The noise section of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) measures noise from aircraft operations, ground operations of cargo aircraft, ground transportation (traffic), and cumulative noise from combined sources. Traffic noise measurements were conducted to characterize existing ambient noise levels and to differentiate between aircraft-specific noise.

Aircraft Noise Contours
The INM was used to model contours for the Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) of 75 decibels (dB), DNL 70 dB, DNL 65 dB, and DNL 60 dB (Figure 4.2-7). DNL is the FAA-defined metric for evaluating noise and the compatibility of land uses in the vicinity of an airport. It is the 24-hour, logarithmic (or energy) average, A-weighted sound pressure level with a 10-dB penalty applied to aircraft operations that occur during the nighttime - between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. In other words, it is a measure of the cumulative noise exposure over a 24-hour day. The baseline noise contours produced by the INM are a graphical representation of how the cumulative noise from aircraft operations was distributed over the area surrounding T.F. Green Airport on an average day in 2004.

Both the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and the FAA, define DNL 65 dB as the threshold of noise incompatibility with residential land uses. Thus, the DNL 65 dB contour is important for population impact assessments. The DNL 65 dB contour also forms the basis on which the FAA determines eligibility for sound insulation funding. The DNL 65 dB contour at T.F.  Green Airport extends mainly along Runway 5‑23 due to its predominant use as the primary runway. The contour extends northward near Warwick Avenue almost to Posnegansett Lake. To the south, it extends across West Shore Road and close to Route 1 in the Greenwood section of Warwick. Along Runway 16‑34, the DNL 65 dB contour is much smaller due to limited runway use. It does not extend off Airport property to the east, but extends to the west across Airport Road and to Post Road.

There are some areas off the Airport that are exposed to aircraft-related noise levels of DNL 70 dB or above. One small area is to the south of the Airport just off the end of Runway 5 and a similar area is just to the north of Runway 23. There is also an area along the east side of the Airport, north of Runway 16‑34, which is exposed to noise levels of DNL 70 dB or above.

To check the reasonableness of the results of the INM modeling effort and to provide an understanding of the existing noise environment at selected sites, noise measurement data were obtained from 12 sites during a short-term noise monitoring program performed during August 2005 and March 2006. The monitoring program demonstrated that the modeled DNL values show agreement with measured values, especially at locations where DNL values exceed 60 dB. At locations where aircraft noise was lower than 60 dB, local noise sources, such as traffic, are likely to be at the same or greater levels than aircraft noise, and therefore higher measured levels were recorded.

Noise-Exposed Population and Housing Units
United States Census data for the year 2000 was used to estimate the baseline population and number of housing units within the 60, 65, 70 and 75 dB DNL noise contours in 2004.

Table 1. 2004 Noise-Exposed Population and Housing Units

Source: HMMH, 2005. US Census Data, 2000.
1. Population based on census data of 2.5 persons per household.

Because the population and housing counts for noise exposure were derived from year 2000 Census Data, these counts may include properties that have already been acquired or sound insulated as a result of the Voluntary Land Acquisition Program and Residential Sound Insulation Program. As of December 31, 2004, 123 parcels had been acquired and 1,236 parcels had been sound-insulated, all of which were located in the city of Warwick.

Other Noise-Exposed Receptors
A total of 26 non-residential noise-sensitive sites were found to experience noise levels of DNL 60 dB or above in 2004. These 26 sites consist of places of worship, schools, a library, and an adult day care. Of the 26 non-residential noise-sensitive sites, two places of worship in Warwick, the Creating Women Ministries and Bahai Faith, have already been sound-insulated.

The results demonstrated that the dominate source of noise at sites near busy streets, such as the site on Main Avenue in Greenwood, was from vehicular traffic rather than aircraft operations. At measurement sites in quieter locations that are farther from major roads, contributions from aircraft and other noise sources can be greater than the contributions from traffic on local streets.

This summary provides an overview of general land use patterns within the Study Areas (including current and planned developments), summarizes relevant land use plans and local zoning, and discusses the existing land use compatibility with noise from the Airport. The Study Area and Project Area for the T.F. Green Airport Improvement Program land use analysis are depicted in Figure 4.3-1.

The land uses in the southeastern portion of Cranston that are adjacent to the Study Area include industrial, institutional and commercial uses. Like Warwick, Cranston is considered a city of villages each with predominant commercial centers. The general land use pattern shows a distinct east/west split with residential development of open space in the western part of Cranston compared to the redevelopment of established neighborhoods and commercial centers in the eastern portion. Residential land uses are the most prominent land use of the Study Area encompassing 30 percent. The Airport is the second-largest land use (17 percent). Conversely, the Project Area mostly consists of the Airport (63 percent) and residential uses are the second-largest (12 percent). Commercial/industrial land uses are the third-largest land use within both the Study Area (16 percent) and Project Area (7 percent), as shown in Figure 4.3-1.

Zoning Districts
Zoning ordinances and regulations (such as subdivision regulations) are implemented by municipalities to promote public health, safety, and welfare by regulating the use of land and how parcels of land may be converted into buildings within a jurisdiction based on factors such as existing and expected socioeconomic conditions. In general, the ordinance restricts any use that interferes with aircraft safety, including communications and obstructions to flight. The Warwick Zoning Ordinance does not specifically reference Airport noise. Figure 4.3-3 illustrates the zoning districts in the Study Area.

Residential Land Uses
Residential land uses directly abut the Airport on the northeast, east, south, and southwest sides. The majority of the residential land use is single-family; however, there is also multi-family housing within the Study Area. There are nine residential neighborhoods within in the Study Area (Figure 4.3-1):

• Hoxsie, east of the Airport;
• Wildes Corner and Kettle Corner, southeast and far southeast, respectively;
• Greenwood, south;
• Apponaug, southwest;
• Hillsgrove, west;
• Lincoln Park, northwest;
• Norwood, north; and
• Spring Green, northeast.

Commercial/Industrial Land Uses
Approximately 16 percent of the Study Area consists of a mix of commercial and industrial uses encompassing approximately 991 acres of land. These uses include primarily products/services and office uses, however, a significant amount of Warwick’s industrial land is within the Study Area. Most commercial land uses in the Study Area are concentrated along the main arterial routes: Airport Road; Warwick Avenue; Post Road (U.S. Route 1); and Jefferson Boulevard. Generally, these corridors contain a mix of convenience retailing, local services (such as real estate agencies or beauty parlors),health care, professional services, restaurant, entertainment, automotive, sports-oriented, and Airport-related activities such as parking, hotels, and car rental.

Noise-Sensitive Land Uses
According to the FAA, community facilities such as schools, libraries, auditoriums, nursing homes, medical facilities, and places of worship (in addition to residential and parks/recreational uses) are considered noise sensitive areas since elevated noise from Airport activities may interfere with activities associated with these uses.There are 19 places of worship, 19 educational institutions (including schools and daycare facilities), three libraries, and one assisted living facility/nursing home within the Study Area. The Project Area has five places of worship, two educational institutions, one assisted living facility/nursing home, and no libraries.

Land Use Compatibility
Based on FAA criteria, residential areas are considered to be non‑compatible land uses in relation to aircraft-generated noise levels that meet and/or exceed DNL 65 dB. The total acreage of land exposed to noise levels of DNL 65 dB and above in 2004 includes approximately 1,171 acres, or 19 percent of the overall Study Area and 72 percent of the Project Area. The DNL 65 dB noise contour in 2004 does not cross into Cranston, and therefore does not impact residential areas or sensitive receptors in Cranston. Table 1 below summarizes these land uses.

