Public Protests Potential Adoption of FEMA Flood Maps as Elevation Standard
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection holds public hearing in Long Branch
Photos
A huge crowd came to Long Branch City Hall on Thursday evening for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection's (DEP) public hearing, to protest the potential adoption of FEMA's advisory base flood elevation (ABFE) maps as the new elevation standard for the the state.
The crowd was mostly comprised of many unhappy homeowners from around the state impacted by Hurricane Sandy in one way or another.
"The thought of increasing flood insurance premiums into the tens of thousands of dollars is daunting," Toms River resident Margaret Quinn said.
Quinn lives in the Silverton section of Toms River, and said her house was more than 50 percent damaged. She, like so many others, has been displaced by the hurricane, and is now faced with rebuilding questions and concerns.
"I was in an A zone and I'm now in V zone," Quinn said.
Construction standards in a V-zone are more stringent in order to account for the increased risk of damages from storm surges, a DEP release states.
"The DEP adopted on an emergency basis and is now proposing amendments to the Flood Hazard Area Control Act rules relating to the construction and reconstruction of buildings in flood hazard areas based on the most recent and reliable flood elevation data," the release states.
Most in attendance agreed that the ABFE maps are flawed.
"Establishing the flood zones is not an exact science....but the flood V zones and A zones are riddled with errors," George Kasimos, a Toms River resident and member of Stop FEMA Now, said. "We need to get together and not let the federal government push us around."
Kasimos also argued that seniors and disabled veterans should be exceptions to the new flood zone rebuilding standards.
"How do you expect them to be able to raise their homes or afoord to do it," Kasimos asked.
Kathy Serra, of Lavallette, is a member of the West Point Island Civic Association, and said many residents in her neighborhood do not want to raise their homes.
"Most people are not in favor of elevating their homes as they cannot afford to do that," Serra said. "Elevating our homes or paying $30,000 in flood insurance is something nobody wants to deal with."
Some municipalities in the state, such as Long Branch, have adopted FEMA's ABFE maps and are requiring new construction or reconstruction within the flood zones to be three feet higher than the base flood elevation.
The DEP is encouraging towns to adopt the ABFE maps because it makes them eligible for Increased Cost of Compliance (ICC) assistance and other federal mitigation aid.
Jeff Tittel is the director of the New Jersey Chapter of the Sierra Club said the NJDEP needs to take an "overall holistic approach" to determining the new flood bases.
"We needs to take a look at how to restructure our coast," Tittel said. "We want to keep families on our coast and just have a bunch of Pier Villages."
Tittel said dunes should be restored and that some homes should be pushed away from the water's edge instead of elevated.
A South Seaside Park resident said there are many low income families in her area and that they could be forced out because of high insurance costs.
"If they are forced to sell, either major developers or the very wealthy will take over the area," she said. "If the current maps are finalized the demographic in the area will be dramatically changed."
The current ABFE maps could change again by the end of this year, so residents are faced with the decision of waiting to rebuild or using the current maps as a standard for elevating or flood-proofing their homes.
"FEMA anticipates some changes to the ABFE maps for both elevations and zones and plans to release the updated flood maps this year," a release from the NJDEP states. "These revisions will further fine-tune coastal flooding elevations as well as areas that in A-zones and V-zones."
The federal government's process to finalize the maps could take up to two years.
Kathy A
7:00 am on Friday, March 8, 2013
So if they don't raise their house, they would have to pay the increased insurance rate. It's as easy as that. Somebody has to pay. Why should the rest of us have to continue to subsidize them living by the water?
Lark Evor
12:43 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
EXACTLY! Thank you. If you want to live in a place where you will be flooded you should pay for it not the rest of us.
Sue
8:43 am on Friday, March 8, 2013
Easy? $50,000 to $150,000 to raise a house, unless it's not feasible, with the alternative of $30,000-a-year insurance premiums! The only easy thing will be the abandonment of tens of thousands of homes, with the rest of each town's taxpayers paying high taxes to pick up the slack.
