"Weatherlawyer" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jul 23, 5:40?pm, "Jack )"
wrote:
On 23 Jul, 17:29, Graham P Davis wrote:

However, another listener had pointed out that ground floors of new
houses
had been made lower than before so as to make it easier to comply with
disabled-access legislation. Imagine the ramps you'd need for a house
on
stilts!

Extrapolating that argument, it would mean that the disabled could
never be housed above ground level. Plenty of disabled people live in
flats and use (stair)lifts. OK, lifts would pose problems when it's
flooded but it cannot be a insuperable difficulty.

As it happens some of the oldest wooden houses in the country were
built on rocky outcrops some 3 feet above the surrounding soil thus
taking them out of the water table abd giving them some flood
resistance.

Of course in those days utilising crown bare sides of hills was the
norm so there never was a chance of flood in the first place.

I am watch Newsnight ATM and some expert is being taken to task
overthe disposition of flood defences. He can't seem to get it through
the skulls of his assailants that there is no defence from such
floods.

Don't people know how long rivers are and how they work or something?
Do they think they are just city features that are in a constant
change, like fountains in watergardens only bigger?

Feck me there are some wazzocks around.

No just the blame society and it's all your fault.

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 08:37:21 -0700, "Jack )"
wrote:

No one seems to have mentioned the obvious idea of constructing
buildings on "stilts".

A quick Google search brought these examples:

http://digitalgladrags.com/photofocu...boat-house.jpg

http://www.hbp.usm.my/conservation/M...s/malaysun.jpg

http://www.forgotten-ny.com/YOU'D%20NEVER%20BELIEVE/Broad%20Channel/ROCKWYHS.JPG

http://www.ndmindia.nic.in/EQProject...wnersguide.pdf

Notice that most of these pictures are from the so called "third
world". Why is it rocket science in Britain?

Jack

Why not put 'ground' floor at 6ft above ground and use the space
created for car garage and garden tools etc. in event of flood warning
just put tools in car and drive to higher ground. It would cost more
for each building, but there would be a greater saving on flood damage
and cost of flood protection.

Another thought, do the opposite of all the present recommendations
and fit barriers in up stream locations and keep water back at source
and let go at a rate that lower stream areas could cope with.

Alternatively blame it all on global warming an increase tax on
4x4's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

jeff

On Jul 23, 10:46 pm, "flybywire" wrote:
makes you wonder how the power companies can get away with not protecting
their important substations with flood walls same goes for the water
authorities and their pumping stations

Also why on earth don't we have some decent culverts like you see in Spain

Bring back the Victorian engineers they would know what to do

Wasn't it the Victorians that put the pumping houses in?

Britain had hedges and ditches with some magnificent trees around
small fields in those days. Any large scale agricultural water
modification was to keep the stuff in as water meadows and in the
winter, ice rinks.

Now we have large fields with barbed wire and scabby bushes here and
there, with no marshland but huge land drainage schemes instead.

On Jul 24, 8:48 am, Edward J Milan wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 08:37:21 -0700, "Jack )"



wrote:
No one seems to have mentioned the obvious idea of constructing
buildings on "stilts".

A quick Google search brought these examples:

http://digitalgladrags.com/photofocu...4731_boat-hous...

http://www.hbp.usm.my/conservation/M...s/malaysun.jpg

http://www.forgotten-ny.com/YOU'D%20NEVER%20BELIEVE/Broad%20Channel/R...

http://www.ndmindia.nic.in/EQProject...wnersguide.pdf

Notice that most of these pictures are from the so called "third
world". Why is it rocket science in Britain?

Jack

Why not put 'ground' floor at 6ft above ground and use the space
created for car garage and garden tools etc. in event of flood warning
just put tools in car and drive to higher ground. It would cost more
for each building, but there would be a greater saving on flood damage
and cost of flood protection.

But us oiks can't afford houses now.
That means that those who can, are stuck with what they already have,
so no innovation can take place.

Another thought, do the opposite of all the present recommendations
and fit barriers in up stream locations and keep water back at source
and let go at a rate that lower stream areas could cope with.

Why not use giant corks and keep it there until needed.

Alternatively blame it all on global warming and increase tax on
4x4's!

You mean if you bought a car capable of dealing with glowballs it
should be taxed to perdition to get everyone in the same boat?

A strange egalitarian stance that.

Weatherlawyer wrote:

On Jul 23, 10:46 pm, "flybywire" wrote:
makes you wonder how the power companies can get away with not protecting
their important substations with flood walls same goes for the water
authorities and their pumping stations

Also why on earth don't we have some decent culverts like you see in Spain

Bring back the Victorian engineers they would know what to do

Wasn't it the Victorians that put the pumping houses in?

Britain had hedges and ditches with some magnificent trees around
small fields in those days. Any large scale agricultural water
modification was to keep the stuff in as water meadows and in the
winter, ice rinks.

Reminds me of Wellingborough where, when I was going to school, there were
water-meadows which were built on thirty-odd years ago. I wonder how that
estate copes now? The Dog & Duck football ground across the road used to
get flooded most winters when the River Nen overflowed.

--
Graham P Davis
Bracknell, Berks., UK
Send e-mails to "newsman" as mails to "newsboy" are ignored.