|
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
I thought it might be interesting to discuss this..
Issues as I see it revolve around preventing water ingress to parts of buildings 'below high water mark' potential damage to foundations, and ability of basic services, particularly sewage, to function in these conditions. One solution that has occurred to me in the past, is to surround residential areas with levees. Roads and so on are built on these - like in the fens..some areas are set aside as 'allowable flooding areas' and buildings are within pumpable zones. Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. It is not possible AFAICT to not 'allow' flooding: the water has to be stored somewhere, or else downstream rises will be massive. Your flood protection is someone else's overtopped levee. Utilities like power and water supply should be proof against what? a 5 meter flood? Likewise any sewage works should also be high enough, and run from sewage pumps to prevent overtopping. Sewage systems should be sealed as far as possible to prevent sewage and flood waters mixing. I am not clears really as to how much issues like blocked storm drains etc actually impact on generalised flooding. However a motorway blocked due to bad drainage is a disgrace. What do you think? |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I thought it might be interesting to discuss this.. Issues as I see it revolve around preventing water ingress to parts of buildings 'below high water mark' potential damage to foundations, and ability of basic services, particularly sewage, to function in these conditions. One solution that has occurred to me in the past, is to surround residential areas with levees. Roads and so on are built on these - like in the fens..some areas are set aside as 'allowable flooding areas' and buildings are within pumpable zones. Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. It is not possible AFAICT to not 'allow' flooding: the water has to be stored somewhere, or else downstream rises will be massive. Your flood protection is someone else's overtopped levee. Utilities like power and water supply should be proof against what? a 5 meter flood? Likewise any sewage works should also be high enough, and run from sewage pumps to prevent overtopping. Sewage systems should be sealed as far as possible to prevent sewage and flood waters mixing. I am not clears really as to how much issues like blocked storm drains etc actually impact on generalised flooding. However a motorway blocked due to bad drainage is a disgrace. What do you think? Many new properties built on flood planes are not liable to flooding because of drainage installed. The problem is the water that used to wait on the flood plain has to go elsewhere, so someone downstream, perhaps in an old house that has never been flooded is. So the answer is do not allow any building on flood plains at all. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
Broadback wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote: I thought it might be interesting to discuss this.. Issues as I see it revolve around preventing water ingress to parts of buildings 'below high water mark' potential damage to foundations, and ability of basic services, particularly sewage, to function in these conditions. One solution that has occurred to me in the past, is to surround residential areas with levees. Roads and so on are built on these - like in the fens..some areas are set aside as 'allowable flooding areas' and buildings are within pumpable zones. Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. It is not possible AFAICT to not 'allow' flooding: the water has to be stored somewhere, or else downstream rises will be massive. Your flood protection is someone else's overtopped levee. Utilities like power and water supply should be proof against what? a 5 meter flood? Likewise any sewage works should also be high enough, and run from sewage pumps to prevent overtopping. Sewage systems should be sealed as far as possible to prevent sewage and flood waters mixing. I am not clears really as to how much issues like blocked storm drains etc actually impact on generalised flooding. However a motorway blocked due to bad drainage is a disgrace. What do you think? Many new properties built on flood planes are not liable to flooding because of drainage installed. The problem is the water that used to wait on the flood plain has to go elsewhere, so someone downstream, perhaps in an old house that has never been flooded is. So the answer is do not allow any building on flood plains at all. It's not often that I agree with the government, but in this case I think I do, in that it is impractical in this case to prohibit flood plain (note spelling) development.Most of occupied england is to a greater or lesser extent on a flood plain of some sort. Arguably about 70% of London is. As is about 90% of the Cambridge and Lincolnshire fens. The Fens have been subject to a well developed system of water control for generations. Maybe there are lessons to be learnt. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
The Natural Philosopher wrote on 23/07/2007 12:18
Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. I think I read recently that some houses in the Netherlands are built to float. They have a bouyancy chamber, normally rest on separate foundations, and rise between vertical rails if a flood arrives. S. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
