Suds advice

[prDIY]

Thanks Tony
So for a sump and pump system where would I even pump the water to?
I measured up my back garden last night and there is nowhere there that I can put a soakaway - again 5 m rule, as I have a garage at one side of my garden and my neighbour has one against the boundary at the other side.

The only place I have to pump it is the foul water drain. It would seem ridiculous for me to pump water into a foul water drain when I could let it run onto the road and into the storm sewer.

In terms of retrospectivity, etc. The hard standing has planning permission. We built an extension last year and the drive was part of that planning application. The condition on the planning stated that we must have a linear channel at the boundary to the pavement, but it didn't specify that it needed to be connected to anything. Obviously just ridiculous. The reason for me asking the question in the first place is because I like to do things right and properly - I do have a conscience about these things. But given that the main driver in this is my own conscience I have no particular interest in doing a half a###d token gesture.

In terms of intransigence of councils, I know what you mean - imagine the following conversation

Me: Can we knock a window out of our current house at this point as part of our extension?
Planning officer: No
Me: But under my permitted development rights I can do that.
Planning officer: I won't pass plans for your extension with that window on.
Me: but I can take it off the plans and then do it anyway under PD, correct?
Planning officer: Yes
Me: Then why on earth won't you pass it.
Planning officer: Because I don't want you to have a window there.
Me: x!#x?

Again many thanks for the information

[lutonlagerlout]

sounds about right
LLL

[dig dug dan]

hen we have the nonsense of cowboy contractors banging in a line of linear channels at the threshold to a driveway which are connected to nothing. They aren't drainage: they are a visual con.

thats exactly what everyone is doing here when the council then catches up with. The council do not check its actually connected to anything so sign it off. morons

[Tony McC]

The 'threshold drain con' is a blight on our trade. Even a non-contractor, prDIY, has seen the attitude of councils in that they want to see a drain but don;t ask about where it will outfall. This is so bloody wrong!

But it has a negative impact on the responsible contractor. A good contractor will price-up a job and include a sum of, say, 500 quid for 3m of linear channel, correctly installed on concrete bed and hanch, and connected to a soakaway and/or a SW system all in accordance with Building Regs Part H. Then, Feckitt & Co come along and their price allows only 100 quid for 3m of cheapest possible linear channel, complete with tinny grating which will deform when crossed by a child's bike, all sat on a sprinkling of sand, and connected to sweet FA. At best, they omit the end-caps so water *might* escape to the adjacent garden. They've spent, at best, 40 quid of materials and can significantly undercut the price for a proper job done by a contractor with integrity.

How would the average householder know that such an installation is a bodge? I had a stand-up row with one "landscaping specialist" who's only answer when asked where such a channel will outfall was that "it's a drain". He seemed to think that once you sent water into a "drain" it somehow magically disappeared and he'd done nothing wrong. "But where will the water go?", I asked. "It's a f***ing drain!" was the reply, "the water guzzinter the drain. Are yer f***ing fick?"

When he was issued with a written instruuction from the householder to remove it and re-install correctly with a connection to soakaway, he threatened to batter me. Such a lovely man, but sadly a man who has not been paid a penny for *any* of the work done because the householder wants to be taken to court to make his point.

Anyway, back to prDIY: the only place your proposed channel can outfall is back to the FW drain via the sump'n'pump. I know it's ridiculous when there is a so-much-simpler solution staring you in the face, but if you really do want to comply with the regs, that would be your only option. There would be plenty who would understand and empathise with you if opted for the basic channel which overflows onto the highway, but, as we said right back at the start of this thread, such a set-up would not be compliant and so we couldn't possibly recommend it.

[prDIY]

Well Thanks for all the advice everyone

All the best

Phil

[Dr Stirbitch]

Thought I may as well piggy-back on this thread as start a new one. Hope that's OK.

On the specification page for drainage - http://www.pavingexpert.com/specs01.htm#drain - this text crops up a number of times: "All Drainage to comply with Building Regs Part H 2002". Am I right in thinking that this compliance means that as far as SUDS is concerned no planning permission will be needed for a driveway.

If not, could someone please give a quick summary of what it means in practical terms for a driveway.

(Great site and forum BTW!)

Cheers

[Tony McC]

That needs updating because the current Part H is "2002 Edition incorporating 2010 amendments". One of the biggest problems of maintaining such a big site is keeping tracck of all these little changes in legislation, guidelines and standards.

Planning permission for driveways is covered by the comedy legislation from 2008 which is explained here

Essentially, if you have a SUDS compliant installation, no PP is required.

[Dr Stirbitch]

Thanks Tony.

I have already read your SUDS information, but was wondering how it should translate into specifying driveway drainage. Is it reasonable to have a statement that it should be "SUDS compliant"? Or maybe there is a better form of words...?

[Tony McC]

SUDS compliant or to comply with the T&C Planning legislation of October 2008