New Haven Independent: Rubber Meets The Sidewalk

Rubber Meets The Sidewalk

by Melissa Bailey | February 19, 2008 12:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (15)

Boing! A new type of walkway could be coming to your block.

Rubber sidewalks, made of recycled tires, are springing up in cities across the country as a more eco-friendly, crack-resistant alternative to traditional cement. Local legislators have posed the question: Could this be New Haven’s time to add a little bounce to its step?

In a letter to be communicated to the Board of Aldermen Tuesday night, four aldermen are requesting a hearing on the matter.

Proponents praise the rubber for not cracking under tree root pressure, as cement notoriously does.

Beaver Hill Alderman Moti Sandman said in his part of town, faulty sidewalks have been a “big issue.” In some places, “you don’t have sidewalks. You have pieces of rubble that used to be a sidewalk.” People in wheelchairs have to be wheeled in the street because the sidewalks are so bad, he said. He joined Aldermen Alex Rhodeen, Roland Lemar, and Erin Sturgis-Pascale in backing the bill.

Rubber paths would not only make for easier wheeling and walking, but would save the city money in the long-term, argued Lemar. The rubber costs more but lasts longer — over 20 years, as opposed to about five years for concrete.

“Concrete sidewalks can’t be maintained,” he argued. “Once they become damaged, they have to be entirely replaced.” In areas where tree roots need to be trimmed as often as every three years, rubber can allow for such trimming: the city can “lift it up, trim the tree root and replace it, and it’s no big deal.”

Sandman agreed the investment makes sense: “I’d be willing to put the extra couple dollars into a long-term positive answer rather than a short-term one that will have to be replaced in a few years.”

The rubber craze has been catching in the last decade or so. Now at least 60 cities are using rubber sidewalks, according to the company Rubbersidewalks Inc.

Rubbersidewalks makes the walkways from 100 percent recycled tires. The eco-friendly upshot: Fewer tires go into landfills, and resources used to pour concrete are conserved. The rubber sidewalk material is also more porous than cement, so it could help with water runoff problems in dense urban areas.

The material doesn’t quite bounce, but it’s said to be easier on the knees. It’s softer when kids fall on it. With fewer schisms in pedestrian paths, the city could stand to save money on trip-and-fall lawsuits, too.

Chief Administrative Officer Rob Smuts, whose purview includes the Department of Public Works, called the idea “definitely worth looking into.”

Click here to read more about the method.

Comments

Posted by: on whalley | February 19, 2008 12:56 PM

This is interesting:

The eco-friendly upshot: Fewer tires go into landfills, and resources used to pour concrete are conserved.

Doesn't just increase the size of the landfill? You're taking scrap/trash rubber and just spreading it over a greater surface area. It seems like a reduction in landfill density rather than size. Not that I have any objection (currently I don't have enough information to approve or object) to using these rubber tiles rather than concrete but this statement is great fun.

Also, what resources are being waste in concrete? Sand and rocks? It's wasteful to take sand and rocks and from one place and dump them in another? I didn't know there was a conservation alert for sand and rock.

I'm surprised the tree-hugging fringe would accept the practice of grinding tree roots back under rubber mats rather than allowing nature to grow where it will even if that means cracking a sidewalk.

Such a weird article.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | February 19, 2008 2:19 PM

These sound great!! One thing left out and I could not find at the site link was cost???

Posted by: Good | February 19, 2008 2:25 PM

Once again, leave up to Lemar, Sandman and Sturgis Pascale to push new, innovative, environmentally friendly and fiscally responsible ideas onto the City's agenda. I like these youngstrers even though I don't always agree with them. There is great talent on the BOA now, not just a bunch of social service providers in elected office - hopefully these guys can prevent the other group of youngsters (Plattus, Calder,Morehead and Joey Rodriguez)from concentrating only on meaningless gestures and social service grabs.

Posted by: Rob Smuts | February 19, 2008 2:51 PM

This is a relatively new product, but one well worth looking into. When I spoke with Ms. Bailey yesterday, I mentioned that the City has looked into this before, but had decided the time hadn't been quite right. I didn't remember the details (it was a holiday, I switched this part of my brain off), but I looked into it today.

