697 replies to this topic

[Frankie811]

http://www.wliinc2.c...ion=DISPLISTDET

[Frankie811]

FAA session on Green expansion draws sparse turnout [ProJo.com]

[AriPVD]

This seems like the biggest no brainer issue.  Yes, it's unfortunate that some people will lose their homes but the interest of an entire metropolitan economy far outweighs that of 359 Warwick residents.

[basachs]

AriPVD, on Oct 20 2005, 09:54 AM, said:

This seems like the biggest no brainer issue.  Yes, it's unfortunate that some people will lose their homes but the interest of an entire metropolitan economy far outweighs that of 359 Warwick residents.

I wonder how objective you would be if you were one of the 359 residents? Sure you might say you would still put the interests of "an entire metropolitan economy" before your own, but until it is you, you cant say.

Being a developer Ari, you look at the big picture. Thats fine because thats the nature of the profession. But this is not some unutilized parcel of land we are talking about. These are people, families, and their lives. Its more than the "unfortunate" lip service you are paying them. Its their life, and just like we want our lives to be better here in Providence, those Warwick residents want their lives to continue to get better, not worse.

Now, whether their lives will actually improve under this plan who knows? But still, these are human beings just like us. Its not just land in this case.

[AriPVD]

I don't deny their right to enjoyment of their property under law.  Politically, I align myself as a libertarian, so I have a personal moral crisis in believing that the government should be able to seize land.

With that said, it is in the clear economic best interest of the state to pursue the airport expansion while accomodating these people fairly.  The economic advantage of a longer runway is undeniable, not only to Rhode Island but to Warwick specifically.  I'm surprised that the Mayor of Warwick has been resistant to that.  To my limited knowledge, the homes we are talking about belong to a rather unremarkable suburban subdivision.  That is not to belittle this neighborhood or to assume that important social and family networks do not exist there, but I think it's also hard to say that their situation isn't replicated in AnySuburb, USA.  Additionally, anyone who has bought a home there in the past 40+ years has been aware of the presence of the airport, the noise and the probabilities of expansion.  It's tough to plead ignorance on that.

Finally, I don't blame the residents for fighting tooth and nail, and I'm sure any of us would do the same if our homes were threatened.  With that said, I think the "bigger picture" needs to win out here.

Edited by AriPVD, 20 October 2005 - 09:52 AM.

[basachs]

All valid points. The previous post struck me as sort of flippant, thats all.

That being said, i agree the airport should expand and be able to serve international markets. I do hope the residents are treated more than fairly in this case.

[CtownMikey]

http://www.pbn.com/c...s.php/id/117409

says that by 2020.. TFG will serve 11 million people annually..  and according to RIEDC --> http://www.riedc.com...ri_databank/30/   , Logan is currentyl serving 11.5 million a year.

the RIEDC info may be a bit outdated... (1 yr tops) but still.. to have Logan's capacity in 15 yrs seems pretty good to me

sorry, that RIEDC is old because the first link I posted states that TFG currently serves over 5 million annually.. so I imagine Logan is at about 20 million or so

[Frankie811]

We listen, FAA tells airport's neighbors [ProJo.com]

[Frankie811]

http://www.pbn.com/c...s.php/id/117409

[Frankie811]

Frankie811, on Oct 21 2005, 11:29 AM, said:

http://www.pbn.com/c...s.php/id/117409

TF Green currently serves more than 5 million passengers a year with about 250 daily flights. By 2020, it is projected that Green will have 11 million passengers annually with about 630 flights daily.



I wonder if that's with or without the airport expansion plan.

[MikeycPVD]

Frankie811, on Oct 21 2005, 11:33 AM, said:

says that by 2020.. TFG will serve 11 million people annually.. and according to RIEDC --> http://www.riedc.com...ri_databank/30/ , Logan is currentyl serving 11.5 million a year.

TF Green currently serves more than 5 million passengers a year with about 250 daily flights. By 2020, it is projected that Green will have 11 million passengers annually with about 630 flights daily.
I wonder if that's with or without the airport expansion plan.

Logan is enplaning about 11.5 milllion, adding to total count of up around 22 million (as of '03).  The 11 million at PVD is factored in after the expansion because the current terminal and facilities was planned for a max of 6 million passengers a year.  Obviously this fell way short, but at the time the terminal was under planning and development, PVD was handling less than 3 million a year, and for most of the 10 years leading up to the opening of the B.S. Terminal, stagnant between 2 and 2.5 million.

[mr2448]

CtownMikey, on Oct 20 2005, 06:52 PM, said:

http://www.pbn.com/c...s.php/id/117409

says that by 2020.. TFG will serve 11 million people annually..  and according to RIEDC --> http://www.riedc.com...ri_databank/30/   , Logan is currentyl serving 11.5 million a year.

the RIEDC info may be a bit outdated... (1 yr tops) but still.. to have Logan's capacity in 15 yrs seems pretty good to me

sorry, that RIEDC is old because the first link I posted states that TFG currently serves over 5 million annually.. so I imagine Logan is at about 20 million or so

BOS currently handles about 26,000,000 enplaning and deplaning international and domestic pax. They have had an upsurge of 17% over last year due to the influx of LCC's; Air Tran and Jet Blue.  PVD has had an increase of 7.5% over last year and will set a new high of about 5.8 mill enplaning and deplaning pax this year.

