Email this article

Village or Pillage?

The Wolf Creek Wars

By Marcia Darnell

"We would like to start some on-site construction this summer . . . and we'd look at a grand opening in 2009 or 2010."

- Bob Honts, president, The Village at Wolf Creek Development Corp.

TIMELINE

1986 U.S. Forest Service denies a land exchange proposal to swap 420 acres at Wolf Creek Ski Area for 1,631 acres of degraded grazing lands. Two weeks later, the Forest Service reverses itself • Scenic Easement contract made between the developer, Forest Service and ski area, banning hazardous products storage, industrial plants, airports and other facilities.

1999 Friends of Wolf Creek formed • Wolf Creek Ski Area proposes new lift, the bottom of which terminates on now-private land. Colorado Wild appeals Forest Service approval of both the lift and a parking lot expansion that originally extended to the private land. Forest Service on agrees to pull the parking lot back from the private land, promises a comprehensive analysis, and agrees to accept public input on the developments' impacts in an EIS.

2003 Developer initiates Forest Service EIS process. 2005 Colorado Wild sues Forest Service for granting temporary access to the inholding without public notification or process • Colorado Wild sues Forest Service to acquire documents under Freedom of Information Act • District Court Judge John Kuenhold throws out Mineral County's approval of the development, requires the developer to secure a road access permit from CDOT and year-round access from Forest Service before the county can reconsider its application. The developer has appealed the Colorado decision • U.S. Rep. John Salazar, state Rep. Mark Larson and state Sen. Jim Isgar publicly oppose the Village.

2006 Friends of Wolf Creek files suit in federal court challenging the Forest Service's EIS and authorization of two roads across public land to access the proposed Village. The lawsuit alleges that the Forest Service violated the National Environmental Policy Act and other federal laws • Developers request a discretionary review of Mark Rey, Undersecretary of the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture • U.S. District Judge Kane issues a 10-day temporary restraining order ceasing road construction and other activities related to the proposed Village at Wolf Creek • TRO converts to preliminary injunction prohibiting construction and permitting activities from going forward until the Court can rule on the case.

2007 Decision expected in May on appeal of environmental impact statement.

Since the first rancher enclosed a pretty meadow or the earliest cluster of homes conquered a mountain valley, people in the West have struggled to reconcile development and economic survival with the preservation of what makes the West THE place to live - open space, wildlife and breathtaking scenery.

Ground Zero of the latest war is on Wolf Creek Pass. Developers Bob Honts and B.J. "Red" McCombs plan to build a resort on acreage adjacent to Wolf Creek Ski Area. The proposed Village at Wolf Creek will comprise 2,172 residential units and 220,000 square feet of commercial and office space, built over more than 20 years. Proponents of the project say it'll mean jobs and money flowing into one of the poorest areas of the state. Opponents say the development will damage or destroy valuable watershed, wildlife habitat, scenery and local culture.

THE CONFLICT

As it goes in Colorado, the battleground of this civil war is located in the courts. Since there is no legal way to prevent the development on private property, opponents have aimed an avalanche of legal documents at the U.S. Forest Service, which decides access to the property, and Mineral County, which approved the development.

There is a scenic easement on the property, putting conditions on the development: no industrial development (like an airport), and building must be consistent with the adjacent ski area.

Colorado Wild, an environmental group based in Durango, successfully sued Mineral County, winning a tossing of the approval in October. The Village at Wolf Creek Development Corp. must now get legal permits from the Colorado Department of Transportation and the Forest Service before it can re-apply to the county.

Colorado Wild also has a lawsuit against the Forest Service challenging its April 2006 decision to OK two access roads across public lands to McComb's holding. CW says the environmental impact statement was "completely inadequate" because it considered only the impact of the road, not of where the road was going.

Wolf Creek Ski Area is suing the development company in federal court, charging default of contract; McCombs' company is countersuing.

And there's another wrinkle in the tapestry. McCombs and his group have been accused of improper influence with the Forest Service. U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar called for the USDA Inspector General to review the approval process, which ruled there was no improper pressure. CW claims the inspection was "extremely cursory," and is hoping for congressional oversight hearings as to what transpired.

U.S. Rep. John Salazar has publicly come out against the Village, but his brother, Ken, has been more conservative about it in public. New Gov. Bill Ritter is said to be exploring the issue, but hasn't made a public stand.

