Forum Topic

Paving over front gardens is damaging to the environment - yet these people are encouraging it!

How very disappointing to read the piece on the news section of PutneySW15 encouraging people to pave their front gardens over to make money, despite the very damaging effect on the environment (http://www.putneysw15.com/default.asp?section=info&link=http://neighbournet.com/server/common/conoffstreetparking001.htm). What's more, this article appears on the very day that judging is taking place in Putney Society's front garden competition! The damage to the environment is caused, as the Royal Horticultural Society points out, by the fact that materials like paving, tarmac and concrete, which are being increasingly used to pave gardens, are less porous than the earth they replace (which can soak up rain). The result is that the amount of rainwater that runs off is increased by as much as 50 per cent, with the additional water usually flowing into street drains which can't always cope, leading to flash floods (https://www.rhs.org.uk/science/pdf/Gardening-matters-Front-Gardens-urban-greening.pdf). The advice being peddled by this Harrison Woods, that “I would encourage homeowners with an empty driveway to register it for renting as soon as possible and see how much money they can make from it. It doesn't cost anything to list a driveway with YourParkingSpace.co.uk, so there's nothing to lose."  No, there's nothing to lose but the damage caused by this idiotic and irresponsible advice, which encourages people to act selfishly, and Woods should be ashamed. And it's all the worse because the "news" piece ends with the mealy-mouthed statement that "there may be a negative effect on the environment". 

Richard Carter ● 2708d65 Comments

100% agreeIt's also one of the key reason that the hedgehog population has dropped so muchAnd you do have to ask, why on earth encourage more drivers to come to Putney???? Seriously?

Emarisa Battoia ● 2708d

Plus it looks crap! Who in their right mind wants to look through their front windows and see a huge lump of metal?

Sue Hammond ● 2708d

I'm sorry but I think you've misread. Not "pave your front garden". Rent out an existing space.

Simon Knight ● 2708d

Rent out existing space =  attract more drivers to over congested Putneywhich also could = more people deciding to cash in and pave their driveway

Emarisa Battoia ● 2708d

Given we are entering a period of declining car ownership with more and more people turning to bikes, buses and tubes for their commute, this is a push in entirely the wrong direction.  They haven’t read the script about the climate emergency most London councils (but not Wandsworth) have now declared. It’s also not a charity. They take a 20% fee (from the driver). The Putney Society got a great response to their competition and of course we hope it will encourage more people to get rid of their concrete driveway and literally go green.  Or even better go multicoloured and plant roses, pansies, wallflowers, flowering bushes, you name it.

Jonathan Callaway ● 2708d

Yes I can see both your points but simplistic me says if you have an existing space that you don't use and can earn £100pm from it...why not?

Simon Knight ● 2708d

But it encourages more people to pave over their garden, Simon, if they think they can make money out of it.

Lucille Grant ● 2708d

Especially if it's someone else's!

Jane Carter ● 2708d

Oh for Gods sake you seem assume all people are imbeciles who when reading PutneySW15.Com think "Hey, that's a good idea...why didn't I think to pave over my front garden to rent out".

Simon Knight ● 2708d

Hello Simon,I am impressed that you called all of us imbeciles, but thank you for including yourself in this group too.The company behind this idea is called YourParkingSpace.com which was set up in 2014, is an online marketplace and parking reservation service for drivers looking to find and pre-book parking in the United Kingdom. It is based in Canary Wharf, has more than a million followers and has had articles in the BBC, Daily Mail, Confused.com, Sky and ITV. Not too sure who TrustPilot are, but YourParkingSpace relies on them for reviews.  With the pressures on parking availability becoming worse everywhere, it would not surprise me if people who have paved front gardens wide enough to take two (or perhaps more) cars did not "hire out" their driveways, just for some additional income, whether it is needed or not.  As you saw in the article, in Kensington and Chelsea the income could be just under £4,000 per car per year but I agree with you that in Wandsworth it is a modest £1,600 per car per year.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2708d

If you have a totally paved front garden you should be thinking of CHANGING it to something much more environmentally friendly to avoid run-off!  There are too many gardens - front and rear - which have been paved over without using porous and permeable materials.  There are regulations about what you can do.  With changing weather patterns eg sudden very heavy downpours - we need to be more thoughtful about trying to avoid flash floods.  Who wants to find that sewage has nowhere to go but up and over everywhere? That Putney Society Competition flyer was brilliant and it is good to hear that there were lots of entries.  We are looking forward to hearing more.

