Laserfiche WebLink
<br />S <br />4. The weight of the evidence demonstrates that the Applicant has met the <br />minimum requirements of Construction Materials Rule 6.4.5(2)(a). <br />H. Appropriateness of Topographv to Fina[ Land Use as Cropland <br />Construction Materials Rules 3.1.5 and 6.4.6 require detailed descriptions <br />of grading and backfilling that show the appropriateness of the final <br />topography to the proposed post-mining land use, compaction and stability <br />measures, erosion control, timetables, pollution control, control of <br />unsightliness, slope compatibility, any off-site backfill requirements and <br />maps. <br />2. The Objectors assert that the Applicant has failed to comply with <br />Construction Materials Rules 3.1.5 and 6.4.6. <br />The Applicant's Reclamation Plan and maps show a 2% grade from south <br />to north for all pit floor areas. A 2% grade is acceptable for croplands and <br />close to the topography currently existing on the site. The Applicant <br />intends to address the unsightliness of the berms by revegetating the berms <br />with grassland mixes and, per Montrose County requirements, by planting <br />and irrigating trees on the berms. <br />The weight of the evidence demonstrates that the Applicant has met the <br />minimum requirements of Construction Materials Rules 3.1.5 and 6.4.6. <br />I. Backfillinp and Grading Plan with Reasonable Timetables, Consistent <br />with Good Mining and Reclamation Practices <br />Construction Materials Rule 3.1.5(4) requires the future operator to <br />complete grading as soon as possible afrer mining and to establish <br />12 <br />