FAA won't study shorter 8,300-foot runway plan
Written by JOHN HOWELL,
Tue, Dec 4,
2007
The high
ranking Federal Aviation Administration official who recently questioned the
costs of proposed improvements at
While the
city maintains that that alternative cost less, not only in terms of money but
residents displaced, LaVerne Reid, FAA manager of
airports for the New England Region, says the agency will continue to look at
8,700-foot and 9,350-foot runways.
In a Nov. 21
letter to the mayor, Reid writes that the 8,700-foot alternative “would achieve
environmental and cost savings compared to a 9,350-foot alternative, while
capturing 91 percent of the West Coast passenger demand.”
On the other
hand, Reid says, an 8,300-foot runway would accommodate 79 percent of the West
Coast passenger demand.
Reid’s
decision comes about a month following a letter sent to then president of the Rhode
Island Airport Corporation, Mark Brewer, in which she says the FAA has agreed
to participate in the airport improvement program at about $150 million for
airfield projects including the longer runway. Preliminary estimates put the
cost of improvements at more than $500 million.
“This
financial piece is a critical element to resolve before we move forward,” Reid
wrote Brewer. Reid goes on to say that the FAA is waiting for a financial plan
and cautions Brewer to take into consideration a series of assumptions that
seem to throw into question the viability of a substantial capital investment.
Reid’s latest
letter to Avedisian, however, makes no mention of a
specific cost for the project. Rather it concludes more could be gained by the
8,700-foot alternative.
She says the
8,700-foot alternative would be the maximum runway length “that could be
accommodated while avoiding the channel of Buckeye Brook and Main Avenue and
thereby maintaining the same general reduction in environmental impact and cost
associated with an 8,300 foot runway.”
The cost of
the proposed improvements, nonetheless, is still on the minds of local
officials.
“Looking at
the cost at the end [of a study] is not the way to do it,” Mayor Avedisian said yesterday. The mayor said he isn’t surprised
by the FAA’s position.
“While they
talk a good game, essentially they don’t want to put anything on the table,” he
said. Avedisian said he believes the FAA “is throwing
away a viable option that could bring compromise to everybody.”
Last week Warwick
Representatives Joseph McNamara and Eileen Naughton
asked that RIAC make available a detailed financial plan to officials and the
public.
In the letter
to Dr. Kathleen Hittner, chairperson of the Rhode
Island Airport Corporation, the Warwick legislators said, “We are very
concerned about continued discussions of T.F. Green Airport expansion in light
of public comments published by LaVerne F. Reid, New
England Regional Airport Manager, who has stated that the Federal Aviation
Administration will only fund $150 million for the proposed $538 million-plus
project that is currently being considered.”
“It’s nice to
see Naugton and McNamara are
aboard and saying half a billion is too much,” said Avedisian.
Patti
Goldstein, RIAC vice president of communications and marketing, said yesterday
that RIAC is in the process of preparing a response to the request.
She said RIAC
has met with FAA subsequent to Reid’s letter and that cost estimates for the
project are “premature.” Environmental studies of the two runway alternatives
being conducted by FAA consultants Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. should be
finalized in the spring according to Susan Nichols at VHB.
Even so, the
study of alternatives without a cost analysis and projection of how the
improvement would be financed continues to raise questions.
City
principal planner William DePasquale said yesterday
“It makes no sense not to step back to look at the cost and the need.” One of
the issues DePasquale said needs to be addressed is RIAC’s bonding match.
Since former
Governor Bruce Sundlun separated state airports from
the state Department of Transportation, making it a quasi-independent agency
under the Economic Development Corporation, it has financed capital
improvements through revenue bonds. Also, RIAC does not receive any state
funding.
Regardless,
under legislation RIAC must gain General Assembly approval to issue revenue
bonds.
“We believe
that the Rhode Island Airport Corporation has a duty to inform elected
officials and the public as to how it plans to finance these various proposals.
Therefore, we are respectfully requesting a complete copy of this financial
plan to be submitted to the General Assembly and made available to the public,
along with a detailed record of consultant fees that have been expended thus
far by the Rhode Island Airport Corporation on these proposals,” McNamara and Naughton say in a joint release.
Goldstein
said improvements wouldn’t happen in the next few years and that RIAC is
working with the FAA and would “brief elected officials when the time is
appropriate.” She noted that a preferred runway alternative won’t be selected
until sometime next year.
John Silva,
FAA environmental program manager, said the decision to study the 8,700-foot
alternative, rather than reducing it to 8,300 feet or making it another
alternative, was based on the conclusion that the 8,700 foot alternative
offered greater utility without that much more impact on the environment or
cost.