Despite objections, Costa Mesa planning commissioners advance Fairview housing plan

To the dismay of Costa Mesans opposed to seeing up to 4,000 residential units built at Fairview Developmental Center, and with support from housing advocates, planning commissioners this week recommended a land-use plan for the state-owned site.

Monday’s 4-2 vote moves the city’s draft-specific plan to the Costa Mesa City Council, where it could be adopted during a Sept. 15 meeting.

The plan establishes a unique zoning designation for the property and lays the groundwork for potential redevelopment of 80 acres by a state-selected master developer who will then have to apply for permits and negotiate with the city once an actual building plan has been created.

Although full buildout of the Harbor Boulevard parcel will likely take up to 20 years to complete, city staff and officials have logged more than two years of preparation, gathering public input, analyzing the potential environmental and traffic impacts and drafting guidelines for everything from building heights and setbacks to housing density and open space.

During that review period, the proposed number of units on the property has risen from 2,300 identified in the city’s housing element — with 40% earmarked for low- and very low-income occupants — to 4,000, a figure that could house more than 10,000 residents.

City planners reported in 2025 that at least 3,450 units would have to be built for the project to be economically feasible for a builder, while still incorporating affordability.

But the bump in units, and its resultant consequences, has many calling for major edits to the draft Fairview Developmental Center Specific Plan.

A project comprising more than 2,300 homes requires a secondary access road. While the city initially considered Merrimac Way to the north, a long-term lease for state-owned disability housing designates the road as private through the current agreement, which runs through 2036.

City planners envision an access road extending from Shelley Circle at the south of the property to a point on Harbor Boulevard below the main entrance at Fair Drive. Such a move would require the reconfiguration of three holes at the city-owned Costa Mesa Country Club golf course.

During more than an hour of public comments Monday, residents expressed concerns about density, the concentration of low-income units and traffic impacts on surrounding city streets and already crowded intersections.

Some criticized environmental findings that determined certain impacts could not be mitigated, while others urged the planning commission not to alter play at the club’s highly popular Mesa Linda course.

“Mesa Linda is not just a patch of green grass, it’s the absolute lifeblood of junior golf in this area,” said Newport-Mesa Unified golf coach Scott Tarnow. “If this access road cuts through the course, our junior golfers will have zero alternatives to practice or play their matches. Let’s find a solution that allows our city to grow without sacrificing the future of our youth.”

Those in favor of bringing more housing opportunities into the city pointed to skyrocketing rents and the need to provide affordable homes for service workers, teachers and other professionals who earn below Costa Mesa’s median household income, $111,500, and cannot afford to live in town.

Resident Jenn Tanaka, who shares musings on Costa Mesa affairs on the blog Goat Hill Rodeo, advised planning commissioners with qualms about the specific plan to consider taking a pause and perhaps encourage the city to revisit affordability levels so a less-dense project might still pencil out for an eventual developer, or solve the golf course conundrum sooner than later.

“Every analysis is telling you we cannot serve 4,000 units in this location with significant reconfiguration on roads and/or upending one of our central community assets,” she said via Zoom. “Maybe we need to reconsider what the capacity really is. Maybe it simply cannot live up to what we wanted at a price we can pay.

“If that’s the case, it would be much better to come to terms with that now, rather than later.”

Commissioner Angely Andrade Vallarta made a motion to recommend the specific plan to the council.

But colleague Rob Dickson, who along with Vice Chair Jon Zich has criticized the plan as being unrealistic and unresponsive to the community’s desires, put forth a substitute motion seeking to reengage with the state over affordability levels and work more on traffic impacts.

Zich supported the alternative, which found no other backers. The commission supported Andrade Vallarta’s motion 4-2, with Zich and Dickson opposed. Commissioner Johnny Rojas was absent.