New Houses Kilcock

dj_bulldogg

brillo pad wrote: »

dj_bulldogg wrote: »

What's your point?
Yes I have read extensively about this development for months.
I have been onto the CoCo.
I had the opinion that the front green was essentially an attenuation pond for the Rye.
It seems to prove that was a fair and reasonable assessment.
It also proves that, as the builder states, the measures put in place can protect against flooding. It passed that particular test first time round.
Does this mean it can protect against 2/3 times the amount of rainfall? No, but civils drawings and specifications will give a good indication of the likelihood.
If you have no vested interest in discussing it only to spout off an ill informed opinion then just keep it to yourself? Why keep badgering on about it? I get it, you wouldn't buy there yada yaddda...
now let the adults who have an interest in talking about it get on with things

My point is all the flood assesment docs you are on about is on that site. There are conditions of planning breached that have been mentioned already. Did you even read those documents or this  thread? Why would I be even contributing or on here if I had no interest in the development.

Look, I have called the CoCo and they stated that they cannot discuss as it is up for appeal until the 7th of December and that they couldn't discuss until then. 
I understand that they have accounted for OPW Fluvial Data and have built higher and further away from these zones. All excellent. But I want the engineer to show where the run-off  goes to, have they accounted for additional drainage capacity once all the new phases are built etc etc? 
I also know that trickle vents in the windows need to be queried as the only means of air change in the building. I assume this is not sufficient when compared to TGD Guidelines and Air Changes per hour calcs. I want an engineer to show me the calculations.
I also want to know why the conditions in the Planning stipulated that each dwelling was to be separated by a garden wall and this did not occur.

I have a million questions but all of these could be pooled together as a group privately and then we could approach them as a group.

I can't understand why you keep referring back to info that is there or has been discussed?

The more pertinant approach is to list 100 queries as a group of potential residents than an "each to their own approach".
If you have an interest in this development and you can set-up a group then be proactive and set it up, post a link to here and we can all join and work together.

highdef

Bristolscale7 wrote: »

Did you ask Meath CoCo about the missing flood report that was mentioned earlier in this thread?

I did. They replied acknowledging that the report was missing. They said they are going to check the hard copy and revert back to me.

Bristolscale7

dj_bulldogg wrote: »

Look, I have called the CoCo and they stated that they cannot discuss as it is up for appeal until the 7th of December and that they couldn't discuss until then.

Lol, what happens if the appeal wins? A reasonable person would have been wrong to assume that building couldn't go ahead until all appeals of the planning process were resolved.

MysticMonk

dj_bulldogg wrote: »

Look, I have called the CoCo and they stated that they cannot discuss as it is up for appeal until the 7th of December and that they couldn't discuss until then.
I understand that they have accounted for OPW Fluvial Data and have built higher and further away from these zones. All excellent. But I want the engineer to show where the run-off goes to, have they accounted for additional drainage capacity once all the new phases are built etc etc?
I also know that trickle vents in the windows need to be queried as the only means of air change in the building. I assume this is not sufficient when compared to TGD Guidelines and Air Changes per hour calcs. I want an engineer to show me the calculations.
I also want to know why the conditions in the Planning stipulated that each dwelling was to be separated by a garden wall and this did not occur.

I have a million questions but all of these could be pooled together as a group privately and then we could approach them as a group.

I can't understand why you keep referring back to info that is there or has been discussed?

The more pertinant approach is to list 100 queries as a group of potential residents than an "each to their own approach".
If you have an interest in this development and you can set-up a group then be proactive and set it up, post a link to here and we can all join and work together.

If you have "a million questions" about somewhere why would you even consider buying there?

It really doesn't need to be that complicated.

Graham

MysticMonk wrote: »

If you have "a million questions" about somewhere why would you even consider buying there?

It really doesn't need to be that complicated.

Questions and answers are generally a good path to understanding. Understanding is a good basis for making decisions.

Bristolscale7

A few questions raise red flags a priori. Examples:

"When did you get out of prison?"
"Why was your fourth marriage so short?"
"How long does it take the flood waters to recede from our green space?"

MysticMonk

Graham wrote: »

Questions and answers are generally a good path to understanding. Understanding is a good basis for making decisions.

That's assuming all your questions are answered truthfully.

Jonting

Hi,

As I've previously mentioned I'm 1 of 4 couples currently in contact (via whatsapp) with each other re; Millerstown. We would be happy to add you to our ongoing chat, please pm me with proof of deposit (screenshot of receipt) name and contact no.

