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

T.F. Green Airport Improvement ProgramEnvironmental Impact Statement and Final Section 4(f) EvaluationAs shown in Table 3-7, Alternative B3 South would have substantially similar environmental impacts andconstruction costs as Alternative B4. The physical impacts of construction at the Runway 16, 34, and 23 Endswould be the same as Alternative B4. However, Alternative B4 would realize an additional 400 feet of runwayutility which could accommodate a maximum of approximately 55,000 more potential non-stop West Coastpassengers annually (resulting in $13.7 million more in potential airline revenue annually) than the 8,300-footconfiguration. FAA did not advance Alternative B3 South further in the alternative screening process.As a result of evaluating funding availability, safety enhancements were prioritized over efficiency enhancements.Safety enhancements would be implemented by the end of 2015 whereas efficiency enhancements would beimplemented in 2020 (except in the case of Alternative B4, where the runway extension would also be complete bythe end of 2015). A new roadway element associated with the Runway 16-34 safety enhancements, PartiallyRelocated Airport Road, was proposed due to the length of time required to acquire properties associated withFully Relocated Airport Road and to limit the period of community disruption also associated with a fullrelocation of Airport Road.The FAA evaluated the environmental impacts and construction costs of Alternatives B1, B2, and B4. 132Alternatives B2 and B4 involve mitigatable wetland impacts as well as fewer land acquisitions and lowerconstruction costs compared to Alternative B1 and, therefore, would move forward in the alternatives analysisin the EIS. Table 3-10 summarizes the Level 5 screening.Table 3-10Summary of Level 5 Screening AnalysisResults ofAnalysisRationaleAlternative B1 – 9,350-foot Runway 5-23 Eliminated Not practicable, unmitigatable wetland impacts. Satisfies the Purpose and Need.Alternative B2 – 8,700-foot Runway 5-23 Retained Practicable, minimizes impacts to Buckeye Brook (south and north). Satisfies thePurpose and Need.Alternative B3 North – 8,300-foot Runway 5-23 Eliminated Alternative B3 North has substantially similar impacts to Alternative B2, but doesnot satisfy the Purpose and Need to the same extent as Alternative B2.Alternative B4 – 8,700-foot Runway 5-23 Retained Practicable, avoids impacts to Buckeye Brook (south and north). Satisfies thePurpose and Need.Alternative B3 South – 8,300-foot Runway 5-23 Eliminated Alternative B3 South has substantially similar impacts to Alternative B4, but doesnot satisfy the Purpose and Need to the same extent as Alternative B4.132 The results of this analysis are summarized in Table E.7-8 of DEIS Appendix E, Alternatives Analysis.Chapter 3 – Alternatives Analysis 3-35 July 2011\\mawatr\ev\09228.00\reports\FEIS_Final_July_2011\PVD_CH03_Alternatives_JUL_2011.doc