Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Does anyone else find it a huge waste to see the same houses and above ground power poles being endlessly restored in hurricane disaster areas?
Will we EVER get any leadership in that regard? I realize that federal won't happen under trump and he'll probably get rid of federal flood insurance- but what about local mayors or governmental officials? Are any of them thinking at all about revising building codes or is it forever going to be repetitive knee-jerk reactions and short term solutions?
Is it really cheaper over the long haul to keep putting up the same stuff that can't endure past next year's storm? Just seems a huge lack of leadership and a huge waste of materials.
Shouldn't this be a big consideration in urban planning in the coming years?
Does anyone else find it a huge waste to see the same houses and above ground power poles being endlessly restored in hurricane disaster areas?
Will we EVER get any leadership in that regard? I realize that federal won't happen under trump and he'll probably get rid of federal flood insurance- but what about local mayors or governmental officials? Are any of them thinking at all about revising building codes or is it forever going to be repetitive knee-jerk reactions and short term solutions?
Is it really cheaper over the long haul to keep putting up the same stuff that can't endure past next year's storm? Just seems a huge lack of leadership and a huge waste of materials.
Shouldn't this be a big consideration in urban planning in the coming years?
New houses rebuilt after a storm, whether flood or hurricane, have to be rebuilt to current codes. That means houses have to be made to withstand whatever category hurricane occurs most often for an area and they have to be lifted 2 feet above the (most common) Base Flood Elevation (if the BFE is 8 feet then the house must be lifted 10 feet as an example).
Power lines are a whole different issue. For one, the cost to bury them is astronomical (we got an estimate about 15 years ago, $500K to bury 300 feet). Add to that, when formerly aboveground lines are buried that's considered a "new" service by the Electrical Code. What that means is that any existing house or other building has to be brought up to current code in order to have service from those new underground lines.
New houses rebuilt after a storm, whether flood or hurricane, have to be rebuilt to current codes. That means houses have to be made to withstand whatever category hurricane occurs most often for an area and they have to be lifted 2 feet above the (most common) Base Flood Elevation (if the BFE is 8 feet then the house must be lifted 10 feet as an example).
Power lines are a whole different issue. For one, the cost to bury them is astronomical (we got an estimate about 15 years ago, $500K to bury 300 feet). Add to that, when formerly aboveground lines are buried that's considered a "new" service by the Electrical Code. What that means is that any existing house or other building has to be brought up to current code in order to have service from those new underground lines.
And yet, somehow it's done anyway, in lots of places. Most if not all subdivisions built in the last few decades in our state (at least the ones I've seen) have buried power lines. Perhaps the argument is that it's cheaper to bury them in new construction than in established areas, and maybe that's true. But rebuilding an area devastated by a hurricane is fairly close to being equivalent to building from scratch.
And over the long run, it surely must be cheaper to bury them than to have to keep replacing them after tornadoes, hurricanes, ice storms, wind storms, downed trees, poles knocked over by cars, and so on and so on. Especially if you add in the cost not only to the utility (i.e. the state) to replace the lines, but the aggregate costs to the consumers (i.e. we the people) of blackout-related expenses such as spoiled food and lost productivity.
And yet, somehow it's done anyway, in lots of places. Most if not all subdivisions built in the last few decades in our state (at least the ones I've seen) have buried power lines. Perhaps the argument is that it's cheaper to bury them in new construction than in established areas, and maybe that's true. But rebuilding an area devastated by a hurricane is fairly close to being equivalent to building from scratch.
And over the long run, it surely must be cheaper to bury them than to have to keep replacing them after tornadoes, hurricanes, ice storms, wind storms, downed trees, poles knocked over by cars, and so on and so on. Especially if you add in the cost not only to the utility (i.e. the state) to replace the lines, but the aggregate costs to the consumers (i.e. we the people) of blackout-related expenses such as spoiled food and lost productivity.
It is cheaper to do for new construction. Even after a devastating storm you'd still have to dig up the roads and then repave.
It's all a dollars and cents issue. You can't really bury the the KV lines, street and house service lines you can. But, for normal operation and maintenance overhead are cheaper (sources are mixed on that) by many accounts.
I'll give you a common example. Power goes out on a street. It's real easy to trace and fix with overhead. Actually happened last week here. With underground you have to start digging. Then your nicely paved new street has a very large weakness in it even after repaving.
