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

T.F. Green Airport Improvement ProgramEnvironmental Impact Statement and Final Section 4(f) EvaluationTwo avoidance alternatives were considered to avoid constructing Fully Relocated Airport Road and to avoidimpacts to the public view and access to the Rhode Island State Airport Terminal.Airport Road TunnelOne option to avoid fully relocating Airport Road would be to construct a tunnel under the Runway 23 End sothat Airport Road would maintain its current alignment adjacent to the eligible airport historic district. This wouldrequire approximately 1,000 feet of approach roadway on either side of the tunnel, with no driveway access.Airport Road currently crosses Buckeye Brook, which is culverted under the road. A tunnel structure could not beconstructed at this location without significantly affecting flows in Buckeye Brook. It would also require significantreconstruction of the storm drainage system. In addition, the cost to construct a tunnel under the runway would beapproximately $50 million. Therefore, placing Airport Road in a tunnel is not feasible due to the elevation ofBuckeye Brook and substantial cost.Runway 5-23 Extension SouthThe second option to avoid fully relocating Airport Road would be to extend Runway 5-23 to the south to avoidcrossing Airport Road. Alternative B4 meets this objective but results in direct and indirect impacts to the RhodeIsland State Airport Terminal due to the location of the split Integrated Cargo Facility. Avoidance alternatives forAlternative B4 are described in the next section.Hangar No. 1Four avoidance alternatives were evaluated to avoid impacts to Hangar No. 1.Runway 16-34 Shift SouthImpacts to Hangar No. 1 might be avoided by shifting Runway 16-34 substantially to the south along its axis toachieve the minimum required height that effectively removes Hangar No. 1 from airspace penetration and theROFAs and TOFAs. The wetland impacts from such a runway shift would be significantly higher than impactsassociated with Alternatives B2 and B4 due to the presence of extensive wetland systems at the Runway 34 End.Under Airport Improvement Program (IP) Option A, described in greater detail in Appendix E, AlternativesAnalysis, of the DEIS, Runway 16-34 was shifted to the south approximately 1,000 feet. Even with the 1,000 footshift south, Hangar No. 1 would still penetrate the ROFA (DEIS Appendix E, Alternatives Analysis, Figure E-36).IP Option A would result in significant wetland impacts (approximately 32 acres at the Runway 34 End) thatcould not be mitigated under the USACE New England District recommended wetlands mitigation guidelines.Therefore, the option of shifting Runway 16-34 farther south to avoid impacts to Hangar No. 1 is not feasible orprudent because of the number of acres required for wetland mitigation.Runway 16-34 Lateral ShiftIn order to remove Hangar No. 1 from protected airspace, Runway 16-34 would have to be laterally shifted430 feet to the west toward the existing Sundlund Passenger Terminal and Post Road. Realigning the entirerunway to avoid Hangar No. 1 would directly impact the existing Sundlund Passenger Terminal, the Air TrafficControl Tower (ATCT), businesses along Post Road between the Terminal and Airport Road, and businessesand residences southwest of the ATCT. It would also require relocating taxiways and navigational aids. ShiftingRunway 16-34 to the east toward Warwick Avenue to remove Hangar No. 1 from airspace penetration wouldChapter 7 – Final Section 4(f)/Section 6(f) Evaluation 7-13 July 2011\\Mawatr\ev\09228.00\reports\FEIS_Final_July_2011\PVD_CH07_4(f)_JUL_2011.doc