I was looking at before-and-afters of the area an noticed this house still standing! Others that seemed to be more intact clearly had hipped roofs, while some that vanished or were heavily damaged seemed to have gabled roofs, and were probably the older houses.

I liked the concept of "breakaways" on this house.

But still, this house is standing amid a sea of destruction, what's its value now? Certainly is an example!

what's its value now? Certainly is an example!

bp, the first thing my husband, who's a builder, said after finishing the article is that the architect is going to be in pretty heavy demand now.

Most new construction on carribean islands is now massive (concrete and CMU). I don’t get why structures close to a beach that is subject to hurricanes are allowed to be constructed with wood. At scale, concrete isn’t that much more expensive.

That's pretty amazing but sadly as he said, out of reach for most people who will want to rebuild.

When I saw the title of this thread, I immediately thought of the NYTimes article I had just read! Sure enough...

I can't begin to say how sorry I am for all those people who totally lost their houses - just devastating. But for decades, many houses in FL might as well have been built by stacking playing cards, and are just about as sturdy. It was all part of a lower-middle class/working class family having a beach house or retirement home, for very little money. Building them cheaply ended up costing these people everything. I would bet that many did not have any insurance - very costly in such areas, and even if they had, the deductible is very high - too high for most people.

Building codes simply must change to protect those building a house from themselves. Penny wise, pound foolish...

similar situation with Hurricane Ike in 2007 (?) - there was only ONE house remaining on Crystal Beach (Bolivar peninsula). I believe that after that ALL building had to meet stringent requirements, similar to that one house. For a while, my sister and her husband owned a house on Crystal Beach but after a few years she was concerned about the possibility of a hurricane and they sold it - needless to say, it WAS NOT the one remaining house and she was so thankful they had sold the house.

FL now has upgraded codes regarding the velocity zones. I toured a handful of CMU and/or concrete & steel homes there in the late 90s.

$30,000 is a figure the architect mentioned as the added cost. I can envision a federal lien on a property to allow an existing owner the money to build to a new code level. When the property is sold the lien is repaid. Something like the GM bailout. Everyone benefits.

Concrete as a building material causes lots of destruction when it comes down. That is one reason to not use it all the time (from my understanding)

We have a barrier island house built to modern codes. But it is wood. I am not sure it is that cheap to build concrete up on concrete pilings. We have large wood pilings that are pound down 16 feet into the ground. I am pretty sure that we were not allowed to have concrete pilings - possibly because getting that depth was pretty hard/impractical.

We have a hip roof - 7% wind insurance discount.

It is always frustrating to see old houses destroyed and then somehow people thinking that means a modern wood structure is a terrible idea. Our house has extra nailing, roof strapping, impact windows etc.

The other argument in my area is that a cat 5 is likely so devastating that infrastructure would probably be gone and not come back - on a barrier island at least. So you could have a great standing house that is habitable but only accessible by boat - and then septic might not be possible and drilling a well might not be practical.

$30k or double per sq foot - big difference.

Lots of angry people commenting on the story in the NYT ...

I actually thought the comments were pretty tame. Comment sections are often places of extreme views and anger venting. Given that - it isn't bad.

Misunderstandings in comment sections are always very frustrating. So here is my vent.

We pay $3000 a year for wind coverage which is in a high risk state pool. My understanding is that there is no direct subsidy but either way - not federal. We pay $2200 for flood which was $1000 5 years ago as they gradually try to cover losses. This is with modern construction and every attention to premium reduction that was possible. Some houses pay $10,000 and up. This coverage is capped at $250k.

Florence was the worst NC coastal storm since Fran in 1996. We had $30k in wind/rain damages which is about what we have paid in premiums over the last 7 years since we built. Not expecting any sympathy. I expect our house to survive Cat 3 and below direct hit. I find that rational and what the backwater state of NC requires.

Building a house to last 500 years on the coast ignores the elephant in the room.

What is interesting is that only 5 million homes are covered by federal flood - most of which are in Fl and Tx. Remind me how much money the federal government paid to NY and NJ for Sandy to people who never paid a dime in premiums.... The federal flood program isn't the only problem. The concept that government can make everyone happy is.

remodeling1840 - lots of the damage in Texas was to homes that were NOT built on sand - the flooding was the problem with Harvey in many areas of Harris County (and surrounding counties). Yes, there was damage along the coast but the really huge amount ($$$) was further inland as Harvey 'hung around' for several days. Areas in my county (Waller County - just West of Harris County - Houston) had lots of flooding and these folks were inland by almost 100 miles - just that our land is FLAT.

Yep Florida kicked into high gear but it is also uniquely vulnerable. Georgia barely has a coastline and the population lives way inland. The other states are either poor or have relatively underpopulated coasts. Not excusing them but Florida should have stronger codes. No state and certainly not the federal government are perfect. Florida codes are not uniform - hence the Miami-Dade code.

I am of the opinion that it's certainly possible to build a hurricane resistant house using wood framing, properly designed and installed.

Poured-in-place concrete and CMUs have their place. But they also have their limitations and drawbacks.

There really is no single, magic solution to good design, and high risk building zone. Everything depends on the design parameters, budget and the specific types of risks involved.

That said, simply designing to code minimums, whatever they may be, wherever they may be located, is not a safe or logical solution. What's required is specific expertise for a given design in a given location.

I can only hope my house holds up in a storm but I certainly won't be here when a storm does hit. Our home was built to Miami/Dade standards.

Cpartist, after all you've been through, there'd better never be a hurricane in Miami/Dade!

Virgil - of course code minimum varies and ideally based on historical conditions. Code minimum in coastal NC is to build to 130 mph standards. In Raleigh, it is 100 mph (by memory). With all different standards in between.

Since it has come up, IBHS has the Fortified Home program of "code plus" criteria. I have forgotten all the standards but it is presumably a reasonable program. Our roof is Bronze and that means I have to recertify it to get my entire insurance check - a bit annoying but it also means they are paying for me to have it redone to that standard.

Cpartist, after all you've been through, there'd better never be a hurricane in Miami/Dade!

Except if there's one the west coast, then I'm screwed since I'm on on the Gulf, not the Atlantic. ;)

Funny that my IDF block supplier sent me the photo of the surviving home this morning.

I know the rebuilders in Boliver after Ike (2008) are taking lessons from the yellow house that stood.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/09/18/ike.last.house.standing/ 

before and after: https://coastal.er.usgs.gov/hurricanes/ike/photo-comparisons/bolivar.html