Mumsnet Talk

I nipped through a newly built housing development the other week (another thread on here reminded me about deep water and children, but not a thread about a thread! and there was a pond, with a warning sign - warning, deep water. It was never there before, they made it - this is a housing development aimed i would say, principally towards young families. Lots of cul-de-sacs where it would be arguably "safe" for older children to play out. But NOT safe for them to be hanging around a deep water pond.

AIBU to think WTAF??? I have seen this on another newbuild estate too (an even bigger pond actually - with fishing!!!!! but at least this one is fenced off, but not locked!

Have the planners gone MAD???

YABU.

Children too young to read danger signs and not understand the dangers of water should not be allowed to play out unsupervised.

I am convinced these planners are all mummies boys who still live at home and have mummy iron their pants as almost every new build we have looked has no storage to put anything like ironing boards or hoovers away.

Also seen some houses with huuuuuuge deep ditches right outside the front door and winding round the house to border the back garden!

But why would you be letting your young children hang around a pond unattended anyway?

I think YABU. If children are old enough to be out playing then they're old enough to understand they don't go near the pond, or how to be safe around the pond. My mum's housing estate has one of these and it's fenced so you couldn't stumble across it by mistake. It's lovely

It does seem a very odd thing for the planners to do.

Is it a new pond, or one that existed before the estate was built? If it was existing, there may have been reasons why they couldn't fill it in (i.e. rare wildlife).

But I fully agree that it should be securely fenced so that children can't get near it.

There is an existing pond at the estate I live on. It was decided to keep it. However, due to some H&S issues there is a high, unclimb-able metal railing all the way round it.

Its a drainage thing - they have to build them - I think it's called an attenuation pond or something. Kids can drown in a few inches of water so the depth is really irrelevant.

Do you live there or are you planning to move there?

And older children and teenagers can also drown in ponds / deep water.

I've heard of cases where an older child or teenager has drowned in an inviting looking pool or waterway, particularly in the summer.

squeaky, i agree with you, i really do but it would be niave to think that the children who CAN read the sign and understand its meaning, wont, in the way children do, think they are invinsible and put themselves in real danger. You'd have to see it to appreciate it, its not like a pond in the park sort of a dip in a grassed area, so on a muddy day i could imagine VERY easy to slip into.

amck - i wondered if it was something like that. No, i don't live there or plan to live there - so no concern for my DD (also i don't let her play out and wont until she is at least 35!!!) More of an observation really.

To me, the obvious answer is a fence! locked! clearly the planners think its "nice" to have open water in their poorly planned estates. There must be other ways to sort the drainage.

I grew up where a canal ran along the back of our houses, and there were two massive reservoirs. From an early age we were all taught the dangers of water and to respect it.

There were still tragedies, usually teenage boys swimming in the reservoirs in the hot weather. Well aware of the dangers, but choosing to be reckless.

You cant bubblewrap your kids for life. As a parent all you can do is teach them the risks and make them aware, and hope that your child is sensible enough to listen to you.

I agree again squeaky But also there is some sort of civil responsibility for planners to not introduce a hazard where there doesn't need to be one? OR make it safe, I am sure we are all good parents who will keep our children as safe as we possibly can, we cant wrap them in cotton wool, BUT sadly, not all parents are as responsible and also, when the kids are older (teens) you can't keep them under lock and key - i think these things are a tragedy waiting to happen

I don't think yabu, some people let their dc out from a very young age.

I lived on a housing estate a few years ago where it was common to see 2&3 year olds playing out on their own or with siblings only a few years older than them.

A pond there would have been an accident waiting to happen

Basically the ponds are required to store drained water, it's some kind of environmental thing - I guess as more and more houses are built on areas that they would have deemed too wet in the past.

I agree it could be fenced in, but unless a site already has natural drainage then most new estates will have one of these somewhere - I have seen some where they plant reeds in them so it becomes more of a marsh than a pond.

I'm not a mummys boy.....
it's about sustainable drainage (veeeeeerry exciting)

Yes, this is what they have there amck - i think its very dangerous

I do see what you mean. There's a huge housing estate near my mum's full of family sized houses, with a big fuck off deep pond in the middle of it. It could at least be fenced off.

But on the other hand, we live across a field from a cliff edge. The kids know they aren't allowed anywhere near it on pain of death. I can't fill in the sea, so the kids have learnt if they want to play out, they don't cross the field

I thought exactly the same as you when I saw a new build estate online whilst looking at houses. A big, deep looking pond, obviously new as they mentioned it in the blurb, about 25 feet from the front doors of some of the houses. If it's a new legal requirement I understand, but there's NO reason they shouldn't have some kind of fencing or grill.

The thing is, everywhere you live will have some kind of danger and you have to educate your kids on what the specific dangers are near your home - e.g. Busy Road, High Wall/Big drop, slippery slopes, rivers etc etc. and additionally supervise your children until they know the rules and obey them - it's not really an age thing.

In my estate, we live in a cul-de-sac, but there are a couple of paths that lead to busier roads - after a time my boys were allowed to play in the street but were not allowed to go onto these paths - when they could be trusted not to then they were allowed to be unsupervised (but watched from inside for a while longer without them knowing) By the time they were old enough to test the boundary of the rule, they were old enough to use the paths

I used to live by the sea. That's a lot of coastline to fence off.

The pond won't be for show. The one where I live is part of the flood prevention work.

I am a civil engineer. I work in Flood Risk Management (which includes drainage) and I work closely with housing developers, the Environment Agency and planners. It's an attenuation pond. It stores run off from the new estate and lets it drain away slowly. It may even be a temporary feature while the development is under construction and permanent drainage put in.

I live right by an automatic half barrier level crossing. There are loads of small kids on this estate.

Scares me

My point being, as mentioned up thread, alnost nowhere is truly safe, you just got to pick your hazard.

But why can't they put a temporary fence around it then Bikerun? Am of your civil engineer status

Nanny state.

I'm with Squeaky and amck on this. Where we lived in the Netherlands we had a large lake straight in front of our house. This lake was unfenced and looped round the primary school. In the summer DH took the kids boating on the lake. In winter they skated on it. This wasnt out in the country but in the middle of a modern housing estate.

You need to teach your children to be safe around water that is all.