Future Noise Contour

Transcription

1 The area within each 5 db noise exposure contour is shown in Table 5-2, Area Exposed to Various Noise Levels 2008 Proposed Action. The 65 Day-Night Average Sound Levels (DNL) of the 2008 Proposed Action noise exposure contour encompasses 4.5 square miles, which is the same area exposed to the 2008 No Action noise exposure contour. The shape of the 2008 Proposed Action noise exposure contour is almost identical to the 2008 No Action noise exposure contour, due to the relatively small change in runway utilization. No noise-sensitive areas would experience an increase in noise of 1.5 db or greater, at or above 65 DNL when compared to the No Action. Table 5-2 AREA EXPOSED TO VARIOUS NOISE LEVELS (IN SQUARE MILES) PROPOSED ACTION Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport Noise Level 2004 Existing Conditions 2008 Proposed Action 2008 No Action DNL DNL DNL DNL Source:, [Contours: FLL_2008 Proposed Action-rev3] Future Noise Contour Per E, Appendix A, 14.4g (2) the FAA is required to consider: "Future conditions both with and without (no action) the proposal and each reasonable alternative. Comparisons should be done for appropriate timeframes." The 2012 contour was selected as the most appropriate timeframe. Should the FAA approve any of the Build Alternatives in the ongoing FLL Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), the Proposed Action of this EA would be superseded in 2012 by runway infrastructure modifications and resulting changes in runway utilization at FLL. The Proposed Action considers utilization of Runways 9R/27L and 13/31 in conformance with the Preferred Runway Program, as occurred prior to the June 23, 2005 letter from Air Traffic to Broward County Aviation Department (BCAD), however, the Proposed Action would not require BCAD permission for reassignment as the No Action Alternative does for reassignment necessary for reduction of delay. However, BCAD's history of consistent support/permission for the FAA Air Traffic's prior requests to reassign aircraft create a presumption that in the future, such reassignments would continue to be granted. Therefore, as with the 2008 contour comparison, 18 the No Action contour in 2012 and the Proposed Action contour in 2012 would be virtually identical because operations and reassignments to Runways 9R/27L and 13/31 would be identical with, or without permission from BCAD. The 2012 Proposed Action noise exposure contour for 65, 70, and 75 DNL levels is 18 The 2008 contours had a deviation of less than which is considered statistically insignificant. March 2008 Page 5-11

2 graphically depicted on Exhibit 5-4, 2012 Proposed Action Noise Exposure Pattern. No noise-sensitive areas would experience an increase in noise of 1.5 db or greater, at or above 65 DNL when compared to the No Action Future Noise Contour The ongoing FLL EIS has not been finalized, nor has the FAA (or Broward County) made any decisions regarding infrastructure improvements at FLL. If a decision is made to reject all of the Build Alternatives analyzed in the FLL EIS the airport would continue to operate without any significant modifications to the runway infrastructure/operations and the Proposed Action would continue beyond The Proposed Action in 2020 continues to utilize Runway 9R/27L and Runway 13/31 in conformance with the Preferred Runway Program, as occurred prior to the June 23, 2005 letter from Air Traffic to Broward County Aviation Department (BCAD), however, the Proposed Action would not require BCAD permission for reassignment as the No Action Alternative does for reassignment necessary for reduction of delay. However, BCAD's history of consistent support/permission for the FAA Air Traffic's prior requests to reassign aircraft create a presumption that in the future, such reassignments would continue to be granted. Therefore, as with the 2008 contour comparison, 19 the No Action contour in 2020 and the Proposed Action contour in 2020 would be virtually identical because operations and reassignments to Runways 9R/27L and 13/31 would be identical with, or without permission from BCAD. The 2020 Proposed Action noise exposure contour for 65, 70, and 75 DNL levels is graphically depicted on Exhibit 5-5, 2020 Proposed Action Noise Exposure Pattern. No noise-sensitive areas would experience an increase in noise of 1.5 db or greater, at or above 65 DNL when compared to the No Action. 19 The 2008 contours had a deviation of less than which is considered statistically insignificant. March 2008 Page 5-12

