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

"Sam Farrell" wrote in message
...
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

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

Julian.

On 2007-07-18 18:33:43 +0100, "Sam Farrell" said:

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

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.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...

snip

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.



Andy Hall on the brag again....

On 2007-07-18 20:25:19 +0100, ":Jerry:" said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...

snip

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.



Andy Hall on the brag again....

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.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-18 18:33:43 +0100, "Sam Farrell" said:

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

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.

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

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-18 20:25:19 +0100, ":Jerry:"
said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...

snip

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.



Andy Hall on the brag again....

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

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

On 2007-07-18 21:30:13 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message ...
On 2007-07-18 18:33:43 +0100, "Sam Farrell" said:

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

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.

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

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.

On 2007-07-18 21:32:37 +0100, ":Jerry:" said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-18 20:25:19 +0100, ":Jerry:"
said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...

snip

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.



Andy Hall on the brag again....

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

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

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,

":Jerry:" wrote in message
reenews.net...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...

snip

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.



Andy Hall on the brag again....

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


--
Dave
The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-18 21:32:37 +0100, ":Jerry:"
said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-18 20:25:19 +0100, ":Jerry:"
said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...

snip

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.



Andy Hall on the brag again....

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

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

On the contrary.

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


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 **** taken by Harry Enfield and his "loads 'a muuuuney"
sketches...

On 2007-07-18 22:45:57 +0100, ":Jerry:" said:

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 **** taken by Harry Enfield and his "loads 'a muuuuney"
sketches...


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......

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-18 22:45:57 +0100, ":Jerry:"
said:

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 **** taken by Harry Enfield and his "loads 'a muuuuney"
sketches...


Have you actually provided a constructive answer here? No.

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


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.

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

snip

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,.

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.

snip even more ego-centric clap-trap

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......

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...

On 2007-07-19 06:46:47 +0100, ":Jerry:" said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message

Have you actually provided a constructive answer here? No.

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

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



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.

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

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.




snip

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,.

To the point that you had "hand made pavers" laid, that is not an
opinion, that is bragging.

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


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.

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



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......

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...

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.

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
....

ARWadsworth wrote:
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

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.

--
LSR

In article ,
jal wrote:
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 ...

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.

--
Tony Williams.

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 06:46:47 +0100, ":Jerry:"
mused:

Have you actually provided a constructive answer here? No.

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

You are a complete waste of space you ****ing moron.

*plonk*
--
Regards,
Stuart.

On 2007-07-19 08:58:32 +0100, jal said:

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
...

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

"The Medway Handyman" wrote

Andy Hall on the brag again....

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

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

"LSR" wrote in message
...
ARWadsworth wrote:
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

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.

That will look smashing on google maps.

Adam

On 2007-07-19 17:51:27 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
said:


"LSR" wrote in message
...
ARWadsworth wrote:
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

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.

That will look smashing on google maps.

Adam

So will this


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...et/6901543.stm

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-19 17:51:27 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
said:


"LSR" wrote in message
...
ARWadsworth wrote:
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

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.

That will look smashing on google maps.

Adam

So will this


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...et/6901543.stm

Brilliant. The site says "During World War II, the Cerne giant was disguised
to prevent the Germans from using him as an aerial landmark." I wonder where
he was pointing the aircraft to.

Adam

On 2007-07-19 19:25:28 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message ...
On 2007-07-19 17:51:27 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
said:


"LSR" wrote in message
...
ARWadsworth wrote:
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

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.

That will look smashing on google maps.

Adam

So will this


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...et/6901543.stm

Brilliant. The site says "During World War II, the Cerne giant was
disguised to prevent the Germans from using him as an aerial landmark."
I wonder where he was pointing the aircraft to.

Adam

Well yes, I did wonder that. It's on the way to Bristol I suppose.

Thanks Andy from what you say it looks as if I can coat it in tarmac. Its
an old bungalow and several around have tarmac drives which look ok so I
might run with that. I'm not too worried about time scales, I'm a pensioner
now and so long as it sees me of the planet then that will do.

Any idea how much per sq metre were talking about ?

Sam Farrell
"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-18 18:33:43 +0100, "Sam Farrell" said:

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

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.

On 2007-07-19 19:52:39 +0100, "Sam Farrell" said:

Thanks Andy from what you say it looks as if I can coat it in tarmac. Its
an old bungalow and several around have tarmac drives which look ok so I
might run with that. I'm not too worried about time scales, I'm a pensioner
now and so long as it sees me of the planet then that will do.

Any idea how much per sq metre were talking about ?

Sam Farrell



OK. It's helpful to know what the more complete story is.

Given what you have and the time available, I would ask several
contractors to come and quote and then compare. Ask them for a spec.
of what exactly they will use. That's a good way to separate the
cowboys from those who know what they are doing and are prepared to
sign up for a proper job.

It's certainly unwise to fall for the wiles of people who come along
with a load of tarmac because of a motorway job, and so on.

The Paving Expert site is very helpful and woth spending time going
through. There are price ranges You can post questions in the forum
and should get a range of responses from various people including
professional contractors.
I didn't find anything in what I was looking for that was factually
incorrect, but there were places where there was more information
available elsewhere. There are a range of prices, but it is quite
influenced by location, season, workload etc.

:Jerry: wrote:

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...

Do you realise how stupid you look, pursuing this snide vendetta in post
after post?

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-19 19:25:28 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-07-19 17:51:27 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
said:


"LSR" wrote in message
...
ARWadsworth wrote:
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

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.

That will look smashing on google maps.

Adam

So will this


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...et/6901543.stm

Brilliant. The site says "During World War II, the Cerne giant was
disguised to prevent the Germans from using him as an aerial landmark." I
wonder where he was pointing the aircraft to.

Adam

Well yes, I did wonder that. It's on the way to Bristol I suppose.

He certainly pointed as to where it was going to rain.

Adam