Council approves Village 5A annexation boundary for LAFCO review after public hearing

The City Council voted unanimously March 26 to send a revised Village 5A annexation application to LAFCO after an extended public hearing that included landowners, developers and residents urging both support and caution.

Planning staff presented a reduced annexation boundary that retains a higher share of sales‑tax‑generating commercial land along State Highway 65 while limiting inclusion of parcels whose owners previously protested the larger, earlier proposal. Staff said the revised map covers roughly half of the originally proposed Village 5 specific‑plan area (about 2,000 of the prior ~4,700 acres), keeps the specific plan policies in place for any future development and was prepared to increase the city’s near‑term commercial base and ability to implement public services.

Developers and landowners supporting the application emphasized the commercial tax base. Brian Cooley of Richland Communities, a property owner and master developer in the area, told council the revised boundary includes a “substantial amount of commercial property” that will help grow the city’s sales‑tax base and noted lender and landowner support for moving forward.

Opponents and many residents urged caution about splitting the original village area into noncontiguous pieces and asked how open space, public services and residents who do not want annexation would be protected. Multiple commenters asked whether the plan preserves open space and whether landowners outside the proposed boundary had been correctly identified as unwilling to annex. Staff and council responded that the revised boundary was crafted in response to LAFCO feedback and prior protest activity and that the LAFCO process includes a statutory protest and hearing, so property owners still have formal opportunities to register objections.

Council concluded that the proposal is a policy decision about the map and whether it should move to LAFCO for review. Following public comment and discussion about fiscal impacts, open‑space protections and future flexibility, Councilmember Joiner moved to find the portion of the adopted Village 5 specific plan area (Village 5A) in conformance with the certified Village 5 EIR and to adopt a resolution to forward the annexation application to LAFCO; the motion passed 5–0 on roll call. The staff presentation identified next steps as preparing a complete LAFCO application and proceeding through LAFCO’s timelines (including any protest hearings), with a target decision by mid‑2024 if the application is complete.

The council’s action authorizes the city to proceed with the LAFCO application for the reduced Village 5A boundary. Future development, open‑space preservation and infrastructure funding will be reviewed at the project and LAFCO stages and may require additional council decisions; opponents noted those later steps would be the appropriate venues to test specific mitigation, phasing and land‑use changes.