• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Post Flood Restoration, Drawing the Line

jar546

jar546

CBO
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
12,816
Location
Not where I really want to be
I have a devastated Borough that I live in and also have under contract as a third party agency where I am the BCO. Approximately 400 homes were flooded and near 100 of them received water into the 2nd floor. Many homes are older with wood lathe wall & plaster over a scratch coat which has horse hair in it. Here is the problem.

Not many want to gut their walls. They think they will run a dehumidifier, fix cracks, paint and move on. The toxic, muddy silt left behind and bacteria fest will still be inside the walls. I am pushing for gutting up to the flood level in homes but don't know where to draw the line and hold it based on my actual legal obligation.

Does anyone have experience with this?

For the most part, the unfortunate residents are in denial and think this will be a short process once they get power back in which is a whole other problem. We have to get all houses affected disconnected from the grid before we can get power to the grid so I am going house by house by house with other electrical inspectors that work for me and assisting the POCO as they blank or block meters.
 
Sorry Jeff...that is a tough spot....I think you are in the right, but I don't know the path that gets you there legally.....maybe a health dept would have some input as to mold, bacteria, and other EWWWWWW that mightbe inside the walls now???
 
You also have the flood waters damaging the insulation, mechanicals, plumbing, and electrical systems. All of which will more than likely have to be replaced
 
Around here in Joplin, MO, where the tornado damaged or destroyed 7,500 homes, we're seeing most owners gutting any walls that got wet. Some are sheetrock, some are the old plaster/lath, but then it's not floating sewage and other toxins either that got it wet. Mold will form inside before they ever see it on the surface.
 
Here's the bigger issue I see:

The more extensive the work you require, the more likely you will be to trigger tear down under the National Flood Insurance Program requirements [aka, the 50% rule].

In my opinion, the first thing to look at is how the local ordinance values the property and the cost of renovations, and how the clock gets reset for multiple projects.

Then handle each project within those constraints.
 
By the way, "drawing the line" is contrary to Milton's Rule. Yes, there is some point at which things have to happen, but that doesn't mean a red card for every foul.
 
Milton's rule most definitely needs to be followed when considering that someone may lose their home.

In some instances it may help to post violations to record the fact that a structure needs to be brought up to code. The NFIP standard gives exceptions to the 50% rule.

Any reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, or other improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the "start of construction" of the improvement. This term includes structures which have incurred "substantial damage," regardless of the actual repair work performed. The term does not, however, include either:

1.Any project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations of state or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which have been identified by the local code enforcement official and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions or

2.Any alterations of a "historic structure," provided that the alteration will not preclude the structure's continued designation as a "historic structure."
 
The first exception helps to determine what costs are applied when following the 50/50 rule. A posted violation documents the need to bring something up to code and it could be argued that those costs can not then be held against someone as far as substantial damage is concerned.
 
Did the city reference a code provision?

The IEBC provisions on repairs could possibly provide some justification.
 
Inside the exterior walls is insulation, electrical, mechanical and plumbing along with mold, mildew and other toxic contaminants from the flooding. There were many home heating oil tanks that upset and a strong odor of heating oil through out the town. They will be gutting their houses and that is about the way it will be.
 
I and a few other volunteer CEO's spent Sunday doing initial damage assessment in a community on the NY side of the Susquehanna river. They are calling it a 500 year flood, and they will be a long time recovering from this one.
 
jar546 said:
Inside the exterior walls is insulation, electrical, mechanical and plumbing along with mold, mildew and other toxic contaminants from the flooding. There were many home heating oil tanks that upset and a strong odor of heating oil through out the town. They will be gutting their houses and that is about the way it will be.
Click to expand...
Just make sure people are aware of the 50% rule.
 
How would you figure the cost? The cost of cleaning up the mess and disposal costs will usually far outweigh the actual rebuild costs.

Are you dealing with a State or Federal agency that will determine if the 50% rule applies? Is market value based on the county assessed value or market value in 2005 or today's depressed values. You need some pre-determined criteria in order to justify any determinations and to be consistent. These decisions may not be yours to make. Good Luck!

Joe
 
MARKET VALUE OR FAIR MARKET VALUE: The price at which a free and willing seller is willing to sell and a free and willing buyer is willing to buy under normal market conditions.
 
This is from our Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance (designed from the NFIP)

c. When it is proposed for a non-conforming structure to be remodeled, renovated, rehabilitated, added to or in any way improved, the total cost of the proposed modifications must be evaluated for "substantial improvement". If the total costs of improvement are fifty percent (50%) or more of the building value, the building must come into compliance with this Chapter. "Total costs" include all structural elements, all interior finishing elements, all utility and service equipment, demolition of storm-damaged building components, labor and costs associated with moving or altering undamaged building components, built-in appliances, hardware, in addition to profit and overhead.

d. "Building value" is the market value of the structure only. Land and exterior improvements, such as swimming pools, pool enclosures, accessory structures, landscaping, paving, fencing, etc., must be excluded.

e. The construction costs to be calculated for both "substantial damage" and "substantial improvement" include both the structural and finish or labor and materials. This includes lighting fixtures, built-in appliances, interior moldings, paneling, tiling, wall-to-wall carpet over sub-flooring, built-in cabinets, etc. The cost to demolish undamaged building components must be established and included. Overhead and profit are also to be included, but not the cost of permits.Again these cost should only be calculated at what it would cost to bring the structure into compliance as the building was build before the damage. If the building was not build to the current code then these exception to the 50% rule may apply.

1.Any project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations of state or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which have been identified by the local code enforcement official and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions or

2.Any alterations of a "historic structure," provided that the alteration will not preclude the structure's continued designation as a "historic structure."

In some cases this may be a fine line or seem like splitting hairs but kicking someone out of their home is hard thing to do.
 
jar546 said:
50% is cost, not work area. correct?
Click to expand...
There's no rule of thumb because flood regulations are implemented at the local level - that means all kinds of different ways, and the specifics of the local jurisdiction are what is relevant. For example, some jurisdictions reset the value of the property as soon as there is a CO [i.e. serial permits allow infinite added value]. Others never reset the limit [i.e. two 25% additions and you are done for good]. And jurisdictions use all sorts of different methods for calculating and documenting the value of a project - from whatever the contractor puts on the permit app (aka "the $30 a square foot, kitchen addition) to assembly data based on RS Means or other standard sources. Keep in mind that home owner repairs apply at market value...usually.

It's a political mess - and this should be your first line of discussion not the actual construction or demolition requirements.
 
mn joe said:
How would you figure the cost? The cost of cleaning up the mess and disposal costs will usually far outweigh the actual rebuild costs. Are you dealing with a State or Federal agency that will determine if the 50% rule applies? Is market value based on the county assessed value or market value in 2005 or today's depressed values. You need some pre-determined criteria in order to justify any determinations and to be consistent. These decisions may not be yours to make. Good Luck! Joe
Click to expand...
Federal Flood Insurance is implemented only through local ordinance. By Law, States have no say in the matter...Florida found itself in the courts over it when they created their first State Building Code and included Flood Hazard requirements therein.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top