Lessons learned from a failed attempt to rebuild the La Sal Mountain Loop Road in 2001 were rehashed as officials from Grand and San Juan counties, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Federal Highway Administration, met last month to begin a process to repair the road before the cost of maintaining it gets out of hand.

All the participants in the Oct. 29 meeting agreed that the public must be informed and involved from the beginning. They also agreed that no significant changes will be made to the road.

“Grand County is looking at existing rights-of-way and just resurfacing the existing road,” said Bill Jackson, Grand County Road Department director. There will be no realignment, Jackson said.

Attempts to reconstruct and widen the road and to realign it in crucial watershed areas brought down the 2001 effort to rebuild the road to federal highway standards, said Jerry McNeely who was a member of the Grand County Council at the time. McNeely now represents San Juan County on matters involving both San Juan and Grand.

Participants in the meeting emphasized that the only changes now anticipated for the existing road would be to widen it in some places, especially on hair-pin curves where the line of sight is limited, and to give the road a new asphalt surface.

Nothing will be done to increase the speed on the road, according to two federal highway officials who attended the meeting by phone. They explained that their agency would do the design and the construction. The two counties would then be responsible for maintenance, as they are now.

A section of the Loop Road is located in San Juan County from its beginning in the Pack Creek area to the Warner Lake turnoff. From there until the road’s end at the Castle Valley Road, the Loop Road is located in Grand County. Grand County is responsible for snow removal for the entire road, according to Jackson.

“We must be right up front with the public, as soon as possible,” said Forest Service Moab/Monticello District Ranger Mike Diem. The meeting participants agreed they must prepare a strong written explanation for the public in order to dispel rumors about the project.

“We’re not looking at expanding out of the existing corridor,” Diem said. “The asphalt has deteriorated to such a point, if we don’t resurface, then we’ll have greater concerns with [safety and erosion].”

But there will be no large cuts or fills, especially not in critical watersheds, Diem said.

Although money is not yet available, the federal highway officials explained that it could be advantageous to get a plan in place so the project is ready to go if some other project, or parts of other projects, get delayed. A long-term plan will compete better with other projects, they said. A positive economic impact is good leverage, they added.

The federal officials also explained that it would be wise to plan for the repair of prioritized segments of the road so the job could be done one segment at a time in case money becomes available in amounts too small to complete the entire project at once. They suggested that several “site improvements” could be lumped together as a single project.

Participants agreed that they would begin next spring to evaluate the needs, estimate the costs, and decide if they should go first with work segments or site improvements.