WAFF building codes and tornado safety (Birmingham: new home, contractors, assess)

[weaverra]

Originally Posted by harry chickpea

If it were code then it would have to be inspected and signed off.

Whoop-de-flip! A piece of paper. I could hold that up to the tornado and say "SEE! I have a piece of paper! You can't touch me!"

It's the same thing these storm shelter people tout. They give you a piece of paper to "show" that their shelter is safe. Honestly I would be more concerned about something I have no control over rather than something I can monitor and have input on.

[Nlambert]

Underground is not a myth, but the chance of flooding one of the in the ground garage shelters is completely possible. A lot of water heaters (like mine) are in the garage. Break the feed line and you have a real possibility of it filling up with water.

I don't know that it necessarily needs to be code, but like it or not code is there for a reason. My father is a contractor in South Alabama and codes are there because over time people identified issues that needed to be addressed. Something somewhere failed, and they stepped up the code.

Now, back to a concrete shelter in the home.... The only real way to figure out if it is going to withstand an EF4 or 5 is to require a FEMA approval and have it inspected during the process.

To avoid code enforcement just to allow someone to own a home is putting them at more risk if you ask me. As one example, bedrooms didn't require windows at one point in time. Now code requires an egress in every bedroom and it must be a certain size in case of a fire. That's a good code and it needs to be there. It could save a life.


If the home doesn't meet code there's a real problem there. If people get a false sense of security it's on them. A big problem a lot of people have nowadays is a lack of common sense. If you KNOW a tornado is coming common sense says to get out of a mobile home, or get into the safest place you can find. No one should rely on a weather reporter to tell you the safe zone in your home. You should do your due dilligence ahead of time and already have a severe weather plan. Self reliance is key.

[harry chickpea]

"No one should rely on a weather reporter to tell you the safe zone in your home."

That bears repeating, and backs up my entire reason for the thread. Be honest now, if you are reading this thread - in a tornado are your intentions to go to a storm shelter or retreat to the safest room in your home? If you plan on retreating to the safest room in your home, chances are you have been subliminally primed by watching repeated tornado weathercasts to accept that as a valid option, even though there are better ones. That complacency could kill you. It is a far better strategy for a weathercaster to emphasize storm shelters and de-emphasize the safety of interior bathrooms.

My intent is not to get into a debate on the positives and negatives of code. In my previous post I was pointing out that universally enforcing code is not a panacea and will have inevitable negative effects reaching far beyond tornado issues. The primary issue is, and remains, that homes are NOT safe in tornadoes - code or no code. That is why I put only that point in the first post. The secondary points are only to support the primary thesis and should not be a distraction from that.

[NoleFanHSV]

People are going to have a false sense of security regardless of common sense or building codes. Remember when airbags were all the rage and people didn't feel the need to wear seat belts? This was a big deal back in the late 90's.

I think we need better building codes regardless of what Brad Travis or anyone says. New homes easily get flooded way down in Florida because they refuse to raise them up on stilts. They don't put hurricane braces in the homes anymore. They put cheap styrofoam stucco and debri just flys threw the home. I really don't think new home builders care about building codes, I don't think the state, county, or city cares about enforcing those codes, and at the end of the day, homeowners are none the wiser.

Getting to Cinder block/concrete reinforced construction for a minute. I remember that school down in Enterprise got blown away and seeing whole attached walls caved in. Thats what killed some of the kids. I don't know what type of reinforcement they had, but that school looked built well and people still died.


I also don't know what the counties or cities provide locally for storm shelters. I had read that Madison county had basically left it up to homeowners to build and I guess get some funding to do it. But what about the shelters that are listed when storms come up? Are those shelters truly rated for EF5+ tornadoes?

[NoleFanHSV]

Originally Posted by harry chickpea

"No one should rely on a weather reporter to tell you the safe zone in your home."

That bears repeating, and backs up my entire reason for the thread. Be honest now, if you are reading this thread - in a tornado are your intentions to go to a storm shelter or retreat to the safest room in your home? If you plan on retreating to the safest room in your home, chances are you have been subliminally primed by watching repeated tornado weathercasts to accept that as a valid option, even though there are better ones. That complacency could kill you. It is a far better strategy for a weathercaster to emphasize storm shelters and de-emphasize the safety of interior bathrooms.

My intent is not to get into a debate on the positives and negatives of code. In my previous post I was pointing out that universally enforcing code is not a panacea and will have inevitable negative effects reaching far beyond tornado issues. The primary issue is, and remains, that homes are NOT safe in tornadoes - code or no code. That is why I put only that point in the first post. The secondary points are only to support the primary thesis and should not be a distraction from that.