Land Use Plans
Local and state land use plans were collected and analyzed to determine if the action proposed in this DEIS is consistent with local, regional, and state plans for development and growth. The FAA recognizes the authority of municipalities and states in relation to land use controls, noting that the FAA does not have the jurisdiction to adopt, amend, or repeal local zoning ordinances, issue or deny building permits, and has no police powers with regards to local land use. The objective of the review of these plans is to determine if the action proposed in this DEIS is consistent with local, regional, and state plans for development and growth. The environmental consequences analysis for Compatible Land Use reports on the consistency of the actions proposed in the DEIS with these local, regional, and state plans.

FAR Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Study
Part 150 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR), "Airport Noise Compatibility Planning," sets standards for airport operators to use in documenting noise exposure and for establishing programs to minimize noise-related land use incompatibilities. The Rhode Island Airport Corporation completed an update of its previous 1986 Part 150 Study in April 2000, which was approved by the FAA in June 2000. The Part 150 Study is a prerequisite for FAA participation in noise mitigation measures undertaken by the Airport.

The Part 150 Study identified approximately 265 eligible residential properties that were determined to be significantly impacted by noise from the Airport (located in the area exposed to noise levels of DNL 70 dB or greater) and recommended they be acquired under a Part 150 Voluntary Land Acquisition Program. The implementation of the Voluntary Land Acquisition Program is anticipated to be completed by 2008/2009.

In 2004, the number of residents in the region ( Kent and Providence Counties) totals 817,573, which is a 3.9 percent increase since 2000. Within all geographies, overall household growth has outpaced population growth since 1990 and this trend is projected to continue over the rest of this decade as average household size decreases. In 2004, Warwick and Cranston had a total of 37,261 and 32,071 households, respectively. The Study Area had 13,618 households. Nearly 40 percent of the housing in the Study Area was built between 1940 and 1959. Projections indicate that over the next five years the Study Area would increase its household base by 5.1 percent, which is similar to the region and the City of Warwick, and slightly higher than Cranston.

The median value for owner-occupied homes within the Study Area is estimated at $204,700. This is slightly lower than in the Cities of Warwick or Cranston ($220,000 and $230,000, respectively). The median sale price for single-family units in the State of Rhode Island is $264,700. Median rents state- and city-wide are lower than estimated in the Study Area. Currently (2004), the median gross rent for renter-occupied units with the Study Area is estimated at $742 per month, which is slightly higher than Warwick ($734), and substantially higher than Cranston ($642), the region ($558) and the State of Rhode Island ($578). Generally, statewide incomes have not kept up with increases in rents and home prices. As a result, increasing numbers of households pay disproportionately large percentages of their income to secure housing.

Generally, the Study Area is similar to Warwick, Cranston, and the region in most demographic elements. However, the Study Area differs by slightly decreasing in population and having generally older households, lower household incomes (with the exception of the overall region), lower valued housing stock, and higher residential rents.

The Study Area consists of 30 percent residential uses and 16 percent commercial/industrial uses. The majority of the tax revenue generated in the Study Area comes from residential properties (59 percent), which account for 30 percent of the land area. The Airport, which is not obligated to pay property taxes, occupies 17 percent of the land within the Study Area. The Governor of Rhode Island has given the City of Warwick Payment-in-Lieu-of-Taxes (PILOT) funding for being the host community of T.F.  Green Airport. City-wide, the property tax revenue in 2004 totaled $161 million. Table 1 provides detail on the Study Area Commercial Land Use Value and Taxes.

The combined economies of Warwick and Cranston include approximately 77,000 employees in 5,800 firms. Approximately ten percent of Warwick jobs are filled by workers commuting from Cranston, indicating that there is an important economic relationship between the cities. Warwick is the retailing center of the State of  Rhode Island. The Study Area, anchored by the Airport, is the major economic component of Warwick. Study Area businesses account for almost half of Warwick’s employment base and 45 percent of its establishments while consisting of less than 25 percent of Warwick’s total land area.

The economic analysis demonstrates that the Study Area has substantial commercial and industrial activity, accounting for almost half of Warwick’s employment, 36 percent of the City’s commercial tax base, and 45 percent of its establishments. The analysis also shows that a notable amount of this commercial activity is airport-related and that this activity occurs in the approximately 89 airport-dependent establishments which employ more than 3,400 people, as well as the approximately 474 aviation-reliant firms which provide nearly 5,100 of the 25,300 jobs in the study area.

Passenger and license plate surveys conducted in 2000 and 2001 as part of the Airport Master Plan Update helped determine mode share and trip origin information for arriving passengers. The survey results indicated that 59.5 percent of airport passengers drive their personal vehicles (or company vehicles) to the Airport. From the license plate surveys, approximately 60 percent of the observed parked vehicles were from Massachusetts, 26 percent from Rhode Island, and the remainder were from other states. Approximately 26.2 percent of passengers arrived by rental car, 7.6 percent by taxi, 4.0 percent by door-to-door shuttles or limousines, and 2.2 percent by hotel courtesy shuttles. Rhode Island Public Transit Authority (RIPTA) bus service was used by 0.4 percent of passengers and “other” means of transport accounted for approximately 0.1 percent of the trips to the Airport. The Airport is not currently accessible via rail, however Rhode Island Department of Transportation (RIDOT) has begun construction of an Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) commuter rail station at the southeast quadrant of the Jefferson Boulevard/Coronado Road intersection, just east of the Airport.

Intersection Safety

The intersections around the Airport with the highest occurrence of crashes over the three-year period from 2002 to 2004 were Post Road at Airport Road (98 crashes), Airport Road at Warwick Avenue (89 crashes), Post Road at Airport Connector Ramps (75 crashes), Jefferson Boulevard at Airport Connector Ramps (55 crashes), Jefferson Boulevard at Coronado Road/Kilvert Street (49 crashes). There were between 30 and 40 crashes over the three-year period at the intersections of Post Road/Main Avenue (36 crashes) and Post Road/Coronado Road (34 crashes).

Rentals Cars

There are ten rental car companies serving the Airport with facilities located both on- and off-Airport property. Nearly every major car rental company is represented at T.F. Green, including Alamo, Avis, Budget, Dollar, Enterprise, Hertz, National, Payless Car Rental, Thrifty, and U-Save Car and Truck Rental. On-Airport rental cars are available on the lower level of the parking garage adjacent to the terminal building (Garage A). Free shuttle bus services are provided to off-Airport facilities.

Parking

On-Airport parking owned by the Rhode Island Airport Corporation (RIAC) consists of approximately 7,421 spaces in four facilities - two garages and two surface lots. The supply of public parking at the Airport has increased over the years in order to keep pace with the increasing parking demands. Since 2002, the number of on-Airport parking spaces has increased by roughly 261 spaces. Parking utilization data from May 2005 indicate a peak weekday utilization of 79 percent at Garage A, 77 percent at Garage B, 15 percent at Hourly Lot D, and Long-Term Lot E was observed to operate at about 48 percent of capacity.

Air Quality in the Area of T.F. Green Airport

EPA Criteria Pollutants
T.F.  Green  Airport is located in an area that has been declared as an “attainment” area whereby air quality is known to be better than the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for all Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) “criteria” air pollutants except ozone. The other EPA criteria air pollutants are carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO₂), sulfur dioxide (SO₂), particulate matter (PM), and lead (Pb). The NAAQS were established by the EPA to protect public health, the environment, and the quality of life from the detrimental effects of air pollution. Ozone is a regional pollutant and the “non‑attainment” designation includes all of Rhode Island and extends into neighboring states. A State Implementation Plan (SIP) is administered by the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM), and another is in development, to bring the area into attainment with the NAAQS for ozone by 2010. An emissions inventory of airport-related activities association with T.F. Green was conducted for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and is described below.

