This proposed subdivision is larger than what the area can support
J
Jim Duvall
9 years ago
Too densely planned for Elbert County. In addition, the PUD expired in 2012, so this needs to go back to a re-zone request.
J
Jennifer Spengler
9 years ago
There is no way the road infrastructure can support 2000 more vehicles, the schools supports @2000 more children and perhaps most importantly - our water supply is finite! This could literally endanger everyone - what happens when your well dries up? Can you afford to have a new one drilled?
A
Anonymous
9 years ago
As a citizen of Elbert County, I am opposed to the Independence development
B
Ben Bacca
9 years ago
The lots are way too small
M
Michael Elder
9 years ago
Keep rural...rural!
B
Beth Ayn Rognmoe
9 years ago
This proposed development would be extremely detrimental to the entire area! If all the surrounding neighbors are against this - their voices have to be heard.
J
Jimmy Both
9 years ago
Development is costly- farmland is priceless.
J
Jerry Strait
9 years ago
We do not want the Independence development in Elbert County!
I
ige gustavson
9 years ago
don't need more overnight apartments in the country.
S
Shawn Tugwell
9 years ago
Elbert County Master Plan general policy #6. "New Development is encouraged to locate in proximity to improved arterial roads or such roads shall be provided by the developer. These roads shall be paved, have adequate traffic carrying capacity and should NOT have serious adverse impacts on the existing roadway network." Do you really think that after 920 clustered high density homes are built that CR 158 won't be adversely impacted for the residents who currently live in the area or who travel going West? And until there is a full path cut from CR5/Delbert going out to Singing Hills all of these new residents will have to use CR158 and Hilltop Road. The developer is only going to pay for the new streets in his development, not on the county roads. This development needs to be voted a big NO!!!!
A
Anonymous
9 years ago
If the plan was for houses with acreage that is similar to the other houses in the area, there likely wouldn't be a problem. Don't shove high density neighborhoods where they don't belong just to make a few extra bucks.
J
Jacqueline Tugwell
9 years ago
Featured
Elbert County Master Plan general policy #2. New Development shall be directed toward existing municipalities, employment centers, rural town centers and rural subdivisions. Improvement of existing communities and neighborhood facilities in these areas shall be encouraged.
S
Susan Murphy
9 years ago
This development would destroy our rural community. There's not enough emergency services, school funds, etc to cover so many additional people. No residents, other than th commissioners, want this development in Elizabeth.
J
Judy Vicari
9 years ago
920 homes is not keeping with the rural atmosphere of Elizabeth. The current roads and infrastructure do not support this type of development.
S
Stephanie Darmstedter
9 years ago
Featured
As a 16 year resident of Ponderosa Park who uses Road 5 and Rd 150 daily, I am vehemently opposed to the Independence development as proposed. This beautiful property with antelope and spectacular views should have no less than 5-10 acre lots which more fitting to the existing developments.
S
Shelly Rodie
9 years ago
You're absolutely correct Beth and if nothing else, they need to abide by the State (and Elbert County) Statutes and Regulations.
E
Elizabeth Haymond
9 years ago
Elbert County should be very careful about how we develop . We only get one chance.
This proposed subdivision is larger than what the area can support
Too densely planned for Elbert County. In addition, the PUD expired in 2012, so this needs to go back to a re-zone request.
There is no way the road infrastructure can support 2000 more vehicles, the schools supports @2000 more children and perhaps most importantly - our water supply is finite! This could literally endanger everyone - what happens when your well dries up? Can you afford to have a new one drilled?
As a citizen of Elbert County, I am opposed to the Independence development
The lots are way too small
Keep rural...rural!
This proposed development would be extremely detrimental to the entire area! If all the surrounding neighbors are against this - their voices have to be heard.
Development is costly- farmland is priceless.
We do not want the Independence development in Elbert County!
don't need more overnight apartments in the country.
Elbert County Master Plan general policy #6. "New Development is encouraged to locate in proximity to improved arterial roads or such roads shall be provided by the developer. These roads shall be paved, have adequate traffic carrying capacity and should NOT have serious adverse impacts on the existing roadway network." Do you really think that after 920 clustered high density homes are built that CR 158 won't be adversely impacted for the residents who currently live in the area or who travel going West? And until there is a full path cut from CR5/Delbert going out to Singing Hills all of these new residents will have to use CR158 and Hilltop Road. The developer is only going to pay for the new streets in his development, not on the county roads. This development needs to be voted a big NO!!!!
If the plan was for houses with acreage that is similar to the other houses in the area, there likely wouldn't be a problem. Don't shove high density neighborhoods where they don't belong just to make a few extra bucks.
Elbert County Master Plan general policy #2. New Development shall be directed toward existing municipalities, employment centers, rural town centers and rural subdivisions. Improvement of existing communities and neighborhood facilities in these areas shall be encouraged.
This development would destroy our rural community. There's not enough emergency services, school funds, etc to cover so many additional people. No residents, other than th commissioners, want this development in Elizabeth.
920 homes is not keeping with the rural atmosphere of Elizabeth. The current roads and infrastructure do not support this type of development.
As a 16 year resident of Ponderosa Park who uses Road 5 and Rd 150 daily, I am vehemently opposed to the Independence development as proposed. This beautiful property with antelope and spectacular views should have no less than 5-10 acre lots which more fitting to the existing developments.
You're absolutely correct Beth and if nothing else, they need to abide by the State (and Elbert County) Statutes and Regulations.
Elbert County should be very careful about how we develop . We only get one chance.