What would it take to build a disaster proof home (Or nearly)

Aunt Bea said:
^^^I agree! ^^^

I’m not sure that I want to own the house that made it through the fire, flood, hurricane, etc…

I would rather choose a boring location that is not prone to natural disasters and build a conventional home.

I suppose that people will keep building as long as they can get financing, insurance, etc…

One idea that is being floated in New York state is requiring sprinkler systems in new construction but it adds considerable cost.
Click to expand...
Sprinkler system for a 2,400 sf house is 3K-5K. Quote from Fall 2023 when I spec'd out a new home build in Tucson
 

WheatenLover said:
Yeah, but would everyone be able to afford it? I don't think so. And the dwellings that were for renters would likely have such high rents that few people could afford that.
Click to expand...
No wonder we are seeing so many homeless these days: One more insurance increase and we could also be homeless! LOL My parents ALWAYS said look out for taxes as you age. Heck it is the INSURANCE almost more than the taxes in most states!
 
Knight said:
IMO designing a fits all disaster possibilities home that would be tornado proof, hurricane proof, forest fire proof, flood proof earthquake proof sure would be interesting to see.
Click to expand...
You forgot to list hail. In my lifetime I've had three roofs that had to be replaced due to hail damage. Also windows and siding.
 

If homeowner insurance rates triple as it was suggested - and I suppose it's possible - and home prices continue rising - there is coming a day, and it may not be far off - when the average person will no longer be able to buy a home, and those homes for sale will sit there.
 
Paco Dennis said:
AI :

What would it take to build a disaster proof home (Or nearly)


Building a nearly disaster-proof home involves strategic planning, resilient materials, and specialized design features:

1. **Location**: Build in areas less prone to natural disasters like flood zones, wildfire-prone regions, or earthquake fault lines[1][5].

2. **Resilient Materials**: Use reinforced concrete, steel, brick, and impact-resistant windows and doors for structural integrity[1][2]. Dome-shaped designs also distribute stress evenly[3].

3. **Structural Reinforcement**: Include reinforced foundations, steel frames, hurricane straps, and proper bracing to withstand high winds and earthquakes[1][4].

4. **Fire Resistance**: Use non-combustible materials (metal or cement siding) and create a defensible space around the home[1][5].

5. **Waterproofing**: Install drainage systems, waterproof membranes, and sump pumps to prevent flood damage[1].

6. **Roof Design**: Opt for hip roofs with fortified systems to resist wind uplift[2][4].
Click to expand...
Excellent points, PD! I"d add to that triple pane windows that won't blow out from heat; and metal roofs (tin, etc.). After Katrina I had a metal roof put on, anchored down with screws-- right on top of the old roof. It won't blow off in a hurricane, nor would it catch fire from embers.
 
Maybe we should start with smaller homes, if we’re going to need/demand these strict building standards. Would the buyers support it?
 
It isn't going to happen.

Too expensive, and at best you might produce a slightly larger fraction of surviving buildings. It's a silly pipedream.

Flooding and firestorms are pretty tough to hold back. Mudslides and tornados as well.
 
WheatenLover said:
Yeah, but would everyone be able to afford it? I don't think so. And the dwellings that were for renters would likely have such high rents that few people could afford that.
Click to expand...
Fire-safe materials aren't that horribly expensive. A million dollar home built with fire-safe materials is still a million dollar home. Ones built for the middle-class might have to be a bit smaller, but not much. The cost of materials for a fire-safe home is about $20K-$40K more than conventional construction. And conventional construction is mostly wood. Lumber. Lumber burns quickly, and it is very expensive.

For a fire-safe home, you mainly need to focus on the roof, window and door frames (vinyl ones melt), eaves, soffits & vents. You mainly need to keep embers from getting inside the house, like through soffits, vents, and windows, and for all the flat areas; roof, decks, and patio covers; to be made of fire-resistant materials. Most modern homes are clad with fire-resistant siding and have fire-proof insulation....people are already paying for that.

Best thing one can do for any home is have a 5ft-10ft exterior clearance and metal fences and gates. Oh, and mow & water the lawn regularly.
 
Nathan said:
This has been on my mind as well. I expect our Homeowner's and fire insurance premiums are either going to triple or polices be cancelled, in light of the horrendous fire danger in California.
Click to expand...
It seems that most fires are spread to homes through drifting embers that either land on the roof, the deck, or on vegetation close to the house. I have heard of fire-resistant coatings you can spray on your roof (Don't know how well they work), and more decks are now made from composite materials which are fire resistant to embers.

I know everyone likes to have plants and trees around their homes, but it may end up being a sacrifice to obtain insurance. I guess if artificial plants could look real enough, then some may choose that route, and you don't even have to water them. One way or another, sacrifices will have to be made.
 
Different disaster types require different solutions..

When it comes to flooding, some homes here were built by the river for esthetic purposes, but are subject to flooding from time to time. The government offered buyouts to tear down the structures and create green space. Some took advantage but some didn't and are willing to take their chances.
 
David777 said:
View attachment 396302

We can, and some do build homes that can be disaster-proof and there are plenty of web sites with such information as well as retrofitting existing structures. But because that may be more expensive, people choose to gamble using convention least expensive materials while local officials, construction companies, and especially real estate and banking corporations who see such as a hit to their profits, work to keep the status quo.

The official California government page on building to withstand wildfires:

Building in the Wildland | OSFM

This sub-page contains most of the pertinent information. Love the interactive map with the red pop-ups:

Home Hardening | CAL FIRE

IMO every person that owns homes within high wildfire hazard zones ought be forced to read this state information at least once annually by their home owners insurance companies as histories have show, large numbers apparently just ignore it until they are victims and then many point fingers elsewhere. Just like with our California Campfire Permit testing, such can be done online effectively, without just allowing people to check some box off.

LRA Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps | OSFM


Of course, it is not just individuals but also local government officials, especially those responsible for establishing and ENFORCING meaningful zoning and building codes. Given recent incredibly sad and horrendously tragic history, one might hope these attitudes will change. We ought not have issue with those rebuilding in even high wildfire hazard zones but rather insuring when they do, they are using materials and structures very unlikely to burn.

The two California disaster types where structures simply should not be built are on geologically unstable mudslide slopes and on historic flood planes like one now sees along I205 about Manteca and Lathrop. Organizations tried to stop builders from constructing the vast housing projects that have sprung up there over the last decade, however real estate and banking corporations with their politicians prevailed. Within our lifetimes, events like we've already seen in 1986 and 2017 will repeat, flooding those riverside areas and the rest of us will pay for it again and not those responsible for allowing it.
Click to expand...
I'm definitely not an engineer. I have read that some buildings in California are on rollers so that they can withstand shaking. I just had a thought, wondering about sufficiently hardened balls for under smaller structures. Found one experiment.
Frontiers | Feasibility Study on Re-Using Tennis Balls as Seismic Isolation Bearings
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top