Some points of clarification regarding Clear Springs project

Dear editor,

We'd like to clarify and correct some information in the article concerning the proposed housing development north of town, known as Clear Springs Ranch Subdivision, the developer being from out of state.

We live on NW Beaman Street, and along with the people who have chosen to live in this rural, quiet area, are very concerned about the negative effects and the impact that 192 houses on 200 acres near us will have: the possible draw down of our private wells, and contamination from 192 septic tanks, a huge increase in traffic (up to 2,000 vehicles/day on NW Beaman), air and noise pollution, a convenience store nearby, inadequate roadways, and definitely not in harmony with the existing vicinity. In short, an infringement on our way of life.

The article stated that the subdivision is located north of the Interstate, but it is not south of Beaman, but would be built on NW Beaman Street, now a dead end road.

For four years, concerned area residents attended and testified their objections at countless P&Z Commission and Elmore County Commission Hearings. There have been Appeal Hearings, Conditional Use Permit Hearings, and Extension Hearings.

The first P&Z Public Hearing was Dec. 19, 2007. Twenty five people signed their opposition to the development, not 15 as the article said. This Hearing was continued to Feb. 20, 2008, at which time petitions signed by 200 area residents objecting to the subdivision, were presented to the P&Z Conunissioners.

Then, in April, 2008, P&Z denied the CUP because it did not meet five of the nine requirements for a subdivision, citing most of the voiced citizens' objections above. The Appeal Hearings began, and in June, 2008, the County Commissioners overturned the P&Z decision to deny the CUP from its AG B zone.

Consequently, on Sept. 8, 2008, they voted to allow the subdivision to be built, seemingly ignoring the concerns, objections, and testimonies of the residents of Elmore County, whose quality of life would be adversely affected. They served outside interests but failed the citizens of the county they were elected to serve.

-- Chuck and Phyllis Whipple