Forum: Block Paving
Topic: This permeable paving.....
started by: williams
Posted by williams on 19 June 2008,20:59Is it actually going to come into force as of October? I cant find anything new on it.
I have also been told by a contractor that it will only be houses which have NO existing driveways which will need planning or permeable paving and that existing drives can be extended and replaced.He works around derby and thats apparantly what his local council told him.
However i,m in essex and am not sure whats happening as the council know nothing.
Posted by Dave_L on 20 June 2008,05:33It's an absolute shambles at the moment!
Posted by williams on 20 June 2008,17:26I spoke to chelmsfod council today to be told
it will be coming in october,it will probably affect any drive to be paved
southend council told me
its coming in august and it may not be for all drives.
they basically know nothing and are not sure whats happening.
Great for people like us.and now i,m really panicking as i have work booked up for october.
Posted by Tony McC on 21 June 2008,11:43No-one, other than the twonks at Defra, know exactly what will be required. The proposal issued during the Spring is dire, but is the only clue we have to date as to what we can expect come October.
As reported in other threads and in < my blog >, the < original proposal document >, plus < my submission > can be downloaded from this site, but until Defra publishes its response, none of us know for certain just what will be required.
Posted by Injured on 21 June 2008,20:08So it will be something that will be brought in through the back door and will be a total shambles because only 50% of people will know about it and no one will be prepared for it.:( But how can they police it and know what has been done and when and how big the existing area was??
Posted by Tony McC on 29 June 2008,23:27They can't police it; Defra will be relying on local Building Control, who are already over-stretched and under-funded. As I've said previously, this will become a rogue's charter unless it is properly controlled. It can't be properly controlled, so making it mandatory is a nonsense.
Posted by williams on 30 June 2008,20:57I think they will police it with fear,i.e the homeowners will not do it for fear of the council coming along and ripping it up.
I just can't see the likes of marshalls and Bretts taking it rolling over surely it has the potential to really upset their buisness?
I,m just not sure if its going to actually be brought in,its meant to be in October but the councils know nothing except it's meant to be happening.
What do you think Tony?
Posted by Tony McC on 01 July 2008,21:59Many of the better manufacturers are providing some form of training to interested contractors, which is all well and good, but does not address the problems of ...
1) is concrete block permeable paving really the best option for any given project?
2) is the generic specification promoted by each of the manufacturers actually suitable for every given project?
As block manufacturers, they are obviously keen to see CBPP installed as widely as possible, and certainly in preference to PIC, bitmac, resin, etc., but the key issue of the proposed action should be sustainability of the drainage, and not whether the surfacing is permeable or not. CBPP is being promoted as the answer, but it is the answer to a different question. As long as surface water is disposed of in accordance with the principles of SUDS, it really doesn't/shouldn't matter what surface/paving has been installed. Along with training lads how to lay CBPP, we should be training them to install soakaways, swales and rain gardens, but the training group is too busy pondering its own navel and the opportunity is being lost.
Secondly: the use of generic designs. These are used because the manufacturers need to offer contractors a simple 'design' that they can use on the majority of residential projects. Although we might not want to admit it, the paving trade isn't overpopulated with mathematicians, engineers or structural designers, and it's unrealistic to expect all contractors to be able to do the sums regarding soil permeability, run-off, storage capacity, etc. Hence the generic design: a spec that works for most drives, on most houses, in most parts of the country, most of the time, mostly.
To achieve this, the design has to be over-engineered, as too much capacity isn't a problem, whereas too little would lead to surcharging and/or flooding. Consequently, most of the 'off-the-shelf' specs being offered by manufacturers tend to be OTT. This results in additional (possibly unnecessary) excavation, plus the associated cart away, plus the extra clean aggs to build-up levels, all of which bumps up the cost, but we can't be sure it is actually warranted on any particular job because we are not training enough contractors to do the (very basic) sums that are needed to create site-specific designs. Again, this should have been addressed by the training group months ago, but wasn't, and probably won't be until after the proposed nonsense is enacted. I think that's what they call shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.
So, the manufacturers don't see the imposition of this proposal as a threat to their business, but as an opportunity to replace some of their low-cost/low-profit standard paving with higher-cost/higher profit permeable paving blocks. That's why you don't hear *any* of them speaking up for SUDS paving rather than permeable paving.
Posted by Slabba. on 10 July 2008,22:40With permeable paving installations being approx 40% more expensive who`s gonna have one!! Its all $£#ked up.
Tony, surely this is all about the run off of water into the system, so why not just install a big soakaway. Job done. Depending on ground conditions of course.
Posted by williams on 15 July 2008,18:54I did a test the other day on how permeable the ground in my area is. Guess what? Its heavy clay and a week later its still sitting there.
This will either make no difference to me or destroy people in our area as pumped water tanks will cost a fortune.
I still don't know if its really going to happen as no body knows anything and its meant to be happening in a couple of months.
Posted by Tony McC on 16 July 2008,09:29I agree with Slabba that, if a big soakaway (or other SuDS installtion) is used, there's nothing gained by insisting on permeable paving, and I have said as much in my submission to DEFRA.
As for Williams' clay, again, this is a factor that seems to have been blithely overlooked, so far, by the proposal.
Still no word from the faceless ones driving this proposal: it's becoming less of a farce and more of a potential disaster with each passing day.
Posted by Injured on 18 July 2008,09:52Does the fact that they are not saying anything mean it will come into force or that they are still thinking over the proposals??:rock:
Posted by Tony McC on 19 July 2008,21:58Given that this is a politically driven proposal, I'm sure summat will happen, as politicians have no qualms whatsoever about introducing bollocks legislation rather than being seen to back down and admit they've not properly thought it through (think of the beloved poll tax).
Posted by Injured on 21 July 2008,20:40do you think it only applies to drives or will it affect new patios at the rear of properties too???
Posted by williams on 22 July 2008,19:12
I don't think even the people making the rules know what they will be going to implement.
There off on their 3 month holidays now so i cant see a lot happening soon.
Posted by ambient on 23 July 2008,22:01been told today that its only drives and front gardens,patios will not be affected and local building inspectors going to police it
Posted by williams on 24 July 2008,17:16
Where abouts are you and who told you?
My local councils seem to know nothing and all i hear is speculation from people.
Posted by ambient on 25 July 2008,17:32im in bolton lancs,i have a friend who is a building inspector
Posted by MarkR on 01 Aug. 2008,19:29Hmmmm.... I have an existing tarmac drive with a small grass area off to one side which I want to pave.... my idea is to block pave the whole lot.
But do I go ahead with a planned work and find that it becomes non-compliant before the contractor can carry out the work or wait for the regulations hoping it will become clear later And what part would the changed regulations would apply to ?
Also the stupid thing is that people will still be able to pave a huge area of their garden with a non-permeable patio and yet made to use a permeable solution on the front garden.
Thanks to those who directed me to this thread
Posted by williams on 04 Aug. 2008,20:58I would just go ahead mate.
No new news and they are off on their holidays now.
Councils seem to have differing opinions but nothing imo which is 100% set in stone.
The government make loads of new proposals and lots never go through.
This was mentioned in April and theres been no update since then. I,m not sure whats going to happen but i just hope its one of those things they don't do....
Posted by podgermash on 05 Aug. 2008,12:30well, as you know I'm trying to get my paving done asap.
I had building control round the other day, to sign off my extension.
They wouldn't, they wanted trickle vents in the window frames before they would sign it off.
But, check this also.
The inspector came around seen my wacked hardcore, blocks and sand at the ready and said,
" I would also like to see the step built before I sign off the work"
when I asked why, he said because the hardcore level is 680mm from my floor level and the regs allow 700mm and under.
" I am under then and ok" I said.
" non the less, I would still like to see the step please"
I practically built the extension myself, except the brick and roof and this inspector has been on my case since I put spade to soil.
But this time I reckon he want a clue on how to do his own step , no way am I directing him here though, he can struggle on the awkward B*$%^
Posted by ambient on 05 Aug. 2008,12:50check your plans you might have to put disabled access ramp in lot of councils specify these now he might be trying to catch you out
Posted by podgermash on 05 Aug. 2008,12:58/smacks head in despair
well, the step's built, a 2 step arrangement levelled at dpc and bevelled for run off.
He's due tomorrow and if he pulls the old ramp nonsense it will put me over the edge and I dread to think what will occour, I have patience and understanding, but I do also have violent mood swings lol, usually focused in my right fist. lol
Posted by seanandruby on 05 Aug. 2008,20:25.....then let someone else talk to him because you are worked up even before the verdict. from experience, its not worth the hag.
Posted by seanandruby on 05 Aug. 2008,20:27.....then let someone else talk to him because you are worked up even before the verdict. from experience, its not worth the hag.
Posted by Dave_L on 05 Aug. 2008,20:33Best of luck, Podge.
Posted by podgermash on 07 Aug. 2008,09:24pass
Posted by GB_Groundworks on 10 Sep. 2008,07:32has just been on breakfast news on bbc1 saying will add £300 to a £5000 drive and you'll need planning permission for non permeable drive in certain areas. was very general and comments like have a gravel drive instead etc.
Posted by lutonlagerlout on 10 Sep. 2008,18:17i would like to see them enforce it
just a side note some time ago i installed a gravel drive at home,i am pretty fed up with it now,every time i wheel spin off the drive the stones fly everywhere
anyway the problem is this,in anticipation of blocking it at some future point (now)i laid acos round the front of the house 150 mm below dpc.
i also laid an edging to the pavement
these two datums are exactly level
so i either have a gully in the centre of the drive?
of have a slight hump?
or lay it all level and see what happens?
your thoughts please?
Posted by williams on 10 Sep. 2008,18:34
Bollocks it will add £300 to a £5000 drive! Where do these mugs get their figures from.
I,ll be really pissed if this does come into effect, especially as local to me the ground is clay so won't even work anyway,with the next choice being an attenuation system which will probably add 5k to a 5k drive!
raise the first meter by however much is needed so the front falls away and the rest back to the house,done properly it will look fine.
Posted by williams on 11 Sep. 2008,13:42Definately coming in
sounds like theres a loophole in the respect you can drain onto a lawn/ bed and i assume soakaway.
< http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/england/genpub/en/1115316438436.html >
Posted by Tony McC on 11 Sep. 2008,14:11I, too, was gobsmacked by that eejit claiming the cost diff was a paltry 300 quid (6%). The blocks alone account for more than that. Do you think, perhaps, that he was blagged by the installer? However, I have noticed a number of 'comments' and media pieces over the last month or so that are vastly under-estimating the cost implications of all this, and you begin to wonder if there isn't some sort of conspiracy to convince the public that it's greedy contractors being opportunistic and bumping up the price. Most *genuine* costings I've seen over the summer vary from 20-50% cost increases compared to conventional block paving.
Anyway, a day later than promised, the government has finally published the "Guidance" and, while it's not as bad as might have been feared, it's a long way short of what it should have been, and I can't help feeling that more credence was given to those experts in construction, the RHS, than to contractors and paving specialists.
You can read about the document, and download your own copy, via the < News page > on this site.
The phrase "clear as mud" springs to mind.
Posted by Injured on 11 Sep. 2008,14:34So if we install none permable paving with a hidden soakaway how will they know this complies? Do they have to come and inspect the soakaway as you construct it? They do say any non permable paving over 5sq m needs planning application is this true if you install a soakaway or "rain garden" etc?
Posted by derekoak on 11 Sep. 2008,14:52I am in the midst of doubling the area of impermeable paving in my front garden. The sub base and kerbs have been in for some time. Do you think I can carry on past Oct 1st? I already had to get Planning 2 years ago to widen the drive entrance
Posted by Tony McC on 11 Sep. 2008,18:00Injured makes a valid point. One of my concerns going back to when this scheme was announced is the fact that ours is a largely unregulated trade and the customer has to be able to trust the installer to carry out the more-expensive-than-normal work in a professional manner. That creates the conditions that are ripe for exploitation, and, as we all know, there are far too many cowboys out there willing to exploit such a situation.
Regarding the 5m² condition, my reading of the guidance is that, as long as the paving is permeable, or drained to a suds installation or some description (rain garden, soakaway, etc.) planning permission will NOT be required. The only situation the would require PP seems to be an impermeable pavement draining onto a public highway. As I say in the < news article >, the possibility of draining into the existing SW system is not made clear.
Derekoak - I'd say that you'd be OK to carry on.
