CAL HDFDF
Aug 24, 2026
City of Anaheim
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, California 92805
Re: Proposed Housing Development Project at 1041, 1057, and 1071 North Kemp Street
By email: �lanninco ission(�anaei ®net
CC: i an C«�anaei ®net; ity ana er anahei ®net;
cityattorneyso ce anahei ®net; tars anahei net
Dear Anaheim Planning Commission,
The California Housing Defense Fund (Ca1HDF) submits this letter to remind the City of its
obligation to abide by all relevant state laws when evaluating the proposed 90-unit housing
development project at 1041,1057 and 1071 North Kemp Street, which includes 5 very
low-income units. These laws include the Housing Accountability Act (HAA), the Density
Bonus Law (DBL), AB 130, and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines.
The HAA provides the project legal protections. It requires approval of zoning and general
plan compliant housing development projects unless findings can be made regarding
specific, objective, written health and safety hazards. (Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subd. (j).) The
HAA also bars cities from imposing conditions on the approval of such projects that would
reduce the project's density unless, again, such written findings are made. (Ibid.) As a
development with at least two-thirds of its area devoted to residential uses, the project falls
within the HAA's ambit, and it complies with local zoning code and the City's general plan.
Increased density, concessions, and waivers that a project is entitled to under the DBL (Gov.
Code, § 65915) do not render the project noncompliant with the zoning code or general plan,
for purposes of the HAA (Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subd. (j)(3)). The HAA's protections therefore
apply, and the City may not reject the project except based on health and safety standards, as
outlined above. Furthermore, if the City rejects the project or impairs its feasibility, it must
conduct "a thorough analysis of the economic, social, and environmental effects of the
action" (Id. at subd. (b).)
Ca1HDF also writes to emphasize that the DBL offers the proposed development certain
protections. The City must respect these protections. In addition to granting the increase in
2201 Broadway, PH1, Oakland, CA 94612
www.calhdf.org
residential units allowed by the DBL, the City must not deny the project the proposed waivers
and concessions with respect to separating wall requirements and recreation leisure area
requirements. If the City wishes to deny requested waivers, Government Code section 65915,
subdivision (e)(1) requires findings that the waivers would have a specific, adverse impact
upon health or safety, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or
avoid the specific adverse impact. If the City wishes to deny requested concessions,
Government Code section 65915, subdivision (d)(1) requires findings that the concessions
would not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, that the concessions would have
a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety, or that the concessions are contrary to
state or federal law. The City, if it makes any such findings, bears the burden of proof. (Gov.
Code, § 65915, subd. (d)(4).) Of note, the DBL specifically allows for a reduction in required
accessory parking in addition to the allowable waivers and concessions. (Id. at subd. (p).)
Additionally, the California Court of Appeal has ruled that when an applicant has requested
one or more waivers and/or concessions pursuant to the DBL, the City "may not apply any
development standard that would physically preclude construction of that project as
designed, even if the building includes `amenities' beyond the bare minimum of building
components" (Bankers Hill 150 a City of San Diego (2022) 74 Cal.App.Sth 755, 775.)
Furthermore, the project is exempt from state environmental review pursuant to sections
15315 and 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines. The project is also eligible for a statutory
exemption from CEQA pursuant to AB 130. (Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66.) Caselaw from the
California Court of Appeal affirms that local governments err, and may be sued, when they
improperly refuse to grant a project a CEQA exemption or streamlined CEQA review to
which it is entitled. (Hilltop Group, Inc. a County of San Diego (2024) 99 Cal.App.Sth 890, 911.)
As you are well aware, California remains in the throes of a statewide crisis -level housing
shortage. New housing such as this is a public benefit: by providing affordable housing, it
will mitigate the state's homelessness crisis; it will increase the city's tax base; it will bring
new customers to local businesses; and it will reduce displacement of existing residents by
reducing competition for existing housing. While no one project will solve the statewide
housing crisis, the proposed development is a step in the right direction. Ca1HD1F urges the
City to approve it, consistent with its obligations under state law.
Ca1HD1F is a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation whose mission includes advocating for
increased access to housing for Californians at all income levels, including low-income
households. You may learn more about Ca1HD1F at w .calhdf.or.
Sincerely,
`2 of 3
Dylan Casey
Ca1HDF Executive Director
James M. Lloyd
Ca1HDF Director of Planning and Investigations
3of3