Flood Plains, Surveying, and Housing Projects
November 27, 2013 4:28 PM Subscribe
Recently I purchased a home that has acerage. Part of the acerage, part of the garage, and part of the lean-to are in the flood plain. The house and the rest of the land are not.
Trying to figure out logistics between house projects, FEMA zones, and surveying.
Recently I purchased a home that has acerage. Part of the acerage, part of the garage, and part of the lean-to are in the flood plain. The house and the rest of the land are not.
Since only part of the property is in the floodplain it has been suggested to me that building up by bringing in truck loads of dirt to fill in the lower levels would be possible to take us out of the floodplain. This was a suggestion from a surveying company, site unseen. Then once the work was completed the survey company would work with FEMA to get the floodplain area rezoned (probably not the right word).
A basic survey would cost us ~$2000-3000 to the survey company. A new survey would be written and that would include the FEMA leg work. Of course, it would not include the actual work on the property. Also, I would imagine that the survey would need to be completed both before and after the work because I have no idea to what level the ground actually needs raised. Guessing approximate costs $4000-6000 to the survey company plus the amount of work.
Of course, this would be eventually made up for in terms of flood insurance ~$1,000 a year. Also, of course we would be in less risk of flooding. I'm not super worried about this because I'm not super invested in these two structures. Also we had significantly flooding this last summer and water was never near the property.
Other complications: I heard FEMA was changing their flood zone maps but I don't know the time frame. So maybe I should wait until that is completed?
Another complication is that we have other things we would like to do with this part of the property namely planting fruit trees and setting up beehives. I don't know the logistics of planting trees and then raising part of the property, but I'd hate to lose them if we plant them next year and then in three years I lose them to land raising. We have other projects that are also somewhat contingent on whether or not significant work had to be done.
Recently I purchased a home that has acerage. Part of the acerage, part of the garage, and part of the lean-to are in the flood plain. The house and the rest of the land are not.
Since only part of the property is in the floodplain it has been suggested to me that building up by bringing in truck loads of dirt to fill in the lower levels would be possible to take us out of the floodplain. This was a suggestion from a surveying company, site unseen. Then once the work was completed the survey company would work with FEMA to get the floodplain area rezoned (probably not the right word).
A basic survey would cost us ~$2000-3000 to the survey company. A new survey would be written and that would include the FEMA leg work. Of course, it would not include the actual work on the property. Also, I would imagine that the survey would need to be completed both before and after the work because I have no idea to what level the ground actually needs raised. Guessing approximate costs $4000-6000 to the survey company plus the amount of work.
Of course, this would be eventually made up for in terms of flood insurance ~$1,000 a year. Also, of course we would be in less risk of flooding. I'm not super worried about this because I'm not super invested in these two structures. Also we had significantly flooding this last summer and water was never near the property.
Other complications: I heard FEMA was changing their flood zone maps but I don't know the time frame. So maybe I should wait until that is completed?
Another complication is that we have other things we would like to do with this part of the property namely planting fruit trees and setting up beehives. I don't know the logistics of planting trees and then raising part of the property, but I'd hate to lose them if we plant them next year and then in three years I lose them to land raising. We have other projects that are also somewhat contingent on whether or not significant work had to be done.
Dude, this stuff is a part of a much bigger system than you are realizing.
In my part if the country (oceanfront) , raising elevations of floodplains would require a permit from the Corps of Engineers.
Your fruit tree dreams are affecting an entire watershed. Do this by the books. The professionals have so much more understanding. (And BTW, these pros may work with you if you approach them.)
posted by Kronur at 4:49 PM on November 27, 2013
In my part if the country (oceanfront) , raising elevations of floodplains would require a permit from the Corps of Engineers.
