16 (58)Date:1/13/2026 6:05:54 PM
From:"Stephanie Mercadante"
To:"Public Comment" publiccomment@anaheim.net
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Regarding the Need to Deny the Festival Development Project
Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachme nts unle ss you recognize the
sender and are expecting the message.
Councilmembers,
The Festival Development Project is not a routine zoning item. It is a decision that wi ll determine whether thi s C i ty protects its
residents or knowingly exposes them to preventable danger.
The Environmental Impact Report makes one fact impossible to ignore: this project site si ts i n an area wi th high wildfire
susceptibility, limited access routes, and emergency‑response capacity that is already stretched thin. Addi ng new
residential development here does not just increase risk — it permanently intensifies it.
This project would increase:
ignition sources from more people and activity
traffic congestion that will slow or block evacuation routes
demand on fire and emergency services already overextended
the number of residents exposed to fast‑moving wildfire conditions
And we know what that means. This community has lived through fires that move faster than anyone expects. We have seen how
quickly a spark becomes a wall of flame. When an EIR states that a project increases exposure to wildfire hazards, that i s
not a footnote — it is a direct warning.
This is not about being for or against development.
This is about public safety and legal responsibility.
The Festival Development Project:
increases fire danger
lacks adequate mitigation
exposes the City to significant legal liability
The EIR does not support approval.
The law does not support approval.
Public safety does not support approval.
The wildfire danger is only the beginning.
This rezoning does far more than allow housing on the old cinema footprint. It opens the door to residential development across
the entire 16 acres. This is not a single project — it is a permanent land‑use change.
Once approved, additional units could be built by right. If 24 Hour Fitness relocates or closes, the property owner could pursue
another 300 or more units without returning to the public, without a hearing, and wi thout any communi ty input. Toni ght is the last
time residents will have a voice.
And it gets worse.
The rezoning includes a reduction in parking requirements, permanently loweri ng the number of spaces required for all future
development on those 16 acres. The justification for this reduction is based on a Bureau of Transportati on survey from 2001, a
study that is 25 years old.
A quarter‑century ago:
rideshare didn’t exist
remote work didn’t exist
e‑commerce didn’t exist
Anaheim’s population and traffic volumes were dramatically lower
Yet the City is using outdated, pre‑smartphone data to justify providing 70 fewer parking spaces than the current code
requires.
This is not responsible planning.
This is not evidence‑based decision‑making.
And it does not protect the community from over‑densification, inadequate parking, or the loss of public oversight.
This issue is not about development.
It is about safety, liability, and whether we choose to protect lives or expose them to preventable danger.
The Festival Development Project:
increases fire danger
worsens evacuation constraints
opens the door to massive by‑right development
reduces parking based on 25‑year‑old data
exposes the City to significant legal liability
The EIR does not support approval.
The law does not support approval.
Public safety does not support approval.
For these reasons, the Festival Development Project must be denied.
Thank you.