- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 5/18/19 at 8:54 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
Net Zero Fill with a 2’ Freeboard achieves a ton of positive results and is stronger than many other progressive parish ordinances re: Floodplain management call for.
But the 36” fill limit makes it obvious the Council in AP wanted to begin to dictate construction methods as well. Pier and Beam construction will be utilized because at the end of the day, property > 1’+ beneath the BFE will reduce in value as a result of the ordinance. Meaning it may cheapen up enough to offset the increased construction costs associated with pier and beam, etc. Which is more expensive to design and build according to design professionals locally.
(How much is up for discussion)
The move towards different foundation and sub floor design structures to achieve elevation and Freeboard requirements also has another outcome. This one is for flood insurance.
The Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) Process allows a homeowner to avoid the mandatory purchase requirement for flood insurance. You bring in your fill, you achieve the desired elevation, shoot the elevation and get your Elevation Certificate done, submit the data to FEMA, and boom, they bring you out of the flood zone and you don’t have to have flood insurance. Or-if you’re truly smart-you pay $380-500/year with the “preferred risk,” rate of someone whose in an X-Zone, which the LOMA essentially puts you in anyway.
The LOMA requirements state that not only the structure must be above the BFE, but the lowest adjacent grade to the structure must be also. To use a phrase from my first post...what does this mean?
It means that not only must the house be elevated, but he top of the fill you brought in must also achieve that height, as well as the height of any structure servicing the home (think whole home generator pads, or HVAC/AC Units, etc).
For a home that used fill to achieve it’s elevation, this is easy, as is the LOMA process.
For a home that used pier and beam...well...where is their lowest adjacent grade? That’s right...it’s back down there at the natural grade in most cases. Meaning that while your elevation is higher, in most cases the mandatory purchase requirement for an NFIP Flood Policy can’t be achieved with a LOMA. Meaning you are paying for a flood policy whether you want to or not.
You will get a major discount by being 2’ above the BFE thanks to the Freeboard Requirement the Council instituted. But...You will still have to buy flood insurance.
Developers have often sold homes or developments with homes in them by stating that these structures won’t need flood insurance. Also-like it or not-people prefer slab on grade. It’s been proven over time. Now, those two sales features for developers will not exist in the way they did before due to these ordinances.
The construction costs and the cost of home ownership will increase as a result of the changes. Changes are coming to development across the board in AP. But hand-in-hand with that will come increased resiliency, higher percentages of insured properties (reducing the cost to the FedGov during a disaster and increase the solvency of NFIP thanks to elevated structures that won’t file claims as often), and potential discounts on flood insurance policies across the board due to discounts NFIP provides to communities who increase their standards above the minimum requirements.
Just some food for thought on a Saturday Morning.
But the 36” fill limit makes it obvious the Council in AP wanted to begin to dictate construction methods as well. Pier and Beam construction will be utilized because at the end of the day, property > 1’+ beneath the BFE will reduce in value as a result of the ordinance. Meaning it may cheapen up enough to offset the increased construction costs associated with pier and beam, etc. Which is more expensive to design and build according to design professionals locally.
(How much is up for discussion)
The move towards different foundation and sub floor design structures to achieve elevation and Freeboard requirements also has another outcome. This one is for flood insurance.
The Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) Process allows a homeowner to avoid the mandatory purchase requirement for flood insurance. You bring in your fill, you achieve the desired elevation, shoot the elevation and get your Elevation Certificate done, submit the data to FEMA, and boom, they bring you out of the flood zone and you don’t have to have flood insurance. Or-if you’re truly smart-you pay $380-500/year with the “preferred risk,” rate of someone whose in an X-Zone, which the LOMA essentially puts you in anyway.
The LOMA requirements state that not only the structure must be above the BFE, but the lowest adjacent grade to the structure must be also. To use a phrase from my first post...what does this mean?
It means that not only must the house be elevated, but he top of the fill you brought in must also achieve that height, as well as the height of any structure servicing the home (think whole home generator pads, or HVAC/AC Units, etc).
For a home that used fill to achieve it’s elevation, this is easy, as is the LOMA process.
For a home that used pier and beam...well...where is their lowest adjacent grade? That’s right...it’s back down there at the natural grade in most cases. Meaning that while your elevation is higher, in most cases the mandatory purchase requirement for an NFIP Flood Policy can’t be achieved with a LOMA. Meaning you are paying for a flood policy whether you want to or not.
You will get a major discount by being 2’ above the BFE thanks to the Freeboard Requirement the Council instituted. But...You will still have to buy flood insurance.
Developers have often sold homes or developments with homes in them by stating that these structures won’t need flood insurance. Also-like it or not-people prefer slab on grade. It’s been proven over time. Now, those two sales features for developers will not exist in the way they did before due to these ordinances.