Simon Morris wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote on 23/07/2007 12:18 Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. I think I read recently that some houses in the Netherlands are built to float. They have a bouyancy chamber, normally rest on separate foundations, and rise between vertical rails if a flood arrives. S. That is...neat! Of course you could build the whole housing estate on a giant raft... |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Simon Morris wrote: The Natural Philosopher wrote on 23/07/2007 12:18 Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. I think I read recently that some houses in the Netherlands are built to float. They have a bouyancy chamber, normally rest on separate foundations, and rise between vertical rails if a flood arrives. S. That is...neat! Of course you could build the whole housing estate on a giant raft... As was Winchester Cathedral nearly 932 years ago, the wooden and stone 'raft' lasted almost 800 years before needing underpinning by William Walker and 250 others who had to go under the foundations in diving suits. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message ... I thought it might be interesting to discuss this.. Issues as I see it revolve around preventing water ingress to parts of buildings 'below high water mark' potential damage to foundations, and ability of basic services, particularly sewage, to function in these conditions. One solution that has occurred to me in the past, is to surround residential areas with levees. Roads and so on are built on these - like in the fens..some areas are set aside as 'allowable flooding areas' and buildings are within pumpable zones. Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. It is not possible AFAICT to not 'allow' flooding: the water has to be stored somewhere, or else downstream rises will be massive. Your flood protection is someone else's overtopped levee. Utilities like power and water supply should be proof against what? a 5 meter flood? Likewise any sewage works should also be high enough, and run from sewage pumps to prevent overtopping. Sewage systems should be sealed as far as possible to prevent sewage and flood waters mixing. I am not clears really as to how much issues like blocked storm drains etc actually impact on generalised flooding. However a motorway blocked due to bad drainage is a disgrace. What do you think? Build all houses on 1 Metre stilts (including garages with a suitable ramp) Make all external doors waterproof. This would make all houses flood proof to at least 2 metres above road level so long as the doors were not left open Put the bedrooms downstairs so most of electrical goods would then be upstairs this also means that the downstairs windows can be smaller and higher up further raising the waterproof level It also has the benefit of reducing heating bills as the rooms which need the higher temperatures are at the top of the house Have electric and gas meters etc upstairs as well Alternatively make all houses 3 floors where the bottom floor is just concrete walls and floors with a separate electric circuit Occupiers could use this for whatever they choose but possessions left there would not be covered by house insurance in the event of flood Tony |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
TMC wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message ... I thought it might be interesting to discuss this.. Issues as I see it revolve around preventing water ingress to parts of buildings 'below high water mark' potential damage to foundations, and ability of basic services, particularly sewage, to function in these conditions. One solution that has occurred to me in the past, is to surround residential areas with levees. Roads and so on are built on these - like in the fens..some areas are set aside as 'allowable flooding areas' and buildings are within pumpable zones. Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. It is not possible AFAICT to not 'allow' flooding: the water has to be stored somewhere, or else downstream rises will be massive. Your flood protection is someone else's overtopped levee. Utilities like power and water supply should be proof against what? a 5 meter flood? Likewise any sewage works should also be high enough, and run from sewage pumps to prevent overtopping. Sewage systems should be sealed as far as possible to prevent sewage and flood waters mixing. I am not clears really as to how much issues like blocked storm drains etc actually impact on generalised flooding. However a motorway blocked due to bad drainage is a disgrace. What do you think? Build all houses on 1 Metre stilts (including garages with a suitable ramp) Make all external doors waterproof. This would make all houses flood proof to at least 2 metres above road level so long as the doors were not left open Put the bedrooms downstairs so most of electrical goods would then be upstairs You haven't seen my bedroom..;-) this also means that the downstairs windows can be smaller and higher up further raising the waterproof level Good thinking..however most cavity walls are not actually that waterproof..In germany they tank cellars with polystrene and surround te masonry with a plastic membrane. It also has the benefit of reducing heating bills as the rooms which need the higher temperatures are at the top of the house MM. Nice pount actually. Have electric and gas meters etc upstairs as well The 'read your meter from outside' boys will LOVE that one. Alternatively make all houses 3 floors where the bottom floor is just concrete walls and floors with a separate electric circuit Occupiers could use this for whatever they choose but possessions left there would not be covered by house insurance in the event of flood Yup. Thats a typical german house with basement. My sisters one got sewage spewing up through the toilets in there when they had a flood.. otherwise the basement comprised one minimalsist guest room with ensuite,. storage for outdoor toys - bikes, lawnmowers etc etc, and a huge laundry room and food storage room with a huge boiler in it. Personally i think its a good arrangement- all the crap stuff is below, and living stuff is up higher. Also a 3 storey building is more energy efficient - more living area per unit outside wall. Keep em coming. Tony |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 13:40:58 +0100 someone who may be "TMC"
wrote this:- Make all external doors waterproof. Some years ago there was film of big floods in Germany taken from inside a building, it might well have been the parliament in Bonn before it was moved to Berlin. What impressed me was that the water was about 2m deep, outside the glass walls of the building. Inside it was dry. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
