NZ Roads: Criminal Negligence?

[cooneyr]

Seeme to be the way it goes eh.
They were resealing the road outside our flat a couple months ago and not only was i shocked about the lack of effort displayed by the road workers and the time it took to complete, but the finished product was absolute crap. There was no attempt made to sweep the road once marking was done, and the first hot day we had it all melted and was messed up by the small amount of traffic on the road.

Your right these guys are just doing what they are told - all to a contract price. There needs to be some clear guidelines as to just what is expected, and what I really want is some resealing to be done that can last more than six months without breaking up and becoming bumpy potholes and lumps.
On one set of works along the state highway up here one section of resealed road started getting potholes before the rest of the job was even completed! This was fixed, but why can't it be done right the first time?

There are detailed standards for all works especially road construction and chip seal. Process comonly used is council asks contractors for price to complete work to require standard (much more to it than that like quality plans etc etc).

Since the minestry of works was disbanded there seems to be a drop in the quality of road construction. I think it may be because some of the skills learnt by the MOW formen etc have been lost. While the process is heavly engineered there is still and art to it.

R

[cooneyr]

Can't remember where this brain snippet came from (20/20, Talkback, NZ Herald...)

Apparently Utility Services companies are at cross purposes and will often dig up the same section of road to access different cables, lines etc.

This has an impact on all manner of things, not the least of which is the road condition and substandard repair methods.

Utilities have the right to put services inthe road but often dont talk to each other and the councils have a nightmare of a task coordinating them so that they dig once and fix many services. Often the utilites dont do a lot of forward planning too so council seals one year then next year service is dug up when coucil would have happily waited till after service was dug up then sealed.

R

[Sanx]

CooneyR has given a number of reasons why repairs and resealing are done in certain ways. I have my own little theory.

The contractors hired by the councils / Transit are working to a budget and hoping to make as much profit as possible. As a result, they do things slowly, badly and with as little quality control as they can get away with. Essentially, to paraphrase the thread title, it's wilful negligence.

This negligence is then compounded by engineers that seem to know jack about their chosen subject. If, as CooneyR states, chip seal in high traffic areas is often ruined because the solvents don't have enough time to go evaporate then why the hell are they putting it there in the first place? Do they not know it gets ruined? Do they not know it's a high traffic area, or - as I feel might be the case - do they simply not give a flying f*ck?

The A12 is a motorway-class road in the UK. It's two or three lanes in each direction and runs between Ipswich in Suffolk and London. A large section of the road, between Marks Tey and Witham (about 20 miles) was built using precast concrete slabs laid in the mid 70s. It lasted almost thirty years before having to be resurfaced, and then the foundations remained solid. The road gets very high levels of traffic - levels that would cripple the Auckland motorway network. Other sections, laid in traditional hotmix, have lasted similar lengths of time.

Now I don't know what the comparitive costs of road laying methods are, but it's been suggested that bunging a quick layer of chipseal down is 12.5% of the cost of hotmix. If a well-constructed hotmix road can last thirty years or more, surely it would be more economical to do the job properly just once than to continually redo the job time and time again leaving a substandard surface and causing incidental economic damage as a result of accidents, damage to vehicles, premature wear, and so on.

The new bit of SH1, near Matamata, has large sections of chipseal. After less than two years, these roads are breaking up. Potholes are developing and the chip is wearing off. This road gets a fraction of the traffic I'm used to from the A12 in the UK, yet the road (seemingly constructed at vast expense) has lasted less than 24 months. At this rate, putting hotmix down would work out cheaper in just 16 years. Assuming a thirty year lifespan, it'd end up costing half as much (and this figure doesn't take into account inflation, increased materials costs, and so on) as the chipseal alternative.

What this country needs is a government who are prepared to invest in infrastructure. Until then, us bikers will have to put up with lazy contractors, mindless road engineers and conditions that are seemingly designed to put as many of us in hospital as possible.

[cooneyr]

The contractors hired by the councils / Transit are working to a budget and hoping to make as much profit as possible. As a result, they do things slowly, badly and with as little quality control as they can get away with. Essentially, to paraphrase the thread title, it's wilful negligence.

I doubt the contractors managers would want things done slowly. Most often they get paid by the job not by the hour, i.e. more jobs more money.

This negligence is then compounded by engineers that seem to know jack about their chosen subject. If, as CooneyR states, chip seal in high traffic areas is often ruined because the solvents don't have enough time to go evaporate then why the hell are they putting it there in the first place? Do they not know it gets ruined? Do they not know it's a high traffic area, or - as I feel might be the case - do they simply not give a flying f*ck?

Cause subject to all the stupid fucks out there respecthing to road itself and not putting the foot down or breaking to hard the road will be ok after a while . Then will last 8ish years with abuse and still shit loads cheaper than hot mix.

