It isn`t tough for us. We are OS and we COPE

kezlou

Happy birthday fruglista and others!

Hope you all have a great day!!

Kemiera19

Long time lurker, infrequent poster here but this really struck a chord......

karren wrote: »

So Lets hope 2011 is the year that I realise less is more!!!xxx

I think this is an excellent sentament to try and live by, so much so that I've stuck a note to the inside of my purse "you don't need anymore stuff!" As Karren says try and find the pleasure in the small things, like the HM bread rolls currently in the oven!

OH commented tonight that I should 'tell them moneysaver lot about our cheap/cheat m*ller yoghurt's (a ramekin of natural yoghurt with either cereal for a crunch corner or jam for a fruit corner).

Thanks to all for the fab contributions. :T

Charis

maryb wrote: »

We are very lucky in this country in that we don't tend to have major climate disasters. The 1953 East Coast floods are the only comparable thing I can think of. But if we did have a storm surge coinciding with a high tide London would still be at major risk if it were not for the Thames Barrier. can you imagine trying to evacuate the Thames Estuary?

Apparently the Thames Barrier only works for areas upstream from it. Many years ago, I met someone who was involved in the planning of it, and he described how, should the worst happen, the area where I then lived (Barking) would be underwater - worse still the tide would swill in, bringing the power station and Ford's plant with it, then drag all the debris back out again. They were really more concerned with preserving 'The City' and preventing the underground from flooding.

GreyQueen wrote: »

You are so right, Maryb. I have ground floor flat with only 50 metres of flat ground between me and a tidal river. [...] Joking aside, there were a lot of deaths from drowning in my area about 100 years ago, but river controls are better now (hopefully)

In another town I used to hear older folk talk about too much building on the former marshes. When Wash Lane flooded one of them commented that the name rather gave it away. There's a lot of truth in that, especially if the name is historic, rather than picked out of a hat by some property developer. As well as being a goldmine of OS tips, older people often have valuable local knowledge and experience of some of the 'once in a hundred years' scenarios we are now facing. Just up the road was Jaywick, where people had to be rescued in the 1953 floods from the roofs of their bungalows - by the local lifeboat.

maryb

That's interesting Charis. And, of course, since then, there has been a whole lot more building in the Thames Estuary. The whole of Thamesmead is built on the Woolwich and Erith Marshes for example

ceridwen

...and the, perhaps, even more astonishing thing about these builders who knowingly build on floodplains is that its perfectly "conventional" style housing as per everywhere else. That is - they don't even normally choose a style of housing thats "up on stilts" (eg 3 storey, with the bottom storey just being garage space). Nope - its still the kitchen and reception room/s that are on the ground floor:cool:.

:think: Maybe - in building the exact same "house styles" as elsewhere - they are deliberately out to try and "kid" the newbie to the area would-be buyers that "Oh..no...of course its not a flood plain REALLY" (wink to solicitor "Am I covered against any potential claims from these homebuyers by not having shown any evidence that I knew their homes might flood - if they didnt - but I went ahead and built there anyway). Building a more "flood resistant" design of house might provide a form of "evidence" that they knew - and therefore make them "liable" to give compensation claims.

GreyQueen

ceridwen wrote: »

...and the, perhaps, even more astonishing thing about these builders who knowingly build on floodplains is that its perfectly "conventional" style housing as per everywhere else. That is - they don't even normally choose a style of housing thats "up on stilts" (eg 3 storey, with the bottom storey just being garage space). Nope - its still the kitchen and reception room/s that are on the ground floor:cool:.

:think: Maybe - in building the exact same "house styles" as elsewhere - they are deliberately out to try and "kid" the newbie to the area would-be buyers that "Oh..no...of course its not a flood plain REALLY" (wink to solicitor "Am I covered against any potential claims from these homebuyers by not having shown any evidence that I knew their homes might flood - if they didnt - but I went ahead and built there anyway). Building a more "flood resistant" design of house might provide a form of "evidence" that they knew - and therefore make them "liable" to give compensation claims.