Posted by ColinP on 11 Sep. 2008,18:12Hi All
Am i right in thinking this new legislation comes into place as of Oct 1st. Im starting, and hopefully finishing mine on w/c 22nd Sept. Booked the week off work and everything for it........
Posted by Tony McC on 11 Sep. 2008,18:26Yep - October 1st is implementation date, giving 20,000 landscape and paving contractors a whole two weeks and six days to change their business plans and working practices.
Is there any other industry that would allow itself to be treated so shabbily?
Posted by ColinP on 11 Sep. 2008,18:37just another inspired process and decision from the fools we allow run our country.......
Posted by williams on 11 Sep. 2008,18:58I was just about to post a reply giving the pdf tont has.
I must admit that after reading that i,m much less worried.
Basically in their eyes permeable means that as long as the water is contained in the property by means of gravel,permeable paving,rain garden,bed,lawn or soakaway then theres no problem.
So i will just fit soakaways or drain to bed/lawn etc.
If the ground is bad clay which will not drain at all then i will fit an overflow at the top of the soakaway which can connect to the storm drain.
This is how i have read it. I ve had a long discussion with calvin from brett technical and we both have read it that way.
I think its only a case of planning permission if the water drains into a road(which your not meant to do anyway) or potentially a storm drain.
I think we will all be ok. (i hope anyway)
Posted by williams on 11 Sep. 2008,19:05Tony
In your arcticle you state
'Both modular and monolithic paving will now cost more, but the document makes no mention whatsoever regarding this, which leaves the poor old contractor to explain to the customer why their driveway is now going to cost 20-50% more than was thought originally. '
Yes permeable paving will cost more however i really dont believe many will be doing it at all. A simple soakaway will suffice in most cases costing maybe a couple of hundred extra.
Again how are they going to police this?
They cant really can they.
Posted by lutonlagerlout on 12 Sep. 2008,05:01they can intimidate BMs into giving them site addresses where block paving has been delivered
I know for a fact that the inland revenue have done this in the past as i was there when they turned up.
Ithink i mentioned this a while back but a proper soakaway is getting expensive now
4 aquacell crates
5 m 110 mm underground pipe
1 roddable BIG gully
remove 1.5M 3 of spoil
more like £400 for this installation,at least
am thinking a central gully in my drive would look better,plus no aggro about water discharging onto the pavement
Posted by Tony McC on 12 Sep. 2008,11:56I don't think it will be policed. I've spoken to an admittedly small number of BCOs in six different local authorities, and not one of them has any intention of pursuing this agenda. If local homeowners apply for PP, the BCO will take the money and approve the plans unless there is something glaringly amiss.
The point made by williamspaving about the use of a soakaway is part of the problem. The number of so-called soakaways that I see convinces me that far too many installers don't know hoe to build one. A soakaway is more than a hole filled with all the off-cuts or bits of broken flagstones. However, of more concern is the fact that an unscrupulous installer could construct a token soakaway, say 400x400x400, with an overflow to the SW system, and that would actually satisfy the requirements as they now stand. This lack of clarity is my main gripe.
Posted by Injured on 12 Sep. 2008,13:21so if what the bco's say that you have spoken to the only change will be the cost of plans and the planning fee for the clients. So we can just carry on as before?? and advise the clients with regards to the planning applications??
Posted by williams on 12 Sep. 2008,18:55Within 3 weeks i will know if this is going to destroy us or not. If not which at this stage i don't think it will i,m going to celebrate by buying myself a set of steel rods and cams for my car
Tony please tell me the BCO'S you spoke with were in essex
Posted by lilyholland on 15 Sep. 2008,12:31I have conflicting information: the FMB website lists the new regulations in brief and under section f says that driveways are exempt from requiring planning permission. However we have an anxious client in Richmon Borough who is insistent that unless we do his drive by Oct 1st he will need planning. Called Richmond and got very fancy, very difficult to use web link back with great picture of house and all the bits that needed PP! Drive is included with detail suggesting we use TYpe 3 as permeable sub-base. Never come across this; nor have my builders merchants!. ANyone else familiar with this, or does it go under a different name?
Posted by Nigel Walker on 15 Sep. 2008,16:21Talk about confusion !!!
I am confused, the public are confused, the planners and BCO's are confused. And I think Tony may be slightly baffled too !
From how I have read it and speaking to my local Planning Officer - PP is only needed if there is un-controlled water going onto the highway.
Ways of controlling this water are - Permeable Paving and Soakaways
If the drive is sloping back to the house ( ie no water going on the highway), I am on the understanding that you can still connect into the surface water drains. At least that is what my local planners have said !!
If the drive is sloping to the road - Install a row of Aco Channels along the bottom of the drive and connect into a soakaway. It also reads that if the soakaway will not work then these channels can be connected directly into the surface water system
With regards to using the Permeable paving. - I have used this method a couple of times and it works very well. But it only works if the ground below soaks up water and there is somewhere for the water to go. The same can be said for a soakaway. These methods are great when conditions allow, but what if you have solid clay or bedrock or service pipes only 100mm below surface !!! Not everthing is so black and white as the goverment would like to think.
As for us contractors - I dont think its as bad as it could have been. Planning permission will only be needed on rare occasions.
The issue that i have and it has been raised before - Cowboys !!! Myself and all those other reputable and conscientious paving contractors will price the extra for installing soakaways and also permeable paving and will do the work how it should be done. What about the cowboys who will always cut corners and also be more cheaper than before.
I asked this question to the planners and answer was - Nothing we can do. There will not be any officers visiting jobs and inspecting. The only time anyone will visit will be if there is a complaint and a Compliance Officer will come out, but by which time the drive is laid and who can tell if a proper soakaway has been installed - if indeed one has !
What, with the sh*t weather, bad clients and now this issue - who would be a paver !!!
Posted by lilyholland on 15 Sep. 2008,18:40Yes that is my reading of the regs as well. The drive we are looking at has 2 socking great trees by its gateway and my worry is that the roots from these will be near the surface when we want to dig down. Add that to the problem of the run-off water and this is one of those jobs I'm not entirely sure I want!
As you say, with this summer's weather who would be a paver!
Posted by colordrives on 15 Sep. 2008,20:39I was wondering today about ways of getting round the costs increases of using a permeable paving system, as a chunk of the cost is the increased price of the pavers is it possible in anyway to convert standard pavers into a permeable system ? maybe using spacers? just an idea...... As it looks like this is all set in stone maybe we should try an come up with some ways of cheapening things a bit
Also does anyone happen to know the average amount of water a square m of permeable paving can handle? could it take more than its own surface area? could 10m's of permeable at the bottom of a 50m drive cope?
