Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />subject of ,oncern is the cost of topsoil purchase and transport. In <br />investigating the cost of topsoil on the Front Range, the figure .if S?.00 <br />per yard seems low. However, the S8-S12 per cubic yard figure ap,~ears <br />to be a Sow volume cost quote not representative of a 24,200 cubic: yard <br />project. Two important aspects of this analysis are the definition of <br />topsoil and its haulage to the site. <br />For the purposes of this discussion, the source of tf~is tops~~il meterlal <br />will be western Metropolitan area excavation for structure foundations. <br />This material will be comprised of both A end B soil horizons and not <br />defined as topscil in a strict agronomic sense, but will provide ai suitable <br />yrowtl~ media for plant astablishment given tha reclamation ePfortm do- <br />scribed in this section. <br />During wrecking and salvage operations forty-foot end-dump ti•aetor- <br />\J <br />trailers will be hauling 190 tons of non-radioactive, unsalvageable <br />materials to the local land fill. This is an estimated 25 miles round <br />trip. This mileage figure should allow these semi-trucks the latitude <br />to backhaul topsoil to the site at a very low incremental cost. f~p- <br />proximately Z8 to 20 truck loads out of an anticipated thirty totzil <br />topsoil loads will be handled in this manner. Trucks scheduled to haul <br />salvagable material from the site first will haul topsoil to the none and <br />then haul the salvaged materials from the mine. The thirty total loads <br />of topsoil could be handled in this fashion based on the followinu <br />assumptions: 29,200 cu. yds. @ 1750 lbs/yd hauled in 8 ft. x 90 ft. end <br />dumps with 55,000 pounds of load capacity. With the following in mind, <br />U <br />