The A12 is a motorway-class road in the UK. It's two or three lanes in each direction and runs between Ipswich in Suffolk and London. A large section of the road, between Marks Tey and Witham (about 20 miles) was built using precast concrete slabs laid in the mid 70s. It lasted almost thirty years before having to be resurfaced, and then the foundations remained solid. The road gets very high levels of traffic - levels that would cripple the Auckland motorway network. Other sections, laid in traditional hotmix, have lasted similar lengths of time.

You are right - there is traffic then there is traffic. We dont even get close to the volumes of traffic that justify concrete roads. Engineers have looked at lifecycle costs (including construction, dafety, maintnenace etc etc) for both mix and concrete many times and still cant justfiy its use.

I highly doubt that the mix has lasted 30 years without replacent. Bitumen oxidies and becomes brittle hence mix or chip seal looses stones after time. Mix lasts longer than seal but still around 10-12 years (oh I forgot dont have sun in england so doesnt oxidise - seriously the lack of ozone layer has an effect in that seal layers are shorter hear - think about how long it takes to sun burn in NZ compared to the UK).

Now I don't know what the comparitive costs of road laying methods are, but it's been suggested that bunging a quick layer of chipseal down is 12.5% of the cost of hotmix. If a well-constructed hotmix road can last thirty years or more, surely it would be more economical to do the job properly just once than to continually redo the job time and time again leaving a substandard surface and causing incidental economic damage as a result of accidents, damage to vehicles, premature wear, and so on.

See para above.

The new bit of SH1, near Matamata, has large sections of chipseal. After less than two years, these roads are breaking up. Potholes are developing and the chip is wearing off. This road gets a fraction of the traffic I'm used to from the A12 in the UK, yet the road (seemingly constructed at vast expense) has lasted less than 24 months. At this rate, putting hotmix down would work out cheaper in just 16 years. Assuming a thirty year lifespan, it'd end up costing half as much (and this figure doesn't take into account inflation, increased materials costs, and so on) as the chipseal alternative.

This is nothing to do with the surfacing i.e. chip seal rather a problem with the aggregate underneath. This comes back to my comments earlier about loss of skills following MOW disbandment. If the aggregate is not suitable or the traffic volmes are really high then mix should have been considered. Given that it was sealed I would suggest that the road wasnt constructed properly.

R

[cooneyr]

You fullas and fulleses all carry and argument well but I would suggest that you do some research as to why things happen rather than making assumptions (most of you are) about why things happen. I know - 4 years at uni, 3 summers working for contractors, time working in an engineering lab, time working for transit, time working for councils, and time working for a consultant (all in eleven years worth now).

More than happy to help with referances (where I know of one) but sick of the "its the fault of contractors, chip seal, engineers, do it like this" crap.

Not meaning to attack anyone personally - debate is good as long as it is two way debate.

R

[dnos]

Not meaning to attack anyone personally - debate is good as long as it is two way debate.

R

Nah bro its good to have someone prepared to spend a bit of time giving us these answers. Makes for a much more interesting read than one way whinging.

[madandy]

Cause subject to all the stupid fucks out there respecthing to road itself and not putting the foot down or breaking to hard the road will be ok after a while . Then will last 8ish years with abuse and still shit loads cheaper than hot mix.

Obviously, roading contractors need to be able to restrict or control traffic flow long enough to allow the surface to cure. Allowing heavy vehicles and higher speeds on freshly laid surfaces is going to ruin a road before it has a chance to set. Who decides when to allow traffic back onto new surfaces and to what limitations?

[Motu]

A loss of skills for sure I think.My father worked for Bitumix when I was a boy,and an uncle was a foreman for NZ Roadmakers...my mother used to always give him heaps for turning farmland into roads....his crew made the first motorway from Penrose to Mt Wellington.I know squat about roads,but grew up with words like Blaw Knox as part of my vocabuary.

They know how to make good roads and how to maintain them - the Aucklad motorways for instance.It's a good surface and the repairs and resurfacing are done free of vehicles.I was surprised when they did my end of Carr Rd a few years ago - there is 300mm of hotmix in there,it's certainly not a rough or cheap job.Back roads are often just tar and chip over the existing surface.When I lived on Waiheke Island a lot of roads were sealed when the Island was taken over by Auck City - I would ride my bike to work on a gravel road and ride home on a sealed road.No prep,just sealed.So it's no wonder a lot of our back roads are not that good.There is pressure to be seen to seal the back roads....sealing a road creates more traffic (sports bikes who would never be seen in the area come in hunting packs),Riders crash,riders complain.I'd rather they be left gravel...less traffic less maintenance,less complaining.

[Skyryder]

I have not read all the posts on this but I have been riding off and on for nigh on forty odd years and there is not doubt the state of the roads have 'gone off the boil. That's certainly true out in suberbs. It was not too long ago when local councils had the responsibility along with the now defunct MOW for road repair and construction. Now it's all private contractors who can not wait to get started on the next job.

Skyryder

[sunhuntin]

think our roads are bad?