Mark

[Frankie811]

http://www.warwickon...ews.asp?ID=8944

[brick]

Frankie811, on Nov 11 2005, 07:40 AM, said:

http://www.warwickon...ews.asp?ID=8944

I didn't realize Green was pushing for transatlantic flights.  That would be pretty cool,
but do they really want to add all of the infrastructure necessary (customs, etc.)?

Although it would be another reason to build CBT, right?  Then Royal Bank of Scotland execs could come right into Providence instead of going through Logan.  

I will be on one of those direct Vegas flights in January.  Much welcomed.

[Frankie811]

brick, on Nov 11 2005, 07:46 AM, said:

I didn't realize Green was pushing for transatlantic flights.  That would be pretty cool,
but do they really want to add all of the infrastructure necessary (customs, etc.)?

PVD does have customs service for the chartered flights to/from Portugal and where ever else.



The Federal Aviation Administration is in the midst of a $6 million environmental impact study of airport projects including the extension of Runway 5-23 to 9,500 feet. The need of the extension is premised on demand for nonstop service to the West Coast as well as London.

But meanwhile, according to a RIAC press release issued yesterday, there are other new one-stop United States and Caribbean air service additions. Spirit Airlines will be offering service to Montego Bay and Kingston, Jamaica beginning this Thursday, and on Dec. 10 Spirit will start service to Punta Cana in the Dominican Republic with $99 introductory fares. Starting Dec. 15 Spirit will start service to St. Thomas in the Virgin Islands.



I wasen't aware of this either.

Edited by Frankie811, 11 November 2005 - 07:03 AM.

[Cotuit]

The Dominican Republic route should do well seeing as we have so many Dominicans in Providence. Sort of the same reason we have Azorean service.

[mr2448]

Frankie811, on Nov 11 2005, 07:55 AM, said:

PVD does have customs service for the chartered flights to/from Portugal and where ever else.
The Federal Aviation Administration is in the midst of a $6 million environmental impact study of airport projects including the extension of Runway 5-23 to 9,500 feet. The need of the extension is premised on demand for nonstop service to the West Coast as well as London.

But meanwhile, according to a RIAC press release issued yesterday, there are other new one-stop United States and Caribbean air service additions. Spirit Airlines will be offering service to Montego Bay and Kingston, Jamaica beginning this Thursday, and on Dec. 10 Spirit will start service to Punta Cana in the Dominican Republic with $99 introductory fares. Starting Dec. 15 Spirit will start service to St. Thomas in the Virgin Islands.
I wasen't aware of this either.

One of the Continental Gates (gate 7 or 8) serves as the international gate. It is a fully secured gate updated for international use. It easily handles the 270 plus that use the Azore flights during the summer.  

Mark

[Magellan98]

Those new destinations being served by Spirit are one-stop service and this isn't new news.  They mentioned when they first began serving Providence that eventually they would offer this one-stop service to the Caribbean.  All in all, PVD gains nothing from Spirit's service except for more convenient connections -not new flights.

Reading the article published in the Warwick Beacon I was surprised at how biased against runway expansion it was.  The whole article seemed written tongue in cheek - lambasting the RIAC's reasoning for the new runway.  Not extending the runway at Green would be such a mistake.  At the very least, its a safety issue.  However, there are much greater implications in terms of attracting new business, new flights, etc.

[brick]

Magellan98, on Nov 11 2005, 01:22 PM, said:

Those new destinations being served by Spirit are one-stop service and this isn't new news.  They mentioned when they first began serving Providence that eventually they would offer this one-stop service to the Caribbean.  All in all, PVD gains nothing from Spirit's service except for more convenient connections -not new flights.

Reading the article published in the Warwick Beacon I was surprised at how biased against runway expansion it was.  The whole article seemed written tongue in cheek - lambasting the RIAC's reasoning for the new runway.  Not extending the runway at Green would be such a mistake.  At the very least, its a safety issue.  However, there are much greater implications in terms of attracting new business, new flights, etc.

I can kind of see where they are coming from.  All of that extra business will bring with it the need for extra support.  I wonder how they plan on getting all those people in and out of there.  At current levels it's good getting in and out if you aren't parking there.  It's only ok if you are parking there and have to get out to post rd. especially during other times of high traffic.

At one time the MBTA was thinking of extending the commuter rail line down to Green.  I assume they would use the existing Amtrak lines which run right between Jefferson Blvd. and Post Rd.  You could then put a really short LRT to connect to the terminal from a station there.  This was probably mentioned in the other threads, of course.

Boston has had two proposals that I know of for a second metro airport shot down so really this is the time for Green and Manchester to get their infrastructure in place as they can probably get some Federal help for it.

[Frankie811]

City wants federal report on Green to focus more on community impact [ProJo.com]