Jump to content

Vehicles in floods


rodp
 Share

Recommended Posts

we are only a small island and we need to stop building

where the water used to soak in the ground it now goes straight off the roofs and roads to the drains and into the rivers

also if you dredge all the rivers and ditches surely it would give more area for water to flow

I worked on the broads and they used to raise the banks as they dredged the rivers, but now it has to go to a safe area. why I don`t know

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

 

:hmm::hmm::hmm:

 

There is only so much water in the world, in simple terms it is picked up and then distributed by the skys. It the UK was a solid concrete block then a drainage system on a scale never considered possible would need to be installed or we would be heading into Waterworld.

 

I don't actually see anyone arguing with that, but I fail to see the connection to a puddle in a field after some of the most horrendous rain ever seen in an area, virtually non stop for 3 weeks.

 

:good:

I know you do, you seem to have the same kind of eyes that the planning people in the local Town Halls have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think some problems are caused by image, some of those very nice towns and also new estates maybe need american style storm drains building around or through them. And people don't like to see that, or live near it. As said before water finds it's level through the most direct route, all about getting it from A to sea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly, my sympathies to all who have been flooded. We experienced it badly here (near Tewkesbury) in 2007, and though my home was OK, the local area was without tap water for weeks and many colleagues had their homes flooded.

 

At least part (and I believe a large part) of the problem here has definitely been building on the flood plain - no doubt whatsoever. Areas that used to act as a flood 'buffer' holding vast quantities of water on 'water meadows' are now houses. The areas were raised, but the water has to go somewhere - result - not only do the new houses flood, but older houses that rarely or never flooded now flood regularly.

Now we are in this situation, there is no easy way out. The water comes down the river and has to go somewhere. There is a general opinion - which I suspect is correct that dredging would provide only limited help as the river here has little 'fall'.

Why are we in this situation? To me, the granting of permission to build on the high risk flood planes is nothing short of criminal - as is the building. Peoples lives are being ruined by these decisions. Locally, there was no shortage of warnings of what would happen - the authorities 'knew better' and ignored local peoples warnings.

I find it very depressing that it is still happening. Planning is being granted for more development on flood plain land.

 

The photos of a flooded York (a lovely historic city), and other current photos show brand new houses flooded. This just should not be allowed to happen. Bottom line is the that local authorities charged with 'planning' are ruining peoples lives by allowing this 'planning'. I really believe that those responsible should be sought out and held responsible - the distress and despair brought to families is every bit as bad as a burglary - a criminal offence.

 

When the event is over - we really should be looking very hard at how this came about - and preventing as far as is possible new build from being at risk - or increasing the risk for old build.

Edited by JohnfromUK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is all the talk about dredging rivers ? Just a few question's ?

 

How deep should a river be dredged ? bearing in mind small streams are flooding towns and villages.

 

So for instance if every stream, beck river and estuary was dredged by say a metre per meter it would cost several million £ than the cost of the floods ! and be a rolling never ending program, and still not offer a solution to the problem.

We are told by our own leaders that the UK will become wetter due to climate change so faster deeper water course's are not a solution, World wide farming practice's do not help as hedges and trees have been removed to make crop production quicker and cheaper.

The way ahead is going to be expensive as food production needs to be cut to reduce the world population, house prices will have rise until population starts to drop to a sustainable level as we a a world population need a reduction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was compelled by my local council to dredge a ditch bordering my ground and the road a few years ago. The problem is that my section of ditch flows into another ditch apparently owned by the council. This was not dredged, so although we spent a lot of money taking about 18" of silt out of the upper sections of the ditch, all that happened was that we had a deep pool of near stationary water where it came to the 'downstream' un-dredged section below my property (actually where it enters a culvert under the council road). The result - silted up again in a year. Now fortunately, this doesn't flood anyone's property, but if you dredge, you have to have a joined up approach. Moving water will carry silt and debris away, near stationary water allows it to settle. I don't think its THE solution, but it may contribute to less problems.

