Well somebody said I was using the wrong ruler. I think that's a very good answer. Trouble is I've not found the ruler. Any idea where it might be? It's not NGS benchmarks, it's not OPUS.
Aerial surveys have to have some kind of ground control. What did FEMA use for ground control. I've never seen the remnants of aerial targets around a benchmark in my career. My guess is they used the old DEM files which I found to be worse than NGS benchmarks.
@mightymoe An Engineering Firm did do a study of the clients property. It showed the house was 0.4 feet below the BFE they came up with. The County says it's below the BFE remove the house. I'm saying the source of the data is not accurate enough to make the decision that 0.4 feet is not significant enough to warrant removal of the house.
I stand corrected. evidently FIRM maps differ in information around the Country.
@skeeter1996 I get the feeling that you are confusing the inaccuracy of the F.E.M.A. FIRM Zone A mapping with the accuracy of the flood study done by the engineering firm. Depending on the methodology, the engineer's model of the flood plain may well be accurate enough for the county to issue a decision. There are "approximate methods" that are acceptable to F.E.M.A. for the purpose of establishing an insurance rate, and then there are far more intensive, and expensive, methods that yield highly accurate models of the predicted flood behavior. You should learn more about what the engineering firm did before you butt heads with the county officials.
@skeeter1996?ÿ ?ÿFor the third time Skeeter, I disagree with you again.?ÿ Aerial control for FIRM Maps is done after the flight. You are provided pin pricks on the actual photos and you run level loops from NGS benchmarks through the pin pricks. FIRM MAPS ARE BASED ON NAVD 88. FEMA is not going to change. OPUS is not going to change. NGS is not going to change. Local officials are not going to change. You are either very dense or very unexperienced.
@holy-cow?ÿ Our 'soon to be adopted' FIRM Maps are now LIDAR based and they are awesome.?ÿ All the LOMAs I've done are now out of the floods zone and it looks like wetland maps and soil maps are no longer used to determine flood boundaries. Flood designations are going to be much easier to determine.
Let's hope they all become correct eventually.?ÿ A LOMA I submitted a few months back had from two feet to fourteen feet of hill top being in the flood plain compared to the number I was provided.?ÿ We excluded over 10 acres via the LOMA.?ÿ Anyone in their right mind could not envision that hill top ever being under water from the creek about three quarters of a mile in the distance.
@holy-cow?ÿ Yes, but FEMA was broke and that added a lot of dollars to their depleted fund. I live on the coast with a fair number of twenty foot bluffs. FEMA drew the flood zone continually 100 feet off the water, just barely clipping?ÿ hundreds of high dollar homes that would never flood, deficit solved.
I'm trying to get the Engineering Firm to butt heads with the County officials. They agree with me its pretty close for the County Officials to be so hard nosed.
This isn't like arguing over setting pin cushions over?ÿ a hundredth of a foot. But kind of the same mentality.
Maybe in your locale that was done, but it certainly wasn't done here. FEMA and NGS know the quality of their maps and benchmarks. Its their duty to train Local Officials in the proper use of their information, which I and several enlightened people on this Forum have confirmed. I know OPUS folks visit this website and I'll bet NGS and FEMA folks do too. I guess I am very dense. Usually Wendell bans posters that get insulting and personal. He must be on vacation. I've gotten banned for much less objectional behavior than yours. I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't one of the most actively posted subjects if not the most posted subjects. There is some substance in your posts, but of very little of value.
I didn??t think you had to tear a structure down, just you couldn??t get flood insurance.
Or more expensive insurance.
The catch here is the local numbnuts who believe three do-gooders can tell people they must do exactly what the do-gooders say, OR ELSE.
That's the way it should be, but the Counties are using the FIRM maps to issue Conformance permits to construct anything on property less than 20 acres. If you own more than 20 acres no permit is required. We're an Agricultural based state.
The remedy i have seen in Louisiana is to put of record the homeowner is responsible for all damages his structure causes if washed away.?ÿ ?ÿThis is why FEMA wants all the structures above the BFE.?ÿ
?ÿ
In louisiana
Does FEMA want that? I've never seen any input from them in that regard. They seem to want the Local Officials to do the dirty work.
The County Officials have to rely upon the best information available to them.?ÿ In this case it is the FIRM maps and the private flood study.?ÿ Provide them with better information, not just opinion. Which seems like the best you've got at this point.
Good luck.?ÿ
@holy-cow in my opinion that is exactly why heath insurance costs so much.
@holy-cow ??and why medical costs are so high, because insurance only pays a small percentage of the costs so let??s make the costs high.
@fairbanksls?ÿ ?ÿGood Point. Run a real benchmark to the site from nearest NGS benchmarks, then there will no longer be that question. And use their own rules; construction techniques, floodproofing or smart vents. Once you get flood insurance, then the log home will be in compliance, FEMA wise. Fix, solve and down the road you go.