What do you think? Stop using wood and plaster in the downstairs construction. Paint all the downstairs with polyurethane so you can clean it. Have the floor on jacks so you can lift everything up by a meter or so at the flick of a switch. Use house boats. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:18:09 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I thought it might be interesting to discuss this.. Issues as I see it revolve around preventing water ingress to parts of buildings 'below high water mark' potential damage to foundations, and ability of basic services, particularly sewage, to function in these conditions. One solution that has occurred to me in the past, is to surround residential areas with levees. Roads and so on are built on these - like in the fens..some areas are set aside as 'allowable flooding areas' and buildings are within pumpable zones. Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. It is not possible AFAICT to not 'allow' flooding: the water has to be stored somewhere, or else downstream rises will be massive. Your flood protection is someone else's overtopped levee. Utilities like power and water supply should be proof against what? a 5 meter flood? Likewise any sewage works should also be high enough, and run from sewage pumps to prevent overtopping. Sewage systems should be sealed as far as possible to prevent sewage and flood waters mixing. I am not clears really as to how much issues like blocked storm drains etc actually impact on generalised flooding. However a motorway blocked due to bad drainage is a disgrace. What do you think? ================================== I suppose the government could order every householder to install a 'sump' in the garden with a minimum capacity of (say) 1000 gallons. The technical details of routing rain water into the sumps could provide some of our Town Hall staff with a useful challenge. A small street of 50 houses would take 50,000 gallons off the street drains. Cic. -- =================================== Using Ubuntu Linux Windows shown the door =================================== |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
On 23 Jul, 12:53, Broadback wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote: I thought it might be interesting to discuss this.. Issues as I see it revolve around preventing water ingress to parts of buildings 'below high water mark' potential damage to foundations, and ability of basic services, particularly sewage, to function in these conditions. One solution that has occurred to me in the past, is to surround residential areas with levees. Roads and so on are built on these - like in the fens..some areas are set aside as 'allowable flooding areas' and buildings are within pumpable zones. Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. It is not possible AFAICT to not 'allow' flooding: the water has to be stored somewhere, or else downstream rises will be massive. Your flood protection is someone else's overtopped levee. Utilities like power and water supply should be proof against what? a 5 meter flood? Likewise any sewage works should also be high enough, and run from sewage pumps to prevent overtopping. Sewage systems should be sealed as far as possible to prevent sewage and flood waters mixing. I am not clears really as to how much issues like blocked storm drains etc actually impact on generalised flooding. However a motorway blocked due to bad drainage is a disgrace. What do you think? Many new properties built on flood planes are not liable to flooding because of drainage installed. The problem is the water that used to wait on the flood plain has to go elsewhere, so someone downstream, perhaps in an old house that has never been flooded is. So the answer is do not allow any building on flood plains at all. Simple :) Every house should have a massive pump installed behind a chimney breast. Then during times of flooding, a 4" diameter hose could clipped onto a port at the side of the chimney breast and water could pumped up thru the chimney and spurted toward the nearest ocean. n.b. People living in Birmingham would need a very big pump. Arthur |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
On 23 Jul, 12:18, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I thought it might be interesting to discuss this.. Issues as I see it revolve around preventing water ingress to parts of buildings 'below high water mark' potential damage to foundations, and ability of basic services, particularly sewage, to function in these conditions. One solution that has occurred to me in the past, is to surround residential areas with levees. Roads and so on are built on these - like in the fens..some areas are set aside as 'allowable flooding areas' and buildings are within pumpable zones. Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. It is not possible AFAICT to not 'allow' flooding: the water has to be stored somewhere, or else downstream rises will be massive. Your flood protection is someone else's overtopped levee. Utilities like power and water supply should be proof against what? a 5 meter flood? Likewise any sewage works should also be high enough, and run from sewage pumps to prevent overtopping. Sewage systems should be sealed as far as possible to prevent sewage and flood waters mixing. I am not clears really as to how much issues like blocked storm drains etc actually impact on generalised flooding. However a motorway blocked due to bad drainage is a disgrace. What do you think? Loos to be upstairs. Any downstairs ones to be fitted with a big ballvalve to cut them off if flood is imminent (to prevent the crp flowing out the bog into the house) Bank the land so the houses run along the top of the banks, roads along the lows. Sloping gardens are the price. Offroad garden parking next to the house would make life easier and greatly reduce vehicle flood damage. Doors could be atop dwarf walls where flooding occurs to low level only. This