|
| |
LUCERNE VALLEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION (LVEDA)
To: Edy Seehafer, BLM Coordinator
West Fry Wind Project
2601 Barstow Rd.
Barstow, CA 92311
From: Chuck Bell, Sec.
P. O. Box 193
Lucerne Valley, CA 92356 760 964 3118
Date: June 30, 2008
RE: WEST FRY WIND ENERGY PROJECT – EIS SCOPING
LVEDA’s Mission Statement:
Provide a forum for discussion………… promote development that is both “economical”
and compatible with our rural lifestyle, environment and resource availability.
Please send us the draft EIS and Plan Amendment documents when available.
LVEDA’s future comments, issues and position re: the project may not be limited
to the following.
GENERAL COMMENTS:
1. Granted, we have wind which should be shared with our countrymen. But we also
have the Mojave Desert which is a treasure unto itself - which cannot be
consumed for the benefit of the over-populated urban mess in the coastal basin.
We already provide that megalopolis with limestone, cement, aggregate (with its
incessant truck traffic), recreation (particularly the resource-consumptive and
largest OHV open areas in the nation), power line/pipeline corridors, tremendous
amounts of acreage committed to military bases and their expansions (critical
for our nation's defense), public open space, immense areas set-aside for
habitat protection, etc. etc. This EIS should include a quantitative assessment
of the megawatts of power that could potentially be generated within the urban
areas of demand (ie: roof top and parking lot solar systems) prior to any
further commitment of public land resources to the subsidy of urban areas. It
should also take into account the nation-wide options for nuclear plants at
locations with sufficient water supplies.
2. This process must include an in-depth survey of Calif. Desert plans and maps
– identifying the limited areas available and suitable for wind farms -
quantifying the amount of acreage/sq. miles and alignments dedicated to all the
land-uses that we already provide s. Calif. It is critical that we take a global
approach instead of reacting to each application on a project by project basis –
including this one.
3. We also have to deal with the dilemma - "where do we mitigate the impacts of
all these proposed projects?"
4. BLM and the renewable energy industry should not displace private sector
opportunities – with the cheaper use of public land competing with potential
wind farm options on private land in s. Cal. counties that cannot otherwise be
developed due to water shortages - allowing landowners to make the best use of
their properties.
5. Although beyond BLM’s purview, we need to find a mechanism to reward
communities that will bear the brunt of these solar/wind plants and associated
impacts. Maybe working w/PUC, CEC, etc. on community-wide electricity rate
reductions? Might make these projects more palatable
SPECIFIC COMMENTS:
1. Quantify and mitigate impacts of construction traffic on State Hwys. 18 and
247 through Lucerne Valley – particularly through our commercial corridor.
2. Require truck and construction traffic to use Hwy 247 for access to Camprock
Rd. to alleviate stress and traffic conflicts on other County roads not suitable
for multiple loads of heavy equipment.
3. Develop an on-going maintenance plan for paved and dirt portions of Camprock
Rd. leading to the project’s access road to mitigate project impacts.
4. Assess and mitigate the consequences of displacing some of the off-road use
from that portion of the Johnson Valley OHV Area committed to this wind project
(ie: effects on the adjacent Ord Mt. Desert Wildlife Management Area where
illegal OHV use is currently increasing). Determine the need for increased BLM
Ranger patrols which should be funded by the wind project.
5. Provide an analysis of the project’s net energy benefit relative to roof-top,
etc. solar options in the coastal basin (the area of electricity demand).
6. Determine the project’s net benefit/detriment to the Lucerne Valley economy.
|
