*AVOID Acaster Malbis*

nickb · Post by **nickb** » Wed Aug 06, 2008 7:49 pm

The council have 'resurfaced' the roads through the village by throwing down a load of tar and sprinkling a few chippings on top. I got about 100 metres along it when my wheels locked up due to tar and stone jammed in my frame and stuck to my tyres. I then had no choice but to carry my bike back to the good bit of road which clogged up my cleats. This meant spending half an hour at the side of the road in the rain with a small knife trying to clean my cleats and bike up. I was so mad i could have picked up my bike and thrown it over the hedge.

What the hell is the point in doing this? The roads were much better before. Is there someone reading this that works for the council/highways that can explain such atrocious quality of work? They have done the same in Bilbrough which is making these 2 places impossible to ride through. Anyone else had the same experience?

AliceS · Post by **AliceS** » Wed Aug 06, 2008 8:08 pm

Most of the roads around there are being resurfaced at the moment but the few I use to get to my horse are usually done better than that. So I would avoid Acaster Malbis generally for the time being but the works are meant to be finished soon I think anyway. As for the newbie chaingang route I haven't noticed any roadworks happening apart from a bit in Appleton Roebuck where they are finishing housing.

willhub · Post by **willhub** » Wed Aug 06, 2008 10:10 pm

I think the council are on a mission to destroy all roads around here

The route I go to york, naburn way is getting chippin crap on it now, means I have to go to the transmitter near stillingfleet and get on the cycle track, no doube the whole part up to naburn will be done too, even the roads around my village, the back roads I used as a quick 3 mile circuit are now covered in this crap, allthough its abit more compact but its messing up the paintwork

So is the actual into chaingang circuit up at acaster also resurfaced? Was going to use that more often.. shame

Arthur · Post by **Arthur** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 9:05 am

Why? It's cheap.

It does settle down after a few days to being ridable, in a jar you teeth out and sap your speed sort of a way. After a year or so, it's almost ok

willhub · Post by **willhub** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 9:47 am

Yea after a year its almost ok!, a year is a long time!!

I dread to think what saturday/sunday rides will be like if they are on a mission to do the whole of north yorkshire

Thanks the lord I'm moving away abit, they cant put chippings in busy citys

nickb · Post by **nickb** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 10:01 am

Ok Arthur, go for a ride round Acaster and see if you still think the cheap way is a good idea.

Dr Dave · Post by **Dr Dave** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 10:45 am

Thanks for the heads up Nick

BroomWagon · Post by **BroomWagon** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 11:01 am

I don't work for the council, but work in a related area. This is known as slurry seal and as Arthur says is the cheapest way of resurfacing roads.

Arthur · Post by **Arthur** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 11:06 am

I don't think it's a good idea! I'm just saying why it is used.

BroomWagon · Post by **BroomWagon** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 11:23 am

Cost comes into everything. I think taxes can be spent on better things than roads, hospitals for example. Slurry seal is horrible stuff, but contrast it to the cost of motorways, lovely road surfaces, but cost 13 million per km......oh no this is all getting far too political

willhub · Post by **willhub** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 12:42 pm

Was concrete not used on motorways in the old days? Is concrete more expensive or cheaper than tarmac?

I'm pretty sure they could make some other surfaces cheaper than tarmac but not as crap as this slurry rubbish.

Least they could do is put tarmac at the side for us cyclists :p

cath · Post by **cath** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 1:53 pm

I believe - though might be wrong - that concrete is much more expensive than normal tarmac and it takes longer to build the road, but it does last longer.

They've resurfaced my parents road on Woodthorpe in a way that is supposed to be even cheaper than chippings....and it's awful, though at least you don't get hit by flying stones.

Dave B · Post by **Dave B** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 2:03 pm

cath wrote:I believe - though might be wrong - that concrete is much more expensive than normal tarmac and it takes longer to build the road, but it does last longer.

Trouble is, concrete has to be laid in sections and, like railway track, needs an expansion joint in between each bit so that it doesn't distort in really hot weather (tarmac doesn't need this as it just softens in the heat to take up the expansion), therefore every so often you get a significant gap where the joint is and a very noticeable 'bump', even in a motor vehicle with suspension. Anyone with the misfortune to have travelled on a concrete motorway at speed (the old M54 surface through Telford was a real shocker) will know what I mean.

Dave

ChrisC · Post by **ChrisC** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 2:37 pm

Concrete is also noisier than tarmac and so can only be used on motorways where the motorway is a long way from people.

Dr Dave · Post by **Dr Dave** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:01 pm

Yes it's the noise that is a real problem with concrete - just ask residents near Garforth - there was a lot of fuss when the M1 extension was built.