Just some ideas
Posted by PatioMan20080915 on 16 Sep. 2008,00:56Just read this on < http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/england/genpub/en/1115316438436.html >
"From 1 October 2008 new rules apply for householders wanting to pave over their front gardens.
You will NOT need planning permission if a new driveway uses permeable (or porous) surfacing which allows water to drain through, such as gravel, permeable concrete block paving or porous asphalt, or if the rainwater is directed to a lawn or border to drain naturally.
If the surface to be covered is more than five square metres planning permission will be needed for laying traditional, impermeable driveways that do not control rainwater running off onto roads."
By deduction it seems to me that you ONLY need planning permission when all 4 of the below are true
i) you are paving a drive of more than 5sqm
ii) your drive will have an uncontrolled run off onto a highway
iii) your drive is not permeable / porous
iv) your drive does not have run off to a lawn / border
It seems pretty straight forward to me, but I don't think the planning advice will win any plain english awards!
Posted by colordrives on 16 Sep. 2008,13:31From what I have read in a number of situations u can plug into a down pipe without needing planning. Ie when there is a large fall to the house.
The biggest problem will be drives with large falls to the road and nowhere to site a soakaway, then it's either permeable or planning permission.
Posted by simeonronacrete on 22 Sep. 2008,21:34A form of permeable paving can be seen here......< Ronadeck Resin Bound Surfacing System >
Posted by Injured on 09 Oct. 2008,10:43I have spoke to Halton council about a drive I have seen to price and it is tarmacced at the moment and falls to the house where there is a gulley. They want it replaced with an aco and block paving. Council say it needs planning permission.
Also does any one know of any permeable training courses in the north west??
Posted by Injured on 09 Oct. 2008,15:11Forget the training courses 'The boss' has emailed me with details. A big thanks Tony.:)
Posted by lutonlagerlout on 09 Oct. 2008,18:58looked at your site ,some nice bits there injured
50 tonne of earth dug out in 2 days by hand!! how on earth did you weigh it?
i estimate that's a barrowful every minute of the day, for an 8 hour day
me and my old scud keith dug a set of footings 1 m deep in a day before and filled 2 7 yard skips,dont know how much it weighed but we were knackered
nice tidy jobs though
Posted by Injured on 09 Oct. 2008,23:24well there was 4 grab loads out and a grab takes around 14 ton. There was 2 digging and 2 running with barrows. And yes it was hard work but ground wasnt too bad though apart from by connifers it deepest bit. Dry hard clay.
Posted by Tony McC on 10 Oct. 2008,20:27
Due to other commitments, not least of which was the bollocks made of the site transfer by our new hosts, I'm late to this ongoing thread, but I just want to pick up on the points raised by patioMan.
It's not necessary for all 4 of the conditions he listed need to be met for a job to require PP. In the < FAQ > wot I writ I tried to make it clear that PP will be required whenever any paving in excess of 5 square metres in front of the building line of the house discharges water onto a public highway (footpath or carriageway) and/or when surface water is sent directly to a piped drainage network that connects to the sewer system without first passing through a SuDS installation such as a soakaway.
So, even if a driveway partially drains to a garden, the fact that some part of the drive is drained to the highway or the sewers is sufficient to warrant the need for PP. In essence, all SW from the driveway must be dealt with on-site.
Posted by gavinruane on 15 Oct. 2008,18:35
do you know of any drainage courses that are being run so that i can get a good grounding and am then able to explain and perhaps come up with answers to this incredible problem.it would be good to explain as much as possible to the clients in different areas what they can have and whether or not PP is needed.
i am totally confused and would really like to be more knowledgeable.
PS i am based in london.
Posted by Dave_L on 15 Oct. 2008,19:16I've got hold of a Government paper on this very subject, will read it later.
If I get the time before the weekend, I'll scan it for you to see.
Posted by Tony McC on 16 Oct. 2008,14:43Gavinruane - regarding courses specifically dealing with drainage solutions to help ensure driveways will comply with the new laws: I did propose such a course at the committee meeting of the Hard Landscaping Training Group held on October 1st, but while there was general agreement about the need for such a course, the rest of the committee would not sanction its creation and development. To be frank, the way that group has been over the past 12 months, if I said 'black', they'd say 'white' just to be bloody awkward.
However, given that the rump of the HLTG regards the timing and availability of lunch to be more important than providing adequate training for our industry, I'm in discussion with a private company to fund the development and subsidised hosting of such a course for later this year or, more likely, early next year. More news as and when, assuming I get agreement from the money men.
The HLTG, in their bewildered wisdom, have also decided they do not need to have any input to the forthcoming HSE review of the ways in which paving materials are handled. Dismayed with this attitude, I've decided to fund my own attendance at the review meetings in that London to ensure that someone puts the contractor's point of view. It's apparent we can't rely on the official training body to represent our trade when the powers-that-be make decisions that will directly affect how and when we work.
Dave - all of the govt documents are available via the website already. Here's a list of the relevant links....
< The actual Legislation >
< The Explanatory memorandum >
< The Guidance Document >
..and other useful info...
< The Pavingexpert.com FAQ >
< Interpave Guidance >
Posted by SFLandscape on 08 Nov. 2008,18:22Had a talk by Hanson Formpave on permeable paving at Ruscrete southampton, really nice guy came out and gave us a talk, he was really helpfully and we were able to bring up a lot of issues that they were unware of, sealents, cleaning, mud in the joints, as most of these systems were design for commercial use, give them a ring see if a group of you in your areas could get a talk from them.
As for how much water the system can hold; for every 13 sq mtrs of blocks with the base they surgest, the base should hold 1 cubic mtr of water
Posted by ambient on 08 Nov. 2008,18:33just been on the marshalls suds course it explained quite a lot about legislation and the ideas behind it all,
Posted by adpandy on 30 Mar. 2009,15:57the new legislation refers to all hard standing areas that run adjacent to the street and could cause run off water to run into the over burdened sewer systems.
Planning is required for all works over 5 m2 be it on new or existing drives / gardens.
exception to this is when you use SUDS approved systems such as the recycled plastic cellular systems that have load bearing strengths on the right sub base very close to concrete.
