Jurupa Valley reviews Santa Ana River master plan, consultants outline habitat protections and phased rollout

Jurupa Valley’s city council and planning commission heard a detailed update April 2 on a proposed Santa Ana River Master Plan that aims to protect natural habitat, improve public safety and expand recreational access along a roughly 14‑mile stretch of the river that forms the city’s southern border. Principal planner Jean Ward opened the presentation and introduced a multidisciplinary consultant team led by Studio MLA.

The consultants said the study area contains roughly 1,500 acres of open space, supports more than 45 special‑status species and seven environmentally sensitive plant communities, and places about 14,000 residents within a 15‑minute walk of the river corridor. “Our overarching goal is to revitalize the river corridor as a community asset,” Jean Ward said, describing a plan that balances conservation, access and economic opportunities.

Why it matters: consultants said the river’s partly natural, non‑channelized character is rare in Southern California and offers an opportunity to combine habitat restoration with public use. Staff described a phased schedule: Phase 1 (December–June) to document existing conditions and stakeholder input; Phase 2 (July–December) to identify and prioritize opportunity sites and initial concepts; and Phase 3 (next year) to prepare the final master plan, implementation strategy and project‑level environmental and MSHCP compliance.

Technical trade‑offs and constraints dominated council discussion. Erin, a senior biologist on the team, said the study area overlaps lands covered by the Western Riverside County Multi‑Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), so design work must take MSHCP conservation requirements and any necessary mitigation into account. A hydrology specialist summarized floodplain and channel‑migration analyses and explained that vegetation such as Arundo can narrow and deepen the active channel during dry years and raise water‑surface elevations during large flood events.

Councilmember Armando Carmona asked whether removing Arundo would restore flow and reduce channel narrowing. The hydrology consultant cautioned that vegetation removal generally helps native species and can allow the channel to reset, but also that large storm events can reset channel geometry and that any removal should be paired with restoration and design that account for flood risk.

Public‑engagement findings presented by the team emphasized residents’ desire to retain the river’s natural character while improving safety and maintenance: early outreach included a Jan. 29 site tour with 20+ agencies, a workshop and an online survey. Top requests were more formal access points and trails, equestrian and multimodal connections, water‑quality signage, and regular cleanup and stewardship programs.

The consultants said they have identified six priority access points for early implementation — Riverbend Park, Mary Tayo Trailhead, Downey Street, Horseshoe Lake Park, Louis Rubedo Park/Pecan Grove and Rancho Jurupa Park — and that analysis and concept‑level plans for those sites will be part of Phase 2.

What’s next: staff and the consultant team said they will post detailed Phase‑1 reports on the project website; Phase 2 work is scheduled to begin in July and run through December, and the team expects to return with refined opportunity sites and initial concept plans at the end of that phase. Officials said CEQA review and MSHCP consistency work will be conducted for project‑level proposals selected from the master plan.

The council’s discussion emphasized balancing improved public access and safety with habitat protection and flood resilience; staff and consultants said the study will use targeted surveys and mitigation strategies where work may affect sensitive species.