3 NW 5th Street PLANTATION 91 Broward Boulevard Broward Boulevard Broward Boulevard 95 Fort Lauderdale Golf Club o Tr lw ca pi Davie Boulevard SW 12th Street e nu e e Av e Roa d Colle g Dav ie 27R DAVIE SW 64th Avenue SW 70th Avenue Pine Island Road Palm Aven ue DANIA BEACH 91 Atlantic Ocean 31 9R 27L Fort Lauderdale Hollywood International Airport Griffin Road Old Griffin Road Dania Cut Off Canal DANIA BEACH SW 56th Avenue SW 65th Avenue Seminole Indian Reservation Dania Beach Boulevard Legend Commercial Transportation 95 Emerald Hills C.C. City Limits Residential Mixed Use FLL Property Boundary Institutional 7 Park Street Park/Open Space Thomas Street HOLLYWOOD 2012 Proposed Action Noise Exposure Contour Water Topeekeegee Yungee Park Brian Picolo Park Sheridan Street West Lake Park SW 53rd Court Stirling Road PEMBROKE PINES John U Lloyd State Recreation Area Te rra c SW 7 1s t DNL 75 DNL 9L Tree Tops Park Port Everglades SW 24th Street 1 65 DNL SW 36th Street COOPER CITY venue 84 SW 28th Street SW 30th Street Cooper Colony G&C.C. Causeway rew A SW 20th Street Riverland Road 595 S And SW 24th Street SW 4th Avenue Pine Island Road SW 35th Avenue FORT LAUDERDALE iv er an R na h Stra ay University Avenue Golf Club of Plantation Harding Street 0 6,000 Feet 1 inch = 6,000 feet Environmental Assessment Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport 3/27/2008 Prepared by Filename: P:\FLL\EA Air Traffic\GIS 5-4_2012 Proposed Action Contour.mxd contour: fll_2012baseline Exhibit: 2012 Proposed Action Noise Exposure Contour 5-4

4 March 2008 Page 5-14

5 NW 5th Street PLANTATION 91 Broward Boulevard Broward Boulevard Broward Boulevard 95 Fort Lauderdale Golf Club o Tr lw ca pi Davie Boulevard SW 12th Street e nu e e Av e Roa d Colle g Dav ie 27R DAVIE SW 64th Avenue SW 70th Avenue Pine Island Road Palm Aven ue DANIA BEACH 91 Atlantic Ocean 31 9R 27L Fort Lauderdale Hollywood International Airport Griffin Road Old Griffin Road Dania Cut Off Canal DANIA BEACH SW 56th Avenue SW 65th Avenue Seminole Indian Reservation Dania Beach Boulevard Legend Commercial Transportation 95 Emerald Hills C.C. City Limits Residential Mixed Use FLL Property Boundary Institutional 7 Park Street Park/Open Space Thomas Street HOLLYWOOD 2020 Proposed Action Noise Exposure Contour Water Topeekeegee Yungee Park Brian Picolo Park Sheridan Street West Lake Park SW 53rd Court Stirling Road PEMBROKE PINES John U Lloyd State Recreation Area Te rra c SW 7 1s t DNL 75 DNL 9L Tree Tops Park Port Everglades SW 24th Street 1 65 DNL SW 36th Street COOPER CITY venue 84 SW 28th Street SW 30th Street Cooper Colony G&C.C. Causeway rew A SW 20th Street Riverland Road 595 S And SW 24th Street SW 4th Avenue Pine Island Road SW 35th Avenue FORT LAUDERDALE iv er an R na h Stra ay University Avenue Golf Club of Plantation Harding Street 0 6,000 Feet 1 inch = 6,000 feet Environmental Assessment Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport 3/27/2008 Prepared by Filename: P:\FLL\EA Air Traffic\GIS 5-5_2020 Proposed Action Contour.mxd contour: fll_2020baseline-rev2 Exhibit: 2020 Proposed Action Noise Exposure Contour 5-5

6 March 2008 Page 5-16

7 5.2 COMPATIBLE LAND USE The compatibility of existing and planned land uses in the vicinity of an airport is usually associated with the extent of the airport s noise impacts. Airport development actions to accommodate fleet mix changes or the number of aircraft operations, air traffic changes, or new approaches made possible by new navigational aids are examples of activities that can alter aviation-related noise impacts and affect land uses subjected to those impacts. In this context, if the noise analysis, described in Section 5.1, Noise, concludes that there is no significant impact, a similar conclusion usually may be drawn with respect to compatible land use No Action As shown on Table 5-3, Incompatible Land Uses 2008 No Action, approximately six housing units with an estimated population of 16, would potentially be impacted by noise levels at or greater than 65 DNL for the 2008 No Action. Of these six housing units, four are located within the 65 DNL noise contour and two would be exposed to noise levels greater than 70 DNL. There are no churches, schools, libraries, nursing homes, or hospitals impacted by noise levels at or above 65 DNL. Table 5-3 INCOMPATIBLE LAND USES 2008 NO ACTION Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport Type of Facility DNL DNL 75+ DNL 65+ DNL Residential Housing Unit Single-Family Multi-Family Mobile Home Total Housing units Population Single-family Multi-family Mobile Home Total Population Noise-Sensitive Facility Churches Library Performing Arts Centers Nursing Homes Schools Note: Residential housing units and population counts are based on 2000 Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) data from the Broward County Metropolitan Planning Organization. Source:, [Contour: FLL_2008No Action-rev2] March 2008 Page 5-17

