Laserfiche WebLink
BY: RIVIERA BLACK HAWK CASINO; <br />720 406 3818; <br />MAY-28-05 1:10PM; <br />PAGE 3/4 <br />Traffic congestion on Highway 119 and U.S. 6 is a serious issue and the economic impacts <br />of congestion ofthese pritnaryroutes into and out ofBlackHawkhave bean quantified and discussed <br />in several report.4 produced by the Colorado Department of Transportation, the Black Hawk <br />Business Irr-provemcntDistrict,the SilverpollarMetropolitanDistrict, andthe Cityof $lackHawIc. <br />Additional tratlic has been shown to slow business traffic through Clear Creek Cauyou and North <br />Clear Creek Canyon, and to contribute to increased accidents and a negative overall perception of <br />sa&ty on these roads. <br />Based upon these reports, Petitioner's reasonable business judgment is that the proposed <br />mining operations described in the application will negatively and seriously affect Petitioner's <br />bottom tine and impair Petitioner's reasonable investment-backed expectations. <br />Petitioner's ,,,A"~ ~+ent has reviewed the potential gaming traffic impacts based upon the <br />iufnrmatioa included ur the Application and has determined that the probable diversion of trafl9c <br />from Highway 119 and U.S. 6 through the Central City southern access road, decreases in gaming <br />trai~ic traveling to Black Hawk generally, and probably shorter gaming time per patron due to patron <br />concerns about traveling time, will result in a drop in business based oa restrictions on access <br />occt~ing in prior years. This economic loss to the Petitioner also represents an economic loss to <br />the State of Colorado, due to the State's loss due to the decline in revenue from lost gaming taxes. <br />These are not speculative damages, but instead are based on the prior trafitic studies experieitoed- <br />based projections of Petitioner's managearent. <br />Pursuant to CMItR 1.4.9, following receipt ofthis petition forhearing, the Office is required <br />to: <br />(1) set a date to consider the application <br />(2) schedule the application for a Formal Hearing before the Board <br />(3) provide aA parties at least thirty (30} days written notice of the Formal Hearing date <br />(4) issue a recommendation to the Board for approval, approval with conditions, or denial <br />of the application. <br />Pursuant to CMRR 2.7.1, the Board may, in its discretion, schedule a Pre-Hearing <br />Co~ufereace prior to the Formal Heating. C]viRR 2.7.1(1)(a) states, iu relevant part, drat thePre- <br />Hearing Conference will beheld to describe the OfSce's review process, to explain the right9 and <br />responsibilities of the parties, and to "discuss and resolve issues to the extent possible." Pursuant <br />to C1vlItR 2.7.1(e), " ...the Pra-hearing conference shall be held after the OfSce has issued its <br />written reconrmelydation and at least ten (10) caleader days prior the Formal Board Hearing." <br />Thus, CMRR 2.7.1 provides for a dispute resolutionprocess by which the Petitioner end the <br />applicant may attempt to informally resolve the issue of the economic sad business impacts of <br />additionalheavytrucktrafficoaHighway119endU.S.6. Cl'itventhattheinformaldisputeresolutien <br />process may yield a negotiated outcome acceptable to ell parties, Petitionerhereby formally regrtests <br />that the Board schedule aPre-Hearing Conference in accordance with CMRIt 2.7, in order that the <br />Petitioner end. applicant be given as opportunity to resolve the issues in advance of the Formal <br />Hearhtg. <br />