Good ethical suppliers will have detailed build up advice for their products and these include using the correct sub base dependent on your own ground conditions, i.e. more sub base when on clay, less when on a free draining firm sub soil.
check out adpsurfacesolutions.co.uk
Posted by Tony McC on 30 Mar. 2009,18:00The above is not quite right. I suggest you read the < FAQ > to get a fuller understanding of what the new legislation actually requires.
There is no such thing as "Suds approved systems". Suds is a technology, not an approval body. Suds compliance is not an approval: it's just a method of drainage that looks to minimise the impact on sewers and other off-site infrastructure.
I've no idea what the phrase "the right sub base very close to concrete" is supposed to mean.
Please don't advertise on this site. Recommending products that might offer a solution to a particular problem posited by another member is all well and good, but unsolicited plugging of your own products will just convince people to steer well clear of your company as well as running the risk of having your posts deleted by the moderators and/or your membership cancelled. All this is explained in the small print to which you signed-up when joining the Brew Cabin.
Posted by Asbury on 16 June 2009,09:45You go Girl.
(disclaimer, Tony is not a girl, he's a proppa butch man and he drinks beer)
Posted by rab1 on 18 June 2009,18:27I`m currently dealing with a large project in central Scotland, the builder is a multi national, same initials as the boys brigade, hospital, permiable paving every where 2000m plus, 800mm down under the paving/base etc there is a layer of DPM polythene, is this normal.
Posted by rab1 on 25 June 2009,20:11was on this site today again, they have laid a green woven sheet (normal thing you see is white) under the laying course, mot 1 and then the large stones and at the bottom the polythene is still there. is there a reason for this?
Posted by Tony McC on 06 July 2009,22:01Rab - it may be a tanked system (officially known as System C) where the surface water is stored or re-directed to another suds installation.
See < this page > for further confusion
Posted by rab1 on 08 July 2009,19:55it will never be called light reading, thats for sure.
Posted by haggistini on 18 Aug. 2009,21:06Hi tony nice to see the revised guidelines on permeable paving. They seem to have taken heed of your submission thank god. It still seems that they are still vague on the methods and if scrutinized there are more loop holes than an MP’s expenses application form.
Guidance on the permeable surfacing of front gardens
What to look out for
• the soil below the driveway or rain garden must be “sandy or gravely (not clay)”
otherwise a connection to the drains may be required. This can be checked by a simple
test (See Interpave guide to responsible rainwater management around the home).”
So If a building inspector questioned the permeability of a drive way that has been installed the old fashioned way and surface water was directed in to existing drains without out prior planning permission gained, then you could simply inform him or her that the subsoil was to “clayey” hence the existing drains were used not to cause flooding or water logging, would they then ask to rip it up and retest the area at who’s expense or just take your word for it. Also the drawings and illustrations in the guidance are way below your standard (PAVINGEXPERT.COM) and are not detailed enough to provide adequate installation guidance to anyone who happens to come across them, i.e. non forum members DIY’ers and contractors alike. I believe there will many huge problems and court cases for people in the future due to uninformed public, contractors and building inspectors dealing with this .It was right to be addressed but a little more thought and discussion wouldn’t have gone amiss .This isn’t going away and will certainly reduce the amount of work out there, I think we need to push forward with the training that’s available as it will only be the contractors qualified who will get the work in years if not months to come.
Posted by Tony McC on 20 Aug. 2009,14:19Where's that quote from, H?
Posted by haggistini on 20 Aug. 2009,21:01http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/pavingfrontgardens
Posted by Tony McC on 21 Aug. 2009,11:48I'd forgotten about that revised document, which is a serious contender for "Most Low-Profile Publication Of The Year". I think they were hoping no-one would notice what a FU the previous incarnation had been, but even this leaves much to be desired.
It came out just before SED and I had intended to write summat for the site, but then with SED plus a number of active project management jobs on the go, it got forgotten. If I get the time (and the inclination) I'll update the info on the main site.
Posted by irishpaving on 28 Aug. 2009,14:34New draft legislation will make sustainable drainage systems (SUDS) mandatory on all new developments within 2 years, and use of concrete block permeable paving – the most versatile SUDS technique – is set to grow rapidly to satisfy this requirement.
Is planning permission mandatory now, Do you have to notify authority if doing a drive
Posted by haggistini on 28 Aug. 2009,16:08no planning is needed if suds are used planning is required if suds are not used. ground conditions will still dictate what suds to be used even if permi blocks are a versatile option, the question still remains are building inspectors/contractors trained enough to decide on the correct suds used for a given job and could you be sure of the job done is going to manage the run off
Posted by irishpaving on 28 Aug. 2009,18:36So while i am advising a possible client of new procedures and quoting them up for a permable drive, in slips a rougue & does the drive as impermable and cuts the costs in half to win the job over.
So am i the bigger idiot then
Posted by haggistini on 28 Aug. 2009,20:35Give them the option of non permeable; explain also the six week delay for planning and the possibility that they might not get it, plus the £150 quid fee and then if some nosey neighbor or someone who's heard about permeable paving informs the council it might also get ripped up almost trebling the cost in the first place.. nightmare
Posted by lutonlagerlout on 28 Aug. 2009,22:01the pikeys told me that block paving is permeable if they dont use KDS
certain people have vested interests in promoting permeable concrete block paving, if a lineal drain is used then there is no need for the paving itself to be permeable
Posted by irishpaving on 10 Sep. 2009,12:43Just received a reply after i fired a couple of questions to the planning dept.
The new hard surfacing legislation does not fall within Building Control’s remit and therefore the new legislation will be policed by planning enforcement. Hence, a new/replacement hard standing that has been constructed out of non-porous materials or does not retain a permeable area to drain to will require planning permission. If planning permission is not sought then clients run the risk of having it ripped up if planning enforcement were to be informed. I would certainly suggest informing potential clients of this when quoting work for them.
There is no set recognised way on testing the permeability of driveways but I should imagine that the simplest option would be to pour a bucket of water over the surface and watch to see whether the water soaks either through the gaps between the block paving or is directed to soak into a permeable area within the garden. The main purpose of the legislation is to prevent surface water runoff from draining onto the highway and entering the main sewerage system. Therefore, provided that you can achieve this objective, this will be sufficient not to require planning permission.
I hope this answers your queries, if however you have any further questions please feel free to come back to us.
