🏛️ COSTA MESA CITY COUNCIL MEETING PREVIEW: Tuesday, October 6, 2026
Fairview Developmental Center Specific Plan is back, and City Council to give direction on Ohio House Appeal
🏛️ The Costa Mesa City Council meets next Tuesday, October 6, 2026. Several items on the agenda may add to the length of the meeting, so I don’t expect it to be a short one.
📅 Date & Time: Tuesday, October 6, 2026, at 6:00 p.m.
🔒 Closed Session begins at 4:00 p.m.
📍 Location: City Council Chambers, 77 Fair Drive
📄 Agenda: Can be found here.
🔒CLOSED SESSION: Six items are scheduled for discussion:
Existing litigation: Five cases are on the Agenda:
Three involving The Ohio House, LLC, or its owners (See Public Hearing No. 1 below for more information on why these cases just might go away)
One with Disability Rights California
One with the California Attorney General and the Housing and Community Development. The deadline for the City to answer the Petition for Writ of Mandate was extended to October 23 by the State because “The Parties have engaged in initial settlement discussions to determine if the dispute can be resolved and wish to continue further discussion.”
Real property negotiations involving the property located at 3303 Hyland, which is the address for Ferguson Home, which took over the old Pirch store in SOCO. Again, the agenda does not explain why the City is interested in the property.
🏛️ REGULAR SESSION: The meeting begins with a proclamation about Walktober 2026. Some cities organize walking events and step challenges for the month, but I haven’t heard of anything for Costa Mesa.
🎤PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is the time for YOU to comment for THREE FREE minutes on ANYTHING that is not on the agenda.
📌 IMPORTANT! WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS AND VISUAL PRESENTATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED BY NOON TO BE SCREENED AND PUBLISHED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
🗂️CONSENT CALENDAR: Most consent items are routine, but these warrant a closer look:
Item 2, Reading Folder. These are claims filed against the City. On the list of people filing claims is Carol Molina. Is this the former Finance Director?
Item 3, Warrant Resolution. This item includes three significant payments:
$144,000.00 to Westminster Adoption Group and Service (WAGS) for shelter services. This appears to be for July through September. This is more than what the City was paying the former shelter operator. I have heard that some of the animals are being housed outdoors, which in this heat, isn’t good. I’m not sure WAGS was the best solution.
$22,759.17 to 24 Carrots, for catering of the ArtVenture opening, which seems a bit expensive for hors d'oeuvres, considering it was a cash bar.
$113,072.71, which is a combined total paid to Jones Mayer and the Atkinson Andelson law firm. What is missing is a payment to the expensive Everett Dorey firm for its work on the State’s lawsuit against the City.
Item 5, Final Map For Tract No. 19334 at 3150 Bear Street. Staff recommends approval of the Final Tract Map and authorization for its execution by the City Engineer and City Clerk. Although the project does not create separate lots, the condominium form of ownership requires preparation, review, and approval of a Final Tract Map under the Subdivision Map Act.
City approval is necessary because the map establishes and dedicates areas for public use and maintenance, including streets, sidewalks, utility easements, and drainage facilities. The map is also based on a detailed field survey prepared and certified by a licensed land surveyor or registered civil engineer, and the City must verify that it complies with all applicable legal, mapping, and engineering requirements.
Approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map are critical steps in the development process. The map must be recorded with the County Recorder’s Office before individual condominium units can be sold, leased, or financed. The County Recorder will not accept the map for recordation unless it has been executed by the appropriate City officials, confirming that all subdivision and mapping requirements have been satisfied.
Item 9, Resolution Authorizing Application For Funds Under OCTA for an Orange County Enhanced Mobility For Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Grant Program. Staff is requesting authorization to apply for this grant for $448,800.00, and to approve a 20% matching city contribution, not to exceed $89,760.00, if the grant is awarded for the period July 2027 to June 2029. The Senior Mobility Program currently provides low-cost curb-to-curb transportation Monday–Friday for Costa Mesa residents aged 60 and older, covering medical and non-medical trips to surrounding cities, and non-medical rides within Costa Mesa. Not pursuing the grant would limit the program’s service capacity.
📑PUBLIC HEARINGS: There is only one item, but it may be the most interesting of the evening:
1. Appeal Of Planning Commission Decision to Uphold Denial of Reasonable Accommodation Request for Sober Living Home Operated by The Ohio House. Staff recommends that the City Council hold a hearing and remand the matter to the Community Development Director for reconsideration of the reasonable accommodation request. The purpose of the remand is to allow consideration of anticipated amendments to the City's reasonable accommodation procedures in response to recent changes in state law.
