Studies and Reports - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PROJECT BACKGROUND

The Inter-Modal Transportation Authority, Inc. (ITA) sponsored this Environmental Assessment (EA) to study the potential impacts associated with the proposed construction of a new replacement airport to be located within the Kentucky TriModal Transpark.

The proposed KTT will be located within a 6,600-acre study area approximately 5 miles northeast of Bowling Green and adjacent to I-65, the CSX Railroad, and US 31W. This general area is identified throughout the EA as the ÒYellow Study AreaÓ. The land requirement for the KTT is approximately 4,000 acres that will be developed in phases. The KTT is being planned to include the following facilities:
While the commerce/business park is being financed without any federal funding, ITA is concerned about the environment. Federal funding or approval may be sought for the airport development within the KTT. Due to the potential for federal funding related to airport development and the ITAÕs concern for the environment, this document was prepared.

This EA addresses the potential environmental impacts of the proposed airport within the KTT. Although there is currently no federal sponsor for this project, the EA was conducted following, to the greatest extent possible, the Federal Aviation AdministrationÕs (FAAÕs) guidelines for completing NEPA documents, which are detailed in Federal Order 5050.4A, Airport Environmental Handbook. In addition, coordination was conducted with appropriate federal, state, and local agencies, as well as the public in the spirit of the NEPA process. Should this project get a federal sponsor, the EA will serve as a springboard to initiate a federal Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). It is important to note, that without a federal sponsor at this point in the project, the formal EA process is not required. The ITA, however, has elected to prepare a document that closely follows FAA procedures in order to identify potential areas of environmental impact and to assure that there is an appropriate level of examination of avoidance, minimization, or mitigation opportunities for potential adverse impacts.

This EA analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the proposed airport runway alternatives. In addition, the potential environmental impacts of the business/commerce park development on the Yellow Study Area were evaluated to the greatest extent possible. The environmental impacts associated with the business/commerce park component of the KTT cannot be evaluated in as great of detail at this time because a final site development plan has not been completed. In addition, the actual configuration of the business/commerce park cannot be established until the property has been acquired for the park. The environmental analyses that were performed on the Yellow Study Area will be utilized in the design of the business/commerce park to ensure that potential impacts to sensitive environmental areas will be avoided, minimized, or mitigated. This information will also be utilized in application for environmental permits that will be required for the development of the business/commerce park.

PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Four alternatives were evaluated for the proposed airport development. These alternatives include three build alternatives that would occur within the Yellow Study Area. Various other runway alternatives were considered, including numerous other runway alignments within the Yellow Study Area. According to the FAAÕs Airport Environmental Handbook, a test of reasonableness and practicality should be applied to identify alternatives that warrant further study. These alternatives were eliminated from further study due to such factors as: site constraints, including other existing roadways and the CSX rail line; direction of prevailing winds; the prevalence of sink holes; proximity to schools located just west of the Yellow Study Area; the location of historic structures; proximity to Oakland and other established communities; or other environmental factors that made them less desirable than the three Build Alternatives which were selected for further study. Each of the Build Alternatives that were selected for further study are viable alternatives; none have operational limitations that would make them unsuitable for implementation. In addition, a No Build Alternative was considered that would consider the continued utilization of the existing Bowling Green-Warren County Regional Airport.

Each alternative includes: a 7,000-foot by 150-foot runway; a 500-foot wide Runway Safety Area (RSA); a 2,500-foot long Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) at each end; High Intensity Runway Lighting (HIRL); Medium Intensity Approach Lighting System with Runway Alignment Indicator Lights (MALSR); Medium Intensity Taxiway Lighting (MITL); Runway End Identifier Lights (REIL); Precision Approach Path Indicators (PAPI); parallel taxiway; terminal building and other aviation-related uses. Each alternative includes the identification of additional acreage within the Yellow Study Area that will be developed as a business/commerce park. The number of acres identified for the aviation related development and the business/commerce park vary for each alternative because the configuration of the alternative runway alignments altered the property available within the Yellow Study Area for other development. In addition, each alternative was adjusted to avoid taking residences, where possible, which also affected the acreage.