The construction costs and the cost of home ownership will increase as a result of the changes. Changes are coming to development across the board in AP. But hand-in-hand with that will come increased resiliency, higher percentages of insured properties (reducing the cost to the FedGov during a disaster and increase the solvency of NFIP thanks to elevated structures that won’t file claims as often), and potential discounts on flood insurance policies across the board due to discounts NFIP provides to communities who increase their standards above the minimum requirements.
Just some food for thought on a Saturday Morning.
This post was edited on 5/18/19 at 9:05 am
Posted on 5/18/19 at 9:37 am to kingbob
Still early in this race for sure, and I haven’t made up my mind on how I’ll vote. However, I struggle with the inevitable fact that Wade Petite will have a prominent role in Cointment’s administration. It has been promised and he’s working deals behind the scenes already in Clint’s name.
Murphy has his own set of issues too. They’ve been examined ad nauseam on this site. As a lifelong resident of the parish, I truly hope every resident educates themselves, and gets to the polls.
Murphy has his own set of issues too. They’ve been examined ad nauseam on this site. As a lifelong resident of the parish, I truly hope every resident educates themselves, and gets to the polls.
Posted on 5/18/19 at 12:40 pm to dipsydoo3
I thought Cointment would’ve been in love with this new set of restrictions. He seems to be very pro-drainage and flood mitigation.
Murphy is just crooked and a huge creep. The Joe Biden of AP, if you will. Plus, he has the entire West Bank money line and the Matassa klan in his back pocket.
I lean heavily in Cointment’s favor but I really don’t like this new set of restrictions. It’s too restrictive and doesn’t do anything to address the CURRENT issues. Only thing it does for future mitigation is address the types of floods like in 2016, where regardless of what man does, everyone’s going to sink. So in my opinion this new restriction is all for show and is a cop out on the part of parish leadership.
DO SOMETHING ABOUT CURRENT DRAINAGE PROBLEMS!
Murphy is just crooked and a huge creep. The Joe Biden of AP, if you will. Plus, he has the entire West Bank money line and the Matassa klan in his back pocket.
I lean heavily in Cointment’s favor but I really don’t like this new set of restrictions. It’s too restrictive and doesn’t do anything to address the CURRENT issues. Only thing it does for future mitigation is address the types of floods like in 2016, where regardless of what man does, everyone’s going to sink. So in my opinion this new restriction is all for show and is a cop out on the part of parish leadership.
DO SOMETHING ABOUT CURRENT DRAINAGE PROBLEMS!
This post was edited on 5/18/19 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 5/18/19 at 2:01 pm to TDsngumbo
They did. They’re going to inspect every mitigation facility (Read: every single detention/retention pond in every neighborhood, commercial development, or individual tract they have on record) annually for proper use and function. They will require the responsible parties to bring them into compliance. Which is a huge part of what’s you are complaining about.
Beyond that, AP got $25 million in grant funding they must dedicate to mitigation of natural hazards. Plenty of drainage improvements on the way, but federal dollars are slow moving.
Tap the brakes on your gnashing of teeth.
Beyond that, AP got $25 million in grant funding they must dedicate to mitigation of natural hazards. Plenty of drainage improvements on the way, but federal dollars are slow moving.
Tap the brakes on your gnashing of teeth.
Posted on 5/18/19 at 2:05 pm to GFunk
quote:
by GFunk
What is your email? I have some questions on the fill mitigation
Posted on 5/18/19 at 2:06 pm to TDsngumbo
We have a lot of issues. Transportation, drainage, property development (individual owners / property developers), education (building new 1500+ student HS’s on two lane country roads), etc. in all honesty, some of these things may be too far gone. The unplanned development over many years is irreversible.
I truly believe Murphy has gotten a bad wrap, but as I said he has his own issues. Clint isn’t as anti-establishment as he wants people to believe he is, and he has his issues. In the end, it won’t matter. The council is a shite show.
I truly believe Murphy has gotten a bad wrap, but as I said he has his own issues. Clint isn’t as anti-establishment as he wants people to believe he is, and he has his issues. In the end, it won’t matter. The council is a shite show.
Posted on 5/18/19 at 2:19 pm to dipsydoo3
Cointment has zero qualifications for running the parish. Nice guy, but he's run a mom and pop shop survey crew which doesn't qualify him to run a 100 plus million dollar budget or be in control of 400 employees. At least Murphy has the qualifications (Masters in Public Administration) and experience (Head of the ATC) needed to be an administrator. Not saying he's the bees knees, but he is the most qualified person to ever run for the position.
This post was edited on 5/18/19 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 5/18/19 at 2:48 pm to TDsngumbo
quote:
Murphy is just crooked and a huge creep. The Joe Biden of AP, if you will. Plus, he has the entire West Bank money line and the Matassa klan in his back pocket.
The guy was cleared on everything and if I remember correctly the people that brought all the charges actually got in trouble for it. Read up on it. That man is a straight arrow when it comes to government. I ain't saying he's perfect but he's the right guy for parish president at this point. And trust me they all got money backing them, this ain't nothing new.
