The Public Record

This provides a targeted analysis of the December 2025 CORA response regarding the EJ Crossing 1041 Permit Application. It highlights how internal communications and the Applicant’s technical filings (ZS-009514-2025) directly impact our opposition strategy.

📋 Strategic Analysis Report: December CORA Response

1. Applicant Response Strategy: The "Technical Compliance" Wall

The Applicant is responding to agency concerns by shifting the debate away from the project's impact and toward its mathematical compliance with code.

CDOT Access Loophole: The Applicant used correspondence with CDOT to confirm that because the project only adds a 4–5% increase in traffic, it falls significantly below the 20% threshold required for a CDOT access permit. This allows them to ignore the fact that the intersections are already failing in absolute terms.

Negotiated Mitigations: Internal logs show the Applicant met with Roaring Fork Fire Rescue (RFFR) on November 20, 2025. By updating civil plans to show 26.0' street widths near buildings and thickened sidewalks for fire apparatus, they have effectively neutralized RFFR's formal technical objections before the public hearing.

Monetary Offsets: To address law enforcement strain, the Applicant explicitly acknowledged the Basalt Police Department’s request for financial contributions and agreed to work with them to establish an appropriate offset6.

2. Strategic Red Flags in Internal Communications

The CORA documents reveal internal leanings by County staff that could undermine a "Health, Safety, and Welfare" (PHSW) challenge.

Engineering Department Passivity: In a critical internal Google Chat on November 8, 2025, Senior Staff Engineer Taylor Ryan stated, "I don't have any comments for the 1041"7. This is a major red flag, as it suggests the Engineering department may not formally support your claims of "catastrophic" infrastructure failure.

Pre-Hearing "Clean Up": Planning staff (Janet Aluise) and Engineering (Taylor Ryan) were coordinating a "Recap & Hearing Discussion" as early as December 11, 2025, indicating the County is moving to finalize its evaluation regardless of public outcry.

Looping the Developer: Internal emails show Janet Aluise requesting the developer (Doug Pratte) to submit referral responses and the revised application in "one electronic document" for public noticing, showing a collaborative effort to ensure the application is procedurally "bulletproof."

3. Use of File ZS-009514-2025 (Technical Proof)

The Applicant is using this specific filing to provide "nondiscretionary" evidence that the project meets all standard requirements.

Revised Compliance Statement: Used to argue that because the property is zoned Residential Suburban Medium-Density (RSM), the 111-unit count is a "by-right" density that is fully consistent with underlying zoning.

Geotechnical & Easements: By filing formal Geotechnical Reports and recorded easements (Double R, Cemetery), the Applicant is attempting to prove the land can physically support modular Type V construction and that legal access is finalized, removing these as valid grounds for permit denial.

💡 How This Informs our Strategy

The CORA response shows that the Applicant and County staff are aligning on a code-conformance path. 

To remain effective, your strategy must adapt:

1. Pivot to County Standards, Not State: Since CDOT has waived the permit requirement, your strategy must ignore the 20% "relative increase" and focus exclusively on Eagle County's LOS D requirement. You must force the Planning Commission to answer: Does a project that contributes to a known LOS F intersection satisfy the County's own safety regulations?
   
   

2. Challenge the "Private Road" Access: The Applicant argues that using Gillespie Drive or Jaci Lane for general traffic would create "safety concerns" for existing residents. Your strategy should highlight that by protecting one neighborhood's safety, they are concentrating the danger at the failing SH-82 intersections used by the entire region.
   
   

3. Target the "Engineering Passivity": Use the fact that Taylor Ryan had "no comments" 16 to question the thoroughness of the staff review. Ask for an independent third-party traffic audit, arguing that the internal review is ignoring the quantitative "Infinite Queue" and gridlock warnings found in the developer’s own traffic study.