Planning Enquiry Officer
Milton Keynes Council
Posted by haggistini on 13 Sep. 2009,21:15there you have it, if it takes a bucket of water that'll do
Posted by jimbob on 26 Mar. 2010,10:38I have googled this but have not seen one available so thought it would be best to ask the experts.
Being a novice - is there a block paving kerb that has holes to allow water to drain through in to the soil behind?
I have a sloping driveway towards the road but I would like to have a kerb around the border at the front and it seems to make sense to me to have a kerb that allows water to go through into the border/soil rather than having all the water going into the drain that will be placed along the front of the driveway to go into the soakaway.
But being a novice I'm sure I'll be told the reason why that would not be a good idea (if such a kerb existed)!
Posted by irishpaving on 26 Mar. 2010,19:32You could just for a normal kerb unit and use a gully instead. You would make sure that the water will drain easily into the soil area you mentioned.
If not a gully then you could look at the option of the mini beany from marshalls
Posted by paddytt on 21 Mar. 2012,00:36We have an old thatched house, with some damp in one wall. The outside level is higher than the floor level, but the outside is a pathway so we can't lower the level below the floor. The typical way to fix this would be to have a channel covered with a grating, running along the wall, or a french drain along the wall.
Does anyone have any experience of using permeable block paving, with a drain below, to achieve a "breathable" solution beside such a wall?
Posted by lutonlagerlout on 21 Mar. 2012,07:49permeable paving is so finickity to install and has so many "cant do's " with it ,that most on here do not go near it
my local merchant are selling off the last of their stock for £8.50 per metre
far better to use a workaround as detailed < here > I did this recently for a client and it left him with a 100mm gap from his path to his wall, 150 below dpc
Posted by paddytt on 25 Mar. 2012,00:07permeable paving looks so straightforward to install, why is it so difficult and do any of the "can't do's" apply to a pathway rather than a driveway?
Posted by wcroz99 on 25 Sep. 2012,17:30I've install permeable paving on a couple of occasions as that's what clients have specifically asked for. Personally, I try to steer clear of permeable paving myself
Posted by lutonlagerlout on 25 Sep. 2012,18:08we have priced it a couple of times and its double the cost
i have seen it done on community carparks and they turn into weedfests in 6 months
welcome to the brew cabin croz
Posted by Pablo on 25 Sep. 2012,20:27I've been forced to sit in the house today due to the weather and I've been having conversations with the voices in my head about this very thing and a few others to boot. We're all going to have to adapt to this new climate that we've been seeing over the last few years and we're going to have to do it for less money. Just about everyjob this year for me has seen delays in starting or finishing due to the rain I've tried to adapt but it's a losing battle sometimes. In the good old days you could jump to another job but the workload isn't there anymore so you end up scratching around and somethimes making more work for yourself cleaning up than you should've. I've not pointed a patio in the traditional way for a couple of years now it's been too risky with the weather and I've got half a dozen lawns waiting to be finished but the soils too wet and the clients don't always have the patience. The machines we use to build with are sometimes our biggest enemies when it rains because of the soil compaction and mushing up meaning the water runs off and doesn't get into the ground. If like me you live in an area with very heavy clay then digging holes in the ground is pointless. Permeable paving is cost prohibitive and due to the amout of rain we get I'd say the design is possibly already obsolete. If the weathers been wet then the grounds water logged and the attenuation area is going to be full meaning any more rain will overflow into the storm system anyway and the whole construction has been a waste of money. Add to that an average driveway is 60-120m2 if you were to dig down 600mm you'd be removing between 36 and 72m3 a normal tipper only carries between 6 and 9m3 and you're going to spend a fortune on doing that sort of thing in an urban area. It's the sort of thing that ticks a box and make it look like you've been good to the environment but with the amount of rain we'll probably see in the future and the demand on landfill space becoming critical is digging big pointless holes the right thing to do. And don't get me started about rainwater harvesting on private properties why would you spend tens of thousands so you can save a hundred quid on your rates.
Posted by lutonlagerlout on 25 Sep. 2012,22:43ever hear of paragraphs pablo?
that day saturday when you were on your bike for a gazillion miles was a lovely day
nearly every day when i look at the weather i look to the north west and NI and its raining
myself MSH and DDD live in the eastern region and its very dry
rain is rarely an issue for us
Posted by mickg on 26 Sep. 2012,00:19yeah ditto with the paragraph, it makes your eyes bleed trying to decipher it
the last 2 days in the north west it has lashed it down continuous all day without any breaks and is set to last the rest of the week plus 3 days partially lost last week where you cant get your work done, in all the time I have worked outside I have never known a wetter year than 2012 but I refuse to stay at home and we get done what we can
this is what we have to contend with in the Costa Del North West while you lucky lot south of Watford Gap bask in sweltering heat and endure hose pipe bans
with regards to the conversation we had on Saturday Tony and what you said it cost you to point that patio, £7 I think you said, I cant risk spending all day using conventional sand and cement to then have a heavy downpour at the end of the day what could wash it all away plus stain the paving which is why I have opted to use Marshalls Weatherpoint 365 on all my work
It's a lot more expensive than sand and cement but it means we can complete the work even if its raining
back on topic
since October 2008 I have only been ask twice to quote for permeable paving, I don't know any M2 figures of the volume of permeable paving installed within the domestic market but I would bet its not that high when compared to conventional block paving what can be installed using various methods but still conform to the current driveway legislation
Posted by lutonlagerlout on 26 Sep. 2012,07:38i agree mick,if i worked up your or pablos area i would use a different material
i worked with a brickie from bury before and he reckoned to lose a day a week on average over the year in that area
we probably get about 5-6 unworkable days per year
once i get my bonsai riddle i will develop the plastering sand a bit farther
maybe a touch of rapid set
Posted by wcroz99 on 26 Sep. 2012,18:53Some great points there Pablo, thats exactly why I try to avoid it as its a bit of a waste of time in my opinion. But, there are people out there that are willing to paying extra if they believe they are saving the environment. Perhaps with all the wet weather we have had this year, we may see customers requesting permeable paving more often.
Posted by Tony McC on 28 Sep. 2012,09:11Permeable block paving (CBPP) just hasn't taken off for residential driveways, despite all the bullish predictions from the manufacturers back in 2008 when the comedy legislation was launched' because there are significantly cheaper ways of achiveing the same result.
