.

Cost-effectiveness analysis measures the net costs (i.e., gross costs minus gross benefits) per unit of provided service or benefit.17 In this case, it measures the cost per ton of GHG emission reductions.

Standard practice is to present results in the cost-effectiveness format because it allows for direct comparison among actions. Cost-effectiveness analysis typically presents net benefits on a per unit basis, in this context dollars per metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions ($/MT CO2e).

Cost-effectiveness can be examined at two levels, the first based on direct market transaction values that represent private financial values, such as an individual’s purchase of an EV instead of a conventional car. The second level encompasses a wider array of impacts cannot be observed as market transactions (a.k.a., non-market) and are often interpreted as societal externalities, benefits and costs.

These non-market benefits can include air quality and other environmental quality improvements that are savings compared to the presumed baseline activity. Monetary values can also be included where sufficient information is available.

Climate actions may have cost-effectiveness values that are very low or negative (i.e., benefits are less than costs). That does not diminish the need to achieve such reductions; instead, it highlights the likelihood that households and businesses may need subsidies to cover the excess costs. The underlying analysis includes both direct private and broader societal costs and benefits. The City can compare the relative net costs of its portfolio of actions using these values.

M.Cubed estimated the costs of the 13 CAAP actions based on several components as follows:

1. Upfront cost for new or replacement technology.

2. Upfront cost for supporting infrastructure such as electric vehicle charging stations.

3. Comparative ongoing costs of new or replacement technology versus the current conventional technology, which often results in net benefits because of lower energy prices and maintenance requirements. Ongoing costs are usually dominated by fuel and energy prices, and M.Cubed

16 William Ascher. Forecasting: An Appraisal for Policy-Makers and Planners. Johns Hopkins University Press. 1978. 17 Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses are closely related with different perspectives on the same question, so the terms are often used interchangeably.
-350-
480

9 applied forecasts for those prices. Where available, M.Cubed included other ongoing costs such as maintenance.

For benefits, M.Cubed estimated the social benefit of GHG emissions reductions. We based the valuation on the US EPA’s estimate of the long-term damage done by a ton of carbon dioxide and other global warming emissions (known as the “social cost of carbon”) and projected reductions in GHG emissions for individual CAAP actions.18
Benefit estimates for GHG reductions are drawn from peer-reviewed literature. While valuation of other environmental benefits are available, reductions in criteria and toxic air pollutants and use other resources have not been calculated for this study. This causes overall benefits to be conservatively underestimated.

M.Cubed calculated the net present value of a range of costs and benefits of each climate action included in the analysis, meaning M.Cubed converted all future costs and benefits to a chosen year value by adjusting for the time value of money with a discount rate.19 M.Cubed then divided the high and low estimates of the net present value of the cost of implementing the climate action by the high and low estimates of net present value of the emission reductions, to arrive at a range of dollars per ton for each climate action. These cost-effectiveness ranges can inform the City’s decisions to prioritize investment of resources in the most cost-effective CAAP actions.

Transportation Objectives and Actions
M.Cubed referred to studies by CARB (2007) and Fowlie & Holt (2025) plus additional analysis by M.Cubed to identify the cost-effectiveness range for the three transportation-related actions:
• Objective T1: Transition to Electric Vehicles. Action T1.b. Install EV charging Stations at non- residential public parking areas
• Objective T2: Promote Walking and Biking. Action T2.b. Implement the Pedestrian Master Plan and Active Transportation Plan to identify pedestrian, bicycle, and roadway circulation gaps and opportunities; update existing plans and the zoning code as needed to support active transportation, including tiered bike facilities and amenities on private property based on development scale
• Objective T4: Increase Public Transit Use. T4.d Construct roadway improvements to improve transit service and reliability, including queue jump lanes, transit signal priority, dedicated transit lanes, business access or transit lanes, and enhanced bus stops, and work with OCTA to pursue support of capital projects, where feasible.

18 US EPA, Supplementary Material for the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final Rulemaking, “Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas Sector Climate Review”: EPA Report on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: Estimates Incorporating Recent Scientific Advances, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2021-0317, https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-12/epa_scghg_2023_report_final.pdf, November 2023. 19 The discount rate is an interest rate at which an individual or society is indifferent between accepting a payment today or accepting a payment in the future or over a series of years. -351-
481

10 The City is required by State Advanced Clean Fleet regulations to purchase only electric vehicles for its fleet and equipment by 2027.20
M.Cubed relied on a study that estimated the net cost of converting a local government’s fleet to electric vehicles compared to conventional internal combustion engine vehicles.21 The study included vehicle purchase and charging infrastructure costs, the relative energy/fuel efficiency of each with the price of each energy/fuel type, the relative maintenance costs per mile (ongoing costs), and the net upfront cost of new charging station infrastructure per electric vehicle. M.Cubed also estimated a range of benefits using projected GHG.22
Energy Objectives and Actions
Categorizing actions by objective because individual actions can serve several objectives. Five of the actions analyzed in this cost-effectiveness study have objectives to decarbonize building energy use and reduce city energy use and increase the supply of carbon-free energy.

For example, Action M2.e – installing PV systems as shade structures on City-owned property – supports both reducing city energy use (Objective M2) and increasing the supply of carbon free energy (Objective E3).

Two actions for private parties and the City focus on upgrading buildings and appliances. By replacing or displacing appliances and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems which use fossil fuels in new and existing buildings with electric alternatives, both the City and private actors can contribute to CAAP objectives:
• Objective E2. Decarbonize Building Energy Use. Action E2.a Explore providing incentives for projects that commit to installing all zero‑emission appliances, such as expedited plan review. • Objective M2. Reduce City Energy Use: M2.d. During major redevelopment of existing City- owned buildings, retrofit facilities to remove natural gas and install all-electric end uses.

Coordinate with the Office of Emergency Management to incorporate fail-safe measures for electrical outages.

M.Cubed estimated a range of net upfront costs for building and appliance electrification based on the Local Energy Codes Reach Code reports and calculated operating costs and net benefits of ownership compared to conventional alternatives.23 The cost-effectiveness analysis assumes homeowners or

20 CARB, Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/advanced-clean-fleets- regulation-state-local-government-agency-fleet; and CARB, Small Off-Road Engines (SORE) Regulations. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/small-road-engines-sore/2021-amendments-small-road-engine- regulations
21 EV Refleet Inc. Fleet Electrification Assessment, Prepared for the County of Sonoma Public Infrastructure Department, January 9, 2024.
22 CARB, “Staff Report: Initial Statement Of Reasons For Proposed Rulemaking --Proposed Regulation For In-Use Off- Road Diesel Vehicles,” Mobile Source Control Division,
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/barcu/regact/2007/ordiesl07/isor.pdf , April 2007, and Fowlie, M. and Holt, B., “Cap-and-Trade and Cost Containment in California,” Table 3-11, IEMAC Discussion Draft (January 2025). 23 The sources for these analyses are listed in Appendix A. -352-
482

11 organizations will replace the appliances and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems at the end of their useful life. For example, for replacing natural gas heating system with an electric version, energy used by the original and new appliance is multiplied by the utility rate for natural gas and electricity, respectively, to ascertain the savings (or cost). New appliance or home ventilation system attributes were obtained from county appliance audit reports, and energy price forecasts are from the California Public Utility Commission.24
Three measures will increase the City’s carbon fee energy supply per Objective E3, as well as reducing city energy use:
• Objective E3. Increase Carbon Free Energy Supply. E3.a. Offer voluntary development incentives (e.g., fee reductions, dedicated staff review, expedited processing) for projects that incorporate on-site renewable energy systems capable of producing at least 95% of total annual load. • Objective M2. Reduce City Energy Use. Action M2.e Install solar photovoltaic (PV) systems as shade structures at City-owned parking lots and facilities. • Objective E3. Increase Carbon Free Energy Supply. E3.c. Consider joining OCPA and launch a voluntary Clean Energy Enrollment Support Program that uses targeted outreach, community partnerships, and incentives such as bill savings comparisons, enrollment assistance, and recognition or rebate-style perks to encourage households and businesses to opt into the 100% renewable energy tier.

For Actions E3.a and M2.e, M.Cubed estimated a range of net upfront and ongoing costs for on-site solar PV generation and compared them to continued electric service from a grid connected utility.25 The community-scale action, E3.a, has high potential for wide adoption and is Measure M2.c would install solar photovoltaic (PV) generation on City-owned parking and facilities. M.Cubed based the net benefits range on a Wildan (2024) study.26
For Action E3.c, M.Cubed compared the potential for carbon-free electricity Southern California Edison and from Orange County Power Authority (OCPA), is projected to achieve 100% renewable energy by 2030. Therefore, increasing on-site solar generation will be displacing renewable generation from OCPA that is already zero emissions. Consequently, the cost-effectiveness based on emission reductions from these actions is expected to be low.

Landscaping Equipment Objective and Action
The Objective OR, Accelerate Zero-Emission Off-Road Equipment Adoption is supported by OR1.a. - transitioning landscaping equipment to zero-emissions via education about rebate opportunities to take advantage of the state regulation that has ended the sale of gasoline powered equipment in California.

M.Cubed relied on information provided by CARB in developing the Small Off Road Engines rules to

24 Willdan, “Sonoma County Energy Project: Investment Grade Audit Report,” https://sonoma- county.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?From=RSS&ID=6664595&GUID=43C2B4AD -CBEB-45E1-9EE7- 5B69E414FD03 , March 15, 2024.
25 Sources for this analysis are listed in Appendix A.
26 Willdan, “Sonoma County Energy Project: Investment Grade Audit Report,” March 15, 2024. -353-
483

12 develop economic comparisons of conventional versus zero-emissions (electric) equipment.27 When the air quality benefits that were the basis of the CARB rule are included, this action provides a net societal benefit.

Carbon Sequestration Objective and Action
Action NU1 is to build upon and implement the Urban Canopy and Land Assessment to encourage equitable tree canopy expansions in support of Objective NU, Increased Carbon Sequestration through Urban Greening, M.Cubed estimated the costs and benefits of urban tree planting that build on the Urban Canopy & Land Assessment. Focusing on areas that encourage an equitable tree canopy provides a high social net benefit by improving local air quality, reducing urban heat island effects, providing shade and aesthetic values.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS
M. Cubed estimated the GHG and total social cost per ton of emissions reductions for 13 local actions.

For each action, Table 1 summarizes the magnitude of expected emission reductions and sequestration relative to the overall community inventory, and net cost effectiveness, which is measured in dollars per metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO2e) GHG emissions. The cost-effectiveness results include the total direct financial costs and benefits of emissions reductions as well as total social value of benefits per ton of GHG reductions.28 The costs per ton are categorized as ranges due to the inherent uncertainty in many dimensions including initial costs, energy price forecasts, technology performance and adoption rates, emission impacts and various public policies. This table shows the actions grouped by sector and objective.

27 CARB, Amendments to the Small Off-Road Engine Regulations: Transition to Zero Emissions , Attachment D:

Updated Emissions and Economic Analysis Results for the Proposed Amendments to the Small Off ‑Road Engine Regulations https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/barcu/regact/2021/sore21/sorefsorattd.pdf , August 2, 2022.
28 Appendix A contains summaries of the calculations for most of these actions. -354-
484
13 Table 1 – City of Costa Mesa Climate Action and Adaptation Plan Objectives Cost Effectiveness per Metric Ton CO2e Climate Action and
Adaptation Plan
Objective
Climate Action and
Adaptation Plan
Action
Type of
Action
2030 GHG
Reduction
2045 GHG
Reduction
Low
Estimate
Net Cost
per MT
CO2e
High
Estimate
Net Cost
per MT
CO2e
Rapid
Payback
Net
Benefit
>$1,000/
MT CO2e
Lifetime
Net
Benefit
$100-
$1,000/
MT CO2e
Societally
Cost-
Effective
Moderate
Net Cost
$100-
$1,000/
MT CO2e
High Net
Cost
$100-
$1,000/
MT CO2e
T1. Transition to
Electric Vehicles
T1.b. Transition City’s non-
emergency light duty fleet to
electric
Infrastructure 84,970 115,216 ($1,400) ($1,300) $$-

T2. Promote Walking
and Biking
T2.b. Implement Pedestrian
Master Plan & Active
Transportation Plan to
support active
transportation
Infrastructure 70 64 ($200) $26,000

$- $=/= $+ $$+
T4. Increase Public
Transportation Use
T4.d. Roadway
improvements for transit
service and reliability
Infrastructure 398 158 ($200) ($100) $$- $-

E2. Decarbonize New
Building Energy Use
E2.a. Incentives for new
projects to install
zero‑emission appliances
Incentives 1,633 0 ($300) $650 $- $=/= $+
E2.Decarbonize Retrofit
Building Energy Use
E2.b Incentives for retrofit
projects to install
zero‑emission appliances
Incentives 25,331 52,655 $100 $250 $+
E3. Increase Carbon-
Free Energy Supply
E3.a. Incentives for on-site
renewable energy systems Incentives 33 0 $100 $250

E3. Increase Carbon-
Free Energy Supply
E3.c. Join OCPA and launch
Clean Energy Enrollment
Support Program to
encourage opting into the
100% renewable energy
Partnerships See E3.a 0 $100 $150

OR1. Accelerate Zero-
Emission Off-Road
Equipment Adoption
OR1.a. Promote the
transition from gas- and
diesel-powered landscaping
equipment to zero-emission
models
Education/
Marketing 1,524 2,825 ($200) $400 $- $=/= $+
NU1. Increase Carbon
Sequestration through
Urban Greening
NU1.a. Build on Urban
Canopy & Land Assessment
equitable tree canopy
Infrastructure 63 317 ($1,300) $200 $$- $- $=/= $+

M1. Reduce City
Vehicle Emissions
M1.b.Transition City’s non-
emergency light duty fleet to
electric
Infrastructure 341 1,130 ($1,400) ($1,300) $$-

-355-
485

14 Climate Action and
Adaptation Plan
Objective
Climate Action and
Adaptation Plan
Action
Type of
Action
2030 GHG
Reduction
2045 GHG
Reduction
Low
Estimate
Net Cost
per MT
CO2e
High
Estimate
Net Cost
per MT
CO2e
Rapid
Payback
Net
Benefit
>$1,000/
MT CO2e
Lifetime
Net
Benefit
$100-
$1,000/
MT CO2e
Societally
Cost-
Effective
Moderate
Net Cost
$100-
$1,000/
MT CO2e
High Net
Cost
$100-
$1,000/
MT CO2e
M1. Reduce City
Vehicle Emissions
M1.d. Commute trip
reduction program for City
employees
Plan/Program See M1.b See M1.b ($1,000) ($100)

M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
M2.d. Retrofit City-owned
buildings to all-electric end
uses and fail-safe backup
power
Regulations 1,045 345 ($1,300) ($150) $$- $-

M2. Reduce City
Energy Use
M2.e. Install solar
photovoltaic as shade
structures on City parking
lots and facilities
Infrastructure See M2.d See M2.d ($2,900) ($3,700) $$-

Note: GHG Reduction cost effectiveness = $/metric ton CO 2 equivalent

Table 1 Legend
Rapid Payback Net Benefit >$1,000/ton $$-
Lifetime Net Benefit $100-$1,000/ton $-
Societally Cost-Effective $=/=
Moderate Net Cost $100-$1,000/ton $+
High Net Cost >$1,000/ton $$+

t
-356-
486

15 Energy
The energy-related climate actions aimed at upgrading and electrifying City facilities (M2.d) show a mix of net benefits and costs. By comparison, on-site clean electricity generation actions (M2.e, E3.a) are moderate net cost and reduce a small amount of GHGs. The small benefit is attributable to the small gain achieved by switching away from Southern California Edison supply that, at times during the day when there is ample renewable generation, is 100% clean.29 According to their Sustainability Report, SCE has a goal of increasing the percentage of carbon-free delivered electricity from 60% in 2025 to 80% and 100% in 2030 and 2045, respectively.30 Overall, energy actions have moderate net costs when compared to the array of available actions.

Building electrification can provide important affordability benefits in addition to reducing GHG emissions.31 Efficiency improvements to buildings, such as insulation or roof replacement, can have very long paybacks because upfront costs are high while annual savings are low. Also, buildings are retrofitted at a slow rate because fixtures, such as rooftop shingles or heating systems, can last several decades.32
Upgrading to more energy efficient appliances is more cost effective and expedient than actions aimed at electrification of buildings. Appliance replacement cost-effectiveness can range from rapid payback with a large net benefit (e.g., replace an old refrigerator) to high cost with lengthy paybacks (e.g., replacing efficient new gas heater with a heat pump). All-electric appliances in new and retrofitted buildings could yield moderate and large GHG reductions, respectively, at a range of cost-effectiveness.

However, it will take a long time for the existing building stock to be upgraded entirely because some appliances can last longer than a decade, such as heating and cooling systems, clothing dryers and refrigerators.33
Multi-family electrification retrofits show the largest net benefits because they tend to have older, less efficient appliances and building shells (roofing, windows) ripe for replacement. New construction of

29 California Energy Commission, “Tracking Progress Toward 100% Clean Energy,” https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/clean-energy-serving-california/tracking-progress-toward-100-clean- energy, retrieved June 2026.
30 SCE Sustainability Report, 2025, pg. 81,
https://download.edison.com/406/files/20266/4adb13a89648fb7507f95eb511350540/2025%20Sustainability%20 Report.pdf?Signature=t5%2Fj0YnOMikiwrjH%2FB3DfNa%2BFrQ%3D&Expires=1784419329&AWSAccessKeyId=AKI ATACLJRQCWOP6ZJOW&versionId=eN4w1BnjQ_x2e4hSYkPhabVMzhRkdEOw &response-content- disposition=attachment
31 Dunlap, L., Sheinberg, R., Callan, W., Smithies, S., and Pierce, G. 2025. Impacts of Household Electrification on Energy Affordability in Los Angeles: Energy Spending and Burden Projections from the L.A. Residential Energy Transition Tool.” escholarship.org/uc/item/602136rz
32 Victor Franco, Youness Bennani, Jing Ke, Edward Cubero, Alex Lekov . Estimating Residential Appliance Lifetime for Energy Efficient Policy Analysis, Energy Analysis and Environmental Impacts Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Energy Efficiency Standards Group, August 2018. 33 James D. Lutz, Asa Hopkins, Virginie Letschert, Victor H. Franco, and Andy Sturges, Using National Survey Data to Estimate Lifetimes of Residential Appliances Energy Analysis Department Environmental Energy Technologies Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, October 2011. -357-
487

16 certain types of commercial space is the costliest option because State building codes already require a high level of energy efficiency.34
The net costs also are highly dependent on how much electricity and gas rates increase over the next several decades. New construction could provide a moderate emission reduction while widespread retrofits could result in a large reduction.

Transportation
As noted, electrifying the City’s vehicle fleet is required under State regulation. Converting the City’s vehicle fleet to electric can be highly beneficial for light-duty cars (M1.b Reduce City Vehicle Emissions).

The charging infrastructure costs are included in the over fleet conversion costs. The total emission reductions would be moderate on the community scale.

34 See California Energy Commission Building Codes at https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and- topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2028-building-energy-efficiency. -358-
488

17 APPENDIX A: COMMON DATA AND FORECAST

SOURCES AND METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES
This appendix discusses data, forecasts and methodological approaches that are commonly applied across economic analyses. In general, where a source or approach is not specified, the analysis relies on inputs from the workpapers used to assess the GHG emission reductions for individual actions in the CAAP. Calculating the economic costs, benefits and externalities relies on additional data and forecasts described below that are common across actions (e.g., energy price forecasts.)

CAPITAL COSTS AND FINANCIAL INDICATORS
Capital costs for an asset are typically incurred when the asset is acquired. To be comparable to other costs that occur repeatedly, capital costs are converted to an annual basis.35 Other annual costs include operations and maintenance costs, utility bill impacts and social cost of carbon estimates.

Adjustments to costs and benefits associated with a specific year are adjusted to common year values using consumer and producer price indices reported by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.36 Debt and loan rates are drawn from data reported by the Federal Reserve Bank.37 Data used includes personal and automobile loan rates, house mortgage rates and Moody's 20-year average annual seasoned Baa corporate bond yield.

Housing and population data are sources from the U.S. Census American Community Survey.38 Petroleum product price forecasts are from the U.S Energy Information Administration. Current gasoline prices are based on EIA weekly Los Angeles retail gasoline prices.39 That price is then escalated based on the motor gasoline price forecast in the EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook.40

35 A common type of levelized annual payment is a mortgage payment on a house loan. 36 St Louis Fed. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All items in Los Angeles, CA (CBSA). Federal Reserve Economic Data | FRED | St. Louis Fed. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/ 37 St. Louis Fed. 30-Year Fixed Rate Mortgage Average in the United States, Finance Rate on Personal Loans at Commercial Banks, 24-Month Loan, Finance Rate on Consumer Installment Loans at Commercial Banks, New Autos 48 Month Loan, Moody's Seasoned Baa Corporate Bond Yield, Percent, Annual, Not Seasonally Adjusted. Federal Reserve Economic Data | FRED | St. Louis Fed. https://fred.stlouisfed.org . 38 U.S. Census Bureau. (2022). American Community Survey Data. Census.gov. https://www.census.gov/programs- surveys/acs/data.html
39 EIA. Weekly Los Angeles Regular All Formulations Retail Gasoline Prices (Dollars per gallon). U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=EMM_EPMR_PTE_Y05LA_DPG&f=W 40 EIA. Annual Energy Outlook. Table 12. Petroleum and Other Liquids Prices. U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/data/browser/#/?id=12- AEO2023&cases=ref2023&sourcekey=0
-359-
489

18 UTILITY RATES FORECASTS
Initial investments are weighed against the discounted net present value of the operational and energy costs for a future period. The discounted net present value is heavily dependent on the price forecasts for each energy source, be it electricity, natural gas, diesel, or gasoline. Electricity and natural gas are provided by regulated utilities for which underlying future costs can be well understood and the forecasts can be made with a fair amount of certainty.

SCE is the distribution utility for electricity in the City, and it also provides generation services to most customers in the City. Southern California Gas is the natural gas utility for the City’s residents. The benefits of energy efficiency climate actions include the current and forecasted electricity rates for SCE service and natural gas rates for SCG.

SOLAR POWER AND MICROGRID COSTS
The National Renewable Energy Laboratory prepared analyses of individual household and community microgrids which are used to calculate distributed energy resources (DER) average costs for residential and community-scale deployments.41 These include the installation costs after applicable tax credits as of 2021 and are translated to annualized cents per kilowatt-hour for comparison to the alternatives.

BUILDING ELECTRIFICATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Studies prepared by California Energy Codes and Standards calculated changes in customer costs for Reach Code standards for new and existing residential and non-residential construction.42 The cases used in the CAAP analysis are all-electric efficiency and mixed fuel efficiency.

41 Vignesh Ramasamy, et al, U.S. Solar Photovoltaic System and Energy Storage Cost Benchmarks: Q1 2021, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Technical Report NREL/TP-7A40-80694, https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/80694.pdf, November 2021; and Vignesh Ramasamy, et al, U.S. Solar Photovoltaic System and Energy Storage Cost Benchmarks: Q1 2020, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Technical Report NREL/TP- 6A20-77324, https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/77324.pdf, January 2021. 42California Energy Codes and Standards. (2026). “Cost-Effectiveness Explorer: Results for City of Costa Mesa.” Updated 2025. https://explorer.localenergycodes.com/jurisdiction/costa-mesa-city/study-results/6- SCE?only_study_type=existing-buildings&exclude_study_ids=48,25,22,19,1,27,54,49,46,45,43,38,2,33 and https://explorer.localenergycodes.com/jurisdiction/costa-mesa-city/study-results/6-SCE?only_study_type=new- buildings&exclude_study_ids=48,25,22,19,1,27,54,49,46,45,43,38,2,33. -360-
490

19 VALUATION OF EXTERNALITIES
Social Cost of Carbon
The social cost of carbon is a metric used by the US EPA and other federal agencies to estimate the value to society of greenhouse gas emissions reductions based on the impacts of climate change on agricultural productivity, human health, and flood risk.43 It is a dollar-based assessment of the negative impact that carbon dioxide emissions have in a given year. Conversely, it represents the benefit of avoided damages from an incremental reduction in carbon dioxide. This study relies on values developed by the EPA for 2030 through 2050, under their 3% average discount rate scenario, representing a mid-range value of the impact.44 The social cost of carbon value used in this analysis is $72 per ton in 2030 and $94 in 2045, in 2022 dollars.

43 Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases, United States Government. Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates under Executive Order 13990.

February 2021. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2021/02/TechnicalSupportDocument_SocialCostofCarbonMethaneNitrousOxide.pdf 44 US EPA. (2017). The Social Cost of Carbon, US EPA. United States Environmental Protection Agency. https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/climatechange/social-cost-carbon_.html; and Executive Order 12866 (May 2013, Revised August 2016).
-361-
491

Costa Mesa
Environmental Funding
Landscape
-362-
492
M.Cubed
June 8, 2026

INTRODUCTION
This funding scan identifies potential grants, incentives, rebates, financing tools, and technical assistance programs that may support environmental projects in Costa Mesa. The accompanying Costa Mesa Grants Excel workbook is intended as a working inventory, not a final application plan. It screens programs by administering agency, government level, action area, and notes on the nature of each opportunity.

The grant landscape is fragmented. Funding is spread across state agencies, regional planning bodies, utilities, air districts, water agencies, transportation agencies, federal pass-through programs, and more.

Many programs are not traditional grants. Some are rebates, tax credits, loan programs, technical assistance resources, utility incentives, or regulatory mechanisms.

A key constraint is timing. This scan assumes Costa Mesa would need at least six months, and likely more, to identify a project concept and submit a competitive application. Programs with near-term deadlines should generally be treated as monitoring items unless a project is already mature. The Excel file uses this lens to distinguish between active opportunities, future-cycle monitoring items, and programs that are not a good fit.

Funding Landscape
California maintains substantial environmental related funding for buildings, ecosystems, energy finance, housing, resilience, technical assistance, waste, water, and workforce development. Regional agencies are especially important for Costa Mesa. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), Southern California Regional Energy Network (SoCalREN), Southern California Edison (SCE), Southern California Gas (SoCalGas), Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWDSC), and regional water agencies are closer to the city’s implementation needs and may provide more practical pathways for financial assistance. Utility and ratepayer-funded programs also remain important California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)-regulated programs, SCE, SoCalGas, and SoCalREN can provide incentives even though they are not traditional grants. State funding sources come from the Strategic Growth Council (SGC) that administers proceeds to from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, California Air Resources Board (CARB), California Energy Commission (CEC) and the Integrated Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Program (ICARP) administered by the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation that receive appropriations from the State Legislature, and the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (I Bank) run by the State Treasurer, and the 2024 Proposition 4 Climate Bond.

Federal funding should be treated with caution. Much of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law money, authorized in 2021, has already moved through funding rounds. Inflation Reduction Act funding, authorized in 2022, also has been largely expended and further allotments are questionable with the change of administration. Some IRA programs are legally uncertain, some have accelerated deadlines, -363-
493
3 and some expected downstream financing pathways have not fully materialized. The Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund within the IRA is especially unlikely for future Costa Mesa planning because it is politically and legally contested and probably not likely to function as a simple, reliable municipal grant source.

This uncertainty is broader than climate funding. The Trump administration has pursued a more centralized federal grantmaking approach, including proposed rules that would require discretionary grants to advance presidential policy priorities and give political appointees greater authority over grant approval.

For Costa Mesa, federal opportunities should not be ignored, but they should be screened conservatively. Programs are most useful when funding is already awarded, formula-based, contractually obligated, administered through a state or regional agency, or part of a long-running program with a clear implementation pathway. For forward-looking planning, Costa Mesa should prioritize recurring California programs, regional funding sources, utility incentives, and established local implementation partners over uncertain future federal discretionary grants.

HOW TO USE THE COSTA MESA GRANTS WORKBOOK
The Excel workbook is organized as a first-pass funding inventory. Each row identifies a program or funding pathway, the administering agency, the government level, a simplified action area, and notes on the specific opportunity. The intent is to help Costa Mesa staff or consultants quickly filter potential opportunities by project type.

The workbook should be used in three ways. First, it can support early project matching. When Costa Mesa is considering a new project, the workbook can identify agencies and programs that may be worth checking. Second, it can serve as a monitoring tool. Some programs are relevant but not currently open, have uncertain future rounds, or have deadlines that are too soon. These should not be treated as immediate opportunities, but they may justify future tracking. Third, it can help remove poor-fit programs. Programs that are geographically ineligible, too tribal- or agriculture-specific, recreation- focused, expired, or not meaningfully environmental should be deleted or deprioritized. The goal is not to list every possible funding source but to maintain a focused list of realistic environmental funding pathways for Costa Mesa.

Key Monitoring Sources
Because individual grant deadlines change frequently, the most useful long-term tool is a short list of agency-wide grant portals. These portals should be checked periodically for new rounds, especially when Costa Mesa has a project concept that needs funding.

Table 1: Grant Monitoring Table
Agency Website Notes
Caltrans Local Assistance Caltrans' Local Assistance Program oversees more than one billion dollars annually available to over 600 cities, counties and regional agencies for the purpose of improving their transportation infrastructure or providing transportation services.
-364-
494
4 Agency Website Notes
CARB CARB Funding
Opportunities
Includes CARB funding opportunities for clean transportation, air quality, climate, freight, and community-scale decarbonization programs.

CEC CEC Solicitations Includes most CEC funding opportunities across energy, buildings, EVs, transportation, and energy research.

CPUC Financial
Assistance,
Savings, and
Discounts
Includes utility bill assistance, rebates, appliance incentives, low- income programs, and customer energy savings resources.

I Bank Financing
Options
IBank’s lending products enable organizations to access the low- cost capital they need for their climate solutions.

ICARP Grant Programs The ICARP Grant Programs provide funding to help fill local, regional, and tribal adaptation planning and resilience needs, provide resources, and support the development of a pipeline of climate resilient projects.

OCTA OCTA Funding
Programs
Includes OCTA transportation, active transportation, and Measure M funding programs and calls for projects.

Prop 4 Climate Bond
Programs
The 2024 Climate Bond invests $10 billion in local projects that enhance the environment. About 40% of funds remain uncommitted.

SCAG SCAG Grant
Opportunities
Includes regional grant opportunities relevant to Southern California local governments, transportation, planning, housing, and sustainability projects.

SCAQMD Grants & Bids Includes incentive programs, grant opportunities, and technology funding focused on air quality and emissions reductions.

SCE SCE Rebates &
Financial
Assistance
Includes SCE rebates, financial assistance, electrification incentives, and customer energy-saving programs.

SGC SGC Grant
Programs
Includes climate resilience, affordable housing, community development, and sustainable infrastructure grant programs.

SoCalGas Energy Efficiency
Contracted
Programs
Includes SoCalGas energy efficiency, contractor-delivered incentive, financing, and technical assistance programs.

SoCalREN SoCalREN
Services
Includes public agency, multifamily, financing, workforce, and regional energy efficiency support programs.

State of
California
California Grants
Portal
Statewide California grant and loan portal aggregating funding opportunities across agencies and sectors.

Priority Areas by Agency
First, some of these funding sources focus on grants and loans to local jurisdictions and others make direct contributions to consumers and taxpayers through rebates, bill credits and tax credits. The City can become an administrator for community funding for the first set of sources or tap those for its own -365-
495
5 needs, but its options for directing financing from the latter group are limited. In those cases, a consumer or taxpayer must directly apply for the financial benefit.

Buildings and energy opportunities include energy efficiency, electrification, heat pump incentives, benchmarking, technical assistance, low-income programs, and utility rebates. CEC, CPUC, SCE, SoCalGas, and SoCalREN are the major agencies to monitor. Most often these are direct bill credit and rebate programs from those entities and the City educates its residents about the opportunities. Certain municipal energy efficiency improvements can be funded and financed through these offerings.

Housing-related opportunities should be included only when they have a clear sustainability nexus, such as affordable housing paired with transit, electrification, resilience, infill, energy efficiency, or VMT reduction. Generic housing funds should not be emphasized unless they can be tied directly to environmental outcomes. The Strategic Growth Council funds income-qualified deed-restricted subsidized affordable housing projects based on a sustainability scorecard.

Transportation opportunities include active transportation, EV charging, clean fleets, safe streets, congestion reduction, and air-quality programs. OCTA, SCAG, Caltrans, CARB, and South Coast AQMD are especially important for this category. Most often these programs are community-wide funding sources that are to be administered by the City. Municipal operation improvements can be funded through some of these sources.

RECOMMENDED NEXT STEPS
Costa Mesa can use the Excel workbook as a living funding tracker. This version contains opportunities that match with priorities identified in the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan. For each priority project, staff can identify the likely lead agency, project maturity, match availability, implementation partner, and minimum application timeline.

Near-term deadlines should not drive the strategy unless a project is “shovel ready.” Instead, the city should identify likely future-cycle programs and prepare project concepts in advance. This is especially important for competitive grants, where successful applications might require scoped projects, cost estimates, maps, community benefits, partnerships, and internal approvals before the solicitation is released.
-366-
496
ATTACHMENT 3
Resolution No. PC-2026-XX Page 1 of 330

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA ,

CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR A SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE (PCTY -25-0002) AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE POLICY UPDATE (PCTY-26-0002)

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA FINDS AND DECLARES AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa is processing amendments to the Costa Mesa General Plan to comply with state law requirements applicable to the Safety Element and environmental justice policies, including Government Code s ections 65300 through 65303.4; and
WHEREAS, California law requires every city to adopt a general plan, which must include specified mandatory elements, and may include additional optional elements, in furtherance of State policy to provide a comprehensive, long- term plan for the physical development and use of property within the City’s jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 65350, et. seq., th e Safety Element update and Environmental Justice Policy amendments constitutes a General Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Element establishes policies to protect the community from natural and human- caused hazards and improving emergency preparedness and resilience, and California has adopted new legislation requiring local governments to incorporate climate adaptation and updated hazard information into their Gen eral Plans including Senate Bill 379 which requires cities to evaluate how climate change may affect future hazards, and Senate Bill 1035 which requires cities to review and revise their Safety Elements using updated flood and fire hazard information as it becomes available; and WHEREAS, the City adopted a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan on November 4, 2022, following a comprehensive evaluation of hazards, vulnerabili ty assessment, emergency preparedness capabilities, and hazard mitigation strategies , and contains the City's most current hazard assessments and mitigation planning, by amending the Safety Element to incorporate the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan ensures that the General Plan reflects the most up-to-date technical information and maintains consistency among the City's long- 497

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 2 of 330

range planning and emergency management documents bringing it into compliance with state law; and
WHEREAS, Government Code section 65302(h), enacted through Senate Bill 1000, requires cities to incorporate Environmental Justice goals, policies, and objectives into the General Plan upon the adoption or substantial revision of two or more General Plan elements; because the City previously updated its Housing Element and is now updating its Safety Element, the City is required to identify and incorporate environmental justice policies throughout the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City identified numerous existing General Plan policies that support Environmental Justice objectives and developed targeted revisions to existing policies and several new policies to address areas where additional policy direction was needed to satisfy state requirements; and
WHEREAS, on July 1, 2026 through August 4, 2026, the draft Safety Element update and Environmental Justice Policy were made available for public review and comment; and
WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on July 27, 2026, the Planning Commission held a study session to receive an introductory presentation on the Safety Element update and Environmental Justice Policy and after public comment the Planning Commission received and filed the report and provided feedback on the documents; and WHEREAS, on August 10, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing at which all interested persons had the opportunity to speak for and against the proposed amendments, and recommended 5 -1, with one commissioner absent, the City Council adopt the proposed General Plan amendment; WHEREAS, on September 15, 2026, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing at which all interested persons had the opportunity to speak for and against the proposed amendments;
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the state CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Safety Element u pdate and Environmental Justice policies are exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Gui delines section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption), as it can be seen with certainty that adoption of these policy documents will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable significant effect on the 498

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 3 of 330

environment. The proposed documents establish goals, policies, and implementation strategies related to hazard mitigation, climate adaptation, greenhouse gas reduction, emergency preparedness, and community resilience, but do not authorize or approve any specific development or physical improvements.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Costa Mesa City Council, in its independent judgment and after fully considering all testimony and evidence presented at the public, hearing hereby finds as follows:

SECTION 1: That the proposed Safety Element update and Environmental Justice Policy update are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3).

S ECTION 2 : City Council a dopts t he General Plan Amendment included within Exhibit A, which reflects both the Safety Element update and the Environmental Justice Policy update.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Costa Mesa City Council does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon the activity as described in the staff report, and compliance of all applicable federal, state, and local laws.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any section, division, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this resolution, or the document in the record in support of this resolution, are for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this ____ day of September, 2026.

John Stephens, Mayor

499

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 4 of 330

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

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

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 is the original of Resolution No. 2026-xx and was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa at a regular meeting held on the ___day of _____, 2026, 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 _____, 2026.

___________________________
Brenda Green, City Clerk
500

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 5 of 330

EXHIBIT A
501
Chapter 2
Land Use Element
Introduction
The Land Use Element is the keystone element of the Costa Mesa General Plan. This Element unifies the other elements by providing an overall policy context for future physical change. Goals and policies define the community’s desired balance among social, environmental , and economic considerations, while maintaining those characteristics of the community that reinforce quality neighborhoods and viable business districts.

As Costa Mesa implements this General Plan, the City aspires to keep Costa Mesa an eclectic community with welcoming public spaces; attractive, walkable residential neighborhoods; exceptional parks and community services; and, a diverse economy that meets the needs of local residents while also attracting investment from regional and international markets.

Looking southeast over Costa Mesa’s Westside District.

