To buy a house on a flood plain?

[Arkbuilder]

We have fallen in love with a house, offer accepted etc. Turns out it's the highest level of flood risk (3). There is a small brook that runs along one boundary. The owners had said it has flooded but never got to the house. We intended to build something bigger on the land. Is this a show stopper? Am I being a fool to proceed?

I'd start off with googling it, the .gov website explains it in more detail than I'd be able to here. You need to prove you couldn't build the house anywhere else in the local area that would have less risk of flooding. For one dwelling, that's very unlikely.

@Wildidle that seems very odd as I don't own any other bit of the local area. I'll have a look online.

It doesn't matter what you own, it's on any piece of "available land" i.e any land that could be purchased and built on. It's precise purpose is to stop people building on unsuitable land just like the plot you have your eye on.

You seem intent on buying it and disagreeing with everyone. Just buy it. Don't complain though if/when it floods. You got yourself into that mess. I'd rather deal with a small house than a flooded one personally, but not everyone is the same.

Grade 3! Absolutely not. Insurance will be a total nightmare and hugely expensive and if you flood you will be expected to deal with it.
Watch the documentary about Somerset floods on youtube and the aftermath. It only takes one exeptionally rainy year and you are done for.
I just turned down a new house that was a flood risk.
I am considering another which is by a stream but which is on a slope and looking at it it's clear it would have to flood 4 fields before it could reach me although I could possibly be cut off until the water drained off.

@Blueoasis I've not disagreed with anyone. I'm making an important decision and trying to gather facts and opinions. But thanks for that extremely helpful comment.

Arkbuilder
just noticed your nn!

I do find it interesting that you are still looking at how to do it though, even though everyone says don't!

Yes, an ark might be a good option. Global warming, more extreme weather. The likelihood of floods in low risk areas are higher, let alone if the risk is moderate to high.

Flood risk is a massive issue for planning, especially if you propose to keep the existing house too. Also other planning issues might also occur- you say you are in the countryside, often there are rules to prevent new builds in the middle of nowhere (which this would be classed as you are keeping the existing house) and some councils even have rules on how big you can extend rural properties.

You need planning advise from the council.

I mean this kindly but you seem very naive about all this.

Blueoasis said what I think a lot of us might be thinking - why are you still considering this given the unanimous views, many from quite experienced posters?
Are you here hoping that one or two people will say something different and then you can justify doing it?

I think the key is that there is an actual professional planner on the thread saying that it would be well nigh impossible to get planning permission for the site - this surely wrecks any plan you might have to build there? My understanding of the sequential test is that you have to prove that there were no other, more suitable plots available elsewhere in the area before they would let you build on this one. I'm concerned that you say you don't own "any other" bit of the local area, as that seems to imply you already own this one?? (Unless it's just unfortunate phrasing, of course! I am very prone to that myself!)

Op you're the one who despite 5 pages of people saying you would be a fool to buy it, still hasn't agreed with anyone. You're still just asking questions or answering them, hoping that someone will tell you that you're right. Yes you might not have many options in your area and they all have drawbacks. But one that will flood? That's a hell of a big drawback. How is a smaller house worse than that? Do you have an answer for that because I can't think of anything.

My sister's house, on a similar site, flooded on Boxing Day in 2015. Their insurance was extremely helpful, and still they didn't get back in until September 2016. If you had ever had to clean up after flood damage, you definitely wouldn't do it - I only have to look at the pictures to be able to smell the damp, sewagey stink, which made all of my skin prickle. Please don't buy the house.

It’s a small brook not a river. I’d consider it, but fully investigate first. Are there houses further down along the brook you can ask? Check records for recorded floods and get a professional in to assess it. How much brook frontage do you have, is it clear of debris, are you allowed to clear it if it isn’t. Lots of things you can investigate before ruling it out

I’m also a planner, and manage environmental impact assessments (including flood risk assessments) for new residential developments. The advice you’ve had above is sound. We have on limited occasions successfully gained permission to build new dwellings in zone 3 but an extraordinary amount of work is involved (£££ consultants fees). The scope of your design is severely limited (eg in our case we did no habitable rooms on ground floor, construct embankment so front door is at first floor not ground so can get in/out in flood). That = very expensive to build. We had to do extensive modelling of where flood water would go if you had built on that area of flood plain, calculations of the volume of flood storage lost in the footprint you are building on and show you can replace it elsewhere (ie the developer owned sufficient land they could build empty lakes/ pond areas to receive flood water if needed). Meetings with the Env Agency over about a year to agree details so they could support (not object to) the planning application.
If it was me, I would consider a zone 3 property but only if I had no plan to rebuild and could afford sufficient sinking fund to risk being uninsurable (ie paying significantly less for the property than equivalent which is not at high risk of flooding).

It’s a small brook not a river.

One of the tips that got flagged up when we had the experts in, over this, was how what you see can have little relation to the reality, as you have no idea about the underlying geo/hydrology. You can have flooding with no watercourse for miles, if the water table is high, and there are hills that cause water to build up. (If I was listening properly )

It really does need expert advice.

One of my hobbies is history/archaeology, and the story of mankind - especially as farmer - is in great part the story learning how to manage water in the landscape.

It’s a small brook not a river. DGRossetti exactly so.
It might be a small brook now, but given the right conditions it can become a river or even a raging torrent. Without deeper understanding of how that can happen you're just putting your fingers in your ears and going la la la.

My grandmas house is in a flood area and she’s been flooded before, her insurance is 1.5k a year for the house and contents !

her insurance is 1.5k a year for the house and contents !

At least she can get insurance. Some places can't. And (this is where the OP really needs to have a careful think) some places which currently can, won't in future. Where "future" could be next year, or the year after. Unless the government decides to subsidise/pay off the underwriters.

Well, from looking at the flood report the water from the brook isn't an issue at all. It comes from across the road then over a field to get to the house. The drive was built up to act as berm that then diverts the water into the brook. The house is insured and has never had a flood claim as flood water has never reached the house. We now also have the 50 year projections which don't project any significant change.

Buy the house if you want - you're clearly set on it.

I would bear in mind that although you seem happy with the risks, the vast majority of people wouldn't be (as this thread shows) and that will effect your ability to sell in the future.

We now also have the 50 year projections which don't project any significant change. So you are a climate change denier! In which case I refer to my original post - crack on and buy it!

Absolutely no way. Have you ever seen inside a flooded house?

Have you ever seen inside a flooded house?

When I was trialling using drones to report on flood damage, one of the adjusters commented it would be a godsend if it meant they could avoid having to smell the aftermath of a flood.

I have a horrible feeling that all this advice is coming rather too late.