Now
Fair
32°
High
42°
Low
15°
Full Forecast

Jobs

Cars

Homes

Rentals

Alerts

Subscribe
Home > News > Local
Bookmark Us   •   Make Us Your Homepage

New FEMA maps place more than 200 homes in floodplain

Comments 12 comment(s)  
E-mail Story E-mail Story
Print Story Print Story
Share  Share
Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

BY ALGIS J. LAUKAITIS / Lincoln Journal Star

Wednesday, Dec 03, 2008 - 11:46:09 pm CST

A bureaucratic tidal wave of sorts hit Waverly recently when the Federal Emergency Management Agency informed the city that new maps place 204 homes in a floodplain, or flood-prone area.

None of those homes was in the floodplain before, city officials say, and now homeowners face the prospect of buying expensive flood insurance.

“This caught us all kind of by surprise. No one expected something like this — this big of a change,” City Council member John Hestermann said.

Story Photo
Justin Dyson, a Waverly High freshman, walks home along Canongate Road after school Wednesday. The Aspen Estates subdivision is at the left, with water often standing in the drainage ditch at the right, according to Dyson. (Robert Becker)

Related Link(s):


Map: Proposed flood way
Waverly floodplain map meeting on Tuesday

The city of Waverly will hold an informational meeting Tuesday to talk about the impact of new proposed FEMA floodplain maps on 204 homes and 26 business properties. The meeting will begin at 7 p.m. at the VFW Hall at 138 Guildford St. City officials will have detailed maps and information available on flood insurance requirements.

FEMA maps

To view the new FEMA floodplain maps, go to: lancaster.ne.gov. Type the keyword "watershed" and then click on "November 2008 Proposed FEMA Floodplain Maps" in the right column.

Most of the impacted homes are in the northwest part of  Waverly along the Ash Hollow Ditch. Twenty-six business properties  also are affected but some had been in the floodplain before.

The Ash Hollow Ditch runs south of the  town of Prairie Home, through Waverly and into Salt Creek. Longtime residents say flooding has occurred along the ditch in the past.

Hestermann said the floodplain changes do not mean homes and businesses will flood tomorrow and affected residents don’t have to rush out and buy flood insurance.

The new maps are only proposed changes to the flood plain and must be finalized by FEMA. Hestermann said the city and residents have 90 days to appeal once they receive an official letter from the federal agency.

 Glenda Wood, the city’s zoning administrator/building inspector, already has sent a letter of her own, telling residents about the new maps and possible flood insurance requirements. She, too, was shocked by the extent of the floodplain revision.

Wood encouraged affected property owners to attend a Tuesday informational meeting. Meanwhile, city officials have hired a civil engineer with HWS Consulting Group Inc. to help gather information for possible appeals.

Property owners will need specific topographic maps or a certificate from a civil engineer to appeal any of the  proposed changes, Wood said. Appeals have to be based on scientific, not anecdotal, information.

The new maps are the result of a nationwide floodplain remapping process undertaken by FEMA. The federal agency sent  letters to counties and cities, asking them if they wanted to participate in a project to update their floodplain maps.

Ben Higgins, a senior engineer with the Lincoln Public Works and Utilities Department, said all of Lancaster County is being re-mapped with a $460,000 grant from FEMA.

A handful of watersheds in Lincoln already have been re-mapped: Salt Creek, Beal Slough, Southeast Upper Salt Creek, Cardwell  Branch and Deadman's Run.

Higgins said the re-mapping done in Lincoln is separate from the Waverly re-mapping project. “We had nothing to do with changing those maps. It was done all through FEMA,” he said.

FEMA periodically updates floodplain maps. The last time it did so was in 2001 when the federal agency digitized topographic maps. The latest maps are the result of laser-mapping technology, which has a much higher degree of accuracy.

Higgins said the mapping process works both ways. In Lincoln’s case, more homes were taken out of the floodplain than were put in.

He noted that anyone in a flood plain who has a federally backed mortgage — and most mortgages are — will need to obtain flood insurance. Flood insurance typically costs $400 to $500 per year for $100,000 worth of coverage.

Said Hestermann about the proposed floodplain changes in Waverly: “It’s unfortunate. We’re still looking at what we can do … and the repercussions.”

Reach Algis J. Laukaitis at (402) 473-7243 or alaukaitis@journalstar.com.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Local > Back to Top of Story

Post Your Comment

Standards and Rules
All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hide Comments Hide Comments   Newest First Newest First  
Believer in flood insurance wrote on December 4, 2008 12:10 am:
" I can't imagine anyone NOT having flood insurance. No other insurance covers the damage that flood insurance covers. Going without the assurance of flood insurance must be the biggest gamble of all. "

 WCG wrote on December 4, 2008 6:24 am:
" This happened to me, in Lincoln, years ago, too. My house hadn't been in the floodplain until they re-mapped it. And since I had a mortgage, I WAS required to get flood insurance right away. And it's expensive, especially for low value homes. So I sympathize with these home-owners.

But what can you do? We must use the best available information for floodplain designations, and we don't want the government to subsidize building in flood plains. My big objection was that the city had allowed developers to build in the previous floodplain by placing buildings above the natural lay of the land. Naturally, this just served to push any flood waters into other areas, so when the floodplain was remapped, it had to be enlarged. Any way you look at it, this was wrong. I hope that's not still allowed. "

 Mike in DC wrote on December 4, 2008 6:44 am:
" $500 a year per 100K. Some said "expensive." When that's said, I was expecting the words "per month" not "per year." It's money, but if you own a $200K home, and it costs you $800 per year, and you live in a 100 year floodplain, YOU come out AHEAD after the flood. So, it's actually CHEAP. It's only expensive if YOU EXPECT the GOVERNMENT to bail you out for "free." Second, if you have cancer, and it was just diagnosed, you just didn't get cancer. Just like being in a floodplain. Unless a stream or drainage MOVED you've ALWAYS been in a floodplain. Consider it good news that your cancer was diagnosed before it became terminal--BEFORE the flood when you're left with nothing; because clearly the American people are PAST bailing people out for living in at-risk areas. "

 Galen wrote on December 4, 2008 8:10 am:
" I could never understand why anyone would ever build in (or NEAR) a flood plain, in the first place. There ARE other choices. As for the insurance - some folks can't afford the extra $1000 or even $500, a year, just like they cannot afford health or life insurance. With property taxes sucking the life out of us, the cash cow favors the cities/counties and insurance companies. "

 russell wrote on December 4, 2008 8:36 am:
" After reading the headlines I was fearful Waverly's floodplain was increased because of Lincoln's developments that increased stormwater runoff. Fortunately Ash Hollow Ditch is not in Lincoln's drainage area. "

 CS wrote on December 4, 2008 9:36 am:
" Maybe its good to have and maybe its not, but to say that someone has 'always lived in a flood plain" is pretty flippant, when they built the maps didn't reflect that they were. If the maps being used by the builders say you aren't in a flood plain, then that is what you have to go on-maybe you can hire a topologist and geologist to plan your home, but many people can't and use the already existing maps to plan these things. "

 Hum wrote on December 4, 2008 10:16 am:
" Only in Nebraska do ya learn the truth AFTER the horse is out of the barn.
And it amazes me to hear someone think flood insurance is cheap. In the
first place ALL houses are way over assessed and priced. Having been in
the insurance business 45 years, flood insurance ain't cheap. And what
they call flood plains around here amazes me. At $800.00 a year in ten
thats $8,000. But of course if your guaranteed a city or state job where
the citizens pay your salary, I suppose its peanuts. Or see what ya
think if your a woman with half the pay of a man trying to survive and
maybe with a couple kids, that maybe the man doesn't pay child support!
I've seen that kind of attitude of people with good jobs here in Lincoln,
nice college education and, think nothing of the high property taxes and
THEN one day they retire, have a few medical bills, already out of sight
property taxes getting higher and higher, medical bills going thru the
roof, food costs going thru the roof, and all of a sudden they cry help,
my fixed income is going down down down. Well yes they saved all they
could when they worked and paid $800.00 a year flood insurance, but now
the shoe is on the other foot. Frankly I think all of Lancaster County
is in a flood plain, greed plain, and oh (yawn) you name it plain!! One
thing with Nebraska, when it rains the mud gets like grease, whereas the
state I lived in the ground is more like a sponge. Not that greasey
slippery stuff I grew up with here!! "

 Common Sense wrote on December 4, 2008 11:22 am:
" It absolutely amazes me that the people building there did not realize on their own that it is a floodplain. Just look around the area and you can see there is no protection from flooding. Just common sense tells you all of Waverly is in a floodplain. The government should not have to tell these people, they should be smart enough to figure it out on their own. Or did they just move there knowing the problem and just expected the government to take care of them. "

 CCG wrote on December 4, 2008 11:51 am:
" Part of the problem is that so much development has occured in Waverly south of highway 6 that what used to be fields is now pavement. The run-off from storms and such that used to soak in to the fields now rushes down to ditches thanks to all the pavement. The city in my opinion should have done something about this years ago and now those homeowners have to pay the price. Flooding wasn't much of an issue before all this new development. "

 Teresa wrote on December 4, 2008 12:20 pm:
" Oh well duh. Have you ever been to Waverly after a heavy rain? All the surrounding fields, ditches, and creeks are completely flooded for days. Remember the flood in '93? I do because I was swimming in the streets. All of Waverly is a flood plain. I joked about all those new houses going in on the Northwest side because that is a really low lying area and I'm not quite sure why anyone would build there. Nothing against the actual town of Waverly. I lived there for 20 years and loved it. But I probably wouldn't build a new house there. "

 go figure wrote on December 4, 2008 12:47 pm:
" Was the builder of that development one of those who complains about the onerous restrictions Lincoln puts on them? Didn't some company just leave Lincoln and move to Waverly because of floodplain issues making it hard for him to do what he wanted here? There is a reason for good long term planning. Lincoln should be commended for their sound policies and looking out for the ultimate consumer (ie homeowner)who otherwise "carries the water" long after the builder makes his buck and moves on. And Waverly needs to get smarter...fast. "

 go figure wrote on December 4, 2008 6:40 pm:
" go figure is right on the mark and who is just like the developer build buy sell at the any cost well as long as the cost is picked up by the city so she can build her biz on the city's wallet Robin Eschliman and her real estate firm "

Ads by Yahoo!