Rebuilding New Orleans and surrounding area.
Discussion
Watching the news on the hardest hit areas all i can see is mile upon mile of match wood?,OK the timber is probably plentiful in these areas and cost effective,but wouldnt it make sense to build in regular storm hit areas with a reinforced concrete shell covered by a skin of brickwork,timber or whatever,with the proper building techniques this sort of damage can be avoided in the future.
Or perhaps it would make sense to release the funding for re-inforcing the flood defences to Cat 5 hurricane standards, the plans for which have been on the drawing board for some considerable time...
Bear in mind that FEMA have a top 3 most likely disasters to hit the US..
Major Terrorist Attack...ooh had that one.
Major Flood in the New Orleans Area...cross another off the list.
Major Earthquake along the San Andreas Fault....Tick tock... ?
Bear in mind that FEMA have a top 3 most likely disasters to hit the US..
Major Terrorist Attack...ooh had that one.
Major Flood in the New Orleans Area...cross another off the list.
Major Earthquake along the San Andreas Fault....Tick tock... ?
Rob_F said:
It would probably make sense not to rebuild the city on an area which is below sea level, but I doubt that will make a difference either.
Cheers,
Rob.
I cant see that happening, Old New Orleans has got so much history,infact!,stick my neck out here
,its probably the most historic city in the USA and if/when they rebuild it they will need to really push the boat out with public money to get the sea defences up to a standard so there is not a repeat of this last week,the only reason i could see them abandoning NO is if the residents dont want to move back.ZR1cliff said:
Watching the news on the hardest hit areas all i can see is mile upon mile of match wood?,OK the timber is probably plentiful in these areas and cost effective,but wouldnt it make sense to build in regular storm hit areas with a reinforced concrete shell covered by a skin of brickwork,timber or whatever,with the proper building techniques this sort of damage can be avoided in the future.
Its not the three little piggies scenario. The brick house doesn't survive.
The expensive steel house do though. Sometimes.
However, there are certain problems with even the hardest of materials in some of these storms. The problem is not how tough the walls are - but whether the windows get pierced by debris in the high winds.
If a window get pierced for instance you simply create a hole for the wind to get into and blow the place apart. Thats why you see many of the wooden house that simply don't exist any more. They were compromised and destroyed.
Brick house suffer worse problems. Although the aeriel shot looks okay, you may find the top half of the house is now 2 inches to the right of the bottom of the house. Walls simply crack. In this case you simply demolish the property.
If a brick house survives then the roof at the very least wont. When the window is compromised the wind simply attacks the waekest thing - the roof.
The odd thing about wooden houses that in storms they are able to "give" a bit. They literally bend in the wind. When the wind is over they right themselves again. The movement is very slight but this "give" increases their protection. A bit like our teeth are not solid in our jaw but have a bit of give in them.
If a cat5 is heading you way (which is what Katrina was although it landed as cat4) then you are in trouble. Nothing short of your real estate being based around caves is going to save you.
Your final material choice is a steel reinforced house but these are expensive and largely immaterial if cat 4/5 heads your way.
Before a big storm hits you may see pictures of boarded up windows to stop them being smashed in.
Rob_F said:The problem wasn’t that they built the city under sea level (indeed when they initially started building the city it was above sea level), it was failing to build adequate levee protection. This responsibility should have lay on the many engineers who maintain the system and ensure public safety, somehow despite many near misses and some 80 years passing those engineers failed to secure the funding to make the necessary improvements.
It would probably make sense not to rebuild the city on an area which is below sea level, but I doubt that will make a difference either.
Cheers,
Rob.
The engineers may also have been using a flawed design, this was pointed out in the 1930’s by an engineer who worked on the levees in Vancouver, Canada.
Updated building codes can help. Building codes after Hurricane Andrew helped a lot of people (including myself)in Central Florida survive the Hurricane trifecta last year. My sister's house in Navarre Beach also took hits from Ivan last year and Dennis this year without a scratch.
That said, nothing will stop a CAT 5. If it is going to be where you are, best to be somewhere else.
ErnestM
That said, nothing will stop a CAT 5. If it is going to be where you are, best to be somewhere else.
ErnestM
Not that it makes an iota of difference to anyone in its path, but Katrina was downgraded to Cat 4 just before it hit land, not Cat 5. They talked about the difference as being a choice between being run over by an artic or run over by a freight train on TV here (Florida). Not much of a choice really.
Well, they DID provide the money, but GW took it away to spend it on bombing Iraq!.....
Anyway......If it's "experts" that they're looking for then Mr Van Der Groot aus der Nederlands is your man!
I mean they ARE the best, of this there is NO doubt!
Only y'ust at the moment, he ish away schmoking something:
He'll be y'ust fine of courshe!! when he ...gets back! ........
See 'im ah!.....a little bit Spater!...Yah?
Anyway......If it's "experts" that they're looking for then Mr Van Der Groot aus der Nederlands is your man!
I mean they ARE the best, of this there is NO doubt!
Only y'ust at the moment, he ish away schmoking something:
He'll be y'ust fine of courshe!! when he ...gets back! ........
See 'im ah!.....a little bit Spater!...Yah?
We were in Panama City Beach (NW Florida on the coast) in February and there was a lot of advertising for concrete homes and condominiums.
Wood is used because it is cheap. However for every advocate of modern construction there is a lobby group that wants something that is the total opposite to keep costs down. What you end up with is a compromise.
In many cases these houses are wrecked anyway, the plasterboard will have soaked through with sewage and the insulation behind it will be growing black mould before long. In that situation it is better to demolish and start again, because it will be cheaper and lead to a much better end result.
Wood is used because it is cheap. However for every advocate of modern construction there is a lobby group that wants something that is the total opposite to keep costs down. What you end up with is a compromise.