Updated September 24, 2025 – General Plan Amendments:

GP 18-02, October 2, 2018 PGPA-24-01, July 15, 2025
GP 18-03, November 13, 2018 PGPA-24-02, August 5, 2025
GP 20-01, July 12, 2021 PCTY-25-04, November 4, 2025
ATTACHMENT 4

EXHIBIT A TO

RESOLUTION
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 6 of 330
502
Purpose
The Land Use Element shape s new physical development in the City and its sphere of influence and provides strategies to preserve, protect, and enhance established neighborhoods and districts consistent with the community’s v ision. Through implementation of the Land Use Element, the City seeks to accomplish the following:
 Target new development opportunities at key locations while ensuring compatibility with established neighborhoods
 Increase homeownership opportunities in the City
 Establish and maintain an orderly pattern of development in the City  Establish a land use classification system that implements land use policies  Identify acceptable land uses and their general locations  Promote consistency with standards for residential density and non-residential building intensity for existing and future development
 Accommodate a diversity of businesses to provide a solid tax base and ample employment opportunities, to attract visitor/tourist spending, and to hedge against periodic downturns in business sectors
 Provide open space, park areas, and public spaces where residents can enjoy passive and active recreational pursuits
 Ensure that new development is economically and environmentally sustainable The Land Use Element serves as the long -range planning guide for development in the City by indicating the location and extent of development to be allowed , in conjunction with any future housing opportunities identified within a sites inventory of the Housing Element. More than any other element, the Land Use Element will have a major impact on the form and character of Costa Mesa over the next 20 years. The Land Use Element applies to all properties within the corporate City limits, as well as properties within Costa Mesa’s sphere of influence, as established by the Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). Together, these areas comprise the “planning area.” Figure LU -1 illustrates the planning area boundaries in Chapter 1, Introduction.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 7 of 330
503
Figure LU-1: Planning Area
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 8 of 330
504
Land Use Context-2015
The City has implemented strategic efforts over the years to provide a sustainable balance of residential, commercial, industrial, and public and institutional uses. Land use planning ensures that compatible and complementary uses are arranged in patterns that achieve efficiencies for projected growth, mobility, and commerce. This Land Use section describes the general location, type, and intensity of development throughout Costa Mesa in baseline year 2015.

Planning Context
Development History
Costa Mesa’s incorporated city limits encompass approximately 10,143 acres, or approximately 15.8 square miles. The City lies on an elevated mesa landform less than one mile from the Pacific Ocean. The Spanish name Costa Mesa means coastal tableland. Like throughout much of Southern California, the earliest settlers were Native Americans who fished and farmed. Spanish land grants in the 1800s brought Europeans into the area, with additional growth facilitated by extension of the railroad and , later, discovery of oil. Until the 1950s, agriculture remained the most important economic component of Orange County, and Costa Mesa was home to thousands of acres of sweet pota to, corn, tomato, and strawberry crops. Remnants of this agricultural heritage remain s through 2015 on properties north of Interstate 405, amid the urban development of South Coast Plaza and the Segerstrom Center for the Arts.

During World War II, the U.S. military established a number of bases in Orange County, including the Santa Ana Army Air Base in Costa Mesa (now the Orange County Fairgrounds). In the years following World War II, the surge in population and demand for affordable ho using soared as returning veterans with new families looked to buy homes. The accelerated demand for suburban homes resulted in the conversion of thousands of agricultural land to large single-family housing tracts. Today, single family homes remain the predominant use in Costa Mesa.

From the 1970s through 1990s, Costa Mesa experienced significant growth in retail and office development, with development of regional shopping malls and high-rise office buildings north of I-405.

Investment in the industrial district south of West 19th Street included a substantial presence of surfing and similar action sports businesses, several of which have grown to be multi-million dollar international brands.

Established Land Uses (2015)
Costa Mesa is 99 percent built out, with the largest vacant parcels located in the North Costa Mesa area.

The two largest available properties are; the 31-acre Segerstrom Home Ranch and the 33-acre Sakioka Lot 2 site: both are currently in agriculture production , as of 2015, and lie north of I- 405. The North Costa Mesa Specific Plan regulates land uses on these properties.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 9 of 330
505
Residential
As of 2015, approximately 46.2 percent of land in the planning area consisted of residential neighborhoods. Single-family neighborhoods cover approximately 30 percent of the land in the City .

There are a greater number of multi-family units ( 28,413 units) than single-family units (14,210 units).

Costa Mesa contains a number of distinct residential neighborhoods, including:
1) Eastside 5) North Costa Mesa/Mesa Del Mar/Halecrest Hall of Fame 2) Westside 6) Bristol/Paularino
3) Mesa Verde 7) South Coast/Wimbledon Village
4) College Park

Opportunity for new large-scale, single-family development is limited due to the built -out nature of the City’s residential areas and limited acreage of vacant land. The accelerated demand for suburban homes experienced in the mid-1950s and 1960s resulted in the conversion of thousands of agricultural acres to large single -family housing tracts. Single -family residential construction primarily consists of infill development, particularly in Eastside and Westside Costa Mesa. F rom 2012 to 2016, new small lo t subdivisions have been approved in multi-family zones in Eastside Costa Mesa. Medium- and High-Density Residential land uses account for 17 percent of the net acreage. Medium -Density Residential areas are distributed throughout the City. High-Density neighborhoods are clustered around Orange Coast College, along Mesa Verde Drive East, along Adams Avenue, around Vanguard University, in the northeast portion of the South Coast Metro area, in Downtown, and in the southeast portion of the City. In addition, t he Housing Element identifies where future housing opportunities are appropriate throughout the City.

These sites are identified in the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

Mesa Verde residential neighborhood with a mixture of single -family and multi -family units, as well as parks and schools.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 10 of 330
506
Because many residential units were constructed prior to City incorporation, particularly on the Eastside, existing residential densities in the Medium - and High-Density land use designations may exceed the currently allowed number of dwelling units per acre.

Commercial Uses
Costa Mesa contains seven commercial corridors: 1) South Coast Corridor 2) Bristol Street Corridor, 3) Harbor Boulevard Corridor, 4) East 17 th Street Corridor, 5 ) North Newport Boulevard Corridor, 6) South Newport Boulevard Corridor, and 7 ) West 19 th Street Corridor. Established commercial land uses encompass 9.6 percent of the land area, or 770 acres.

South Coast Plaza, located along the Bristol Street Corridor, contains the largest single concentration of retail uses in the City and accounts for 30 percent of the commercial square footage; the adjacent Town Center area accounts for nearly 20 percent of the area planned for office space throughout the City.

The Harbor Boulevard commercial corridor accounts for almost one-third of the City’s commercial land.

Businesses along the boulevard account for 40 percent of the City’s total retail sales, indicating that Harbor Boulevard’s trade area is of a regional scale. The major factor for this is the concentration of auto dealerships on Harbor Boulevard.

The 92-acre East 17th Street commercial corridor contains a variety of commercial uses, including retail, service, and office. The area generally serves local residences and businesses.

Major retail centers other than South Coast Plaza include the CAMP, the LAB Anti-Mall, South Coast Collection (SOCO), Metro Pointe, and The Triangle. Each offers its own unique mix of shopping and dining experiences, as well as entertainment for the residents of Costa Mesa and Orange County at large.

Costa Mesa Downtown and The Triangle consists of a mixture of neighborhood and community-serving commercial uses.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 11 of 330
507
Industrial Uses
Established i ndustrial land use s encompass approximately 10 .5 percent of land and are primarily concentrated in three major districts: The Westside District, the Airport Industrial/Business Park District, and the Harbor Gateway District.

The Westside District is the City’s oldest industrial area; it covers approximately 312 acres and represents

82.5 percent of land area designated for Light Industrial. The remaining 17.5 percent of Light Industrial uses are located in areas along Baker Street. Light Industrial uses consist of small manufacturing and service industries, as well as larger industrial operations.

The Westside District contains several large manufacturing firms and a high percentage of smaller industrial operations, frequently in multi-tenant structures. The Southwest District is one of Costa Mesa’s major employment centers, providing about one-fourth of all local manufacturing-related jobs.

The 390 -acre Airport Industrial Area is a component of the much larger Irvine Business and Industrial Complex, which extends into the cities of Irvine and Tustin. This area is characterized by large parcels and wide landscaped building setbacks. Several firms have located their main or regional headquarters in the area and are often the single tenants in large structures.

Industrial space directly adjacent to John Wayne Airport provides opportunities to airport-related industries. Some of these properties include hangars with access to the runway.

The 323-acre Harbor Gateway District is an Industrial/Business Park located within the north part of Costa Mesa, northeast of I-405 and the Santa Ana River. This district is a part of a larger industrial area extending northward into the c ity of Santa Ana. The primary users of this industrial area are large single -tenant manufacturing firms and corporate offices. Included within this district is a 14.5-acre portion of the Home Ranch area property and the unique “lifestyle” South Coast Collection (SOCO) shopping center . SOCO includes over 300,000 square feet of design showrooms, creative studios, specialty retail and food stores, The Airport Industrial/ Business Park District includes a concentration of industrial, office, and commercial uses.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 12 of 330
508
a weekly farmers’ market, and outdoor gathering spaces. The OC Mix, located in SOCO, is a marketplace for gourmet foods, coffee, wine, and over 30 owner-operated retail and specialty shops under one roof.

Public/Institutional, Golf Course, and Fairground Uses
The Public/Institutional designation applies to publicly and privately owned properties that provide recreation, open space, health, and educational opportunities, as well as uses that provide a service to the public.

A major land acquisition by the State in 1950 was responsible for the public ownership of the Costa Mesa Golf Course and Country Club and Fairview Park. In 1950, 750 acres were acquired for a State institution.

In 2015, the Fairview Developmental Center occupied 114 acres of the original 750-acre site. Acquisitions by the City and County have expanded this area to include the County’s Talbert Regional Park adjacent to the Santa Ana River and the City’s adjoining Canyon Park. See Table LU -1: Public and Institutional Land Acquisitions, for various public and institution uses government land acquisitions.

A total of 1, 263.4 acres are designated Public/Institutional. When combined with the Costa Mesa Golf Course and Orange County Fair & Event Center, these uses constitute 25 percent of the planning area.

This high percentage of land area designated for public and institutional use primarily reflects past and current use by various governmental agencies: T he Santa Ana Army Air Base during World War II, the original 750-acre land acquisition by the State of California, and land acquisitions by the City and Orange County.

The golf course designation includes the Mesa Verde and Santa Ana Country Clubs (both private) and the City-owned Costa Mesa Golf Course and Country Club. The Fairgrounds property includes the 150 -acre Orange County Fair & Event Center, which is owned by the 32nd District Agricultural Association, a State special-purpose district in the Division of Fairs and Expositions of the California Department of Food and Agriculture formed in 1949. Its board is appointed by the Governor of California.

Orange Coast College, founded in 1947, includes over 80 academic program areas and over 50 career and technical programs.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 13 of 330
509
Table LU-1: Public and Institutional Land Acquisitions
Government Land
Acquisition Public and Institutional Uses
Santa Ana Army Air Base Orange Coast College, Costa Mesa High School, Davis Middle School, Presidio Elementary School, TeWinkle
Park, the National Guard Armory, Orange County
Fairgrounds, Jack R. Hammett Sports Complex, Civic
Center Park, City Hall, and Vanguard University
750-acre land (1950) Costa Mesa Golf Course and Country Club and Fairview Park, Fairview Developmental Center
City and County expansion Talbert Regional Park and Canyon Park

Table LU-2: Established Land Uses (2015) , summarizes the existing land uses in Costa Mesa that were surveyed in 2015, including number of acres, residential units, building square feet, hotel and motel rooms, and estimated employees.

Orange Coast College Vision 2020 Facilities Master Plan Costa Mesa is home to Orange Coast College, which is one of three colleges in the Coast Community College District. Orange Coast College is located at 2701 Fairview Road in the central portion of Costa Mesa. The District has been involved in preparing the Orange Coast College Vision 2020 Facilities Master Plan, which involves construction of new academic, administrative, residential, and parking facilities on the campus. In November 2015, the Coast Community College District Board of Trustees approved the Final Orange Coast College Vision 2020 Facilities Master Plan Program EIR.

The proposed Master Plan involves following improvements:
 Renovation of two existing buildings, totaling approximately 54,000 assignable square feet (ASF) and demolition of approximately 200,900 ASF.
 A new planetarium and an 818-bed student housing project would be added to the campus; the proposed project would also involve improvements to the pedestrian circulation network in and around campus, and the enhancement of open -space areas through landscape and pedestrian plaza improvements.
 Reconfiguration of existing parking lots and vehicular entryways, and the addition of a parking structure in the Adams Avenue parking lot on campus.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 14 of 330
510
Table LU-2: Established Land Uses (2015)
Land Use Net
Acres1
% of
Acres
Residential
Units Population Building Square
Feet
Lodging
Rooms Employees
Single-Family 2,314 28.8 14,210 39,508 -- -- --
Multi-Family 1,402 17.4 28,413 71,032 -- -- 100
Office 332 4.1 -- 7,224,000 -- 24,000
Commercial 770 9.6 -- 11,403,000 -- 23,400
Lodging:

Motel/Hotel 60 0.8 -- -- Motel: 2, 272
Hotel: 1,877 1,400
Industrial 841 10.5 -- 13,087,000 -- 27,300
Public Facilities/
Institutional 491 6.1 -- -- -- 6,2005
Schools/Colleges 525 6.5 -- -- -- 4,300
Golf 553 6.9 -- -- -- 100
Parks/Recreation 592 7.4 -- -- -- --2
Agriculture 72 0.9 -- -- -- 200
Other4 70 0.9 -- 555,000 -- 300
Vacant Lands 20 0.3 -- -- -- --
Total 8,042 100.0% 42,623 110,540 32,269,000 4,149 87,3003 Sources: City of Costa Mesa, Stantec, and MIG, 2015.

Note:

1. Net acres includes all private property land areas for the entire Planning Area, excluding all public right-of-way.

2. Park employment is counted under Public Facilities

3. Employees is calculated using building square footage and employment generation rates by land use category. Center for Demographic Research, California State University, Fullerton identifies 87,097 jobs for 2015 based on 2014 projections.

4. Other land uses refers to religious institutions, utilities, railroad properties, and other classifications that are not classified under the existing land use categories.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 15 of 330
511
Table LU-3: Land Use Designations (2015)
Land Use Designations Residential
Density Floor-Area Ratio Acres
Developed
Acres
Undeveloped
Net
Acres
% of
Acres
Residential*
Low-Density Residential <8 du/ac
N/A
2,087.4 0.8 2,088.2 25.9%
Medium-Density Residential <12 du/ac 858.1 1.1 859.1 10.7% High-Density Residential1,2 <20 du/ac 866.12 2.912 869.03 10.8% Non-Residential*
Commercial-Residential <17.4 du/ac

0.20/High Traffic

0.30/Moderate Traffic

0.40/Low Traffic

47.9 0.0 47.9 0.6%
Neighborhood Commercial <20 du/ac

0.15/High Traffic

0.25/Moderate Traffic

0.35/Low Traffic

0.75/Very Low Traffic

40.3 0.2 40.5 0.5%
General Commercial <20 du/ac

0.20/High Traffic

0.30/Moderate Traffic

0.40/Low Traffic

0.75/Very Low Traffic
599.82 8.5 608.32 7.5%
Commercial Center3, <20 du/ac

0.25/High Traffic

0.35/Moderate Traffic

0.45/Low Traffic

0.75/Very Low Traffic
117.18 0.3 117.48 1.5%
Urban Center Commercial3 20 to 80 du/ac N/A5 59.74 66.6 126.34 1.6% Cultural Arts Center4 Varies4 1.774 57.3 0.0 57.3 0.7%
Regional Commercial <20 du/ac 0.652/0.894 147.9 0.0 147.9 1.8% Industrial Park <20 du/ac

0.20/High Traffic

0.30/Moderate Traffic

0.40/Low Traffic

0.75/Very Low Traffic
630.13 2.4 632.53 7,9%
Light Industrial6 <20 du/ac

0.15/High Traffic

0.25/Moderate Traffic

0.35/Low Traffic

0.75/Very Low Traffic
374.2 4.0 378.1 4.7%
Public and Institutional -- 0.25 1,263.2 0.3 1,263.4 15.7 Golf Course -- <0.01 553.7 0.0 553.7 6.9%
Fairgrounds -- <0.10 150.0 0.0 150.0 1.9%
Multi-Use Center 15 to 25 du/ac 0.25 102.6 0.0 102.6 1.3% Totals 7,955.6 87.1 8,042.4 100%
Notes: * Residential density may exceed those identified within Table LU-3 to accommodate the density of sites identified as housing opportunity sites within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

1. Within the Medium and High Density Residential designation, existing residential units legally built in excess of the dwelling units per acre standard may be rebuilt at the same higher density subject to other zoning code standards. The allowable density or number of units to be redeveloped would be limited to the 1990 General Plan density with a 25% incentive bonus for Medium-Density or a 50% incentive bonus for High Density or the existing number of units, whichever is less.

2. See High Density Residential text regarding areas in North Costa Mesa where the density allowance exceeds 20 units per acre. Site Specific Density of 20.4 du/acre approved for 1.86-acre 38 unit project at 1957 Newport Blvd. and 390 Ford Road.

3. See Commercial Center, Regional Commercial, and Urban Center Commercial text for site specific density and FAR.

4. See text for Mixed-Use Development and Cultural Arts Center provisions for additional discussion.

5. Varies, depends on development agreement for site.

PGPA-24-02, Adopted August 5, 2025
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 16 of 330
512
Jobs/Housing Relationship
The variety and distribution of land uses in Costa Mesa enable people to live near their jobs, to shop within a reasonable distance from their homes or work, to use the City’s parks and recreational facilities, and to carry out other daily activities conveniently. Information from the 2010 Census indicates that 32 percent of residents work in the City. Fifty-one percent work within 20 minutes of their homes. The City recognizes the importance of providing both job and housing opportunities to reduce vehicle trips and overall, create a higher quality of life.

Table LU-4: Housing, Population, and Employment, presents historical data for Costa Mesa’s population, number of housing units, and employment opportunities, and includes projections to the year 2040. The table is based upon OCP-2015 Projections and data from the U.S Census.

Table LU-4: Housing, Population, and Employment
Year 20001 20102 20153 20203 20404
Housing 40,406 40,104 42,496 43,484 54,503
Population 108,724 109,960 111,276 113,900 116,400
Employment 88,294 88,416 87,097 89,600 93,200
Sources: 1. 2000 U.S. Census; 2. 2010 U.S. Census and SCAG 2016-2040 Regional Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction Report. ; 3. Center for Demographic Research, California State University, Fullerton, 2014 and SCAG 2016- 2040 Regional Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction Report. ; 4. Center for Demographic Research, California State University, Fullerton, 2022 and SCAG 2016-2040 Regional Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction Report.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 17 of 330
513
Key Land Use Issues
Residential Neighborhood Compatibility
Early subdivisions in Costa Mesa established patterns that markedly affect the design of current developments. Prior to the City’s incorporation, residential development—particularly in the Eastside and Westside neighborhoods—consisted of subdivisions with long, narrow lots . As residential development occurred, construction on these narrow, deep lots often took the form of subdivisions usually consisting of a row of detached or attached residential units on one side of the parcel and the driveway access for the residential units on the opposite side.

In 2013, the Small Lot Ordinance was adopted to promote affordable ownership housing by providing more flexible development standards and maintenance mechanisms for underutilized multi -family residential lots within the densities allowed by the General Plan. The Small Lot Ordinance allowed new homeownership opportunities in the form of detached single-family residential development on small lots with a maximum of 15 dwelling units.

Promotion of Home Ownership
According to the 2010 Census data, Costa Mesa’s renter-occupied units consisted of 58 percent of the total occupied units, whereas owner-occupied units consisted of 42 percent of the total occupied units, a difference of nearly 16 percent. Most owner -occupied unit s consist of single -family homes and condominiums, and the majority of renter-occupied residences consist of apartments. The City strives to improve the balance of owner-occupied and renter-occupied units to create more stability in terms of property maintenance and residents’ social investment in their neighborhoods and the community.

Revitalization of Commercial Districts
Although most of the issues experienced with small parcels and narrow, deep parcels are related to residential development, several commercial districts face similar constraints. While large retail developments like the Triangle have resulted from lot consolidation, smaller commercial lots along Newport Boulevard and 19th Street, for example, pose challenges for new businesses due to substandard parking facilities. Along the east side of Newport Boulevard, many small parcels retain the original residential structures that have been converted to commercial use. Additionally , along Newport Boulevard, north of 19th Street, commercial uses have more limited exposure and visibility due to the one- way traffic flow and wide separation from land uses to the west. Newport Boulevard’s one -way traffic flow, diversity of ownership patterns, and eclectic mix of uses contribute to its lack of unity and identity, which in turn makes it difficult to attract new development proposals and/or businesses. The City will need to continue t o monitor activity on Newport Boulevard , Harbor Boulevard, and other commercial districts with similar challenging circumstances to determine if additional adjustments to land use policy and zoning regulations are needed to incentivize reinvestment.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 18 of 330
514
Live/Work Development in Industrial Areas
The Westside has long supported an intertwined mix of industrial, commercial, and residential uses.

Industrial uses have predominated in this southwest corner of the City, including many that once supported the marine industry. In 2005, the City adopted a mixed-use overlay zones within the Westside and SoBECA Urban Plans. The Urban Plans do not promote any major intensification of land uses. The emphasis is on improving the Urban Plan area by providing visual enhancement and encouraging the development of live/work units or residential lots with the plan area , thereby revitalizing marginal properties and creating opportunities for home ownership. The objectives of the Urban Plans include:
 Encourage the construction of Live/Work Units that combine residential and nonresidential uses in the same unit without exceeding the development capacity of the General Plan transportation system.
 Attract more residents and merchants by allowing mixed- use development in the form of a live/work loft, which offers first-floor retail/office uses and upper story living spaces in the same unit.
 Encourage adaptive reuse of existing industrial or commercial structures, which would result in rehabilitated buildings with unique architecture and a wider array of complementary uses.  Stimulate improvement in the Urban Plan area through well- designed and integrated urban residential development that is nontraditional in form and designed with flexible open floor plans and which complements the surrounding existing development.  Meet demand for a new housing type to satisfy a diverse residential population comprised of artists, designers, craftspeople, professionals, and small-business entrepreneurs.  Promote new type of urban housing that would be target-marketed to people seeking alternative housing choices in an industrial area. An urban loft would be an alternative to a traditional single- family residence, tract home, or small-lot subdivision.

Costa Mesa values the opportunities the Westside provides to support enterprising industry and entrepreneurs. Land use regulations need to be crafted in a way that furthers economic development and business support while allowing residential development in the right locations in the Westside.

Mixed-Use Districts
The Westside and South Bristol Entertainment and Cultural Arts (SoBECA) areas contain eclectic uses that have emerged organically. In other areas of Costa Mesa, including High Density Residential areas and the Harbor Mixed -Use Overlay District, the City encourages mixed-use urban environments that include purposeful combinations of entertainment, retail, office, hospitality , and residential uses . Mixed-use development creates a productive use of space that adds vitality to urban areas and conserves land resources by allowing for shared parking and public spaces.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 19 of 330
515
Airport Considerations
Both the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County have concern for the safety of air navigation around John Wayne Airport. Under Part 77 of t he Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR), the FAA requires notice of proposed construction in excess of certain heights which may affect the safety of aircraft operations. The authority of the FAA in these matters extends only as far as issuing a notice of hazard to air navigation; the FAA does not have jurisdiction to prohibit construction. The issuance of a hazard notice, however, may adversely affect the ability of a developer to obtain financing and insurance. The FAA standard that is of most concern in Costa Mesa is the horizontal surface around John Wayne Airport. This surface is 206 feet above mean sea level and extends nearly two miles from the airport.

The South Coast Plaza Town Center Master Plan (the area east of Bristol Street and north of the I -405) was approved subject to the condition that building height be limited to that specified by FAR Part 77 unless evidence is presented that the structure will not pose a hazard to air navigation nor interfere with instrument guidance systems. Evidence may be in the form of an FAA determination of no hazard. A number of Town Center structures and proposed mid-rise and high-rise residential buildings have received City approval although they encroach beyond the established horizontal surface elevation. In all cases obstruction lighting was required and , in some cases, minor adjustments to seldom-used flight patterns were necessitated, but the safety of aircraft operations in the airport vicinity has not been compromised.

The horizontal surface established by the FAA places restrictions on future development proposals similar in scale to the Town Center buildings. These developments will also be required to provide mitigation for potential hazards to air safety. The California Public Utilities Code prov ides for creation of countywide commissions to work towards achieving compatible land uses in the vicinity of airports. Commissions are required to formulate comprehensive land use plans which may include acceptable uses, height restrictions, and other building standards, such as noise insulation. The Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County (ALUC) has established a planning area surrounding John Wayne Airport which sets forth standards for acceptable land uses and provides for review of development plans for properties within its planning area. The Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP), adopted by the Airport Land Use Commission, specifies acceptable uses proximate to the airport. These are defined as uses that will not subject people to adverse noise impacts, will not concentrate people in areas with high potential for aircraft accidents, and will not adversely affect navigable airspace or aircraft operations.

The AELUP for Heliports establishes regulations and restrictions for the siting of heliports and helipads/helistops. The purpose of the AELUP for Heliports is to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise by ensuring that heliports/helipads are sited in areas of compatible land use. A heliport is a small airport suitable only for use by helicopters, typically containing one or more helipads.

A helipad or helistop is a designated area, including any buildings or facilities, intended to be used for the landing and takeoff of helicopters. Helipads/helistops may or may not be located within heliports.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 20 of 330
516
Refueling and overnight maintenance of helicopters are permitted on heliports but prohibited on helipads/helistops.

The City will ensure that each applicant seeking a conditional use p ermit or similar approval for the construction or operation of a heliport or helistop complies fully with the State permit procedure provided by law and with all conditions of approval imposed or recommended by the FAA, by the Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County (ALUC), and by Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics. This requirement shall be in addition to all other City development requirements.

The City will also ensure that development proposals including the construction or alteration of a structure more than 200 feet above ground level, reference North American Vertical Datum 1988 (NAV88), must fully comply with procedures provided by Federal and State law, including with the referral requirements of the ALUC, and filing a Notice of Construction and Alteration (Form7460-I). This requirement shall be in addition to all other City development requirements.

Land Availability
As of 2015, of the 8,042 net acres in the City of Costa Mesa, only 87.1 acres—or 1.1 percent—were either vacant or support agricultural production. The agricultural uses are temporary, as the lands are entitled for development by the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan. Thus, new development will take the form of infill development, particularly on underutilized sites. The primary challenge for land use planning will be to determine the best use and development approach for remaining infill properties. A second challenge will be to guide re-use of aging commercial properties for long-term community and property owner benefit.

Sustainable Development Practices
Costa Mesa residents recognize the relationship between the use of resources to fuel a vibrant community (energy, water, air, and land) and unsustainable energy consumption can have long-term environmental consequences. Both the f ederal and State governments have established laws aimed at environmental protection and enhancement, and many of these regulations are being implemented through development practices that are far more sustainable than practices of a generation ago. The Orange County region historically has had an imbalance of land uses (availability of high paying jobs, but shortfall of affordable housing1) and roadway infrastructure primarily dedicated to the automobile.

These historic al development patterns an d practices have adversely affected Costa Mesa in terms of traffic congestion, high housing costs, increased air pollution, and disproportional impacts on the young, elderly, and disabled. While many laws require the City to adopt new ways of planning and conducting 1 The New Economy and Jobs/Housing Balance in Southern California. Southern California Association of Governments, April 2001.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 21 of 330
517
day-to-day operations—such as the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) and Executive Order S- 3-052—the City has broad latitude to establish local procedures and practices for addressing sustainability. 2 The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) and Executive Order S -3-05 set a target to reduce California’s greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by year 2020 and by 80 percent below the 1990 levels by year 2050.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 22 of 330
518
Land Use Plan
The Land Use P olicy Map (Figure LU -3) presents a pictorial representation of the land use and development policies set forth in this element. The colored land use designations indicate the type and nature of development allowed on all properties within the City of Costa Mesa and its sphere of influence.

The map shows 15 land use designations , Specific Plan s and six overlays that largely reflect lon g- established land use patterns and development intensities, with the overlays indicating where targeted efforts are planned to encourage reuse and revitalization. The City will use the land use designation descriptions and the trip budget limitations described below—together with the Land Use Element Goals, Objectives, and Policies —to evaluate proposed development and land use projects. General Plan users are advised to refer to all components when evaluating proposed development and improvement projects.

Density/Intensity and Trip Budgets
Density and intensity are quantitative measures used to describe how much development may occur on a property. The City will use both density/intensity and the trip budget metric to determine the carrying capacity of each individual property or group of properties.

Density
The term density applies to residential uses and refers to the development and population capacity of residential land. Density is described in terms of dwelling units per acre of land (du/ac).

Floor-area Ratio
For nonresidential land use categories, the term intensity is used. Development intensity refers to the amount of development on a parcel of land or lot based on building characteristics such as building height, bulk, floor-area ratio, and/or percent of lot coverage. The development intensity standard used for most non-residential development is floor-area ratio (FAR), which is the ratio of the total gross floor area of all buildings on a lot to the total area of the lot. For example, a 21,780 -square-foot building on a 4 3,560- square-foot lot (one acre) yields an FAR of 0.50. A 0.50 FAR allows a single -story building, which covers half the lot, or a two-story building with reduced lot coverage. Figure LU-2 illustrates an example of density and FAR.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 23 of 330
519

The determination of development density or intensity at which a proposed project can occur is a function of: 1) General Plan policies intended to maximize public safety, achieve high -quality site planning and design, retain significant natural resources, and ensure compatibility between uses; and 2) development standards contained in the Zoning Code, public works standards, and other regulations.

Trip Budgets
Building intensity can also be measured by the traffic impacts generated by a particular development.

Because of the potential for significant traffic generation from major site developments, trip budgets are established to regulate development in terms of both building intensities and trip generation. Proposed development intensity with traffic generation allows the allocation of development based on current and planned roadway improvements and capacity.

The trip budget is expressed in terms of morning (
A.M.) and afternoon ( P.M.) peak-hour traffic volumes.

The trip budget for each of the major land use designations is based upon the land use trip rates and FAR standard used in the Costa Mesa Traffic Model.

The allowable FAR and trip budget are applied on a project-planning rather than parcel-specific basis. This approach allows for consideration of multi- phased or multi-lot projects as a whole development rather than individual pieces of the whole. Graduated FAR standards divide nonresidential uses into four broad Figure LU-2: Density and Floor-area Ratio

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 24 of 330
520
categories based upon traffic generation characteristics, as shown in Table LU-5: Nonresidential Maximum Floor-area Ratios.

Trip Budget Transfers
The trip budgets established at the Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ)3 level in the Costa Mesa Traffic Model can be combined or transferred between TAZs in a specified area of the City and under certain conditions to account for large planned developments which contain multiple TAZs. Likewise, trips can be combined or transferred between individual parcels within single TAZs. Combinations and/or transfers shall only be allowed for projects which meet the following conditions:
 The combination and/or transfer of trips shall only be allowed in the area of the City that is north of I-405 and east of Harbor Boulevard, and shall be limited to parcels within a one-mile radius of each other.
 Trip budget transfers shall be evaluated in the review and approval of a planned development or master plan projects. Sufficient conditions of approval shall be applied to the master plan or development plan to ensure long-range control over subsequent phases of development.  The combination and/or transfer of trips shall not result in any greater impacts on the surrounding circulation system than would occur if each Traffic Analysis Zone was developed independently.  For the combination and/or transfer of trips between TAZs, such combination and/or transfer of trips shall not exceed the total trip budget of all parcels involved if each were developed independently according to the floor-area ratio and trip generation rates provided herein.  The combination and/or transfer of trips shall not allow development intensities which result in abrupt changes in scale or intensity within the project or between the project and surrounding land uses.
 Approval of the master plan or development plan shall be conditioned to ensure compliance with the above criteria and to preclude future over -development on portions of the project or properties from which trips were transferred.
 Trip budget transfers shall be recorded against the properties.

3 Traffic analysis zones (TAZs) are the basic geographic unit for inventorying demographic data and land use within a study area.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 25 of 330
521
Table LU-5: Nonresidential Maximum Floor-Area Ratios
Land Use
Traffic Generation Characteristics
Very Low4 Low3 Moderate2 High1
Commercial Residential NA 0.40 0.30 0.20
Neighborhood Commercial 0.75 0.35 0.25 0.15
General Commercial 0.75 0.40 0.30 0.20
Commercial Center 0.75 0.45 0.35 0.25
Regional Commercial5 -- -- 0.652/0.89 --
Urban Center Commercial5 -- 0.60 0.50 --
Light Industry 0.75 0.35 0.25 0.15
Industrial Park 0.75 0.40 0.30 0.20
Public/Semi-Public 0.25 and 0.01 for golf courses
Fairgrounds 0.10
Notes:

1. For commercial designations, high traffic uses generate more than 75 daily trip ends per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. For industrial designations, high traffic uses generate more than 15 daily trip ends per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area.

2. For commercial designations, moderate traffic uses generate between 20 and 75 daily trip ends per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. For industrial designations, moderate traffic uses generate between 8 and 15 daily trip ends per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area.

3. For commercial designations, low traffic uses generate between three and 20 daily trip ends per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. For industrial designations, low traffic uses generate between three and eight daily trip ends per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area.

4. For commercial and industrial designations, very low traffic uses generate less than three daily trip ends per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area.

5. Maximum FAR standards in the Regional Commercial and Urban Center Commercial designations shall be further limited by the maximum
A.M. peak hour and P.M. peak hour trip budget as established in the General Plan, North Costa Mesa Specific Plan and One Metro West Specific Plan, as applicable.

6. Site-specific FAR standards are separately established for the Home Ranch site, LA Times site and One Metro West Specific Plan.

7. This table does not specify FAR standards as allowed in mixed-use overlay zones.

8. The FAR standards related to trip generation may be modified to accommodate the residential site capacity, or density, of sites identified as housing opportunity sites within the sites inventory of the Housing Element, but still apply to a commercial component of a development project.

Land Use Designations
The Land Use Policy Map (Figure LU-3 ) graphically represents General Plan goals and policies. The following land use designations correspond to the categories shown on the Land Use Policy Map. See Table 6: Land Use Density and Intensity Summary, for a summary of the land use residential densities and commercial intensities. The Land Use Element contains 15 land use designations, Specific Plans, and six overlays as follows.

Residential Designations
Costa Mesa's residential designations are divided into Low -Density, Medium-Density, and H igh-Density Residential.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 26 of 330
522
Low-Density Residential
Low-Density Residential areas are intended to accommodate detached single-family residences. Other housing types include attached housing that provide a greater portion of recreation or open space than typically fou nd in multi -family developments and clustered housing which affords the retention of significant open space. Low -Density Residential areas are intended to accommodate outdoor living activities (front yards and backyards) in open space adjacent to dwellings. To avoid land use conflicts, these areas should be located away from or protec ted from the more intense non residential areas and major travel corridors.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 27 of 330
523
General Plan Amendments:

GP 18-02, Adopted Oct. 2, 2018
GP 18-03, Adopted Nov. 13, 2018
GP 20-01, Adopted Jul. 20, 2021
PGPA-24-01, Adopted July 15, 2025
PGPA-24-02, Adopted August 5, 2025

Figure LU-3: Land Use Policy Map

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 28 of 330
524

This page intentionally left blank.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 29 of 330
525

Table LU-6: Land Use Density and Intensity Summary
Land Use Designations
Maximum Density Maximum Intensity
Maximum
Units
Dwelling Units
per Acre (du/ac)
Persons per
Acre (p/ac)
Floor-Area Ratio
(FAR)
Employees per
Acre (e/ac)
Residential*
Low-Density Residential -- 8 du/ac 26 p/ac -- --
Medium-Density Residential -- 12 du/ac 38 p/ac -- --
High-Density Residential8,9 -- 20 du/ac 50 p/ac -- --
Non-Residential or Multi-Use*
Commercial-Residential -- 12 to 17.4 du/ac 40 p/ac 0.20 to 0.40 FAR 27 e/ac Neighborhood Commercial -- -- 50 p/ac 0.15 to 0.75 FAR 27 e/ac General Commercial -- -- 50 p/ac 0.20 to 0.75 FAR 27 e/ac Commercial Center3,4 -- -- 50 p/ac 0.25 to 0.75 FAR 27 e/ac Urban Center Commercial2 660 20 du/ac
80 du/ac 50 to 210 p/ac 0.48 to 0.79 FAR 27 e/ac
Cultural Arts Center2 535 -- 25 p/ac 1.77 FAR 275 e/ac
Regional Commercial5,6 -- 50 p/ac 0.652 to 0.89 FAR 53 p/ac Industrial Park -- -- 50 p/ac 0.20 to 0.75 FAR 58 e/ac
Light Industrial -- -- 50 p/ac 0.15 to 0.75 FAR 58 e/ac Public and Institutional -- -- -- 0.25 FAR 44 e/ac
Golf Course -- -- -- 0.01 FAR --
Fairgrounds -- -- -- 0.10 FAR 14 e/ac
Fairview Developmental
Center Specific Plan 4,000 30 to 65 du/ac 105 p/ac 0.40 FAR 0.77 e/ac Overlays and Urban Plans*
Residential Incentive Overlay -- 30 du/acre 82 p/acre N/A N/A SoBECA Mixed-Use Overlay1 450 40 du/ac 110 p/ac 1.00/1.25 FAR 27 to 44 e/ac Harbor Mixed-Use Overlay1 20 du/ac 55 p/ac 1.00/1.25 FAR 27 to 44 e/ac Westside Urban Plans1 -- 20 du/ac 55 p/ac 1.00/1.25 FAR 27 to 44 e/ac Notes: * The maximum density may exceed those identified within Table LU-6 to accommodate the density of sites identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element. FAR may also be modified to realize the site capacity identified within the sites inventory.

1. Increase in FAR from 1.00 to 1.25 may be allowed for mixed-use plans exhibiting design excellence.

2. Refer to the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan for detailed density/intensity and trip budgets for specific sites.

3. The Home Ranch site has a site-specific FAR of 0.64 for office development; residential development is not permitted due to the site-specific FAR.

4. For the LA Times site, 0.54 FAR applies to commercial development and 0.64 applies to office development.

5. Residential development is not permitted due to the site-specific FARs.

6. South Coast Plaza, west of Bear Street has a 0.89 FAR and east of Bear Street has a 0.652 FAR.

7. The 38-unit residential project at 1957 Newport Blvd. and 390 Ford Road has a Site Specific Density of 20.4 du/acre.

8. The One Metro West Specific Plan has a site-specific FAR of 2.22 and density of 80 dwelling units per acre. Refer to Specific Plan text for further information.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 30 of 330
526
Costa Mesa contains seven distinct residential neighborhoods: 1) Eastside, 2) Westside, 3) Mesa Verde, 4) College Park, 5) North Costa Mesa/Mesa Del Mar/Halecrest Hall of Fame, 6) Bristol/Paularino, and 7) South Coast/Wimbledon Village. These existing, stable single-family neighborhoods should be preserved and maintained. The establishment of attached or clustered housing through the planned development concept can be allowed in appropriate Low -Density Residential areas as a means to encourage the consolidation of parcels or to make more efficient use of larger parcels.

