Construction schedules for some of the cumulative projects considered may align with implementation of the proposed Project. Construction noise and vibration are localized impacts that rapidly attenuate as distance from the source increases, especially within an urban environment. In addition, each individual project would need to comply with City standards regarding construction.
Therefore, cumulative impacts related to construction noise and vibration would be less than significant.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.9-18
The Project would have no impact related to noise or vibration during operation, nor is the Project area located within two miles of a public airport or within the noise contours identified in an airport land use plan. Therefore, the Project cannot contribute to a cumulative impact related to noise or vibration during operation, or excessive noise levels from aircraft operations.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Recreation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.10-1
4.10 Recreation
This section analyzes potential impacts to recreation. Specifically, this section discusses the environmental and regulatory setting, the criteria used to determine the significance of environmental impacts related to recreation, and potential impacts related to recreation that would result from implementation of the proposed Project.
4.10.1 Setting
a. Regional Parks and Recreation Facilities
The Project area encompasses all of the City of Agoura Hills. The Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area (SMMNRA) borders the City to the east and south. The SMMNRA is comprised of approximately 153,075 acres, features over 500 miles of trails, and is considered one of the largest urban national recreation areas in the country (City of Agoura Hills 2010a). SMMNRA is jointly operated by the National Park Service, California State Parks, Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, and Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority. Popular recreation sites within the SMMNRA include (National Park Service 2025):
Cheesebro/Palo Comado Canyon. This recreation area features hiking, biking, and equestrian routes through generally undisturbed areas. The area is joined to the east by the Upper Las Virgenes Canyon Open Space Preserve (formerly Ahmanson Ranch), which consists of nearly 3,000 acres of open space.
Paramount Ranch. This 2,700-acre resource offers hiking trails, a picnic area, and a western town movie set.
Peter Strauss Ranch. This resource offers hiking, concerts, picnics, and art exhibits on approximately 78 acres.
Malibu Creek State Park. This recreation area provides over 4,000 acres of open space land and features hiking and equestrian trails that lead through the wilderness preserve and across Mulholland Highway.
Other recreation facilities located near the city include parks within the Conejo Valley Recreation and Park District, parks within the community of Oak Park, and recreational resources within the communities of Thousand Oaks and Westlake Village (City of Agoura Hills 2022). b. Local Parks and Recreation Facilities
The City of Agoura Hills has a variety of parks, recreation, and open space areas that provide land for recreational uses and the preservation of natural features. There are approximately 1,378 acres of land within the city classified as Local Park, Restricted Open Space, and Open Space/Deed Restricted land uses, all of which are intended to protect lands for open space uses. The Restricted Open Space land use includes areas for which development rights are assumed to exist, but development potential is constrained because of natural habitats, oak trees, visual/aesthetic values or other constraints. The Open Space/Deed Restricted land use includes areas with deed restrictions that provide additional limitations on their use as open space. Open Space/Deed Restricted areas are owned by both public agencies and private homeowners’ associations; Morrison Ranch and Chateau Park are two residential tracks with large open space acreages that are maintained by private homeowners’ associations. The city also has approximately 28 acres of Commercial Recreation land City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.10-2
use, which include commercial uses that are recreation-oriented with ancillary retail sales and restaurants, such as golf courses (City of Agoura Hills 2022).
There are seven key open space resources within the city including Lindero Canyon, Medea Creek, Ladyface Mountain, Palo Comado Hills, Morrison Hills, Southeast Ridge, and Indian Hills. These resources provide access to active and passive open spaces throughout the city and the surrounding area, as well as biological habitats for wildlife and visual value for the community (City of Agoura Hills 2022). In addition to open space areas, the City owns and maintains eight local neighborhood parks and two community centers including Chumash Park, Forest Cove Park, Morrison Park, Old Agoura Park, Reyes Adobe Park, Sumac Park, Agoura Hills Community Center, Agoura Hills/Calabasas Community Center. Local schools also serve as recreational facilities. Specifically, the Las Virgenes Unified School District includes five school sites that offer recreational uses outside of school hours. These sites offer open playfields and specialized facilities such as a pool, tennis courts, and a gymnasium (City of Agoura Hills 2022).
c. Trails
There is a network of existing trails throughout the City of Agoura Hills. This trail system links open space and recreational resources within the City of Agoura Hills to surrounding communities, including Thousand Oaks, Oak Park, and Westlake Village. Equestrian trails throughout the Old Agoura area provide equestrian access to the Santa Monica Mountains. The Zuma Ridge Trail also traverses the city, which allows for both pedestrian and equestrian access and connects to the national parklands surrounding the city (City of Agoura Hills 2010a).
4.10.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal Regulations
There are no federal regulations related to recreation that apply to the proposed Project. b. State Regulations
State Public Park Preservation Act of 1971
The State Public Park Preservation Act is an instrument for protecting and preserving parkland in California. Under Division 5, Chapter 2.5 of the Public Resource Code, cities and counties may not acquire any real property that is in use as a public park for any non-park use unless compensation, land, or both, are provided to replace the parkland acquired. This provides no net loss of parkland and facilities.
c. Regional and Local Regulations
City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035
The City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 was adopted on March 24, 2010 (updated on August 10, 2022) by the City Council (City of Agoura Hills 2022). The City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 is a strategic document designed to guide the physical development of the city until the year 2035.
Among other things, the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 sets out the pattern of land uses, including residential, commercial, and industrial. It also establishes the system of streets, bikeways, and trails. The City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 addresses a wide variety of subject areas, Environmental Impact Analysis
Recreation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.10-3
including housing, traffic, natural resources, land uses, economic development, noise, and public safety.
The City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 contains the following goals and policies related to recreation, which would apply to the proposed Project.
Goal M-8. Enhanced bicycle facilities throughout Agoura Hills for short trips and recreational uses.
Policy M-8.1. Provide bikeway connectivity between residential areas and surrounding natural resource areas, parks, schools, employment centers, and other activity centers in the community.
Policy M-8.3. Encourage recreational biking and promote the community‘s mountain biking trail system to residents and visitors.
Goal CS-1. Balanced and comprehensive recreation facilities for the Agoura Hills community.
Policy CS-1.1. Develop and maintain parks and recreational areas in accordance with the goals in Table CS-1.
Policy CS-1.3. Connect recreational facilities with walking paths, trails, bikeways, and equestrian trails.
Policy CS-1.5. Ensure that the location and design of all parks, recreation, and community centers are compatible with existing adjoining uses.
Policy CS-1.6. Distribute parks and facilities so that they are well dispersed throughout the community, and include recreation opportunities for all residents Policy CS-1.7. When renovating and creating new recreational facilities, ensure accessible standards as specified in state and federal laws, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Goal CS-2. Recreational programs and services that promote personal enrichment, healthy lifestyles, wellness, fun, lifelong learning, skill development, and community relationships.
Policy CS-2.1. Provide a wide range of recreation opportunities designed to enrich the lives of all residents, including passive, active, individual, and organized recreational services, including reasonable accommodations for special needs individuals and groups.
In accordance with Goal CS-1 of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035, the city seeks to maintain eight acres of parks and open space areas for every 1,000 residents. This goal is further divided into three acres of local park and recreational spaces for every 1,000 residents and five acres of open space areas for every 1,000 residents (City of Agoura Hills 2022). According to the California Department of Finance (DOF), the City of Agoura Hills had a population of 19,904 on January 1, 2025 (DOF 2025). Based on the approximately 1,378 acres of park and open space land uses, the city currently maintains nearly 70 acres of park and open space area for every 1,000 residents.
City of Agoura Hills Municipal Code
Article IX of the Agoura Hills Municipal Code (AHMC) contains the city’s Zoning Code, which serves as the primary implementation tool of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035. The Zoning Code designates certain zoning districts to maintain open space and recreation areas within the city.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.10-4
Specifically, Section 9481 of the Zoning Ordinance designates the Open Space-Restricted District (OS-R) for areas that should be preserved as natural open space because of natural habitat, visual and aesthetic value or other reasons by restricting or transferring development rights. Section 9490 of the Zoning Ordinance designates the Open Space – Deed Restricted District (OS-DR) for areas which should be preserved as natural open space because of natural habitat, visual and aesthetic value or other reason by restricting development rights through deed restrictions. Section 9411 of the Zoning Ordinance designates the Local Park District (P) for local recreational and passive uses compatible with the nearby residential areas and the community.
Article X, Chapter 8 of the AHMC defines parkland dedication fees and codifies the parkland service level goals outlined in Chapter 3, Infrastructure and Community Services, of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035. The regulations require subdividers to dedicate land to the city at a ratio based on proposed dwelling units to create parkland and recreation space.
4.10.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
As discussed in Section 4.0, Environmental Impact Analysis, all Project components are analyzed at the programmatic level. Project components include the Bicycle Master Plan (BMP), the VMT Mitigation Exchange and Banking Program (Program), and the General Plan Amendments (Amendments). Projects included within the BMP are grouped into Class I facilities, Class II facilities, Class III facilities, Class IV facilities, and enhanced bicycle treatments, as identified in Section 2.5, Project Characteristics, and in Table 1 of Chapter 2, Project Description. The impact analysis contained herein provides a programmatic analysis of anticipated impacts for each of the five facility classes, as the individual project impacts associated with each class of facility are expected to be similar. Because the City seeks to prioritize implementation of the Medea Creek Path (Path) and the Agoura High School Connection (Connection), the Path and the Connection have their own subheadings within the Class I Facility impact analysis subsection to provide a more specific assessment of their environmental impacts. Impacts associated with the General Plan Amendments are analyzed within their own subsection.
As discussed in Chapter 2, Project Description, the only projects that are currently planned, unfunded, and could potentially be funded by the VMT Mitigation Exchange and Banking Program are those currently included within the Bicycle Master Plan. Therefore, the impact analysis contained herein does not include a subsection for impacts associated with the Program, as the individual project list for the BMP and the Program are identical and impacts associated with the BMP would encompass impacts associated with the Program.
Within the following environmental analysis, impacts associated with each Project component are explicitly identified under the respective heading.
According to State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, impacts related to recreation would be significant if the proposed Project would:
Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; or, Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Environmental Impact Analysis
Recreation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.10-5
b. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 1: Would the Project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Impact REC-1 BICYCLE FACILITIES IMPLEMENTED UNDER THE PROPOSED BMP WOULD NOT INCREASE
THE USE OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES SUCH THAT PHYSICAL DETERIORATION WOULD OCCUR OR BE ACCELERATED. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
Class I Facilities
Construction of the Class I facilities would require clearing and grubbing, pavement demolition, grading, utility relocation, retaining wall or fencing installation, asphalt paving or repaving, street and undercrossing improvements, striping, and revegetation. Storage, staging, and active work areas would be established during the construction period for Class I facilities. These areas would be located outside of existing roadways within the individual project boundaries. At the time of construction, should the construction contractor require additional staging areas, they would be responsible for identifying and securing long-term staging areas on previously disturbed storage yards, the locations of which are currently unknown. Given the known locations of proposed Class I facilities, storage, staging, and active work areas would not occur within or adjacent to recreational facilities. Therefore, construction impacts associated with the implementation of Class I facilities would be less than significant
Operation of the Class I facilities would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along shared use paths. Implementation of Class I facilities would result in new and improved multimodal access throughout the city, including to existing parks and open space resources. Improved access could incrementally increase the number of visitors at recreational facilities within and surrounding the city. However, as determined in Section 4.13.5, Population and Housing, the proposed Project would not induce substantial population growth. Therefore, operation of the Class I facilities would not result in an increase in the use of existing recreational facilities such that the city would be unable to meet their service ratio goals, nor would substantial physical deterioration of recreational facilities occur or be accelerated. Operational impacts would be less than significant.
MEDEA CREEK PATH
The proposed Path would result in construction of a Class I facility along Medea Creek from Agoura Road to the northern city limit. Storage, staging, and active work areas would be established during construction activities. Because there is designated open space surrounding Medea Creek, the establishment of storage, staging, and active work areas could occur within or adjacent to this open space, which could restrict access to this recreational resource.
The City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 includes ratio goals for park and open space resources.
Specifically, the city seeks to maintain eight acres of park and open space areas for every 1,000 residents. The city currently maintains nearly 70 acres of park and open space areas for every 1,000 residents. Therefore, if the establishment of storage, staging, and active work areas were to restrict access to an open space area, residents could access alternative recreational facilities within and immediately surrounding the city while the city continues to meet its ratio goals for park and open space resources. As such, any temporary increase in the use of alternative recreational facilities City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.10-6
would not result in substantial physical deterioration of the alternative recreational facility.
Construction impacts associated with the implementation of the Path would be less than significant.
Operation of the Path would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along a shared use path.
Implementation of the Path would result in improved access to Chumash Park and the established open space areas surrounding Medea Creek, which could incrementally increase the number of visitors at these recreational resources. As determined in Section 4.13.5, Population and Housing, the proposed Project would not induce substantial population growth. Therefore, operation of the Path would not result in an increase in the use of existing recreational facilities such that the city would be unable to meet their service ratio goals, nor would substantial physical deterioration of recreational facilities occur or be accelerated. Operational impacts would be less than significant.
AGOURA HIGH SCHOOL CONNECTION
The proposed Connection would result in construction of a Class I facility connecting Thousand Oaks Boulevard to Fountain Place along the northern border of Agoura High School. Storage, staging, and active work areas would be established during construction activities. Although Agoura High School does offer recreational uses near the location of this proposed facility, storage, staging, and active work areas would not be established on school property. Therefore, construction activities would not result in the increased use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. No construction impacts would occur.
Operation of the Connection would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along a shared use path.
Implementation of the Connection would result in improved access to the recreational features of Agoura High School, which could incrementally increase the number of visitors at this recreational resource. As determined in Section 4.13.5, Population and Housing, the proposed Project would not induce substantial population growth. Therefore, operation of the Connection would not result in an increase in the use of existing recreational facilities such that the city would be unable to meet their service ratio goals, nor would substantial physical deterioration of recreational facilities occur or be accelerated. Operational impacts would be less than significant.
Class II Facilities
The establishment of Class II facilities would generally require roadway restriping and reconfiguration of lane widths to accommodate new dedicated bike lanes. Restriping can be completed within a single work period and does not require the establishment of storage, staging, or work areas. As such, restriping activities would not restrict access to or result in temporary closures of existing parks or recreational facilities throughout the city.
Pavement widening would be necessary on Driver Avenue, between Easterly Road and Colodny Drive, and on Cornell Road, between Agoura Road and Cornell Way, to allow for the addition of bicycle lanes. These activities would require the establishment of storage, staging, or work areas.
Although unanticipated, pavement widening on Driver Avenue and the establishment of storage, staging, or work areas could restrict access to or result in temporary closures of the Old Agoura Park. If temporary construction impacts to Old Agoura Park were to occur, residents could access alternative recreational facilities within and immediately surrounding the city while the city continues to meet its ratio goals for park and open space resources. As such, any temporary increase in the use of recreational facilities would not result in substantial physical deterioration of the facility. Construction impacts associated with the implementation of Class II facilities would be less than significant.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Recreation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.10-7
Operation of the Class II facilities would consist of bicycle travel along delineated bike lanes on existing roadways. Implementation of these facilities would not provide new or improved access to existing parks and open space resources within and surrounding the city given that no new roadways are proposed. Furthermore, as determined in Section 4.13.5, Population and Housing, the proposed Project would not induce substantial population growth. Therefore, operation of the Class II facilities would not result in an increase in the use of existing recreational facilities such that the city would be unable to meet their service ratio goals, nor would substantial physical deterioration of recreational facilities occur or be accelerated. Operational impacts would be less than significant.
Class III Facilities
Establishment of Class III facilities would be limited to the restriping of existing roads to identify bike routes. Restriping can be completed within a single work period and does not require the establishment of storage, staging, or work areas. As such, restriping activities associated with the implementation of Class III facilities would not restrict access to or result in temporary closures of existing parks or recreational facilities throughout the city.
Operation of the Class III facilities would consist of bicycle travel along shared use travel lanes on existing roadways. Implementation of these facilities would not provide new or improved access to existing parks and open space resources within and surrounding the city given that no new roadways are proposed. Furthermore, as determined in Section 4.13.5, Population and Housing, the proposed Project would not induce substantial population growth. Therefore, operation of the Class III facilities would not result in an increase in the use of existing recreational facilities such that the city would be unable to meet their service ratio goals, nor would substantial physical deterioration of recreational facilities occur or be accelerated. Operational impacts would be less than significant.
Class IV Facilities
Construction of Class IV facilities would require pavement demolition, minor grading, bollard or fencing installation, asphalt paving or repaving, and striping. Implementation of the Class IV facilities would occur adjacent to but separate from existing roadway ROWs. These activities could require the establishment of storage, staging, or work areas. Given the known locations of proposed Class I facilities, storage, staging, and active work areas could occur within or adjacent to recreational facilities, which could restrict access to or result in temporary closures of the recreational facilities.
If temporary construction impacts to recreational facilities were to occur, residents could access alternative recreational facilities within and immediately surrounding the city while the city continues to meet its ratio goals for park and open space resources. As such, any temporary increase in the use of recreational facilities would not result in substantial physical deterioration of the facility. Construction impacts associated with the implementation of Class IV facilities would be less than significant
Operation of the Class IV facilities would consist of bicycle travel along physically separated bikeways adjacent to existing travel lanes. Implementation of these facilities would not provide new or improved access to existing parks and open space resources within and surrounding the city given that no new roadways are proposed. Furthermore, as determined in Section 4.13.5, Population and Housing, the proposed Project would not induce substantial population growth. Therefore, operation of the Class IV facilities would not result in an increase in the use of existing recreational facilities such that the city would be unable to meet their service ratio goals, nor would substantial physical deterioration of recreational facilities occur or be accelerated. Operational impacts would be less than significant.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.10-8
Enhanced Bicycle Treatments
Enhanced bicycle treatments could include street striping and restriping, signage and wayfinding, bicycle signals and detection at traffic signals, bicycle parking, and bicycle repair facilities. These facilities would be implemented at various locations throughout the city within or adjacent to existing, new, or improved bikeways. Construction and implementation of these facilities would be completed within a single work period and would not require the establishment of storage, staging, or work areas. As such, implementation of the enhanced bicycle treatments would not restrict access to or result in temporary closures of existing parks or recreational facilities throughout the city. Construction impacts would be less than significant.
Operation of the enhanced bicycle treatments would include continued use of existing bicycle facilities, storing of bicycles at new parking facilities, and use of bicycle repair facilities. Operation of these facilities would not provide new or improved access to existing parks and open space resources within and surrounding the city. Furthermore, as determined in Section 4.13.5, Population and Housing, the proposed Project would not induce substantial population growth. Therefore, operation of the enhanced bicycle treatments would not result in an increase in the use of existing recreational facilities such that the city would be unable to meet their service ratio goals, nor would substantial physical deterioration of recreational facilities occur or be accelerated. Operational impacts would be less than significant.
General Plan Amendments
As part of the proposed Project, the City must amend Chapter 3, Infrastructure and Community Services, of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 to ensure consistency with the proposed BMP. These General Plan Amendments shift the focus from prioritizing automobile mobility to reducing VMT alternative transportation modes like walking and biking, guided by the BMP. The proposed General Plan Amendments would not result in construction or operation activities beyond existing conditions. Therefore, the Amendments would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures would be required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 2: Does the Project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might adversely affect the environment? Impact REC-2 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN THE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES THAT COULD ADVERSELY AFFECT THE ENVIRONMENT. THOSE IMPACTS ARE IDENTIFIED THROUGHOUT THIS PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. IMPACTS WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE.
The proposed Project consists of a Bicycle Master Plan, which proposes to build upon the city’s existing bicycle network by constructing approximately 30 miles of new bikeways, implementing improvements to existing bikeways, and providing new enhanced bicycle treatments throughout the Environmental Impact Analysis
Recreation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.10-9
city. Implementation of the BMP would result in the construction and expansion of recreational facilities. The environmental impacts of implementing the BMP have been evaluated throughout this Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (PEIR). No additional impacts outside those disclosed herein would occur. With the implementation of mitigation measures identified throughout this PEIR, impacts related to Cultural Resources would remain significant and unavoidable; impacts related to Biological Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Noise would be potentially significant and would require the implementation of mitigation measures. All other impacts would be less than significant. No additional impacts related to Recreation would occur.
As part of the proposed Project, the City must also amend Chapter 3, Infrastructure and Community Services, of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 to ensure consistency with the proposed BMP. The proposed General Plan Amendments would not result in physical development includes recreational facilities or requires the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures
Refer to Section 4.3, Biological Resources, Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, Section 4.5, Geology and Soils, Section 4.6, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Section 4.9, Noise, for full text of relevant mitigation measures.
No additional mitigation measures related to Recreation would be required.
Significance After Mitigation
Following the implementation of mitigation measures, impacts related to Cultural Resources would remain significant and unavoidable; impacts related to Biological Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Noise, would be reduced to less than significant.
No additional impacts related to Recreation would occur.
4.10.4 Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope for cumulative impacts to recreation is the City of Agoura Hills and adjoining recreational and open space facilities. This geographic scope is appropriate because of the connectivity of recreational resources within and surrounding the city. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, as identified in Table 3-1, include residential, commercial, and recreational development. Cumulative development could directly and indirectly result in population growth within the City of Agoura Hills, which could increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. This impact would be potentially significant if population growth associated with cumulative development were to prevent the city from meeting its recreation service goals, as identified within the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035. The proposed Project would result in new and improved multimodal access throughout the city, including access to existing parks and open space resources, but would not result in population growth such that the city would be unable to meet its recreation service goals. Therefore, the Project would not contribute considerably to a cumulative impact.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.10-10
This page intentionally left blank.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.11-1
4.11 Transportation
The analysis in this section considers potential impacts to transportation. Specifically, this section discusses the environmental and regulatory setting; the criteria used to determine the significance of environmental impacts related to transportation; and potential impacts related to transportation that would result from implementation of the proposed Project.
4.11.1 Setting
a. Roadway System
Regional Highways
The Project area encompasses all of the City of Agoura Hills. U.S. Highway 101 (Ventura Freeway) is the only major highway in the city, connecting it to other communities in Southern California. It runs east-west in the southern portion of the city. There are four interchanges along the Ventura Freeway that provide access to the city including the Reyes Adobe interchange, the Kanan interchange, the Chesebro/Palo Comado Canyon interchange, and the Liberty Canyon interchange (City of Agoura Hills 2022a).
Primary Arterials
Primary arterials are streets and highways that are designed to move high volumes of traffic between the freeway and local circulation system. Primary arterials typically include four to six divided lanes, and access to primary arterials from private properties and collector streets is limited.
Primary arterials in the City of Agoura Hills include (City of Agoura Hills 2022a):
Kanan Road, a north-south corridor that spans the entirety of the central portion of the city.
This facility generally provides two travel lanes in each direction and is divided by a raised median. As Kanan Road approaches the Ventura Freeway, three lanes are provided in the southbound direction beginning at Canwood Street. South of Agoura Road to the southern city limit, Kanan Road provides one travel lane in each direction. Limited access is provided to development along this corridor and street parking is prohibited. The posted speed limit is 45 miles per hour (mph) south of Agoura Road and north of Laro Drive, 40 mph between Canwood Street and Laro Drive, and 35 mph between Agoura Road and Canwood Street. Thousand Oaks Boulevard, an east-west corridor between Carell Avenue and the western city limit. This facility provides two travel lanes in each direction. There is limited access to development along this corridor, and street parking is prohibited west of Kanan Road. The posted speed limit is 45 mph.
Secondary Arterials
Secondary arterials are similar to primary arterials but serve a more localized function. Secondary arterials generally have a narrower right-of-way (ROW) than primary arterials and provide two to four divided or undivided travel lanes. Secondary arterials provide more access to adjacent development and have less parking restrictions. Secondary arterials in the city include (City of Agoura Hills 2022a):
Agoura Road, an east-west corridor that spans the entirety of the southernmost part of the city.
This facility provides one travel lane in each direction between the eastern city limits and just City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.11-2
west of Kanan Road and two travel lanes in each direction from just west of Kanan Road to the western city limits. The segment of Agoura Road east of Cornell Road to the eastern boundary of the Agoura Village Specific Plan Area is semi-rural with no curb, gutter, sidewalk, or streetlights. On-street parking is permitted along this facility from Kanan Road to Cornell Road and in the Old Agoura commercial area. The posted speed limit is 45 mph. Reyes Adobe Road, a north-south corridor between the northwestern city limit and Agoura Road. This facility provides two travel lanes in each direction between Canwood Street and Lake Lindero Road; south of Canwood Street, the facility narrows to one travel lane in each direction over the Ventura Freeway overcrossing, then widens again to two lanes in each direction south of the Ventura Freeway. There are no driveways north of the Ventura Freeway and access to cross streets is limited. On-street parking is prohibited along the entire corridor, and the posted speed limit is 40 mph.
Canwood Street, an east-west corridor between Driver Avenue and Lake Crest Drive running parallel to the north side of the Ventura Freeway. This facility provides one travel lane in each direction between Lake Lindero Road and Chesebro Road. Access is provided to adjacent development, and on-street parking is permitted west of Reyes Adobe Road. On-street parking is prohibited between Reyes Adobe Road and Chesebro Road. The posted speed limit is 35 mph, except between Reyes Adobe Road and Chesebro Road where it increases to 40 mph. Palo Comado Canyon Road, a north-south corridor that connects the Driver Avenue/Chesebro Road intersection north of the Ventura Freeway to Chesebro Road south of the Ventura Freeway. This facility provides one travel lane in each direction, development along the corridor is limited, and on-street parking is prohibited. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. Liberty Canyon Road, a north-south corridor that extends from the Ventura Freeway south to the southern city limit. One travel lane is provided in each direction and on-street parking is permitted. The posted speed limit is 40 mph.
Semi-Rural Arterials
Semi-Rural Arterials reflect semi-rural character. They lack continuous curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights, and allow for narrower rights-of-way (minimum 36 feet). The semi-rural arterial classification also involves two travel lanes and Class II bicycle lanes. Semi-rural arterials in the city include (City of Agoura Hills 2024):
Agoura Road, an east-west corridor that spans the entirety of the southernmost part of the city.
From Cornell Road to the eastern Agoura Village Specific Plan Area, this facility is classified as a semi-rural arterial.
Collector Streets
Collector streets are designed to distribute traffic from higher classified arterial streets to local access streets and adjacent properties. Collector streets generally provide two to three undivided travel lanes. Collector streets in the city include (City of Agoura Hills 2022a):
Driver Avenue, an east-west corridor between Chesebro Road and Argos Street. This facility has one travel lane in each direction and provides local access to adjacent neighborhoods. On-street parking is allowed, and the posted speed limit is 30 mph.
Chesebro Road, an east-west corridor between the eastern city limit and Canwood Street.
Chesebro also serves as a north-south collector street between Palo Comado Canyon Road and the Ventura Freeway eastbound on-ramp. This facility has one travel lane in each direction and Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.11-3
provides on-street parking on the north side of the road between Canwood Street and Palo Comado Canyon Road, along both sides of the road south of Dorothy Drive, and along the south side of the road between Palo Comado Canyon Road and Agoura Road. The posted speed limit ranges from 25 mph to 35 mph.
Local Streets
Local streets typically have two undivided lanes and are designed to be low-volume and low-speed, providing access to individual properties. Local residential streets are generally not intended to handle through traffic. Arterial, connector, and local streets within the City of Agoura Hills are shown in Figure 4.11-1, below (City of Agoura Hills 2022a). b. Transit System
The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) and the City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) provide regional public transit services to the City of Agoura Hills. Metro service provides access between Thousand Oaks and Warner Center in the west San Fernando Valley while the LADOT Commuter Express provides service between Downtown Los Angeles and Thousand Oaks/Newbury Park (City of Agoura Hills 2022a). Specifically, Metro Line 161 provides local service between Warner Center and the City of Thousand Oaks. Within the City of Agoura Hills, this route generally runs along Agoura Road to Roadside Drive, Kanan Road, and Thousand Oaks Boulevard. Overall, this bus line includes 15 stops within the city limits. LADOT Commuter Express 422 and LADOT Commuter Express 423 are express commuter lines that travel from Downtown Los Angeles to the City of Thousand Oaks. Within the City of Agoura Hills, these lines operate on Kanan Road and Thousand Oaks Boulevard and include seven stops in the western portion of the city.
In addition to the regional transit services described above, the City of Agoura Hills operates a diala-ride service and a seasonal shuttle service (City of Agoura Hills 2022a). The Agoura Hills Dial-ARide service provides a demand-responsive door-to-door transportation service Monday through Friday at a reduced fare to residents who are 65 or older and to individuals with disabilities. Services are provided between any two points within the city limits of Agoura Hills and the Malibu Lake area.