As noted in the Agenda Report, revisions to the Costa Mesa Municipal Code (CMMC) are necessary to align with California Code of Regulations Sections 12176 through 12181. The report states:
"Although the City's Reasonable Accommodation provisions were partially revised earlier this year, those changes in state law have not yet been fully incorporated into the CMMC, as staff learned in discussions with HCD and the Civil Rights Division. Staff is in the process of preparing amendments to the Reasonable Accommodation provisions to address some of these changes."
Staff further recommends scheduling a follow-up public hearing on October 20, 2026, to reconsider the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application following the determination on the reasonable accommodation request.
Background and Legal Context: Ohio House has operated a sober living facility at 115 E. Wilson St. since 2012, housing up to 45 adults in recovery, along with resident managers. Under the City's zoning regulations, group homes with seven or more residents require a Conditional Use Permit and must maintain a minimum separation of 650 feet from other similar facilities.
The Ohio House is located approximately 550 feet from another sober living home, which has resulted in the denial of previous CUP and reasonable accommodation requests. Those denials have been challenged through multiple administrative, state, and federal proceedings, with prior decisions generally upholding the City's position that the regulations did not constitute unlawful discrimination and did not require the requested accommodation.
The property consists of five residential units with four bedrooms each and currently houses between 40 and 45 residents. This level of occupancy exceeds both HUD and local overcrowding standards, resulting in an average of approximately 1.3 to 1.5 persons per bedroom.
Recent Developments: Ohio House has submitted renewed requests for reasonable accommodation, citing recent changes in state law and housing policy. The requests seek, among other things, flexibility from the City's "single housekeeping unit" requirement and relief from the 650-foot separation standard to allow continued operation at the site.
The City has maintained that reducing the separation requirement would fundamentally alter its zoning framework and that the facility does not meet the City's definition of a single housekeeping unit.
Planning Commission Action and Appeal: The Planning Commission upheld the denial of both the reasonable accommodation request and the CUP application, emphasizing that its decision was based on established zoning and land use standards rather than the facility's recovery-oriented mission. Ohio House and several residents subsequently appealed those decisions, arguing that state housing laws, fair housing protections, and recent policy changes warrant a different outcome.
The Staff recommendation before the Council would not approve or deny the requested accommodation at this time. Instead, it would allow the City to first update its procedures and policies to ensure consistency with evolving state regulations before making a final determination on the Ohio House applications. This approach is intended to provide greater legal clarity while ensuring that the City's review process remains aligned with current state requirements.
🕰️OLD BUSINESS: One item here:
1. Adoption of Fairview Developmental Center Specific Plan (FDCSP), Related General Plan and Zoning Amendments, and Certification of Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This item is the second reading of the ordinance associated with the Fairview Developmental Center Specific Plan (FDCSP). Unless the City Council directs additional modifications, this action will finalize adoption of the ordinance.
Ordinance Adoption and Project Scope: Ordinance No. 2026-08 adopts the FDCSP, amends applicable zoning regulations, and updates the City's zoning map for the approximately 110-acre Fairview Developmental Center site located at 2501 Harbor Boulevard.
Of the total site area:
Approximately 15 acres will remain under State ownership for the Southern Regional Emergency Operations Center and are not subject to the Specific Plan.
Approximately 15 acres are reserved by the California Department of Developmental Services for future housing similar to Harbor Village Apartments.
Approximately 80 acres are available for redevelopment under the FDCSP.
City Council Revisions Adopted on September 15, 2026: At its September 15 meeting, the City Council directed several substantive modifications to the FDCSP, including:
Reducing the maximum residential development capacity from 4,000 units to 2,300 units, while maintaining the proposed affordable housing requirements.
Increasing the minimum open space requirement from 14 acres to 25 acres.
Increasing the minimum required non-residential development area from 10,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet.
Requiring updated traffic and transportation analysis as part of future development review.
Incorporating 22 non-substantive text revisions, including clarifications related to fruit trees, landscaping, and open space provisions.
Directing continued discussions with State agencies regarding public access opportunities and potential reductions in site remediation costs.
Implementation and Technical Updates: Additional implementation measures incorporated into the plan include:
Provisions for a potential secondary access road if future development studies determine one is necessary, along with procedures for evaluating its location and design.
New standards requiring lighting studies for proposed sports field lighting.
Updated application review processes and amendment procedures for future modifications to the Specific Plan.
Environmental Review: The City Council previously certified the EIR and approved the associated Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, consistent with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Fiscal Considerations: The City received approximately $3.5 million in State grant funding to support planning efforts associated with the site. Approximately $400,000 remains available for eligible project-related expenses.
