Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (701055)	9/10/2005 8:18:46 AM
From: JDN	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Buddy, I am familiar with S. Fla building codes. I cant address UNENFORCED as have no way of knowing, but s. fla building codes are the toughest in the nation and now even tougher. jdn

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (701055)	9/10/2005 3:35:54 PM
From: HPilot	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

And, yes, I know the tremendous cost of Andrew. Crappy and unenforced building codes had a bit to do with that as well.... Sorry, the problem with codes was greatly exaggerated by the news. Fact is the hurricane center claimed Andrew was a Cat 3 strom because they did not record a great enough wind speed at their center in Coral Gables. They ignored hobbyist and airfield indicators that recorded wind speeds of almost 200 MPH, claiming that the indicators were not calibrated. I think they did not understand how small the eye wall was. Then the assumption was that most of the houses must not meet code, and they did find a few. But the vast majority did meet code, the storm actually blew over houses of concrete and steel built for 120 MPH winds that met code. Though most reinforced CMU homes were left with four walls and no roof, some had thier walls blown down. The storm was upgraded to cat 4 shortly after the storm, then years later to cat 5 when engineers and scientists proved that the storm had to be that strong.