Tarmac,Asphalt or the other!

fergal28_01

I have decided to get the area around the house and the driveway surfaced.
I am in the process of pricing with a few experienced and recommended companies who I can trust and have seen previous work. This is not the issue.
However I havent decided on tarmac or asphalt.
Also suggested to me was a 3rd type of surface which is a combination of both.
The contractor says this third option can stay darker for longer but is slightly more expensive.
He called it SMA.
Can anyone suggest which surface would suit my situation best?
Which surface will not retain water, I have a certain amount of drainage but not sure if its sufficient.
What is the going rate these days for laying these surfaces?
Does it matter what time of year this work is carried out?
Thanks in advance.

bbam

SMA is "Stone Mastic Asphalt" from what I remember anyway... tough stuff surely, We have it down near 10 years and it hasn't marked or deteriorated in any way..

Tarmac should only be used on very level sites as it will wear poorly if the drive has much of a slope... Very popular with developers as it's cheap and they won't be round to see it wear or go soft on a hot day :rolleyes:

Water retention will depend largely on the site, levels/falls and drainage... It's better to have lots of gullies for taking rainwater as it's amazing how much rain falls during a cloud burst which we seem to see more off each year...

Also ensure each length of drain can be rodded out with sewer rods as silt will build up over time and best if it can be cleaned..

Do ensure it's machine laid, anything else will look "pants" no matter what they say and may even be uneven enough for water to puddle..

The contractor will be best to advise to ensure you have enough drainage, then if there is a problem you have recourse with them.

Prices vary hugely but have come down well in the last two years..

They can be mostly laid any time of year but will be easier worked to a finish in warmer weather as the product stays warm longer..

fergal28_01

Thanks or the info.
Whatever I decide on, will be machine laid.
Have already recieved 1 price. SMA is 1100 more expensive than ordainary tarmac.
It sounds like the option for me, as I have regular deliverys of oil by truck and I will need a surface that will not be affected by a truck, also as the layout of my driveway allows cars to travel all around the house I want a surface that can withstand the extra wear of cars turning around the house at the corners.

On the drainage issue, I have been advised to put in additional drains for water and that this could cost another 1000. I already have kerbing and lawns in place and I would not wish to dig these up to put in soakage pits from these drains.
However I may have no option!

bbam

If it's possible don't go for soakage pits from the gullies... Over time silt will gather in the pits and slow/stop them working, I've seen this and it's a disaster to remedy.. Small sandy material comes in on car wheels/traffic and gets washed down the drains by the rain, it depends on your ground and they may work OK for a few years...
If possible get the rain water away into a flowing drain and maybe lay out that it can be rodded clear......

Also, I have SMA down and get the oil company to deliver with long hose rather than bringing the truck in on it... I'd say keep all trucks off it unless there is no option at all...

Max Moment

IMO laying SMA in a domestic setting is overkill. I have laid this in very hard wearing applications such as Roundabouts mostly. Also, the surface of SMA tends to be a lot more 'open textured' than Tarmacadam which can look unsightly. Properly laid Tarmacadam will give you a much smoother surface. I have laid Tarmacadam on many commercial projects with no issue and it has stood the test of time.

Once the correct depth of layers are laid and laid properly (DBM Basecourse followed by a DBM wearing course) Tarmacadam is as good as any surfacing material and will provide a hard wearing surface that will last. There will be no issue with Trucks turning either.

Some people do prefer SMA as it can be laid in one layer instead of two(due to its hard wearing properties) but this should tend to make a cheaper option from my experience.

+ 1 on the machine laying - the only way to laying surfacing!

If I were you I would put the extra money into the sub-grade under the surfacing i.e. good quality, well compacted hardcore to CL804. Don't just rely on the paving contractor to compact whatever stone you have already laid. Also, It may seem like you are spending a bit more money, but make sure you use a reputable contractor so you will have some come back if there are any issues at a later stage.

Finally, It's not really an issue this time of year, but do not let your contractor lay any surfacing if there has been a heavy frost the night before or on frozen ground - it's a recipe for disaster and could affect the surfacing material.

Good luck whatever you decide

fergal28_01

All top advice and appreciated. From what you have said it seems strange that both contractors would advise SMA is the way to go. Although sometimes the house does feel like a roundabout
Also from the 2 prices I have already received this week SMA is on average 1500 more expensive than Tarmac.
Does SMA stay darker for longer?
What are the differences in between the two?
Is SMA easier to lay, why would they recommend it?
The house was built in 2006 and we did put in a lot of broken stone and finished off with 804 for comfort but I will def make sure that the base is right before anything goes down.