There are two basic reasons we don't already have rubber sidewalks. The first is that we were interested to see how they're working out in cold weather areas (initially most applications were in areas like Arizona - Chicago and other colder cities have been trying them out, however). The second reason is the location of the manufacturing plants. When Bob Levine was acting director of DPW, he pursued this idea but found the places currently making this product were too far away - California and the like. Transportation costs for a bulk item like this would be prohibitive (though you'll notice that we've been using a similar product in specialized areas such as at the base of some playground equipment).

It's good that this group of aldermen is prompting us to take another, perhaps more in-depth look. A more local plant might be up and running now. If not, a resolution from the Board might help encourage one along.

- Rob Smuts, Chief Administrative Officer

Posted by: Alex Rhodeen | February 19, 2008 4:02 PM

The most recent request for the city to look futher at rubber sidewalks came from a Fair Haven Heights neighbor who also forwarded me some articles on the use of rubber sidewalks around the country. My neighbor supported a public hearing taking place to learn more. Once again this is an excellent example of a neighbor focusing the city's attention on a resource that may serve the city well in the years to come.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | February 20, 2008 8:13 AM

Here is an Artical from Boston about there looking into it as well

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/09/13/talking_the_talk_on_rubber_walks/

It does state....
"The rubber sidewalks cost about $15 per square foot, compared with about $10 per square foot for concrete.."

But it also brings up the fact that Rob did which is that most of the extra cost is shipping from Calf.... And I did notice when searching that many citys on the east coast are interested. So again as Rob stated maybe with the demand the industry will come to the East coast soon and this may be a do-able option.
Has anyone contacted the company in Calf. to see if they have plans of expanding?

Posted by: robn | February 20, 2008 3:52 PM

I once read a Raymond Chandler novel set during WWII, in which the War Department pulled up rubber sidewalks for wartime use. So maybe this is an old technology coming into reconsideration. I would be concerend however, that the sulphuric components of the recycled vulcanized rubber (as opposed to clean virgin rubber) not cause any long term environmental damage.

Posted by: Andy Ross | February 20, 2008 5:41 PM

Good thoughts. This is exactly what we need. The Alderman to begin thinking for themselves and representing what is not only good for their ward, but the city as a whole. Keep your thinking caps on. Some ideas will blow, but others will hit. Don't be afraid to speak up.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | February 21, 2008 8:08 AM

Andy,
I agree!

Posted by: THREEFIFTHS | February 21, 2008 8:33 AM

How about using pampers and huggies for sidewalks!!!

Posted by: Hiscoolness | February 21, 2008 8:59 AM

Rob Smuts comments on waiting to determin long term durability in cold weather is valid. However, shouldn't the City have already done the cost/benefit analysis to determine whether total life cycle costs justify this innovation on the basis of material and installation and maintenance costs alone?

Given the info that traditional concrete has to be replaced in 5 years -- is this correct?? sounds as if this might be true only where tree roots cause damage -- why would this technology not have been tried here already?

Posted by: WEBblog 1 | February 21, 2008 11:06 AM

To our thoughtful aldermen:

Why not concentrate on street paving as a first priority. New Haven taxpayers pay the whole sale value of their car times 42.12 mills, and cannot ride down any three connecting streets without running over Huge pot holes and construction "BIG DIGGS". The car taxes you are collecting is not being used for street resurfacing.

May I suggest you get your priorities straighten- out, before moving on to these diversionary ideas.

Posted by: charlie | February 21, 2008 12:41 PM

Webblog, I disagree. Pedestrians should come first. All sidewalks should be fixed before another road is resurfaced in this city.

Cars can always drive a bit slower, around the potholes - god knows that this would improve everyone's quality of life.

Posted by: WEBblog 1 | February 21, 2008 1:58 PM

Charlie,
Noble point however, What you don't seem to realize or have not been made aware of is; according to the municipal code sidewalks are the responsibility of the owner first then city, if repairs are not made by the former, then the city can repair followed by a lien on the property for the cost.

According to the mayor, New Haven is more than 70% rental, of which appox. 55-60% of the rentals are owned by absentee landlords. Doesn't seem likely the landlords will cooperate with this project.

The realization is that through-out New Haven far more people travel by car than by foot.

New Haven Independent

Rubber Meets The Sidewalk

Comments

Post a comment

Preview:

Sections

Neighborhood News

Special Sections

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Legal Notices

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

News Feed