✍️ Public comments from Change.org ✍️
This page last updated 1/4/2026.
Read the latest public comments & sign the petition here at change.org
Process matters. Fire safety, environmental impact, and fraud review are fundamental. Further, there are no guarantees or guardrails explicit in this proposal against further development without inherent policy concerns being first addressed. To do the right thing, do it right. Housing matters - not rewarding expedient self-enrichment development without true community goals.
-Skye
This is where my family lives. Please don’t risk their lives so a developer can make a buck.
- Jeff
This project would place 398 units in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone on a narrow canyon street with known evacuation bottlenecks. Fast-tracking it under AB 2011 removes public hearings and the CEQA fire-safety review our community depends on. Our safety depends on wise planning. This is not opposition to affordable housing; it is a plea to build it where it is safe and where infrastructure can support it. North of Ventura is already overwhelmed with traffic from large apartment buildings added in recent years. Adding hundreds more units in a fire-prone canyon with limited evacuation capacity is the recipe for disaster during an actual wildfire. Insurance companies have already stopped insuring many of our homes after recent fires. Building more density in an area considered too risky to insure makes no sense. We expect responsible planners to protect lives, not risk them, and to invest housing projects in locations that solve problems, not create new ones. Why choose a site that combines fire hazard, evacuation difficulty, congestion, and overstressed infrastructure when safer parcels exist throughout Los Angeles? Please require full CEQA review before any approval and prioritize public safety over shortcuts.
- Mahnaz
I’m strongly against the Woodland Hills Project being pushed onto the former golf course land, and people deserve to understand what’s actually happening here. This isn’t just a disagreement about development — there are real questions about whether this project is even legal under existing Los Angeles zoning and planning laws. the land is A1 open-space zoning, and AB 2011 cannot override that. The site is zoned A1, which is open-space/agriculture. That zoning only allows things like single-family homes, farming, and limited recreational uses. Large housing projects are NOT permitted in A1. AB 2011 — the law the developer is trying to use to “speed this up” — only applies to land that already allows retail or office uses by right. That is the key requirement. This land does not meet that requirement. If the city tries to approve hundreds of units on A1 land without a public rezoning process, environmental review, or discretionary hearings, that is effectively: Spot zoning Rezoning without due process A violation of the Los Angeles Municipal Code A violation of the Los Angeles General Plan The city cannot legally ignore its own zoning just because a developer wants to call a golf course “urban use.” Open-space and agricultural zones have special protections. The law was designed for commercial corridors, not for land that was always meant to remain low-density. Trying to force AB 2011 onto A1 land could be considered: Misapplication of state housing law Abuse of ministerial approval authority A bypass of CEQA environmental review that is NOT legally justified If the city wants to rezone A1 land, it must do it publicly, legally, and transparently — not through a loophole that doesn’t actually apply.
-Matthew
Thank you for getting this petition started. Very well prepared! If there is a fire it would be very difficult getting the fire department in and getting the people out. Canoga Ave South of Ventura cannot handle this amount of traffic if a fire broke-out up on “dirt Mulholland.” Just this last January we saw Canoga Ave heavily used to get Fire and police equipment up to Topanga and dirt Mulholland. If this was a legitimate proposal they wouldn’t be trying to pass it using AB 2011.
-James
There's no way that the streets in the area can handle the increased traffic. All roads in the area are only 2 lanes with lots of stop signs. This will create an unsafe environment in the event of an emergency evacuation like we saw during the Palisades fire.
-Scott
The proposed construction of so many units is not appropriate for this location due to lack of support for traffic ingress and egress in a high fire danger area
-Maureen
Construction projects in Woodland Hills are multiplying (Wisteria at Warner Center senior living development with 486 units, a new affordable housing complex at 21300 W. Oxnard Street, a 1.1-million-square-foot complex at 6100 Canoga Avea, 54 residential units at 19923 Ventura Blvd, 578-unit mixed-use project with residential and commercial spaces at 21241 Ventura Blvd, etc…) but what is the city doing to preserve the safety, some quality of life for the current residents as well as the history and the environment? This project would be a major threat to all. Less than a year ago, many residents of the Girard tract left in fear because of the devastating fires and the streets were overly crowded not allowing them to leave the area in a safe and timely manner. Let’s prioritize safety, the improvement of the current streets and buildings, historical landmarks (the golf course and country club built 100 years ago and part of popular culture), the environment, and the quality of life of current inhabitants instead of allowing another architectural disaster that would endanger the safety and lives of the current residents!
-Clara
This project does not belong in a neighborhood of single family homes built on very narrow winding roads. It is in a fire zone and could have an outcome like the Altadena and Palisades fires if something were to break out. Additionally the existing infrastructure is insufficient to support the density this would bring to the neighborhood. Fire and police response times are terrible as it is. To add insult to injury, this was pushed through with NO input from all those that will be affected. Do not approve this project when there are many more suitable locations
-Melinda
Hello All, we have our first opportunity to express our grave concerns with the 4868 Development 12/4 at the PLUM Committee meeting. The development is not on the agenda which means they will not address the development at the meeting but we all have 1-2 minutes to express our concerns. Thursday 12/4 at 630 pm Fire station 84 21050 Burbank Blvd. Free parking across the street. No parking at station. We have requested it be on the 12/18 meeting agenda, so they will need to respond then. Please share! Please show up! Lets overwhelm them!
-John
This is absolutely criminal and we will sue the city as over a thousand residents oppose this plan. Dirty politicians (city officials) are apparently getting a kick back! This WILL be investigated and we will go up the proper chains.
