OneGuyFromBarlick

A bit like here, then. Hundreds of new houses built in recent years on flood plains around the local towns such as Bridgwater and Taunton.

Tripps wrote:"By the way David, how did you get on with ripening the tomatoes?"

I think it was a success. They certainly tasted pretty good. Not done to Tizer's scientific standards though. Needed to have some with onions, some with bananas, and some just on a sunny window ledge as a control. I'm trying the same method with a basket of peaches at the moment. Watch this space.

Quick update - the second trial on tomatoes was a failure, and the onions had no effect at all on the peaches. For flavour it's back to the vine ripened tomatoes, or the mini ones.

Looks like a complicated business. Ripening tomatoes

Ian is right about Bancroft Fold. I took the trouble at the time to go and see the planning officer and point out the danger and its cause. I suggested upgrading the old culvert and taking it under the road before the site of the old lodge and doing away with the old watercourse but nothing was ever done. There has been flooding of the gardens occasionally but the water never reached the houses. I have seen how that section of Gillians can react to sudden rainfall on the moor.



In 1977 the culvert was overwhelmed.......

On the flooding front, the rules of engagement laid down by the government (planning policy and guidance as enforced by government inspectors, who make ultimate decisions on planning applications) require developers to demonstrate that the site can achieve a greenfield run-off rate after construction. That is, water discharging downstream of the land can be attenuated to match what the run-off would be from an unsaturated field. Nowadays, the 'saturation level' is set at that of a one hundred year flood event plus a 30% allowance for climate change.

Developers use Sustainable Urban Drainage Schemes (SUDS) to achieve this attenuation. The techniques include incorporating swales into landscaping and putting massively oversize pipes in the ground with outfalls attenuated by restrictions in the downstream size of pipes. The effect of this is to create mini reservoirs which hold back the water and let it out downstream in a steady way.

I've no doubt that such solutions do work (within the terms of their design). And if a developer can design such a scheme for a site, the planning authority wouldn't have a leg to stand on if a relevant application went to appeal. (Pendle Council has learned this the hard way with a recent application at The Meadows in Colne; (in part) it was turned down because of flooding issues at the 'outline' stage, when only the principle and access are normally up for decision. The government inspector decreed that flooding concerns could be overcome by conditioning the need for an appropriate size SUDS as part of the final planning permission for the site. The inspector awarded the developer £25,000 costs from the council because we had been 'unreasonable' in using the flooding issue as a reason for refusal.)

My problem with such schemes is that I can't see how they work on an area which acts as a flood plain. Houses built in such areas can be protected by building them high enough to keep them out of the water, but what happens to all the water displaced by those structures? Unless homes are built on stilts, and you accept that gardens, roads and everything at ground level will be submerged from time to time? And a subsidiary issue is what happens to the wildlife that uses such wetland areas in winter?

(There's also a secondary concern that worries me; who'll maintain these SUDS in the decades (centuries?) to come? What'll happen when they silt up or otherwise become ineffective?)

To be fair to the owners of the Barnsey site, they have done more work than they need to at this stage to consider what's required to deal with the water falling or flowing onto the site from adjacent land. When they submit plans for the next stage of development, they will need to be able to show that the drainage design can cope with that 100 year + 30% event. When it comes to that point, I seriously question if the lower lying land at Barnsey can be practically developed at an affordable cost.

Elsewhere on flooding, Pendle Council will be submitting a bid to the EA within a few days for funding to carry out a study for the Ghyll Meadows area, hopefully leading to a further bid to fund a large alleviation scheme. We are aiming to include a study for the Gillians Beck area within this bid as well. Whether we get funding allocated depends on how cost effective the work will be.

I think David's misgivings about the efficacy of trying to alleviate flooding on natural flood plains are well founded. The bottom line is that the drainage routes have to be sufficient to deal with the amount of water coming in from upstream. Measure like larger pipes to act as reservoirs are fine in sudden short lived events but once full are useless. There is only one satisfactory defence, get the water away as fast as it arrives and before the level rises enough to overspill. It has to be accepted that this transfers the problem downstream and similar measures will have to be taken to alleviate that. Consider a culvert big enough to handle any possible flow and discharging into the summit level of the canal which has many by-washes to keep the level within bounds. Then recognise that one of the routes for this water out of the summit level is via the by-wash into the bed of County Brook below the mill. That water goes down into Salterforth Bottoms and eventually Lane Ends at Earby so they would get the brunt. There is very little fall from Salterforth and the watershed right down to beyond Thornton in Craven. The problem and the expense would be transferred to this valley. I'm not advocating this, just pointing out that the water has to go somewhere.
The bottom line is that building, no matter how attractive to the developer, should never be allowed on a natural flood plain. Our ancestors knew that and built accordingly. The problem is of course that it is more expensive and restrictive to use 'safe' sites like for instance the quarries on Salterforth Drag. Not as attractive and not as much profit.