Although the battles are unresolved, the first collateral damage in the war has been incurred. The developers barred cross-country skiers' access to a meadow near the ski area last winter. According to Michelle Ames, spokesperson for Wolf Creek Ski Area, for 30 years the ski area has groomed those trails free to skiers, who now can't get there.

THE PLAYERS

Bob Honts is president and CEO of The Village at Wolf Creek Development Corp., and he's been Red McCombs' business partner since 1973. He's confident about the future of the project.

"We would like to start some on-site construction this summer," he said, "and we may do it, depending on what happens with the Colorado Wild lawsuit against the Forest Service. It would take a 2-year subdivision facility installation period, and we'd look at a grand opening in 2009 or 2010. It takes that long to build it.

"I don't think the lawsuit will stop or even delay the development," he continued. "Any inholding has a right to access."

Honts is also optimistic about the sales of the units.

"I have hundreds of people, on reading about the Village at Wolf Creek, who've asked to be put on the 'hot list' to be contacted when land or condominiums are ready," he added. "One thing the controversy has done is made us well known. I've had inquiries from as far away as the East Coast."

And the charges of influence peddling?

"The Inspector General of the Department of Agriculture ruled after his investigation that he found no indication of improper influence," Honts said. "It's a ridiculous charge, since we got a terrible decision from the Forest Service. Not only didn't we have improper influence, we had no influence at all."

Honts and McCombs recently bought two large ranches near Del Norte, the 1,650-acre Flying W Ranch, and Twin Pines Ranch, about 900 acres. Honts' vision for those properties includes a championship golf course and employee housing for those who will work at the Village at Wolf Creek.

"We'll have over 6,000 jobs created by year six," he said. "About 3,000 in construction, the rest in operations, the largest single investment in Southwest Colorado to ever take place." He said the total investment could top $400 million.

According to Honts, part of that development may include employee housing.

"We have made no proposal to the town of Del Norte yet," Honts said. "We are considering on Twin Pines Ranch the possibility of very affordable housing, but there is no commitment."

Honts, who has college degrees in urban geography and public administration, said the design for the Village includes no cars, just a transit system with "the look of 1892 steam train. No power lines, no neon signs, a park-style architecture.

"Compare that to the zoning practice in Pagosa Springs," he added. "Strip zoning, meaning malls, retail chains, and the like, is a product that happens as a direct result of zoning in cities. It doesn't matter if you're talking about Dallas, Denver or little cities. Strip zoning starts in towns that build up along highways. If you look at Pagosa Springs and analyze their commercial areas, its a classic kind of strip zoning. Urban geographers say it's not the most desirable form of development."

Honts has served as city manager of White Settlement, Texas; assistant city manager of Fort Worth; and director of administration for Lubbock. He was also a county commissioner in Travis County, home of Austin. He relishes the prospect of designing a town from scratch. He said that in his vision, the Village will have traffic restrictions. Residents of single-family homes (there are 123 of them planned) may have cars, but will be required to park out of sight. Condo users will have to use central parking buildings, and will have restrictions on when they can drive. The owners want to restrict/prevent auto jams and heavy traffic on Wolf Creek Pass.

His plan also calls for using no outside water, just the water the company owns on site. "And as for wastewater, we have the highest standards in Colorado."

Honts said he plans to own one of the units at the Village.

The main opposition to the Honts-McComb dream is Colorado Wild. Ryan Demmy Bidwell is the executive director of the organization, which has been hip-deep in the dispute since 1999.

"Developers should be treated equally," Bidwell said. "Any individual wanting to develop land should be treated fairly, regardless of wealth or political connections. We have felt from 1986, when Mr. McCombs acquired the land, that he has received unique treatment, gaining access to that property in such a way that the public was never informed of the impacts."

Bidwell said the impact includes traffic, wildlife and water.

"Adding possibly thousands of vehicles per day on a high mountain pass is a significant concern," he said, "and development itself significantly impacts wildlife - increased human presence up there will make the area much less desirable from a wildlife perspective.

"Water is a huge issue," he continued, "given that the development is so close to the Continental Divide, there's not a lot of water to begin with, and building a new city the size of Alamosa will impact communities and agriculture."