Lark Evor
12:44 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
The homes should be abandoned and the land reclaimed as a flood zone. The loss of taxes will be fine since all of the people will leave and not need schools and other services. There is plenty of empty land in the middle of the US - the government should do a land swap.
Wanda Wohlin
8:44 am on Friday, March 8, 2013
It's not just about wealthy people. Most live in homes that have never flooded in the over 60 years that they have been there. Why because of one storm that all agree was a freak thing and not likely to happen in 100-500 yrs be forced out of their homes and neighborhoods because of flood insurance? And how is it fair that those without flood insurance are not required to raise their homes? Flood insurance should be an option not a requirement for everyone.
Peter Koenig
9:44 am on Friday, March 8, 2013
In many instances, flood insurance is required under the terms of a mortgage - so it isn't really "optional" and the mortgagor-homeowner cannot choose to forego it. The flood insurance issue is challenging. (1) Premiums could be increased to reflect enhanced risks of buildings that are "too low", but the premiums may indeed cause abandonment or forced sale at distress prices. (2) Additional assistance could be given to homeonwers who must "raise or pay," but that requires financial aid from the government - the taxpayers. (3) Premiums could be subsidized, that is, set at less than the actuarial assessment of the risk, but that would also leave the taxpayers with additional costs. My solution? Wish I had one. Maybe a combination of all three?
Martin
8:47 am on Friday, March 8, 2013
Erroneous flood zone maps, overkill house-raising mandates and exorbitant annual insurance costs... FEMA wants NJ to bail it out of its Katrina debt!
Join our fight -- come to a 1-hour meeting Sat. March 9th, 3 PM, at Silverton First Aid Squad, 86 Maine St., Toms River (all towns welcome).
Info at StopFemaNow.com and Facebook.com/StopFemaNow. Save our Shore Communities!
Lark Evor
12:46 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
The maps are not erroneous. You only think so because your house is in it. There should be no buildings within 2 miles of the coast.
David E
11:17 am on Friday, March 8, 2013
Folks, FEMA is just PROOF positive of how horrible things are when the Fed Govt runs it.....Just wait until healthcare is fully under the Fed with the 'Affordable' Healthcare Act. Think dealing with flood maps is horrible? Wait until its dealing with getting approval for that life saving heart by-pass surgery!!! And yet, somehow, a majority in this Country want this, as per how the Vote last November went for the White House. Go figure.
Lark Evor
12:47 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
The majority cannot even read or write. They are just deadbeats and want freebees. You will notice the difference in healthcare since you work and pay for insurance and get it. The crackheads and welfare moms will now run wild and get healthcare - so even if its crappy its free and more than they have now.
tom nemec
1:00 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
I want to elevate and i have to. However i think along with the 4 year requirement to elevate if your home is substantialy damaged and below the BFE you should be given more time to comply and your flood ins. premium should stay the same until that time. Govt should provide a very low cost loan or grant. Why is it so bad to issue 1% loans Or even 2% without accrued payment on interest. Why do they need to make so much money on the loans. Why do we accept being covered in debt we cant afford. I don't understand why our own towns cant figure this out themselves. Those who borrow to elevate the towns can take a lien on the property and if you sell it needs to be settled. These are just some constant thoughts and ideas of my own. No one want to have other taxpayers be responsible to help me elevate and flood proof a home i knowingly bought in a flood zone. If it was the other way around i would not want to foot the bill for me.
tom nemec
1:05 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
And if homes need to be elevated as mandated by the Govt. at the least there should be reasonable low cost ways of doing so. If it is mandate it is not a vanity project, therefore not subject to the same treatment .
Squandered Youth
1:15 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
Adopting ABFEs as a building code sends an unfortunate signal to Washington the ABFEs are credible, when the message we need to send is "Stop it!"
