Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Beaumont Annexations topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

LAFCO approves two annexations into Beaumont Cherry Valley Water District

Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission · December 4, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission approved two annexation requests to the Beaumont Cherry Valley Water District: a multi-parcel commercial Oak Valley Village LLC annexation (32.6 acres of a 48.4-acre project) and a one-acre McClure Machine Shop annexation for a ~16,500 sq ft building; both actions were unanimous.

The Riverside LAFCO on Dec. 4 approved two annexations into the Beaumont Cherry Valley Water District, following staff presentations and unanimous roll-call votes.

Michael Henderson, GIS analyst, presented the first request (LAFCO 2025-07-05) for Oak Valley Village LLC, describing five parcels proposed for annexation that total 32.6 acres of a 48.4-acre development in western Beaumont. Henderson told the commission the project proposed a commercial center of about 10 structures, including three anchor stores and about 280,000 square feet of retail space; staff recommended approval.

Chair Vargas opened and closed the public hearing on the item with no public speakers. Commissioner Sanchez moved to approve staff's recommendation and the commission adopted the resolution by unanimous roll call.

Henderson also presented LAFCO 2025-08-5 for annexation of a 1-acre parcel in southern Beaumont near I-10 for the McClure Machine Shop project, which would include an owner's suite and two tenant spaces for office and manufacturing uses and a building area of nearly 16,500 square feet. That hearing likewise drew no public speakers; Commissioner Areola moved, Commissioner Corona seconded, and the commission voted unanimously to approve the annexation.

Both approvals were presented as consistent with the district's sphere-of-influence area and were accompanied by staff findings under the California Environmental Quality Act noted in the staff reports. The commission did not identify conditions or amendments to the staff recommendations during the meeting.