Your fruit tree dreams are affecting an entire watershed. Do this by the books. The professionals have so much more understanding. (And BTW, these pros may work with you if you approach them.)
posted by Kronur at 4:49 PM on November 27, 2013
Best answer: So, I am registered Professional Engineer and i have specialized most of my career in drainage/hydrology/water related issues. This can get really, really complicated and it is going to cost you a lot in professional fees and fill dirt ain't usually free either (unless you are just willing to take dirt from anywhere and then you end up with chunks of concrete, trash, asphalt, gravel, rocks and god knows what else) and it has to be placed in lifts and compacted somewhat and it all has to be raised to a level at LEAST 1' above the base flood elevation (BFE). If you didn't understand what i just said, you need to hire a professional engineer to explain it to you, measure how much dirt you need to raise your land above the flood plain and determine if you have a floodway on your property (you do NOT fill in the floodway). As an added level of difficulity if your floodplain is undetermined, there is no established base flood elevation and first you have to do a study to get that established then fill to that line, and you pay for all of it. BTW this whole process is called a Letter Of Map Amendment (LOMA).
You can file a LOMA at anytime, even if they are planning a new flood study. However if they do file a new study and your fill is now under the new BFE than you need to fill, refile the LOMA and go from their. The reason they redo the studies is that the original studies were done in the 1970's mostly using USGS quad maps with 20' contours line on the best computers of the day. A smartphone is more powerful and better at modelling than the best of the computers in 1970. And the 20' contour lines were pretty inexact for capture a 1' elevation change in the floodplain and it just goes on and on as to the extent of the accuracy of the FEMA Floodplain maps.
And for another difficulty level, FEMA just lost a lawsuit about the fact that the floodplain maps were done without any regard to the endangered species act. It turns out they should have been. And FEMA doesn't know what the hell to do about this yet. This is specifically in the northwest on salmon bearing streams (which is pretty much all of them) and probably doesn't affect the rest of the country but my town has been instructed NO LOMA or LOMR (a bigger deal called a Letter of Map Revision) will be granted until this is resolved. This is a HUGE problem for development in the northwest right now.
So why do you want to raise your land? just because it is in a mapped floodzone (and this is no gurantee it will be inundated in any flood)? Are you planning on building any new structures on it? if not, you don't really need to worry about it. It might, MIGHT increase the value of the land, but probably not in an equal amount to cost of filling it to above BFE and won't at all if the zoning doesn't allow any additional development (and most floodplain areas in the country are pretty much off limits by zoning anyway). An orchard, or any agricultural activity in a floodplain is specifically granted as allowed by FEMA and is pretty much what SHOULD be done in a floodplain. Orchards are not going to be harmed by some inundation, and might even be helped (assuming it isn't a violent flash flood) with the new silt/deposits of someone else's topsoil (re: the nile, and the pyramids). Filling on planted trees is going to kill them however. Generally, any more than about 6" of dirt on top of roots is pretty a death sentence for most trees.
I have probably skipped huge portions of stuff, so feel free to memail me, or just post a followup question on here and I will answer as I can. But an hour or two with a local engineer is how you should decide on this. That 300 bucks is money well spent.
posted by bartonlong at 5:25 PM on November 27, 2013 [8 favorites]
You can file a LOMA at anytime, even if they are planning a new flood study. However if they do file a new study and your fill is now under the new BFE than you need to fill, refile the LOMA and go from their. The reason they redo the studies is that the original studies were done in the 1970's mostly using USGS quad maps with 20' contours line on the best computers of the day. A smartphone is more powerful and better at modelling than the best of the computers in 1970. And the 20' contour lines were pretty inexact for capture a 1' elevation change in the floodplain and it just goes on and on as to the extent of the accuracy of the FEMA Floodplain maps.
And for another difficulty level, FEMA just lost a lawsuit about the fact that the floodplain maps were done without any regard to the endangered species act. It turns out they should have been. And FEMA doesn't know what the hell to do about this yet. This is specifically in the northwest on salmon bearing streams (which is pretty much all of them) and probably doesn't affect the rest of the country but my town has been instructed NO LOMA or LOMR (a bigger deal called a Letter of Map Revision) will be granted until this is resolved. This is a HUGE problem for development in the northwest right now.
