Understanding the 1041 Permit

Why the El Jebel Crossing isn't just another subdivision.

In Eagle County, standard developments get a standard review. But when a project is so massive that it threatens to overwhelm our schools, drain our water supply, or gridlock our roads, it triggers a 1041 Permit.

This permit gives the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) the power to deny a project if it fails to meet strict state-level standards. This is our strongest tool to ensure development doesn't come at the expense of current residents.

🛑 The 3 Criteria They Must Meet

To get approved, the developer must prove—with data—that they satisfy Chapter 6 of the Land Use Regulations. If they fail even one of these, the permit must be denied.

1. No "Leapfrog" Development

The Rule: A new community cannot be an "island" of density dropped into the middle of rural land. It must connect logically to existing urban centers.

• The Reality: If the project forces everyone to drive for every errand, it violates this rule. It must be contiguous to existing services, not "leapfrog" over rural land.

2. The "Pay Your Own Way" Standard

The Rule: The project cannot be a burden on existing taxpayers. The tax revenue it generates must cover the cost of the new roads, police, and schools it requires.

• The Reality: Most residential developments cost counties more than they pay in taxes. If their "Fiscal Impact Study" shows a deficit, you will end up subsidizing their profit through higher taxes or degraded services.

3. Traffic Safety (Level of Service)  THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FAILS THIS CRITERION

The Rule: The development must not cause our roads to fail.

• The Red Flag: The developer has admitted they cannot meet this standard. They have requested a Variance (Waiver) because their project creates too much traffic for the road to handle.

⚠️ The Danger: The Traffic Variance

The developer is asking to break the rules.

Because the El Jebel Crossing project is too big for the existing road network, the applicant has asked for a "Variance" to ignore the traffic standards. This is a critical safety issue.

• Gridlock = Danger: When an intersection fails (Level of Service F), it blocks ambulances, fire trucks, and evacuation routes.

• Self-Imposed Hardship: Variances are legally intended for physical hardships (like a cliff on the property), not for financial gain. The developer could solve the traffic problem simply by reducing the size of the project.

📢 How to Oppose This Effectively

Don't just say "I don't like it." Give the Commissioners a legal reason to vote NO.

A. Excessive Density & Incompatible Scale

The Rule: A "New Community" must be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood character.

The Violation: The proposal for 111 units on 20.384 acres (5.45 units/acre) is not a neighborhood extension; it is an urbanization of rural land.

● The Math: This represents a 133% increase in density compared to adjacent communities like Blue Lake (which averages 2.34 units/acre).

● The Visual Impact: The plan calls for three-story multi-family buildings. This vertical scale is visually incompatible with the established, low-profile one-and-two-story homes

in the surrounding area.

B. The "Phantom Traffic" Flaw

The Rule: Traffic studies must use realistic data to predict impact.

The Violation: The applicant's traffic study relies on ITE Code 223 ("Affordable Housing") rather than standard workforce data.

● Why this is Flawed: The applicant is using an administrative zoning label (Income Status) rather than actual behavior (Workforce Commuters) to predict trips.

● The Undercount: By using this lower standard, the study claims 111 units will generate only 28 total vehicle trips during the AM peak hour. This is statistically unrealistic for a workforce housing project where residents are commuters. The study is "grossly undercounting" the real impact.

C. The "Rulebook" Violation: Comprehensive Plan Non-Compliance

The Rule: Under 1041 General Standard #1, a project must conform to the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map (FLUM).

The Violation: The project violates the fundamental definitions found in Chapter 3 (Section 3.40) of the Comprehensive Plan.

● Violation of "Suburban" Character: The Future Land Use Map designates this area as Residential Suburban Medium. The Comprehensive Plan defines "Suburban" areas as having lower intensities that serve as a transition between urban centers and rural lands. Placing massive, 3-story multi-family blocks here treats the land as "Urban Residential," which contradicts the Map.

● Failure to Transition: The Plan requires new development to provide logical "transitions" in scale. Dropping maximum-density buildings directly next to low-density single-family homes (Blue Lake) without a gradual step-down is a direct violation of the Plan's compatibility policies.

Step 1: Demand an Independent Review

The developer's traffic and fiscal studies are paid for by the developer.

Action: Write to the County Planner and demand an Independent Third-Party Review of the Traffic Study and Fiscal Impact Study, paid for by the applicant but managed by the County.

Step 2: Use the "Sandwich Method" in Hearings

When you testify, keep it under 2 minutes and use this structure to be clear and authoritative:

1. State the Rule: "Commissioners, the 1041 regulations prohibit lowering the Level of Service on our roads."

2. State the Breach: "The applicant has admitted they will break this rule by asking for a variance."

3. State the Demand: "You must deny the variance to protect public safety. If the project doesn't fit the road, the project must change."