10 (71)Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important
Date:2/3/2026 8:59:08 AM
From:"Tina Aluzzi - Lounsbury"
To:"Ashleigh Aitken" AAitken@anaheim.net, "Public Comment" publiccomme nt@anahe im.ne t
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Resident concern; Anaheim Hills Festival Center 447-unit reside ntial project (De ve lopme nt Application No.
2023-00043)
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.
Date: February 3, 2026
City of Anaheim
Mayor and Members of the City Council
200 S. Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, CA 92805
Via email address: publiccomment@anaheim.net; aaitken@anaheim.net
Regarding: Anaheim Hills Festival Center 447-unit residential project (Development Applicati on No. 2023-00043)
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council,
I am writing to formally express my opposition to the proposed 447-unit residential development at the Anaheim Hills Festi val
Center.
I became an Anaheim Hills resident in 2020, when I made the deliberate decision to purchase a home i n thi s community. I chose
Anaheim Hills thoughtfully and intentionally—because of its natural beauty, cleanliness, strong sense of order, li mited transient
population, family-oriented environment, and overall commitment to safety and quality of li fe. These characteristics di sti nguish
Anaheim Hills from other areas and are central to why residents invest here and remai n engaged stewards of the communi ty.
I pay multiple homeowners association assessments, along with city, county, and state taxes, and I do so wi th the reasonable
expectation that public safety and emergency preparedness remain the City’s highest priorities. I strongly oppose any project
that introduces foreseeable and preventable risk to residents—particularly in a Very High Fi re Hazard Severity Zone—or that
may ultimately require public funds to mitigate hazards created by private development.
Professional Perspective – Emergency Care, Public Health, and EMS Impact
I am a licensed Registered Nurse and a licensed Public Health Nurse in the State of C ali forni a, a Former Emergency Room
Nurse, and a Clinical Consultant, with professional experience spanning acute emergency care, public health, and healthcare
system operations. From both a frontline clinical and population-health perspective, this proposed development raises seri ous
and legitimate concerns.
High-density residential development in wildfire-prone areas directly affects:
•
Emergency Medical Services (EMS) response times
•
Fire and rescue access during evacuations
•
Hospital surge capacity, diversion risk, and patient throughput
•
Medically vulnerable populations, including seniors, individuals with disabilities, oxygen-dependent pati ents, and those with
chronic or mobility-limiting conditions
Unlike a vacant or intermittently used commercial site, residential development creates continuous population exposure,
including individuals who may be unable to self-evacuate quickly or safely. These reali ti es place added strai n on EMS,
emergency departments, and hospital systems during disasters—strain that cannot be fully mitigated through traffi c
modeling alone.
Fire Safety and Evacuation Concerns
While I was not a resident during the 2017 Canyon Fire 2, the documented evacuation failures from that event are widely known
and remain highly relevant today. As a former ER nurse, I am acutely aware that mi nutes matter during emergenci es—and that
evacuation delays translate directly into increased injuries, delayed care, and preventable loss of li fe.
Although City leadership references “lessons learned” and updated evacuation plans, traffi c models cannot replicate real-world
emergency conditions, including:
•
Human behavior under stress and panic
•
Smoke, reduced visibility, and falling embers
•
Disabled or stalled vehicles
•
Power outages and traffic signal failures
•
Nighttime evacuations when residents are asleep
•
Simultaneous EMS ingress while residents are evacuating
The assertion that “traffic generated by the proposed project is offset by the previous commercial use” is deeply concerning
and not clinically or operationally credible. A vacant cinema does not generate:
•
24-hour residential occupancy
•
Nighttime sleeping populations
•
Families, children, seniors, or medically fragile residents
•
Sustained daily vehicle demand during emergencies
Residential density fundamentally and irreversibly changes the risk profile of this site.
Infrastructure Limitations and Cut-Through Traffic
The City has acknowledged that evacuation challenges in Anaheim Hills are exacerbated by freeway cut-through traffi c. While
future infrastructure projects are planned, some will not be completed until 2029. From an emergency preparedness standpoint,
it is unacceptable to justify increased risk today based on future, uncompleted infrastructure.
Public safety decisions must be based on current, real-world conditions, not projected improvements.
Impact on Emergency Systems and Taxpayers
As both a healthcare professional and taxpayer, I am deeply concerned that this project:
•
Increases demand on fire, police, and EMS services
•
Exacerbates emergency department crowding during disasters
•
Raises the likelihood of future taxpayer-funded emergency mitigation
•
Places first responders and healthcare workers in more dangerous conditions
•
Creates moral and legal risk should evacuation challenges result in injury or loss of life
I do not support development that knowingly places residents, emergency personnel, or public systems i n compromi sed
positions—particularly when these risks are already well documented and repeatedly raised by the community.
Closing
This opposition is not opposition to housing. It is opposition to inappropriate siting, excessive density, and avoidable public
safety risk.
Anaheim Hills is valued precisely because it has remained a safe, well-maintained, low-transi ency community. Approvi ng this
project undermines those qualities and introduces risks that cannot be fully mitigated.
I respectfully urge the City Council to reject this proposal and prioritize solutions that protect li fe, preserve community safety, and
uphold the standards that drew residents like myself to Anaheim Hills in the first place.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Tina R. Aluzzi-Lounsbury, BSN, RN, PHN
Anaheim Hills Resident
Sent from my iPhone