would interfere with wheelchair access requirement though. Ground floor used for garage and shed space only. This is similar to houses on stilts, as in practice people would frequently enclose the stilt areas and use for low value storage. Sacrificing the car isn't ideal, but would be a big improvement on today's flood damage costs. Electric wiring all to be above the flood line. Fully washable furniture, eg plastic Deepen rivers for greater water flow. provisions to get furniture upstairs in flood to minimise damage. Maybe an electric stair hoist? Make all external doors waterproof. this also means that the downstairs windows can be smaller and higher up further raising the waterproof level Good thinking..however most cavity walls are not actually that waterproof..In germany they tank cellars with polystrene and surround te masonry with a plastic membrane. Applying (polystyrene) foam cavity insulation in wet form could greatly improve water resistance and crack sealing. What is needed is not necessarily waterproofness, but rather to limit water ingress to a rate that can be pumped out with little or no damage. Have electric and gas meters etc upstairs as well The 'read your meter from outside' boys will LOVE that one. New meters can send the readings along the mains wires, avoiding the issue and reducing operating costs. Have the floor on jacks so you can lift everything up by a meter or so at the flick of a switch. A simpler related idea is to have a hook in the ceiling above all water damageable items (perhaps require a matrix of heavy duty hooks in the downstairs ceiling), plus a rope attached to each item thats usually tucked under the item out of sight. In event of impending flood, put rope over hook and haul it up. 30-60 minutes work would get all the major items strung up under the ceiling, thus gaining around 5'-6' extra height. I dont know whether it could be made possible to use a floating floor to reduce damage. I'm very doubtful but who knows. Requiring new flood-prone house owners to keep a dinghy would take a lot of pressure off emergency services. Perhaps it need be nothing more fancy than a sheet material covered foldable. another option is to require all building materials below the expected floodline to be floodproof. Eg tiled walls rather than plasterboard, ditto floors. Perhaps there would then emerge a market for kitchen units with bottoms & sides made of fully waterproof board. A British Standard for floodproof goods would be a real motivator. Any goods sold with this on, the buyer would know would survive a flood. This could very much stimulate the flood-proof goods market. The BS could cover more than one possible way to achieve floodproofness. Grant PP for multistorey structures, maybe 3 and 4 floors, with large garden areas. If a building has say 4 floors, the land around it can be divided into 4 areas, so each householder has their own garden. This way the flats are a bit more house-like, and more people might be tempted to buy into medium rise flats. NT |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Broadback wrote: The Natural Philosopher wrote: I thought it might be interesting to discuss this.. Issues as I see it revolve around preventing water ingress to parts of buildings 'below high water mark' potential damage to foundations, and ability of basic services, particularly sewage, to function in these conditions. One solution that has occurred to me in the past, is to surround residential areas with levees. Roads and so on are built on these - like in the fens..some areas are set aside as 'allowable flooding areas' and buildings are within pumpable zones. Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. It is not possible AFAICT to not 'allow' flooding: the water has to be stored somewhere, or else downstream rises will be massive. Your flood protection is someone else's overtopped levee. Utilities like power and water supply should be proof against what? a 5 meter flood? Likewise any sewage works should also be high enough, and run from sewage pumps to prevent overtopping. Sewage systems should be sealed as far as possible to prevent sewage and flood waters mixing. I am not clears really as to how much issues like blocked storm drains etc actually impact on generalised flooding. However a motorway blocked due to bad drainage is a disgrace. What do you think? Many new properties built on flood planes are not liable to flooding because of drainage installed. The problem is the water that used to wait on the flood plain has to go elsewhere, so someone downstream, perhaps in an old house that has never been flooded is. So the answer is do not allow any building on flood plains at all. It's not often that I agree with the government, but in this case I think I do, in that it is impractical in this case to prohibit flood plain (note spelling) development.Most of occupied england is to a greater or lesser extent on a flood plain of some sort. Arguably about 70% of London is. As is about 90% of the Cambridge and Lincolnshire fens. The Fens have been subject to a well developed system of water control for generations. Maybe there are lessons to be learnt. That is all very well as the water is being sent into the sea, this is not practical inland, so others get flooded instead. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
Ensure rivers are kept free from debris and fallen trees - they ultimately block bridge arches. Dredge key parts of rivers to improve their capacity - so speeding the water on its way to the sea. Ensure all bridge arches are free of silt so that all arches can accommodate a rush of water. -- -- John |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
|
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
John wrote:
Dredge key parts of rivers to improve their capacity - so speeding the water on its way to the sea. The EA doesn't really like dredging. They feel that it's costly and the rivers just start silting up again. -- -blj- |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
Flood plain houses should have hulls not foundations!