So why do you want to raise your land? just because it is in a mapped floodzone (and this is no gurantee it will be inundated in any flood)? Are you planning on building any new structures on it? if not, you don't really need to worry about it. It might, MIGHT increase the value of the land, but probably not in an equal amount to cost of filling it to above BFE and won't at all if the zoning doesn't allow any additional development (and most floodplain areas in the country are pretty much off limits by zoning anyway). An orchard, or any agricultural activity in a floodplain is specifically granted as allowed by FEMA and is pretty much what SHOULD be done in a floodplain. Orchards are not going to be harmed by some inundation, and might even be helped (assuming it isn't a violent flash flood) with the new silt/deposits of someone else's topsoil (re: the nile, and the pyramids). Filling on planted trees is going to kill them however. Generally, any more than about 6" of dirt on top of roots is pretty a death sentence for most trees.
I have probably skipped huge portions of stuff, so feel free to memail me, or just post a followup question on here and I will answer as I can. But an hour or two with a local engineer is how you should decide on this. That 300 bucks is money well spent.
posted by bartonlong at 5:25 PM on November 27, 2013 [8 favorites]
Why is the survey so expensive? I own a few properties in Central Florida on flood plains. My own home is less than 15yds from a large lake, and is very much on a flood plain. I have had several elevation surveys done, by different companies over the years. I have never paid more than $400.00.
You say you are not invested in the garage and the lean-to, then why insure them at all? Is you lender making you insure these buildings? Try to see if you can get them excluded. Talk to your lender.
I am also a contractor. The cost of bringing in truck loads of dirt. Having it all properly tamped down. Building codes, architectural plans. You need engineers. Retaining walls to prevent it from washing away. You are talking about extreme sums of money here.
Your surveyor suggested this? It seems to me like a crazy suggestion to me. This same surveyor is charging $2,000 for an elevation survey? Have you shopped around for different surveyors.
posted by Flood at 5:30 PM on November 27, 2013
You say you are not invested in the garage and the lean-to, then why insure them at all? Is you lender making you insure these buildings? Try to see if you can get them excluded. Talk to your lender.
I am also a contractor. The cost of bringing in truck loads of dirt. Having it all properly tamped down. Building codes, architectural plans. You need engineers. Retaining walls to prevent it from washing away. You are talking about extreme sums of money here.
Your surveyor suggested this? It seems to me like a crazy suggestion to me. This same surveyor is charging $2,000 for an elevation survey? Have you shopped around for different surveyors.
posted by Flood at 5:30 PM on November 27, 2013
Dude, this stuff is a part of a much bigger system than you are realizing.
This, with the addition that rules and regulations on this are changing fast, and there is the risk of significant liability by acting improperly.
Your first conversation needs to be with your local planning department, not with the surveyors. Even before you get into the FEMA issues, there are questions of local planning and environmental compliance. Where I am, you would need to be compliant with city, county, state, and federal regulations, and the point of contact for a bunch of them is the planning department. From there you will want to talk with an engineer to make sure your plans are workable, and only then will you be talking with surveyors and excavators.
Secondly, depending on where you are, the old-school approach of piling fill in the floodplain is no longer necessarily allowed (because doing so causes a net loss of both habitat and floodplain). You don't mention where you are, but in some areas (including most of the Northwest), FEMA is involved in huge lawsuits around the Endangered Species Act. (It's way more complicated than this, but basically localities have been allowing development in floodplains in accordance with FEMA's rules that has caused an obvious impact to ESA habitat, and as a result the rules are changing drastically; a side issue is that localities that had thought they were in the clear by following FEMA's rules now have to worry about liabiilty and therefore in many cases are being reluctant to allow new floodplain development until this is more settled.) Other parts of the country are, or should be, watching closely, and I'd be very careful about making sure I had all my permits fully in order before dropping one truckload of fill in there.
Thirdly, planting trees and then adding soil doesn't tend to work well. Figure out the long term plans, then do your planting.