If you take the average British driveway, which is 48.5m², why would you excavate to, say, 450mm and generate and additional 14m³ of spoil (two good wagon loads) when you could drain the lot to a 2m³ soakaway? It's economic and logistical madness!
Slightly different scenario on commercial schemes, where the case for CBPP is much stronger, and I get angry when I see brand new commercial parking areas, such as the two bloody huge new supermarkets built in nearby Leigh in the last 12 months, being surfaced with blacktop. Firstly, what sort of corrupt planning scheme allows an impermeable surface to be specified on such large and low-lying areas within a known flood plain, and secondly, why are the economics so skewed to favour impermeable paving? There should be financial incentives, whether it's via tax advantages or punitive planning charges, that make permeable paving (and I'm quite happy to see permeable blacktop, if that's what designers prefer) the default surface of choice.
Returning to the residential market, I've been out to assess four so-called CBPP installations this year and in every case, the contractor didn't have a chuffing clue what they were doing, ranging from the pillocks in Warrington who used crudely broken 3x2s as a sub-base to the moron in Chadderton who used at least 20 bags of KDS on a 40m² CBPP driveway. Now, we all know there are contractors out there who *do* know how to do the job, but they are then pricing the work accurately, whereas these eejits have no understanding of the procedure and materials, and are consequently under-pricing the job and winning the work on cost alone.
Finally: rainwater harvesting. It may seem like a crazy idea to us in the north and west of these islands, Pablo, but it's of HUGE interest in the chalk areas of Lower Britain where hosepipe bans and parchged summers are the norm for many and the opportunity to have their own private supply of water for the garden and/or washing the car, is highly attractive.
I designed a RWH scheme in Kent where the property owner had a 1 acre small holding that was slowly dtying due to the hosepipe ban. Installing a harvesting system for the 80m² roof and 140m² driveway now provides just about enough water to get them through a normal summer. It cost roughly 8,000 quid extra for the tank and the pump and the pipework, but the client considers that to be excellent valuie as it means the smallholding and garden thrive, his metered water bills are reduced, and he's looking at a service life of at least 25 years. If growing veg, keeping chickens and ponies, and having a stunning garden were your hobby, would 320 quid/year (8,000 ÷ 25) or less than a pound per day seem like money well spent?
Posted by Nigel Walker on 28 Sep. 2012,12:21I have installed 3 permeable paving jobs in last 5 years. One was for an Eco Development, the other two were on large flat courtyard / parking areas that had buildings on 3 sides.
On the above projects Permeable block paving was justified and worked great.
However, installing permeable paving on normal domestic drives is total nonsense.
What is the point in spending an extra 25-35% for permeable paving when the water all goes to the same place. Let me explain - Traditional block paving - we install Aco Channels at bottom of driveway or at the lowest point, which are connected into a soakaway, with an overflow into surface water drains if the ground is not ideal for soakaways.. Permeable paving - water drains through the blocks and sub stone, drains to the lowest point and then into a soakaway.
How can anyone justify the extra spend when it does the same thing - if you comply with the regs.
Someone has installed a Permeable drive locally. Its 2.5m wide by 6m long - single car driveway. Drive slopes from garage to the road by about 2m, there are walls on both sides of the driveway. There is no where for a soakaway, unless you are gonna pump water up 2m in height. Where the hell is the water going from the permeable drive ? Its gonna collect under the paving at the lowest point and drain slowly onto the highway. Bloody crazy !
I agree with Tony, that all commercial projects should be Permeable, where possible. How many supermarket car parks have you been in where there are hundreds of puddles - either badly laid tar or drains cant cope.
Agree with Mick regarding worst year for rain that i have known. Kind of getting used to wearing waterproofs on almost daily basis.
Posted by Tony McC on 28 Sep. 2012,13:47Here we go, the new council-owned Elf Centre cum Gym in Warrington, opened by that Mrs Windsor back in June...
...a great advertisement for blacktop in place of permeable paving if ever there was one!
Posted by rab1 on 28 Sep. 2012,14:55most of the large jobs we work on now are a mixture of black top and permeable block, could be wrong but i'm sure its the regs up here.
now please tell me all about hose pipe bans and warm dry summers. my grandad once told me about these strange things.
Posted by sy76uk on 10 Mar. 2014,19:50My experience of permeable paving is that it only works for a couple of years. I've done loads of it. once the joints get mucky and the bedding layer fills with silt no water gets through so it's pointless.
Posted by Tony McC on 11 Mar. 2014,09:21There's summat wrong if the joints are silting-up to the point of losing permeability after just a couple of years. I've seen research where 8-10 year old pavements in commercial areas are functioning perfectly well even with 60-70% silting. Is the site haveliy silted? Is there a lot of detritus washed across the surface?
One thing that rarely gets mentioned with permeable block paving < CBPP > is that it needs annual maintenance in the form of thorough sweeping to remove any surface vegetation from the joints and possibly a blast with a jet washer to loosen the grit in the joints, which may also then need topping-up.
Properly maintained, you should be looking at a minimum 20 year service life.
Posted by sy76uk on 11 Mar. 2014,15:50I couldn't tell you about every job I've done in permiable because I've done more than I can remember over the years and it has all been for a big paving firm so it wouldn't have been me that got the phone call a few years down the line to say that the paving is holding water but I've been sent to plenty of jobs that have needed lifting and re laying due to the problems I mentioned above and a fair few have been on sites that are only a couple of years old. All of them have been big commercial jobs too by the way so they have all had the proper sub-base installed.
I think some of the problems are,
1, If the grit used for jointing is too fine it's too hard for the water to find it's way through even when it's brand new so after a few years of dirt in the joint's it doesn't stand a chance.
2, If the area is cleaned often by a road sweeper all the jointing grit is sucked out and the joints just get filled up with dirt and sealed.
3, If the site is half permiable, half tarmac and the permiable area is used as a drainage area then all the muck gathers over the block paved area and seals it all.
Just my point of view from my own experience.
I have done some really nice area's in permiable though, I'm not against it. I just don't think it does what it says on the tin as well as it should.
Posted by lutonlagerlout on 11 Mar. 2014,18:47its nigh impossible here to get the correct stone so nobody bothers
plus its mainly clay so its unsuitable from the start
Posted by lemoncurd1702 on 11 Mar. 2014,22:46I've mentioned this on another thread.
