Flood damage, renew floor joists?

[malky boi]

Hi guys, I am working on the flood damaged properties in Carlisle. In the one I am working on at the moment, the chipboard living room floor was under 6 feet of water. Took the chipboard floor up and skipped it. The floor joists were renewed 10 years ago after the last floods with regularized and treated timber. The various restoration companies working in the area seem to have different views. The one I am subcontracted to want all the joists ripped out and replaced, while other companies do not. The joists were under water for 5 days. I appreciate they may warp anyway.

They also want me to replace the stair treads and risers but not the stringers.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

 

[blackrodd]

I would assume that the soaking joists would contaminate any new flooring, and would soon suffer from wet rot without any decent underfloor ventilation in place.
I can only guess that by leaving the strings, the expense of all the newels, handrail and spindles etc is avoided, but any understairs cupboard's will need some time with a de humidifyer to keep the rot at bay.
Regards Rodders

 

[malky boi]

The de humidifyers are going in on monday, the powers that be seem to think the drying process will be about 10 weeks.
There is brilliant under floor ventilation and at least 1 of the other contractors on a house 4 doors away, is not renewing the joists but is having them chemically treated. I am going to another strip out on tuesday, it will be interesting to see what that insurance company will specify.

 

[Limey Lurker]

The joists and floor boards in my previous place were underwater in the 1953 floods. When we bought the place in '77, we updated heating etc., and found that the timber that had been wet was absolutely fault free. The cut nails in the skirting, and the lower door hinge screws were pretty rusty, though!

 

[heimlaga]

Wood isn't usually damaged from being underwater a few days. Not if it is allowed to dry quickly enough once the water is gone.

I would say that the critical part isn't how long the joists were underwater but how long it took from the time when they broke the surface until the floor was ripped open and a proper heating fan was put in to dry out the house. If that was only a matter of hours or a day or two I would think the pressure treated joist should be OK after having dried out properly. There are moisturemeters that can be used to monitor the progress.

I would not be prepared to state this in court..... but as a rough guess I think both methods should yield equal results.

Shouldn't it be time to move that town of yours a bit uphill? Two floods in 10 years isn't acceptable.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Two floods in ten years not acceptable? Tell that to the poor sods in Cumbria at the moment - I'm sure they'd be delighted with that. My heart goes out to them - what a blo0dy miserable Christmas.

 

[heimlaga]

I also feel sorry for all those who have had their homes destroyed.

Though live in a very flood prone region where homes are destroyed almost every year.....and that has got me thinking.
In the old days people lived on the hills above and farmed the fertile floodplains along the rivers. Modern society tries to do the opposite more or less. In my oppinion we should put pressure on planning officials to revert to the old practise.....because having one's home damaged by a flood is never ever acceptable!

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Certainly. A little forethought in the planning wouldn't go amiss, either. For instance when building on flood plains, why aren't the electrics run through the ceiling and down the walls rather than under the floors and up? The cost wouldn't be significantly different. Sometimes you wonder why people don't do a little more to help themselves - I saw a news report a few years ago where a pub landlord was moaning that he couldn't get insurance after three floods. They asked him where the flood water came in and he said the only place was through the box frame window on the side of the building. The window was about 6' x 3' - so why on earth didn't he remove the window and replace it with two or three rows of block and a smaller window?

 

[andersonec]

Certainly. A little forethought in the planning wouldn't go amiss, either. For instance when building on flood plains, why aren't the electrics run through the ceiling and down the walls rather than under the floors and up? The cost wouldn't be significantly different. Sometimes you wonder why people don't do a little more to help themselves - I saw a news report a few years ago where a pub landlord was moaning that he couldn't get insurance after three floods. They asked him where the flood water came in and he said the only place was through the box frame window on the side of the building. The window was about 6' x 3' - so why on earth didn't he remove the window and replace it with two or three rows of block and a smaller window?

Unless techniques have changed, we used to run cables for the power downstairs through the ceiling and down the walls, the lighting cables for downstairs and power cables for upstairs in the ceiling and up the walls, cables for upstairs lighting were into the attic and through the ceiling. Unless there were any cables going outside no cables were in the downstairs floor. Power sockets downstairs would be inundated if the flood water came up a couple of feet or so.

Andy

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Yes, I'm probably thinking of older properties. It wouldn't make any sense running cables through solid concrete floors.