Photo courtesy of Zac Rantz, Communication Department, Nixa Public Schools

Figure 7: The Inman Intermediate School built a gymnasium that doubles as a tornado storm shelter.

Case Study: Tornadoes
Inman Intermediate School, Nixa, Missouri

Many Missouri school districts have spent years working to add safe rooms to their schools. Officials say it is largely a result of the destruction of the May 2011 EF5 tornado that destroyed thousands of homes and businesses, dozens of churches, nearly a dozen school buildings, and the loss of many lives. In fact, across the state, there are now approximately 220 safe rooms in many types of buildings. One example is the new gymnasium at Inman Intermediate School that doubles as a tornado safe room. It is basically a concrete fortress where the roof and walls are concrete.

Inman Intermediate School’s safe room was designed for a 250-mph wind speed or the equivalent of an EF5 tornado, meets specific flying-debris or missile-impact criteria, and was built 5 feet into the ground. As well, the facility has first-aid equipment, restrooms, and backup power that can accommodate up to 1,200 people. FEMA grants covered 75 percent of the costs for the safe room. Nixa School District also has similar shelters at other schools, including Mathews Elementary, Nixa Junior High School, and Nixa Senior High School. In total, the district can house 6,700 people in its safe rooms, and they are open to the public.

Quantifying the Benefits of Resilient Construction

Building to a higher standard potentially adds cost, and for an owner to accept the higher initial cost, there must be convincing evidence of long-term savings. There are several studies that attempt to quantify the benefits of resilient construction.

Urban Land Institute (ULI)

In its report “Returns on Resilience: The Business Case,” the Urban Land Institute (ULI) explores the economic benefits of resilient construction. The report presents 10 detailed case studies that demonstrate cost savings from implementing resilient strategies. The study is based primarily on interviews with developers, property owners, and their consultants to identify motivations to protect assets against climate-related threats, what resilience strategies were selected, the design and development processes, and ultimately the projects’ performance. Hazards addressed included inland flooding, drought, hurricane wind, and storm surge. In all cases, the projects were able to demonstrate economic justification for spending more up front to design and build resilient structures.

Photo: Michael Dwyer/Alamy Stock Photo

Figure 8: The developer of The Eddy in East Boston designed for sea level rise.

Case Study: Sea Level Rise
The Eddy, Boston

For coastal cities, preparing for climate change impacts can be a daunting task. Despite threats of continuing sea level rise, development continues along our vulnerable coastlines. But developers of The Eddy, a 258-unit luxury apartment building along the waterfront in East Boston, understood these risks and designed the building to adapt to these threats. “Built to last” compared to “built to code” was a theme for The Eddy. For example, the high-rise was constructed 9 inches higher than the previous building. The electrical room was located on the first floor and the emergency generator on the roof as a buffer from storm surge, sea level rise, and flooding. It stores enough fuel on-site in a secured location to support fire and safety operations for up to four days.

Other resilient features included placing at-grade entrances at strategic locations and installing an 18-inch curb wall to prevent losses in case of a flood. The Eddy also realized immediate benefits. The insurance underwriter estimated that the resilience strategies could reduce the potential flood losses by 10 times compared to similar buildings without these features. Thus, the resilient design is creating real long-term savings.

NRMCA Insurance Cost Study

The National Ready Mixed Concrete Association (NRMCA) undertook a research study to understand if insurance companies offered lower insurance rates for structures built using noncombustible materials for both builder’s risk insurance and commercial property insurance. One of the main drivers behind the study was the enormous loss in buildings each year due to structure fires.

Structure fires, whether caused by accident, arson, or wildfires, result in significant loss of life and property each year. Designing buildings using a balanced design approach—combining active and passive fire protection strategies—can help save lives and reduce property damage. According to a 2017 report titled “Total Cost of Fire in the United States” by the Fire Protection Research Foundation and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), the total cost of fires in 2014 was $328.5 billion, equaling 1.9 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product. The total cost of fire is divided into categories of expenditures and losses. The expenditures—items such as fire department budgets, fire-protection devices, and equipment—constitute $273.1 billion (83.1 percent of total) and the losses constitute $55.4 billion (16.9 percent of total).

Photo courtesy of NRMCA

Figure 9: Bedford Development used concrete walls built using insulating concrete forms (ICFs) for Walker’s Landing located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, for fire resistance, among other benefits.

According to NFPA, there were 481,500 structure fires in 2019, causing 2,980 civilian deaths, 13,900 civilian injuries, and $12.3 billion in damages. NFPA estimates that 264,500 fires occurred in homes, resulting in 2,390 deaths, 8,800 injuries, and $6.4 billion in damages, and 75,000 occurred in apartment buildings, resulting in 380 deaths, 3,400 injuries, and $1.3 billion in damages. Property damages from fires have been increasing over time.

The NRMCA study titled “Survey of Insurance Costs for Multifamily Buildings” revealed that insurers are aware of the risks of building with combustible construction and the benefits of building with noncombustible construction. In summary, builder’s risk insurance is 22–72 percent less for noncombustible construction, depending on location. Commercial property insurance is 14–65 less for noncombustible construction, also depending on location. According to the study, some agents suggested that the gap between rates for wood frame and concrete is likely to grow in the future and that a growing number of insurers are declining to serve as sole insurer for wood-frame apartment buildings. Additionally, insurers of such buildings are increasingly requiring that the insured take extra measures to protect against fire loss.

Image: National Institute of Building Sciences

Figure 10: The national cost-benefit by hazard when building beyond 2015 IBC requirements.