-Mason
The zip code 91364 is already overloaded with unaffordable housing and rental units! This is about greed and lack of concern for this canyon community. There's lots of land at the former Rocketdyne site and over the hill in burnt to the ground Malibu and Pacific Palisades. The "affordable housing" clause is being abused throughout the city! The design is similar to cheap-n-hyper expensive properties going up all over town and the country.
-Norman
There are enough abandoned, neglected, disused &/or derelict brown-fields in this catchment area, where residential units can be built. Local council & town planners must refrain from blindly snatching Farmlands, Greenfield, River-side, Bloomfield, Meadow-lands, Turf-lands, Pastureland &/or Country Side. The local council is obligated to initiate a transparent consultation period with the local community to decide the way forward with an overwhelming majority.
- A.
The development gives no thought for the neighbors who live close by between Mulholland and Dumetz, who use a single lane (each direction) street for ingress / egress. Adding 835 parking spaces, and the added related traffic of deliveries, and local traffic to support the infrastructure could impact emergency services along the southern part of Canoga.
-Johanna
Adding high density housing in an area already concerned with extreme fire safety and disaster evacuation issues is completely irresponsible.
-Farnaz
This is ridiculous! The streets are too small to add this many people to this tiny quiet neighborhood! It's a safety hazard. You're destroying green areas that wildlife depend on for feeding and breeding. Deer, coyote, skunk, raccoon, possum, frog, bees have been using that land long before it was a golf course. You're destroying where they live! You're destroying where I live!
-Heather
There are already a plethora of apartments that still are yet to be absorbed [correction: occupied] in Woodland Hills. Too much traffic already!!! Not enough open space. Keep the golf course. Keep it green.
-Michele
We need to protect open spaces. We need to stop the push from both developers and city leaders to create density for not other reason than profits and high property taxes.
-Noel
As a lifetime Woodland Hills resident the news of this development is very concerning....not merely because of the lack of oversight, but also because of the lack of consideration that a development of this size will have on a very quiet corner of the community. Doesn't remotely seem like the right move to have a development at this scale...
-Randy
There needs to be community input and studies on the impact of so many living spaces added to an area that is in the fire danger zones. Why wouldn’t the community that’s impacted be included in the planning? Greed.
- Patricia
No traffic study No fire study No sewer study No water study No evacuation study No electrical grid study
Wayne
I have been living here almost 40years Because of by the this beautiful country club and views
-Yoko
This golf course adds value to the community. Pouring concrete over it will destroy the green area that this golf course offers to the entire area.
-Jorge
Contrary to the ignorant comments by whcc president [correction: WHWCNC president] we are not rich do not have a view and are not anti humanity. In reality this will massively increase congestion traffic noise and yes crime by extension, in an extremely high fire zone which is already congested with an uptick in crime. Moreover this is not an altruistic endeavor. It is a money making enterprise which will enrich the developers while killing the area and endangering current residents.
-Ann
I cannot even make a left off of the Canoga exit from the 101 nowadays. (Only 2 cars can make a left per green might) Traffic is terrible all times of day and now to add literally more fuel to the fire in a high fire hazard zone. I’ve lived in this neighborhood my whole life and this may be the worst thing to ever happen to it.
-Arya
I’m not sure Victor Girard would have liked this. I know I certainly don’t. I’m not against improvements and growth, but this is obscene. I know that I personally will do whatever it takes to either stop this or make sure that it goes through all of the same scrutiny that me and my neighbors have to go through to do the smallest of improvements on our properties.
-Jack
This is our canyon, our homes, and our evacuation routes.
- Jenifer
BIG BUILDERS don’t care about our neighborhoods when they live behind gated communities this sounds like a nightmare and safety hazard for this beautiful community of Woodland Hills country club
- Michelle
This development does not support affordable housing goals it uses legislation designed to support affordable housing to circumvent due process and community engagement for an unnecessary, unsafe, and profit motivated development that is not in the community best interest.
-Kyle
I strongly oppose this fast-tracked, multi-story development proposed for what is currently a golf course in the heart of an exclusively residential neighborhood. This project cynically exploits a recently passed Senate Bill intended for genuine commercial corridors, using it as a loophole to override local community rights through a rushed 90-day review and the elimination of meaningful neighborhood veto. Calling Canoga at Dumetz a “commercial corridor” is a blatant distortion of language and intent—a corridor is a passage from somewhere to somewhere, and there is nothing corridor-like or commercial about this quiet residential area today. This is not smart growth; it is an abuse of legislative intent and a profound disregard for both established communities and basic planning principles.
-Maciej
My husband was a firefighter in this area for many years before he retired from the LAFD. He knows this area well and said it would be heavily impacted as well as a big fire danger to build so many residential. homes there.
-Debbie
My family and I have lived on Topanga canyon our entire lives. I’ve moved between a couple homes that are in direct contact with this area of Woodland Hills. My family and I wouldn’t feel as safe if there were homes added to a small secluded section of Woodland Hills that would more than likely pose as a threat during a global emergency.
-Chelsea
Please 🙏 pay attention to the dangers of building on this land and listen to the people who live here. Keep us safe. If this was a legitimate proposal they wouldn’t be trying to pass it using AB 2011.
-Alexi
I’ve grown up in this neighborhood and part of its charm is the quietness despite being so close to Ventura boulevard. If this gets put in the neighborhood will not only lose its friendly charm, but also the small back streets are not suitable for the amount of accelerated traffic that will occur. It’s unsafe for this development to be put in.
-Madelyn