Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Evacuation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Agoura Hills residents urge council to reconsider approval process for Regency project, cite evacuation risks on Canaan Road
Summary
Several residents told the council that adding hundreds of housing units near Canaan Road could worsen summer traffic and create dangerous evacuation chokepoints; speakers urged the council to exercise discretion and defend community safety.
Multiple Agoura Hills residents used the public-comment period to warn the City Council that construction of hundreds of apartments near Canaan Road would worsen traffic and could create life‑threatening evacuation bottlenecks in a high-fire area.
Lorraine Crawford, who said she has lived in Agoura Hills for 24 years, told the council she opposes “adding hundreds of more cars in our ultra‑high fire zone off of Canaan Road” and said the city’s website shows the Regency project is “approved ministerially,” a process she described as involving “little or no personal judgment or discretion.”
Glenn Crawford said the Regency development, which speakers estimated would add roughly 300 units, would place more people into an existing choke point near the 101 Freeway and Canaan Road and increase the risk of loss of life during a fast‑moving wildfire. Both speakers referenced the Woolsey and Paradise fires as examples of how quickly fire can cut off escape routes.
Oren Gottlieb, who said he lives next to Chumash Park, described daily congestion around Agoura High School and detailed measures he asked the city to consider to improve neighborhood egress: painting “Do Not Block” markings and installing signage at the Parkeith Drive–Argo Street intersection, adding yield signs to give exiting residents right of way, and adding solid white lines to clarify parking areas and deter lane‑splitting. Gottlieb said mornings can be dangerous for families trying to leave the neighborhood.
Council members did not debate or take action during the public‑comment item; the mayor noted that items not on the agenda cannot be discussed by the council at that time. Speakers said they had sought help from state and federal lawmakers and asked the council to “fight for us” and consider relocating development or exercising discretion in approvals.
The public comments combined evacuation safety concerns with specific traffic‑management proposals; no formal council direction or vote on the Regency project was recorded during the meeting.