Deposition of Particulate Matter
In response to public concerns about the deposition of atmospheric fallout in the vicinity of T.F.  Green  Airport, FAA conducted a short-term study to analyze particulate matter including "soot", oily films and other atmospheric residues collected in the surrounding community as part of the EIS studies. The public concerns stemmed from unidentifiable deposits observed on surfaces and questions as to whether aircraft operations associated with T.F. Green Airport contributed to those deposits. The results of the FAA study consistently confirm that soot deposition in the community surrounding T.F. Green Airport is the result of regional emissions from automobile and other urban sources rather than specifically (and only) originating from aircraft fuel or aircraft engine exhaust from the airport.

Receptacle used to capture and study particulate matter deposition in the vicinity of the Airport.

Air Emissions Associated with Airport Operations

The results of the air emissions inventory for the pollutants CO, VOC, NO_x, SO_x and PM_10/2.5 are shown in Table 1. As shown in the table, airport-related CO emissions were estimated to be produced in the greatest quantities followed by NO_x, VOC, SO_x and PM_10/2.5. For VOC and NO_x, aircraft were the dominant on-site source of these pollutants with GSE/auxiliary power units (APU) being secondary sources.

Dispersion of Air Emissions
An atmospheric dispersion analysis was conducted to determine the ambient or outdoor concentrations of CO, NO₂, and PM_10/2.5 at receptors located on the airport, around the perimeter, and in the neighboring community (Figure 4.6-2). This was achieved by combining the air emissions inventory output for T.F. Green Airport with actual hourly meteorological data and geographical information from the area around the airport. “Background” pollutant levels were added to the results to account for the contributions from non-airport, regional, and natural sources. It is important to note that atmospheric dispersion analyses are not typically carried out for Environmental Impact Statement air quality impact assessments but was conducted in this case in response to agency and public comments received during the EIS scoping process.

The atmospheric dispersion analysis results for current conditions at T.F. Green Airport are summarized in Table 2. The results were compared to the applicable NAAQS. The results of the analysis represent the maximum predicted concentrations or “worst-case” conditions. As shown in the table, all of the maximum predicted concentrations were within the NAAQS for each pollutant and timeframe.

Carbon Monoxide “Hot-Spots”
A CO “hot-spot” analysis was conducted to predict ambient levels of CO in the vicinity of the roadway intersections shown on Figure 4.6-3. CO is a highly localized pollutant that can build up in areas characterized by conditions of high motor vehicle volumes and stop-and-go traffic and queuing. In accordance with EPA guidelines, the analysis was conducted for simulated “worst-case” meteorological conditions including low wind speeds, stable atmospheric conditions, and low ambient temperatures. The analysis demonstrated that even under “worst-case” conditions CO levels in the vicinity of the intersections analyzed do not exceed the NAAQS for CO under baseline conditions.

Hazardous Air Pollutants Emissions Inventory
Hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) are a category of air emissions distinct from the EPA criteria air pollutants and for which there are no NAAQS. In addition, because the assessment of airport-related Analysis of HAPs is an emerging topic and a great deal of uncertainty still exists, FAA guidelines for NEPA documents do not specifically address such an analysis. Therefore, this analysis is comprised of an emissions inventory of HAPs for current conditions at T.F.  Green  Airport and is prepared following draft, unpublished FAA recommendations for airport-related HAPs. These guidelines define which HAPs to include in the inventory, identify the available sources of data, and describe the potential limitations of such an analysis.

The airport-related sources of HAPs emissions included in the inventory are aircraft, GSE/APU, motor vehicle operations and on-site stationary sources. The results of the HAPs emissions inventory for 2004 are shown in Table 3. Toluene and formaldehyde are expected to be generated in the greatest amounts followed by benzene, styrene, and xylene. This trend is consistent with other findings by the EPA on a nationwide basis.

RIDEM Hazardous Air Pollutants Monitoring Program
In partnership with the City of Warwick, RIDEM completed a year-long air monitoring study in the vicinity of T.F.  Green  Airport. The study was designed to determine the levels of HAPs in the outdoor air, assess whether surrounding neighborhoods have different levels of HAPs, and determine if these levels are different than in other parts of the state. The data were collected at four sites on (or adjacent to) the airport and in the neighboring community beginning in 2005 and then compared to similar data collected away from the airport in Providence, East Providence, Pawtucket and West Greenwich. The findings of the Study are summarized as follows:

• PM_2.5 levels were within NAAQS.
• Levels of HAPs were within acute (short-term) health benchmarks.
• Levels of HAPs were above chronic (long-term) benchmarks, but are the same as elsewhere in R.I.
• Black Carbon levels were occasionally elevated downwind of the Airport; the Airport is suspected as a source.
• Formaldehyde levels were occasionally elevated near the Airport but the source is currently undetermined.
• More follow-up study is scheduled.

The results of the study are provided in the Air Quality Appendix: RIDEM Airport Air Quality Study (and available via www.dem.ri.gov/programs/benviron/air/slides/tfgreen_files/frame.htm).

Ambient Deposition Study

As part of the T.F. Green Airport Improvement Program Environmental Impact Statement, FAA conducted a study to analyze particulate matter including "soot", oily films and other ambient air deposits collected at the Airport and in the surrounding communities. Residents who live near T.F. Green Airport expressed concerns regarding deposits they observed on surfaces of their property and whether aircraft operations at the Airport contributed to those deposits. In order to address these concerns, this study included an enhanced chemical analysis technique to identify the sources of deposited material in the community. The results of the analyses strongly and consistently confirm that soot deposition in the communities surrounding T.F. Green is more the result of contamination from regional background pollution rather than from aircraft fuel or aircraft engine exhaust from the Airport. Click on the link below for a detailed description of the study's methodology and results.

The Historical, Architectural, Archaeological, and Cultural ResourcesAffected Environment section summarizes the findings of surveys conducted to identify historic and archaeological properties within the Areas of Potential Effect (APEs) that may be impacted by the proposed T.F. Green Airport Improvement Program.

The APE is defined as the geographic area within which the undertaking may cause changes in the character of or use of historic properties. An historic property is any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places. The “direct impacts” APE is the geographic area in which properties would be directly impacted by either a physical taking/modification or by a construction-related taking/modification to the historic property. This area includes the airport property and any properties that would need to be acquired for the program. The “indirect impacts” APE is the area in which environmental impacts of the project could affect the qualities for which the historic property is eligible or listed in the National Register of Historic Places. Changes in noise level and visual setting are anticipated to be the only environmental impacts that could indirectly affect historic properties. The “indirect impacts” APE includes the area that could be adversely affected by airport-related noise (Figure 4.7-1)

Historic Context

T.F.  Green  Airport is located in the geographic center of Warwick, approximately one mile east of I-95 Exit 13, and a mile and a half north of Warwick’s historic Apponaug village (Figure 4.7-1). The Project Area encompasses portions of the villages of Norwood, Hoxsie, Wildes Corner, Greenwood, and Hillsgrove.

