Jump to content

T.F. Green Airport Developments


Frankie811

Recommended Posts

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.

I no airport expert by any means (I hope some of those posters here like Mental757 chime in) by my impression from the decades of airport renovation/expansion battles at Westchester County Airport in White Plains, NY was that airline use of gates, routes, etc is virtually a minute to minute issue and they never commit long term to anything. Opponents of the White Plains expansion made the same point about the lack of airline committment.

Once the expansion/renovation was done, airlines filled the gates/routes/etc in a New York minute...

Again, I've lived in several towns with airport expansion issues... The pattern always, without question, is...

- Rational expansion proposed...

- Neighborhood groups battle forever over issues of noise, traffic, light, etc, etc, etc...

- It drags on for ages...

- Expansion happens...

- Everyone in town says, "Boy this is great. Why didn't this happen a decade ago?"

Again, in my opinion, this is what eminent domain is really for... 1.5-2 million (if not more) people depend on that airport for travel and as an economic engine. As long as individuals there are well compensated for their homes, then the airport needs to expand. Period...

- Garris

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 690
  • Created
  • Last Reply

i am very uncomfortable with eminant domain (and street abandonments and other "takings") for speculative purposes, however. If the airline industry was healthier i might feel differently (and i'm not necessarily opposed to the expansion--just believe the ECONOMIC due dilligence needs to be done as well as the Environmental) but the airline industry is having a tough go of it right now and unless a runway expansion is a magic bullet, i can see why the warwick neighbors are digging their heels in.

That said, anyone who within the last 25 years bought a house near the airport, should just shut their yaps about airline traffic and noise! I liken that kind of complaining to folks who started smoking 15 years ago and now are suing tobacco companies because it made them sick. No time at all for folks like that. You don't get to cry NIMBY when you MOVED into the airport's back yard.

see, bet that surprised ya! I'm not always anti-everything.

:thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, in my opinion, this is what eminent domain is really for... 1.5-2 million (if not more) people depend on that airport for travel and as an economic engine.

Well yes, that's great for those 2 million or so people, but the 500 or so folks in Warwick say no, so it's no. "The answer's always no." What's more important here, the needs of the many or the needs of the few?

There is no emoticon to express the level of sarcasm I reach when I think about this issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the airline industry was healthier i might feel differently... unless a runway expansion is a magic bullet, i can see why the warwick neighbors are digging their heels in.

Well, the airline industry is probably the most cyclical of all US industries, so just because they're down now doesn't mean they won't be healthy and robust in 10 years, and as others have pointed out, if expansion goes through, 10 years might well be the lag time between project start and planes landing and taking off on a new runway.

There's never a "magic bullet." All things economic are to some degree a speculative gamble...

That said, anyone who within the last 25 years bought a house near the airport, should just shut their yaps about airline traffic and noise! I liken that kind of complaining to folks who started smoking 15 years ago and now are suing tobacco companies because it made them sick. No time at all for folks like that. You don't get to cry NIMBY when you MOVED into the airport's back yard.

see, bet that surprised ya! I'm not always anti-everything.

:thumbsup:

:shok: Color me shocked! I thought I'd never read that!

- Garris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As always, the media is happy to highlight the people who are outraged. I'm sure there are many people living in the airport's shadow who have cookies freshly baked and lemonade freshly squozed for the government officials they are hoping will be knocking on their doors with eviction papers. At this point, the houses near the airport are worthless, you couldn't sell one. So the only way these people can get out is through eminant domain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"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 " --- jencoleslaw 3/25/06

OK, just imagine what would happen if, say, American Airlines announced something like "we are very pleased with the prospect of new service to West Coast destinations to be made possible by the expansion of PVD." Avedisian would scream that AA is a menace to the environment, they'll pave over Buckeye Brook, the character and quality of life in Warwick will be forever compromised, and the NIMBY's would cheer. :rolleyes:

Green can take care of itself. I don't think we need any meaningful assurance from the airlines at all. Mij took the words right out of my mouth: "if you build it they will come." Southwest Airlines came, an assortment of new hotels opened along Jefferson Blvd., and the long-awaited train station is about to finally become a reality. The market is already there! In fact, traffic increased in the last year for the first time since the WTC attacks.

