Chris Bouffard, post: 439319, member: 12313 wrote: I'm not as savvy in EC's as I'd like to be, I do them but they are generally in coastal areas where there is a determined elevation and most are for house raising purposes as a result of the devastation caused by Hurricane Sandy here in NJ.
Immediately post hurricane I did an EC for my brother who's lender contacted him and required that he secure flood insurance to the tune of $600/month. His property was on the fringe of a flood zone with a small tributary touching the rear corner of his lot. The basement floor elevation was 12' higher than the BFE and having lived in the home through a few 100 yr storms and the hurricane with a lake directly across the street he never experienced any sort of flooding in the 20 years he lived there. The lender would hear none of that and stood their ground.
He was obviously looking for a solution to the issue and the best that I could come up with was to have an Engineering study done and apply for a LOMA. Even with my services and those of the engineers that I worked with being done at cost he was looking at $10K for the study and decided to do some searching on his own.
He spent some time Googling different things and came up with an Engineering firm in the Southwest that specializes in the very issue he was having and ended up paying them $1,500 to apply for a LOMA, I have no idea how they did the stream study with no feet on the ground but they were successful in getting my brother the modification and the insurance requirement went away in less than a year.
I'm confused by this story. If the basement was 12' above BFE, then why was any further study needed? You should have been able to apply for a LOMA using the elevation certificate.
clearcut, post: 439169, member: 297 wrote: No it is not allowed for elev certs or LOMAs.
Its purpose is only for the use by community flood-plain managers for evaluating the level of risk present in areas designated for low density development.
I think I would agree, and disagree with that statement (more or less). I have used the simplified method as outlined in "Managing Floodplain Development in Approximate Zone A Areas- A guide to obtaining and Developing base (100-year) Flood Elevations" on numerous occasions with success. I usually submit everything to the local FPM after my work, asking him to sign a Community Acknowledgement Form and note on the EC that the EC is only valid with the CAF attached. I have also used the method noted above asking FEMA to determine the BFE, but they usually will only do it if you are requesting a LOMA. When doing so, I have used the edge of the Flood Zone overlaid on an aerial photo and ran levels along the line, either from my smoke and mirrors photo, or the actual FIRM panel with aerial photos and submit those with the LOMA application. When using the older greyscale FIRM I will print the area on a clear sheet and scale, scrunch, whatever it takes, to overlay it on an aerial photo to find the edge of the Flood Zone on the ground (Smoke & Mirrors Method) for running levels along it. I feel that if FEMA hasn't done a study in the area, and you can't find USACE or anyone else who has determined a BFE, you are using the best available technology from FEMA to do their work. Seems to have worked on about 5 removals I used this method on, and they determined the BFE on others which I can then use for the neighbors.
Howard Surveyor, post: 439664, member: 8835 wrote: ........
...... I have used the simplified method as outlined in "Managing Floodplain Development in Approximate Zone A Areas- A guide to obtaining and Developing base (100-year) Flood Elevations" on numerous occasions with success. I usually submit everything to the local FPM after my work, asking him to sign a Community Acknowledgement Form and note on the EC that the EC is only valid with the CAF attached. ......
From the FEMA source document quoted above, the following is in bold type:
"Simplified methods may not be used by the community to complete an elevation certificate used for flood insurance rating"
And following that in bold and underlined type:
"Communities must use the detailed methodologies described in this section or other methods comparable to those used in a FIS for completing the elevation certificate"
Consider also that it is not only your liability on the table in what I consider a very risk prone arena, but also may be provide clients without a thorough understanding of the quality of product and risk assessment their home investment is based upon. The simplified methods are very inexact and are why FEMA specifically excludes them from flood insurance rating purposes.
I personally am appalled not only that FEMA will approve use of simplified methods for LOMAs but also that FEMA actually utilizes them for same purposes.
