Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And these storms aren't tornadoes? Just really high winds? Just trying to understand, I think I might have seen a 70mph wind only once or twice in my life
Nope, not tornadoes, they were severe thunderstorms with very high winds.
judging from the news story posted, the wind didn't blow the trailers apart but rather broke trees that fell or were flung into trailers.
And these storms aren't tornadoes? Just really high winds? Just trying to understand, I think I might have seen a 70mph wind only once or twice in my life
Quote:
Originally Posted by mistyriver
Where were 40 plus mobile homes "blown apart"? The place I spoke of had trees come down on them. Many, many trees.
It may not be intentional but your posts sound very patronizing and belittling. I don't think your future neighbors in Idaho (or anywhere else) will take kindly to that.
If mobile homes are prohibited in Alaska...why are they still selling them? CAREYHOMES.NET
I confess, I did not read the article, only glanced at it.
Misty, please read my OP, there is no intention on my part to be "belittling", or "patronizing". I am sorry your perception of my stating facts about the weather here in Alaska and the perspective portrayed by the media outlets and those responding to my questions has you upset. Honestly, I have no clue how you draw that conclusion.
That link is for a MANUFACTURED HOME dealership, not the "mobile home" or "trailer homes" (as identified in the news article) of old, sorry, I guess I need to be more specific. There is a distinction between them these days, in case you are unaware. The construction materials and specifications today are nothing like soda cans of yore.
I will refrain from further asking honest questions if it going to bother you so much to share your perspective and enlighten those who are interested in the PNW.
Not upset at all, just letting you know since you did seem to want to avoid that impression.
If you look on the Carey site, they are selling brand smacking new, single wide mobile homes...of course no one calls them that any more, they call them "park models" or "manufactured homes" but a single wide is a single wide..mobile home. Same exact critter.
Not upset at all, just letting you know since you did seem to want to avoid that impression.
If you look on the Carey site, they are selling brand smacking new, single wide mobile homes...of course no one calls them that any more, they call them "park models" or "manufactured homes" but a single wide is a single wide..mobile home. Same exact critter.
I did not think that I would have to expand on what I said earlier, but, my mention of mobile homes and the attrition of them here, it is the Municipality of Anchorage, not Alaska on the whole BTW, that enacted the restriction, applies to the older construction methods I alluded to I my last post, the "soda cans". Aluminum wiring, thin metal skin, 2x2 studs, etc. The Muni actually outlawed, retroactively, some of the trailer parks in town, hauled off and demolished the trailers, and reclaimed the property for alternative development. The manufactured homes of modern day are available with 2x6 construction, build to withstand snow load and wind per code set forth by the Muni, etc., which those of the past, and those shown in the article, where/are ill-equipped to handle. Major difference. Call them all mobile homes as you like, I tend to call current modern models manufactured homes in order to make the distinction between the eras and the quality of construction/materials that separate them, while referring to the older type as mobile, or trailer homes. They are interchangeable terms. I may be incorrect, but I think that any new manufactured homes set on site here in the "Muni" must be set upon a permanent foundation as part of the code.
It seems to me, perhaps, is that structures are not built sturdy enough to withstand the weather conditions that high winds bring. We get 100+MPH winds every year, often 2 or 3 times, and often the only property damage is shingles being blown off.
From what I've seen, the overwhelming amount of damage was from fallen trees striking buildings. I don't think there were many instances of buildings being severely damaged by the wind directly. From the photos I've seen even the mobile homes were primarily damaged by being struck by trees.
Are you suggesting that that homes in Alaska are designed and built to withstand having a 75' tall Douglas Fir fall on them without sustaining significant damage? I'd be surprised if that were the case.
The other major impact of the storms was that power was taken out for a good long while in many instances. I know in the first storm power was out at our house in Sagle for a week. I think this was a function of the widespread damage that occurred, so while the power company crews are great, there was simply too much damage over a very large area for them to deal with it any more quickly than they did. It would not be cost effective for the power company to keep crews on hand to deal with this sort of storm damage that occurs relatively infrequently. I know they did bring in crews from other nearby areas to bolster their capacity to repair damage.
My family all lives in NJ, and my sister was without power for a week following hurricane Sandy. She lives in a rural area of NJ (yes, there are rural areas of NJ!). My point is these sorts of things can happen even in a relatively urban state when unusually extreme weather events occur.
Finally, you may want to do some research on how the various north Idaho counties handle planning and zoning regulations before you settle on a specific location. Certainly Idaho state building codes are required to be followed throughout the region, but the counties do seem to vary quite a bit in terms of the degree to which they implement and enforce extensive building and land use codes. As an example, the Boundary County Planning Commission takes an almost militantly "hands off" approach to planning and zoning regulations as evidenced in some of their planning documents. If you are more comfortable with a higher degree of government oversight of planning and zoning regulations perhaps that should influence your choice of locations in north Idaho.
From what I've seen, the overwhelming amount of damage was from fallen trees striking buildings. I don't think there were many instances of buildings being severely damaged by the wind directly. From the photos I've seen even the mobile homes were primarily damaged by being struck by trees.
Are you suggesting that that homes in Alaska are designed and built to withstand having a 75' tall Douglas Fir fall on them without sustaining significant damage? I'd be surprised if that were the case.
Seriously? My comments are directly related to the wind against property and how the construction standards hold up against it, not trees falling on property.
The other major impact of the storms was that power was taken out for a good long while in many instances. I know in the first storm power was out at our house in Sagle for a week. I think this was a function of the widespread damage that occurred, so while the power company crews are great, there was simply too much damage over a very large area for them to deal with it any more quickly than they did. It would not be cost effective for the power company to keep crews on hand to deal with this sort of storm damage that occurs relatively infrequently. I know they did bring in crews from other nearby areas to bolster their capacity to repair damage.
My family all lives in NJ, and my sister was without power for a week following hurricane Sandy. She lives in a rural area of NJ (yes, there are rural areas of NJ!). My point is these sorts of things can happen even in a relatively urban state when unusually extreme weather events occur.
Hurricanes are a whole different monster, not something I care to ever experience, nor will I live in an area susceptible to them. I much prefer earthquakes.
Finally, you may want to do some research on how the various north Idaho counties handle planning and zoning regulations before you settle on a specific location. Certainly Idaho state building codes are required to be followed throughout the region, but the counties do seem to vary quite a bit in terms of the degree to which they implement and enforce extensive building and land use codes. As an example, the Boundary County Planning Commission takes an almost militantly "hands off" approach to planning and zoning regulations as evidenced in some of their planning documents. If you are more comfortable with a higher degree of government oversight of planning and zoning regulations perhaps that should influence your choice of locations in north Idaho.
Dave
In a nutshell, the less govt., the better, but it is common that govt. entities set down building codes, lending institutions also require them in the sense that they will not finance a property that fails to meet certain criteria, so, generally speaking, it is in everyone's best interest to follow a minimum construction standard. Common sense would dictate that typical environmental conditions would be the major influence to base that criteria upon.
As to the area we are planning to move to, some place between CDA and Spokane is the focus. Considering that is the most "urban" influence in the area, I suspect the planning and zoning would be the more stringent in the region.
A week without power just does not happen here, not even when we had a turbine blow up a few years ago. I can only guess as to why, perhaps more manpower per population/demand to maintain and operate the utility because the environment requires it? Perhaps because much of the infrastructure is either buried or on 100' towers, above the tallest trees? Perhaps, due to our isolation that the utility companies stock more replacement parts than what is common in the L48 since response is much quicker and logistics simpler? Perhaps between the 3 providers there is enough excess/reserve generation that 2 of the 3 can compensate in times of breakdown?
I suspect that with all of the trees knocked down and the amount of time that it took to get Sagle back on grid was due trees falling and damaging the transmission lines and it just required so many man hours to clear and repair the damage, that the majority of the infrastructure in that region is above ground due to terrain? Difficult to access?
Generally speaking, the Anchorage area does not have trees as large as the PNW, the harsh weather limits there size and range(avg. tree line is 1800' above sea level)they get much larger just a short distance to the south, though they are not exactly uncommon, and those that are within striking distance of a house are often removed due to the wind events that occur here, in order to avoid potential damage. The spruce bark beetle infestation has dramatically reduced the number of surviving large mature trees in south-central Alaska as well. Most common trees are birch, cottonwood, aspen, spruce and black spruce.
FWIW, we drove by "the day after." The damage, indeed, was caused by falling trees. Large, healthy-looking trees, most of which had be snapped in two with the roots holding firm. I have never seen anything like it. And I've lived in Florida and experienced hurricanes.
Seriously? My comments are directly related to the wind against property and how the construction standards hold up against it, not trees falling on property.
Yes, seriously. You brought up the issue of building codes, implying that perhaps north Idaho building codes were substandard. See below:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK76
It seems to me, perhaps, is that structures are not built sturdy enough to withstand the weather conditions that high winds bring. We get 100+MPH winds every year, often 2 or 3 times, and often the only property damage is shingles being blown off.
Yet, AFAIK, none of the damage was directly caused by wind, it was all due to trees falling on buildings and power lines. So my point is your comments about the building codes relative to wind damage are not relevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK76
In a nutshell, the less govt., the better, but it is common that govt. entities set down building codes, lending institutions also require them in the sense that they will not finance a property that fails to meet certain criteria, so, generally speaking, it is in everyone's best interest to follow a minimum construction standard. Common sense would dictate that typical environmental conditions would be the major influence to base that criteria upon.
As to the area we are planning to move to, some place between CDA and Spokane is the focus. Considering that is the most "urban" influence in the area, I suspect the planning and zoning would be the more stringent in the region.
Since it seems you are more comfortable living in an area where the government has greater involvement in building codes and land use, I think you are targeting the right area in north Idaho. You might not be happy in Boundary County for instance. Just for grins you might be interested to spend some time looking at their Planning Commission web site. In the intro to their zoning ordinance you will find this statement:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boundary County Zoning Ordinance Intro
It is the belief of the county that people who buy and build a here have the right to build the home that best suits them with minimal intrusion; if the roof caves in under the weight of the snow, they'll know better next time. Conversely, you may build a beautiful home that meets the most stringent building codes, but your next door neighbor may not. County government will not intercede on your behalf to make your neighbor live up to your standards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK76
A week without power just does not happen here, not even when we had a turbine blow up a few years ago.
I think the fundamental issue is that these were not at all a "normal" events, so the capacity to deal with such a large number of downed power lines over such a widespread area overwhelmed the power companies. Should a similarly rare event happen in AK I would not be surprised if at least some residents might be without power for a week.
I should also be clear that many people had their power restored in much less than a week. Ours was probably out for so long because we we had power lines down directly in front of our property, the number of homes between there and the end of that particular line is small, and they prioritized repairs based on getting the largest number of residents back up as quickly as possible.
Here is a photo taken of our street shortly after the first storm. Between this point and the end of this particular branch of the power line there are perhaps 20 homes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK76
I suspect that with all of the trees knocked down and the amount of time that it took to get Sagle back on grid was due trees falling and damaging the transmission lines and it just required so many man hours to clear and repair the damage, that the majority of the infrastructure in that region is above ground due to terrain? Difficult to access?
So, yes, the power grid is pretty much all above ground - not uncommon for rural areas anywhere in the country. The cost of burying power lines is high when you pass few homes per mile. Sounds like the trees may be taller in north Idaho compared to AK, and they are certainly taller (on average) than the height of the power lines. Hence the widespread damage, which extended into northwestern Montana BTW.
"It is the belief of the county that people who buy and build a here have the right to build the home that best suits them with minimal intrusion; if the roof caves in under the weight of the snow, they'll know better next time. Conversely, you may build a beautiful home that meets the most stringent building codes, but your next door neighbor may not. County government will not intercede on your behalf to make your neighbor live up to your standards"
That's the most beautiful thing I've ever seen printed my a government entity. Thank you for posting that!
Since you say these weren't "normal" events, do I then not need to factor in the cost of a generator in my home buying budget? Or does it happen enough that a generator is a good idea?
originally posted by boundary county zoning ordinance intro it is the belief of the county that people who buy and build a here have the right to build the home that best suits them with minimal intrusion; if the roof caves in under the weight of the snow, they'll know better next time. Conversely, you may build a beautiful home that meets the most stringent building codes, but your next door neighbor may not. County government will not intercede on your behalf to make your neighbor live up to your standards.
The excerpt above is clear indication "that perhaps north Idaho building codes were substandard", evidently, or at the least have the potential to be. Frankly I find that refreshing that the county puts the onus on the people who choose to build and occupy a poorly built dwelling, for they have no one to blame but themselves. Sadly, this is all too rare that people are put in the position to take responsibility for themselves and their actions, or lack thereof. I wonder (rhetorical) how the insurance industry treats such instances?
Regardless of where a dwelling is located and the amount of "govt. intrusion" involved I would not purchase a home without a proper inspection, so, any "substandard" construction would be exposed and any decision following, based on that.
Alaska has plenty of large trees, my reference/comparison was to the Anchorage area. If you reread my post you'll see that distinction was made.
The only "similar event" that I can recall that caused a lasting outage was in south-east Alaska many years ago, an avalanche came down and destroyed a high tension transmission line, not that avalanche and windstorm are synonymous. But, it was so long ago I have no recollection of the length of the outage or time to repair the damage.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
