Tarmac on a driveway

[Sam Farrell]

My concrete driveway is still sound but looking its age . I was thinking of getting someone to put a few inches of tarmac on it.

Is this acceptable or do I have to dig it all out etc ??

Sam

[Julian]

I couldn't say for sure, it sounds OK, but get the advice of a professional - avoid a Pikey job at all costs!

Julian.

[Andy Hall]

Yes you can

I had this situation for my drive from when the house was new - a substantial concrete base of around 100-125mm on top of MOT type 1 and then about 75mm of tarmac on top of that.

During its 20 year lifetime there was one small crack across part of the width - probably settlement - and some indents where skip lorries dropped their hydraulic rams directly on the surface rather than onto timber as they had been asked to do in writing. That mistake cost them several thousands of £s.

Other than that, it was certainly durable.

The problem for me is that it is a large drive and I just don't feel that a large amount of tarmac is visually appealing at all. My solution was to have the whole lot ripped up including the concrete and replaced with handmade clay pavers.

If you are starting from sound concrete that looks tired and the area is not too large, then I think that properly done tarmac is a good proposition - as long as you can soften its visual impact with plants and other features. It should be mechanically good for 15 years plus as long as you don't run heavy lorries on it.

If you think you might want to have blocks or bricks laid on a flexible base (i.e. compacted type 1, compacted sand, .. in a few years then this can't be done on concrete - there has to be drainage. The only options then are to go for a rigid paving - means blocks laid and pointed - specialist and costly, or to take out the concrete.

So there's the "now" decision and the "down the road" decision. The questions are really timescales, lifetimes and is the concrete really sound.

[:Jerry:]

Andy Hall on the brag again....

[Andy Hall]

Not really. The major part of the cost is in the labour.

The choices were strip and redo the tarmac, rip out the lot and use coloured concrete blocks which fade to uniformity in a few years, machine made clay pavers, which are variant in colour but mechanically identical in size and hand made ones which offer colour and size variation.

That was why I made the point about expected lifetime. For a 20 year lifetime, laying new tarmac on good concrete is economically viable as long as the job is done properly. If either aren't or the projected lifetime is 5 years for lifetime or change of mind reasons, the labour becomes a huge factor.

Given all of that, for an intended lifetime of 20 years both mechanically and visually, it makes good economic and aesthetic sense to go for good quality materials, preparation and implementation.

[ARWadsworth]

One option to visually break up a large tarmac driveway is a block paving circle or square within it. It will depend upon the size and shape of the drive.

Adam

[:Jerry:]

Yes, but nothing to do with the OP so why mention it?

[Andy Hall]

The problem is then how to drain it. I looked at that kind of thing and asked around quite a bit. With concrete underneath, when it rains the sand effectively liquifies. So this would probably need to be a rigid arrangement.

[Andy Hall]

On the contrary.

I have answered the question and also given views related to various options and longevity timescales.

For example, the concrete being "tired" could mean that it is so tired that it won't reliably support tarmac for a long period of time. Let's say that one spends a £k or two on tarmac - which it could easily be for a decent job on a large area - and it starts breaking up within a year?

It would have been far better to have ripped up the lot and started again. The ripping up of concrete and more to the point, the taking away for disposal, is not cheap. By the time that has been done, and replaced with properly compacted type 1 and properly compacted sand plus laying of a suitable surface, the labour, heavy equipment and disposal form the lion's share of the cost. If one is going to go to that trouble and cost, it makes very good sense to look at options for materials as well.

OTOH, if the objective is only to provide an improvement to an old concrete drive and to take the risk on how strong it really is, with perhaps a view to selling the property in a shortish time period, the equation is different.

I make no apology for illustrating a bigger picture with other options when the possibility exists to spend quite a bit of money on the first option that occurs and end up disappointed. I considered all of the various options when I had exactly this situation apart from failing tarmac already being there, and spent a lot of time considering all of the pros and cons. The illustration was of what I decided to do and why.

At the very least, it makes sense to point out the snares and pitfalls. They may not apply to every situation, but they can be wisely considered and taken into consideration or not,

[The Medway Handyman]

Oh leave off Jerry will you. Andy provided a comprehensive answer to the OP's question - which is more than you seem to do.

