
Wood chips currently cover the pet area at the William S. Hart Dog Park. (photo by Rance Collins)
William S. Hart Dog Park sits behind bustling Sunset Boulevard, adjacent to the Sunset Tower and the former Standard Hotel. On Monday, Sept. 16, its aesthetic future will come before the West Hollywood City Council. The council will consider awarding a professional design and engineering services agreement to urban landscape firm Stoss, Inc.
The city already directed staff in March 2018 to replace existing wood chips that cover much of the ground with synthetic turf, a proposal with which some residents have taken issue.
“I’ve been going there roughly four or five times a week for roughly 20 years now,” resident Bob Claster said, explaining that he’s never seen evidence that wood chips cause any harm to the dogs at the park.
Claster charges that turf can be toxic to pets, can smell and get exceedingly hot, citing a June report from the Santa Clarita Medical Association recommending that turf not be used instead of natural grass “to benefit the health and safety of children, athletes and the environment.”
But city staff insists that the more environmentally-and dog-friendly K9Grass, produced by Forever Lawn, is not toxic to animals like the older styles of synthetic turf Claster is referring to. K9 Grass is already installed in the dog areas at West Hollywood Park.
This version does not use perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances – or PFAS – which were supposed to be banned in California last year – although the ban was vetoed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, saying the bill “falls short of providing enhanced protection to California consumers due to lack of regulatory oversight.”
“The petrochemical companies who make this crap are to be believed when they say these things to the same extent that the tobacco companies were to be believed when they told us that cigarettes were perfectly safe and that the fossil fuel companies were to be believed when they told us that burning fossil fuels did no damage to the environment,” Claster said. “These people are just trying to make some money.”
Claster also postured that turf is hotter and, often, can smell bad.
Ric Abramson, the city’s urban design and architecture studio manager, pointed out that the redesign is necessary to help advance access to the park.
“One of the main goals of the upgrades and improvements to the park is disability access and wood chips are not accessible,” Abramson said.
Hart Park, interestingly, is owned by the city of Los Angeles. It was gifted to Los Angeles by actor William S. Hart. According to the Santa Clarita Valley History website, the silent screen western star lived in a nearly 3,000-square foot house on the property for decades.
“I would like to say in all the sincerity of which I am capable that in donating this beautiful spot, … my former home, I am only trying to do an act of justice,” Hart said in 1944 announcing the donation. “I am only trying to give back to the American public some part of what the American public has already given to me.”
The house and grounds officially went to Los Angeles after Hart’s death in 1946. It was leased out to families until 1968, when the Actors Studio’s West Coast branch took up residence. The home was converted into offices and rehearsal spaces, while the garage became a small theater. The Actors Studio has remained a tenant ever since.
West Hollywood, however, began leasing the grounds from Los Angeles in 1989 and turned it into a dog park. The city noted that this was appropriate, since Hart was famously an animal lover, particularly of Great Danes. For years, wood chips have filled in the spaces between the numerous trees and landscaping on the hilly location.
West Hollywood city officials insist there is no cause for concern.
“All of our research indicates the turf is non-toxic,” facilities and field service manager Helen Collins said. “A lot of the newer products for dog parks do not contain PFAS.”
Councilman John Heilman said it is used in his building.
“I’m in a building where we have artificial turf in an area where it was difficult to keep grass growing,” Heilman said. “It has worked well for our residents.”
He would not say, however, how he might vote in advance of the meeting. Mayor John Erickson also declined to answer, but did say he will have to consult his closest advisor in the matter.
“I’ll have to ask the pet mayor,” Erickson said. His dog, Winnie, currently serves as the honorable “pet mayor” for the city of West Hollywood.
“I know she has very strong opinions,” Erickson continued. “I know she, and I, are looking at all the evidence presented and listening to the community who has been contacting City Hall about this.”
“There is no perfect solution here,” Abramson said. “The council will hear what everybody has to say, and they may reaffirm the direction they’ve gone already, [or] they may change direction.”
The City Council meeting will start at 6 p.m. on Sept. 16 in the council chambers at 625 N. San Vicente Blvd. For information, visit weho.org/city-government/city-council/council-agendas.




3 Comments
There are no artificial turf products that do not contain PFAs. Not one. Zero. We obtained the independent analysis supplied by the company whose product is under consideration, and shared it with scientists who pointed out that it was utterly deceptive and self-serving. They only tested for things they knew they wouldn’t find, they failed to test for things they knew they would find, and used absurd thresholds to make it appear as if their products are safe. The entire scientific community is unanimously in agreement. There is no safe artificial turf. The wood chip surface that is currently at the park has caused no problems for 25 years, and is absolutely navigable by someone in a wheelchair. By the way, the excellent and exhaustive study on the subject was done by the Santa Clara County Medical Association, and can easily be found online. The users of the park are virtually unanimous in our desire not to have artificial turf at our park. Between that fact and the mountain of irrefutable scientific evidence we’ve provided, we are utterly baffled as to why this is still under consideration.
West Hollywood has had a very long history of hiring high paid consultants to “listen to the community” only to skew the results to what they had in mind all along. In this case, the community outreach was interrupted by Covid and it never reconvened. Many of us were at the initial outreach and the overwhelming support was to keep wood chips. One idea the city unveiled at the time was to have some wood chips and some turf. ♂️
Nearly 100 people recently signed a petition to keep the wood chips. Although Bob Claster has taken the lead in opposing this turf, he has the support of many of us daily park patrons. Why is the Council digging their heals in and refusing to take a second look at this?
The city has admitted in an open forum that it’s less expensive to maintain wood chips than turf.
Many people who go to the WEHO turf parks complain that it gets very hot which is incredibly harmful to dogs sensitive paws, is very smelly, the parks are grossly small for the local dog population, the turf has caused abrasion injuries, the water trickles out of the fresh water fountain and if a dog has a loose stool, patrons simply cover it with a bag and rock until city staff can deal with the smelly mess. YUCK
If someone likes turf better, they already have an option to go to West Hollywood Park and soon to be the Plummer Park dog park, yet another grossly small size for the # of local dogs who need a place to run and socialize.
It’s our understanding that one plan included approximately half of the trees in the park to be removed. Ugh, really???
The plan includes no additional parking which is sorely needed as it currently has 7 spaces (2 of which are disable) and it’s used by dog park patrons, the Actors Studio, and sadly some local staff and Sunset patrons who know they won’t be ticketed.
In Palm Springs, there are 2 very large dog parks behind city hall, both of which have grass. If a desert city can maintain REAL GRASS, why can’t WEHO?
The City of LA actually owns Hart park and leases it to West Hollywood. LA is considering a citywide ban of this turf product due to its harmful properties and many cities around the globe have already done so. Again, why isn’t the Council taking a second look at this?
I’m glad to hear there’s talk amongst those involved to consider legal action, either before this project starts or after it’s completed.
Why is West Hollywood constantly wasting taxpayer monies for projects residents don’t want???
The Council should be doing what the community members and stakeholders wants.