PVD airport is better-positioned to succeed than any other in the region. Its also a business and the most important thing is to remain competitive. PVD will beat Logan and Bradley on the West Coast / London ticket sales because of its convenience. As far as the Winslow Park neighborhood... those homes are in the process of being bought out, which is the right way to do things.

I think you can use ED to take a street that runs through a parking lot, but you can't seize someone's land. I think the homeowners will all take the money anyway. The airport was there first and that's what made the house a great deal in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you absolutely can use eminent domain to take someone's property. It is easily challenged in court but it doesn't mean it hasn't been done. Just look at New London, and North Smithfield.

btw, who pays for the expansion? do they float a bond for it? Yes, the airport is a business, but it is also quasi gov agency known as RIAC. So, does the state pay for it? Does it have enough profit to pay for it itself? how does that work?

While i believe that the airport is an important economic engine, i just would like to see the actual economic feasibility study done in advance, just as we require an Environmental Impact Statement. The "If you build it, they will come" doesn't really work for me. :) I'd rather see "if you build it, the state will realise x dollars in revenue, y dollars in taxes, surrounding businesses within a 10 mile radius will appreciate z dollars etc."

Just as we like to see reasons we're going to war in advance (even if they ended up being lies in the end), i would like for someone to run the numbers to ensure that an airport expansion makes financial sense BEFORE it is done.

And i've heard from folks as far away from the airport as Edgewood, complaining of being in flight patterns and being too loud and those people definately do NOT want an expansion, so the NIMBYs are quite far flung...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And i've heard from folks as far away from the airport as Edgewood, complaining of being in flight patterns and being too loud and those people definately do NOT want an expansion, so the NIMBYs are quite far flung...

I've lived in Edgewood for 15 years. It's never been a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a project is in an Airport's Master Plan, then the FAA will fund (I beleive) 95% of a capital improvement project, usually with a state and local match. This is for non-hub airports though, and Green definitely is a hub, so the federal share may be more like 90%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you absolutely can use eminent domain to take someone's property. It is easily challenged in court but it doesn't mean it hasn't been done. Just look at New London, and North Smithfield.

btw, who pays for the expansion? do they float a bond for it? Yes, the airport is a business, but it is also quasi gov agency known as RIAC. So, does the state pay for it? Does it have enough profit to pay for it itself? how does that work?

While i believe that the airport is an important economic engine, i just would like to see the actual economic feasibility study done in advance, just as we require an Environmental Impact Statement. The "If you build it, they will come" doesn't really work for me. :) I'd rather see "if you build it, the state will realise x dollars in revenue, y dollars in taxes, surrounding businesses within a 10 mile radius will appreciate z dollars etc."

Just as we like to see reasons we're going to war in advance (even if they ended up being lies in the end), i would like for someone to run the numbers to ensure that an airport expansion makes financial sense BEFORE it is done.

And i've heard from folks as far away from the airport as Edgewood, complaining of being in flight patterns and being too loud and those people definately do NOT want an expansion, so the NIMBYs are quite far flung...

Miss Coleslaw,

While I will admit your stance is admirable I dont sit with you. I think RI needs this. As far as studies go they are under way. here is a quote from them, them being The TF GREEN EIS

"Economic Impact

Does the Rhode Island Airport Corporation have an estimate of how many new flights and the number of new jobs that will result from the expansion?

The economic benefits from the proposed airport projects are not identified at this time. The Rhode Island Airport Corporation is updating its Economic Impact Analysis for T.F. Green Airport. When the results of this study are available they will be posted on the Rhode Island Airport Corporation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While i believe that the airport is an important economic engine, i just would like to see the actual economic feasibility study done in advance, just as we require an Environmental Impact Statement. The "If you build it, they will come" doesn't really work for me. :) I'd rather see "if you build it, the state will realise x dollars in revenue, y dollars in taxes, surrounding businesses within a 10 mile radius will appreciate z dollars etc."

