WOODLAND HILLS—Los Angeles City Councilmember Bob Blumenfield released a community-wide update announcing that the Los Angeles City Planning Department determined the Woodland Hills Country Club site qualifies as wildlife habitat for mountain lions. This finding blocks the developer from using the streamlined approval process for its proposed 398-unit housing project. Bob Blumenfield is the Los Angeles City Councilmember who represents the 3rd District, which includes the site of the 4868 Canoga Avenue project.
The housing complex was expected to be built on the Woodland Hills Country Club golf course, which is located in a very high fire hazard severity zone. The developer applied to fast-track the project for approval under a state law called AB 2011, which allows developers to get approved without public hearings or environmental reviews.
The Planning Department’s decision came after neighbors, biological experts, and the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy rallied together and submitted extensive documentation showing the golf course serves as habitat for mountain lions. Mountain lions are classified as a threatened species in the Santa Monica Mountains, and under the California Endangered Species Act, developers must undergo rigorous environmental reviews.
Blumenfield framed the decision as a fire safety and process issue rather than opposition to affordable housing. During his time as city councilman, he approved or built more than 15,000 housing units in his district in recent years. In his community update, Blumenfield stated, “just a few miles from the Palisades and Woolsey burn scars, a high-density proposal should not get approved ministerially without thorough analysis and hearings for local concerns and voices.”
The developer’s biologist, Matt South, directly disputes the city’s habitat finding in his July 17 report, stating that “not only is the Project Site not habitat for mountain lions, but mountain lions deliberately avoid open areas modified by humans such as golf courses.” The City Planning Department’s ruling is expected to be challenged in court. Blumenfield said the developer and property owner are likely to sue over the determination and that the outcome could still be overturned by a judge.