Thanks

Berserker

brillo pad wrote: »

Nothing is going to change the front green flooding constantly..and at some stage the front houses.

Just drove by that area for the first time in ages and I couldn't believe that they are building on that patch of land. I used to spend a lot of time in the cricket club nearby. That patch of land was well known as a patch of floodland. Feel for people who have put money into a property there but any local would have told you about the issues with that land.

dj_bulldogg

Jonting wrote: »

Hi,

As I've previously mentioned I'm 1 of 4 couples currently in contact (via whatsapp) with each other re; Millerstown. We would be happy to add you to our ongoing chat, please pm me with proof of deposit (screenshot of receipt) name and contact no.

Thanks

PM sent jonting

Sam Hain

Berserker wrote: »

Just drove by that area for the first time in ages and I couldn't believe that they are building on that patch of land. I used to spend a lot of time in the cricket club nearby. That patch of land was well known as a patch of floodland. Feel for people who have put money into a property there but any local would have told you about the issues with that land.

a fool and their money.........

dj_bulldogg

Sam Hain wrote: »

a fool and their money.........

Opinions are like arseholes. Everybody's got one.

pajosa66

highdef wrote: »

Finally.....some photos. Looks like the levels were still rising at this point. Photo taken a little after 10am

Very dangerous

liam7831

I don't see any photos ?

highdef

liam7831 wrote: »

I don't see any photos ?

The person was just quoting me without unnecessarily reposting the photos as well. If you read back further to where I said what was quoted, you will see the photos.


In other news.....how did the meeting with the engineers go? Not sure if the lack of posts here is because residents were asked not to post here or on social media but curious to see if fears have been allayed and if everyone is happy with what the engineers have told you all.

dj_bulldogg

highdef wrote: »

The person was just quoting me without unnecessarily reposting the photos as well. If you read back further to where I said what was quoted, you will see the photos.


In other news.....how did the meeting with the engineers go? Not sure if the lack of posts here is because residents were asked not to post here or on social media but curious to see if fears have been allayed and if everyone is happy with what the engineers have told you all.

I think the general consensus was positive for most. Personally I think I will let mine go.

listermint

Engineers wouldn't mean much to me. I'd be more concerned what the banks mortgage team have to say or you know the house insurers which I would need for the mortgage. Are engineers going to provide either of them

Berserker

listermint wrote: »

Engineers wouldn't mean much to me. I'd be more concerned what the banks mortgage team have to say or you know the house insurers which I would need for the mortgage. Are engineers going to provide either of them

Insurance will be a big problem. People won't get cover after their first flooding claim and that place is going to flood.

dj_bulldogg

listermint wrote: »

Engineers wouldn't mean much to me. I'd be more concerned what the banks mortgage team have to say or you know the house insurers which I would need for the mortgage. Are engineers going to provide either of them

There are a number of insurers providing quotes.
The are numerous flood mitigation measures in place. The issue is that the front green is a flood attenuation pond and not an amenities area as advertised.

dj_bulldogg

Berserker wrote: »

Insurance will be a big problem. People won't get cover after their first flooding claim and that place is going to flood.

In my opinion you are wrong. Those houses will only flood in a flood the likes that has never been seen. And half of Kilcock will be under water if that happens. Not just Millerstown.

Berserker

dj_bulldogg wrote: »

In my opinion you are wrong. Those houses will only flood in a flood the likes that has never been seen. And half of Kilcock will be under water if that happens. Not just Millerstown.

We'll as I said in my post earlier, I have been visiting Kilcock for well over 20 years and that land is known to flood. It flooded year after year at the rest of Kilcock village and the surrounding estates had no problems. Moreover, insurers will look at the historical data when it comes to pricing for that estate and once that area floods premiums will rise sharply, at worst.

Graham

Berserker wrote: »

We'll as I said in my post earlier, I have been visiting Kilcock for well over 20 years and that land is known to flood.

'that land' used to be significantly lower than it is now with no flood mitigation measures in place.

dj_bulldogg

Berserker wrote: »

We'll as I said in my post earlier, I have been visiting Kilcock for well over 20 years and that land is known to flood. It flooded year after year at the rest of Kilcock village and the surrounding estates had no problems. Moreover, insurers will look at the historical data when it comes to pricing for that estate and once that area floods premiums will rise sharply, at worst.

