Presentation and Supplemental Material — Costa Mesa City Council, September 15, 2026

City Council Hearing
September 15, 2026

Overview
 FDC Specific Plan background
 Community visioning efforts and work to date
 Hearing Draft Specific Plan Contents and Updates
 Maximum Units in the FDCSP, Traffic Analysis & Other updates  Environmental Analysis
 Next Steps
 Recommendation
Background

4 Actions by City and State
4 EOC
2015 Senate Bill 82 allows up to 20 acres of the FDC site for the developmentally disabled
2016 State adopted FDC Closure Plan
2022 Senate Bill 188 approved disposition of the
property
State and City Agreement for City led planning
effort
2023 Senate Bill 138 authorizes Department of
Developmental Services (DDS) to construct up to 3
complex needs homes
State pursued a 15-acre Emergency Operations
Center (EOC)
City starts preparing Specific Plan and EIR
2026 Department of General Services (DGS) initiated
disposition process for the selection of a Master
Developer
5 State and City Agreement
The Agreement includes the following deliverables:
 Robust Community Engagement Strategy (and implementation thereof);  Comprehensive Conditions Report on the property and its setting;  Economic Market Demand Report;
 Water Supply Assessment and coordination among Water Agencies;  Project Conceptual Alternatives & a Preferred Plan Framework;  Draft Specific Plan with Implementation Strategies;
 Public Draft Initial Study and Notice of Preparation, if required;  Public Draft Environmental Impact Report;
 Draft Final Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program;  Final Draft Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report; and  Public hearings for EIR certification and Specific Plan adoption, including any General Plan and Zoning amendments identified as necessary for consistency. 6  DGS 2021 Infrastructure Assessment (2,500 units / assumes 500 affordable).
 City goal in 2021-2029 Housing Element | Program 3B
 Very Low-Income Units – 575
 Low Income Units – 345
 Moderate Income Units – 690
 Above Moderate-Income (Market Rate) Units – 690
 Total – 2,300 units minimum
 40% Low and Very Low
 2025 Financial Feasibility Analysis (3,450 units break even)  DGS July 2026 letter provides overall support for 4,000 units  City and State agree that housing shall be a priority use with supporting uses (commercial, open space, sports field, etc.) FDC Housing Goals

7 2026 Affordable Income Levels
Household
Size
15% AMI
(Acutely Low)
30% AMI
(Extremely
Low)
50% AMI
(Very Low)
80% AMI
(Low)
120% AMI
(Moderate)
1 $14,550 $39,100 $65,150 $104,200 $116,400
2 $16,650 $44,700 $74,450 $119,100 $133,050
3 $18,700 $50,300 $83,750 $134,000 $149,650
4 $20,800 $55,850 $93,050 $148,850 $166,300
5 $22,450 $60,350 $100,500 $160,800 $179,600
6 $24,150 $64,800 $107,950 $172,700 $192,900
7 $25,800 $69,300 $115,400 $184,600 $206,200
8 $27,450 $73,750 $122,850 $196,500 $219,500
Effective: 6/23/2026 - Orange County Median Income for Household Size of Four: $138,600 8 2026 Affordable Housing Costs - Rent
Affordable Housing Costs for Renters
Unit Size
Acutely Low
H&S Code
§50053(b)(1)(A)
Extremely Low
H&S Code
§50053(b)(2)
Very Low
H&S Code
§50053(b)(3)
Low
H&S Code
§50053(b)(4)
Moderate
H&S Code
§50053(b)(5)
Studio $364 $728 $1,213 $1,455 $2,668
1-Bedroom $416 $832 $1,386 $1,663 $3,049
2-Bedroom $468 $936 $1,559 $1,871 $3,430
3-Bedroom $520 $1,040 $1,733 $2,079 $3,812
4-Bedroom $561 $1,123 $1,871 $2,245 $4,116
5-Bedroom $603 $1,206 $2,010 $2,412 $4,421
For projects with no federal assistance, household size is set at number of bedrooms in unit plus one. 9 2,300 Units
(Previously Concept 1)
3,450 Units
(Previously Concept 2)
4,000 Units
(Previously Concept 3)
Total project development cost (excludes
Financing) $578,100,000 $959,100,000 $1,213,200,000
Cash Flow Sums with Financing and Cost/Revenue Escalation Total Cash Inflow $810,300,000 $2,148,000,000 $2,905,000,000 Total Cash Outflow (includes Financing) ($962,700,000) ($1,779,000,000) ($2,235,000,000) Total Net Cash Flow ($152,360,000) $369,100,000 $669,900,000 Financial Feasibility Metrics
Annual Internal Rate of Return (IRR)* (20.0%) 14.6% 16.7% Feasibility Surplus/(Gap) ($233 million) ($5.02 million) $26.7 million Financial Feasibility Analysis
*Industry standard is to achieve at least a 15% IRR
10 FDC Specific Plan Area
10  Total Site Area = 110 acres
 SREOC = 15 acres
 Specific Plan Area = 95 acres
 DDS = 15 acres
 Master Developer = 80 acres for:
 Housing
 Open Space and Parks
 Supporting Retail/Non-residential
FDCSP and SREOC Site Boundaries
Community Outreach

