BITUMEN V. CONCRETE

Te Aroha News, Volume XLI, Issue 6442, 24 January 1924, Page 8

BITUMEN V. CONCRETE

FOR MAIN HIGHWAYS COUNTY COUNCIL DISCUSSION An interesting discussion took place at the Piako County Council on Monday in reference to the relative merits of bitumen and concrete. The question arose through a statement sent to the Council in regard to the maintenance of roads under the Main Highways Board. The chairman. Mr F. W. Walters, in response to a question regarding the material to be used in the formation of roads under the Main Highways Board said that the Board was opposed to the use of concrete on the Tc Aroha-Hamilton road.

Cr. Kennedy was opposed to putting a “half-pie” road between Te Aroha and Hamilton. This road was destined to carry a lot of traffic, and it should be put down in concrete. It would be foolish to use bitumen when in America, where it was manufactured, they did not use it. He suggested obtaining an estimate from the engineer regarding the difference between the cost of concrete and bitumen.

The engineer, Mr W. J. Gibbs, considered that they should not do anything of a temporary nature. Bitumen should not be used for permanent roading - unless it had a concrete base. The Council wanted a policy so that the road which was put down today would be of service in years to come. In America they had put down 4 inch concrete roads, the quality of the road put down being sacrificed for quantity. They should put down roads for what they estimated the traffic would demand. If they had a first-class road between Te Aroha and Hamilton they would immediately take the traffic off the railways. The chairman, Cr. F. W. Walters, Was not in accord with the engineer’s views. He favoured bitumen and did not think that the Highways Board would agree to concrete. In Taranaki they were at present paying 10/- per acre for their roads, and-if concrete were used they would pay £1 per acrei Waterbound macadam would last for three or four years." The- engineer: Concrete would last for fifty years. Cr. McLean: How long would a bitumen road last? The engineer: It all depends upon the traffic. For ordinary traffic bitumen was as good as any other material, but for a main highway it was not to be compared with concrete. Bitumen was merely glorified tar and would never be of any use for heavy traffic. He thought a board of engineers should be set up to examine the whole of the roading question. Cr. Kennedy said that the Council had no reason to experiment. Experts were giving up. tar sealed roads in favour of concrete. Before he could induce his ratepayers to favour the scheme he would want to know what would be the difference in the cost. The chairman said that the Government would pay' one-third of the maintenance. “You are not satisfied with that,” he concluded, t Cr. Kennedy. No. The engineer did not consider a bitumen road a main highway.

• After it was discovered that the discussion was reaching no finality it was decided, on the suggestion of Cr. Hughes, that those most interested in Thames-Waikato road (Crs. Stark, Walters and Kennedy) should hold a special meeting, the date being fixed for next Saturday at 1 pan.