[:Jerry:]

You really are so far up your own arse that you don't even realise when you cross from answering the question asked and bragging about how much you have or would spend, the OP never asked for other options, he asked if "put a few inches of tarmac" on top of his present concrete was a good idea - a yes or no answer, he never asked about ripping it all up and having it replaced by "replaced with handmade clay pavers" (not even machine made but *hand made* pavers). If the OP had the option of spending that sort of money do you really think he would be bothering about having a few inches of tarmac, sort of leaving the old drive way as is, it's just about the cheapest option available.

Andy, you are nothing but a (1980's style [1]) snob, you might well have money but it's very obvious that you so lack real class...

[1] so ably piss taken by Harry Enfield and his "loads 'a muuuuney" sketches...

[Andy Hall]

Have you actually provided a constructive answer here? No.

Have I seen somebody with a concrete drive past its sell by date who had it topped with tarmac only to see it failing in under two years? Yes.

Have I had a drive with a concrete base and a failing tarmac top and researched what was involved in various ways of remedying it? Yes

Have I considered expected lifetime, the costs and risks/rewards of different approaches? Certainly.

Let's conisder the question. On the face of it, it could be a simple yes or no answer. However:

- do you know what the concrete is like?

- do you know the recommended thickness and grade of tarmac that should be used and how it should be applied?

- do you know the area involved?

- do you know how long it is required to last?

The reality is that you don't know the answers to any of those questions any more than I do, yet they are the chief factors involved since they will determine the practicality and the cost.

Yet against this background, you seem to be unwilling yourself to give a straight yes or no answer either but would prefer to criticise a reasoned reply and enter into unjustified abuse. Of course that may also be because you aren't able to think laterally.

In reality, and in providing a fairly complete answer, there are a lot of factors that should be taken into account as mentioned above, and it would be as wrong to say go ahead without qualification as it would to say do nothing or to tear it up and start again.

My point was very clearly

1) that there is a risk in just laying tarmac on top of a possibly failing concrete base. If that is done and it proves unsatisfactory in an unacceptably short time, then the exercise is a huge waste of money because there is the cost of the original tarmac and then the cost of removing it plus the concrete later if and when it fails. 2) Once that is taken into account, it makes a substantial contribution towards the cost of starting again 3) The labour costs form a substantial proportion of the total cost of a new drive, whichever materials are used. One can hire a bunch of cowboys and get a crappy job or research further and find a good contractor with verifiable references. The same goes for materials. 4) There are some basic things that one can and can't do. For example, drainage issues, slopes to drains, loadings, thicknesses of materials and so forth. If these are wrong, be it a new job or a refurbishment, the outcome can be an expensive disaster.

In the project that I put together, I spent a great deal of time and trouble in checking all of these issues - options for surfaces and materials, construction requirements and contractors. I used various sources of information including web sites such as Paving Expert (which does have a lot of useful detail) plus several others, books, articles, manufacturers and so on. A lot of cross checking. There were differences in recommended techniques. I had samples of probably 20 different types and varieties of surface material at different price points and interviewed 6 or 7 contractors.

This was going to be a relatively expensive project anyway, simply because of the area involved, plus various other issues such as accesses etc. Given that, I think that it's perfectly reasonable to research the whole thing properly and to take time over doing so before committing; That has to do with doing the job properly as well as the cost. I'm not a believer in bodging things and then having to redo them.

The criteria that I had were longevity, suitability, fitting correctly with the surroundings and achieving that for the minimum cost. In terms of that, I wanted to achieve a result in terms of appearance that would not change with time in a negative way.

The material selected was neither the cheapest, nor the most expensive. Out of the original 20 ideas and samples, there was a shorter selection list of 10 from across the entire price range. Some concrete products were left in the final 8, plus some machine made bricks and some handmade. One of the handmades was eliminated for mechanical reasons (not thick enough) and two on high price. One of the machine mades was more expensive than one of the handmades, IIRC. Several concrete products were eliminated when I asked to see them in drives that had been there a few years. The colours fade in some of them leaving a disappointing appearance. The eventual choice was actually 4th in terms of price and there was quite some way to the most expensive.

The end result is entirely as good as expected and came in at less than the estimated cost,

As a matter of interest, I did look at the option of replacing the tarmac. It would have required remedial work to the concrete or replacing it entirely. For the work involved, the cost was starting to approach that for implementing concrete blocks.

Obviously different people will have different criteria in terms of appearance, cost and longevity. There were certainly less expensive options than the ones I selected and there were some that were more expensive. The range of total implementation cost across the options were much more compressed than I had expected, which made it possible to entertain a greater range of possibilities as well.