David and Stanley's concerns about Sustainable Urban Drainage Schemes (SUDS) are justified. There is a long-established precedent for SUDS, a natural experiment carried out over centuries and I live next to it - the Somerset Levels. The complex system of drainage ditches and rivers here works like a SUD scheme, or at least it works when it's maintained and when it's improved to keep up with increasing frequency and intensity of flooding. But the problems we had in recent years were due to lack of maintenance and improvement and that's now having to be rectified. Looking after such schemes is not simple because it involves more than just councils and agencies, it needs the attention of the many landowners involved and you only need a few absentee or uncaring landowners and the whole system can collapse.

Even the best schemes can be inadequate. When I was at Ellenroad I had to look very carefully at flood measures connected with the River Beal next to the site and was surprised to find out that the large culvert under the motorway junction was undersized and was not expected to cope with a 'hundred year event'.



Here it is in conditions of low water. Notice also that it has a central division and one tree washed down stream could lodge and collect trash making the situation even worse. The point is that even the 'expert solutions' must be carefully scrutinised. The then Rivers Authority told me that they were never adequately consulted during the design stage.

I may be stepping beyond some people's bounds here. If so I apologise but this is an important matter! You may remember I pushed the boat out and bought 6 pairs of underpants recently. They are good quality and satisfactory except for one vital flaw. My vital bits escape out of the access at the front! This is uncomfortable and not acceptable. I shall have to sit down with needle and thread this morning and seal the gaps! At the moment this is getting my undivided attention. (Should I get out more?)

How about return to seller as 'unfit for purpose' Stanley?

Oh dear. There is another solution though, just shout yourself some new ones.

Wear them back to front?

Being an engineer, I got the needle and cotton out and modified all six pairs. There is no possibility of uncomfortable dangling now!

The other thing that attracted my attention was the fact that all 3 deliveries I was expecting came while I was in. The new grate for the stove, the new spare door glass and a copy of 'Cherry's Engines', the products of the best model engineer in the world, Cherry Hill. That's right, a lady, look her up! (LINK) She is still alive and well and working on her 19th masterpiece.



The grate is fitted, the glass is ready if the new one fails and the book is splendid!

The fact I feel a bit off colour this morning.... touch of a summer cold picked up from the kids last week?

Working in school among kids is fraught with danger, generally speaking if you regard them all as fester balls of infection you can miss most of it, doesn't include your own though. Hope you feel better soon Stanley.

Colin Braithwaite with his bucket and spade at Barnoldswick Beach.

Things generally fall into place... it was a bit nip and tuck, but Colin came up trumps with his machine for getting the sand into our beach yesterday afternoon!

Still a bit crook.... I shall have another easy day.

PanBiker wrote:Working in school among kids is fraught with danger, generally speaking if you regard them all as fester balls of infection you can miss most of it, doesn't include your own though. Hope you feel better soon Stanley.

And the kids at Keele with Stanley were fester balls of American infection which means he would have had less resistance to rely on. On the other hand, he might have given them all a good dose of Barlick bugs!

David, I love your `bucket and spade' photo, very punny, haha!

Our Australian members are on the move... Aussie sat-nav

Take care Stanley. Yesterday's highlight here in Whitby was driving to our holiday let up the cobbled access only single track road. We are right at the bottom of the steps up to the abbey. The lane is about half a mile lonb with only two passing areas where you effectively have to you mount the pavement for passing. Effectively the lane is regarded as a pedestrianised zone it's probably one of the busiest areas of the town, our cottage is 3/4 of the way up with a turning area further on at the end of the lane. We are booked long stay car parking in the town, after unloading I had to find somewhere in the town to park on the street. I went back at 9pm andmoved it onto a long stay car park. Whitby wasn't built for cars!

Neither were Barlick, and most other places!

Late by a day, but Sunday 31st July 1966 was the date of my dad's best cricket score, 10 for 7! Will get out the cuttings next time I am round at Mum's. It was one of his proudest moments. (BTW his team won).

There aren't the usual early morning posts from Stanley today so I guess he's feeling under the weather. I hope his infection clears up fast.

A "back storm" and sorting out the LPA .

Thanks, Wendy, it's good to know that thow'd codger is OK!

National Parks to Expand in Size ( but still miss the Craven and Barnoldswick Areas generally.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36905517

Hi All

You are right about less posts from Stanley, he is not a well bunny. Nurse Susan is on the case and is keeping Janet and I upto date daily.

I spoke to dad last night our time, about lunchtime in the UK he said "he is worse than China......"

I will update you all later when I have heard Susans daily report.

Regards to you all
Margaret