They need to stop building on flood plains then

New Topic!

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby despair » Sat Jan 02, 2016 4:49 pm

Of course the day after day deluge of rain has massive effects and will cause flooding and if thats the shape of things to come then the entire we build houses must change

However when you have a relative whose house was flooded not long ago in Thatcham Berks solely because drainage ditches were filled in and loads of houses were built on a well known flood plain thus forcing water to affect houses that were correctly built on non flood plain and to this date nothing has really been done to address the issue or prevent future problems plus all the flooded houses are effectively blighted and have seen their insurance premiums and excess hiked you soon see the devisive corruption at the base of it all

The EU were supposed to provide funds after the last bout of flooding that hit the UK but i have not heard they actually coughed up
I suspect this time will be the same

If stupid EU rules and Environment Agency and other authorities have blocked correct dredging of rivers and watercourses
Have allowed building on flood plains and also encouraged a huge influx of people entering the UK which is simply too small
an area to cope with more houses then something is fundamentally wrong .
despair
 
Posts: 16026
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 8:07 am

Ads are not endorsed by www.gardenlaw.co.uk or the staff thereof and visitors should perform their own due diligence on the product or service offered.
 

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby Hugh Jaleak » Sat Jan 02, 2016 7:39 pm

It is worth noting that all new developments are required to comply with 'SUDS', (Sustainable Urban Drainage schemes), whereby the development must be so designed as to limit the surface water runoff from the site to the level it was prior to development. Retention tanks, balancing reservoirs etc, store runoff from roofs and paved areas, releasing it slowly downstream to limit the effect of the discharge to that as it would have been prior to development.

The issue is with existing properties that are vulnerable, simply it seems, due to sheer volume of rain falling onto already saturated ground. I am a believer that dredging on a routine basis, as has happened for many years prior to recent changes in legislation and practices would assist the issue, and possibly lessen the impact, although with the amount of rainfall in recent times, it is impossible to say if it would have eliminated this flooding.
Hugh Jaleak
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 12:09 am
Location: Northamptonshire

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby jonahinoz » Sun Jan 03, 2016 10:55 am

Hi,

Billy Connelly pointed out that people become fat because the hole IN is bigger than the hole OUT. Similarly, If water can get onto an area of land faster than it can get off, there will be a flood.

We MIGHT be able to control the water coming in. We SHOULD be able to control the water going out, in normal circumstances. But with the biblical rainfall recently, we would need storm drains similar to those raced along by hot-rodders in Hollywood films. The question is ... "Are these floods likely to happen again, in the same place?"

Tongue in cheek ... require illegal immigrants to bring a spade and wheel barrow with them.

In the meantime, require new houses on flood plains to be built on stilts. Give home owners the option to install an elevating car ramp on their drive, so the car can be lifted above flood level. Replacing an electric motor should be cheaper than replaced a drowned car. Holiday caravans can be fitted with floats, and I understand that a house that COULD float was featured on TV recently.

John W
jonahinoz
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 5:15 pm

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby arborlad » Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:35 am

arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7359
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby Janieb » Sun Jan 03, 2016 5:18 pm

[quote="arborlad"]An interesting document: http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/__data/a ... cument.pdf[/quote]

I haven't read all of this article but historically towns and villages were built by a source of fresh water (rivers and streams) by necessity. A lot of them being in low lying areas. The town I live in is one where we are sort of half way between the Berkshire Downs and the Thames Valley so on higher ground. Our river was culverted many years ago and the majority of the towns residents don't know it's there. There was a situation a few years ago when Transco decided to put a new gas main through the town and consulted our local LPA. They were unaware of the culverted river and failed to tell Transco. As most of the longstanding residents knew about it we weren't really surprised when the works came to a massive standstill when they came across the culvert only a few inches below the road.

The river also runs through the cellar of one of our public buildings, again only known by longstanding residents. We also have a biennial run of frogs who must have some residual memory of an open river.