Nonresidential uses that complement and serve the surrounding residential neighborhood are also appropriate within this designation. These uses typically include schools, parks, religious institutions , libraries, and other public facilities.

Medium-Density Residential
The Medium-Density Residential designation is intended to support single-and multi-family developments with a density of up to 12 units to the acre. The 12 units to the acre standard can be exceeded for legal, nonconforming Medium-Density Residential lots between 6,000 and 7,260 square feet in size that existed as of March 16, 1992, or any sites identified as a housing opportunity site in the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

The 12 dwelling units per acre standard is exceeded by approximately 53 percent of the existing Medium- Density development. Existing nonconforming units that are voluntarily demolished may be rebuilt to the same existing density, subject to other standards of the zoning code and the following: The allowable density or number of units to be redeveloped is limited to the General Plan density plus a 25 percent density incentive bonus or the existing number of units, whichever is less. Because of the location and intensity of development, Medium -Density Residential areas are also appropriate for quasi- residential uses such as convalescent hospitals and private residential care . Schools, religious institutions, parks, libraries, and related public facilities are also appropriate.

Complementary commercial uses within this designation may be allowed in planned development projects, provided the commercial uses will have FARs that are the same as the Neighborhood Commercial land use designation.

High-Density Residential
Areas designated as High-Density Residential are intended for residential development with a density of up to 20 units to the acre with some exceptions , as described in this section , or any sites identified as a housing opportunity site in the sites inventory of the Housing Element. Density bonuses shall be granted by the City when a project is designed to provide housing for individuals and families with specialized requirements (e.g., senior citizens, disabled, very-low, low -income, and moderate income ho useholds with needs not sufficiently accommodated by conventional housing) or provide other facilities or land as required by State law. The City may also grant additional incentives or concessions pursuant to State law.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 31 of 330
527
Sakioka Lot 2, a 41-acre parcel located in the Town Center area of the City adjacent to Anton Boulevard (Area 8 of the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan), is an identified opportunity site within the sites inventory of the Housing Element and its overall density limit is identified in the Housing Element.

The two-acre property at 580 Anton Boulevard in the Lakes Area (Area 5 of the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan) has a site -specific density of 125 units/acre. This equates to a maximum of 250 units on the site , with an approximate building height of 26 stories. Additionally, a resident-serving commercial/retail use component is permitted, provided that minimal traffic-generation characteristics of this retail component can be demonstrated in review and approval of a master plan. Additional development standards for this planned development are contained in the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan.

A three-acre property at 3350 Avenue of the Arts is located north of Anton Boulevard along the east side of Avenue of the Arts in The Lakes area (Area 5 of the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan). The following standards have been established: (1) A site-specific density of a maximum 44 units/acre for a mixed- use development comprised of a boutique hotel and high -rise residential building and (2) a maximum nonresidential mixed use FAR of 2.12, which includes the hotel use and ancillary commercial uses.

However, subject to comparable traffic generation characteristics, the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan contains provisions allowing development flexibility related to the maximum overall development of dwelling units, hotel rooms, and resident -serving retail/commercial uses. Additional development standards for this planned development, including maximum allowable building height and mix of dwelling units and hotel rooms, are contained in the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan.

In 2014, a site-specific density of 58 units/acre and site-specific building height of five and six stories were established for a 4.17 -acre site at 125 East Baker Street. The project featured a five- story, 240- unit apartment building and six-story parking structure.

In 2015, a 224-unit apartment building on a 4.15-acre property at 2277 Harbor Boulevard was approved.

The approved project involved: (1) Change of the land use designation from General Commercial to High Density Residential; (2) site -specific base density of 40 du/acre with a development incentive for an additional 58 dwelling units, for an overall site -specific density of 54 du/acre; (3) site -specific building height for a five -level parking structure. Rezone R -14-04 from C1 (Local Business District) to PDR-HD (Planned Development Residential – High Density) was also approved. Based on a Settlement Agreement executed on June 21, 2018, the project was modified to maximum 200 units including nine very low - income units subject to a fifty-five year restrictive covenant.

In 2021, the City Council approved the One Metro West project which is a mixed -use development on a

15.23-acre property located at 1683 Sunflower Avenue. The approval included the following entitlements:
general plan amendment (GP-20-01), rezone (R-20-01), specific plan (SP-20-01), master plan (PA-19-19), and Tentative Tract Map No. 19015 (T-19-01). The land use plan for One Metro West depicts the following:
three multi-family residential structures with 1,057 multi-family residential units and associated amenities Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 32 of 330
528
including parking structures within a base building height of seven stories; one 25,000 square foot creative office building; 6,000 square feet of supporting special retail uses; a 1.5 acre open space; two off- site improvements that relate to the trail con nection to the Santa Ana River Trail and improvements to the south side of Sunflower Avenue north of the South Coast Collection retail center.

In order to encourage the development of additional residential ownership opportunities in the Westside, the City Council designated an overlay area by adoption of the Mesa West Residential Ownership urban plan. For existing developments that exceed 20 dwelling units per acre, the Mesa West Residential Ownership urban plan may allow redevelopment of residential projects to existing densities , provided that certain development standards are met for encouraging ownership housing.

In the High -Density Residential designation, existing non -conforming developments that are voluntarily destroyed may be rebuilt to the original density subject to other standards of the zoning code and the following: The allowable density or number of units to be redeveloped would be limited to the General Plan density plus a 50 percent density incentive bonus or the existing number of units, whichever is less.

High-density areas should be located in proximity to transportation routes, especially those served by public transit, and also within convenient distances to shopping and employment centers. Although proximity to the above uses and transportation routes often r esults in a residential development being subject to adverse impacts, High-Density Residential development can be less susceptible to impacts than lower densities if visual and acoustical shielding techniques are incorporated into the project.

In addition to the above locational preferences, viable high density development is also dependent upon site characteristics. A site should be of appropriate size and dimension before the higher densities within this designation are allowed.

Because of their location and intensity of development, High -Density Residential areas are also appropriate for quasi-residential uses (e.g., convalescent hospitals). Schools, religious institutions, parks, libraries, and related public facilities are also appropriate.

Complementary commercial uses within this designation may be allowed in planned development projects, provided that the commercial uses will have FARs that are the same as the Neighborhood Commercial land use designation.

Mixed-use development projects are intended to provide additional housing opportunities in the City by combining residential and nonresidential uses in an integrated development. Additionally, this type of development is inten ded to revitalize areas of the C ity (such as the Westside) without exceeding the capacity of the General Plan transportation system. Mixed- use developments shall be implemented through an adopted urban plan (such as the 19 West Urban Plan) , or an adopted Specific Plan, and shall be identified on the Zoning Map by designating either the R2 -HD and R-3 base zoning districts with the mixed-use overlay district, or by designating a site with “(SP)”. The mix of uses can occur in either a Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 33 of 330
529
vertical or horizontal design, up to four stories in height. Product types shall be identified in the applicable urban plan and may include live/work units and commercial/ residential units where the residential uses are located above or adjacent to the nonresidential component. Nonresidential uses may include office, retail, business services, personal service, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities. In conjunction with areas that are designated with the mixed-use zoning overlay district, the maximum FAR is 1.0. An increase to 1.25 FAR may be allowed for mixed -use plans exhibiting design excellence. In a mixed-use overlay district area, this FAR in cludes both residential and non residential components, and the maximum number of stories is four. The FAR shall not exceed 1.25 FAR for a commercial component of a development project that is proposed in conjunction with a residential development project on a housing opportunity site identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element. The FAR and height shall be modified to realize the residential site capacity, or density, for housing opportunity sites.

Major high-density neighborhoods are clustered around Orange Coast College, along Mesa Verde Drive East, between Adams and Harbor, around Vanguard University, in the northeast portion of the South Coast Metro area, in the Downtown Redevelopment area, and in the southeast portion of the City.

Commercial Designations
Seven commercial land use designations are established. These designations vary in location and intensity to accommodate the full range of commercial activity present and desired in Costa Mesa. Development intensity potential is measured using FAR in relation to the amount of traffic expected (see Table LU-7, Commercial Floor -Area Ratio ). The density, FAR, height, and trip generation standards apply for commercial development projects but these standards may be modified to realize the residential site capacity, or density, for a residential development on a housing opportunity site identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

Commercial-Residential
The Commercial-Residential designation is intended to be applied to a limited area on the eastside of Newport Boulevard between East 19th Street and Mesa Drive. It is the intent of this land use designation to allow a complementary
mix of commercial and residential zoning along Newport Boulevard. It is anticipated that individual parcels will be developed as either a commercial or residential use. A mix of both commercial and residential uses on one parcel should only be allowed as a Planned Development.

Residential development is encouraged, provided that certain development standards are met pursuant to the adopted Newport Boulevard Specific Plan. Residential density ranges from 12 units per acre to 17.4 units per acre , except where the Residential Overlay applies . It will be necessary to ensure adequate buffering between the residential development and non-residential uses.

Allowable floor area ratios are 0.20 for high-traffic-generating uses, 0.30 for moderate-traffic-generating uses, and 0.40 for low -traffic-generating uses, as shown on Table LU -7. Residential and non residential Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 34 of 330
530
uses may be integrated into a single development through the Planned Development process. Residential densities in planned development projects shall not exceed 17.4 units per acre pursuant to the development standards in the Newport Boulevard Specific Plan. Noncommercial uses would be subject to the same floor area standards as commercial uses in this designation.

Institutional uses are also appropriate in this designation, provided that land use compatibility and traffic issues have been addressed. Institutional uses would require discretionary approval.

Table LU-7: Commercial Floor-Area Ratio
Land Use
Traffic FAR
Very Low Low Moderate High
Commercial-Residential -- 0.40 0.30 0.20
Neighborhood Commercial 2 0.75 0.35 0.25 0.15
General Commercial 2 0.75 0.40 0.30 0.20
Commercial Center 1,2,3 0.75 0.45 0.35 0.30
Regional Commercial 0.652/0.890 FAR
Refer to Regional Commercial discussion
Urban Center Commercial

0.50 FAR for Retail, 0.60 FAR for Office, 0.79 FAR for
S.C. Metro Center. Refer to Urban Center Commercial
discussion and the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan for
additional discussion.

Cultural Arts Center

1.77 FAR. Refer to Cultural Arts Center discussion and
the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan for additional
discussion.

Notes:

1. Refer to Commercial Center discussion for site-specific FARs on certain properties.

2. With application of the mixed -use overlay district, the FAR may range from 1.0 to 1.25.

Refer to appropriate land use designation discussion.

3. Los Angeles Times Site has a 0.54 (commercial) to 0.64 (office) FAR.

Neighborhood Commercial
The Neighborhood Commercial designation is intended to serve convenience shopping and service needs of local residents. Appropriate uses include markets, drug stores, retail shops, financial institutions, service establishments, and support office uses. Restaurants, hotels , and motels may be appropriate if properly located, designed, and operated to avoid adverse impacts to surrounding uses. Since Neighborhood Commercial uses are intended to serve nearby residential neighborhoods, the uses permitted should be among the least intense of the commercial uses.

General Commercial
The General Commercial designation is intended to permit a wide range of commercial uses that serve both local and regional needs. These areas should have exposure and access to major transportation Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 35 of 330
531
routes since significant traffic can be generated. General Commercial areas should be insulated from the most sensitive land uses either through buffers of less-sensitive uses or on-site design features. The most intense commercial uses should be encouraged to locate on sites of adequate size to avoid compatibility issues with surrounding uses. Appropriate uses include those found in the Neighborhood Commercial designation, plus smaller retail stores, theaters, restaurants, hotels and motels, and automobile sales and service establishments.

In areas designated General Commercial, development typically will result in combinations of one - and two-story commercial buildings. Buildings in excess of two stories may be permitted in select zoning areas via discretionary approval where the additional height would not impact surrounding uses.

Institutional uses are also appropriate in the General Commercial designation, provided that land use compatibility and traffic issues have been addressed. Institutional uses would require discretionary approval.

For a 4.4 -acre site at 1626/1640 Newport Boulevard, a site -specific FAR of 0.40 and trip budget of 186 A.M. peak hour trips and 281 P.M. peak hour trips was established. These two standards allowed the development of medical office uses or similar moderate -traffic-generating uses, provided that the site - specific trip budget is not exceeded.

Commercial Center
The Commercial Center designation is intended for large areas with a concentration of diverse or intense commercial uses serving local and regional needs. Appropriate uses include a wide variety and scale of retail stores, professional offices, restaurant s, hotels , and theaters. Intense service uses, such as automobile repair and service, should be discouraged.

Development within this designation is intended for a variety of intensities ranging from one - to four- story buildings. The allowable FARs are 0.25 for high -traffic-generating uses, 0.35 for moderate -traffic- generating uses, 0.45 for low -traffic-generating uses, and 0.75 for very -low-traffic-generating uses.

Because of the large service area, direct access to major transportation corridors is essential.

In conjunction with areas that are designated with the mixed -use zoning overlay district, the maximum FAR is 1.0. An increase to 1.25 FAR may be allowed for mixed- use plans exhibiting design excellence. In a mixed-use overlay district area, this FAR includes both residential and non-residential components, and the maximum number of stories is four.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 36 of 330
532
Mixed-use development projects are intended to provide additional housing opportunities in the City (such as the Westside) by combining residential and nonresidential uses in an integrated development.

Additionally, this type of development is inten ded to revitalize areas of the City without exceeding the capacity of the General Plan transportation system. Mixed- use developments shall be implemented through an adopted urban plan (such as the 19 West Urban Plan and Harbor Boulevard Mixed-Use Overlay), or through an adopted Specific Plan and shall be identified on the Zoning Map by designating either the CL, C1, and/or C2 base zoning districts with the mixed-use overlay district, or by designating a site as “(SP)” . The mix of uses can occur in either a vertical or horizontal design, up to four stories in height. This height limit may be increased to realize the development potential for sites identified within housing opportunity sites inventory of the Housing Element. Product types shall be identified in the applicable urban plan and may include live/work units and commercial/residential units where the residential uses are located above or adjacent to the nonresidential component. Nonresidential uses may include office, retail, business services, personal s ervice, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities.

Institutional uses are also appropriate in this commercial designation, provided that land use compatibility and traffic issues have been addressed. Institutional uses require discretionary approval.

As complementary uses, residential and other noncommercial uses may be allowed through the Planned Development process. Residential densities in planned development projects should not exceed 20 dwelling units per acre. The corresponding population density range is up to 50 persons per acre. A site- specific residential density of 40 du/ac was approved for 1901 Newport Boulevard. The corresponding density range for the project is 100 persons per acre.

A site-specific FAR of 0.70 and a site -specific density of 40 units/acre was established for the property located at 1901 Newport Boulevard, a 7.79-acre site located on the northwest corner of West 19 th Street
and Newport Boulevard. The General Plan amendment recognized the existing development intensity of the 1901 Newport Plaza commercial building (127,500 square feet) and allowed additional development of 145 multi-family units with a site-specific building height allowed for a five-level parking structure.

Segerstrom Home Ranch
The Segerstrom Home Ranch is a 93.34 -acre located at 3315 Fairview Road. It has a base land use designation of Commercial Center and is a part of the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan. In conjunction with approval of Home Ranch Alternative A, a site -specific FAR of 0.41 was established for the 17.2 -acre IKEA site. (IKEA is a large retail/warehouse use.) This property is located at the southeast corner of South Coast Drive and Harbor Boulevard. A maximum allowable FAR of 0.40 for office uses was established for the

14.5-acre Industrial Park parcel located to the north of South Coast Drive.

In 2016, a specific-site FAR allowed a maximum of 0.64 FAR on the 44-acre subarea of Segerstrom Home Ranch located south of South Coast Drive . Maxim um building height varies from two stories to five stories/75 feet within this subarea. The Planned Development Commercial zoning may allow mixed-use Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 37 of 330
533
development (i.e., housing as a complementary use). The established trip budgets for this subarea of Home Ranch is 1,860 A.M. and 1,788 P.M. See Table LU-7 and Figure LU-4. However, the parcel is identified as a housing opportunity site within the sites inventory of the Housing Element, and the density, including the resulting total number of units, of the parcel may be increased to align with the residential site capacity and deviate from the trip budget.

The North Costa Mesa Specific Plan provides additional FAR, building height, and trip budget information for Segerstrom Home Ranch (Area 1).

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 38 of 330
534

* Building intensity shall not exceed maximum
allowable development set forth by the trip budget
in the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan, unless
reductions are needed to accommodate the site
capacity identified within the sites inventory of the
Housing Element.
* Building intensity shall not exceed maximum
allowable development set forth by the trip budget
in the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan, unless
modifications are needed to accommodate the
residential site capacity identified within the sites
inventory of the Housing Element.

Figure LU-4:

Segerstrom Home Ranch

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 39 of 330
535
Table LU-8: Segerstrom Home Ranch
Categories Baseline
(2015) Segerstrom Home Ranch
Floor-Area Ratio
(FAR) N/A

0.64 Maximum trip budget for this subarea of Segerstrom Home Ranch is 1,860 A.M. and 1,788 P.M.

Building intensity shall not exceed maximum allowable
development set forth by the trip budget in the North
Costa Mesa Specific Plan , unless needed to
accommodate the residential site capacity identified
within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

Building Square
Feet N/A 1,200,000
Los Angeles Times Site
The Los Angeles Times Site is a 24-acre site located at 1375 West Sunflower Avenue, near the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and South Coast Drive. The intent is to create opportunities for either office or commercial retail development at a strategic location. Office development is allowed at a maximum 0.64 FAR (up to 655,000 square feet office). Commercial/retail development is allowed at a maximum FAR of

0.54 (up to 553,000 square feet). Maximum allowable building height is five stories/75 feet. Although the Planned Development Commercial zoning may allow mixed -use development (i.e. , housing as a complementary use), housing is not permitted on this property due to its location . The maximum trip budget established for the Los Angeles Times site is 1,015 A.M. and 976 P.M. peak hour trips. See Table LU-
9 and Figure LU-5.

Table LU-9: Los Angeles Times Site
Categories Baseline
(2015) Los Angeles Times Site
Floor-Area Ratio
(FAR) N/A

0.64 FAR for office development

0.54 FAR for commercial/retail
Maximum trip budget is 1,015 A.M. and 976 P.M.

Building intensity shall not exceed maximum allowable
development set forth by the trip budget.

Building Square
Feet 374,000 655,000 sf for office development
553,000 sf for commercial/retail

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 40 of 330
536

* No residential use is permitted.

Figure LU-5:

Los Angeles Times Site

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 41 of 330
537
Regional Commercial
The Regional Commercial designation is intended to apply to large concentrated shopping centers of regional scale and importance. The intended uses within this designation include major department stores, specialty retail outlets, restaurants, offices, hotels, and other complementary uses.

Application of the Regional Commercial designation is limited to the existing South Coast Plaza sites. This includes the original 97-acre site between Bristol and Bear Street and the additional 18 -acre site located west of Bear Street. This designation and locational criteria recognizes the evolution of South Coast Plaza as a regionally significant retail trade center served by major regional transportation facilities and services.

The Costa Mesa General Plan assigns a trip budget for the original South Coast Plaza site of 1,166 A.M. peak hour trips and 5,036 P.M. peak hour trips. The trip budget for the site west of Bear Street is 293 A.M. peak hour trips and 1,264 P.M. peak hour trips.

Complementary residential uses within this designation are allowed through the Planned Development process. The maximum allowable residential density shall be 20 dwelling units per acre , unless a site is identified as a housing opportunity site within the sites inventory of the Housing Element, then the density shall be allowed to increase to the density specified therein . The trip budget for South Coast Plaza is identified in Table LU-10, and in the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan.

Table LU-10: Trip Budget for Regional Commercial
Area
Maximum
Square
Footage
Floor
Area
Ratio
A.M. Peak
Hour Trip
Budget
P.M. Peak Hour
Trip Budget
South Coast Plaza
West of Bear Street 690,350 0.890 293 1,264
South Coast Plaza
East of Bear Street 2,750,000 0.652 1,166 5,036
Metro Pointe 592,287 0.48 729 965

Urban Center Commercial
The Urban Center Commercial designation is intended to allow high -intensity mixed -use commercial development within a limited area. Developments within this designation can range from one - and two- story office and retail buildings to mid - and high -rise buildings of four to approximately 25 stories, provided the maximum building height set forth in the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan is not exceeded.

Appropriate uses include offices, retail shops, restaurants, residential, and hotels.

For mixed-use projects that include separate or distinct components, the nonresidential FAR standard and the residential density standard shall apply to each of the respective components, not the entire project site. For mixed -use projects that do not include distinct elements or include mixed- use buildings, the Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 42 of 330
538
overall level of intensity shall be governed by the allowable nonresidential FAR and the maximum number of residential units identified in this designation for a specific project site. Developments shall also comply with the established trip budget standards and comply with the most restrictive standard.

Complementary residential uses within this designation may be allowed through the Planned Development zone process. The maximum allowable residential density within this designation shall be 20 dwelling units per acre, unless otherwise specified in the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan, or a higher density is allowed on sites identified as a housing opportunity site in the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

The Urban Center Commercial designation includes the following major developments:
 Automobile Club of Southern California
 Metro Pointe
 South Coast Metro Center/Experian
 Sakioka Lot 2 (as of 2015, unbuilt)
All of these four properties had development agreements with the City of Costa Mesa that vested maximum development square footages, floor area ratios, trip budgets, and allowed uses. Provided in Table LU-11: Urban Center Major Developments, is a summary of the various land use standards that apply to these major developments. Please refer to the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan for additional information related to these properties. See Figure LU-6 for Sakioka Lot 2 land use plan.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 43 of 330
539

LU-6:

Sakioka Lot 2

28 or 90 DU/AC
* Building intensity shall not exceed maximum
allowable development set forth by the trip budget
in the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan, unless
modifications are needed to accommodate the site
capacity identified within the sites inventory of
the Housing Element.
660 minimum
(20 du/ac)
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 44 of 330
540

Table LU-11: Urban Center Major Developments
Area Acres
Maximum Peak Hour Vehicle Trip Budget
North Costa
Mesa Specific
Plan Applies
Development
Agreement
Non-Residential
Building Sq.Ft./FAR
Allowable
Residential
Units
A.M. P.M.

Automobile
Club of
Southern
California
1 43 967,000 sf

0.56 FAR 0 1,1902 1,5762 No
South Coast
Metro
Center/
Experian
1 45
Residential Option:
1,335,386 sf

0.69 FAR
Non-Residential
Option:
1,546,180 sf

0.79 FAR
Residential
Option:
484 units
Residential
Option: 1,9312
Non-
Residential
Option: 1,8862
Residential
Option:
1,9762
Non-
Residential
Option:
1,9942
Yes
Sakioka Lot 21 33
Non-Residential:
863,000 sf

1.0 retail FAR

1.0 office FAR
Residential
Option:
660 units
1,0622 1,4072 Yes
Notes:

1. A development agreement specifies the maximum building square footage and floor area ratio, which is consistent with the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan and General Plan. However, the South Coast Metro Center/Experian plan area and Sakioka Lot 2 include sites identified as a housing opportunity site within the sites inventory of the Housing Element, and the FAR, residential units, trip generation, and heights may be modified to realize the site capacity identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

2. Vehicle trips per hour
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 45 of 330
541
Automobile Club of Southern California Processing Center This 39.2-acre site consists of two parcels and is located on the southwest corner of Sunflower Avenue and Fairview Road. The primary site contains 29.5 acres and is located west of Fairview Road, between South Coast Drive and Sunflower Avenue. The second parcel contains approximately 9.7 acres and is located across the adjacent flood control channel to the west, just north of South Coast Drive. As of 2000, the site was developed with 717,000 square feet of office and support service uses. An additional 250,000 square feet of development is allowed pursuant to a development agreement for a total of 967,000 square feet; the resultant maximum FAR is 0.56. Future construction will be developed in phases during the 30- year term of the agreement.

Metro Pointe
Metro Pointe includes two office building sites located north of South Coast Drive at its intersection with Greenbrook Drive and approximately 28.5 acres of land located south of South Coast Drive along the San Diego Freeway. A development agreement approv ed in 1994 addresses the site south of South Coast Drive. The development agreement vests the property owner with the ability to construct 592,287 square feet of office and commercial uses with a resultant floor area ratio of 0.48. This property is also located in the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan area.

South Coast Metro Center/Experian
The 44.72-acre South Coast Metro Center/Experian sites are located south of Anton Boulevard and east of Avenue of the Arts. Upon completion, the site will include nearly 1,546,180 square feet of office and commercial development. A site-specific FAR of 0.79 was established for the combined South Coast Metro Center and Experian sites.

In 2006, a site -specific residential density increase for a 4.86 -acre site portion of this development was approved as an optional development scenario for this property. The maximum density allowed is 100 units/acre with integrated ancillary retail uses. This equates to a maximum density of 100 units/acre, or a total of 484 high-rise units. The residential development option results in a corresponding decrease in the maximum allowable FAR and building square footages for non- residential buildings in orde r to be similar to the
A.M. and P.M. trip budgets established for the South Coast Metro Center/Experian sites with strictly nonresidential development. In 2014, an alternative development option for 393 apartment units was approved. This scenario also results in decrease in trip budget. The North Costa Mesa Specific Plan provides further detail for these properties. Certain parcels within the South Coast Metro Center/Experian plan area include sites identified as a housing opportunity site within the sites inventory of the Housing Element. For these sites, the FAR, residential units, trip generation, and heights may be modified to realize the residential site capacity, or density, identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

Sakioka Lot 2
The 33-acre Sakioka Lot 2 is located south and east of Anton Boulevard. This site is undeveloped except for farmhouses and farm operation facilities. Pursuant to a development agreement, the maximum Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 46 of 330
542
allowable building square footage is of 863,000 square feet . A maximum 1.0 FAR shall be applied for nonresidential development.

The maximum residential density shall be 28 dwelling units per acre for the residential compone nt of a mixed-use development (see “Mixed -Use” discussion in the Specific Plan) or a maximum of 80 dwelling units per acre if an independent parcel is developed as residential community including affordable housing (see “Affordable Housing/Density Bonus discussion in the Specific Plan).

Future development on Sakioka Lot 2 is subject to the trip budget limitation, applicable development standards of the PDC zone, and consistency with the both the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan and the General Plan. However, this site is identified as a housing opportunity site in the sites inventory of the Housing Element and the density, FAR, heights and trip budgets may be modified accordingly to achieve the site capacity identified within the sites inventory.

Cultural Arts Center
The Cultural Arts Center designation is applied to the 57.3 acres, including private streets, that comprise South Coast Plaza Town Center. This area is generally bounded by Sunflower Avenue to the north, Bristol Street to the west, Avenue of the Arts to the east, and the San Diego Freeway to the south. This designation is limited to this geographical area, and it is not intended to be applied to other locations in the City.

The Cultural Arts Center designation allows intensely developed mixed commercial and cultural uses within a limited area. The intended uses within this designation include mid - to high-rise offices, hotels, restaurants, retail, and cultural uses (theater, art museum or academy, etc.), as well as mid- to high-rise residential units in limited areas that are defined in the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan. It serves as the cultural center of the community and provides a focus to the arts-related uses, with the complement of nearby employment and shopping opportunities.

The overall allowable FAR standard for this designation is 1.77. Included in this FAR calculation is the land dedicated or reserved in 2000 for the Avenue of the Arts off -ramp and associated flood control channel improvements. The 1.77 FAR may be exceeded on individual parcels within South Coast Plaza Town Center, provided that over the entire 54- acre site the 1.77 FAR is not exceeded. Further delineation of the allocation within South Coast Plaza Town Center of the FAR and trip budget is provided in the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan.

In 2006, a high-rise residential development option for each of the three sub -areas in South Coast Plaza Town Center was approved. The maximum number of residential units allowed in the entire South Coast Plaza Town Center is 535 units. The high -rise residential development option is further detailed in the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan. As shown in Table LU-12, this scenario results in a corresponding decrease in the maximum allowable FAR and building square footages for non -residential buildings in order to maintain the
A.M. and P. M. trip budgets established for the South Coast Plaza Town Center. The South Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 47 of 330
543
Coast Plaza Town Center plan area includes sites identified as a housing opportunity site within the sites inventory of the Housing Element, and the FAR, residential units, trip generation, and heights may be modified to realize the residential site capacity, or density, identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

Table LU-12: Town Center Intensity*

Maximum Allowable Peak Hour Trip Budget
Nonresidential High-Rise
Residential
Units
A.M. P.M.

FAR Building
Square Footage
Residential Option 1.701 3,991,008 sf 535 5,123 6,632
Non-Residential Option 1.773,4 4,161,813 sf 80 5,180 6,632 Notes: * The FAR, residential units and trip budgets may be modified accordingly to realize the site capacity identified for the sites that are included as housing opportunity sites within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

1. This maximum FAR may be increased to no more than 1.77 in direct relation to the decrease in the maximum number of high-rise residential units.

2. This maximum peak hour trip budget may be increased to no more than 5,180 A.M. peak hour trips in
direct relation to the decrease in the maximum number of high-rise residential units.

3. This alternative includes the 80 high -rise residential units associated with the museum site in Segerstrom Center for the Arts; see North Costa Mesa Specific Plan.

4. This maximum FAR may not be increased if the 80 -unit residential component is not constructed; see North Costa Mesa Specific Plan.

Industrial Designations
Two industrial land use designations apply to over 1,000 acres. These designations accommodate a variety of industrial and compatible office uses, as well as limited and supportive commercial uses. Development intensity potential is measured using FAR in relation to the amount of traffic expected, as shown in Table LU-13: Industrial Floor -Area Ratio. The density, FAR, height, and trip generations may be modified accordingly to accommodate the residential site capacity, or density, for the housing opportunity sites identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 48 of 330
544
Table LU-13: Industrial Floor-Area Ratio

Note:

1. With an application of the mixed-use overlay district, the FAR may range from 1.0 to 1.25.

Refer to Mixed -Use discussion and Table LU -15: Overlay and Urban Plan Residential Density.

Light Industry
The Light Industry designation applies to areas intended for a variety of light and general industrial uses.

Uses are limited to small manufacturing and service industries, as well as larger industrial operations that can demonstrate design features or restricted operations that limit disruptions to surrounding uses .

Although the uses within Light Industry areas are intended to be less intense than those allowed in Industrial Parks, the frequent lack of a physical separation between Light Industry areas and residential development necessitates design features that limit disturbances between uses. Access to industrial areas should be provided in a manner that directs industrial traffic away from more sensitive uses.

Development within this designation would be characterized by a combination of one - and two -story buildings. Because of the location of Light Industry areas and their proximity to residential uses, taller buildings should be restricted to areas that will not disrupt the surrounding residential uses.

Certain commercial uses may be allowed, provided that the commercial use is determined to be complementary to the industrial area. Commercial recreational uses may also be appropriate under the same condition.

Institutional uses may also be appropriate, provided that land use compatibility and traffic issues have been addressed. Institutional uses would require discretionary review.

Mixed-use development projects in overlay zones are intended to provide additional housing opportunities in the City (such as the Westside) by combining residential and nonresidential uses in an integrated development. Additionally, this type of development is intended to revitalize areas of the City without exceeding the capacity of the General Plan transportation system. Mixed-use developments shall be implemented through an adopted urban plan (such as the 19 West and Mesa West Bluff Urban Plan) and will be identified on the Zoning Map by designating the MG base zoning district with the mixed -use Industrial Use1
Traffic FAR
Very Low Low Moderate High
Light Industry 0.75 0.35 0.25 0.15
Industrial Park 0.75 0.40 0.30 0.20
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 49 of 330
545
overlay district. The mix of uses can occur in either a vertical or horizontal design, up to four stories in height. Product types will be identified in the applicable urban plans and may include live/work units and commercial/residential units where the residential uses are located above or adjacent to the nonresidential component. Nonresidential uses may include office, retail, business services, personal service, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities. Residential development may be allowed in conjunction with the mixed-use overlay district for Mesa West Bluff Urban Plan area at density that does not exceed 13 units per acre. The required Mesa West Bluff U rban Plan shall include development standards to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses.

Industrial Park
The Industrial Park designation is intended to apply to large districts that contain a variety of industrial and compatible office and support commercial uses. Industrial parks are characterized by large parcels and landscaped setbacks that create a campus-like environment. Industrial parks must have proximity to freeways and other major transportation routes to provide the accessibility they require. An internal circulation system consisting of lesser highways is also necessary to accommodate the vehicle d emands created.

Industrial parks have major physical separations from areas designated for other uses to maintain their distinctiveness and avoid potential land use incompatibilities.

Development within this designation would consist of one- and two-story buildings. Additional height may be permitted when compatible with adjacent development and provided uses are consistent with other constraints, such as height limits and use restrictions within John Wayne Airport influence area, as identified in the Safety Element. The Industrial Park portion of the Home Ranch site may include buildings up to five stories in height near the center of the development. The North Costa Mesa Specific Plan provides specific building height information for the Segerstrom Home Ranch (Area 1).

Commercial uses may be allowed , provided that the use is determined to be complementary to the industrial area. Commercial recreational uses may also be appropriate under the same condition.

Institutional uses may also be appropriate , provided that land use compatibility and traffic issues have been addressed. Institutional uses will require discretionary approval.

Proposed i ndustrial development must be analyzed for potential significant impacts to air quality, aesthetics, land use, and other environmental issues.

Combinations of residential, institutional, and commercial uses may be allowed through the Planned Development process. FARs and population densities for commercial projects would be similar to the Neighborhood Commercial land use designation. Residential densities in planned development projects shall not exceed 20 dwelling units per acre. However, sites identified as housing opportunity sites within the sites inventory of the Housing Element shall be allowed to develop a project at the specified density within the Housing Element.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 50 of 330
546
Institutional and Open Space
Costa Mesa has thousands of acres of land set aside for public, semi-public, and open space type uses, all identified by one of these three land use designations: Public/Institutional, Golf Course, and Fairgrounds.

Public/Institutional
The Public/Institutional designation applies to both publicly and privately owned land that provides recreation, open space, health, and educational opportunities, as well as uses that provide a service to the public. Since this designation includes many different types of land uses, the Land Use Plan is labeled to identify the individual uses.

Areas included in this designation are park sites, health care facilities, educational institutions, religious facilities, fairgrounds, State Regional Emergency Operations Center, and public facilities. Since many of the uses are recreational and open space in nature, levels of building intensity are minimal.

Golf Course
Three golf courses are located within the City's planning area. Two of these, the Costa Mesa Golf Course and Mesa Verde Country Club, lie within City limits. Santa Ana Country Club is in the unincorporated area east of Newport Boulevard. Because of the large area devoted to open space, the building intensity for this designation is 0.01 FAR.

Fairgrounds
The Fairgrounds land use designation is applicable to only one property known as the Orange County Fair & Event Center (OCFEC) in the City of Costa Mesa. The Fairgrounds is a 150 -acre site located at 88 Fair Drive. This designation is intended to:
 Ensure continued development of the property as an integrated complex that is composed of recreational, agriculture-related educational institutions, open space, farmland, equestrian, and commercial uses; and
 Promote the continued and sustained use of the property for the annual Orange County Fair in recognition of its value as a regionally significant resource in the City of Costa Mesa.

Home to the annual Orange County Fair since 1949, the site is bounded by Arlington Drive (north boundary), Fair Drive (south), Fairview Road (west), and Newport Boulevard (east). Regional access is primarily provided to the site by State Route 55 at the interchanges of Fair Drive/Del Mar Avenue and 22nd Street/Victoria Stre et. Access from Interstate 405 , which is approximately one -mile north of the Fairgrounds, is provided via interchanges at Bristol Street, Fairview Road, and Harbor Boulevard. See Figure LU-7.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 51 of 330
547

Figure LU-7: Fairgrounds

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 52 of 330
548
The site was formerly a portion of the Santa Ana Army Air Base, and in 1949 the California 32nd District Agricultural Association (DAA) acquired the property from the federal g overnment. Since that time, the annual Orange County Fair has occurred at this location. Through the years the 32 nd DAA has expanded the use of the property into a year -round exhibition, conference, equestrian, activity, and event center; these uses collectively the OCFEC.

The 32nd DAA Fair Board adopted the current OCFEC Master Plan in 2003. Given that the 32 nd DAA is a State entity for administration of the Orange County Fair, Costa Mesa has limited land use and permitting authority over the property while it is controlled by the State.

In the future, if the State no longer controls the property, any proposed new development or change of use shall be subject to review for consistency with the City’s General Plan and zoning regulations. The new property owner/operator may continue to operate the Fairgrounds as it existed at the time of sale as a legal nonconforming use and development. The property’s legal nonconforming status will remain in effect until such time as the property owner submits and receives approval of a master plan by Cos ta Mesa.

The Fairgrounds site contains approximately 400,000 square feet of buildings, including:
 Pacific Amphitheater
 Arlington Theater
 Grandstand Arena
 Equestrian center
 Exhibit and administration buildings
 Concession and restaurant buildings
 Memorial Gardens
 Centennial Farms
 Livestock barns
The Fairgrounds designation recognizes the existing fairground and event center uses associated with this site. The General Plan traffic model does not take into account the trip generation from the annual OC Fair or weeknight/weekend special event uses ( i.e., Orange County Marketplace) because peak vehicle trips to the site occur outside normal business timeframes. However, further development of the Fairgrounds will need to be balanced with the development capacity of the City’s transportation system and with the protection of surrounding neighborhoods.

Permitted uses include ancillary office uses, exposition/conference uses, equestrian uses, agricultural/livestock activities, restaurants, temporary specialty retail sales (including vehicle sales), outdoor marketplace, emergency operational uses, and conc erts/live entertainment uses.

Complementary uses to the fairground and event center uses may include botanical gardens, animal Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 53 of 330
549
exhibits, museum, art/historical artifacts gallery, and performance art theaters that are supportive of the fairground uses.