Philippa Bond ● 2708d

Hello Ivonne,At what point did I say "all of us" are imbeciles...show me please!I do not believe that SW15 people need the £100pm to rip up their gardens. And here you must bear in mind that there would need to be a dipped pavement to facilitate ease of parking plus WBC approval for loss of space plus revenue.I reiterate: The front page at no point suggested paving front gardens, just utilising existing space.Frankly where do you have a problem with this?

Simon Knight ● 2708d

Because if people hire and park in peoples drives then it will free up more spaces on the road which could encourage more people to drive to Putney and therefore more traffic. And i don't want that. I want to deter people driving to Putney and parking up, its as simple as that. And nothing you can say Simon will change my mind on that.

Emarisa Battoia ● 2708d

Poeple who drive to Putney need to. So what better, if they park in Felsham Road, Hotham or Dryburgh? Or somebodies drive thereby taking up less on-road parking?And what's wrong with more parking space? Do you want Putney to thrive or not?

Simon Knight ● 2708d

You said:   "Oh for Gods sake you seem assume all people are imbeciles who when reading PutneySW15.Com think...." I used poetic licence to reduce it to: "Oh for Gods sake you seem assume all people are imbeciles when reading PutneySW15.Com ".

Ivonne Holliday ● 2708d

I seriously don't follow you. Sorry!

Simon Knight ● 2708d

"People who drive to Putney need to" Wrong: many people who drive to Putney do not need to: this is one of the great myths about motoring. Of course some do need to, but many choose to because it's convenient, they do not on any measure need to. You can see this in observing the phenomenon of traffic evaporation: when congestion increases, many are deterred from driving, just as when extra road capacity is provided, more people drive. There is no fixed level of traffic, it varies up or down according to the conditions.

Richard Carter ● 2708d

I agree with you Phillipa - not only are paved areas  more environmentally unfriendly by discouraging wildlife, they are ugly.Richard, you are right - it is a misconception that drivers NEED to drive through Putney. The fact is most do to avoid using public transport which from the suburbs can be  most unpleasant if you happen to be a commuter.

Lucille Grant ● 2708d

LOLSo the people parking on the the side streets off Roehampton Lane or along Putney Heath, leaving their car there to get on the train to go to work are helping Putney to thrive (i know at least 10 people who do that)Pull the other one xx

Emarisa Battoia ● 2708d

Richard and Emarisa, I have no desire to get into a lengthy debate over this. My stance is this:If one has a driveway that is not used then why not rent it out?If such off-street parking alleviates on-street parking surely that's good?

Simon Knight ● 2708d

Simon, as I see it the point is that whichever way you view this it's not a good concept insomuch as it either encourages car use into London (as far as Putney or wherever) and just as negatively the article encourages (Richard's main point) people to tarmac or pave over a front garden which causes issues with water run-off into roads and drains. So, bad for traffic and polution and ecologically ill-considered. Nobody has a problem with renting out existing driveways per se as far as I can see. This is the key parahgraph: "Concerns are being raised about the increased number of applications for crossovers by residents of the borough. It is feared that by paving over front gardens to allow cars to be parked off street to avoid increasing resident parking charges there may be a negative effect on the environment."

Freddie Francis ● 2708d

People should be reminded that it is illegal to just drive over the pavement onto your own land unless you have gained permission from and have had built and have paid for a crossover from the LA.  This should include a survey of services underneath and strengthening of the paving.  (The picture on the front page does NOT show a double crossover.)You also may not necessarily get approval for your crossover.We should be discouraging rather than encouraging car use.

Philippa Bond ● 2708d

True. But as Richard has pointed out the greater part of the article is taken up with telling us how much people can earn by renting out their drive/front garden. As Simon says, fine if you already have space in a porous drive. However I fear that people will be encouraged to get rid of their front gardens and pave them over. The example given in the photo is particularly ugly and obviously not porous.

Caroline Whitehead ● 2708d

With the cost of a footway crossover from the Council it would take years at 1000 oer year to break even so I doubt many new ones will be created on ths back if thys

Andy Pike ● 2708d

Sad to say I think there has been quite a lot of ill-informed nonsense in this thread. £100 a month is a very inadequate incentive to pave over a front garden to create a parking space for rent. Aside from the diminution of the capital value of the property, there would be considerable costs in doing the conversion and the uncertainty of being given permission for a crossover. It would almost certainly be a guaranteed money loser.The relatively small income you would get self-evidently would justify conversion but could provide a useful extra income to someone who was a bit short and already had free parking space in front of their home.There are legitimate reasons to create parking space at the front of a property. A friend of mine was prompted to do so after she was mugged one night after coming home late and not being able to park nearby. I am aware of another family with an elderly relative who required regular care visitors who found it so difficult to ensure parking they felt they had no option. Obviously it would be better for the environment if they had a lovely green front garden but sometimes people's circumstances make this impossible.

