Almost 2,000 homeowners in Virginia Beach, including many near the Oceanfront, may no longer have to buy flood insurance, because of recent changes to federal flood maps.
However, 350 other property owners who haven't been required to buy flood insurance may have to do so because of the revisions.
"For the most part, these changes are very positive for the city," said Rebecca Lear, National Flood Insurance Program coordinator for Virginia Beach. The last revisions were made in 1996.
When the new maps take effect later this year, the insurance requirement will apply to fewer properties, Lear said.
"But we encourage people to keep their flood insurance," she said.
Virginia Beach's flood maps, like others compiled by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, determine which home-owners must buy flood coverage. Those who have a federally insured mortgage are required by their lenders to have the coverage if they live in a flood-prone area. Mortgage lenders also can require that a borrower have flood insurance even if a home isn't in a risky location.
The savings for property owners whose homes are no longer included in a flood-prone area can be significant. Residents of high-risk coastal zones, for example, pay annual premiums up to $5,922 for the maximum coverage, according to the National Flood Insurance Program.
For a homeowner whose property has been dropped from a high-risk zone, "the reduction in flood-insurance premiums is like paying for auto insurance for a Chevy Impala after paying for coverage on a Corvette," said Fred Brusso, special projects administrator in Portsmouth, who has worked with that city's flood maps.
Portsmouth and Norfolk are also in the process of reviewing new flood maps. In Portsmouth, almost 1,500 properties have been added to the flood-prone areas, while 1,155 have been removed, said Brian Swets, a city planner.
Portsmouth city departments, including police and fire, and surveyors in the community are reviewing the maps before they are submitted to the City Council later this year for approval, Swets said.
Frank Duke, planning director for the city of Norfolk, said he did not yet have a breakdown of properties affected by flood map changes. However, he expects that the number of properties included in high-risk areas will increase. The new maps are likely to be approved and in place by the end of the year, Duke said.
FEMA is still revising flood maps for Suffolk, said Bob Oblinsky, the city's manager of geographic information systems.
In Chesapeake, FEMA has made no changes to the city's flood maps, said Michelle Oblinsky, emergency management planner. She could not say when the revised maps may be available.
Throughout the country, the primary source of flood insurance is FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program, which is underwritten by the federal government but relies on insurance agents to sell its policies. The flood insurance program provides as much as $250,000 of coverage for a dwelling and as much as $100,000 of coverage for contents. Flood policies also are available for condominium units, rentals and commercial buildings.
Disputes involving flood damage often materialize after a major storm because some homeowners wrongly assume that their homeowners insurance will cover the losses, something that property and casualty insurers exclude from their policies.
FEMA has been in the process of upgrading the flood maps for thousands of localities that participate in its National Flood Insurance Program.
Virginia Beach officials began talking with FEMA four years ago about upgrading their city's flood maps, Lear said. The shift of 2,000 properties out of high-risk zones was due largely to protections from sand replenishment and other parts of the city's plan for beach-erosion control and hurricane protection, she said.
In cities that are reviewing new maps, property owners whose homes have been added to a flood zone can buy flood insurance at a lower cost until the new maps take effect. That typically takes place after several months of review by a city government. And those who think that flood-map revisions don't accurately reflect the risk of flood damage to their homes can appeal to FEMA.
Anyone who plans to challenge the details in the new flood maps, however, should gather evidence to support their case, Lear sai d.
"You can't say, 'I've lived here 20 years, and my home has never flooded,' " she said. "That doesn't work with FEMA."
Tom Shean, (757) 446-2379, tom.shean@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
FEMA is flawed . . .
. . .becasue of Eald's mom. She was paid $40,000, but chose to stay. Now she is surprised that the premiums went up? It's insurance, if you make a claim your rates go up. Insurance stinks until you need it.
The FEMA maps were old and needed to be updated. A lot of development has occured since the maps last came out. So the maps still showed ditches and low areas that have been filled by development.
Anyone living...
on a BEACH or an area that repeatedly floods and causes property damage shouldn't be allowed to get insurance at all.
Eald and jason
"No reason to make stuff up. First you don't get the flood policy directly through FEMA so you'd be getting paid by your insurance carrier and not FEMA. Second, the rates are fixed and published."
