Home Build Quality - This is Unacceptable

[stormchaser]

This is unacceptable if this is true. Anyone know what home builder this was in Elkhorn? It’s a miracle that people didn’t die because they cut corners (again, if it’s true).

[Busguy2010]

I'm not sure. You'd think that'd been exposed in any number of the other 50-100 mph wind events we've had. But then again, I wouldnt be that surprised if we're talking about homes build this millennium. Any homes built after WWII are bad enough, but they've gotten worse standards as times gone on.

[stormchaser]

Yeah, much of the damage in Elkhorn was to newer homes. Apparently the lack of being properly anchored is something the NWS said but I’m just repeating what someone says - I have no idea if true but if it is, that’s unacceptable and there needs to be some accountability. Hopefully it isn’t true but wouldn’t surprise me either.

[Cermak]

I'm not sure. You'd think that'd been exposed in any number of the other 50-100 mph wind events we've had. But then again, I wouldnt be that surprised if we're talking about homes build this millennium. Any homes built after WWII are bad enough, but they've gotten worse standards as times gone on.

Does anyone know after your house is a total loss do you have to rebuild in the same area or can you take the money and rebuild or just buy a house somewhere else. I personally would be hesitant to build in the same area and would prefer to just look somewhere else in the Omaha region or leave the region all together. To me I would want a completely fresh start after dealing with having your house flattened.

The strange thing is I have been to all the neighborhoods in Douglas county that got hit, the guy that remodeled my bathroom lived on Bennington lake but moved a few years ago. And I’m familiar with the damaged neighborhoods on the northside of Elkhorn as I was there for work related activities in the last 5 years.

[Big E]

Does anyone know after your house is a total loss...

I can't speak for primary residences, but any time I've had a fire at a rental property (two total losses, couple other minor fires) the insurance company just cuts a check and lets you do what you will. The terms are laid out in whatever policy type you have purhcased, typically either "replacement cost" (should you want to rebuild) or "full value" (if you just want your investment protected) or some other similar terminology that's slipping my mind at the moment.

Again, only spekaing for non-primary residences and my experience.

[NEDodger]

Does anyone know after your house is a total loss...

I can't speak for primary residences, but any time I've had a fire at a rental property (two total losses, couple other minor fires) the insurance company just cuts a check and lets you do what you will. The terms are laid out in whatever policy type you have purhcased, typically either "replacement cost" (should you want to rebuild) or "full value" (if you just want your investment protected) or some other similar terminology that's slipping my mind at the moment.

Again, only spekaing for non-primary residences and my experience.

This makes sense. I guess the only thing preventing more people from moving lots is you still own the land that the structure was on anyways.

[nebugeater]

Yeah, much of the damage in Elkhorn was to newer homes. Apparently the lack of being properly anchored is something the NWS said but I’m just repeating what someone says - I have no idea if true but if it is, that’s unacceptable and there needs to be some accountability. Hopefully it isn’t true but wouldn’t surprise me either.

Much of the damage was to newer homes had much to do with the area that was hit, and very little to do with the age of the home.

[stormchaser]

Yeah, much of the damage in Elkhorn was to newer homes. Apparently the lack of being properly anchored is something the NWS said but I’m just repeating what someone says - I have no idea if true but if it is, that’s unacceptable and there needs to be some accountability. Hopefully it isn’t true but wouldn’t surprise me either.

Much of the damage was to newer homes had much to do with the area that was hit, and very little to do with the age of the home.

Yep - I realize that. I'm just saying most of these homes were newer construction and consequently "should" have been properly anchored to the foundation. Old homes they didn't have the same building codes as now so if they had been older homes, then at least it would be somewhat understandable.

The bottom line is it "seems" like whoever built many of these homes cut corners and didn't properly anchor the homes (if the report is true) in which case they should be held accountable. This is honestly something that could easily cost people their lives.

[nebugeater]

Yeah, much of the damage in Elkhorn was to newer homes. Apparently the lack of being properly anchored is something the NWS said but I’m just repeating what someone says - I have no idea if true but if it is, that’s unacceptable and there needs to be some accountability. Hopefully it isn’t true but wouldn’t surprise me either.

Much of the damage was to newer homes had much to do with the area that was hit, and very little to do with the age of the home.

Yep - I realize that. I'm just saying most of these homes were newer construction and consequently "should" have been properly anchored to the foundation. Old homes they didn't have the same building codes as now so if they had been older homes, then at least it would be somewhat understandable.

The bottom line is it "seems" like whoever built many of these homes cut corners and didn't properly anchor the homes (if the report is true) in which case they should be held accountable. This is honestly something that could easily cost people their lives.

Guess I would need to understand if they were to code or not. If not to code, there is liability all around. How did they pass a building inspection?

If it is widespread, then I would question if the code is there to require it. ( it should be of course)

[Brad]

This is the one I found interesting, you can clearly see the bolts where the sill plate was anchored to the foundation, but the sill plate is gone. The one thing I don't see washers. However looking at the damage, including the relocated bent steel beam, I would guess this house was going to be destroyed washers or not.

[nebugeater]

This is the one I found interesting, you can clearly see the bolts where the sill plate was anchored to the foundation, but the sill plate is gone. The one thing I don't see washers. However looking at the damage, including the relocated bent steel beam, I would guess this house was going to be destroyed washers or not.

Look at the positive. at least most of the sealing foam is still there.

[Brad]

Look at the positive. at least most of the sealing foam is still there.

Is that stuff adhesive now? Or is that some weird tornado thing where it rips off the 2x8 but leaves the flimsy little foam?

[GenX]

This is the one I found interesting, you can clearly see the bolts where the sill plate was anchored to the foundation, but the sill plate is gone. The one thing I don't see washers. However looking at the damage, including the relocated bent steel beam, I would guess this house was going to be destroyed washers or not.

There are washers, just have to zoom in to see them.

[Busguy2010]

This is the one I found interesting, you can clearly see the bolts where the sill plate was anchored to the foundation, but the sill plate is gone. The one thing I don't see washers. However looking at the damage, including the relocated bent steel beam, I would guess this house was going to be destroyed washers or not.

There are washers, just have to zoom in to see them.

I see the washers. Sil plates are supposed to be pressure treated lumber, which is always pine, a more dense wood, so I am kind of surprised for them to be ripped clean. I wonder slightly if the sil plates were a place of cutting corners, and the builder used SPF [(Spruce, Pine, Fir) more often White Fir or Spruce, which are both very light and brittle)] for the sil plates.

I absolutely do question the quality of the houses as to what led them to be swept away. Not to brush the devastation off, but things definitely can be done better.

[guitarguy]

From a former framer who built many houses and personally bolted many houses down lol if you zoom in you can see that the bolt that holds the sill plate down is exactly the thickness of a 2x above the top of the foundation. There simply couldn't be a bolt there without the house being properly bolted down since the boards are drilled out to go over the threaded stud that sticks up. Looks like the suction was so strong it pulled the boards around the bolts clean off! Because the floor joists are nailed directly to the sill plates its very possible it just shattered all the wood. Certainly would support an EF5 hypothesis.

[stormchaser]

From a former framer who built many houses and personally bolted many houses down lol if you zoom in you can see that the bolt that holds the sill plate down is exactly the thickness of a 2x above the top of the foundation. There simply couldn't be a bolt there without the house being properly bolted down since the boards are drilled out to go over the threaded stud that sticks up. Looks like the suction was so strong it pulled the boards around the bolts clean off! Because the floor joists are nailed directly to the sill plates its very possible it just shattered all the wood. Certainly would support an EF5 hypothesis.

To clarify, from what it sounds like there are some homes that were anchored correctly (which this picture may show one that was) but supposedly in one of the newer developments in Elkhorn none of the homes were anchored correctly in the development. This is all hearsay though and I have no idea if true and it 100% could be untrue. Hopefully if it is, though, lessons will be learned and that won't ever be an issue again - and the people responsible will be held accountable.

If it's legit information, I'd assume that will come out more publicly in the coming weeks/months as insurance companies like to deny claims and I can 100% guarantee they would deny a damage claim if the house wasn't properly anchored.

[nebugeater]

Look at the positive. at least most of the sealing foam is still there.

Is that stuff adhesive now? Or is that some weird tornado thing where it rips off the 2x8 but leaves the flimsy little foam?

I have never seen that with an adhesive.

[orangeboots]

I was just watching This Old House or something the other day and they used metal straps instead of bolts. The straps were poured into the concrete and when the plates were put down the strap was separated and wrapped around the plate. The were attached with joist hanger nails in a couple spots.

[guitarguy]

I was just watching This Old House or something the other day and they used metal straps instead of bolts. The straps were poured into the concrete and when the plates were put down the strap was separated and wrapped around the plate. The were attached with joist hanger nails in a couple spots.

That would keep the sill plate down better in theory assuming the strength of a metal strap is stronger than a 5/8 in thick metal stud. Many of these tv show things fall well out of compliance with our local storm related building codes. If I had to guess they mostly have tornados in the f1-low f2 range in mind with codes related to tornado protection. If a tornado is strong enough to tear the roof off even with the additional lag screws on each side of all the roof trusses I really don’t think having stronger fasteners would do anything more to prevent a total house loss.