12 Phase 1: Community
Visioning
Phase 2: Selecting
a Preferred Plan
Phase 4:

Approving the
Plan
Phase 5:

Implementing the
Plan
• Community workshops
1, 2 & 3
• Creating the vision and
guiding principles
• Reviewing existing
conditions
• Exploring the land use
alternatives
• Community Workshop
No. 4 & survey
• Draft land use and
circulation
alternatives
• Meetings with PC (3) &
CC (1) to review and
discuss alternatives
• Directed Study of a
Land Use Plan – up to
4,000 units
• Townhall
• Public can review and
comment on the drafts
• City’s Planning
Commission provides
input on the drafts
• City Council approves
and finalizes drafts and
certifies the EIR
Master Developer
selected by the State, who
then takes the lead:
• Begins to build out
the area
• Must comply with
plan created through
this process
• Coordinates with the
City to obtain
necessary permits
Fall 2023 to 2024 2024 to Summer 2025 2026 2026 and Beyond Project Process and Progress
Phase 3: Drafting
the Specific plan
• Community Workshop
No. 5
Draft the Specific Plan
• Land use, open
space, design, &
circulation plans
Draft the Environmental
Impact Report (EIR)
• Air quality, noise,
traffic, etc. analyses
Late 2025 to 2026
We are here!
13  Community Workshop 1 – Project Kick-off
 Community Workshop 2 – Vision and Guiding Principles
 Community Workshop 3 – Open House to Progress
 Community Workshop 4 – Draft Land Use Concepts
 Community Workshop 5 – Review the Draft FDCSP
 NOP Scoping Meeting
 FDCSP Draft to Decision – Review the Draft FDCSP & Answer Questions
 Stakeholder Engagement with Golf Course Groups
 Planning Commission/City Council Meetings (8)
 Project Website, Social Media, Mailers, Flyers
 Public Review Draft Specific Plan and EIR
Community Visioning

14 Public Review Draft
 Public review and
comments March 16 to
April 15, 2026
 3 Community Open
Houses

15 Community Input

16  Community Open Forum Q&A held on July 23, 2026
 Questions and discussions included the following
overall topics:
 FDC Specific Plan process and site evolution
 State coordination and questions regarding SREOC
operations
 Housing limits and affordable housing
 Open space requirements
 Traffic concerns, including secondary road access,
emergency access and internal neighborhood
traffic.

Community Meeting: From Draft to Decision

Hearing Draft
Specific Plan

18 Key Contents of the Draft FDC Specific Plan
Consists of eight chapters that
establish the following:
 History and vision for the area
 A land use plan
 Development and design standards
 A mobility plan
 An infrastructure plan
 Implementation, phasing, and financing
options

19 Ch. 1-2 History & Introduction
 Current Land use: Multi-Use
Center
 Current Zoning: Institutional
Recreational-Multi-Use
 Proposed Land Use and Zoning:

FDCSP , to be implemented by
the standards in the Specific
Plan
Figure 2-5: Proposed General Plan Land Use
20 Ch. 3 Vision & Guiding Principles
 The Vision for FDC focuses on:
 Diverse housing types and affordability
 Sustainable and high-quality design
 Welcoming, community-oriented environment
 Open space and active amenities
 Walkability, bike connectivity, and trail network
 Environmental stewardship and nature
integration in design
 Community-aligned redevelopment vision
21 Ch. 4 Draft Land Use Plan
 Designated land uses:
 Residential: 2,300 – 4,000 units
 Commercial: 10,000 – 35,000
sq.ft.
 Public Open space: Min. 14
acres
 Affordable Housing in the Plan
 Very Low-Income Units – 575
 Low Income Units – 345
 Moderate Income Units – 690
Figure 4-1: Conceptual Land Use Plan

22 Ch. 4 Land Use Plan
 Permitted uses
 Allows for variety of residential
types, community serving retail,
offices and events such as
farmers markets.
 Development Standards
 Sets specific standards for
buildings adjacent to the SREOC
and the Radio Tower.