I believe you're in Maryland. There's a real big issue now in Annapolis about the utilities coming in and digging up streets with no notification to the local jurisdiction. There was an agreement hammered out last year that opens up communication.
We have primarily overhead here but the newer TH developments are underground. One had to have BGE come in two weeks after the final paving in it was done a couple years ago. Now they're talking pothole repair.
It surely is a dollars and cents issue. But if we just keep throwing good money after bad.........
On another note: I heard the reporters on the weather channel talking about how all the houses built on stilts in the Mexico Beach area of the panhandle got washed away with the rest. So those standards need updating (or they need to just quit building there- but of course that runs afoul of what people see as their rights).
I don't have the answers- just wondering if enough of the right people are considering the question!!!!!
It surely is a dollars and cents issue. But if we just keep throwing good money after bad.........
On another note: I heard the reporters on the weather channel talking about how all the houses built on stilts in the Mexico Beach area of the panhandle got washed away with the rest. So those standards need updating (or they need to just quit building there- but of course that runs afoul of what people see as their rights).
I don't have the answers- just wondering if enough of the right people are considering the question!!!!!
Once again the codes govern what is most likely to happen. They were probably built to a Cat 3 (maybe 4) standard for surge and wind. This was a Cat 5.
FEMA will come in a do buyouts for property that suffers chronic loss. The land then has a permanent easement for unbuildable open space.
As far as power lines go, it absolutely is a dollars and cents issue. I'll use myself as an example because, one way or another, property owner pays.
A couple things, I'm going to up the cost of burying to $200/ft. to account for inflation since the last cost I got (this was from another hat I wear).
50 foot frontage X $200/foot equals: $10000
Upgrading house service: $25000
Repaving/sidewalk repair. $ 4000
Proportional vault cost: $ 5000
Total: $44000
Amortization at 5% over 20 years: $290/month
The above is having the utility do the work so the payment would be part of your electric bill.
A government might spread the cost over all the taxpayers or create a Special Taxing District and charge only those effected.
We lived in a beach town for 13 years. If a house was damaged more than 50% of its value it had to be brought up the current code. The code required that living quarters had to be above the 100 year flood level which in our townhouse meant on the 2nd floor. Our entire ground floor was garage. Our street was 5' above sea level.
No hurricane ever came near us, but a small tornado tore off a piece of a roof. That ruins your entire day.
Does anyone else find it a huge waste to see the same houses and above ground power poles being endlessly restored in hurricane disaster areas?
Will we EVER get any leadership in that regard? I realize that federal won't happen under trump and he'll probably get rid of federal flood insurance- but what about local mayors or governmental officials? Are any of them thinking at all about revising building codes or is it forever going to be repetitive knee-jerk reactions and short term solutions?
Is it really cheaper over the long haul to keep putting up the same stuff that can't endure past next year's storm? Just seems a huge lack of leadership and a huge waste of materials.
Shouldn't this be a big consideration in urban planning in the coming years?
How in the world is this a “trump issue”? People have been building homes on the beach long before DT was born, so I’m not understanding what leadership you’re referring to. Did you feel the same way about the last two dozen presidents? Oh, btw I can’t stand DT but people building on the beach has nothing to do with him.
Personally, I think it’s incredibly risky to build in high hazard areas like beaches. I feel the same way about people who build houses in canyons and forests.
As far as building codes, Florida’s building codes are very stringent, but very few buildings can withstand nature’s fury such as a hurricane of Michael’s strength.
How in the world is this a “trump issue”? People have been building homes on the beach long before DT was born, so I’m not understanding what leadership you’re referring to. Did you feel the same way about the last two dozen presidents? Oh, btw I can’t stand DT but people building on the beach has nothing to do with him.
Personally, I think it’s incredibly risky to build in high hazard areas like beaches. I feel the same way about people who build houses in canyons and forests.
As far as building codes, Florida’s building codes are very stringent, but very few buildings can withstand nature’s fury such as a hurricane of Michael’s strength.
Where are you seeing OP saying this is a Trump issue? She just mentioned him to say it won't happen under him.
I also thing is a big waste of money and more importantly lives to keep building the same way in known disaster areas. It's common knowledge that hurricanes happen every year and have been for centuries. Why are not the houses built to withstand that? It's more expensive for sure, but you only spent it once, not decade after decade.
Concrete buildings should be mandatory in beach areas or any kind of building system that will protect lives in the event of an hurricane.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
