Page 1 of 2
Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:11 am
by Aalindo
Hi all,
Firstly, I should say that this is a great site.
I'm looking to source paving to sit within an oak framed porch on a new-build (but traditionally styled) farmhouse. The house has a green painted, timber, stable front door and a gravel drive.
I've looked at Marshalls Coach House and Stonemarket Millstone so far, primarily because the porch has 2 steps and these ranges come with bullnose flags. However, the prices are routinely around £50 m2 which i think is outrageous for concrete.
Does anyone have any natural stone alternatives that they'd recommend? I'm aiming for a light-grey, riven/tumbled look, with matching bullnose steps.
The main porch area is only 4m2 while the step is 1.9 x 0.45m.
Thanks in advance.
Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2014 2:06 pm
by lutonlagerlout
Aalindo wrote:. However, the prices are routinely around £50 m2 which i think is outrageous for concrete.
really? welcome to 2014 
I like millstone and used to lay a lot of it, but the bullnosed part tends to abrade after a few years
for such a small are the world is your oyster
installations costs are similar no matter what stone you use
for 5-6 metres I would consider yorkstone = with bullnoses
london stone yorkstone
its gonna cost you a few quid but will last the test of time
buy cheap pay twice as the saying goes
cheers LLL
Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:49 pm
by Aalindo
LLL,
Many thanks for the reply. I have PM'd London Stone (as I see he is a regular on here).
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:47 am
by London Stone Paving
Thanks for the reference LLL
There are a few different options available. Is it definately a riven/tumbled material that you are looking for?
Steve
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2014 10:15 am
by Tony McC
As nice as Coach Houlse and Millstone may be, I be very reluctant to use them in a porch just because they wear relatively quickly, not as quickly as some wet-cast but quickly compared to natural stone, in such heavily traffiicked areas.
And if you've spent all that dosh on oak framing to a traditional farmhouse, I'd definitely opt for traditional paving, which means stone. Just what sort of stone depends on where you are, but York Stone works well regardless of location.
It'd be a bit more pricey than concrete copies, but with only 5 or so square metres, I'd say it's well worth the investment. No point spoiling the ship for a ha'p'orth of tar!
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2014 4:12 pm
by Pablo
How about exposed aggregate concrete if you get the dyes and pebbels right it would look great next to the timber and would easily be the longest lasting and least maintenance finish.
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2014 6:06 pm
by lutonlagerlout
longer than yorkstone pablo?
we went in the Cittie of Yorke pub in holborn the weekend before we met mick
the yorkstone there was laid in 1430 and still looks good
doubt concrete would look that good 600 years on
LLL :;):
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2014 11:00 pm
by GB_Groundworks
cough cough
the pantheon in rome built in 126ad thats over 2000+ years concrete with volcanic pumis stones to be lighter
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 10:22 am
by Tony McC
If we're doing Roman paving and/or building materials, I give you the Appian Way - just 2,300 years old, built from stone (and they didn't feel it necessary to use a sealant!!!), and still going strong.
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 10:54 am
by Aalindo
Many thanks for all the suggestions so far. I have to say that I agree with the points raised, especially about it being such a small area that it is worth the extra money it would take to use some quality stone.
However, my wife has had an idea...
She has suggested laying brick paving (specifically Global Stone Rose Cottage) in a herringbone pattern within the porch an step. She has taken the idea from our inglenook fireplace, which has turned out great.
It's not a bad idea as it would really suit the place. My only concern would be the step. The BCO is (reluctantly) happy for us to have a stepped entrance, but I obviously still need to satisfy Part M.
Would a single course of bullnose brick specials on the 'outside' of the herringbone be enough to satisfy Para 6.17d, namely that "it has steps with suitable tread nosing profiles"?
Thanks in advance.
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 11:04 am
by Tony McC
I don't see why not but we are dealing with BCOs here, so s/he may interpret it differently, but a bull-nosed nosing.....the clue is in the name!
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 11:33 am
by Aalindo
True, they are indeed a law unto themselves!
I reckon they'd be suitable. My concern was that when viewed from the side, the bullnose stone is a full semi-circle and overhangs the brick risers, whereas the bullnose bricks will sit flush with the risers and only curve over the top edge.
I could argue that it is safer as there's no overhanging tread to trip over!
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 11:57 am
by Aalindo
Having read through the relevant sections on the site, i Just a couple more question reference using the brick pavers if I may:
1. I'd want a mortar joint between the pavers, so would i be looking at rigid rather than flexible construction?
2. Is the recommended 100-150mm concrete base applicable for such a small and lightly trafficced area or can it be reduced?
3. Will the guide on how to create a 45' herringbone pattern on the website work with mortar joints? Do i follow it, but use 10/12mm spacers when setting out?
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2014 6:49 am
by Aalindo
Any thoughts on the above, anyone?
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:17 am
by Tony McC
Sorry, your post of 5th March didn't show up as unread on my screen.
1 - yes - if you have rigid joints, you need a rigid bed. There are exceptions if using a flexible resin mortar. but for cement mortars, it *always* means a rigid/bound bed.
2 - Any concrete of less than 100mm depth is barely capable of supporting its own mass. It *can* be done when high pressure compaction is used, but for simple pours, even if using a vibro-tamp or similar, 100mm would be a minimum depth.
3 - Yes - you could use, say, GapFast spacers to give you a consistent joint width