Uses that are not supportive of fairground and event center uses are expressly prohibited. Prohibited uses include, but are not limited to, casinos/gambling venues, shopping centers, hotel/motels, residential uses, self-storage facilities, hospitals, and medical uses. In addition, exclusive use or dedicated athletic sports facilities and educational uses that are unrelated to the OCFEC are prohibited.

As a State- owned property, the Fairgrounds is not normally subject to the City’s Noise Ordinance.

However, pursuant to a 1990 Court Order (Case Nos. 42 07 28 and 55 65 08), exterior noise standards comparable to the City’s noise regulations have been applied to the property. Noise sensitive uses include neighboring residences, Davis Intermediate School, and Costa Mesa High School. The court-ordered noise restrictions apply to the operation of the Pacific Amphitheater. Development within the Fairgrounds designation is intended for buildings ranging from one- to four-story structures. The maximum allowable FAR for this designation shall be 0.10.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 54 of 330
550
Land Use Overlays and Urban Plans
The City has adopted land use overlay s that are intended to encourage reuse and revitalization of underutilized properties . The incentives provided expand land uses, provide development flexibility, stimulate economic growth, and create integrated areas complementary to the surrounding environs.

Refer to Figure LU-8 for the location of the Overlay and Urban Plan boundaries. The density, FAR, height, and trip generations may be modified accordingly to accommodate the residential site capacity , or density, for the housing opportunity sites identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

Mixed-Use Overlay Zone/Urban Plan Areas
Mixed-use development projects are intended to provide additional housing opportunities in the City by combining residential and nonresidential uses in an integrated development. Additionally, this type of development is intended to revitalize areas of the City without exceeding the capacity of the General Plan transportation system. Mixed-use developments shall be implemented through an adopted urban plan and shall be identified on the Zoning Map with the mixed -use overlay district. The mix of uses can occ ur in either a vertical or horizontal design.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 55 of 330
551
General Plan Amendments:

GP 18-03, Adopted Nov. 13, 2018
GP 20-01, Adopted Jul. 20, 2021
PGPA-24-01, Adopted July 15, 2025

Figure LU-8: Overlays and Urban Plans
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 56 of 330
552
Housing types shall be identified in the applicable urban plan and may include live/work units and commercial/residential units, where the residential uses are located above or adjacent to the nonresidential component. Nonresidential uses may include office, retail, business services, personal service, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities.

In conjunction with areas that are designated with the mixed -use zoning overlay district, the maximum FAR is 1.0. An increase to 1.25 FAR may be allowed for mixed-use plans exhibiting design excellence. In a mixed-use overlay district area, the FAR includes both residential and non-residential components. Table LU-14: Overlay and Urban Plan Residential Density, lists the appropriate land uses and the necessary base zoning district where mixed-use development is permitted.

Table LU-14: Overlay and Urban Plan Residential Density Base Land Use
Designations That Allows
Mixed Use3
Residential Dwelling Units Per Acre (D/A) and
Floor-Area Ratio (FAR)*
Overlays Urban Plans
Residential
Incentive
Harbor
Mixed-Use
SoBECA
Mixed-Use1
Westside
Urban Plans2
Commercial-Residential 30 du/acre -- -- --
Neighborhood Commercial -- -- --

1.00/2

1.25 FAR

General Commercial 30 du/acre 20 DU/A 40 D/A1
Light Industry -- 40 D/A1
Commercial Center -- -- --
Notes: * The density, FAR, height, and trip generations may be modified accordingly to realize the residential site capacity, or density, for the housing opportunity sites identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

1. The SoBECA Overlay has a maximum capacity of 450 residential units over the entire district, with individual projects having a maximum density of 40 dwelling units per acre. However, sites identified as housing opportunity sites within the sites inventory of the Housing Element shall be allowed to develop the site according to the specified density therein.

2. Under the Westside Urban Plans, a maximum FAR of 1.0 is allowed for mixed-used projects that include a residential component. An increase to 1.25 FAR may be allowed for mixed-use plans exhibiting design excellence. FAR calculations are based on the total site area (subarea) of the commercial component and does include the residential site area.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 57 of 330
553
Residential Incentive Overlay
The Residential Incentive Overlay allows the maximum 30 du/acre unit residential density option at strategic locations along Harbor Boulevard and Newport Boulevard. The Residential Incentive Overlay expands development opportunities on commercial properties not developed to their full potential or supporting outdated buildings and underperforming uses.

Maximum building height is three stories, provided privacy concerns of adjacent established residential neighborhoods are adequately addressed through the setback of upper stories or other design approaches. Housing within the Residential Incentive Overlay is limited to a maximum density of 30 units per acre. See Table LU-15: Residential Incentive Overlay and Figures LU-9 and LU-10.

Table LU-15: Residential Incentive Overlay
Categories Baseline
(2015)
Residential Incentive
Overlay
Density (DU/AC) N/A 30
Units
Harbor Boulevard 84 361
Newport Boulevard 237 117
Total Units 321 478

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 58 of 330
554

REVISED Nov. 13, 2018:

General Plan Amendments:
* GP 18-03, Adopted Nov. 13, 2018
Figure LU-9:

Residential
Incentive Overlay:

Harbor Boulevard
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 59 of 330
555

Density 30 du/acre
Residential Units 117
General Plan Amendments:
* GP 18-03, Adopted Nov. 13, 2018
* PGPA-24-01, Adopted July 15, 2025
Figure LU-10:

Residential
Incentive Overlay:

Newport Boulevard
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 60 of 330
556
South Bristol Entertainment & Cultural Arts (SoBECA) Overlay and Urban Plan The SoBECA Overlay applies to properties within the SoBECA Urban Plan area. Allowed uses include a mix of housing and retail/service commercial businesses, light industrial uses, creative studios, retail campuses, and entertainment and restaurant uses that attract local residents and visitors. Permitted development approaches are mixed-use development that combines residential and commercial uses, as well as stand-alone commercial and residential uses. This designation emphasizes commercial uses and aims to expand the established innovative, eclectic, and unique uses that support homegrown and incubator-type businesses important to the local economy. The integration of innovative public spaces and “hangout” areas for special events are highly encouraged.

The maximum residential density within the SoBECA overlay is 40 units per acre. A maximum 1.25 FAR applies to mixed-use buildings that integrate residential and commercial uses. Stand-alone commercial or industrial buildings have a maximum 1.0 FAR. The maximum building height for all projects is four stories.

The maximum number of residential units allowed within the entire SoBECA Urban Plan area is 450 units.

See Table LU-16: SoBECA Mixed-Use Overlay. See also Figure LU-11: SoBECA Mixed-Use Overlay. However, the density, FAR, and height may be modified accordingly to realize the residential site capacity , or density, for the housing opportunity sites identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

Table LU-16: SoBECA Mixed-Use Overlay
Categories Baseline
(2015) SoBECA Mixed-Use Overlay
Density (DU/AC) N/A 40 DU/AC
Not to exceed 450 units for Overlay
Units 0 450
Floor-Area Ratio (FAR) N/A 1.00 to 1.25
Building Square Feet 491,000 420,359

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 61 of 330
557

Figure LU-11:

SoBECA Urban Plan

* Density may be increased to the densities identified
for housing opportunity sites within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

SoBECA Overlay
Individual residential projects cannot exceed
40 dwelling units per acre, unless the site is a
housing opportunity site, then the density may
increase to align with the density identified
within the sites inventory of the Housing
Element.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 62 of 330
558
Harbor Mixed-Use Overlay
The Harbor Mixed -Use Overlay applies to select areas along Harbor Boulevard, between Wilson Street and 19th Street. The intent is to introduce a diverse mix of uses, with the objective of creating a much more integrated, walkable, and complementary balance of creative residential and retail spaces, neighborhood- serving retail and commercial services, and residential uses along the southern portion of Harbor Boulevard that intersects with 19 th Street. The designation allows residential development at up to 2 0 dwelling units per acre. A maximum 1.25 FAR applies to projects that consist of both residential and commercial mixed uses; maximum building height is four stories. See Table LU-17 : Harbor Mixed-Use Overlay and Figure LU-12. However, the density, FAR, and height may be modified accordingly to realize the residential site capacity, or density, for housing opportunity sites identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

Table LU-17: Harbor Mixed-Use Overlay
Categories Baseline
(2015) Harbor Mixed-Use Overlay
Density (DU/AC) N/A 20 DU/AC
Units 13 491
Floor-Area Ratio (FAR) N/A 1.00 to 1.25
Building Square Feet 337,300 321,000 of Commercial

Westside Urban Plans
In April 2006, the City adopted three Westside urban plans that created overlay zones in designated areas of the Westside: The 19 West Urban Plan, the Mesa West Bluffs Urban Plan, and the Mesa West Residential Ownership Urban Plan. Development proposed within the Westside Urban Plans requires approval of a Master Plan pursuant to the City of Costa Mesa Municipal Code. However, the density, FAR, and height may be modified accordingly to realize the residential site capacity, or density, for housing opportunity sites identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 63 of 330
559

Figure LU-12:

Harbor Mixed-Use Overlay
* The total residential units, density and FAR may be modified to realize the residential site capacity, or density, of the housing opportunity sites identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.
*
*
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 64 of 330
560
19 West Urban Plan
The 19 West Urban Plan provides commercial and residential mixed -use opportunities primarily along West 19th Street and Harbor Boulevard, at a cluster of properties between Newport Boulevard and Superior Avenue, and at the south side of Victoria Street and Placentia Avenue. This mixed -use overlay zone (over the Commercial and Industrial base districts) is intended to promote commercial/residential mixed-use development, encourage adaptive reuse, stimulate private investments and impro vements, promote new housing types, and meet housing demand. Development is subject to the trip budget established in the Zoning Code.

Mesa West Bluffs Urban Plan
The Mesa West Bluffs Urban Plan encompasses approximately 277 acres and was adopted to provide an overlay zone encouraging the development of live/work units or residential development, with the goal of revitalizing and providing new high -quality residences. The Mesa West Bluffs Urban Plan applies to industrial properties predominantly south of 18
th Street, north of 16th Street, and along Placentia Avenue.

The Urban Plan intends to stimulate live/work and residential development without exceeding the development capacity of the General Plan transportation system. With regard to industrial uses, established industrial uses may continue and expand. New residential development must recognize long- established industrial uses and be designed to minimize conflicts . New creative industrial workspace is permitted, provided that activities limit or confine noise, dust, and vibration impacts.

Mesa West Residential Ownership Urban Plan
The Mesa West Residential Ownership Urban Plan encompasses approximately 238 acres located between Victoria Street and 17 th Street, west of SR -55. The objective of the Mesa West Residential Ownership Urban Plan is to promote economic viability in existing medium -density and high -density residential areas, encourage the conversion of existing rental apartments to residential common-interest development (i.e., condominiums, planned unit developments), and encourage new residential common- interest development to improve the balance between rental and ownership opportunities.

The Mesa West Residential Ownership Urban Plan provides flexible development regulations to create additional incentives for new development.

See Figure LU-13: Westside Urban Plans, for the location and boundaries for each Westside Urban Plan.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 65 of 330
561

Figure LU-13: Westside Urban Plans

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 66 of 330
562
Specific Plans
While the General Plan establishes broad parameters of development on a long- term horizon, a specific plan is designed to identify particular land uses and development standards relating to a specific area, site or development proposal. California Government Code, Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 3, Article 8, Sections 65450 through 65457 allows cities and counties to prepare specific plans to develop policies , programs, regulations, and guidelines to implement the jurisdiction’s adopted general plan. As prescribed by law, specific plans include text and diagrams that generally describe the following:
• The distribution, location, and extent of all land uses; • The standards and criteria by which new development will proceed; • The proposed distribution, location, extend, and intensity of major components of public infrastructure, such as transportation and utility systems; and • A program of implementation measures, such as financing options, policies, regulations, and public works projects.

The City’s adopted specific plans will serve the best interests of the City by establishing detailed controls on the nature of future development and facilitat e the processing of subsequent development plans within the area governed by the Specific Plan. In some cases, City adopted specific plans may utilize the land use designations of th is Element and specific details relating to the land use designations can be found in the applicable adopted document.

Fairview Developmental Center Specific Plan
On January 5, 1959, the Fairview Developmental Center opened as a State hospital originally occupying 750 acres. Fairview Developmental Center had an initial bed capacity of 2,622 and was intended to house some 4,125 residents. The population at the facilities peaked in 1967 and has been declining since. In 2015, the current population was 275 persons, and the downward trend is expected to continue due to the restructuring of the State of California's approach to providing institutionalized care for the developmentally disabled. The State has been focusing on residential care options (as opposed to institutional care) for these disabled individuals.

A large portion of the original land was transferred in 1979 to the City of Costa Mesa and now encompasses Fairview Park and the golf course. In 1985, the City granted a General Plan amendment and rezone of 54 acres of surplus land immediately to the north of the hospital facilities for high -density residential uses. In 1987 and 2005, other parcels were converted to residential uses. These areas are planned developments with one -story, single -family residences, a two -story, small- lot residential subdivision, and two-story apartment buildings (Harbor Village Apartments).

In February 2016, the State of California Department of Development Services initiated the process for closure of Fairview Developmental Center. In June 2022, the State Legislature through Senate Bill (SB) 188 approved Government Code Section 14670.31, which provides a framework for the reuse of the FDC property. The legislation codifies a partnership between the Department of General Services (DGS), the Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 67 of 330
563
Department of Developmental Services (DDS), and the City of Costa Mesa, with defined roles for each entity. The City’s role was to develop a Specific Plan, conduct necessary studies, and manage a community- based planning process. The Legislature’s intent for the redevelopment of the FDC site is to prioritize affordable housing to the greatest extent feasible, including a minimum o f 200 units of permanent supportive housing, open space, and housing for individuals with developmental disabilities, and a City created Specific Plan for the FDC site that implements the provisions of Government Code Section 14670.31.

The Fairview Developmental Center Specific Plan consists of 95 acres of the prior Fairview Developmental Center state hospital site and was prepared in conformance with State requirements outlined in Government Code Section 65450 et seq. The Fairview Developmental Center Specific Plan was adopted on XXXX through City Council Resolution No. XX-XX and establishes land use designations, site specific zoning regulations, permitted uses , development and design standards, and mobility and infrastructure improvements. Future redevelopment proposed within the Fairview Developmental Center Specific Plan must be consistent with the plan , and it provides a future developer, City staff, the public and dec ision makers with information on the overall intent for the area, design standards to facilitate implementation, and future changes thereto . Figure LU-3 identifies the specific plan area, whereas Table LU- 6 identifies the specific plans residential and non-residential development intensities.

General Plan and Zoning Ordinance
Consistency
The relationship between the General Plan land use designations and zoning districts is shown in Table LU-19: General Plan and Zoning Consistency . This table indicates how properties will be zoned to be consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan. The Zoning Ordinance has the following Zoning Districts:
 Single-Family Residential (R1)
 Multiple-Family Residential, Medium Density (R2-MD)
 Multiple-Family Residential, High Density (R2-HD)
 Multiple-Family Residential (R3)
 Administrative and Professional (AP)
 Commercial Limited (CL)
 Local Business (C1)
 General Business (C2)
 Shopping Center (C1-S1)
 Town Center (TC)
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 68 of 330
564
 Off-Street Parking (P)
 Institutional and Recreational (I & R)
 Institutional and Recreational - School (I & R-S1)
 General Industrial (MG)
 Industrial Park (MP)
 Planned Development Residential (PDR)
 Planned Development Commercial (PDC)
 Planned Development Industrial (PDI)
 Mixed-Use Overlay District (MU)
 Residential Incentive Overlay District (RI)

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 69 of 330
565
Table LU-19: General Plan and Zoning Consistency
Land Use Plan Designations Consistent Zoning Classification Low Density R1, PDR-LD, I&R, I&R-S
Medium Density R1, R2-MD, PDR-MD, I&R, I&R-S, MU
High Density R2-MD, R2-HD, R3, PDR-HD, PDR-NCM, I&R, I&R-S, MU, RI Commercial-Residential AP, CL, C1, PDC, R2-MD, R2-HD, PDR-MD, PDR-HD, RI Neighborhood Commercial CL, C1, AP
General Commercial CL, C1, C2, C1-S, PDC, AP, RI, MU
Commercial Center C1, C2, C1-S, PDC, AP
Regional Commercial PDC
Urban Center Commercial PDC
Cultural Arts Center TC

Industrial Park MG, PDI, CL
Light Industrial MP, PDI, CL
Public and Institutional I&R, I&R-S
Golf Course I&R
Fairgrounds I&R
Fairview R2-MD, R2-HD, R3, I&R
Off-Street Parking (P) zoning classification is consistent with any land use plan designation, with the exception of Low Density.

Residential development shall be allowed, regardless of the underlying zoning or land use designations, for any housing opportunity site identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element, including any densities identified therein.

Revised February 20, 2019
Consistent with Table LU-9
of 2002 General Plan
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 70 of 330
566
Housing and Employment Projections
Providing a land use arrangement that encourages a correlation of employment and housing opportunities is a local and regional responsibility. Providing sufficient commercial land to support residential development is primarily a local responsibility, although commercial uses serving regional needs are provided as well. Sufficient land must also be established to meet the recreational needs of the local community, although regional needs are often accommodated by land within individual cities. Table LU-20: General Plan Land Use 2035 , identifies the projected future growth and im plications of the Land Use Plan.

Table LU-20: General Plan Land Use 2035
Land Use Designations Net
Acres
Residential
Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Feet
2015
Existing
2035
Future*
2015
Existing
2035
Future
Residential
Single-Family1 2,088.2 14,210 14,811 -- --
Multi-Family2 1,718.2 28,413 37,291 -- --
Non-Residential
Commercial-Residential 47.9 -- -- 543,000 455,200
Neighborhood Commercial 40.5 -- -- 338,000 472,100
General Commercial 616.3 -- 2,254 7,065,300 8,556,100
Commercial Center 117.5 -- 2,215 733,000 1,075,800
Urban Center Commercial 126.3 -- 1,735 4,550,700 5,581,200 Cultural Arts Center 57.3 -- 851 2,673,300 4,869,800
Regional Commercial 147.9 -- 1,959 2,723,700 3,260,800
Industrial Park 632.6 -- 3,626 8,684,500 9,895,000
Light Industrial 378.1 -- 1,668 4,402,500 2,838,000
Public and Institutional 1,278.4 -- -- 1,989,000 3,970,700 Golf Course 553.7 -- -- 84,200 84,200
Fairgrounds 150.0 -- -- 454,450 1,020,400
Fairview Developmental
Center Specific Plan3 95 -- 4,000 -- 35,000
Totals 8,044.5 42,623 68,690 33,916,000 42,553,000
Notes: * The residential dwelling units added to the Land Use Designations for 2035 reflect the site capacity identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element. The total unit counts are not intended to reflect a maximum build-out scenario.

1. Includes Low-Density Residential General Plan land use designation.

2. Includes Medium-Density, High-Density, and Commercial-Residential, Overlays General Plan land use designations.

3. The Fairview Developmental Center Specific Plan has a buildout horizon of 15-20 years from adoption.

General Plan
Amendment:

PGPA-24-02, Adopted
August 5, 2025
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 71 of 330
567
Goals, Objectives, and Policies
Maintaining and enhancing the great quality of life in Costa Mesa is the foundation of this General Plan.

The City will look towards focusing future change within targeted growth areas. Some of these areas already have a mix of commercial, office, hotel, and residential uses, and are located along roadways that will be enhanced with “Complete Streets” features (see Circulation Element), improved landscaping, and expanded public spaces (such as parks and plazas). In turn, the City will also protect and enhan ce neighborhoods throughout Costa Mesa to ensure these largely residential areas continue to provide value to residents and the community as whole.

Foremost, attention will be given to protecting the character and quality of residential neighborhoods, including those features that distinguish an area, such as building scale, historical structures, well- maintained rental housing, mature vegetation, and attractive streetscapes.

Goal LU-1: A Balanced Community with a Mix of Land
Uses to Meet Resident and Business Needs
Objective LU-1A. Establish and maintain a balance of land uses throughout the community to preserve the residential character of the City at a level no greater than can be supported by the infrastructure.

Policy LU-1.1 Provide for the development of a mix and balance of housing opportunities, commercial goods and services, and employment opportunities in consideration of the needs of the business and residential segments of the community.

Policy LU-1.2 Balance economic gains from new development while preserving the character and densities of residential neighborhoods.

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.

Policy LU-1.4 Promote housing and employment opportunities within planned development areas to the extent feasible.

Policy LU-1.5 Maintain a land use structure that strives to balance jobs and housing with available infrastructure and public and human services.

Policy LU-1.6 Promote sustainable development patterns that consider negative economic and health impacts on existing residents and businesses.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 72 of 330
568
Policy LU 1.7 Consider the attraction and retention of full service grocery stores and similar purveyors of healthy foods a part of the community's economic development strategy, with consideration to neighborhoods that lack suitable access to healthy food options.

Goal LU-2: Preserve and Protect Residential
Neighborhoods
Objective LU-2A. Promote land use patterns and development that contribute to community and neighborhood identity.

Policy LU-2.1 In the event of damage or destruction, allow any legal conforming use in existence at the time of adoption of the General Plan that is located in a nonconforming development to be rebuilt to its original building intensity, as long as any such rebuilding would not increase the development's nonconformity, and the damage or destruction was in no way brought about by intentional acts of any owner of such use or property.

Policy LU-2.2 Pursue maximum use of utility company funds and resources in undergrounding existing overhead lines, and encourage undergrounding of utilities in the public right-of-way for residential development consisting of five units or more, to the extent feasible and practical.

Policy LU-2.3 Develop standards, policies, and other methods to encourage the grouping of individual parcels to eliminate obsolete subdivision patterns and to provide improved living environments while being consistent with the neighborhood character of the surrounding community.

Policy LU-2.4 Do not allow "rounding up" when calculating the number of permitted residential units, except for lots existing as of March 16, 1992, zoned R2 -MD that have less than 7,260 square feet in area, and no less than 6,000 square feet, where density calculation fractions of 1.65 or greater may be rounded up to two units.

Policy LU-2.5 Allow creation of parcels without street frontage if sufficient easements are provided for planned developments or common- interest developments consistent with the neighborhood character. This policy does not apply to small lot subdivisions.

Policy LU-2.6 Encourage increased private market investment in declining or deteriorating neighborhoods, prioritizing neighborhoods located within designated environmental justice area boundaries.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 73 of 330
569
Policy LU-2.7 Permit the construction of buildings over two stories or 30 feet only when it can be shown that the construction of such structures will not adversely impact surrounding developments and deprive existing land uses of adequate light, air, privacy, and solar access.

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. (A four- story/five-level parking structure with roof deck parking on the f ifth level is considered a four-story structure.) The height limitation may be increased further to realize the residential site capacity , or density, of housing opportunity sites identified within the sites inventory of the Housing Element.

Policy LU-2.9 Require appropriate building setbacks, structure orientation, and placement windows to consider the privacy of adjacent residential structures within the same project and on adjacent properties.

Policy LU-2.10 Promote lot consolidation of residential properties to the extent feasible and practical, including the creation of larger single-family residential lots that exceed the minimum 6,000 -square-foot requirement in neighborhoods where the prevailing residential subdivision pattern features larger-sized residential lots.

Policy LU-2.11 Ensure adequate noise attenuation in urban design, such as walls for sound attenuation, development of landscaped greenbelts, provis ion of landscape berms, etc.

Goal LU-3: Development that Maintains Neighborhood
Integrity and Character
Objective LU-3A. Establish policies, standards, and procedures to minimize blighting influences, and maintain the integrity of stable neighborhoods.

Policy LU-3.1 Protect existing stabilized residential neighborhoods, including mobile home parks (and manufactured housing parks), from the encroachment of incompatible or potentially disruptive land uses and/or activities.

Policy LU-3.2 Actively enforce existing regulations regarding derelict or abandoned vehicles, outdoor storage, and substandard or illegal buildings , and establish regulations to abate weed -filled yards when any of the above are deemed to constitute a health, safety, or fire hazard.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 74 of 330
570
Policy LU-3.3 Continue code enforcement as a high priority with regard to the regulation of property maintenance standards citywide.

Policy LU-3.4 Ensure that residential densities can be supported by the infrastructure and are compatible with existing residential neighborhoods in the surrounding area.

Policy LU-3.5 Provide opportunities for the development of well-planned and designed projects which, through vertical or horizontal integration, provide for the development of compatible residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, or public uses within a single project or neighborhood.

Policy LU-3.6 Facilitate revitalization of aging commercial centers by working with property owners, developers, local businesses, and other community organizations to coordinate efforts.

Policy LU-3.7 Promote development/design flexibility that encourages older or poorly maintained high-density residential uses to be rehabilitated.

Policy LU-3.8 Ensure that new development reflects existing design standards, qualities, and features that are in context with nearby development and surrounding residential neighborhoods.

Policy LU-3.9 Locate high -intensity developments or high -traffic-generating uses away from low-density residential in order to buffer the more sensitive land uses from the potentially adverse impacts of the more intense development or uses.

Policy LU-3.10 Minimize effects of new development on the privacy and character of surrounding neighborhoods.

Policy LU-3.11 Promote small-lot residential development on long, narrow, single parcels or combined residential lots.

Policy LU-3.12 Ensure that new development reflects existing design standards, qualities, and features that are in context with nearby development.

Policy LU-3.13 Prohibit construction of buildings which would present a hazard to air navigation, as determined by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

Policy LU-3.14 Certain development proposals which may include the construction or alteration of structures more than 200 feet above ground level may require filing with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) pursuant to federal and State law. If a filing requirement is determined to be necessary in accordance with the procedures provided by State/federal agencies, the filing of a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration (FAA Form 7460 -1) shall be required prior to review and consideration of the proposed development.” Land Use Element (page LU -18) refers to the threshold stated Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 75 of 330
571
above. It shall be amended to refer to Filing FAA Form 7460 -1 Notice of Construction and Alteration, and not to Form 7480-1.

Policy LU-3.15 The City will ensure that development proposals , including the construction or operation of a heliport or helistop comply fully with permit procedures under State law, including referral of the project to the ALUC by the applicant, and with all conditions of approval imposed or recommended by the Federa l Aviation Administration, ALUC, and Caltrans, including the filing of Form 7480-1 (Notice of Landing Area Proposed) with the FAA. This requirement shall be in addition to all other City development requirements.

Policy LU-3.16 The City shall refer certain projects to the Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County , as required by Section 21676 of the California Public Utilities Code to determine consistency of the project(s) with the A irport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport.

Policy LU 3.17 New residential developments within the 60 dB CNEL noise contour of the airport shall provide designated outdoor signage informing the public of the presence of operating aircraft.

Goal LU-4: New Development that Is Sensitive to Costa
Mesa’s Environmental Resources
Objective LU-4A. Encourage new development and redevelopment that protects and improves the quality of Costa Mesa’s natural environment and resources.

Policy LU-4.1 Ensure that appropriate watershed protection activities are applied to all new development and significant redevelopment projects that are subject to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Stormwater Permit during the planning, project review, and permitting processes.

Policy LU-4.2 Avoid conversion of areas particularly susceptible to erosion and sediment loss (e.g., steep slopes) and/or establish development guidelines that identifies these areas and protects them from erosion and sediment loss.

Policy LU-4.3 Preserve or restore areas that provide water quality benefits and/or are necessary to maintain riparian and aquatic biota.

Policy LU-4.4 Promote site development that limits impact on and protects the natural integrity of topography, drainage systems, and water bodies , and protect the integrity of the bluff crest.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 76 of 330
572
Policy LU-4.5 Promote integration of stormwater quality protection into construction and post- construction activities, as required by the NPDES Stormwater Permit and the City’s Local Implementation Plan.

Policy LU-4.6 Incorporate the principles of sustainability into land use planning, infrastructure, and development processes to reduce greenhouse gas emissions consistent with State goals.

Goal LU-5: Adequate Community Services,
Transportation System, and Infrastructure to Meet
Growth
Objective LU-5A. Ensure availability of adequate community facilities and provision of the highest level of public services possible, taking into consideration budgetary constraints and effects on the surrounding area.

Policy LU-5.1 Pursue annexation of certain areas within the City's Sphere of Influence to provide land use regulation and city services within its jurisdiction.

Policy LU-5.2 Strongly encourage protecti on and preservation of existing but underutilized school sites for future recreational, social, or educational uses.

Policy LU-5.3 As appropriate and timely, consider the establishment of development impact fee program(s) to fund additional fire and police personnel, library facilities, and related equipment to meet the demands of additional growth in the City.

Policy LU-5.4 Require appropriate site and environmental analysis for future fire and police station site locations or for the relocation or closure of existing fire and police facilities.

Policy LU.5.5 Ensure that new development pays its fair share of impact fees such as park fees and traffic impact fees. This can also include impact fees related to community services (police protection services and fire emergency response services) or library facilities, once adopted and applicable.

Policy LU-5.6 Promote development of revenue-generating land uses to help defray the costs of high quality public services.

Policy LU-5.7 Encourage new development that is organized around compact, walkable, mixed- use neighborhoods and districts to conserve open space resources, minimize infrastructure costs, and reduce reliance on the automobile.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 77 of 330
573
Policy LU-5.8 Include an evaluation of impacts on utility systems and infrastructure in EIRs for all major general plan amendment, rezone, and development applications.

Policy LU-5.9 Phase or restrict future development in the City to that which can be accommodated by infrastructure at the time of completion of each phase of a multi-phased project.

Policy LU-5.10 Building densities/intensities for proposed new development projects shall not exceed the trip budget for applicable land use classifications, as identified in the Land Use Element, unless the site is identified as a housing opportunity site within the sites inventory of the Housing Element, then the density and intensity may be modified to realize the residential site capacity , or density, identified therein .

Building intensities for proposed new development projects shall not exceed the applicable floor area standards, except for the following conditions:
(a) Limited deviations from the graduated floor-area ratio standards for the commercial and industrial land use designations may be approved through a discretionary review process. No deviation shall exceed a 0.05 increase in the FAR in the moderate traffic category, and no deviation shall be allowed in the very low, low, and high traffic categories. Deviations from the FAR standards shall not cause the daily trip generation for the property to be exceeded when compared to the existing daily trip generation for the site without the proposed project or maximum allowable traffic generation for the Moderate Traffic FAR category, whichever is greater.
(b) Additions to existing nonconforming nonresidential developments may be allowed if the additions do not affect the overall traffic generation characteristics of the development and if the additions do not substantially affect the existing height and bulk of th e development. Additions to nonresidential developments shall be limited to those land uses with traffic generation rates based on variables other than building area square footage.

Examples of such additions include, but are not limited to: 1) Hotels/motels:

Increases in the size of hotel rooms or lobbies where no increase in the total number of rooms is proposed , and 2) t heaters: Increases to “back -stage” support areas or lobbies where no increase in the total number of seats is proposed.
(c) In the above conditions, the new development shall be compatible with surrounding land uses.
(d) Additional criteria for approving deviations from the FAR standards may be established by policy of the City Council.

Policy LU-5.11 Development plans shall be required for all phased development and approvals and shall be approved by the Planning and Transportation Services Divisions prior to the issuance of building permits.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 78 of 330
574
Policy LU-5.12 Development plans shall include an overall buildout plan, which can demonstrate the ability of the circulation system to support the proposed level of development.

Policy LU-5.13 The City shall continue its annual preparation of the Development Phasing and Performance Monitoring Program. The annual review will specifically address major intersection operations in any mixed-use overlay area.

Goal LU-6: Economically Viable and Productive Land
Uses that Increase the City’s Tax Base
Objective LU-6A: Ensure the long- term productivity and viability of the community's economic base.

Policy LU-6.1 Encourage a mix of land uses that maintain and improve the City’s long-term fiscal health.

Policy LU-6.2 Continue to promote and support the vitality of commercial uses to meet the needs of local residents and that support regional-serving commercial centers.

Policy LU-6.3 Continue to prioritize commercial and industrial park use of properties north of I- 405 and within the Airport Industrial District.

Policy LU-6.4 Support the continued presence of incubator businesses in the action sports industry and jobs-producing businesses in the Westside.

Policy LU-6.5 Encourage revitalization of existing, older commercial and industrial areas in the Westside with new mixed -use development consisting of ownership housing stock and live/work units.

Policy LU-6.6 Continue to encourage and retain land uses that generate sustainable sales and property tax revenues, including regional commercial destinations and automobile dealerships.

Policy LU-6.7 Encourage new and retain existing businesses that provide local shopping and services.

Policy LU-6.8 Provide efficient and timely review of development proposals while maintaining quality customer service standards for the business, development, and residential community.

Policy LU-6.9 Support the retention and growth of Class A office tenants, including corporate headquarters for the action sports industry, biotech , and high technology companies within the City.

Objective LU-6B: Encourage and facilitate activities that expand the City’s revenue base.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 79 of 330
575
Policy LU-6.10 Encourage a broad range of business uses that provide employment at all income levels and that make a positive contribution to the City’s tax base.

Policy LU-6.11 Provide opportunities for mixed -use, office, manufacturing, and retail development that respond to market and community needs in terms of size, location, and cost.

Policy LU-6.12 Track retail trends and tailor regulations to respond to market changes, maximize revenue, and maintain the appropriate business mix.

Policy LU-6.13 Encourage new development along major corridors that are pedestrian oriented and includes a mixture of retail/service, residential, and office uses.

Policy LU-6.14 Improve ease and accessibility to information to capture opportunities for businesses to establish in Costa Mesa and bring high -skill and professional jobs and new revenue sources into the community.

Policy LU-6.15 Promote unique and specialized commercial and industrial districts within the City which allow for incubation of new or growing businesses and industries.

Policy LU-6.16 Examine options for the development of new infrastructure for new technologies and businesses that use those technologies.

Objective LU-6C: Retain and expand the City’s diverse employment base, including office, retail/service, restaurants, high -tech, action sports, boutique and prototype manufacturing, and industrial businesses.

Policy LU-6.17 Engage in activities that promote Costa Mesa as a great place to live, work, and develop a business.

Policy LU-6.18 Continue to work with surrounding cities to strengthen regional economic development.

Policy LU-6.19 Provide flexibility and support for development of residential, office, small retail centers, and similar uses that would serve local residents and would also benefit from the high visibility along major corridors outside of significant commercial or industrial nodes.

Goal LU-7: A Sound Local Sustainable Economy that
Attracts Investment, Creates Educational Opportunities, and Generates Employment Opportunities
Policy LU-7.1 Endeavor to create mixture of employment opportunities for all economic levels of residents and businesses.

Policy LU-7.2 Support linkages between local educational institutions and local industries and businesses. Foster training, collaboration with employers, and new innovative programs that increase job opportunities for residents and students attending school locally.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 80 of 330
576
Policy LU-7.3 Foster and provide useful and efficient partnerships to implement economic opportunities with private, non-profit, or other public agencies.

Policy LU-7.4 Cultivate an entrepreneurial and academic environment that fosters innovation through non -traditional housing developments, flexible office spaces, experiential development, and ensuring the diversity of retail/service throughout the urban districts.

Policy LU-7.5 Support and provide flexibility for development projects and businesses which produce, care, and maintain material goods or fixed assets meant to support the production of market goods, especially for niche industries within the City of Costa Mesa.

Policy LU-7.6 Seek out opportunities to attract primary businesses within stable industries and support industries that already exist within the City.

Policy LU-7.7 Explore economic and employment opportunities to retain and strengthen the unique industry niches along Bristol and Paularino, in the Westside, on East 17 th
Street, and throughout North Costa Mesa.

Policy LU-7.8 Support the development of pedestrian plazas and gathering places, and institutional spaces, as well as the more efficient use of existing spaces, to support economic growth and branding of existing industries within the City.

Goal LU-8: Promote a range of multiple uses at the
Fairview Developmental Center site
Policy LU-8.1 In anticipation of the potential closure or repurposing of the Fairview Development Center site, the City will work with appropriate State agencies or private entity (if the property is sold) to plan for a complementary mix of residential, institutional, public facilities, open spaces, and recreational uses.

Goal LU-9: Ensure that Fairgrounds uses are consistent
with the General Plan designation
Policy LU-9.1 Discourage changes in the allowable uses specified in the Fairgrounds General Plan land use designation for the Orange County Fair & Event Center property.

Ensure that amendments to this General Plan designation are approved by the electorate.

Goal LU-10: Promote the growth of tourism
Objective LU-10A: Promote structural improvements of visitor-oriented land uses.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 81 of 330
577
Policy LU-10.1 Engage with property owners, developers, and business owners to encourage the revitalization of the hotel/motels.

Policy LU-10.2 Provide incentives to motel development projects seeking to improve existing motel facilities by increasing the hotel rating. These projects may include:
(a) Updating building mechanical, electrical, or plumbing to comply with current building standards
(b) Updating physical improvements to the site
(c) Adding hotel amenities to the site
(d) Updating or improving the landscaping on the site
(e) Updating or improving the façade of the building(s)

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 82 of 330
578
Objective LU-10B: Promote growth of visitor-oriented land uses.

Policy LU-10.3 Motel and hotel land uses should be encouraged to be located near major transportation corridors and close to key tourist/visitor draws, other recreation venues, the airport, regional, and general local shopping centers.

Policy LU-10.4 Consider the interest of quality of stay for visitors when evaluating projects near visitor-oriented land uses by requiring on -site amenities and upscale guest services.

Objective LU-10C: Promote uses and events that make visitor -oriented business more economically viable.

Policy LU-10.5 Celebrate and promote the arts, culture, and industries of Costa Mesa through special events, civic gatherings, and City marketing and tourism promotion efforts.

Policy LU-10.6 Promote the development of small -scale manufacturing uses or other uses that generate multiple secondary and tertiary markets that support business travel tourism-related uses.

Policy LU-10.7 Maintain and enhance the City’s status and image as a centrally located destination and cultural center in Orange County.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 83 of 330
579

Chapter 3:

Circulation Element
Introduction
Costa Mesa’s transportation system consists of a comprehensive network of sidewalks, bicycle routes, trails, bus transit facilities, local streets, major roadways, and freeways. This integrated system supports connectivity among the major activity areas and residential neighborhoods, and brings people to and through the City. Although the established street system moves many people every day to local and regional destinations, the system—not unlike most road systems in Southern California established long ago—has been designed primarily for automobiles. This Circulation Element changes the paradigm for transportation planning by giving equal attention to planning and building systems that accommodate all mobility means, including on foot, by bicycle, and via transit.