 

On the rivers, dredging used to be used to support navigation - years ago - grain and coal came in by barge, but now its only leisure boats. Although I understand that all boats pay a licence fee that maintains the locks etc, I don't believe the navigable part of the river has been dredged since the war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A former work collegue of mine retired about ten years back and bought a place in Norfolk on the coast right where over 100 people drowned in their beds when there was a freak tide in the 1950s. I'm not talking about a few miles away either, he is right on the coast bang in the centre of where they died. The sea came over like a sunami one winters night and they never had a chance.

 

When we said to him about it and wasn't he bothered he said no. Simple as that, absolutely not bothered about if it could happen again.

 

People are so different, it would bother me all the time, it would always be there in the back of my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A former work collegue of mine retired about ten years back and bought a place in Norfolk on the coast right where over 100 people drowned in their beds when there was a freak tide in the 1950s. I'm not talking about a few miles away either, he is right on the coast bang in the centre of where they died. The sea came over like a sunami one winters night and they never had a chance.

 

When we said to him about it and wasn't he bothered he said no. Simple as that, absolutely not bothered about if it could happen again.

 

People are so different, it would bother me all the time, it would always be there in the back of my mind.

I knew a man (Charlie Cook) in Cley, N Norfolk who was telling me about the floods, I asked where he he went and he replied why upstairs boy

Edited by islandgun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you do, you seem to have the same kind of eyes that the planning people in the local Town Halls have.

 

 

Perhaps you should read my posts again, and perhaps you need to grasp the fact we have had puddles in fields since this world was created, there is nothing new in that. It doesn't mean the land is unsuitable for building, or on a flood plain, I have loads of bits of land that get puddles, some very large, but the areas do not flood.

 

The pictures displayed so far in the thread show fields with puddles, whether or not these are on flood plains, or areas at risk from flooding are unclear, but not evident from the pictures, a puddle in a field is not a flood.

 

This is a flood...............

post-20848-0-07230300-1451473581_thumb.jpgpost-20848-0-78401100-1451473563_thumb.jpgpost-20848-0-01613900-1451473490_thumb.jpgpost-20848-0-14963800-1451473460_thumb.jpgpost-20848-0-04182200-1451473427_thumb.jpg

:good:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly, my sympathies to all who have been flooded. We experienced it badly here (near Tewkesbury) in 2007, and though my home was OK, the local area was without tap water for weeks and many colleagues had their homes flooded.

 

At least part (and I believe a large part) of the problem here has definitely been building on the flood plain - no doubt whatsoever. Areas that used to act as a flood 'buffer' holding vast quantities of water on 'water meadows' are now houses. The areas were raised, but the water has to go somewhere - result - not only do the new houses flood, but older houses that rarely or never flooded now flood regularly.

Now we are in this situation, there is no easy way out. The water comes down the river and has to go somewhere. There is a general opinion - which I suspect is correct that dredging would provide only limited help as the river here has little 'fall'.

Why are we in this situation? To me, the granting of permission to build on the high risk flood planes is nothing short of criminal - as is the building. Peoples lives are being ruined by these decisions. Locally, there was no shortage of warnings of what would happen - the authorities 'knew better' and ignored local peoples warnings.

I find it very depressing that it is still happening. Planning is being granted for more development on flood plain land.

 

The photos of a flooded York (a lovely historic city), and other current photos show brand new houses flooded. This just should not be allowed to happen. Bottom line is the that local authorities charged with 'planning' are ruining peoples lives by allowing this 'planning'. I really believe that those responsible should be sought out and held responsible - the distress and despair brought to families is every bit as bad as a burglary - a criminal offence.

 

When the event is over - we really should be looking very hard at how this came about - and preventing as far as is possible new build from being at risk - or increasing the risk for old build.

That is a spot on post. Build on flood plains which were the safety valve, then build flood defences for that area just moves flooding somewhere else.

 

Blackpowder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw some interesting stats on rainfall comparisons last night - can recall exact percentages but the previous highest had been exceeded by multiples of 3 or 4. So even if DC or any previous government had assumed a 100 or 200% increase and occurring every 5 or 10 years those areas would still have been stuffed despite billions of £'s being spent. Who expected 2/300 year old bridges and pubs to be demolished? So my learned friends do we now build defences to protect every town and city that assumes a tenfold increase in rainfall sometime very soon? And what would you suggest for the East Coast where inundation by the sea might happen next year or the next?? PM is the last job on earth I would want today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...