David Parker ● 2708d

'Aside from the diminution of the capital value of the property,' I doubt this would be the case as  the owner would be able to sell the property with off-street parking so a bonus for the future if they want it.Meanwhile you can be mugged anywhere unfortunately, so that is  not really a legitimate reason to pave over your front garden imo.  Until a few years ago  I lived on a street in Putney where the  gardens were too small to consider paving over and we rarely were able to park  directly outside our own property.  I would still have never considered  paving it over had it been large enough and prior to living there  had been accustomed to a private driveway.

Lucille Grant ● 2708d

Thank you Caroline. There are some who use any issue to further their anti-car campaign.I like hedgehogs and want decent drainage. I don't want people slabbing over front gardens to grub a few quid a week. All Mr Woods said was "Renting out a driveway provides a steady income...." Judging by the comments you would think he said "rip up all front gardens in Putney, pave them all over, squeeze in as many cars as you can and let me do the renting out...luvvly jubbly!"I really think that there are some on here who need to realize that whilst we all want Putney to be Xanadu reality is that cars, lorries and delivery vans are and will always be part of everyday life.

Simon Knight ● 2708d

As I understand it you have to get planning permission for replacements or new over 5msq if the material is impermeable with water not running off to a permeable area.The regs for maisonettes and flats differ from houses.We should be encouraging people to green their gardens so that water doesn't just run off causing flooding and overflowing sewers.

Philippa Bond ● 2708d

Many people manage a very happy compromise. Others make no concession and pave from edge to edge.  Pots of plants often seem like an easy addition - but they aren't.  Count the number of pots full of dead plants!Hedgehogs need highways or small holes in fences so that they can move from one garden to another without getting run down on the roads.

Philippa Bond ● 2708d

Hello David,I do not think people were saying that gardens should be paved over now for a small profit.The article clearly spoke of existing driveways and, should you have space to spare, let it out.The cost of the driveway has already been met and there is no expectation that by creating a new one you would get your investment back, no way.Some roads nearby home all have driveways as the houses are quite big.  But, because they disliked people parking along the road, they requested controlled parking.  The residents were horrified to learn they had to buy parking permits to park on the road during the controlled hours.  The road now is empty during controlled hours and the residents park on their driveways and have not bought residents permits.The drawbacks in being unable to park on a road are many.  For one, trade people are not accepting jobs on these roads.  I still remember, in 2013, we had a problem with our Sky disk and the chap refused to repair it as he could not park by our front door.  Not the end of the world but an illustration.Being mugged is no laughing matter but it could happen whether you are parked away from your house or in front of it. I for one, would never tarmac over my front garden, if I were so lucky to have one.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2708d

Really! Which bit of urban London are we not understanding?  Of course you can’t pave over too small a front garden under planning rules but developers in our area are buying up rear gardens for redevelopment.  This thread relating to front drives is nothing new and totally pointless.

Robert Wheeler ● 2708d

Thank you Robert for your comment.I do not think it is a question of understanding urban London (would you please define it?)However pointless you consider this thread to be, the reality is many people have paved their front gardens, provided they are wide enough.The reason for the thread is the environmental damage caused and not the financial gain of developers.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2708d

Define urban London does not need definition,  it is a city.  The front page on this site about closing Richmond Park should worry you more environmentally than losing front drives.  Losing the traffic in Richmond Park is going to go where and yet not a thread on that.

Robert Wheeler ● 2708d

"Losing the traffic in Richmond Park is going to go where"A classic error: it's one of the most tenacious of urban myths the amount of traffic is fixed: it is not, it expands or contracts depending on the amount of road space, so it is false to imply that closing Richmond Park to through traffic will simply displace it elsewhere. Some will displace, much will not happen.

Richard Carter ● 2708d

We need to remember and discuss more the damage that cars and vans and lorries are doing to our environment and to us.  Don't just think of your own convenience.  With regard to the use of front gardens as parking areas driving over and on the pavement can damage it.  When a crossover/dropped kerb has been approved, put in and paid for by the Council then the pavement should be strengthened there.  If it isn't and is being driven over and parked on there is a knock on effect.  Check out the condition of paving stones!It is interesting that with social media it can be discovered when one particular paving stone has hospitalised several people.  Those are just the ones that you have heard of!  Please as a start always report problems with the pavement.  The next person may be even unluckier.