This element includes goals, objectives, and policies that the City will use to make decisions regarding transportation improvements that significantly Bicyclists traveling along 17th Street
Updated March 4, 2025 – General Plan Amendments:
* PGPA-23-0001, March 7, 2024
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 84 of 330
580
expand bicycle and pedestrian travel capabilities, manage the established roadway system efficiently and effectively, enhance transit facilities, and implement “complete street” strategies that ensure all users and mobility options are addressed in future street improvements.

Purpose
Costa Mesa will pursue strategies and programs that not only address relieving vehicular congestion but also create local conditions that emphasize active transportation. With its mild climate and flat terrain, Costa Mesa should be a place where people can easily bike and walk. The transportation system described in this element is a balanced multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and highways for safe and convenient travel. Those users include children, cyclists of all ages, pedestrians, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, transit riders, and seniors. The City’s aim is to balance the ability of this varied circulation network to accommodate planned growth in a manner that minimizes delay, creates efficiencies, and supports the community’s environmental and economic goals.

The Circulation Element establishes policies governing the system of roadways, intersections, bike paths, pedestrian ways, and other components of the circulations system, which collectively provide for the movement of persons and goods throughout Costa Mesa. Most significantly, the element:
 Applies “Complete Streets” strategies for street improvements  Defines active transportation improvements that will create improved conditions for walking and cycling
 Coordinates land use planning and transportation improvements to effectively manage and improve the established roadway system  Identifies linkages and connectivity among all transportation modes.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 85 of 330
581
Baseline Conditions-2015
Established Roadways
Regional Transportation
Costa Mesa is centrally located in Orange County near the Pacific Coast and is well served by the regional freeway system consisting of:
 San Diego Freeway (I-405), which traverses east-west across the northern portion of the City
 Corona del Mar Freeway (SR-73), which begins at I-405 between Fairview Road and Bear Street and extends southeast, where it becomes the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor
 Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55), which enters at the northeast corner of the City and extends southwest, transitioning into Newport Boulevard south of 19th Street
These freeways provide regional access throughout Orange County and points beyond, which is convenient but also can be severely congested during weekday and weekend peak-hour periods, placing additional burden on parallel streets.

Street System
North/south arterial roadways serving the City include Harbor Boulevard, Fairview Road, Bear Street, and Bristol Street, all of which are six-lane facilities; and Placentia Avenue and Red Hill Avenue, both of which are four- lane facilities. East-west arterial roadways serving the City include Anton Boulevard and Adams Avenue, which are six-lane facilities; Sunflower Avenue, which is a six-lane facility east of Bear Street and a four-lane facility west of Bear Street; and South Coast Drive, Baker Street, Fair Drive, Victoria Street, West 19th Street, and East 17th Street, all four-lane facilities.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 86 of 330
582

East-west access to Costa Mesa is constrained by the Santa Ana River on the west and on the east by John Wayne Airport and Upper Newport Bay. The Santa Ana River runs along the entire western City boundary, with crossings only at Adams Avenue, Victoria Street, and MacArthur Boulevard. Besides I- 405, these roadways represent the only locations where Costa Mesa residents can travel to Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley. Although a crossing had one time been planned via West 19th Street, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) amended its Master Plan of Arterial Highways1 in 2014 to remove this connection. To the east, the airport and Upper Newport Bay entirely constrain surface street connections extending east, except via Pacific Coast Highway to the south, Bristol Street parallel to SR-73, and MacArthur Boulevard north of I-405.

The circulation system layout is notable for its two grid patterns. Streets east of and including Newport Boulevard were constructed at approximately 45 degree angles from the traditional north/south streets in north Orange County. This results in odd-angled intersections along Newport Boulevard; west of Newport Boulevard, the streets are generally in a more traditional grid pattern.
1 Cities throughout Orange County must ensure that their own circulation master plans are consistent with OCTA’s Master Plan of Arterial Highways to remain eligible for M2 funds, as described later in this element.

Looking north on Bristol
Street from the pedestrian
bridge connecting South
Coast Plaza and the
Segerstrom Center for the
Arts
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 87 of 330
583
Long-Term Regional Transportation Projects
I-405 Improvement Project
In 2015, I-405 through Orange County carried as many as 370,000 vehicles per day, making it one of the busiest roadways in the nation. OCTA, in cooperation with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), plans to widen the 16-mile length of I-405 between I-605 and SR-73 to handle forecasted vehicle volumes and to address ongoing congestion challenges.

Project improvements include widening the freeway to include a general purpose lane and an express lane, improved overcrossings at Fairview Road and Santa Ana River, and a new bridge that will connect I-405 and SR-73.

Several freeway ramps will be reconstructed; adjacent roads will be configured to accommodate the widening; and new sound walls will be built where necessary.

State Route 55 (SR-55) Freeway Extension Alternatives
One of the keystone projects for alleviating congestion are the planned improvements for SR-55/Newport Boulevard. In 2015, close to 100,000 vehicles passed through the terminus of the Costa Mesa Freeway at 19th Street every day. OCTA has examined several alternatives of a freeway extension of SR-55 to address congestion resulting from the terminus of SR-55 at 19th Street in Costa Mesa. Alternatives include transportation systems management and traffic synchronization, construction of a single lane elevated structure at 17th Street, and a cut-and-cover tunnel that would run below SR-55/Newport Boulevard from 19th Street to Industrial Way. The cut- and-cover strategy offers the most benefits to Costa Mesa; in addition to The San Diego Freeway
(I-405) in Orange County
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 88 of 330
584
completely removing freeway traffic from the local road network, it would allow the City to repurpose Newport Boulevard, including possibly using excess right-of-way for enhancing the downtown experience by adding landscaping and facilities that support other modes of transportation.

This General Plan assumes that the cut-and-cover approach, which the City supports, will not occur within the year 2035 planning horizon due to the significant costs and planning required.

Key Issues
Freeway Congestion
Interstate 405, between I-605 and SR-73, is one of the most congested freeways in Southern California during commute hours. In addition to particularly heavy traffic volumes, I-405 suffers from a lack of alternative routes plus closely spaced on- and off-ramps that interfere with smoothly flowing vehicle movements. The congestion impacts Costa Mesa by pushing non-local trips onto City streets and hindering easy access to commercial districts.

Traffic congestion at the terminus of SR-55 is caused by local and regional commuters. Through trips to Newport Beach and other coastal areas use capacity that would better serve local residents and businesses; these trips also clog intersections that affect east-west travel within the City.

Local Traffic Conditions
Residents cite congestion on local streets as a key concern. Due to the City’s geographic location, accessibility from freeways, proximity to Orange County beaches, and popular attractions and destinations, many local streets experience frequent heavy traffic loads.

Need for a Comprehensive Bicycle System
While Costa Mesa has long had several Class I bicycle paths such as the Santa Ana River Trail, Banning Channel Trail, Victoria Street path, and the Joann Street Bike Trail, connectivity has been limited. Gaps in the bicycle network create challenges for cross-town travel and easy access to major activity areas and residential neighborhoods. While Costa Mesa’s weather and terrain make for great biking, the lack of efficient and safe bike routes and supporting bike Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 89 of 330
585
infrastructure have made it difficult for bicycling to be a good alternative mode of travel.

Accommodating Pedestrians
Many residential neighborhoods in Costa Mesa are near shopping districts, schools, and parks. Pedestrian access improvements including attractive streetscape and landscape features, lighting, decorative crosswalks, enhanced traffic signal timing, and other amenities will attract higher use of pedestrian facilities.

Neighborhood Cut-Through Traffic
Three major freeways and several regional arterials provide access to the City and adjacent jurisdictions. As a result, some neighborhood streets are affected by cut-through traffic, resulting in higher than normal traffic volumes at higher speeds. Additionally, due to limited vehicle access routes over the Santa Ana River, a significant number of vehicles converge along Adams Avenue and Victoria Street to get to Huntington Beach. Many neighborhood streets in proximity to these streets are affected by cut-through traffic, especially by vehicles attempting quicker routes via Costa Mesa streets.

Mobile technologies such as smart phone apps that alert motorists of congested streets and suggest alternative routes through residential neighborhoods compound the issue.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 90 of 330
586
Circulation Plan
Efficient movement within and through Costa Mesa and the region will be facilitated by developing and maintaining a well-designed and integrated multimodal transportation network for all users. Easy and convenient access to transit, pedestrian, and bicycle options within the City are essential to an efficient network.

Streets are the backbone of Costa Mesa’s circulation system. They lend identity to our neighborhoods and have always served as a determining force in the shape, form, and function of the City. Streets should be considered as places with many functions beyond moving people and goods, such as connecting neighborhoods, providing social spaces, and serving as statements of civic pride.

Master Plan of Streets and Highways (MPSH)
The City of Costa Mesa MPSH defines the existing and future roadway system in the City. One of the objectives of the MPSH is to maintain consistency with the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH). OCTA administers the MPAH, including the review and approval of amendments requested by local agencies. In order for Costa Mesa to receive funding from Orange County M2 funds for planned local road network improvements, the City’s MPSH must be consistent with the County’s MPAH.

Roadway Classifications
Roadway classifications are designated on the MPSH as a general guideline for arterial highway right-of-way requirements. Additional right-of-way beyond the typical sections may be required for any classification when an arterial highway coincides with an adopted route for an additional public facility (e.g., special transit facilities, bikeways, wider landscaped parkways, wider sidewalks, or riding and hiking trails), or a scenic highway. Figure C-1 shows typical cross-sections for the arterial roadway designations on the MPSH, and Table C-1 lists the daily number of vehicles that can be accommodated by each type of arterial roadway.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 91 of 330
587

Figure C-1: Roadway Typical Cross Sections
Major Arterial
Primary Arterial
84’
100’
12’ 11’ 12’ 4’ 10’ 12’ 11’ 12’8’ 8’
4’ 7’12’ 11’ 10’ 11’ 12’7’
60’
74’
56’
6’ 12’ 11’ 10’ 11’
68’
12’ 6’
Secondary Arterial
Collector 60’
10’ 10’
40’
12’ 12’ 8’8’
Notes: 1. Additional right-of-way may be required at intersections for accommodating turn lanes.

2. Additional right-of-way may be required along streets that are planned to included future bicycle facilities, consistent with the Conceptual Bicycle Master Plan (Figure C-3).

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 92 of 330
588
Table C-1: Master Plan of Streets and Highways
Arterials Lanes
Typical
Right-of-Way
Daily Vehicle
Trips
Accommodated
Major Six-lane divided (median) 100 Feet 56,000-68,000
Primary Four-lane divided (median) 74 Feet 38,000-45,000 Secondary Four-lane undivided (no median) 68 Feet 25,000-30,000 Divided
Collector
Two-lane divided (continuous
two-way left-turn lane) 68 Feet 22,000
Collector Two-lane undivided (no median) 60 Feet 12,500 Major Arterial
A Major Arterial highway is a six-lane divided (raised or painted median) roadway. A Major Arterial may be designed with emphasis for automobile, goods movement, and/or transit. Major Arterials carry a large volume of regional through traffic not handled by the freeway system.

Primary Arterial
A Primary Arterial highway is a four-lane divided (raised or painted median) roadway. A Primary Arterial may be designed with emphasis for automobile, goods movement, transit, and/or bicycle. A Primary Arterial's function is similar to that of a Major Arterial. The principal difference between the two classifications is capacity.

Secondary Arterial
A Secondary Arterial highway is a four-lane undivided (no median) roadway. A Secondary Arterial may be designed with emphasis for automobile and/or bicycle. A Secondary Arterial serves as a connector, distributing traffic between local streets and Major and Primary Arterials. Although some Secondary Arterials serve as through routes, most provide direct access to surrounding land uses.

Divided Collector Arterial
A Divided Collector Arterial is a modified Secondary Arterial with a reallocation of pavement width to emphasize bicycle and pedestrian use. It provides one bicycle lane per direction on bicycle corridors and one through vehicle lane per direction. The two directions of travel are divided by a continuous two-way left-turn lane.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 93 of 330
589
Collector Arterial
A Collector Arterial is a two-lane undivided (no median), unrestricted access roadway. Collector Arterials differ from local collector streets in their ability to handle through traffic movements between two arterials.

Roadway Plan
The Costa Mesa MPSH is shown in Figure C-2. Prior traffic studies and the General Plan analysis evaluated a number of potential modifications that are now either included in the MPSH or could be considered based on coordination with OCTA. Those modifications are discussed below.

Santa Ana River Crossings
A cooperative study was carried out by the cities of Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Fountain Valley, and Huntington Beach and OCTA to support OCTA’s amendment to the Orange County MPAH to downgrade the Gisler Avenue/Garfield Avenue crossing of the Santa Ana River to a “Right-of-Way Reserve” status and to delete the West 19th Street crossing of the Santa Ana River from the MPAH. To maintain consistency with the amended MPAH, the cities of Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, and Huntington Beach have subsequently changed the designation of the Gisler Avenue/Garfield Avenue crossing to “Right-of-Way Reserve” status in their respective General Plan Circulation Element roadway systems, including the Costa Mesa MPSH presented here. The City of Huntington Beach has subsequently deleted the West 19th Street crossing from its General Plan circulation system. With this deletion, there is no possible connection for a vehicular bridge from Costa Mesa towards Huntington Beach. The Costa Mesa General Plan traffic study concluded that the future traffic demand in Costa Mesa can be adequately served without the West 19
th Street crossing. Therefore, the West 19th Street
crossing over the Santa Ana River has been deleted from the Costa Mesa MPSH.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 94 of 330
590

Figure C-2: Master Plan of Streets and Highways

Map prepared by Stantec, Inc.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 95 of 330
591
West 19th Street Downgrade
West 19th Street west of Placentia Avenue could be downgraded from a Primary Arterial to a Divided Collector Arterial on the MPSH, a downgrade that is supported by the results of the General Plan traffic study. This roadway is designated as a Primary Arterial on the Orange County MPAH. To maintain consistency with the MPAH, the City of Costa Mesa will initiate an MPAH amendment process with OCTA to downgrade this roadway to a Divided Collector Arterial.

West 17th Street Downgrade
West 17th Street west of Placentia Avenue could be downgraded from a Secondary Arterial to a Divided Collector Arterial on the MPSH, a downgrade that is supported by the results of the General Plan traffic study. This roadway is designated as a Secondary Arterial on the Orange County MPAH.

To maintain consistency with the MPAH, the City of Costa Mesa will initiate an MPAH amendment process with OCTA to downgrade this roadway to a Divided Collector Arterial on the MPAH.

East 22nd Street Downgrade
East 22nd Street between northbound Newport Boulevard and Orange Avenue has been downgraded from a Secondary Arterial to a Collector Arterial on the MPSH. This downgrade is supported by earlier studies as well as the General Plan traffic study, and the Orange County MPAH has been amended by OCTA to incorporate this downgrade.

Baker Street Downgrade
Baker Street between Mesa Verde Drive East and Royal Palm Drive could be downgraded from a Secondary Arterial to a Collector Arterial on the MPSH, a downgrade that is supported by the results of the General Plan traffic study.

This roadway is designated as a Secondary Arterial on the Orange County MPAH. To maintain consistency with the MPAH, Costa Mesa will initiate an MPAH amendment process with OCTA to downgrade this roadway to a Collector Arterial on the MPAH.

Bluff Road Deletion
The previous Costa Mesa MPSH included Bluff Road between Victoria Street and West 19
th Street as a Major Arterial. The General Plan traffic study concluded that the future traffic demand in Costa Mesa can be adequately Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 96 of 330
592
served without this roadway. Therefore, Bluff Road between Victoria Street and West 19th Street could be deleted from the MPSH. To maintain consistency with the MPAH, Costa Mesa will initiate an MPAH amendment process with OCTA to delete this roadway from the MPAH.

Balanced Approach to Complete Streets
The California Complete Streets Act (2008) places the planning, designing, and building of “Complete Streets” into the larger planning framework of the General Plan by requiring jurisdictions to plan for multimodal transportation networks. Complete Streets are designed and operated to enable safe access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, the disabled, motorists, seniors, users of public transportation, and movers of commercial goods. These networks allow people to effectively travel to key destinations within their community and the larger region. In addition, all transportation projects should be evaluated as to their ability to improve safety, access, and mobility for all travelers and to recognize pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes as integral elements of their transportation system.

Costa Mesa has already begun the work of reviewing the existing street network and looking for opportunities to improve alternative modes of transportation through the construction of bike paths, such as the Joann Street Bicycle Trail. The goals, objectives, and policies in this element continue the work of making enhancements to the transportation network to accommodate all modes of mobility.

Active Transportation
“Active transportation” refers to non-motorized travel modes such as walking, biking, or skateboarding. Because everyone uses a mode of active transportation at some point in a trip, such as walking to a bus stop or from a parking lot to work or school, active transportation is a critical component of a Complete Streets network. The Active Transportation Plan—divided in this element into a bicycle component and pedestrian component—responds to direct comments from residents for more active transportation facilities and increased connectivity throughout Costa Mesa and regional destinations.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 97 of 330
593
Bicycle Master Plan
A transportation system that incorporates a well-designed bicycle network results in fewer motorized vehicle trips and miles of vehicle travel (and related pollutant emissions) while providing an option for healthful physical activity.

Costa Mesa is committed to improving the bicycle experience with implementation of the comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan. The Conceptual Bicycle Master Plan is shown in Figure C-3. Following a detailed analysis and public review of the proposed facilities, a final Bicycle Master Plan will be incorporated into the Circulation Element. New bicycle facilities and amenities will be added to complement the established bicycle network.

Costa Mesa follows Caltrans’ standards and recognizes four classes of bicycle facilities: Class I – Bike Paths or Bike Trails, Class II - Bike Lanes, Class III - Bike Routes (On-Street), and Class IV - Protected Bike Lanes. Figures C-4 and C-5 illustrate typical cross sections for each bicycle classification.

Class I: Off-Street Paved Bike Paths
This class provides a pathway exclusive to bicycles and other active transportation modes, with no motor vehicle use of the roadway. Costa Mesa has extensive Class I bike routes within and adjacent to the City boundaries.

Examples of Class I trails include Joann Street Bicycle Trail, Harbor Boulevard Bicycle Trail, Victoria Street Bicycle Trail, Fairview Channel Trail, Santa Ana River Trail, Greenville-Banning Channel Bikeway, and Back Bay Trail.

Class II: On-Street Striped and Signed Bicycle Lanes
Most of the functional bicycle trips in Costa Mesa are on Class II bicycle lanes on many of the arterial and collector streets in the City. The lanes are striped and signed for exclusive use of bicycles and are located adjacent to curb. The lanes use existing rights-of-way and share roadways with motor vehicles.

Class II can be found along Placentia Avenue, Newport Boulevard, Santa Ana Avenue, Fairview Road, and South Coast Drive.

Class III: On-Street Shared-Lane Signed Bicycle Routes
Similar to Class II bicycle lanes, Class III routes are multimodal but generally are located on low-traffic residential streets; they are identified as bikeways through signage only. On these routes, several short-distance “Bicycle Boulevards” are planned to connect the eastside and westside Class II bike lanes.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 98 of 330
594

Map prepared by Stantec, Inc.

Figure C-3: Conceptual Bicycle Master Plan

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 99 of 330
595
Figure C-4: Bike Cross Sections
Class I and Class II
Class I: Off-Street Paved Bike Paths

Class II: On-Street Striped and Signed Bicycle Lanes

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 100 of 330
596

Class IV: Protected Bike Lanes (Cycle Tracks), an On-Street and Separated Bike Lane

Class III: On-Street Shared-Lane Signed Bicycle Routes

Figure C-5: Bike Cross Sections
Class III and Class IV
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 101 of 330
597
Bicycle Boulevards are achieved mostly through signage, pavement markings, landscaping, and other vehicular traffic-calming measures to optimize bicycle travel. They never require widening of streets or removal of curb parking.

Santa Ana Avenue between 22nd Street and 21st Street is a Class III bicycle facility.

Class IV: Protected Bike Lanes (Cycle Tracks) - On-Street and Separated Bike Lanes
A cycle track is marked out by a separate bike lane, or multidirectional bike lane, that protects it from other traffic—vehicular, transit, and pedestrian—by a physical barrier such as a curb, planters, or parked cars. Cycle tracks can be configured either for one-way travel (with a lane on each side of the street) or for two-way travel (with each lane on one side of the street). The lane is for exclusive use by bicycles.

Physical separation can also be vertical, with the bike lane raised above ground (i.e., bicycle freeway). When cycle tracks are built, they tend to attract even more bicycle riders, as they are perceived to be safer. In this manner, cycle tracks can increase cycling as a share of the overall mode of travel and address roadway safety by minimizing collisions between vehicles and cyclists.

No Class IV facilities are currently located in Costa Mesa.

Framework Bicycle Facilities
The Conceptual Bicycle Master Plan builds upon long-established bicycle assets in Costa Mesa, including the Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail, Greenville- Banning Channel Bikeway, Joann Street Bicycle Trail, and Victoria Street Bicycle Trail.

Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail and Banning Channel Bikeway The Santa Ana River Trail is a dedicated bike path along the banks of the Santa Ana River. As a segment of the OC Loop, the Santa Ana River Trail provides bicycle access to Orange County beaches, as well as to Fairview Park, Talbert Nature Preserve, and Talbert Regional Park. A bridge over the Santa Ana River near Fairview Park and Talbert Nature Preserve provides pedestrian and bicycle access to both sides of the Santa Ana River Trail and the Banning Channel Bikeway.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 102 of 330
598
The Greenville-Banning Channel Bikeway is located on the eastern bank of the Santa Ana River and merges into the Santa Ana River Trail just south of Adams Avenue.

Joann Street Bike Trail
The Joann Street Bike Trail is a Class I bike path located along the southern edge of the Costa Mesa Golf Course and the western side of Harbor Boulevard. The trail connects Placentia Avenue and Tanager Drive.

Victoria Street Bike Trail
The Victoria Street Bike Trail is a Class I bike path located along the northern side of Victoria Street, between Canyon Drive and Placentia Avenue.

Bicycle Infrastructure to Increase Bicycling
This Circulation Element recognizes that a complete bicycle network must include infrastructure improvements and amenities for bicyclists that add comfort and convenience for commuters and recreational bicyclists.

Recommendations to implement Safe Routes to School programs, provide bike lockers, require new developments to provide adequate bicycle parking, and implement a bicycle sharing system will all contribute to the infrastructure needed to complete Costa Mesa’s planned comprehensive bicycle network.

The Joann Street Bicycle Trail
along the southern boundary
of the Costa Mesa Golf Course.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 103 of 330
599
Bicycle Parking Facilities
Safe and convenient bike parking is an essential component of a comprehensive bicycle network. Bike racks are required to be provided in most new development projects. However, larger bicycle parking facilities should be located at schools and colleges, major activity centers and venues, parks and community centers, office complexes, and major shopping centers.

Examples of bicycle parking facilities can include:
 Bike racks, lockers, and shelters. A bicycle rack is a device to which bicycles can be securely attached for parking purposes. A bike rack may be attached to the ground or some stationary object such as a building. A bicycle locker is a box in which a single bicycle can be placed and locked in. They are usually provided at places where numerous cyclists need bike parking for extended times, yet where the bikes might otherwise get damaged or stolen. Bicycle shelters typically include bike racks that are covered by a permanent structure to protect against the elements.
 Secure bicycle parking areas. Secure bicycle parking areas are enclosures for storing bicycles. They are commonly located in larger residential complexes or at colleges. They typically include 24-hour controlled access to limit bicycle theft and vandalism.  Attended bicycle stations. Bike stations provide indoor bike parking served by an attendant. Stations can include various services, including valet parking, day-use lockers, self-repair stations, bike rentals, professional bike repair, classes, and events.

Bicycle Boulevards
Bicycle boulevards are low-traffic streets that have been optimized for use by cyclists. A variety of traffic-calming elements and signage are used to reduce car volumes and speeds, thus fostering a safe bicycling environment. Bicycle boulevards often include features that allow cyclists to travel farther without stop controls or intersection treatments that allow cyclists to continue through intersections, while cars are forced to turn. Bike boulevards often make use of “sharrows”— shared-lane markings—that communicate the presence of bicyclists to drivers.

Bike racks: from the
simple to the artistic
to the whimsical.

They all serve the
same intended

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 104 of 330
600
Colored Bicycle Lanes and Boxes
Bike boxes, painted at intersections, allow cyclists to move in front of the travel lane in order to be more visible to cars and avoid turning conflicts.

Bicycle lanes are another technique to provide dedicated space in the street for cyclists and to increase driver awareness to the presence of cyclists.

Increasingly, cities are using colored pavement treatments to designate bike lanes, either by coloring the beginning of the lane or the entire lane.

Bicycle Programs
Developing a healthy bicycling environment and culture is an important part of supporting good bicycle access. Building a strong and lasting bicycling constituency requires a multifaceted approach that provides required infrastructure and makes cyclists feel they are part of a broad and growing community.

Safety Campaigns
Bicycle safety campaigns and programs are critical to creating a bicycle- friendly culture. Safe travels by bicyclists can be actively integrated into traffic safety programs such as training law enforcement officers on bicyclists’ rights and responsibilities, promoting efficient reporting mechanisms for behaviors that endanger bicyclists, employing traffic safety officers to educate, and correcting bicyclists’ traffic violations.

Celebrating Bicycling
Programs and activities can stimulate community spirit toward cycling, such as events that celebrate those who ride or allow families to ride safely together.

Common events include organized and supported rides, where local streets Example of a painted bicycle
box at an intersection
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 105 of 330
601
are closed to cars and cyclists are free to ride; bike commute month (or week), where local companies can compete for the highest cycling rates; or events that showcase numerous types of cycling. All these events can help to build a cycling culture.

Accommodating Pedestrians
Walkability, access, and connections are essential components of a circulation system that accommodates pedestrians. Walkability includes design features such as wide sidewalks, safe street crossings, treatments that encourage cautious driving, and comfortable and safe walking environments.

Comfortable sidewalks, well-designed pedestrian crossings, pathways, and pedestrian shortcuts allow people to get from one destination point to another with ease.

The City supports the integration of pedestrian-oriented improvements and amenities within the circulation system to improve walkability. Figure C-6 identifies the primary pedestrian districts in Costa Mesa that will receive focused attention.

An example of a cyclovía in
Southern California
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 106 of 330
602

Sidewalks and Sidewalk Zones
Sidewalks are not merely places for pedestrians to move about. As public spaces, sidewalks serve as the front steps to the City, activating streets socially and economically. Safe, accessible, and well-maintained sidewalks can enhance general public health and create vibrant social settings. In districts with heavy pedestrian activity—such as in the Westside, SoBECA and South Coast Plaza/Orange County Performing Arts districts—sidewalks should have several zones that accommodate pedestrians. The zones should include a frontage zone, pedestrian-through zone, street furniture zone, and enhancement/buffer zone. Figure C-7: Sidewalk Zones, provides an example.

Example of pedestrian-
friendly streets with wide
sidewalks, street furniture,
and lighting that illuminates
the sidewalk
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 107 of 330
603

Figure C-6: Pedestrian Opportunity Zones
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 108 of 330
604

Figure C-7: Sidewalk Zones
Frontage Zone
The frontage zone is that section of the
sidewalk that functions as an extension of
the building, whether through entryways
and doors or sidewalk cafes and sandwich
boards. The frontage zone consists of both
the structure and the façade of the building
fronting the street, as well as the space
immediately adjacent to the building.

Pedestrian through Zone
The pedestrian through zone is the primary
accessible pathway that runs parallel to the
street. The through zone ensures that
pedestrians have a safe and adequate place
to walk and should be five to seven feet wide
in residential settings and eight to 12 feet
wide in downtown or commercial areas.

Street Furniture Zone
The street furniture zone is defined as the
section of the sidewalk between the curb
and the pedestrian through zone in which
street furniture and amenities, such as
lighting, benches, newspaper kiosks, utility
poles, tree wells, and bicycle parking are
provided.

Enhancement/Buffer Zone
The enhancement/buffer zone is the space
immediately next to the sidewalk that may
consist of a variety of different elements.

These include curb extensions, parklets,
stormwater management features (e.g,
bioswales), parking, bike racks, bike share
stations, and curbside bike lanes or cycle
tracks.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 109 of 330
605
Crosswalks and Markings
Properly designed, marked, and signed crossings improve motorist courtesy toward pedestrians. The City supports the provision of marked crosswalks at protected (signalized or stop-controlled) intersections if their presence minimizes pedestrian-auto conflicts. The City has prioritized improving intersections near schools to create pedestrian-friendly environments under the suggested Safe Routes to School program. Figure C-6: Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, identifies areas where the City will pursue street enhancements to create pedestrian-friendly environments. Table C-2: Street and Intersection for Pedestrian Safety, outlines the types of design improvements that create safer streets and intersections for pedestrians.

Table C-2: Street and Intersection
Improvements for Pedestrian Safety
Design Improvements Supplemental Design Improvements
 Traffic Signal
 Stop Sign
 High-Visibility Crosswalks
 Mid-Block Crosswalks
 Pedestrian Refuge Islands
 Advance Stop and Yield Lines
 Flashing Lights and Beacons
 Special Intersection Paving
 Raised Crosswalk and Intersections
 RRFB and HAWKs
HAWK – High Intensity Activated Crosswalk is a pedestrian hybrid beacon that is used at busy crosswalks. The beacon is activated to solid red followed by flashing red when the pedestrian button is pushed.

RRFB – Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons are used at mid-block pedestrian crossings to increase driver awareness of potential pedestrian conflicts. They use irregular flash patterns when activated by pedestrians to get driver attention.

Costa Mesa has approved several projects under its Capital Improvement Programs that invest in all neighborhoods with proven methods to enhance pedestrian safety, including:
 Implementation of traffic-calming devices
 Illuminated crosswalks
 New landscaped parkways and medians to both address pedestrian- orientation and provide effective visual cue to slow traffic  Completion of sidewalks and curbs
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 110 of 330
606
 Extensive traffic signal synchronization
Transit Services
Transit services—which includes buses, trains, commuter shuttles, paratransit, and emerging forms of multi-passenger transport—offer a mobility alternative for residents, employees, students, and visitors who either do not have access to, or prefer not to use, a car. OCTA provides local bus and paratransit services within Orange County, with several routes in Costa Mesa.

One of the primary goals of this element is to make transit use a more viable option for both work and non-work trips. Accomplishing this goal will require an improved transit system capable of providing faster and more frequent trips while maintaining safe, clean, and dependable service. As OCTA and the City continue to enhance public transit, the City will also prioritize these activities, particularly when it comes to improvements and investments made in street design and land uses that take into account transit transportation.

Figure C-8 identifies Transit Corridors in Costa Mesa that will receive focused transit improvement attention. Transit Corridors feature improvements such as enhanced signal coordination, transit amenities, bicycle accommodations, and an improved pedestrian experience.

Limited-Stop Bus Service: Bravo!
A limited-stop bus service route is a service that stops less frequently than local service. OCTA operates Bravo!, a limited-stop bus route (Route 543) along Harbor Boulevard, with buses making stops every 10 to 15 minutes.

Bravo! extends from the Fullerton Transportation Center through Anaheim, Garden Grove and Santa Ana, ending at MacArthur Boulevard at the Costa Mesa city limit.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 111 of 330
607

Figure C-8: Transit Corridors

Source: Stantec, Inc.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 112 of 330
608

Paratransit
Through OCTA’s Senior Mobility Program and ACCESS, the City supports discounted bus fares to seniors and flexible paratransit shuttles. ACCESS is OCTA's shared-ride service for people who are unable to use the regular fixed- route bus service because of functional limitations caused by a disability.

OCTA's Senior Mobility Program is designed to fill the gap between local fixed- route buses and ADA paratransit by providing local transportation services to seniors.

Improving Vehicular Travel
Traffic congestion impacts many of Costa Mesa’s roadways. This results in driver frustration, added pollution from idling vehicles, and residents constrained as they try to get to work, school, and other local destinations.

Costa Mesa is committed to improving local traffic conditions both to address the harmful effects of congestion and to support of the Orange County Congestion Management Plan (CMP) goals of:

1. Achieving regional mobility and air quality objectives

2. Providing a mechanism for coordinating land use and development decisions that support the regional economy

3. Determining gas tax fund eligibility
In 2013, Senate Bill 743, a law that introduced Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as the replacement to Level of Service (LOS) as the primary metric of Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 113 of 330
609
transportation system performance. The law requires that the new metric be used when analyzing the impacts of a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and will go into effect in 2017 when new CEQA guidelines are adopted.

While the law specifies that VMT will be the baseline metric for future CEQA analysis, it allows the local agencies to continue using LOS for purposes of long-term transportation planning. Consistent with current State law, Costa Mesa continues to use LOS as the performance metric for land use and circulation planning, although the City supports policies that would reduce VMTs primarily through the implementation of a transportation demand management and the active transportation and transit strategies. Overall, the City’s goal is to prevent the deterioration of LOS at key intersections within the City. The City will pursue a broad array of projects that will help maintain and improve of LOS for vehicular travel.

Concurrent with the project-specific transportation system LOS improvements, the City will:
 Complete and annually maintain a needs assessment for traffic service levels and traffic safety
 Develop and annually update a priority list of improvement projects  Regularly assess peak-hour traffic volumes at critical intersections  Minimize circulation improvements that will necessitate the taking of developed private property
 Pursue programs that reduce vehicle speeds and cut-through traffic on local streets
 Develop a program to regularly evaluate traffic collision data Transportation Demand Management
Transportation Demand Management, or TDM, is a general term for strategies that promote the efficient use of transportation systems without adding physical capacity (additional lanes or widening) on the roadway system. TDM strategies can help address a variety of traffic problems and provide secondary economic, social, and environmental benefits. When all are considered, TDM strategies are often the most cost-effective way to improve transportation. Examples of TDM include:

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 114 of 330
610
 Telecommuting
 Bike/Transit Integration
 Carpool/Vanpool
 Pedestrian Facility Improvements
 Transit Improvements/Transit Pass Subsidy
 Encouraging Walking and Cycling
 Parking Management and Pricing
 Bicycle Parking/Facilities
 Alternative Work Schedules
 Flexible Work Hours
To implement these strategies and support regional air quality objectives, the City has adopted a Transportation Demand Management Ordinance. The City will continue to work with major employers to implement TDM strategies.

Neighborhood Traffic Management
Managing traffic in neighborhoods that are most affected by congestion and cars traveling at unsafe speeds requires the multiple-prong approach that Costa Mesa has practiced for many years, such as installing traffic-calming infrastructure, reclassifying minor streets, and deploying Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). The added strategy of implementing Complete Streets plans will augment past and ongoing efforts to protect residential neighborhoods from the ill effects of cut-through traffic.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 115 of 330
611
Goals, Objectives, and Policies
The following goals, objectives, and policies work in concert with those in the Land Use Element.

Goal C-1: Implement “Complete Streets”
Policies on Roadways in Costa Mesa
Plan, develop, and implement a comprehensive transportation system that serves all users and modes of travel.

Objective C‐1A: Create a transportation network that meets the mobility needs of all Costa Mesa residents, businesses, and visitors.

Policy C-1.1: Update th
e City’s engineering standards for public and
private streets to provide for safe, comfortable, and
attractive access and travel for pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit users of all ages, abilities, and modes of travel.

Policy C-1.2: Allow for fle
xible use of public rights-of-way to
accom
modate all users of the street system while
maintaining safety standards.

Policy C-1.3: Complete
and annually maintain a needs assessment for
traffic safety and traffic service levels. Develop and
annually update a priority list of improvement projects, with priorities based on: 1) correcting identified hazards; 2) accommodating multimodal trips; 3) improving and/or
maintaining peak
-hour traffic volum
es at critical
intersections; 4) improving efficiency of existing
infrastructure utilization; and 5) intergovernmental
coordination.

Policy C-1.4: Pursue do
wngrade of arterials that no longer have the
demand requiring their buildout to planned capacity.

Policy C-1.5: Implemen
t road diets on street segments with excess
capacity to enhance bicycle and pedestrian facilities. For Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 116 of 330
612
roadways with excess vehicle capacity, consider the
reduction of travel lanes and use the reclaimed space for active modes of transportation including pedestrian and bicycle.

Policy C-1.6: Encoura
ge the conversion of excess on-street parking

spaces for expanded sidewalk gathering places or
landscaping.

Policy C-1.7: Encourage
community participation in City processes and
programs focused on improving mobility and
transportation facilities. Outreach should facilitate
participation of underserved populations.

Policy C-1.8: Pursue
downgrade of 17th Street from 6-lane Major
Arterial to 4-lane Primary Arterial between Orange Ave
and Tustin Avenue, through Master Plan of Arterial
Highways (MPAH) Amendment process with the Orange
County Transportation Authority.

Objective C‐1B: Pr
eserve the character of our residential neighborhoods.

Policy C-1.9: Implement traffic
calming measures that discourage
speeding and cut-through traffic on residential streets.

Identify opportunities to update signal timing and phases with high collision frequencies.

Policy C-1.10: Encourage n
on-motorized transportation in residential
areas by providing sidewalks, implementing pedestrian
and bicycle friendly design of local streets, and
incorporating street trees in new projects wherever
feasible. Provide additional consideration in implementing such enhancements within designated environmental
justice area boundaries.

Policy C-1.11: Reduce or e
liminate intrusion of traffic related to non-
residential development on local streets in residential neighborhoods.

Policy C-1.12: With an emph
asis on safety, prioritize intersection
improvements which improve through traffic flow on
Major, Primary, and Secondary Arterials, and reduce
impacts on local neighborhood streets.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 117 of 330
613

Policy C-1.13: Promote engi
neering improvements such as physical
measures constructed to improve safety, lower speeds,
and otherwise reduce the impacts of motor vehicles.

Policy C-1.14: Design and Imp
lement transportation projects to meet
local and regional system capacity needs in accordance
with the Master Plan of Streets and Highways.

Policy C-1.15: Implement ne
ighborhood approved traffic-calming
measures in residential neighborhoods and appropriate
commercial areas, such as street narrowing, curb
extensions, roundabouts, landscaped medians, and radar
speed feedback signs. Additional consideration should be given to working with neighborhoods located within
designated environmental justice area boundaries to
identify and implement appropriate measures.

Policy C-1.16: Establish priorit
y-ranking system
to evaluate traffic-
calming requests for implementation throughout the City.

Policy C-1.17: At regular intervals
, conduct a study to re-evaluate speeds
along the city’s roadways, and pursue programs that
reduce vehicle speeds and cut-through traf
fic on local
streets in accordance with the most recent version of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD).

Policy C-1.18: Lever
age the tools discussed in the Pedestrian Master
Plan Infrastructure Toolbox (e.g. sidewalk connectivity, curb ramps, and crosswalks) to continue to develop a
pedestrian network that is safe and accessible by users of all ages and abilities.

Policy C-1.19: Develop a network of walking paths in different commercial districts and neighborhoods to encourage
community members to walk. The walking paths could be
artistic and each path could have its own wayfinding signs and stylistic flair to create a sense of place.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 118 of 330
614
Goal C-2: Effectively Manage and Improve
the Roadway System
Develop and maintain a robust and efficient multimodal circulation network.

Objective C‐2A: Implement policies that encourage and
accommodate all users while maintaining the safety and
efficiency of the circulation system.

Policy C-2.1: Establish a c
itywide crosswalk policy to address
installation, maintenance, removal, and enhancements of crosswalks at intersections and mid-block location
s.

Crosswalk locations and treatment will be based on
criteria including, but not limited to safety, traffic volume, and concentration of pedestrian activity. Potential
enhancements may include leading pedestrian intervals at signalized intersections, bulb
-outs, and m
edian refuges to
reduce crossing distances.

Policy C-2.2: Avoid cre
ation of frequent driveways for new
development access in active pedestrian areas that create conflict points between pedestrians and vehicles.

Policy C-2.3: Encoura
ge commercial property owners to use shared
driveway access and interconnected roads within blocks, where feasible. Require driveway access closures or
consolidations, or both when a site is remodeled or
redeveloped.

Policy C-2.4: Collaborate
with law enforcement and public safety
organizations to coordinate policies and programs that
would reduce injuries and deaths on the roadways.

Policy C-2.5: Designate
routes for truck traffic to minimize potential
conflicts between trucks and cars, pedestrians, bicycles, transit, and vehicle access and circulation. Establish by ordinance a truck map that depicts allowable truck routes within the City.

Policy C-2.6: Periodically
review and update traffic signal timing at all
signalized intersections to improve safety, maintain traffic signal coordination and to accommodate bicycle and
pedestrian needs.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 119 of 330
615
Policy C-2.7: Develop ne w traffic level of services criteria in accordance with SB 743 to meet the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Policy C-2.8: Continue th
e use of the Intersection Capacity Utilization
(ICU) methodology to address local traffic level of service and impacts, with Level of Service “D” as the threshold for meeting the City’s significance criteria.

Objective C‐2B: Co
nstruct street improvements and apply congestion
management tools to improve safety and obtain efficient performance of the transportation system.

Policy C-2.9: Incorporate
the street system improvements identified in
the General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) into the Capital Improvement Program.

Policy C-2.10: Continue to d
eploy intelligent transportation systems
(ITS) strategies—such as adaptive signal controls, fiber optic communication equipment, closed circuit television cameras, real
-time transit i
nformation, and real- time
parking availabilit
y information—to enhance safety,
reduce traffic delays, lower greenhouse gas emissions,
improve travel times for pedestrians, cyclist, and
motorists.

Policy C-2.11: Investigate all
operational measures, including the use of
one-way streets, to imp
rove safety, improve traffic
circulation, and to minimize congestion for all travel
modes.

Policy C-2.12: Investigate an
d utilize state-of-the-art transportatio
n
system management technology and industry practices to
address recurring and non
-recurring traffic ev
ents (i.e.,
special events, incident/emergency management).

Policy C-2.13: Continue to
evaluate and pursue design and operational
improvements (medians, driveway closures, signal
synchronization or phasing, prohibited or regulated right- turn-on-red movements in pedestrian opportunity zones
including safe routes to school and near transit stops, parking restrictions or setbacks; ADA Accessibility, etc.) to improve the safety and efficiency of intersections.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 120 of 330
616
Goal C-3: Enhance Regional Mobility and
Coordination
Encourage development of a regional transportation network that addresses regional mobility needs for all modes of travel.

Objective C‐3A: Promote development of transportation projects along regional corridors.

Policy C-3.1: Maintain com
pliance with Orange County Congestion
Management Plan (CMP) requirements, including
consistency with CMP level of service standards, adoption of a seven
-year capital improv
ement program, analysis of
impacts of land use decisions on the CMP highway
system, and adoption and implementation of deficiency
plans when intersections do not meet adopted
performance standards.

Policy C-3.2: Support
the goals and objectives of the Orange County
Long Range Transportation Plan, including expansion of
transportation system choices, improvement of
transportation system performance, and sustainability of transportation infrastructure.

Policy C-3.3: Support
the goals and objectives of the SCAG Regional
Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
(RTP/SCS), including expansion of transportation system choices, improvement of transportation system
performance, and sustainability of transportation
infrastructure.

Policy C-3.4: Coordinate
signal timing on all major arterials with a local
signal synchronization program consistent with the
Orange County Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan (TSSMP).

Policy C-3.5: Ensure
Costa Mesa’s input, participation, and
discretionary review of applicable region-wide
transporta
tion system policies, programs, and
construction.

Policy C-3.6: Develop s
hort-term and long-term improvements to the
SR-55 corridor in coordination with Caltrans and OCTA to address safety and regional mobility needs.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 121 of 330
617
Policy C-3.7: Promote the City’s preferred alternative of undergrounding the SR-55 freeway south of 19th Street
within the City limits.

Policy C-3.8: C
ollaborate with Caltrans, OCTA, and other local agencies to re-envision the future of Newport Boulevard in the
area between and adjacent to 17th Street and 19th Street as a destination that improves safety and facilitates
placemaking and pedestrian and bicycle activities by
implementing enhanced pedestrian and bicycle
infrastructure that provides for connectivity, especially in the east-west direction.

Objective C‐3B: Coordinate and partner with local and regional agencies to promote projects and polices that improve safety and regional mobility.

Policy C-3.9: Coordinate wit
h adjacent jurisdictions to maintain or
improve mobility within the City to achieve a standard
Level of Service no worse than “D” at all intersections under State or joint control. Intersection Level of Service analyses for General Plan conditions for locations under State or joint control will be updated periodically and presented to the City Council.

Policy C-3.10: Consult with
Caltrans and OCTA regarding the I-405
widenin
g project to minimize adverse impacts to Costa
Mesa’s neighborhoods, businesses, and streets.

Policy C-3.11: Coordinate wit
h OCTA and other jurisdictions to remove
Gisler Avenue Bridge over the Santa Ana River from the
City’s Master Plan of Streets and Highways and County’s Master Plan of Arterial Highways.

Policy C-3.12: Collaborate wit
h Caltrans and neighboring jurisdiction to
improve signal timing and coordination along major
arterials across jurisdictional boundaries.

Policy C-3.13: Work closely
with the State of California and other
government agencies to control traffic–related impacts of uses on State- or other agency-owned land (i.e., Orange County Fairgrounds, Orange Coast College, etc.).

Policy C-3.14: Coordinate
with other responsible agencies the planning,
funding, prioritization, and implementation of bicycle, Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 122 of 330
618
pedestrian, and transit programs and supporting
infrastructure.

Goal C-4: Promote Transportation
Demand Management, Transit, and
Efficiency
Utilize Transportation Demand Management strategies to manage demand and maximize available capacity.

Objective C‐4A: Encourage greater utilization of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to reduce dependence on
single‐occupancy vehicles.

Policy C-4.1: Support
South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) trip reduction programs, including park and
ride lots, transit subsidies, carpool and vanpool programs, flexible working hours, bicycle facilities, and other traffic reduction strategies.

Policy C-4.2: Support lo
cal and multi-jurisdictional c
ar-sharing and
bike-sharing programs
.

Policy C-4.3: Consider i
mplementing park-once approache
s for
multiuse districts and regional destinations areas.

Policy C-4.4: Embrace
innovative parking solutions that reduce the
required spaced needed for parking, such as automated
parking lifts and elevators.

Policy C-4.5: Encourage
and provide incentives for commercial, office,
and industrial development to provide preferred parking for carpools, vanpools, electric vehicles, and flex cars.

Policy C-4.6: Encourage
and support programs that increase vehicle
occupancy, including the provision of traveler
information, shuttles, preferential parking for
carpools/vanpools, transit pass subsidies, and other
methods.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 123 of 330
619
Policy C-4.7: Promote th e combination of TDM measures as much more effective than any single measure.

Policy C-4.8: Require d
iscussion of transportation system management
(TSM) and TDM measures in all EIRs prepared for major
projects.

Policy C-4.9: Encourage
the integration of compatible land uses and
housing into major development projects to reduce
vehicle use.

Policy C-4.10: Allow the
application of transportation management
rideshare programs, integration of complementary land
uses, and other methods to reduce project related
average daily and peak hour vehicle trips to achieve
consistency with allocated trip budgets.

Objective C‐4B: Pr
omote regional and local transit services as an
alternative to automobile travel.

Policy C-4.11: Ensure that ro
adways designated as transit routes can
accommodate transit vehicle circulation and safe and
convenient pedestrian access to and from transit stops.

Policy C-4.12: Review all cap
ital improvement projects to ensure
improvements located on existing and planned transit
routes include modification of street, curb, and sidewalk configurations to allow for easier and more efficient
transit operations and improved passenger safety and
access.

Policy C-4.13: Provide trans
it stop amenities that facilitate access to and
from transit stops and transfer locations. These may
include pedestrian pathways approaching stops, high-
quality benches and shelters, traveler information
systems (real
-time transit arriv
al information), and bike
storage and bicycle connections. Bus stops should
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 124 of 330
620
accommodate timed transfers between buses and other
transit services where necessary.

Policy C-4.14: Encourage ne
w development along major transit
corridors to provide safe and efficient access to transit stops and public sidewalks.

Policy C-4.15: Support an
d participate with OCTA ACCESS Service in
providing transportation assistance to senior citizens and the disabled.

Policy C-4.16: Consult wit
h OCTA for transit services, such as changes to
bus routes, bus stops, and hours of operation.

Additionally, coordinate with OCTA for changes to transit services provided for seniors, the disabled, and transit dependent populations.

Policy C-4.17: Consult wi
th the Newport-Mesa Unified Sch
ool District to
maintain school bus services provided for local
schoolchildren.

Policy C-4.18: Coordinate w
ith OCTA to improve transit services in the
City, including strategies such as bus rapid transit, express services, community circulators, and other strategies.

Policy C-4.19: Encourage ne
w local transit programs in coordination
with OCTA, consisting of shuttle services to local and
regional destinations.

Policy C-4.20: Coordinat
e with OCTA to construct bus turnouts at
appropriate locations, with attractive shelters designed for safe and comfortable use.

Policy C-4.21: Require di
scussion of transit service needs and site design
amenities for transit ridership in EIR for major projects.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 125 of 330
621
Goal C-5: Ensure Coordination between
the Land Use and Circulation Systems
Facilitate close coordination between development of land use and circulation system.

Objective C‐5A: Coordinate land use policies and development activities that support a sustainable transportation system.

Policy C-5.1: Ensure tha
t new development projects are consistent
with the vehicular trip budgets, where adopted.

Policy C-5.2: Require tha
t large developments and redevelopments
provide short-term and long-term vehicular traffic
impact
studies.

Policy C-5.3: Encourage p
ermitted General Plan land uses which
generate high traffic volumes to be located near major
transit and transportation corridors to minimize vehicle use, congestion, and delay.

Policy C-5.4: Maintain balanc
e between land use and circulation
systems by phasing new developments to levels that can
be accommodated by roadways existing or planned to
exist at the time of completion of each phase of the
project.

Policy C-5.5: Promote
development of mixed-use projects to reduce
number of vehicle trips.

Policy C-5.6: Coordin
ate the design and improvement of pedestrian
and bicycle ways in major residential, shopping and
employment centers, parks, schools, other public
facilities, public transportation facilities, and bicycle networks with adjacent cities.

Policy C-5.7: Require ded
ication of right-of-way, in an equitable
manner, for development that increases the intensity of land use.

Policy C-5.8: Minimize circ
ulation improvements that will necessitate
the taking of private property on existing developed
properties.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 126 of 330
622
Policy C-5.9: Require th at circulation necessary to provide or attain the minimum traffic level of service standard at an
intersection to which a development project contributes measurable traffic be completed within three years of
issuance of the first building permit for such development project, unless additional right-of-way or coordination with other government agencies is required to complete
the improvement. Improvements may be required sooner
if, because of extraordinary traffic generation
characteristics of the project or extraordinary impacts to the surrounding circulation system, such improvements
are necessary to prevent significant adverse impacts.

Policy C-5.10: Allow for co
nstruction of circulation improvements for a
phased development project to be constructed
commensurate with the project construction, based upon
the findings of a traffic study approved by the City of Costa Mesa.

Policy C-5.11: Maintain balance b
etween land use and circulation
systems by phasing new development to levels that can
be accommodated by roadways existing or planned to
exist at the time of completion of each phase of the
project.

Policy C-5.12: Support co
nsistency with the Orange County Sustainable
Communities Strategy (OC SCS) and SCAG RTP/SCS by
providing an integrated land use and transportation plan to meet mandated emissions reduction targets consistent with SB 375.

Objective C‐5B: Es
tablish strategies and processes that allow large
developments to analyze and mitigate traffic impacts
and infrastructure needs.

Policy C-5.13: Require that
new development projects improve access to
and accommodations for multimodal transportation,
provide pedestrian access that serves the intensity of use and compliments the existing pedestrian network, and
whenever feasible incorporate pedestrian improvements
in to the public right-of-way as a part of conditions of approval.

Policy C-5.14: Require dev
elopers of new building and
redevelopment/reuse projects as part of the project
development review process that are located along bus
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 127 of 330
623
routes to pay a designated fair share of the cost of
providing improved bus stop facilities and related street furniture or, where appropriate, dedicate land for
improved bus stop facilities.

Policy C-5.15: Consider t
he needs of the transportation and
infrastructure system early for large developments and
coordinate with developers to design projects that
minimize traffic impacts and infrastructure demands, and implement complete streets wherever feasible.

Alternatively, address transportation and infrastructure system impacts through the implementation of
development agreements.

Goal C-6: Fund and Evaluate the City’s
Transportation Network
Explore opportunities to secure funding for enhancing the circulation system.

Objective C‐6A: Pursue funding sources to maintain and enhance the transportation and infrastructure system.

Policy C-6.1: Evaluate traffic
collision data regularly, and identify top
collision locations for pedestrians, bicycles, transit, and automobiles in Costa Mesa. Develop appropriate
countermeasures and pursue funding from all available
sources to implement them.

Policy C-6.2: Continue
to develop and maintain long-range capital
improv
ement programs consistent with the General Plan
and M2 eligibility requirements.

Policy C-6.3: De
velop an annual list of Active Transportation projects to be proposed as part of the City’s Capital Improvement
Program (CIP), including identification and additional
consideration of such projects within designated
environmental justice area boundaries

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 128 of 330
624
Policy C-6.4: Coordinate with OCTA to fund, develop, and maintain a Master Plan of Streets and Highways consistent with the Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH).

Policy C-6.5: Require a locally
collected and administered traffic
mitigation fee program to guarantee that new
development pays for its fair share toward improvements resulting in reductions in air pollutant and GHG emissions and traffic impacts generated by the development.

Policy C-6.6: Actively pursue
local, State, and federal funding to
implement, maintain, and evaluate the transportation and infrastructure system.

Policy C-6.7: Supplement f
unding from annual fees or assessments on
existing and new development with grants and other
nonlocal sources.

Policy C-6.8: Develop stra
tegies to implement an infrastructure and
transportation system to be consistent with State policies on resiliency and sustainability.

Policy C-6.9: Amend the Gen
eral Plan, if necessary, to be responsive to
evolving funding requirements and to comply with State
and federal regulations affecting the goals and policies of the Circulation Element.

Policy C-6.10: Coordinate wit
h OCTA and Caltrans to seek funding and
implementation solutions to improve Newport Boulevard
at the terminus of the State Route 55 freeway to increase safety and relieve congestion from regional traffic.

Policy C-6.11: Review the
City’s transportation impact fee program on a
regular basis, and adjust fees as needed to ensure that funding is available for planned transportation
improvements that will benefit all travel modes.

Policy C-6.12: Prioritize fun
ding and timing for implementing
transportation improvements. Consider prioritizing
multimodal projects that provide the most benefit to all users.

Policy C-6.13: Require t
hat every new development project pay its share
of costs associated with the mitigation of project
generated impacts.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 129 of 330
625
Policy C-6.14: Measure M2 sa les tax revenues shall not be used to replace private developer funding which has been
committed for any project.

Policy C-6.15: The City’s s
even-year capital improvement program shall
be adopted and maintained in conformance with the
provisions of Measure M2 for the purpose of maintaining the established level of service standard.

Policy C-6.16: Maintain a traffic im
pact fee for circulation system
improvements to the Master Plan of Streets and
Highways; review and update fees on a regular basis.

Objective C‐6B: Ev
aluate the transportation system to ensure that it
meets the City’s circulation goals.

Policy C-6.17: Provide an ann
ual Capital Improvement Program General
Plan consistency report.

Policy C-6.18: Provide ann
ual public review of implementation status
reports of goals, policies, and objectives stated in the Circulation Element.

Policy C-6.19: Adopt and se
ek out methods and processes that provide
appropriate and accurate data for evaluating the
performance of the transportation and infrastructure
system.

Goal C-7: Promote a Friendly Active
Transportation System in Costa Mesa
Create a bicycle and pedestrian friendly environment throughout Costa Mesa for all types of users and all trip purposes in accordance with the five “Es:” Education, Encouragement, Enforcement, Engineering, and Evaluation.

Objective C‐7A: Expand, enhan
ce, and protect the existing
bicycle and pedestrian network to provide a
comprehensive, system of Class I, Class II, Class
III, and Class IV facilities to increase
connectivity between homes, jobs, schools
transit, and recreational resources in Costa
Mesa.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 130 of 330
626
Bikeways and Pedestrian Paths
Policy C-7.1: Develop an extensive bicycle and pedestrian backbone network through the use of standard
and appropriate innovative treatments.

Policy C-7.2: Plan and install new bicycle lanes on Major Arterials, where feasible and appropriate.

Policy C-7.3: Plan and install shared lane markings
(“sharrows”) and signage on appropriate
existing and planned bicycle routes where
bicycle lane implementation is demonstrated to
be infeasible.

Policy C-7.4: Where feasible, Class I shared-use paths should be a priority for future developments.

Policy C-7.5: Plan and install new shared-use paths in utility corridors and/or along flood control channels,
and extend existing bicycle and shared-use
paths.

Policy C-7.6: Plan and complete north/south multi-purpose and bicycle routes through the City to augment
the east/west route.

Policy C-7.9: Encourage reallocation of roadway rights-of- way where appropriate to accommodate
shared-use path and bicycle facilities, while
preserving and respecting the character of each
adjacent neighborhood.

Policy C-7.10: Support bicycle improvement projects that close gaps in the regional bicycle network either
by implementing specific projects
recommended in the Plan or through other
treatments.

Policy C-7.11: Encourage bicycle projects that connect local facilities and neighborhoods to major bicycle
corridors.

Policy C-7.12: Work cooperatively with adjoining jurisdictions and local/regional agencies to coordinate
bicycle planning, and implementation activities.

Where required, develop consistent active
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 131 of 330
627
transportation plans and policies with regional
and adjacent agencies.

Policy C-7.13: Prioritize safe access to major regional trails such as the OC Loop/Santa Ana River Trail and
the Newport Back Bay Trail System. Where
feasible, plan and provide a continuous low-
stress Class I and/or Class IV facility from east to
west across the city between these facilities.

Policy C-7.14: Explore favorable opportunities to remove parking to accommodate bicycle lanes.

Policy C-7.15: Identify favorable opportunities to retain parallel parking adjacent to sidewalks to
maintain pedestrian safety.

Policy C-7.16: Consider every street in Costa Mesa as a street that cyclists could use.

Policy C-7.17: Link on-road and off-road bicycle and
pedestrian facilities within Costa Mesa to
existing and planned facilities in adjacent and
regional jurisdictions.

Policy C-7.18: Low-stress design techniques should be
considered where necessary to attract a wide
variety of users.

Policy C-7.19: Establish designated safe routes to schools for biking and walking.

Policy C-7.20: Designate walkable districts in the City.

Bike and Pedestrian Facilities
Objective C‐7B: Provide end‐of‐trip facili ties that support the bicycle network.

Policy C-7.21: P
rovide bike parking and bike-related amenities
at public facilities and along public rights-of-
way.

Policy C-7.22: Pursue public-private partnerships to furnish local businesses with secure bike parking and
other related amenities.

Policy C-7.23: Develop and adopt bicycle parking equipment standards for bicycle parking to be installed
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 132 of 330
628
within the public right-of-way and post on the
City website.

Policy C-7.24: Work with local schools and colleges to provide ample and secure bike parking and other
related amenities for students and employees.

Policy C-7.25: Work with OCTA to maximize bicycle amenities, such as bus stop solar lighting and bicycle
lockers, at high-volume transit stops.

Policy C-7.26: Prioritize the installation of bicycle-scale and/or pedestrian-scale lighting.

Policy C-7.27: Encourage and incentivize providing attended bicycle parking services, such as a bicycle valet,
at major City events, OC Fair, Farmers’ Markets,
holiday festivals, and other community events.

Policy C-7.28: Prioritize schools with the highest auto traffic volume during peak hours and insufficient
parking for staff and parents. Plan and install
bicycle facilities adjacent those schools.

Policy C-7.29: Provide bike parking and bike-related amenities at public facilities and along public right-of-way.
“First and Last Mile” Programs
Objective C‐7C: Encourage sus tainable modes of
transportation to fill gaps between the first
and last miles of trips (walking, biking, ride
sharing, transit, taxi and car
‐sharing).

Policy C-7.30: I
dentify citywide infrastructure needed to
create the interconnected multi-trail system.

Policy C-7.31: Improve the safety, quality, and aesthetics of high-use pedestrian corridors.

Policy C-7.32: Development and implement a bicycle sharing system.

Policy C-7.33: Proposed new mode split goals:
 50 percent motor vehicles
 10 percent transit
 10 percent bicycles
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 133 of 330
629
 20 percent walking
 10 percent carpools, taxi, transportation
network company services, and car sharing
Policy C-7.34: Establish a goal for all trips of less than three miles to be 30 percent by bicycle, and establish
a goal of less than 1 mile to be 30 percent by
walking.

Policy C-7.35: Consider implementing a small-scale
transportation system to encourage mode shift
to popular destinations as defined by users.

Goal C-8: Create a Safer Place to Walk and
Ride a Bicycle
Provide a safe, convenient, and attractive bicycling and pedestrian environment. Apply design standards, enforcement of traffic laws, maintenance practices, and safety awareness campaigns to encourage and increate the use of bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Design and Way-finding
Objective C‐8A: Develop bicyc le and pedestrian facilities with approved uniform design standards, and
implementation of way‐finding sign
age
providing information on various destinations.

Policy C-8.1: Req
uire that all facilities be designed in
accordance with the latest federal, state, and
local standards.

Policy C-8.2: Provide and maintain bicycle and pedestrian signal detectors, informational signage, and
lighting, along City bikeways.

Policy C-8.3: Develop, install and maintain a bicycle and pedestrian way-finding signage program to
indicate route turns, the presence of
intersecting bikeways, streets and distances to
nearby local and major destinations.

Policy C-8.4: Develop a list of acceptable plant materials for shared use paths that will not damage, create
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 134 of 330
630
hazards or security problems for bicyclists.

Incorporate canopy trees and native, drought-
tolerant landscaping as a standard Class I facility
and shared use path feature. Address areas
where the pedestrian infrastructure is disrupted
by street trees, such as buckled sidewalk and
sidewalk obstruction. Encourage the use of
sustainable drainage designs, such as bio-
swales.

Policy C-8.5: Utilize Complete Streets elements as
demonstrated in most recent versions of
National Association of City Transportation
Officials (NACTO) Urban Street Design Guide
and Bikeway Design Guide.

Policy C-8.6: Crosswalks will include high visibility crossing treatments. Where feasible implement
enhanced crossing treatments to reduce
pedestrian-automobile collisions at multi-lane
crossings including median refuge islands, and
Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacons.

Policy C-8.8: Paint direction arrows on all bike lanes and bike paths to reduce the risk of collisions.

Safety Enforcement and Reporting
Objective C‐8B: Continue and expand enforcement activities that enhance safety of bicyclists on bike paths
and roadways.

Policy C-8.
9: Enforce laws that reduce
bicycle/pedestrian/motor vehicle incidents and
conflicts.

Policy C-8.9: Train police officers on bicyclists’ rights and responsibilities and bicycle/pedestrian/vehicle
collision evaluation.

Policy C-8.11: Utilize the City’s bicycle-mounted patrol officer program to educate and enforce pedestrian and
bicycle user violations not necessarily to punish,
but to correct.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 135 of 330
631
Policy C-8.12: Promote efficient reporting mechanisms for behaviors that endanger cyclists and
pedestrians.

Policy C-8.13: Develop a partnership with the school
community to establish and update suggested
routes to schools for biking and walking and
expand student and school participation in Walk
and Bike to School Week events within Newport
Mesa Unified School District.

Safe Roadway Conditions
Objective C‐8C: Maintain bicy cle and pedestrian facilities that are clear of debris and provide safe conditions
for all users.

Policy C-8.
14: Establish routine maintenance
schedule/standards for bicycle and pedestrian
facilities such as sweeping, litter removal,
landscaping, repainting of striping, signage, and
signal actuation devices.

Policy C-8.15: Encourage and empower citizens to report maintenance issues that impact bicyclist and
pedestrian safety including, but not limited to,
potholes, sidewalk lifting, and overgrown
vegetation.

Policy C-8.16: Establish procedures for responding to citizen reports in a timely manner.

Policy C-8.17: Where feasible, reduce or eliminate conflict points such as driveways that cross the
sidewalk.

Policy C-8-.18 Study the potential to establish “transition zones” (an area which is communicated to
motorists that the roadway environment is
changing and their travel speeds or behavior
should change as well) between major
commercial and employment centers, and
residential areas to better support pedestrian
safety and access.

Policy C-8-19 Prohibit the addition of new channelized right turns and remove existing channelized right
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 136 of 330
632
turn lanes where feasible, to improve safety for
pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists.

Safety Education
Objective C‐8D: Increase edu cation of bicycle and pedestrian safety through programs and training of school
children and the public.

Policy C-8.20: C
reate, fund, and implement bicycle-safety
curricula and provide to the public, tourists,
various ethnic groups, diverse ages and
disadvantaged communities.

Policy C-8.21: Provide multilingual bicycle-safety maps and brochures (print and electronic versions) in
languages that are widely used in Costa Mesa.

Policy C-8.22: Encourage schools to develop and provide bicycle-safety curricula for use in elementary,
middle, and high schools, such as the Bicycle
Rodeo events.

Policy C-8.23: Support marketing and public awareness
campaigns aimed at improving bicycle and
pedestrian safety.

Policy C-8.24: Provide a user education program developed and promoted to encourage proper trail use
and etiquette.

Policy C-8.25: Work with local bicycle advocacy organizations to develop, promote and support a series of
bicycle education classes. Include information
on bicycle safety, maintenance, and security.

Policy C-8.26: Develop and distribute education material regarding bicycle and pedestrian responsibilities
and laws.

Safety Data
Objective C‐8E: Monitor and analyze bicycle and pedestrian safety.

Policy C-8.
27: Request bicycle and pedestrian collision reports
from local law enforcement periodically and
consider improvements to address problem
areas.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 137 of 330
633
Policy C-8.28: Establish an expedited process to report maintenance and safety concerns, e.g.
pavement markings (sharrows, missing bike
lane lines), ramps, curb cut-outs, broken
walk/bike signal buttons, signage, minor
maintenance of bike lanes/paths (street/path
sweeping, minor surface patching, inoperable
traffic signal bicycle detection).

Policy C-8.29: Conduct Roadside Safety Audits (RSAs) on a regular basis to provide periodic snapshots of
roadway safety, including bicycle, pedestrian,
equestrian, skateboard, and other non-
motorized modes of travel.

Goal C-9: Integrate Active Transportation
Elements into Circulation System and
Land Use Planning
Provide bikeway and walkway facilities that are integrated with other transportation systems and land use planning decisions.

Land Use Planning Decisions and Active Transportation
Objective C‐9A: Consider bi cycle and pedestrian facilities during land use planning process.

Policy C-9.1: In
corporate the Costa Mesa Active
Transportation and Pedestrian Master Plan into
the City’s General Plan.

Policy C-9.2: Ensure that all current and proposed land use planning is consistent with the Costa Mesa
Active Transportation and Pedestrian Master
Plan.

Policy C-9.3: Require new developments provide adequate bicycle parking and pedestrian access.

Policy C-9.4: Collaborate with property owners to increase bicycle parking over time.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 138 of 330
634
Policy C-9.5: Encourage the integration of compatible land uses and housing into major development
projects to reduce vehicle use.

Policy C-9.6: Provide a fully integrated network of modern active transportation facilities to and from
major activity centers and residential centers.

Policy C-9.7: Identify areas where an increase in the need for active transportation can reasonably be
anticipated due to housing/business growth.

Policy C-9.8: Make commercial and recreational areas more enjoyable for pedestrians by implementing
measures such as providing shade, planting
trees, eliminating visible parking lots and vacant
land minimizing long stretches of blank building
façade, and orienting new development toward
the street where feasible.

Policy C-9.9: Develop creative, artistic, and functional bicycle parking solutions, and install them throughout
the City as a standard.

Policy C-9.9(a): Support the incorporation of bicycle and pedestrian facilities into capital improvement
projects, where appropriate to maximize
leveraging of funds.

Active Transportation in Developments
Objective C‐9B: Integrate bi cycle and pedestrian facility improvements during planning, design and
implementation of transportation projects.

Policy C-9.10
: Promote the preservation of bicycle access
within all roadway rights-of-way, as well as the
development of innovative, safety-enhanced
on-street facilities, such as bicycle boulevards
and cycle tracks.

Policy C-9.11: Establish bike boulevards on streets with low traffic volumes and slow speeds to encourage
bicycling.

Policy C-9.12: Proactively seek new opportunities for
acquisition of abandoned rights-of-way and
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 139 of 330
635
other lands for the development of new multi-
use pathways that integrate with the planned
network.

Policy C-9.13: Improve the safety of all road users through the implementation of neighborhood traffic-
calming treatments.

Policy C-9.14 Detours through or around construction zones should be designed for safety and convenience,
and with adequate signage and minimum
impacts for cyclists and pedestrians.

Policy C-9.15: Provide opportunity for public input prior to the removal of an existing bicycle or pedestrian
facility or the approval of any development or
street improvement that would preclude these
planned facilities.

Policy C-9-16: Along commercial corridors, identify
opportunities to reduce surface parking and
driveways along the pedestrian infrastructure
network. Whenever possible, have storefronts
face the street to encourage pedestrian safety
and access.

Goal C-10: Promote an Active
Transportation Culture
Develop educational and promotional programs to increase bicycle and pedestrian usage that respects and accommodates all users to foster a more balanced transportation system.

An Active Transportation Culture
Objective C‐10A: Encourage m ore people to walk and bicycle by supporting programs that foster community
support for bicycling and walking, and raise
public awareness about active transportation.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 140 of 330
636
Policy C-10.1: Support marketing and public awareness
campaigns through a variety of media aimed at
promoting bicycling and walking as a safe,
healthy, cost-eﬀective, environmentally friendly
transportation choice.

Policy C-10.2: Support programs aimed at increasing bicycle and walk trips by providing incentives,
recognition, or services that make bicycling and
walking a more convenient transportation
mode.

Policy C-10.3: Build partnerships with local businesses and community groups to host regular bike and
walk tours and other biking and walking-related
activities that promote biking and walking.

Policy C-10.4: Promote bicycling and walking at City-
sponsored and public events, such as Earth Day,
Bike to Work Day/Month, farmers’ markets,
public health fairs, art walks, craft fairs, and
civic events.

Policy C-10.5: Encourage and promote bicycle related
businesses within Costa Mesa including, but not
limited to, involvement of civic clubs and
organizations.

Policy C-10.6: Promote active transportation events in Costa Mesa to raise awareness and encourage
bicycling, including, but not limited to, bicycle
and pedestrian safety education, Open Street
events, bike to work/school, senior walks,
historic walks.

Policy C-10.7: Encourage major employment centers and
employers to promote commuting by bicycle
including the use of flex-time work schedules to
support non-rush bicycle commuting. Build a
coalition with City, businesses, schools, and
residents to promote active transportation.

Policy C-10.8: Encourage participation in bicycle and
pedestrian promotion activities by education
facilities, arts programs, active transportation
clubs, and entertainment providers.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 141 of 330
637
Policy C-10.9: Plan and install tactical urbanism
demonstrations and/or quick-build projects
along corridors or at areas with high pedestrian
and/or bicycle activity to showcase potential
new traffic calming and pedestrian
infrastructure treatments to improve safety and
the pedestrian environment.

Policy C-10.10: Achieve “Silver Level Bicycle Friendly
Community” by League of American Bicyclists
by 2028.

Policy C-10.10: Achieve “Walk Friendly Community” status from WalkFriendly.org by 2028.

Policy C-10.11: Achieve “HEAL City” designation by 2030.

Goal C-11: Promote the Positive Air
Quality, Health, and Economic Benefits of
Active Transportation
Encourage active transportation by promoting air quality, health, and economic benefits, and by pursuing multiple sources of funding for active transportation programs and facilities.

Improving the Environment with Active Transportation
Objective C‐11A: Improve air qua lity and public health and reduce ambient noise by promoting Active
Transportation programs.

Policy C-11.1: D
etermine baseline emissions levels, then track
and communicate changes in emissions as
modes of transportation trips shift to encourage
more walking and biking.

Policy C-11.2: Improve the quality of life in Costa Mesa by reducing neighborhood traffic and noise.

Policy C-11.3: Increase pedestrian and bicycle trips, thereby reducing vehicle trips and vehicle miles
Traveled.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 142 of 330
638
Policy C-11.4: Coordinate with appropriate federal, state, and county health agencies on active transportation
programs to achieve health benefits.

Economic and Other Incentives
Objective C‐11B: Provide eco nomic incentives for expanding and enhancing bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Policy C-11.5: I
ncentivize the business community to support
pedestrians and bicycle users in tangible ways.

Policy C-11.6: Partner with the business and school
communities to create a marketing strategy to
encourage individual businesses to market
Costa Mesa as a bicycle-friendly City.

Policy C-11.7: Encourage developers to include features, amenities and programs that are proven to
increase walking and/or bicycling.

Policy C-11.8: Offer incentives for businesses whose
employees walk or bike to work.

Policy C-11.9: Encourage the Chamber of Commerce and the business community to promote active
transportation in commercial areas to stimulate
economic vitality.

Goal C-12: Monitor, Evaluate, and Pursue
Funding for Implementation of the Bicycle
and Pedestrian Master Plan
Objective 12A: Continuously monitor and evaluate Costa Mesa’s implementation progress on the Bicycle
and Pedestrian Master Plan policies, programs,
and projects.

Policy C-12.1: Establish a monitoring program to measure the effectiveness and beneﬁts of the Costa Mesa
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.

Policy C-12.2: Track citywide trends in active transportation through the use of Census data, bicycle and
pedestrian counts, travel surveys, and online
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 143 of 330
639
surveys as part of annual reviews of the General
Plan.

Policy C-12.3: Ensure that Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan programs and projects are implemented in an
equitable manner geographically,
socioeconomically, and serving disadvantaged
communities, with additional consideration on
implementation of such programs and projects
within designated environmental justice areas
boundaries.

Fund the Plans
Objective C‐12B: Pursue grant s and other sources of funding for bicycle and pedestrian projects.

Policy C-12.4: S
trategize use of resources on developing
effective and efficient grant application and
program administration.

Policy C-12.5: Pursue multiple sources of funding and support efforts to maintain or increase federal, state
and local funding for the implementation of the
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.

Policy C-12.6: Consider designating a portion of development traffic impact fees to fund bicycle and
pedestrian facilities.

Policy C-12.7 Develop a program to regularly collect and share citywide pedestrian and bicycle count
data, and add as a requirement for all traffic
studies/impact analysis conducted within the
City’s jurisdiction.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 144 of 330
640
Chapter 6:

Conservation Element
Introduction
Costa Mesa residents benefit from the City’s favorable location, with cool ocean breezes and coastal bluffs that provide a diversity of natural habitats. Costa Mesa’s natural resources include the Santa Ana River, which provides flood control and open space connectivity, and Fairview Park and Talbert Regional Park, which support wildlife diversity.

Purpose
The purpose of the Conservation Element is to preserve, protect, and replenish the limited natural resources in the City, including water, open space, and sensitive habitats. In addition, this element addresses the management of energy resources and opportunities to integrate sustainability considerations into City policies. This element establishes a policy framework that:

Fairview Park natural habitat and open spaces
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 145 of 330
641
 Identifies areas in Costa Mesa with substantial natural resources that the City is committed to manage and prevent from waste, destruction, and neglect
 Provides for programs aimed at resource conservation for the benefit of future generations
The Conservation Element meets the requirements of State law, which declares that Conservation Elements must address the protection and maintenance of California’s natural resources. In Costa Mesa, natural resources of concern are:
 Air quality
 Biological resources
 Energy
 Water resources
 Wastewater
 Water quality
 Water management
Baseline Conditions-2015
The City has actively pursued improving natural conditions through conservation and protection programs since the early 2000s. Substantial progress has been made both to educate the community and achieve measurable results. To provide a baseline to gauge future progress, this section provides a snapshot of environmental conditions in 2015.

Coastal Wildlife Habitat Areas
Santa Ana River Parks and Riparian Areas
The Santa Ana River and riparian areas are important to local wildlife, not only for the habitat they provide but for the open space connectivity they create between isolated areas where animals live and forage, as well as for migration corridors. Riparian areas, such as the Fairview Park wetlands and riparian habitat area, play an important role in the ecosystem by sorting and filtering sediment, recharging groundwater aquifers, and reducing flood potential. For residents, these systems provide valuable connections to natural areas and create opportunities for recreation, education, and awareness. One such area is a portion of the Santa Ana River lowlands that has been preserved as a multi-use Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 146 of 330
642
regional park, Talbert Regional Park/Nature Preserve, which is owned and maintained by the County of Orange. Public recreation amenities at the park include hiking and running trails, and bird-watching areas. In addition, sensitive wetlands and paleontological resources within the park provide opportunities for education.