Native American Context
The first Europeans arrived in Warwick between 1638 and 1640 and encountered at least four major subdivisions of the larger Narragansett Tribe: Shawmets, Potowomuts, Cowesetts, and Pawtuxets. Native American settlement at the time of European contact focused around near-coastal and coastal confluences of rivers and streams. A network of fields and collecting territories surrounded concentrations of dwellings Previously conducted excavations in Warwick along Potowomut, and at the Maskerchugg Site, Lambert Farm, Sweet Meadow Brook, Locust Spring, and Greenwich Cove indicate long-term semi-permanent, perhaps seasonal, settlements along the near-interior and coast, with significant populations occupying them. Fishing supplemented hunting, collecting, and planting with particular population concentrations at the falls (Pawtuxet) of rivers during spring fish runs. Inland and coastal ponds were fished in the winter while shellfish beds in sheltered coves could be exploited year-round. Where people were living in large numbers, they were also burying their dead. Woodland and Contact Period burials are known in the Cowesett, Apponaug (Rt 117, Sweet Meadow Brook), Horse Neck, Warwick Cove (Wharf St), and Potowomut sections of Warwick (Source: Rhode Island State Historic Preservation and Heritage Commission)

City of Warwick Historical Context
The City of Warwick was first settled by English Colonists in 1643 and was one of four independent Narragansett Bay settlements that were consolidated the following year to form the colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. Throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries Warwick grew organically around several nodes of settlement that were spread over an expansive area extending from Narragansett Bay to the Connecticut Colony border. The early economy of the town was based primarily on agricultural production, but maritime industries became increasingly important as the period wore on. The onset of the Industrial Revolution in the early nineteenth century caused significant changes in the settlement pattern of Warwick. By 1794 Warwick’s first cotton mill had been constructed in Centerville by Job Green. Throughout the remainder of the nineteenth century Warwick continued to expand as a result of the Industrial Revolution and consequent immigration of many European nationalities. Industry grew in the western part of the city, while farming continued to dominate the eastern part. This configuration ultimately resulted in the creation of the Town of West Warwick in 1913 and the resultant loss of much of Warwick’s industrial base.

The development of inter-urban trolley and electrified railroad systems through Warwick after 1892 placed the community within easy commuting distance of Providence and ushered in a period of suburban residential development that intensified dramatically after the full adoption of the automobile as the preferred mode of transportation prior to World War II. This trend continued in the immediate post-war period and resulted in the creation of a number of sprawling residential subdivisions and accompanying commercial strip development along the major arterial roads. The neighborhoods of Hoxsie, Wildes Corner, and Greenwood are largely the product of early to mid‑twentieth century development.

T.F.   Green  Airport
The creation of T.F.  Green  Airport had a profound effect on the development patterns of the western section of Warwick in the twentieth century. By the early 1920s Rhode Island had a number of small airfields that served a burgeoning number of aircraft. Recognizing the economic potential of air freight and passenger travel, Providence-area businessmen began lobbying for a centralized, state-operated airfield. In 1925 the state legislature authorized a study to investigate appropriate locations for the airfield. After having lost much of its industrial base when West Warwick was established in 1913, Warwick was particularly interested in the potential of an airport to spur commercial development. In 1928 the Warwick Town Council passed a resolution asking the Governor to establish an airport in Warwick. The State Airport at Hillsgrove, as it was originally known, became the nation’s first state‑owned airport to open for commercial traffic and was officially dedicated on September 26, 1931.

During the first few years of operation, the airport’s facilities were limited to the runways, administrative offices that were housed in a pre-existing structure, and several small hangars that were built by private air companies on the fringes of the field. In January 1933 an administration and terminal building (erected in the then-popular International style and reflected the influence of aerodynamic streamlined forms) was opened for passenger use. Other improvements in the 1930s included paving of the two 3,000-foot-long and 150-foot-wide runways, installing lights and building two large hangars near the terminal. In 1938, the airport was officially renamed Theodore  Francis Green Airport in honor of the former governor and state senator who was instrumental in its establishment. During World War II the airport was taken over by the U.S. Army and served as a fighter pilot training installation for the Army Air Corps, and was returned to state control in 1945. The increasing size of passenger jet aircraft during the post-war period required additional expansion of the airport. In 1961 a new and larger terminal was constructed and in 1966 the runways were expanded to roughly their present size. The facility prompted intensive commercial development in the surrounding area, particularly along Post Road and Airport Road. The current terminal was constructed in 1996 and was expanded by four additional gates the following year. The early history of the Airport is represented by the surviving original terminal building, two late 1930s hangars along Airport Road, and the Air National Guard Offices, built in the late 1950s to early 1960s.

Historic, Architectural, and Archaeological Survey Results

The following sections discuss resources listed on the National Register, eligible for listing on the National Register, and properties that do not appear to be eligible for listing in the National Register. This section also discusses cemeteries within the Area of Potential Effect and surveyed properties not previously identified.

Identified Historic Architectural Resources within the APE for Direct Impacts
The literature review identified five previously surveyed buildings within the APE for direct impacts for the T.F. Green Airport Improvement Program. Hangar No. 1, Hangar No. 2, and the Air National Guard Offices are considered potentially eligible. Both the Hess Station and the Airport Maintenance Facility are included in the RIHPHC historic property inventory as not eligible for listing in the National Register. A total of 357 additional properties within the APE for direct impacts were surveyed as part of the identification effort. None appear to be eligible for listing in the National Register.

Rhode Island State Airport Terminal

Identified Historic Architectural Resources within the APE for Indirect Impacts
A total of 11 historic properties were identified within the APE for indirect impacts. They include Hangar No. 2 and the Air National Guard Office identified above in the APE for direct impacts, the Rhode Island State Airport Terminal, listed on the National Register, and the following eight properties located off the airport property that are also listed in the National Register:

• Pawtuxet Village Historic District, Warwick,
• Christopher Rhodes House, 25 Post Road, Warwick,
• John Waterman Arnold House, 11 Roger Williams Avenue, Warwick,
• Warwick Civic Center Historic District, Warwick,
• Apponaug Historic District, Warwick,
• Caleb Greene House, 15 Centerville Road, Warwick,
• Cowesset Pound, Cowesett Road, Warwick, and
• Amasa Sprague Estate Stone Wall, Post and Cowessett Roads, Warwick
• (The inclusion of Hangar No. 2 and the Air National Guard Office in the APE for direct impacts and the APE for indirect impacts depends on the location of the Integrated Cargo Facility.)

Cemeteries within the APE for Direct Impacts
The APE for direct impacts includes six historic cemeteries, two are on the airport property and four are within the non-Airport portion of the APE (none of the six cemeteries are part of a larger potentially eligible historic district)(Figure 4.7-2). Historic cemeteries in Rhode Island are protected under Rhode Island General Law (R.I.G.L.) 23-18-11 et. seq. The law conditionally prohibits any town or city to permit “construction, excavation or other ground disturbing activity within twenty-five feet (25’) of a recorded historic cemetery.”

Archaeological Sites Identified within the APE for Direct Impacts.
Subsurface testing was conducted to determine and document the presence/absence of cultural materials, and subsequently archaeological sites, within the APE. Subsurface testing included the hand excavation of 251 shovel test pits within areas of assessed moderate archeological sensitivity. All areas that were accessible for testing were sampled. Three pre-contact Native American archaeological sites, which are potentially significant cultural resources for the information it contains relative to understanding past Native American activities in and around the Buckeye Brook watershed, have been identified as a result of the Phase I(c) archaeological survey of the APE for direct impacts.

