What is the need to replace tar road by concreting the same where there is only limited vehicular traffic.?

Question

Presently in the local area where there is no heavy traffic, what is the need to replace tar roads by concreting. it is waste of time, money & inconvenience to all the residents.

Answer 1

No need at present

Answer 2

In the long run, it saves money. It costs money every time you re-do the roads. If the roads are done in concrete (maybe 7 - 15 yrs) they will last longer and not need to be replaced as fast. If they were left as tar roads you can quickly end up as gravel with very upsetting potholes (some residents in some cities are so upset about potholes they try to bill the city for their car repair -potholes are hard on cars) and need to be re-paved (5 yrs or so, but don't quote that-estimate).

Also, concrete looks better and is attractive to new investors, realtors, and businesses. If the city looks better the available income typically increases because more tax revenue (businesses) moves in.

All in all it IS a large expense but only because it happens at the same time. The tar roads are as expensive or more expensive but the cost is spread out over many years so no-one notices.

In addition, perhaps they forcast additional traffic in the not too distant future. This happens a-lot without prior planning and is certainly no fun when you are stuck with lots of traffic on bad roads because someone in city planning didn't plan for it 5 yrs ago when it was needed.

Look around the area. Are there new subdivions or lots being done up? There soon might be.

Answer 3

for one or all of these reasons

1. they expect traffic to build up
2. the are probably gets standing water for some time in the year
3. a contract has been handed out because the contractor has paid someone off and there weren't enough other major roads which were not already being concretised.

Answer 4

the cost is more for concreating roads.but they are long lasting than thar roads