20 (03)
Susana Barrios
From:Linda <lindahurley101@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, June 20, 2026 10:07 AM
To:Christine Nguyen; Public Comment
Subject:\[EXTERNAL\] Concerns Regarding Prohousing Designation
Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message.
Mayor and Members of the Anaheim City Council,
I respectfully ask the City to explain why it would pursue California’s Prohousing Designation when
serious deficiencies have already been identified in the City’s own environmental analyses and
evacuation assumptions.
This is not a question of whether Anaheim should build housing. It is a question of why the City would
encourage even greater density before demonstrating that existing roads, infrastructure, parking, and
emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. Based on what
residents experience daily, and based on the findings raised by legal experts reviewing the City’s own
documents, there is little evidence that they can.
More importantly, this is not a situation where additional studies have never been performed. The City
has already prepared environmental documents and evacuation analyses. However, our CEQA attorneys
have identified significant errors and inconsistencies in those studies. Their review concluded that the
Festival Center EIR relies on assumptions that conflict with Anaheim’s own “Know Your Way” evacuation
maps and improperly minimizes the cumulative effects of nearby developments that would depend on
the same evacuation routes.
The attorneys further concluded that the EIR understates wildfire and evacuation risks, omits important
cumulative impacts, contains misleading assertions, and relies on inadequate and unenforceable
mitigation measures that may violate CEQA requirements.
Perhaps most troubling, the City Council itself previously determined that increased density and traffic
on these same roadways would exacerbate evacuation risks and be detrimental to public health and
safety. The Fire Chief and City staff recommended denial of the Hills Preserve project because of those
concerns, and the Council agreed.
Residents do not experience projects individually. We experience them collectively.
East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills face unique challenges, including wildfire hazards, limited evacuation
routes, and already-congested roadways. Pursuing Prohousing Designation sends the message that
development incentives and grant opportunities are being prioritized over public safety and
infrastructure capacity.
1
Before seeking a designation intended to accelerate additional residential growth, the City should first
address the unresolved deficiencies identified in its own environmental reviews and explain to residents
why it believes increasing density is appropriate when serious concerns regarding traffic, parking,
infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved.
As residents already know, and as the City’s own record reflects, our roads and evacuation
systems are already strained. Pursuing Prohousing Designation under these circumstances would
be irresponsible and contrary to the City’s obligation to protect public safety and the quality of life
of existing residents.
Respectfully,
Linda Hurley
Anaheim Hills resident
2