Equip them with sea toilets. Fit bilge pumps. More seriously, piles/piers/stilts/jacks etc. seem to have little tradition in the UK - but with lightweight construction - why not. Where there is a risk of deep, fast moving water, piled or floating/ buoyant construction may be unsafe - though the choice to evacuate with improved chances of your home surviving unscathed/less-scathed may be welcome. Many houses could be built with exterior metal staircases leading to the front door on an upper level (main living area), and an internal staircase to the lower level (bedrooms). Combined with whole-house ventilation (and/or porthole type windows), and there may be no need for there to be any route for water penetration on the ground floor (there may be a need to provide a secondary ground floor escape route). Levees/dykes are a practical solution for existing housing. Particularly when housing in an area is uninsurable.Ultimately that may need to be mandated and paid for through local taxation (or possibly national). That is how the Victorian draining of the fens happened. The government made a special legal provision for the drainage companies to be formed and to raise local taxes to pay for it. Odd arrangement to allow unelected private bodies to raise taxes - I think they must have been regarded with great suspicion at the time. Even now, the drainage companies still charge local farmers for drainage (but no longer domestic properties) and have the power to make local bye-laws (particularly regarding any sort of construction - they also have the power of planning permission veto on extending houses near drainage dykes). Nevertheless without them (and slave labour from Napoleonic prisoners of war), the drainage wouldn't have happened. (As an aside, I used to live in a fenland ex-pumping station engineer's cottage - built in 1950. I had to negotiate with the local drainage company "The Middle Level Commissioners" to split costs on repairing the driveway shared by the pumping station and my house. Negotiations were direct with the MD of board - and he recalled voting to spend the money on building the cottage back in 1950, when he first joined the board of directors! Nice to have a bit of continuity). |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
"Cicero" wrote in message ... I suppose the government could order every householder to install a 'sump' in the garden with a minimum capacity of (say) 1000 gallons. The technical details of routing rain water into the sumps could provide some of our Town Hall staff with a useful challenge. A small street of 50 houses would take 50,000 gallons off the street drains. Insignificant. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
"Arthur 51" wrote in message oups.com... Simple :) Every house should have a massive pump installed behind a chimney breast. Then during times of flooding, a 4" diameter hose could clipped onto a port at the side of the chimney breast and water could pumped up thru the chimney and spurted toward the nearest ocean. n.b. People living in Birmingham would need a very big pump. Given how high above sea level Brum is I don't think we need to worry about getting it to the sea. The rest of the country has already gone so we can just pump it anywhere we like. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
The message op.tvxcoh1y0v1caa@thedell
from "Brian L Johnson" contains these words: Dredge key parts of rivers to improve their capacity - so speeding the water on its way to the sea. The EA doesn't really like dredging. They feel that it's costly and the rivers just start silting up again. They are silting up anyway in the relatively slow moving sections in the valley bottoms that have flood plains. The natural course of events is for the rivers to constantly change their course gradually building up the level of the valley floor with deposited silt. Once there are houses on the flood plain dredging would be the only way to maintain historic water levels at equal flows. There are some things that can be done to shift the flood risk up or down stream. Upstream of towns by introducing choke points to increase flooding on the relatively inexpensive farm land and downstream by relieving the natural choke points as suggested by John above. -- Roger Chapman |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
Cicero wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:18:09 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: I thought it might be interesting to discuss this.. Issues as I see it revolve around preventing water ingress to parts of buildings 'below high water mark' potential damage to foundations, and ability of basic services, particularly sewage, to function in these conditions. One solution that has occurred to me in the past, is to surround residential areas with levees. Roads and so on are built on these - like in the fens..some areas are set aside as 'allowable flooding areas' and buildings are within pumpable zones. Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. It is not possible AFAICT to not 'allow' flooding: the water has to be stored somewhere, or else downstream rises will be massive. Your flood protection is someone else's overtopped levee. Utilities like power and water supply should be proof against what? a 5 meter flood? Likewise any sewage works should also be high enough, and run from sewage pumps to prevent overtopping. Sewage systems should be sealed as far as possible to prevent sewage and flood waters mixing. I am not clears really as to how much issues like blocked storm drains etc actually impact on generalised flooding. However a motorway blocked due to bad drainage is a disgrace. What do you think? ================================== I suppose the government could order every householder to install a 'sump' in the garden with a minimum capacity of (say) 1000 gallons. The technical details of routing rain water into the sumps could provide some of our Town Hall staff with a useful challenge. A small street of 50 houses would take 50,000 gallons off the street drains. Cic. That is interesting also. A way to store an utilize rwainwater..coopled with a wind pump to use for e.g. toilet flushing...split plumbing eh? |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
