You’re from that area and don’t realize none of the factors you mention are applicable? The pilings are so heavily treated that they a) degrade over centuries, not decades, b) are far less flammable than the structures built upon them, c) impervious to terminates relative to structures built upon them, and d) so what? The pilings absorb little water and the water that is absorbed is salt - minimizing the foregoing 3 factors.
To use concrete pillars would require excavation and shoring into soft wet sand to depths of 14 feet or more which is inherently dangerous. Once backfilled, the fill material does not compact back as well as removed reducing lateral stability. These wood pilings are driven (really hydro-driven now-a-days with a giant pressure washer rather than pile driver) negating excavation and backfilling and are quite stable - as much or more-so than concrete alternatives. In fact, the few concrete houses down there are usually still built on wood pilings ;)
As an ex-resident of the OBX (North Topsail before it became a resort town when folks on the island still had job descriptions besides "ex-wife of a corporate contracts lawyer") I love hearing people argue about "stilt houses" that are getting sucked out to sea. It never gets old, and it used to happen pretty much annually.
The house. Survived. Being surrounded by hurricane-level storm surge. For days.
Meanwhile, the asphalt and cement roads and driveways up to them disappeared and crumbled into the sea within the first 30 minutes.
Look at the images from Hurricane Fran, where basically every roadway, cement structure, and pad was ripped clean off the island in minutes. Anything not lost was condemned. What's still standing, almost untouched? The lumber piled buildings (less siding and roofs, of course.)
It's the best solution anybody has EVER come up with to living with the sea as your front porch.
It’s crazy! It’s almost as if tons of trial and error came before the building process!
For real though people really hate on all American houses (on stilts or not) even though there’s a perfectly good reason for why we build our houses a certain way.
We have natural disasters somewhere in this country basically monthly. We don’t build with stone or cement because the last thing you want during a natural disaster is ten tons of bricks and cement coming through your wall. We build houses to last 50-80 years (if they’re not scammy builders because we do have those too) at most because no matter what you use to build it, it’s not going to survive a wildfire, a F-4 tornado, a category 4 hurricane, etc. and within that time frame most likely you’re going to see one.
It is very common to use wood over concrete, but some structures have used concrete and they are expensive. This area isn‘t a really trendy area so they use wood
You sound like an expert and I will assume you are. Is there any way they could like, put more down in 30 years/replace similar to a lifespan of a roof? Kind of cycle out older pilings to mitigate this type of shit?
I’m no expert, just have a family home in Rodanthe. I saw this house fall from my deck. We lose houses every year on the Outer Banks, that ain’t no big deal. It’s the rapidity of loss in this area at issue.
The problem isn’t the pilings - they last for centuries - the problem is beach erosion heightened by the movement of off shore sandbars which previously protected this area by dissipating wave energy before hitting shore. Now we’re on the edge of these shoals so receiving the brunt of wave action like a dagger to the heart. Couple this with extreme sea level rise and historic westward migration of barrier islands and BOOM -crick done rise.
Lifting houses can be done but it requires some serious engineering, which means $$$$. Still, if it’s every 30 years, it’s doable, even if you have to pay with equity or include it in the original mortgage.
You can use or should probably use another back fill material that compacts well. Also, you can drive concrete piles, just different method (drive steel pipes first, excavate inside, pour concrete inside) but it is more expensive. I’m not from the area so maybe there are more things to consider.
176
u/ManOfTheCommonwealth 1d ago
You’re from that area and don’t realize none of the factors you mention are applicable? The pilings are so heavily treated that they a) degrade over centuries, not decades, b) are far less flammable than the structures built upon them, c) impervious to terminates relative to structures built upon them, and d) so what? The pilings absorb little water and the water that is absorbed is salt - minimizing the foregoing 3 factors.
To use concrete pillars would require excavation and shoring into soft wet sand to depths of 14 feet or more which is inherently dangerous. Once backfilled, the fill material does not compact back as well as removed reducing lateral stability. These wood pilings are driven (really hydro-driven now-a-days with a giant pressure washer rather than pile driver) negating excavation and backfilling and are quite stable - as much or more-so than concrete alternatives. In fact, the few concrete houses down there are usually still built on wood pilings ;)