There are also trips to the cities of Westlake Village and Thousand Oaks, to the community of Oak Park, and appointment-based destinations to the community of Woodland Hills for an increased fare. The Summer Beach Bus provides service between the City of Agoura Hills and local beach communities during the summer season (June to August), typically to Zuma and Leo Carrillo Beaches. Bus stops include Lindero Canyon Middle School, Agoura High School, and Agoura Road at Liberty Canyon Road.
Transit available in the City of Agoura Hills also includes the Kanan Shuttle, which is operated by the City of Thousand Oaks. The Kanan Shuttle, which runs on clean natural gas and is ADA-compliant, travels to residential areas and neighborhood schools near Kanan Road in the City of Agoura Hills and Oak Park community. The Kanan Shuttle service is provided by the County of Ventura in partnership with the City of Agoura Hills, Oak Park Unified School District, and the Oak Park County Service Area #4 (City of Thousand Oaks 2025).
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.11-4
Figure 4.11-1 Circulation Plan and Street Classification Source: City of Agoura Hills 2022a
Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.11-5
c. Bicycle Network
The existing bicycle network in the City of Agoura Hills is comprised of 1.3 miles of bicycle routes and 9.2 miles of bicycle lanes (City of Agoura Hills 2022b). The bicycle network is generally comprised of Class II and Class III facilities, which are shared facilities on roadways. Bicycle facilities within the city will be described as follows in Chapter 3, Infrastructure and Community Services, of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 following adoption of the proposed General Plan Amendments:
Kanan Road—A Class II facility between the northern City limits and Hillrise Drive.
Reyes Adobe Road—A mixed Class I and Class II facility between Lindero Canyon Road and Canwood Street. The Class II facility comprises the majority of the bicycle route on Reyes Adobe Road between Lindero Canyon Road and Passageway Place; the Class III section lies between Passageway Place and Canwood Street.
Forest Cove Lane—A mixed Class II and Class III facility between Thousand Oaks Boulevard and Canwood Street. The Class II facility is available between Rainbow Creek Drive and Canwood Street. The Class III facility is provided in the northbound direction between Rainbow Crest Drive and Thousand Oaks Boulevard.
Thousand Oaks Boulevard—A Class II facility that spans between the western City limits and Argos Street (eastbound only) or Kanan Road (westbound only).
Agoura Road—A Class II facility spanning the entire width of the City between the western and eastern City limits.
Rainbow Crest Drive—A Class III facility that crosses Reyes Adobe Road and provides access between Forest Cove Lane and Mainmast Drive.
Canwood Street—A mixed Class II and Class III facility that crosses Reyes Adobe Road. The Class II facility is provided east of Reyes Adobe Road to Forest Cove Drive; the Class III facility is available west of Reyes Adobe Road to Lake Lindero Road.
Palo Comado Canyon Road—A Class II facility between Chesebro Road and Agoura Court, crossing the Palo Comado Canyon Interchange; this was implemented after the General Plan Update and coincided with the Palo Comado Canyon Interchange improvement.
The existing bicycle facility network is shown in Figure 4.11-2, below. d. Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities available within the city are comprised of sidewalks, crosswalks, and a footbridge over the Ventura Freeway. Sidewalks are generally available to link the residential communities to arterial roads. Several sections of roadways do not currently have sidewalks available including Driver Avenue, between Easterly Road and Chesebro Road; Kanan Road, between Laro Drive and the northern city limit; portions of Agoura Road, between the western city limit and Kanan Road, and east of Kanan Road to the eastern city limit; and, Reyes Adobe Road, north of Rainbow Hill Road to Lake Lindero Drive. There are crosswalks available at all signalized intersections. Pedestrian linkages between the northern and southern sides of the Ventura Freeway are available through sidewalks on the bridges of Reyes Adobe Road, Kanan Road, and Palo Comado Canyon Road overpasses. There is also a footbridge available across the Ventura Freeway, joining Canwood Street and Roadside Drive west of the Palo Comado Canyon Interchange (City of Agoura Hills 2022a).
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.11-6
Figure 4.11-2 Agoura Hills Existing Bike Network
Source: City of Agoura Hills 2024
Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.11-7
4.11.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal Regulations
There are no federal regulations related to transportation applicable to the proposed Project. b. State Regulations
Caltrans Highway Design Manual
Chapter 200 and 1000, Geometric Design and Structure Standards and Bicycle Transportation Design, of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Highway Design Manual outlines safe geometric design of bicycle facilities and serves as the official design standard for bikeways in California. Chapter 200 focuses on appropriate stopping distances, curvatures, superelevation transitions, overcrossings/undercrossings, and bicycle railings for Class II and III facilities. Chapter 1000 intends to help accommodate motor vehicle and bicycle traffic on the roadway system, or as a complement to the road system, to meet the needs of cyclists for Class I facilities. This chapter also classifies and defines bicycle facilities (Caltrans 2020, 2025). Design Information Bulletin 89 provides similar guidance specifically for Class IV bikeways (Caltrans 2022).
Caltrans Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
Chapter 6C of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) outlines the essential components and principles for establishing safe and effective Temporary Traffic Control zones during road work or incidents. The goal is to ensure the safety of road users and workers while maintaining efficient traffic flow. Key guidance elements include proper signage, buffer zones, barriers and channelizing devices, reduced speed limits, and lane closure (Caltrans 2014).
California Transportation Plan 2050
The California Transportation Plan is prepared by Caltrans every five years to provide a long-range policy framework to meet the State’s future mobility needs and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to goals set by the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill [AB 32], and implementing legislation Senate Bill (SB) 375 (discussed below). The most recent California Transportation Plan 2050 was adopted in 2021 (Caltrans 2021). The California Transportation Plan defines goals, performance-based policies, and strategies to achieve the State’s collective vision for California’s future Statewide, integrated, multimodal transportation system by envisioning a sustainable system that improves mobility and enhances quality of life. Through ongoing engagement, the California Transportation Plan is intended to provide goals and visions to support a fully integrated, multimodal, sustainable transportation system that supports the quality of life, prosperous economy, human and environmental health, and social equity.
Assembly Bill 1358
Assembly Bill (AB) 1358 requires the legislative body of a city or county, upon revision of the circulation element of their general plan, to identify how the jurisdiction will provide for the routine accommodation of all users of the roadway including drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, individuals with disabilities, seniors, and public transit users. The characteristics of complete streets include the following: integrated and comprehensive transportation network; multi-model design City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.11-8
accommodating walking, cycling, transit, driving, parking, and deliveries; street design correlating to the adjacent land uses; pedestrian and bicycle facilities providing connectivity and promoting safety; uniform landscaping, including street trees and landscaped medians and sidewalks; and sustainable design minimizing runoff, heat island effects, and responding to climatic demands and conservation of scarce resources. (City of Agoura Hills 2022b).
Senate Bill 375
Senate Bill (SB) 375 requires that a metropolitan planning organization adopt a sustainable communities strategy as part of its regional transportation plan to reduce GHG emissions from cars and light trucks in a region. SB 375 requires the State Air Resources Board, working in consultation with metropolitan planning organizations, to provide each region with GHG emission reduction targets for the automobile and light truck sector. Agoura Hills is included within the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).
Senate Bill 743
On September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 743 into law. SB 743 changed the way transportation impact analysis is conducted as part of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance. These changes eliminated automobile delay, level of service, and other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as a basis for determining significant impacts under CEQA.
Prior rules treated automobile delay and congestion as an environmental impact. SB 743 requires the State CEQA Guidelines to prescribe an analysis that better accounts for transit and reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. In December 2018, Office of Planning and Research (OPR) released the final update to State CEQA Guidelines consistent with SB 743, which recommends using vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the most appropriate metric of transportation impact to align local environmental review under CEQA with California’s long-term greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals. The Guidelines require all jurisdictions in California to use VMT-based thresholds of significance no later than July 1, 2020.
At the same time as the release of the updated State CEQA Guidelines, OPR also released a nonbinding Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, which outlines potential VMT analysis methodologies and thresholds of significance for use by agencies in California based on substantial evidence developed by OPR related to achievement of the State’s greenhouse gas emissions reductions targets (GOLUCI 2018).
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 and OPR Technical Advisory State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 implements SB 743 and establishes VMT as the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. The primary components of Section 15064.3 include:
Identifies VMT as the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts; Declares that a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact (except for projects increasing roadway capacity); Creates a rebuttable presumption of no significant transportation impacts for (a) land use projects within one-half mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.11-9
high quality transit corridor, (b) land use projects that reduce VMT below existing conditions, and (c) transportation projects that reduce or have no impact on VMT; Allows a lead agency to qualitatively evaluate VMT if existing models are not available; and Gives lead agencies discretion to select a methodology to evaluate a project’s VMT, but requires lead agencies to document that methodology in the environmental document prepared for the project.
CEQA lead agencies were required to comply with the State Guideline Section 15064.3 no later than July 1, 2020.
c. Regional Regulations
Connect SoCal 2024
SCAG is the regional planning agency for Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial Counties. SCAG addresses regional issues relating to transportation, the economy, community development, and the environment. Every four years, SCAG updates their Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), as required by federal and state regulations. On April 4, 2024, SCAG’s Regional Council formally approved Connect SoCal 2024, the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS.
Connect SoCal 2024 builds upon the progress made through implementation of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. Using growth forecasts and economic trends that project out over a 20-year period, Connect SoCal 2024 considers the role of transportation in the broader context of economic, environmental, and quality-of-life goals for the future, identifying regional transportation strategies to address our mobility needs. Compared to previous RTPs, Connect SoCal 2024 places a greater emphasis on sustainability and integrated planning and includes a strong commitment to reduce emissions from transportation sources to comply with California SB 375, improve public health, and meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards as set forth by the federal Clean Air Act. d. Local Regulations
City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035
The City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 was adopted on March 24, 2010 (updated on August 10, 2022) by the City Council (City of Agoura Hills 2022a). The City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 is a strategic document designed to guide the physical development of the city until the year 2035.
Among other things, the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 sets out the pattern of land uses, including residential, commercial, and industrial. It also establishes the system of streets, bikeways, and trails. The City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 addresses a wide variety of subject areas, including housing, traffic, natural resources, land uses, economic development, noise, and public safety.
The City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 contains the following goals and policies related to transportation, which would apply to the proposed Project.
Goal M-1. A safe and efficient roadway system in Agoura Hills that facilitates the movement of goods and people while utilizing advanced technologies to minimize travel delays.
Policy M-1.1. Maintain a safe and efficient system of circulation.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.11-10
Goal M-2. A transportation system that serves all modes of travel and meets the needs of all users, as specified in the Complete Streets Act of 2007.
Policy M-2.1. Ensure that the existing and future transportation system serves multiple modes of travel, such as driving, walking, biking, and transit.
Policy M-2.1. Develop an interconnected mobility system that allows travel on alternative routes and modes.
Policy M-2.5. Develop and maintain a safe, integrated, and comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian system that serves all ages and abilities in Agoura Hills.
Goal M-6. Reduced reliance on single-occupancy vehicle travel and VMT through the provision of alternative travel modes and enhanced system design.
Policy M-6.1. Promote the most efficient use of the City's existing transportation network and encourage the integration of alternative modes into design standards and future improvements.
Policy M-6.2. Expand the choices of available travel modes to increase the freedom of movement for residents and reduce reliance on the automobile. Ensure that existing and future infrastructure will be adequate for future transportation modes.
Goal M-8. Enhanced bicycle facilities throughout Agoura Hills for short trips and recreational uses.
Policy M-8.1. Provide bikeway connectivity between residential areas and surrounding natural resource areas, parks, schools, employment centers, and other activity centers in the community.
Policy M-8.2. Provide a bicycle network that is continuous, closes gaps in the existing system, and permits easy bicycle travel throughout the community and the region.
Policy M-8.4. Establish a Bicycle Safety Program that aims to educate the public about the safe use of bicycles on the City’s bikeways.
Goal M-12. A comprehensive transportation system that is coordinated with adjacent jurisdictions and regional planning efforts.
Policy M-12.2. Support regional efforts by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro or MTA) and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to reduce single-occupancy vehicle travel, such as goals and measures identified in Metro’s Long Range Transportation Plan and SCAG’s Regional Transportation Improvement Program.
Policy M-12.3. Support regional planning efforts that maximize the efficiency of existing transportation facilities.
Goal S-21. Decrease Greenhouse Gas Emissions through a Reduction in VMT.
Policy S-21.1. Develop a Citywide network that ensures access to safe bicycle facilities, and connects to regional bicycle facilities.
Agoura Village Specific Plan
The Agoura Village Specific Plan, adopted in 2008 and updated in 2024, is a long-range planning effort intended to guide the revitalization, appropriate uses, and beautification of the Agoura Village (City of Agoura Hills 2024). The Specific Plan area encompasses approximately 135 acres of Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.11-11
developed and underdeveloped land running along both sides of Agoura Road, one block west of Kanan Road to approximately two blocks east of Cornell Road. Roadside Drive and the Ventura Freeway border the Specific Plan area to the north, and open space borders the Specific Plan area to the south.
Chapter 3, Streetscape Beautification & Public Improvements, of the Agoura Village Specific Plan provides recommendations for street beautification amenities and gateways. This Chapter indicates that bicycle racks shall be installed at convenient locations along Agoura Road, at any future bus stop, and conveniently located near building entries that are centrally located within development and not facing Agoura Road. Chapter 4, Mobility, of the Agoura Village Specific Plan identifies opportunities for new or improved pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure, and traffic calming concepts. This chapter also notes that all bicycle facilities within the Specific Plan area shall be constructed in accordance with Figure M-7 of the General Plan, which will be updated as part of the General Plan Amendments.
Ladyface Mountain Specific Plan
The Ladyface Mountain Specific Plan, adopted in 1991 and amended in 2010, is a long-range planning effort intended to guide development at the base of Ladyface Mountain in the City of Agoura Hills. The Ladyface Mountain Specific Plan area covers approximately 747 acres, of which about 225 are developable while 520 acres are designated as permanent open space. The Ladyface Mountain Specific Plan area is bounded by Agoura Road to the north, Kanan Road to the east, the Agoura Hills city limit along the Ladyface ridgeline to the south, and the Agoura Hills-Westlake Village city limits to the west.
The Ladyface Mountain Specific Plan establishes hillside development standards to preserve the natural character of the mountain. Chapter III, Design Guidelines, emphasizes oak tree preservation, natural grading techniques, and architecture that blends in with the hillside environment. It also includes standards for drought-tolerant landscaping and signage. Chapter IV, Development Regulations, includes requirements for building coverages and grading, mandates transportation demand management strategies, LEED-equivalent construction practices, and water-efficiency.
Chapter V, Implementation, establishes procedures for Conditional Use Permits, architectural review, and environmental review under CEQA.
City of Agoura Hills Municipal Code
The City of Agoura Hills Municipal Code (AHMC) includes provisions for development standards in regard to bicycles and emergency vehicle access. Article III, Chapter 2 of the AHMC discusses public safety in regard to traffic regulations. Specifically, Section 3206 states that bicycles are prohibited on sidewalks, pedestrian walkways, and parking areas within a shopping center, shopping district, or business district. Section 9654.3(L) of the AHMC identifies bicycle parking standards.
4.11.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
As discussed in Section 4.0, Environmental Impact Analysis, all Project components are analyzed at the programmatic level. Project components include the Bicycle Master Plan (BMP), the VMT Mitigation Exchange and Banking Program (Program), and the General Plan Amendments (Amendments). Projects included within the BMP are grouped into Class I facilities, Class II facilities, Class III facilities, Class IV facilities, and enhanced bicycle treatments, as identified in Section 2.5, City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.11-12
Project Characteristics, and in Table 1 of Chapter 2, Project Description. The impact analysis contained herein provides a programmatic analysis of anticipated impacts for each of the five facility classes, as the individual project impacts associated with each class of facility are expected to be similar. Because the City seeks to prioritize implementation of the Medea Creek Path (Path) and the Agoura High School Connection (Connection), the Path and the Connection have their own subheadings within the Class I Facility impact analysis subsection to provide a more specific assessment of their environmental impacts. Impacts associated with the General Plan Amendments are analyzed within their own subsection.
As discussed in Chapter 2, Project Description, the only projects that are currently planned, unfunded, and could potentially be funded by the VMT Mitigation Exchange and Banking Program are those currently included within the Bicycle Master Plan. Therefore, the impact analysis contained herein does not include a subsection for impacts associated with the Program, as the individual project list for the BMP and the Program are identical and impacts associated with the BMP would encompass impacts associated with the Program.
Within the following environmental analysis, impacts associated with each Project component are explicitly identified under the respective heading.
According to Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, impacts related to transportation would be significant if the proposed project would:
Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities;
Conflict or be inconsistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b); Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); or, Result in inadequate emergency access?
b. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 1: Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Impact TRA-1 THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH CONNECT SOCAL 2024, THE CITY OF AGOURA HILLS GENERAL PLAN 2035, AND THE AGOURA VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
The primary plans addressing the circulation system in the Project area are the RTP/SCS (SCAG 2024), the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035, and the Agoura Village Specific Plan. These plans address various modes of transportation, including roadway vehicle, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, and include goals, policies, and objectives related to these modes of transportation.
Implementation of individual projects identified within the BMP would involve construction activities such as clearing and grubbing, pavement demolition, grading, subgrade stabilization, utility relocation, construction of undercrossings and/or overcrossings, installation of retaining walls, construction of bollards and fencing, asphalt paving or repaving, striping, restriping, reconfiguration and/or revegetation. Construction would require use of delivery trucks, vehicles, and other construction equipment, as well as the creation of storage, staging, and active work areas. These areas would be located within or adjacent to the identified project boundaries. At the time of Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.11-13
construction, should the construction contractor require additional staging areas, they would be responsible for identifying and securing long-term staging areas on previously disturbed storage yards, the locations of which are currently unknown. Nonetheless, construction of individual projects could affect roadways and the circulation system if construction were to occur within roadway rights-of-way (ROWs) or require temporary lane closures, which would conflict with Goal M-1 of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035, which calls for a safe and efficient roadway system. A construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented for any construction activities occurring within the roadway ROW in accordance with the CA MUTCD. The construction traffic control plan would include the use of flaggers during temporary lane closures and would ensure the use of proper signage, buffer zones, barriers, and reduced speed limits around construction zones consistent with Chapter 6 (Flagger Control) of the CA MUTCD, and no detours would be required (Caltrans 2014). Therefore, temporary construction impacts resulting in conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, would be less than significant.
Operation of individual projects identified within the BMP would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along shared use paths, delineated bike lanes, shared use travel lanes, and physically separated bikeways. These activities would be consistent with the SoCal Connect 2024 goals aimed at reducing emissions from transportation sources, as the proposed Project would encourage alternative travel modes. Implementation of the BMP would also be consistent with City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 goals and policies including Goal M-2, which aims to create a transportation system that serves all modes of travel, Goal M-6, which aims to reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicle travel and VMT through the provision of alternative travel modes, Goal M-8, which aims to enhance bicycle facilities throughout Agoura Hills, and Goal M-21, which aims to decrease GHG emissions through a reduction in VMT.
Implementation of the BMP would result in the installation of enhanced bicycle treatments at various locations throughout the city. These facilities would include street striping and restriping, signage and wayfinding, bicycle signals and detection at traffic signals, bicycle parking, and bicycle repair facilities. Installation of these facilities would be consistent with Chapter 3, Streetscape Beautification & Public Improvements, of the Agoura Village Specific Plan, which calls for bicycle racks at convenient locations along Agoura Road, at any future bus stop, and conveniently located near building entries that are centrally located within development As part of the proposed Project, the City must also amend Chapter 3, Infrastructure and Community Services, of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 to ensure consistency with the proposed BMP. These General Plan Amendments shift the focus from prioritizing automobile mobility to reducing VMT through alternative transportation modes like walking and biking, guided by the BMP.
This shift in focus to reducing VMT would be consistent with the SoCal Connect 2024 goals aimed at reducing emissions from transportation sources, City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 Goal M-6, which aims to reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicle travel and VMT through the provision of alternative travel modes, and City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 Goal M-21, which aims to decrease GHG emissions through a reduction in VMT.
Overall, this impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.11-14
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 2: Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Impact TRA-2 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT
RESULT IN LONG-TERM TRIP GENERATION, AND ANY TEMPORARY INCREASE IN VMT WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY IMPACT REGIONAL VMT. ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS GENERALLY REDUCE VMT. THEREFORE, THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS PRESUMED TO RESULT IN A LESS-THAN-SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)describes considerations for evaluating a project’s transportation impacts. Specifically, this section of the State CEQA Guidelines includes criteria for analyzing transportation impacts, such as:
Land Use Projects. VMT exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. Generally, projects within one-half mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. Projects that decrease VMT in the project area compared to existing conditions should be presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact.
Transportation Projects. Transportation projects that reduce, or have no impact on, VMT should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. For roadway capacity projects, agencies have discretion to determine the appropriate measure of transportation impact consistent with CEQA and other applicable requirements.
Qualitative Analysis. If existing models or methods are not available to estimate the VMT for the particular project being considered, a lead agency may analyze the project’s VMT qualitatively.
Such a qualitative analysis would evaluate factors such as the availability of transit, proximity to other destinations, etc. For many projects, a qualitative analysis of construction traffic may be appropriate.
Methodology. A lead agency has discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate a project’s VMT, including whether to express the change in absolute terms, per capita, per household or in any other measure. A lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s VMT, and may revise those estimates to reflect professional judgment based on substantial evidence. Any assumptions used to estimate VMT and any revisions to model outputs should be documented and explained in the environmental document prepared for the project. The standard of adequacy in Section 15151 shall apply to the analysis described in this section Impacts related to VMT during construction of individual projects identified within the BMP would be primarily associated with the construction equipment, worker vehicles, and truck deliveries accessing individual project sites. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b), construction-related VMT is generally evaluated qualitatively. Any increase in the number of trips taken on roadways in the Project area due to construction activities for individual projects would be temporary in nature and would cease to occur once the construction period is over. Construction would not result in long-term trip generation, and any temporary increase in VMT would not substantially impact regional VMT. Therefore, construction impacts related to VMT would be less than significant.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.11-15
The City of Agoura Hills adopted their own Transportation Assessment Guidelines in 2020, which establish city-specific protocols for transportation assessments. These guidelines identify a variety of screening thresholds that can be used to determine if the facts of a project can result in the presumption of a less than significant transportation impact. These guidelines do not establish protocols for determining transportation impacts of active transportation projects (City of Agoura Hills 2020). Therefore, this analysis relies on the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Innovation’s Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (2018). As identified therein, active transportation projects generally reduce VMT and therefore are presumed to cause a lessthan-significant impact on transportation.
As part of the proposed Project, the City must amend Chapter 3, Infrastructure and Community Services, of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 to ensure consistency with the proposed BMP. These General Plan Amendments shift the focus from prioritizing automobile mobility to reducing VMT through alternative transportation modes like walking and biking, guided by the BMP.
Additionally, the General Plan Amendments would include the addition of Policy M-6.7, which would require new development projects to minimize VMT and submit a VMT analysis as part of a development application. Overall, the proposed Project would not conflict or be inconsistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b). This impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 3: Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Impact TRA-3 DUE TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN DURING ACTIVITIES
OCCURRING WITHIN THE ROADWAY, CONSTRUCTION WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE HAZARDS DUE TO A GEOMETRIC DESIGN FEATURE OR INCOMPATIBLE USE. INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE BMP WOULD BE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE CALTRANS HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
Class I Facilities
Construction of Class I facilities would include clearing and grubbing, pavement demolition, grading, utility relocation, retaining wall or fencing installation, asphalt paving or repaving, street improvements and/or construction of undercrossings and/or overcrossings, striping, and revegetation. These activities would require the use of delivery trucks, vehicles, and other construction equipment, as well as the creation of storage, staging, and active work areas. These areas would be located within or adjacent to the identified project boundaries and outside of existing roadway ROWs. At the time of construction, should the construction contractor require additional staging areas, they would be responsible for identifying and securing long-term staging areas on previously disturbed storage yards, the locations of which are currently unknown.
Nonetheless, construction of Class I facilities could temporarily increase hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses from the temporary presence of construction equipment on City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.11-16
local roadways and the potential for lane closures. A construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented for any construction activities occurring within the roadway ROW in accordance with the CA MUTCD. The construction traffic control plan would include the use of flaggers during temporary lane closures and would ensure the use of proper signage, buffer zones, barriers, and reduced speed limits around construction zones, consistent with Chapter 6 (Flagger Control) of the CA MUTCD (Caltrans 2014). Therefore, construction of the Class I facilities would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses.
Operation of the Class I facilities would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along shared use paths. These facilities would provide a completely separate ROW designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with minimal vehicle crossflows. All Class I facilities would be designed in adherence with the Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000, which specifies the appropriate width, clearance, signage, intersection design, crossing pavement, horizontal alignment, and superelevation (Caltrans 2025). Prior to approval of individual Class I facilities identified within the BMP, design review would ensure all standards outlined in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual are met. Therefore, proposed Class I facilities would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use. This impact would be less than significant.
MEDEA CREEK PATH
Construction of the Path would require the use of delivery trucks, vehicles, and other construction equipment, as well as the creation of storage, staging, and active work areas. These areas would be located within or adjacent to the identified project boundary and outside of existing roadway ROWs.
At the time of construction, should the construction contractor require additional staging areas, they would be responsible for identifying and securing long-term staging areas on previously disturbed storage yards, the locations of which are currently unknown. Nonetheless, construction activities could result in a temporary increase in hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses if construction equipment is present on local roadways or if temporary lane closures are required. Although not currently anticipated, if future construction activities require work within the roadway, a construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented in accordance with the CA MUTCD. The construction traffic control plan would include the use of flaggers during temporary lane closures and would ensure the use of proper signage, buffer zones, barriers, and reduced speed limits around construction zones, consistent with Chapter 6 (Flagger Control) of the CA MUTCD (Caltrans 2014). Therefore, construction of the Path would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses.
Operation of the Path would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along a shared use path designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians. As currently proposed, the Path would include four roadway crossings with bicycle and pedestrian access ramps and/or crosswalks at Kanan Road, Thousand Oaks Boulevard, Laro Drive, and Fountainwood Street, an undercrossing beneath the Ventura Freeway, and an undercrossing beneath Oak Creek Lane. During design advancement, all components of the Path would comply with the Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000, which specifies the appropriate width, clearance, signage, intersection design, crossing pavement, horizontal alignment, and superelevation (Caltrans 2025). Prior to final approval of the Path, design review would ensure all standards outlined in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual are met. Therefore, operation of the Path would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use. This impact would be less than significant.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.11-17
AGOURA HIGH SCHOOL CONNECTION
Construction of the Connection would require the use of delivery trucks, vehicles, and other construction equipment, as well as the creation of storage, staging, and active work areas. These areas would be located within or adjacent to the identified project boundary and outside of existing roadway ROWs. At the time of construction, should the construction contractor require additional staging areas, they would be responsible for identifying and securing long-term staging areas on previously disturbed storage yards, the locations of which are currently unknown. Implementation of the Connection would involve roadway and intersection improvements on Thousand Oaks Boulevard near Argos Street. Specifically, improvements would include relocation of the existing signal head and modifications to the existing median on Thousand Oaks Boulevard. Construction of these improvements could result in a temporary increase in hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses due to construction equipment on local roadways or if temporary lane closures are required. A construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented for any construction activities occurring within the roadway ROW in accordance with the CA MUTCD. The construction traffic control plan would include the use of flaggers during temporary lane closures and would ensure the use of proper signage, buffer zones, barriers, and reduced speed limits around construction zones, consistent with Chapter 6 (Flagger Control) of the CA MUTCD (Caltrans 2014). Therefore, construction of the Connection would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses.
Operation of the Connection would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along a shared use path designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians. As currently proposed, the Connection would include modifications to the existing median on Thousand Oaks Boulevard, construction of a sidewalk connection at the intersection of Thousand Oaks Boulevard and Argos Street, construction of a sidewalk extension at the eastern end of Thousand Oaks Boulevard, and construction of a bicycle and pedestrian access ramp at Easterly Road near Fountain Place. During design advancement, all components of the Connection would comply with the Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000, which specifies the appropriate lane width, clearance, signage, intersection design, crossing pavement, horizontal alignment, and superelevation (Caltrans 2025). Prior to final approval of the Connection, design review would ensure all standards outlined in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual are met. Therefore, operation of the Connection would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use. This impact would be less than significant.