23 How do development standards shape building form?
Taller buildings
allow more
density, or more
units, and create
more room for
open space
amenities
Open space requirements
create private amenities
like yards or balconies, and
public spaces such as plazas
and parks
Landscaping
requirements
improve streets
and sidewalks
with trees and
other plants
Setbacks regulate how a building
is situation on a site, and can
create yards for residential uses
or a better retail experience in
mixed-uses
24 Ch. 5 Mobility Plan
 Establishes
required
backbone
roadway system
(shown left) and
paseo.
 Other internal
elements are
flexible in where
they are located.

Figure 5-3: Backbone Roadway Network
Figure 5-2: Proposed Roadway Network
25 Traffic Analysis
 Level of Service (LOS) Traffic Analysis Conducted
 Understand congestion on City streets through
grading system (A through F)
 City's adopted minimum acceptable standard is
LOS D
 Analyzed 26 intersections (15 on Harbor Blvd.)
through traffic modeling
 Analysis Found:
 With the project (includes cumulative analysis
with Measure K rezoning) and intersection
improvements result in LOS D at Harbor Blvd.
and Fair Dr.

26 Secondary Access Road Alternatives Considered
26  Secondary access road determined
through traffic study, public safety,
and community input – required at
2,300 units.
 Suggested at the south end
connecting to Harbor.
 Alternative locations vetted (in red).
 State will not permit usage of
Merrimac for non-emergency
use.
 Secondary access road through
Mesa Linda Golf Course studied as
part of FDCSP and will be further
studied and finalized with a master
developer.

27 Ch. 6 Open Space Plan & Requirements
 Minimum 14-acres of publicly accessible
open space.
 Open Space requirements:
 Residential: 90 sq.ft. per unit
 Indoor/outdoor common areas, private
open space, and publicly accessible
private spaces like plazas.
 Commercial: 5,000 sq.ft.
 The requirement applies even when
commercial uses are developed as stand-
alone projects.
 Public: 4.26 acres per 1,000 people
 Can be met through land dedication, park
improvements, and in-lieu fees.

Figure 6-2: Proposed Open Space and Trails Plan
28 Ch. 7 Infrastructure Plan
 New infrastructure for all dry utilities is required.  Adequate water supply is available.
 Existing on-site water system to be replaced, connecting at Fair Dr.  On site sewer system to be replaced to accommodate buildout.  New public safety facilities are permitted and will be evaluated when the FDC Development Review Application is reviewed.
 A nexus study to develop a fee for improvements.
 School district confirmed capacity for anticipated future students. 29 Ch. 8 Administration and Implementation
 Establishes the FDC Development Review Application.
 Establishes a timeline and responsibility for implementation.  Interim requirements for construction such as fencing requirements, stormwater pollution prevention plan, construction staging plans, maintenance and security lighting requirements.
 Requires Transportation Demand Management measures to be submitted with an FDC Development Review Application.
 Outlines responsible parties for funding and long-term maintenance.  Nexus Study for project specific impact fees.
30 Ch. 8 – FDC Development Review Application
 Requires future Master Developer to provide details on the following:
 The location and size of Planning Areas
 Maximum number of units in each Planning Area
 Backbone infrastructure (roadway, utilities, etc.)
 Open space locations
 Proposed phasing plans
 Development projects
 Engage with the Community and City around any golf course redesign that will require City Council approval
 Affordable Housing Plan that details the following:
 Total number of affordable units
 Location, structure, size/bedroom count of units, and construction phasing  Tenancy of the units, income certification/screening, fair housing marketing plan, and monitoring Refinements to the FDCSP and
Consistency Updates

32 FDC Specific Plan Refinement
 March 2026 public comments resulted in the following
updates:
 Refinements to vision and guiding principles, and purpose statements.
 Refinements to phasing details and implementation
processes.
 City staff updates:
 Land Use classification updates consistent with ongoing City Zoning Code updates.
 Remove residential parking minimums consistent with City Council direction for Housing Element Sites.
 Master Developer to continue outreach for the secondary access road.

