Hello. We are neighbors trying to get information out to other neighbors about the proposal to fast track the 4868 Canoga Ave project under AB 2011.

City planning should reject fast tracking this project. A development of this magnitude, in a fragile canyon community, requires a transparent review process that includes community input and a clear accounting of how fire safety, infrastructure capacity, and neighborhood impacts are being addressed. Neighbors are asking elected officials to step up and take a stand for safety and transparency.

Key Public Letters & Statements

June

  • Woodland Hills Neighborhood Collective Update Email. - June 16th, 2026 - Subject: “We will fight for us - because this is worth protecting” - PDF HERE

December to June Section - Under Construction

December


Press comments on Dec 5, 2025

“We have heard a significant amount of concern from community members and we think that it does meet the need for a full CEQA review, considering it’s in a Very High Fire Severity Zone, Hillside area, Special Grading Area among other environmentally sensitive categories. 

Our team has made it very clear to the developer that they should engage with neighbors and the surrounding community, regardless of potential exemptions due to state legislation. This is a privately-owned, large scale golf course that is adjacent to the Santa Monica Mountains and building anything here should be intensely vetted by community stakeholders.”

- Bob Blumenfield
Source: https://valleynewsgroup.com/woodland-hills-country-club-to-be-developed-with-398-homes/

Download the full Dec 9, 2025 letter here in PDF

Download Motion

Highlights:

“In short, this proposed project takes advantage of new state laws that may have made it impossible to get proper environmental review and community input. It is deeply concerning that these changes, which could affect our district and many areas throughout the City and State, have happened with little scrutiny or local awareness.”

“My office was approached by the owners of this site years ago to request my support for various necessary entitlements needed for a large scale project like this. At that time, the project needed a zone change and general plan amendment, among other accommodations. I refused to support it flat out, because this is the sort of project that needs a full public vetting process. Just recently, I found out that the developer is now attempting to use newly passed State laws to obtain streamlined approvals for the project ministerially, meaning the City would have no discretion to review the project, no authority to require CEQA and that the project would not be appealable by the community or my office.”

“I can’t help but feel as if the developer went behind our backs to Sacramento to forge the path they wanted. They seem to have lobbied Sacramento to surgically amend bills to avoid public and environmental scrutiny and get their project approved ‘by right’ pursuant to newly enacted State law”

“While there are specific criteria that must be met to use AB 2011 and the developer’s application is currently under review with the City Planning Department to make sure these criteria are being met, there is not a mechanism for discretionary review. This is especially concerning given that the project is in a Very High Fire Severity Zone.”

“This week I will introduce a motion seeking clarity from the City’s land use experts and attorneys to officially answer all the questions about this application. While I fear the worst, if there is a way to get the public input, and CEQA review that a project of this size should be required to do, I will pursue it.”

- Bob Blumenfield, LA City councilmember


Download the full Dec 15, 2025 letter here in PDF

CONCLUSION: “The Conservancy stands if full opposition to both the proposed project and the City’s consideration of any level of review less than an Environmental Impact Report with alternatives.”

Highlights:

“As a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) trustee agency for the Santa Monica Mountains Zone, the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy offers the following reasons why the City must not process the proposed 20-acre mixed income residential project in Woodland Hills without a regular review under CEQA.

Per the attached exhibit, the proposed project is located well within the Santa Monica Mountains Zone established by the Legislature in 1980 (Public Resource Code Section 33105). … No project approaching even five acres within the City of Los Angeles portion of the Zone have been approved in the last quarter-century.

The subject property is rung by numbered habitat blocks (see attached) in the Conservancy’s adopted Big Wild – Topanga State Park Core Habitat Planning Map recognized by a City Council resolution. The subject property is less than 900 feet from the Conservancy’s property that abuts Serrania Park.

In short, core habitat ecological values in those two parks are located less than 300 yards from the subject property.

- Santa Monica Mountain Conservancy

The whole golf course with its trees and water features is an integral portion of the Santa Monica Mountains ecosystem, particularly for raptors and small to medium sized mammals. Both the golf course water features located due south and west of the clubhouse, and in the central drainage leading to Dumetz Road, are included in the United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Wetland Inventory. Both are slated to be partially eliminated.

The proposed high density project site on agriculturally zoned land is now a boundaryless island within a single 94-acre parcel designated as Open Space by the City. The project proposal offers zero insight into what would or could become of the remaining 74 acres. Unless the project description adequately addresses the permanent fate of those 74 acres, the project environmental review is clearly being piecemealed. ... The environmental fate of the full 94 acres within the Zone, and that of all the properties that abut the 94 acres, are at stake, not just 20 acres proposed for the project which does not exist in a vacuum.

[A full] Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must address the mass concentration of lighting the proposed project would bring with uniformly multi-story buildings, almost 900 parking spaces, headlights from the 900 cars, and ubiquitous street and drive lane lighting. The baseline condition of the 94 acres is free of all lighting. The proposed level of lighting would have a permanent, significant adverse effect on natural resources for a considerable radius determined by surrounding topography and the adjacent project housing type. The project essentially proposes a 24-hour shopping mall level of direct impact in an area that is accessible to State-listed threatened evolutionarily significant mountain lions, bobcats and great foxes. That level of light emittance within the Zone, and in proximity to abundant open public and private open space, would be a permanent, unmitigable significant biological impact.