In many cases these houses are wrecked anyway, the plasterboard will have soaked through with sewage and the insulation behind it will be growing black mould before long. In that situation it is better to demolish and start again, because it will be cheaper and lead to a much better end result.
ErnestM said:
Updated building codes can help. Building codes after Hurricane Andrew helped a lot of people (including myself)in Central Florida survive the Hurricane trifecta last year. My sister's house in Navarre Beach also took hits from Ivan last year and Dennis this year without a scratch.
That said, nothing will stop a CAT 5. If it is going to be where you are, best to be somewhere else.
ErnestM
Navarre, Pensacola Beach and Perdido Key took a big hit last year with Ivan but Dennis passed by relatively easily with only Destin and Milton bearing any brunt of the storm.
I thought Ivan landed as a cat3?
Many houses were damaged by tornadoes that accompany the storm. They are often along the wall of the big storm, in the front right quarter where the worst winds are. If you can easily have tornadoes with ordinary 30 mph wind thunderstorms, then there must be a whole lot more when the wind's up to 150 mph. That's often why you see both houses still standing, and large swaths of utter destruction, even though the whole area experienced storm-force winds. It's the projectiles in the wind that spread the damage. So this much is unavoidable becuase there aren't a lot of reasonably cheap building materials that can withstand that.
Plus, I think it was mentioned before, but once a structural failure starts, it tends to propagate quickly. Like a roof tearing off (or starting to): the beginning of the damage makes like leverage in high wind to continue the tear.
The difficulty is that so many people are uninsured, and will likely need a lot of public aid, for a while to come, in order to rebuild themselves. It would be better if more people could afford homeowner's insurance. As long as there isn't a natural disaster in every part of the country at once, big nation-wide companies would be able to handle it better without going bankrupt. I mean, a few years ago, there was horrendous flooding up and down the Mississippi River in several states. We've had disaster areas declared in the Carolinas (due to hurricanes) in previous administrations. We get multiple tornadoes that destroy entire towns in the middle of the country (Jarrel, Texas). Blizzards in the north east.... Extreme cold (-50F) in states like Minnesota,... earthquakes, hurricanes, lions and tigers and bears oh my. The fun never ends.
Plus, I think it was mentioned before, but once a structural failure starts, it tends to propagate quickly. Like a roof tearing off (or starting to): the beginning of the damage makes like leverage in high wind to continue the tear.
The difficulty is that so many people are uninsured, and will likely need a lot of public aid, for a while to come, in order to rebuild themselves. It would be better if more people could afford homeowner's insurance. As long as there isn't a natural disaster in every part of the country at once, big nation-wide companies would be able to handle it better without going bankrupt. I mean, a few years ago, there was horrendous flooding up and down the Mississippi River in several states. We've had disaster areas declared in the Carolinas (due to hurricanes) in previous administrations. We get multiple tornadoes that destroy entire towns in the middle of the country (Jarrel, Texas). Blizzards in the north east.... Extreme cold (-50F) in states like Minnesota,... earthquakes, hurricanes, lions and tigers and bears oh my. The fun never ends.
GavinPearson said:
We were in Panama City Beach (NW Florida on the coast) in February and there was a lot of advertising for concrete homes and condominiums.
Wood is used because it is cheap. However for every advocate of modern construction there is a lobby group that wants something that is the total opposite to keep costs down. What you end up with is a compromise.
In many cases these houses are wrecked anyway, the plasterboard will have soaked through with sewage and the insulation behind it will be growing black mould before long. In that situation it is better to demolish and start again, because it will be cheaper and lead to a much better end result.
Which is why i thought it would be better to build using a reinforced concrete shell as a start with shutters ,like a main stay,then after serious storms you give it a serious makeover and start with the shell again,change the outside look with removable panels,even change the roof design,the interior could be gutted and cleaned and a new interior fitted ,all the time being protected by the reinforced concrete that also helps keep the occupants cool in the hot climate.
tinman0 said:
Before a big storm hits you may see pictures of boarded up windows to stop them being smashed in.
By the wind or by the looters
I heard that housing in the untouched rurrounding areas is being bought up, sometimes bought without even being seen.
Also that some householders are holding out hoping the number of people needing shelter will drive house prices through the roof (scuse the pun)Random thought occured to me when we had the spate of floods over here in the UK: if you know your house is going to be flooded, then after you've done your best to protect it wouldn't you be better off just turning the taps on and flooding it with clean water from the inside rather than waiting for the muddy water to find its way in? It'll get wet, but it'll dry out eventually. It's the dirt and sewage that does the long term damage, surely?
GreenV8S even if you could seal your house tight enough to stop the water getting out, the pressure on windows would be too great.
If you only went up to the windows and water rose above the windowsill the outside pressure would be too much.
Saying that im not sure the structure could take the pressure. I only have a small fish tank at home but I wouldnt be able to lift it when full, imagin the weight of all that water against your walls
If you only went up to the windows and water rose above the windowsill the outside pressure would be too much.
Saying that im not sure the structure could take the pressure. I only have a small fish tank at home but I wouldnt be able to lift it when full, imagin the weight of all that water against your walls
seafarer said:
It would be better if more people could afford homeowner's insurance.
my places are in pensacola and are right in line for an occasional pounding and the insurance isn't exactly a great deal.
for instance, the 2 two bedroom apartments that i own cost $1050pa and covers the contents and the building including rebuilding. another 2 bedroom cottage has come in at $700 in the last two weeks. so not exactly a great deal of money.
I'm sure there is a state requirement that tenant properties have to be insured so all the families who were renting and lost their contents should be covered, and the landlords are also covered for rebuilding costs.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff