Was chatting away to an environmental engineer. He was talking about the floods we just had saying. That The situation we have where Traditional Front gardens with flowers and lawns at the front of houses disappearing to make way for the family cars. Not helping matters. Because the garden in itself acted as a natural soak away for The rain water and also did the garden a great deal of good. Now it has no where to go except down the drain and That in its self is creating its own set of problem's as there are so many front gardens Now disappearing.

Sorry if this has already been done and dusted but been away for a while.

Lis@~~

[SamRadford]

I've de-turfed my garden and put 4 tons of white gravel down. It reflects the sunlight, thus helping to negate the warming effect of black tarmac roads.

My car is silver.

In any case, roads should be made from lime cement. It binds carbon dioxide and reflects sunlight.

[Synchro]

However, I think you'll find, in creating a eco-friendly, sun reflector in your garden, the wee creatures that used to frollic there have shifted into your neighbours evironmentally damaging, lawn with shrubbed-edging garden.

[ad47uk]

Originally Posted by lisa burrell

Was chatting away to an environmental engineer. He was talking about the floods we just had saying. That The situation we have where Traditional Front gardens with flowers and lawns at the front of houses disappearing to make way for the family cars. Not helping matters. Because the garden in itself acted as a natural soak away for The rain water and also did the garden a great deal of good. Now it has no where to go except down the drain and That in its self is creating its own set of problem's as there are so many front gardens Now disappearing.

Sorry if this has already been done and dusted but been away for a while.

Lis@~~

You are right, I have got a driveway in the front of my house and now garden or very little anyway, but it was partly built when I moved in, so it was easier to complete it than to demolish it. Anyway the chance of getting flooded up here is zero, if I got flooded then the rest of the city would be under water.

the other problem is people deciding that they don't want a garden and can't be bothered with the digging or the grass mowing and have a patio and decking. I don't blame them and if this was my own house, I would do the same thing.

Guilty as charged, it was half and half, then the green half died during a hosepipe ban, now it all block paved. I still have a hedge for wee creatures.

Plenty of green and flowers at the back mind you, with under-surface economical automatic watering system. (This is AVforums, so you should expect some gadgetry).

I guess the overall effect is the same if you add a conservatory, or extend.

[Steve.J.Davies]

Interesting point. Bearing in mind the percentage of built on land compared to countryside I think that the prairie farming/huge fields/destruction of hedgerows has a much bigger effect. Farmers forced into this by economics.
Maybe Tesco et al should be paying towards fixing the damage...

[TimeLord]

Rub out all the double yellow lines outside residential areas and theres not such a need to build a driveway, but then i guess they would have to increase council tax to compensate for the lost income of parking fines.

a synical attitude mayb, but has anyone had a tax reduction when bin emptying went from weekly to fortnightly? i thought not.

[damo_in_sale]

A further problem is that this bunch of muppets we call our government designate peoples gardens as brownfield sites. And brownfield sites are where 'devellopment' is encouraged. That means flats everywhere. In fact, I live in one.

What we really need is to get rid of this green belt nonsense, which forces cities to become ever denser, and property ever more expensive, and simply build outwards.

[blearyeyes]

Originally Posted by damo_in_sale

A further problem is that this bunch of muppets we call our government designate peoples gardens as brownfield sites. And brownfield sites are where 'devellopment' is encouraged. That means flats everywhere. In fact, I live in one.

What we really need is to get rid of this green belt nonsense, which forces cities to become ever denser, and property ever more expensive, and simply build outwards.

Agree with you on that 100%. This government has its priorities ar*e about face. It allows giant windmills on sites of natural beauty and then insists that these same sites are off limit for residential development. Recently saw two adjacent guest houses with large back gardens sold off to developers and replaced with 24 flats! This only puts further strain on city infrastructures and services and, by the way the, flats were next to a river!

[Nimby]

Blocks of flats are actually more beneficial to the environment because the footprint is smaller, insulation and combined heating is more economical as are all services.

