UK Pavement vs US Sidewalk materials

[Sir Ray]

Another overly broad question of things UK vs US

 

First, I am equating UK pavement = US sidewalk, and defining them as a surfaced public footpath alongside a public road - so paths thru public parks or in peoples backyards/gardens don't count, nor do 'dirt' paths that people wear out walking across the edges of lawns where there are no sidewalks (this is common in more rural areas of the US).

 

In the US, as a rule (and the wiki article about Sidewalks backs me up on this) sidewalks in Urban and Suburban areas are concrete - maybe about 93% or more. OK, the concrete may be patterned or colored (as in moderized "Business Improvement Districts" - notable for brick edgings along the curb and tree planters, and dark green old-fashioned light poles), but it's still concrete. Some places have brick or (more likely) pavers - hexagonal pavers were popular during the 1960s/1970s US Urban renewal era, maybe 2%, and some areas have a strip of asphalt (~tarmac) servering as the sidewalk material - usually in industrial areas or alongside large semi-wild parks or recreation areas. The remaining percent or so, odd stuff like flagstones or cobbles or even wood. So for US sidewalks concrete is clearly King.

 

However, from Images, TV shows and Google Earth/Bing, I gather that much of UK pavements are, indeed, pavement (tarmac) - I have no idea of the percentages. In addition, I assume this is not the case in urban areas like London, and concrete is more common - but is it overwhelmingly common? I was in London about 10 years ago on vacation, and did some walking tours - often starting from the area of Euston Station, but for the life of me I cannot remember what material was under my feet (no, it wasn't dog poo or fast food wrappers). Can anyone supply some educated quantitative guesses on pavement - tarmac vs concrete vs whatever, urban vs suburban?

Thanks

[trisonic]

Traditionally London's pavements have utilized "Yorkstone" paving slabs. I can't imagine they are still using this stone as it is freakingly expensive (and people have been know to steal it).

 

Best, Pete.

[F-UnitMad]

In general (which seems to fit the OP!!) the "normal" surface for pavements was usually stone or concrete paving slabs, usually about 3ft x 2ft, cut to fit where neccesary, with kerbstones at the roadside edge. Nowadays block paving is popular in big cities, but we don't have vast areas of poured concrete really; even our road surfaces aren't concrete very often - although it was tried years ago, especially for the then-new Motorways (late 50s/early 60s - think 'Interstate') it has never been seen as a satisfactory surface in this Country - for one thing it produces a lot of 'road noise' under tyres; I've read somewhere that one stretch of concrete road was so bad for this that signs were put up to tell motorists what the cause was - that it wasn't something wrong with their car...

A cheap repair/covering for pavements in suburban areas these days is a thin layer of tarmac over the old slabs, that has gravel chippings spread over it while still wet. Of course for a while, that means lots of loose chippings lying around... we were all less than thrilled when that happened in our street, I can tell you...

I couldn't guess at quantitive percentages, but if American concrete sidewalks stand out to us UK-resident, US-outline modellers, then that tells you something about the difference between here and there....

[Gwiwer]

British footpaths have typically been laid with pavers, stone flags, bricks, tiles or sometimes bitumen (asphalt) but very seldom concrete. All can be used almost immediately whereas concrete needs to be left to go off (set or cure) before the path can be re-opened though whether that or the abundance of local materials, natural and manufactured, is the reasoning I can't say.

[Edwin_m]

Indeed poured concrete footway (the correct technical term!) is almost unheard of in the UK though it seems quite common in the suburbs of Dublin.

 

I remember the "tyre noise" signs on the M1 (Watford-Luton area IIRC) in the 70s. Concrete pavement (technical term for the road surface) is more uneven due to the need to pour it in sections, so your really feel it with a harder car suspension.

[Grovenor]

Remember that UK footpaths usually have lots of utilities under them. When doing one of the frequent digging exercises to repair same its much easier to lift a few slabs than break up some solid concrete. The tarmac version is also fairly easy to cut through and patch up.

Keith

[James]

for one thing it produces a lot of 'road noise' under tyres; I've read somewhere that one stretch of concrete road was so bad for this that signs were put up to tell motorists what the cause was - that it wasn't something wrong with their car...

