SNOHOMISH — In 2006, an opposition pamphlet begged the question: “Why would ‘ANYONE’ want to expand an airport in a flood plain?”
Almost 20 years later, a fight is on again.
Harvey Field, south of Snohomish city limits, is seeking to expand its footprint to reposition its runway further south to suit the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) compliance requirements to remove obstructions, such as the perimeter fence at Airport Way. To obtain a bigger footprint, though, it needs to reroute Airport Way to make space for the re-situated north-south runway.
The proposal adds six acres of fill dirt, and removes 35 trees.
In November 2006, a sizable flood in the river valley spread far, overtopping Highway 9. The flood of ‘75 did worse when it tore a hole in the French Slough dike.
Harvey Field commissioned an extensive environmental assessment to show cause for its expansion plans.
Comments on that draft report are being taken until Friday, May 24.
The only public meeting will be on Tuesday, May 14 from 6 to 7:30 p.m. at the Harvey Field Hangar 15 Event Center, 9900 Airport Way, Snohomish.
The added fill would go in the grassland south of the airport that is currently a floodwater receiving area.
Consultants’ maps depict the fill would be a raised area that extends off the end of the proposed runway, not a fill of the whole basin, and use culverts.
Flood control managers contend any fill in this space would place much more pressure on the levee system holding back the nearby Snohomish River and Hanson Slough. Area residents worry that if those levees fail, they’ll suffer damages.
Harvey Field’s consultants RS&H, a transportation engineering firm, indicate this won’t happen.
On paper, the consultant’s calculations say this plan crosses under the 15% maximum change limit allowed by the county’s density fringe code for maximum allowable obstruction of floodwaters, although they also write they aren’t sure where the water will flow toward.
“Given that the Harvey Property is in an area with many surrounding levees, the exact flow direction is unclear,” RS&H’s appendix on water resources states.
The entire area south of Snohomish proper is under development restrictions because it’s in a floodplain. In 2016, the county looked at a similar plan and said the expansion could meet its guidelines. There are enough land cuts on the property, which could take in water, to offset the land fill elsewhere that displaces floodwater.
Harvey’s operators say they need to expand because as it stands the main runway doesn’t meet FAA standards. The FAA does not like that the runway is hemmed between the railroad tracks and powerlines on one end and the perimeter fence at Airport Way at the other. These above-ground obstructions for pilots is one of the two reasons the runway does not meet FAA standards. The other is that the runway is too narrow.
The runway safety area is 50 feet too short to meet FAA standards, too.
At stake for the Harveys is that the FAA will restrict giving grants if the airport’s out of compliance, airport owner Kandace Harvey said to the Tribune in 2022. Without funding, it would be tough for the airport to make improvements on its own, she said at the time.
At that time, the draft plan was being prepared and taking a round of public comments, which included a December 2022 meeting.
Harvey’s plan is to have a single runway instead of having a paved runway and a grass runway parallel to each other.
The environmental assessment says a length of 2,400 feet is the shortest the runway should be for the size of planes that use it today.
The expansion is to suit the largest aircraft that use Harvey Field, which are the planes operated for skydiving, Marshland Flood Control District’s attorney Gary Brandstetter submitted for comments.
“Extending a runway for a recreational activity that does not need an extension to operate is at odds with the mission of Marshland to protect against flooding and drain property as efficiently as possible,” Marshland’s attorney wrote.
The Snohomish County Farm Bureau wrote in that it is concerned by flooding and the loss of ag land.
The airport happens to have bought much of the floodway farmland on the opposite side of Airport Way.
The final environmental assessment was prepared from an earlier round of comments taken during December 2022.
The record of public comments have largely opposed the expansion, although pilots cheer it on. Harvey is an important reliever airport for private flight.
Longer runway lengths than 2,400 feet were analyzed, “but to meet the Airport’s critical aircraft requirements, as well as meet (the county’s) density fringe requirements, 2,400 feet was determined to be the preferred runway length,” the draft report reads.
The draft environmental assessment can be read online at https://harveyfield.mysocialpinpoint.com/en/home/ under the link “Documents and Displays.” The public comments are in Appendix J.
A final report could come later this year to send to the FAA for consideration.