On the drainage issue, directing gullies to a flowing drain is not possible in my location. It will have to be soak away pit/pits. I do have a treatment system which already takes the waste water from the house including the downpipes. Suppose it might be possible to incorporate the surface water to this network of pipes. This would also mean a good but of digging and some drainage expertise.
Will have to look into it too!

harry21

Max Moment wrote: »

IMO laying SMA in a domestic setting is overkill. I have laid this in very hard wearing applications such as Roundabouts mostly. Also, the surface of SMA tends to be a lot more 'open textured' than Tarmacadam which can look unsightly. Properly laid Tarmacadam will give you a much smoother surface. I have laid Tarmacadam on many commercial projects with no issue and it has stood the test of time.

Once the correct depth of layers are laid and laid properly (DBM Basecourse followed by a DBM wearing course) Tarmacadam is as good as any surfacing material and will provide a hard wearing surface that will last. There will be no issue with Trucks turning either.

Some people do prefer SMA as it can be laid in one layer instead of two(due to its hard wearing properties) but this should tend to make a cheaper option from my experience.

+ 1 on the machine laying - the only way to laying surfacing!

If I were you I would put the extra money into the sub-grade under the surfacing i.e. good quality, well compacted hardcore to CL804. Don't just rely on the paving contractor to compact whatever stone you have already laid. Also, It may seem like you are spending a bit more money, but make sure you use a reputable contractor so you will have some come back if there are any issues at a later stage.

Finally, It's not really an issue this time of year, but do not let your contractor lay any surfacing if there has been a heavy frost the night before or on frozen ground - it's a recipe for disaster and could affect the surfacing material.

Good luck whatever you decide

+1 here. SMA has larger gaps, allows more water to penetrate the surface. They use is on roads to reduce 'spray' from vehicles.

A macadam surface is fine for domestic.

Just remember the most important factor for either finish is what the wearing course is laid on!!

bbam

fergal28_01 wrote: »

I do have a treatment system which already takes the waste water from the house including the downpipes. Suppose it might be possible to incorporate the surface water to this network of pipes. This would also mean a good but of digging and some drainage expertise.
Will have to look into it too!

Jebus it sounds like I'd recommend nothing..... but don't do that either. During perlonged rain you will flood your sewerage system.. If you must go with soak pits my advice would be place them under the lawn/garden rather than under the finished surface.. Then in years come you won't have to dig up the surface if they sludge up and need clearing..
If you have the cash go with the SMA and yes IMO it does hold its colour better in the long run..

fergal28_01

Soakage done, SMA down. Looks great. All advice greatly appreciated. Local contractor. So far so good. Went for soak pits under lawn in the end. Very happy with results. Only time will tell now!!

Richie1970

HI Fergal, i too am looking to put SMA on my drive. I live just outside maynooth and am looking for a genuine contractor to put down SMA. Do you happen to have the name of the contractor?
By the way, how much SMA did he put down?
did you dig up the lawn to put down the soak pits? what depth and width are they and do you think it has been successful. as you know we have got a lot of rain recently

darkstream

Hi Fergal. I'm also considering getting this done and am waiting for a price to come back. Was wondering what you were quoted per sq metre?

fergal28_01

Richie1970 wrote: »

HI Fergal, i too am looking to put SMA on my drive. I live just outside maynooth and am looking for a genuine contractor to put down SMA. Do you happen to have the name of the contractor?
By the way, how much SMA did he put down?
did you dig up the lawn to put down the soak pits? what depth and width are they and do you think it has been successful. as you know we have got a lot of rain recently

http://www.callington.ie/ was the contractor that i used, John Drey was the contact, they are a big operation and do a lot of work for local authority, which makes it difficult to get them in at certain times of year. I did dig up lawn for soak pits on advice i recieved regarding the SMA surface sinking after a period of time if pits are underneath SMA. They did it all, soak pits,drainage piping and gutters. The lawn is back to original condition now after some topsoil and raking again. Soakpits were prepared by minidigger and were about 2 metres deep by 1 metre square. They did put a lot of time into the preparation and rolling before they put down any SMA. I cannot remember the exact depth of the SMA now but we did discuss it at the time. Sorry, hope some of this info helps. Substantial cost but well worth it. I can only say I was and I remain extremely happy with the results.

Richie1970

Hi Fergal, many thanks, i have left a message with them. I would prefer to get someone right and pay the extra amount rather than take the cheapest quote. Do you have a range of what it cost and the size of ground you had to cover?

fergal28_01

Richie1970 wrote: »

Hi Fergal, many thanks, i have left a message with them. I would prefer to get someone right and pay the extra amount rather than take the cheapest quote. Do you have a range of what it cost and the size of ground you had to cover?

Glad to help. Exact figures on area are hard to remember, but I do remember the total. Spent 1000 on drainage and 7544 on SMA. That was the quote I got. It wasnt the lowest I received but not highest either. I also negotiated the final price down from that. My house is detached on a 3/4 acre site, the area i got surfaced lead right around the house and is quite a large area. How this applies to your situation i dont know. There are 6 soak pits, a couple of them were a little larger and used for more than 1 gutter. This outfit machine lay the SMA which is seemingly offers best results, so I presume your area is large enough to accomatate laying equipment. Anyway best of luck with it all...