33 Planning Commission Revisions
 Updates throughout for typos and that pedestrian is mentioned first in a list.  Chapter 4 – Land Use & Urban Design
 Define Extremely Low-Income (FDCSP pg. 4-9).
 Update Table 4-3 to consolidate uses (FDCSP pgs. 4-11 to 4-13).  Chapter 5 - Mobility
 Incorporate flexibility for Merrimac Way in the event a new lease agreement allows access (FDCSP pg. 5-6).
 Update Figure 5-16 to add missing bus stops (FDCSP pg. 5-23) and mobility figures for typos.
 Add list of crosswalk features for pedestrian safety (FDCSP pg. 5-17).  Add reference to Green Building Code for bike parking (FDCSP pg. 5-25). 34 Planning Commission Revisions Continued
 Chapter 7 – Infrastructure & Public Services
 Update Fire topic to include Emergency Services (FDCSP pg. 7-13).  Chapter 8 – Administration & Implementation
 Update Table 8-4 Ownership column for clarification (FDCSP pg. 8-17). 35 Further FDCSP Staff Refinements
 Internal consistency updates in various Chapters
 Include reference to Vision and Guiding Principles in the purpose statements  Consistent phrasing for pedestrian "safety, comfort and convenience"  Community Development Department/Director references
 Chapter 5 – Mobility
 Clarifications for street furniture use in the right-of-way  Incorporate flexibility for final street sections if pedestrian and bicyclists are prioritized  Chapter 8 – Administration & Implementation
 Clarifications for application requirements around secondary access road  Affordable housing prioritization for first responders, public service employees, etc. 36 Other updates for internal consistency
 Land Use Map Updates
 Refer to the FDCSP and change SREOC
to compatible use and zone
 Zoning Map Updates
 Refer to the FDCSP and change SREOC to
compatible use and zone
Current CurrentProposed Proposed

37 Other updates for internal consistency
 General Plan Land Use Element Amendment
 Remove existing FDCSP land use designation of Multi-Use Center  Add Specific Plans category and include FDCSP
 Zoning Code Amendments
 Remove zoning designation of Institutional and Recreational Multi-use (I&R-MLT) throughout
 Add new Chapter XVIII titled "Specific Plans"
Environmental Analysis

39 CEQA Process
 Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Scoping
 NOP Public Review: October 29 - December 5, 2025 (30-days)  Public Scoping Meeting: November 17, 2025
 Draft EIR and Notice of Availability (NOA)
 Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIR Issued: May 14 to July 1, 2026.  Draft EIR and NOA posted to City’s website, Mesa Verde and Costa Mesa/Donald Dungan Libraries, and the State Clearinghouse.
 14 Comments (7 from agencies, 3 from organizations and 4 from individuals)  Comments focused on cumulative impacts, aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, hazards, hydrology and water quality, land use, noise, population and housing, public services, parks and recreation, transportation, tribal cultural resources, utilities and alternatives. 40 Key CEQA Findings
No Impact or Less than Significant
Impact
Significant Impacts that can be
Mitigated to Less than Significant
Impact
Significant and Unavoidable
Impacts
Aesthetics Geology and Soils Air Quality
Energy Hazards and Hazardous Materials Biological Resources Hydrology and Water Quality Noise Cultural Resources
Land Use and Planning Transportation Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population and Housing Tribal Cultural Resources --
Public Services -- --
Recreation -- --
Utilities and Service Systems -- --
41 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
 Air Quality
 Construction and long-term operation associated with the proposed project would generate emissions in exceedance of the South Coast Air Quality Management District ’s (AQMD) threshold criteria and cumulatively contribute to the South Coast Air Basin’s nonattainment designations.
 Biological Resources
 Construction and operation of the proposed project may have an impact on an unknown aquatic resource which is associated with the human-made freshwater pond that is concrete lined and supplied with irrigation lines on the Costa Mesa Country Club golf course.
 Cultural Resources
 Removal of structures and outdoor features that contribute to the Historic District associated with the FDC  Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG)
 Operation of the proposed project would generate a cumulatively considerable increase in GHG emissions that would exceed the South Coast AQMD Working Group bright-line threshold. 42 Alternatives Studied in the Draft EIR
 The alternatives evaluated in the Draft EIR were selected in part for their potential to reduce or avoid the project’s significant impacts.

