Save Guanella Pass

Text from Denver Post Article December 7, 2000

Guanella proposal runs into Potholes

By Steve Lipsher
Denver Post Mountain Bureau



Dec. 7, 2000 - GEORGETOWN - A lucrative federal grant to
improve the winding road over Guanella Pass is getting a
bumpy ride from residents on both sides who already have
sent officials back to the pits once.

In a series of public meetings this
week, representatives from the
Federal Highway Administration
have gotten an earful from
Georgetown to Grant over a new
$25 million proposal to widen the
road, straighten curves, repave
crumbling asphalt and resurface
the washboard-ridden dirt
stretches.

Locals intent on preserving the
"rural and rustic nature" of the
scenic byway worry about the
impacts of heavy truck traffic for
the road work, the drain on
business during construction,
and the potential for increased
traffic induced by the
improvements, which they say go
far beyond what is needed.

"I know there are some things up
there that need to be fixed," said
Coralue Anderson, one of the
opposition leaders. "But do we
need to fix it via the Cadillac way, or the Jeep way?"

But in the all-or-nothing world of federal funding, officials in
Clear Creek and Park counties are hardpressed to turn down
money that would pay for road repairs otherwise neglected and
which ultimately could allow Guanella Pass Road to remain open
- even if it means improvements designed for speed, safety
and comfort rather than aesthetics.

As requested by the two counties and the U.S. Forest Service
as far back as 1974 under the federal Forest Highway grant
program, the Highway Administration two years ago produced
four alternatives for road improvements, ranging from full
paving to repairs and alignment changes on the 24-mile stretch
of road.

"We got into this because the county commissioners felt they
had a road they couldn't maintain," observed Cathy Wilson of
Georgetown.

Rejected by residents who were concerned about the major
overhauls proposed in each alternative, however, the agency in
the past year crafted a final, scaled-down plan that would leave
the road designed for lower speeds, smaller vehicles and less
traffic.

"This is our bottom line. It's about as low as we can go in our
design standards and still maintain our stewardship and still
use the money efficiently," said Rick Cushing, environmental
planning engineer for the Highway Administration who noted
the four previous alternatives have been scrapped entirely.

But at packed meetings in Bailey and Georgetown earlier this
week, only one person spoke in favor of the new plan, and
most others said they'd rather see nothing done than the
"standard design" of guardrails, retaining walls, signs, stripes
and deep road cuts needed to accommodate broader
switchbacks.

"Rather than make the road fit into federal standards, we need
to make federal standards fit scenic byways," said Scott
Dugan, who owns the Tumbling River dude ranch on the Grant
side of the 11,670-foot pass. "We're not trying to stop traffic.
We've never tried to do that. What we like is we live four miles
up a dirt road in the country. We think people come up the
road because it's a nice, rural mountain road." Others argued
that the road needs only to be repaired and maintained, not
rebuilt. But money from the Forest Highway program, which
dates back to the 1920s and has helped build highways across
many of the state's major passes, can be used only for
construction, Cushing said.

"You say it can't be used for maintenance, and it seems that's
what we really need," said Jan Shirlaw of Georgetown.

Mark Taylor, project engineer for the Highway Administration,
said the new design would closely follow the existing roadbed
for the most part and add only 1 mile of paving, but
Georgetown residents were skeptical in particular about
changes in the highly visible switchbacks up Leavenworth
Mountain.

"There are still some sections that we feel need to be
reconstructed to meet the traffic needs (and) the safety
needs," Taylor acknowledged.

In a dramatic demonstration of the potential impact, however,
Anderson unfurled a 50-foot banner depicting, full scale, the
width of the road and its associated shoulders, ditches and
cuts, while pointing out that in some areas, the road is only 22
feet wide.

"What's going to happen to our mountain?" she asked.

Copyright 2000 The Denver Post. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or
redistributed.