In particular, the implementation cost difference (i.e. labour and materials) between hand and machine made bricks was small for the project size, and the end result the appearance that was wanted.

It was for all of those reasons that I made the point that it's important to look at many options if one wants a good outcome without the risk of throwing good money after bad,.

If I am going to undertake a project, then I will research it properly and do it properly or I don't do it at all. It is factually incorrect for you to sugges that achieving lowest cost is not a factor in what I decide to do - in fact it's one of the most important, especially when there is the possibility of incrementalism resulting in something much more expensive than originally intended. At that point it's time to go around again and look at where savings can be made without compromising the outcome unacceptably.

I certainly don't follow the "any old thing will do" or "what's the cheapest I can get away with?" mentality. Some people have difficulty in separating the difference between cost and value - I've always seen that as a clear distinction.

I find that the outcome and the means to achieve it are both important.

I don't and don't need to make any apology or justification for that approach. If you have a problem with or a lack of understanding of that concept then it's really your problem and not mine......

[:Jerry:]

Best form of defence is attack and all that...

So why did you not say that rather than go off on a egocentric trip about something OP never asked about?

To the point that you had "hand made pavers" laid, that is not an opinion, that is bragging. If you were really suggesting that the OP should not bother with tarmac why did you then reply (in your original reply) with the following;

"Yes you can

I had this situation for my drive from when the house was new - a substantial concrete base of around 100-125mm on top of MOT type 1 and then about 75mm of tarmac on top of that."

"During its 20 year lifetime there was one small crack across part of the width - probably settlement"

"Other than that, it was certainly durable."

"If you are starting from sound concrete that looks tired and the area is not too large, then I think that properly done tarmac is a good proposition"

Only at the very end did you mention that tarmac *might* not be suitable in the long term and place any sort of caveat.

Yes, quite right too, those addicted to drugs etc. are never at fault either - self denial is such a marvellous thing. Sorry Mr Hall, you're on an ego trip whether you know it or not...

[Andy Hall]

Not really. You are making the assumption that I have something to defend. I haven't.

The first point is that it wasn't an egocentric trip. It was an explanation of a sequence of events and costings taking all of the potential issues into account.

The point about having seen tarmac drives fail because the base is inadequate or damaged to begin with ius a perfectly reasonable one. The OP's base may be fine or it may be in poor condition. The point is that that should be assessed and accounted for. An outcome of that may be that it isn't viable to use it. Once having arrived at that point, a whole range of options open up and it is reasonable to mention them.

No it isn't. It's simply a statement of fact. Handmade pavers were laid. A contractor did it.

The information was all there. I described the best case scenario, through to the worst case.

You have very fanciful ideas. That's the charitable explanation. Another could be that you have some chip on your shoulder and have a problem if somebody mentions that they have something that you don't or an idea that you didn't think of first.

To be honest, I'm not that interested in which problem you have and I am not about to allow it to influence what I choose to say or ideas that I introduce in comments made in newsgroups just because it doesn't happen to suit you.

[jal]

damn ... I saw 14 articles in this thread and thought that it was going to be a useful discussion of a problem that I, too, have, namely a buggered up concrete drive which I sometimes think I might get tarmacced ...

[LSR]

My young daughter offered to help the builders when they were pondering patterns to put in our block paving, and she layed out a nice array of swastikas.

[Tony Williams]

We've just had our drive re-tarmac'd (tarmac slapped straight onto tarmac). [1]

If it was a concrete base I think I'd get a good layer of bitumastic painted onto the concrete first. This would ensure that the tarmac is stuck down to the concrete, rather than a layer that might lift.

[1] It was a repair by contractors from the local water company, after a burst main damaged the front 20% of our drive. It was a little splash and dash but I'm not complaining because they resurfaced the whole drive, rather than patch the damaged section.

[Andy Hall]

So now you know that it would be a good idea to check carefully before spending your money.

[TheScullster]

"The Medway Handyman" wrote

Seconded! Whilst Mr Hall may appear verbose at times (whether bragging or not) he is one of the most prolific contributors of valuable material to this group (over recent years to my knowledge). The op may not have requested chapter and verse, but having been given it will now be in a position to make a more informed decision.

I, for one, am much relieved that the likes of AH (who has certainly been of invaluable assistance to me in the past) are not put off by these unfounded rants.

Phil

[ARWadsworth]

That will look smashing on google maps.

Adam