Pros And Cons Of Building In Flood Plains

Two years ago, sparked by the devastating flooding of the Skagit River delta, the state Legislature created the Joint Select Committee on Flood Damage Reduction to study what could be done every time Western Washington rivers swell and spill.

The committee has drafted its first comprehensive report, which basically recommends that new developments located within a flood plain "be built in a manner that will not back up water." The committee also is recommending that flood-control funds be raised in already developed flood plains to construct additional dikes and levees, and suggests that the increased funding could support non-structural control methods such as land buyouts and better communication/disclosure about the flood potential of land located in flood plains.

Home buyers and sellers, along with real estate agents and brokers, soon felt the affects of the report. Two of the fastest growing areas in the state, the Skagit and Green River valleys, contain a considerable amount of flood plain.

"The report is controversial because it suggests we view a flood plain as hazardous," said Jim Kramer, manager of King County's Surface Water Management Division. "In some areas, it's telling people they can't build a home in a flood plain the way they used to."

The pros and cons of building in a flood plain bring heated discussion. Some folks will tell you that the pleasure of living by a river or stream far outweigh the inconveniences caused by a big flood every 10 years. In addition, property values in a flood plain are often greater than the cost of building levees, so the construction of specific projects has been considered justifiable.

Opponents of flood-plain development ask why we should try to stave off an imminent problem by spending millions of dollars on dikes and levees. Houses should be on higher ground and, similar to the practice in Asia, the flood plain adjacent to the river should be used as farmland, they argue. That way, when the river naturally floods, losses are minimal.

Beyond the arguments on whether, or how, flood plains should be developed, the committee recommends that flood hazards be disclosed to potential property buyers in three ways:

-- By amending the Land Development Act to expressly state that location of a development wholly or partially within a 100-year flood plain must be disclosed as a physical hazard.

-- By requiring the Department of Ecology to file maps of 100-year flood plains with the county auditor of each county. The title search would then turn up this information and it would appear on the title insurance policy.

-- By requiring that each earnest-money agreement and each document conveying real property located in a 100-year flood plain contain a warning stating that the property is located in such an area. And by requiring the seller to disclose the location as a hidden defect in the property.

Will these new disclosure requirements, if adopted, make or break real estate deals? Probably not. Folks who buy or build in a flood plain should not be surprised by what comes with the lay of the land.

The Flood Damage Reduction Report is being finalized this week and will soon be available to consumers. The final report will strongly suggest legislation. Questions and comments may be sent to the committee's co-chairs: Rep. Rob Johnson, D-Mount Vernon, JLOB 338, Olympia, WA 98504, telephone 206-786-7970; or Sen. Ann Anderson, R-Acme, 303 Legislative Building, Olympia, WA 98504, telephone 206-786-7682.

Tom Kelly is a private real-estate consultant.