Loading...
20 (28) Susana Barrios From:Lori Hughes <hughes.lori.lynn@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, June 22, 2026 8:44 PM To:Public Comment Subject:\[EXTERNAL\] Fwd: California’s Prohousing Designation Concerns for Anaheim Hills 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. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Lori Hughes <hughes.lori.lynn@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 8:43 PM Subject: California’s Prohousing Designation Concerns for Anaheim Hills To: <cnguyen2@anaheim.net> Mayor and Members of the Anaheim city Council, I respectfully ask the City explain why it would pursue California’s Prohousing Designation when significant concerns about traffic, parking, infrastructure, and evacuation safety remain unresolved. 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 our roads, infrastructure, and emergency evacuation systems can safely support the growth already approved. The City has already prepared studies, but independent CEQA counsel identified serious deficiencies in the City’s own analysis, including inconsistencies with Anaheim’s adopted evacuation plans, and failures to adequately account for the cumulative impacts. East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Zone, where evacuation is a matter of life and death. Residents have already experienced the realities of wildfire and gridlock. Seeking Prohousing Designation and state funding to encourage even greater density while these safety risks remain is irresponsible. Public safety must come before development incentives. Anaheim should not be seeking state incentives to encourage additional density when it has yet to demonstrate that the growth already approved can be safely accommodated. Respect, Lori Hughes Concerned Resident 1