Great! Will do!
Hi @Sophie_Beese , did Julien give you some feed back concerning pre-feasibility and architects issued for xx sites…?
No, not yet, but maybe we can fill in the blanks all together. Also, @reef-building, I have added a couple of points to our agenda, I am afraid it might be a long meeting, please bear with me 
Hi @reef-building , I’ve included some changes and comments in the proposal about site selection for feasibility studies.
Please have a look at it, and comment where need be (or edit but with track changes on).
1 Like
@reef-building, another (positive) update for our agenda tomorrow: The architects sent us 5 pre-feasibility studies 
I put them in this folder. This should help us launch a pilot for a “real” feasibility study!
2 Likes
@reef-building, Me again. As just agreed at our meeting, let’s find a date for another Sunday of assessing fiches together. If possible, let’s pre-assess a few beforehand to speed up the process (and adapt it in the meantime).
- Sunday 27.8
- Sunday 3.9
- Not available on both dates
0 voters
Hi @reef-building !
Just to let you know, I’ve prepared the fiches for l’Echappée and Brutopia; I’ve put them in the Fiches folder with the header ‘TEST - XX’ and I’ve made a new tab in the 'Scouting Follow up" folder
3 Likes
@reef-building, just a quick update (apologies for the late notice) to let you know that we’ll be organising a short meeting tonight on the process to screen the fiches. Julien, Sébastien, Sophie and I will be there, but everybody is welcome of course.
I have also saved a copy of a simplified version of the scoring of the fiches in the “OLD” folder (called “screening the fiches”). I’m not trying to impose this, but I think it can be useful to clarify a couple of things about the criteria we set out for the site that we are looking for.
2 Likes
I won’t be able to join as I have an appointment with the kine at 20.00 h.
2 Likes
Hello @reef-building just a quick heads-up that the agenda is now complete. The main point will be about which sites to send on for pre-feasibility studies. Please have a look at the “yeses” (and if you have time, the “maybes”) in this table.
Things I have been wondering when scoring/evaluating:
- What do we do with sites that have running businesses on them?
- What do we do with sites for which a permit has (just) been issued?
- What do we do with sites that are in fact several parcels (3-4)?
Other questions to discuss: Does the system/ranking in terms of noise pollution and flood risk need to be amended? Also pinging @Lee on this one.
Hello everybody.
Maybe it is worth taking some time to discuss the flood risk and our criteria for excluding areas. The map we have been using colours in light blue areas with a flood risk whose chances of flooding seem rather low (Aléa faible: zone potentiellement inondable, mais de façon très exceptionnelle : environ une fois tous les 100 ans). I wonder if we have excluded areas because they are within this light blue category and I wonder if this needs a revision maybe?
Indeed @MariaAM , there is a 10min item on the exclusion criteria (from you and @Sebas ). Some of us have been wondering about the flood risk criterion and I guess it’s a good idea to ask the architects about it once their back from their holidays (after all, Brutopia is in a flood zone, if I am not mistaken).
1 Like
- What do we do with sites that have running businesses on them?
I don’t think we should create files for such sites, because then we could also consider creating a file for an occupied residential building… Et on n’est pas sorti de l’auberge !
hi @reef-building do we still keep one of these two dates available for screening or not necessary anymore with the new guidelines?
I’d be happy to contribute, but I’m not clear on what the question is?
I’m not sure I agree with this. A one in 100 years flood means that if you are going to live in the same place for 50 years, there is a 50% chance of being victim of a flood. And this is a statistic that was computed prior to climate breakdown.
A quick search on the internet confirms that things are likely to get worse due to climate change. Here are two articles that have a reference about 1 in 100 floods now happening back-to-back (i.e. every year):
- https://abcnews.go.com/US/100-year-floods-happening-term-change/story?id=78969683
- https://environment.princeton.edu/news/100-year-floods-will-happen-every-one-to-30-years-according-to-new-coastal-flood-prediction-maps/
(and then we didn’t yet go into the details of how accurate these maps are)
I’m also not sure that I agree on this one. Alberto says that the average business only lasts for 5 years, which means that businesses that are on their last legs may be looking for someone to buy their assets, including their building. Admittedly it’s a long shot, but not necessarily an impossible one.
No, indeed, that’s not necessary anymore because the backlog of fiches is gone.
1 Like
When screening the fiches, a few members of Team Building realised that a lot of sites and entire areas scouted (Anderlecht, Forest) had to be excluded due to flood risk. Combined with the fact that Brutopia is built in such an area at risk, we thought it might be worth discussing among ourselves and ask the architects about their opinion.
Also, I guess the question is when/if/how to adapt the assessment criteria in general if we come across issues.
1 Like
I asked the architects their opinion about the flood risk and here under is their answer.
Le tout est de bien prendre en compte les risques et leurs évolutions possibles.
A Brutopia, nous n’avons eu aucun dégâts des eaux depuis 11 ans. Les étanchéités des murs enterrés sont prévues pour être dans la nappe phréatique.Pour nous, il ne faut pas écarter d’office les bâtiments en zones inondables.
I personnaly think we could authorise light bleu zones in our scouting but not forget about it for latter on (impact on works and price for example)
2 Likes
I’m sorry, but I don’t feel that this provides a content-based reply to what I wrote above on floods.
Let me try again by referring to the wikipedia article on 100-year floods (i.e. those predicted for light blue zones): “A common misunderstanding is that a 100-year flood is likely to occur only once in a 100-year period. In fact, there is approximately a 63.4% chance of one or more 100-year floods occurring in any 100-year period.”
In that context “we did not have a flood in the last 11 years” is not a solid argument in terms of statistics.
I also can’t stress enough the importance of the fact that these maps were made prior to the acceleration of climate breakdown impacts.
1 Like