Jump to content

T.F. Green Airport Developments


Frankie811

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 690
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Oh boy! Just heard on the news that American Airlines is cutting back at TF Green also. :(

I wouldnt worry about it, AA wasnt doing anything to grow at PVD, and they were leasing 2 gates with only 3-4 flights total, most airlines will operate at least 5-6 flights out of each gate. With no new gates on the immediate horizon this would allow someone else to come in an operate more effeceiently. I know southwest airlines who averages 10 flights per gate has the pen in hand ready to sign for any more space at PVD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

kick all of the residents out within a 3 mile radius of the airpot and move them to Providence ;) Have the airport and state fund a few high rise and low rise apt buildings ;)

Seriously though, if someone moved there post-airport existance, why can't officials just say "tough luck, think next time you choose a place to live".

Thats like me living in Las Vega, Las Vegas wanting to add a casino to its strip, and I complain becuase I dont want the added traffic and all that crap that a casino will bring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

After TF Green completes $85 million in renovations/expansion (story below), and opens the proposed Warwick Station, it may well see itself adding tens or hundreds of thousands of new passengers by the end of the decade. Then all that will be left to do is to extend the main runway to 9,000+ ft to accomadate aircraft flying to the West coast. Green handles about 5.4 million passengers a years now and I'm wondering if 7 mil by the year 2010 is possible. Extending the main runway isin't in the cards for at least another 10-12 yrs. :(

http://www.projo.com/news/content/projo_20...x.180777ef.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harrisburgh PA (MDT International) has a close in airport/highway/Amtrak station too...

look in the projo again! The main runway is slated to be expanded to 9,350 feet! There are 5 alternatives they will choose from. The lengthened runway is in the 7-10 year time frame from what I've been told...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

look in the projo again! The main runway is slated to be expanded to 9,350 feet! There are 5 alternatives they will choose from. The lengthened runway is in the 7-10 year time frame from what I've been told...

I can't believe we are talking about me being in my mid-30's the the time the runway gets a length-job. Add to this, I wasn't even a legal adult when the topic first begun serious discussions. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Some info about the proposed expansion, including times/locations of public meetings can be found HERE

I can't believe we are talking about me being in my mid-30's the the time the runway gets a length-job. Add to this, I wasn't even a legal adult when the topic first begun serious discussions. :unsure:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The five scenarios for expanding the main runway are:

Avoiding impacts to the north: This option would extend the main runway mostly to the south. It would require that Main Avenue be tunneled under the runway, but would not require relocation of Airport Road to the north. It would require taking a substantial number of houses in the Greenwood area, and some commercial areas at the corner of Post Road and Airport Road. It would also have substantial impact on the Buckeye Brook wetlands.

Avoiding impacts to the south: This option would shift the main runway mostly to the north. It would require relocation of Airport Road, but not Main Avenue. It would require taking many homes in the Spring Green neighborhood, and would impact Buckeye Brook.

Avoid Buckeye Brook: This option would extend the runway both north and south, requiring tunneling Main Avenue under the runway and relocating Airport Road, but would not affect the Buckeye Brook wetlands. It would impact Greenwood to Bingham Street.

Avoid Buckeye Brook/minimize Airport Road relocation: This option would extend the runway primarily south, so as to avoid the relocation of the east end of Airport Road. It would not affect the Buckeye Brook wetlands, but would require taking houses in Greenwood to Lucile Street.

Avoid Buckeye Brook/minimize Airport Road relocation: This option is similar to the third alternative in that it extends the runway both north and south, but does not impact the Greenwood neighborhood as dramatically and requires less relocation of Airport Road. It would require taking homes north of the runway to Bellevue Avenue, and south of the runway to Vega Road in Greenwood.

I'm thinking I like "avoid Buckeye Brook/minimize Airport Rd relocation" (extending the runway south) option the best. No wetlands, and only taking houses in one neighborhood, and minimal cost of relocating Airport Rd.

I guess the trade-off is homes vs. cost of road relocation vs. wetlands impacts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thinking I like "avoid Buckeye Brook/minimize Airport Rd relocation" (extending the runway south) option the best. No wetlands, and only taking houses in one neighborhood, and minimal cost of relocating Airport Rd.

I guess the trade-off is homes vs. cost of road relocation vs. wetlands impacts.

You have to steer clear of the wetlands. The city can veto any proposal based solely on impact to wetlands. If you have to take houses, it only makes sense to take the Winslow Park neighborhood because many of those homes have already been knocked down... people have been watching homes fall left and right over there so they are more or less prepared for the day to come when the runway crosses Main Ave. If one neighborhood had to be saved over the other, I would say save Spring Green.

Avoid the wetlands and extend the runway primarily south over a new Main Ave. tunnel. I wonder how long it will take to get this project approved. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the draft EIS is slated to be completed by the end of next year. Say another 6 months for the FAA to take the draft EIS to it's final form with rcommendations and findings. Once that is done, figutre a year for planning and design and another year for home acquisition. Without any major roadblocks to any of these phases thats 2010. Another 1 to 2 years for construction - 2012 at the earliest for extanding the main runway. Other projects (more gates) could happen slightly less time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as it meets their safety and security requirements, they won't care. I recently learned that the tunnel will actually be cheaper than re-routing the road all the way around the runway extension. The other thing to remember with these alternatives is that they are the "extremes." They will study all the alternatives and the "preferred" alternative will be the one that has the least environmental imopacts overall. I think rough cost estimates are in that calculation as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How deep a tunnel are we talking about for Main Ave? Because I have to think the FAA isn't going to be happy about that idea.