|
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
|
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
Broadback wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote: Broadback wrote: The Natural Philosopher wrote: I thought it might be interesting to discuss this.. Issues as I see it revolve around preventing water ingress to parts of buildings 'below high water mark' potential damage to foundations, and ability of basic services, particularly sewage, to function in these conditions. One solution that has occurred to me in the past, is to surround residential areas with levees. Roads and so on are built on these - like in the fens..some areas are set aside as 'allowable flooding areas' and buildings are within pumpable zones. Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. It is not possible AFAICT to not 'allow' flooding: the water has to be stored somewhere, or else downstream rises will be massive. Your flood protection is someone else's overtopped levee. Utilities like power and water supply should be proof against what? a 5 meter flood? Likewise any sewage works should also be high enough, and run from sewage pumps to prevent overtopping. Sewage systems should be sealed as far as possible to prevent sewage and flood waters mixing. I am not clears really as to how much issues like blocked storm drains etc actually impact on generalised flooding. However a motorway blocked due to bad drainage is a disgrace. What do you think? Many new properties built on flood planes are not liable to flooding because of drainage installed. The problem is the water that used to wait on the flood plain has to go elsewhere, so someone downstream, perhaps in an old house that has never been flooded is. So the answer is do not allow any building on flood plains at all. It's not often that I agree with the government, but in this case I think I do, in that it is impractical in this case to prohibit flood plain (note spelling) development.Most of occupied england is to a greater or lesser extent on a flood plain of some sort. Arguably about 70% of London is. As is about 90% of the Cambridge and Lincolnshire fens. The Fens have been subject to a well developed system of water control for generations. Maybe there are lessons to be learnt. That is all very well as the water is being sent into the sea, this is not practical inland, so others get flooded instead. No, it isn't. The fens are a system of interlinked 'fens' surrounded by 'dykes' (essentially ditches on top of earth banks)into which water is either pumped (when the rivers are low, or from which water is allowed into the fens to flood them, when water is high..thus only maintaining the downstream parts of he land to a suite of flow rates that the actual rivers can accommodate. Nearly all the land is actually BELOW river levels, and MUCH of it is below seal levels too. It is a system whereby houses are protected at the expense of flooding the fens, if necessary. These act as short term reservoirs to absorb peak flow, from whence the water is then pumped out in drier spells. It's a sacrificial system: low grade grazing land - water meadows - are the first to be allowed to flood, then arable land, and housing areas NEVER. It works too. The whole area is actually being pumped pretty much all the time. ASnd is maintained by an authority whose job it is to physically open sluices and flood areas if more important araes are threatened. As I said, my old house there was around 8 feet below river level. And IIRC about 18" below means sea level. In bad rain times many of teh areas between the dykes were (deliberately) flooded, but never 'our fen' as that had housding on it. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
Brian L Johnson wrote:
John wrote: Dredge key parts of rivers to improve their capacity - so speeding the water on its way to the sea. The EA doesn't really like dredging. They feel that it's costly and the rivers just start silting up again. Well sell the excellent gravel and sand to fund it. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
Brian L Johnson wrote:
John wrote: Dredge key parts of rivers to improve their capacity - so speeding the water on its way to the sea. The EA doesn't really like dredging. They feel that it's costly and the rivers just start silting up again. So's clearing a storm drain, but someone's got to do it. They proposed chopping 60 million off the budget over the next 5 years and this lot will end up costing at least 3 and a half billion. Typical. Apparently the displaced, more southerly jet stream is going to stay exactly where it is 'for the next few months' according to the Met Office. Lovely autumn and possibly winter too coming up (not). |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
|
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
magwitch wrote:
wrote: Levees/dykes are a practical solution for existing housing. Particularly when housing in an area is uninsurable.Ultimately that may need to be mandated and paid for through local taxation (or possibly national). Even now, the drainage companies still charge local farmers for drainage (but no longer domestic properties) and have the power to make local bye-laws (particularly regarding any sort of construction - they also have the power of planning permission veto on extending houses near drainage dykes). Nevertheless without them (and slave labour from Napoleonic prisoners of war), the drainage wouldn't have happened. Perhaps they could PAY farmers to allow their fields to flood (or at least compensate them for any crop damage) in an emergency, thus saving towns or settlements further on. Well a 5 hectare field is probably worth about £10k in terms of crop value, and flooded to a depth of a meter, can take water from an area that is 100 times its size for a massive rainfall of 4" (10cm) Compare THAT level of compensation with a 5 hectare suburban housing estate flooded to the same depth..£20M? I'm thinking of a sort of terraced or engineered water meadow system taking the pressure off rivers so the water can go sideways and be contained then gradually drained off when the emergency's over. That and making all housing estate hard surfaces out of semi-permeable materials. The problem would seem to ultimately resolve itself into one of 'where can we put the water and do the least damage, until the rivers can cope with it' The worst of all possible places is a town center.. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