There is no need for tarmac car parking. Stone blocks set in grass have been used for decades. No heat build up from black body solar absorption and green vegetation remains as a calming measure. A quick mow keeps the grass trim and neat. The remaining area of earth between the blocks acts as a water sink for rainfall. Trees and shrubs can still grow while tarmac depletes their water supply. What's is there not to like apart from the energy costs of transporting such heavy materials around? Vast quantities of tasteless granite is already being dragged halfway round the world as decoration for the masses.

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by Nimby

Blocks of flats are actually more beneficial to the environment because the footprint is smaller, insulation and combined heating is more economical as are all services.

Sod the environment, people want houses.

[Stephen Wilde]

The Soviet Union saw the benefits of flats. Or rather they saw the benefit of cheap control of people while the environment was destroyed by government owned industries and sod the planet.

Is Nimby in the right nation for his political leanings ?

Population is key. Too many people and houses cease to be an option for most. Too many people and the environment is stuffed whatever we do.

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by Stephen Wilde

The Soviet Union saw the benefits of flats. Or rather they saw the benefit of cheap control of people while the environment was destroyed by government owned industries and sod the planet.

Is Nimby in the right nation for his political leanings ?

Population is key. Too many people and houses cease to be an option for most. Too many people and the environment is stuffed whatever we do.

Hi mate,

I commonly hear on this forum that 'politics doesn't come into it' i.e. this whole environmental argument has nothing to do with politics. As both you and I appreciate, that is nonsense.

What I do know is that ever further population density of our cities leads to ever smaller dwellings and ever increasing market value. Demolishing a lovely old semi or detached house and building a block of apartments, because that is what the planning restrictions encourage, means that our young folk wanting to start a family are severely hampered.

What I want to see is agricultural land far more open to development as residential land.

As for population growth, there wouldn’t be any in the UK if it weren’t for (I await the wrath of our leftie friends) immigration. Oooh, I am evil, and have probably done something more evil than murder: bought a Daily Mail. I probably have a racist agenda in leftie la la land.

The thing is, this government in particular requires population growth in order to pay for the often unfunded and final salary linked pensions of state employees.

Also, much of the economy over the last ten years has been funded by the ever increasing value of homeowners’ property. It seems to me that this governments policy regarding housing has been to ‘pull up the ladder’ of opportunity for our young folk whilst bribing existing homeowners. I personally belive that this was a part of Gordon Browns strategy- I think he hates the idea of the little folk getting on all by themselves.

In any case, house prices have crashed in some places in the US, and I feel tempted to emigrate to a place where liberty is valued, criminals are treated severely and professionals who work hard are rewarded

Rant over.

Damo

[Nimby]

We are discussing car parking, Damo.
Not your ultra-right concept of the built-up world.
I have no political stance.
I respect no party which is not altruistic.
Yeah, right.

Get back to improving car parking or go and hold a rally somewhere else.
Hopefully you can still find somewhere that is not privately owned. So you can share your extreme views while enjoying almost complete freedom of speech. Which you appear to want to deny to those who disagree with your very odd beliefs.

If America seems to offer the heaven on earth reserved for the chosen few then go or it. Just make sure that your have sufficient funds to pay your way. Stay young, rich and healthy or you'll be back like a shot to live off the few remaining taxpayers in Britain.

Now, let's discuss alternative pavements for parking. We need a lack of heat absorption and the ability to soak up water in very large quantities. (allegedly)

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by Nimby

We are discussing car parking, Damo.

The issues I raise are interconnected with the topic. You can pretend they are not if you like, so as to make your thought experiments appear to work.

Originally Posted by Nimby

Not your ultra-right concept of the built-up world.

Yes, it would appear that preference for the small state, liberty and market economics does indeed make me appear ‘ultra-right wing’ in this Marxist dominated forum.

Originally Posted by Nimby

I have no political stance.

You appear to be a Marxist of some kind.

Originally Posted by Nimby

I respect no party which is not altruistic.

Originally Posted by Nimby

Get back to improving car parking or go and hold a rally somewhere else.

You assume too much. There’s that bigotry I’ve mentioned elsewhere regarding lefies.

Originally Posted by Nimby

Hopefully you can still find somewhere that is not privately owned. So you can share your extreme views while enjoying almost complete freedom of speech. Which you appear to want to deny to those who disagree with your very odd beliefs.