Class II Facilities
Construction of Class II facilities would generally consist of roadway restriping and reconfiguration of lane widths. These activities would require the use of paint trucks and similar equipment along existing roadways. Restriping can be completed within a single work period and does not require the establishment of storage, staging, or work areas. Nonetheless, the presence of paint trucks could result in a temporary increase in hazards due to incompatible uses from construction equipment on local roadways. A construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented for any activities occurring within the roadway ROW in accordance with the CA MUTCD. Therefore, construction of the Class II facilities would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses.
Implementation of Class II facilities would also require pavement widening on Driver Avenue and Cornell Road to allow for the addition of bicycle lanes. Construction would require the use of delivery trucks, vehicles, and other construction equipment, as well as the creation of storage, City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.11-18
staging, and active work areas. These areas would be located within or adjacent to the identified project boundaries and outside of existing roadway ROWs. At the time of construction, should the construction contractor require additional staging areas, they would be responsible for identifying and securing long-term staging areas on previously disturbed storage yards, the locations of which are currently unknown. Nonetheless, pavement widening could temporarily increase hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses from the temporary presence of construction equipment on local roadways and the potential for lane closures. A construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented for any construction activities occurring within the roadway ROW in accordance with the CA MUTCD. The construction traffic control plan would include the use of flaggers during temporary lane closures and would ensure the use of proper signage, buffer zones, barriers, and reduced speed limits around construction zones, consistent with Chapter 6 (Flagger Control) of the CA MUTCD (Caltrans 2014). Therefore, pavement widening during construction of the Class II facilities on Driver Avenue and Cornell Road would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses.
Operation of the Class II facilities would consist of bicycle travel along delineated bike lanes, which would separate vehicles and bicyclists into distinct lanes. Class II bike lanes would be designed in adherence with the City and County guidelines as well as the Caltrans Highway Design Manual.
Therefore operation of the Class II facilities would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use. This impact would be less than significant.
Class III Facilities
Construction of the Class III facilities would be limited to the restriping of existing roads to identify bike routes. These activities would require the use of paint trucks and similar equipment along existing roadways. Restriping can be completed within a single work period and does not require the establishment of storage, staging, or work areas. Nonetheless, the presence of paint trucks could result in a temporary increase in hazards due to incompatible uses from construction equipment on local roadways. A construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented for any activities occurring within the roadway ROW in accordance with the CA MUTCD. Therefore, construction of the Class III facilities would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses.
Operation of the Class III facilities would consist of bicycle travel along shared use travel lanes. Class III bike routes would be designed in adherence with City and County Guidelines and the Caltrans Highway Design Manual. Therefore operation of the Class III facilities would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use. This impact would be less than significant.
Class IV Facilities
Construction of Class IV facilities would require pavement demolition, minor grading, bollard or fencing installation, asphalt paving or repaving, and striping. Construction would require use of delivery trucks, vehicles, and other construction equipment, as well as the creation of storage, staging, and active work areas. These areas would be located within or adjacent to the identified project boundaries and outside of existing roadway ROWs. At the time of construction, should the construction contractor require additional staging areas, they would be responsible for identifying and securing long-term staging areas on previously disturbed storage yards, the locations of which are currently unknown. Nonetheless, construction of Class IV facilities could temporarily increase hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses from the temporary presence of Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.11-19
construction equipment on local roadways and the potential for lane closures. A construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented for any construction activities occurring within the roadway ROW in accordance with the CA MUTCD. The construction traffic control plan would include the use of flaggers during temporary lane closures and would ensure the use of proper signage, buffer zones, barriers, and reduced speed limits around construction zones, consistent with Chapter 6 (Flagger Control) of the CA MUTCD (Caltrans 2014). Therefore, construction of the Class IV facilities would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses.
Operation of the Class IV facilities would consist of bicycle travel along physically separated bikeways adjacent to travel lanes, which would physically separate vehicles and bicyclists into ROWs within the roadway due to the presence of vertical barriers. All Class IV facilities would be designed in adherence with City and County guidelines and the Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000, which specifies the appropriate width, signage, intersection design, crossing points, and physical separation for Class IV facilities (Caltrans 2022). Therefore, proposed Class IV facilities would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use.
This impact would be less than significant.
Enhanced Bicycle Treatments
Enhanced bicycle treatments would include street striping and restriping, signage and wayfinding, bicycle signals and detection at traffic signals, bicycle parking, and bicycle repair facilities.
Construction and implementation of these facilities would be completed within a single work period and would not require the establishment of storage, staging, or work areas. Nonetheless, implementation of the enhanced bicycle treatments could result in a temporary increase in hazards due to incompatible uses from construction equipment on local roadways. A construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented for any activities occurring within the roadway ROW in accordance with the CA MUTCD. Therefore, construction of the enhanced bicycle treatments would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses.
Operation of the enhanced bicycle treatments would include continued use of existing bicycle facilities, storing of bicycles at new parking facilities, and use of bicycle repair facilities. Enhanced bicycle treatments would be implemented at various locations throughout the city, but these facilities would generally be placed within or adjacent to existing, new, or improved bikeways.
Therefore, the enhanced bicycle treatments would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. This impact would be less than significant General Plan Amendments
As part of the proposed Project, the City must amend Chapter 3, Infrastructure and Community Services, of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 to ensure consistency with the proposed BMP. These General Plan Amendments shift the focus from prioritizing automobile mobility to reducing VMT through alternative transportation modes like walking and biking, guided by the BMP.
The proposed General Plan Amendments would not result in construction or operation activities beyond existing conditions. Therefore, the Amendments would not result in safety hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.11-20
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 4: Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Impact TRA-4 DUE TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN DURING ACTIVITIES
OCCURRING WITHIN THE ROADWAY, CONSTRUCTION WOULD NOT RESULT IN INADEQUATE EMERGENCY ACCESS. COORDINATION WITH THE AGOURA HILLS FIRE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO DESIGN REVIEW AND FUTURE PROJECT APPROVAL WOULD ENSURE EMERGENCY ACCESS IS MAINTAINED DURING OPERATION. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
Class I Facilities
Construction of Class I facilities would involve the establishment of storage, staging, and active work areas. These areas would be located within or adjacent to the identified project boundaries and outside of existing roadway ROWs. Nonetheless, construction activities could have temporary effects on vehicle flow due to the temporary presence of construction equipment on local roadways and the potential for lane closures. Construction activities could also temporarily block access to roadways that are currently used by emergency response vehicles. A construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented for any construction activities occurring within the roadway ROW in accordance with the CA MUTCD. The construction traffic control plan would include the use of flaggers during temporary lane closures and would ensure the use of proper signage, buffer zones, barriers, and reduced speed limits around construction zones, consistent with Chapter 6 (Flagger Control) of the CA MUTCD. Furthermore, the CA MUTCD stipulates that a construction traffic control plan must include provisions for acceptable access to abutting property owners and businesses, and when work occurs on a high-volume or highly congested facility, vehicle storage or staging spaces must be provided for emergency vehicles (Caltrans 2014). Therefore, construction of the Class I facilities would not result in inadequate emergency access.
Operation of the Class I facilities would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along shared use paths away from existing roadway ROWs. In accordance with Chapter 1000 of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, Class I facilities would be designed with widths of eight to 10 feet wide, with an additional two-foot buffer on either side (Caltrans 2025). As identified in the 2021 International Fire Code, fire apparatus access roads should have a minimum width of 20 feet (International Code Council 2021). Prior to design review and future approval of Class I facilities, coordination with the City of Agoura Hills Fire Department would be required to confirm the minimum sufficient widths for emergency access along the Class I facilities. Therefore, Class I facilities would not result in inadequate emergency access. This impact would be less than significant.
MEDEA CREEK PATH
Construction of the Path would involve the establishment of storage, staging, and active work areas.
These areas would be located within or adjacent to the identified project boundary and outside of existing roadway ROWs. Nonetheless, construction activities could have temporary effects on vehicle flow due to the temporary presence of construction equipment on local roadways and the potential for lane closures. Construction activities could also temporarily block access to roadways that are currently used by emergency response vehicles. A construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented for any construction activities occurring within the roadway ROW in accordance with the CA MUTCD. The construction traffic control plan would include the use of Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.11-21
flaggers during temporary lane closures and would ensure the use of proper signage, buffer zones, barriers, and reduced speed limits around construction zones, consistent with Chapter 6 (Flagger Control) of the CA MUTCD. Furthermore, the CA MUTCD stipulates that a construction traffic control plan must include provisions for acceptable access to abutting property owners and businesses, and when work occurs on a high-volume or highly congested facility, vehicle storage or staging spaces must be provided for emergency vehicles (Caltrans 2014). Therefore, construction of the Path would not result in inadequate emergency access.
Operation of the Path would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along a shared use path away from existing roadway ROWs. As identified in Figure 2-3 through Figure 2-10, the width of the Path would range from 10 feet to 14 feet. Prior to design review and future approval of the Path, coordination with the City of Agoura Hills Fire Department would be required to confirm the minimum sufficient widths for emergency access along the Path. Therefore, the Path would not result in inadequate emergency access. This impact would be less than significant.
AGOURA HIGH SCHOOL CONNECTION
Construction of the Connection would involve the establishment of storage, staging, and active work areas. These areas would be located within or adjacent to the identified project boundary and outside of existing roadway ROWs. Nonetheless, construction activities could have temporary effects on vehicle flow due to the temporary presence of construction equipment on local roadways and the potential for lane closures. Construction activities could also temporarily block access to roadways that are currently used by emergency response vehicles. A construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented for any construction activities occurring within the roadway ROW in accordance with the CA MUTCD. The construction traffic control plan would include the use of flaggers during temporary lane closures and would ensure the use of proper signage, buffer zones, barriers, and reduced speed limits around construction zones, consistent with Chapter 6 (Flagger Control) of the CA MUTCD. Furthermore, the CA MUTCD stipulates that a construction traffic control plan must include provisions for acceptable access to abutting property owners and businesses, and when work occurs on a high-volume or highly congested facility, vehicle storage or staging spaces must be provided for emergency vehicles (Caltrans 2014). Therefore, construction of the Connection would not result in inadequate emergency access.
Operation of the Connection would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along a shared use path away from existing roadway ROWs. As identified in Figure 2-11 and Figure 2-12, the width of the Connection would range from 10 feet to 14 feet. Prior to design review and future approval of the Connection, coordination with the City of Agoura Hills Fire Department would be required to confirm the minimum sufficient widths for emergency access along the Connection. Therefore, the Connection would not result in inadequate emergency access. This impact would be less than significant.
Class II Facilities
Construction of Class II facilities would generally consist of roadway restriping and reconfiguration of lane widths. These activities would require the use of paint trucks and similar equipment along existing roadways. Restriping can be completed within a single work period and does not require the establishment of storage, staging, or work areas. Therefore, restriping activities would not result in inadequate emergency access.
Implementation of Class II facilities would also require pavement widening on Driver Avenue and Cornell Road to allow for the addition of bicycle lanes. Construction would require the use of City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.11-22
delivery trucks, vehicles, and other construction equipment, as well as the creation of storage, staging, and active work areas. These areas would be located within or adjacent to the identified project boundaries and outside of existing roadway ROWs. Nonetheless, construction activities could have temporary effects on vehicle flow due to the temporary presence of construction equipment on local roadways and the potential for lane closures. Construction activities could also temporarily block access to roadways that are currently used by emergency response vehicles. A construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented for any construction activities occurring within the roadway ROW in accordance with the CA MUTCD. The construction traffic control plan would include the use of flaggers during temporary lane closures and would ensure the use of proper signage, buffer zones, barriers, and reduced speed limits around construction zones, consistent with Chapter 6 (Flagger Control) of the CA MUTCD. Furthermore, the CA MUTCD stipulates that a construction traffic control plan must include provisions for acceptable access to abutting property owners and businesses, and when work occurs on a high-volume or highly congested facility, vehicle storage or staging spaces must be provided for emergency vehicles (Caltrans 2014). Therefore, construction of the Class II facilities would not result in inadequate emergency access.
Operation of the Class II facilities would consist of bicycle travel along delineated bike lanes on existing roadways. Therefore, there would be no change in emergency access from existing conditions. This impact would be less than significant.
Class III Facilities
Construction of the Class III facilities would be limited to the restriping of existing roads to identify bike routes. These activities would require the use of paint trucks and similar equipment along existing roadways. Restriping can be completed within a single work period and does not require the establishment of storage, staging, or work areas. Therefore, implementation of Class III facilities would not result in inadequate emergency access.
Operation of the Class III facilities would consist of bicycle travel along shared use travel lanes on existing roadways. Therefore, there would be no change in emergency access from existing conditions. This impact would be less than significant.
Class IV Facilities
Construction of Class IV facilities would involve the establishment of storage, staging, and active work areas. These areas would be located within or adjacent to the identified project boundaries and outside of existing roadway ROWs. Nonetheless, construction activities could have temporary effects on vehicle flow due to the temporary presence of construction equipment on local roadways and the potential for lane closures. Construction activities could also temporarily block access to roadways that are currently used by emergency response vehicles. A construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented for any construction activities occurring within the roadway ROW in accordance with the CA MUTCD. The construction traffic control plan would include the use of flaggers during temporary lane closures and would ensure the use of proper signage, buffer zones, barriers, and reduced speed limits around construction zones, consistent with Chapter 6 (Flagger Control) of the CA MUTCD. Furthermore, the CA MUTCD stipulates that a construction traffic control plan must include provisions for acceptable access to abutting property owners and businesses, and when work occurs on a high-volume or highly congested facility, vehicle storage or staging spaces must be provided for emergency vehicles (Caltrans 2014). Therefore, construction of the Class IV facilities would not result in inadequate emergency access.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.11-23
Operation of the Class IV facilities would consist of bicycle travel along physically separated bikeways adjacent to travel lanes, which would physically separate vehicles and bicyclists into ROWs within the roadway due to the presence of vertical barriers such as mountable curbs or flexible barriers. Use of mountable curbs or flexible barriers would maintain separation between vehicles and bicyclists while allowing for emergency access from the adjacent travel lanes. Therefore, implementation of the Class IV facilities would not result in inadequate emergency access. This impact would be less than significant.
Enhanced Bicycle Treatments
Enhanced bicycle treatments would include street striping and restriping, signage and wayfinding, bicycle signals and detection at traffic signals, bicycle parking, and bicycle repair facilities.
Construction and implementation of these facilities would be completed within a single work period and would not require the establishment of storage, staging, or work areas. Therefore, implementation of enhanced bicycle treatments would not result in inadequate emergency access.
Operation of the enhanced bicycle treatments would include continued use of existing bicycle facilities, storing of bicycles at new parking facilities, and use of bicycle repair facilities. Enhanced bicycle treatments would be implemented at various locations throughout the city, but these facilities would generally be placed within or adjacent to existing, new, or improved bikeways. These facilities would not be placed in locations that would block ingress or egress, or would otherwise impede emergency access while in use. Therefore, enhanced bicycle treatments would not result in inadequate emergency access. This impact would be less than significant.
General Plan Amendments
As part of the proposed Project, the City must amend Chapter 3, Infrastructure and Community Services, of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 to ensure consistency with the proposed BMP. The proposed General Plan Amendments would not result in construction or operation activities beyond existing conditions. Therefore, the Amendments would not result in inadequate emergency access. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
4.11.4 Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope for cumulative impacts related to transportation is the Project area, which encompasses all of the City of Agoura Hills. This geographic scope is appropriate because cumulative development would have a cascading effect on the overall circulation network throughout the city.
A cumulative impact would occur if cumulative development from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, including the projects listed in Table 3-1, would have the potential to conflict with transportation programs, plans, ordinances, and policies; conflict with or be inconsistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b); substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design features or incompatible uses; or result in inadequate emergency access.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.11-24
Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, including the projects listed in Table 3-1 and other cumulative development in the geographic scope defined above, would be required to comply with all local regulations and policies related to public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Therefore, no cumulative impacts related to conflict with transportation programs, plans, ordinances, and policies would occur.
Cumulative development could facilitate an increase in VMT that may exceed applicable VMT thresholds. This would be a potentially significant cumulative impact. As described under Impact TRA-2, the proposed Project is an active transportation project that generally reduces VMT by encouraging alternative modes of travel. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not contribute to additional VMT in the City of Agoura Hills, and the Project would not have a considerable contribution to cumulative impacts related to VMT.
Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, including the projects listed in Table 3-1 and other cumulative development in the geographic scope defined above, would be required to comply with the applicable regulations and design standards set forth by the City. Discretionary projects would undergo a project-level design review to ensure individual development projects comply with such regulations and standards related to hazards, incompatible uses, and emergency access. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses, and cumulative impacts related to emergency access would be less than significant.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Tribal Cultural Resources
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.12-1
4.12 Tribal Cultural Resources
The analysis in this section considers potential impacts to tribal cultural resources. Specifically, this section discusses the environmental and regulatory setting; the criteria used to determine the significance of environmental impacts related to tribal cultural resources; and potential impacts related to tribal cultural resources that would result from implementation of the proposed Project.
Tribal cultural resources are those resources identified by California Native American tribes in consultation with lead agencies during tribal consultation (also referred to as Assembly Bill [AB] 52 consultation]. Local governments must also contact, refer plans to, and consult with tribal organizations prior to making a decision to adopt or amend a general or specific plan (also referred to as Senate Bill [SB] 18 consultation). The analysis in this section is based on the results of the City’s AB 52 and Senate Bill (SB) 18 consultation efforts.
4.12.1 Setting
a. Ethnographic Context
The Project area, which encompasses all of the City of Agoura Hills, is situated near the boundaries of several Native American groups including the Ventureño Chumash, the Gabrieleño, and the Tataviam. Below are synopses of ethnographic data for each of these three Native American groups.
Chumash
The Chumash spoke six closely related Chumashan languages that have been divided into three branches—Northern Chumash (consisting only of Obispeño), Central Chumash (consisting of Purisimeño, Ineseño, Barbareño, and Ventureño), and Island Chumash (Golla 2007). The name “Ventureño Chumash” denotes the people who were administered by the Spanish from the Mission San Buenaventura during the historic period. At the time of European-Native contact, the Ventureño Chumash occupied areas along creek corridors that provided intermittent or perennial fresh water sources. A series of trailways into these areas facilitated trade between coastal and other neighboring groups such as the Salinan to the north, the Southern Valley Yokuts and Tataviam to the east, and the Gabrielino (Tongva and Kizh) to the south (Roman 2017).
Early Spanish accounts from European-Native contact describe the Santa Barbara Channel as heavily populated. Estimates of the Chumash total population range from 8,000 to 10,000 (Kroeber 1925:
551) to 18,000 to 22,000 (Cook and Heizer 1965; Grant 1978a). Santa Cruz Island had at least six villages observed by Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo in 1542 (Johnson 1982). Typical house structures were large (up to 55 feet in diameter) and could accommodate 70 people (Kroeber 1925; Grant 1978b).
The village of šukuw, (or shuku), at Rincon Point, was encountered by Gaspar de Portola in 1769.
This village had 60 houses and seven canoes, with an estimated population of 300 (Grant 1978b). At this time, Western coastal Chumash lived in hemispherical dwellings covered by interwoven grasses, such as tule, carrizo grass, wild alfalfa, and fern (Grant 1978b). Other structures in a village included small sweathouses and a large ceremonial chamber (Kroeber 1925: 557).
Historic Spanish period accounts suggest the overarching social structure to be patrilineal chiefdoms. These have been separated into three sub-chief categories: “Big Chief,” who lead groups of settlements, “Chief,” who was head of a single village, and “Lesser Chief,” who was subordinate to the others (Gamble et al. 2001). Social or economic status may also have been indicated through mortuary practices, although this is debated by archaeologists. Mourning rituals consisted of burials City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.12-2
in cemeteries with grave goods, such as Olivella shell beads, and beads made from other local shells.
Other recorded mortuary rituals included burying individuals in the floor of a residence and burning the deceased’s house and possessions (Gamble et al. 2001; Arnold and Green 2002).
During this period, Chumash populations exploited multiple subsistence strategies. The acorn was an especially important resource. It could be gathered, stored, ground into meal, or cooked into paste. Other seeds or fruits like pine nuts and wild cherries would be gathered and processed with a mortar. Hunting and fishing were also an important aspect of Chumash subsistence. Hunters would use a bow and arrow for land mammals like deer, coyote, and fox (Grant 1978b). Sea mammals were hunted with harpoons, while deep-sea fish were caught using nets, hooks, and lines. Shellfish were gathered from beaches using digging sticks, and mussels and abalone were pried from rocks using wood or bone wedges (Johnson 1982). Other subsistence technology included skillet-like flat stones called comals, sandstone storage bowls, and wooden plates and bowls. Archaeological evidence suggests the Ventureño Chumash practiced lithic production of tools from quartzite, chalcedony, and chert in separate lithic workspaces near their occupation sites (Roman 2017).
Woven baskets were also used for food storage and food preparation. Tightly woven baskets for holding or draining water were made with coiling or twining techniques (Grant 1978b).
The Chumash were heavily affected by the arrival of Europeans. The Spanish missions and later Mexican and American settlers dramatically altered traditional Chumash lifeways. The Chumash population was considerably reduced by the introduction of European diseases. Many Chumash descendants still inhabit the region (Grant 1978a).
Gabrieleño
Archaeological evidence suggests the Gabrieleño arrived in the Los Angeles Basin sometime around 500 BCE; however, this has been a subject of debate. Many contemporary Gabrieleño identify themselves as descendants of the indigenous people living across the plains of the Los Angeles Basin and use the native term Tongva (King 1994). This term is used in the remainder of this section to refer to the pre-contact inhabitants of the Los Angeles Basin and their descendants. Surrounding native groups included the Chumash and Tataviam to the northwest, the Serrano and Cahuilla to the northeast, and the Juaneño and Luiseño to the southeast.
Tongva lands encompassed the greater Los Angeles Basin and three Channel Islands, San Clemente, San Nicolas, and Santa Catalina. The Tongva established large, permanent villages in the fertile lowlands along rivers and streams, and in sheltered areas along the coast, stretching from the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains to the Pacific Ocean. Tribal population has been estimated to have been at least 5,000 (Bean and Smith 1978: 540), but recent ethnohistoric work suggests a number approaching 10,000 (O’Neil 2002). Houses constructed by the Tongva were large, circular, domed structures made of willow poles thatched with tule holding up to 50 people (Bean and Smith 1978). Other structures served as sweathouses, menstrual huts, ceremonial enclosures, and probably communal granaries. Cleared fields for races and games, such as lacrosse and pole throwing, were created adjacent to Tongva villages (McCawley 1996: 27). Archaeological sites composed of villages with various sized structures have been identified.
The Tongva subsistence economy was centered on gathering and hunting. The surrounding environment was rich and varied, and the tribe exploited mountains, foothills, valleys, deserts, riparian, estuarine, and open and rocky coastal eco-niches. Like most native Californians, acorns were the staple food (an established industry by the time of the early Intermediate Period). Acorns were supplemented by the roots, leaves, seeds, and fruits of a wide variety of flora (e.g., islay, cactus, yucca, sages, and agave). Fresh water and saltwater fish, shellfish, birds, reptiles, and insects, Environmental Impact Analysis
Tribal Cultural Resources
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.12-3
as well as large and small mammals, were also consumed (Bean and Smith 1978: 546; Kroeber 1925:
631–632; McCawley 1996: 119–123, 128–131).
A wide variety of tools and implements were used by the Tongva to gather and collect food resources. These included the bow and arrow, traps, nets, blinds, throwing sticks and slings, spears, harpoons, and hooks. Groups residing near the ocean used oceangoing plank canoes and tule balsa canoes for fishing, travel, and trade between the mainland and the Channel Islands (McCawley 1996: 7). Tongva people processed food with a variety of tools, including hammerstones and anvils, mortars and pestles, manos and metates, strainers, leaching baskets and bowls, knives, bone saws, and wooden drying racks. Food was consumed from a variety of vessels. Catalina Island steatite was used to make ollas and cooking vessels (Blackburn 1963; Kroeber 1925: 629; McCawley 1996: 129– 138).
At the time of Spanish contact, the basis of Tongva religious life was the Chinigchinich cult, centered on the last of a series of heroic mythological figures. Chinigchinich gave instruction on laws and institutions, and taught the people how to dance, the primary religious act for this society. He later withdrew into heaven, where he rewarded the faithful and punished those who disobeyed his laws (Kroeber 1925: 637–638). The Chinigchinich religion seems to have been relatively new when the Spanish arrived. It was spreading south into the Southern Takic groups even as Christian missions were being built and may represent a mixture of native and Christian belief and practices (McCawley 1996: 143–144).
Deceased Tongva were either buried or cremated, with inhumation more common on the Channel Islands and the neighboring mainland coast and cremation predominating on the remainder of the coast and in the interior (Harrington 1942; McCawley 1996: 157). At the behest of the Spanish missionaries, cremation essentially ceased during the post-Contact period (McCawley 1996: 157).
Tataviam
The Tataviam were not well documented by early ethnographers. John P. Harrington was a primary source ethnographer, who conducted interviews with Tataviam descendants in the early twentieth century (Johnson and Earle 1990). Today, researchers generally agree the Tataviam spoke an UtoAztecan language, most likely a Takic language (Hudson 1982). This language is now dead (Johnson and Earle 1990).
Tataviam territory included the upper Santa Clara River from Piru Creek eastward, extending over the Sawmill Mountains to the southwest edge of the Antelope Valley (King and Blackburn 1978).
Their territory was bounded on the west and north by various Chumash groups, to the east by the Kitanemuk and Serrano, and on the south by the Tongva (Gabrieleño and Fernandeño, although some Tataviam were also identified as Fernandeño because of their association with Mission San Fernando). Environmentally, their lands consisted of sloped areas surrounded by desert (Stickel and Weinman-Roberts 1980). Dwellings were domed-thatch shelters under shady overhanging rocks that aided in cooling (Eargle 2008). Settlement size ranged from 10 to 200 persons, with small settlements often ancillary to large villages.
Archaeological evidence from Bower’s Cave—located between Newhall and Piru—combined with ethnographic evidence suggest their ritual organization was similar to both the Chumash and Gabrieliño, two groups whose lifestyles were distinct from one another. Rock art found in their traditional territory included representational and abstract pictographs, incised pictographs, petroglyphs, and cupules (Knight 2010).
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.12-4
The Tataviam were a hunting and gathering society. Acorns were a main food source and were ground into flour (Eargle 2008; Garza 2012). King and Blackburn (1978) hypothesize that because of the predominance of large south-facing slopes in their territory, the Tataviam relied on yucca as a food source more than their neighbors (Garza 2012). Additional food resources included sage seeds, berries, small mammals, deer, and possibly antelope.
Exogamous marriage was commonly practiced and Tataviam intermarried with Tongva, Chumash, and Kitanemuk neighbors (King and Blackburn 1978). Genealogical research suggests that Tataviam individuals and families persisted into the twentieth century in other communities (Johnson and Earle 1990). Spanish missions developed in the area relatively early, with records of Tataviam baptisms as early as 1803. By 1810, the Tataviam were virtually completely missionized through baptism at Mission San Fernando (King and Blackburn 1978; Johnson and Earle 1990).
4.12.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal Regulations
There are no federal regulations related to Tribal Cultural Resources applicable to the proposed Project.
b. State Regulations
Assembly Bill 52
AB 52 of 2015 expanded the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by defining a new resource category, “tribal cultural resources.” AB 52 establishes, “a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment” (Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21084.2). It further states the CEQA lead agency shall establish measures to avoid impacts that would alter the significant characteristics of a tribal cultural resource, when feasible (PRC Section 21084.3).
PRC Section 21074 (a)(1)(A) and (B) define tribal cultural resources as “sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe” and that meets at least one of the following criteria, as summarized in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G:
1) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k) 2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC Section 5024.1. In applying these criteria, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
AB 52 also establishes a formal consultation process with California Native American tribes that must be completed before a CEQA document can be certified. Under AB 52, lead agencies are required to “begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project.” California Native American tribes to be included in the process are those that have requested notice of projects proposed within the jurisdiction of the lead agency.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Tribal Cultural Resources
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.12-5
Senate Bill 18
California Government Code Section 65352.3 (adopted pursuant to the requirements of SB 18) requires local governments to contact, refer plans to, and consult with tribal organizations prior to making a decision to adopt or amend a general or specific plan. The tribal organizations eligible to consult have traditional lands in a local government’s jurisdiction and are identified, upon request, by the NAHC. As noted in the California Office of Planning and Research’s Tribal Consultation Guidelines (2005), “the intent of SB 18 is to provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early planning stage, for the purpose of protecting, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places.” SB 18 refers to PRC Section 5097.9 and 5097.995 to define cultural places as:
A Native American sanctified cemetery, place of worship, religious or ceremonial site, or sacred shrine (PRC Section 5097.9)
A Native American historic, cultural, or sacred site, that is listed or may be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources pursuant to Section 5024.1, including any historic or prehistoric ruins, any burial ground, any archaeological or historic site (PRC Section 5097.995.