I wouldn't sweat the FAA, Mayor Avedisian never saw an airport expansion plan he didn't oppose. This one has a long way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Public meeting held last night regarding runway extension [Projo.com]

Avedisian continues to oppose:

"What are being presented tonight are five of the most costly and environmentally insensitive alternatives available to meet what has become essentially a single, no-holds-barred attempt to provide nonstop West Coast service to 100 percent of the future fleet mix," Avedisian said.

The expansion scenarios would cut out the heart of some of Warwick's neighborhoods, Avedisian said, and mean, "In short, the loss of a vital piece of Warwick's societal, cultural, and historical fabric. They may be lines on a map to VHB, FAA, and RIAC. They are families to me," Avedisian said.

I have yet to hear what Avedisian would propose. Not saying that I totally disagree with him, but if he opposes this so much, what does he propose instead? He never says. And how are these five alternatives all the most "environmentally insensitive"?

Also, does this statement not sound like the biggest load of bullsh!t ever? "They are families to me"!! C'mon, that is ooozing with b.s. votes votes votes....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Public meeting held last night regarding runway extension [Projo.com]

Avedisian continues to oppose:

I have yet to hear what Avedisian would propose. Not saying that I totally disagree with him, but if he opposes this so much, what does he propose instead? He never says.

He supports the projects that are in place or proposed that will make Green more efficent and conveniet for travlers. He's also on record as being supportive of the train station/garage/people mover. I don't think he'll ever publicly come out in favor of runway expansion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The expansion scenarios would cut out the heart of some of Warwick's neighborhoods, Avedisian said, and mean, "In short, the loss of a vital piece of Warwick's societal, cultural, and historical fabric.

a) You have none in Warwick, so don't worry.

b) You have none in Warwick, so don't worry.

c) You have some areas of historical value in Warwick, but not in any of the neighorhoods in question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Public meeting held last night regarding runway extension [Projo.com]

Avedisian continues to oppose:

I have yet to hear what Avedisian would propose. Not saying that I totally disagree with him, but if he opposes this so much, what does he propose instead? He never says. And how are these five alternatives all the most "environmentally insensitive"?

Also, does this statement not sound like the biggest load of bullsh!t ever? "They are families to me"!! C'mon, that is ooozing with b.s. votes votes votes....

He has nothing to propose. That's the problem. He's like Hillary Clinton on illegal immigration. Blast the guest worker program but suggest no better plan. Avedisian opposes any alternative which expands the runway - the environmental remark was a load.

He supports the projects that are in place or proposed that will make Green more efficent and conveniet for travlers. He's also on record as being supportive of the train station/garage/people mover. I don't think he'll ever publicly come out in favor of runway expansion.

The projects in place are all in the works for one reason - to handle increased traffic. A longer runway is the only component of the master plan that will enable the additional flights.

The train station will to connect PVD with downtown Providence and Boston. In fact, the new rail link could double traffic at Green over the next 20 years if the line is expanded to the south and west into CT. Can the state afford to turn away all of these west coast business travelers who will stay, dine out, and rent cars in Rhode Island? That's in addition to those new passengers who will take the commuter rail to depart Green for the convenience.

IMO it is absurd to support the train station and oppose expansion of the runway. We need the Anti-NIMBY crew on board with this one! :yahoo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He has nothing to propose. That's the problem. He's like Hillary Clinton on illegal immigration. Blast the guest worker program but suggest no better plan. Avedisian opposes any alternative which expands the runway - the environmental remark was a load.

The projects in place are all in the works for one reason - to handle increased traffic. A longer runway is the only component of the master plan that will enable the additional flights.

The train station will to connect PVD with downtown Providence and Boston. In fact, the new rail link could double traffic at Green over the next 20 years if the line is expanded to the south and west into CT. Can the state afford to turn away all of these west coast business travelers who will stay, dine out, and rent cars in Rhode Island? That's in addition to those new passengers who will take the commuter rail to depart Green for the convenience.

IMO it is absurd to support the train station and oppose expansion of the runway. We need the Anti-NIMBY crew on board with this one! :yahoo:

Yes we do.

Again - what is not understood by some of the anti-runway expansion folks is that the alternatives are the "worst case scenarios" for the lack of a better phrase. There is nothing in how the EIS process is run that says they can't take the LEAST environmentally insensitive alternative and scale it down even further. It's a step by step process but these folks think every alternative drawing is the final plan! Maybe the runway ends up only being 9000 feet - who knows, but let the process take its course!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FAA considers options for runway extension

The latest report from the Federal Aviation Administration on T.F. Green Airport is a case of pick your poison, Warwick residents and officials say.

The Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce and the R.I. Economic Development Corporation, among others, are pushing for the extension because they view it as crucial to maintaining the state

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm coming late to this party, but i was involved with the expansion stuff several years ago, and i was wondering whether any of the airlines have signed on to the longer runway? The last i heard no airline had pledged to have coast to coast flights if the airport runway was expanded, and i think that was one of the issues a lot of folks had with the expansion--that it was too speculative. Again, this was a few years ago and perhaps one of the airlines has been tugging on the hem of the state for sometime now asking for an expansion, but considering that we seem to losing SHORT flights out of Green (independance air the most recent loss) i wonder just what the market need really is for longer flights?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm coming late to this party, but i was involved with the expansion stuff several years ago, and i was wondering whether any of the airlines have signed on to the longer runway? The last i heard no airline had pledged to have coast to coast flights if the airport runway was expanded, and i think that was one of the issues a lot of folks had with the expansion--that it was too speculative. Again, this was a few years ago and perhaps one of the airlines has been tugging on the hem of the state for sometime now asking for an expansion, but considering that we seem to losing SHORT flights out of Green (independance air the most recent loss) i wonder just what the market need really is for longer flights?

If you build they will come. I'm sure that these people wouldn't be displacing naiborhoods if there wasn't a real sence of urgency to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.