Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Roads topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County engineers outline 2025 results and options for 2026 asphalt program amid coordination challenges
Summary
Grand County engineers reported nearly $2.77 million in 2025 asphalt work and presented a 2026 program emphasizing chip seals for cost control, while flagging coordination needs with Blue Valley Ranch river‑restoration haul traffic and possible add‑alternates for County Road 64/1 work.
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Roads topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County Engineer Tim Gagnon and Road & Bridge Superintendent Dave Buckley presented the county’s asphalt plan update on Feb. 10, reviewing 2025 projects, unit costs and proposed 2026 work.
Key figures and results: Gagnon said United Companies completed roughly $2.769 million in 2025 construction and nearly 5 miles of resurfacing; chip‑seal unit costs used for budgeting are materially lower than full removal‑and‑replacement (R&R) or overlays. A geotechnical issue on County Road 511 required a small remove‑and‑replace; United agreed to return to repair that area this summer.
2026 planning and coordination: the proposed 2026 program includes R&R at segments such as 5197 and 5221 East, and conversion of several gravel roads (CR 1 East, CR 519, CR 5221 East) to asphalt in limited segments to fill gaps in existing asphalt. Commissioners asked about haul traffic from Blue Valley Ranch river‑restoration (boulder moves and aggregate truck routes) and Gagnon committed to coordinate schedules with the developer/contractor to avoid paving during heavy haul periods. He recommended using bid add‑alternates so the county can add or remove segments (for example, CR 64) depending on final timing and bids.
Cost control and tradeoffs: Gagnon emphasized chip seal as a lower‑cost preventative treatment (roughly one‑fifth to one‑third the cost of full overlays) while noting unknown subsurface conditions make R&R sometimes unavoidable; he also noted mobilization cost differences for small, remote projects can raise unit prices.
Board directions and next steps: commissioners asked staff to include add‑alternates in the March bid package and to follow up with Blue Valley Ranch on their haul schedule; staff will return with a recommended final bid package and will report back by email on coordination outcomes.
