The Obscure Process Reshaping Land Use In Unincorporated Riverside County – The Riverside Record

Analysis of Riverside County’s Land Use Planning in Relation to Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: The Foundation General Plan Amendment (FGPA) Process

Riverside County’s land use planning is currently under scrutiny following the initiation of 35 Foundation General Plan Amendments (FGPAs) over the past year. This process, which allows for fundamental changes to land use designations, directly impacts the county’s progress toward several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities). The FGPA system was established following a 2003 settlement with the Endangered Habitats League to combat sprawl and promote organized growth, but its current application raises questions about its effectiveness in fostering sustainable development.

Balancing Economic Growth with Sustainable Community Development

A primary tension exists between proposals for industrial development, which align with SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) and SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), and the preservation of community well-being and residential areas, a core tenet of SDG 11.

• Approximately 18 of the 76 applications submitted during the 2024 cycle proposed changes to allow for industrial uses.
• Resident concerns focus on the conversion of residential land to industrial zones, which can negatively impact SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) through increased traffic and pollution.

Case Study: The Mead Valley Megawarehouse Project

The approval of a megawarehouse project in Mead Valley exemplifies the complex trade-offs involved in achieving balanced sustainable development.

1. Land Use Transformation: The project required changing 23 parcels from “Rural Community: Very Low Density Residential” to “Community Development and Open Space,” highlighting a shift in planning priorities.
2. Economic and Infrastructure Development: The approval of a 1,003,510-square-foot warehouse supports local economic activity (SDG 8) and infrastructure development (SDG 9).
3. Contribution to Green Spaces: The project also included a 15-acre community park, directly contributing to SDG 11.7, which calls for universal access to safe, inclusive, and accessible green and public spaces.

Institutional Framework and Governance Challenges

The effectiveness of the FGPA process as a governance tool is critical for achieving sustainable outcomes, as outlined in SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions). However, the current framework faces significant challenges.

• Inefficiency: The eight-year cycle for amendments inundates county staff with applications simultaneously, making it difficult to process them efficiently and meaningfully review their alignment with long-term sustainability goals.
• Inconsistency with State Housing Law: The restrictive eight-year timeline conflicts with state mandates to streamline housing production. This institutional barrier hinders progress on SDG 11.1, which aims to ensure access to adequate, safe, and affordable housing.
• Administrative Nature: The initial FGPA approval is an administrative step that only allows a developer to submit a formal project proposal. This multi-step process is intended to prevent speculative land use changes but has been criticized as inefficient.

Proposed Reforms for Enhanced Sustainability and Efficiency

In response to these challenges, the Riverside County Planning Department is considering reforms to better align the land use amendment process with sustainable development principles.

• A workshop is planned to review the FGPA process and explore improvements for property owners, developers, and county staff.
• The primary goal is to create a more flexible and efficient system, potentially moving to a rolling application basis. This would support the objective of SDG 16 to develop effective, accountable, and transparent institutions.
• Streamlining the process, particularly for housing, is essential for the county to meet state requirements and make meaningful progress toward achieving the housing targets of SDG 11.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
• SDG 15: Life on Land
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

   • Target 11.3: By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries.
     
     Explanation: The entire article focuses on Riverside County’s unique planning process (Foundation General Plan Amendments or FGPA) for managing land use changes. It discusses the balance between industrial development, housing density (“change of 23 low density housing areas getting changed out to a different higher density or commercial”), and community concerns. The mention of public hearings where residents can voice their opinions directly relates to participatory planning.
   • Target 11.7: By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces.
     
     Explanation: The article explicitly mentions that a proposed megawarehouse project also included a “roughly 15-acre community park space,” which directly addresses the goal of creating public green spaces as part of urban development.
   • Target 11.a: Support positive economic, social and environmental links between urban, peri-urban and rural areas by strengthening national and regional development planning.
     
     Explanation: The FGPA process is a form of regional development planning that governs land use changes in “unincorporated parts of the county,” such as the “Mead Valley area.” This process manages the conversion of rural and low-density residential land for industrial and community development, directly addressing the links between different types of areas.

2. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

   • Target 9.1: Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure… to support economic development.
     
     Explanation: The article discusses the approval of multiple industrial development projects, including a specific “1,003,510-square-foot warehouse.” This represents the development of significant industrial infrastructure intended to support economic activity in the county.

3. SDG 15: Life on Land

   • Target 15.9: By 2020, integrate ecosystem and biodiversity values into national and local planning, development processes…
     
     Explanation: The article states that the county’s unique FGPA process was the result of a “settlement agreement with the Endangered Habitats League” which sued the county to “combat piecemeal general plan amendments (GPAs) and potential sprawl.” This historical context shows a direct integration of environmental and habitat protection values into the local planning process.

4. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
     
     Explanation: The article describes in detail the county’s multi-step administrative process for land use changes, involving the Planning Department, the General Plan Advisory Committee, the Planning Commission, and the Board of Supervisors. The Planning Director’s admission that the process is “deeply inefficient” and his plan to hold a workshop to “streamline the process” demonstrates an effort to develop more effective institutions.
   • Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.
     
     Explanation: The article highlights the role of “public hearing[s]” in the decision-making process. It quotes a resident, David Hernandez, expressing his concerns during a hearing, which serves as a direct example of a participatory mechanism designed to make the process more inclusive and responsive to citizen input.

Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Number of land use plan amendments processed: The article states that “35 Foundation General Plan Amendments (FGPA)” were initiated in the past 12 months and “76 applications” were received in the 2024 cycle. This can serve as an indicator for the level of activity in urban planning and management (Target 11.3).
2. Area of public green space created: The article specifically mentions the inclusion of a “roughly 15-acre community park space” as part of a development project. This is a direct quantitative indicator for progress towards Target 11.7.
3. Scale of new industrial infrastructure: The approval of a “1,003,510-square-foot warehouse” is a specific metric that can be used as an indicator for the development of new industrial infrastructure (Target 9.1).
4. Existence of a legal/planning framework to control sprawl: The article describes the FGPA process itself, which was established following a settlement with the “Endangered Habitats League” to combat sprawl. The existence and application of this process is an indicator of the integration of ecosystem values into local planning (Target 15.9).
5. Mechanisms for public participation in planning: The article’s reference to “a July 29 public hearing” and the quoting of a resident’s testimony implies the use of public hearings as a tool for participatory decision-making. The number of such hearings and the level of public engagement could be used as indicators for Target 16.7.

SDGs, Targets and Indicators Table

Source: riversiderecord.org