Bahnzo

Not sure if this belongs on this forum, but it's something I have a real pet peeve about in my county.

My local county roads department has turned to using chip seal to "pave" roads out in the country. They use the largest stones (3/4" I believe, my state and city uses 1/4 when they must chip seal) and it's killing all the good roads for cycling. It's rough and bumpy and in cases where there is a bike lane, it never really adheres and becomes worse than when it's laid due to vehicles never driving over it to help tamp it down.

As a result, in most roads I'm forced to ride about 3ft or so out to follow the "groove" laid down by vehicles. As they drive, they smooth and pack the stones down, so the only real good line is out in traffic. And of course this causes all sorts of problems. I've tried writing the county roads dept, but the only reply I get is the standard, "we'll send this to the appropriate dept" and never heard again. I assume that dept is the delete bin.

Just pissed. They recently chip sealed every single road in the country I ride on now and I'm pissed.

Hoopdriver

Perhaps it's time for a fat bike?

ExPatTyke

I can only agree @Bahnzo - it's a very common way for local councils around here to do a repair on roads. Very annoying when they do it, and the road that's been dressed will be back to the same condition a few months later.

You've got the combined hazards of loose chippings being flicked up by passing motor traffic, and losing your grip on the drifts of unstuck gravel. And if you do come off, the chances are that you're going to leave a lot of skin on the gravel that has stuck.

JoeyBike

Now THAT sucks! Someone in charge hates cyclists. That is just a hateful anti-cycling device they installed. I remember sadly about 20 years ago when DOT installed ruble strips on every good roadbike route in my area, ensuring I had to ride in the travel lane. I got rid of my road bike and switched to my Long Haul Trucker with 26x2.1 semi-slick tires. Even the worst rumble strips would not take me down and some I could just ride on when cars were passing. Could barely feel them.

So my Trucker is set up EXACTLY like my road bike. Obviously it is a tad slower but I ride alone so no one cares. Fat tires, or find another sport. Not sure how to combat DOT.

Sorry bro. I remember my sadness well so I can relate. Sucks.

Milton Keynes

Ugh. I absolutely hate chip seal, especially when it's been freshly laid down and the chat is loose. Even after it's been packed down, it's rough and not nearly as nice to ride on as asphalt. But they do it around here because it's a lot cheaper than paving so they can waste that money elsewhere.

aspalmat

Agreed, chip seal is the worse surface I have ridden on. I did a ride this past Sunday ,and ended up on a dirt road with my road bike, and it was still better then roads with chip seal!

Bahnzo

Well, there is one minor victory. I see they didn't chip seal the bike lane on one road, so there is that. (They still oiled it however, no idea why).

A couple years ago I wrote the country roads dept commish about chip seal and asked that roads with existing bike lanes not chip seal the bike lane. I was told it couldn't be done and would result in the bike lane being filled with debris if it wasn't chip sealed as well. Of course we all know that's BS, but that's what it was.

So there is that...maybe I should try again to get them to use the smaller size gravel.

leob1

My town does that, it is horrible. They do minimal repairs to the road before the chip seal, so now you have a bumpy road with rough and loose gravel on top. The roads suck. Then during election time they brag about how many roads the have 'repaved'.

Milton Keynes

Chip seal is not "paved" by any sense of the imagination.

Bahnzo

According to the county it is! I wonder, what was the original purpose of chip seal? Was it a rough pavement alternative?

I wrote my county thanking them for the accommodation towards cyclists of not chip sealing the bike lanes, and asking why they don't use the smaller gravel for chip seal. Heard nothing so far.

Stormsedge

Chip seal is not my favorite, but my Domane with 32s soaks it up pretty well. Thankfully, it is not used around here (yet), but have experienced it in Texas during organized rides. I suspect the infrastructure costs in some areas are driving these decisions and practices. Pedal on!

Milton Keynes

Yes, a much cheaper alternative.

indyfabz

I did my first Cycle Oregon in 2002. Several long days in the saddle on chip seal. By the third or forth day butt butter was the new currency of the ride.

dedhed

You need to move up the food chain and contact ELECTED officials. They control the department budgets and answer to voters.

jon c. 

I've never seen a chip seal road with a bike lane. Are these painted lanes? Chip seal roads around here are sufficiently low volume that they don't have lanes of any sort.

Bahnzo

Yes, they were designated bike lanes before the chip seal. My county has these here and there (Colorado here, we do try to like bikes on some level) between cities because of the cycle traffic. But then the idiot roads dept didn't bother to think before they chip sealed them before. I can only hope that enough of us complained to them and it banged some reason into their heads.

But again, I rode another road today that has a very wide, but chip sealed bike lane. It's VERY rough, and completely full of rocks and debris because it's never swept (being out inthe country). But if I ride in the road, then I get honked at and mirrors that whiz by my ears. There's no win.

jon c. 

That sounds pretty dreadful. The only chip seal roads here are formerly dirt roads where you seldom see more than a car per mile. You can ride in any part of the road you wish. And they're pretty firm and smooth.

CliffordK

On my last trip between Eugene and Portland and back, they were out chipsealing parts of the state designated Willamette Valley Scenic Bikeway. I even hit an area with active construction and loose gravel.

I think they mostly use 1/4" or perhaps 1/2" stones, so while rough, it isn't the worst. And, once applied, compacted, and swept, it does tend to stay in place pretty well.

As far as "Safety", there are a few issues.