Health and Safety Code Sections 7050.5 and 7052
California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 provides legal protection for human remains discovered outside of a dedicated cemetery. Specifically, subsection (a) makes it a misdemeanor offense to knowingly mutilate, disinter, disturb, or remove human remains without lawful authority.
Subsection (b) requires that if human remains are discovered in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, all excavation or disturbance must cease until the county coroner has made a determination regarding the nature of the remains. The coroner must assess whether the remains fall under their jurisdiction according to Government Code Section 27491 and related provisions, and must provide treatment and disposition recommendations within two working days, consistent with PRC Section 5097.98. Subsection (c) mandates that if the coroner determines the remains are not under their jurisdiction and identifies or suspects the remains to be Native American, the NAHC must be notified by telephone within 24 hours. This provision ensures timely tribal notification and potential involvement in the treatment and disposition of Native American remains.
California Health and Safety Code Section 7052 establishes felony penalties for further unlawful treatment of human remains and reinforces the legal and ethical standards for the respectful treatment of human remains.
c. Local Regulations
The City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 was adopted on March 24, 2010 (updated on August 10, 2022) by the City Council (City of Agoura Hills 2022). The City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 is a strategic document designed to guide the physical development of the city until the year 2035.
Among other things, the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 sets out the pattern of land uses, including residential, commercial, and industrial. It also establishes the system of streets, bikeways, and trails. The City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 addresses a wide variety of subject areas, including housing, traffic, natural resources, land uses, economic development, noise, and public safety.
The City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 contains the following goals and policies related to tribal cultural resources, which would apply to the proposed Project.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.12-6
Goal HR-3 City That Recognizes its Prehistoric Resources. The protection of significant archaeological and paleontological resources in Agoura Hills.
HR-3.1 Recognition of Resources. Require that the potential for the presence of significant archaeological and paleontological resources be considered prior to the development of a property. (Imp HR-5).
HR-3.2 Protection of Resources. Require that significant archaeological and paleontological resources be preserve in-situ, as feasible. When avoidance of impacts is not possible, require data recovery mitigation for all significant resources. Require that excavation of deposits of Native American origin be coordinated with and monitored by recognized Chumash representatives. (Imp HR-6).
HR-3.3 Discovery of Resources. Require that if human remains or funerary objects are discovered and unearthed during any soil disturbing activity, the discoveries shall be treated in compliance with applicable state and federal laws, including notifying the County Coroner and the California Native American Heritage Commission, as appropriate, and following relevant procedures.
4.12.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
As discussed in Section 4.0, Environmental Impact Analysis, all Project components are analyzed at the programmatic level. Project components include the Bicycle Master Plan (BMP), the VMT Mitigation Exchange and Banking Program (Program), and the General Plan Amendments (Amendments). Projects included within the BMP are grouped into Class I facilities, Class II facilities, Class III facilities, Class IV facilities, and enhanced bicycle treatments, as identified in Section 2.5, Project Characteristics, and in Table 1 of Chapter 2, Project Description. The impact analysis contained herein provides a programmatic analysis of anticipated impacts for each of the five facility classes, as the individual project impacts associated with each class of facility are expected to be similar. Because the City seeks to prioritize implementation of the Medea Creek Path (Path) and the Agoura High School Connection (Connection), the Path and the Connection have their own subheadings within the Class I Facility impact analysis subsection to provide a more specific assessment of their environmental impacts. Impacts associated with the General Plan Amendments are analyzed within their own subsection.
As discussed in Chapter 2, Project Description, the only projects that are currently planned, unfunded, and could potentially be funded by the VMT Mitigation Exchange and Banking Program are those currently included within the Bicycle Master Plan. Therefore, the impact analysis contained herein does not include a subsection for impacts associated with the Program, as the individual project list for the BMP and the Program are identical and impacts associated with the BMP would encompass impacts associated with the Program.
Within the following environmental analysis, impacts associated with each Project component are explicitly identified under the respective heading.
According to State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, impacts related to tribal cultural resources would be significant if the proposed Project would:
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a TCR, defined in PRC Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size Environmental Impact Analysis
Tribal Cultural Resources
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.12-7
and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k), or b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe.
AB 52 and SB 18 Consultation
On November 23, 2024, the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) conducted a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search for the Project area. The SLF search did not identify the presence of known tribal cultural resources within or in the vicinity of the Project area. The NAHC identified a list of tribal contacts known to be traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Place of Use.
The City of Agoura Hills sent AB 52 notification letters via certified mail to the following Native American tribal contacts:
Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians
Chumash Council of Bakersfield
Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians
Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians The City of Agoura Hills sent SB 18 notification letters via certified mail to the following Native American tribal contacts:
Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians
Chumash Council of Bakersfield
Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation
Northern Chumash Tribal Council
Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians
Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians
Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council Gabrielino/Tongva Nation
Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe
Under AB 52 and SB 18, tribes have 30 and 90 days to respond and request consultation, respectively. The City received one response from the Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians (FTBMI). No responses were received from the other three groups notified.
On January 24, 2025, Miguel Luna, Chief Administrative Officer for the FTMBI, responded via email requesting additional details regarding the proposed Project. City staff responded to Mr. Luna’s inquiry the same day providing the requested details. On February 18, 2025, Mr. Luna responded by referring to previous consultation efforts undertaken between the City and FTBMI in December 2022, wherein the following Conditions of Approval (COAs) were recommended by FTBMI for projects that would impact a tribal cultural resource:
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.12-8
CUL-1. Retention of a Qualified Archaeologist
CULT-2. Retention of tribal monitors affiliated with the FTBMI CUL-3. Implementation of a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) CUL-4. Inadvertent discovery protocols for archaeological resources CUL-5. Inadvertent discovery protocols for human remains Mr. Luna requested revisions to the COA language and asked that the final revisions be provided to him. As discussed below, no tribal cultural resources were identified as part of the consultation process to date. Therefore, the COAs do not apply to the proposed Project. Consultation between the City and FTBMI officially concluded in November 2025.
Threshold 1: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a TCR, defined in PRC Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is:
a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k), or b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe.
Impact TCR-1 NO TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES WERE IDENTIFIED AS A RESULT OF THE CITY’S REQUIRED AB 52 AND SB 18 CONSULTATION PROCESSES. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
No tribal cultural resources listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant were identified as a result of the City’s consultation process. As outlined in PRC Section 21080(e)(1-2), substantial evidence is defined as a reasonable assumption predicated upon fact, or expert opinion supported by fact, and is not an argument, speculation, or unsubstantiated opinion or narrative. Therefore, no mitigation measures are warranted, and impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures would be required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
4.12.4 Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope for cumulative impacts related to tribal cultural resources is the Project area, which encompasses all of the City of Agoura Hills. This geographic scope is appropriate because TCRs have the potential to extend across large areas.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Tribal Cultural Resources
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.12-9
Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, including the projects listed in Table 3-1 in Chapter 3, Environmental Setting, would result in ground disturbance in locations with the potential to contain tribal cultural resources, anticipated or unanticipated. As such, cumulative development could adversely impact tribal cultural resources. Tribal cultural resources evaluations and AB 52 consultations would be completed by the appropriate jurisdiction on a case-by-case basis for all future development. Compliance with applicable regulations and implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, including resource avoidance measures, monitoring during ground disturbance within culturally sensitive areas, and preparation of mitigation plans for the inadvertent discovery of tribal cultural resources, would address impacts related to tribal cultural resources associated with future development. Therefore, cumulative development would have a less-thansignificant cumulative impact involving substantial adverse changes in the significance of a tribal cultural resources.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
4.12-10
This page left intentionally blank.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Effects Found Not to be Significant
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.13-1
4.13 Effects Found Not to be Significant
Section 15128 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to briefly describe any possible significant effects that were determined not to be significant and were therefore not discussed in detail in the EIR. This section is based on State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G and addresses the potential environmental effects of the project that clearly would not be significant and are not addressed in the preceding sections of this PEIR, including Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Mineral Resources, Utilities and Service Systems, Population and Housing, Public Services, and Wildfire. Any items not addressed in this section are addressed in Sections 4.1 through 4.12 of this PEIR.
4.13.1 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
All thresholds pertaining to Agriculture and Forestry Resources (from State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G) are discussed below.
Would the Project:
A. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use; B. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract; C. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)); D. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use; or, E. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to nonforest use? The Project area encompasses all of the City of Agoura Hills. According to the California Department of Conservation’s (DOC’s) Important Farmland Finder, the city is characterized by “Urban and BuiltUp Land” and “Other Land.” “Other Land” is land not included in any other mapping category.
Common examples of “Other Land” include low density rural developments; brush, timber, wetland, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing; confined livestock, poultry or aquaculture facilities; strip mines, borrow pits; and water bodies smaller than forty acres. Vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development and greater than 40 acres is also mapped as “Other” Land (DOC 2025a). There is no prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance located within the boundaries of the city (DOC 2022). No impact would occur.
The City of Agoura Hills does not contain lands zoned for agricultural use, and there are no parcels under a Williamson Act contract within the city (City of Agoura Hills 2023; DOC 2025b). The closest parcel under a Williamson Act contract is located approximately six miles west of the city in Hidden Valley. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. No impact would occur.
There are currently no existing zoning districts for forest land, timberland, or timberland production within the City of Agoura Hills (City of Agoura Hills 2023). Therefore, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan Project
4.13-2
Timberland Production. Also, the Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Overall, the Project would not involve changes to the existing environment that could result in the conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur.
4.13.2 Energy
All thresholds pertaining to Energy (from State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G) are discussed below.
Would the Project:
A. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation; or, B. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? During construction of individual bicycle facilities identified within the Bicycle Master Plan (BMP), energy would be consumed in the form of petroleum-based fuels used to power off-road construction vehicles and equipment on the Project site, construction workers traveling to and from the Project site, and vehicles used to deliver or haul materials. Construction equipment would be maintained to applicable standards, and construction activities and associated fuel consumption and energy use would be temporary and typical for construction sites. It is reasonable to assume contractors would avoid wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary fuel consumption during construction to reduce construction costs. Therefore, the Project would not involve inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary energy use during construction, and construction-phase impacts related to energy consumption would be less than significant.
Operation of bicycle facilities identified within the BMP would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along shared use paths, delineated bike lanes, shared use travel lanes, and physically separated bikeways adjacent to travel lanes. Use of these facilities would not consume gas or electricity. Implementation of the BMP would also result in the installation of enhanced bicycle treatments including street striping and restriping, signage and wayfinding, bicycle signals and detection at traffic signals, bicycle parking, and bicycle repair facilities. Operation of these facilities may require minimal amounts of electricity, such as bicycle signals or detection at traffic signals.
These features would be anticipated to rely on existing electrical infrastructure and would tie into nearby transmission lines without the need for new or expanded electrical infrastructure. As part of the proposed Project, the City must also amend Chapter 3, Infrastructure and Community Services, of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 to ensure consistency with the proposed BMP. These General Plan Amendments would shift the focus from prioritizing automobile mobility to reducing VMT through alternative transportation modes like walking and biking, guided by the BMP, which would reduce the consumption of gas and electricity in the city. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
The 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality outlines a strategy to meet carbon neutrality goals and cut human-caused greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in accordance with the directive of Assembly Bill 1279. The Scoping Plan includes several goals and policies related to reducing energy and petroleum consumption and energy efficiency. The proposed Project would align with these goals and policies through its objective to increase transportation choices by providing viable alternatives to driving. These objectives would reduce overall energy consumption due to the potential for a reduction in petroleum use from mobile sources. As such, the Project would be consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan that states under Chapter 5, Challenge Accepted, “[state Environmental Impact Analysis
Effects Found Not to be Significant
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.13-3
funding] strategies aid in developing new technologies, in ramping up access for all, and in shifting to cleaner, modes of transport; for instance, by supporting investments in walkable, bikeable communities and transit, as well as in vehicles.” The Project would also allow for local residents to avoid vehicle trips (and thus petroleum use from mobile sources) into the area in accordance with its objective to improve accessibility through local and regional connectivity by providing dedicated bicycle lanes. Appendix D of the Scoping Plan discusses local actions that can occur to support State Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reduction and energy efficiency goals. Included in this discussion is a key priority area of VMT reduction that calls for increasing “public access to clean mobility options by planning for and investing in electric shuttles, bike share, car share, and walking” and “amend(ing) zoning or development codes to enable mixed-use, walkable, transit-oriented, and compact infill development,” which the Bicycle Master Plan would support through its objective to provide a mechanism for developers to mitigate VMT impacts from development projects.
Appendix E of the 2022 Scoping Plan discusses sustainable and equitable communities. Specifically, part of the vision of the 2022 Scoping Plan is to help meet the State carbon neutrality goal no later than 2045 and advance energy efficiency and equity by providing “complete networks of safe and accessible bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure to make those modes of transportation the preferred travel mode for short distances.” The proposed Project would implement up to 30.1 miles of new bikeways and bikeway improvements in the City of Agoura Hills, which would improve accessibility through local and regional connectivity, improve safety by providing separate biking facilities, and improve the public health by creating facilities that allow for more biking. Therefore, the Project would be consistent with the energy efficiency goals and vision of the 2022 Scoping Plan. This impact would be less than significant.
4.13.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
All thresholds pertaining to Greenhouse Gas Emissions (from State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G) are discussed below.
Would the Project:
A. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or,
B. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Operation of bicycle facilities identified within the BMP would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along shared use paths, delineated bike lanes, shared use travel lanes, and physically separated bikeways adjacent to travel lanes. Operation of enhanced bicycle treatments would consist of the continued use of existing bicycle facilities, storing of bicycles at new parking facilities, and use of bicycle repair facilities. As part of the proposed Project, the City must also amend Chapter 3, Infrastructure and Community Services, of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 to ensure consistency with the proposed BMP. These General Plan Amendments would shift the focus from prioritizing automobile mobility to reducing VMT through alternative transportation modes like walking and biking, guided by the BMP. Therefore, during operation, the Amendments would result in fewer vehicular trips. Overall, operational activities would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly. Rather, the Project would be expected to reduce vehicle trips due the addition of bicycle facilities, which would reduce GHG emissions in the Project area. No impact would occur.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan Project
4.13-4
As identified in Section 4.13.2, Energy, the proposed Project would be consistent with the goals and vision of the 2022 Scoping Plan. No impact would occur.
4.13.4 Mineral Resources
All thresholds pertaining to Mineral Resources (from State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G) are discussed below.
Would the Project:
A. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state; or,
B. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? According to the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035, there are no significant mineral deposits known to exist within the city (City of Agoura Hills 2022). The majority of the city is classified as Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ)-1, which indicates an area has a low likelihood for significant mineral deposits to be present. Those areas not classified as MRZ-1 include Ladyface Mountain, a small portion of Palo Comado Canyon, and the Liberty Canyon area. These areas are classified as MRZ-3, which indicates the significance of mineral deposits cannot be evaluated with available data (City of Agoura Hills 2022). The Liberty Canyon area is the only location within Agoura Hills where mining activities have been documented. Elsewhere in the city, large-scale movements of earth materials have been associated with grading operations for urban developments, but not for the purpose of extracting minerals or construction aggregates. Despite no record of significant mineral deposits in the city, the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 includes Goal NR-8, which aims to protect access to and availability of mineral resources while maintaining environmental protection. Specifically, Policy NR-8.1 focuses on the protection of lands designated as MRZ for potential future mining and the regulation of such activities in accordance with relevant laws and regulations. These goals are likely precautionary. Nonetheless, future development of individual bicycle facilities identified within the BMP would be required to comply with Goal NR-8 and Policy NR-8.1 of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035. Thus, the proposed Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource or locally important mineral resource recovery site. No impact would occur.
4.13.5 Population and Housing
All thresholds pertaining to Population and Housing (from State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G) are discussed below.
Would the Project:
A. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure); or,
B. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The proposed Project would consist of the implementation of shared use paths, delineated bike lanes, shared use travel lanes, physically separated bike lanes adjacent to travel lanes, enhanced bicycle treatments, and General Plan Amendments. The proposed Project would generate temporary employment opportunities during construction activities for individual projects identified Environmental Impact Analysis
Effects Found Not to be Significant
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.13-5
within the BMP. Construction activities would be short term in nature and construction workers are expected to be drawn from the existing regional work force. Therefore, construction of the Project would not induce growth due to temporary employment opportunities or the relocation of construction workers. The proposed Project would not result in long-term employment opportunities, as it would not result in new commercial or industrial development that would require daily employees. Furthermore, the proposed Project would not involve the construction of infrastructure that could induce substantial population growth, such as new homes, new or increased capacity sewer or water lines, or new streets or roads. Although local bicycle improvements would make the area more attractive to residents and visitors, implementation of the Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth directly or indirectly. No impact would occur.
The Project would not require demolition of existing residences nor create long-term disturbances to residential land uses that would lead to the displacement of substantial numbers of people or necessitate construction of replacement housing. No impact would occur.
4.13.6 Public Services
All thresholds pertaining to Public Services (from State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G) are discussed below.
Would the Project:
A. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection;
Police protection;
Schools;
Parks; or,
Other public facilities?
The Project area encompasses all of the City of Agoura Hills, which is currently served by police and fire protection. As identified in Section 4.13.6 Population and Housing, the proposed Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth that could result in the need for new or physically altered fire or police protection services or facilities. The shared use paths, delineated bike lanes, shared use travel lanes, physically separated bike lanes adjacent to travel lanes, and enhanced bicycle treatments would not require specialized or additional fire or police services since they are along existing paths and roads. Furthermore, the Project would not result in unplanned population growth as new or improved bicycle facilities would not generate new residents that would increase the demand for school facilities, parks, or other public facilities such as libraries. No impact would occur.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan Project
4.13-6
4.13.7 Utilities and Service Systems
All thresholds pertaining to Utilities and Service Systems (from State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G) are discussed below.
Would the Project:
A. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects; B. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years;
C. Result in a determination by the waste water treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments;
D. Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals; or, E. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
The proposed Project would consist of the implementation of shared use paths, delineated bike lanes, shared use travel lanes, physically separated bike lanes adjacent to travel lanes, enhanced bicycle treatments, and General Plan amendments. These features would not require new or expanded utility services such as expanded water, wastewater, storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities. Furthermore, the Project would not involve or facilitate physical development requiring permanent utility services.
As discussed in Section 4.7, Hydrology and Water Quality, individual projects that disturb over one acre of soil would comply with the Construction General Permit, and all projects would have to comply with Article V, Chapter 5 of the Agoura Hills Municipal Code, requiring the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Control Plan and implementation of Best Management Practices to control runoff from construction sites. During precipitation events, stormwater would flow from proposed facilities into adjacent permeable (grass or landscaped) areas or onto existing streets, where it would be collected by the city’s existing stormwater system. Therefore, the proposed Project would not require new or expanded storm water drainage facilities.
Enhanced bicycle treatments would consist of components that may require minimal amounts of electricity, such as bicycle signals or detection at traffic signals. These features would be anticipated to rely on existing electrical infrastructure and would tie into nearby transmission lines without the need for new or expanded electrical infrastructure. Implementation of some components, such as Class I and Class IV facilities, may necessitate the relocation of existing utility infrastructure. The relocation of such utilities would not result in environmental impacts beyond what is evaluated throughout this environmental document. Therefore, Project impacts involving the construction or relocation of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities would be less than significant.
During ground disturbance associated with implementation of individual projects identified within the BMP, small quantities of potable or non-potable water would be required for dust control and suppression. Construction activities requiring dust suppression would be temporary in nature and water needs would be minimal. Water needs in the City of Agoura Hills are accounted for by the Las Environmental Impact Analysis
Effects Found Not to be Significant
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 4.13-7
Virgenes Municipal Water District’s (LVMWD) Urban Water Management Plan. According to LVMWD’s Urban Water Management Plan (2020), it is anticipated that water supplies will reliably meet all of LVMWD’s water demands through 2040 during average, single dry-, and five-year drought. Operation of the Project would not require a permanent water supply. Therefore, sufficient water supplies would be available to serve Project construction. This impact would be less than significant.
During construction activities associated with implementation of individual projects identified within the BMP, portable toilets may be required for construction personnel, which would generate a minor amount of wastewater that would be hauled to the Tapia Water Reclamation Facility for disposal. The Tapia Water Reclamation Facility is permitted and designed to treat up to 16.1 million gallons per day. This facility is currently operating at approximately 59 percent of its permitted capacity, averaging approximately 9.5 million gallons per day in daily wastewater treatment (LVMWD 2025). Therefore, the Tapia Water Reclamation Facility would have adequate capacity to serve the projected wastewater generation during individual project construction in addition to existing commitments. Project components would not include new restrooms or septic systems, result in operational activities that would result in the ongoing generation of wastewater, or involve or facilitate physical development that would generate wastewater. Therefore, the Project would not result in the generation of wastewater exceeding the existing capacity of a wastewater treatment provider. This impact would be less than significant.
Construction activities may temporarily generate solid waste, including soil spoils or crushed asphalt, which would be disposed of in accordance with all applicable federal, State, and local statutes and regulations. Construction waste would be disposed of at the Calabasas Landfill, which has a permitted daily capacity of 1,000 tons per day, and an expected remaining life of 10 years (Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts 2025). Due to the temporary nature of construction activities and the minimal amount of construction waste anticipated, the Project would not generate quantities of solid waste that would account for a substantial percentage of the total daily regional permitted capacity available at the Calabasas Landfill. Trash cans may be installed on some segments of the proposed Class I facilities, including the Medea Creek Path and Agoura High School Connection. Disposal of waste by users of the Class I facilities would generate a minimal amount of solid waste, which would also be disposed of at Calabasas Landfill. Overall, implementation of the Project would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure. Impacts related to solid waste would be less than significant.
4.13.8 Wildfire
All thresholds pertaining to Wildfire (from State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G) are discussed below.
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the Project:
A. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; B. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire;
C. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment; or, City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan Project
4.13-8
D. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? The City of Agoura Hills is located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) in a Local Responsibility Area and is bordered to the north and south by VHFHSZ in a State Responsibility Area (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2025).
As discussed in Section 4.6 Hazards and Hazardous Materials, if future construction activities require work within the roadway, a construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented in accordance with the MUTCD. The construction traffic control plan would include the use of flaggers during any temporary lane closures, consistent with Chapter 6 (Flagger Control) of the MUTCD, and no detours would be required (Federal Highway Administration 2023).
Therefore, construction of individual projects identified within the BMP would not impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
During construction, there would be a temporary increase in human activity and potential ignition sources, including equipment that could create sparks, be a source of heat, or leak flammable materials on individual project sites. Heat or sparks from construction equipment, vehicles, and the use of flammable hazardous materials have the potential to ignite adjacent vegetation and start a fire, especially during weather events that include low-humidity and high wind speeds. Compliance with rules and regulations including Hazardous Material Transportation Act, Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s Standard 1917.156, CCR Title 22, Hazardous Waste Control Law, Environmental Health Standards for the Management of Hazardous Waste Law, CCR Title 8 Section 1532.1, and the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035, all of which establish procedures for the proper transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials that have potential to ignite, would reduce the construction impact to a less than significant level.
The proposed Project would not include structural components or physical development that would exacerbate wildfire risk due to slope, prevailing winds, or other factors that would expose bike riders to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire. The Project would not require installation or maintenance of roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities. Implementation of Class I bicycle facilities would result in the construction of new paved bicycle paths away from existing roadway rights-of-way. Operation of Class I facilities would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along these shared use paths.
Although the Agoura Hills Municipal Code does not include regulations that pertain to the use of electric bicycles (E-bikes), Assembly Bill 1096, adopted in October 2015, limits the use of E-bikes on Class I and Class IV facilities. Furthermore, Senate Bill 1271, adopted in September 2024, establishes stricter battery safety rules and motor requirements to reduce fire risk associated with the use of Ebikes. Therefore, the Project would not exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. This impact would be less than significant.
As discussed in Section 4.5, Geology and Soils, several areas within the City of Agoura Hills are located within liquefaction zones. The Project would not result in physical development that could exacerbate seismic risks related to landslides. Furthermore, as discussed in Section 4.7, Hydrology and Water Quality, the Project would not substantially alter the topography of individual project sites, nor would the Project substantially alter existing drainage patterns. Overall, the Project would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, as the Project would not exacerbate wildfire risk. No impact would occur.
Other CEQA Required Discussions
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 5-1
5 Other CEQA Required Discussions
This chapter discusses other issues for which the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires analysis in addition to the specific issue areas discussed in Chapter 4, Environmental Impact Analysis, of this Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (EIR). These additional issues include the potential to induce population growth and/or economic growth; removal of obstacles to growth; significant irreversible effects; and mandatory findings.
5.1 Growth Inducement
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(d) requires a discussion of a proposed project’s potential to foster economic or population growth, including ways in which a project could remove an obstacle to growth. Growth does not necessarily create significant physical changes to the environment.
However, depending upon the type, magnitude, and location of growth, it can result in significant adverse environmental effects. The proposed project’s growth inducing potential is therefore considered significant if project-induced growth could result in significant physical effects in one or more environmental issue areas.
5.1.1 Population Growth
As discussed in Section 4.13.6, Population and Housing, the proposed Project would consist of the implementation of shared use paths, delineated bike lanes, shared use travel lanes, physically separated bike lanes adjacent to travel lanes, enhanced bicycle treatments, and General Plan Amendments. The proposed Project would generate temporary employment opportunities during construction activities for individual projects identified within the Bicycle Master Plan (BMP).
Construction activities would be short term in nature and construction workers are expected to be drawn from the existing regional work force. Following construction, the proposed Project would not result in long-term employment opportunities, as it would not result in new commercial or industrial development that would require daily employees. Furthermore, the proposed Project would not involve the construction of infrastructure that could induce substantial population growth, such as new homes, new or increased capacity sewer or water lines, or new streets or roads.
5.1.2 Economic Growth
The proposed Project would generate temporary employment opportunities during construction.
Because construction workers would be drawn from the existing regional work force, construction of the Project would not be growth-inducing. Following construction, the proposed Project would not result in long-term employment opportunities, as it would not result in new commercial or industrial development that would require daily employees. Therefore, the proposed Project would not contribute to the city’s economic growth.
5.1.3 Removal of Obstacles to Growth
As identified is Section 4.8, Land Use and Planning, the City of Agoura Hills is comprised of a blend of semi-rural and suburban development. As discussed in Section 4.13.5, Utilities and Service Systems, existing infrastructure in the City of Agoura Hills would be adequate to serve the Project. The Project City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
5-2
would not result in the modification to or addition of water or wastewater facilities in the Project area that would facilitate or accommodate new development. Furthermore, the Project does not involve the extension of new water, wastewater, or vehicular transportation infrastructure through undeveloped areas, nor does the Project propose to increase the capacity of existing infrastructure.
The Project does propose to implement paved Class I facilities away from existing roadways; these facilities would not provide access to currently undeveloped areas. Rather, these facilities would provide improved access for bicycles and pedestrians to existing developed areas within the city.
Because the Project would not result in new infrastructure, require the extension of existing infrastructure to undeveloped areas, or increase the capacity of existing infrastructure in a way that would support new development or increase development intensity, Project implementation would not remove an obstacle to growth.
5.2 Irreversible Environmental Effects
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) require that EIRs contain a discussion of significant irreversible environmental changes which would be caused by the project should it be implemented. Such significant irreversible environmental changes may include the following:
Use of non-renewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the project which would be irreversible because a large commitment of such resources makes removal or non-use unlikely;
Primary impacts and, particularly secondary impacts (such as highway improvement which provides access to a previously inaccessible area) which generally commit future generations to similar uses; or
Irreversible damage which may result from environmental accidents associated with the project.
This section addresses non-renewable resources, the commitment of future generations to the proposed uses, and irreversible impacts associated with the proposed Project.
Construction of individual projects identified within the BMP would involve an irreversible commitment of construction materials and non-renewable energy resources, including petroleumbased fuels used to power construction vehicles and equipment. Construction of bicycle facilities is generally low impact in that the requirements for construction materials is less than that of a typical roadway in the same extent. Following construction, implementation of the Project would not involve the development of new land uses resulting in the need for expanded electricity or creating additional vehicular trips. Rather, the Project would be expected to reduce vehicular trips by providing alternative travel modes, thereby reducing the consumption of non-renewable energy resources such as petroleum-based fuels. Some Project components, such as bicycle signals or detection at traffic signals, may require minimal amounts of electricity. These features would be anticipated to rely on existing electrical infrastructure and would tie into nearby transmission lines.
