My client needed heated 210' x 25' road between 4 triplexes. It's a new site so hydronic was an easy decision, but the road type was not. All the contractors we talked to said concrete, we knew it was going to set us back more then asphalt but every plumber and dirt/road professional more then suggested concrete for a number of reasons. I wanted it for aesthetics, the plumber wanted it to keep heavy asphalt machines from driving over the hydronic tubing, the dirt professional didn't want to put another substrate down such as sand or a slurry to cover the tubing before asphalt to protect the tubing from above said risk, not to mention the added cost and time. Also, no matter what substrate we used under the ashpalt, the thermal transfer would be nill, especially sand. For these reasons and more, we went with concrete.
Well, the dust settled and my client is pissed! He said people do the asphalt "on the east coast" all the time, he thinks all the above worries are crap and is looking for a head to lob off, it may be mine. I think he's pissed about something entirely different and is projecting....I also think he missinformed or full of
. Am I wrong? Shall I mention we got it done in time and under budget?
Linear Mode
