I am currently having concrete block paving laid by a professional paving firm (Oyster paving of Reading).
The edge course has been laid. The paving slopes across the front of the house. At one side it is two courses below the DPC, but at the other edge it is only 1/2 course. The blocks are flush to the front house wall. Is this acceptable?
I thought that paving should always be at least 2 courses below, but as this is a paving company I would hope that they know what they are doing.
Paving against DPC
-
84-1093879891
-
100-1093880152
Thank you for your reply.
No, I only noticed on my way out to work this morning.
Problem is, they could give some reason and I don't know enough to know if it is valid. Site is pretty level.
It was not mentioned before, in fact they were talking about installing a soakaway, but were going to wait until they had got all the levels before finally deciding on the best way to drain the drive. They haven't dug a soakaway yet.
No, I only noticed on my way out to work this morning.
Problem is, they could give some reason and I don't know enough to know if it is valid. Site is pretty level.
It was not mentioned before, in fact they were talking about installing a soakaway, but were going to wait until they had got all the levels before finally deciding on the best way to drain the drive. They haven't dug a soakaway yet.
-
84-1093879891
-
100-1093880152
Tony,
Thank you very much for taking the time to reply. Your help is greatly appreciated. Your site is probably the most informative and useful I have come across.
Their expanation is that in order to get the levels to match in with existing path (at the low end of the new drive), plus other suitable slopes to road and garden, they needed to rise this corner. The drive slopes both across the front of the house and away from the house at this point. They claim that by having this slope across the front (2 courses in about 30 ft) water will not collect and hence no damp.
Sounds reasonable to me (and the work they have done looks good), but I am still a bit concerned.
I thought one of the reasons for having drives 2 courses below DPC was to stop damp caused by rain splashing up from the path onto the brick work, or is this and old wives tale?
They state that, if I want, they will move back the drive edge from the house by the width of one block and infill with gravel, should I go for this (it won't look so good, but if it stops damp?)?
Thank you,
Dave
Thank you very much for taking the time to reply. Your help is greatly appreciated. Your site is probably the most informative and useful I have come across.
Their expanation is that in order to get the levels to match in with existing path (at the low end of the new drive), plus other suitable slopes to road and garden, they needed to rise this corner. The drive slopes both across the front of the house and away from the house at this point. They claim that by having this slope across the front (2 courses in about 30 ft) water will not collect and hence no damp.
Sounds reasonable to me (and the work they have done looks good), but I am still a bit concerned.
I thought one of the reasons for having drives 2 courses below DPC was to stop damp caused by rain splashing up from the path onto the brick work, or is this and old wives tale?
They state that, if I want, they will move back the drive edge from the house by the width of one block and infill with gravel, should I go for this (it won't look so good, but if it stops damp?)?
Thank you,
Dave
-
84-1093879891
The 150mm below dpc rule is, as you rcorrectly state, to prevent or minimise damp problem from splashback, and although the gradient they've created will not allow water to hang in that area, the fact that they're what? only 30-40mm below dpc is worrying and not something I would accept and certainly not something that would be permitted on a commercial or civil contract.
The gravel strip is, to my mind, a cheap cop out and again, I wouldn't be happy with it. You're paying for block paving, not bloody gravel!
I'm not familiar with the layout at your property, but the correct procedure when there's insufficient fall to drain an area of paving is to create a low point and add an extra gully, NOT elevate the paving up towards the dpc. How feasible this would be on your project, I can't say.
At the end of the day, it's your paving and you have to live with it. If you're happy, then fair enough, but, you must bear in mind that any encroachment of the '150mm below dpc' standard is the sort of thing a surveyor picks up on if you come to sell the property and then you're left with the choice of reducing your asking price or paying for remedial work.
My question to them would be why they haven't created a low point and installed an extra gully. This should have been allowed for in their original survey and pricing of the work.
The gravel strip is, to my mind, a cheap cop out and again, I wouldn't be happy with it. You're paying for block paving, not bloody gravel!
I'm not familiar with the layout at your property, but the correct procedure when there's insufficient fall to drain an area of paving is to create a low point and add an extra gully, NOT elevate the paving up towards the dpc. How feasible this would be on your project, I can't say.
At the end of the day, it's your paving and you have to live with it. If you're happy, then fair enough, but, you must bear in mind that any encroachment of the '150mm below dpc' standard is the sort of thing a surveyor picks up on if you come to sell the property and then you're left with the choice of reducing your asking price or paying for remedial work.
My question to them would be why they haven't created a low point and installed an extra gully. This should have been allowed for in their original survey and pricing of the work.