Being in Florida, I don't deal with houses with basements very often. Typically, (on a non-basement house) if the lowest adjacent grade is above BFE, we can apply for a LOMA. Is that also the case with a basement below BFE?
well, you can apply.....likely would be rejected.
Is that also the case with a basement below BFE?
yes, as long as the LAG is above the BFE
Think of it like this. If there was not a house there, you could apply for the area to be removed from the flood zone because it really is above the flood zone. The house located there is actually in Zone X so the map needs amended. The insurance rating on the house should be reduced by a significant amount due to the house actually being in Zone X. The fact that there is a basement will increase the cost of the insurance compared to there being no basement. However, now insurance is optional, not mandatory. There should be no damages resulting from short term surface flooding, only the type of damages that can result from porous, saturated soils creating hydraulic pressures against the basement wall. These would be far less than in cases where there are additional feet of water above this level increasing said hydraulic pressure.
Prepare a LOMA requesting that an area be removed from flood zone. What lies within that area is irrelevant to FEMA. The current or future siting of a house there not of concern to FEMA, only to the final cost of a flood insurance policy should one be purchased.
SOMEWHERE BURIED AMONGST THE REAMS OF PAPERS I READ
ON THE SUBJECT OF FLLOD INSURANCE IS THE PHRASE
FILLED GROUND MEANING IF THE LAND IS FILLED
THEN ITS AN OUT FOR GRANTING A LOMA
THINK ABOUT IT AND IT MAKES SENSE
SOMEONE COULD MAKE A MOUND IN A SWAMP
AND GO FOR A LOMA BUT A HOUSE ON A REAL HILL
SHOULD HAVE ONE
Fill placed after the date of the first map showing the area in a special flood hazard disqualifies you for a LOMA but that's why the LOMR-F exists. Locally we are restricted to filling no further than the mid-point between the 100yr and the floodway. With our topography that often allows developers to create additional lots by bringing in fill. I've completed LOMR-F's on whole cul-de-sacs where all structures and LAGS are now several feet above the BFE due to the placement of fill. The rear of the lots still lie in a SFHA but the structures are clear and do not require flood insurance.
:good:
Thanks all, I did the field work today, turns out, the house is stranger than I thought and probably wouldn't qualify for a LOMA. The original builder cut a channel-like driveway/ramp to connect to the basement/garage, so I think that makes the lowest adjacent below the BFE -- at least, that's how I showed it. This house also has a crawlspace on the front half. Here's a photo of the rear, showing the driveway to the basement.
Now my problem is what building number? FEMA has considered a 1/2 crawlspace, 1/2 basement, with a "walkout' ramp. I went with #7 and lots of photos ... I even attached an AutoCAD profile schematic.
The owner screwed himself on that one. The area around the house probably could have justified a LOMA. The basement elevation would have increased his insurance rate, but, at least, it would have started with a Zone X classification. Totally opening the basement/garage out to a point below the BFE finished him off.
If you can show that the LAG is completely surrounded by ground that is above the BFE it can still qualify for a LOMA.
