Harvey Field Master Plan

HYDRAULICS/FLOODING
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) ADJUSTED 100-YR FLOOD LEVELS FOR HARVEY FIELD:  Prior To February 26, 2000 even though history and structures on the Airport property standing for more than 100 years proved the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) levels were too high, the Harvey Field was required to fill, elevate or flood proof airport construction projects five (5) to ten (10) feet higher than necessary.  On February 25, 1998, Harvey Field was advised by the Corp of Engineers that the FIRM overstated the flood levels at Harvey Field by five (5) to ten (10) feet.  On April 29, 1998, the Corp of Engineers issued reduced flood level recommendations by five feet or more for Harvey Field.  On February 26, 2000 (two years after the process began) FEMA notified Harvey Field that it concurred with the adjusted 100-year Flood Elevation for Harvey Field developed by the Corp of Engineers.    See 1998 Corp/FEMA HF 100-Yr Flood Elevation Report

Hydraulic Studies:  Through a cooperative effort the Marshland Study Review Committee, Harvey Field (HF) and Snohomish County have addressed hydraulic/flooding concerns for the entireMarshland Flood Control District.  In accordance with FEMA’s requirements, two technical studies have been conducted regarding flooding and the impact of development in the Marshland Flood District (includes the South Snohomish Urban Growth Area).  The first technical study, jointly favored by Snohomish County Council and Marshland Study Review Committee addresses the South Snohomish UGA and Marshland Agricultural District and is referred to as “Alternative 5 (Alt 5) revisions to the Snohomish River Floodway Analysis Affecting Mapping on FEMA FIRM panels 53061C1061C1062F,53061C1065F”.  See West Consultant’s UGA Hydraulic Report on the UGA  The second technical study, ordered by Harvey Field, addresses the 18 acre runway protection zone (RPZ) just south of Airport Way, and is referred to as
"Analysis of Snohomish Master Plan Update and Clear Approaches to Harvey Field"
Both studies were performed by West Consultants, the firm under contract with Snohomish County and FEMA.   HF chose to contract with West Consultants on the Master Plan hydraulic work to ensure maximum credibility, continuity and consistency with Snohomish County and FEMA’s flood plain work.  
Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) Process
The CLOMR is a formal application submitted to FEMA requesting a revision to the current flood plain maps which consider fill impacts following hydraulic studies that support the request. The hydraulic studies must conclude that the revision will not cause more than a one (1) foot rise in base flood elevation (100-Year level) (BFE).  See report Corp/FEMA HF 100-Yr Flood Elevation. The current CLOMR action underway by Snohomish County seeks to preserve the industrial uses within the South Snohomish UGA and increase development opportunities for the agricultural interests in the valley based on sound hydraulic studies that meet FEMA’s requirements. West’s UGA  hydraulic report For the agricultural interests this would mean that the current 2% development cap, would increase to somewhere between 6% and 9%.  For the South Snohomish UGA it would return the industrial area to a status that allows industrial development which is the purpose of a UGA in the first place.  

MASTER PLAN vs. CLOMR: To clarify, the Harvey Field Master Plan Update which began in 2001 is unrelated to the County CLOMR process which began in 2004.  When the Master planning process began, the UGA industrial properties were not restricted and development was allowed in accordance with adopted floodplain and shoreline regulations.  Later, FEMA re-mapped the flood plain, the new maps were adopted, and the mapping placed the restricted “density fringe” designation on the South Snohomish UGA.  Once adopted “density fringe” took precedence over the existing industrial zoning causing the existing industrial uses to become “non compliant” and the county and city’s comprehensive plans inconsistent with the use and designation.  To remedy the contradiction between the comprehensive plan, existing zoning and the density fringe designation, Snohomish County began the CLOMR process.  Hydraulic studies were conducted and the resulting conclusion led to the Council’s unanimous decision to press forward with the CLOMR process under Alternative 5 (Alt 5) revisions to the Snohomish River Floodway Analysis Affecting Mapping on FEMA FIRM panels 53061C1061C1062F,53061C1065F)  as recommended by the Marshland Study Review Committee. (See letter dated October 16, 2005)

Marshland Study Review Committee’s October 16, 2005 recommendation

Hydraulic Report for the CLOMR process for the South Snohomish UGA

West Consultants Hydraulic Report for the Runway Clear Zone Road Loop

SNOHOMISH COUNTY FLOOD HAZARD REGULATIONS

The CLOMR action is very complicated, understanding how the CLOMR process works is difficult. However, the facts prove that the hydraulic studies support Snohomish County’s Alternative 5 CLOMR action confirmed by Mr. Craig Ladiser, Director of Snohomish County Planning and Development Services at the Snohomish City Council meeting on April 17, 2007 during his presentation on the CLOMR.  ##

Misinformation is circulating which claims the Airport is responsible for the CLOMR action by Snohomish County, and further the CLOMR action is for the benefit of the Airport only, and in addition, the County will be spending thousands of dollars to conduct a Biological Assessment for the benefit of the Airport . This information is false. The CLOMR action was not triggered by the airport Master Plan update, by request of the airport or because of the airport’s development plan.  The action was undertaken by Snohomish County to correct the restrictive “density fringe” designation applied over the South Snohomish UGA industrial properties following the re-mapping of the flood plain and to correct a comprehensive plan conflict on 53 acres inside the UGA as the density fringe designation is not permitted inside the UGA, and lastly to increase fill opportunities for the Marshland Agricultural land owners from the current 2% to 6%. The CLOMR action would be much smaller in scale if the UGA was the only area of consideration; approximately 325 acres as opposed to approximately 6000 acres with the inclusion of the Marshland Flood Control District.

CLOMR COMPLICATIONS:  After the County CLOMR process began for the UGA and Marshland, it became more complicated because of litigation in another part of the country under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).  Endangered Species Related Laws, Regulations, Policies & Notices  As a result of the litigation, FEMA stiffened its map revision policy and required additional studies in order to submit the CLOMR application to FEMA which is underway; i.e. an ESA section 7 consultation and biological assessment (BA).   The hardships imposed on the South Snohomish UGA industrial land owners nearly 3 years ago and still in place today as a result of the re-mapping of the flood plain is a fact unknown to most and not understood by the public.  The UGA Industrial land owners have been at a stand still since the map revisions were imposed because of the 2% penalty restriction has been processing now for over 19 months.