Yes the rates are fixed and published, but the companies do not pay these losses as FEMA does. In fact, flood is the only insurance where the insurance company is actually paid for a loss. If not for the federal backing most would not be able to obtain the coverage. The comment about voting for change to end FEMA is a standard socialist remark. The goverment has no business backing these policies, much less giving it away so someone can live in a flood zone by choice.
No reason to make up stories
No reason to make stuff up. First you don't get the flood policy directly through FEMA so you'd be getting paid by your insurance carrier and not FEMA. Second, the rates are fixed and published.
On the question of why get it when you hear about people getting disaster relief is most floods do not get a disaster declaration.
Let me tell you about FEMA....
My mother had $40,000. in flood damage from Isabelle. Oh, yes...FEMA paid. Now her flood insurance premium has risen from $400. per year to $2,400. per year. All "insurance" does is hold your spot in line to get assistance. No matter how many years you've paid into it, and she paid for 46 years, you end of paying them back for the assistance through higher premiums.
FEMA is flawed, majorly inept, and an embarrassment to the American people.
I look forward to voting for change in November. Perhaps the new President will fix the broken FEMA.
It'd be nice...
if I could pull up the Chesapeake map. I get a message saying the file is damaged.
"And if you refused to pay,
"And if you refused to pay, you could be labeled as combative and then threatened to go into one of the new FEMA detainment camps."
If FEMA did not back the flood program than most people would not be able to afford it. If anyone has a problem w/ FEMA making it available then as many in the OBX will tell, there is a private choice. Lloyds and many other companies will gladly charge you more w/ a higher deductable.
As for the fact that they paid the uninsured, yes the federal goverment literally stole from all of us. However, regardless of political stripe, hopefully you realize that directive came from a very high position in the goverment. Your tax dollars and premiums were given away(stolen) by those who choose not to participate in the program by a goverment that runs on the promise of less.
maulotaur
Your example where there would be a tsunami from a rock slide off the African coast is bogus for many reasons. 1-Unless the rock slide consisted of one massive rock it wouldn't create a tsunami. Try throwing one large rock into a pond, you will see it creates on large wave. Now try and throw many rocks (even of the same size) into the pond at the same time, you will see the waves cancel each other out and are much smaller before getting to shore. 2-Unlike the West Coast and the Indian Ocean tsunami we have a much longer continental shelf. A wave traveling from the coast of africa to here would not be a visible wave traveling above the water but the energy would travel underneath the water (if you were in the ocean in a boat you wouldn't even know it went underneath you), when it gets close to our coast it would start to disipate of the course of our continental shelf, losing energy and eventually hitting our shore but with much less impact.
Why buy it?
I've had flood insurance for years and don't live in a house that requires it by the mortgage company. Being near water, it gives me peace of mind. However, after the New Orleans fiasco, when the govt came in and said they would cover those that hadn't been paying for flood insurance, I became disenfranchised at paying the premiums. Why should I continue to pay when the govt has set that precedent?
I agree with a previous poster, why would the govt continue to allow people to build in areas prone to flood? They even pay to elevate houses that flood frequently instead of condeming them. We need to be more practical with our public funds.
I'll keep mine either way
I wouldn't mind getting removed from the flood zone because that will drop my rates. If you don't have it, look into it, because it really doesn't cost much if you're not in a high risk zone and will cover you in case of flash floods which can happen anywhere. This isn't all a bunch of water front houses their talking about. I'm no where near the ocean or the bay and my house does not sit on the water. The flood zones go all through the city.
Using the flood maps
This information is so important but how do you navigate the Norfolk flood zone map? This is antiquated software for sure. I can't seem to find any flood information on the site. Found my address but nothing else. Someone care to enlighten me on how to use this thing? Thanks.
Stupidity
Why is the federal government subsidizing insurance so people can build in flood zones? It is stupid.
made up maps
These maps are all based on imaginations. They do not show the areas that would be affected by a tsunami generated from sliding rocks off the African coast. Perhaps they could make up a map for that possibility and 'require' tsunami insurance for everyone? That would certainly bring in a lot of money. And if you refused to pay, you could be labeled as combative and then threatened to go into one of the new FEMA detainment camps.
Murphy's law, I can see
Murphy's law, I can see people taking flood insurance off their house, a hurricane hitting a few weeks later and then the house gets flooded. The good news is that normally if you are not in a flood zone but purchase the coverage anyway it is a whole lot cheaper than if you were in a flood zone.