Cheap/easy surfacing for drive

The drive in front of my garage is really starting to break up - it was only every nastily laid tarmac about 1mm thick.
Now luckily, I don't keep a car in the garage, nor use the drive to keep a car on at all. The only traffic that goes over the drive is the Mrs power scooter. Being (like everyone else) of limited means, we can't really afford the rolls-royce solution of block-paving, and experience from when we first moved in tells us that no-one will actually quote to tarmac a 4m x 4m piece of ground.
I'm thinking of putting down some of that plastic honeycomb, that can be filled with shingle:
http://www.kedel.co.uk/drainage-and-ground-reinforcement/ground - reinforcement-grids-permeable-paving-mesh-6-sq-metre.html
luckily there's about 40mm between the garage floor and the drive :). I'm not too concerned about the dip to the pavement ... I could probably rig up a small slope for that.
As an aside, we went out on New Years Eve, and when I returned, there were tyre marks across the drive (in the moss !). Cheeky neighbours - might explain why it's deteriorated so rapidly. I've put a concrete fence post across it for now.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 11:07:15 AM UTC, Jethro_uk wrote:

Omitting the grids is cheaper. Put down cement powder and mix into the surface before adding gravel. Ideally then roll it.
NT
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@care2.com writes

Highways dept. can get a bit *tarty* if you allow pebbles/gravel to escape to the road.
--
Tim Lamb

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 02/01/2013 12:16, Tim Lamb wrote:

any chance of me getting a bit *tarty* about all the chippings on my nice block paved drive from when the road was resurfaced months ago?
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jethro_uk wrote:

I think you mean 1 inch thick, 1mm is basically paint

You've got 16m2 that needs covering, so the 6m2 is no good to you, if you decide to leave a strip on each side, you may get away with the 12m2 at £171, failing that you'll have to get the 22m2 @ £314. Then you need gravel at £55 a tonne and I can't see that area going in one so you'll need two and someone to do it for you unless you can DIY and even then I can't see it being suitable for a scooter.
You can get cheapo paving flags (400X400) from b&q for £212 for 100, then say £50 worth of sand & cement and a day and half to lay them....bearing in mind they are as light as a feather, it's like dealing a deck of cards.
http://snipurl.com/260vh8t
Available in buff or grey
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

you need to check with your council's building control about permitted methods of surfacing. It's all to do with letting rainwater soak into the ground, rather than running off into the road.
--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
charles wrote:

As it's already tarmacced now, he's not changing anything WRT drainage
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

true, but they might require the replacement to be different.
--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
charles wrote:

If he starts getting those people involved, they will find a way to triple the cost of anything he wants to do, making it un doable.[1] If he just goes ahead and does it, it's been there for the past 15 years and so it's not subject to any regulations, and in any case, we don't know that the drive slopes towards the pavement, it could have a drain already installed, in which case it will just drain into that.
Of the 18 drives I've done since this legislation came into place, over half of them drained onto the path / road. No one from any local authority have been in touch with either me nor any of my clients, IE, they don't care, as they know it can't be policed, if they had been involved from the start, they would have photographed it and kept an eye on it watching for any changes. If the drains are at the house end and the land runs away from them, there's no way to collect water at the road end and get it back uphill to the house drains, soakaways aren't allowed so close to the highway, and the LA won't allow you to connect into the road drains, so what is there left to do but ignore these idiotic rules....what they want you to do is pay an extra £10k so they can dig up the pavement and put an extra drain in for you, but who's gonna do that on a £500 job?
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 02/01/2013 19:45, Phil L wrote:

Have you applied for the planning permission? They won't get in touch if they don't know. However it is not their responsibility to apply, maybe not even yours. At worst you will only have to dig them up and replace them with porous sub-bases and surfacing and you might even get paid if its the owners responsibility.

It only makes floods further down stream more likely so its not going to be a problem for you unless you are down stream of lots of other people putting in non porous surfaces.

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
dennis@home wrote:

Happy days, this was the idea.

I won't be replacing anything and it's never going to happen where the council try and force someone to remove a driveway when they've no way of proving it's only been done since the legislation - how can they prove it's been done since and not been there for 10 years? - they have to prove this and the customer doesn't have to prove anything, nor even speak to them if he chooses not to.

Not really, the country didn't suddenly start flooding when we built the motorway network. And it's nothing but a money making scam anyway, what difference does it make if it drains off into the house drains, or into the road and into street gullies? - everyone pays for surface water removal and it all ends up in the same place anyway
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It makes those of us who live next to streams: downstream from conurbations very nervous.
I think the concept of not adding to surface water run off is a wise one, particularly in the South East where existing aquifers are barely keeping pace with consumption. There is also the issue of overloading sewage treatment plant leading to discharges of untreated water to rivers and annoying the anglers.

--
Tim Lamb

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tim Lamb wrote:

The OP isn't adding to surface water run off, and if he did it according to my earlier suggestion of leaving a patch at each side for gravel, he will be decreasing it
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 03/01/13 20:30, Phil L wrote:

I haver cured surface flooding in several areas by using limestone MOT type I covered with soil. The limestone allows the surface water to drain. You can if enough is used, even safely run cars over it. Heavy use will wear back to chalk, but occasional uses does little harm to the soil surfaces.
My drive is about 4" of crushed MOT top dressed with about 4" of gravel., Up till this year it has always drained well, but now the gravel in the high traffic entrance is all mashed down and full of mud, so it needs another 20 tonnes or so whacked on top.
--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 03/01/13 17:39, Tim Lamb wrote:

The pint is that mostly house rainwater drains are required by law to go into soakaways, which store and disperse the water into the ground. |Not into the local waterway, at least not immediately.
--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/01/2013 17:10, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

That is certainly the modern trend, but it does depend on the area though... older towns often had combined sewers that were fed from both foul and surface drains.
Our previous place had separate sewers for foul and surface water.
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 03/01/2013 16:29, Phil L wrote:

Google may well be able to show when stuff was done.

The motorway network is a minor thing compared to all the building work done and some bits of country side do flood when it rains on the motorways. They didn't flood before the motorways.

The idea is that it doesn't run off into *any* drains. As you say there is little difference between the rainfall drains of a house and those of the road. It should not run into either these days as it is intended to keep as much of it in the soil as would have been if there was no impermeable surface.
Its all quite simple really.. 1" of rains falls. It either soaks into the ground and then seeps into the rivers as it used to. This takes a few days so the rivers don't rise much.
Or it all drains into the river from hard surfaces almost immediately and causes the rivers to rise quickly.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I suspect agricultural land drainage has a lot to answer for when it come to flooding. Not that there's an easy solution to this though, if we want productive fields, we have to drain land.
Tim
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In article

when in the train to Edinburgh in early November and seeing all the flooded fields, SWMBO (a biologist) remarked that a large part of the problem was that organic feritilizers (aka manure) were no longer used. This means that the soil is not as aerated as it used to be, so water simply lies on the surface instead of draining through.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 03/01/13 20:16, charles wrote:

A half truth at best.
On heavy soils where compaction exists, there is considerable work done to break up and mulch in last years crops as part of the subsoil ploughing.
You dont need organic matter to create porosity any more - you can use mechanical means. Also the stalks of the last years crops are mulched in anyway. They don't have much nutrient, but they have,mechanical value.
Finally the optimal cost benefit is to go extremely light on fertilizers anyway. They are very expensive, and the best profit is just enough sprayed when its relatively dry so it doesn't get washed away. ]

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.