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 (701283)	9/10/2005 9:00:21 PM
From: HPilot	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

I'm sure you are correct that many, or even most, did meet code... but that doesn't mean that the building codes were themselves adequate for the region. Buddy, The code was adequate, windows were rated at 120 MPH, at my house the wind speeds were over 130 MPH and they broke. Just a few miles away, they were less than 120 MPH and most of them at least the ones not hit with debris were intact. The only real problem were roofs, and many of them held, just a few houses had gable end roofs that were improperly braced, or had poorly installed hurricane straps. They had hurricane shutters that were torn off or damaged with debris, and they have strengthened hurricane shutter standards, as well as some roofing standards. But it is considered uneconomically feasible to make a house withstand 150 MPH gusting to 200, so if another Andrew hits there you won't see much difference in damage.