Alternatives Considered but
Rejected
Alternatives Selected for Further
Analysis
Environmentally Superior
Alternative
Alterative Site Alternative 1: No Project/ No
Development
The Partial Adaptive Reuse of
Historic District Alternative
Reduced Density Below Housing
Element Alternative
Alternative 2: No Project
Alternative
Full Adaptive Reuse Alternative Alternative 3: Partial Adaptive Reuse of Historic District
Increased Parkland Alternative
No Secondary Access Point
43 Final EIR
 Final EIR Public Review (August 6-17, 2026)
 Posted to the City website, FDCSP website and State Clearinghouse  Agencies, organizations and individuals that commented on the Draft EIR were notified that the Final EIR was posted
 Final EIR Contents
 Includes responses to comment letters received on the Draft EIR  Contains revisions to the Draft EIR in response to comments from agencies, organizations, and the public as well as Planning Commission-directed changes to the FDCSP and EIR  Findings
 Revisions do not result in a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified environmental impact or result in a significant new environmental impact not previously disclosed in the Draft EIR.
44 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
 The Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (MMRP) serves as a
vehicle for monitoring and ensuring
implementation of mitigation measures
outlined in the EIR
 The MMRP identifies the
environmental factor, specific
mitigation measures, schedule, and
responsible monitor to ensure
compliance with all mitigation
measures

45 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations  Findings of Fact
 Summarizes the significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, describes how these impacts are to be mitigated, and discusses various alternatives to the proposed project, which were developed to reduce the remaining significant environmental impacts.  Statement of Overriding Considerations
 CEQA requires the City to weigh a project’s benefits against its unavoidable environmental risks before project approval.
 The proposed project would advance substantial public benefits, including housing production, mixed- income development, open space, mobility improvements, and redevelopment of an underutilized State property.
 Feasible mitigation measures have been adopted to avoid or substantially lessen environmental impacts where practicable; however, certain impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.

For Consideration

47 Financially
Feasible Unit
Alternatives
Alternatives consistent with
legislation, the Agreement with the
State and meets Housing Element
Criteria outlined by HCD.

Unit Count
Reduction
Options
Potential Trade-offs
3,800 units ~2 acres of ground
floor open space
3,500 units ~5 acres of ground
floor open space
48 2,300 Unit Alternative
 Consistent with Housing Element with 920 affordable lower-income units  Not financially feasible
 Does not meet the industry standard of 15% IRR
 Remediation and site preparation costs remain the same  Propel use of State density bonus law, waiving development standards  Requires secondary access road
 Not consistent with legislation or Agreement with State  Reducing Affordable Units Option
 Require Housing Element Amendment
 Significantly reduces (or eliminates) low/very-low buffer  Risk HCD Certification of Housing Element
Next Steps

50 Phase 1: Community
Visioning
Phase 2: Selecting
a Preferred Plan
Phase 4:

Approving the
Plan
Phase 5:

52 Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Adopt Resolution No. 2026-XX titled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, California, Certifying the Environmental Impact Report and Adopting the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Fairview Developmental Center Specific Plan Project;” and

2. Adopt Resolution No. 2026-XX titled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, California, Amending the Land Use Element of the General Plan and Update the Land Use Map to Change the Land Use Designation of the 110 Acre Fairview Developmental Center (FDC) Site Located at 2501 Harbor Boulevard from Multi-Use Center to Refer to the 95 Acre FDC Specific Plan (FDCSP) and Change the Remaining 15 Acres to Public/Institutional;” and

3. Introduce Ordinance No. 2026-XX titled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, California, Adopting the Fairview Developmental Center Specific Plan (FDCSP) and Amend Sections 13- 20, 13-28, 13-30, Chapter V, Article 7, and Add Chapter XVIII “Specific Plans” to Title 13 of the Zoning Code, and Amend the Zoning Map to Change the Zoning Designation of the 110 Acre Fairview Developmental Center (FDC) Site Located at 2501 Harbor Boulevard to Refer to the 95 Acre FDCSP and Change the Remaining 15 Acres to Institutional and Recreational (I&R).” Back-up Slides
54 RHNA CAPACITY AND BUFFER
Income Category Very Low Low Moderate Above
Moderate TOTAL
RHNA (2021-
2029) 2,919 1,798 2,088 4,959 11,760
Total Units
Towards RHNA 5,167 2,995 6,888 15,238
Total Capacity
over RHNA +454 +907 +1,929 +3,478
Buffer (10%) (43%) (39%) (30%)
55 State Density Bonus Law - Government Code Section 65915 et.

