SNOHOMISH – Opponents of a plan for Harvey Field’s growth are trying to force Snohomish County to quit paying for studies that could help the private airport expand.
The county has spent about 16 months trying to clear federal regulatory hurdles that stand in the way of the airport’s growth, a county official said this week.
So far, county taxpayers have spent about $25,000 and may be asked to spend up to $200,000 more.
Opponents are lobbying county officials to stop spending taxpayer money to help a private business. And earlier this week, the city of Snohomish decided to side with them.
“It’s going to cause us problems,” Snohomish City Councilman Dean Randall said. “I’m not against the airport by any means, but I don’t believe it should be expanded.”
Airport owner Kandace Harvey on Thursday declined to comment, saying the family is still considering this week’s developments.
On Tuesday the Snohomish City Council voted 4-0 to push the county to stop pursuing changes in federal flood regulations. Those changes could ease the way for airport expansion.
Three council members – Doug Thorndike, R.C. “Swede” Johnson and Larry Countryman – abstained from the vote because, they said, the airport has yet to complete its development plan.
The airport is in the county’s jurisdiction, just south of the city limits across the Snohomish River. The land is in the city’s urban growth area. In the future, the airport could be part of the city.
Snohomish’s opposition “will be influential,” said County Councilman Dave Somers, whose district includes Snohomish and the airport. “I don’t know whether the full (County) Council will agree with that. But I’m glad that the city has expressed an opinion on this.”
The County Council will discuss money for flood-plain studies during a Tuesday subcommittee meeting, but it hasn’t set a time for making a decision, Somers said.
County and city officials have struggled with land use issues associated with the airport and surrounding properties for years.
Small airplanes and helicopters have flown from Harvey Field since 1945.
The airport is in a flood plain, though that area has been zoned for industrial use for more than a decade.
The Harvey family has been developing a blueprint to build new hangar space and other buildings to meet growing service demand over the next 20 years.
An average of 326 aircraft are parked at the airport each day. The Harveys figure that number could increase to 410 over the next 20 years.
Federal and state aviation officials support the airport expansion because airports are considered essential public facilities.
The hitch in the expansion plans came along in 2005, when the Federal Emergency Management Agency redrew the area’s flood maps.
The new maps put stricter development rules on property owners in the Snohomish Valley.
“We are kind of stuck in the middle on this thing,” Somers said.
In December 2005, the County Council unanimously decided to get FEMA to put the area under the former flood hazard designation, which would allow property owners to add more buildings.
Now Snohomish wants the county to stop asking for that change.
The process also is costing more money than county officials originally expected, County Councilman Dave Gossett said.
The county must conduct a study to prove that proposed changes in flood regulations won’t harm chinook salmon that migrate in the Snohomish River, said Craig Ladiser, director of the county’s development and planning services.
That study could cost the county somewhere between $100,000 and $200,000, Ladiser said.
Somers, who is a fish biologist, said spending that much money gives him pause. “This doesn’t benefit the county, and where would we get the money?” he said.
The proposed airport expansion has piqued emotions in Snohomish. About 300 people attended Tuesday’s City Council meeting to share their opinions.
Opponents say that the expansion would make noise and traffic problems worse and lower their property values. They also believe that the work would build up the land and increase the damage from floods in the valley.
A grass-roots group aimed at stopping the airport’s growth, called Stewards of the Land and Community, gave the council a petition they said had 1,000 signatures from people opposing the airport’s plan.
One of the more controversial parts of the expansion plan calls for building a new, 2,400-foot-long runway that would push beyond the airport’s current boundaries.
That would require shifting Airport Road south, into an area that turned into a lake during the 2006 Election Day flood.
“I’m all for the airport as it is,” said Andrew Swan, of Snohomish. “We don’t want the airport to go anywhere, but we don’t want the airport to be bigger and noisier.”
Supporters of the expansion plans include pilots who say that the airport creates local jobs and brings in tax revenue.
Barb Schach of Kirkland keeps her airplane at Harvey Field. The airport is part of Snohomish’s charm and boosts the local economy, she said.
“We’d like to pour money into Snohomish because we love Snohomish,” she said.
And airport workers and pilots have worked hard to solve the noise problem generated by the airport, Schach said.
“Nobody wants to be a noisemaker,” she said.
Owners of Harvey Field in Snohomish want to build new hangar space, a runway and other facilities to meet growing demand at the 148-acre private airport over the next 20 years.
The Snohomish City Council on Tuesday voted to urge Snohomish County to cease attempts to change federal flood regulations, which would ease the way for airport expansion. The county has spent about 16 months and $25,000 on the process and may need up to $200,000 more to cut through the red tape.
The Snohomish County Council will discuss the issue in a subcommittee meeting at 9 a.m. Tuesday on the eighth floor of County Administration Building East, 3000 Rockefeller Ave., Everett. The County Council has yet to schedule when or how to settle the issue.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