This post was edited on 5/18/19 at 2:52 pm
Posted on 5/18/19 at 10:20 pm to GFunk
Do you realize that Ascension Parish has a net zero 100 year flood zone fill policy for about the last 15 years? That part is nothing new. Development has not been filling in the 100 year flood zone no matter how much Pettit, Petite, Saterlee and Fournier want it to be true. The new 2' rule does nothing for existing residents who are at or below the BFE. They will still flood in another 2016 like event. Development had nothing to do with 2016.
Posted on 5/18/19 at 10:46 pm to Scrowe
quote:Man, You have got to be kidding me? You think a bought and paid for candidate - like the current PIECE OF shite KENNY MATASSA - is the best answer to fix this shite hole that has been generated for the last 20 years? I hope you don't live and vote here. If so, you are part of the problem.
At least Murphy has the qualifications (Masters in Public Administration) and experience (Head of the ATC) needed to be an administrator. Not saying he's the bees knees, but he is the most qualified person to ever run for the position.
Posted on 5/18/19 at 11:37 pm to LSUengr
quote:
The new 2' rule does nothing for existing residents who are at or below the BFE. They will still flood in another 2016 like event. Development had nothing to do with 2016.
quote:
LSUengr
Show me in any of the multiple posts in this thread where I’ve said that a 2’ Freeboard magically assists residents at or below BFE? The only thing that can assist them is Acquisition, elevation or drainage improvement projects. Which is EXACTLY what the $25 million they got in HMGP funding can be used for.
Please also tell me where I said people below the BFE wouldn’t flood by instituting the ordinances?
I also never said 2016 was caused by development. The rain wasn't created by development. It was created by weather. But it’s disingenuous-at best-to say that development didn’t impact the severity of flooding throughout the Capitol Region, including AP.
Your entire post didn’t make much sense. Try again and focus on trying to stick to things I said or points I actually made.
Posted on 5/18/19 at 11:44 pm to Scrowe
The fact that he ran the ATC to me is a reason to not vote for him. If anything it makes me think he’s a criminal. Those bastards never do anything positive for Louisiana in my opinion.
Being backed by Matassa money is a no go for me as well.
Being backed by Matassa money is a no go for me as well.
Posted on 5/19/19 at 12:04 am to Scrowe
quote:
Not saying he's the bees knees, but he is the most qualified person to ever run for the position.
Didn't he resign for stalking a girl and illegally using ATC resources to run background checks for personal reasons?
Seems like an up and up guy.
Posted on 5/19/19 at 6:00 am to fightin tigers
quote:
Didn't he resign for stalking a girl and illegally using ATC resources to run background checks for personal reasons?
Yep. He was acquitted for that, in fairness, but he ended up paying in a civil suit the victim filed against him afterwards. His supporters always fail to remember that when saying he was acquitted.
Posted on 5/19/19 at 6:03 am to potent357
quote:
quote:
At least Murphy has the qualifications (Masters in Public Administration) and experience (Head of the ATC) needed to be an administrator. Not saying he's the bees knees, but he is the most qualified person to ever run for the position.
quote:
Man, You have got to be kidding me? You think a bought and paid for candidate - like the current PIECE OF shite KENNY MATASSA - is the best answer to fix this shite hole that has been generated for the last 20 years? I hope you don't live and vote here. If so, you are part of the problem.
Im so glad for people like you. Hopefully Murphy loses but he probably won’t due to all the Donaldsonville money and Matassa klan support he has.
Posted on 5/19/19 at 6:24 am to BeerMoney
He’s not “backed by Matassa money”; however, he’s going to get the West Bank vote ala Matassa. There is money in d’ville, but not a mountain of cash.
Posted on 5/19/19 at 6:29 am to dipsydoo3
quote:
He’s not “backed by Matassa money”
Correct. He’s backed by the Matassa klan.
quote:
There is money in d’ville, but not a mountain of cash.
Oh how naive you are! Donaldsonville has about four very prominent last names that are all donating and “donating/wink wink” to Murphy and his campaign.
Two of them married each other in one instance, so it’s amplified. Trust me, Murphy has the money and backing to win the race handily. I hope the east bank folks who are more affected by the issues at hand come through for Cointment but they likely won’t be able to overcome the money and what it can do during an election.
This post was edited on 5/19/19 at 6:32 am
Posted on 5/19/19 at 7:28 am to mikelbr
Sheeeit. Doc Satterlee's ole arse will be all over em like white on rice. He ain't takin no shite. Dude's on a fricking CRUSADE to stop people like Dip shite Lambert from fostering overdevelopment and not playing by the rules.
Lambert has a conflict of interest due to the fact that he works for a local gas company and he's getting them customers by promoting subdivisions big time. POS in my opinion.
Lambert has a conflict of interest due to the fact that he works for a local gas company and he's getting them customers by promoting subdivisions big time. POS in my opinion.
Posted on 5/19/19 at 8:08 am to LSUengr
quote:
Development had nothing to do with 2016.
Bruhhhhhhhhhhhh
How you gonna flood if you aint built no house where it floods?
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News