Philippa Bond ● 2707d

Sorry Richard but you are wrong here. Hammersmith Bridge's closure is a fine example of traffic being displaced - much of it to Putney, so Robert's comment is valid.

Lucille Grant ● 2707d

Even if we have notice of a closure of a road our lives are such that it can take us time to work out alternative solutions that suit us. It is really helpful if ideas and alternatives are suggested and discussed.  Some of us find any changes to routine difficult and others can be incredibly resistant to just trying anything different.  We just may be pleasantly surprised!It is true that building roads creates the traffic to go on them.

Philippa Bond ● 2707d

I don't agree on this, Lucille.  Of course some traffic is displaced, as you say about putney bridge, but how much is displaced and how much evaporates? There are no data, so you can't draw any conclusion. And it also, as Philippa says, takes time for people to adapt to new situations, reinforcing the point.

Richard Carter ● 2707d

Another point which we should all be very aware of is the vulnerability of street trees.  You can't see from the photo that was chosen to illustrate the front page article whether or not there is still a tree in what looks to be a tree pit in the pavement.  We should treasure and protect our street trees - we all need to be their guardians to make sure they come to no harm.

Philippa Bond ● 2707d

I am sorry Richard to disagree with you on displaced traffic.  From personal experience, the closure of Kingston Gate had an enormous effect on our roads.The immediate, constant and continuing traffic from the A3 onto Roehampton Lane, Medfield Street and surrounding roads was, and continues to be, enormously felt, experienced and endured. If, as you say to Lucille, there is no data on displaced traffic and how much evaporates, then the same principle should apply to your comment - there is no data to prove you are right, or wrong, as the case may be.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2707d

re. When a dropped kerb is paid for by the council.  I do not know the rules in Putney.  When I lived in Colchester, Essex ( I moved to Putney in 2008 ) the owner of the house could indeed have a dropped kerb.  Had to pay for it though. £!000--£1500.  We were told that all the services under the road had to strengthened. It was a personal choice and not a necessity or right.That was over 10 years ago!

Barbara Shillabeer ● 2707d

@Richard.  You state some of the traffic will be displaced much will not happen, based on what current data? What with Hammersmith Bridge closure is now even the right time to be thinking of anything that could acerbate Putney’s air quality?

Robert Wheeler ● 2707d

As yet it is clearly too early for there to be specific data on the effects of the closure of Hammersmith Bridge, but the phenomenon of traffic evaporation is thoroughly established. For example: (1) evidence from over 200 transport professionals and about 150 published documents was collated to provide information on about 100 case studies from across the world. About 60 provided sufficiently detailed evidence for in-depth analytical review. The key findings were as follows. (a) When road space for cars is reallocated, traffic problems are usually far less serious than predicted. (b) Overall traffic levels can reduce by significant amounts. (c) Traffic reduction is partly explained by recognising that people react to a change in road conditions in much more complex ways than has traditionally been assumed in traffic models. ('Disappearing traffic? The story so far,' Cairns, Atkins and Goodman, Municipal Engineer, 2001: https://nacto.org/docs/usdg/disappearing_traffic_cairns.pdf) and (2) A report for the European Commission found that "The experience in a number of European cities is that: • traffic problems following the implementation of a scheme are usually far less serious than predicted; • after an initial period of adjustment, some of the traffic that was previously found in the vicinity of the scheme ‘disappears’ or ‘evaporates’, due to drivers changing their travel behaviour; • as a result the urban environment becomes more liveable in many respects." (Reclaiming city streets for people: Chaos or quality of life? European Commission, ND, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/pubs/pdf/streets_people.pdf) These are only two of the many studies that attest to traffic evaporation against the myth that the level of traffic is always static.

Richard Carter ● 2707d

Thank you Richard but the studies are dated 2001 and as an engineer l would prefer more up to date data from comparable schemes. What is clear is now is not a good time for any increase in traffic in our area given Bridge closures as many will have nowhere else to go.

Robert Wheeler ● 2707d

You're dismissing this evidence far too easily: are you seriously suggesting that the phenomenon of traffic evaporation has changed since 2001? That sounds like a pretty desperate argument to me.

Richard Carter ● 2707d

I can only speak from personal experience Richard, but it seems to me that unless it's school holiday time there is far more traffic on our roads than there used to be. 2001 is almost 20 years ago. Incidentally there is also far more crowding on public transport than there used to be. Make of that what you will!