I will never complain about potholes again!

This is the Russian Federal highway that runs from Moscow to Yakutsk.

The road doesn't have asphalt surface, though it is a vital Federal highway.

Every time it rains, the traffic flow gets paralyzed; these shots were taken a few days before a traffic jam of 600 cars got stuck there. Hunger and lack of the fuel followed, according to witnesses. One woman gave birth to a child right in the public bus she was riding on.

Construction teams were afraid to appear on site because during their previous visit they were beaten by people who were stuck for a few days. People were breaking the locks on the trucks in search of food and warm clothes.

Fuel, food, firearms and steel tow-lines are the things that are needed most these days on this Federal highway.

[scracha]

More than happy to help with referances (where I know of one) but sick of the "its the fault of contractors, chip seal, engineers, do it like this" crap.
R

My observations as a yurropean.

1) Kiwi's do seem to have a "grin and bear it cos we can't make a difference" or "someone else will report the problem" attitude. If I complain about anything I'm called a "wingeing pomm" (I'm not even a bloody pomm) and comments like "if you don't like it then fuck off" normally follow.
2) As I stated before, nobody expects perfect roads. However, I just can't see why the common sense approach of sweeping up gravel isn't applied once it is deemed safe enough for the 50kmph signs to be removed (and maybe again at a later date if some of the stones/chip become loose)
3) Yep, a lot of bikers are to arrogant to go through the roadworks at 50kmph. When guys are working on the road it's not nice and it's not clever.
4) As I stated before, the current road construction process doesn't seem to make long lasting road surfaces. Roads here are have low volumes of traffic (yes, even Auckland) so there's no excuse for a new road to start breaking up after a few months. If local authorities were held responsible for damage caused by neglected roads I'm sure the roads would be in a better state. I'm also sure that taxes would go up as a result (don't think there'd be any reduction in crashes as the better/wider the roads the faster people drive).
5) Why the hell isn't there there an and active riders rights organisation in New Zealand? Organisations like FEMA work. This forum alone has over 5000 members, probably around 2000 are semi-regular "active" members. Why don't WE start one or actively support the existing one (can't remember what it's called)?

[eliot-ness]

Having read through all the posts and being in full agreement as to the low quality of some roads, not all, and , having ridden on roads of the same standard for over twenty years in the UK i'm puzzled about something. Why, when modern bikes are so much better in most respects, did the old bikes handle rough roads so much better than the modern stuff?
We certainly didn't hang about in the old days. Cruising speeds were generally higher than now but I don't remember a time when I was worried about loose chip or potholes and I never had a problem with them, so, I reckon a lot of todays problems are built into the bikes we ride. One thing, steering geometry, in the search for quicker steering, has changed a lot.Great on smooth seal but less stable on the loose stuff. Second, and perhaps more important, Tyres. The old bikes were shod with real tread, designed to handle just about everything you were likely to come up against and you didn't need to check the pressures, Blow 'em up with a bicycle pump and they did the job. Not good enough for todays high performance bikes but adequate for the time. Todays tyres are designed for high grip on smooth surfaces, wet or dry, and high speeds. but on loose surfaces are almost useless. Dropped bars and clipons also give less control. Wide bars and a more upright stance may be retro and not be the look a sportsbike rider wants but they certainly give more control when things go pear shaped. In short, manufacturers have provided what modern bikers want but road designers haven't, and in the case of rural back roads it's unlikely they ever will.

[cooneyr]

think our roads are bad?

I will never complain about potholes again!

This is the Russian Federal highway that runs from Moscow to Yakutsk.

The road doesn't have asphalt surface, though it is a vital Federal highway.

Every time it rains, the traffic flow gets paralyzed; these shots were taken a few days before a traffic jam of 600 cars got stuck there. Hunger and lack of the fuel followed, according to witnesses. One woman gave birth to a child right in the public bus she was riding on.

Construction teams were afraid to appear on site because during their previous visit they were beaten by people who were stuck for a few days. People were breaking the locks on the trucks in search of food and warm clothes.

Fuel, food, firearms and steel tow-lines are the things that are needed most these days on this Federal highway.

That is awsome. You fullas can have your sealed road arguments - I want roads like that!!!! Not supprising I liked the segment when Chalie and Ewan did the Road of Bones.

Thanks for that Sunhuntin

Cheers
R

[Motu]

Ah! At last,someone who has seen the real problem - it's the bikes.But you can't tell these guys they are riding the wrong bike for the condition,'cause their bike's real fast y'know.The ideal bike for NZ conditions has a 50/50 weight dist,low CG,almost upright riding position,pegs under your but and wide bars - and that doesn't mean a dirt bike,there are plenty of bikes out there set up like that.Not super fast,but not dangerous when something out of the ordinary crops up.

[Ixion]

The old bikes, even the 500s and 650 also had wheel and tyre sizes better suited to bad roads. 19" fronts and at most a 4 1/2 inch rear tyre.