Therefore, operation of individual projects would not increase the local demand for non-renewable energy resources such as petroleum products and natural gas. As discussed in Section 4.13.2, Energy, neither construction nor operation of the proposed Project would result in wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Although construction activities for individual projects would involve the use of energy, energy usage would be negligible and would not result in irreversible environmental effects. Consumption of construction materials and energy resources would occur with any development in the region and is not unique to the proposed Project.
Other CEQA Required Discussions
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 5-3
Implementation of individual projects identified within the BMP would not involve land development requiring a commitment of law enforcement, fire protection, water supply, wastewater treatment, or solid waste disposal services such that new or increased public services or utility services would be necessary. As discussed in Section 4.13.6, Public Services, and Section
4.13.7, Utilities and Service Systems, impacts to these services and systems would not be significant.
As discussed in Section 4.11, Transportation, active transportation projects, including the proposed Project, generally reduce VMT. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in additional vehicle trips, and thus would not increase local traffic or regional air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions. Furthermore, as discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, and Section 4.13.3, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, construction and operation of the individual projects would not generate air emissions or greenhouse gas emissions that would result in a significant impact. As such, the Project would not result in irreversible effects.
5.3 Mandatory Findings
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15065 requires the following specific Mandatory Findings of Significance be addressed as part of the environmental review for the project. The potential for the project to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory Project impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
Environmental effects of the project which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly
Section 4.3, Biological Resources, describes the Project’s potential effects on plant and animal species populations, habitats, communities, and migratory patterns and concluded that there would be a less than significant impact to biological resources with implementation of mitigation measures. Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, and Section 4.12, Tribal Cultural Resources, describe the Project’s potential effects on important historical and prehistorical cultural and tribal cultural resources. Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, concluded that impacts to cultural resources would be significant and unavoidable, while Section 4.12, Tribal Cultural Resources, concluded that there would be no impact to tribal cultural resources. Potential adverse environmental effects to human beings are discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, Section 4.5, Geology and Soils, Section 4.6, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Section 4.9, Noise, and Section 4.13.8, Wildfire. As identified therein, impacts related to air quality and wildfire would be less than significant; impacts related to geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, and noise would be less than significant with mitigation.
Therefore, the Project would not have the potential to substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Furthermore, the environmental analyses in Sections 4.1 through 4.12 of this EIR conclude with a discussion of the Project’s contribution to cumulative effects; as discussed in City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
5-4
these sections, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable environmental impacts.
Due to the significant and unavoidable impacts to cultural resources, the Project could eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory; thus, implementation of the Project could substantially degrade the quality of the environment.
Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-1
6 Alternatives
As required by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, this Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (EIR) examines a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed Project that would feasibly attain most of the Project’s basic objectives but would avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project.
6.1 Development of Alternatives
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c) requires that a EIR identify alternatives that were considered but rejected as infeasible and provide a brief explanation as to why such alternatives were not fully considered in the EIR. As required by the State CEQA Guidelines, the selection of alternatives for this PEIR included a screening process to determine a reasonable range of alternatives, which could reduce significant effects but also feasibly meet Project objectives.
Alternatives that do not clearly provide any environmental advantages compared to the Project, do not meet basic Project objectives, or do not achieve overall lead agency policy goals, have been eliminated from further consideration. The factors that may be considered when addressing the feasibility of alternatives include site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, General Plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f][1]). To develop a reasonable range of alternatives to the project, the City considered the following Project objectives and potentially significant impacts of the proposed Project.
6.1.1 Project Objectives
As discussed in Chapter 2, Project Description, the objectives for the proposed Project, are as follows:
Increase transportation choices by providing viable alternatives to driving and improved equity to include all bikers, those who choose not to drive and those who cannot drive. Improve accessibility through local and regional connectivity. Local connections include residential communities, schools, commercial centers, and parks whereas regional connections include the surrounding communities and recreational trail network. Improve safety by providing separate biking facilities, reducing bicycle collisions, creating greater visibility for bikers, and raising awareness to both bicyclists and road users. Improve the public health by creating facilities that allow for more biking. Enhance sustainability and environmental benefits by reducing air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and noise pollution.
Enhance community character by constructing bicycle facilities near areas of high scenic value, such as along greenbelts or near surface waters.
Provide a mechanism for developers to mitigate VMT impacts from development projects.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-2
6.1.2 Potentially Significant Impacts of the Project
As discussed throughout Chapter 4, Environmental Impact Analysis, and summarized in Table ES-1 in the Executive Summary, the proposed Project would cause significant and unavoidable environmental impacts related to Cultural Resources. The proposed Project would require mitigation to reduce potentially significant impacts related to biological resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, and noise to less-than-significant levels. All other impacts identified in Chapter 4 would be less than significant or no impact.
6.1.3 Alternatives Considered but Rejected
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a) states that “an EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision making and public participation.” Thus, alternatives shall be limited to those that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the Project. Of those alternatives, the EIR need only examine in detail the ones that the lead agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the Project. Other alternatives may be considered but are not required to satisfy the requirements of CEQA. For the proposed Project, characteristics used to reject alternatives from further consideration include:
Failure to meet basic Project objectives;
Limited effectiveness in reducing project environmental impacts; Inconsistency with City policies; and
Potential for inconsistency with adopted agency plans and policies.
The following alternatives were considered but eliminated from further analysis by the City due to one or more of these factors.
Alternative Location
The first step in considering an off-site alternative is identifying whether any of the significant impacts of the Project would be avoided or substantially lessened by the relocation. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant impacts of the Project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f][2][A]). If it is determined that no feasible alternative locations exist, the EIR must disclose the reasons for this conclusion (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f][2][B]).
No alternative Project locations are analyzed in this EIR. The Project area encompasses all of the City of Agoura Hills. It would be infeasible to relocate the proposed Project outside of the city boundaries.
Only Class IV Facilities
This alternative would involve implementation of the BMP, Program, and Amendments. However, this alternative would limit projects identified within the BMP to just the proposed Class IV facilities.
There are two Class IV facilities proposed within the BMP: Kanan Road, from Thousand Oaks Boulevard to the northern city limits, and Thousand Oaks Boulevard, from the western city limits to Kanan Road. These two proposed Class IV facilities would consist of replacing approximately three miles of existing Class II facilities with new Class IV facilities. Therefore, implementing only the Class IV facilities would not result in the addition of new bicycle facilities within the City of Agoura Hills; Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-3
up to 28 miles of new bikeways and bikeway improvements would not be implemented under this alternative. Furthermore, given that no new bicycle facilities would be included within the BMP, this alternative would not facilitate the establishment of a VMT Mitigation Exchange and Banking Program because there would be no active transportation projects available for VMT reduction credits to fund. This alternative would not fulfill the basic Project Objectives as it would not increase transportation choices, improve accessibility through Agoura Hills, improve public health, enhance sustainability, or enhance community character by constructing bicycle facilities near areas of high scenic value. For this reason, this alternative has been considered but rejected from further analysis.
6.1.4 Project Alternatives
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a) states that “an [P]EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision making and public participation.” The selected alternatives are limited to those that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and those that the lead agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the Project. This section presents the selected alternatives and includes an evaluation for the environmental topics addressed in Sections 4.1 to 4.12, although at a more general level to compare the merits of the alternatives to the proposed Project (as allowed by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[d]).
The following alternatives are evaluated in this PEIR, including the CEQA-required “no project” alternative:
Alternative 1: No Project Alternative
Alternative 2: Project Minus Medea Creek Path and Agoura High School Connection Alternative 3: Only Class II and Class III Facilities Table 6-1 provides a summary comparison of the characteristics of the proposed Project and each of the alternatives considered. Detailed descriptions of the alternatives are included in the impact analysis for each alternative. The potential environmental impacts of each alternative are analyzed in Sections 6.1 through 6.4.
Table 6-1 Comparison of Project Alternatives’ Characteristics Feature
Proposed
Project
Alternative 1:
No Project
Alternative
Alternative 2: Project
Minus Medea Creek
Path and Agoura High
School Connection
Alternative 3: Only
Class II and Class III
Facilities
Medea Creek Path
Agoura High School
Connection
Class I Facilities
Class II Facilities
Class II Facilities
Class IV Facilities
Enhanced bicycle treatments
VMT Mitigation Exchange and
Banking Program
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-4
Feature
Proposed
Project
Alternative 1:
No Project
Alternative
Alternative 2: Project
Minus Medea Creek
Path and Agoura High
School Connection
Alternative 3: Only
Class II and Class III
Facilities
General Plan Amendments
Total mileage of bicycle paths 31.35 miles 0 miles 29 miles 25.6 miles
6.2 Alternative 1: No Project Alternative
6.2.1 Description
The purpose of describing and analyzing the no Project alternative is to allow decision-makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed Project with the impacts of not approving the proposed Project. According to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(c), the lead agency should analyze the impacts of the no Project alternative by projecting what would reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the Project were not approved. The No Project Alternative assumes that the Bicycle Master Plan (BMP), including Medea Creek Path (Path) and Agoura High School Connection (Connection), would not be implemented, the VMT Mitigation Exchange and Banking Program (Program) would not be established, and General Plan Amendments (Amendments) and would not be adopted. Under this alternative, no construction activities associated with the Path, Connection, Class I through Class IV facilities, or enhanced bicycle treatments would occur, and the city’s existing 1.3 miles of bicycle routes and 9.2 miles of bicycle lanes would remain unchanged. Furthermore, the General Plan would not include the General Plan Amendments prioritizing non-vehicular mobility and would continue to prioritize the preservation of auto mobility rather than reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The No Project Alternative would not fulfill any Project Objectives, as the No Project Alternative would not increase transportation choices, improve accessibility through Agoura Hills, improve bicycle safety, improve public health, enhance sustainability, or enhance community character by constructing bicycle facilities near areas of high scenic value, or provide a mechanism for developers to mitigate VMT impacts from development projects.
6.2.2 Impact Analysis
a. Aesthetics
The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving adverse effects to scenic vistas, conflicts with applicable zoning and other regulations that govern scenic quality, and the creation of new sources of light or glare that would adversely affect views. Because there are no officially designated state scenic highways within the City of Agoura Hills, the proposed Project would result in no impact to scenic resources within a State scenic highway.
Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be implemented, and the visual character and quality of the overall Project area would remain similar to existing conditions. The No Project Alternative would not require construction activities that could impact scenic vistas of hillsides, scenic resources, and the Santa Monica Mountains. Thus, the No Project Alternative would result in no impact to scenic vistas. Furthermore, because the No Project Alternative would not involve construction activities, this alternative would not result in a temporary change in the existing visual character or quality of the Project area by introducing vehicles, equipment, or construction activities. Thus, the No Project Alternative would result in no impact related to conflict Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-5
with the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 goals and policies that pertain to scenic quality, AHMC development standards that govern the preservation of views and aesthetic character, or the Agoura Village Specific Plan viewshed standards that protect the view of Ladyface Mountain. The No Project Alternative would also result in no impact related to the creation of new sources of light or glare, as no storage, staging, or active work areas would be established, no construction equipment would be utilized, no bicycle signals, signage, or other reflective elements would be installed, and no bicycles would utilize new facilities. Given that the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts, this would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
There are no designated state scenic highways within the Project area. Thus, similar to the proposed Project, the No Project Alternative would result in no impact to scenic resources within a State scenic highway.
Overall, the No Project Alternative would have no impact on aesthetics. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
b. Air Quality
The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving conflict with or obstruction of the 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is in nonattainment, exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and odors.
Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be implemented. Growth in the City of Agoura Hills would continue to occur as anticipated based on the SCAG growth forecast, or other growth forecasts on which the 2022 AQMP is based. Similar to the Proposed Project, the No Project Alternative would not directly result in the construction of new residential or businesses; thus population, housing, and employment would not grow such that the SCAG growth forecast for the City of Agoura Hills, or other growth forecasts on which the 2022 AQMP is based, would be exceeded. Furthermore, because no construction activities would occur, the No Project Alternative would not generate criteria pollutant emissions from construction equipment, vehicle trips, or fugitive dust. Therefore, the No Project Alternative would result in impact involving conflict with or obstruction of the 2022 AQMP or involving a net increase of any criteria pollutants. This would be a level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Similarly, because no construction activities would occur, the No Project Alternative would not generate toxic air contaminants above a localized significance threshold, nor would this alternative result in odors emitted during construction activities. Therefore, the No Project Alternative would result in no impact involving exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or odors. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Overall, the No Project Alternative would have no impact on air quality. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
c. Biological Resources
The proposed Project would result in potentially significant impacts to special-status species, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, and state or federally protected wetlands due to construction activities in previously undisturbed areas. The proposed Project would also result in a potentially significant impact related to a conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources due to the potential for direct impact to oak trees during construction activities in previously undisturbed areas. The proposed Project would result in a less City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-6
than significant impact involving interference with wildlife movement and nursery sites.
Furthermore, the proposed Project would result in no impact related to a conflict with Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans within the boundaries of the City of Agoura Hills.
Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be implemented, and no construction activities would occur. Because construction activities would not occur, this alternative would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any special-status species, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, or state or federally protected wetlands. Mitigation Measures BIO-1a, BIO-1b, BIO-1c, BIO-2a, BIO-2b, and BIO-2c would not be required, and no impact would occur. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Because no physical improvements would occur, the No Project Alternative would not interfere with wildlife movement and nursery sites, nor would this alternative conflict with a local policy protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation ordinance. Mitigation Measures BIO-5a would not be required, and no impact would occur. These would be reduced levels of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Because there are no existing landscape‐level Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans within the boundaries of the City of Agoura Hills, the No Project Alternative would result in no impact related to a conflict with such plans, similar to the proposed Project.
Overall, the No Project Alternative would have no impact on biological resources, and no mitigation measures would be required. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
d. Cultural Resources
Due to the cultural sensitivities within the City of Agoura Hills, the proposed Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to historical resources even with implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, which would require preparation of a Historical Resources Evaluation for individual projects that could result in impacts to structures 45 years or older. The proposed Project would also result in a significant and unavoidable impact to archaeological resources even with implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2, which would require preparation of an Archaeological Resources Assessment for individual projects that would involve ground-disturbing activities. The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving the disturbance of human remains.
Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be implemented, and no construction activities would occur. Because construction activities would not occur, this alternative would not have the potential to directly impact historical structures and/or objects, have the potential to encounter or impact surficial and subsurface archaeological resources or have the potential to disturb human remains. Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2 would not be required, and no impact would occur. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
e. Geology and Soils
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts involving risk of loss, injury, or death due to rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-7
ground failure including liquefaction, or landslides; substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; unstable soils; and expansive soils. Furthermore, because the proposed Project would not result in the construction of buildings or habitable structures requiring a sanitary sewer system, there would be no impact involving the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. The proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact involving the destruction of paleontological resources due to ground-disturbing activities within geologic units with high or undetermined paleontological sensitivity.
Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be implemented, and no construction activities would occur. Because construction activities would not occur, this alternative would not have the potential to exacerbate risks due to rupture of a known earthquake fault, seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, or landslides, nor would this alternative result in soil erosion.
Furthermore, because no physical improvements would occur, the No Project Alternative would not increase exposure of people or property to the risk of loss, injury or death from structural failure, development on unstable soils, or development on expansive soils. No impact would occur, which would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Neither the proposed Project nor the No Project Alternative would result in the construction of buildings or habitable structures requiring a sanitary sewer system. Thus, similar to the proposed Project, the No Project Alternative would result in no impact related to the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.
Given that no construction activities would occur under the No Project Alternative, this alternative would not have the potential to damage or destroy paleontological resources that may be present on or below the ground surface in areas of high or undetermined paleontological sensitivity.
Mitigation Measure GEO-9 would not be required, and no impact would occur. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Overall, the No Project Alternative would have no impact on geology and soils. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project. f. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The proposed Project would result in potentially significant impacts involving the creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; the creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials; emissions of hazardous materials within 0.25 mile of a school; and creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment due to a known hazardous material site. The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact related to interference with the implementation of an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan and a less than significant impact related to wildland fires. Furthermore, because the City of Agoura Hills is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, the proposed Project would result in no impact involving safety hazards or excessive noise from airports.
Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be implemented, and no construction activities would occur. Therefore, this alternative would not require the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, nor would this alternative have the potential to release hazardous materials into the environment. Furthermore, because no ground-disturbing activities would occur, this alternative would not require handling of or have the potential to emit hazardous emissions, substances, or waste near a school. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would not be required City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-8
and no impact would occur, which would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Because no physical improvements would occur, the No Project Alternative would not result in the development of a bicycle facility on a known site included on the list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would not be required and no impact would occur, which would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Because no construction activities would occur, this alternative would not temporarily or permanently impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan due to the establishment of storage, staging, and active work areas within the roadway right-of-way (ROW). Furthermore, the No Project Alternative would not result in a temporary increase in potential ignition sources. No impacts would occur, which would be reduced levels of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
There are no airports located within the City of Agoura Hills, nor is the city located within the noise contours of an airport. Thus, similar to the proposed Project, the No Project Alternative would result in no impact related to safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the area.
Overall, the No Project Alternative would have no impact related to hazards and hazardous materials, and no mitigation measures would be required. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
g. Hydrology and Water Quality
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts involving violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements; a reduction in groundwater supplies or interference with groundwater recharge; alteration of existing drainage patterns such that erosion, siltation, increased runoff, polluted runoff, or redirected flood flows would occur; the release of pollutants due to project inundation; and conflict with a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be implemented. No construction activities or ground disturbance would occur. Thus, the No Project Alternative would not have the potential to degrade surface or ground water quality due to runoff from a construction site.
Furthermore, because no physical improvements would occur, the No Project Alternative would not result in an increase in impervious surface area or otherwise interfere with groundwater recharge, nor would this alternative alter drainage patterns that erosion, siltation, increased runoff, polluted runoff, or redirected flood flows would occur. No impacts would occur, which would be reduced levels of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
There are no tsunami inundation zones or seiche inundation zones within the Project area. Thus, similar to the proposed Project, the No Project Alternative would result in no impact related to the risk release of pollutants due to tsunami or seiche inundation events. However, given that the No Project Alternative would not result in any physical improvements within a flood hazard area, this alternative would not risk release of pollutants due to inundation within a flood hazard area; no impact would occur, which would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Overall, the No Project Alternative would have no impact on hydrology and water quality. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-9
h. Land Use and Planning
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts related to the physical division of an established community and related to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect.
Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be implemented, and no construction activities would occur. Therefore, this alternative would not have the potential to impact the circulation system due to construction activities within the ROW. No impact would occur during construction, which would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project. Similar to the proposed Project, the No Project Alternative would not result in physical development such that an established community would be physically divided during operational activities.
Under the No Project Alternative, existing bicycle infrastructure would remain unchanged within the City of Agoura Hills, and no Amendments would be made to the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035. This alternative would not improve connectivity or address existing gaps in the bicycle network, nor would this alternative shift the focus from prioritizing automobile trips to reducing VMT. As such, this alternative would be inconsistent with the SoCal Connect 2024 goals aimed at reducing emissions from transportation sources and the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 goals and policies related to providing bicycle connections, improving pedestrian-oriented amenities, and promoting land development practices that reduce energy consumption, pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions, and improving. While no direct land use conflicts would occur, the No Project Alternative would not advance local or regional land use plans or policies. Nonetheless, no impact would occur.
Overall, the No Project Alternative would have no impact on land use and planning. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project. i. Noise
The proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact related to the generation of noise in excess of applicable noise standards. The proposed Project would also result in a potentially significant impact involving the generation of excessive groundborne vibration. Because the City of Agoura Hills is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, the proposed Project would result in no impact involving excessive noise levels from airports.
Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be implemented. Thus, the No Project Alternative would not generate construction noise or operational noise associated with landscaping or maintenance activities, or portable amplified music or people’s voices from facility users. Furthermore, the No Project Alternative would not generate groundborne vibration due to construction activities. Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 would not be required, and no impact would occur. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Similar to the proposed Project, the No Project Alternative would not generate groundborne vibration during operational activities. Furthermore, there are no airports located within the City of Agoura Hills, nor is the city located within the noise contours of an airport. Thus, similar to the proposed Project, the No Project Alternative would result in no impact related to exposure to excessive noise levels for people residing or working in the area.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-10
Overall, the No Project Alternative would have no impact related to noise, and no mitigation measures would be required. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
j. Recreation
The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving the physical deterioration of recreational facilities.
Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be implemented. No new bicycle infrastructure would be constructed, and no improvements to existing facilities would occur. As a result, the No Project Alternative would not involve construction activities that could temporarily impact access to parks, open space, or recreational facilities such that alternative facilities would be utilized. Furthermore, the No Project Alternative would not result in new or improved multimodal access to existing recreational resources throughout the city. While the No Project Alternative would not result in or accelerate the physical deterioration of a recreational facility, the No Project Alternative would not advance local or regional plans or policies related to recreation access and mobility. Nonetheless, no impact would occur, which would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
k. Transportation
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts related to a conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system; a conflict with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b); substantially increased hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses; and inadequate emergency access.
Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be implemented, and no construction activities would occur. Therefore, this alternative would not have the potential to impact roadways or the circulation system due to construction activities within the ROW or require temporary lane closures, which would conflict with Goal M-1 of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 that calls for a safe and efficient roadway system. However, under the No Project Alternative, existing bicycle infrastructure would remain unchanged within the City of Agoura Hills, and no Amendments would be made to the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035. This alternative would not improve connectivity or address existing gaps in the bicycle network, nor would this alternative shift the focus from prioritizing automobile trips to reducing VMT. As such, this alternative would be inconsistent with the SoCal Connect 2024 goals aimed at reducing emissions from transportation sources and the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 goals and policies related to creating a transportation system that serves all modes of travel, reducing reliance on single-occupancy vehicle travel through the provision of alternative travel modes, enhancing bicycle facilities, and decreasing GHG emissions through a reduction in VMT. While no direct conflicts would occur with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, the No Project Alternative would not advance local or regional land use plans or policies related to transportation. Nonetheless, no impact would occur.
Because no physical improvements would occur, the No Project Alternative would not conflict or be inconsistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use within the roadway, or result in inadequate emergency access to existing land uses. No impact would occur, which would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-11
Overall, the No Project Alternative would have no impact on transportation. This would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project. l. Tribal Cultural Resources
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts to tribal cultural resources, as no tribal cultural resources were identified during the City’s required AB 52 and SB 18 consultation processes. Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Project would not be implemented, and no construction activities would occur. Therefore, the No Project Alternative would result in no impact related to tribal cultural resources, which would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
6.3 Alternative 2: Project Minus Medea Creek Path and
Agoura High School Connection
6.3.1 Description
Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would involve implementation of the BMP, Program, and Amendments. However, the BMP implemented under Alternative 2 would only include Class I facilities on Ladyface Greenway, Reyes Adobe Road, and Medfield Path; the Medea Creek Bike Path and the Agoura High School Connection would be removed from the list of bicycle facilities. All Class II facilities, Class III facilities, Class IV facilities, and enhanced bicycle treatments would be included within the BMP under Alternative 2. The Program would be revised to reflect the ability to purchase VMT reduction credits only for the funding of individual projects identified within the BMP under this alternative, which would exclude the Path and the Connection. The Amendments would also be revised to exclude the Path and Connection from the City’s planned additions to its system of bikeways. Under Alternative 2, the Amendments would still shift the focus from prioritizing automobile mobility to reducing VMT through alternative transportation modes like walking and biking.
Construction activities under Alternative 2 would consist of:
Class I: Clearing and grubbing, pavement demolition, grading, utility relocation, retaining wall or fencing installation, asphalt paving or repaving, street improvements, striping, and revegetation; Class II: Restriping and reconfiguration of lane widths to accommodate new dedicated bike lanes; pavement widening on Driver Avenue, between Easterly Road and Colodny Drive, and on Cornell Road, between Agoura Road and Cornell Way, which would require clearing and grubbing, subgrade stabilization, base course installation, and asphalt paving; Class III: Restriping to identify bike routes;
Class IV: Pavement demolition, minor grading, bollard or fencing installation, asphalt paving or repaving, and striping;
Enhanced Bicycle Treatments: street striping/re-striping, installation of signage and wayfinding, installation of bicycle signals, installation of bicycle parking, and installation of bicycle repair facilities.
Under Alternative 2, approximately 29 miles of bicycle facilities would be implemented. Alternative 2 would fulfill the Project Objectives that aim to increase transportation choices, improve accessibility through Agoura Hills, improve bicycle safety, improve public health, enhance City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-12
sustainability, and provide a mechanism for developers to mitigate VMT impacts from development projects. However, Alternative 2 would meet Project Objectives to a lesser extent given the reduced miles of bicycle facilities implemented and improved under this alternative. Alternative 2 would not fulfill the Project Objective that aims to enhance community character by constructing bicycle facilities near areas of high scenic value, such as along greenbelts or near surface waters.
6.3.2 Impact Analysis
a. Aesthetics
The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving adverse effects to scenic vistas, conflicts with applicable zoning and other regulations that govern scenic quality, and the creation of new sources of light or glare that would adversely views. Because there are no officially designated state scenic highways within the City of Agoura Hills, the proposed Project would result in no impact to scenic resources within a State scenic highway.
Similar to the proposed Project, construction activities under Alternative 2 would be visible from City-designated scenic corridors, including Agoura Road, Thousand Oaks Boulevard, and Kanan Road. Due to the removal of the Path from the BMP, Alternative 2 would result in fewer temporary visual impediments from the scenic corridors on Thousand Oaks Boulevard and Agoura Road where the Path’s alignment is proposed to intersect. Furthermore, due to the removal of the Connection from the BMP, Alternative 2 would result in fewer temporary visual impediments to existing views of nearby ridgelines from Thousand Oaks Boulevard. Impacts under Alternative 2 would remain less than significant but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project. However, following construction, Alternative 2 would not provide new views of the natural habitat surrounding Medea Creek, nor would Alternative 2 provide enhanced opportunities to view scenic ridgelines from the Connection.
Similar to the proposed Project, construction activities under Alternative 2 could cause a temporary change in the existing visual character and quality of the Project area. These activities would not permanently impair or block any sensitive or unique visual resources or landscapes, nor would the BMP under Alternative 2 result in the construction of new structures that could permanently disrupt existing views. Similar to the proposed Project, all facilities implemented under Alternative 2 would be required to comply with applicable goals, policies, and regulations identified within the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035, the Agoura Hills Municipal Code (AHMC), and the Agoura Village Specific Plan. Thus, impacts related to a conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality under Alternative 2 would remain less than significant and would be similar to the proposed Project.
Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would result in temporary sources of light and glare due to the creation of storage, staging, or active work areas. Alternative 2 would also result in permanent sources of light and glare due to the implementation of bicycle signals, signage, or other reflective elements, as well as the operation of bicycles on new facilities. However, due to the exclusion of the Path and the Connection, Alternative 2 would result in less sources of temporary and permanent light and glare than the proposed Project. Impacts under Alternative 2 related to light and glare would remain less than significant but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project.
There are no designated state scenic highways within the Project area. Thus, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would result in no impact to scenic resources within a State scenic highway.
Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-13
Overall, impacts to aesthetics would remain less than significant under Alternative 2 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project.
b. Air Quality
The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving conflict with or obstruction of the 2022 Air Quality Management Plan, a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is in nonattainment, exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and odors.
Alternative 2 would result in the implementation of a smaller set of bicycle facilities. Similar to the proposed Project, normal background growth in the City of Agoura Hills would continue to occur but no residential or businesses would be built under Alternative 2. Thus population, housing, and employment would not grow such that the SCAG growth forecast for the City of Agoura Hills, or other growth forecasts on which the 2022 AQMP is based, would be exceeded.
Alternative 2 would exclude the Path and the Connection from the BMP. The Path, a two-mile bicycle path, is the longest new facility proposed in the BMP under the proposed Project.
Construction of the Path would result in the largest area of disturbance with the most construction activities. Thus, exclusion of the Path and the Connection under Alternative 2 would reduce the scope, extent, and duration of construction activities, and criteria pollutant emissions from construction equipment, vehicle trips, or fugitive dust would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project. Therefore, Alternative 2 would result in a less than significant impact involving conflict with or obstruction of the 2022 AQMP, and a less than significant impact involving a net increase of any criteria pollutants. Although impacts would remain less than significant, these impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduction in scope, extent, and duration of construction activities.