I have received specs for commercial works where the specified base is type 1 with coarse sand and permeable paving jointed with kiln dried.
It's doomed to failure until some body or other polices this. If needs be this body should insist on a relay, that should make the rest comply.
Personally I hate the stuff, the finish looks shite.
Besides the extra cost of excavation the producers of permeable blocks somehow believe the paving should also be more expensive even though most of it is based on run of the mill existing products.
Do they really believe that the average consumer gives enough of a f**k to pay extra for an inferior finish.
Especially if they live on a hill
Posted by Tony McC on 12 Mar. 2014,10:49If the CBPPs are jointed with sand or the wrong type of grit, then it is bound to fail. This is largely down to poor training.
In cahoots with Interpave, I helped create a 1-day training course for CBPP, half theory, half practical, but the useless gits responsible for delivering the training never actually bothered. At one point, in a move designed purely to annoy me by refusing to let me lead the first few courses, train the trainers as it were, they had a retuired overweight, unfit bricklayer leading the course and he had to ask the lads how to set out a 90° herringbone, which then destroyed what little credibility he had with his trainees.
So, while some of the manufacturers have cannibalised the Interpave/pavingexpert CBPP course to present their own simpler, half-day courses for residential projects, there is no effective training for commercial projects, which is why we see so many problems. I've shouted as loudly as I can. It's down to Interpave to ensure the training is both available and actually delivered (by competent person rather than feckwitts or salesbods!)
When cleaning is undertaken, it *must* be done with the right sort of kit. A standard road sweeper is NOT the right sort of kit. And when cleaning is complete, the jointing must be topped-up using the right sort of grit. Again, this comes down to training.
As I've already said, I know of CBPP surfaces approaching a decade of trouble-free service because they were properly installed and then properly maintained.
As for the cost, I've been saying for 10 years that it is WRONG of the manufacturers to charge more per m² for CBPP than for conventional CBPs. Think about it: with that 6mm or so joint, there is actually *less* concrete per m² with CBPPs, so how can it be right to charge more? I've heard all the arguments about recovering R&D costs, smaller sales volumes, and so on, but it's not acceptable to whinge about poor sales voulmes whilst not actively doing very much to promote the products via sensible pricing!
And again: if I can get a grant to stuff my loft and walls with insulation, and to hang a new boiler in the kitchen, why can't I get a grant to make my new driveway permeable? Flooding and the way we handle surface water is just as important as carbon emissions and energy usage....as many have seen to their cost over the winter!
Now that I've finally got the < machine-lay page > finished and published, my next big project will probably be CBPPs. Like it or lump it, this is a technology that we as a society will have to adopt because dumping surface water into the sewer systems is becoming increasingly unacceptable.
Posted by sy76uk on 13 Mar. 2014,19:17I agree with your point about poor training being responsible for failure as far as domestic work is concerned but not on commercial projects. On all of the commercial installations I've been involved with we have to work to the specifications we are given regardless of my experience or opinion.
One real plus point for permiable paving for me is that you can lay it in all weathers ;)
< [IMG]http://i952.photobucket.com/albums....MG] >
< [IMG]http://i952.photobucket.com/albums....MG] >
Posted by lutonlagerlout on 13 Mar. 2014,20:22
2 outta 3 aint bad
Posted by Tony McC on 14 Mar. 2014,09:38
Oh, the spec is often right, but the implementation and, critically, the supervision is often wanting,
I've yet to meet a contractor working on a commercial project who was asked to provide evidence of relevant training before undertaking CBPP. The usual 'vetting' runs summat like....
"Can you lay this permeable block stuff?"
"Yeah, not a bother!"
"Get on with it, then"
This is how we end up with jobs laid on Type 1, jobs laid on sand, jobs jointed with KDS, jobs with all cuts omitted and filled with grit instead, and jobs with ineffective or non-existent edge restraint.
On one high-profile job here in Warrington, the eejit contractor convinced the site manager that the spec was wrong because there was not enough fines in the "hardcore", which led to the 20-5 being sent back and replaced with DTp1, with predictable results 3 months later.
Posted by sy76uk on 14 Mar. 2014,18:48I've never come across any of the problems you've mentioned above Tony. The first job I did in CBPP was back in 2003. It was a hospital car park in Birmingham city centre. There were a lot of protected tree's in the area and the only way the could do the car park was if they did it in permiable.
On that job we had 2 types of grit to use. 2-5mm for the bedding layer and 0-2mm for the jointing. We ended up running out of 25kg bags of grit for jointing and used the bedding grit for the last 100 or so m2 for brushing in and guess what, that was the only area that didn't hold water. Lesson learned.
The job I posted photo's of above is of a big tesco's car park. All of the parking bay's are CBPP and the roads are tarmac. The tarmac roads are cambered in the centre and the parking bays have a 100mm valley in the centre so that the they act as a soak away for the whole job and the rain water is stored for re-cycling. Nice idea but it get's cleaned by a road sweeper constantly and they just suck all the grit out. We were called back out to the job about a year later re-joint the whole job which was 2400m2. We had to lift and re lay alot of the edges too. Nothing to do with the way we laid it, purely down to poor maintanence.
I've been there once since too. I Did a patio for someone that lives near there and mentioned to them that I did the paving at there local tesco. After nipping there at lunch time I'd wished I hadn't because it looked a right flipping mess.
IMPO the best way to acheive a good finish with the stuff is if it's laid with 100mm of 2-5mm pea gravel screed on a peckered tarmac sub-base with 2-5mm pea gravel brushed into the joints.
I agree with your point's that it need's to be installed and maintained correctly for it to stand a chance but even when it is once the bedding layer get's full of silt it becomes non permiable anyway.
When I say I've done loads of it I'd like to explain that up util early 2012 I worked as a ganger for a big paving firm doing big commercial projects. We would get down at least 500m2 a week on big area's and it was 50/50 permiable-non permiable.
CBPP is a good idea and it keeps the lad's working in the winter but I think the system need's improving.
Posted by Tony McC on 15 Mar. 2014,12:19The 2-5 for bedding should have been used for jointing and the 0-2 for jointing is the same spec as KDS!
It's not just the system that needs improving, it's the level of understanding by clients, contractors and the alleged maintainers. Too much CBPP has been sent out there with little or no real understainding of its idiosyncracies.