On 23 Jul, 16:42, "Brian L Johnson" wrote:
John wrote: Dredge key parts of rivers to improve their capacity - so speeding the water on its way to the sea. The EA doesn't really like dredging. They feel that it's costly and the rivers just start silting up again. -- -blj- The EA seem to be obsessed with "nature" topics and are bloody useless at doing what they should be doing such as keeping flod banks maintained, rivers dredged, costal groynes maintained and at least keeping us at the defence standards the Victorians enjoyed. There are too many suits and too few indians nowadays. In my locality we used to have the Yorkshire Ouse River authority and a few drainage boards mostly composed of farmers who "knew" the land and its needs. Achieved much using manpower very simply and cheaply instead of the current highly educated but largely innefective, highly paid battery of staff with a plethora of expensive machinery. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
cynic wrote:
On 23 Jul, 16:42, "Brian L Johnson" wrote: John wrote: Dredge key parts of rivers to improve their capacity - so speeding the water on its way to the sea. The EA doesn't really like dredging. They feel that it's costly and the rivers just start silting up again. -- -blj- The EA seem to be obsessed with "nature" topics and are bloody useless at doing what they should be doing such as keeping flod banks maintained, rivers dredged, costal groynes maintained and at least keeping us at the defence standards the Victorians enjoyed. There are too many suits and too few indians nowadays. In my locality we used to have the Yorkshire Ouse River authority and a few drainage boards mostly composed of farmers who "knew" the land and its needs. Achieved much using manpower very simply and cheaply instead of the current highly educated but largely innefective, highly paid battery of staff with a plethora of expensive machinery. Hear bloody hear. "Initiatives" "Consultations" "Workshops" "Official Inquiries" "********!". Just pay some people to go round and DO something. We came upon a couple of chaps who were fiddling about with a ditch... 'what you up to?' 'Oh? we are making sure the road gullies to this ditch are clear' 'Oh, well when I walk up here in winter in me wellies, I usually kick them myself to clear the crap out and drain this bit of road' But of course we have a tory council, so money is spent on public services, not on public servants. No, we don't have gay lesbian shelters, or rape crisis centers, or park and ride schemes, or bendy busses that are simply mobile traffic blockaders, or traffic congestion caused by traffic calming chicanes, we just have, for the most part, postmen that deliver the post, refuse people who empty the bins, and occasionally even when we haven't put them out, walk up the drive and collect em..roads that are not great, but are passable, not too many road signs, almost no speed cameras.. farmers who go out and cut their hedges and clear dangerous trees without involving the council at all, and dredge their ditches because its their bloody land and they know exactly how to keep it at just the right moisture level for their crops, and so on and so forth. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 18:40:44 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote: "Cicero" wrote in message k... I suppose the government could order every householder to install a 'sump' in the garden with a minimum capacity of (say) 1000 gallons. The technical details of routing rain water into the sumps could provide some of our Town Hall staff with a useful challenge. A small street of 50 houses would take 50,000 gallons off the street drains. Insignificant. OK : Give us a figure that would be significant. DG |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message ... I thought it might be interesting to discuss this.. Issues as I see it revolve around preventing water ingress to parts of buildings 'below high water mark' potential damage to foundations, and ability of basic services, particularly sewage, to function in these conditions. One solution that has occurred to me in the past, is to surround residential areas with levees. Roads and so on are built on these - like in the fens..some areas are set aside as 'allowable flooding areas' and buildings are within pumpable zones. Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. It is not possible AFAICT to not 'allow' flooding: the water has to be stored somewhere, or else downstream rises will be massive. Your flood protection is someone else's overtopped levee. Utilities like power and water supply should be proof against what? a 5 meter flood? Likewise any sewage works should also be high enough, and run from sewage pumps to prevent overtopping. Sewage systems should be sealed as far as possible to prevent sewage and flood waters mixing. I am not clears really as to how much issues like blocked storm drains etc actually impact on generalised flooding. However a motorway blocked due to bad drainage is a disgrace. What do you think? 99% of people are within a short distance of a telephone pole or even street lighting. Preparation for this type of disaster should include strengthening these poles to carry a communal electric supply line. And in times of flooding people could connect to an outlet to provide electricity to where they live. Then people could stay in their homes on their upper floors where at least 90% have bathrooms. This would simplify the logistical nightmare of the flooded neighbourhood recovery processes. Arthur |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
"Arthur2" wrote in message ... "The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message ... I thought it might be interesting to discuss this.. Issues as I see it revolve around preventing water ingress to parts of buildings 'below high water mark' potential damage to foundations, and ability of basic services, particularly sewage, to function in these conditions. One solution that has occurred to me in the past, is to surround residential areas with levees. Roads and so on are built on these - like in the fens..some areas are set aside as 'allowable flooding areas' and buildings are within pumpable zones. Another option is to simply build on piles, in order to allow flood water to gaily rush by underneath ('Hello Sailor!') and limit damage to simply the garden. It is not possible AFAICT to not 'allow' flooding: the water has to be stored somewhere, or else downstream rises will be massive. Your flood protection is someone else's overtopped levee. Utilities like power and water supply should be proof against what? a 5 meter flood? Likewise any sewage works should also be high enough, and run from sewage pumps to prevent overtopping. Sewage systems should be sealed as far as possible to prevent sewage and flood waters mixing. I am not clears really as to how much issues like blocked storm drains etc actually impact on generalised flooding. However a motorway blocked due to bad drainage is a disgrace. What do you think? 99% of people are within a short distance of a telephone pole or even street lighting. Preparation for this type of disaster should include strengthening these poles to carry a communal electric supply line. And in times of flooding people could connect to an outlet to provide electricity to where they live. Then people could stay in their homes on their upper floors where at least 90% have bathrooms. This would simplify the logistical nightmare of the flooded neighbourhood recovery processes. Arthur I forgot feeding arrangements. So the emergency services couldn't provide meals on wheels. It would have to be Chips on Ships :))) Arthur |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Brian L Johnson wrote: John wrote: Dredge key parts of rivers to improve their capacity - so speeding the water on its way to the sea. The EA doesn't really like dredging. They feel that it's costly and the rivers just start silting up again. Well sell the excellent gravel and sand to fund it. I don't know about the value of the gravel, but the silt is extremely valuable. If the EA is encouraging the sale of land to the Nat Trust because the land is no longer suitable for arable purposes, that's because the rains have washed the (extremely fertile) surface topsoil into the rivers where it eventually finds its way into the Wash. As you said in 'Another Thread', with the fens now all being below sea-level, there's an ideal opportunity to build the surface up again with landfill. Top it all off with dreged silt and sand to bring back the fertility, and Robert's your father's brother. -- -blj- |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
|
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 08:08:02 -0700 someone who may be
wrote this:- Electric wiring all to be above the flood line. Although I agree with much this is debatable. Electric cables work fine under water and provided the fittings are above the water level, or submersible ones are used, the electricity system can continue as normal. I doubt if many in towns would welcome overhead supply poles being put into the streets. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
"Owain" wrote in message ... wrote: Sacrificing the car isn't ideal, but would be a big improvement on today's flood damage costs. Why can't cars be waterproof? A well-sealed car will float away. I've seen it happen with a car that was trying to cross a flooded ford. Fortunately, the ford had a raised footpath on the downstream side that stopped it going too far. Colin Bignell |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'floodplain ' builds?
David Hansen wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 08:08:02 -0700 someone who may be wrote this:- Electric wiring all to be above the flood line. Although I agree with much this is debatable. Electric cables work fine under water and provided the fittings are above the water level, or submersible ones are used, the electricity system can continue as normal. I doubt if many in towns would welcome overhead supply poles being put into the streets. Indeed. Many supply cable are run below a permanent water table. Of course replacing telephone cables with fibre would make them more resilient. |
What (new) building/local regulations would YOU enforce in 'flood plain ' builds?
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 08:14:07 +0100, David Hansen wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 08:08:02 -0700 someone who may be wrote this:- Electric wiring all to be above the flood line. Although I agree with much this is debatable. Electric cables work fine under water and provided the fittings are above the water level, or submersible ones are used, the electricity system can continue as normal. Hmm, maybe there's a danger that moisture will get into the fittings by some sort of wick effect up the outside of the cables? I doubt if many in towns would welcome overhead supply poles being put into the streets. You know, I'm picky about street furniture and stuff, but I hardly ever notice the power poles when I'm in the US. They typically seem to be wooden and a lot higher than UK equivalents, so aren't as noticable (plus the roadsides are generally tree-lined, but there's not always the space for that in the UK!) The lines running from poles to individual houses aren't as nice on the eye, though. Thinking about it, some of the power in the village here in the UK is above-ground too and not really noticable - no different from overhead phone lines, after all. I suppose the sensible thing to do would be to combine streetlamps, telegraph poles, and power poles into one wherever possible, so that there's less clutter at ground level. cheers Jules |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:29 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter