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

T.F. Green Airport Improvement ProgramEnvironmental Impact Statement and Final Section 4(f) EvaluationAnalysis of state-regulated floodplain found that Alternative B2 also impacts floodplain associated withTributary A11 outside of the FEMA FIRM base flood boundary. This impact would also be mitigated at WetlandMitigation Site 1.6.21.13 Coastal ResourcesBased on the impact analysis presented in Chapter 5, Environmental Consequences, there would be no significantimpacts related to coastal resources as a result of the T.F. Green Airport Improvement Program. Therefore nomitigation is required.6.21.14 FarmlandsBased on the impact analysis presented in Chapter 5, Environmental Consequences, there would be no significantimpacts related to farmlands as a result of the T.F. Green Airport Improvement Program. Alternative B2 woulddirectly and indirectly impact a total of 18.8 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance north of existing AirportRoad due to the proposed Fully Relocated Airport Road and the Integrated Cargo Facility. Indirect impactscould ultimately result in the loss of the remaining 20.6-acre portion of the Confreda Farm under Alternative B2.The NRCS Farmland Conversion Impact Rating, as reported on Form AD 1006, is 125. This is well below thesignificance threshold identified in the FAA Order 1050.1E, which identifies significant impacts to farmlands, asimpacts to existing, intact farmland units that receive a score between 200 and 260 points using Form AD 1006.Form AD-1006 has been completed by the NRCS and is included in Appendix C, Federal, State, City, and TribalCoordination. Therefore, no mitigation would be required.6.21.15 Hazardous Materials, Pollution Prevention, and Solid WasteBased on the impact analysis presented in Chapter 5, Environmental Consequences, there would be no significantimpacts to hazardous materials, solid waste, or pollution prevention and, therefore, no mitigation is required.Alternative B2 would be designed and constructed in compliance with applicable local, state, and federal lawsand regulations concerning hazardous or solid waste management, as discussed in Chapter 5, EnvironmentalConsequences.6.21.16 Light Emissions and Visual EnvironmentBased on the impact analysis presented in Chapter 5, Environmental Consequences, Alternative B2 would notresult in significant impacts related to light emissions or the visual environment. While no mitigation isrequired, BMPs would be followed to further reduce impacts from light emissions. Additional light polesassociated with the expansion and modification of the Airport roadway system would use downcast hoods thatavoid light propagation to neighboring areas. Access to the new structured parking garage would face Airportland and a solid wall or screening would be designed facing the adjacent neighborhood.6.21.17 Energy Supply, Natural Resources, and Sustainable DesignBased on the impact analysis presented in Chapter 5, Environmental Consequences, Alternative B2 would notresult in significant impacts concerning energy, natural resources, or sustainable design and, therefore, nomitigation is required. However, acknowledging the intent of the FAA to encourage construction thatexemplifies the highest standards of design including principles of sustainability, and the intent of the State ofChapter 6 – Mitigation 6-52 July 2011\\Mawatr\ev\09228.00\reports\FEIS_Final_July_2011\PVD_CH06_Mitigation_JUL_2011.doc