Similarly, because less construction activities would occur, Alternative 2 would generate fewer toxic air contaminants and result in less odors. Although impacts would remain less than significant, these impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project.
Overall, impacts to air quality would remain less than significant under Alternative 2 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project.
c. Biological Resources
The proposed Project would result in potentially significant impacts to special-status species, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, and state or federally protected wetlands due to construction activities in previously undisturbed areas. The proposed Project would also result in a potentially significant impact related to a conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources due to the potential for direct impact to oak trees during construction activities in previously undisturbed areas. The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving interference with wildlife movement and nursery sites.
Furthermore, the proposed Project would result in no impact related to a conflict with Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans within the boundaries of the City of Agoura Hills.
Alternative 2 would exclude the Path and the Connection from the BMP. Under the proposed Project, the Path and the Connection are proposed away from the existing roadway in areas with higher biological sensitivity where there is potential for wetlands and riparian habitats to occur.
Although these facilities would be excluded under Alternative 2, other Class I facilities and all Class City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-14
IV facilities would still be constructed under Alternative 2. Furthermore, some Class II facilities would require pavement widening outside of the existing roadway. Construction activities associated with the remaining Class I facilities, all Class IV facilities, and the Class II facilities that require pavement widening could occur in locations where sensitive biological resources exist.
Therefore, Alternative 2 could still result in potentially significant impacts to special-status species, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, and state or federally protected wetlands due to construction activities in previously undisturbed areas. Furthermore, Alternative 2 could still result in a potentially significant impact related to a conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources due to the potential for direct impact to oak trees. Mitigation Measures BIO-1a, BIO-1b, BIO-1c, BIO-2a, BIO-2b, BIO-2c, and BIO-5 would be required to reduce these potentially significant impacts to a less-than-significant level. Although impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation, these impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduced construction footprint in previously undisturbed areas.
Alternative 2 would result in implementation of the remaining Class I facilities, all Class IV, and Class II facilities that require pavement widening outside of the existing roadway. Wildlife adjacent to these facilities would be expected to be urban tolerant. Furthermore, use of these bicycle facilities would not prevent wildlife movement or disrupt nursery sites. Although impacts would remain less than significant, this impact would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduced construction footprint.
Because there are no existing landscape‐level Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans within the boundaries of the City of Agoura Hills, Alternative 2 would result in no impact related to a conflict with such plans, similar to the proposed Project.
Overall, impacts to biological resources would remain less than significant with mitigation under Alternative 2 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project. d. Cultural Resources
Due to the cultural sensitivities within the City of Agoura Hills, the proposed Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to historical resources even with implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, which would require preparation of a Historical Resources Evaluation for individual projects that could result in impacts to structures 45 years or older. The proposed Project would also result in a significant and unavoidable impact to archaeological resources even with implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2, which would require preparation of an Archaeological Resources Assessment for individual projects that would involve ground-disturbing activities. The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving the disturbance of human remains.
Alternative 2 would result in the implementation of a smaller set of bicycle facilities, excluding the Path and the Connection. Other Class I facilities and all Class IV facilities would still be constructed under Alternative 2. Furthermore, some Class II facilities would require pavement widening outside of the existing roadway. Construction activities associated with the remaining Class I facilities, all Class IV facilities, and the Class II facilities that require pavement widening would include ground disturbance in previously undisturbed areas. Thus, Alternative 2 would still have the potential to directly impact historical structures and/or objects, encounter or impact surficial and subsurface archaeological resources, and disturb human remains. Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2 would be required under Alternative 2. Although impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, these Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-15
impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduced construction footprint in previously undisturbed areas.
e. Geology and Soils
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts involving risk of loss, injury, or death due to rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure including liquefaction, or landslides; substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; unstable soils; and expansive soils. Furthermore, because the proposed Project would not result in the construction of buildings or habitable structures requiring a sanitary sewer system, there would be no impact involving the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. The proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact involving the destruction of paleontological resources due to ground-disturbing activities within geologic units with high or undetermined paleontological sensitivity.
Similar to the proposed Project, there are no faults or Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones within the Project area for Alternative 2, which would encompass all of the City of Agoura Hills; the nearest fault would be the Simi-Santa Rosa Fault, located approximately seven miles north of the city.
Therefore, Alternative 2 would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault. This impact would remain less than significant, similar to the proposed Project.
Alternative 2 would exclude the Path and the Connection from the BMP. Although these facilities would be excluded, other Class I facilities would still be constructed under Alternative 2. These Class I facilities, the Class III facilities, and the enhanced bicycle treatments would be located within identified liquefaction zones and within areas identified as at risk of landslides. Under the proposed Project, the Path and Connection are not located within identified liquefaction zones; thus, impacts related to the risk of loss, injury, or death due to liquefaction under Alternative 2 would remain less than significant and would be similar as compared to the proposed Project. The Path and the Connection are located within areas identified as at risk of landslides; thus, although impacts would remain less than significant, impacts related to the risk of loss, injury, or death due to landslides would be reduced under Alternative 2 as compared to the proposed Project due to the removal of facilities from the BMP within areas identified as at risk of landslides.
Although Alternative 2 would exclude the Path and the Connection from the BMP, construction activities associated with the remaining Class I facilities, all Class IV facilities, and the Class II facilities that require pavement widening would include ground disturbance in previously undisturbed areas.
Thus, Alternative 2 would still have the potential to result in soil erosion and the loss of topsoil.
Similar to the proposed Project, soil erosion that occurs due to implementation of individual projects involving earth-disturbing construction activities would be effectively controlled through a combination of State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) permits and AHMC requirements.
Although impacts would remain less than significant, impacts related to soil erosion and the loss of topsoil would be reduced under Alternative 2 as compared to the proposed Project due to fewer earth-moving construction activities.
Because construction activities associated with the remaining Class I facilities, all Class IV facilities, and the Class II facilities that require pavement widening would include ground disturbance in previously undisturbed areas, Alternative 2 would still have the potential to damage or destroy paleontological resources that may be present on or below the ground surface in areas of high or undetermined paleontological sensitivity. Mitigation Measure GEO-9 would be required to reduce this potentially significant impact to a less-than-significant level. Although impacts would remain City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-16
less than significant with mitigation, this impact would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduced construction footprint in previously undisturbed areas.
Similar to the proposed Project, a geotechnical investigation would be prepared prior to construction of aboveground features under Alternative 2 to determine the potential for risks of lateral spreading, subsidence problems, and expansive soils. Furthermore, similar to the proposed Project, the BMP under Alternative 2 would not result in the construction of buildings or habitable structures on soils subject to lateral spreading or subsidence, or on expansive soils. These impacts would remain less than significant and would be similar as compared to the proposed Project.
Neither the proposed Project nor Alternative 2 would result in the construction of buildings or habitable structures requiring a sanitary sewer system. Thus, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would result in no impact related to the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.
Overall, Alternative 2 would have a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Nonetheless, mitigation measures would still be required to reduce impacts related to geology and soils to a less-than-significant level.
Overall, impacts related to geology and soils would remain less than significant with mitigation under Alternative 2 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project. f. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The proposed Project would result in potentially significant impacts involving the creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; the creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials; emissions of hazardous materials within 0.25 mile of a school; and creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment due to a known hazardous material site. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would be required, which would involve the preparation of a Soil Management Plan. The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact related to interference with the implementation of an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan and the risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. Furthermore, because the City of Agoura Hills is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, the proposed Project would result in no impact involving safety hazards or excessive noise from airports.
Construction activities under Alternative 2 would involve the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials such as fuels, solvents, and asphalt products. These activities would be subject to existing federal, state, and local regulations governing hazardous materials management.
Nonetheless, Class IV facilities and enhanced bicycle treatments implemented under Alternative 2 may still be located within 1,000 feet of known hazardous materials sites. Therefore, Alternative 2 would have the potential to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment, either through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment or through the implementation of a project on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would be required. However, Alternative 2 would exclude the Path, which is proposed within 1,000 feet of three closed leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites. Therefore, although impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation, these impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project because the chance of Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-17
encountering contaminated soils on a known hazardous materials site during construction activities would be reduced.
Alternative 2 would exclude the Path and the Connection from the BMP. The Path and the Connection are located adjacent to Willow Elementary School and Agoura High School, respectively.
While there are known hazardous materials sites located within 1,000 feet of the Path, none are located within 0.25 mile of a school, and there are no known hazardous materials sites within 1,000 feet of the Connection. Class IV facilities would still be implemented under Alternative 2 and would be constructed near schools, including Lindero Canyon Middle School, Willow Elementary School, and Sumac Elementary School. There is one closed Cleanup Program Site (Joe Martin Commercial Property) located with 0.25 mile of Lindero Canyon Middle School. Therefore, Alternative 2 would have the potential for hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous materials near schools, and Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would be required. Impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation and would be similar to the proposed Project.
Under Alternative 2, construction activities associated with implementing the Class I facilities on Reyes Adobe Road and Agoura Road, the Class II facility proposed on Driver Avenue, and the Class IV facility proposed on Kanan Road north of Thousand Oaks Boulevard would occur on or near identified evacuation routes. Similar to the proposed Project, a construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) should construction within the roadway or should temporary lane closures occur. Thus, Alternative 2 would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. This impact would remain less than significant and would be similar to the proposed Project.
Because Alternative 2 would exclude the Path and the Connection from the BMP, there would be a lesser increase in human activity and potential ignition sources during construction activities in undeveloped areas. Nonetheless, construction of the remaining Class I facilities, some Class II facilities, and all Class IV facilities would still result in a temporary increase in potential ignition sources during construction activities in undeveloped areas. Compliance with OSHA fire prevention standards would ensure that risks are minimized. Furthermore, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would not include structural components or physical development that would expose people or structures to a significant risk involving wildland fire. Although this impact would remain less than significant, impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduced construction footprint in previously undisturbed areas.
There are no airports located within the City of Agoura Hills, nor is the city located within the noise contours of an airport. Thus, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would result in no impact related to exposure to excessive noise levels for people residing or working in the area.
Overall, impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would remain less than significant with mitigation under Alternative 2 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project. g. Hydrology and Water Quality
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts involving violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements; a reduction in groundwater supplies or interference with groundwater recharge; alteration of existing drainage patterns such that erosion, siltation, increased runoff, polluted runoff, or redirected flood flows would occur; the release of pollutants due to project inundation; and conflict with a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-18
Although Alternative 2 would exclude the Path and the Connection from the BMP, construction activities associated with the remaining Class I facilities, all Class IV facilities, and the Class II facilities that require pavement widening would still involve clearing, grading, paving, and excavation. Similar to the proposed Project, these activities would be subject to the Construction General Permit and Article V, Chapter 5 of the AHMC, which require the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) and, where applicable, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). With adherence to these requirements, impacts related to water quality standards, erosion, and runoff would remain less than significant, but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project given the reduced scope of construction activities.
Exclusion of the Path and Connection would reduce the amount of new impervious surfaces introduced within the Project area. Nonetheless, the remaining Class I facilities, all Class IV facilities, and the Class II facilities that require pavement widening would still result in minor increases in impervious surfaces. Due to the known depths of groundwater in the Russell Valley Groundwater Basin, construction activities under Alternative 2 would not require groundwater dewatering.
Furthermore, similar to the proposed Project, semipermeable materials would be utilized when feasible to construct the remaining Class I facilities, all Class IV facilities, and the Class II facilities that require pavement widening, and during precipitation events, stormwater would flow into adjacent permeable areas, or onto existing streets where it would be collected by the city’s existing stormwater system. Impacts to groundwater supplies or recharge would remain less than significant, but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project given the reduced amount of new impervious surfaces introduced.
Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the Project area or alter the course of a stream or river because no streams or rivers are located within individual project sites. Furthermore, Alternative 2 would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site, flooding on or off site, substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, or impeded or redirected flood flows, nor would Alternative 2 introduce structures that could redirect floodwaters. These impacts would remain less than significant and would be similar to the proposed Project.
There are no tsunami inundation zones or seiche inundation zones within the Project area. Thus, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would result in no impact related to the risk of release of pollutants due to tsunami or seiche inundation events. However, Alternative 2 would exclude the Path from the BMP, which is located within a flood hazard area. Class III facilities and enhanced bicycle treatments included in the BMP under Alternative 2 would still be constructed within flood hazard areas. Implementation of BMPs as required by the AHMC would reduce the potential for release of pollutants during construction of these facilities. Impacts related to the risk of release of pollutants due to project inundation within a flood hazard area would remain less than significant but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the removal of facilities from the BMP within flood hazard areas.
Overall, impacts to hydrology and water quality would remain less than significant under Alternative 2 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project. h. Land Use and Planning
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts related to the physical division of an established community and related to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect.
Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-19
Although Alternative 2 would exclude the Path and the Connection from the BMP, construction activities associated with the remaining Class I facilities, all Class IV facilities, and the Class II facilities that require pavement widening could still occur within or adjacent to existing ROW. These construction activities could temporarily impact the circulation system. Similar to the proposed Project, a construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented in accordance with the MUTCD should construction within the roadway or should temporary lane closures occur.
Following construction, Alternative 2 would not result in physical development such that an established community would be physically divided. Thus, Alternative 2 would not result in the physical division of an established community. This impact would remain less than significant and would be similar to the proposed Project.
Alternative 2 would implement approximately 29 miles of new bikeways within the City of Agoura Hills and would amend the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 to shift the focus from prioritizing automobile mobility to reducing VMT. Therefore, Alternative 2 would be consistent with the SoCal Connect 2024 goals aimed at reducing emissions from transportation sources and the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 goals and policies related to providing bicycle connections, improving pedestrian-oriented amenities, and promoting land development practices that reduce energy consumption, pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions, and improving. This impact would remain less than significant and would be similar to the proposed Project.
Overall, impacts related to land use and planning would be generally similar under Alternative 2 as compared to the proposed Project and would remain less than significant. i. Noise
The proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact related to the generation of noise in excess of applicable noise standards. The proposed Project would also result in a potentially significant impact involving the generation of excessive groundborne vibration. Because the City of Agoura Hills is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, the proposed Project would result in no impact involving excessive noise levels from airports.
Alternative 2 would result in the implementation of a smaller set of bicycle facilities, excluding the Path and the Connection from the BMP. Exclusion of the Path and the Connection under Alternative 2 would reduce the scope, extent, and duration of construction activities, which would reduce noise and groundborne vibration generated during construction activities as compared to the proposed Project. Nonetheless, the remaining Class I facilities, all Class IV facilities, and the Class II facilities that require pavement widening would still result in construction noise that could exceed the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) threshold of 80 dBA Leq(8-hour) at sensitive receptors located within 125 feet of construction. Similarly, use of vibratory rollers and other heavy equipment during construction of the remaining Class I facilities, all Class IV facilities, and the Class II facilities that require pavement widening could generate vibration levels exceeding the FTA threshold of 0.12 in/sec PPV at nearby structures. Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 would be required to reduce these potentially significant impacts to a less-than-significant level. Although these impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation, impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduced the scope, extent, and duration of construction activities.
Similar to the proposed Project, operational noise under Alternative 2 would be limited to landscaping and maintenance activities, portable amplified music from facility users, and people’s voices. Noise from these sources would be required to comply with AHMC Section 9656.2.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-20
Operational activities would not introduce new sources of vibration. Operational impacts would remain less than significant and would be similar to the proposed Project.
Overall, impacts related to noise would remain less than significant with mitigation under Alternative 2 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project. j. Recreation
The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving the physical deterioration of recreational facilities.
Alternative 2 would exclude construction of the Path and the Connection. As such, this alternative would not require the establishment of storage, staging, and active work areas within or adjacent to the designated open space surrounding Medea Creek, which would reduce the potential to restrict access to recreational resources. However, pavement widening on Driver Avenue associated with the construction of the Class II facilities under this Alternative could still restrict access to or result in temporary closures of the Old Agoura Park. Construction of the Class IV facilities could also restrict access to or result in temporary closures of nearby recreational facilities. Operation of all facilities included in the BMP under Alternative 2 would result in new and/or improved multimodal access to existing recreational resources throughout the city. Nonetheless, under both the proposed Project and Alternative 2, the city would continue to exceed their service ratio goals of eight acres of parks and open space areas for every 1,000 residents during both construction and operation. Therefore, impacts to recreation would be generally similar under Alternative 2 as compared to the proposed Project and would remain less than significant.
k. Transportation
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts related to a conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system; a conflict with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b); substantially increased hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses; and inadequate emergency access.
Although Alternative 2 would exclude the Path and the Connection from the BMP, construction activities associated with the remaining Class I facilities, all Class IV facilities, and the Class II facilities that require pavement widening could still occur within or adjacent to existing ROW. These construction activities could temporarily impact the circulation system, which would conflict with Goal M-1 of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 that calls for a safe and efficient roadway system. Similar to the proposed Project, a construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented in accordance with the MUTCD should construction within the roadway or should temporary lane closures occur. Following construction, Alternative 2 would implement approximately 29 miles of new bikeways within the City of Agoura Hills and amend the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 to shift the focus from prioritizing automobile mobility to reducing VMT. Therefore, Alternative 2 would be consistent with the SoCal Connect 2024 goals aimed at reducing emissions from transportation sources and the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 goals and policies related to creating a transportation system that serves all modes of travel, reducing reliance on single-occupancy vehicle travel through the provision of alternative travel modes, enhancing bicycle facilities, and decreasing GHG emissions through a reduction in VMT. Impacts related to a conflict with local or regional land use plans or policies would remain less than significant under Alternative 2 and would be generally similar as compared to the proposed project.
Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-21
The temporary presence of construction equipment on local roadways and the potential for lane closures under Alternative 2 could temporarily increase hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses, and could temporarily block access to roadways that are currently used by emergency response vehicles. Similar to the proposed Project, a construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented in accordance with the MUTCD should construction within the roadway or should temporary lane closures occur. Therefore, construction impacts related transportation hazards, incompatible uses, and emergency access would remain less than significant under Alternative 2 and would be generally similar as compared to the proposed Project.
All bicycle facilities proposed under Alternative 2 would be designed in adherence with the Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000 and would undergo design review prior to approval to ensure the appropriate standards are met. Therefore, operational impacts related transportation hazards and incompatible uses would remain less than significant and would be generally similar as compared to the proposed Project.
Alternative 2 would exclude the Path and the Connection from the BMP. The operation of both the Path and Connection would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along a shared use path away from existing roadway ROWs. All remaining facilities included within the BMP under Alternative 2 would be construction within or adjacent to existing roadways, which could be accessed by emergency vehicles. Therefore, although impacts related to emergency access would remain less than significant, this impact would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project because fewer facilities would be implemented away from existing roadway ROWs.
Alternative 2 would be considered an active transportation project that would generally reduce VMT. Therefore, Alternative 2 would be presumed to cause a less-than-significant impact on transportation, similar to the proposed Project.
Overall, impacts to transportation would remain less than significant under Alternative 2 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project.Overall, Alternative 2 would have a reduced level of impact related to transportation as compared to the proposed Project. Impacts would remain less than significant.
l. Tribal Cultural Resources
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts to tribal cultural resources, as no tribal cultural resources were identified during the City’s required AB 52 and SB 18 consultation processes. Given that there are no known tribal cultural resources within the Project area for Alternative 2, which would encompass all of the City of Agoura Hills, Alternative 2 would result in less than significant impacts to tribal cultural resources, similar to the proposed Project.
6.4 Alternative 3: Only Class II and Class III Facilities
6.4.1 Description
Similar to the Project, Alternative 3 would involve implementation of the BMP, Program, and Amendments. However, the BMP implemented under Alternative 3 would only include Class II and Class III facilities. Class I facilities, including the Path, Connection, and Class IV facilities would be removed from the BMP. All Class II facilities, Class III facilities, and enhanced bicycle treatments would be included within the BMP under Alternative 3. The Program would be revised to reflect the ability to purchase VMT reduction credits only for the funding of individual projects identified within the BMP under this alternative, which would exclude Class I facilities, including the Path, City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-22
Connection, and Class IV facilities. The Amendments would also be revised to exclude Class I facilities, including the Path, Connection, and Class IV facilities from the City’s planned additions to its system of bikeways. Under Alternative 3, the Amendments would still shift the focus from prioritizing automobile mobility to reducing VMT through alternative transportation modes like walking and biking.
Construction activities under Alternative 3 would consist of:
Class II: Restriping and reconfiguration of lane widths to accommodate new dedicated bike lanes; pavement widening on Driver Avenue, between Easterly Road and Colodny Drive, and on Cornell Road, between Agoura Road and Cornell Way, which would require clearing and grubbing, subgrade stabilization, base course installation, and asphalt paving; Class III: Restriping to identify bike routes;
Enhanced Bicycle Treatments: street striping/re-striping, installation of signage and wayfinding, installation of bicycle signals, installation of bicycle parking, and installation of bicycle repair facilities.
Under Alternative 3, approximately 25.6 miles of bicycle facilities would be implemented.
Alternative 3 would fulfill the Project Objectives that aim to increase transportation choices, improve accessibility through Agoura Hills, improve bicycle safety, improve public health, enhance sustainability, and provide a mechanism for developers to mitigate VMT impacts from development projects. However, Alternative 3 would meet Project Objectives to a lesser extent given the reduced miles of bicycle facilities implemented and improved under this alternative. Alternative 3 would not fulfill the Project Objective that aims to enhance community character by constructing bicycle facilities near areas of high scenic value, such as along greenbelts or near surface waters.
6.4.2 Impact Analysis
a. Aesthetics
The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving adverse effects to scenic vistas, conflicts with applicable zoning and other regulations that govern scenic quality, and the creation of new sources of light or glare that would adversely views. Because there are no officially designated state scenic highways within the City of Agoura Hills, the proposed Project would result in no impact to scenic resources within a State scenic highway.
Similar to the proposed Project, construction activities under Alternative 3 would require the creation of storage, staging, and active work areas during pavement widening for construction of some Class II facilities. These areas could be visible from public ROWs and could result in minor, temporary effects to publicly-accessible views of hillsides and other scenic resources. However, due to the exclusion of Class I and Class IV facilities from the BMP, construction activities under Alternative 3 would not be visible from City-designated scenic corridors, including Agoura Road, Thousand Oaks Boulevard, and Kanan Road. Impacts under Alternative 3 would remain less than significant but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project. However, following construction, Alternative 3 would not provide new views from Class I or Class IV facilities, including views of the natural habitat surrounding Medea Creek or enhanced opportunities to view scenic ridgelines from the Connection.
Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-23
Similar to the proposed Project, construction activities under Alternative 3 could cause a temporary change in the existing visual character and quality of the Project area. These activities would not permanently impair or block any sensitive or unique visual resources or landscapes, nor would the BMP under Alternative 3 result in the construction of new structures that could permanently disrupt existing views. Similar to the proposed Project, all facilities implemented under Alternative 3 would be required to comply with applicable goals, policies, and regulations identified within the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035, the AHMC, and the Agoura Village Specific Plan. Thus, impacts related to a conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality under Alternative 2 would remain less than significant and would be similar to the proposed Project.
Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would result in temporary sources of light and glare due to the creation of storage, staging, or active work areas during pavement widening for construction of some Class II facilities. Alternative 3 would also result in permanent sources of light and glare due to the implementation of bicycle signals, signage, or other reflective elements, as well as the operation of bicycles on new Class II and Class III facilities. However, due to the exclusion of the Class I and Class IV facilities, Alternative 3 would result in less sources of temporary and permanent light and glare than the proposed project. Impacts under Alternative 2 related to light and glare would remain less than significant but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project.
There are no designated state scenic highways within the Project area. Thus, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would result in no impact to scenic resources within a State scenic highway.
Overall, impacts to aesthetics would remain less than significant under Alternative 3 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project.
b. Air Quality
The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving conflict with or obstruction of the 2022 Air Quality Management Plan, a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is in nonattainment, exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and odors.
Alternative 3 would result in the implementation of a smaller set of bicycle facilities. Similar to the proposed Project, normal background growth in the City of Agoura Hills would continue to occur but no residential or businesses would be built under Alternative 3. Thus population, housing, and employment would not grow such that the SCAG growth forecast for the City of Agoura Hills, or other growth forecasts on which the 2022 AQMP is based, would be exceeded.
Alternative 3 would exclude Class I and Class IV facilities from the BMP. Thus, Alternative 3 would result in a reduced scope, extent, and duration of construction activities, and criteria pollutant emissions from construction equipment, vehicle trips, or fugitive dust would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project. Therefore, Alternative 3 would result in a less than significant impact involving conflict with or obstruction of the 2022 AQMP, and a less than significant impact involving a net increase of any criteria pollutants. Although impacts would remain less than significant, these impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduction in scope, extent, and duration of construction activities.
Similarly, because less construction activities would occur, Alternative 3 would generate fewer toxic air contaminants and result in less odors. Although impacts would remain less than significant, these impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-24
Overall, impacts to air quality would remain less than significant under Alternative 3 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project.
c. Biological Resources
The proposed Project would result in potentially significant impacts to special-status species, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, and state or federally protected wetlands due to construction activities in previously undisturbed areas.
The proposed Project would also result in a potentially significant impact related to a conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources due to the potential for direct impact to oak trees during construction activities in previously undisturbed areas.
The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving interference with wildlife movement and nursery sites. Furthermore, because there are no existing landscape‐level Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans within the boundaries of the City of Agoura Hills, the proposed Project would result in no impact related to a conflict with such plans Alternative 3 would exclude Class I and Class IV facilities from the BMP. Under the proposed Project, Class I and Class IV facilities are proposed away from the existing roadway ROWs in areas with higher biological sensitivity. Nonetheless, pavement widening would still be necessary on Driver Avenue and on Cornell Road to allow for the addition of Class II bicycle lanes. Construction activities for pavement widening would require grading and/or excavation in natural and undisturbed habitats. Therefore, Alternative 3 could still result in potentially significant impacts to special-status species, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, and state or federally protected wetlands due to construction activities in previously undisturbed areas. Furthermore, Alternative 3 could still result in a potentially significant impact related to a conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources due to the potential for direct impact to oak trees.
Mitigation Measures BIO-1a, BIO-1b, BIO-1c, BIO-2a, BIO-2b, BIO-2c, and BIO-5 would be required to reduce these potentially significant impacts to a less-than-significant level. Although impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation, these impacts would be reduced under Alternative 3 as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduced construction footprint in previously undisturbed areas.
Alternative 3 would require pavement widening on Driver Avenue and on Cornell Road to allow for the addition of Class II bicycle lanes. Wildlife adjacent to these facilities would be expected to be urban tolerant. Furthermore, use of these bicycle facilities would not prevent wildlife movement or disrupt nursery sites. Nonetheless, although impacts would remain less than significant, this impact would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduced construction footprint.
Because there are no existing landscape‐level Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans within the boundaries of the City of Agoura Hills, Alternative 3 would result in no impact related to a conflict with such plans, similar to the proposed Project.
Overall, impacts to biological resources would remain less than significant with mitigation under Alternative 3 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project.
Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-25
d. Cultural Resources
Due to the cultural sensitivities within the City of Agoura Hills, the proposed Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to historical resources even with implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, which would require preparation of a Historical Resources Evaluation for individual projects that could result in impacts to structures 45 years or older. The proposed Project would also result in a significant and unavoidable impact to archaeological resources even with implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2, which would require preparation of an Archaeological Resources Assessment for individual projects that would involve ground-disturbing activities. The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving the disturbance of human remains.
Alternative 3 would result in the implementation of a smaller set of bicycle facilities, excluding Class I and Class IV facilities. Class II and Class III facilities would still be constructed under Alternative 3.
Some Class II facilities would require pavement widening outside of the existing roadway.
Construction activities associated with these Class II facilities that require pavement widening would include ground disturbance in previously undisturbed areas. Thus, Alternative 3 would still have the potential to directly impact historical structures and/or objects, encounter or impact surficial and subsurface archaeological resources, and disturb human remains. Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2 would be required under Alternative 3. Although impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, these impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduced construction footprint in previously undisturbed areas. e. Geology and Soils
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts involving risk of loss, injury, or death due to rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure including liquefaction, or landslides; substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; unstable soils; and expansive soils. Furthermore, because the proposed Project would not result in the construction of buildings or habitable structures requiring a sanitary sewer system, there would be no impact involving the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. The proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact involving the destruction of paleontological resources due to ground-disturbing activities within geologic units with high or undetermined paleontological sensitivity.
