11. ECONOMICS ELEMENT

11.A. Visual and Performing Arts

Joshua Tree already has a large contingent of musicians, writers, sculptors, painters and performers. Economic development efforts need to support artist cooperatives, online gallery sales, tour buses for studio tours and art sales, promotion for music festivals, and downtown gallery spaces that are in partnership with major urban galleries. Resources need to be applied so that Joshua Tree is developed and recognized as the artistic center of San Bernardino County.

11.B. Ecotourism & International Cooperation

The tourist footprint must be kept minimally intrusive and yet allow for the growth of a variety of businesses that entertain guests to the national park. Promotional materials need to emphasize the fine arts and the community’s resource conservation ethic. Possible new entertainment venues could include an observatory, artificial rock climbing walls, concert hall, art galleries, bicycle and electric vehicle concessions. New accommodations for overnight stays might include campgrounds, additional bed and breakfast homes, and an American Youth Hostel. Economic development activities should be supportive of existing motels and inns and enhance the attractiveness of those facilities.

11.C. Retail & Shopping

Joshua Tree does not need to be completely self-supporting in this aspect since the surrounding communities have created retail and shopping venues that incorporate the needs of our residents for periodic (approximately weekly) shopping that does not necessitate very repeated travel. New retail/shopping developments should not duplicate the efforts of the adjoining communities but rather reinforce Joshua Tree’s unique downtown character. A shopping district needs to be developed that encourages pedestrian movement. A centralized and permanent Certified Farmer’s Market would reinforce Joshua Tree’s holistic lifestyle and should be investigated for a possible downtown retail anchor. New construction is welcome as long as it respects the natural resources present in the desert. Large scale, nationally branded enterprises may be considered if they adapt their standard format and propose projects that are scaled appropriately, and conform to the village themes; for example, no drive-through window concessions and monument-styled signage only.

Some degree of interest in a centrally located supermarket-style grocery store was expressed in citizen surveys. Since supply deliveries are typically made by large trucks at non peak hours, siting of the store needs to be close to Highway 62 yet not disrupt residents or visitors. A possible range of locations for the store may be found on the north side of 62. The store should present proposals that conform to the overall downtown themes, and assure minimal intrusion on the small-enterprise downtown character.

11.D. County Infrastructure and Centralized Services

Joshua Tree has been identified as one of the county’s locations for law enforcement and social services. Economic development efforts should propose ways to further service and expand upon these employment sectors without conflicting with the community’s priorities for ecotourism and artistic expression. Development of the hospital as a widely respected and accessible facility may be accomplished through greater reliance on county funds.

11.E. Research & Technology Development

Copper Mountain College (CMC) should be supported in the development of a sophisticated electronic library and solar technology research institute. The type of academics that would be supportive of Joshua Tree’s economic prerogatives include programs for natural resource management, nursing, telecommunications, information systems, fine arts, culinary science and parks and recreation. Initiation of a Desert Studies Institute at the College is enthusiastically endorsed.

11.F. Existing & Future Development Efforts

This plan recognizes the efforts of the Morongo Basin Economic Development Consortium and the Joshua Tree Chamber of Commerce and applauds the efforts and creativity of local business owners. The Morongo Basin Regional Economic Development Action Plan details many pertinent concerns; Joshua Tree should increase its involvement in any future development plans.

Among the considerations voiced by some in the community is the value of tax-revenues from local business to help fund infrastructure and allow for the possibility of eventual incorporation. As with all things, this is a matter of tradeoff, specifically among all the other elements in this plan, and will require careful evaluation. Creation of high-technology, or the like employment, and entry-level jobs having advantage for youth employment are worthy objectives. However, only a massive urban center, which is certainly precluded here, can hope to begin to provide the range of professional and other employment opportunities sufficient to challenge and genuinely serve the occupational needs of the full spectrum of local young graduates.