How does "if you don't build it, they will leave" sound? When the present airport was first proposed everyone doubted the necessity of it. Yet it has been expanded since the original 1996 product and noone envisioned 5.5 mill pax per year going through it this quickly. An economic engine of 1.3 billion dollars was not envisioned. Rhode Islanders are short sighted and never willingly proact. Do we remember the doubters of Providence Place? This is the age of airport against airport. Both Bradley and Manchester have runways capable of providing east-west coast flights and infact, BDL has LAX service and had SFO before 9/11. A longer runway needs to be in place for this service to happen. Obviously it can't be a consideration without it. Airlines never predict what their needs will be 2-3 years down the road. Did AA tell us they were leaving T.F. Green 2 years ago? No they announced it in December and they will be gone as of April 1. Would a longer runway have kept them. Probably not because they and Delta have their own specific needs to recapture pax and redirect them to Logan. So this allows all the other airlines to consider expanding service at PVD. The longer runway should just be part of the normal infrastructure of this airport. If longer flights do not come, it will still make landings and takeoffs safer.

Mark

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?

Airlines won't commit to soemthing as public as this. It gives away thier competitive egde with respect to future planning and locks them into something that they may or may not want/need in 5-10 years. The airline industry is highly cyclical and airlines strive to be as flexible as they can to react to ever changing market conditions as quickly as possible. Remember, airlines' assets are mobile and can deployed wherever that airline sees fit, but they only have so many to go around and if your airport doesn't have the facilities to support certain service - you can be certain you won't get it - thats what is happening at PVD right now. Whats worse is the 3 surrounding airports have those facilities and PVD loses passengers (revenue/economic generation) to those competing airports.

Los Angeles is the largest market from PVD without nonstop service. San Diego is the 3rd largest. The Bay area and Seattle are among the top 20 overall largest markets from PVD as well...

Independence left every airport they served, not just PVD - they went Chapter 7!!

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.

This is more or less the case - no guarantees unless you DON'T extend the runway - count on NOT getting some of the west coast or European flights...

I no airport expert by any means (I hope some of those posters here like Mental757 chime in) by my impression from the decades of airport renovation/expansion battles at Westchester County Airport in White Plains, NY was that airline use of gates, routes, etc is virtually a minute to minute issue and they never commit long term to anything. Opponents of the White Plains expansion made the same point about the lack of airline committment.

Once the expansion/renovation was done, airlines filled the gates/routes/etc in a New York minute...

Again, I've lived in several towns with airport expansion issues... The pattern always, without question, is...

- Rational expansion proposed...

- Neighborhood groups battle forever over issues of noise, traffic, light, etc, etc, etc...

- It drags on for ages...

- Expansion happens...

- Everyone in town says, "Boy this is great. Why didn't this happen a decade ago?"

Again, in my opinion, this is what eminent domain is really for... 1.5-2 million (if not more) people depend on that airport for travel and as an economic engine. As long as individuals there are well compensated for their homes, then the airport needs to expand. Period...

- Garris

well put - FYI - PVD served over 5.7 million passengers in 2005 which was a record. PVD has been over 5 million since the late 90's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i am very uncomfortable with eminant domain (and street abandonments and other "takings") for speculative purposes, however. If the airline industry was healthier i might feel differently (and i'm not necessarily opposed to the expansion--just believe the ECONOMIC due dilligence needs to be done as well as the Environmental) but the airline industry is having a tough go of it right now and unless a runway expansion is a magic bullet, i can see why the warwick neighbors are digging their heels in.

That said, anyone who within the last 25 years bought a house near the airport, should just shut their yaps about airline traffic and noise! I liken that kind of complaining to folks who started smoking 15 years ago and now are suing tobacco companies because it made them sick. No time at all for folks like that. You don't get to cry NIMBY when you MOVED into the airport's back yard.

see, bet that surprised ya! I'm not always anti-everything.

:thumbsup:

The economic impact staement was done in 97, updated in 2002/03 and will be updated again in the next few months. For those who don't know - the airport IS the largest economic engine of the region to the tune of almost 1.5B in economic generation and thousands of direct and indirect jobs.

There are people that bought there house in the last decade that complain. It seems the real issue (which I understand) is that people just want to be bought out and be done with it. The problem is, the home acquisition program is funded by the FAA annually, so the process is done in phases - not one big buy-out at once. Frustrating for many I'm sure...

Well, the airline industry is probably the most cyclical of all US industries, so just because they're down now doesn't mean they won't be healthy and robust in 10 years, and as others have pointed out, if expansion goes through, 10 years might well be the lag time between project start and planes landing and taking off on a new runway.

