Churchill Fellowship lecture explores adaptive architecture approaches to flood recovery

Winston
Churchill
Fellowship
Lecture
by
Dr
James
Davidson

Interna<onal
WaterCentre,
Brisbane

18
March
2014

Case
Studies
from
Brisbane,
Australia

New
Orleans
&
Gulf
Coast
Mississippi,
USA

Maasbommel,
RoNerdam,
Ijburg,
The
Netherlands

Bewdley,
Lewes,
United
Kingdom

Brisbane

CBD

REBUILDING COMMUNITIES AND BUILDING A REPUTATION
DR JAMES DAVIDSON

WINSTON CHURCHILL FELLOWSHIP PRESENTATION
ADAPTIVE ARCHITECTURE
WINSTON CHURCHILL FELLOWSIHP PRESENTATION
EAA INSPECTIONS
P-002
assessments and spoken to over 1000 families through
community meetings in 34 suburbs in Ipswich and Brisbane.
Over 60 registered architects and 100 students/graduate
architects had voluntarily given their time to the project.

FLOOD DAMAGE
P-003
TYPE OF DAMAGE SEEN DURING EAA ASSESSMENTS
EAA assessments were geared towards providing a sense of direction for occupants in wading
throughnotonlyrebuildingbutalsotheplanningprocessassociatedwithreconstruction,something
which the majority of homeowners had never faced previously.

1
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
www.emergencyarchitects.org.au Issue E: 08/02/2011
Date of Visit:
Building address:
Local Authority:
Owner's Name Occupant's Name:
Phone Contact: Email Contact:
Occupancy Description: 3 Bedrooms # 1 Bathrooms # 1 Living Areas #
Insurance Details:
GPS Co-ordinates:
1.1 Type: Housing Office Shop
Detached x Townhouse Apartment
1.2 Construction: Timber Clad x Brick Veneer Cavity Brick
Elevated Frame x Slab on ground Other
1.3 Number of storeys:
1.5 Date/s of construction:
1.6 Heritage Status: Heritage Listed Character x None
age 0 to 5: ,age 6-17: , age 18 to 70: 2 ,age 70+:
Project Supporters Project Sponsors EAA Major Sponsors
2.0 FLOOD DAMAGE DATA
2.2 Length of inundation:
3.6m
4 days
Very late 11/01/11
2.1 Height of flood above floor level:
2.4 Number of people displaced/evacuated during flood:
BUILDING ASSESSMENT REPORT 2011 No: 0024
Emergency Architects Australia architects are assisting homeowners to assess the building damage caused to their houses by the flood, in
order to help them organise affordable and functional repairs.
Report of Apparent Damage
26/02/2011
Unit 6, 5 Spalding Court, Goodna
The volunteer architects will look over the house with the owners, help the owners get a good understanding of the full extent of
damage (both apparent and perhaps hidden), and discuss options and opportunities for the repair work. They will also indicate
any areas of concern which might need further assessment by other tradespeople or professionals before repairs are undertaken.
Unkown
1.4 Height of floors above ground:
2.3 Date of initial inundation:
Ipswich council
Wayne McIntosh Wayne McIntosh
0407 017 123
1.0 TYPE OF BUILDING/CONSTRUCTION
1
approx. 1995
wmcintosh@hotmail.com
Body corporate covers structure - but this only covers bricks
S 27° 36' 45.5'' E 152° 54' 02.4''
Sydney Office
PO Box 1430
POTTS POINT NSW 1335
T: 02 8004 7982
Brisbane Office
1/19 Brereton St (PO Box 3239)
SOUTH BRISBANE QLD 4101
T: 07 3846 5621
2
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
www.emergencyarchitects.org.au Issue C: 03/02/2011
Yes No N/A ?
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
If Yes: Posts may have filled with water from holes in the top. If necessary drill a very small hole at base of the post to allow water to escape.
5.9 Are there any structural brick walls affected?
If Yes: Brick cavities and cores may have filled with water. If possible check if water has flowed into cavities through gaps in the top or vents in the side.
Take note to advise future builder and engineer.
If Yes: Make sure that all steel is clean and dry from water and silt.
If Yes: A structural engineer will determine the extent of sub-structural damage and advise as to the necessary initial step of securing the structure. Do not
proceed in any renovation work until the engineer has cleared the building.
If Yes: An engineer will advise as to the necessary steps to secure the foundations.
If Yes: An engineer will advise as to the necessary steps to repair the affected structure.
LVL lintel above sliding glass door to patio. We recommend structural engineer look at the LVL in one or two townhouses in the development and advise
whether all the LVLs are ok (see summary of recommendations) - since all townhouses have the same lintel and were inundated for the same amount of
time
If No: An engineer will advise as to the necessary steps to secure floor framing
See Summary of Recommendations at end of document - subheading "internal linings/external cladding"
5.2 Has there been visible subsidence or cracking in the sub-structure?
5.4 Are there any cracked or broken structural members?
5.0 Structure
If Yes: Be aware there health risks related with lead paint. Avoid sanding and wear protective clothing and masks during clean up. Seek further advice if
need be.
If Yes: A structural engineer will determine the extent of structural damage and advise as to the necessary initial step of securing the structure. Do not
proceed in any renovation work until the engineer has cleared the building.
3.0 Building Clean-out Status
4.0 Asbestos and lead paint
5.5 Are there any affected laminated beams, or other composite members in the structure?
3.1 Is the building clean of mud, silt and water?
5.6 Are all flooring members adequately seated and beared? Including sub-structure?
5.7 Did water inundate areas of steel posts?
5.8 Did water inundate areas of steel framing?
3.2 Has the building finished drying out?
3.3 Have possessions, furnishings, linings, joinery, etc. been removed?
5.3 Have floodwaters scoured out soil around footings/foundations (remove silt to see)?
If No: We recommend a full secondary clean of all mud, silt and water. Make sure to check on tops of the building frame if possible (beams, trusses, posts,
etc.)
4.2 Are there any potential signs of asbestos? If evident, advise owner to seek appropriate advice.
4.3 Is there potential encapsulated non-visible asbestos lining (eg. under floor tiles)?
4.4 Recommend testing for lead paint?
If No: All affected materials need to be removed. This includes: all kitchen and bathroom cabinetry. All plasterboard. All carpets,vinyl,etc. Underneath all
linings needs to be thoroughly cleaned and then dried. This is to decrease the chance of mould once linings have been removed.
4.1 Is the house built prior to 1990? If yes, it may have asbestos.
Note: A person removing > 10m2 of asbestos must have an 'A' or 'B' class WHS license
5.1 Has the water visibly shifted the house structure?
If Yes: If you suspect asbestos is present do not cut, sand or displace any material sheeting. Contact an asbestos expert. 1300 QH INFO.
If Yes: If you suspect asbestos is present do not cut, sand or displace any material sheeting. Contact an asbestos expert 1300 QH INFO.
Sydney Office
PO Box 1430
T: 02 8004 7982
Brisbane Office
T: 07 3846 5621

7
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
14.3 Extent of works required: Major (Items 3,4,5,9,12) x
x Structural Engineer Archicentre Inspector x
x Lic. Plumber Town Planner
x Lic. Electrician Building Certifier
14.5 Future Direction:
15.0 STATUS
Y N N/A ?
x
x
x
x
x
x
Wayne McIntosh
Date: 26/02/11
DISCLAIMER
Pest Inspector
Asbestos Inspec.
“Emergency Architects are providing advice to individuals affected by the recent floods in Queensland. Emergency Architects are delighted to provide this service without charge as part of their “not for profit”
mission.
Emergency Architects will give advice on the choices available to those individuals for rebuilding on their properties. This advice will be on a preliminary basis only and will be intended to enable the affected
individuals to identify options available to them that may be worth exploring in greater detail.
Any options identified by Emergency Architects will need to be tested later against other specialist advice; including for example, advice from soil and drainage engineers. The preliminary advice will also need
to be reviewed and developed into formal plans by design and project architects selected for the purpose once a preferred option is identified.”
Date: 26/02/11
Minor (Items 5,6,7,8,10,11,13)
Mark Jones
15.6 Have occupants returned to house?
15.7 Extent of re-occupation (eg. upper level only):
17.0 CERTIFICATION
15.5 Is the stormwater system functioning?
Reccommended items to be removed: see Summary of Recommendations
15.1 Is the power back on?
15.2 Is water connected?
15.3 Is gas connected?
15.4 Is the sewer connection functioning?
NOTE: If a Structural Engineer's advice is required, no further action should be taken until the engineer's assessment has been made.
14.4 Reccommended further advisors:
Items which can be replaced now. Eg. Tiles, internal doors, cabinets:
Items to be replaced after further approvals. Eg. Lights, switches, interal wall lining:
Additional services required: Plumber, Electrician, Termite Control (see summary of recommendations)
14.0 OVERALL EVALUATION AND SUMMARY
14.1 Visual opinon of extent of structural damage: 1
14.2 Visual opinion of extent of superficial damage: 8
Scale 1 (low damage) to 10 (high)
Scale 1 (low damage) to 10 (high)
NOTES: Do not need a structural engineer to inspect every townhouse - all residents could contribute to get an
inspection of one each townhouse type (middle, end/2bed, 3bed). See summary of recommendations, p 10
Reccommended items to be cleaned: see Summary of Recommendations
Brisbane Office
T: 07 3846 5621
Sydney Office
PO Box 1430
T: 02 8004 7982
8
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Brisbane Office
T: 07 3846 5621
Sydney Office
PO Box 1430
T: 02 8004 7982
Photo 2
Photo 3
Elevational Photo Units 5,6 (6 on right)
GPS marker: 149
Coordinates: S 27° 36' 45.5''
E 152° 54' 02.4''
Water level went to 3.6m from ffl
Recommend removal of all eaves soffits for
cleaning. When these are replaced/re-instated,
place some perforated panels/grilles in the eaves
to help ventilate the cavity and prevent growth of
mould etc.
Photo taken from ladder looking down at base of
external wall. Recommend cleaning debris out
from under and on top of Damp Proof Coursing

EAA Structural
Assessment Checklist
GLOBAL.ARUP.COMAUSTRALASIABNEPROJECTS860008668652 - EAA FLOOD
ASSESSMENTSDOCUMENTSREPORTS11-03-04 80 PEGG RD ROCKLEAEAA STRUCTURAL CHECKLIST 80 PEGG RD
ROCKLEA.DOCX
©Arup F??
Rev 1, 14 February 2011
Date of Visit: (Day/Month/Year)
EAA Building Assessment 2011 Job No.
Building address:
No..80...........Pegg Road...............................................................................................................
Suburb..........Rocklea..............................................State.............QLD.....................Post Code.....4106.....
Y N N/A Notes
Check details of house construction as noted in architects inspection form.
Attach to this checklist x
Before entering property, check that power is off, or property has been signed
off as safe by qualified electrician. x
Before entering property, check whether property has been determined to be
asbestos-free. If not, proceed only in accordance with Arup SWMS if certain
that any asbestos is bound and undisturbed.
x
Potential Asbestos
observed along the
eaves lining at the
rear of the property
Before entering property, ensure that appropriate clothing and PPE worn
e.g. boots, gloves, eyewear, hardhat, protective clothing, sunscreen x
Record the extent to which structure is visible and accessible
House has been largely cleaned. Only the main interior wall sheeting has
been stripped. Kitchen carpentry still remains and is not in a state to be
reused.
View each elevation of the house.
Is there any perceptible out of plumb or square in any posts, walls or
door or window openings?
x
Is there any visible cracking or opening up of joints? Is there any
perceptible bulging of walls?
x
Horizontal cracking
observed on the
exterior brick wall
on the front face of
the residence.
If so, look for evidence to try to determine if misalignment is due to
flood affects (recent subsidence, scour or lateral water loading)
Notes:
Levelling of the house with additional timber packers suggests that the
property has had previous history with settlement issues. Increased water
content to the soil beneath the property could have caused increased
subsidence to the foundations of the brick work wall resulting in the
cracks observed on the brick work.
View inside house
Are there any out of plumb or square posts, walls, doors or window
openings?
x
Are there any significant out of level floors? x
The brick work
flooring to the south
western side of the
property appears to
have subsided.
20113040
0093
EAA Structural
ROCKLEA.DOCX
©Arup F20.1
Rev 13.11, 6 April 2010
Is there any visible cracking or opening up of joints? x
Vertical and
horizontal cracks
are observed in the
south and north
western corners of
the brick flooring
area.
To the rear of the
property, owner has
recently put in a
new extension to the
property. The
connection detail
between the timber
bearings and the
fascia of the main
property is not good
practice and should
be rectified.
If found try to determine source – deflection of floor or roof beams,
timber decay, foundation movement etc.
Notes:
The source of brick work cracking and floor subsidence is likely to be as
a result of foundation movement beneath the brick work due to increase
settlement in the soil from the floods. The reason why defects are
observed only within the western section of the property is because the
brick work only provides a support base to the western section of the
property, which is separate to the support base to the rest of the
property. The rest of the property is predominantly supported by
adjustable steel stumps and any settlement issues can be counteracted by
adjusting the steel level to suit.
x
Look for wall bracing (ply, hardboard or diagonal braces)
Are there any signs of racking or damage?
Notes:
Ply appears to be in good condition....................................................
x
View outside house
Are there any signs of damage or misalignment of foundations
stumps, post bases, floor slabs?
x
Brick work has
evidently subsided
in the south western
corner of the
property.
Are there any signs of damage or misalignment of foundations for
the external stairs?
x
Look for tie downs
Is there any presence of water pressure lifting house off foundations
or laterally displacing house relative to foundation location?
x
What is the condition of the tie downs? Ok
For masonry walls, are there any cracks apparent?
Crack widths?
Retaining Wall
Caused by brick or growth/foundation movement?
x
0.5mm cracks
observed in brick
work.

EAA Structural
ROCKLEA.DOCX
©Arup F20.1
Rev 13.11, 6 April 2010
Disclaimer:
This checklist has been created as part of the Emergency Architects Australia (EAA) flood assessment work and is the
copyright property of Arup Pty Ltd. Advice supplied by Arup is provided to EAA for the sole purpose of providing an
engineering assessment and is not to be used for any other purpose aside from recording the general assessment of the
structural integrity of the dwelling, based on what is visible or evident at the time of inspection. This assessment should
not be used for any other purpose other than making a judgement regarding future investigation or further assessment
required by others.
Y N N/A Notes
View the upper level of the house (if applicable)
Try to ascertain flooring type
x
In the case of suspended timber floors. If flooring is not solid
timber, is there any evidence of water damage of particleboard, ply
etc.
x
If visible and safely accessible, view floor framing and confirm
whether there are any signs of damage, deflections and tie down
x
Note down any and all observations likely to have any structural
significance, with photographs where required.
Notes:
Subsidence in the brick work towards the South western corner of
residence resulting in cracking of the brick work wall.
Are there any signs of corrosion caused by flood?
x
Where any signs of structural movement or distress or inadequacy are
observed or suspected that cannot be reliably diagnosed and understood (and
for which any required rectification can be readily described), recommend
further structural engineering inspection/checking.
Notes:
There are no immediate concerns structurally with the property in the
temporary case, however we recommend that the crack widths of the
brick work be monitored over time and if want to be dealt with in the
short term, the brickwork bed joints could be filled with a flexible filler
to allow for future movement.
The owner has stated that they are looking to potentially raise and extend
this property above the flood level. The structural issues nominated
within this assessment could be rectified during the raising process by
replacing the brick work flooring and foundations of the western section.
Should the owner consider improving the ground conditions to counter
the settlement issues of the property further advice could be obtained
from a geologists or an assessment by a certified hydrologist of the water
flow through the property.
Inspected by
Dylan Smith | Associate
Evan Lo | Engineer
Date: 11/3/2011..............................
EAA Structural
ROCKLEA.DOCX
©Arup F20.1
Rev 13.11, 6 April 2010
Figure 1: Subsided flooring and cracking on the south western corner of the property
Figure 2: Cracking on the north western corner of the residence.

EAA Structural
ROCKLEA.DOCX
©Arup F20.1
Rev 13.11, 6 April 2010
Figure 3: Interior wall sheets stripped to timber frame work
Figure 4: History of subsidence levelled with timber packers on top of load bearing brick wall.
Figure 5: Cracking in brick wall to the front exterior of the property
EAA Structural
ROCKLEA.DOCX
©Arup F20.1
Rev 13.11, 6 April 2010
Figure 6: Potential asbestos identified along the eaves above the rear extension to the property
Figure 7: Steel adjustable stumps supporting residence

Table 1.1:
Table 1.2:
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
06
02
01
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Table 1.3:
Figure 1.1:
Figure 1.2:

Table 3.1-3.3
3.3 Have
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Table 4.1-4.4
4.4
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Figure 1.3:
Figure 1.4:Damaged sarking
Figure 1.4:Damaged sealing

Hmmm... traditions developed here in Queensland versus those which evolved elsewhere.
I know which I prefer...
BUILDING TYPOLOGY
P-014

Financial insurance for such events should be a right, not a privilege.

Streetscape?

Community?

Ideas?

CASE STUDY 1: FAIRFIELD
P-016
ORIGINAL HOUSE
JDA©2011
RENOVATED HOUSE
JDA ©2011
2011 FLOOD LINE
disaster-affected home-owners, while designed resilience assists in mitigating these impacts.

CASE STUDY 1: PLAN & SECTION
P-017
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
JDA ©2011
SECTION
JDA ©2011
2011 FLOOD LINE
1893 FLOOD LINE
1974 FLOOD LINE
EXISTING HEIGHT OF BUILDING
2.5m 2.5m 2.5m 2.5m

CASE STUDY 1: JOINERY
P-018
REMOVABLE MARINE PLY CUPBOARDS & DRAWERS
(IN CASE OF FLOOD CAN BE TAKEN AWAY & CLEANED)
ADJUSTABLE BOLTS UNDER ALLOW
JOINERY TO RISE UP &
LOCK IN UNDER STEEL FRAME
POWDERCOATED STEEL FRAME SUPPORTS
BENCHTOP INDEPENDENTLY OF JOINERY
UNDERNEATH. THIS PREVENTS BUCKLING &
FRACTURE OF EXPENSIVE STONE BENCH.
STONE BENCHTOP
PRELIMINARY - FOR INFORMATION ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
select scale bar!
SHEET TITLE
COPYRIGHT JAMES DAVIDSON ARCHITECT
CHECKED BY
DRAWN BY
CAD FILE
PROJECT No
CLIENT
PROJECT
CHECK ALL DIMENSIONS ON SITE
BEFORE FABRICATION OR SET OUT
Use figured dimensions in preference to scaled
© JAMES DAVIDSON ARCHITECT. These
designs, drawings and specifications are
copyright and must not be used, kept or
copied by any means without written
permission.
PLOT DATE:
SCALE @ A3
LOCATION
:
:
:
:
:
:
18 SHARP STREET,
FAIRFIELD
16/04/2012 1:14:21 PM
C:SB035 -sb V12.rvt
3d Axo Kitchen
Author
Project 035
DOUG SCOWN &
JACQUELINE BOON
Checker
JDA- 035
Project 035. AE-310
ISSUE DATE DESCRIPTION
KITCHEN DETAIL
JDA ©2011
COMPLETED KITCHEN
JDA ©2011
Designing for resilience should assist in lowering insurance premiums.
The problem will be getting insurance companies to accept this as a logical idea.
I’m not holding my breath...

CASE STUDY 1: MATERIAL DETAIL
P-019
MATERIAL
JDA©2011
SILL DETAIL
JDA©2011

CASE STUDY 2: GRACEVILLE
P-021
2011 FLOOD LINE
SCALE? What scale? Streetscape anyone?

CASE STUDY 2: GRACEVILLE
P-020
BEFORE RAISE
JDA©2011
AFTER RAISE
JDA©2011
2011 FLOOD LINE
restrictive and prohibitive guidelines for post disaster reconstruction and recovery
the victims of disaster.

P-022
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
JDA©2011
SECTION
JDA©2011
2011 FLOOD LINE
EXISTING HEIGHT OF BUILDING
1893 FLOOD LINE
1974 FLOOD LINE
6m 8m 12m 12m

FLOOD DAMAGE
P-003
TYPE OF DAMAGE SEEN DURING EAA ASSESSMENTS
EAA assessments were geared towards providing a sense of direction for occupants in wading
throughnotonlyrebuildingbutalsotheplanningprocessassociatedwithreconstruction,something
which the majority of homeowners had never faced previously.

2011 FLOOD LINE
GRACEVILLE FLOOD HOUSE
additional costs being passed on to homeowners already suffering undue stress; eg.

CASE STUDY 3: WEST END
P-024
BEFORE RAISE
JDA©2011
AFTER RAISE
JDA©2012
2011 FLOOD LINE
The scary thing is we could have legally gone 1 metre higher than we have.
100mm of raise = $8,000 to $10,000

CASE STUDY 3: WEST END
P-025
WEST END FLOOD HOUSE

P-026
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
JDA©2011
SECTION
JDA©2011
2011 FLOOD LINE
ORIGINAL RIDGELINE OF BUILDING
1893 FLOOD LINE
1974 FLOOD LINE
6m6m

CASE STUDY 2: CONSTRUCTION
P-023
WEST END FLOOD HOUSE

Flood Response: Urban Strategies

P 11
P 13
immediately after the polder was drained and a second after several years of consolidation. The facilities t
controlled the water levels were all designed for these water level variations.
Wieringermeer was the ﬁrst polder created from the Zuiderzee (see Figure 9). The dike, constructed betwe
1927 and 1929, covered the distance from the tip of the Wieringen Island to the mainland near Medemblik. T
polder was dry by 11 August 1930, after pumping 7 Â 108
m3
of water, thereby creating 200 km2
of new land. T
pumping stations with a combined capacity of 28.3 m3
sÀ1
keep this polder dry (van Duin and de Kaste, 1990). T
polder sloped from north-west to south-east, resulting in four separately controlled water levels. The great
elevation difference between the canal water levels and the outside IJsselmeer water was 6 m.
The second polder to be created in the former Zuiderzee was the Noordoost Polder (see Figure 9). The dike ru
from the town of Lemmer in the north to Blokzijl in the east, incorporating two former islands, Schokland and U
Two rivers in the old land were dammed and diverted.
Construction of the Noordoost Polder started in 1937. In 1940 the last gap in the polder dike was closed
was pumped dry in 1942 (during the time of German occupation) after pumping 1.5 Â 109
m3
of water. T
created 480 km2
of new land. The deepest canals in this polder lie 5.5 m below the IJsselmeer (van Duin a
de Kaste, 1990).
Soon after pumping this region dry problems were discovered in the old land. Before any pumping,
groundwater levels along the former seashore were controlled by the water level in the Zuiderzee. Af
Figure 9. Layout of the IJsselmeer polders. Reproduced with permission from ASCE under License Number RH 031507
S124 R. J. HOEKSEMA

Environment Agency Flood and coastal risk management in England 27
Figure 12: Local Authority Boundaries
Number of properties in areas with significant likeihood of flooding
© FEMA
51
Time (hr)
No
Figure 6.7 Evolution of seepage rate with time for all materials
6.2 Drying ability
With regard to another aspect of resilience, the drying ability, Eng
the best properties as they absorbed little water and became clos
end of the drying phase than other types of brick (see Table 5.1 an
With regard to blocks, Aircrete showed the least favourable prop
regain its dry weight after wet testing (see Table 5.1 and Figure 6.
absorption rate. The two types of concrete block tested had compa
their drying characteristics.
27 The Design Response
Thickened floor structure provides an
easily accessible deep storage space
for mattresses, temporary bedding and
emergency drinking water
Wall hooks allow for furniture and toy boxes
to be raised out of harm’s way during a flood
Electrical sockets above flood line
A concrete dado extends to a height
of 1,000mm above floor finish, creating
a resilient surface
Hard-wearing screed flooring maintains its
integrity and is easy to clean after a flood
Operable roof light to facilitate drying after
a flood
Water storage tanks above WC allow for
toilet flushing during a flood if water mains
are shut down
Storage wall – emergency supplies are
stored in deep cabinets and accessed in
times of flood
Storage in drawers forming steps of
staircase for shoes, board games and
emergency supplies
Timber storage shelves below staircase
to a height of 1,000mm above floor finish,
water resistant storage below
Concrete steps to a height of 1,000mm
above floor finish with timber steps above
Removable water resistant concrete
plank flooring
Sloped concrete trough below floor creates
a path of least resistance for floodwater.
Also acts as a reservoir in the event of a
minor flood. Sloped floor allows water to drain
towards WC and exit at the rear of house
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
5
12
13
Improving the Flood Resilience of Buildings Final Report June 2005
Page 12 of 62
Figure 1 Potential Routes for Entry of Flood Water into a Dwelling (CIRIA 2003)
6. Review of Existing UK Guidance and Advice on Flood Protection of
Buildings
This literature review found that the majority of existing UK guidance and advice on the flood protection of
buildings is related either to the repair and reinstatement of buildings after a flood or to the installation of
flood proofing measures on existing buildings. There is very little guidance on flood protection measures
for new buildings.
Some attempts are being made to collate all the experiential information and guidance on the flood repair
process. For example, the Flood Repairs Forum is developing a guide for the insurance industry which
seeks to describe best practice for the investigation and repair of domestic properties, taking the whole
process starting from the flood event all the way through to the owner returning to the property (Proverbs
2005)2
. The document is still in an early draft form and, unfortunately, is not available for comment at this
stage (May/June 2005).
Evidence from the UK floods of 2000 indicated that the emergency response was strongly dependent
upon the use of sandbags as the main temporary flood defence measures and that public information on
local protection and restoration could be improved (Bramley and Bowker 2002). Where buildings did have
some form of additional local protection they noted a reduction in the cost of damage. They also identify
three different types of local protection as follows:
Temporary and demountable barriers that prevent floodwater reaching the property.
2
The Flood Repairs Forum is a group comprising insurers, flood repair companies, expert investigators and loss adjusters.
51
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time (hr)
Note: Engineering Class A seepage rate equal to zero
Figure 6.7 Evolution of seepage rate with time for all materials tested
6.2 Drying ability
With regard to another aspect of resilience, the drying ability, Engineering bricks also present
the best properties as they absorbed little water and became closer to their dry weight at the
end of the drying phase than other types of brick (see Table 5.1 and Figure 6.8).
With regard to blocks, Aircrete showed the least favourable properties in terms of ability to
regain its dry weight after wet testing (see Table 5.1 and Figure 6.9). This was due to a higher
absorption rate. The two types of concrete block tested had comparable behaviour, in terms of
their drying characteristics.

Flooddesignisnotaboutreinforcinglinesbutabouterasingthem.
Is it not time to re-invent our relationship with water?
To see water as not within, adjoining, serving or threatening
settlement, but the ground of settlement.
Dilip da Cunha & Anuradha Mathur
CHURCHILL FELLOWSHIP RESEARCH
P-028

Churchill Fellowship lecture explores adaptive architecture approaches to flood recovery

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (6)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (8)

Similar to Churchill Fellowship lecture explores adaptive architecture approaches to flood recovery

Similar to Churchill Fellowship lecture explores adaptive architecture approaches to flood recovery (20)

More from Kate Hodge

More from Kate Hodge (11)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Churchill Fellowship lecture explores adaptive architecture approaches to flood recovery