Fairview Park
The City’s Fairview Park lies immediately adjacent to Talbert Regional Park and is linked with the Santa Ana River system of trails and parks. Fairview Park includes open space consisting of bluffs, vernal pools, trails, native plant communities, and wildlife. Within the park, the City has pursued riparian habitat restoration through a system of wetland ponds and streams with riparian and coastal plants, native habitat plantings, and an irrigation system. The creation of wetlands and riparian habitat provides many benefits. Dry weather urban runoff and stormwater are diverted from flood control to the wetlands, where plants and ultraviolet rays naturally remove impurities, thus reducing the amount of pollutants from reaching the ocean or having to be otherwise treated. The restored wetlands create a wildlife recreational area in an urban setting, where local residents and visitors can observe wildlife and learn about the broader ecosystem. Fairview Park is part of the larger natural open space/habitat preservation system immediately adjacent to the Orange County Central/Coastal Subregional Natural Communities Conservation Plan and Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) lands.

Within the upper mesa of Fairview Park are several vernal pools, which are seasonal pools of water that provide habitat for distinctive plants and animals.

Vernal pools are considered dynamic micro-ecosystems. They are considered to Fairview Park Wetlands and
Riparian Habitat Project
includes nearly 23 acres of
native riparian habitat and
wetland ponds within the north
section of Fairview Park. The
project also educates the public
on the benefits of wetlands and
their contribution to the
ecology of the coastal area.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 147 of 330
643
be a distinctive type of wetland usually devoid of fish, and thus allow the safe development of natal amphibian, such as the San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis) and insect species. Vernal pools are protected by State and federal laws.

Talbert Regional Park/Nature Preserve
Talbert Regional Park encompasses approximately 180 acres on Victoria Street between Pacific Avenue and the Santa Ana River, see Figure CON-1: Biological Resources. Within this compact area, the park supports six distinct introduced and native plant zones that respond to changing conditions along the river. The introduced zones are intended to accommodate more active human use and provide a visual screen. Native zones include the "Coastal Strand," which consists of gentle slopes and dunes, a habitat now largely absent due to urbanization. The "Native Grassland" zone is the largest zone in the park and provides wildlife habitat. The "Alluvial Woodland" zone contains a wide variety of plant and animal life and is the most secluded area in the park. Finally, the "Wetland Zone" consists of the southern 14.8 acres of the park and contains elements of riparian woodland and mulefat scrub.

Talbert Regional Park/Nature Preserve has been identified as an area providing important biodiversity habitat and is part of the open space and natural habitat reserve system of the Orange County Central/Coastal NCCP/HCP. The 37,000- acre reserve system permanently protects a broad range of plant and animal populations that are within the Central and Coastal Subregion. The Nature Reserve of Orange County, a nonprofit corporation, manages the Orange County Central/Coastal NCCP/HCP and coordinates land management activities, conducts wildlife and habitat research and monitoring, and restores disturbed habitats within the reserve system.

Orange Coast River Park, Inc.

The Orange Coast River Park, Inc., a nonprofit committee founded by the Friends of Harbors, Beaches & Parks, manages projects across multiple boundaries to help coordinate a mosaic of more than 1,000 acres of open space along the Santa Ana River, including the Talbert Nature Preserve and Fairview Park. The organization’s mission is to realize a master plan of parks and open space that meets the diverse needs of the urban population and provides seamless passageways from inland to the coast while also allowing for conservation and preservation of valuable habitats.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 148 of 330
644

Figure CON-1: Biological Resources
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 149 of 330
645
Coastal Plants and Wildlife
Prior to development of Costa Mesa, the natural landscape consisted of native grasses, sage scrub, and riparian plant life. Examples of these habitats are extant in the City, primarily within Talbert and Fairview Parks (Figure CON-1, Biological Resources). The grasslands generally can be found at lower elevations that have a deep layer of clay-bearing soil. Sage scrub communities occur at elevations lower than 3,000 feet on foothills and coastal bluffs, and in canyons. Riparian vegetation is found around springs, streams, seeps, and ponds.

The remaining natural habitats support diverse plant species, including several sensitive species listed as threatened or endangered according to federal and State criteria. Whether or not specific species are present in particular habitats is determined through site-focused studies. However, sensitive or protected species of concern within the planning area may include:
 San Diego button-celery (Eryngium aristulatum var. parishii)  Big-leaved crownbeard (Verbesina dissita)
 Gambel's water cress (Nasturtium gambelii)
 Ventura Marsh milk-vetch (Astragalus pycnostachyus var. lanosissimus)
 Salt marsh bird's-beak (Chloropyron maritimum ssp. Maritimum)  California Orcutt grass (Orcuttia californica)
 Santa Ana River woollystar (Eriastrum densifolium ssp. Sanctorum) 1 Tables CON-1, CON-2, and CON-3, inventory plant species found in the grassland, sage scrub, and riparian communities in Costa Mesa.

1 California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), Biogeographic Information & Observation System (BIOS) Viewer, Department of Fish & Wildlife, April 2015.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 150 of 330
646
Table CON-1: Plant Communities
Common Name Scientific Name Status (A) Confirmed
Observation
Possibly
Present
Desert needlegrass Achnatherum speciosum - X
Red-skinned inion Allium haematochiton - X
Southwestern beardgrass Andropogon glomeratus - X
California sagebrush Artemesia californica - X
Coulter’s saltbush Atriplex coulteri CNPS 1B X
Slender wild oat Avena barbota - X
Wild oat Avena fatua - X
Black mustard Brassica nigra - X
Red brome Bromus rubens - X
Poverty brome Bromus sterilis - X
Prostrate spineflower Chorizanthe procumbens CNPS 4
Wild hyacinth Dichelostemma pulchellum - X
Shooting stars Dodecatheon clevelandii - X
California buckwheat Erigonum fasciculatum - X
White-stemmed filaree Erodium moschatum - X
California poppy Eschscholzia californica - X
California Chocolate lily Fritillaria biflora - X
Southern tarplant Hemixonia Parryi ssp. Australis CNPS 1B, FSC X Vernal barley Hordeum intercedens CNPS 3 X
Wild barley Hordeum murinum - X
Goldentop grass Lamarckia aurea - X
Coulter’s goldfields Lasthenia glabrata ssp. Coulteri CNPS 1B, FSC X (Historic)
Hairy peppergrass Lepidium nitidum - X
Small-flowered microseris Microseris douglasii var,
platycarpha
CNPS 4 X
Costal prickly-pear Opuntia littoralis - X
California buttercup Ranunculus californicus - X
Johnson grass Sorghum halepense - X
Johnny jump-up Viola pendunculata - X

Note: A) CNPS 1B: California Native Plant Society List for Plants Rare or Endangered in California and Elsewhere; CNPS3: California Native Plant Society List for Plants About Which We Need More Information - A Review List: CNPS 4: California Native Plant Society List for Plants or Limited Distribution -A Watch List; FSC:

Federal Species of Concern
Source: BonTerra Consulting, May 22, 2000
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 151 of 330
647
Table CON-2: Plants of the Sage Scrub Community
Common Name Scientific Name Status (A) Confirmed
Observation
Possibly
Present
Red-skinned wild onion Allium haematochiton - X
Aphanisma Aphanisma blitoides CNPS 1B, FSC X
California sagebrush Artemesia californica - X
Coulter’s saltbush Atriplex coulteri CNPS 1B
South coast saltscale Atriplex pacifica CNPS 1B, FSC X Parish’s brittlescale Atriplex parishill CNPS 1B, FSC X Davidson’s saltscale Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii CNPS 1B X Slender wild oat Avena barbata - X
Wild oat Avena fatua - X
Goldenstar Bloomeria crocea - X
Wavy-leaved soap plant Chlorogalum pomeridianum - X
Buckwheat Eriogonum fasciculatum - X
Decumbent goldenrush Isocoma menziesil var. decumbens CNPS 1B X Robinson’s pepper-grass Lepidium virginicum var. Robinsonli CNPS 1B X Deerweed Lotus scoparius - X
Laurel sumac Malosma laurina - X
Melic grass Melica frutescens - X
Lemonade berry Rhus integrifolia - X
California wild rose Rosa californica - X
White sage Salvia apiana - X
Purple sage Salvia leucophylla - X
Black sage Salvia melifera - X
Hedge mustard Sisymbrium officinale - X
Note: A) CNPS 1B: California Native Plant Society List for Plants Rare or Endangered in California and Elsewhere, FSC: Federal Species of Concern
Source: BonTerra Consulting, May 22, 2000

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 152 of 330
648
Table CON-3: Plants of the Riparian Community
Common Name Scientific Name Status (A) Confirmed
Observation
Possibly
Present
Big-leaf maple Acer macrophyllum - X
White alder Alnus rhombifolia - X
Mule fat Baccharis salicifolia - X
Santa Barbara morning-glory Calystegia sepium ssp. Binghamiae CNPS 1B X (Historic)
Salt marsh bird’s beak Cordylanthus maritimus ssp.

Maritimus

FE, SE X
(Historic)
Los Angeles sunflower Helianthus nuttallii ssp. Parishii FSC X (Historic)
Western sycamore Plantanus racemose - X
Sword fern Polystichum munitum - X
Fremont cottonwood Populus fremontii - X
Canyon oak Quercus chrysolepis - X
Castor bean Ricinus communis - X
Arroyo willow Salix lasiolepis - X
Mexican elderberry Sambucus mexicana - X
Coastal bulrush Scirpus robustus - X
Poison oak Toxicodendron diversilobum - X
Broad-leaved cattail Typha latifolia - X
California bay laurel Umbelluraris californica - X
Desert wild grape Vitis giardiana - X
Note: A) FE: Federally-listed endangered FSC: Federal Species of Concern SE: State-listed endangered; CNPS 1B: California Native Plant Society List for Plants Rare or Endangered in California and Elsewhere; Source: BonTerra Consulting, May 22, 2000.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 153 of 330
649
In prehistoric times, wildlife roaming Orange County included bison, jaguars, camels, wolves, ground sloths, bears, saber-tooth cats, and shrews. Today, wildlife is much smaller and less threatening, with species consisting of those that have adapted to close human contact, such as squirrels, voles, white-tail kites, red-tail hawks, and coyotes. Some species of special interest that inhabit open spaces within the City include the burrowing owl (Speotyto cuniculara), an indigenous species that uses abandoned rodent burrows for nests; the San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis) which occupies vernal pools in Fairview Park; the Belding’s savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi) which resides year-round in coastal salt marshes of Southern California, and the Least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) which inhabits riparian and terrestrial fields, shrubland, chaparral, and woodlands.

Coastal Zone Management
California’s coastal zone generally extends 1,000 yards inland from the mean high tide line. In significant coastal estuarine habitat and recreational areas, the zone extends inland to the first major ridgeline or five miles from the mean high tide line, whichever is less. Subsequent to the City’s 1979 request to remove 13 acres, the coastal zone in Costa Mesa encompasses the Santa Ana River lowlands and Talbert Regional Park south of Victoria Street, approximately 76 percent of Canyon Park, and 0.23 acres of Tract 12067 (see Figure CON-2: Coastal Zones).

Santa Ana River Lowlands
The coastal zone encompasses the central segment of the Santa Ana River lowlands, which extends inland from the coastline to the northern boundary of Fairview Park in Costa Mesa and includes the City of Newport Beach and the County of Orange. Costa Mesa's Local Coastal Plan (LCP) is coordinated with both jurisdictions for the lowland properties to the south and with the City of Huntington Beach due to the close proximity and the interrelationship of coastal issues. All of the river lowlands between Pacific Coast Highway and Fairview Regional Park are included in the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Corridor. The Greenbelt Implementation Plan designates this area as a Water- Related Recreation and Conservation Area. Although the implementation plan does not propose a specific use for these properties, it does require recreational use to be compatible with the overall greenbelt and provide access to the river trails network.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 154 of 330
650

Figure CON-2: Coastal Zones
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 155 of 330
651
Parks and Open Space within the Coastal Zone
As described above, the County of Orange operates Talbert Regional Park; approximately 97 acres lie within the coastal zone. The land use designation for the park is Open Space Reserve (OSR). The OSR designation applies to lands of scenic and natural attraction and areas of ecological, cultural, historical, and recreational significance permanently preserved as and restricted to open space and compatible uses.

Canyon Park is City-owned and designated Public/Institutional. This designation applies to publicly and privately owned lands that provide recreation, open space, health and educational opportunities, and uses that provide a service to the public. Approximately 27 acres of the 36-acre Canyon Park are within the coastal zone.

Talbert Regional Park
provides natural habitat and
hiking trails adjacent to the
Santa Ana River.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 156 of 330
652

Figure CON-3: Coastal Zone Properties in Costa Mesa
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 157 of 330
653
Tract 12067
The coastal zone also encompasses the northerly 0.23 acres of a 2.3-acre privately owned residential condominium development built in 1986 (known as Tract 12067). The property is zoned PDR-LD and designated Low Density Residential.

Local Coastal Program (LCP)
The California Coastal Act of 1976 is the permanent enacting law approved by the State legislature. The Coastal Act establishes policies, boundary lines, and permitting procedures. Further, it provides for the transfer of permitting authority, with certain limitations reserved for the State, to local governments through adoption and certification of Local Coastal Programs (LCP) by the Coastal Commission. All local governments in the coastal zone must prepare LCPs.

Development in the coastal zone must be evaluated through a permit review process for consistency with the LCPs where they are certified, or the Coastal Act where the Commission retains permitting jurisdiction. This portion of the General Plan fulfills the City’s responsibilities to address and protect its coastal resources and integrates the necessary coastal policies and programs. Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act contains policies regarding future development in the coastal zone that must be addressed in the LCP process.

Key Coastal Wildlife Habitat Area Issues
Loss of Coastal Habitat to Support Wildlife
The City commits to preserving and protecting, to the greatest extent possible, open space areas devoted to the preservation of natural resources, sensitive habitat and wildlife species, managed production of resources, outdoor recreation, and open space buffer areas for public health and safety. There are no plans to convert any of the open spaces identified in the General Plan.

Protection of Sensitive Species
Sensitive habitat areas, such as the vernal pools and wetland areas at Fairview Park, are threatened by human impact, household pets, storm runoff, pollution and trash, and herbicides and pesticides. The limited natural habitat areas in Costa Mesa are critical, as they are home to sensitive plant and wildlife species.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 158 of 330
654
Environmental Sustainability
Energy Resources
Southern California Edison is the primary supplier of electricity in Costa Mesa, and the Southern California Gas Company supplies natural gas.

Land Use and Transportation Planning
A reduction in automobile usage and vehicle miles traveled will lower energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, thus producing further public health benefits. Costa Mesa has adopted land use and transportation policies and practices that recognize the importance of coordinating land use, housing, economic development, and transportation planning. Refer to both Chapters 2 (Land Use Element) and 3 (Circulation Element).

Energy Efficiency
California residents and institutions have many years of experience practicing energy efficiency. While national per capita energy consumption has increased 50 percent over the past 30 years, per capita consumption in California has remained the same over this period. This is due to many factors, including efficiency and conservation campaigns conducted by private citizens, businesses, and utility companies, and regulations adopted by State and local governments.

Because the City of Costa Mesa does not operate any local energy-related utility, it does not directly influence local energy use practices (other than leading by example). However, the City is a committed partner to energy providers, supports local small energy systems such as solar and wind, and promulgates sustainable practices through local regulations.

Renewable Energy Resources
Renewable energy sources capture energy from natural processes such as sunlight, wind, flowing water, biological processes, and geothermal heat flows.

Renewable energy resources may be used directly or used to create other, more convenient forms of energy. Examples of direct use include passive solar design for heating. Examples of indirect use are electricity generation through photovoltaic cells (solar panels) and wind turbines, or the production of fuels such as ethanol from biomass. To encourage the use of renewable energy sources, the City initiated the “Go Green Program,” which waives the permit fees for residential solar installations and electric vehicle charging stations.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 159 of 330
655
Green and Sustainable Building Practices
In 2007, the City of Costa Mesa implemented a voluntary “green building” program that expedited the permitting process and waived certain fees for LEED2 certification, and became the first city in California to require that all new municipal construction be LEED Gold certified. Additionally, green building standards are encouraged with project applications. “Green building” is a design approach that focuses on minimizing a building’s negative impacts on both the environment and building occupants. Green buildings provide many tangible benefits, including improved worker productivity, recruitment, and retention; minimized energy and water costs during both construction and operations; waste minimization; and pollution prevention. This integrated, interdisciplinary approach to design and construction promotes investments in resource-efficient materials, technology, and the use of low-emitting and recycled content materials. Green building practices include the following:
 Healthy buildings and sustainable building design aim to create buildings that are not harmful to occupants or the environment and help improve employee productivity. An important emphasis is on indoor environmental quality, especially indoor air quality.
 Low-impact materials are used, such as non-toxic, sustainably produced, and recycled building and construction materials that require little energy to process.
 Quality and durability are valued, leading to longer-lasting and better- functioning products that require less-frequent replacement, thus reducing the impacts of producing replacements.
 A life-cycle assessment approach is used by building operators when making design and purchasing decisions.
 Local, regional, or sustainably managed renewable sources are used and, whenever possible, composted at the end of their useful lives.

Green Building Strategy
In 1978, California established the Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations) in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. The 2 LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) is a building certification program run under the auspices of the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). LEED concentrates its efforts on improving performance across five key areas of environmental and human health: energy efficiency, indoor environmental qualit y, materials selection, sustainable site development and water savings.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 160 of 330
656
State updates these standards approximately every three years to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. For example, the 2013 energy standards were projected to save 25 percent more energy relative to the 2008 Building Energy Efficiency Standards.

The standards apply to newly constructed buildings, as well as additions and alterations for existing buildings. All standards in Title 24, Part 6 must be followed as part of the City’s building permit process. The City encourages applying green building standards beyond what is required in Title 24 for all new development projects.

Waste Management and Recycling
Residential trash and recycling collection services are designated functions of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District. The Costa Mesa Sanitary District has developed innovative programs and processes to reduce the waste stream heading to landfills. One example is the Organics Recycling Program, which allows residents to deposit yard and kitchen waste into the organics cart, where these materials will be transported to an anaerobic digestion facility and converted into fertilizers and natural gas. Other recycling programs include the Large Item Collection Program; Electronic and Universal Waste; Sharps Disposal Recycling Program; and Residential Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG) Recycling Program. The Costa Mesa Sanitary District continues to pursue innovative reduction, reuse, and recycling strategies that allow Costa Mesa residents to make responsible choices in disposal of waste products, but to also protect the environment. The Costa Mesa Sanitary District and the City of Costa Mesa also continue to collaborate in providing quality services to their customers and residents.

Key Environmental Sustainability Issues
Energy Consumption
In addition to promoting sustainable practices, reduced energy consumption and associated lower costs benefit local residents and businesses. As energy demand grows over time and nonrenewable energy resources become more limited, more aggressive conservation measures and increased use of innovative new technologies will be of greater necessity.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 161 of 330
657
Encouraging More Green Building Practices
Builders are sometimes reluctant to integrate green building strategies within their project, mostly due to upfront costs associated with the design and technologies. “Green” is often viewed as an add-on to current building practices.

However, what builders do not often consider is what can be changed, modified, improved, or eliminated from the typical building practices and replaced with better, proven technologies and practices, typically resulting in lower overall cost of construction, as well as savings in long-term operation and maintenance costs.

Recycling and Waste Management
Convenient landfill space will diminish in Southern California, and costs to haul waste greater distances for disposal will drive efforts for increased waste reduction, reuse, recycling, and composting. The City should continue efforts to expand recycling and source reduction programs to minimize the volume of trash entering landfills, conserve resources, and protect the environment from the negative impacts associated with landfills such as contaminating the groundwater and aquifers, contaminating the soil, and producing methane.

Water Resources
Water Supply
Domestic water service to Costa Mesa residents and businesses is provided by two agencies: Mesa Water District (MWD) and Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD). MWD service area encompasses approximately 18 square miles, covering most of Costa Mesa, part of Newport Beach, and John Wayne Airport, (see Figure CON-4, Water Districts). IRWD has an approximate 181-square-mile service area and includes a portion of properties in Costa Mesa located southeast of Newport Boulevard (between 23
rd Street and Bristol Street), as well as all of
the city of Irvine and portions of Tustin, Santa Ana, Orange, Lake Forest, Newport Beach, and unincorporated areas in Orange County.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 162 of 330
658
Figure CON-4: Water Districts
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 163 of 330
659
Natural water supplies in Orange County are limited to groundwater, surface flows in the Santa Ana River (which originate in the San Bernardino Mountains), and local precipitation. Since the demand for water generally exceeds the rate of replenishment of these natural water sources, the majority of communities in Orange County are dependent upon water imported from sources outside Orange County. The two primary sources for imported water are the Colorado River Aqueduct and the State Water Project. The Colorado River Aqueduct transports water from Lake Havasu (in Nevada) to Lake Mathews (in Riverside County), and then to points in Orange County. The State Water Project carries water from the Upper Feather River in Northern California to Lake Castaic (in Los Angeles County). From Lake Castaic, water is transported and distributed to customers in Orange County.

In Costa Mesa, groundwater collects in underground aquifers that are approximately 2,500 feet beneath the ground surface. MWD owns and operates eight groundwater production wells that pump water from the Orange County Groundwater Basin, which underlies north-central Orange County from Irvine to the Los Angeles County border and from Yorba Linda to the Pacific Ocean (see Figure CON-5, Groundwater Basins). This groundwater basin is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD) and is replenished in three ways: 1) by water from the Santa Ana River, 2) from imported water from Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) through the Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC), and 3) via a groundwater replenishment program that injects purified sewer water into two of OCWD’s recharge basins in the City of Anaheim. The eight wells have a total design capacity of approximately 14,000 gallons per minute (as of 2015). However, since Costa Mesa depends upon imported water for a portion of its water supply, the potential impacts of water supply and demand extend beyond the boundaries of the City and its two serving agencies. The availability of imported water is directly related to the water supply conditions in the source watersheds, as well as demand for water throughout the State. Recurring dry years can also significantly affect Southern California's water allotment.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 164 of 330
660

Figure CON-5: Groundwater Basins
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 165 of 330
661
Mesa Water District
In 1986, MWD introduced a Master Plan designed to meet the long-term growing needs of its customers. The plan defined ways to improve water delivery systems, create additional local storage facilities, drought-proof the service area, and develop new sources of water. One of MWD’s primary focuses is to decrease dependence on high cost imported water by upgrading the Mesa Water Reliability water treatment facility’s filtration treatment technology and expand the water filtration capacity. Subsequent to completion of the Mesa Water Reliability Facility Improvement Project, MWD’s water supply mix is comprised of 94 percent groundwater and six percent recycled water, with no imported water needed.

Irvine Ranch Water District
IRWD prepares two planning documents to guide water supply decision-making:

The Water Resources Master Plan (WRMP) and the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). The WRMP is a comprehensive document that IRWD uses for its planning needs. The UWMP is based on the WRMP; it examines historic and current water use projections and compares water supplies with demands over the next 20 years. These plans identify the imported and local water supplies that will meet future demand—including groundwater recovery and water recycling— as well as IRWD's planned conservation measures to ensure a reliable supply of high-quality water.

For many years, IRWD received almost all of its water from imported sources. To alleviate the dependency on costly imported water, in the late 1970s IRWD began building a network of groundwater wells. Today, approximately 50 percent of IRWD water supply comes from groundwater wells located within the Orange County Groundwater Basin. IRWD meets approximately 23 percent of its total demands with recycled water and the remaining 27 percent with potable water imported through MWD.

To further reduce reliance upon imported water and ultimately increase supply reliability and water quality, IRWD has creatively partnered with the Rosedale- Rio Bravo Water Storage District to construct 502 acres of groundwater recharge ponds in Kern County. This arrangement allows available surface water to percolate into distant groundwater basins for later use during dry periods to offset potential reductions in supply from its normal sources. IRWD's partnership Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 166 of 330
662
with Rosedale provides long-term equity ownership of water banking capacity of up to 50,000 acre-feet of water.

Water Resources Master Plan
Per the California Urban Water Management Planning Act of 1983, all urban water suppliers must prepare an updated UWMP every five years for review by the California Department of Water Resources. The purpose of UWMPs is to ensure that urban water suppliers have adequate water supplies for existing and future demands. Plans must identify and discuss various factors affecting current and projected water supplies and demand, and must identify steps to ensure the availability and reliability of future supplies. Furthermore, effective 2010, UWMPs were required to incorporate the Water Conservation Act of 2009 (SBx7- 7), which established even stricter reduction targets. With the continued drought years during the 2000s, additional reduction targets were mandated by Executive Order B-29-15 in 2015.

As retail water suppliers, MWD and IRWD have the option of complying with SBx7-7 individually or through participation in a Regional Alliance. Both districts have chosen to participate in a Regional Alliance with the Metropolitan Water District of Orange County (MWDOC). In the event that the region does not comply with the regional target, an agency may still be in compliance if it meets its own individual target.

Water Conservation
The importance of water conservation has been highlighted during several periods of extended drought in California. In response, MWD and IRWD have adopted water conservation policies, as has the City of Costa Mesa, which require new development projects to incorporate water conservation measures.

The water agencies and the City continually evaluate policies and programs to maximize water savings and integrate the latest water efficient technologies and practices in their policies. The City, in cooperation with MWD and IRWD, educates homeowners and business owners of the importance of installing water-conserving fixtures and appliances, repairing leaking fixtures, planting drought-tolerant landscaping, and avoiding unnecessary water use. In addition, the City enforces its Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance consistent with the State requirements to maximize use of drought tolerant plants, improve irrigation efficiency, and minimize use of turf.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 167 of 330
663
Water Quality and Urban and Stormwater Runoff
The quality of water in our natural and domestic water systems affects the health of wildlife, habitat, and people. Most water pollution comes from untreated storm flows and urban runoff that runs across streets, yards, and parking lots before draining into creeks, marshes, and the ocean. This untreated water can contain a variety of pollutants harmful to the environment, including heavy metals, excessive sediment, petroleum hydrocarbons, domestic sewage, pesticides, and trash. Urban runoff is the result of human-caused activities, such as the overwatering of lawns or the washing of vehicles in driveways. Stormwater runoff refers to water generated during storm events, particularly with an initial rain event as water pollution entering storm drains in areas with high proportions of impervious surfaces is typically more concentrated of toxic materials compared to the remainder of the storm.

Federal, State, and local regulations set standards to protect water quality. In particular, the State Regional Water Quality Control Board mandates control of urban runoff to reduce the percolation of pollutants from surface runoff into groundwater supplies. At the local level, Costa Mesa implements regulations consistent with federal and State requirements, most notably through the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program.

Wastewater/Recycled Water
Recycled water has become an important resource for Costa Mesa and will become increasingly important as other sources of water become less reliable and more costly. Recycled water is wastewater (sewage) that has been treated to remove solids and certain impurities, and is available for non-potable water uses.

The use of recycled water extends potable water supplies, reduces the need for Bioswales were included in the
parking lot in the
redevelopment of Davis Magnet
School. Stormwater runoff can
enter the swale and filter out
pollutants and toxins that
would have otherwise entered
local streams and eventually
the Pacific Ocean. Collected
water can also
infiltrate into
the ground below, recharging
underground water basins.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 168 of 330
664
additional potable water facilities, reduces the amount of treated wastewater discharged into the ocean, reduces reliance on costly imported water supplies, and increases Costa Mesa’s water supply reliability. The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) processes over 200 million gallons of collected wastewater daily at treatment plants in Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach.

As described above, millions of gallons of treated effluent are injected into the groundwater basins or are used for irrigation, and actually results in improved basin water quality due to the high treatment standards required of the recycled water.

Key Water Resources Issues
Water Supply and Reoccurring Droughts
Water is an essential resource. A stable and reliable water supply must be identified if the community desires growth. With drought conditions ever present in California, even during relatively wet periods, the City recognizes that conservation measures and education put in place today will have long-lasting effects. In 2010, the City adopted the State-mandated Model Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. As a response to the ongoing drought, the State revised the Model Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance with Costa Mesa adopting the revised ordinance in 2016. Working with MWD and IRWD, the City must continually advance programs and measures that promote wise water use and ensure continued recharge of local groundwater basins.

Water Quality and Storm Runoff
Urban runoff from streets, sidewalks, parking lots, and roofs washes urban-based pollutants into the watershed system and into the Santa Ana River, Upper Newport Bay, and ultimately to the Pacific Ocean. Consistent with federal and State law, Costa Mesa must take local actions to protect the quality of the regional water supply.

Atmosphere and Climate
Air Quality
Costa Mesa is located in the South Coast Air Basin, which is an approximately 6,600-square mile area bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west; the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east; and Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 169 of 330
665
the San Diego County line to the south. The Basin includes all of Orange County and the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. Basin air quality is influenced by stationary (point source), area-wide, and mobile sources that generate pollutants which contribute to the formation of smog and other poor air quality conditions. Point sources are emission sources located at a single location, while area-wide sources are many smaller point sources that are widely distributed. Examples of point and area-wide sources include manufacturing plants, lawnmowers, fireplaces, and painting operations.

Mobile sources, as their name implies, are not stationary: they are motor vehicles, trains, and aircrafts.

The climate within the Basin varies considerably from the coastal zone to the inland valleys, mountain areas, and deserts. Most of the Basin is relatively arid, with very little rainfall and abundant sunshine during the summer months.

Factors such as wind, sunlight, and temperature all affect the accumulation and/or dispersion of pollutants throughout the Basin. The extent and severity of the air pollution problem is a function of the area's natural physical characteristics and as well as human-caused influences, e.g., development patterns and lifestyle.

Wind
One of the most important factors affecting climate in the Basin is the direction and intensity of the prevailing winds. The Basin has a limited capability to disperse air contaminants due to light average wind speeds. Winds generally blow from the coast inland, where temperature inversions (and the mountains) trap pollutants. As a result, the movement or stagnation of air during the morning and evening hours determines the pollution level on any given day.

Costa Mesa’s coastal location provides for relatively good air quality due to wind patterns. However, the highest pollution levels in Costa Mesa are often associated with Santa Ana wind conditions that reverse the dominant wind patterns.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 170 of 330
666

Sunlight
The presence and intensity of sunlight is another important factor that results in the formation of smog in the Basin. Due to ultraviolet radiation from sunlight, primary pollutants (mainly reactive hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen) react to form secondary pollutants (e.g., oxidants). Since this process is time-dependent, secondary pollutants can be formed many miles downwind from the emission sources. As a result of the prevailing daytime winds and time-delayed nature of smog, oxidant concentrations are highest in the inland areas of Southern California. However, smog can settle in the City on days with early morning easterly winds.

Temperature Inversions
Temperature inversion is a reversal in the decrease of temperature as altitude increases. In most parts of the United States, air near ground level is warmer than the air above it. However, Southern California's daily summertime sunshine and high barometric pressure reverse that pattern, creating warmer air at higher elevations. As a result, temperature inversion traps pollutants by preventing cooler air from rising to the upper atmosphere. Although temperature inversion can occur throughout the year, the summer months of July, August, and September generally account for higher occurrences of this phenomenon.

Clear skies over Costa Mesa
with the OC Fair & Event
Center in the center and the
Pacific Ocean in the
background.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 171 of 330
667
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Ambient air quality standards are the levels of air pollutant concentration considered “safe” with regard to public health and welfare. The federal Clean Air Act (CAA) establishes the framework for regulating national air quality standards and the means to achieve them. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) is responsible for enforcing the Federal CAA and for establishing the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). California has adopted more stringent regulations under the California CAA, which are administered by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

The CARB, which is part of the California Environmental Protection Agency, is responsible for meeting the State requirements of the federal CAA, administering the California CAA, and establishing the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). Both State and federal ambient air quality standards have been established for the following six pollutants: ozone (O
3), particulate matter (PM10
and PM2.5), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead (Pb). The CAAQS generally are more stringent than the corresponding federal standards and incorporate additional standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, and visibility reducing particles.

Ozone (O3), a key ingredient of smog, is a highly reactive and unstable gas capable of damaging the linings of the respiratory tract. This pollutant forms in the atmosphere through complex reactions between chemicals directly emitted from vehicles, industrial plants, and many other sources.

2.5 and PM10 are particles that easily penetrate into the airways and lungs where they may produce harmful health effects such as the worsening of heart and lung diseases. The risk of these health effects is greatest in the elderly and the very young. Exposure to elevated concentrations of PM is also associated with increased hospital and doctor visits and increased numbers of premature deaths.

Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless gas. It results from the incomplete combustion of carbon-containing fuels such as gasoline or wood, and is emitted by a wide variety of combustion sources.

Nitrogen dioxide (NO
2) is a reactive, oxidizing gas capable of damaging cells lining the respiratory tract. This pollutant is also an essential ingredient in the formation of ground-level ozone pollution. NO
2 is one of the nitrogen oxides
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 172 of 330
668
emitted from high-temperature combustion processes, such as those occurring in trucks, cars, and power plants. In the presence of sunlight, complex reactions of nitrogen oxides with ozone and other air pollutants produce the majority of NO2 in the atmosphere. Indoors, home heaters and gas stoves also produce substantial amounts of NO2.

Sulfur dioxide (SO2) is a gaseous compound of sulfur and oxygen. SO2 is formed when sulfur-containing fuel is burned by mobile sources, such as locomotives, ships, and off-road diesel equipment.

Lead (Pb) is a relatively soft and chemically resistant metal. Lead forms compounds with both organic and inorganic substances. As an air pollutant, lead is present in small particles. Sources of lead emissions in California include a variety of industrial activities. Because it was emitted in large amounts from vehicles when leaded gasoline was used, lead is present in many soils (especially urban soils) and can be reintroduced into the air by grading activities.

Sulfates (SO
42) are the fully oxidized ionic form of sulfur. Sulfates occur in combination with metal and/or hydrogen ions. In California, emissions of sulfur compounds occur primarily from the combustion of petroleum-derived fuels (e.g., gasoline and diesel fuel) that contain sulfur. This sulfur is oxidized to sulfur dioxide (SO
2) during the combustion process and subsequently converted to sulfate compounds in the atmosphere. The conversion of SO2 to sulfates takes place comparatively rapidly and completely in urban areas of California due to regional meteorological features.

Hydrogen sulfide (H
2S) is a colorless gas with the odor of rotten eggs. It is formed during bacterial decomposition of sulfur-containing organic substances. Also, hydrogen sulfide can be present in sewer gas and some natural gas, and can be emitted as the result of geothermal energy exploitation.

Vinyl chloride (chloroethene), a chlorinated hydrocarbon, is a colorless gas with a mild, sweet odor. Vinyl chloride largely is used to make polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic and vinyl products. Vinyl chloride has been detected near landfills, sewage plants, and hazardous waste sites due to microbial breakdown of chlorinated solvents.

Visibility-reducing particles consist of suspended particulate matter, which is a complex mixture of tiny particles that consists of dry solid fragments, solid cores Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 173 of 330
669
with liquid coatings, and small droplets of liquid. These particles vary greatly in shape, size, and chemical composition, and can be made up of many different materials such as metals, soot, soil, dust, and salt.

Areas that do not violate ambient air quality standards are considered to have attained the standards. Violations of ambient air quality standards are based on air pollutant monitoring data and are judged for each air pollutant.

The clean air effort still has a long way to go. In 2005, the federal one-hour ozone standard was replaced by a stricter eight-hour standard that was further strengthened in 2008. Even though air quality continues to improve in South Coast Air Basin, pollutant levels in the Basin persistently exceed the federal eight- hour standard for ozone almost one-third of the year. Due to tougher federal air quality standards for particulates and ozone issued in 2006 and 2008, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) estimates it will take until at least 2020 to meet the 24-hour average particulate standard and until 2030 to meet the eight-hour ozone standard. The status of attainment for the criteria pollutants discussed above for the Basin in year 2014 is presented in Table CON-

4. Air Basin Attainment Status.

Table CON-4: Air Basin Attainment Status
Pollutant Federal State
O3 (1-hr) -- Nonattainment
O3 (8-hr) Nonattainment Nonattainment
PM10 Attainment Nonattainment
PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment
CO Attainment Attainment
NO2 Attainment Nonattainment
SO2 Attainment Attainment
Pb Nonattainment Nonattainment
VRP -- Unclassified
SO4 -- Attainment
H2S -- Unclassified
Source: California Air Resources Board 2014

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 174 of 330
670
Regional air quality is regulated by the SCAQMD. SCAQMD tests and regulates stationary sources such as refineries and heavy industry, monitors regional air pollutant levels, develops air quality control strategies, and conducts public awareness programs. SCAQMD continuously monitors air quality at numerous locations throughout the four-county area. Costa Mesa is located within Source Receptor Area 18.

Climate Change
Global climate change is an increasingly acknowledged environmental problem caused as greenhouse gases (GHGs) are released into the atmosphere faster than the Earth’s natural systems can reabsorb them. The primary GHGs emitted into the atmosphere are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3). Collectively, these gases trap heat in the atmosphere and intensify the natural greenhouse effect, thus causing the global average surface temperature to rise, which in turn affects global climate patterns. Other compounds—including some aerosols—can also have a strong heat-forcing effect on the atmosphere. This includes black carbon, which consists of microscopic particles emitted from the incomplete combustion of biomass and fossil fuels.

In response to these concerns, California enacted AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. The law seeks to reverse climate change through a comprehensive program reducing GHG emissions for virtually all sources statewide. AB 32 requires CARB to develop regulations and market mechanisms to achieve technologically feasible and cost-effective measures that will reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020—a 25 percent reduction statewide. In 2008, CARB approved a comprehensive “Scoping Plan” which is to be updated every five years. The first update was approved in 2014.

Senate Bill (SB) 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, provides key support to achieve the goals of AB 32. SB 375 is intended to encourage regional planning that integrates land use and transportation policy in a way that reduces GHG emissions from passenger vehicles. This legislation endeavors to control the emissions by curbing sprawl (the unplanned, uncontrolled spread of urban development). The legislation encourages compact development patterns that reduce the need to drive, thereby reducing air pollution from car exhaust, conserving water, and protecting habitat, among Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 175 of 330
671
other benefits. To achieve these goals, this law is designed to align regional land use, housing, and transportation plans with greenhouse gas reduction targets for 2020 and 2035.