Granted, there are many situations where a structure is obviously clear of the flood plane and extensive engineering is truly a wasted expense. However unfortunately many structures are receiving LOMAs that are at a much higher risk than simplified and approximate methods reveal. Unfortunately there are far too many persons utilizing and dictating the use of inappropriate methods in inappropriate situations.
clearcut, post: 439677, member: 297 wrote: From the FEMA source document quoted above, the following is in bold type:
"Simplified methods may not be used by the community to complete an elevation certificate used for flood insurance rating"And following that in bold and underlined type:
"Communities must use the detailed methodologies described in this section or other methods comparable to those used in a FIS for completing the elevation certificate"Consider also that it is not only your liability on the table in what I consider a very risk prone arena, but also may be provide clients without a thorough understanding of the quality of product and risk assessment their home investment is based upon. The simplified methods are very inexact and are why FEMA specifically excludes them from flood insurance rating purposes.
I personally am appalled not only that FEMA will approve use of simplified methods for LOMAs but also that FEMA actually utilizes them for same purposes.
Granted, there are many situations where a structure is obviously clear of the flood plane and extensive engineering is truly a wasted expense. However unfortunately many structures are receiving LOMAs that are at a much higher risk than simplified and approximate methods reveal. Unfortunately there are far too many persons utilizing and dictating the use of inappropriate methods in inappropriate situations.
I agree with you on points you have presented, but I think just because it is an A zone doesn't make it a "very risk prone area". When looking at A Zone areas, many in our county are not in populated areas, hence the lack of funding for a full study to develop a BFE. AND, the methods I have described do not always work. Case in point, a house built in 1910 along a creek bank and far into a Flood Zone by FEMA has never had water close to the house, even though in the summer time the water level is only about 3'-4' below the foundation. I tried to use the edge of the Flood Plain line as shown on the FIRM. Our elevations only varied 0.10'+/- on a 300' run along the line so I think the LIDAR photos submitted to FEMA were good. That elevation was 10' above the crawlspace elevation {C2(a)} yet because of the fall in the creek and broad creek basin to the north, the house has never seen water under it.
After about 20 years of doing FEMA survey work, I find I still learn each time and something more from FEMA if they request additional information. I found they have far better maps which are utilized during LOMA requests than what are available to surveyors or the public. I'm a strong believer in peer review, so as I see it, any submittal for a CAF to local FPM are one form, and FEMA determination either good or bad is a third. I also provide a form letter to my clients which state that even though FEMA has removed the structure from mandatory insurance, it doesn't prevent epic floods which are acts of God, and therefore it would be wise to continue the insurance at a reduced premium rate.
Peter Lothian - MA ME, post: 439479, member: 4512 wrote: I'm confused by this story. If the basement was 12' above BFE, then why was any further study needed? You should have been able to apply for a LOMA using the elevation certificate.
That would have required a stream study. I fought it till I was blue in the face but nobody wanted to hear a word of it, especially the lender.
Chris Bouffard, post: 440246, member: 12313 wrote: That would have required a stream study. I fought it till I was blue in the face but nobody wanted to hear a word of it, especially the lender.
If the BFE is published, and the LAG is above the BFE, apply for a LOMA and ye shall receive. Easy stuff. Any federally backed lender is required to honor the LOMA. If not, being that high above the BFE should get you a very inexpensive rate with an Elevation Certificate.
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
Paul D, post: 440264, member: 323 wrote: If the BFE is published, and the LAG is above the BFE, apply for a LOMA and ye shall receive. Easy stuff. Any federally backed lender is required to honor the LOMA. If not, being that high above the BFE should get you a very inexpensive rate with an Elevation Certificate.
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
My understanding is the lender can still insist on flood insurance. I believe that is mentioned in the full loma letter. I had that happen to one client and they changed mortgage companies
That is correct. The lender can make the borrower meet their demands or pay off the mortgage within some number of days.
James, that is also my understanding. Just like any other insurance requirement they may have, it is the lender's prerogative.