Adopting the FDCSP is not expected to have a direct fiscal impact on the City's budget at this time.
Overall, this ordinance establishes the regulatory framework for the future redevelopment of the Fairview Developmental Center property and implements the City Council's policy direction to reduce residential density, expand open space, strengthen development standards, and preserve flexibility for future site planning.
🆕NEW BUSINESS: There are four items:
1. Review of Conceptual Design for Open Parcel Adjacent to Shalimar Park. Staff requests that the City Council review and approve the conceptual design for improvements to the vacant parcel adjacent to Shalimar Park. The property was acquired by the City to expand the park and increase recreational opportunities, open space, and community amenities for nearby residents.
Community Outreach and Public Input: To help shape the design, the City conducted multiple community outreach events and surveys, with approximately 100 participants attending each event and nearly 1,300 votes collected overall.
Residents identified a variety of desired amenities, including sports courts, open lawn areas, outdoor fitness equipment, a community center, shaded seating, and enhanced landscaping. Outreach efforts included bilingual materials and targeted engagement to ensure broad community participation.
Concept Design Alternatives: Two primary concepts were presented for consideration:
Option 1: Multi-use sports court, outdoor fitness equipment, and open grass areas.
Option 2: Outdoor fitness equipment, open grass areas, and a 2,100-square-foot community center with event space and a kitchen.
Community feedback showed strong support for incorporating a community center into the project. However, funding is not currently available to construct the facility as part of the initial phase.
Recommended Phased Approach: To balance community priorities with available funding, staff recommends a two-phase implementation strategy:
Phase 1: Construction of outdoor recreational amenities and park improvements.
Phase 2: Development of a community center when future funding sources or grant opportunities become available.
Proposed Park Improvements: The preferred conceptual design includes:
A multi-use sports court
A multi-use soccer lawn
Outdoor fitness equipment
Shaded picnic and gathering areas
Canopy trees and expanded landscaping
A bioswale for stormwater management and sustainability
Additional park and beautification improvements
Staff Recommendation: The Parks and Community Services Commission endorsed the phased design approach and recommended maintaining flexibility for future implementation of the community center. Staff similarly recommends approval of the conceptual design and use of available project funds to advance Phase 1 improvements, while pursuing future grants and other funding sources for Phase 2.
This phased approach allows the City to deliver immediate park and recreational enhancements to the neighborhood while preserving the opportunity to add a community center in the future, consistent with community feedback and long-term park goals.
2. Resolution Establishing Speed Limits in School Zones. Staff is requesting approval of a reduction in school zone speed limits to 20 mph, in line with California Assembly Bill 382 (AB 382), the Vehicle Code, and traffic control guidelines.
Background and Legislative Context: AB 382, effective January 1, 2031, sets a standard 20 mph school zone speed limit statewide, but cities can adopt this change earlier by resolution. Previously, the default was 25 mph; under certain conditions, 15 mph was permitted if adopted locally. School zones are defined as areas within 500 feet of a school boundary.
Current and Proposed Changes: Costa Mesa currently uses 25 mph school speed limits, often matching nearby residential streets, providing little added safety impact. The resolution would immediately lower the speed limit to 20 mph in residential areas near schools with a 25 mph limit. Major streets with higher speed limits will retain the 25 mph limit near schools until at least 2031 or until further local action. Allows for further reductions to 15 mph in certain residential school zones based on additional criteria and police department input.
Safety and Community Goals: Lower speed limits are intended to reduce crashes and enhance safety for students and parents. The resolution supports city goals for public safety, aligns with transportation planning, and drafts for the Safe Routes to School Action Plan.
Implementation: City staff will notify schools and the community, using digital and print media and social posts. Police will lead public education and enforcement for the new limits. Signage changes will be implemented on eligible streets after adoption.
Alternatives: The Council could delay and wait until the statewide mandate in 2031, but staff recommends earlier adoption for improved safety.
Funding: Funding for new signs is available in the current budget.
3. Fair Drive Circulation Improvements- “Fair Drive For All.” Staff is requesting City Council approval of a Professional Services Agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to provide engineering design services for the Fair Drive for All project. Following a competitive selection process, Kimley-Horn was identified as the most qualified firm based on its technical approach, project understanding, and relevant experience.