On preview, what Bartonlong said.
posted by Dip Flash at 5:59 PM on November 27, 2013
This, with the addition that rules and regulations on this are changing fast, and there is the risk of significant liability by acting improperly.
Your first conversation needs to be with your local planning department, not with the surveyors. Even before you get into the FEMA issues, there are questions of local planning and environmental compliance. Where I am, you would need to be compliant with city, county, state, and federal regulations, and the point of contact for a bunch of them is the planning department. From there you will want to talk with an engineer to make sure your plans are workable, and only then will you be talking with surveyors and excavators.
Secondly, depending on where you are, the old-school approach of piling fill in the floodplain is no longer necessarily allowed (because doing so causes a net loss of both habitat and floodplain). You don't mention where you are, but in some areas (including most of the Northwest), FEMA is involved in huge lawsuits around the Endangered Species Act. (It's way more complicated than this, but basically localities have been allowing development in floodplains in accordance with FEMA's rules that has caused an obvious impact to ESA habitat, and as a result the rules are changing drastically; a side issue is that localities that had thought they were in the clear by following FEMA's rules now have to worry about liabiilty and therefore in many cases are being reluctant to allow new floodplain development until this is more settled.) Other parts of the country are, or should be, watching closely, and I'd be very careful about making sure I had all my permits fully in order before dropping one truckload of fill in there.
Thirdly, planting trees and then adding soil doesn't tend to work well. Figure out the long term plans, then do your planting.
On preview, what Bartonlong said.
posted by Dip Flash at 5:59 PM on November 27, 2013
Best answer: The old FEMA maps can have pretty significant error, so before hiring a surveyor, you should contact your City / County Planning or GIS Departments to see if they have any new and accurate Lidar (elevation) data. They might be able to help you determine (possibly free of charge) if your property is higher than the BFE. If it is, then you should proceed to hire a surveyor and then file a LOMA. Your City / County government might also help facilitate this process, but I'm sure that varies from place to place. I'm also guessing that if you file a LOMA now, and it's approved, that should carry over if FEMA were to create new maps. Also, an elevation survey should cost in the neighborhood of $400 (give or take).
posted by Beardsley Klamm at 6:17 PM on November 27, 2013
posted by Beardsley Klamm at 6:17 PM on November 27, 2013
Response by poster: I don't know if it clarifies, but the surveyor I contacted told me a lot of the charge was because we had so many random buildings and that each building was extra.
However, I'm getting the impression that they were wildly overpriced so I will look around. At the time we talked with someone it was within a week of closing and we ultimately just decided to pay the extra flood insurance in order to not delay closing.
Also, I did not know that not insuring the buildings was an option. Our original mortgage company was pretty adament about it. Seeing as one of the buildings is actually not an enclosed structure and has a dirt floor I thought it was pretty ridiculous to have to pay flood insurance so I will contact our new mortgage company to discuss it with them.
The suggestion to talk with the planning office is helpful also, since we are in the country I was sure how much support we would have on those things, so thanks.
Yes, definitely I understand that this is a huge system. That is one of the reasons I felt like I was probably not getting the whole story. Also, the changes in FEMA had me concerned that even if we managed to get out of the flood zone now we might be stuck in it again later.
posted by aetg at 6:41 PM on November 27, 2013
However, I'm getting the impression that they were wildly overpriced so I will look around. At the time we talked with someone it was within a week of closing and we ultimately just decided to pay the extra flood insurance in order to not delay closing.
Also, I did not know that not insuring the buildings was an option. Our original mortgage company was pretty adament about it. Seeing as one of the buildings is actually not an enclosed structure and has a dirt floor I thought it was pretty ridiculous to have to pay flood insurance so I will contact our new mortgage company to discuss it with them.
The suggestion to talk with the planning office is helpful also, since we are in the country I was sure how much support we would have on those things, so thanks.