8 Proposed Action In both the 2008 No Action and the 2008 Proposed Action there were four housing units located in the 65 DNL noise exposure contour and two housing units located in the DNL noise exposure contour, as shown on Table 5-4, Incompatible Land Uses 2008 Proposed Action. There were no new noise-sensitive facilities located in the 65 DNL or greater noise exposure contour. Therefore, it may be concluded that there are no additional significant impacts to compatible land use due to the Proposed Action. There would be no new adverse incompatible land use impacts with the implementation of the Proposed Action. Table 5-4 INCOMPATIBLE LAND USES 2008 PROPOSED ACTION Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport Type of Facility DNL DNL 75+ DNL 65+ DNL Residential Housing Unit Single-Family Multi-Family Mobile Home Total Housing units Population Single-family Multi-family Mobile Home Total Population Noise-Sensitive Facility Churches Library Performing Arts Centers Nursing Homes Schools Note: Residential housing units and population counts are based on 2000 Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) data from the Broward County Metropolitan Planning Organization. Source:, [Contour: FLL_2012 Proposed Action-rev3] 5.3 SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS, ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE, AND CHILDREN S ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY RISKS Potential socioeconomic impacts have been assessed to determine the effect, if any, that implementation of the Proposed Action would have on the social fabric of the surrounding communities. The types of social impacts that may arise from airport development are: Relocation of residences, farms, and/or businesses Disruption of established communities or planned development March 2008 Page 5-18

9 Changes in employment Changes in surface traffic patterns that may temporarily restrict community access Environmental Justice issues Disproportionate health and safety risks to children No Action With the No Action Alternative, the existing operating conditions at FLL would remain in place. Therefore, there would be no impacts not already occurring or expected to occur Proposed Action The Proposed Action would not require the relocation of any residences or farms and would not impact minority and/or low-income populations. No acquisition of real property or displacement of persons would be involved. There would be no increase or decrease in employment due to the Proposed Action. The Proposed Action would not change surface traffic patterns that would temporarily restrict community access. There would be no environmental health and safety risks, including exposure of products nor substances, that a child is likely to come in contact with or ingest, such as air, food, drinking water, recreational waters, or soil, associated with the Proposed Action. There would be no adverse socioeconomic impacts, environmental justice, nor children s environmental health and safety risk impacts with the implementation of the Proposed Action. 5.4 SECONDARY (INDUCED) IMPACTS Major development proposals often involve the potential for induced or secondary impacts on surrounding communities. Examples of potential secondary impacts include shifts in patterns of population movement and growth, public service demands, and changes in business and economic activity to the extent influenced by the airport development. Induced impacts will normally not be significant except where there are also significant impacts in other categories, especially noise, land use, or direct social impacts No Action With the No Action Alternative, the existing operating conditions at FLL would remain in place. Therefore, there would be no impacts not already occurring or expected to occur Proposed Action The Proposed Action would not affect regional growth and development patterns. The Proposed Action would not result in shifts in patterns of population movement or growth. Broward County and the surrounding region are not expected to encounter any significant socioeconomic impacts as a result of the Proposed Action. The Proposed Action would not impact public service demands in the communities March 2008 Page 5-19

