The vast majority of those comments opposed approval of the easement because of the large-scale development project it would allow. The authors cited concerns about impacts to water resources, Grand Canyon National Park and the surrounding environment.

The window closed last Tuesday for the public to comment on the town’s request for an easement to improve and install utilities along Forest Service roads that lead to two parcels where Stilo Development Group USA plans to build homes, retail, hotels, cultural centers and more.

Of the thousands of comments, many were form letters opposing the project from members and supporters of conservation organizations like the Center for Biological Diversity, the Sierra Club and the National Parks Conservation Association. About 2,400 were non-form letters, according to the Forest Service’s comment review site.

Now, the Forest Service’s task is to go through those letters to identify issues associated with the proposed project that the agency should consider in its environmental review process. By the end of this month, the forest expects to decide what level of environmental review to conduct on the project based in large part on what the thousands of comments say, Banks said.

Supporters in the minority

Though in the minority, the Forest Service did receive comments supporting the issuance of an easement, as long as certain minor requests were fulfilled.

John Dillon, a longtime Tusayan resident, emphasized that the Forest Service is required to allow reasonable access to private inholdings, especially when the only access to those properties is via national forest. The easement should be granted, but not before a full environmental impact statement is done, Dillon wrote.

“A full EIS will provide the greatest environmental protection to the Kaibab National Forest and Grand Canyon National Park,” he wrote. “It will also help to provide real and current answers to all the questions that have yet to be satisfactorily addressed by both the Town of Tusayan and the developer.

Another resident of the area, Quentin Johnson, said the easement issue should be completely disconnected from the development that happens on private land.

Elected leaders mostly silent

It appears that comments submitted to the Forest Service from local elected leaders were few, though Flagstaff City Council passed a resolution opposing the easement in March. Celia Barotz was the only Flagstaff City Council member to offer formal input on the project and no one from the Williams City Council submitted individual comments on the project, according to city staff. Coconino County Supervisor Art Babbott was the only one from that board to submit input.

Babbott, whose district covers Tusayan, offered several comments related to public safety, traffic impacts and the size of the easement.

The scale of the road proposed in Tusayan’s application doesn’t appear to be adequate for the size of the project, Babbott wrote in a letter to the Kaibab National Forest.

“At over 3 million square feet of proposed commercial space, the Stilo development would be equivalent to 8 Flagstaff Malls. In my estimation, serving that intense level of use is not possible with a minor collector road,” he wrote. “Providing a road capacity that is severely undersized presents significant public safety implications.”

Tusayan Town Mayor Greg Bryan was one local leader who commented and he weighed in on the comment process in a letter to the editor on Tuesday.

“As the Forest Service weighs the comments, we hope they will take into consideration the significant difference between the form letters and someone who is truly engaged and stands to be personally impacted,” Bryan wrote.

Local concerns

The Tusayan Sanitary District as well as several longtime residents, many who are involved in tourism-related businesses, opposed at least parts of the easement proposal. Traffic and noise adjacent to the town’s future park and school site was a major concern mentioned in the sanitary district’s resolution opposing use of one of the town’s preferred routes.

Comments written by an attorney representing several Tusayan residents urged the Forest Service not to approve the easement request because the public hasn’t been given the basic level of information necessary to assess the impact of the improved roads. The letter pressed for an Environmental Impact Statement if the Forest Service does decide to move forward.

“There can be no doubt that the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed easements will be significant, given that it will create a commercial, retail, and residential community several times larger than the Town of Tusayan itself,” the letter said.

Stilo speaks

Stilo itself also weighed in on the application, calling for the Kaibab National Forest to limit the scope of its analysis to only the potential environmental effects on areas within its control and ignore what the developer called “speculative and unsubstantiated assertions,” like concerns about the lack of an identified water source or impacts to Grand Canyon National Park.

“There is an insufficient causal link between the proposed easements and future water uses on Kotzin and Ten-X Ranches to merit an in depth review of those issues in the NEPA document,” said the letter, written by a law firm representing the developer. “There are no facts to suggest that development of adequate housing and commercial sites in the Tusayan area will significantly increase visitation to (Grand Canyon National park) beyond (current) levels.”

The letter also discounted comments made by Grand Canyon National Park Superintendent Dave Uberuaga.

“Mr. Uberuaga’s comments erroneously assume that the (Kaibab National Forest) has some obligation to manage the National Forest as a buffer zone for the Grand Canyon National Park,” it said.

Population growth and increased public use of the improved roads to access surrounding national forest are the only indirect impacts the Forest Service should consider, the letter said.

Tribes weigh in

Both the Hopi and Havasupai tribes wrote in opposition to the town’s easement application.

The Hopi Tribe’s concerns center on potential impacts to seeps and springs in Grand Canyon National Park and increased park visitation, wrote Leigh Kuwanwisiwma, director of the tribe’s cultural preservation office. The tribe also determined the development will adversely affect the tribe’s traditional cultural properties, Kuwanwisiwma wrote.

In its comment letter, the Havasupai Tribe suggested the Forest Service should consider a land exchange with Stilo to consolidate the company’s holdings and concentrate development along State Highway 64.

The tribe also urged the Forest Service to consider the cumulative impact of groundwater development on springs and seeps on the Coconino Plateau as part of its analysis. Groundwater pumping in Tusayan is already affecting flows in Havasu Creek and the tribe is pursuing legal action on the issue, the letter said.

The letter recognized that Stilo’s project would provide what the town doesn’t have: land for housing or community services.

“However, these services are the responsibility of the Town and should not be provided at the expense of protection of forest and other resources,” it said.

This article has been changed to reflect new information about comments on the Tusayan easement from Flagstaff City Council member Celia Bartoz.