• Comfort. Not the biggest "safety" issue, but it can also affect a person's riding. There are a couple of places where the county has paved over chipseal, leaving the shoulders chipsealed, and the lane smooth. So, the poor paving slams cyclists into the driving lane.
  I suppose one could also argue the health benefits of cycling, and anything one does to make it uncomfortable will also reduce riding, and thus the health benefits.
  
• Hand numbness. Privates? This is an issue with cycling, and shouldn't be taken lightly. There is a lot a cyclist can do, but some of it may come down to rough roads. Permanent or long term injuries?
  
• NOISE. Actually, drivers of new cars dislike chipseal. However, it may actually be a benefit to cyclists... Noisy cars are Safe cars????
  
• Traction. I can't say. As long as the road surface is clean and sticking together, then it may not significantly negatively affect cyclists. I have to wonder if the rough surface may actually improve traction for vehicles. What about water drainage from the surface?
  

One of the issues is that I'm not convinced that chipseal is cost effective.

It is most often applied to cover up road surface damage. But, if the road foundation is crumbling, then the chipseal merely hides those problems without fixing them. And, within a few years, the crumbling comes up through the chipseal.

A quality pavement job can last a good long time. I'm pretty sure a fairly heavily used road near Mom's house including truck traffic was just repaved for the first time since I was a kid... So almost 40 years ago. And the road may not have been new then.

We'll see how long the new repaving job lasts, but if properly prepared and applied, it could well outlast me.

I know of at least one local MUP (off street bike path) that was chipsealed. Quite dreadful.

Is that chip sealing directly over gravel/dirt? I didn't know that was even possible, but that sounds absolutely ridiculous. They used to oil some gravel roads. I don't know if the practice is still being used, I would assume the environmentalists have tried to shut down the practice. Oiled gravel may start clumping, but is quite different than chip sealing over asphalt.

Chip-sealing over a gravel foundation would give very little support to the paving, and it could break up very rapidly. It would make a pretty road for a few months.

79pmooney

Question - asphalt is a petroleum product and requires heat to melt (and reuse). Energy (and petroleum resource) -wise, which, over the long run is the more conservation minded approach?

I don't know the answer to this, but if chip seal is the better approach, environment-wise, I am willing to suck it up and just deal with it. Yes, the fresh, loose stuff sucks, Find a new route for a week or so. And the rest? Get the right bike, wheels and tires. Even bad chip seal is a lot better than what bicycles once had to deal with.

I rode and raced a vertically stiff, very steep angled race bike on some poor New England roads in the '70s. My wheels were 36 spoke sew-up wheels with very light spoke and not laced super tight. By anybody's wheel-building standards now, just "wrong". But on bad roads, they worked very well. (Also sewups which are not very prone to pinch-flatting so lower pressures work well.)

My thoughts on good road policy re: both money and conservation is that after a decent surface put down. the city/county should spend the labor hours filling cracks with asphalt early on, that if this were done enough, re-paving could be stretched out a few more years, probably saving real money (and petroleum/energy). I'm guessing this isn't done here in Portland because it is easier for the city planners to just hire a contractor every few years. Here they save money by simply doing nothing for too long and let us pay the price with worn shocks, bike crashes, etc. Those don't show up on the city ledger.

Ben

79pmooney

Chip seal traction is highly dependent on the stones used. When sharp cut/broken stones are used, traction can be very high (as can the road rash). Smooth, polished beach stones can be very slippery.

Ben

Bahnzo

A couple things: Traction - this is one thing they tout about chip seal is the improved traction. I'm sure there is increased traction, but since when was asphalt lacking? And, while it increases traction, I'm 100% sure it also increases tire wear. I did some googling a while ago, and there were no studies that I could find. I'd be willing to bet that if it was known how much more it wears tires, drivers would also be increasingly against chip seal.

And: your point about covering up damage. Chip seal is absolutely not meant for that. But, that tends to be it's prime use. There's a street here in town that was in terrible shape, and they chip sealed it instead of a proper repair. It's two years on now, and it's 10x worse that it was before. The problem is the chip seal actually magnifies the underlying damage.

CliffordK

Oh, I forgot about Road Rash. Personally I try to avoid laying my bike down.

It would be a difficult study as modern tires may last 50K miles if the alignment is good.

Perhaps one could compare multiple counties, some with chip seal, some without it, but it would have to be a large study with careful controls.

Another poorly studied question is whether it affects fuel efficiency. Even if it is a small as 1% or 1/2%, overall could add up to a significant amount of money.

Bahnzo

That's true, rolling resistance is significantly affected.

mr_bill

CliffordK

Hard to say. I presume Chipseal is applied with hot tar. The chip sealing I was seeing done north of Salem appeared to go down in multiple layers of tar/gravel/tar/gravel. But, overall, there may be less heating of the rock, and less tar. Nonetheless, if chipsealing is done say once every 5 years, and paving is done once every 30 to 50 years, then it is quite possible any savings would be a false savings.My old Portland neighborhood has an issue that the city refuses to repave without curbs... And curbs are unnecessary for the neighborhood... and weren't put in during the 1950's when it was built up. Landscaping really is now built around not having curbs.

So, now the road just deteriorates. Nonetheless, the city still collects taxes.

It has the advantage of being like a quarter mile long speedbump, and is popular for pedestrians and dog walkers.

Shocks are fine as long as you keep the speed under 5 MPH.