An overview of the three proposed development alternatives and the No Build Alternative are presented below.

Alternative A
This alternative, which is shown on Figure S-1, includes a 7,000-foot long by 150-foot wide runway with a southwest to northeast orientation. The 7,000-foot runway alignment allows enough reserve acreage for a 150-foot wide runway surface, a 500-foot wide Runway Safety Area (RSA) and a 2,500-foot long Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) at each end. This alternative includes approximately 3,987 acres, on which 1,667 acres will be utilized for aviation related development including the runway, airport facilities, and open space. The remaining acreage (approximately 2,320 acres) would potentially be utilized for the business/commerce park and buffer areas. This assumes that the entire 2,320 acres designated for the business/commerce park area is acquired and developed. The blue shading on Figure S-1 highlights the area identified for the aviation related development while the red shading shows the area that is identified for the business/commerce park and buffer areas.

Environmental Impacts: The airport portion of Alternative A will displace 18 residences and require the closure and/or relocation of Freeport Road, a secondary road within the Yellow Study Area. With the construction of the business/commerce park, an additional 37 residences will be displaced, assuming that the entire 2,320 acres designated for the business/commerce park are acquired and developed.

Alternative A also could potentially impact two properties that are potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) that are within the area to be acquired for the airport. In addition, there are five NRHP properties and one potentially eligible property that are adjacent to the area to be acquired for the airport. These properties also may be impacted by the project.

As a result of Alternative A, approximately 1,655 acres of farmland will be rezoned to airport rezoning uses. The construction of the business/commerce park will result in the rezoning of an additional 2,332 acres of farmland. It is likely that undeveloped sections could be leased back for agricultural uses.

Each of the Build Alternatives and the business/commerce park has the potential to impact water quality within the Yellow Study Area, due to the karst hydrology in which pollutants can quickly and seriously affect water quality. Impacts to water quality within the Yellow Study Area could adversely impact the blind cave crayfish, listed as a special concern species by the Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission (KSNPC). In addition, the potential for the Kentucky cave shrimp to occur within the Yellow Study Area, although considered highly unlikely, cannot be ruled out completely. Although the species was not identified within the Yellow Study Area during field investigations conducted as part of this EA, it may occur in a lower portion of the Graham Springs Basin. If the blind cave shrimp occur within the Yellow Study Area, it would be sensitive to water quality impacts, as well. The Graham Springs BasinÕs water quality is

Insert S-1

currently impacted by agricultural runoff. The proposed development will address water quality concerns through an effective site runoff management plan, including detention ponds, swales, etc.

Each of the Build Alternatives will have positive economic impacts. With the implementation of an enhanced replacement airport, approximately 240 new jobs will be created by year 2010, 870 new jobs will be created by year 2020, and approximately 1,530 new jobs will be created by year 2030. As a result of the new jobs, the Gross Regional Product (GRP) will increase by $15.8 million in year 2010, $74.3 million in year 2020, and $106.3 million in year 2030. Additional economic benefits will occur as a result of the implementation of the business/commerce park. By year 2010, approximately 1,640 new jobs are projected as a result of the business/commerce park. By years 2020 and 2030, approximately 5,160 and 6,020 new jobs will be created as a result of the business/commerce park, respectively. The increases to annual GRP resulting from the business/commerce park will be $106.9 million in 2010, $438.9 million in 2020, and $640.0 million in 2030. In addition, there will be construction related economic impacts from the development of the airport and business/commerce park. These impacts are documented in a separate report, Benefit-Cost and Economic Impact Analysis.

Expansion Potential: The potential for runway expansion for Alternative A exists to the northeast and to the southwest. Due to the potential for business/commerce development to occur to the southwest, the greatest potential for long-term expansion is to the northeast. An expansion to the northeast would bisect Oakland Road.