I agree and disagree.

In some cases, there isn't a likelyhood of Tornadoes for that day, but one pops up with little warning. In some cases thats all the choice one has.

On days like last Monday (or in 2011), the best policy is to either get to a storm shelter or get out of the way. Thats what I did. I got in the car and headed south and had my other half do the same. Huntsville as of late has been lucky that many of the Tornadoes have started west of Huntsville. If there is time to go to a shelter or get out of the way, that I think is the better option.

[NoleFanHSV]

Originally Posted by harry chickpea

Brad from WAFF gets paid enough that a slight increase in his costs of existence have little or no impact. What he is not taking into account is that he is not representative of the area - an area that has just lost a major paper mill impacting hundreds involved with logging, that had a manufacturing facility pull out a few years back, that had a railroad car manufacturing plant flop, and been majorly affected by increasing gasoline and food costs. He has not had the experience of code creep, or skyrocketing insurance costs. In short, his good intentions stand to do more harm than good.

His stressing the need to USE storm shelters would be far more productive and save more lives.

I'm not sure what Limestone county's economy has to do with anything. Cost? Ok, but storm shelters are still expensive for many homeowners. There is still an economic burden somewhere, whether it be with the county, city, or the individual homeowner. The only way it works economically is if each community has one that can hold enough people in said community. I'm all for that, however, one of the reasons the small upright storm shelters work so well is because they are small. The load on the walls and corners are decreased versus a larger shelter.

To some degree, I see hints of your same argument all the time when Hurricanes wipe out areas. Why live there? Why build expensive houses knowing they will eventually flood? This goes for California earthquakes, Midewest flooding from the Mississippi River, Landslides in the pacific northwest to ice and snow damage in the northeast. Just about every part of our country has natural disasters that can economically effect an area.


Should Athens to Meridianville to New Market be nothing but trailers since they are so tornado prone and the cost to rebuild is cheaper?

[Nlambert]

Realistically there should be more people that want to educate themselves on what to do in the event of a tornado. That's a very cost effective option. The issue is (IMO) that many people decided for themselves that when a weather reporter says "There's a tornado in your immediate area, take cover now" and people 20 miles east are watching, they assume that they should also take cover in their closet or a room with no windows when in fact the reporter is simply saying if you stuck around it's too late to leave, so take cover as best you can.

[harry chickpea]

"To some degree, I see hints of your same argument all the time when Hurricanes wipe out areas. Why live there? Why build expensive houses knowing they will eventually flood?'

There ARE certain areas that never should have been allowed for development. Those area have damage all out of proportion to other areas. I speak specifically of the barrier islands made of sand. Another instance of questionable development is Miami Beach. I got a hoot out of a recent broadcast bemoaning how it will be affected by rising oceans. The whole area was built on spoil dredged out of Biscayne Bay and mounded up. Flooding has been common to the area - I know of it firsthand from theatres in the area that I was overseeing. Try to make a code that restricts the choice spots to build a home with a view and water access, and that will get shot down before you can pay your bribe of a million bucks to the people setting code. There is just too much money to be made on taxes and fees. This is the U.S., outside of the basics, laws are based primarily on protecting money and income streams.

The income and economics issue is again a SUPPORTING argument to the primary one.

CBS construction. The difference is that with CBS in south Florida, a concrete wall has a monolithic frame of reinforced concrete. Concrete block with rebar and fill then sits within that frame and attached to it. A building made like that is stunningly strong. I have pics of three theatres that were in the middle of hurricanes. One was a dead center hit by Andrew. It had holes in the roof, but the structure was solid. Contrast to Cobb's original Madison Square theatre. It looked similar from the outside with the stucco, but I saw it being built. Bent metal studs - FOAM BOARD - stucco. I had to sweep my jaw off the ground. People rushing to it for shelter in a tornado would have been in for a deadly surprise. Of course, it was to the code of the time. You can't get a CO without the required inspections.

[weaverra]

Originally Posted by NoleFanHSV

Getting to Cinder block/concrete reinforced construction for a minute. I remember that school down in Enterprise got blown away and seeing whole attached walls caved in. Thats what killed some of the kids. I don't know what type of reinforcement they had, but that school looked built well and people still died.

They may have not been infilled with reinforced rebar. Calhoun on the other hand is building it's newer buildings out of solid concrete with concrete poured ceilings.

[weaverra]

Originally Posted by Nlambert

Underground is not a myth,...

The underground is the only option for a F5 myth. Everyone used to think just because you had a basement you were safe. Well that's not the case. Many have been killed in basements.