T.F. Green Airport Improvement Program - FEIS Chapters - PVD

T.F. Green Airport Improvement ProgramEnvironmental Impact Statement and Final Section 4(f) Evaluationand provide only limited potential environmental and cost savings benefits over an 8,700-foot runway. 127 FAAdid not advance Alternative B3 South further in the alternative screening process because it would result in adecreased likelihood that an airline would choose to commence non-stop West Coast service due to the runwayutility findings presented in this section, and its potential environmental impacts would be substantially similarto Alternative B4.3.7.3.4 Level 5 Alternatives Retained for Detailed Environmental ConsequencesThis section provides a summary of each of the three Level 5 T.F. Green Airport Improvement ProgramAlternatives that underwent detailed environmental consequences impact assessment in support of the Level 5Alternatives Screening. 128 The impacts of each Level 5 Alternative are compared to the No-Action Alternative.Each alternative includes the program elements shown in Table 3-9.As part of the iterative process, Alternatives B1 and B2 were also modified to reduce impacts to naturalresources on the Runway 34 End and to limit mandatory land acquisition. Design changes applied to allalternatives on the Runway 34 End included removing the hold apron, moving the Perimeter Road between theEMAS bed and the runway end, and relocating the Perimeter Road to avoid wetlands near the air traffic controltower. The environmental analysis for the Level 4 Alternatives assumed that land acquisition in the RPZs wouldbe mandatory. The FAA then re-examined the assumptions and determined that properties within theAlternative B1 and B2 Runway 5-23 RPZs and Alternative B4 Runway 5 RPZ would be eligible for voluntaryland acquisition instead of mandatory acquisition. 129 The environmental analysis for the Level 5 Alternativesassumed that both the land acquisition for project-related noise mitigation and clearing of the RPZ would bevoluntary.3.7.4 Level 5 Screening Step 4 – Practicability Analysis of Alternative B1Alternatives B2 and B4 involve reduced wetland impacts as well as fewer land acquisitions and lower costscompared to Alternative B1 and, therefore, were advanced to the Level 6 impact analysis. Alternative B1 waseliminated from further consideration due to high and potentially unmitigatable wetland impacts,socioeconomic impacts due to land acquisition, and construction costs. The following section describes therationale for eliminating Alternative B1.3.7.4.1 Wetland Impacts and Mitigation MeasuresAlternative B1, with 19.0 acres of wetland impacts, would have twice the wetland impacts of Alternatives B2and B4. Alternative B2 would impact a total of 7.5 acres of wetlands with impacts on the Runway 23 End andRunway 34 End. Alternative B4 has the fewest acres of wetland impacts (7.3 acres) and limits the wetlandimpacts to the Runway 34 End only.127 See April 22, 2010 Letter from RIAC to FAA in FEIS Appendix E.4, RIAC Decision Documents.128 Alternatives B3 North and South were dismissed prior to the Level 5 detailed environmental analysis because they would not meet the Purpose and Needas fully as the alternatives with longer Runway 5-23 extensions.129 The Alternative B4 Runway 23 End RPZ properties would not be eligible for acquisition because the RPZ remains the same as in the No-Action condition.Chapter 3 – Alternatives Analysis 3-31 July 2011\\mawatr\ev\09228.00\reports\FEIS_Final_July_2011\PVD_CH03_Alternatives_JUL_2011.doc