10 surrounding the airport. There would be no adverse secondary (induced) impacts with the implementation of the Proposed Action. 5.5 AIR QUALITY The air quality assessment provides an analytical evaluation of the potential for significant adverse air quality impacts in Broward County due to the Proposed Action. The proposed change in runway use does not suggest any change in the operational characteristics of on-road mobile sources, ground support equipment (GSE), or stationary sources. Therefore, project impacts would be limited to an assessment of emissions from aircraft relating to aircraft departure delay and aircraft taxi time. A complete discussion of applicable laws, guidelines, and methodology relied upon in this assessment are provided in Appendix D, Air Quality No Action With the No Action, the existing operating conditions at FLL would remain in place. Therefore, there would be no impacts not already occurring or expected to occur Proposed Action The proposed change in runway use would improve the efficiency of the airfield at FLL by reassigning aircraft from Runway 9L/27R during times of high delay to the appropriate secondary runway. In addition, the proposed runway utilization would not apply to all aircraft servicing FLL. In fact, just a few aircraft would be reassigned to a secondary runway. Some aircraft that usually depart on Runway 9L/27R would be reassigned primarily to Runway 9R/27L and to Runway 13/31 for departures and arrivals. Although just a few aircraft would be reassigned, this runway use strategy would be expected to decrease the average aircraft delay time for all aircraft using Runway 9L/27R. Delay on Runway 13/31 and Runway 9R/27L is very low, and at times zero under existing conditions. Consequently, aircraft delay would not be expected to increase measurably on either of these runways due to the few aircraft that would be reassigned under the Proposed Action. The proposed reassignment for departures and arrivals would change aircraft taxi time but the change in taxi time would affect just the reassigned aircraft. As such, implementation of the Proposed Action would cause a change in aircraft emissions with respect to taxi time. An analysis of aircraft arrival and departure taxi times included the three categories of aircraft generally in use at the airport, which are jets (commercial and cargo), turboprop aircraft (commuter and air taxi), and general aviation aircraft. The potential for changes in emissions due to the change in taxi times was estimated using the FAA Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS), Version 5.0.2, the latest approved version of the model. The EDMS calculates projected emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides March 2008 Page 5-20

11 (NO x ), sulfur oxides (SO x ), coarse particulate matter (PM 10 ), and fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ). The expected net change in emissions is described in Table 5-5, Net Emissions. Table 5-5 NET EMISSIONS Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport ALTERNATIVES ANNUAL EMISSIONS (tons per year) CO VOC NO X SO X PM 10 PM 2.5 No Action Proposed Action Net Emissions Change Source: FAA, Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS, v ), Implementation of the Proposed Action would cause an overall decrease in emissions of CO, VOC, NO x, SO x, PM 10, and PM 2.5 due to a decrease in taxi time for the reassigned aircraft. Further, the data in Table 5-5 does not consider the overall decrease in aircraft delay times on Runway 9L/27R, which would further decrease emissions of all the pollutants considered in Table 5-5. Therefore, the overall impact on air emissions due to the Proposed Action would potentially be less than shown in Table 5-5. The projected changes in emissions due to the Proposed Action would not equal or exceed any of the threshold levels given in the General Conformity regulations under the Clean Air Act, including the 1990 Amendments (CAA) 20. As such, the expected impact due to the Proposed Action would be considered de minimis and would not have the potential for significant adverse air quality impacts. The Proposed Action would be assumed to conform to the CAA General Conformity regulations and to the applicable provisions in the Florida State Implementation Plan (SIP). In addition, because the emissions due to the Proposed Action are estimated to be de minimis under the CAA General Conformity regulations, it is further assumed that project-related emissions would not cause a violation of any National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), delay the attainment of any NAAQS, or worsen any existing NAAQS violation, 21 as defined under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Consequently, the Proposed Action would not have the potential for significant adverse air quality impacts and the Proposed Action would comply under CAA, Title 1, Section 176(c)(1). No further analysis is required under NEPA or the CAA. For more detailed information regarding the assessment of air quality impacts, see Appendix D, Air Quality See Appendix D, Air Quality. FAA, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures (FAA Order E), Appendix A, paragraph 2.1c, March 20, March 2008 Page 5-21