I think you will find that freedom of speech is something I hold dear.

Originally Posted by Nimby

If America seems to offer the heaven on earth reserved for the chosen few then go or it. Just make sure that your have sufficient funds to pay your way. Stay young, rich and healthy or you'll be back like a shot to live off the few remaining taxpayers in Britain. )

Yes, Europe has been swamped with American immigrants fleeing their appalling standard of living in their country of origin. How did I miss this?

Originally Posted by Nimby

Now, let's discuss alternative pavements for parking. We need a lack of heat absorption and the ability to soak up water in very large quantities. (allegedly)

In the UK we need to free up planning restrictions in the country. That is what will help people the most. I can understand though how perverse this ‘extreme view’ must seem to you Nimby.

[paul1967]

On my planning requirement for parking was a hardstanding surface were the runoff has to go to a soakaway and not onto the road.

[Nimby]

That's very interesting, Paul.

Were any suggestions made as to suitable materials for the hardstanding?

Or was it assumed that tarmac would be used?

What materials did you use as a matter of interest?

What was the size of the soak-away specified in the permission?

Gravel seems to be by far the most popular drive and parking surface around here.

But it is far from perfect. Being very noisy at unsociable hours. Prone to drifting on corners. Puddles in heavy rain. Causes wheelspin on quick exits and slopes. It collects in tire treads and flies out at speed to cause windscreen damage to following cars. It also wanders rather too freely onto the road. It is however attractive to the eye having quite an even surface appearance in all weathers. I do know it is hell to ride on with skinny bicycle racing tyres.

[Corey USA]

Originally Posted by paul1967

On my planning requirement for parking was a hardstanding surface were the runoff has to go to a soakaway and not onto the road.

The problem with this is it is possible to over saturate an area thus cause mud slides and such. So I hope they take this into account when planning for this. the more surface area horizontally for saturation the more effective it will be.

We are draining natures natural areas that did this thus more flooding if you want to fix the problems we need to restore wetland areas.

the surface area covered by water kinds of act as a radiator as well. keeping the ground temp cooler.

[Corey USA]

Originally Posted by damo_in_sale

A further problem is that this bunch of muppets we call our government designate peoples gardens as brownfield sites. And brownfield sites are where 'devellopment' is encouraged. That means flats everywhere. In fact, I live in one.

What we really need is to get rid of this green belt nonsense, which forces cities to become ever denser, and property ever more expensive, and simply build outwards.

building out wards is what we do best in the USA. I tell you now its unsustainable. Its not walkable, its hell on the public transit, its too time consuming to ride bike even for the fit, without a car you can spend all day just going to two different stores on the opposite side of town using public transit..

there is more traffic infrastructure more plumbing infrastructure for water thus expensive and wasteful by concentrating the population you reduce the need for infrastructure while conserving the natural areas vital for our survival.

If you want to really minimize infrastructure you need to limit population.

[Nimby]

It used to be chain building along roadsides in the UK.
The countryside disappeared from view behind private, privet hedges.
Around here it is little boxes going up everywhere behind tall, road-noise-reflecting, earth banks.
No consideration given to solar orientation or local shopping needs.
The tiny, single story houses are just plonked down in a field at maximum density within the space available.
Gardens are too small to produce more than one carrot at a time.
Intended only to carry a worn out lawn supporting vast collections of huge imported plastic toys.
The compulsory people carrier has to have its parking place and access roads.
So the supermarket run can be dumped close to the door to avoid all exercise and inclement weather.
The irony is the popularity of oversized inflatable paddling pools.
The pools wont know whether to sink or swim when the floods come.
Bobbing lifebelts for a fat family on a flooded field?
If not the homeowners can huddle (carefully) on the kid's trampolines as they wait for rescue.
I'm waiting for the first media image of a row of flood stranded homeowners waving form the top of the earth bank.
Perhaps there is method in the developer's apparent madness after all?

[paul1967]

Nimby , there was no requirements for what to use , on the size of soakaway there a calculation on size of drive to size of soakaway, on gravel going on to the road from drive ways thats an offence, as I was told when doing the site clearance for the house that the road should be kept clear of all debri.