He's also concerned about the most amorphous impact, that of culture. "There are literally hundreds of local businesses on both sides of the pass that depend on visitation to Wolf Creek Ski Area, and there's concern about the Village changing the character of it and making it a place people won't want to go to. Unlike many other ski areas in Colorado, Wolf Creek has no residential development, and no commercial development at its base, and many who value it appreciate the place for that."

Bidwell said he'd like to see the Forest Service do a new environmental impact study that includes the potential impact on the socio-economics of the area.

"Primarily, our focus is on ensuring the protection of the native plants and animals of Colorado's high country," he said. "Our concern is making informed, unbiased decisions. If we had that information, whether a smaller development is appropriate, or whether that area should be preserved, I believe the current development could not move forward as it's now proposed."

Another environmental group, The San Luis Valley Ecosystem Council, is based in Alamosa and has taken a strong role in trying to prevent the building of the Village.

"We have so many concerns as to where they want to do this," said Christine Canaly, director of the council. "It's between the Weminuche and South San Juan wilderness areas, in important Rio Grande cutthroat trout and Canadian lynx habitat. It's in a wetlands area that is irreplaceable. Over many millennia, the organic matter that grows there has evolved. They're going to go in there and start tearing them up. There's no way they cannot interfere with that whole system."

Canaly, too, is concerned about water.

"Pass Creek feeds into the south fork of the Rio Grande," she said. "That is the creek the development plans to use for their water supply. Their augmentation plan is based on water rights that are farther downstream. No matter how you work the numbers, it becomes abundantly clear there is not enough water to build what they want to build."

THE COMMUNITIES

As with any juicy conflict, the Wolf Creek war has divided neighbors in the surrounding communities, with some hopeful about change, others dreading it.

South Fork writer Wayne Sheldrake describes himself as "a concerned citizen and concerned skier," but points out, "If environmentalism was the motivation for blocking the Village, we'd all be against the ski area, too."

"The last thing North America needs is another megaresort," he said. "Half the storefronts are empty at the new village at Aspen Highlands and it's three minutes from an airport. Last year they were auctioning condos in Steamboat. They have an airport, too. This village won't work. There's not a model for it anywhere on the planet. Nowhere is there a strictly winter resort that accommodates 10,000 people at a ski area that has 1,400 vertical feet of skiing more than four hours away from a major metropolitan area. Nowhere."

Sheldrake's hope is that the land is preserved in a trust.

"Why botch it up forever with an experiment that benefits only a very few investors, is destined to fail, and will forever be a black eye on skiing?" he asked.

Business owner Patricia Skroch of South Fork sees it differently, however. "Since mining and logging have ceased, tourism is the major economic driver in Mineral County," she said. "The Village represents real economic development for the west end of the San Luis Valley. It is planned to be a world-class resort, year-round. I believe it will bring visitors from markets in the United States that do not currently visit the Valley, during slow times of the year. This will help businesses during the slow times of the year."

Skroch is a board member of the Upper Rio Grande Economic Development Council and sits on the South Fork Town Board. She foresees a boom for her town if the Village is built.

"I personally would like to see more viable, year-round business and services for the residents and visitors," she said. "The Village will help justify funding to grow the airports in Alamosa and Del Norte and the new Rio Grande County Hospital. It will provide opportunities for transportation companies and other services."

In Creede, the seat of Mineral County, resident Jim Turnbull knows water. He's a semi-retired water resources analyst who also focuses on wastewater.

"I find the whole proposal to be inappropriate for that location," he said of the Village. "The scale is inappropriate. There's a lack of assessment of damage to neighboring counties: health care, law enforcement, schools, water quality and supply. Those need to be addressed before construction."

Turnbull has studied the Village's water demand analysis.

"The independent study overestimated their supply of water and underestimated their demand," he said. "They estimate demand of 256 acre feet per year, but Alamosa uses 2,700 acre-feet per year, for about the same projected population."

He has serious problems with the decree from the Colorado Water Court. "The Village manipulated its percent occupancy numbers for the year," he theorized. "They project usage of 68 gallons per capita, but they're estimating their percent occupancy at 55 percent. I can't believe the demand number they presented would be acceptable. I think this case got only a cursory look. There's not a reliable source of water on that mountain."