12. ENFORCEMENT ELEMENT

By absolute consensus of local citizens, the issue of enforcement is considered to be one of the most if not the most critical aspect of county policy in Joshua Tree, and is therefore included as a supplemental element to this community plan. Whether or not considered to be partly in fact or partly in perception, the overwhelming view of residents is that present enforcement of county planning regulations and ordinances has been largely unsatisfactory, thereby giving rise to serious misgivings as to the ultimate effectiveness of the community plan itself. This is not an unheard of concern as evidenced by the following quote from the year 2000 General Plan of Taos, New Mexico, a town often cited as almost a kindred community to Joshua Tree: “The Planning Department will carry out the community’s planning, zoning and regulatory policies while providing consistent, high-quality service. Their goal is to guide the physical growth and appearance of the community in order to enhance the collective quality of life of community residents and ensure safe, healthy and quality development.”

The following issues have been vigorously expressed to be among this community’s greatest concerns, and represent the foremost pressing demands in this regard:

• Without exaggeration or hyperbole, universal opinion by residents who have been associated with the county permitting process is that present enforcement is inadequate to the point of egregiousness regarding regulations and ordinances as written; to say nothing of often heard pessimism about the effectiveness of future planning. A program of rigorous and intensive inspection of permit and building conditions must be implemented that well exceeds present practice.
• Besides the need for a much improved inspection process, a policy of genuinely consequential penalties for violation of permitting and inspection conditions must be established. In particular, the common practice by some property developers of starting a project prior to acquiring necessary permits should not be allowed to happen with essential impunity, as is presently the case. Penalties must be instigated that will strongly discourage such practices which even as we speak maintain an unfortunate history of disagreeable consequences for neighborhoods and community.
• Time frames for compliance with permit requirements or for remedying of violations should be sharply curtailed. Present regulations seem to lack reasonable justification and can result in obviously manipulative delaying tactics which sometimes succeed in avoiding proper compliance.

A surely obvious recommendation voiced by practically everyone not only in Joshua Tree but in all the desert regions is that notification of property owners regarding Conditional Use Permits and/or public hearings must be expanded beyond present policy. Mailing of notification of such action only to property owners within 300 ft. to at most a quarter mile is clearly inadequate for the distances and property dimensions typical of desert and rural areas. Direct notification in these cases must be expanded to at least a two-mile radius. Effective methods for general public notice should also be established. Additionally, the reported implicit if not explicit practice of prioritizing public input to favor mainly those in direct contact with affected property should be dissuaded. All residents of the community should be given equal status in addressing the consequences of a project (e.g., a communication tower or smokestack).

Public access to information regarding permitted projects and ongoing status of projects being processed by the planning department needs to be improved and enhanced. As often reported, it’s not unusual for bulldozers to appear on a site well before the public has had access to a description of the project. An entire set of documentation on the status of all permitted work should be routinely and easily available at the local county offices in Yucca Valley prior to or concurrent with issuing of permits. It is recommended that the system for reporting planning department action should be modified to allow public access to the entire planning-staff process of conditional use or variance decisions and rationale regarding need for public hearings. As it now stands, letters or other communication with the planning department regarding a project often appear to go unheeded, or their impact entirely unknown.

Finally, one of the more remarkable determinations of this effort was discovery of the fact that a nominal land-use category, such as Rural Living, is rife with conditional use exceptions fully incongruous with any reasonably orthodox definition of the term. As is happening in other areas where rural character or environmental and scenic attributes are paramount, a land use categorization should be established in San Bernardino County, which establishes complete immunity to any type of industrial or other usage clearly incompatible with rural or conservation designation, subject only to direct action by the Board of Supervisors.

It is sincerely anticipated that implementation of the above will provide the final impetus for achievement of the goals already implicit in the customs and character of Joshua Tree and for which this community gratefully acknowledges the recognition by the County of San Bernardino of the need to establish its own community plan.

