20 (43)
Susana Barrios
From:Armida Lansner <armidafl@aol.com>
Sent:Sunday, June 21, 2026 9:49 PM
To:Christine Nguyen
Subject:\[EXTERNAL\] Prohousing Designation
You don't often get email from armidafl@aol.com. Learn why this is important
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 am writing to express serious concerns regarding any effort by the City of Anaheim to pursue
California's Prohousing Designation and the policies that typically accompany such a designation.
While Anaheim has long supported housing development and continues to approve significant
residential projects throughout the city, many of your constituents question why our City leaders
would further commit our city and its residents to a state dictated framework that prioritizes housing
production above other critical community considerations such as traffic, parking, infrastructure ,
public safety, and quality of life. Anaheim has already demonstrated substantial housing
production. If the City is meeting or exceeding its housing obligations, residents deserve a clear
explanation of why additional Prohousing commitments are necessary and what public benefits justify
the potential loss of local planning flexibility.
Citywide Concerns Across Anaheim: residents are experiencing the consequences of policies that
encourage higher density while reducing traditional development standards. One of the most visible
impacts is parking. State and local policies increasingly support reductions in parking requirements
based on assumptions about traffic use and changing transportation habits. The reality experienced
by residents is very different. Families continue to own vehicles, visitors require parking, and many
neighborhoods already face significant parking shortages. Overflow parking spills into surrounding
residential streets, creating frustration and conflict among neighbors. Traffic congestion has similarly
worsened throughout our City. Residents routinely encounter longer travel times, increased cut-
through traffic, and growing strain on roadways that were not designed to accommodate continued
population growth without corresponding infrastructure improvements. Many residents feel that
planning decisions are increasingly driven by housing production targets rather than balanced
consideration of all community needs.
East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills: These concerns are magnified in East Anaheim, where
geography, wildfire risk, and limited evacuation routes create unique public safety challenges.
Residents are particularly concerned that projects are evaluated independently while the real-world
impacts are cumulative. The proposed Deer Canyon development, the approved 447-unit Festival
Center apartment project, future Housing Element sites, accessory dwelling units, and other
anticipated development all add residents, vehicles, and evacuation demand to the same constrained
transportation network. Yet each project is typically analyzed as a standalone proposal. Residents do
not experience these projects individually. They experience them collectively. The critical question is
not whether one project can be accommodated in isolation. The question is whether the entire Santa
Ana Canyon corridor can safely accommodate the cumulative population growth that results from all
1
approved, proposed, and anticipated projects combined. This concern is particularly important in
areas affected by wildfire hazards. During a major wildfire event, residents will have only a limited
number of evacuation routes available. Existing congestion already affects Santa Ana Canyon Road
and surrounding corridors during ordinary daily conditions. Safe and timely evacuation under
conditions similar to the Palisades or Altadena fires is at high risk under current density
conditions. Lives are at risk now. Residents have legitimate concerns regarding what evacuation
conditions would look like after full build-out of multiple high density I residential projects.
Prohousing and Local Control: Many residents view Prohousing designation as a signal that the
City intends to further reduce barriers to development through measures such as reduced parking
requirements, increased density allowances, streamlined approvals, and diminished opportunities for
community input. While these policies may be promoted as tools to increase housing production, they
can also weaken the City's ability to address neighborhood-specific concerns and respond to
infrastructure limitations. Residents deserve assurance that Anaheim's planning decisions will
continue to prioritize public safety, infrastructure capacity, traffic management, and neighborhood
livability-not a prohousing designation, short-sighted and motivated by grant monies.
REQUEST: Before pursuing Prohousing designation or adopting additional policies intended to
accelerate residential development, I respectfully request that the City:
• Conduct a comprehensive cumulative impact analysis of approved, pending, and anticipated
residential projects.
• Evaluate cumulative traffic and evacuation impacts throughout East Anaheim and Anaheim Hills.
• Demonstrate consistency with Anaheim's adopted Safety Element and wildfire planning policies.
• Assess the citywide impacts of reduced parking requirements on existing neighborhoods.
• Provide residents with meaningful opportunities to participate in decisions that will permanently
serve Anaheim's future. Anaheim's responsibility is not merely to approve housing. It is to balance
housing with public safety, infrastructure capacity, mobility, environmental constraints, and the quality
of life of existing residents. We urge the City to reject any Prohousing policies that prioritize
development incentives over these equally important responsibilities. "The issue before us is not
whether Anaheim should build housing. The issue is whether Anaheim should continue increasing
density without first proving that our roads, parking supply, infrastructure, and evacuation systems
can safely support the cumulative growth that has already been approved."
Respectfully,
Armida Lansner
935 S Harvard Circle
92807
2