The proposed agreement has a term of up to three years, with the option for two additional one-year extensions. The contract includes:
Base contract amount: $863,000
Contingency (10%): $86,300
Total contract authority not to exceed: $949,300
Funding: Project funding is proposed from the following sources:
· Federal Grants Fund (Fund 230): $679,000
· Local matching funds: $270,300 from the FY 2026-27 Capital
Improvement Program, utilizing Measure M2 Fairshare funds (Fund 416) and the Traffic Impact Fee Fund (Fund 214)
Project Purpose and Scope: The Fair Drive for All project is intended to improve safety, accessibility, and mobility along the Fair Drive corridor for all modes of travel, including motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. The potential improvements would run from Newport Boulevard to the new Fairview Developmental Center Specific Plan area (FDCSP), and include:
Roadway resurfacing and pavement improvements
Raised center medians
Intersection enhancements
Improved pedestrian crossings and crosswalks
New or upgraded bicycle facilities, including cycle tracks west of Fairview Road
Transit stop improvements
Traffic signal upgrades and operational enhancements
The Project alternatives would have to account for future FDCSP and the future South Emergency Operations Center located west of Harbor Boulevard.
Community Engagement and Planning: The design process will include extensive community outreach, stakeholder engagement, alternatives analysis, environmental review, and preparation of final construction-ready plans. Completion of these efforts will position the City to pursue future state and federal construction funding opportunities.
A key focus of the project will be addressing long-standing community concerns regarding vehicle speeds and pedestrian safety along Fair Drive. Particular attention will be given to the Fair Drive and Fordham Drive intersection, where residents have identified challenges crossing the roadway. Potential solutions to be evaluated include enhanced pedestrian crossing treatments, a pedestrian signal, or other traffic-calming measures such as a roundabout.
4. Purchase Of Docking Stations and Drone for Police Department UAS Program. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the purchase of three drone docking stations and one Skydio X-10 drone from Axon Enterprise, Inc. to expand the Costa Mesa Police Department's Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) program and enhance public safety operations throughout Costa Mesa.
Cost and Funding: The proposed agreement has a two-year term with a total cost of $292,144.59, along with a contingency of $7,855.41, for a total authorization not to exceed $300,000.
The purchase will be fully funded through an Organized Retail Theft Prevention Grant from the State Grants Fund (Fund 231) and does not require the use of General Fund dollars.
Background: The Police Department launched its UAS program in 2019 to support public safety operations, including search and rescue missions, perimeter containment, and major incident response. The program currently includes 24 FAA-certified drone pilots operating a fleet of seven drones. During Fiscal Year 2025-26, drones were deployed 459 times in support of law enforcement and emergency response activities.
Pilot Program Results: In 2025, the Department conducted a three-week pilot program with Skydio's autonomous drone technology. The pilot demonstrated the ability of drones to respond directly to live calls for service, quickly providing aerial intelligence to responding personnel.
During the pilot, 24 of 63 calls for service were resolved without requiring an in-person officer response, demonstrating the technology's potential to improve operational efficiency while enhancing officer safety and situational awareness. The technology proved particularly valuable during critical incidents and rapidly evolving situations.
Expansion Plan and Real-Time Information Center Integration: The next phase of the UAS program would establish a Drone as First Responder (DFR) capability through the installation of three strategically located drone docking stations throughout the city. The system is expected to achieve average drone response times of approximately two minutes, allowing aerial assessment of incidents before officers arrive on scene.
The program will be managed through the City's planned Real-Time Information Center (RTIC), which is expected to be operational by late 2027 with substantial federal funding support. The RTIC will integrate drone operations with other real-time public safety technologies, improving coordination among police, fire, and other City departments.
Compliance and Oversight: The proposed equipment complies with both NDAA cybersecurity requirements and California AB 481 standards governing law enforcement technology. Drone deployments would be limited to approved calls for service and public safety incidents and would not be used for routine or discretionary surveillance.
To ensure transparency, the Department will continue providing public access to drone activity information through an online reporting portal. All video and data will be stored within Axon's CJIS-compliant evidence management system, which includes encrypted storage, role-based access controls, and comprehensive audit tracking.
Fiscal and Operational Considerations: Failure to approve the purchase would result in the loss of available grant funding and limit the Department's ability to expand its drone program and deploy emerging Drone as First Responder capabilities. According to staff, the proposed investment would improve emergency response times, increase situational awareness during critical incidents, enhance officer and public safety, and further advance the City Council's public safety objectives.
Given the abuse by officers of the Flock system, how safe do we feel about this program?
🎤PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Do not forget! You get three FREE minutes of public comment on anything not on the Agenda at the beginning of the meeting, and three FREE minutes on any of the agendized items.
📌 IMPORTANT! WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS AND VISUAL PRESENTATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED BY NOON TO BE REVIEWED AND PUBLISHED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
Comments