YORK COUNTY — Communities along the coast are disputing newly revised Flood Insurance Rate maps by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, released the proposed maps earlier this month.
The Flood Insurance Rate Maps support the National Flood Insurance Rate Program, and provide the basis for community floodplain management regulations and flood insurance requirements, according to a fact sheet published by FEMA.
Flood Insurance Maps show flood hazard area levels in communities and detail classifications such as high hazard, moderate hazard and low hazard.
When a new map is put into effect, a property’s flood hazard status, as well as their building or insurance requirements, may change.
Communities have the opportunity for public review and an appeal process before the maps go into effect.
“Flood hazards are dynamic and can change frequently because of a variety of factors, including weather patterns, erosion, and new development,” according to FEMA officials.
For many communities, it’s been a long time since the FEMA maps have been revised. In Old Orchard Beach, for example, the maps haven’t changed since the 1980s.
However, there have been proposed revisions, the last being about five years ago.
When proposed FEMA maps were released in 2012-2013, “everyone complained” in the affected communities of York and Cumber counties, said Wells Town Manager Jonathan Carter last week. A number of communities were in the process of appealing the maps when FEMA pulled the maps and nothing was heard from the agency until recently.
But the newly proposed maps are not much improved, said Carter
“Most, if not all, of the the maps are similar to the 2012 maps,” he said. “We’re very concerned these maps do not reflect reality.”
So now, a number of communities are hoping to pool their resources and hire the engineering firm Ransom Consulting to help them with their appeal. Ransom has proposed a two-phase appeal, Carter said.
The first phase would be creating a regional model of the coast using a FEMA-approved methodology, he said. The second phase would be greater detailed models of specific communities.
Wells has 18 sections of FEMA maps, and Ransom would conduct quadrant models to include the sections, he said.
If eight or nine local communities group together to hire Ransom, Carter said, he expects the total cost to be several hundred thousand dollars; Wells contribution would be about $80,000.
This would be a good deal for the town, which would be one of the most affected communities in the state if the new maps are accepted as currently proposed, Carter said. He said his community has the highest number of flood insurance policies in the state, with just under 900 policies issued.
In Wells there are about 2,100 dwelling or lodging units (1,649 lots) in the flood zone, said Wells Code Enforcement Officer Jodine Adams. Of the 2,100 units, “670 will be either positively or negatively effected” by the new maps, she said. In addition, “60 new lots will be in the flood (zone) …. up to 691 new units.” Most of the newly affected area is along Webhanet Drive.
Carter said local coastal communities will decide within the next few weeks whether they want to work together to hire Ransom.
He said the sooner the decision is made that better because once the FEMA appeal process begins — it hasn’t started yet — communities have only 90 days to file an appeal.
Old Orchard Beach and Kennebunkport have already voted to join the appeal effort through Ransom Consulting.
Old Orchard Beach at a recent Town Council meeting approved the up to $75,000 to cover the cost of the two phases of the appeal.
Engineer Nathan Dill with Ransom Consulting, spoke at a recent Old Orchard Beach Town Council meeting. In Old Orchard Beach, parts of town that would be impacted by the proposed maps include areas in the Ocean Park community and along East Grand Avenue.
If areas of town are designated to have increased flood risk, property owners there could end up paying higher insurance premiums, and house values would decrease, which would decrease the amount of property taxes the town collects, said Dill.
Dill said the studies and trials Ransom plans on conducting will provide more accurate information than the testing done by FEMA. He said Ransom would be using testing methods that were used in a successful appeal in Louisiana.
Data collected for the appeal would include topographic and geological information, model simulations, historic events, including statistical calculations, according to written Old Orchard Beach Town Council commentary.
Kennebunkport Town Manager Laurie Smith said the proposed maps would expand flood zones and the base flood plains have increased in several areas in town. She said areas that would be particularly impacted include Goose Rocks area, along the Kennebunk River and in Cape Porpoise.
“We are looking for communities to join us. Kennebunkport was the first to vote to move forward with that joint process,”said Smith. “The process depends on doing that on a regional basis.”
Greg Tansley, city planner with Biddeford, said the proposed maps would expand flood zones along the coast. He said there has been no discussion at this time from the city regarding filing an appeal.
Kennebunk First Selectman Michael Pardue said the town staff will be meeting with FEMA officials on Aug. 23.
“FEMA is coming here to review the maps with staff to talk about any changes, and once that conversation has been held we’ll make a determination from there as far as whether we will be involved in an appeal process or not, but we wanted to have a one-on-one conversation with FEMA first,” he said.
— Staff Writer Liz Gotthelf can be contacted at 282-1535, ext. 325 or egotthelf@journaltribune.com. Staff Writer Alan Bennett at 282-1535, ext. 329 or abennett@journaltribune. Associate Editor Dina Mendros at 282-1535, ext. 324 or dmendros@journaltribune.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less