SarahBell Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Andy and Nicki Bruce decided to buy a riverside plot in May 2013.They paid a farmer £750 a week to use his field across the Thames as a storage yard so they could chain ferry things across to their site. Oh and then it rained. :-) http://www.channel4.com/programmes/grand-designs/on-demand/57386-002Watched this last night and thoroughly enjoyed it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
“Nasty Piece of work” Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 I know the original bungalow well, the new building is small, pokey and very, very ugly, what a way to waste £1.1M. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olliegog Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 farmer did well out of it - £750 PER WEEK for the use of a sodden wet field Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 I've always wondered why they don't build like that in flood prone areas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 I couldn't understand why they just didn't run a dredger over there ...and cut a dock ...build the " house " in a boatyard , and tow it into position ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timak Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 He could have bought a yacht for that type of money and saved a lot of hassle! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wurzel Of Highbridge Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 I expect the novelty of living on an island will wear off after 6 months. Reminds me of when we moved into the wilderness in Ireland, loved it for the first 6 months the realized living in the countryside is not all it's cracked up to be. After moving over 20 times I do find that I get a little bored after 6 months or so. Plus I wouldn't want to be in that house when it's 6 to 12 foot in the air + how the feck are you going to get up/down the themes in a massive flood? Bonkers. At least their wealth is tricklig down tot he construction workers eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandad Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 I enjoyed the program too, but I thought it was an expensive way to solve the problem. I noted that they do a similar thing sucessfully in Holland but not in a sealed tank. I think that they may have a real problem if the river overtops the rim of the tank and silt gets trapped under the float, it'll take some cleaning out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
“Nasty Piece of work” Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 It was a self inflicted "problem", and the Thames in flood in winter is not nice - they will soon get stir crazy in that tin shed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyguy Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 The cheaper, saner solution would be to build the house outside of the flood plain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wish I could afford one Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 I know the original bungalow well, the new building is small, pokey and very, very ugly, what a way to waste £1.1M. With £1.1M they could buy a lovely home outside of the UK that won't flood plus never have to work again... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OurDayWillCome Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 I enjoyed the program too, but I thought it was an expensive way to solve the problem. I noted that they do a similar thing sucessfully in Holland but not in a sealed tank. I think that they may have a real problem if the river overtops the rim of the tank and silt gets trapped under the float, it'll take some cleaning out. That was the first thing that I was wondering when the concept was revealed with the flashy 3D graphics. I was expecting them to cover that at some point but it got conveniently left out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
76zedfour Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 This seemed an incredibly over engineered way to avoid flood damage to me. Perhaps the basement was worth £300k in extra constructions costs to them? I would have built an upside down house with all ground floor windows above the historical max flood line together with any full height openings for living areas and balcony sitting on top floor well above the flood water. Then either have a mid height entrance hall and lobby allowing internal access down and up or perhaps just a floating lobby if one really prefers a ground floor entrance in normal conditions. I cant imagine I would enjoy living there during last winters spate conditions so maybe just a lock up and leave watertight policy is best for these riverside houses Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 This seemed an incredibly over engineered way to avoid flood damage to me. Perhaps the basement was worth £300k in extra constructions costs to them? I would have built an upside down house with all ground floor windows above the historical max flood line together with any full height openings for living areas and balcony sitting on top floor well above the flood water. Then either have a mid height entrance hall and lobby allowing internal access down and up or perhaps just a floating lobby if one really prefers a ground floor entrance in normal conditions. I cant imagine I would enjoy living there during last winters spate conditions so maybe just a lock up and leave watertight policy is best for these riverside houses I think the issue was planning permission. I'm guessing the house couldn't have a bigger foot print than the demolished bungalow, and had a height limit (hence why a bungalow could only be built). I did wonder why not just flatten the land and plonk a very nice house looking barge on the island, but it would be a pretty small house. I think it was an elegant solution, but only feasible where house prices are ridiculously high. The dolphins go pretty high, and if it ever got to that height London would be flooded (I'm guessing anyway)! One engineering question I would like to be asked is how strong are those dolphins? Imagine an 8foot flood, if it was that high it's going to be fast moving water and a huge amount of pressure to push the house side ways. Ok, the other houses held against a 6foot flood, but those houses are on stilts so a smaller area to push against. Oh, and to clear the silt from under the basement would probably be quite easy - I dare say they would use the same method as those swimming pool hoovers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.