Yes, definitely I understand that this is a huge system. That is one of the reasons I felt like I was probably not getting the whole story. Also, the changes in FEMA had me concerned that even if we managed to get out of the flood zone now we might be stuck in it again later.
posted by aetg at 6:41 PM on November 27, 2013
Best answer: If all you want to accomplish is to lower your insurance rates, you can get the buildings certified as wet floodproofed. Basically this means an engineer signs off on that the buildings can be inundated without structurally compromising them. Garages and pole barns are very easy to certify. In addition you can move your garage (if you have room) or deconstruct the old one and build a new one with the materials (pricey if you hire someone, not so much if you do the labor).
With the wet floodproofing done you can probably convince the bank they don't need to be insured.
As a piece of advice, I would carry flood insurance on your house even though it isn't in the floodplain. Remember how i mentioned the 20' contour thing? yeah those studies aren't exact, and hydrology and flood modeling isn't an exact science either. Unless I was well, well out of the floodplain (like 20+ in most cases) or some other way protected (like on a bluff over the river, with a wide flood plain lower than me on the OTHER side of the river that would take the flood water) I would carry flood insurance. If you are only in the 500 year flood zone or not in a flood zone (this is called zone x) the insurance is likely pretty cheap. And your regular insurance won't cover any flood damage.
posted by bartonlong at 9:29 PM on November 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
With the wet floodproofing done you can probably convince the bank they don't need to be insured.
As a piece of advice, I would carry flood insurance on your house even though it isn't in the floodplain. Remember how i mentioned the 20' contour thing? yeah those studies aren't exact, and hydrology and flood modeling isn't an exact science either. Unless I was well, well out of the floodplain (like 20+ in most cases) or some other way protected (like on a bluff over the river, with a wide flood plain lower than me on the OTHER side of the river that would take the flood water) I would carry flood insurance. If you are only in the 500 year flood zone or not in a flood zone (this is called zone x) the insurance is likely pretty cheap. And your regular insurance won't cover any flood damage.
posted by bartonlong at 9:29 PM on November 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
Also, I did not know that not insuring the buildings was an option.
I don't know that it isn't. There may be some kind of liability thing that you have to insure buildings in the floodplain in case they get washed away and damage someone else's property or something.
I don't know that the rates the surveyor is giving you are all that out of whack. Surveying buildings on a property is one thing, but producing drawings and getting government approvals of those drawings is quite another. The rate they quoted may have included processing fees (although I doubt it).
I'm still not sure what the actual process you're thinking of doing is. If the whole point of doing all this is to get your lean-to and garage off the floodplain, I don't see how raising the land solves that problem without removing or reconstructing the existing structures. If you're going to be reconstructing or moving the structures anyway, I don't see why you wouldn't just put them on land that's already out of the floodplain unless space is really tight.
posted by LionIndex at 9:30 PM on November 27, 2013
I don't know that it isn't. There may be some kind of liability thing that you have to insure buildings in the floodplain in case they get washed away and damage someone else's property or something.
I don't know that the rates the surveyor is giving you are all that out of whack. Surveying buildings on a property is one thing, but producing drawings and getting government approvals of those drawings is quite another. The rate they quoted may have included processing fees (although I doubt it).
I'm still not sure what the actual process you're thinking of doing is. If the whole point of doing all this is to get your lean-to and garage off the floodplain, I don't see how raising the land solves that problem without removing or reconstructing the existing structures. If you're going to be reconstructing or moving the structures anyway, I don't see why you wouldn't just put them on land that's already out of the floodplain unless space is really tight.
posted by LionIndex at 9:30 PM on November 27, 2013
This thread is closed to new comments.
It'll depend on how fine-grained you need to be to get an accurate description of your land, but topo maps of your property exist somewhere already, possibly online in a GIS format, just probably not at an extremely useful scale. However, they may give you (or a contractor) enough of an idea of how much earth moving you'll need to do to bring the land you want out of the floodplain and put a price to it, which will likely be much much higher than just what you're paying the surveyors. Are the surveyors actually civil engineers?
posted by LionIndex at 4:47 PM on November 27, 2013