Coe on roads

johnboy said :

As far as i can tell an overpaid idiot who thinks he’s a strategist in the party has got them all trotting out this line at every opportunity.

It’s particularly stupid because one way or another we’ve got three more years of the Stanhope Government and chances are the world won’t really end before then.

So you think that not resurfacing roads is not an issue and he should shut up? He makes valid points and has his argument backed by vaild figures, there is nothing idiotic about his statement.

The fact that because Stanhope is on TAMS’ case about managing their operations to budget, that parts of the Department have had to cut back on essential services. One would think that if the price of an essential service like this would be covered by the Government rather than restricted by budget. But hey, they could just build 60% of a hospital or buy 60% of a police car, better still they could build 60% of a road! Oh wait, they’ve already done that, named it the GDE extension. Though, with the cost cutting they’ve used on that surface, 60% complete might be pushing it a bit.

JC said :

But if you are talking about road maintenance which is where chipseal is actually used (GDE is not actually chipseal) then you will find the cost saving to be significantly more than ripping up the surface and relaying the hotmix. My guess is a reseal, ie spray some tar and put the chip down is about 10% the cost of ripping up the surface of the road and then putting down a new sheet of asphalt.

Okay it’s quite established that all of us don’t know the actual cost or ratio – but the main road to my house was done less then 6 months ago and I can already see where the chipseal has washed away and the really nice bitumen underneath. ie it needs resealing once again. Now that road has been there since this suburb was created along time ago and i doubt it ever needed a re-work after 6 months….

They’re not going to rip up the whole road to fix one part of it – they just stick hotmix back into the effected area unless there is substantial damage or the damage has been prolonged and not maintained.

Madman said :

chip seal is absolutely shocking stuff – you’d think that the gumberment would be able to save money in the long term by using bitumen as it doesn’t need to be resealed as much.

You think about it – I don’t know what the real savings are on this but lets use the above figure.
If chipseal is at a cost to 60% of bitumen then they’re saving 40%. 3 years later the chipseal needs to be replaced as well as repairs between – thats another 60% plus inflation – the bitumen 3 years later has just needed some minor work… Thus the chip seal costing 120% of the life of its counterpart.
You don’t see pot holes and regular maintenance on our quality highways as much as you do in our streets.

Also i bet that statistics would show that after introduction of chipseal becoming the major road surface that vehicle tyre sales have risen… And has the government lowered taxes and levied sales to consumers for the added rubber we need to buy?

Also as a motorcycle rider – I would have to say it would seem a lot safer to slide on bitumen then it would be torn up by chipseal?!

If you are talking from a construction perspective then yes it is better in the long run to go with a hotmix road.

But if you are talking about road maintenance which is where chipseal is actually used (GDE is not actually chipseal) then you will find the cost saving to be significantly more than ripping up the surface and relaying the hotmix. My guess is a reseal, ie spray some tar and put the chip down is about 10% the cost of ripping up the surface of the road and then putting down a new sheet of asphalt.

Bitumen got expensive last year because petroleum was expensive last year. Bitumen costs are mostly driven by the cost of crude oil.

Bitumen will be cheaper this year because petroleum is cheaper this year.

Perhaps the government needs to stockpile bitumen when the crude oil price is cheap and draw down on the stockpile when crude oil prices are expensive. Just a thought.

You can do waaaaay better fooly sik burnouts on bitumen.

The wiki article is interesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asphalt_concrete Despite working for 9 months as a laborer for the old Roads and Bridges branch of the ACT Dept of Interior many years ago I had no idea about composition or relative costs and durability of the various surfaces. Experience would indicate that it is futile to expect an ACT government of any persuasion to make decisions based on cost effectiveness or even bother to determine what that might be.

Madman said :

chip seal is absolutely shocking stuff – you’d think that the gumberment would be able to save money in the long term by using bitumen as it doesn’t need to be resealed as much.

You think about it – I don’t know what the real savings are on this but lets use the above figure.
If chipseal is at a cost to 60% of bitumen then they’re saving 40%. 3 years later the chipseal needs to be replaced as well as repairs between – thats another 60% plus inflation – the bitumen 3 years later has just needed some minor work… Thus the chip seal costing 120% of the life of its counterpart.
You don’t see pot holes and regular maintenance on our quality highways as much as you do in our streets.

Also i bet that statistics would show that after introduction of chipseal becoming the major road surface that vehicle tyre sales have risen… And has the government lowered taxes and levied sales to consumers for the added rubber we need to buy?

Also as a motorcycle rider – I would have to say it would seem a lot safer to slide on bitumen then it would be torn up by chipseal?!

and your leathers won’t save you. nasty stuff.

chip seal is absolutely shocking stuff – you’d think that the gumberment would be able to save money in the long term by using bitumen as it doesn’t need to be resealed as much.

You think about it – I don’t know what the real savings are on this but lets use the above figure.
If chipseal is at a cost to 60% of bitumen then they’re saving 40%. 3 years later the chipseal needs to be replaced as well as repairs between – thats another 60% plus inflation – the bitumen 3 years later has just needed some minor work… Thus the chip seal costing 120% of the life of its counterpart.
You don’t see pot holes and regular maintenance on our quality highways as much as you do in our streets.

Also i bet that statistics would show that after introduction of chipseal becoming the major road surface that vehicle tyre sales have risen… And has the government lowered taxes and levied sales to consumers for the added rubber we need to buy?

Also as a motorcycle rider – I would have to say it would seem a lot safer to slide on bitumen then it would be torn up by chipseal?!

Inappropriate said :

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

unable to deliver on core services such as the Territory’s roads, what hope does the Government have in dealing with the global financial crisis?

Non-sequitur in aisle 5. Come on, you can do better than this, surely?

Remember, he’s just a kid…

but one who is in the ACT legislative assembly…

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

unable to deliver on core services such as the Territory’s roads, what hope does the Government have in dealing with the global financial crisis?

Non-sequitur in aisle 5. Come on, you can do better than this, surely?

Remember, he’s just a kid…

ramblingted said :

I used to live in pothole in road…

Luxury…. I used to dream about living in a pothole.

I used to live in pothole in road…

As far as i can tell an overpaid idiot who thinks he’s a strategist in the party has got them all trotting out this line at every opportunity.

It’s particularly stupid because one way or another we’ve got three more years of the Stanhope Government and chances are the world won’t really end before then.

unable to deliver on core services such as the Territory’s roads, what hope does the Government have in dealing with the global financial crisis?

um. wait for rudd to give them money, and then spend it?

sounds like a bit of bitchumen…

unable to deliver on core services such as the Territory’s roads, what hope does the Government have in dealing with the global financial crisis?

Non-sequitur in aisle 5. Come on, you can do better than this, surely?

If the Stanhope-Gallagher Government is unable to deliver on core services such as the Territory’s roads, what hope does the Government have in stopping us all from being raped in our sleep by a bloke called Trevor?