There's never a "magic bullet." All things economic are to some degree a speculative gamble...

:shok: Color me shocked! I thought I'd never read that!

- Garris

Very well put. Figure 7-10 years before those planes land on the longer runway (at least).

As always, the media is happy to highlight the people who are outraged. I'm sure there are many people living in the airport's shadow who have cookies freshly baked and lemonade freshly squozed for the government officials they are hoping will be knocking on their doors with eviction papers. At this point, the houses near the airport are worthless, you couldn't sell one. So the only way these people can get out is through eminant domain.

The voluntary home acquisition program is first. ED is really the last resort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you absolutely can use eminent domain to take someone's property. It is easily challenged in court but it doesn't mean it hasn't been done. Just look at New London, and North Smithfield.

btw, who pays for the expansion? do they float a bond for it? Yes, the airport is a business, but it is also quasi gov agency known as RIAC. So, does the state pay for it? Does it have enough profit to pay for it itself? how does that work?

While i believe that the airport is an important economic engine, i just would like to see the actual economic feasibility study done in advance, just as we require an Environmental Impact Statement. The "If you build it, they will come" doesn't really work for me. :) I'd rather see "if you build it, the state will realise x dollars in revenue, y dollars in taxes, surrounding businesses within a 10 mile radius will appreciate z dollars etc."

Just as we like to see reasons we're going to war in advance (even if they ended up being lies in the end), i would like for someone to run the numbers to ensure that an airport expansion makes financial sense BEFORE it is done.

Mij & Mr2448 - I agree with your last posts in this thread...

MIJ & MR2448 - I agree with your last posts in this thread...

And i've heard from folks as far away from the airport as Edgewood, complaining of being in flight patterns and being too loud and those people definately do NOT want an expansion, so the NIMBYs are quite far flung...

Dan: Post #56 - very well stated.

The FAA pays medium hub airports (PVD falls there) 85% of approved projects from the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funds in the Federal budget. RIAC would pay off the rest from airport generated revenue, CIP funds, and/or PFCs (passenger facility charges) - the State will continue to pay NOTHING (as has been the way since 1991) for these improvements.

please refernce my above post regarding the economic impact statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mental757,

Thank you very much for your informed posts on the issue. It's really an education!

I have a question for you... Can you think of any airport that's done a runway expansion that hasn't been utilized and where backers were disappointed in the results? I can't think of any in areas where I have lived... From Stewart in NY to Rochester's airport in Minnesota, they've all done well. I was wondering if you knew of any...

- Garris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you can use ED to take a street that runs through a parking lot, but you can't seize someone's land. I think the homeowners will all take the money anyway. The airport was there first and that's what made the house a great deal in the first place.

I could have written this paragraph more thoughtfully. This demonstrates the "lack of tone" you referenced in another thread. I disagree with taking someone's land through eminent domain. I'm well-aware of the New London outrage, and I wish there was a way to fast-track the voluntary home acquisitions for the residents who just want to move on with their lives. Real estate is not exactly a buyers market right now, and this is very much a working class neighborhood.

And i've heard from folks as far away from the airport as Edgewood, complaining of being in flight patterns and being too loud and those people definately do NOT want an expansion, so the NIMBYs are quite far flung...

Whether the city likes it or not, it is defined by the airport as Johnston is by the central landfill - for better or for worse. Jet engines have become much quieter since I was a kid growing up in "the flight path."

You live in Warwick. The entire city is a flight pattern. If you don't like it, move to Coventry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And i've heard from folks as far away from the airport as Edgewood, complaining of being in flight patterns and being too loud and those people definately do NOT want an expansion, so the NIMBYs are quite far flung...

There is a very vocal group opposed to the runway expansion at Logan based on the south shore, in Marshfield, 30 miles away from the runway. When it comes to airports, the opposition does indeed get loud (oooooh) and farflung.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mental757,

Thank you very much for your informed posts on the issue. It's really an education!

I have a question for you... Can you think of any airport that's done a runway expansion that hasn't been utilized and where backers were disappointed in the results? I can't think of any in areas where I have lived... From Stewart in NY to Rochester's airport in Minnesota, they've all done well. I was wondering if you knew of any...