This type of situation means that watercourses that are now artificially restricted are prone to causing flooding as the water cannot escape except by using the storm drains. In this towns case they are ancient. Thames Water keep putting back the improvement desperately needed. The bonus of this situation is that until the drains are upgraded builders can't build any more houses.

We also have a housing estate that was built on what were water meadows which are I suppose a type of flood plain. I know they've had to shore up the houses in the past as they were beginning to "slide".

I suppose the point of this post is that you don't need to be on a flood plain, you can have flooding problems on higher ground. The posters who've said there is more water coming into the system than can escape are right, and covering the ground with concrete doesn't help. If the water had to go through soil first it would slow it down and give the drainage time to work.
Janieb
 
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 1:44 am

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby jonahinoz » Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:34 am

[quote="Roblewis"]Our LA is building a new 6000 house estate in a wetland area - complete with water leisure centre. It was flooded by the Trent not so many years ago[/quote]

Hi Rob,

In Days of Yore, somebody would have built a cottage. If it flooded, nobody would have built near it.

Nowadays, they ARE going to built 6000 new houses, come "Hell or High Water" (pun intended).

Anybody driving on the M4 past Swansea may wonder about the elevated road. When the road was at the planning stage, there were a lot of buildings (houses? factories?) in the way, so a fly-over was necessary. Fifteen years later, when they started to construct the road, all the buildings had been demolished, so no need for a fly-over. But (presumably) it was quicker and/or cheaper to build the fly-over, than to start the planning process all over again.

Seeing as we are discussing planning and flooding ... a stretch of small canal was drained to allow development for tourists ... car park, slip-way, aquaduct, etc. When the canal was refilled, it flooded the car park. Oops! Solution was to erect a small dam across the slipway. The same LA, replaced an ancient dry stone wall alongside a stretch of road, with a cemented stone wall. Very pretty ... until it rained heavily. Water poured off the hillside on other side of the road, but couldn't get off because the new wall acted as a dam. What was on the other side of the wall? About a 20ft drop to the canal. Previously, the water was only as deep as the height of the footpath kerb stones, and cars could drive through, albeit slowly. My neighbour wrote off her new Mercedes in the now deeper water. Oops!

Should Planners be responsible for their mistakes? Maybe even just having personal Public Liability insurance? My daughter's job can put her in jail if she gets it wrong.

John W
jonahinoz
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 5:15 pm

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby PJ999 » Fri Jan 08, 2016 3:42 pm

This thread started with a suggestion that the rate of housebuilding was acerbating the problem and this rate was driven by migration.

My research suggests that the last annual figures showed a population increase of over 400,000 a mixture of immigration and births to foreign women.

I was at a public meeting in the run up to the election with a panel of politicians and academics and a woman in the audience asked "Can we now discuss the population ?"

I have no idea what she actually meant but the senior Tory on the panel went into a rant about "This is not communist China and I am sure I speak for my colleagues in saying we will work our way through this situation" He did too none of them to their shame were prepared to open their mouths.

On a more mundane level only Corbyn has been prepared to observe that "social cleansing" is taking place. If you cannot cope in London you will eventually arrive in flood risk Jaywick on the Essex coast.. The Thames Estuary Development Corporations (RIP) came up with a figure of £21,750 per dwelling in "infrastructure" cost imposed on the local authority by each new dwelling. I did not really believe it but there hass recently been a row between the developers and the government about the development of Ebbsfleet, so I divided the number of new homes into the infrastructure subsidy demanded and got £24,333

The population of this country is over 270 per sq km [That is one of those little squares on an ordnance survey map] and we are importing half our food.
PJ999
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:36 am
Location: England

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby jonahinoz » Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:56 pm

Hi PJ,

How much food are we exporting?

I think (but don't know) that a new born baby has a bigger carbon foot print than my gas guzzling Land Rover. I would not dream of telling somebody to stop making babies, but hey ... "pot, kettle, black". Yes, population is a problem ... and I don't have an answer, at least, not one I would post here. (not the Chinese solution)

John W
jonahinoz
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 5:15 pm

Why cannot the country feed itself ?

