ENFORCE33205

• Permit No: M1977210
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Date: 8/23/1989
• Doc Name: REPORTERS TRANSCRIPT VOLUME 1
• Violation No.: MV1989015
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

I 1
• •
10

LJ

t
1

1

1 Concrete was aware of slides, certainly, that were ju::t over the
2 lip and outside the permit boundary. Those were known. And I
3 just--I have the feeling of betrayal.
4 And I have a feeling that we were not permitted down in
5 that drainage area because of what we might see, and that if I
6 hadn't happened up that drainage on that July 6 afternoon, none
7 of this would ever come out during the permitting process. And
8 I--you know, what I think of today's testimony and Slide Area 1
9 over on the access road, and how Castle Concrete deposited a
10 tremendous amount of material without any--and there w.ss no legal
11 right to do that.
12 And how Castle Concrete didn't check that. :C mean,
13 someone that experienced in moving material would not bother to
14 see if it was legal--took the word of another owner.
15 It really goes to the--to the feelings that Exist in
16 Colorado Springs. In looking back at the documents as~;ociated
17 with the stipulation that was mentioned earlier 1974 ar.~d the
18 public hearings that are in the various records in Colorado
19 Springs and the assurances that were made to the citizens of
20 Colorado Springs about slides on Queens Canyon, about the
21 limitation of 27 acres for Snider Quarry.
22 That was in the stipulation that was in the Dames
23 Morris Study. There were letters. There were resolutions
24 adopted by Castle Concrete. The citizens of Colorado Springs see
25 these things progress.