12 5.6 SECTION 303(C) FORMERLY SECTION 4(F) RESOURCES Section 303(c) of 49 U.S. Code (USC), Subtitle I, provides that the Secretary of Transportation shall not approve any program or project which requires the use of any publicly owned land from a public park, recreation area, or wildlife refuge, of national, state, or local significance or land of an historic site of national, state, or local significance, as determined by the officials having jurisdiction thereof, unless there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such land and such program or project includes all possible planning to minimize harm resulting from the use. 22 Such lands and sites are known as Section 303(c) resources. Please note that Federal statute Title 49 USC, Subtitle I, Section 303(c) was recodified; it was previously known as Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of The discussion of Section 303(c) properties, provided in this section, evaluates the potential for both a "physical taking" and an indirect taking as a result of the implementation of the Proposed Actions No Action With the No Action Alternative, the existing operating conditions at FLL would remain in place. Therefore, there would be no impacts not already occurring or expected to occur Proposed Action As described in Chapter 1, Proposed Action, the Proposed Action does not include construction activities and would not directly use any publicly owned land from a public park, recreation area, or wildlife refuge, of national, state, or local significance or land of an historic site of national, state, or local significance. The Proposed Action would also not create adverse indirect impacts (constructive use). No Section 303(c) lands would lose or reduce their value, or prior significance or enjoyment due to the Proposed Action. As discussed in Section 5.1, Noise, the Proposed Action would not create an increase in the DNL of 65 db or greater and any noise due to the implementation of the Proposed Action would not be at levels sufficient enough to have negative consequences of a substantial nature that would result in a taking of a park or portion of a park for transportation purposes. 5.7 HISTORICAL, ARCHITECTURAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) and the Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 are primary Federal laws governing the preservation of historic and prehistoric resources encompassing art, architecture, archaeological, and other cultural resources. Section 106 of the NHPA requires that, prior to approval of a Federal or Federally-assisted project, or before the 22 FAA Order B, NEPA Implementing Instructions for Airport Actions. March 2008 Page 5-22

13 issuance of a license, permit, or other similar approval, Federal agencies take into account the effect of the project on properties that are on or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) No Action With the No Action Alternative, the existing operating conditions at FLL would remain in place. Therefore, there would be no impacts not already occurring or expected to occur Proposed Action As described in 36 CFR 800.4(a)(1) and in 36 CFR (d) the Area of Potential Effect (APE) for historic resources including structures and archaeological sites, is defined as the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist. For direct impacts, the APE would be considered to be the study area as shown on Exhibit 4-2, Study Area. There would be no direct impacts from the Proposed Action. The Proposed Action would not result in significant noise impacts on incompatible land use as described in Section 5.1, Noise; therefore, there would be no indirect impacts for the APE. The Proposed Action would not physically destroy or alter any historic properties; remove any properties from its historic location; or introduce an atmospheric, audible, or visual feature to the area that would diminish the integrity of any property s setting or through transfer, sale, or lease, diminishes the long-term preservation of any property s historic significance that Federal ownership or control would otherwise ensure. No National Register historic structures or historic properties would be directly or indirectly impacted by the Proposed Action. A historical or cultural resource survey is not necessary in accordance with 36 CFR and 36 CFR No historic properties affected. There would be no impacts to historical, architectural, archaeological, or cultural resources with the Proposed Action. 5.8 FISH, WILDLIFE, AND PLANTS This section describes the biological characteristics of the flora and fauna located within the Proposed Action site. A biotic community is an assemblage of living things residing together, including both plants and animals. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), as amended, provides for the protection of certain plants and animals as well as the habitats in which they are found No Action With the No Action Alternative, the existing operating conditions at FLL would remain in place. Therefore, there would be no impacts not already occurring or expected to occur. March 2008 Page 5-23

14 Proposed Action Implementation of the Proposed Action would not affect biotic communities and would not cause adverse impacts to existing ecological resources in the vicinity of FLL. There is no potential for impacts to water quality as described in Section 5.6, Water Quality. A Biological Assessment is not required because the Proposed Action would not adversely affect listed species or designated critical habitat, jeopardize the continued existence of species that are proposed for listing, or would not adversely modify proposed critical habitat. The Proposed Action adversely impact any Federal-listed or state-listed endangered, threatened, or special concern species because no suitable habitats occur or would be disturbed during nesting season in the areas affected by the Proposed Action. 5.9 COASTAL RESOURCES The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 established the Federal Coastal Zone Management Program to encourage and assist states with preparing and implementing management programs to "preserve, protect, develop, and, where possible, to restore or enhance the resources of the nation s coastal zone." The Coastal Barrier Resources Act of 1982 requires that no new Federal expenditures or financial assistance be made available for construction projects within the boundaries of the Coastal Barriers Resource System. Under Executive Order 13089, Coral Reef Protection, U.S. coral reef ecosystems are defined to mean those species, habitats, and other natural resources associated with coral reefs in all maritime areas and zones subject to the jurisdiction or control of the U.S No Action With the No Action Alternative, the existing operating conditions at FLL would remain in place. Therefore, there would be no impacts not already occurring or expected to occur Proposed Action The Proposed Action would not adversely impact coastal resources or coral reef ecosystems and would be consistent with the Federal Coastal Zone Management Program. The Proposed Action is also consistent with the Florida Coastal Management Program per the February 11, 2008 letter from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. (See Appendix A, Coordination and Comments). There would be no adverse coastal resource impacts with the implementation of the Proposed Action NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY SUPPLY This section contains the determination as to whether there would be major changes in the demand for energy or natural resources. March 2008 Page 5-24