Commuting along the M18 before it was resurfaced in a car with low profile tyres and sports suspension was a horrible experience!

 

On the A180 (which joins the M180 end-on), IIRC, extra lay bys were installed as the road surface was so bad it could send people to sleep! I suspect it was probably the frequency of the noise caused by a vehicle passing over it.

[Gwiwer]

The flip-side to that is the use of concrete strips or patches in "noise zones" to ensure drivers stay alert. The M5 in Devon still has lengthy stretches of pink concrete surface which was installed to blend with the dominant local soil colour (red) and which also gives a fairly "loud" ride. The A30 between Exeter and Okehampton is the same

[Glorious NSE]

I'd agree with the above, the only thing i'd add is that tarmac seems to be on the ascendancy from paving slabs, my *guess* was that tarmac might well result in less litigation down the line, no uneven paving slab edges to fall over...

[PhilJ W]

During the building boom during the 50's and 60's many streets were laid in concrete but most have now been covered in tarmac. Public roads and footpaths in the UK are the responsibility of local authorities and they are legally required to be built to a standard. Concrete footpaths are most often found in 'Plotland' type areas where during the 1930's areas of marginal farmland were sold off in plots for self builders, a good example is Jaywick on the Essex coast. Many such roads had the word 'unadopted' attached after the name meaning that the maintainance of both street and footpath were not the responsibility of the local authority.

[The Stationmaster]

I'd agree with the above, the only thing i'd add is that tarmac seems to be on the ascendancy from paving slabs, my *guess* was that tarmac might well result in less litigation down the line, no uneven paving slab edges to fall over...

 

The main reason for using tarmac is that it is quick and cheap - relaying paving slabs (or laying them in the first place) means a higher cost for material (even with concrete slabs) and more time and labour to do the job plus far lower repair costs. Parts of our town centre pavements have been repaved with some very expensive stone slabs in recent years but when they got to the less touristy fringes of the job down went the blacktop and several yards of pavement were finished and in use in an hour or two - where the stone slabs were going in the job took several days for just a few yards of pavement.

[James]

In villages round here we don't ever have slabs for pavements - normally either tarmac or dirt!

[Tony_S]

Our road (side road, built 1990) is concrete, the pavements are tarmac except for where the dropped kerbs are installed (where the house drive crosses the tarmac) when concrete is used.

 

Tony

[Adrian Wintle]

Remember that UK footpaths usually have lots of utilities under them. When doing one of the frequent digging exercises to repair same its much easier to lift a few slabs than break up some solid concrete. The tarmac version is also fairly easy to cut through and patch up.

Keith

 

This isn't a hindrance in Toronto. They will cut the concrete, do their work, and patch with asphalt... it sort of defeats the concept of a homogeneous poured concrete sidewalk. The latest trend is to 'beautify' sidewalks by re-laying them in brick/pavers, despite the very visible evidence that these are totally stupid sidewalk materials in an environment that gets frequent freeze-thaw cycles and encourages the use of salt or other ice melters on the sidewalks (and the utility companies still patch their holes with asphalt rather than replacing the pavers...)

 

Adrian

[PhilJ W]

In the UK woe betide the utility company that does not restore the existing surface after digging it up. They hate brick pavers as they are the hardest to replace properly. Concrete is also compulsory under a dropped kerb but often it is covered by a thin layer of tarmac. This is the case with my own dropped kerb.

[Lady_Ava_Hay]

The paving slabs were nearly all pre cast concrete and were laid on sand. The slightest weight of a parked car would crack them and in many areas they were poorly laid and started to cant over.

 

The reason that concrete is rarely used as surface is because it holds water which then freezes and breaks up the concrete causing dust and even holes. Paving slabs have drainage gaps and a lot of the modern tarmacs are slightly porous and laid on an amalgam of stone chips and earthy sand.

 

Flexibility is a key ingredient of any flat surface laid out to carry heavy traffic weights. Concrete lacks that and tends to break up at the edges or crack mightily across its full bay width. You also have to leave a small gap between each bay for movement and this is usually filled with either timber strip or pitch. The reason that the tyre noise was so bad was that the concrete was marked with widthways stripes as a result of the method used to compact the concrete and for extra grip. It didn't matter a jot until they invented the radial tyre. Cross plies make a lot less noise.

[F-UnitMad]

The paving slabs were nearly all pre cast concrete and were laid on sand. The slightest weight of a parked car would crack them and in many areas they were poorly laid and started to cant over.

 

That reminds me of a delivery I did once to a large Factory in Stafford; the Goods In was at the end of a long road down the side of the building, along which the workers also parked their cars, so it was a bit tight. While I was being unloaded, another truck came down, and to 'save time' he went up along the pavement on the opposite side to the cars... and crashed through the slabs, dropping the front axle to the ground. A trench had been dug under the pavement to access Utility pipes, and instead of back-filling, the workmen had just laid the slabs back over the gap! A paving slab alone cannot support a 17ton truck...

There was another way out so I didn't get stuck and didn't see how they eventually got the truck out (crane I presume!), but I couldn't help thinking "There but for the grace of god go I...", as the access had been tight, and I'd been tempted to go up on the pavement myself.... I have always avoided doing anything like that since, as well!!!

[Adrian Wintle]

It didn't matter a jot until they invented the radial tyre. Cross plies make a lot less noise.

 

I recall cross-ply tires singing very well on concrete road surfaces over here.

 

Adrian

[Sir Ray]

Thank you for the responses, an rather interesting mix of info so far.

 

First, let me re-iterate how common concrete footways (sounds nicer than 'pavement' or 'sidewalks' ) and asphalt-concrete roads (I found out this is the correct term of what everyone else calls 'asphalt' roads - including me), I took the bus this morning (car in shop), and of a 16 mile journey (also looking out the windows at the side roads since, hey, it is a bus. maybe 700ft of footways was asphalt (and this was a cheat - this was a light industrial zone, and a cabinet maker and a plumbing supply house had simply paved the entire areas in front of their buildings as parking lots, so in fact there was no footways) - the remainder I saw was concrete footways and asphalt roads (this is on Long Island, suburban area of New York City). As a rule, 'driveway aprons' and 'corner handicap ramps' - which I guess is what you call 'dropped kerbs' - are also concrete.

 

So, if I have this right, in the UK - tarmac (which may or may not be asphalt-concrete - wiki just shrugged and said 'depends') is quite popular for both roads and pavements, paving slabs are also common (I suppose mostly on High Streets), but more common in the past (come to think of it, I recall as a kid historical buildings used to have flagstones as the sidewalk, but apparently even for these areas flagstones have been relegated to backyard/garden duty (although there are a lot of historical districts in the US, some must still have flagstone walks), and concrete walks, rather uncommon. Speaking of Pavers, in the US when they use pavers the most common is a Hexagonal design, is that a common design in the UK also?

 

Now, I am not exactly sure why concrete is so popular as footways in the US - it is more expensive than asphalt, and requires follow-up after pouring it, but OTOH the crews who lay down the concrete walks are fast - boom, dig up the old walk, lay down the forms and tamp the subgrade, pour the concrete, level the concrete, follow up and remove the forms (our neighbor just had their done last month) - I can see the pouring and leveling with screeds and floats of concrete to be much easier for semi-skilled labour to perform, than to lay and grade asphalt pavements (with mini-road rollers?). And for the record, few roads are build/rebuild w/ concrete nowadays either in the US, although this was the material of choice back in the 1950s-1970s - apparently costs are 3x greater for the concrete, and it takes twice as long to construct than using asphalt.

 

BTW, I looked up images of the Yorkstone paving slabs mentioned, and many of them were so flat and uniform and tightly fitted together that you could mistake them for poured concrete (which I probably did when I was in London) - I guess ones that heaved and were unlevel would be very obvious.

 

BTW, in the US a ridiculously large number of roads are called "Main Street" -now, assuming a High Street is the main conmmercial road in a town, are a large number of these roads also called "High Street"

 

 

[F-UnitMad]

Yes, almost every City & Town will have a "High Street", it is the UK equivalent to Main Street.