Download December 2025 WHHO Newsletter here

Highlights:

”This past week revealed a virtually “secret plan” for a proposed high density housing development on the south side of a large chunk of the Woodland Hills Country Club.”


”This is an initial plan for the WH Country Club development. While approximately 20% of the land is targeted for the project, there is a very good possibility that the remaining 80% of the golf course land will be sliced up and sold to other developers.”

”What hasn’t been brought out into the light are the many expensive and necessary problems with turning a 100+ year old tract of land that has only been equipped for use as a golf course. The City, County or State may face the exorbitant costs of replacing very old, barely navigable roads that are almost as old, and the need to add many necessary upgraded utilities like new water, sewer and electrical grids that can adequately serve the proposed new 3 and 4-story residences and other necessary facilities.”

” At a December 4 Planning, Land Use and Mobility (PLUM) meeting of the Woodland Hills-Warner Center Neighborhood Council, over 40 concerned area residents showed up to voice their issues, concerns and even fears during the Open Comment period of the meeting—even though the topic had not been set for the meeting because it had not become an “official City Case” with a project number and filed paperwork that had been distributed by Planning. In fact, for many of the speakers and most of the PLUM members, they had not even heard about the project until December 1 when some details started leaking out to the public.

The concerns and comments they made were striking:

  • Most understood the City’s need for lower cost housing and for residences for low-income and seniors. The vast majority were not NIMBYs, but they questioned why a proposal as large as this could even be considered for reasons the developer—and the City and the County—have failed to address.

  • The most concerning issue is that the location is in the center of a dangerous high fire hazard zone. The golf course is in a “bowl” surrounded by hillsides thick with homes, trees, and crumbling City roads. Remember, the golf course is over 100 years old and situated in the middle of the older developments in Woodland Hills.

  • Related to the concerns for a major fire is that there is basically just one way out (not counting two antiquated dirt roads that the golf course used for maintenance.) A major wildfire like the last one that almost jumped “Dirt Mulholland” and had access to the homes and hills surrounding the WoodlandHills Country Club, could not only see a panic of cars streaming to get out of the canyon, but see LA Fire impeded by traffic jams and issues similar to the Palisades fore.

  • The water pipes, sewerage, and even the electrical are all relics of the 20s and 30’s when the Girard development was the first residential area in Woodland Hills. A completely new sewerage system and an upgrade to virtually the entire water system and electricity systems would be necessary to serve this project.

  • In very rainy seasons, the golf course grounds haven often been flooded and so far, no one has proposed how the developer or City will deal with flooding issues if the reach older homes that ring the golf course.

  • The roads into the Country Club—as well as those roads in the surrounding residential hillside--are in poor or even worse condition and dangerous when wet. Single vehicles can barely access the area--not to mention oversized trucks carrying building supplies for 3 and 4 story buildings.

  • The land is zoned for “Agricultural use— which also covers the golf course. They received no notification from the City, County or State that the zoning was under consideration for change.

  • Nearby schools are now at capacity and bringing in residences that are not limited only to seniors will exacerbate the crowding in schools. Low income families have more school-age children that seniors and couples in their 40s and 50s.

  • The trees, shrubs and natural vegetation on and surrounding the golf course are currently refuges for all forms of wildlife in the area. This needs to be taken into consideration

    A spokesperson for the developer emphatically has stated that the project embodies California’s goal of producing much-needed mixed-income housing that the developer believes the site qualifies to “utilize the Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process provided by AB 2011/AB 2243 so that lengthy hearings and approvals from City Council and County boards can be avoided.

    However, area homeowners point out that the law (AB 2011) was written to streamline housing on commercially zoned properties--not on A1-zoned agricultural land, and that its Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone designations raises additional concerns and questions on how the law(s) actually work in real life. They point out that the law (AB 2011) was written to streamline housing on commercially zoned properties … not on A1-zoned agricultural land,” and that its Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone designation “raises additional questions about how the law functions here.”

    Earlier this year, the Palisades fire prompted voluntary evacuations in the Girard Tract, where residents could see the flames from their balconies as the fire moved through the Topanga Canyon area toward their neighborhood above the golf course. After many had to evacuate their homes, the fire issue is top-of-mind. “We want to ensure the project receives the level of safety and environmental review any community would expect,” one worried homeowner stated

Former Customer

Woodland Hills Homeowners Organization

Key Documents

A Reference Sheet on Terms and Acronyms

Letter and Motion From Councilman Bob Blumenfield’s office

SMMC is meeting on Monday Dec 15 at 06:30 PM to discuss.

The meeting agenda + zoom link are here:

https://smmc.civicweb.net/Portal/MeetingInformation.aspx?Org=Cal&Id=2563

Letter From the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy (SMMC)

Community Meeting Slides from December 12th

From the LA City Planning Office - the proposed Project Plan