East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current, 1906-03-28

Street Committee.
While investigating the merits of
the different classes of pavement the
street committee sought the opinion
of ]. w. Howard, New York con-
sulting engineer upon roads, streets
and pavements. He is said to be an
authority upon such subjects and |
wholly disnterested. His reply is as
follows:
New York, Feb. 26, 1906.
b. +. Rem, Esq, Chairman Street 1
Committee, Common Council, PEN
deton, Ore.
Sir:-Answering your request of
February II, based upon my personal
examinations of pavements, l respond
as follows:
You ask in regard to bitulithic
pavement and so-called Victor btu
minous macadam pavements. This
necessitates the mention of bitumi-
nous macadem pavements of various
kinds in order to give you definite
answer and opinion.
have examined at intervals for
several years, tar, pitch and asphalt
macadams in various cities of the
United States, Canada and Europe.
These pavements formerly, although
few in number, weer called tar and
pitch macadams, but within about
five years, including various expert
mental and new mixtures, they may
all be grouped as bituminous macad-
ans This Is because tar, pitch, as
phalt and combinations of these are,
technically speaking, bituminous. BIZ
tulithic pavement is one of the btu
minous macadams and thus far the
most successful. 1t Is used in many
cities. Various other bituminous ma
cadams have been tried and are being
tried with little or no success In sew
eral cities. especially in small places,
either by various contractors or by
those places themselves, and with lit
tie or no success. What you refer to
as Victor botuminous macadam pave
ment Is undoubtedly that which is re-
ferred TO in certain specifications en-
titled specifications for Victor Pave
ments," which l have received from
Portland, ore. These specifications
are indefinite. know of no pave
ments laid anywhere by the name of
Victor unless the persons or company
advocating these specifications shall
assume that certain asphalt macadams
or pavements approximating this gen.
eral class have been heretofore laid
without name or by other names In
n few cities including two trial pieces
I'm New York city which failed, some
I'm Owosso, Mich, which is disinte-
grating and not success, or In
Scranton. Pa, on an inclined viaduct
In this last case, 1t seems rather an
asphalt pavement with some stone
admixed in It, although not sufficient
to keep that pavement from being
slippery on the incline where 1t is
laid. The addition of more stone IN
that pavement. especially II 1t were
on a level, and otherwise proposed
of about the proportions and slightly
irregular mixture 1t now is, would
result in pavement which would not
wear well and which would probably
disintegrate from any excessive mois'
ture; also from freezing and thawing
The Victor btuminous cement men
toned in the Victor specifications is
as far as / know, and am able tc
learn. unknown to commerce. 1t may
mean any pitch or asphalt cemen
which the contractor for a Victor
pavement would desire to use and 81
name.
The Victor specifications seem t.
encroach on several patents owned
by the w. r. Co. with which, in con
nectlon with this report and opin
ion, l have compared the specifca
tions. The Victor specifications d,
not duplicate fully btuminous pave
ment nor without a knowledge of bi
luminous pavement would they pro
duce as good pavement.
The success Of all bituminous pave
ments seems at present not possible t
be equal to bltulithic pavement, with
out copying, encroaching or infringing
on several of Warren Bros processe
or principles as set forth I'm their de
tailed specifications.
In conclusion, I'm answer to you
request for me to give you my "un
biased opinion concerning the tw
pavements whether or not they arr
in your opinion, the same" [ beg
state that while the Victor specified
tions call for much which, as far a
general description is concerned,
the same, they omit n few very es
sential requirements and therefor
unless those requirements describe
in the bitulithic specifications WEI
used, pavements resulting from til
proposed Victor specifications woul
not. in all respects, be the same c
bitulithic pavement nor be as goo
as bitulithic pavement as describe
by its specifications and as laid
many cities where examined by n
during construction and subsequei
thereto.
The above statements and opinic
in no way refer to what are know
as asphalt pavements of which the
are several good kinds, but only to Il
general class Of pavements referr,
to as bituminous macadam pavement
Respectfully yours
j. w. HOWARD,