Dear Editor,

The City of Black Hawk’s 2024 Comprehensive Plan envisions its future as a resort with new casinos, distilleries, breweries, beautiful people enjoying the spa and expanding the number of hotel rooms from 1,500 to 3,000 over the next few years and then to 6,000 in following years.

People have asked whether there is a demand study for a resort of this scale. They ask about added sanitation, medical and law enforcement needs. They mostly ask about water.

In May of this year, city council approved Resolution 33-2026 authorizing the contract for Four Mile Gulch Well #6 near the bottom of Dory Hill Road. Well #6 has been or will be drilled to a depth of 1,000 feet. This one well will deliver up to 161-acre feet of water per year or approximately 52 million gallons. Enough for 500 homes. Aspen Springs and Chalet Park currently have just over 300 homes.

The introduction to the resolution states that city staff are pursuing a plan to drill a “well or multiple wells while sites are still viable in the area”. Four Mile Gulch Well #7 is in the hopper. The phrase “while still viable” raises a red flag concerning risks to the residential water supply.

The city’s Alternatives Analysis Report produced by ERO Resources states that the maximum annual flow rate in the city is currently 482-acre feet per year or approximately 157 million gallons.

If the resort plan is fully realized, the report forecasts the maximum annual flow rate in the city to be 3,070-acre feet or approximately one billion gallons.

ERO Resources recommends ground water from Aspen Springs and new, larger reservoirs in Pickle Gulch between Missouri Lakes and Paradise Valley as the primary sources to meet the one-billion-gallon tourist needs.

 The city’s plan aims to generate a great deal of institutional wealth for a select group of people. However, none of the documents that I have found cite potential impact to nearby residential neighborhoods.

In addition to the risks to Aspen Springs and Chalet Park water supply, residents near the Gilpin County Schools have similar concerns while seeing no tangible benefit to the community at large.

The city has around 125 residents who will assuredly see no harm. The county, with around 6,000 residents may see incremental tax revenue, which if history repeats itself, will be sucked up by serving the increase of law enforcement, medical and related infrastructure needs in servitude to the city's dream from the hilltop. And then there's the water.

Is this just an 'if we build it, they will come" venture? Who are the winners?

Phil Gibbs

Gilpin County