Existing building in floodway

[davidpro]

I have been asked to submit a LOMR-F for a development that has been completed in a flood zone. The property used to be in an unstudied A-Zone, but apparently there was a detailed study done for another project that affected this property, defining a floodway and BFE's. This development was built after the study, but it appears neither the owner or engineer was aware of the map revision until after construction was completed.

By overlaying the site plan on the revised flood map, it appears that one building may be located in the floodway. Does anyone know what the process might be with FEMA at this point? Obviously construction isn't allowed within a floodway, and the local official didn't catch it before issuing his building permit, so what can be done to allow the owner to purchase flood insurance?

The building FFE is higher than the BFE of the adjacent floodplain, so I believe a LOMR-F would be appropriate if the building were in the fringe. But what should the process be now that the building was unknowing built in the floodway? I know property owners have to be notified when a study is done that affects their property, and this land has changed hands several times as a result of the development, so I doubt the notification made it all the way to the current owner/developer.

Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks!

 

[gbam]

Have you consulted with FEMA?

 

[davidpro]

Was able to get in touch with them after posting. They recommended taking it to the local floodplain and building officials to see how they wanted to handle it, seeing as it was a slip-up on their part in the first place by issuing a building permit for a building located in a floodway. The FEMA rep didn't seem to want anything to do with the situation, even though it's a violation of their regs.

Hopefully a no-rise certification will suffice the local officials, thus avoiding a LOMR submittal to FEMA. Either way the area will have to be modeled however, so the developer is out the cost of the H&H study either way. A no-rise will be cheaper, but still a large price to pay for his previous engineer/surveyor not catching the updated maps.

I'll keep updated with what happens as we go.

 

[beej67]

Sounds like lawyers, guns, and money to me.

Keep us informed. Make sure you're very transparent with your client about how nasty this could end up, and stay on top of your fees / billing. You may end up in court with the other engineer, while you rep your client to try and get enough insurance money to pay your fees for your FEMA work, plus possible damages. You could also end up in court opposite the municipality, depending on where your client's attorney wants to go with it. Absolutely do not touch this job without an open ended, hourly contract, because there is no telling how far down this rabbit hole goes.



Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East -

http://www.campbellcivil.com

 

[davidpro]

Quick update:

We consulted with the local floodplain official, who ran around trying to figure out why he didn't know about the revised map. He has placed the property under violation of their ordinance, pending an H&H study to determine the impact of the encroachment. If a study reveals no impact, a no-rise certificate will satisfy the municipality. If there is an impact, a LOMR would be required through FEMA.

After asking some questions of the original engineer, they admitted fault in the miss. They will be performing the hydraulic study, and it appears will be footing the bill for costs, even though it is every bit as much the fault of the city officials for missing it.