This section identifies public parks, recreation areas, and wildlife and waterfowl refuges within areas potentially affected by the proposed T.F. Green Airport Improvement Program in order to provide necessary content for compliance with Section 4(f) of the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) Act of 1966 (49 United States Code  Section 303(c)). Historic sites subject to review under Section 4(f) are described in detail in Section 4.7, Historical, Architectural, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources and summarized here.

The Project Area for the Airport Improvement Program includes the current T.F.  Green  Airport property and immediately adjacent land. The Study Area for the Airport Improvement Program extends beyond the Project Area and is roughly bounded by I-95 on the west, the mouth of Apponaug Cove on the south, Warwick Avenue (State Route 117A) on the west, and Post Road on the north (Figure 4.8-1). The Study Area for the Airport Improvement Program encompasses an area larger than the baseline (2004) 65 dB DNL noise contour, and was developed to include all areas potentially affected by noise changes from the proposed alternatives to be considered in the DEIS. The Study Area was developed based on changes in noise level because increased noise constitutes the largest geographic effect with the potential to impair the use of Section 4(f) resources.

Section 4(f) resources were identified within the Study Area and Project Area using the Natural Resources, Open Space, and Recreation chapter of the 1993 City of Warwick, Rhode Island Comprehensive Plan, available State of Rhode Island Geographic Information Systems data on public parks and recreation space, available street maps and atlases, United States Geological Survey Quadrangle Maps, the City of Warwick website, field reconnaissance, historic research documented in the Historic, Architectural, Archaeological Resources section, and consultation with local officials having jurisdiction over resources typically protected under Section 4(f). The City of Warwick also provided confirmation of Section 4(f) resources.

There are 19 Section 4(f) public parks and recreation areas within the study area which have the potential to be indirectly affected by changes in noise levels. Of these, three public parks and recreation areas are within the Project Area: John Wickes School Playfield, Winslow Park, and the Mickey Stevens Sports Complex.

Section 4(f) resources (public parks and recreation areas) identified within the Study Area and Project Area are listed in Table 4.8‑1 and shown on Figure 4.8-1. There are no wildlife or waterfowl refuges within the Study Area or Project Area

The Wetlands and WaterwaysAffected Environment section describes the existing surface water resources and wetlands within the Project Area and Study Area, including jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetlands and waterways.

The term "wetland" means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions . Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Areas that do not support hydrophytic vegetation because of lack of hydrology, and perennial streams, reservoirs, and deep lakes, are not considered wetlands and are defined as waterways or waterbodies.

The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has jurisdictional authority over Waters of the United States, which includes waterways and adjacent wetlands. In addition to the USACE, the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) also regulates freshwater wetlands, and the Coastal Resources and Management Council (CRMC) enforces freshwater wetland regulations in the vicinity of the coast. In addition to the federally regulated wetlands, RIDEM, CRMC, and subsequently the City of Warwick have jurisdiction over additional state-regulated freshwater wetland areas outside of the federal-regulated wetlands.

Wetlands occur east and north of the Airport in the Project Area, and occur throughout the Study Area (Figure 4.9-1 and 4.9-2). These wetlands are situated in a large outwash plain and the hydrology of the freshwater wetlands is driven by groundwater discharge. Project Area streams include Buckeye Brook, Spring Green Pond Brook, Tuscatucket Brook, Callahan Brook and many smaller unnamed streams.

Many of the wetlands in the Study Area are in urbanized watersheds. Often these wetlands provide valuable water quality functions acting to remove nutrients, toxicants and sediments from storm water.

The larger water bodies, Warwick Pond, Spring Green Pond, Posnegansett Lake, Sand Pond, and Little Pond provide recreational opportunities. The presence of a public school next to the shore of Little Pond provides potential educational opportunity for use as an outdoor classroom.

Wetlands within the Project Area are generally associated with Buckeye Brook, and provide surface water and groundwater support, flood protection, and water quality protection (sediment transformation/retention, nutrient transformation/retention). Buckeye Brook, Warwick Pond and Spring Green Pond provide fisheries values. Wildlife habitat values of these wetlands are limited by the quality of the wetlands, and because the airport perimeter fence restricts movement of mammal species. Wetlands in the southeastern and northern portions of the Airport have been encroached into by past landfill operations, gravel removal, ditching, and road and runway construction. These encroachments reduce the functional values of these wetlands but within the built environment represent some of the only remaining habitat capable of supporting mammals, reptiles, amphibians and bird species.

The Wetland systems within the Study Area are shown on Figure 4.9-1. A wetland system consists of one or more wetland classes that are adjacent or in close proximity. Each wetland system was investigated to collect information on the structure and species composition of the dominant plant associations, soils, landscape setting, and hydrologic source.

Wetlands within the Study Area include Warwick Pond and its associated wetlands, wetlands associated with Callaghan Brook, Buckeye Brook, and Tuskatucket Brook, the Three Ponds wetland system, and other wetlands north and south of the Project Area. Examples of some the functions and values of these Study Area wetlands include:

• Groundwater Recharge/Discharge
• Flood Flow Alteration
• Sediment/Toxicant/Pathogen Retention
• Nutrient Removal/Retention/Transformation
• Wildlife, Fish, and Shellfish Habitat
• Visual Quality/Aesthetics
• Project Area Wetlands

Wetlands within the Project Area are shown on Figure 4.9-2. Wetlands systems are grouped by watershed typically named by a principal stream, pond or point of discharge along the coast. All of the wetlands within the Project Area are “waters of the United States” subject to federal jurisdiction and protected by the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) regulations. Table 1 lists the functions and values associated with each wetland.

Wetlands at Runway 34 end with Warwick Pond in Background

Table 1 Summary of Project Area Wetland Functions and Values

P Principal Wetland Function or Value
X Wetland Function or Value likely provided by wetland
GWR/D Groundwater Recharge/Discharge
SWGW – Surface Water and Groundwater
FFA Flood Flow Alteration
FP Flood Protection
S/T/P R Sediment/Toxicant/Pathogen Retention
WWH Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat
NR/R/T Nutrient Removal/Retention/Transformation
REC Recreation and Aesthetic
PE Production Export
AES Aesthetic
S&S S Sediment and Shoreline Stabilization
F&S H Fish and Shellfish Habitat
WLH Wildlife Habitat
T&E SH Threatened and Endangered Species Habitat
REC Recreation
ED/SV Educational/Scientific Value
U/H Uniqueness/Heritage
VQ/A Visual Quality/Aesthetics

Biodiversity

Biological diversity or biodiversity is an assessment of the numbers, types, and relative abundance of plant and animal species in natural (biotic) communities. Biodiversity includes the abundance or rarity of species in a landscape, and the variety of habitats, communities, ecosystems, and landscapes where species occur. The concept of biodiversity is a combination of the connections within, between, and among these levels, and how the interrelated elements sustain the system as a whole.

For this DEIS, biodiversity is described primarily in terms of important fish, wildlife, and plant communities and species that are known to occur in the Project Area and Study Area. It also includes rare species, one of the most sensitive elements of biodiversity.

The combined Project Area and Study Area are in an urbanized section of Warwick characterized by industrial, mixed commercial, and dense residential development. Most of the historic forested habitats have been removed and irretrievably converted to other uses. Remaining forest habitats are highly fragmented with few interconnecting corridors suitable for wildlife passage.

Biological Diversity On and Near the Airport

The Airport provides limited habitat for wildlife species because most wildlife (birds and large mammals) are incompatible with safe operations of an airport. Biotic communities within the airport are managed to minimize the risk of aviation collision with wildlife and maintain unobstructed airspace surfaces.

