I would like to comment on the broader issue of flood insurance. As the law is written and enforced by FEMA, the Federal Government has made 1/3 of the real estate of Batavia unsaleable. Who in their right mind or thru ignorance is going to buy property if they are going to be burden with a large annual bill for an event that may or may not occur during their life time? This has just come up on my radar, and I find this very troublesome. Home owners in the Red Zone should be up in arms over this.
I can't see that map well, is there a link to it where I can see it? And John, I'm sure the "no" votes are from people not living in the red zones and likely due to fear of their taxes going up.
Why is this going to be mandatory? If a person wanted to risk not having flood insurance, shouldn't that be their option?
My Mom talked about the Tonawanda coming half way up our street in the 1940's. After that, something was done to the creek and it never happened again. So in 70-ish years there hasn't been flooding, but I am potentially in a flood zone?
Lori, it is the banks that hold the mortgage that insist on you having flood insurance. And traditional insurance companies either will not write policies or charge very high rates. If you do not have a mortgage, then it is voluntary.
The people not in the red zone will have their taxes go up if the people who are in the red zone can not sell their property. The value of the property will drop and the others will have to make up the difference. This problem will bite everyone in the City and in the school district.
Thank you for the explanation, John! Mortgage is paid off, so I'm glad to read it isn't mandatory for me. Just trying to keep my head above water with bills as it is (groan...bad play on words)
Lori. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure this 'flood insurance' isn't "always" mandatory.
As long as you aren't financing your house, you have the option of carrying 'flood insurance'. It's the same as purchasing a car. If you pay cash for it, you are not required to carry collision insurance. But, if a bank/finance company is covering your purchase, they don't want to lose money (should you smash it up), so they do require the 'extra' insurance.
If you OWN your home, you can roll the dice, and drop the flood coverage. But, in that case, should you get flooded out, you are the one who will take the hit.
Then click the "view" button on the left and it becomes allows you to zoom in/out, pan, etc.
I just clicked on my link and it takes you to the whole country. Zoom in until you get to Batavia. I guess because I put "Montclair Avenue" in the query, that's where you'll wind up. Doesn't matter, just pan left or right, zoom in or out until you find your own street.
Why the "No" votes?
Why the "No" votes?
I would like to comment on
I would like to comment on the broader issue of flood insurance. As the law is written and enforced by FEMA, the Federal Government has made 1/3 of the real estate of Batavia unsaleable. Who in their right mind or thru ignorance is going to buy property if they are going to be burden with a large annual bill for an event that may or may not occur during their life time? This has just come up on my radar, and I find this very troublesome. Home owners in the Red Zone should be up in arms over this.
I can't see that map well, is
I can't see that map well, is there a link to it where I can see it? And John, I'm sure the "no" votes are from people not living in the red zones and likely due to fear of their taxes going up.
Why is this going to be mandatory? If a person wanted to risk not having flood insurance, shouldn't that be their option?
My Mom talked about the Tonawanda coming half way up our street in the 1940's. After that, something was done to the creek and it never happened again. So in 70-ish years there hasn't been flooding, but I am potentially in a flood zone?
Lori, it is the banks that
Lori, it is the banks that hold the mortgage that insist on you having flood insurance. And traditional insurance companies either will not write policies or charge very high rates. If you do not have a mortgage, then it is voluntary.
The people not in the red zone will have their taxes go up if the people who are in the red zone can not sell their property. The value of the property will drop and the others will have to make up the difference. This problem will bite everyone in the City and in the school district.
Thank you for the
Thank you for the explanation, John! Mortgage is paid off, so I'm glad to read it isn't mandatory for me. Just trying to keep my head above water with bills as it is (groan...bad play on words)
Lori. I could be wrong, but
Lori. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure this 'flood insurance' isn't "always" mandatory.
As long as you aren't financing your house, you have the option of carrying 'flood insurance'. It's the same as purchasing a car. If you pay cash for it, you are not required to carry collision insurance. But, if a bank/finance company is covering your purchase, they don't want to lose money (should you smash it up), so they do require the 'extra' insurance.
If you OWN your home, you can roll the dice, and drop the flood coverage. But, in that case, should you get flooded out, you are the one who will take the hit.
Here is the map of the city
Here is the map of the city flood area for the City of Batavia, from the FEMA site:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=montclair%20avenue%20Ba…
Then click the "view" button on the left and it becomes allows you to zoom in/out, pan, etc.
I just clicked on my link and it takes you to the whole country. Zoom in until you get to Batavia. I guess because I put "Montclair Avenue" in the query, that's where you'll wind up. Doesn't matter, just pan left or right, zoom in or out until you find your own street.
a no brainer
a no brainer