Nice People Thread Number 10 -the official residence of Nice People

SingleSue

vivatifosi wrote: »

As I've said before, I still don't understand why they build new builds that aren't raised off the ground (if at risk from flooding). In most cases, these houses would only need to be a further 3-5 feet off the ground in order to stop water ingress. So they could either build the house on a higher plinth or on stilts. I just don't get it. I wonder if our obsession in only lending on traditional construction styles is part to blame.

I know that BRE in Garston (Watford) is busy designing flood defences for houses, but if you build the house above the flood level, surely that's better to start with?

They built on one of our flood plains here but the council insisted on the houses being raised up because of the risk of flooding..came in handy in December, the parking areas flooded but the houses were completely fine. If they hadn't insisted on that kind of build, those brand new houses would now have insurance claims going in.

lostinrates

purch wrote: »

How did you guess my name :eek:

Macputism.


They were reinforcing the embankment at our local station on Friday. We have a couple of choices of station to use, but go in from the west obviously. DH is here till Wednesday morning, and so we'll have to see what commuting situation is then.

Today roads here are much better.. The small historic town I use a lot which has been dominating local news (note, they concentrate on pretty towns in flood zones!) is fine, I went through this morning to do something but couldn't get any parking. Its still closed in a lot of areas from the flooding at Christmas time, but so busy that all the parking was taken. We went through on Saturday too. Flood defences are all out, but water is barely near them, much better than on Saturday.


The problem is after the rain tonight it will be massive.

I left a (plastic) wheel barrow out this week and it was full, not half full or almost full, but full to overflowing, with water.

I get less rain than most areas locally, because most falls on the big hill I reckon. I often see rain over there I don't get anyway. Not this week though!

mystic_trev

PasturesNew wrote: »

I wasn't going to mention that bit.... I passed that part onto the authorities as unsolicited nuisance.

I've also taken a video of me opening the message - and the image - and uploaded that to Youtube with your full contact details, and then Facebooked it under the tags #sexpest #pervert and #stalker

And now I'm off to discussion time and netmums to draw their attention to it, so it can go viral and end up in the papers, on the news.

Just in time for Valentines day!

purch

lemonjelly wrote: »

It is a lovely thought. I hope I don't have to make a speech though!

Are they making you pay :eek:

Doozergirl

vivatifosi wrote: »

As I've said before, I still don't understand why they build new builds that aren't raised off the ground (if at risk from flooding). In most cases, these houses would only need to be a further 3-5 feet off the ground in order to stop water ingress. So they could either build the house on a higher plinth or on stilts. I just don't get it. I wonder if our obsession in only lending on traditional construction styles is part to blame.

I know that BRE in Garston (Watford) is busy designing flood defences for houses, but if you build the house above the flood level, surely that's better to start with?

Was it £50k the BRE had been given towards it by DEFRA?! (Edit: yes it was) That's where some of the £10 million could be spent.

Make rainwater harvesting compulsory for new builds as well.

Doozergirl

lemonjelly wrote: »

It was a bit of a shock, though someone had accidentally said something that had made me wonder.

It is a lovely thought. I hope I don't have to make a speech though!

I hate to disappoint you, but the liklihood might be...

vivatifosi

lemonjelly wrote: »

Alain de Bottons new book arrived at the weekend.
Timely, as I need to start a new book.
I have 2 long train journeys on wednesday, so need to pick something I can take with me... Not sure if de Botton will be that yet.

I am still waiting for it to turn up at my library. Ho hum... Please let me know if it is good.

vivatifosi

Doozergirl wrote: »

Was it £50k the BRE had been given towards it by DEFRA?! (Edit: yes it was) That's where some of the £10 million could be spent.

Make rainwater harvesting compulsory for new builds as well.

Well that's pitiful. Just pitiful. I love the BRE. I would work for them if I could. I used to sit and read some of their reports - so interesting.

Just watching Datchet on the news. So sad that they sandbanked the area by the river - which is holding, then the water came down the trainline from Wraysbury and into the town anyway . I have friends in Wraysbury still and know where they are showing on TV. It is awful, just awful.

PasturesNew

vivatifosi wrote: »

As I've said before, I still don't understand why they build new builds that aren't raised off the ground (if at risk from flooding).

The man with the £1mill island house wanted to build his higher, but wasn't allowed he said.

lostinrates

PasturesNew wrote: »

The man with the £1mill island house wanted to build his higher, but wasn't allowed he said.

That's very probable.


Some neighbours here were allowed to build a bungalow in the farm (for retiring parents, but ostensibly for farm development ....where is the roll eyes smiley?) . They had a two year planning row two argue why it should be built on the opposite side of the road from where planning wanted it. Planning wanted it in the historic flood meadow for the mill pond. Mill pond is still there, meadow still floods. Council couldn't see why building over the road was both better for both houses and possibly ecology as well as just.....cheaper.