The airport is a large facility with high levels of activity near the terminal, aircraft hangars, and runways. Natural habitats are found in land between the runways and the runway safety areas and in protection zones. Grasslands closest to the runways perimeters are mowed frequently to purposely discourage wildlife usage. Further from the runways closely mown grasslands transition to taller less intensely maintained grassland, then shrub land and low tree, and finally forested zones in the northern, southern and eastern sides of the airport property. These grasslands, shrub habitats, and wooded areas provide habitat for common bird, mammal, reptile and amphibian species including white‑footed mouse, meadow vole, raccoon, striped skunk, coyote, and eastern white‑tailed deer. Birds that use the grassland and shrub habitats include bobolink, killdeer, Canada goose, several sparrow species, American robin, and European starling.

One unusual plant community type, a small relic stand of pitch pine/scrub oak barren, occurs in the south part of the airport east of Buckeye Brook. This exposed sand habitat provides habitat for a state-listed plant species (golden aster) and a tiger beetles. No other state- or federally-listed rare plant or animal occurs on or near the Airport, although some areas provide suitable habitat for state-listed grassland bird species.

Upland habitats within the Project Area off the airport occur in small patches of forest or shrub communities, which potentially support limited populations and generalist species common in urbanized areas. The wetlands, waterways and water bodies in the Buckeye Brook system east of the airport provide important wetland wildlife and fishery habitat. Buckeye Brook originates north of the airport, where it combines with the outlet stream from Spring Green Pond and flows into Warwick Pond. Buckeye Brook flows from the south end of Warwick Pond south through the wetlands southeast of Runway 34. These marshes and forested wetlands provide habitat for species of fish, insects (particularly dragonflies), birds and amphibians. After flowing through Lockwood Corner and other residential neighborhoods, it outlets into Mill Cove, a tidal estuarine community. Tuscatucket Brook, which flows to Brushneck Cove, also originates near the south end of Runway 5 and Industrial Avenue.

American eel and alewife fish travel up Buckeye Brook, through Warwick Pond and through Spring Green Pond Brook to reach Spring Green Pond. The DFW found bluegill, pumpkinseed, white perch, largemouth bass, yellow perch, golden shiner, common carp, American eel, and alewife in Spring Green Pond. The herring run from Narragansett Bay into Buckeye Brook to Warwick and Spring Green Pond provides a valuable food source for fish and wildlife populations in the Narragansett Bay Estuary. Warwick Pond supports a more diverse fish community, including gizzard shad, banded killifish, tessellated darter, as well as the fish found in Spring Green Pond.

Regional Biodiversity

Much of the Warwick area is densely developed with residential and commercial properties, but does provide areas of habitat for common suburban wildlife species. Typical birds include crow, blue jay, American robin, house finch, goldfinch, chickadee, tufted titmouse, down woodpecker, Baltimore oriole, and cardinal. Common mammals include eastern coyote, raccoon, striped skunk, Virginia opossum, eastern cottontail, and gray squirrel. Larger natural habitats, which include various upland community types, forested wetlands, marshes, and open water bodies, support a more diverse wildlife and plant community and provide corridors which connect habitats needed by wildlife for feeding, breeding, or overwintering. Some the larger natural habitat systems in the vicinity of the Airport include the Pawtuxet River corridor (including the Pawtuxet Reservation), Three Ponds, Posneganset Lake, Occupessatuxet Cove, Brush Neck and Brush Neck Cove, Mill Cove, and Rocky Point.

Airport Management of Biological Resources

Biotic communities within the airport are managed to minimize the risk of aviation collision with wildlife and maintain unobstructed airspace surfaces. A perimeter chainlink fence around the airport restricts large animal movement into and out of the airport property. Intensive maintenance of airfield grasslands adjacent to runways minimizes the habitat value to grassland birds.

Collisions between wildlife (birds, deer, coyotes) and aircraft are a safety hazard and cause substantial losses to the aviation industry. In order to minimize this risk, a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan is implemented by RIAC to discourage wildlife from utilizing habitats within the RIAC property. As required by this plan, RIAC removes vegetation around the perimeter fence; mows grass areas to discourage bird activity; removes temporary standing water that could attract birds; and uses exclusion devices to prevent birds from perching or nesting on airfield structures. RIAC inspects the airport daily to assess wildlife activity on the airport.

In addition to managing wildlife collisions hazards, the airspace around the airport must remain clear of fixed obstructions. The FAA regulates mandated airspace surfaces in the vicinity of the airport to maintain aviation safety. Left unmanaged, plant communities in the immediate vicinity of the airport could grow into this airspace surface. RIAC has developed and implements a Vegetation Management Program (VMP) that defines long-term, sustainable vegetative management and maintenance practices that prevent future vegetative penetrations of FAA‑mandated airspace surfaces. Under this Plan, RIAC maintains and manages specific zones around the airport to make sure that vegetation located within these zones is compatible with the airspace surfaces that overly them. Most of the grassland, shrub, and low tree habitats around the airport were created and are maintained as part of the VMP.

Threatened and Endangered species are protected under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (the ESA) and the Rhode Island Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Act (Rhode Island General Law Title 20, Chapter 37). The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) defines an endangered species as one that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A Threatened species is one that is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future. The USFWS maintains a list of plants and animals native to the U.S. that are classified as Threatened or Endangered and a list of species that are candidates or are proposed for possible addition to the federal list. All listings, including proposed additions and delistings, are announced through the Federal Register.

The Rhode Island Natural Heritage Program (RINHP) maintains and publishes lists of species considered to be Endangered, Threatened, or of Concern in Rhode Island. The RINHP defines Endangered as a native species in imminent danger of extirpation from Rhode Island. Populations of these species have already been reduced to a critically low number or have experienced drastic habitat loss or degradation. Immediate management action is required to prevent extinction in the state. A Threatened species is a native species that is likely to become State Endangered in the future if current trends in habitat loss or other detrimental factors remain unchanged. In general, these taxa have three to five known or estimated populations and are especially vulnerable to habitat loss. A State Species of Concern is a native species (or subspecies) not considered to be State Endangered or Threatened at the present time, but is listed due to various factors of rarity and/or vulnerability.

Investigations regarding the presence of state- or federally listed Threatened or Endangered species were conducted through coordination with the appropriate regulatory agencies (RINHP, RIDEM Division of Fish and Wildlife [RIDFW], and the USFWS), inspections of the Project and Study Areas, review of previously collected or reported data, and literature reviews. The findings of these investigations are described in the following sections.

American Eel
RIDEM DFW fisheries data provides records for American eel in the following waterways and waterbodies associated with the Project Area: Buckeye Brook, Tuscatucket Brook, Spring Green Pond, and Spring Green Pond Brook, and Study Area: Warwick Pond, Gorton Pond, and Little Pond. American eel is a catadromous fish species with multiple life stages that migrate from freshwater to the ocean to spawn. The American eel requires various habitats over their lifespan, including open oceans, large coastal tributaries, small freshwater streams, lakes, and ponds. If present, the American eel is likely to use the Buckeye Brook watershed for the upstream and downstream movement into and out of Warwick and Spring Green Ponds, to the estuarine freshwater-saltwater interface, and Narragansett Bay. The American eel is not protected under the Endangered Species Act. On February 2, 2007, the USFWS published its decision not to list the American eel as threatened or endangered in the Federal Register. It is not listed by Rhode Island.

