Another night of outstanding reading has afforded me a look into the world of the Tollgate development. To be honest, the level of detail found in the Final Environmental Impact Statement

(FEIS) impressed me. But beyond the pages of detailed information that would

put Albert Einstein to sleep are some hidden concerns and assumptions.

There is one underlying factor that continues to thread through one of

the biggest potential impacts of the proposed development — increased flooding.

First let’s set the stage for what King County thinks is important with

regards to the Snoqualmie Valley. In 1989, the county developed its

Snoqualmie Valley Community Plan listing five major themes _ to protect the

Snoqualmie River in terms of water quality; invest in flood protection measures;

preserve rural areas, resource land and sensitive environments; promote the

economic health of the Valley cities and keep the Interstate 90 corridor scenic.

Notice that the second theme focuses on investing in flood protection measures.

After the flood of 1959, the state, Army Corps of Engineers and the

county all agreed that flood protection was of key importance, thus the network

of levees that currently traverse much of the Upper and Lower valleys.

Despite the importance of these levees in protecting life and habitat, all of the

above agencies continue to point fingers on who should be responsible for

maintaining these levees.

Now keeping in mind that the levees are not receiving any

maintenance and their long-term viability is in question, here comes the biggest

concern about the Tollgate development. The FEIS states that the hydrology

modeling studies were based on several assumptions, the first of which is,

“Existing South Fork levees were assumed to remain in place for assessment of

South Fork flooding risks and elevations.”

So a development is being planned, with elevations and flooding

impact data based on a levee system that nobody seems to want to maintain.

If continued development is to occur within the Snoqualmie Valley,

then the levee system either needs to be maintained or eliminated, the latter

of which will wipe a couple of Upper Valley cities off the map. In addition

to concerns about the levee system, which the proposal is so strongly

depending on for flood data, there suggests the need for increased compensatory

water storage due to impacts to wetlands. Despite each developers’ assurances

that there will be no significant increases in water volumes, many longtime

Valley residents can tell you that water tables have increased and that areas, not

prone to minor flooding 30 years ago, are now seeing water regularly. The

FEIS even states, “There is a potential for downstream flooding impacts if fill

is placed without adequate compensatory storage. Preliminary indications

are that the development may not have adequate compensatory storage.”

Despite my obvious concerns about rural character, it appears the

Tollgate FEIS is attempting to address several major impacts. But if the development

is counting on a rundown levee system for flood impact data, it’s time for

the city, county, state and Army Corp of Engineers to step up and assure the

vitality of their flood control efforts.

Jim McKiernan