Postby PJ999 » Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:58 am

The balance of imports and exports depends on how one measures it.
You will remember the Turkey Twizzler and disease import fuss that revealed that bootiful Norfolk turkeys were being processed in Eastern Europe and re-imported, because there was a market over there for the offal?

A quick Google reveals that the government is at least trying to count the figures (inspite of thd fact that the world publishes a massive trade deficit with trest of the galaxy.

05:00 Dover docks "Wots in here mate" - I dunno it is pallets wrapped in black plastic, its sounds metal n it clanks a bit and it is going to Brussels - "Oh I will put it down as machinery then" [When I eventually got to the destination and it was unwrapped it was air conditioning ducting]

By Value

2013 (prov) 18,910 40,222 -21,312

By weight (I think as it is called the "self sufficiency" ratio)

2013 (provisional) 60 73 [60/40 is home grown to imported and 73/27 is home grown to could be home grown if we had the space ie oranges and bananas etc are not in the equation. these figures include food, drink and feedstocks, which I think of as food that has value added in industrial sheds.]

So provided we all become Vegan there isn't a problem.

Subsidies for solar farms anyone ?

The field out the back of me has been growing maize only to dump in in a methane generator.
PJ999
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:36 am
Location: England

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby COGGY » Sun Jan 10, 2016 11:47 am

Completely off track, but relevant to the last post, is everyone aware that food produced by the "Duchy of Cornwall" is often grown abroad? Shopping in Waitrose and looking for apples I was amazed to find this. On asking a member of staff I was told that it was common practice today. Next time you are shopping have a look.
COGGY
 
Posts: 1355
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:58 pm

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby jonahinoz » Mon Jan 11, 2016 11:08 pm

PJ999 wrote:
> The field out the back of me has been growing maize only to dump in in a methane
> generator.

Hi PJ,

Is that a cow, or a tank?

I always have an apple with my mid-day snack. I have started putting them in the microwave for two minutes, to get rid of the woody texture ... improves the taste too. I asked SWMBO about the relevant cost of apples and prunes. (There is more to food than entertainment. ;-) )

John W
jonahinoz
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 5:15 pm

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby PJ999 » Fri Jan 15, 2016 11:53 am

It is a large metal tank system subsidised by the rest of us to digest "Waste",

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... ize-biogas
PJ999
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:36 am
Location: England

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby PJ999 » Fri Jan 15, 2016 12:02 pm

In case you missed it last night:

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-01-14/floo ... e-tonight/

" What we’ve seen is the warmest December on record and what’s interesting is that we’ve broke the record by 2 degrees - this is the consequences of one degree of warming that’s caused by human influence on climate in the last century. What’s interesting is that even at the scale of the UK in a single month, the largest natural climate fluctuation in existence - that’s the El Nino phenomenon in the Pacific - is being overtaken by climate change.”

– Myles Allen – Professor, Geosystem Science, Oxford University
PJ999
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:36 am
Location: England

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby despair » Fri Jan 15, 2016 1:44 pm

My local idiotic council has given permission for 600 + homes to be built on notorious flood plain
No doubt passed by committee under immense pressure from government to cover the land with concrete
Since committee passed it there can be no legal comeback against the council for the hapless buyers when they are
flooded and their homes are unsaleable never mind insurable

It is all utterly criminal.
despair
 
Posts: 16026
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 8:07 am

Re: They need to stop building on flood plains then

Postby jonahinoz » Thu Feb 18, 2016 10:04 am

Hi,

How about making the Environment Agency responsible for ALL drainage ditches (somebody should appreciate the potential to Empire Build). That way, we would have somebody to blame.

Then they could contract the work to the farmer who owns the land, which would give the EA somebody to blame.

Then they would have to build houses for the digger drivers, re-populate the villages, provide jobs, make a market for diggers ..... etc.

Would it cost anymore than the floods?

John W
jonahinoz
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 5:15 pm

Ads are not endorsed by www.gardenlaw.co.uk or the staff thereof and visitors should perform their own due diligence on the product or service offered.
 
PreviousNext

Return to Flooding

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests