Posted on 08/29/2015 1:00:40 PM PDT by BenLurkin
John Belles said he was prepared for the inevitability of a wildfire when he built his thin-shelled, concrete dome in 1999 surrounded by dry fields in Okanogan County.
Earlier this week, Belles just happened to be working 30 miles out of town when he received a voicemail from a friend warning him about a fire approaching his home, he told ABC News today.
After shuttling three vehicles off his property, Belles said he realized he had to hurry as the fire was only a couple hundred yards away.
“The fire was getting close, in fact, there was a firefighter there at the time who got trapped inside when I shut the gate inadvertently,” Belles said.
“I grabbed the hose, soaked my clothing down and doused the north side of the building as much as I could. [The fire] got close enough that it was super heated and getting uncomfortable out there in the smoke. I went inside, shut the door behind me and watched it move by.”
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
I discovered Monolithic a while back. I would love to have one of those someday.
Smart guy!
I wonder how expensive concrete hiuses are? In fire or tornado areas, seems worth it.
Oy...meant to write Houses...darned touch screens with little keys!
That thing is built like a brick Shiite house. ;)
YEARS back a g/f took me to a party at a dome house, loved it.
Open space design, like a loft and seemingly ease of exterior maintenance.
Oddly enough, years later, I bought a house that was one street away from the dome house and didn’t know it for 3 years (party was at night, unfamiliar area).
My second choice was an in ground house (cave).
In the meantime, I now own a HUD property (conventional, stick built).
Eventually, I may at least get that in ground domicile.
Cool story. This kind of forethought excites me. I would imagine you could be a more traditional style home using the same concrete technique. A rough finish might give it an adobe or stucco look.
Why don’t home-owners in wildfire prone areas invest in a permanent house roof / outside wall “sprinkler” system, in addition to a permanent landscape sprinkler system, as a way to get the outside skin of the house wet for such threats? Ideally, they would never have to run water through it. And it could pay for itself the first time that they had to use it.
You’ve never been around a forest fire if you really think water sprinklers are going to save your property from a forest fire
Expensive I think. Years ago I looked into it and decided I needed to buy more lotto tickets.
There are different levels of quality. This outfit seemed like they know what they are doing: http://www.monolithic.org/homes
You are pretty clueless about wildfires in Washington apparently. I appreciate your compassion.
I’m not saying that house fire-prevention watering system that is designed for such a purpose will or won’t save a house. But if well-designed system provably reduces the risk of damage to a house by a wildfire then a home-builder might decide that it’s worth the investment.
Note the extra quick step in the second list.
See fire
Run
See fire
Turn on water fire-protection system
Run
Article describes it as “soft shell” which suggests that it is not one of their products.
You know what works just as well? A big green yard with no trees or bushes in it surrounding the house. Defensible space is what they call it.
I look at it as an engineering challenge for all high-risk areas. Also, given the “it’ll never happen to me” (aka, “I can’t afford it") mentality, it is also a psychological challenge which hinders research and refinement.
Some things to note. It looks like the vehicles survived the fire, too. The home is up on a pad, and it looks like the surrounding vegetation was sparse and low to the ground.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.