That's about the measure of it, eh? I'm not on the floodplain per se but in the centre of an ancient city. People have been living here for 1,000+ years but bad stuff can still happen. Never mind, could always count on Idiot Boy upstairs to take me in should I get flooded....(insert irony here ). I saw some Dutch houses in a book which have been designed to accomodate life in an area prone to flooding; they are out on the "polder" (fields reclaimed from the sea). The were built on a sort of pontoon which rested on the canal, but was built around a core column which safely held the electrical services etc. If the water level rose, the pontoon rose with it, and the whole house climbed its core column. Very, very clever design (and my explanation is grossly over-simplistic btw). D'you ever feel that this country is sorely lacking in common sense compared with some other Northern European countries?!

saveabobortwo

:)WOKE UP FROZE BOILER WAS FLASHING UP A FUNNY NUMBER SO RESET THAT USUALLY DOES IT AND IT COMES BACK ON. WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED THOUGH IF IT NEEDED A SERVICE ITS HAD A BASHING THIS WINTER WITH IT BEING SO COLD. OUR SUNHOLIDAYS CAME THROUGH GOT DATE AND NICE PLACE DOWN CORNWALL NOT BAD IS IT 38 QUID FOR A HOLIDAY AND NICE PEOPLE WE CAN TAKE THE DOG ALTHOUGH HE IS DEARER THAN US 40 QUID BUT WON T GRUMBLE AS HE IS A DEAR LITTLE FELLA AND I LIKE HIM TO COME TO THE SEASIDE WITH US.TRIED YESTERDAY SOME OF MY HOMEMADE SPICED APPLE AND PLUM CHUTNEY LITTLE BIT RUNNY BUT WAS MY FIRST ATTEMPT AND TASTED ALRIGHT SO PUT SOME ON ROAST DINNER FAMILY GET DIFFERENT NEW TREAT EVERY WEEK:rotfl:.DONT KNOW WHATS GOING ON IN THE WORLD THE NORTH WIND DOTH BLOW HERE AND TVHAS NO SIGNAL GOING TO TAKE DOG FOR A LONG WALK IN THE COUNTRY WITH A HOT FLASK OF TEA TODAY I KEEP LOOKING ON THE TREES FOR START OF SPRING LOVELY HAVE GOOD DAY EVERYONE.:)

HariboJunkie

ceridwen wrote: »

...and the, perhaps, even more astonishing thing about these builders who knowingly build on floodplains is that its perfectly "conventional" style housing as per everywhere else. That is - they don't even normally choose a style of housing thats "up on stilts" (eg 3 storey, with the bottom storey just being garage space). Nope - its still the kitchen and reception room/s that are on the ground floor:cool:.

:think: Maybe - in building the exact same "house styles" as elsewhere - they are deliberately out to try and "kid" the newbie to the area would-be buyers that "Oh..no...of course its not a flood plain REALLY" (wink to solicitor "Am I covered against any potential claims from these homebuyers by not having shown any evidence that I knew their homes might flood - if they didnt - but I went ahead and built there anyway). Building a more "flood resistant" design of house might provide a form of "evidence" that they knew - and therefore make them "liable" to give compensation claims.

I REALLY wish people would check some facts some time before posting these things.

a. Yes. Builders DO knowingly build on flood plains. The Environment Agency allow them to so it really isn't sneaky conspiracy. EVERY SINGLE house built on a flood plain goes through a rigorous and extensive series of very complicted, thorough, historic and scientific assessments which MUST be passed by the relevant ENVIRONMENTAL body. Many, many fail and nothing is built. So please don't blame builders.

b. If a home is deemed to be at risk of flooding it is simply not allowed to be built. It can't just be built on stilts!!!

c. Think about your last paragraph..... "builders trying to hoodwink newbies to an area"!!! The Flood plain is online for everyone to see and most people insure their houses so I think they might find out if it was build on flood plain.

I'm not having a go at you personally but I DO know what I'm talking about here and I would gently point out that not all unfortunate occurances have a conspiracy lurking behind them.

[Deleted User]

lol. They buy floodplain land cheap. Do a good deal (both ways ) for planning and build the houses to sell to guillable buyers and I know what I am talking about

PS. I know many developers and none of them put morals before profit

HariboJunkie

kittie wrote: »

lol. They buy floodplain land cheap. Do a good deal (both ways ) for planning and build the houses to sell to guillable buyers and I know what I am talking about

Really? Where is this? Have you any experience of the flood risk assessment process?

I'm genuinely curious because I have seen how hard it is to build a house on a flood plain. BTW A flood plain is not an area that is CERTAIN to flood. But the Environment Protection agencies will either stop a house being built on the plain if a risk assessment highlights a problem or they will insist of flood alleviation measures (usually very expensive) being done before approving the build.
I have never heard of a builder and EPA/SEPA being in cahoots over builds. More often than not builders resent the hoops they have to jump through to appease an overcautious EPA.

Anyway. It's off topic but I know that many people read this thread and I just wanted to correct a couple of the points ceridwen made. No offence intended.