Asphalt Versus Brick

 

Asphalt has a limited life, as this close-up of a street in Torrance, Calif. taken in 2002 clearly shows.

A short article from suburban Chicago?EUR??,,????'???s Pioneer Press sheds light on a community debate over using asphalt or concrete to pave a street. The city did not decide the question, but was carefully weighing the cost of both materials. The average cost to reconstruct a block of Wilmette?EUR??,,????'???s Linden Avenue is about $240,000, said local engineering director Brigitte Mayerhofer.

The village has about $770,000 from the motor fuel tax to use on the program, and $2.3 million from the accelerated road program, via bond funds.
When comparing costs on road surfaces, asphalt serves as a better short-term investment while brick comes out on top in the long run, said Mayerhofer. She explained it is cheaper to pave in asphalt but those streets must be resurfaced every 15 to 20 years and reconstructed after 25 to 30 years.

If a brick street has been installed properly, follow-up work should come 40 years later, when the bricks need to be rotated and flipped, she said.

Comparing the two types of streets over an 80-year period, the cost of a brick street is more economical because the only other maintenance work involves filling the street’s joints with sand, she added.