Since I introduced the resolution to restrict the use of brick pavers on public walkways, I have received quite a bit of feedback, mostly from accessibility advocates in favor of the plan.
Not everyone agrees, though. Some have questioned why I’m pursuing such a measure when we have so many big economic issues on our plate. I would argue that access to public facilities is even more important during hard times and that this measure has a cost-saving element to it. Still, I agree that we have some big tasks ahead of us as we enter the budgeting season.
Others have said that brick pavers are so aesthetically superior to concrete that we should find a way of continuing to use them, especially in historic or shopping districts.
I’m curious to know what you think. Have you had experience with brick pavers?
Friday, March 13, 2009
Your Thoughts on Brick Pavers
Posted by
Councilmember Nancy Floreen
Labels:
brick pavers
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
When brick pavers are laid correctly and are of a non-slick surface, I think they are preferable to concrete. A surface with texture is safer than one that is smooth and slick. A surface that is more easily repaired is also safer. Think about the many concrete sidewalks that are cracked, have upheavals from frost or tree roots - that isn't safer than brick pavers.
The District of Columbia put in brick pavers in crosswalks several years ago. (K street is one example). Evidently that was a mistake because they have been removed and replaced by concrete. Too much wear and tear by traffic.
I've seen the use of dyed (red) concrete to look like pavers. The concrete has a form overlay while it is still wet to make it look like bricks. So then you get the look of pavers, but perhaps the advantages of concrete.
What about using rubber sidewalks? rubbersidewalks.com. I have no affiliation with this company, but did hear about it being trialed in a DC neighbourhood somewhere...Seems to be a great way to recycle old tires...
Post a Comment