Landscaping project

Latest Articles

Landscaping project
Page Previous 1, 2, 3, ... 47, 48, 49 Next

Downsizer Forum Index -> Energy Efficiency and Construction/Major Projects

Author

Message

dpack

Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46249
Location: yes

Posted: Tue Feb 25, 20 9:59 am Post subject:

jema
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 28239
Location: escaped from Swindon

Posted: Tue Feb 25, 20 10:27 am Post subject:
Well as promised the current mess!

dpack

Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46249
Location: yes

Posted: Tue Feb 25, 20 11:13 am Post subject:
you have a lot of reclaimable timber, the sleepers look fine and there are quite a few, well useful. some decking might be of use the rest should burn off in a few hours. once you have cleared it might be worth setting some profiles with stakes and string etc to establish what needs digging and what needs filling, find a decent fence line and establish routes between sections

sgt.colon

Joined: 27 Jul 2009
Posts: 7380
Location: Just south of north.

Posted: Tue Feb 25, 20 11:37 am Post subject:

Shane wrote:

Did the wood pass?

That's Derbyshire isn't it?

jema
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 28239
Location: escaped from Swindon

Posted: Tue Feb 25, 20 12:05 pm Post subject:
The sleepers will go into the retaining wall. But as you say its all about finding the lines, the heights that work best. My experience suggests that engineering effort starts to go exponential from about the 30 inch point. I have done some at 40 inches but I'd be unhappy going that high as I do not want to be fighting on this.

dpack

Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46249
Location: yes

Posted: Tue Feb 25, 20 1:17 pm Post subject:

30" is a good depth for terracing etc, if needs be 30" can hold another few feet if it slopes gently, but for a flat top and retaining wall taller than that needs pretty sold engineering

sleepers are pretty solid and set in a serious trench and plenty of concrete could probably hold a lot more than 30" if that looks like it is needed.

retaining walls are a bit like icebergs , most of it should be out of sight .

Ty Gwyn

Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 4613
Location: Lampeter

Posted: Tue Feb 25, 20 3:11 pm Post subject:

Once you establish a level at the lowest part of your garden,to save a lot of digging,just sink a series of holes,2ft 6in to 3ft deep,roughly 5ft apart and concrete in short girders or rails to the required height,build your sleeper wall against these,and working up your garden to where you want the next terrace wall,level, sink more holes and repeat,throwing the soil/debris back against first sleeper wall,and so on.

jema
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 28239
Location: escaped from Swindon

Posted: Tue Feb 25, 20 3:55 pm Post subject:

Ty Gwyn wrote:

That's pretty much how I have done the 40" retaining wall

Seemed about the right level of engineering for it.

jema
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 28239
Location: escaped from Swindon

Posted: Fri Feb 28, 20 1:19 pm Post subject:

Plans are evolving a bit albeit only mentally in this weather.
Basically not having a path up top so all the space can be used, and then a path that will take the line of least resistance around the back taking advantage of the natural slope and being lower and wider, this has a few advantages.

1. It's a bit lazier initially, I don't need to care as much about the lower terrace.
2. It's giving in a bit more to the marsh and that is pretty important to the idea.
3. More stable room to work in, when doing the retaining stuff.
4. Less path means more raised bed room.

jema
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 28239
Location: escaped from Swindon

Posted: Thu Mar 05, 20 7:19 pm Post subject:

Still little scope to get much work done, but plans evolving so that's probably a good thing.
New plan adds some work and says get real and recognise we do not so much slope off into the marsh but plummet into the marsh.
It makes sense to reduce this as much as possible, so abandon the idea of the new terrace being at the summer house level, but take it down significantly. 30" down at the top provides a lot of soil and gives us significantly less to do down bottom where it will be a lot harder.
Basically I think I should go as deep as I can without access becoming too awkward.

dpack

Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46249
Location: yes

Posted: Thu Mar 05, 20 7:48 pm Post subject:
if you are going for a fairly deep drop have you had a poke with a bar or dug a test pit to see how far down you might need to go to make a solid foundation that can hold the verticals against that depth of soil? if the lower side is soft you will need to work in a way to allow for that.

jema
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 28239
Location: escaped from Swindon

Posted: Thu Mar 05, 20 10:07 pm Post subject:
Part of the plan is to get down to be able to access and figure out what to do with the main "plummet" so far the evolution of the plan has been retreating as much as possible from the plummet, reducing its ultimate height which is still something of an unknown by terracing where I have confidence in the solidity of the ground.

dpack

Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46249
Location: yes

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 20 1:39 pm Post subject:

odd thought , is there a fair bit of stone available at a good price, most of it could be rubble with some pretty facingfor the top few feet of the inside that shows?
i mean lots, at least 3 cuM per linerar M

the lowest bit seems to be pretty much part of the swamp at that level.

if there was a cornish bank at the perimeter a few feet of level could be gained in the bottom section.
that makes it usable most of the time, reduces the level changes above it and would give a solid edge to the whole heap.

if you have access at the top a chute would drop materials to the lowest level with little effort with that angle

it is the strength of the lowest retaining wall that will determine if it lasts and stays fairly stable.

done well cornish banks can retain quite a deep level change, permanantly, pretty and good for wildlife etc

wet earth, especially if it has been recently stirred, is pretty keen on slumping to a gentle slope if it can, i fixed one where the garden was in the sitting room, at least yours goes the other way but your house etc sits on the top so preventing any significant ground movement from the highest point to the lowest is top engineering priority.

a combo of bank at the base and sleeper/concrete/girder retaining walls or perhaps just wall might give decent size of flat areas and a stable micro geology

however you do this it will involve moving a lot of stuff ,keep up to a minimum and gravity is your friend for owt going downhill apart from your land

jema
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 28239
Location: escaped from Swindon

Posted: Sat Mar 07, 20 8:12 am Post subject:
I certainly think it needs to be an inorganic solution at the lowest level. In terms of pouring rubble down I am a little concerned about boundaries and it being an eyesore.

dpack

Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46249
Location: yes

Posted: Sat Mar 07, 20 12:17 pm Post subject:

stone with planted earth in the gaps for a pretty skin around a rubble core?

tis quite a lot of work and you probably should put it inside the actual boundary line but it might a good way to prevent long term slump.

i was trying to get an idea of total mass and angle of drop, best guess is quite high in both, therefore i might be inclined to get a long bar and a post driver to find out how solid the ground is.

the nature of the geology might provide useful data.

because it is a fairly sharp drop is there perhaps a lump of stone under the top bit and the slope is mostly earth or is it earth all the way?

	Downsizer Forum Index -> Energy Efficiency and Construction/Major Projects	All times are GMT Page Previous 1, 2, 3, ... 47, 48, 49 Next
Page 2 of 49

View Latest Posts