Should we build to accommodate or resist flooding?

A month ago I commented on the need to reconsider planning guidelines for wind turbines, in light of the fact that they can contribute to reducing carbon emissions and thus indirectly help a city like Kingston upon Hull, much of which is already liable to flooding, and will become more so as the climate changes.

A couple of weeks later, On 13th June, the Royal Institute for British Architects (RIBA) published "Living with Water: Visions of a Flooded Future". The report considers the future of the development of the Thames Gateway in light of its increased risk of flooding, and discussed options for building, or not building, the proposed new town in this floodplain as part of the government's aim to build 300,000 new houses a year in the UK.

And then two weeks after that, in Hull and East Yorkshire the heavens opened. So much rain fell in such a short time that much of the city was left underwater, with over 13,000 homes being flooded and damage estimated to cost hundreds of millions of pounds. The city is still not back to normal, and for many people their streets remained rivers for days.

The problem is that, in many parts of the country, building on flood plains is seen as the only solution to a raising UK population. Currently nearly 61 million, this is forecast to rise to 62 million by 2011 and 65 million by 2021. Coupled with the fact that there are an increasing number of single person households, large numbers of new houses need to be constructed.

It's only in recent centuries that we have attempted to withstand the force of the sea: the Isle of Ely in Eastern England is now nowhere near the coast, yet was once surrounded by water. In Holland, constant land reclamations mean that one third of the country is below sea level, potentially disastrous if storms occur like those of 1953, which breached coastal defences and killed 2,100 in The Netherlands and the UK combined.

In The Netherlands, amphibious houses designed by Factor Architecten, have been built along the Maas which rise and fall with the water level. The base of the houses acts much like the hull of a ship, helping the house to float above water; the houses move up and down on steel posts which are driven into the ground and engineered to withstand storms and currents equivalent to those out at sea.

Unfortunately most British housing developments are designed to be cheap and quick to construct rather than to withstand flooding, so it's unlikely that this approach will be taken in either Hull or the Thames Estuary in the near future. And yet without an innovative approach, how will the millions of households liable to flooding be able to cope? Should we just start assuming that the ground floor is for storage and live on upper floors - as many already do in Venice to escape the high water? Do we design using water resilient concrete flooring and fittings and water proof plaster? Should we start positioning electrics above projected flood levels? And what about road levels?

It is highly unlikely that flood defences alone will solve the problem of flooding, so it is up to architects, engineers, planners and all those involved in the construction industry to develop innovative design solutions - or suffer with the consequences.