The City recognizes the importance of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, enhancing our environment and economic sustainability, and preserving a high quality of life and safety for generations to come. Many actions undertaken by the City directly or indirectly improve air quality. These include implementing the Build Green Incentive Program, pursuing mixed-use development and live-work housing that will reduce vehicle miles traveled, implementing energy efficiency programs, supporting transit use, developing bicycle routes and trails, minimizing landfill waste, and supporting the use of alternative fuel vehicles in the City’s fleet and in the community. Considering air quality issues in the decision-making process will ensure that new development minimizes new emissions.

Key Atmosphere and Climate Condition Issues
Air Pollution
Breathing polluted air can cause eye irritation and nose burn, and long-term effects including chronic respiratory ailments. Air pollution can irritate throats and make breathing difficult. In fact, pollutants like tiny airborne particles and ground level ozone can trigger respiratory problems, especially for people with asthma. Air pollution can also be damaging to the natural environment by impacting trees, plants, water bodies, and wildlife.

Greenhouse Gases
Within Costa Mesa, as in most urban areas, fossil fuels are the number one source of energy consumed by residents, government, industry, and commercial activities, thus leading to increases in greenhouse gases. Vehicles are the single largest consumer of fossil fuels, followed by buildings that use large amounts of energy for heating and cooling. These activities have contributed to the elevated concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, in turn, this is causing the Earth’s temperature to rise. A warmer Earth may lead to changes in rainfall patterns, smaller polar ice caps, a rise in sea level, and a wide range of impacts on plants, wildlife, and humans.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 176 of 330
672
Goals, Objectives, and Policies
The following goals, objectives, and policies mandate or encourage specific actions the City, residents, the business community, and local institutions will pursue to achieve objectives relative to resource conservation.

Goal CON-1: Preserved and Restored
Natural Coastal Habitat and Landforms
It is the goal of the City of Costa Mesa to provide residents with a high-quality environment through the conservation of resources, including land, water, wildlife, and vegetation; and the protection of areas of unique natural beauty.

Objective CON-1.A: Evaluate existing biotic resources and preserve them in ecologically viable and natural conditions, where possible; and/or restore and integrate these resources into the urban environment, where feasible.

Habitat and Biological Resources Protection and Restoration Policy CON-1.A.1: Natural habitat is essential to ensuring biodiversity and protecting sensitive biological resources. Protect these areas and consult with the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife, Orange County Water District, Orange County Parks, and other regional agencies to identify areas for special protection, and establish appropriate protection measures for these areas.

Policy CON-1.A.2: Contribute to regional biodiversity and the preservation of rare, unique, and sensitive biological resources by
maintaining functional wildlife corridors and habitat linkages.

Policy CON-1.A.3: Coordinate with the United States Fish and Wildlife service, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and other regulatory agencies to mitigate project impacts affecting open and natural spaces.

Policy CON-1.A.4: Promote and protect native plant species within Fairview Park, and remove and control the spread of invasive species, including plants, animals, and fungi.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 177 of 330
673
Policy CON-1.A.5: Ensure that all future development is reviewed with regard to protecting natural topography and bluffs to preserve and enhance Costa Mesa’s natural beauty.

Policy CON-1.A.6: Minimize soil depletion and erosion in development projects.

Prevent erosion caused by construction activities, and
encourage preservation of natural vegetation and
topography.

Policy CON-1.A.7: Work with applicable regional agencies to discourage the use of herbicides and pesticides within the community’s natural areas and especially its riparian corridors, and to educate the public on the impacts of their use.

Access to Large-Scale Natural Areas
Policy CON-1.A.7: Improve access to large-scale natural areas in the City. These areas should be open for controlled access to improve public enjoyment. Access should be limited where natural habitat is extremely sensitive. Work with transit agencies to improve connections and access to open space and recreation
facilities from all Costa Mesa neighborhoods.

Policy CON-1.A.8: Require the provision of adequate visitor-serving on-site parking facilities that do no impact sensitive resources within the Coastal Zone.

Policy CON-1.A.9: Coordinate the development of plans, policies, and design standards for projects within the Coastal Zone with
appropriate local, regional, and federal agencies.

Goal CON-2: Conserved Natural Resources
through Environmental Sustainability
Reduce the City’s carbon footprints and manage resources wisely to meet the needs of a growing population and economy. Base community planning decisions on sustainable practices that reduce environmental pollutants, conserve resources, and minimize waste. Encourage the design of energy-efficient buildings, use renewable energy, and promote alternative methods of transportation.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 178 of 330
674
Objective CON-2.A: Work to conserve energy resources in existing and new buildings, utilities, and infrastructure.

Energy Efficiency and Conservation
Policy CON-2.A.1: Promote efficient use of energy and conservation of available resources in the design, construction, maintenance, and operation of public and private facilities, infrastructure, and equipment.

Policy CON-2.A.2: Consult with regional agencies and utility companies to pursue energy efficiency goals. Expand renewable energy strategies to reach zero net energy for both residential and commercial new construction.

Policy CON-2.A.3: Continue to develop partnerships with participating jurisdictions to promote energy efficiency, energy
conservation, and renewable energy resource development by leveraging the abilities of local governments to strengthen and reinforce the capacity of energy efficiency efforts.

Policy CON-2.A.4: Encourage new development to take advantage of Costa Mesa’s optimal climate in the warming and cooling of
buildings, including use of heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems.

Green Building Sustainable Development Practices
Policy CON-2.A.5: Promote environmentally sustainable development principles for buildings, master planned communities,
neighborhoods, and infrastructure.

Policy CON-2.A.6: Encourage construction and building development practices that reduce resource expenditures throughout the lifecycle of a structure.

Policy CON-2.A.7: Continue to require all City facilities and services to incorporate energy and resource conservation standards and practices and require that new municipal facilities be built within the LEED Gold standards or equivalent.

Policy CON-2.A.8: Continue City green initiatives in purchases of equipment, and agreements that favor sustainable products and
practices.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 179 of 330
675
Solid Waste Reduction and Recycling
Policy CON-2.A.9: Encourage waste management programs that promote waste reduction and recycling to minimize materials sent to landfills. Maintain robust programs that encourage residents and businesses to reduce, reuse, recycle, and compost,
prioritizing education programs directed toward designated environmental justice communities.

Policy CON-2.A.10: Support waste management practices that provide recycling programs. Promote organic recycling, landfill diversion, zero waste goals, proper hazardous waste collections,
composting, and the continuance of recycling centers.

Policy CON-2.A.11: Continue construction and demolition programs that require recycling and minimize waste in haul trips.

Goal CON-3: Improved Water Supply and
Quality
Pursue a multijurisdictional approach to protecting, maintaining, and improving water quality and the overall health of the watershed. A comprehensive, integrated approach will ensure compliance with federal and State standards, and will address a range of interconnected priorities, including water quality and runoff; stormwater capture, storage, and flood management techniques that focus on natural drainage; natural filtration and groundwater recharge through green infrastructure and habitat restoration; and water recycling and conservation.

Objective CON-3.A: Work towards the protection and conservation of existing and future water resources by recognizing water as a limited resource that requires conservation.

Water Supply
Policy CON-3.A.1: Continue to consult with local water districts and the Orange County Water District to ensure reliable, adequate, and high- quality sources of water supply at a reasonable cost.

Water Conservation
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 180 of 330
676
Policy CON-3.A.2: Encourage residents, public facilities, businesses, and industry to minimize water consumption, especially during drought years.

Policy CON-3.A.3: Restrict use of turf in new construction and landscape reinstallation that requires high irrigation demands, except for area parks and schools, and encourage the use of
drought-tolerant landscaping.

Water Recycling
Policy CON-3.A.4: Consult with local water districts and the Orange County Water District to advance water recycling program for new and existing developments, including the use of treated wastewater to irrigate parks, golf courses, roadway
landscaping, and other intensive irrigation consumers.

Water Quality and Urban Runoff
Policy CON-3.A.5: Work with public and private property owners to reduce stormwater runoff in urban areas to protect water quality in storm drainage channels, the Santa Ana River, and other local water courses that lead to the Pacific Ocean.

Policy CON-3.A.6: Continue to develop strategies to promote stormwater management techniques and storm drain diversion programs that collectively and naturally filter urban runoff.

Policy CON-3.A.7: Continue to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program (NPDES) by participating in the Countywide Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP), which
stipulates water quality requirements for minimizing urban runoff and discharge from new development and requires
the provisions of applicable Best Management Practices
(BMP).

Policy CON-3.A.8: Require that all applicable development projects be reviewed with regards to requirements of both the on-site Water Quality Management Plan and State requirements for runoff and obtaining a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) permit.

Municipal Sewer System
Policy CON-3.A.9: Continue to consult with the Costa Mesa Sanitation District and the Orange County Sanitation District to modernize
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 181 of 330
677
wastewater treatment facilities to avoid overflows of
untreated sewage.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 182 of 330
678
Goal CON-4: Improved Air Quality
Take steps to improve and maintain air quality for the benefit of the health and vitality of residents and the local economy. In alignment with State emissions reduction goals and in cooperation with the South Coast Air Quality Management District, pursue regional collaboration to reduce emissions from all sources.

Objective CON-4.A: Pursue the prevention of the significant deterioration of local and regional air quality.

Air Quality
Policy CON-4.A.1: Support regional policies and efforts that improve air quality to protect human and environmental health, and
minimize disproportionate impacts on sensitive population groups.

Policy CON-4.A.2: Encourage businesses, industries and residents to reduce the impact of direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of stationary and non-stationary pollution sources.

Policy CON-4.A.3: Require that sensitive uses such as schools, childcare centers, parks and playgrounds, housing, and community
gathering places are protected from adverse impacts of
emissions.

Policy CON-4.A.4: Continue to participate in regional planning efforts with the Southern California Association of Governments, nearby jurisdictions, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District to meet or exceed air quality standards.

Climate Change
Policy CON-4.A.5: Encourage compact development, infill development, and a mix of uses that are in proximity to transit, pedestrian, and bicycling infrastructures.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 183 of 330
679
Policy CON-4.A.6: Enhance bicycling and walking infrastructure, and support public bus service, pursuant to the Circulation Element’s goals, objectives, and policies.

Policy CON-4.A.7: Encourage installation of renewable energy devices for businesses and facilities and strive to reduce community- wide energy consumption.

Policy CON-4.A.8: Develop long-term, community-wide strategies and programs that work at the local level to reduce greenhouse gases and Costa Mesa’s “carbon footprint”.

Policy CON-4.A.9: Assess consistency with the Climate Action & Adaptation Plan (CAAP) in major land use decisions and investments in public infrastructure.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 184 of 330
680

Chapter 7:

Noise Element
Introduction
Costa Mesa residents enjoy the diversity of their neighborhoods. With the pleasant, ocean-influenced climate, they find many reasons to spend time outdoors. While some level of noise is part of the urban environment—with noise conditions varying depending upon the type and density of development—residents desire to keep Costa Mesa a relatively quiet place.

This Noise Element establishes goals focused on creating a local noise environment that contributes to positive community health and minimizes exposure of residents to adverse noise conditions.

Federal and State statutes define noise to be an environmental pollutant that can affect the quality of life and human health by causing annoyance and disrupting everyday activities. Many laws are in place to protect individuals from excessive noise at their workplaces and in their homes. In Costa Mesa, significant noise sources include I-405, SR-73 and SR-55, major arterials such as Harbor Boulevard and 17
th Street, the Orange County Fairgrounds and
17th Street and Superior Avenue
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 185 of 330
681
Pacific Amphitheater, John Wayne Airport, and the activities of local industrial businesses. While the City does not have jurisdiction to control how most of these noise sources affects the community, it can direct land use policy and work with responsible agencies to minimize noise impacts on residents.

Purpose
The purpose of the Noise Element is to identify noise sources in Costa Mesa and define strategies for reducing the negative impact of noise on the community. The Noise Element identifies baseline and projected noise levels so that this information can guide future land use decisions in a manner that limit noises and its effect on the community.

Legal Requirement
State Law (Section 65302[f] of the California Government Code) requires that general plans include a Noise Element that identifies and appraises noise problems in the community. The Noise Element follows the revised State guidelines in Section 46050.1 of the Health and Safety Code that require the Element analyze and quantify—to the extent practical—baseline and projected noise levels for the following sources:
 Highways and freeways
 Primary arterials and major local streets
 Passenger and freight on-line railroad operations and ground rapid transit systems
 Commercial, general aviation, heliport, helistop, military airport operations, aircraft overflights, jet engine test stands, and all other ground facilities and maintenance functions related to airport operation
 Local industrial plants, including, but not limited to, railroad classification yards
 Other ground stationary noise sources identified by local agencies as contributing to the community noise environment
State law is fairly specific as to how local noise conditions are presented. The 24-hour noise environment typically is expressed in terms of noise contour maps, which display average noise levels over a 24-hour period. They resemble topographic maps, which illustrate varying ground elevations. The Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 186 of 330
682
noise contour maps indicate an aggregation of noise from all sources, and state the noise levels in terms of Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) or Day-Night Average Level (Ldn); these terms are described below. The noise contours establish a guide for establishing a pattern of land uses in the Land Use Element to minimize exposure of residents to excessive noise. State law specifies that the Noise Element is to include implementation measures to address existing and foreseeable noise problems and, importantly, to serve as a guideline for compliance with the State’s noise insulation standards.

Noise Metrics
Noise—in its most simplistic terms—is defined as unwanted sound. While sound can be defined easily using scientific standards, noise has qualities that require more complex treatment. Sound is measured and expressed by decibels (dB), with an adjustment referred to as the A-weighted measure (dBA) to correct for the relative frequency response of the human ear.

Decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale, representing points on a sharply rising curve. For example, a sound level of 10 decibels is 10 times more intense than one decibel, 20 decibels represent a noise 100 times more intense, and 30 decibels reflects a condition 1,000 times more intense. A sound as soft as human breathing is about 10 times greater than a zero decibel level.

The decibel system of measuring sound gives a rough connection between the physical intensity of sound and its perceived loudness to the human ear. A 10-decibel increase is perceived by the human ear as only doubling of the loudness. Ambient sounds in the urban environment generally range from 30 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud), as indicated in Table N-1: Typical Sound Levels.

Because people generally are more sensitive to noise intrusions during the evening and night hours, State law requires, for planning purposes, use of such metrics as the CNEL or L
dn. These metrics add an artificial decibel
increment to quiet time noise levels in a 24-hour noise descriptor to account for increased sensitivity during late hours. The CNEL descriptor requires that an artificial increment of five dBA be added to the actual noise level for the hours from 7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M., and 10 dBA for the 10:00 P.M.to 7:00 A.M.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 187 of 330
683
period. The Ldn descriptor uses the same methodology, except that no artificial increment is added to the hours between 7:00 A.M. and 10:00 P.M.

Table N-1: Typical Sound Levels
Common Outdoor Activities
Noise
Level
(dBA) Common Indoor Activities
Threshold of pain 140
Near jet engine 130
Jet fly-over at 1,000 feet 110 Rock band
Loud auto horn 100
Gas lawnmower at 3 feet 90
Diesel truck at 50 feet at 50 mph 80 Food blender at 3 feet Noisy urban area during daytime 70 Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet Heavy traffic at 300 feet 60 Normal speech at 3 feet
Quiet urban area during daytime 50 Large business office Quiet urban area during nighttime 40 Theater, large conference room (background)
Quiet suburban area during nighttime 30 Library
Quiet rural area during nighttime 20 Bedroom at night, concert hall (background)
10 Broadcast/recording studio
Lowest threshold of human hearing 0 Lowest threshold of human hearing

Both descriptors yield roughly the same 24-hour level, with the CNEL being only slightly more restrictive (that is, higher).

The discussion of noise requires the use of a number of technical terms.

Some of the key noise-related terms used in this element include:
 Decibel (dB). A decibel is a unit of measurement which indicates the relative amplitude of a sound. The zero on the decibel scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Sound levels in decibels are calculated on a logarithmic Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 188 of 330
684
basis. Each 10 decibel increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness over a fairly wide range of intensities.
 A-weighted sound level (dBA). The A-weighted sound level is the most common method to characterize sound in California. This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. All sound levels in this chapter are A-weighted, unless reported otherwise.
 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). CNEL is the energy average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring during a 24-hour period, with 10 dB added to the A-weighted sound levels occurring between 10:00
P.M. and 7:00 A.M. and five dB added to the A-
weighted sound levels occurring between 7:00 P.M. and 10:00 P.M.  Energy-equivalent sound/noise level (Leq). Leq describes the average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time-varying events. This descriptor is useful because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of time. The most common averaging period for L
eq is hourly, but it can be of any duration.
 Day/night average sound level (Ldn). Ldn is a measure over a 24-hour period at a given location, with a 10 dB added to the A-weighted sound levels occurring between 10:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M.

Noise Standards
While primary responsibility for control of noise rests with State and local governments, the United States Noise Control Act of 1972 and the Quiet Community Act of 1978 recognized the role of the federal government in addressing major commercial noise sources to provide uniform treatment of such sources. The federal government specifically preempts local control of noise emissions from aircraft, railroad, and interstate highways.

The State of California’s noise insulation standards are codified in the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Building Standards Administrative Code, Part 2, California Building Code. These noise standards apply to new construction for providing suitable interior noise environments. The regulations specify that acoustical studies must be prepared when noise- Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 189 of 330
685
sensitive structures, such as residential buildings, schools, or hospitals, are located near major transportation noise sources, and where such noise sources create an exterior noise level of 60 dBA CNEL or higher. Acoustical studies that accompany building plans must demonstrate that structures have been designed to limit interior noise in habitable rooms to acceptable noise levels. For new residential buildings, schools, and hospitals, the acceptable interior noise limit for new construction is 45 dBA CNEL.

Costa Mesa has a comprehensive Noise Ordinance within the Municipal Code (Chapter XIII-Noise Control) that sets standards for noise levels citywide and provides the means to enforce the reduction of offensive noises. The noise standards in Table N-2: Residential Exterior and Interior Standards, apply to both indoor and outdoor residential areas. Between the hours of 11:00 P.M.
and 7:00 A.M., the noise standards are five dBA more stringent for exterior areas and 10 dBA more stringent for indoor areas. The Noise Ordinance further specifies that residential exterior areas such as private balconies, roof decks, and internal courtyards in a Mixed-Use Overlay District for live/work and multi-family residential development that are approved pursuant to a Master Plan, and subject to the land use regulations of an Urban Plan, are exempt from the residential exterior noise standards. A similar exemption also applies to high-rise residential development in the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan.

Table N-2: Residential Exterior and Interior
Standards
Exterior Noise Standards Interior Noise Standards
55 dBA: 7:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M.

50 dBA: 11:00 P.M.to 7:00 A.M.
55 dBA: 7:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M.

45 dBA: 11:00
P.M. to 7:00 A.M.

Note: These represent the basic standards applicable for time periods exceeding 15 minutes each hour. Higher levels may be generated for specified shorter time periods.

Source: Costa Mesa Zoning Code, Chapter XIII

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 190 of 330
686
Noise Conditions and Compatibility Standards
Two types of noise sources are considered in the community noise inventory:
mobile sources and stationary sources. Mobile noise sources refer to cars, trucks, motorcycles, buses, aircraft, and trains. Stationary sources include industrial and construction activities (including truck loading), playgrounds, outdoor sports facilities, landscape maintenance equipment, construction activities, and the typical sounds heard in a residential neighborhood (power tools, barking dogs, etc.).

Table N-3: Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix presents the guidelines promulgated by federal and State agencies, modified to meet local conditions and Costa Mesa’s needs. This table represents the primary tool the City will use to ensure integrated planning compatibility between land uses and outdoor noise.

Costa Mesa’s noise environment is dominated by vehicular traffic and aircraft operations at John Wayne Airport. To provide a description of the baseline 2015 noise environment in Costa Mesa, noise contours were obtained from the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission and quantified for highway and local street traffic.

Vehicular Noise
Traffic noise levels can be reliably predicted using formulas that take into account traffic volume, speed, and the percentage of trucks. Baseline 2015 noise contours were calculated for all the City’s primary and major arterials, as well as the three freeways (I-405, SR-55, SR-73) that traverse the City. In addition, a number of secondary and commuter streets were modeled. Noise generation for each roadway segment was calculated, and the distance to the 60, 65, and 70 dBA CNEL contours was determined (A noise contour is a line behind which the noise level does not exceed a certain value. For instance, the 60 dBA CNEL contour indicates that the CNEL between the street and the contour line is equal to, or greater than 60 dB; the CNEL beyond the contour line—away from the street—is less than 60 dB).

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 191 of 330
687
Table N-3: Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix
Land Use Category
Community Noise Exposure
Ldn or CNEL, dBA
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
Residential: Low-Density 50-60 60-70 70-75 >75
Residential: Multiple Family 50-65 65-70 70-75 >75
Mixed use 50-65 65-70 70-75 >75
Transient Lodging-Motel, Hotels 50-65 65-70 70-80 >80
Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals,
Nursing Homes 50-60 60-65 65-80 >80
Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters NA 50-70 NA >80 Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports NA 50-75 NA >80 Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 50-67.5 NA 67.5-75 >75
Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water
Recreation, Cemeteries 50-70 NA 70-80 >80
Office Buildings, Business Commercial and
Professional 50-67.5 67.5-77.5 77.5-85
>85 unless
appropriately
insulated
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities,
Agriculture 50-70 70-80 80-85 NA
Normally Acceptable. Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.

Conditionally Acceptable. New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.

Conventional construction but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice.

Normally Unacceptable. New Construction or development should be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.

Clearly Unacceptable. New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.

NA: Not Applicable.

Source: Modified from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Guidelines and State of California Standards.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 192 of 330
688
Aircraft Noise
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has established guidelines in the California State Noise Standard to control residential area noise levels produced by aircraft operations that use the State’s airports.

Under these guidelines, residential noise sensitive areas exposed to an average CNEL of greater than the 65 dBA define the noise impact area.

John Wayne Airport
John Wayne Airport, operated by the County of Orange, abuts industrial and commercial properties at the northeast corner of Costa Mesa. A small portion of Costa Mesa lies within the 65 dBA CNEL contour of John Wayne Airport.

The northeast corner of Costa Mesa is impacted by noise from the airport.

However, the majority of this area is developed with industrial uses.

Approximately 107 dwelling units within the City’s sphere of influence lie within the 65 dBA CNEL noise impact area south of the runway.

Noise contours resulting from operations at John Wayne Airport, indicated on Figure N-1, John Wayne Airport Noise Contours, are those on file with the County of Orange Office of Noise Abatement and the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC).

The 2008 Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) adopted by the Airport Land Use Commission specifies acceptable uses proximate to the airport. These are defined as uses that will not subject people to adverse noise impacts. John Wayne Airport, primarily through the General Aviation Noise Ordinance (GANO), has ongoing programs of noise reduction that include limits on the number of commercial airline flights, noise abatement arrival and departure procedures, admonishment of noisy operators (including private aircraft), curfew, and take-off weight limitations.

The Orange County Board of Supervisors approved a master plan for the airport in February, 1985. Settlement of lawsuits concerning airport expansion were reached in December 1985 between the County, City of Newport Beach, and two community organizations. In 2003, the settlement agreement was amended which extended the agreement until 2015, allowed an increase in passengers served from 8.4 million annual passengers to 10.8 million annual passengers, allowed an increase in regular Class A flights to 85 average daily departures, and allowed facility improvements.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 193 of 330
689

Figure N-1: Noise Monitoring Locations

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 194 of 330
690
In 2014, the Board of Supervisors authorized an increase in operational capacity and extended the terms of the settlement agreement through December 31, 2030, with no change to curfew until December 31, 2035.

Additionally, beginning on January 1, 2021, the approval allows a gradual increase in passenger count from 8.4 million average passengers to 11.8 million average passengers and 95 average daily departures. Further, on January 1, 2026, the number passengers would again be allowed to increase, up to 12.5 million average passengers, depending upon the actual service levels in the preceding five years.

Despite the increase in air traffic from John Wayne Airport, the ultimate CNEL noise contours are considerably less than the noise contour contained in the 2008 AELUP due to updated technology creating quieter fleets of commercial aircrafts.

Helicopter Services
The City of Costa Mesa contracts with Huntington Beach for police helicopter services on a case-by-case basis. Depending on altitude and speed, noise levels generated by the craft under normal conditions range from 61 to 65 dBA. As of 2015, four heliports were located in Costa Mesa at the following locations:
 Costa Mesa Police Department, 99 Fair Drive
 Former Los Angeles Times building, 1375 West Sunflower Avenue  South Coast Metro Center, 555 Anton Boulevard
 Tridair Helicopter, 3000 Airway Avenue
The AELUP for Heliports establishes regulations and restrictions for the siting of heliports/helipads. The purpose of the AELUP for Heliports is to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise by ensuring that heliports/helipads are sited in areas of compatible land use. The City regulates the siting of helipads through a conditional use permit. The City requires an analysis to identify potential noise impacts and the City may regulate the hours of operation and arrival, departure/arrival routes, and type of helicopters which may use the heliport in order to minimize impacts to sensitive land uses. Heliports and helistops must comply with the all conditions of approval imposed or recommended by the Federal Aviation Administration, Orange County ALUC, and Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 195 of 330
691
OC Fair & Event Center
The OC Fair & Event Center (OCFEC) has existed at its location across from the Civic Center for over 65 years and has become a year-round exhibition, conference, and event center. The primary function of the OCFEC is to host the annual summer fair, which includes rides, exhibits, theater, the centennial farm area, equestrian center, and amphitheater for concerts. Over 1.3 million people attend the fair during its summer run.

Several noise sources exist within the fairgrounds property. A majority of the on-site stationary noise is due to the weekly Orange County Market Place, Farmers Market, Centennial Farm, and Food Truck Fare Wednesday, as well as annual events such as the OC Home and Garden Show, Orange County Fair, and concerts at the Pacific Amphitheater. Parking lot activity during various fairground events also generates noise.

In 1980, a stricter, modified Noise Ordinance for fairground operations was established in an agreement between the 32
nd District Agricultural Association
and the City of Costa Mesa (“1980 Settlement Agreement”). Table N-4, Orange County Fairgrounds Modified Noise Ordinance, applies to the activities within the Orange County Fairgrounds, with the exception of the events at the Pacific Amphitheater.

Table N-4: Orange County Fairgrounds
Modified Noise Ordinance1

Land Use
Noise Level Not to Be
Exceeded
Maximum Allowable
Duration of Exceedance

Residential
50 dBA
55 dBA
60 dBA
65 dBA
70 dBA
30 min/hour
15 min/hour
5 min/hour
1 min/hour
Not for any period of time
Noise Zone Noise Level (CNEL) Time Period

1 and 2 Family Residential
60 dBA
50 dBA
7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.
11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

Multiple Dwelling
Residential, Public Space,
Commercial
60 dBA
55 dBA
7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.
11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 196 of 330
692
Note: 1. Doe
s not apply to events at Pacific Amphitheater
Source: City of Costa Mesa Inter Office Memorandum, August 24, 2010 .

Orange County Fair
The Orange County Fair operates for four weeks annually during the summer months. Noise sources during the fair events include a public address system, carnival rides, and several sound reinforcement systems used for concerts and carnival rides. Noise levels in the activity areas of a typical fair are in the range of 65 to75 dBA.

Pacific Amphitheater
The 8,200-seat Pacific Amphitheater is owned and managed by the OC Fair & Event Center and provides year-round events. Prior to 1990, noise levels generated by concert events at Pacific Amphitheater exceeded the Costa Mesa Noise Ordinance, impacting surrounding residential neighborhoods. In 1990, a permanent injunction (“1990 Order”) was entered against the former operators of the Amphitheater and the order set the current noise level established in Table N-5. The order specifically stated that the City’s Noise Ordinance does not apply to the Pacific Amphitheatre. The amphitheater closed in 1997, but reopened in 2003 and remains subject to the noise restrictions of the 1990 Order outlined in Table N-5.

Table N-5: Pacific Amphitheater Court Order
Current Noise Restriction (1990 Order)
Maximum Noise Level Time Period Days of the Week
55 dBA 7:00 A.M. - 10:30 P.M. Sunday-Thursday
50 dBA 10:30 P.M.- 7:00 A.M. Sunday-Thursday
55 dBA 7:00 A.M. - 11:00 P.M. Friday-Saturday
50 dBA 11:00 P.M.- 7:00 A.M. Friday-Saturday
Source: City of Costa Mesa Inter Office Memorandum, August 24, 2010 .

Stationary Noise Sources
Stationary noise sources in Costa Mesa include restaurants, bars, entertainment establishments, mixed-use structures, mechanical equipment, outdoor industrial and commercial activities, and use of recreational facilities.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 197 of 330
693
Delivery trucks, air compressors, generators, outdoor loudspeakers, and gas venting cause the primary noise sources associated with these facilities.

Other significant stationary noise sources include construction activity, street sweepers, and gas-powered leaf blowers. Residential land uses and areas identified as noise-sensitive must be protected from excessive noise from stationary sources including commercial and industrial centers. These impacts are best controlled through effective land use planning and the application of the Noise Ordinance.

Ambient Noise
To describe the ambient or background noise level throughout the City, several noise measurement samples were taken in 2015. Noise sensitive land uses include schools, residences, churches, hospitals, and similar facilities.

The locations included a mix of public schools, preschools (childcare centers), hospitals, convalescent homes and a senior housing development. The locations shown in Figure N-1: Noise Monitoring Locations, were distributed throughout the City to provide an overall understanding of the noise environment.

The noise measurement locations also functioned as noise-sensitive indicators. These noise-sensitive indicators are uses, such as schools and hospitals, that have a lower tolerance for noise than do industrial and commercial activities or normal residential uses. Noise levels measured at these locations are reported in Table N-6: Field Noise Measurements.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 198 of 330
694

Table N-6: Field Noise Measurements – 2015 Ambient Noise Levels Site Time Leq Lmax Lmin Location
1 7:12 A.M. 67.8 84.5 57.8 Northeast corner of Anton and Avenue of the Arts 2 7:45 A.M. 77.6 102.1 55.3 Southeast corner of Bear and Paularino 3 8:12 A.M. 71.5 88.5 57.6 Northeast corner of Harbor and Adams 4 8:37 A.M. 70.2 84.3 56.2 Northwest corner of Fairview and Fair 5 9:12 A.M. 66.2 82.3 55.1 Southwest corner of South Coast and Susan 6 11:07 P.M. 68.4 80.7 45.5 Northwest corner of Mesa Verde and Adams 7 11:35 P.M. 52.5 65.2 39.1 East corner of Santa Ana and 22nd 8 7:02 A.M. 67.8 84.9 46.4 North corner of Del Mar and Orange 9 7:33 A.M. 61.5 75.1 45.5 East corner of Santa Ana and Cabrillo 10 7:55 A.M. 73.1 86.9 57.1 Northeast corner of Harbor and 19th 11 8:21 A.M. 73.8 89.4 60.5 Northeast corner of Harbor and Victoria 12 8:47 A.M. 69.4 82.5 54.3 Northeast corner of 17th and Pomona 13 9:11 A.M. 63.1 82.0 42.3 Northeast corner of 17th and Whittier 14 9:43 A.M. 74.1 93.9 53.9 Northeast corner of Placentia & 20th 15 10:24 A.M. 69.3 85.5 56.2 South corner of Red Hill and Paularino Note: This table displays the short-term noise measurements results that were conducted to identify the ambient noise in the City. An American National Standards Institute (ANSI Section SI4 1979, Type 1) Larson Davis model LxT sound level meter was used to monitor noise levels . The noise meter was programmed to record noise levels in A-weighted form. The microphone height was set at five feet.

Fifteen 15-minute daytime noise measurements were taken on Tuesday August 4, 2015 , through Thursday August 6, 2015.

Source: MIG, 2015.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 199 of 330
695
Citywide Noise Environment
Existing Noise Environment (2015)
Figure N-2: Existing Noise Contours - 2015, illustrates the existing (2015) CNEL noise contours along many of the City's major roadways in the City. CNEL contours are found by calculating distances to the 55, 60, 65, and 70 CNEL contours. Figure N-2 also depicts John Wayne Airport’s CNEL noise contours prepared in 2013.

Future Noise Environment (2035)
The noise environment in Costa Mesa is not expected to change as a result of implementation of the General Plan. Vehicular traffic noise—the dominant source citywide—is not anticipated to change substantially along local streets or major through routes, including I-405, SR-73 and SR-55, major arterials.

Aircraft noise from John Wayne Airport, noise from events at the OC Fairground & Event Center, and non-transportation noise similarly are not anticipated to increase in the community.

The projected noise exposure contours for year 2035 are indicated in Figure N-3: Future Noise Contours - 2035. The future noise contours should be considered as a guide to identifying potential land use/noise compatibility issues and will be used to determine the requirement for project specific noise studies and mitigation. Future noise CNEL for John Wayne Airport are also shown in Figure N-3, which reflect the airport’s 1985 Master Plan future noise conditions.

In comparison to the 2015 noise contours presented in Figure N-2, future noise levels will increase only modestly.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 200 of 330
696

N-2: Existing Noise Contours - 2015
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 201 of 330
697
N-3: Future Noise Contours - 2035
Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 202 of 330
698
Key Noise Issues
The key noise issues in Costa Mesa are:

John Wayne Airport
John Wayne Airport, a very busy airport, has some of the most restrictions related to noise in the United States. Noise from operations at John Wayne Airport affects primarily industrial and commercial properties in northeast Costa Mesa (Figures N-2 and N-3). Departures from the airport were amended in 2011 under STREL, which directed departure flights away from residences and over Newport Bay. STREL is the name provided by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to describe the Area Navigation (RNAV) departure procedure implemented in 2011, and replaced the flight departure pattern called DUUKE ONE/TWO.

The County’s General Aviation Noise Ordinance regulates the hours of operation and the maximum permitted noise levels associated with general aviation projects. General aviation flights are allowed, as long as aircraft comply with the General Aviation Noise Ordinance. The County has installed 10 noise-monitoring stations along the main designated departure and arrival flight routes; no noise monitoring station was located in Costa Mesa as of 2015.

The FAA, under its Next Generation Air Transportation System program, also known as Southern California Metroplex project, seeks to optimize flight patterns departing out of the airport; it may affect the flight paths over Costa Mesa over the long term.

Construction Noise
Construction noise could occur in almost any part of the City. However, Section 13-279 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code limits construction activity as follows:

Allowable Hours Applicable Days
7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. Mondays through Fridays
9:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. Saturdays
Construction is prohibited all hours on Sundays and on the following specified federal holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day.

Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 203 of 330
699
Helicopter Noise
Because of the nature of their operations, police helicopter noise may impact any location in the City at any time between 10:00 A.M. and 3:00 A.M.

Overflights are usually brief, lasting only a few seconds. Noise exposure of several minutes may occur when circling a crime scene. Although helicopter noise levels are not extremely high in either case, they may be sufficient to cause sleep interruption during nighttime hours. The FAA does not have minimum altitude requirements for helicopters when weather, safety, and other air traffic permit.

Roadway Traffic Noise
Roadway traffic noise has the greatest impact on the noise environment of Costa Mesa’s residential properties. Between 55 and 60 dBA CNEL contours are common along collector streets; freeways and major streets expose adjacent areas to levels of 65 dBA CNEL or greater.

Figures N-2 and N-3 show baseline 2015 and projected 2035 noise contours along many of the City's major and primary arterials and the three freeways that traverse the City. Noise contours for selected secondary and commuter streets are also included. The figures display the average daily traffic volume noise levels at 100 feet from the roadway centerline and the distance from the roadway centerline to the 70, 65 and 60 dBA CNEL contours. The improvements on the I-405, SR-55, and SR-73 would produce noise impacts on immediately adjacent Costa Mesa properties.

Noise/Land Use Compatibility Conflicts
A great proportion of mixed-use developments, typically multi-family residential or live/work units atop a leasable commercial space or loft studio, are located in the Westside. The Mixed-Use Overlay District encompasses three urban plans that govern almost all of the Westside of Costa Mesa—19 West, Mesa West Bluffs, and Mesa West Residential Ownership. In addition, the SoBECA Urban Plan allows for mixed-use development. Residents in Westside neighborhoods have expressed some concern regarding the operational ambient noise emanating from industrial activities from truck traffic, heavy machinery, materials processing, and general worker activity. In addition, the commercial spaces below the residential portions of buildings could also generate noise. The SoBECA district has additional noise issues associated with the proximity of the SR-55 and SR-73 freeways.

Land use development process within the context of these urban plans take into consideration noise impacts. A project application is required to include a Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 204 of 330
700
noise study to show how compliance with noise standards will be achieved.

Furthermore, as part of conditions of project approval, the required Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) must disclose the existing noise environment within and surrounding the mixed-use development.

Proper design that attenuates the impact of noise is embedded in the urban plans. The plans recommend noise-reduction building design approaches such as double-pane windows, wall and ceiling insulation, and the limitation on commercial operations to minimize interaction between noise-generating business activities such as deliveries and loading.

Noise Plan
Typical Noise Attenuation Techniques
Noise impacts can be mitigated in three ways: 1) by reducing the sound level of the noise generator, 2) by increasing the distance between the source and receiver, and 3) by insulating the receiver. Noise reduction can be accomplished by placement of walls, landscaped berms, or a combination of the two between the noise source and the receiver.

Generally, effective noise shielding requires a solid barrier with a mass of at least four pounds per square-foot of surface area, which is large enough to block the line of sight between source and receiver. Variations may be appropriate in individual cases based on distance, nature and orientation of buildings behind the barrier, and a number of other factors. Garages or other buildings may be used to shield dwelling units and outdoor living areas from traffic noise. In addition to site design techniques, noise insulation can be accomplished through proper design of buildings. Nearby noise generators should be recognized in determining the location of doors, windows and vent openings. Sound-rated windows (extra thick or multi-paned) and wall insulation are also effective.

However, none of these noise mitigation measures can realize their full potential unless care is taken in actual construction: doors and windows fitted properly, openings sealed, joints caulked, plumbing adequately insulated from structural members, and sound-rated doors and windows will have little effect Resolution No. 2026-XX Page 205 of 330
701
if left open. This may require installation of air conditioning for adequate ventilation.

Costa Mesa City CouncilSeptember 15, 2026

Costa Mesa City Council
September 15, 2026