Small Villages may not, being built along a main road to somewhere else, but they are also most likely to have unusual names for the small streets and alleys off the main road. Then again, similar names can be found in Cities... such as "Back Passage" in the City of London... :laugh:

 

Sorry, schoolboy humour there ... hope it translates across the Pond...

[Tony_S]

Thank you for the responses, an rather interesting mix of info so far.

 

...

 

BTW, in the US a ridiculously large number of roads are called "Main Street" -now, assuming a High Street is the main conmmercial road in a town, are a large number of these roads also called "High Street"

 

 

or in our local example "High Road."

 

 

 

[Kris]

Speaking of Pavers, in the US when they use pavers the most common is a Hexagonal design, is that a common design in the UK also?

 

 

 

The overwhelming majority of paving slabs are either square or rectangular. These would account for more than 99% of slabs used.

 

 

[skipepsi]

Strangely the council estate I grew up on was built in around 1937 and had slabs of a red coloured granite effect each the width of the pavement, this was in Yorkshire and of course they were later covered over with tarmac when the gas mains were upgraded.

[The Stationmaster]

First, let me re-iterate how common concrete footways (sounds nicer than 'pavement' or 'sidewalks' ) and asphalt-concrete roads (I found out this is the correct term of what everyone else calls 'asphalt' roads - including me),

 

Look up 'bitumen macadam' on google although 'tarmacadam' (modern version) is usually used on pavements I suspect as the material size is much finer then 10mm bitumen macadam

 

BTW, in the US a ridiculously large number of roads are called "Main Street" -now, assuming a High Street is the main conmmercial road in a town, are a large number of these roads also called "High Street"

 

Strange to relate but my home town (which dates back to the 1200s and received its Royal Charter in 1568) hasn't got a 'High Street' despite straddling an important through road and being a once important trashipment point between river and road (packhorse) transport; so there are exceptions to the rule.

[Derekl]

The use of concrete for motorway road surfaces in the UK was the result of lobbying by the concrete industry in the early days of motorway construction - I think the government agreed that X % of motorway surfaces were to be concrete. I don't know what the cost of material and building are, but I guess that agreement would not have been made unless concrete and tarmac surfaces were broadly similar in cost.

 

The concrete surface is not totally satisfactory - smooth concrete would be bad for water run-off and provides poor grip, so it is ridged to allow for run-off and increase grip, thus the unpleasant tyre noise levels on concrete roads.

 

To move on to the actual question, I don't think you will find much poured concrete on pavements in the UK, although it is used for driveway access across the pavement. My access is poured concrete (recently replaced), but having seen the post, I notice that the house across the road has tarmac access. The pavement on that side is tarmac, on my side concrete slabs, with grassed verge to the curb stones.

 

My general impression is that in city/town centres and in older areas concrete slabs were used. Newer developments use tarmac pavements, possibly because they are laid at the same time as the road surface, making it a logical choice. Both are (usually - this is never going to be an exact science) supported by pre-cast concrete curb stones.

 

The traditional 3 foot by 2 foot slab fell foul of the Manual Handling Regulations (they are too heavy to be lifted by one person) although, obviously, many are in still in place. I am not sure what size is currently used, but it is probably about half of that. The large slab could still be used, although the vehicle used to transport and lay would have to be (small) crane equipped.

 

Laying stone slabbing is fairly skilled (particularly if you don't want to have to come back next month to re-align the lot) which may discourage use. Tarmac is (I think) quite easy, although you need the equipment to smooth the surface, which may encourage use.

 

Stone slabbing also has a tendency over time to deteriorate, producing hazardous trips where the sand foundation has been washed or worn away so that the slab can rock, resulting in an apparently flat surface surface suddenly becoming a 1 inch plus trip hazard. This has cost local authorities dearly in compensation payments in the past, but that has also resulted in higher standards of inspection.

 

I don't see it as likely that paving slabs in city/town centres are likely to be replaced with other than slabs, or a version thereof. I can see that in suburban areas, older worn slabbed pavements are likely to be replaced by tarmac.