- Garris

None that I can think of. Bottom line is, the extension is way to improve the facility as a whole. There is no formula that shows for every extra foot of runway you get XX more passengers of flights. You either have it or you don't. It's kind of like having a Dunkin Donuts without a drive through - how many people really want the coffee, but go to Tim Horton's next door because they are late for work and they have a drive through...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did AA tell us they were leaving T.F. Green 2 years ago? No they announced it in December and they will be gone as of April 1. Would a longer runway have kept them. Probably not because they and Delta have their own specific needs to recapture pax and redirect them to Logan.

Mark

I just want to clarify that AA is not leaving PVD. It has simply ended its 1 flight a day to Dallas in order to redeploy planes for its new services at Dallas Love Field where it hopes to challenge Southwest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to clarify that AA is not leaving PVD. It has simply ended its 1 flight a day to Dallas in order to redeploy planes for its new services at Dallas Love Field where it hopes to challenge Southwest.

Technically, they are leaving PVD as AA mainline flights are leaving. The DFW flight is gone, and all of the ORD flights are being switched to E-140s from MD-80s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technically, they are leaving PVD as AA mainline flights are leaving. The DFW flight is gone, and all of the ORD flights are being switched to E-140s from MD-80s.

While technically true, I wouldn't categorize a shift to regional jets flying under the American Eagle banner as AA abandoning Providence. It is less an indicator of how PVD is doing as an airport or destination, and more an indicator of shifts in the way airlines are doing business and cutting costs (as well as competition with Southwest to Chicago). At least we aren't Manchester, which has no AA presence at all! Plus, in a few months time we may see American mainline jets back on the runways at Green, given the fickle nature of the industry. My point is, I wouldn't worry too much about Green's future based on these changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While technically true, I wouldn't categorize a shift to regional jets flying under the American Eagle banner as AA abandoning Providence. It is less an indicator of how PVD is doing as an airport or destination, and more an indicator of shifts in the way airlines are doing business and cutting costs (as well as competition with Southwest to Chicago). At least we aren't Manchester, which has no AA presence at all! Plus, in a few months time we may see American mainline jets back on the runways at Green, given the fickle nature of the industry. My point is, I wouldn't worry too much about Green's future based on these changes.

Of course this isn't a horrible sign for PVD, but right now I doubt that we'll see the mad dogs back anytime soon as AA is focused on BOS at the moment. We might see an occasional jump in ERJ service around school vacation time, however (which will happen this month, but this is probably because people booked flights way in advance when the switch wasn't definite). Regardless, United must like this move!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to clarify that AA is not leaving PVD. It has simply ended its 1 flight a day to Dallas in order to redeploy planes for its new services at Dallas Love Field where it hopes to challenge Southwest.

They are definitely doing more to PVD than just stripping us of the 1 daily DFW. As mentioned, the 3 Chicago routes are being tossed, and being replaced with Regional jets. But don't get it miscontrued, AA's presence at T.F. Green is about to be severely dismantled. American Eagle is coming in with their own agents and those agents will be wearing American Eagle attire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are definitely doing more to PVD than just stripping us of the 1 daily DFW. As mentioned, the 3 Chicago routes are being tossed, and being replaced with Regional jets. But don't get it miscontrued, AA's presence at T.F. Green is about to be severely dismantled. American Eagle is coming in with their own agents and those agents will be wearing American Eagle attire.

While I hate to see AA end its jet service to Providence, the average consumer is not going to notice whether the ground crew is wearing AA or A Eagle on their lapels. When they book their tickets online, it will say AA with a small aterisk few bother to read. The flying public's rude awakening will come when they get on the plane - but even then with the new regional jets and American's regional jet gangways at O'Hare there shouldn't be a huge difference. Again, in the airtravel economy of teh future there is going to be little difference for the consumer between flying AA or A Eagle, Delta or Delta Connection, Northwest or Northwest Airlink. From a strictly technical point of view AA may be leaving Green, but AMR is not and consumers will see very little difference until they are on the plane (except for first class passengers). What this does mean is higher ticket prices for AMR on limited seats and better margins with the regional jets - and a boon for United and Southwest on point-to-point service to Chicago.

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.