Turnbull's long-term vision is simple: "I would like to see the Village go away," he said, "but I'm not against some small-scale development. In March 1985, the original proposal was for 160 residential units and 100 hotel units. You have to look at what is sustainable up there, what would maintain Wolf Creek's status as a family friendly ski area. It's rare."

Del Norte Mayor Glenn Graham, on the other hand, is gung-ho about the Village.

"I think it will have economic benefit for the town of Del Norte," he said. "I think we'll be a bedroom community for the Village. Archuleta County doesn't want it and South Fork would be cost prohibitive for the workers, so Del Norte would be the logical place."

He foresees no negative impact, "except for lag time to absorb the workers," he said. "I'm definitely in favor of it."

Graham, whose term lasts until April 2009, believes he's in the majority of town residents in wanting the Village, and trusts the developers to do the right thing. "I'd like them to go ahead with the plan as is, in phases," he said. "They're not going to overbuild the market."

In contrast to Del Norte's mayor, Pagosa Springs' leader has a different outlook on the Village at Wolf Creek. "We don't know what kind of impact it's going to have," Ross Aragon said. "That's reason enough to oppose it."

Aragon has been mayor of Pagosa Springs since 1978. His current term runs until 2010. "We [the town] adopted a resolution about three years ago opposing the Village," he said. "There are so many bad things about it - migratory animal routes, water quality, traffic and resultant pollution. We never detailed the opposition, but just passed the resolution. There are a lot of ifs. We'd get quite a few people moving to Pagosa Springs and that would affect services, schools, and infrastructure.

"We are a growing area here, from development and annexations," he continued, "and it takes more work, more involvement, and a lot of planning. We've had to add staff here and everything multiplies with growth and you have to come up with a way to pay for the growth."

The city lives on sales tax revenue. The county survives on property tax and is lobbying for a raise now.

"No one's happy, of course, no one likes taxes," Aragon said.

He said he is "absolutely" in the majority in Pagosa Springs opposing the Village, but pragmatically admits it's likely to go through anyway. "I'm for personal property rights," he said, "and the opposition is grasping at straws, because that is someone's property. If its going to happen it's going to happen, and there's nothing we can do about it."

ENDGAME

In May, a court decision is expected on the EIS appeal. The enviros, CW and SLVEC, if victorious, see an opportunity for negotiation. Visions vary as to what the end result will be.

"If Honts and McCombs could shift their dream onto their ranches in Del Norte," said SLVEC's Canaly, "residents could go to the ski area, to Del Norte, South Fork, Alamosa, Creede. They could use those ranches as the hub. That's more ecologically and economically feasible way to do it. And when they're skiing at Wolf Creek, they'd be able to stop and look over The Red McCombs Endangered Species Sanctuary. That would be a great legacy for the people of Texas and the people of Colorado. That would be elegant."

Sheldrake's view is more glum.

"The Village is obviously a scam," he said. "If it goes through, a few buildings will be propped up, lots will be sold, real-estate prices in the surrounding communities will skyrocket, and within two years the Village will be a veritable ghost town. Yes, we need jobs around here, but I don't want to see Wolf Creek become the Summitville of skiing."

Honts reiterated his optimism about the project and said he thinks most area residents are positive about it. "We've talked to about a thousand people around the Valley," he said, "and we've heard a lot of support."

In February, Honts and McCombs held a forum on the Village in Alamosa. More than 200 people turned out to peruse charts, listen to statistics and ask questions.

One of the pair's arguments for the Village was more skiers for Wolf Creek. They cited data that the ski area runs below 50 percent capacity most of the season. One person in the room shouted, "That's the attraction!"

Detractors brought up issues of water, wastewater, tourists' altitude sickness, costs to communities for the growth and even the prospect of West Nile virus from the wetlands. Many repeatedly said, "Growth doesn't pay for itself."

No one asked if millionaires will be willing to fly into a small airport and ride a shuttle to their homes, or whether those tourists with driving restrictions will be able to access the businesses in surrounding communities. And it remains to be seen whether the tax benefits from the Village will cover the costs of increased populations.

Despite the sometimes hostile tone of the meeting, a show-of-hands poll showed the crowd roughly even between supporters and detractors. It seems that money is a most powerful motivator for change, and that a "wait-and-see" strategy is unavoidable.

Marcia Darnell lives and writes in Alamosa.