Pine Barrens Tiger Beetle
A deeply sculpted outwash terrace juts northwestward into the floodplain swamp associated with Buckeye Brook in the southeastern corner of the airport property. This peninsula supports a remnant pine barren community dominated by pitch pine (Pinus rigida) and scrub oak (Quercus ilicifolia). Though small and isolated by encroaching urban development, suitable habitat for the Pine Barrens Tiger Beetle (Cicindela formosa) is present. A small population of three or four of this Rhode Island tiger beetle species was observed on June 13, 2006 and again on August 17, 2006 by wildlife biologists from the RIDFW. This species is designated as State Threatened by the RINHP indicating that only a few stations are known in the state. The pine barrens tiger beetle is common in other parts of its range in North America and is not afforded federal protective status under the ESA. It is not known if the existing population is large enough to remain viable. In the event of a local extinction, the absence of suitable habitat supporting populations of this species in the vicinity of this station would preclude potential recolonization.

Grassland Bird Species
The airfield provides potentially suitable habitat for a number of regionally rare grassland bird species, including the upland sandpiper, horned lark, and grasshopper sparrow as reported by the RIDFW. On September 9, 2005 a female northern harrier (Circus cyaneus, State Endangered), was observed in grasslands south of Runway 34. This was likely a migrating bird, considered common during this season along the coast of southern New England.

As a group, grassland bird species require large expanses of short grass (up to 2 feet in height) habitat. These bird species are rare at the state level but have no special federal status besides the normal protection afforded to all migratory birds. Neither upland sandpipers, grasshopper sparrow, nor horned larks have been identified within the Project Area, and there are no records of northern harrier breeding in the Project Area or Study Area.

Sickle-leaved Golden Aster
The sickle-leaved golden aster (Pityopsis falcata) was identified during an inspection of the pine barren community in the southeastern corner of the airport. This species was found growing in loose sands near the airport perimeter fence. This species is listed as State Concern by RINHP and is found on dry sandy soils associated with pine barrens in the coastal plain.

Floodplains are defined as “the lowland and relatively flat areas adjoining inland and coastal waters including flood prone areas of offshore islands. Floodplains include, at a minimum, those areas with at least a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year” (i.e., area inundated by a 100-year flood).

The Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) Rules and Regulations Governing the Administration and Enforcement of the Freshwater Wetlands Act regulates the 100-year floodplain and floodway as freshwater wetlands. The Rules define floodplain as “that area of land adjacent to a river or stream or other body of flowing water which is, on the average, likely to be covered with flood waters resulting from a 100-year frequency storm. A 100‑year frequency storm is one that is to be expected to be equaled or exceeded once in 100 years; or may be said to have a one percent probability of being equaled or exceeded in any given year.” RIDEM regulates unmapped floodplains associated with all flowing bodies of water. These areas are identified by developing complex models of flood flows passing through stream valley cross-sections and must be determined by site-specific hydrologic analysis.

A floodway is defined as the channel of a river or stream, with any immediately adjacent areas that must be kept free of encroachment in order that the 100-year flood waters can be carried without increase in flood heights or flows and without endangering life and/or property.

Floodplain Values

The natural and beneficial values of these floodplains include moderation of flood waters; protection of water quality of Warwick Pond and Buckeye Brook; wildlife habitat; and groundwater recharge. The floodplain areas within the airport boundary do not provide natural and beneficial values for scientific study, outdoor recreation, agriculture, aquaculture, or forestry because they are within the fenced and managed limits of the airport and are not accessible to the public.

Existing Floodplains

The areas subject to flooding and protected under EO 11988, USDOT Order 5650.2, and RIDEM Rules and Regulations Governing the Administration and Enforcement of the Freshwater Wetlands Act were identified and mapped according to existing Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). According to the FIRMs, the Project Area contains areas of 100‑and 500‑year floodplains.

The eastern portion of the Project Area within the eastern and south eastern portions of the T.F. Green Airport boundary contains areas designated as Zone AE and Zone X (other flood areas) associated with Warwick Pond and Buckeye Brook (Figure 4.14-1). Zone AE refers to areas inundated by the 100-year floodplain with base flood elevations determined to be 15 feet above National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD). Zone X refers to areas of the 500-year floodplain; areas of the 100-year floodplain with average depths less than one foot or with drainage areas less than one square mile; and areas protected by levees from the 100-year flood.

All of the Zone AE floodplain mapped along Buckeye Brook and Warwick Pond is projected inland from the still water elevation of the 100-year coastal flood modeled between Conimicut Point and Allard Street in Warwick. Three areas below this coastal flood elevation occur along Buckeye Brook within the Project Area. Area A is associated with Wetland A‑5 and A‑6, upstream of Lake Shore Drive (Figure 4.9-2). The existing culvert under Lake Shore Drive restricts unmapped riparian flood flows and impounds water in this area. Area B includes Wetlands A‑10, A‑13, A‑14, and A‑15, south of Runway 16‑34 (Figure 4.9-2). Area C includes part of Wetland A‑8. The FIRM map for Area C is inconsistent with existing topography, and shows the floodplain extending across Runway 34, which is elevated 15 to 20 feet above the 100‑year floodplain elevation of 15 feet. (See Section 4.9, Wetlands and Waterways, for additional information.)

Additional areas of 100-year floodplain and floodway subject to the RIDEM Rules and Regulations Governing the Administration and Enforcement of the Freshwater Wetlands Act will be calculated and mapped in the FEIS to identify impacts of the Preferred Alternative.

Coastal resources in Rhode Island are protected under the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA), whose purpose is to provide for appropriate use and conservation of coastal barriers along the Atlantic, Gulf, and Great Lakes coastlines.

The CBRA defines "undeveloped coastal barriers" as geological features including bay barriers, barrier islands, and other associated aquatic resources including wetlands, marshes, and estuaries that protect landward aquatic habitats from the detrimental effects of direct wind and wave action. Barriers have been found to provide essential habitats for wildlife and marine life, natural storm buffer zones, and areas of scientific, recreational, historic, and archaeological significance.

Under the CBRA, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) was tasked with the preparation of maps depicting areas designated for protection. The John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resource System (CBRS) includes all areas designated for protection under the CBRA. Neither the Project Area nor the Study Area contains any coastal barriers mapped in the John H. Chafee CBRS.

Five coastal areas included in the CBRS and designated for protection under the CBRA occur outside of the Project Area and Study Area, as shown on Figure 4.15-1. Bakers Creek, Brush Neck/Buttonwoods Cove, Mill Cove, Occupessatuxet Cove and Passeonkquis Cove are designated CBRS areas. Two of these, Buttonwoods Cove and Mill Cove, are downgradient of T.F. Green Airport.

Rhode Island Coastal Zone Management Program

Rhode Island’s Coastal Zone includes the entire state. However, the inland extent of the regulatory authority of the state’s CZMA agency is 200 feet inland from any coastal feature.

Under the CZMP (administered by the RICRMC), the RICRMC has jurisdiction over activities occurring in the Rhode Island Coastal Zone. In accordance with the RICRMC Federal Consistency Manual, RICRMC defines the Coastal Zone as “the area encompassed within the state’s seaward jurisdiction (three miles) to the inland boundaries of the state’s 21 coastal communities.” Within these communities, RICRMC exercises its federal consistency requirement over direct federal activities or federally sponsored activities which are reasonably likely to affect any coastal use or resource within the CRMC's jurisdictional area (Figure 4.14-2).

In addition, the RICRMC has jurisdiction over specific activities within all upland areas that have the potential to impact tidal waters of Rhode Island, including power-generating plants (excluding facilities of less than a 40-megawatt capacity); petroleum storage facilities (excluding those of less than a 2,400-barrel capacity); chemical or petroleum processing; minerals extraction; sewage treatment and disposal facilities (excluding individual sewage disposal systems); solid waste disposal facilities; and desalination plants. This list of activities does not include airports.

In some areas, RICRMC coastal zone jurisdiction is expanded to include those areas within the watershed boundaries of certain coastal estuaries. These watershed areas are regulated under Special Area Management Plans (SAMPs). RICRMC’s SAMPs have been prepared for the Salt Pond Region, Providence Harbor, Pawcatuck River, Narrow River and Greenwich Bay. The southern portion of the Project Area is within the watershed of Greenwich Bay (Figure 4.15-1), and is subject to CRMC coastal jurisdiction and requirements of the Greenwich Bay SAMP. Activities proposed by the T.F. Green Airport Improvements Project will require a CZM Consistency Determination from the RICRMC due to the Project’s location within the Coastal Zone as identified in the Greenwich Bay SAMP. The SAMP identifies T.F. Green as a potential source of pollutant loading in the Greenwich Bay watershed and the regional groundwater aquifer that discharges to Greenwich Bay.

CRMC also has authority over freshwater wetlands in the vicinity of the coast. The Rules and Regulations Governing the Protection and Management of Freshwater Wetlands in the Vicinity of the Coast defines resources subject to protection and requirements for seeking approvals. Maps identifying the boundary between RICRMC and Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management jurisdictions are published by the RICRMC. The boundary typically follows major roadways, railroad corridors and the like. In the vicinity of T.F. Green, the boundary line follows Narragansett Parkway to Warwick Avenue, Warwick Avenue south to West Shore Road, and West Shore Road south and west to Post Road as shown on Figure Figure 4.14-2. T.F. Green is not within the RICRMC freshwater wetland jurisdiction.

Coastal resources in the vicinity of T.F. Green Airport.

In 1981, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) passed the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) to ensure that significant agricultural lands are protected from being converted to non-agricultural uses during federal actions. The FPPA protects three classes of farmland soils: Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and farmland other than prime or unique farmland that is of statewide or local importance.

Prime Farmland is defined as land (certain decimated soil types) that has the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops, and is also available for these uses. Prime farmland can include cropland, pastureland, range-land, forest land or other land. It does not include land already in or committed to urban development or water storage. Unique Farmland is land other than prime farmland that is or can be used for the production of specific high-value food and fiber crops.

Additional farmlands of statewide or local importance are lands also potentially used for the production of food, feed, fiber, forage, and oil seed crops. Generally, additional farmlands of statewide or local importance include those that nearly meet the definition of prime farmland and that economically produce high yields of crops when treated and managed according to acceptable farming methods.

The USDA Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) and the Rhode Island Department of Administration Division of Planning (RIDOA) have identified those lands in Rhode Island that have a combination of physical and chemical features that make them best suited for farming. These lands are subdivided into Prime Farmlands and Additional Farmlands of Statewide Importance. No unique or locally important farmlands have been identified in Rhode Island.

Farmland Within the Project Area

The Soil Survey of Rhode Island identifies soils within the Project Area (Figure 4.15-1) that are classified as Prime Farmland or Additional Farmland of statewide importance (Table 1).

Scattered pockets of both Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance soil mapping units occur throughout the northern and southeastern portions of the Project Area (Figure 4.15-1). Regulated farmland soils at the southeastern corner of the Project Area are primarily within undrained wetland areas, or are developed. Areas that are in urban development are excluded from the Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance units identified by the NRCS. Within the Project Area, most Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance units are undeveloped and consist of woodland and shrubland or undrained wetlands.

Most undeveloped farmland soils occur north of Airport Road, extending from Post Road to Spring Green Pond. A 55‑acre tract of cultivated Farmland of Statewide Importance is located approximately one‑quarter mile north of Airport Road. This (the Confreda Farm) is the only area of active farmland within the Project Area.

Most of the Farmland of Statewide Importance units closest to the eastern portions of the Airport property boundary are mapped as poorly drained Walpole soils according to the Soil Survey of Rhode Island. Walpole soils are hydric and are only considered Farmland of Statewide Importance when drained. Since these soils are not presently drained, they are excluded from consideration as Farmlands of Statewide Importance. Small pockets of both Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance soil mapping units are interspersed either within or around these larger Walpole mapping units closest to the eastern portions of the Airport.

Field crops at Confreda Farm, north of T.F. Green Airport.

Hazardous Materials, Pollution Prevention, and Solid Waste

The Hazardous Materials, Pollution Prevention, and Solid Waste section of the Affected Environment Chapter describes potential and confirmed sources of subsurface contamination and/or waste materials, and regulations governing existing solid and hazardous waste conditions at T. F. Green Airport. Potential sources of soil and groundwater contamination were assessed within the Project Area (Figure 4.15-1), the area of probable physical impact, and the Study Area, which includes additional areas in the vicinity of T.F. Green Airport that may have the potential to affect the airport or the Project Area.

Sanitary and Solid Waste Management

A variety of solid and hazardous wastes are generated and managed at T.F. Green Airport. These include sanitary waste and garbage from airport facilities and aircraft, waste oil products associated with vehicle and equipment maintenance facilities (including GSE), and miscellaneous waste from building and airfield maintenance. RIAC is operating in compliance with applicable section of Rhode Island’s Rules and Regulations for Hazardous Waste Management according to a letter of compliance from the RIDEM to RIAC in May, 2004.

Storage and Handling of Oil Products at T.F. Green Airport

T.F. Green Airport is divided into nineteen oil management areas. Oil management areas include areas where oil products are stored or handled, such as underground and aboveground storage tanks, drums, miscellaneous oil product containers, and fueling areas. The Hazardous Materials, Pollution Prevention, and Solid Waste section of the Affected Environment Chapter describes the various facilities at T.F. Green Airport that have the potential to contain hazardous materials or contribute to soil or groundwater contamination.

According to the RIAC Oil Spill History, in 2004, 16 spills involved between 15 and 50 gallons of Jet A fuel or diesel fuel. Five spills were recorded above 50 gallons (up to 60 and 80 gallons, 70, 385, and 456 to 656 gallons). Other substantial releases recorded which were greater than 20 gallons involved hydraulic fluid, motor oil, lavatory waste and glycol. Spills were contained in accordance with RIAC’s operational procedures.

Pollution Prevention Measures at T.F. Green Airport

The maintenance facility operations at T. F. Green Airport generate waste oil, which is considered a hazardous waste by Rhode Island. Because the Airport is a generator of a small amount of this hazardous waste, RIAC has obtained a permanent EPA identification number for the airport as required by RCRA.

Potential Sources of Contaminated Soil or Groundwater within the Project Area

The majority of sites identified in the database search are not anticipated to present a threat to soil or groundwater within the Project Area based on the distance from T.F. Green, direction with respect to inferred groundwater flow direction, and/or completed remedial status. Further review of sites within the Project Area or upgradient from the Project Area was undertaken to identify the potential contaminants that could be encountered during construction of the proposed Airport Improvement Program. The following sites are some of the known or potential areas of hazardous material contamination in the Project Area, but not necessarily within the Airport Property Boundary:

• Former Fuel Farm
• Truk-Away Landfill
• The former Truk-Away landfill is located within the boundary of the airport property, adjacent to Mays, Marshall, and Meier, Co.
• A leaking underground storage tank at Mobil SS#01
• Strawberry Field Estates, Inc. /ETCO Cord Products
• The Forest Company
• Jay Packaging Group, Inc.