Agoura Hills planning commission backs safety‑element update, forwards evacuation analysis to council with requests for further study

The Agoura Hills Planning Commission on Thursday voted to recommend the City Council adopt a general plan amendment updating the table of contents and the safety element to incorporate the city—s evacuation plan and a new evacuation analysis.

The recommendation, approved 3–0 with one abstention, forwarded staff—s findings that the evacuation analysis meets state requirements while asking the council to consider an additional midday scenario and stepped-up communications coordination with school districts and neighboring jurisdictions.

Why it matters: The update is meant to align Agoura Hills— safety planning with a recently amended, multi‑jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan used by the Las Virgenes/Malibu Council of Governments and reviewed by state and federal agencies. Staff and outside consultants told commissioners the report models full buildout and large cross‑jurisdictional evacuation flows and identifies where operational measures will be needed to keep traffic moving during a large wildfire evacuation.

What staff presented: Denise Thomas, Agoura Hills community development director, said the safety‑element amendment is necessary to incorporate the amended regional hazard mitigation plan and to add the evacuation analysis and evacuation plan as appendices. Thomas said the city—s evacuation plan was first adopted in 2020 and updated in 2022 and that it was used during recent fire responses when the city—s emergency operations center was activated.

Matt Stewart, the city traffic engineer, summarized the modeling approach. The study modeled a worst‑case, overnight mandatory evacuation in which the city and nearby communities are emptied at once. The analysis assumed buildout population and assumed about two vehicles per household, and it explicitly modeled additional flows from neighboring areas: about 5,000 trips from Oak Park (north) in one scenario and about 2,000 trips from unincorporated Los Angeles County (south) in the other.

Staff reported a total available lane capacity on the evacuation network of about 66,690 vehicles per hour. In the two scenarios the consultant modeled, the number of vehicles directed to the safe gateway (U.S. 101) was about 21,463 in the scenario including Oak Park trips and about 17,931 in the scenario including southern unincorporated Los Angeles County trips. The presentation identified a small number of roadway segments where the modeled volume approached or exceeded capacity and where the analysis recommends implementation measures.

Recommended operational measures listed in the analysis include phased evacuations, use of counterflow on certain roadways (with at least 20 feet reserved for emergency responders), and deployment of emergency personnel at key intersections to reroute traffic as needed. The report also identifies single‑egress streets for targeted resident notification.

Public comment and commissioner concerns: Dozens of written comments were filed and several residents spoke at the hearing, including speakers who live in Oak Park and Old Agora (Old Agoura). Commenters raised consistent concerns about evacuation on Canaan Road and Driver Avenue, the effect of school pickups and drop‑offs, vehicle counts (some residents said local households commonly have more than two vehicles), bottlenecks such as motorists stopping for fuel, evacuations involving livestock and horses, and outreach to older residents and those without cars.

Commissioners asked staff about assumptions the consultant used and whether the analysis should include an afternoon/daytime scenario when schools and businesses are occupied. Staff responded that California Government Code section 65302.15 requires an evacuation analysis that identifies evacuation locations and routes, capacity, safety and viability under a range of scenarios; that the state expects jurisdictions to model representative scenarios rather than every possible permutation; and that the nighttime scenario was chosen to capture a high‑occupancy (most residents at home) evacuee load. Thomas and the traffic engineer said the analysis also documents where additional mitigation or operational measures would be needed if traffic volumes rise in other scenarios.

Commission action and amendment: Commissioner Sharon moved, and Commissioner Stein seconded, a motion recommending City Council adoption of the general plan amendment and MND related to Chapter 5 (Community Safety) and the table of contents edits, and asking the council to consider an additional evacuation analysis that models a daytime/midday scenario that includes schools and large employers and to review communication strategies that better coordinate with school districts and neighboring jurisdictions. The motion passed on a roll call vote: Sharon, Stein and Chair Roth voted yes; Commissioner Plattzer abstained.

What happens next: The Planning Commission—s recommendation will be included in the staff report to the City Council, which is tentatively scheduled to consider the amendment at its May 28, 2025 meeting. The council is the final approval authority noted in staff materials. If the council approves the amendment and adopts the related findings, the updated safety element will be incorporated into the city—s general plan and the evacuation analysis and evacuation plan will be added as appendices.

Key quotes: "The item before you this evening is an item to discuss an amendment to the safety element of the general plan and the table of contents for the general plan," Denise Thomas, community development director, said when she opened the staff presentation. "We took people from where they are, routed them to a safe gateway which was seen to be the U.S. 101 so that they can make it safely to the safe gateway and then from there they'd be able to move on to their ultimate place of safety," Matt Stewart, the city traffic engineer, said while describing the model.

Ending: The Planning Commission—s recommendation forwards a technical evacuation analysis that staff says meets state requirements while formally asking the City Council to consider further study of a daytime scenario and to strengthen cross‑jurisdictional and school communications before final action at the council level.