Costa Mesa planning commission approves Priceless Pets kennel at East 16th Street amid noise and parking concerns

On July 28, 2025, the Costa Mesa Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit PCUP-25-0007 to allow Priceless Pets to operate an animal kenneling facility with ancillary veterinary services at 126 East 16th Street, by a 6-0 vote.

The commission approved the permit after staff described the proposed operations and neighbors raised concerns about noise, odor and parking. The permit allows the business to operate Tuesday through Sunday from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m., occupy a 6,480-square-foot portion of an existing 18,265-square-foot industrial site, and use a 1,586-square-foot enclosed outdoor play area. Staff’s recommended conditions of approval — and a commission amendment adopted at the meeting — include limiting outdoor use to two animals at a time, requiring building wall soundproofing, and a requirement that the operator “institute whatever security and operational measures, including sound attenuation, are necessary” to preserve quiet enjoyment for surrounding properties.

Why this matters: Priceless Pets holds a contract with the city to provide animal-control intake and veterinary care for rescued animals. The city’s stated need for a separate kennel facility and the operator’s contract were central to commissioners’ deliberations, while nearby residents and adjacent businesses urged stronger noise protections and further study before approval.

Staff presentation and proposal Jeffrey Raimondo, assistant planner with the Economic and Development Services Department, told commissioners that Priceless Pets would occupy an existing industrial building near Newport Boulevard and Seventeenth Street. Raimondo said the tenant would staff the site with three to four employees, maintain reception and office rooms, and store a mobile veterinary unit onsite. As shown in staff materials, the interior plan indicated a maximum internal capacity of up to 50 animals; staff also said the outdoor play area would be enclosed by existing building walls and an eight-foot metal fence and limited to two animals at a time during business hours. Raimondo said staff received emails opposing the project from residents of the Seabreeze Mobile Home Park and from the adjacent tenant, Barn Life Recovery, raising noise and odor concerns. He recommended the commission find the project exempt from CEQA under a Class 1 exemption and approve the CUP with conditions.

Operations, parking and state law Raimondo and other staff noted the site is zoned MG (general industrial) and lies within the corridor the city has mapped as subject to Assembly Bill 2097 (referred to in staff materials at the hearing as “AB 2097”), which can limit local parking requirements where properties are within defined transit priority areas. As a result, staff said the project is not subject to a minimum parking requirement; the plan shows seven shared parking spaces for the site. Commissioners pressed staff on how the AB 2097 determination was made; Raimondo and public-works staff said an internal GIS layer and collaboration between departments identified the site as falling within the state-defined area.

Neighbor and business concerns Several neighbors and nearby business owners spoke against the project. Matthew Carver, owner of Barn Life Recovery (the tenant adjacent to the proposed kennel), said his facility provides counseling and meditation services and that “a quiet environment is crucial.” Steve Schwimer, representing Sea Breeze Mobile Home Park (about 75 feet from the proposed play yard), told the commission he had gathered more than 25 signatures from park residents opposing the kennel. Schwimer asked for quantitative evidence — an acoustic study or post-construction decibel testing — and said staff’s soundproofing condition was vague because it listed no specific STC (sound transmission class) targets, no roof or door treatments, and no requirement for post‑construction testing.

Operator response Lisa Price, executive director of Priceless Pets, told the commission she had read and agreed with staff’s conditions and said the organization has operated multiple Southern California facilities for years. Price said she had sought a facility for more than three years and that prior approval for another location in November 2024 failed due to landlord issues rather than city action. She described mitigation measures used at other warehouses — wall attenuation panels, reorganized kennel placement, interior barn doors to block visual triggers for barking and other operational steps — and said the proposed site would not provide public adoptions or commercial boarding; it would function primarily as a shelter/intake and veterinary site for the city contract. Price also said the organization’s typical on‑site dog count under the contract has been far lower than the plan’s theoretical maximum, and she characterized the operator’s average load as “no more than, say, 12 dogs at any moment” in practice.

CEQA and enforcement Staff recommended, and the commission agreed, that the project is exempt from CEQA under a Class 1 exemption for existing facilities after finding no unusual circumstances that would make the exemption inapplicable. Commissioners asked how noise complaints and other operational changes would be handled. Director Tai and Raimondo said the conditions allow the director to review and require modifications to operations; planning staff and code enforcement would handle complaints and could require additional mitigation or bring the CUP back to the commission if conditions were violated.

Commission action and conditions Commissioner Michael Dixon moved to approve the CEQA finding and CUP, amending condition number 8 to add the phrase “including sound attenuation” to the list of measures the operator must institute to preserve quiet enjoyment. Commissioner Andrade seconded. The commission voted 6-0 to approve the permit (yes: Harlan, Zick, Rojas, Andrade, Dixon, Martinez; Klipak absent). The approval includes the staff conditions noted above: hours of operation (Tuesday–Sunday, 10 a.m.–6 p.m.), outdoor play area limited to two animals at a time during business hours, required soundproofing of building walls, ongoing maintenance and waste removal protocols, and director authority to review operational changes.

Appeal and next steps The decision is final unless appealed to the City Council within seven days of the decision. The city and the operator will be responsible for enforcing the CUP conditions; neighbors may pursue code‑enforcement complaints if they believe conditions are not met.

Votes at a glance - Conditional Use Permit PCUP‑25‑0007 (Priceless Pets, 126 E. 16th St.): Approved 6-0. Motion by Commissioner Dixon; second by Commissioner Andrade. Conditions include limiting outdoor play to two animals at a time, required building wall soundproofing, and an amendment adding “including sound attenuation” to the operational measures required under condition 8.

(For appeals and procedural deadlines: the commission noted appeals must be filed with the city council clerk within seven days of the July 28 decision.)