Similar to the proposed Project, there are no faults or Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones within the Project area for Alternative 3, which would encompass all of the City of Agoura Hills; the nearest fault would be the Simi-Santa Rosa Fault, located approximately seven miles north of the city.
Therefore, Alternative 3 would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault. This impact would remain less than significant, similar to the proposed Project.
Alternative 3 would exclude Class I and Class IV facilities from the BMP. Although these facilities would be excluded, Class II facilities, Class III facilities, and the enhanced bicycle treatments would still be implemented. Class III facilities and enhanced bicycle treatments would be located within identified liquefaction zones and within areas identified as at risk of landslides. Under the proposed Project, Class I facilities would be located within identified liquefaction zones and within areas identified as at risk of landslides; Class IV facilities are not located within identified liquefaction zones or within areas identified as at risk of landslides. Therefore, although impacts would remain less than significant, impacts related to liquefaction and landslides would be reduced under City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-26
Alternative 3 as compared to the proposed Project due to the removal of facilities from the BMP within areas identified liquefaction zones and within areas identified as at risk of landslides.
Class II facilities that require pavement widening would include ground disturbance in previously undisturbed areas. Thus, Alternative 3 would still have the potential to result in soil erosion and the loss of topsoil. Similar to the proposed Project, soil erosion that occurs due to implementation of individual projects involving earth-disturbing construction activities would be effectively controlled through a combination of State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) permits and AHMC requirements. Although impacts would remain less than significant, impacts related to soil erosion and the loss of topsoil would be reduced under Alternative 3 as compared to the proposed Project due to fewer earth-moving construction activities.
Because construction activities associated with implementation of the Class II facilities that require pavement widening would include ground disturbance in previously undisturbed areas, Alternative 3 would still have the potential to damage or destroy paleontological resources that may be present on or below the ground surface in areas of high or undetermined paleontological sensitivity.
Mitigation Measure GEO-9 would be required to reduce this potentially significant impact to a lessthan-significant level. Although impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation, this impact would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduced construction footprint in previously undisturbed areas.
Similar to the proposed Project, a geotechnical investigation would be prepared prior to construction of aboveground features under Alternative 3, including the enhanced bicycle treatments, to determine the potential for risks of lateral spreading, subsidence problems, and expansive soils. Furthermore, similar to the proposed Project, the BMP under Alternative 3 would not result in the construction of buildings or habitable structures on soils subject to lateral spreading or subsidence, or on expansive soils. These impacts would remain less than significant and would be similar as compared to the proposed Project.
Neither the proposed Project nor Alternative 3 would result in the construction of buildings or habitable structures requiring a sanitary sewer system. Thus, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would result in no impact related to the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.
Overall, impacts related to geology and soils would remain less than significant with mitigation under Alternative 3 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project. f. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The proposed Project would result in potentially significant impacts involving the creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; the creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials; emissions of hazardous materials within 0.25 mile of a school; and creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment due to a known hazardous material site. The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact related to interference with the implementation of an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan and the risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. Furthermore, because the City of Agoura Hills is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, the proposed Project would result in no impact involving safety hazards or excessive noise from airports.
Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-27
Construction activities under Alternative 3 would involve the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials such as fuels, solvents, and asphalt products. These activities would be subject to existing federal, state, and local regulations governing hazardous materials management.
However, Alternative 3 would exclude Class I facilities and Class IV facilities, some of which are proposed within 1,000 feet of known hazardous materials sites. There are no known hazardous materials sites within 1,000 feet of proposed Class II facilities. There are 19 known hazardous materials sites located within 1,000 feet of proposed Class III; however, due to the lack of ground disturbance required for implementation, implementation of these facilities would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment, either through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment or through the implementation of a project on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Alternative 3 would not require the implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 and impacts would be less than significant without mitigation, which would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Class II and III facilities would still be constructed near schools, including Lindero Canyon Middle School and Sumac Elementary School. However, because there are no known hazardous materials sites within 1,000 feet of proposed Class II facilities, and due to the lack of ground disturbance required for implementation required for implementation of Class III facilities, Alternative 3 would not require the implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation, which would be a reduced level of impact as compared to the proposed Project.
Under Alternative 3, construction activities associated with implementing the Class II facility proposed on Driver Avenue would occur on or near identified evacuation routes. Similar to the proposed Project, a construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented in accordance with the MUTCD should construction within the roadway or should temporary lane closures occur. Thus, Alternative 3 would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Although this impact would remain less than significant, impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project because fewer construction activities would occur on or near identified evacuation routes.
Because Alternative 3 would exclude Class I facilities, including the Path and the Connection, from the BMP, there would be a lesser increase in human activity and potential ignition sources during construction activities in undeveloped areas. Nonetheless, pavement widening for some Class II facilities would still result in a temporary increase in potential ignition sources during construction activities in undeveloped areas. Compliance with OSHA fire prevention standards would ensure that risks are minimized. Furthermore, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would not include structural components or physical development that would expose people or structures to a significant risk involving wildland fire. Although this impact would remain less than significant, impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduced construction footprint in previously undisturbed areas.
There are no airports located within the City of Agoura Hills, nor is the city located within the noise contours of an airport. Thus, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would result in no impact related to exposure to excessive noise levels for people residing or working in the area.
Overall, impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant without mitigation under Alternative 3, which would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-28
g. Hydrology and Water Quality
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts involving violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements; a reduction in groundwater supplies or interference with groundwater recharge; alteration of existing drainage patterns such that erosion, siltation, increased runoff, polluted runoff, or redirected flood flows would occur; the release of pollutants due to project inundation; and conflict with a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
Although Alternative 3 would exclude Class I and Class IV facilities from the BMP, construction activities associated with the Class II facilities that require pavement widening would still involve clearing, grading, paving, and excavation. Similar to the proposed Project, these activities would be subject to the Construction General Permit and/or Article V, Chapter 5 of the AHMC, which require the implementation of BMPs and, where applicable, a SWPPP. With adherence to these requirements, impacts related to water quality standards, erosion, and runoff would remain less than significant, but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project given the reduced scope of construction activities.
Alternative 3 would reduce the potential for impacts to groundwater recharge by excluding the Class I and Class IV facilities, which would reduce the amount of new impervious surfaces introduced within the Project area. Nonetheless, the Class II facilities that require pavement widening would still result in minor increases in impervious surfaces. Due to the known depths of groundwater in the Russell Valley Groundwater Basin, construction activities associated with pavement widening under Alternative 3 would not require groundwater dewatering. Furthermore, similar to the proposed Project, semipermeable materials would be utilized when feasible for pavement widening, and during precipitation events, stormwater would flow into adjacent permeable areas, or onto existing streets where it would be collected by the city’s existing stormwater system. Impacts to groundwater supplies or recharge would remain less than significant, but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project given the reduced amount of new impervious surfaces .
Similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the Project area or alter the course of a stream or river because no streams or rivers are located within individual project sites. Furthermore, Alternative 3 would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site, flooding on or off site, substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, or impeded or redirected flood flows, nor would Alternative 3 introduce structures that could redirect floodwaters. These impacts would remain less than significant and would be similar to the proposed Project.
There are no tsunami inundation zones or seiche inundation zones within the Project area. Thus, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would result in no impact related to the risk of release of pollutants due to tsunami or seiche inundation events. Alternative 3 would exclude some individual projects from the BMP that would be located within a flood hazard area under the proposed Project. Nonetheless, Class III facilities and enhanced bicycle treatments included in the BMP under Alternative 3 would be constructed within flood hazard areas. Implementation of BMPs as required by the AHMC would reduce the potential for release of pollutants during construction of these facilities. Impacts related to the risk of release of pollutants due to project inundation within a flood hazard area would remain less than significant under Alternative 3 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the removal of facilities from the BMP within flood hazard areas.
Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-29
Overall, impacts to hydrology and water quality would remain less than significant under Alternative 3 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project. h. Land Use and Planning
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts related to the physical division of an established community and related to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect.
Although Alternative 3 would exclude Class I facilities and Class IV facilities from the BMP, construction activities associated with the Class II facilities that require pavement widening could occur within or adjacent to existing ROW. These construction activities could temporarily impact the circulation system. Similar to the proposed Project, a construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented in accordance with the MUTCD should construction within the roadway or should temporary lane closures occur. Following construction, Alternative 3 would not result in physical development such that an established community would be physically divided. Thus, Alternative 3 would not result in the physical division of an established community. This impact would remain less than significant and would be similar to the proposed Project .
Alternative 3 would implement approximately 25.6 miles of new bikeways within the City of Agoura Hills and amend the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 to shift the focus from prioritizing automobile mobility to reducing VMT. Therefore, similar to the proposed Project, Alternative 3 would be consistent with the SoCal Connect 2024 goals aimed at reducing emissions from transportation sources and the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 goals and policies related to providing bicycle connections, improving pedestrian-oriented amenities, and promoting land development practices that reduce energy consumption, pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions, and improving. This impact would remain less than significant and would be similar to the proposed Project.
Overall, impacts related to land use and planning would be generally similar under Alternative 3 as compared to the proposed Project and would remain less than significant. i. Noise
The proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact related to the generation of noise in excess of applicable noise standards. The proposed Project would also result in a potentially significant impact involving the generation of excessive groundborne vibration. Because the City of Agoura Hills is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, the proposed Project would result in no impact involving excessive noise levels from airports.
Alternative 3 would result in the implementation of a smaller set of bicycle facilities, excluding the Class I and Class IV facilities from the BMP. Exclusion of the Class I and Class IV facilities under Alternative 3 would reduce the scope, extent, and duration of construction activities, which would reduce noise and groundborne vibration generated during construction activities as compared to the proposed Project. Nonetheless, implementation of the Class II facilities that require pavement widening would still result in construction noise that could exceed the FTA threshold of 80 dBA Leq at sensitive receptors located within 125 feet of construction. Similarly, use of vibratory rollers and other heavy equipment during construction of the Class II facilities that require pavement widening could generate vibration levels exceeding the FTA threshold of 0.12 in/sec PPV at nearby structures.
Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 would be required to reduce these potentially significant impacts City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-30
to a less-than-significant level. Although these impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation, impacts under Alternative 3 would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project due to the reduced the scope, extent, and duration of construction activities.
Similar to the proposed Project, operational noise under Alternative 3 would be limited to landscaping and maintenance activities, portable amplified music from facility users, and people’s voices. Noise from these sources would be required to comply with AHMC Section 9656.2.
Operational activities would not introduce new sources of vibration. Operational impacts would remain less than significant and would be similar to the proposed Project.
Overall, impacts related to noise would remain less than significant with mitigation under Alternative 3 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project . j. Recreation
The proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact involving the physical deterioration of recreational facilities.
Alternative 3 would exclude construction of the Class I and Class IV facilities. As such, this alternative would not require the establishment of storage, staging, and active work areas within or adjacent to the designated open space surrounding Medea Creek or within recreational facilities near Class IV facilities, which would reduce the potential to restrict access to recreational resources. However, pavement widening on Driver Avenue associated with the construction of the Class II facilities under this alternative could still restrict access to or result in temporary closures of the Old Agoura Park.
Operation of all facilities included in the BMP under Alternative 3 would result in new and/or improved multimodal access to existing recreational resources throughout the city. Nonetheless, under both the proposed Project and Alternative 3, the city would continue to exceed their service ratio goals of eight acres of parks and open space areas for every 1,000 residents during both construction and operation. Therefore, impacts to recreation would be generally similar under Alternative 3 as compared to the proposed Project and would remain less than significant. k. Transportation
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts related to a conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system; a conflict with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b); substantially increased hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses; and inadequate emergency access.
Although Alternative 3 would exclude Class I facilities and Class IV facilities from the BMP, construction activities associated with implementing the Class II facilities that require pavement widening could still occur within or adjacent to existing ROW. These construction activities could temporarily impact the circulation system, which would conflict with Goal M-1 of the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 that calls for a safe and efficient roadway system. Similar to the proposed Project, a construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented in accordance with the MUTCD should construction within the roadway or should temporary lane closures occur.
Following construction, Alternative 3 would implement approximately 25.6 miles of new bikeways within the City of Agoura Hills and amend the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 to shift the focus from prioritizing automobile mobility to reducing VMT. Therefore, Alternative 3 would be consistent with the SoCal Connect 2024 goals aimed at reducing emissions from transportation sources and the City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 goals and policies related to creating a transportation system that serves all modes of travel, reducing reliance on single-occupancy vehicle Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-31
travel through the provision of alternative travel modes, enhancing bicycle facilities, and decreasing GHG emissions through a reduction in VMT. Impacts related to a conflict with local or regional land use plans or policies would remain less than significant under Alternative 3 and would be generally similar as compared to the proposed project.
The temporary presence of construction equipment on local roadways and the potential for lane closures under Alternative 3 could temporarily increase hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses, and could temporarily block access to roadways that are currently used by emergency response vehicles. Similar to the proposed Project, a construction traffic control plan would be prepared and implemented in accordance with the MUTCD should construction within the roadway or should temporary lane closures occur. Therefore, construction impacts related transportation hazards, incompatible uses, and emergency access would remain less than significant under Alternative 3 and would be generally similar as compared to the proposed Project.
All bicycle facilities proposed under Alternative 3 would be designed in adherence with the Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000 and would undergo design review prior to approval to ensure the appropriate standards are met. Therefore, operational impacts related transportation hazards and incompatible uses would remain less than significant and would be generally similar as compared to the proposed Project.
Alternative 3 would exclude construction of Class I facilities and Class IV facilities; the operation of both Class I facilities and Class IV facilities would consist of bicycle and pedestrian travel along a shared use path away from or along physically separated from existing roadway ROWs. Class II and Class III facilities constructed under Alternative 3 would be implemented within existing roadway ROWs with no physical barriers. Therefore, although operational impacts related to emergency access would remain less than significant, this impact would be reduced under Alternative 3.
Alternative 3 would be considered an active transportation project that would generally reduce VMT. Therefore, Alternative 3 would be presumed to cause a less-than-significant impact on transportation, similar to the proposed Project.
Overall, impacts to transportation would remain less than significant under Alternative 3 but would be reduced as compared to the proposed Project .
l. Tribal Cultural Resources
The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts to tribal cultural resources, as no tribal cultural resources were identified during the City’s required AB 52 and SB 18 consultation processes. Given that there are no known tribal cultural resources within the Project area for Alternative 3, which would encompass all of the City of Agoura Hills, Alternative 3 would result in less than significant impacts to tribal cultural resources, similar to the proposed Project.
6.5 Environmentally Superior Alternative
CEQA requires the identification of an environmentally superior alternative among the alternatives evaluated in a EIR. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) provides that, if the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, then the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.
This discussion identifies the environmentally superior alternative by assessing the degree to which each alternative avoids or minimizes environmental impacts. In some cases, an alternative will avoid City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-32
or minimize one or more impacts identified for the proposed project but then introduce one or more new impacts. Therefore, selection of the environmentally superior alternative requires an overall assessment of the changes in the number and type of significant impacts.
The State CEQA Guidelines do not define a specific methodology for determining the environmentally superior alternative. For the purposes of this analysis, the Project alternatives have been compared within each issue area to the proposed Project, and a determination has been made as to whether the potential environmental effects of each alternative would be reduced, increased, or is similar in comparison to the proposed project (refer to Table 6-2). For the purpose of this PEIR, each impact is equally weighted. Decision makers and the community in general may choose to emphasize one issue or another, which could lead to differing conclusions regarding environmental superiority.
The No Project Alternative would result in the fewest adverse environmental effects when compared to existing conditions because no construction activities would occur; therefore the No Project Alternative would be considered environmentally superior. However, the No Project Alternative would not fulfill any Project objectives.
As stated above, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) provides that, if the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, then the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. The environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives would be Alternative 3 (Only Class II and Class III Facilities).
Due to Alternative 3’s reduced construction footprint, Alternative 3 would have less potential than the proposed Project and Alternative 2 (Project Minus Medea Creek Path and Agoura High School Connection) to result in impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, and transportation.
Alternative 3 would not meet the following Project objectives to the same extent as the proposed Project, as it would only include the Class II and Class III facilities:
Increase transportation choices by providing viable alternatives to driving and improved equity to include all bikers, those who choose not to drive and those who cannot drive. Improve accessibility through local and regional connectivity. Local connections include residential communities, schools, commercial centers, and parks whereas regional connections include the surrounding communities and recreational trail network. Improve safety by providing separate biking facilities, reducing bicycle collisions, creating greater visibility for bikers, and raising awareness to both bicyclists and road users. Improve the public health by creating facilities that allow for more biking. Enhance sustainability and environmental benefits by reducing air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and noise pollution.
Provide a mechanism for developers to mitigate VMT impacts from development projects.
Alternative 2 would not meet the following Project objective, as it would not result in the implementation of the Minus Medea Creek Path and Agoura High School Connection facilities:
Enhance community character by constructing bicycle facilities near areas of high scenic value, such as along greenbelts or near surface waters.
Alternatives
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 6-33
Table 6-2 Impact Comparison of Alternatives
Issue
Proposed
Project Impact
Classification
Alternative 1:
No Project
Alternative
Alternative 2:
Project Minus Medea
Creek Path and Agoura
High School Connection
Alternative 3: Only
Class II and Class III
Facilities
Aesthetics LTS NI
+
LTS
+
LTS
+
Air Quality LTS NI
+
LTS
+
LTS
+
Biological Resources LTSM NI
+
LTSM
+
LTSM
+
Cultural Resources SU NI
+
SU
+
SU
+
Geology and Soils LTSM NI
+
LTSM
+
LTSM
+
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
LTSM NI
+
LTSM
+
LTS
+
Hydrology and Water Quality LTS NI
+
LTS
+
LTS
+
Land Use and Planning LTS NI
+
LTS
=
LTS
=
Noise LTSM NI
+
LTSM
+
LTSM
+
Recreation LTS NI
+
LTS
=
LTS
=
Transportation LTS NI
+
LTS
+
LTS
+
Tribal Cultural Resources LTS NI
+
LTS
=
LTS
=
NI: No Impact
LTS: Less than Significant Impact
LTSM: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated SU: Significant and Unavoidable Impact
+ Superior to the proposed project (reduced impact)
- Inferior to the proposed project (increased impact)
= Similar impact to the proposed project
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
6-34
This page intentionally left blank.
References
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 7-1
7 References
7.1 List of Preparers
This EIR was prepared by the City of Agoura Hills, with the assistance of Rincon Consultants, Inc.
Consultant staff involved in the preparation of the EIR are listed below.
RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.
Kim Avila, Principal-in-Charge
Taylor Freeman, Senior Project Manager
Nicholas Carter, Environmental Planner & Deputy Project Manager Ryan Perry, Environmental Planner
Monet Bernard, Environmental Planner
Brooke Baranek, Environmental Planner
Jesse McCandless, Noise Specialist
Jessie Jaegar, Air Quality Specialist
Bill Vosti, Air Quality and Noise QA/QC
Michael Vader, Senior Cultural Resources Specialist
JulieAnn Murphy, Senior Architectural Historian
Monica Strauss, Senior Principal and Cultural Resources QA/QC Tyler Barns, Supervising Biologist
Jennifer Turner, Natural Resources Director and Biological Resources QA/QC Dario Campos, Technical Editor
Debra Seltzer, Publishing Specialist
Yaritza Ramirez, Publishing Specialist
7.2 Bibliography
Executive Summary
Introduction
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2025. Highway Design Manual: Chapter 100 – Bicycle Transportation Design. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/design/documents/chp1000-a11y.pdf (accessed June 2025).
Project Description
Fehr and Peers. 2020. VMT Mitigation through Fees, Banks, and Exchanges: Understanding New Mitigation Approaches. April 2020. https://www.fehrandpeers.com/wpcontent/uploads/2020/04/VMT-Fees_Exchanges_Banks-White-Paper_Apr2020.pdf (accessed May 2024).
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
7-2
Environmental Setting
City of Agoura Hills. 2010. General Plan.
https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/30826/638644930871500 000 (accessed January 2025).
______. 2022. Bicycle Master Plan.
https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/26973/637965041760970 000 (accessed January 2025).
______. 2025. Transportation Services. https://www.agourahillscity.org/ourcity/residents/transportation-services/alternative-transportation (accessed March 2025).
Aesthetics
California Department of Finance (DOF), Counties, and State 2021-2025, with 2020 Benchmark. May 1, 2025. E-4 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2021-2025 with 2020 Census Benchmark | Department of Finance (accessed July 2025).
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2018. California State Scenic Highway System Map.
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e 8057116f1aacaa (Accessed June 2025).
City of Agoura Hills. 2024b. Agoura Village Specific Plan. https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/30782/638630207576870 000 (Accessed June 2025).
City of Agoura Hills. 2022. City of Agoura Hills General Plan Update. https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/30826/638644930871500 000 (Accessed February 2025).
City of Agoura Hills. 2010a. City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 Environmental Impact Report.
Accessed February 2025.
Air Quality
Agoura Hills, City of. 2022. Agoura Hills General Plan. https://www.agourahillscity.org/department/planning-community-development/generalplan (accessed February 2025).
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2023. Maps of State and Federal Area Designations. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/maps-state-and-federal-area-designations (accessed February 2025).
______. 2024a. Overview: Diesel Exhaust & Health. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overviewdiesel-exhaust-and-health (accessed February 2025). ______. 2024b. Top 4 Pollutant Summary.
https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfourdisplay.php (accessed February 2025). ______. 2024c. National Ambient Air Quality Standards. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/nationalambient-air-quality-standards (accessed February 2025).
References
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 7-3
______. 2024d. California Ambient Air Quality Standards. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/california-ambient-air-quality-standards (accessed February 2025).
______. 2024e. Table of Ambient Air Quality Standards.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-
08/AAQS%20Table_ADA_FINAL_07222024.pdf (accessed February 2025).
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2020. The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/fileattachments/0903fconnectsocal-plan_0.pdf?1606001176 (accessed February 2025).
Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2003. Final 2003 AQMP Appendix V. Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2003-air-quality-managementplan/2003-aqmp-appendix-v.pdf (accessed February 2025). ______. 2005. Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning A Reference for Local Governments Within the South Coast Air Quality Management District. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/planning/air-qualityguidance/complete-guidance-document.pdf (accessed February 2025). ______. 2008. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significancethresholds/final-lst-methodology-document.pdf (accessed February 2025). ______. 2009. 2006 – 2008 Thresholds for Construction and Operation. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significancethresholds/appendix-c-mass-rate-lst-look-up-tables.pdf (accessed February 2025). ______. 2017. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2016-air-quality-managementplan/final-2016-aqmp/final2016aqmp.pdf (accessed February 2025). ______. 2022. 2022 Air Quality Management Plan. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2022-air-quality-managementplan/final-2022-aqmp/final-2022-aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=16 (accessed February 2025). ______. 2023. South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/south-coast-aqmd-air-qualitysignificance-thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=25 (accessed February 2025). ______. 2025. Southern California Air Basins. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/defaultdocument-library/map-of-jurisdiction.pdf (accessed June 2025).
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2014. Policy Assessment for the Review of the Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pb/data/140501_pa_pb_fin.pdf (accessed February 2025).
______. 2015. Overview of EPA’s Updates to the Air Quality Standards for Ground-Level Ozone. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-10/documents/overview_of_2015_rule.pdf (accessed February 2025).
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
7-4
______. 2024a. Health Effects of Ozone Pollution. https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozonepollution/health-effects-ozone-pollution (accessed February 2025). ______. 2024b. Basic Information about Carbon Monoxide (CO) Outdoor Air Pollution. https://www.epa.gov/co-pollution/basic-information-about-carbon-monoxide-co-outdoorair-pollution#Effects (accessed February 2025). ______. 2024c. Basic Information about NO2. https://www.epa.gov/no2-pollution/basicinformation-about-no2#Effects (accessed February 2025). ______. 2024d. Sulfur Dioxide Basics. https://www.epa.gov/so2-pollution/sulfur-dioxidebasics#effects (accessed February 2025). ______. 2024e. Basic Information about Lead Air Pollution. https://www.epa.gov/lead-airpollution/basic-information-about-lead-air-pollution#health (accessed February 2025). ______. 2024f. Health and Environmental Effects of Hazardous Air Pollutants. https://www.epa.gov/haps/health-and-environmental-effects-hazardous-air-pollutants (accessed February 2025).
______. 2024g. NAAQS Table. https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants/naaqs-table (accessed February 2025).
______. 2024h. Process of Reviewing the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants/process-reviewing-national-ambient-airquality-standards (accessed February 2025).
Western Regional Climate Center. 2003. Oxnard, California Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary. https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca6569 (accessed February 2025).
Biological Resources
Barbour, M. G., T. Keeler-Wolf, and A. A. Schoenherr, eds. 2007. Terrestrial Vegetation of California. 3rd ed. University of California Press. Brady, Roland H., III, and Kris Vyverberg. 2013.
Methods to Describe and Delineate Episodic Stream Processes on Arid Landscapes for Permitting Utility-scale Solar Power Plants: With the MESA Field Guide. Final Project Report.
Sacramento: California Energy Commission. California Department of Fish and Game. 1994.
A Field Guide to Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). "Special Animals List." California Natural Diversity Database, 2025,
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109406&inline California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2025a. California Natural Diversity Database, Rarefind V. Accessed January 2025.
_____. 2025b. Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List. Biogeographic Data Branch, California Natural Diversity Database. Accessed January 2025.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). (2025a). Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List. California Natural Diversity Database. Sacramento, CA. Retrieved from https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Plants-and-Animals.
California Native Plant Society. 2025. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. V.7-08c-Interim 8- 22-02. Updated online and accessed via: www.rareplants.cnps.org.
References
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 7-5
City of Agoura Hills. General Plan 2035. Agoura Hills, CA: City of Agoura Hills, 2022. Significant Ecological Area (SEA) | County Of Los Angeles Enterprise GIS, Los Angeles County 2025 Sawyer, J. O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J.M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California.
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. 2025. Web Soil Survey. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/. Accessed February 2025.
Spencer, W.D., P. Beier, K. Penrod, K. Winters, C. Paulman, H. Rustigian-Romsos, J. Strittholt, M.
Parisi, and A. Pettler. 2010. California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project: A Strategy for Conserving a Connected California. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, California Department of Fish and Game, and Federal Highways Administration.
State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State. Published by the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), with an effective date of May 28, 2020Final 2018 National Wetland Plant List, USACE Regulatory, Published May 22, 2020,
https://www.usace.army.mil/Media/Announcements/Article/2876007/22-may-2020-final2018-national-wetland-plant-list/ Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual" Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2025a. Information for Planning and Consultation online project planning tool. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. _____. 2025b. Critical Habitat Portal. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html. _____. 2025c. National Wetlands Inventory. https://www.fws.gov/program/national-wetlandsinventory.
United States Geological Survey. 2025. National Hydrography Dataset. Accessed via the national map. https://apps.nationalmap.gov/viewer/ and
https://usgs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapTools/index.html?appid=41a5c2ca49bd4a83b2394 50e61022d53. Accessed January 2025.
Cultural Resources
Arnold, Jeanne E. 1995. Transportation Innovation and Social Complexity among Maritime HunterGatherer Societies. American Anthropologist 97(4): 733–747.
Bancroft, Hubert Howe. History of California. 1885.Bean, Lowell John. The Impact of California Missions. The Union-Tribune Publishing Company, 1968.California Office of Historic Preservation 2025. Built Environment Resources Directory for Los Angeles County.
Electronic Resource, https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1068/files/Los%20Angeles.csv (accessed October 2025).
City of Agoura Hills 2022. General Plan Chapter 1. Electronic resource, https://cms2.revize.com/revize/agourahillsca/Documents/Government/Departments/Com munity%20Development/Planning%20and%20Zoning/General%20Plan/General%20Plan%2 0Chapter%201%20Introduction.pdf (accessed March 2025).
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
7-6
LA County Library. (2023, August 15). Agoura Hills local history. Retrieved from https://lacountylibrary.org/agoura-hills-local-history/. Dumke, Glenn S. The Boom of the Eighties in Southern California. San Marino, CA: Huntington Library, 1944. Erlandson, Jon M. 1991. Early Maritime Adaptations on the Northern Channel Islands in Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California. Volume 1: Perspectives in California Archaeology. J. M.
Erlandson and R. Colten, eds. Pp. 101–111. Los Angeles, California: Costen Institute of Archaeology Press.
______. 1994. Early Hunter-Gatherers of the California Coast. New York, New York: Plenum Press.
Erlandson, Jon M., Theodore Cooley, and Richard Carrico. 1987. A Fluted Projectile Point Fragment from the Southern California Coast: Chronology and Context at CA-SBA-1951. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 9: 120–128.