Seq.
 An increase in allowable density can be requested if deed-restricted affordable housing is provided  A minimum of five residential units are required to be eligible  Applies to for-sale or for-rent housing development projects  Incentive/Concession [Gov. Code Sec. 65915(d)]
 Limited number of incentives, depends on the percent affordable provided in a project  A financial cost savings for the housing development project (e.g. height)  City can deny an incentive if specific impact upon health and safety, and findings are made  Waiver [Gov. Code Sec. 65915(e)]
 Unlimited requests to modify development standards (e.g. setback, parking, private open space, etc.) if standard physically precludes development of affordable housing  City can deny a waiver (Health/Safety, California Register of Historic Places, or contrary to State or Federal Law)
 An applicant can opt to not increase density [Gov. Code Sec. 65915 (f)] 61 Ch. 6 Open Space Plan & Requirements
Illustrative example of how
development and open space
could occur in FDC plan area.

Recommendations for Text Edits - Reynolds
Chapter 2

1. Page 2-14 - Add “or as may be amended” at the end of the paragraph to incorporate future updates/amendments to relevant plans.

Chapter 4

2. Page 4-2, Objective 3 - add “for all ages and abilities”

3. Page 4-3, Figure 4-1 - Add note/footnote in figure that Merrimac Way has and will maintain sidewalks that can serve bike/walk access.

4. Page 4-5, Table 4-1 - Add footnote referencing the set aside requirement (from page 8-6, section 8.2.6.E) for households that live or work in Costa Mesa.

5. Page 4-6, Objectives - Add objective on shade: “Incorporate trees and shade elements to minimize heat impacts and provide a comfortable pedestrian environment.”

6. Page 4-10, lower figure - Replace with image that is consistent with FDCSP objectives and requirements (i.e., homes front open space not parking lot; trees on sidewalks/streets).

Chapter 5 - Mobility

7. Page 5-2, Objective 6: Add “ Design all streets for slow speeds to ensure safety and comfort of all road users and support an active pedestrian environment. ” Add “... narrow as possible and incorporating road calming treatments .”

8. Page 5-3, Add “Streets shall be designed to encourage slow speeds and foster a pedestrian friendly environment.”

9. Page 5-6 - Add language confirming that Merrimac Way allows bike/ped access on existing sidewalks.

10. Page 5-6 - Add reference requirement on Page 6-15 that states "Street trees shall be provided along all public and private streets"

11. Page 5-11 to 5-15 (Figure 5-6, 5-7, 5-8, 5-9, 5-10) - Add reference to shade tree requirements (e.g., developer can incorporate tree wells along parking lane to provide shade on pedestrian path)

12. Page 5-17 - Pedestrian pathways need to incorporate shade. Expand text: “.. this includes ample eigh-foot sidewalks, a central paseo, street trees and shade , and a separated … ”

13. CORRECTION: Page 5-21, Intersections - Current text states “two existing intersections with Harbor”. Change to “existing intersection and potential new intersection” Chapter 6 - Open Space, Landscaping & Public Art

14. Incorporate in appropriate place reference to these as potential amenities: community garden, dog run or dog park

15. Page 6-2, Objective 5 - expand to “...land area for open space and park amenities”

16. Page 6-2, Objective 7 - expand to “Direct noise and lighting impacts from from sports fields and other park amenities away from homes to … ”

17. CORRECTION : Page 6-2, Objective 11 - change requirement to 3:1 ratio (three new trees for each tree removed); update requirement in any other location for consistency

18. Page 6-7, Private open space - Replace “shall include fencing with” with “ when used, fencing shall have a maximum height of six feet ”

19. Page 6-8, Paseo, bullet 4 - expand to “lighting, shade, landscaping, and seating shall be provided … ”

20. Page 6-15, 6.3 - Allow fruit trees to be planted in public areas Chapter 7 - Infrastructure & Public Service s - stormwater, public services

21. Page 7-5, “Storm Drain” - Add “ The project should prioritize green stormwater infrastructure to capture and re-use water on site and minimize impacts to the citywide storm drain system. ”
Chapter 8

22. Add to Section 8.3.2, Requirements During Construction - Require that Master Developer maintain a public website with updates on development activity so public is aware of what is happening and what is coming; also who to call for any site issues (e.g., noise or other construction-related impacts).

Costa Mesa City CouncilSeptember 15, 2026

Costa Mesa City Council
September 15, 2026