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

T.F. Green Airport Improvement ProgramEnvironmental Impact Statement and Final Section 4(f) Evaluationfish, wildlife, and plants commonly occurring in the affected area (Table 5-125). Furthermore, the habitatassociated with state-listed species would not be impacted.Table 5-125Alternatives B2 and B4: Summary of Impacts to Important Biotic CommunitiesFish Total Waterfowl orFish Run Spawning/ Terrestrial Grassland Wading Bird Atlantic WhiteStreams Foraging Habitat Bird Habitat Habitat Pine Barren Cedar Stand(linear feet) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres)Alternative B2 142 1 0 36.0 0.5 1.5 0 0Alternative B4 0 0 8.6 1.2 1.4 0 0Source: VHB, Inc.1 Includes a 30-foot culvert extension and minor relocati on of 112 linear feet of the channel from its present locati on.5.12.8 Avoidance and MinimizationAlternatives B2 and B4 were evaluated to identify ways to avoid and minimize impacts to biotic communities andbiodiversity within the Project and Study Areas. The No-Action Alternative would only impact biotic communitiesthrough implementing the on-going VMP and WHMP. Chapter 6, Mitigation, contains mitigation measures.5.12.8.1 AvoidanceDescriptions of the elements included in Alternatives B2 and B4 are provided in Chapter 3, Alternatives Analysis.As stated in that chapter, the runways at T.F. Green Airport cannot be realigned to avoid all impact to naturaland managed biotic communities. These habitats occur directly adjacent to Runway 23 and Runway 34 Ends.Avoidance strategies are not required at the Runway 5 and Runway 16 Ends, as productive wildlife or plantcommunities are not present in these areas.Runway 34There are biotic communities at the Runway 34 End which provide productive habitat for plants and animalsspecies common in the Study Area and habitat for the less common species of Greater Conservation Need andstate-listed threatened and endangered species. These biotic communities include forested and standingdeadwood cover types in Wetland A8, various plant associations within Wetland A10 along Buckeye Brook, theaquatic habitat in Buckeye Brook below Warwick Pond, grasslands south of the Runway 34 end, and forestedwetland and open water components within Wetland A13 west of the Runway 34 End.Impacts to habitats south of Runway 34 for Alternatives B2 and B4 could be avoided if the runway end is shiftednorth along with new safety enhancements towards the Runway 16 End, which is already developed and doesnot include habitats that support fish, wildlife or plant populations. This scenario was evaluated in theLevel 4 Alternatives Analysis presented in the DEIS and was found not practicable since this would require PostRoad to be relocated.The DEIS Level 5 analysis of impacts to fish, wildlife and plant resources provided a description of measureswhich reduced impacts under Alternatives B2 and B4. These included the elimination of a hold apron foraircraft awaiting departure at the Runway 34 End and the routing of the Perimeter Road through the ROFAChapter 5 - Environmental Consequences 5-238 July 2011\\mawatr\ev\09228.00\reports\FEIS_Final_July_2011\PVD_CH05_Environmental_Cons_JUL_2011.doc