---

Back to Top

 

 

JOSHUA TREE
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

PROPOSAL FOR THE
CSA 20/JOSHUA TREE COMMUNITY PLAN UPDATE
JUNE 10, 2004

13. REFERENCES & WORKS CITED

1. Town of Jackson, Wyoming. “Jackson/Teton County Comprehensive Plan”. Retrieved 3/18/2004. http://www.ci.jackson.wy.us/buldplan1.htm
2. Town of Jackson, Wyoming. “Jackson/Teton County Comprehensive Plan”. Retrieved 3/18/2004. http://www.ci.jackson.wy.us/buldplan1.htm
3. San Bernardino County. “Section III. Regional Sub-regional Planning Areas and Specific Plans Desert Region—Joshua Tree. August 14, 1991
4. California State Water Resources Board. Water Code Section 13280-13286.9
5. Rivasplata, A. & McGuire, B. (1998). “State of California general plan guidelines”. Sacramento, CA: Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. Retrieved April 12, 2003 from http://ceres.CA.gov/planning/pub_or.html
6. San Bernardino County. “Section III. Regional Sub-regional Planning Areas and Specific Plans Desert Region—Joshua Tree. August 14, 1991.
7. Sprawl-Buster Home Town America Fights Back! “2003-08-03 Clovis, CA. City proposes 15,000 s.f. cap for Conditional Use Permit”. Retrieved 4/23/2004 from www.sprawl-busters.com
8. San Bernardino County Planning Department Streamlining Program Environmental Public Works Agency. “Joshua Tree Community Plan”. 1980
9. San Bernardino County Planning Department Streamlining Program Environmental Public Works Agency. “Joshua Tree Community Plan”. 1980
10. San Bernardino County. “Section III. Regional Sub-regional Planning Areas and Specific Plans Desert Region—Joshua Tree. August 14, 1991
11. San Bernardino County Planning Department Streamlining Program Environmental Public Works Agency. “Joshua Tree Community Plan”. 1980
12. San Bernardino County Planning Department Streamlining Program Environmental Public Works Agency. “Joshua Tree Community Plan”. 1980
13. Town of Jackson, Wyoming. “Jackson/Teton County Comprehensive Plan”. Retrieved 3/18/2004. http://www.ci.jackson.wy.us/buildplan1.htm .
14. Howe, J. McMahon, E. & Probst, L. 1997. Balancing nature and commerce in gatewary communities. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. And. Town of Jackson Wyoming. “Jackson/Teton County Comprehensive Plan”. Retrieved 3/18/2004 from http://www.ci.jackson.wy.us/buldplan1.htm .
15. San Bernardino County. Section III—Regional/Sub-regional Planning Areas and Specific Plans. Desert Region—Victor Valley Sub regional Planning Area (RSA 32b). “Oak Hills Area Plan Policies/Actions”. Adopted July 1, 1989. Revised March 27, 2003.
16. Henry E. Mc Cutchen, Ph.D, ecologist, National Park Service, Joshua Tree National Park. Interview, June, 2004.
17. Town of Jackson, Wyoming. “Jackson/Teton County Comprehensive Plan”. Retrieved 3/18/2004 from http://www.ci.jackson.wy.us/buldplan1.htm .
18. Town of Jackson, Wyoming. “Jackson/Teton County Comprehensive Plan”. Retrieved 3/18/2004 from http://www.ci.jackson.wy.us/buldplan1.htm .
19. San Bernardino County. Section III—Regional/Sub regional Planning Area (RSA 32b). “Oak Hills Area Plan Policies/Actions”. Adopted July 1, 1989. Revised March 27, 2003.
20. Joshua Tree National Park Air Quality Working Group and National Park Conservation Association. Howard Gross, director. Joshua Tree, CA.
21. Downtown Merchants, personal communication.
22. San Bernardino County Website
23. Town of Jackson, Wyoming. “Jackson/Teton County Comprehensive Plan”. Retrieved 3/18/2004 from http://www.ci.jackson.wy.us/buldplan1.htm .
24. San Bernardino County. Section III—Regional/Sub regional Planning Area (RSA 32b). “Oak Hills Area Plan Policies/Actions”. Adopted July 1, 1989. Revised March 27, 2003.
25. Reynolds, Christopher. May 11, 2004. pp F3. “Houses hit; BLM [Bureau of Land Management] bans target practice”. Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, CA.
26. “San Bernardino County Library Facility Master Plan December 2001”. Prepared by: Providence Associated Inc. Cottonwood, AZ
27. City of Banning Draft of General Plan, Buildings & Facilities. 4/26/2004