Runway plan takes homes, businesses
09:57 AM EST on Saturday, March 10, 2007
By Cynthia Needham, Journal Staff Writer
WARWICK — If the main runway at T.F. Green Airport is
expanded, it will swallow at least 204 houses, up to 53 businesses and dozens
of acres of wetlands, according to a draft summary of a Federal Aviation
Administration report released yesterday, examining the consequences of
expansion.
Expansion would also increase noise pollution and cut the
city’s tax base by as much as $2.2 million a year. On the flip side, it is
predicted to generate $138 million in business revenue within the next 13
years.
Since February 2005, the FAA has been studying the local
impact of extending T.F. Green’s main runway to 9,350 feet, which would allow
airlines to provide nonstop coast-to-coast service. As part of that review, FAA
consultant Vanasse Hangen Brustlin Inc. has examined the effects five proposed
expansion scenarios would have on the local community — namely, on quality of
life, economics and the environment.
Depending on which, if any, option is ultimately selected,
the draft summary shows the following:
•204 to 339 houses would be taken
•10 to 32 acres of wetlands would be taken
•6 to 53 businesses would be displaced
•36 to 60 houses would experience such an increase in the
level of noise that they would become eligible for a volunteer land-acquisition
program
The FAA has not ranked any one alternative above another,
saying it does not plan to choose a preferred scenario until the summer.
But the release of the consequences summary yesterday
signals the beginning of what is expected to be a protracted battle between
expansion critics — many of them at the city level — and the FAA.
“No matter what you do, there will be adverse effects,”
Mayor Scott Avedisian said. “All the options will
encroach on different parts of the city.”
City officials say they’ve known for years what expansion
would do to their community. They expressed frustration yesterday that the FAA
is only now recognizing those impacts.
But Brenda Pope, the Rhode Island Airport Corporation’s vice
president of environmental systems, urged residents and officials not to panic.
“People should not draw any conclusions here because no decisions have been
made at this point,” she said.
The summary’s findings indicate that extending the runway
north, beyond
“In general, all the options that go to the north will
impact the residential properties more than those that go to the south,” said
Carol Lurie, project manager at VHB.
Several other options under consideration call for more
expansion to the south, or a hybrid plan, with expansion in both directions.
But those alternatives create their own obstacles, including eclipsing parts of
the Buckeye Brook wetlands, or requiring that parts of Route 113 be tunneled
under airport property, Lurie acknowledged.
Complicating matters is the required upgrade to the
airport’s secondary crosswind runway (the runway used when wind patterns
change) that must accompany any expansion of the main runway. The secondary
runway would not be extended, but the security areas surrounding it would be,
cutting into either the Buckeye Brook at one end or the busy commercial area at
the intersection of Airport and Post roads at the other. Approximately 80
percent of the businesses displaced by expansion would come at or near that
intersection, the report shows.
THERE WAS ALSO good news in yesterday’s summary.
Aviation-related economic gains in the state of
FAA officials say it is still too early to isolate more
exact consequences of expansion — including what it would do to air traffic —
without knowing which way the runway might expand.
Before it selects a top choice, the FAA says it will work
with city and state agencies to get technical input on its draft. It also plans
to hold a public meeting, probably in late May. The FAA will report back to the
state airport corporation with a final recommendation later this year. If
expansion is approved, construction would not start for at least a few years,
an airport corporation official said yesterday.
The proposed scenarios are posted on VHB’s
website at: www.vhb.com/pvd/eis/
The five options for expanding the main runway are as
follows:
•Extend the main runway mostly to the south. It would
require that
•Extend the main runway mostly to the north. It would
require moving
•Extend the runway both north and south, requiring tunneling
•Extend the runway primarily south, to avoid moving the east
end of
•Extend the runway both north and south. This alternative
requires less relocation of
cneedham@projo.com