SAVE FLAMINGO HEIGHTS.
Thank you for taking the time to submit your comments against Flamingo 640.
Full Name
*
E-mail
*
example@example.com
Letter to Planning Commissioners
Dear Chair Jonathan Weldy, Commissioner Matthew Slowik, Vice Chair Michael Stoffel, Commissioner Melissa Demirci, and Commissioner Kareem Gongora, I am writing to you as a concerned advocate of the desert. Despite years of tirelessly advocating for the preservation of rural living, its zoning, serene landscape, wildlife, traffic safety, and advocating against the development of the Flamingo 640 project, I am concerned that the development is still moving forward without addressing the points raised by the community and without undergoing the thorough scrutiny of a full Environmental Impact Report. My concern about the project is greatly two-fold: traffic safety and environmental impact. This development would pose a significant traffic hazard along the narrow two lane HWY 247, which is already the site of many fatal and critical accidents. The highway cannot support increased constant traffic. The project will also endanger wildlife in one of the most beautiful wildlife corridors along Pipes Canyon Wash bordering Sand to Snow National Monument, including threatened desert tortoises, protected burrowing owls, coyotes, jackrabbits, and more, all of which have been spotted in the area. It is also concerning that the project plans to remove at least 34 Western Joshua Trees, a protected species and highly threatened part of California’s natural heritage, in addition to Mojave Yuccas. I am writing to demand a full Environmental Impact Report under CEQA, which would include traffic studies, wildlife impact, air/water quality, noise, and dark sky impacts amongst other important issues. Because of the impact to our community, safety, and way of life, a mitigated negative declaration report is simply not sufficient for the scope of this proposed project. This area does not need a private "resort" experience or "hotel" in a rural zoned area that would add nothing to the community except add danger on the roads, add unnecessary hazard in an area already distinguished as a threat from wildfires, knowingly disrupt and destroy the natural environment, pollute the area with noise and light and change the character of our community irreparably. If one of the listed "objectives" for this development is to relieve camping congestion in the National park, then a safe and small public campsite and trails would do much less damage, not a private resort experience out of the price range of the residents who live here, or campers who would otherwise camp in the national park. I hope you read this with thought and concern, and do not leave those in your fellow SB community feeling dismissed. Thank you.
If additional comments, enter here:
SUBMIT
Should be Empty: