Laxey flooding

[GD4ELI]

8 minutes ago, quilp said:

DoI want to add 1.5mtrs of height to the existing wall. That's a tall wall...

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/doi-seeking-approval-for-350-metre-wall-in-next-stage-of-laxey-river-flood-works/

1.2m, good to see something happening. I'd never buy a house in a valley such as Laxey, Glen Auldyn, ...

[Andy Onchan]

14 minutes ago, quilp said:

DoI want to add 1.5mtrs of height to the existing wall. That's a tall wall...

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/doi-seeking-approval-for-350-metre-wall-in-next-stage-of-laxey-river-flood-works/

 

Quote

the DOI says the design has been kept to a minimum to avoid 'visual disruption' for residents and their properties.

Does that mean they'll be using glass similar to that erected on top of the wall at the Shore?

[Two-lane]

They think there is going to be an extra 5 feet height of water coming down the river.

I suppose they have published their calculations.

 

[The Phantom]

56 minutes ago, quilp said:

DoI want to add 1.5mtrs of height to the existing wall. That's a tall wall...

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/doi-seeking-approval-for-350-metre-wall-in-next-stage-of-laxey-river-flood-works/

That's a very tall wall Paul!

It can't be far off 1.5m on the roadside and double that on the river side now.  I can't help but think this might be a bit of overkill?  Did it actually overtop the wall @Roxanne or was it all through the digger access hole?

[GD4ELI]

20 minutes ago, The Phantom said:

That's a very tall wall Paul!

It can't be far off 1.5m on the roadside and double that on the river side now.  I can't help but think this might be a bit of overkill?  Did it actually overtop the wall @Roxanne or was it all through the digger access hole?

Better safe than sorry. Extreme events should only become more extreme with climate change.

[The Phantom]

23 minutes ago, GD4ELI said:

Better safe than sorry. Extreme events should only become more extreme with climate change.

But this will mean there will be a 3m wall next to the road.  The pious would be heading to an Ark if the river ever hit that level. 

[Two-lane]

3 hours ago, The Phantom said:

Did it actually overtop the wall

According to the report by, I think Arup, there was minimal overtopping of the river bank down at The Shore. The pub was flooded by water coming down Minorca, going over the bridge and then turning right - into the pub.

Nevertheless, the DoI determined that a wall needed to be built. That wall there is a bit dubious because the base of the wall is at the same level as the bridge - i.e. if the water is up at the level of the wall, the bridge will form a dam and the water will back up somewhere else.

I am a bit suspicious about these designs.

Maybe it is part of the desire to attract more visitors. Instead of visitors wandering along the road, looking over the wall at the fishes in the river, they can look at a really nice concrete wall.

[Len Trench]

1 hour ago, Two-lane said:

I am a bit suspicious about these designs

Designs?

 I am a lot suspicious of these too. Unless MR is reporting it wrong.

[Kopek]

Fish? Isn't Laxey river rather devoid of fish, Trout, because of the lead levels???

(Despite its name.)

Is the flooding historical? Seems to be a more recent phenomena, lack of run off management  in the uplands? What did they used to do back then that they don't do now???

[Roger Mexico]

2 hours ago, Two-lane said:

According to the report by, I think Arup, there was minimal overtopping of the river bank down at The Shore. The pub was flooded by water coming down Minorca, going over the bridge and then turning right - into the pub.

Nevertheless, the DoI determined that a wall needed to be built. That wall there is a bit dubious because the base of the wall is at the same level as the bridge - i.e. if the water is up at the level of the wall, the bridge will form a dam and the water will back up somewhere else.

I am a bit suspicious about these designs.

I suspect there's very little thinking going on here in excess of "There's a problem, let's do something that that looks dramatic so people will think we've solved it".  Plus of course "What will be nice and simple for our mates in the construction industry to do, so they make big profits".  There will be no actual modelling or consideration of alternatives or looking at unintended consequences.  A 'solution' will have been decided on and no one is supposed to question it.

And of course if the 'solution' doesn't work, it's all to the good because that means even more money will be spent trying to fix that.  And if the cost is way over what was promised - well even better.

[Two-lane]

There must be records somewhere - how many times has the river come over the top of the river wall? In the most recent flood, did not most of the water come through a hole in the wall?

[GD4ELI]

22 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

The calculations are based on river levels over the last 100 years. We all have maps and graphs showing the river levels during that time. Sadly this doesn't take into account the biggest flood levels from 1915 (I think) or take into account that the last 100 years may have little relevance on the next 100 years, weather wise.

Exactly why DOI should be very proactive over the next 20 years, just as their predecessors were in the 60s. There's a vast amount to be done.

[Blade Runner]

The new look laxey river and hardcore river warden.

 

 

[La Colombe]

59 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

That's the best news I've heard all week.

🤣

[Happier diner]

11 hours ago, Two-lane said:

There must be records somewhere - how many times has the river come over the top of the river wall? In the most recent flood, did not most of the water come through a hole in the wall?

No most of the water did not come through the hole in the wall. Read the report. 

Some of the water came out of the hole and did damage to properties higher up which would have otherwise be ok. 

The hole in the wall and the digger in the river were stupid errors of judgement. But they were not the main cause of the flooding. That was the extreme rainfall and river flows combined with a blocked weir in the river. 

There was also substantial damage to properties on the valley side caused by water running down the hillside. Nothing to do with the river. 

Again, all in the report.