Lucille Grant ● 2707d

Personal experience/anecdotal evidence does not trump scientific studies, Lucille - and, since Robert is keen to justify his argument "as an engineer," I should add that I write that as a scientist.

Richard Carter ● 2707d

I forgot to add that there are heavy fines for damaging street trees and LB Ealing is prosecuting over the illegal cutting down of one.

Philippa Bond ● 2707d

It is not anecdotal it is fact traffic has got busier in the last 20 yrs due to population increase.  As a scientist you will be aware of the dangers of applying the results of an experiment to a different situation after a long time gap.  This isn’t about who wins the argument it is about who can breathe pushing pollution from a-b isn’t the solution.

Robert Wheeler ● 2707d

Oh dear, so many things wrong for such a short post!* The anecdotal comment wasn't about the level of traffic (it has clearly got a lot bigger in the last 120 years) but about observations of the changes from road/bridge closures, specifically Lucille's post;* It is not a long time gap to compare the research I quoted with the present day, since I was using it to establish that traffic evaporation is a recognised phenomenon, and the work quoted is not an experiment but based on real worldobservation;* The issue is not about displacing pollution but reducing/preventing it in the specific location of the iconic Richmond Park;The problem is that you don't seem able to accept that the presence of so many motorised vehicles in the Park is a bad thing: why?

Richard Carter ● 2707d

Also, this has strayed a long way from the original theme, which was about the paving over of gardens. This discussion would fit better in the Richmond Park thread.

Richard Carter ● 2707d

If we gave more feedback on what changes would improve public transport it might be more pleasant.  I'm sure that in other countries it is more heavily subsidised.  With more flexible working I suspect that the old season ticket system doesn't work well for many.

Philippa Bond ● 2707d

This was not anything to do with traffic, it was if you already had a paved over front garden (already) you could rent out your space to perhaps somebody travelling by train into the city or car wasn't used in the week. So the householder could make some money, saving the car owner worrying about places to park. Or if they have a spare garage they don't use.

Barbara Stevens ● 2706d

Freddie read the front page people with existing drives who may park there already. You might have room for another car. What is the problem. You have no Hammersmith Bridge. Shall everybody walk from Hammersmith to get to Putney. or anywhere for that matter.

Barbara Stevens ● 2706d

So everybody who already can park on their drive should dig it up just for you Phillipa.

Barbara Stevens ● 2706d

It can only be about traffic and it is very unfortunate that the photograph chosen shows what appears to be an undropped kerb with a car parked on hard standing.  We cannot quite see whether the tree is still growing in what appears to be a tree pit.  We all need to safeguard our street trees so that we don't lose them!

Philippa Bond ● 2706d

Philippa I'm sure everybody will leave enough tree's for you to hug.

Barbara Stevens ● 2706d

Just in case you haven't heard - we need to plant more!

Philippa Bond ● 2706d

That will keep you bust then.

Barbara Stevens ● 2706d

Was meant to say busy.

Barbara Stevens ● 2705d

The Putney Society has a Tree Fund and we are always looking for ideas about where to plant new ones. We plant in public areas such as Wandsworth Park and Dover House Estate but we don’t do street trees - that’s the Council’s job.

Jonathan Callaway ● 2705d

Along Gwendolen Ave and a couple of roads in Barnes I've noticed people planting flowers around street trees where soil permits. It's a lovely touch, costs pennies and brightens up ones day. Who knows, I might become Simon the Roehampton Street eco planter.

Simon Knight ● 2705d

That's good to know that the Putney Society is looking for ideas of where to plant trees.Every so often there are trees made available through grants to Councils  (which is how they get a lot of funding).  New saplings need to be looked after until they are established.  It's good if everyone keeps a look out for them as in hot weather they can suffer and also if their stakes go missing etc they'll need tying back up.  A contact at the Council is useful to deal with this  or if not your local üCouncillors.I've seen tree pits filled with poppies this summer and with dwarf daffodils this spring but not in Wandsworth.  Council contractors don't always agree - sadly - so you have to decide on whether you can risk not telling them!

Philippa Bond ● 2705d

Hi Philippa,Here in Southfields we have an initiative known locally as 'Greening the Grid' which has been running for a couple of years or so, and is fully supported by Wandsworth. Come and have a look - all the streets in the 'Grid' have the majority of their tree bases beautifully planted with colourful flowers and great imagination, including gnome families!Wandsworth were all for it.

Jackie Lever ● 2705d

Wow!  I'll try and come and have a look.  So you can't have Council operatives spraying around your trees with glyphosate!

Philippa Bond ● 2705d