Advertisement

Neighbors' Opinions on Warner Ridge Project

November 30, 1988

The letter from the principals of the Warner Ridge Associates organization is yet another attempt to mislead the community.

1. There are those who live closest to Warner Ridge who are members of our organization and oppose the proposed development.

2. The most outspoken supporter of the proposed development from the Pierce College administration has moved to Northern California and is no longer a voice on the subject.

3. The majority of the Agricultural Department at Pierce College is less than 3% of the overall faculty on campus.

4. How can a monstrous, 810,000-square-foot commercial development preserve the college's farm programs? How can it buffer the campus from existing and future growth in Warner Center?

5. The endorsement of the proposed project by the Woodland Hills Chamber of Commerce can hardly be considered an endorsement given the fact that contingencies, including severe traffic mitigation measures, were included in the chamber's comments.

6. Warner Ridge Associates surreptitiously acquired a copy of our organization's roster several months ago. They have used it at least two times in mailings to our membership. They know full well the demographics of this roster as it relates to geographic locations of our membership.

For the record, 60% of the Woodland Hills Homeowners Organization membership resides north, not south, of Ventura Boulevard. The Palms have become active members in our organization over the past two years because of Warner Ridge Associates and other major issues of community concern. We, as an organization, legitimately speak for the whole community because they, the community, will not accept your project. Plain and simple. They have repeatedly spoken. Why don't you listen?

If Warner Ridge Associates now, for the first time, feels that multifamily housing on Warner Ridge is the "only feasible residential alternative" on this property, maybe they ought to bring it before the public and "test the water." Two things are for sure:

1. The community will never accept the proposed high-rise (not low- to mid-rise) project.

2. The community prefers single-family residential development, which is consistent with the existing zoning on the property.

So, Mr. Spound and Mr. Spindler, when will you gentlemen consider the wishes of a whole community? The ball is in your court.

R.J. GROSS

Woodland Hills

Gross is vice president of the Woodland Hills Homeowners Organization .

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|