Hurricane-proof House

[HMFIC-1369]

Since everybody for the most part overlooked the obvious........ I'd say it may stand, just nothing at home upstairs!

[Matt Whiting]

^^^^ I think you wrote it above! :-)

[maximus.chunk]

There's a big clue whenever you see news shots of the flooded city. What structures are still standing, almost completely untouched?

The big apartment buildings.

Just build multistory buildings, and put all essential building utilities on the second floor or higher. Let the bottom floor have only easily repaired interiors and utilities. Connect the second floors of the buildings using a system of walkways just like in Minneapolis.

You could even build the walkways open air, using the wrought iron balcony style popular for Mardi Gras in New Orleans. This would make the city a fun place to visit.

Essentially this is the "house on stilts" idea but on a big enough scale you could house a population of 500,000 in a densely populated area.

For car storage some buildings would use the lower 3 or 4 stories for car parks. Again, visit Minneapolis to see this sort of structure. You'd need fewer cars since this would be a densely populated area with lots of people able to walk to work.

This is the future.

Of course, this doesn't fit in with the real estate agent / developer scenaria where every American is isolated on his own lot with 2 acres of grass to mow every weekend. That's going to prove economically non-viable when fuel prices rise, anyway.

Max

[bluestrkchain]

This is already provided, Joe Taxpayer is footing the bill.

[Dr. Hardcrab]

I don't know who Robin is let alone her/his butt.

If it's a him, I WILL let it alone....

[CW]

I'm sure there are.

[Lee DeRaud]

Here's a turn-key design, courtesy of Uncle Sam:

Lee

[Lee DeRaud]

More to the point, you wouldn't be able to break ground on the house's foundation without having to deal with it.

Lee

[Robatoy]

I usually hang up after 3-4 rings.

[PaPaPeng]

Normal houses should be able to survive a direct hit Cat 2 hurricane (correct me if I am wrong). A direct hit from anything above that will cause damage however strong you build it. Once there is damage and the rainwater/floofwater gets in the inside contents that can absorb water are toast. And the stronger and heavier your building the more damage there will be to your house and to your neighbor's as the parts tear off in the high wind or flood surge. You also don't want to build a house so heavy that it looks like a prison and cost more than one. You'll never pass the guidelines for neighbourhood architectural conformity anyway.

So we can presume that your house will look be built like one of those antebellum houses that makes New Orleans so charming. It should also be a two storey house so that you will have a place of refuge in case of flooding

If I were to rebuild what I will do is to design a house that will have a concrete structural frame that will stand intact in a Cat 5 storm. Presumably the main panels and outlets for utility llines, water pipes and other services will be attached to or be protected by this concrete frame. This is so that while the service runs to the rest of the house can be destroyed one can easily re-establish new connections to the main panels and outlets.

Everything else of regular construction can tbe damaged, be blown or washed away but the frame stands. That way I can easily tear down the roof and walls and quickly rebuild without having to bulldoze the whole structure or having to resubmit the building approvals.

A refinement to this house design will be to make the first floor level a sacrificial part that a storm surge can wash away without bringing the second floor with it, or damaging the structure of the house. I saw some TV shots of a breachfront house in the Carolinas that survived such a surge. That left the house looking like it was built on stilits. The second floor was damaged and not worth salvaging. But had someone taken refuge there (none) that person would have survived. A conventionally build house would have been totalled and killed everyone within it.

One can understand the desire to stay in and sit out the storm, mainly to prevent looting, and perhaps to fix fixable damage on the fly before it becomes a big one. The chances of a direct hurricane hit are small enough for most homeowners to take this risk. The chances of a direct hit is nonetheless there and it will seem very stupid by then to risk life and limb for a house.

Therefore the problem should be recast as how can one stay for a less threatening storm and yet survive the perfect storm?

The answer will be a storm-proof safe room built on top of this concrete structure. It will probably be the size of a large bathroom and made of steel or concrete for protection against flying debris or tree falls. It should be capable of being buttoned down and float upright like a boat should it be dislodged. At that level of storm intensity there is no longer any consideration of living in it to guard your property. All you want is to survive the perfect storm and get the hell out, a stay of less than 48 hours.

[Adam Weiss]

And big office buildings.

And big hospitals.

And big hotels.

And big police stations are also all standing.

1970s style megastructures. Yeehah!

But really, your idea of putting essential building utilities on the above the water line in floods is one I had before (re: thread titled "why don't they" on alt.architecture.

I suggested it for certain buildings that are of importance during catastrophes - hospitals in particular. They are often full of people who are in various states of disability who would have difficulty evacuating or may not survive evacuation. Furthermore, hospitals should be up and running during natural disasters and other catastrophes in order to be used by those suffering injury during the natural disaster.