Wind Coverage: Alternative A is acceptable based on wind coverage, since it provides at least 95 percent wind coverage for the design class of aircraft, which is C-III for the proposed airport. Among the Build Alternatives, Alternative A is ranked third for its wind coverage for both all weather and IFR conditions.

Proximity to Noise Sensitive Areas: Noise sensitive areas include residential structures, as well as places of public assembly (churches, schools, parks, etc.). Alternative AÕs extended centerline avoids passing over Mammoth Cave National Park. The southwestern centerline, however, indicates potential overflights of Bristow Elementary School, Warren East Middle School, Warren East High School, and Ephram White Community Park, as well as the city limits of Bowling Green. It should be noted that the location of the City, the schools, and the park are well outside prescribed FAA safety and noise zones.

Airspace: There are no airspace concerns such as towers, terrain, or restricted navigation areas with Alternative A.

Runway Protection Zones: The FAA recommends that the airport sponsor control a trapezoidal area off each runway end. It is recommended, though not prohibited that roads not be included in the RPZ. Alternative A has one road, Oakland Road, located within the northeastern RPZ.

Alternative F

This alternative includes a 7,000-foot runway also having a southwest to northeast orientation, as shown on Figure S-2. Alternative FÕs 7,000-foot runway alignment allows enough reserve acreage for a 150-foot wide runway surface, a 500-foot wide Runway Safety Area (RSA), and a 2,500-foot long Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) at each runway end. This alternative is south of Alternative A and requires approximately 4,182 acres, of which 1,962 acres will be utilized for aviation related development and 2,220 acres would potentially be utilized for the business/commerce park and buffer areas. This assumes that the entire 2,220 acres that are identified for the business/commerce park are acquired and developed. The aviation related development will occur in the area shaded in blue on Figure S-2 and the business/commerce park will be developed in the area shaded in red.

Environmental Impacts: Alternative F will result in 10 residential displacements and the closure and/or relocation of a portion of Freeport Road. With the construction of the business/commerce park, an additional 46 residences will be displaced, assuming that the all of the land identified for the business/commerce park is acquired and developed.

There are no properties eligible or currently listed in the NRHP within the property to be acquired. However, there are six properties that are listed on the NRHP and three properties that are potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP adjacent to the land to be acquired for the airport development. Therefore, there could be potential impacts to these resources.

As discussed above under Alternative A, Alternative F and the business/commerce park also could impact water quality, as well as the blind cave crayfish and the Kentucky cave shrimp, if it is found to occur within the Yellow Study Area. Water runoff will be controlled through a series of carefully engineered detention ponds, swales, etc.

As a result of Alternative F, approximately 1,961 acres of farmland will be rezoned to airport uses. With the development of the business/commerce park, an additional 2,221 acres of farmland will be rezoned to business/commerce park uses. It is likely that undeveloped sections could be leased back for agricultural uses.

The same economic benefits that would occur under Alternative A would occur with the implementation of Alternative F.

Expansion Potential: The greatest potential for expansion of Alternative F is to the northeast. The location of US 68 and the CSX railroad will prevent any significant expansion to the southwest. Any extension to the northeast will bisect Oakland Road.

Wind Coverage: Alternative F is acceptable based on wind coverage and meets the FAAÕs criteria of at least 95 percent wind coverage for the design class of aircraft (C-III). Compared to the other Build Alternatives, Alternative F ranks second for coverage for both all-weather and IFR conditions.


Insert S-2

Proximity to Noise Sensitive Areas: While Alternative FÕs alignment avoids the City of Bowling Green, it does point towards the center of Mammoth Cave National Park, located approximately eight miles to the northeast. It is important to note that arriving and departing aircraft could easily avoid Mammoth Cave overflights by establishing standard operating procedures. It is important to note that there are currently no airspace or noise restrictions for pilots flying over Mammoth Cave.

Airspace: There are no air space concerns such as towers, terrain, or restricted navigation areas associated with Alternative F.

Runway Protection Zones: Like Alternative A, Oakland Road is located within the northeastern RPZ.

Alternative T
This alternative, which is shown on Figure S-3, includes a 7,000-foot long by 150-foot wide runway with a north-south orientation. Alternative TÕs 7,000-foot runway alignment allows enough reserve acreage for a 150-foot wide runway surface, a 500-foot wide Runway Safety Area (RSA), and a 2,500-foot Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) at each runway end. This alternative requires approximately 4,079 acres, of which approximately 1,435 acres will be utilized for aviation related development and 2,644 acres would potentially be utilized for the business/commerce park and buffer areas. This assumes that the entire 2,644 acres that are identified for the business/commerce park are acquired and developed. The aviation related development will occur in the area shaded in blue on Figure S-3 and the business/commerce park will be developed in the area shaded in red.

Environmental Impacts: Alternative T would result in 37 residential structures and the closure and/or relocation of a portion of Freeport Road. With the implementation of the business/commerce park, an additional 27 residences will be displaced.

There are no properties on or potentially eligible for listing on the NRHP within the land to be acquired for the airport development. There are three properties listed in the NRHP that are adjacent to the area to be acquired for the airport development.

Water quality impacts and potential impacts to the blind cave crayfish and the Kentucky cave shrimp, if it is found to occur within the Yellow Study Area, are also concerns with Alternative T and the development of the business/commerce park. As with the other development alternatives, on-site engineering will address water quality concerns.

With the implementation of Alternative T, approximately 1,233 acres of farmland will be rezoned to airport uses. With the construction of the business/commerce park an additional 2,869 acres of farmland will be rezoned. Areas not initially considered for development will be leased back for agricultural uses.

The same economic benefits that would occur under Alternative A would occur with the implementation of Alternative T.
Insert S-3

Expansion Potential: Expansion to the south is precluded due to the CSX railroad, as well as US 68. A significant expansion to the north would require that U.S. 31-W be relocated.

Wind Coverage: Alternative T provides the best wind coverage for both all-weather and IFR conditions of any of the Build Alternatives.

Proximity to Noise Sensitive Areas: Alternative T, with its north-south alignment, avoids straight out overflights of and approaches over Bowling Green, Mammoth Cave, and Oakland.

Airspace: There are no air space concerns such as towers, terrain, or restricted navigation areas associated with Alternative T. There is a ridge line of high terrain to the north, but it does not create a problem.

Runway Protection Zones: US 31W is located in the northern RPZ and US 68/80 and the CSX railroad are located in the sourthern RPZ.

No Build Alternative

The No Build or ÒDo-NothingÓ Alternative was evaluated pursuant to the Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulation Section 1502.14(d). With the No Build Alternative, the existing Bowling Green-Warren County Regional Airport will continue to be utilized as it is. With no new development, there are limited potential environmental impacts. The existing airport has several hundred homes located in the FAA-recognized 65 DNL noise contour. In addition, the airportÕs runway safety areas do not currently meet FAA standards. Non- compatible land uses surrounding the airport prevent any significant future expansion. There is insufficient adjacent, available property for the development of a business/commercial park. The areaÕs future need for developable commercial property would go unfulfilled or occur through random, private, developments.

SUMMARY

The EA addresses the potential environmental impacts of the proposed airport development within the KTT. Although there is currently no federal sponsor for this project, the EA was conducted following, to the greatest extent possible, the Federal Aviation AdministrationÕs (FAAÕs) guidelines for completing NEPA documents, which are detailed in Federal Order 5050.4A, Airport Environmental Handbook. Based on this review, it is recommended that Alternative T be carried forward as the preferred runway alignment. While each of the Build Alternatives is operationally feasible and the potential environmental impacts can be satisfactorily managed and controlled, Alternative T offers the following advantages over the other alternatives:

Because of the potential environmental impacts that have been identified during this EA, it is likely that an Environmental Impact Statement will be required if federal funding or approval of the airport components of the KTT is sought.
     C-III Aircraft classification includes aircraft having approach speeds of at least 121 knots, but less than 141 knots and wingspans of at least 79 feet, but less that 118 feet. Typical aircraft in this category include Boeing 737 and DC- 9.



Chapter One