Upland planning commission recommends council approve Via Serena plan for 65 homes after lengthy hearing

The Upland Planning Commission on a 6-0 vote recommended that the City Council certify an environmental impact report and approve entitlements for the Via Serena specific plan, a proposal to build 65 single‑family homes on about 9.2 acres of a former storm detention basin east of the Upland Hills Country Club.

The commission’s recommendation covers the final focused environmental impact report (EIR) and mitigation monitoring and reporting program, a general plan amendment to change the site’s designation from public utilities (flood control) to a specific plan, a zoning map amendment to the specific plan designation, and a tentative tract map and development plan review subdividing the parcel into 65 numbered lots and 12 lettered lots. Commissioners voted to forward all four items to council; each motion passed with six affirmative votes.

The project matters locally because it would remove roughly half of the basin’s existing footprint for homes while reconfiguring the remaining basin and adding mitigation and conservation measures. Staff and the applicant said the reconfiguration is designed to preserve flood control capacity, increase detention and dead storage, improve infiltration and provide an on-site public trail and pocket park; residents said the plan risks wildlife habitat loss, makes their properties more vulnerable to flooding and would alter neighborhood character.

Project components and city findings The Via Serena specific plan (applicant: Colonies Partners LP) would develop 65 single‑family detached homes across about 9.2 acres for an average density of 7.1 dwelling units per acre. The tentative tract map subdivides the site into lots ranging from roughly 3,300 to 5,800 square feet (most about 3,500 square feet). Each home is designed with a two‑car garage and driveway parking; staff said the development meets parking requirements without parallel stalls and that the project could provide about 40 parallel spaces subject to fire-department restrictions.

Staff described legislative and development components including a general plan amendment, a zoning map amendment, a specific plan containing design and landscape standards, a development plan review for site and architectural design, grading and a tentative tract map. The applicant submitted a focused EIR after a Superior Court ruling in Friends of Upland Wetlands v. City of Upland found that the earlier IS/MND did not sufficiently analyze wetlands, biological resources, groundwater recharge, noise and aesthetics. The EIR expanded scope to include greenhouse gases, vehicle miles travelled and tribal cultural resources.

Key environmental and engineering findings - Basin reconfiguration: Staff and the project engineer said the overall basin area would be reduced from roughly 20.3 acres to about 11.1 acres; to maintain flood control the basin bottom is excavated in places by up to about 7 feet. Dead storage (the volume on the bottom that supports infiltration) is estimated to increase from about 6.45 acre‑feet to about 9.04 acre‑feet, and the 100‑year detention time was described as increasing from about 27 hours to up to 40 hours. The project engineer said outlet and conveyance dimensions are sized so post‑development outflow would not exceed existing downstream flow rates. - Groundwater and water quality: Staff and the engineer said the reconfigured basin and added native plant habitat are expected to improve infiltration and filtration of urban runoff; the project will also include on‑site capture/infiltration measures required by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (staff said the development would capture about 0.66 acre‑feet on site). The city is preparing a written response to the Regional Board’s April correspondence and included a condition requiring review of the water quality management plan to address the board’s concerns. - Biological resources: The EIR identified habitat types on the site (including mule‑fat and other riparian/wetland indicators and some sensitive scrub) and concluded that no federally or state‑listed species were observed but that the site contains suitable habitat for special‑status species. The EIR and conditions require pre‑construction biological surveys (mitigation measures Bio‑1 through Bio‑9), a streambed alteration agreement with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and a habitat mitigation and monitoring plan (HMMP) covering about 1.5 acres (1.2 acres of mule‑fat scrub restoration plus a 0.3‑acre enhanced wetland at the eastern basin) to be implemented and monitored for an initial maintenance period. - Noise and construction: The EIR found construction noise could be significant without mitigation. Per the city noise ordinance and mitigation measures staff cited, construction hours are limited to weekdays and specific equipment and barrier measures would be required; staff summarized standard mitigation measures (the city’s noise ordinance limits construction to daytime weekday hours and prohibits most weekend work). - Traffic and circulation: The traffic study (prepared with the EIR baseline established in 2022) estimates about 614 two‑way vehicle trips per day from the project with approximately 46 AM peak‑hour trips and 61 PM peak‑hour trips. Staff said project intersections are expected to operate at Level of Service D or better (the general plan standard), and the project is screened out for Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) thresholds because it meets low‑VMT area criteria. The Fifteenth Street extension will be the primary access and a secondary gated egress is planned for emergency vehicle access.

Public concerns and responses About a dozen residents spoke at the public hearing. Common concerns included: - Flooding and spillway: Neighbors said the basin historically functioned as emergency overflow to a spillway near Grove Avenue and expressed worry that filling half the basin could increase downstream flood risk. Staff and the project engineer said the outlet pipe and spillway design maintain or improve detention and outlet control, that the reconfigured basin increases dead storage and detention time, and that a spillway designed for rarer events (the engineer described it as sized to handle substantially more than a 100‑year event) remains in place. - Biological impacts and prior grading: Several speakers said prior weed‑abatement/bulldozing work removed vegetation and wildlife and asked whether current surveys reflect pre‑disturbance conditions. The applicant’s consultants said they used prior reports and recent surveys together, have been coordinating with CDFW, have an SAA (streambed alteration agreement) in circulation for signature and will implement the HMMP and required pre‑construction surveys. - Trail, privacy and maintenance: Residents questioned a public decomposed‑granite basin trail that will cross land retained by the HOA. Staff and the applicant said the trail will be open to the public from sunrise to sunset, will be maintained by the HOA, and could be gated or otherwise changed if security becomes an issue. The pocket park and landscaping along Fifteenth Street will also be HOA‑maintained; the city will retain access to the remainder basin for maintenance. - Traffic, construction and pests: Speakers asked about construction hours (staff cited the city noise ordinance limits), additional neighborhood traffic, and pesticide use near private gardens; staff said construction traffic will use the Fifteenth Street extension and that there is no planned public parking on Fifteenth Street.

Votes at a glance - EIR and mitigation monitoring program: motion to recommend certification — approved (6–0) - General Plan amendment (PU‑FC to Specific Plan): motion to recommend approval — approved (6–0) - Zone change to Specific Plan, and adoption of the Via Serena specific plan: motion to recommend approval — approved (6–0) - Tentative tract map (65 lots) and development plan review: motion to recommend approval — approved (6–0) - Continued item 8B (separate parcel map/development review): motion to continue to the May 28 Planning Commission meeting — approved (6–0)

What’s next The commission’s recommendations will be transmitted to the City Council for final action; staff said the council hearing is likely the second Monday in June and will use the same public notice radius. Several residents were told they may speak again at the council hearing. The record shows ongoing coordination with California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and the city’s public works division on final conditions of approval and technical details.

Ending: The planning commission emphasized that its action is a recommendation; final project approvals remain with the City Council. Residents who remain concerned about hydrology, wildlife mitigation and construction impacts were told the council hearing offers another formal opportunity to comment.