Shore owners are not looking for a bailout. For 30 years, the NFIP has been essentially solvent, even with pre-FIRM subsidies leaving only 78% of homes paying actuarial rates. Any shortfall going forward could be addressed by minor premium and subsidy tweaks.
Unfortunately, failed levees in Katrina put a one-time $15 billion charge on the NFIP. Biggert-Waters transferred the cost of that federal engineering failure to us - but still subsidizes homes below levees by assuming the levees will protect them. It does NOT recognize protection from dunes. Biggert-Waters is masterful politics. By creating "new science" maps and "actuarial" premiums it disguises a surtax on policyholders as a consequence of global warming while co-opting "pay their own way" conservatives to support creating a new federal revenue stream taking $500 million a year from NJ alone.
However this was sold to the NJ congressional delegation that voted for it, shifting a national debt to a subset of individual homeowners isn't fair. Sandy was close to a 500 year event. The new premiums will cover damage from a Sandy-level event every nine years. This goes far beyond making the shore paying its own way for whatever global warming might do. We need our federal and State officials to take every opportunity to say this will not stand.
Lark Evor
1:25 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
Why do you think sandy is a 500 year even? Do you really think past performance in the only indicator of future actions? If you have a mortgage you have no choice but to do as your mortgage company says. If you own your home out right do as you please but when you are under water dont come looking for a bailout.
tom nemec
1:22 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
Very well put Squandered youth. Its so refreshing to read something that informs with out muck raking.
Kathy A
3:51 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
I've read a lot of good points here! tom nemec-I especially like some of the solutions that you are presenting, such as very low cost loans (car companies do it!) and liens on the property that would be repaid when the property sold. Another idea could be to bring back something like the WPA. People who are unemployed could help to rebuild/raise their neighbors homes, while collecting unemployment type benefits that would then circulate in the local economy.Something that I have wondered about for a long time is just exactly how our loss of wetlands affect flooding. That said, everyone keeps saying that Sandy was a once in a 100 or 500 year event, but I disagree. What about all of the low lying areas that flood every time it rains, and experience major flooring when there is a nor'easter or hurricane? I'm talking about Sea Bright, many parts of Monmouth Beach, Oceanport, Little Silver, and North Long Branch right off the top of my head. I can remember many, many times in the not so distant past when they have experienced severe flooding. Personally, I am sick of those who CHOOSE to live in those areas cry and have their hand out for "disaster relief" every time it floods! If you lived next to a volcano, and it erupted, would you rebuild there???? Not to mention the fact that for those lucky people who live in Sea Bright have private beaches!
tom nemec
4:35 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
and God knows we could sure use architects with the insight of Howard work
Kathy A
5:40 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
Yes, please give us an architect who has integrity and individuality like Howard Roark over these idiots who practice architectural abortions!
tom nemec
1:23 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Hello, i live in Middletown and my house has to be elevated. As you, i did everything i was supposed to and sent all the right paper work and i was approved by my insurance Co. for an ICC claim for up to 30,000.00 $ towards the cost of elevation.
Then i was told by the aduster that my Ins. Co., Harlesyville, will not pay any money out until the elevation is comoplete. What am i suppoed to do? Take a loan?
DID THIS HAPPEN TO YOU?
Yes? What i started to do and i hope you will also is contact a representitive at Senator Robert Menendez's office. You will have to send a description of the problem and some Ins. docs. PLEASE, Please do this. A small moment of your time will help yourself and so many others. Stephanie N. Alonso Community Affairs Coordinator, Office of Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ),973-645-3201,Fax973-645-0502.
Also i contacted The NJ Dept. Of banking and Insurance. There is a prompt telling you what number to press for Sandy Issues. 1-800-446-7467. If we all follow through we can make change.
James D'Monquay
2:04 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Hopefully Menendez is in his office and not on another tax payer funded junket with his Florida pimp . . . .
Mattytas
4:53 pm on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Lark Evor, Just another Misinformed hate filled republican hiding behind his internet Anonymity. What a shame.