Post & Pier: Deciding How High

[DanielP]

I think that all in all, the 8' is best. For the builder, the cost is greater because you have to move all of the material higher, installed, trimmed, painted, often from scaffolding, etc. etc.

[Hotzcatz]

I'd get a new draftsperson if they want to charge double to have the house 8 feet in the air. Other than a bit more shear wall and perhaps use a 6" x 6" post instead of a 4" x 4" (although you can still use a 4" x 4" anyway) I don't see why they'd want to charge that much more. If the space isn't enclosed, it's doesn't even require an additional floor plan.

---

"I like yard sales," he said. "All true survivalists like yard sales."
Kurt Wilson

[csgray]

I love how our house is raised up, it is like living in a tree house; breezes flow right through the space under our house cooling it beautifully. However, when I broke my ankle the 14 steps were daunting, and it is a challenge for our older friends and family. If I was building from scratch I would spend the extra money to build extra wide, fully covered switchback stairs with a landing and bench halfway up, and handrails on both sides. It would make moving furniture easier, and be much safer for people too.

Carol

[ericlp]

hell, just opt out for an elevator. Gonna go through all that I think that's what I'd do.

[YurtGirl]

Over a certain height (I think it's 6'?) and the county wants to consider the space additional square footage. So there's a charge for that, not much though. The draftsman shouldn't charge actual square footage on that unless it's a slab downstairs, or walled in... even if it's a slab, it's more of a lanai sf than residence, so it certainly shouldn't double it. But it does take a bit more infrastructure to go higher, so I can understand the cost going up a BIT.

As for building, material cost shouldn't skyrocket unless, again, you go for slab downstairs. If it's just post and pier, then it's sheer walls, taller posts and bracing. Labor for that will rise though, certainly, because the builder's work increases considerably having to lift all the materials, work on scaffold and above their heads.

My take on going higher is this: In wet areas, dry space is like gold. For the cost, it makes far more sense to build high so that you can have utilizable space under a residence rather than to build out or build additional structures. If you plan on calling the space 'parking' then be prepared to face more cost in permit costs and materials. Stairs can be a pain in the butt, but a lack of dry space is worse to me.

[csgray]

ericlp,
I would never want to be dependent on power to get up and down in my house. When I was a kid I had a friend who lived in a crumbling shabby old mansion with a REAL elevator. I had never heard of a house having an elevator before, and thought it was super cool until we were in it during a power outage and got stuck for hours! Not so cool.

Carol

[DanielP]

I would guess that going to 8' would cost an extra 5-10% or so, but add double your enclosable area.

[Ryan.]

Thanks everyone, for sharing your insights & preferences. To our surprise, we've decided to go low. After taking a detailed look at the pros and cons of each, 3 ft made the most sense for our situation. Mahalo.

[Hotzcatz]

Low is good! We are in the process of buying a new (well, new to us, anyway) house and when our friends are finding out we will be living somewhere with no long stairway (such as our current house has) they are all much more eager visit.

---

"I like yard sales," he said. "All true survivalists like yard sales."
Kurt Wilson