It's a difference of opinions mate. I'm in construction. I understand that at its peak that water was at least 1 metre below the threshold of the front doors. That is a hell of a lot of water that needs to fall to reach there. The driveways are also permeable drives which would also soak away. The estate is built 500mm above the 1/1000 year flood model. You saw a field that flooded below that level, well below. You can never say never unfortunately, records are there to be broken, but you will have say 30 floods over the next 10 years and none of them will reach those front doors. I would bet my €5k deposit on it! But instead I will take it back and look for somewhere better suited to mine and my kids needs. Fair play to the people buying there.
They will be listening to scare stories for years to come but those houses won't flood. The fields might. But the houses won't. Mark my words.

ixus

Dj, your posts are logical and appreciated. Without having the information you received at meetings i would re-raise points.

1metre until breach. How many metres did river rise on 40ml of rain in 12hrs, 6-10? Would 60ml of rain in 48hrs have done it? That is not a biblical event.

Ophelia was a wind event most will not have seen. That level of downpour with the wind may have had different results.

How will the river area be affected by further development upstream? The area around Ryebridge, Summerhill is intended for development with similar flooding issues. Could see large volumes pushed down from there during rain events.

Given the lack of detail from attendees it seems that purchaser's have had their fears allayed but also fears instilled about sharing information. Interesting.

dj_bulldogg

ixus wrote: »

Dj, your posts are logical and appreciated. Without having the information you received at meetings i would re-raise points.

1metre until breach. How many metres did river rise on 40ml of rain in 12hrs, 6-10? Would 60ml of rain in 48hrs have done it? That is not a biblical event.

Ophelia was a wind event most will not have seen. That level of downpour with the wind may have had different results.

How will the river area be affected by further development upstream? The area around Ryebridge, Summerhill is intended for development with similar flooding issues. Could see large volumes pushed down from there during rain events.

Given the lack of detail from attendees it seems that purchaser's have had their fears allayed but also fears instilled about sharing information. Interesting.

Not true. I attended a meeting last week. There is no request to keep quiet. It is all very open forum and the Estate Agents, Consulting Engineer and Building Contractor were all there to answer questions.
All new developments will have attenuation areas and soakwaways that will accommodate significant water volumes.
The flood event yielded over 70m3 of water volume at Leixlip which is upstream from the Rye. The max recorded water volume was 90m3 at this station (see OPW website for historical info of this station).
Listen, it is a risk, but as I have said I will eat my hat if water ever reaches those front doors.

highdef

dj_bulldogg wrote: »

Not true. I attended a meeting last week. There is no request to keep quiet. It is all very open forum and the Estate Agents, Consulting Engineer and Building Contractor were all there to answer questions.
All new developments will have attenuation areas and soakwaways that will accommodate significant water volumes.
The flood event yielded over 70m3 of water volume at Leixlip which is upstream from the Rye. The max recorded water volume was 90m3 at this station (see OPW website for historical info of this station).
Listen, it is a risk, but as I have said I will eat my hat if water ever reaches those front doors.

Just in case anyone gets confused, Leixlip is actually downstream.

dj_bulldogg

1metre until breach. How many metres did river rise on 40ml of rain in 12hrs, 6-10? Would 60ml of rain in 48hrs have done it? That is not a biblical event.


Further, If you got a measuring stick (or a theodolite) from the edge of that river up to the highest point it flooded a few weeks ago you will find that it rose by roughly a metre (not 6-10) if it had of been 6-10m the whole country would be flooded (",)
Then consider that this rise was at the base of the valley. The valley widens significantly as you move up. I will attach a picture to explain what I mean.
In other words, you would need 3/4 times the amount of rain for it to move up another 1m in height and reach the houses.

dj_bulldogg

highdef wrote: »

Just in case anyone gets confused, Leixlip is actually downstream.

Apologies, you are correct.

Reg_hurley

dj_bulldogg wrote: »

There are a number of insurers providing quotes.
The are numerous flood mitigation measures in place. The issue is that the front green is a flood attenuation pond and not an amenities area as advertised.

Interesting thread.
The photos of the flooded area showed a footpath and associated lighting was also flooded. At the meeting did they indicate these were included in the flood attenuation pond?
Does the path get closed off each time it rains?

thanks.

highdef

Reg_hurley wrote: »

Interesting thread.
The photos of the flooded area showed a footpath and associated lighting was also flooded. At the meeting did they indicate these were included in the flood attenuation pond?
Does the path get closed off each time it rains?

thanks.

The flooded area was not closed off last time as the development was not opened to the public. Going forward, I don't know what the plan is. Did anyone at the meeting find out will there be any safety measures out in place every time that the park temporarily becomes a flood pond?