In retrospect, it would be a good idea, though not as crucial, for fire stations and police stations to have the same hurricane resistance and auxiliary power systems as the hospitals. That way first responders can better do their jobs.

But doing it for every apartment building? Very excessive. Unless the people who choose to live in apartment buildings want it and the people leasing apartments can sell it.

I shudder to think of the poor old woman stuck on the 17th floor, surrounded by gangs of roaming youths who are ready to break in at any moment.

This is what happens when you ignore peoples' desires for open space and the privacy of private homes and cram them into giant megastructures where the identity of their home is reduced to a mere number on a door.

Just go over to Yahoo and do a search for "Housing Projects, Chicago" - you'll see what I mean.

Car storage?

People use their cars.

And Katrina showed us just how vital cars are to the evacuation of cities. Simply put, if you were in New Orleans and could get a car out, you were MUCH better off than you would have been if you were one of the thousands who didn't have a car or a spot in someone else's car.

Access to transportation was really the issue in New Orleans; not directly socio-economics or race. The rich new urbanist yuppie lawyer who refused to drive on principal was stuck in New Orleans. (He was interviewed on NPR) The cabbie who recently arrived from Pakistan and works 18 hours a day 6 days a week so his family can live at the poverty level could use his cab to get out of the city. (I saw him driving down the road in Houston right after I heard the first guy's interview on the radio).

No it's not.

Bullshit. And I know what you're saying is bullshit because if you visit France, or Spain, or Germany, you'll see people living in private suburban houses and driving cars to and from work. Meanwhile they snicker when America goes into crisis over $3 a gallon prices at the pump, because that's what they've been paying all along. In fact, many Europeans pay significantly more than that for gas, and it hasn't dampened their desire for comfortable, private, individual houses.

Their entire nation of Holland is like the city of New Orleans - below sea level and prone to very nasty storms and floods. It's also a nation with all of the high fuel prices and gas taxes as the rest of Europe. But the Dutch haven't abandoned private houses and cars - they've adapted them.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

In certain flood prone areas it is already requird by code. Has been for a number of years in some places. It is js ut common sense if you are prone to flooding either on the coast or the banks of a river. Houses in Florida and the New Jersey shore have been rasied on pilings for the same reason.

Every building? Yes, but for many it makes a lot of sense. In some areas there are even basement apartments that are about six feet below grade. Makes for some interesting things in the bathtub when plumbing problems happen.

Las Vegas is using elevated walkways to avoid traffic. It can easily be used in other areas too. Well, maybe not always easily, but it is not a bad idea.

Maybe. In New York it is common to leave a car parked or "stored" for weeks at a time. Parking, storeage, just variations on termonology.

[Michael Daly]

Composting toilet. Pricier, but works just fine. Put one on the second floor to avoid the flood.

Mike

[Michael Daly]

Local Hell's Angel hangout was raided - the cops used a backhoe to open the door. The HA rebuilt with a concrete wall in front to the door so they couldn't use a backhoe again.

Mike

[EagleMtn]

I dobt that a concrete wall will stop a backhoe.

[Michael Daly]

It isn't that they aren't there - they do exist in certain crevices in rock faces and survive in tiny microclimates. Since they aren't too mobile, your dead seal on a beach can last a long time.

Mike

[Notan]

Constant, evenly dispersed pressure.

Not.

Notan

[Edwin Pawlowski]

How long will it take a backhoe to get through it?

Relative to what? There are many mechanical or structurally made 10 x or more heavier than even a big backhoe.

[Notan]

My point is, it's not the material that's used, it's how the structure is designed.

Notan

[Adam Weiss]

Cameras, man, cameras.

Cops, whether local guys on the beat, DEA agents, Secret Service, swat teams, or anything, don't fear guns. They make sure they're always more heavily armed than and outnumber the people they've been told to take out.

And they don't worry too much about heavily fortified buildings. As your post states, if they find a door or wall that their battering rams can't take down, they'll use a backhoe; if that doesn't work, a bulldozer.

What law enforcement fears; what can really put a stop to what they're doing, is cameras. A single video of a cop doing something that doesn't look right, sent to the media, will be more damaging to a cop than a million guns, and a bigger impedement to their goals than a house built like Fort Knox.

I saw video today of a scuffle between cops and evacuees. One of the cops completely ignored his cohorts efforts to get a handle on the situation, and instead approached the camera-man - yelling "TURN OFF THE CAMERA! TURN OFF THE CAMERA NOW!"