15 No Action With the No Action Alternative, the existing operating conditions at FLL would remain in place. Therefore, there would be no impacts not already occurring or expected to occur Proposed Action The Proposed Action would not impact the supply of energy or other natural resources and would not cause demand to exceed supply. There would be no impacts to natural resources and energy supply with the Proposed Action LIGHT EMISSIONS AND VISUAL IMPACTS Only in unusual circumstances, for example, when high-intensity strobe lights would shine directly into residences or overhead apron, parking, or street lights create glare that affects pilots and air traffic controllers, would the impact of light emissions be considered sufficient to warrant special study and a more detailed examination of alternatives. Visual, or aesthetic, impacts are inherently more difficult to define because of the subjectivity involved. Aesthetic impacts deal more broadly with the extent that the development contrasts with the existing environment and whether the jurisdictional agency considers this contrast objectionable. Public involvement and consultation with appropriate Federal, state, and local agencies and tribes may help determine the extent of these impacts. The visual sight of aircraft, aircraft contrails, or aircraft lights at night, particularly at a distance that is not normally intrusive, should not be assumed to constitute an adverse impact. The art and science of analyzing visual impacts is continuously improving and the responsible FAA official should consider, based on scoping or other public involvement, the degree to which available tools should be used to more objectively analyze subjective responses to proposed visual changes No Action With the No Action Alternative, the existing operating conditions at FLL would remain in place. Therefore, there would be no impacts not already occurring or expected to occur Proposed Action The Proposed Action does not include high-intensity strobe lights that would shine directly into residences. Therefore, as discussed above, no special lighting study is warranted. There would be no significant impacts from light emissions and visual impacts with implementation of the Proposed Action. March 2008 Page 5-25

16 5.12 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The CEQ NEPA regulations (40 CFR ) define a cumulative impact as "...the impact on the environment, which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively significant, actions taking place over a period of time." Cumulative impacts must be evaluated relative to the direct and indirect effects of the proposed action for each environmental category discussed previously in this chapter. As with the environmental consequences discussion, the No Action Alternative serves as the reference point against which to evaluate potentially significant cumulative impacts. Significant cumulative impacts are determined according to the same thresholds of significance used in the evaluation of each environmental category in the environmental consequences discussion. Below is a list of the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects at FLL that have the potential to include environmental impacts and when combined with the impacts from the Proposed Action in this EA could result in significant cumulative impacts: Past Projects (completed) Florida Airspace Optimization Project designed to reduce congestion in the Washington Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) airspace, to identify the resulting congestion and operational constraints in other Florida airspace, and to determine the effect this congestion has on the entire National Airspace System. (Implemented on October 27, 2005.) Revised Terminal Roadway System modifications to the connections of the terminal road system with US Highway 1. (Completed Fall 2003.) Consolidated Rental Car Facility the construction of new facility for rental car companies in the main terminal area. (Completed January 2005.) Tractebel Calypso Natural Gas Pipeline construction of a 42.5-mile long pipeline to transport natural gas. The route is proposed to pass along the northern edge of FLL; within the existing pipeline easement near Interstate-595. (Construction began in 2004 with active transport of natural gas beginning in 2007.) Present Projects. (currently under construction) Westside Airfield Development Program development of infrastructure facilities on the west side of the airfield for development of air cargo and aircraft support services including maintenance and parking. (Currently under construction to be complete by Fall 2008.) March 2008 Page 5-26

17 Short Term Improvements to Terminal 4 expanding the immigration/customs areas and improving Transportation Security Administration. (TSA) screening areas. (Phase 1A completed Fall 2006; Phase 1B/1C currently under construction to be complete Fall 2008.) Future Projects. (construction yet to begin) Concourse A EA - development of an additional five-gate concourse in Terminal 1. (At the time of this publication, the Concourse A EA was being prepared by the Broward County Board of County Commissioners before submission to the FAA.) Taxiway C Improvements Phase 1 of Taxiway C construction (started in 2007); Phase 2 of Taxiway C, including relocation of the Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range. (VOR). (Summer 2010.) Ramp Rehab / Airfield Modifications. (High-Speed Exits) - Ramp Rehabilitation will include the mill and overlay of the aprons around Terminals 2 and 3. The Airfield Modifications project includes the construction of two high-speed exits on Runway 9L/27R. (Construction anticipated ) FAA EIS for the Redevelopment and Expansion of Runway 9R/27L and Other Associated Airport Projects at FLL assesses the potential impacts that may result from the Airport Sponsor s Proposed Action to redevelop and extend Runway 9R/27L to an overall length of 8,000 feet and width of 150 feet. (the reconstructed runway would be equipped with an Engineered Materials Arresting System (EMAS) at both runway ends; construct a new full-length parallel taxiway 75 feet wide on the north side of Runway 9R/27L with separation of 400 feet from 9R/27L; construct an outer dual parallel taxiway; construct a connecting taxiway from the proposed full-length parallel taxiway to existing Taxiway E; construct a Category I Instrument Landing System (ILS) for landings on Runways 9R and 27L that includes a Medium Intensity Approach Light System with runway alignment indicator lights (MALSR), localizer, and glideslope. The EIS also assesses the connected Federal actions to decommission Runway 13/31; assess the redevelopment of terminal gates and a terminal area envelope, relocate Aerial Surveillance Radar (ASR)-9; close Airport Perimeter Road located within the approach to Runway 9R; acquire all or a portion of the Hilton Fort Lauderdale Airport Hotel and Dania Boat Sales.. (Final EIS for public review expected to be complete in 2008, upon approval construction anticipated ) Broward Intermodal Center and the Automated People Mover Development of a regional transportation hub and people mover to transport passengers within and between FLL and the Port, with connections to other regional transportation modes. (Broward County authorized the initiation of the environmental study phase of the project, with the Federal Highway Administration as the lead agency.) March 2008 Page 5-27

18 U.S. Border Patrol Facility - Located in the city of Dania Beach on NE 7 th Avenue. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is currently reviewing the necessary Federal permit applications for the proposed facility. (A timeline for the development of this facility is not currently available.) Relocation of the Buckeye Aviation Fuel Pipeline - The Buckeye pipeline, which is owned by the Everglades Pipeline Company, transports commercial aviation fuels from Port Everglades, Florida to FLL and Miami International Airport. The line traces a 35-mile arc west from Port Everglades, through Fort Lauderdale, Dania Beach, Cooper City, Pembroke Pines, Miramar, and Hialeah down to Miami International. The pipe measures ten inches in diameter and runs four feet underground. A portion of this pipeline that is on the airport is proposed to be relocated out of the existing terminal area within the next four to five years. The relocation would be done by the Everglades Pipeline Company. (Construction anticipated next four to five years.) Relationship of the Proposed Action to the Runway 9R/27L EIS The FAA has included the FAA EIS for the Redevelopment and Expansion of Runway 9R/27L and Other Associated Airport Projects at FLL as a future project; however, it does not have cumulative effects. Given the impact of selecting any of the Build Alternatives contemplated in the EIS, the Proposed Action in this EA would be superseded. Any Build Alternative would necessarily alter runway utilization at FLL and that utilization is contemplated within the EIS document. Cumulative Impacts Summary These notable actions have been implemented, are under current planning, or are anticipated in the future to address transportation and infrastructure needs. The level of cumulative impact anticipated to occur with these actions is not significant due to the types of projects proposed, the extent of the built environment in which they will occur, and the options considered or implemented to mitigate for unavoidable impacts. The cumulative impact of the Proposed Action, when added to the other past, present, and future actions, is not significant. The Proposed Action would have affects on the environment similar to those that already exist. All the projects identified above have independent utility from, and are not connected with the Proposed Action. The limited impacts associated with the Proposed Action addressed in this EA, when considered with impacts from the other projects, are not anticipated to lead to additional significant impact CONSISTENCY WITH APPROVED PLANS OR LAWS The Proposed Action would be consistent with environmental plans, laws, or administrative determinations relating to the environment of Federal, state, regional, or local agencies. March 2008 Page 5-28

19 5.14 MITIGATION This EA identified the relevant areas of environmental concern and determined any potential impacts would be insignificant. Therefore no mitigation measures were considered or planned. March 2008 Page 5-29

20 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK March 2008 Page 5-30