Erlandson, Jon M., Torben C. Rick, Terry L. Jones, and Judith F. Porcasi. 2007. One If by Land, Two If by Sea: Who Were the First Californians? in California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity. Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar, eds. Pp. 53–62. Lanham, Maryland: AltaMira Press.
Galvin Preservation Associates 2009
Glassow, Michael A., Lynn H. Gamble, Jennifer E. Perry, and Glenn S. Russell. 2007. Prehistory of the Northern California Bight and the Adjacent Transverse Ranges. California Prehistory:
Colonization, Culture, and Complexity. Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar, eds. Pp. 191–213.
Lanham, Maryland: AltaMira Press.
Graffy, Colleen. Spanish and Mexican Land Grants in New Mexico and the American Southwest.
Sunstone Press, 2010.Gumprecht, Blake. 1999. The Los Angeles River: Its Life, Death, and Possible Rebirth. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Huckell, Bruce B. 1996. The Archaic Prehistory of the North American Southwest. Journal of World Prehistory 10(3):
305–373.
Johnson, J.R., T.W. Stafford, Jr., H.O. Ajie, and D.P. Morris. 2002. Arlington Springs Revisited in Proceedings of the Fifth California Islands Symposium. D. Browne, K. Mitchell, and H.
Chaney, eds. Pp. 541–545. Santa Barbara, California: USDI Minerals Management Service and the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History.
Jones, Terry L., and Jennifer A. Ferneau. 2002. Deintensification along the Central California Coast. In Catalysts to Complexity, Late Holocene Societies of the California Coast, edited by Jon M.
Erlandson and Terry L. Jones, pp. 205-232. Perspectives in California Archaeology Vol. 6.
Costen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.
Jones, Terry L. and Kathryn A. Klar. 2005. Diffusionism Reconsidered: Linguistic and Archaeological Evidence for Prehistoric Polynesian Contact with Southern California. American Antiquity. 70(3): 457–484.
______. 2007. California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity. Berkeley, California:
AltaMira Press.
Jones, Terry L., Nathan E. Stevens, Deborah A. Jones, Richard T. Fitzgerald, and Mark G. Hylkema. 2007. The Central Coast: A Midlatitude Milieu. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar, pp. 125–146. AltaMira Press, Lanham, Maryland.
References
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 7-7
Justice, Noel D. 2002. Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points of California and the Great Basin.
Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.
King, Chester D. 1990. Evolution of Chumash Society: A Comparative Study of Artifacts Used in Social System Maintenance in the Santa Barbara Channel Region Before A.D. 1804. The Evolution of North American Indians. David Hurst Thomas, ed. New York, New York: Garland Publishing.
Library of Congress 2024a
Library of Congress 2024b
Livingston 1914
McLaren, Duncan, Daryl Fedje, Quentin Mackie, Loren Davis, Jon Erlandson, Alisha Gauvreau, and Colton Vogelaar. 2019. Late Pleistocene Archaeological Discovery Models on the Pacific Coast of North America. PaleoAmerica 6(1):43-63.
Moratto, Michael. 1984. California Archaeology. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press, Inc.
NETR Online 2023
Orsi and Gutierrez 1998
Pascal 2013
Rolle, Andrew F. California: A History of the Golden State. 7th ed. Wheeling, IL: Harlan Davidson, 2003.SCCIC 2025
Treganza, Adan E. and Agnes Bierman. 1958. The Topanga Culture: Final Report on Excavations, 1948. University of California Anthropological Records 20(2): 45–86.
USGS 1932
Wallace, William. 1955. Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology.
Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11(3):214–230.
______. 1978. Post-Pleistocene Archaeology, 9000 to 2000 B.C. California. Handbook of North American Indians Volume 8. Robert F. Heizer, ed. and William C. Sturtevant, general eds.
Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press. 505–508.
Warren, Claude N. 1968. Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast in Archaic Prehistory in the Western United States. C. Irwin-Williams, ed. Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology 1(3): 1–14.
Waugh, John C. On the Brink of Civil War: The Compromise of 1850 and How It Changed American History. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2003. Geology and Soils Agoura Hills, City of. 2022. City of Agoura Hills General Plan. https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/30826/638644930871500 000 (accessed February 2025).
Bedrossian, T.L. and P.D. Roffers. 2012. Geologic compilation of Quaternary surficial deposits in southern California: Los Angeles 30’ x 60’ quadrangle. [map.] California Geological Survey.
CGS Special Report 217, Plate 9, scale 1:100,000.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
7-8
California Department of Conservation. 2018. Earthquake Fault Zones. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/documents/publications/specialpublications/SP_042-a11y.pdf (accessed February 2025).
California Geological Survey (CGS). 2002. California Geomorphic Provinces. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/documents/publications/cgs-notes/CGS-Note-36.pdf (accessed February 2025).
______. 2025. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/ (accessed February 2025).
Dibblee, T.W. and H.E. Ehrenspeck. 1992. Geologic map of the Calabasas quadrangle, Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, California. [map]. Dibblee Geologic Foundation, Dibblee Foundation Map DF-37, scale 1:24,000.
______. 1993. Geologic map of the Thousand Oaks quadrangle, Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, California. [map]. Dibblee Geologic Foundation, Dibblee Foundation Map DF-49, scale 1:24,000.
Jefferson, G.T. 2010. A catalogue of late Quaternary vertebrates from California. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County Technical Report. Volume 7, pp. 5-172.
Norris, R.M., and R.W. Webb. 1976. Geology of California. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York.
Paleobiology Database. 2025. The Paleobiology Database, http://paleobiodb.org/ (accessed March 2025).
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP). 2010. Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee. https://vertpaleo.org/wpcontent/uploads/2021/01/SVP_Impact_Mitigation_Guidelines-1.pdf.
Yerkes, R.F. and R.H. Campbell. 2005. Preliminary geologic map of the Los Angeles 30’ x 60’ quadrangle, southern California. United States Geological Survey. [map]. Open-File Report 2005-1019, scale 1:100,000.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Agoura Hills, City of. 2022. General Plan Update 2022. Community Safety Element. https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/30836/638644930916770 000 (accessed February 2025).
______. 2025. Know Your Evacuation Zone. Know Your Evacuation Zone | City of Agoura Hills, CA (accessed February 2025).
______. 2020. Evacuation Plan.
https://www.agourahillscity.gov/government/departments/city_manager/emergency_prep aredness/agoura_hills_ready.php#collapselinks-182-20b0 (accessed February 2025).
References
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 7-9
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2025. Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). https://34c031f8-c9fd-4018-8c5a-4159cdff6b0d-cdn-endpoint.azureedge.net/- /media/calfire-website/what-we-do/fire-resource-assessment-program---frap/pdfmaps/wildland-urban-interface2019.pdf?rev=e44c740c777940c6bda816c42c886c87&hash=52A9A0873B1CBF3E468DC52D 4E5CB5B5 (accessed February 2025).
______. 2024. Fire Hazard severity Zone Viewer.
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/03beab8511814e79a0e4eabf0d3e7247/ (accessed February 2025).
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2014. California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices Chapter 6C, Temporary Traffic Control Elements. https://dot.ca.gov/- /media/dot-media/programs/safety-programs/documents/ca-mutcd/rev8/camutcd2014- part6c-rev8-a11y.pdf (accessed July 2025).
CalEPA. 2025. Cortese List Data Resources. Cortese List Data Resources | CalEPA (accessed March 2025).
Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission (LACLUC). 2003. Van Nuys Airport. file:///L:/EPS/LA%20Co/Agoura%20Hills/23-
14553%20Agoura%20Hills%20Bicycle%20Master%20Plan%20CEQA/Report/Drafts/03_Admi n%20Draft%20EIR/02_Admin%20Record/Noise/LACLUC_Van%20Nuys%20Airport.pdf (accessed July 2025).
LVMCOG. 2024. Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. https://www.cityofcalabasas.com/home/showpublisheddocument/32212/63865475287633 0000 (accessed February 2025).
U.S. EPA. 2024a. USEPA Researchers Investigate the Impacts of Everyday Products on Air Quality. https://www.epa.gov/sciencematters/epa-researchers-investigate-impacts-everydayproducts-air-quality (accessed March 2025). ______. 2024b. Definition of hazardous chemical and OSHA's MSDS requirement for determining applicability of EPCRA 311/312. https://www.epa.gov/epcra/definition-hazardous-chemicaland-oshas-msds-requirement-determining-applicability-epcra (accessed March 2025). ______. 2024c. Learn About Asbestos. https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/learn-about-asbestos (accessed July 2025).
______. 2024d. Learn about Lead. https://www.epa.gov/lead/learn-about-lead (accessed March 2025).
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 2025. Diesel Exhaust/Diesel Particulate Matter Hazard Alert. https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA-3590.pdf (accessed March 2025).
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2025. GeoTracker. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?global_id=T0611100192 (accessed February 2025).
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
7-10
Hydrology and Water Quality
Agoura Hills, City of. 2022. City of Agoura Hills General Plan. https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/30836/638644930916770 000 (accessed February 2025).
California Department of Conservation. 2025. Tsunami Hazard Area Map. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/ts_evacuation/ (accessed February 2025).
California Department of Transportation. No date. Caltrans Water Quality Planning Tool. https://svctenvims.dot.ca.gov/wqpt/wqpt.aspx (accessed June 2025).
California Department of Water Resources (DWR). 2003. California’s Groundwater Update 2003:
South Coast Hydrologic Region.
https://content.rcflood.org/permittrackerreports/reports/bulletin118_4-sc.pdf (accessed June 2025).
______. 2004. Russell Valley Groundwater Basin. https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-Website/WebPages/Programs/Groundwater-Management/Bulletin-118/Files/2003-BasinDescriptions/4_020_RussellValley.pdf (accessed February 2025). ______. 2013. California Water Plan Update 2013, South Coast Hydrologic Region. https://cawaterlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/CWP-Update-2013-South-CoastHydrologic-Region.pdf (accessed February 2025). ______. 2025. SGMA Basin Prioritization Dashboard. https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/bpdashboard/final/ (accessed February 2025).
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2008. National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer. https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5 529aa9cd (accessed February 2025).
______. 2018. National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer.
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5 529aa9cd (accessed February 2025).
Las Virgenes Malibu Conejo Council of Governments. 2001. Watershed Management Area Plan for the Malibu Creek Watershed. January 2001. https://acz.qcy.temporary.site/wpcontent/uploads/2019/05/Watershed-mgmt-plan-Malibu-Creek-2001.pdf (accessed June 2025).
United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2024. “How’s My Waterway?” https://mywaterway.epa.gov/community/agoura%20hills/overview (accessed February 2025).
United States Geological Survey. 2025. USGS Groundwater Historical Instantaneous Data for California. https://waterdata.usgs.gov/ca/nwis/uv/?referred_module=gw (accessed June 2025).
References
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 7-11
Land Use and Planning
Caltrans (2014). California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD), 2014 Edition.
Sacramento, CA: California Department of TransportationCity of Agoura Hills. 2024b. Agoura Village Specific Plan.
https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/30782/638630207576870 000 (Accessed June 2025).
City of Agoura Hills. 2022. City of Agoura Hills General Plan Update. https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/30826/638644930871500 000 (Accessed February 2025).
City of Agoura Hills. 2010a. City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 Environmental Impact Report (Accessed February 2025).
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2024. Final Connect Socal 2024. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-05/23-2987-connect-socal-2024-final-complete040424.pdf (Accessed June 2025).
Noise
Agoura Hills, City of. 2010. City of Agoura Hills General Plan, Noise Element. March 2010. https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/27652/638060875782730 000 (accessed February 2025).
______ .2022. City of Agoura Hills General Plan Update. https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/30826/638644930871500 000 (Accessed February 2025).
______. 2024. Agoura Hills Code of Ordinances. October 28, 2024. (Accessed February 2025).
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2017. 2017 Traffic Volumes. March 2010. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census/traffic-volumes/2017/route-101 (accessed February 2025).
California Department of Transportation. Technical Noise Supplement to the Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Transportation, 2013.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). (2020). Transportation and construction vibration guidance manual. Caltrans, Division of Environmental Analysis. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2017, June. Special Report – Measurement, Prediction, and Mitigation. 2017.
Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment.
November. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/researchinnovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no0123_0.pdf. Accessed February 2025.
Los Angeles County Land Use Commission, 2003. Van Nuys Airport – Airport Influence Area. May 13, 2003. https://case.planning.lacounty.gov/assets/upl/project/aluc_airport-van-nuys.pdf. (Accessed February 2025).
McIver, IR. 2012. Ground Vibration from Road
Construction. https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/FileAPI/proposal/NSP000005/Hearings/f73d4769 a3/APSOC-Closing-Subs-Attachment-report.pdf (accessed June 2025).
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
7-12
Transportation
Agoura Hills, City of. 2024. Agoura Village Specific Plan. https://cms2.revize.com/revize/agourahillsca/Documents/Government/Departments/Com munity%20Development/Planning%20and%20Zoning/Specific%20Plans/Agoura%20Village% 20Specific%20Plan_FINAL.pdf (accessed July 2025).
______. 2022a. General Plan Infrastructure and Community Services. https://cms2.revize.com/revize/agourahillsca/Documents/Government/Departments/Com munity%20Development/Planning%20and%20Zoning/General%20Plan/General%20Plan%2 0Chapter%203%20InfrastructureandCommunityServices.pdf (accessed July 2025). ______. 2022b. DRAFT Bicycle Master Plan.
https://cms2.revize.com/revize/agourahillsca/Documents/Government/Departments/Publi c%20Works/Capital%20Improvement%20Projects/Bike%20Master%20Plan/Agoura%20Hills %20Bicycle%20Master%20Plan%20Final%20Report_111422.pdf (accessed July 2025). ______. 2020. Transportation Assessment Guidelines.
https://cms2.revize.com/revize/agourahillsca/Documents/Government/Departments/Com munity%20Development/Planning%20and%20Zoning/Documents/FINAL_Agoura%20Hills%2 0Transportation%20Assessment%20Guidelines_08112020.pdf (accessed July 2025).
Caltrans. 2025. Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000 – Bicycle Transportation Design. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/design/documents/chp1000-a11y.pdf (accessed July 2025).
______. 2022. Highway Design Manual BIB 89-02. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/design/documents/dib-89-02-final-a11y.pdf (accessed July 2025). ______. 2021. California Transportation Plan 2050. February 2021. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/transportation-planning/documents/ctp-2050-v3-a11y.pdf. (accessed July 2025).
______. 2020. Highway Design Manual Chapter 200 – Geometric Design and Structure Standards. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/design/documents/chp0200-092923- a11y.pdf (accessed July 2025).
______. 2014. California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices Chapter 6C, Temporary Traffic Control Elements. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/safetyprograms/documents/ca-mutcd/rev8/camutcd2014-part6c-rev8-a11y.pdf (accessed July 2025).
Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation. 2018. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. https://lci.ca.gov/docs/20180416- 743_Technical_Advisory_4.16.18.pdf (accessed February 2025).
International Code Council. 2021. International Fire Code. https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IFC2021P2 (accessed July 2025).
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2024. Connect SoCal. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-05/23-2987-connect-socal-2024-final-complete040424.pdf (accessed July 2025).
Thousand Oaks, City of. 2025. Kanan Shuttle. https://toaks.gov/kanan (accessed October 2025).
References
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 7-13
Recreation
California State Parks. 2025. Malibu Creek State Park. https://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=614 (Accessed July 2025).
City of Agoura Hills. 2022. City of Agoura Hills General Plan Update. https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/30826/638644930871500 000 (Accessed February 2025).
City of Agoura Hills. 2010a. City of Agoura Hills General Plan 2035 Environmental Impact Report.
Accessed February 2025.
Department of Finance. 2025. Estimates-E1: Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State — January 1, 2024 and 2025.
https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates-e1/ (Accessed July 2025).
National Park Service. 2025. Paramount: Past, Present, and Future. https://www.nps.gov/samo/learn/historyculture/paramount-past-present-and-future.htm (Accessed July 2025).
Tribal Cultural Resources
Arnold, Jeanne E. and Teresa Green. 2002. “Mortuary Ambiguity: The Ventureño Chumash Case.” American Antiquity 67(4): 760–771.
Bean, Lowell J., and Charles R. Smith. 1978. Gabrielino. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 538–549. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, William G. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Blackburn, Thomas. 1963. Ethnohistoric Descriptions of Gabrielino Material Culture. Annual Report, Archaeological Survey. University of California, Los Angeles.
Cook, S.F., and Robert F. Heizer. 1965. The Quantitative Approach to the Relation between Population and Settlement Size. Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey No. 64. University of California Archaeological Research Facility, Berkeley.
Eargle, Dolan H. 2008. “Native California: An Introductory Guide to the Original Peoples from Earliest to Modern Times.” Book One: The Evolution of Native Cultures in the Land that Became California. Trees Company Press, San Francisco, California.
Gamble, Lynn. H., Philip. L. Walker, and Glenn S. Russell. 2001. Integrative Approach to Mortuary Analysis: Social and Symbolic Dimensions of Chumash Burial Practices. American Antiquity 66: 185–212.
Garza, Sebastian C. 2012. “Social Complexity at Vasquez Rocks: A Bioarcheological Study of a Middle Period Cemetery.” Master’s Thesis, California State University Northridge.
Grant, Campbell. 1978a. “Chumash: Introduction.” In California. Volume 8: Handbook of North American Indians, edited by Robert F. Heizer and William C. Sturtevant, pp. 505–508.
Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press, Washington D.C. ______. 1978b. “Eastern Coastal Chumash.” In California. Volume 8: Handbook of North American Indians, edited by Robert F. Heizer and William C. Sturtevant, pp. 505–508. Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press, Washington D.C.
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
7-14
Golla, Victor. 2007. Linguistic Prehistory. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity. AltaMira Press, Lanham, Maryland.
Harrington, John P. 1942. Culture Element Distributions: XIX, Central California Coast.
Anthropological Records 7:1. University of California Press: Berkeley.
Hudson, Travis. 1982. “The Alliklik-Tataviam Problem.” Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 4: 222–232.
Johnson, John R. 1982. “An Ethnohistoric Study of the Island Chumash.” M.A. Thesis, University of California Santa Barbara.
Johnson, John R. and David D. Earle. 1990. “Tataviam Geography and Ethnohistory.” Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 12(2): 191–214.
King, Chester D. 1994. Native American Placenames in the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreational Area, Agoura Hills. Topanga Anthropological Consultants, California Koerper, Henry C., and Christopher E. Drover
King, Chester D., and Thomas C. Blackburn. 1978. “Tataviam.” In Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, California, R. F. Heizer, ed., pp. 535–537. Washington: Smithsonian Institution.
Knight, Albert. 2010. “The Rock Art of the Sierra Pelona Mountains, Central Los Angeles County, California.” American Indian Rock Art, 36: 1–14.
Kroeber, Alfred J. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Unabridged reprint 1976. New York, New York: Dover Publications, Inc.
McCawley, William. 1996. The First Angelinos: The Gabrielino Indians of Los Angeles. Malki Museum/Ballena Press Cooperative Publication, Banning or Novato, California.
O’Neil, Stephen. 2002. The Acjachemen in the Franciscan Mission System: Demographic Collapse and Social Change. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, California State University, Fullerton.
Roman, Deborah V. 2017. “New AMS Dating Sequences for the Chumash Ventureño Early Period:
Revisiting the Question of Antiquity of Ventureño Chumash Inland Occupation.” SCA Proceedings 31: 181–194.
Stickel, E. Gary and Lois J. Weinman-Roberts. 1980. “An Overview of the Cultural Resources of the Western Mojave Desert.” California Desert Planning Program, Riverside, California.
Effects Found Not to be Significant
Agoura Hills, City of. 2023. City Of Agoura Hills Zoning Map. https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/29202/638411046713200 000 (accessed February 2025).
______. 2022. General Plan Update SEIR 2022. https://files.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/273228- 3/attachment/_LbvOhs_r_Qk_RWlVSJbDINJP6k9aATbx0k5c9tKLjZhTQRz5N8yRyxt63V2hec3 nEfgflUDP5OyE3PR0 (accessed February 2025).
______. 2022. General Plan Update 2022.
https://www.agourahillscity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/30826/638644930871500 000 (accessed February 2025).
References
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 7-15
California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2022. California Important Farmland Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/ (accessed February 2025). ______. 2025a. Important Farmland Categories.
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Important-Farmland-Categories.aspx (accessed July 2025).
______. 2025b. California Williamson Act Enrollment Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/WilliamsonAct/App/index.html (accessed February 2025).
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire). 2025. Fire Hazards Severity Zone Viewer. https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/03beab8511814e79a0e4eabf0d3e7247/ (accessed February 2025).
Federal Highway Administration. (2023). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (11th Edition). U.S. Department of Transportation, (accessed February 2025).
Las Virgenes Municipal Water District (LVMWD.) 2025. Tapia Water Reclamation Facility. https://www.lvmwd.com/our-services/wastewater-services/tapia-water-reclamationfacility-copy (accessed July 2025). ______. 2020. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan for Las Virgenes Municipal Water District. https://www.lvmwd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/13459/637616788962730000( accessed July 2025).
Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts. 2025. Calabasas Landfill Gas-to-Energy Facility. https://www.lacsd.org/services/solid-waste/energy-recovery-and-fueling-facilities/landfillgas-to-energy-facilities/calabasas-landfill-gas-to-energy-facility (accessed July 2025).
City of Agoura Hills
Agoura Hills Bicycle Master Plan
7-16
This page left intentionally blank.
Appendix A
Notice of Preparation and Comments Received
n11s NOTICE WAS POSl EO
ON January 17 2025
UNTIL Februa1v 18 2025
AEGISTR"R-RECORDERICOUNTY CLEHK
To:
From:
Date:
CITY O F
AG~JLLS
2025 011592
lilllllllllllllllllllll!illlllllllllllllllllllllllllilllllli FILED
Jan 17 2025
E1eclronlull, 11::ir ed by C?WUY MAFFI TT
State Clearinghouse, Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, and Interested Parties and Organizations
City of Agoura Hills
30001 Ladyface Court
Agoura Hills. CA 91301
January 13, 2025
CITY OF AGOURA HILLS
NOTICE OF PREPARATION (NOP) OF A PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR THE BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
The City of Agoura Hills will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) pursuant to the State of California Public Resources Code and the "Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970," as amended to date.
PROJECT LOCATION: The City of Agoura Hills is located in western Los Angeles County near the southeastern edge of Ventura County. Agoura Hills is bordered by the City of Westlake Village to the west, the City of Thousand Oaks to the northwesi the unincorporated community of Oak Park (Ventura County) to the north , the City of Calabasas and unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County to the east, and unincorporated areas of Los AngelesCountyto the south. Regional access to the City is provided by U.S. Highway 101 which runs east-west through the City of Agoura Hills. Local access within the City is provided primarily by Kanan Road and Reyes Adobe Road in the north-south direction, and Agoura Road and Thousand Oaks Boulevard in the east-west direction. The Planning Area for the Bicycle Master Plan (BMP) includes the existing City boundaries (approximately 7.86 square miles).
Specific improvements within the BMP would be located in the areas depicted in Figure 1.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project includes the following components:
1. Bicycle Master Plan (BMP). The BMP proposes 30.1 miles of new bikeways and bikeway improvements to build upon the city's existing 1.3 miles of bicycle routes and 9.2 miles of bicycle lanes. The BMP aims to create a network of diverse bike corridors, as well as support facilities and programs to link local and regional destinations and make biking more practical and desirable for a broader range of people. The City seeks to prioritize implementation of two projects within the BMP:
the Medea Creek Path (Path), a two-mile bicycle path along the Medea Creek Channel, and the Agoura High School Connection (Connection), a 0.35-mile bicycle path connecting two intersections adjacent to Agoura High School.
2. VMT Mitigation Exchange and Banking Program (Program). The Program would establish a mitigation opportunity for projects exceeding the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) threshold by allowing a developer or project proponent to purchase VMT 2025 011592
llll\lllllll llillllllllilllllllil\11111111111111111111111111 FILED
J~n 17 2025
Oean c. Logan. fhl)ltlrr - R,cord1r/Co11 ,If Clttlt
reduction credits, which would in turn be used to fund the implementation ofbicyde improvement projects identified within the BMP.
3. General Plan Amendments (Amendments). To ensure the city's General Plan is consistent with the Bicycle Master Plan, the project would amend the existing General Plan Infrastructure and Community Services Element.
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: The City of Agoura Hills will prepare a programmatic environ mental docu mentevaluating the potential environ mental effects of the proposed project. Pursuantto CEQA Section 15168, a Program EIR (PEIR) will be prepared for the Bicycle Master Plan Project. The PEIR will evaluate the potentially significant environmental impacts of the project, will propose feasible mitigation measures that may lessen or avoid such impacts, and will analyze alternatives that could reduce potential environmental impacts. It is anticipated the EIR will evaluale potentially significant environmental effects related to the following environmental issues:
■ Aesthetics
■ Agriculture and Forestry Resources
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
■ Energy
• Geology and Soils
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Mineral Resources
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services
• Recreation
• Transportation
■ Tribal Cultural Resources
■ Utilities and Service Systems
• Wildfire
■ Mandatory Findings of Significance
In addition, the EIR will include a discussion of other topics required by CEQA, including cumulative impacts, project alternatives, growth-inducing effects, and significant irreversible effects.
PUBLIC SCOPING PERIOD: The City would like to know the views of all interested parties requesting notice, responsible agencies, agencies with jurisdiction by law, and trustee agencies as to the scope and content of the environmental information to be included in the PEIR that is germane to youragency'sstatutory responsibilities(CEQA Section 21080.4 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15082). Your agency may need to use the PEIR when considering a permit or other approval for the individual projects included therein . Due to the time limits mandated by CEQA Section 15082(b), all formal comments on the NOP shall be submitted in writing via e-mail or U.S. mail no later than 30 days from the date of receipt of the NOP by U.S. certified mail, or, if not 2 received via U.S. certified mail, no later than 5:00 PM on February 17, 20251 • Wien
responding, provide the name and contact information foryouragency's staff contact.
Please send your response to the following:
Charmaine Yambao, PE
Senior Civil Engineer, Public Works
30001 Ladyface Court
Agoura Hills, CA 93101
Responses may also be e-mailed to [email protected] be directed to this e-mail address, .or (818) 597-7360.
A public scoping meeting per CEQA Guidelines Section 15082 is also scheduled.
Please see the public meeting notice, attached to this NOP, for further information.
Charmaine Yambao, PE, Senior Civil Engineer Date: January 13, 2025 2025 011592
111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 FILED
Jan 17 2025
Dean C. Logan, Reginrt1r- Aecorder/Co1m:y CJ~ rK
flo;>clron ittily signed by CORTP/£'! MAFFITT
1 The NOP was formally filed withtheStateClearinghouseon January 13, 2025, indicating that the scoping period would end on February 13, 2025.Asthe NOP will be filed with the Los Angeles County Clerk on January 17, 2025, the scoping period has been extended to end on February 17, 2025.
2025 011592
llllillllllllllllilllllllllllllllllllllli!llilllllll
1!111111
FILED
Jon 17 2025
C
0 =a
u
0 .....
-u
Qj
.....
0 ...
IL
Qj
...
:::,
C)
~
,,---
-·
t
•
~t • . ~·
l
,,
• '
-'•
' ' ' ' ' :
t
I
t
0 "" C ! - GI
~111 ' ' ' '
.r
0 "' ....
0 0
J
State of California – Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director South Coast Region
3883 Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123
wildlife.ca.gov
Conserving California’s Wildlife Since 1870
January 27, 2025
Charmaine Yambao
City of Agoura Hills
30001 Ladyface Court
Agoura Hills, California 93101
[email protected]
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE BICYCLE MASTER PLAN PROJECT, SCH NO. 2025010338, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CA
Dear Charmaine Yambao:
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) reviewed the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) from the City of Agoura Hills (City) for the Bicycle Master Plan (Project) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines
1 .
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish and wildlife.
Likewise, CDFW appreciates the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects of the Project that CDFW, by law, may be required to carry out or approve through the exercise of its own regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code.
CDFW ROLE
CDFW is California’s Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the State (Fish & G. Code, §§ 711.7, subd. (a) & 1802; Pub. Resources Code, § 21070; CEQA Guidelines § 15386, subd. (a)). CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species (Fish & G. Code, § 1802). Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, CDFW is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources.
1 CEQA is codified in the California Public Resources Code in section 21000 et seq. The “CEQA Guidelines” are found in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, commencing with section 15000.
Docusign Envelope ID: DA8041A1-39B5-410B-B16A-DB36B3875A1B Charmaine Yambao
City of Agoura Hills
January 27, 2025