Justification MVY. Chapter 3 Project Development &

Transcription

1 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport Chapter 3 Project Development & Justification The purpose and need for each component of the MVY improvement program are presented below with additional development and details on the composition of the 14 project elements of the program. 3.1 TAXIWAY ALPHA TO FAA STANDARDS [PROJECT #1] Existing Taxiway Alpha is proposed to be reconstructed at the appropriate offset from the parallel Runway Given the aircraft presently utilizing MVY, FAA design standards call for the taxiway-to-runway centerline distance to be 400 feet to maintain wingtip clearance between aircraft landing and taking off on the runway and aircraft moving along the taxiway; at present, the centerline of Taxiway Alpha is located 370 feet from the centerline of Runway This project is safety-oriented and will enhance safety margins at the airport. In addition, several lengths of taxiway pavement are degraded severely. Loose bits of pavement can be sucked into aircraft engines or blown into/onto other aircraft. The width and length dimensions of Taxiway Alpha will remain the same in the reconstruction. Two so-called stub taxiways connecting Taxiway Alpha to Runway 6-24 along its length will be configured and old pavement dating to the airport s military period will removed. This project will result in a net reduction of 1.44 acres of total impervious area. Essentially, the rehabilitation of Taxiway Alpha is a safety/maintenance project. The existing and Future Build conditions along Taxiway Alpha are illustrated in Figures 2-1 and 2-3, respectively. Engineering plans for Phase I of the taxiway reconstruction/ relocation are provided in Appendix C Airport Reference Code The designation of an Airport Reference Code (ARC) is a key step in any airport master plan as it establishes many of the design criteria and dimensions used in laying out runways, taxiways, aircraft parking areas and so on. It is based on the most demanding aircraft or category of aircraft generally referred to as the critical aircraft using the airport. The FAA defines the critical aircraft as the largest, heaviest and fastest aircraft having or projected to have more than 500 annual itinerant 3 Project Development & Justification 3-1

2 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment operations at the airfield. Itinerant operations are flights which originate or terminate at an airport more than 25 miles from the aircraft's base airport. The ARC is made up of two components: a letter designation (A-D) followed by a Roman numeral (I-VI): the letter indicates the approach category of the critical aircraft and the Roman numeral designates the Design Group in terms of the aircraft's wingspan. The ARC for MVY was thoroughly reviewed and analyzed in the recent master plan. The driving factor behind this review is the increasing use of the airport by large general aviation business jets, often referred to as corporate jets, which are creating space demands on the airfield, particularly in regards to available apron parking. This trend is in keeping with trends in the aviation industry. The review of the ARC for the airport resulted in a shift of the ARC from one of B-III to C-III, based on the existing and projected increase in business jet activity at MVY Impact of ARC Change on Taxiway Alpha Taxiway Alpha presently is 370 feet centerline-to-centerline to Runway This separation exceeds safety design criteria (350 feet) for an ARC of B-III on a runway with less than ½-mile visibility minimums, which was the ARC of Runway 6-24 prior to its review in the master plan. However, assigning MVY an ARC of C-III changes the design criteria to a separation distance of 400 feet. Accordingly, Taxiway Alpha is proposed to be designed and reconstructed at the appropriate 400-foot separation to provide the proper distance for safe wing clearance between a plane on Runway 6-24 and a plane on Taxiway Alpha Physical Condition of Taxiway Alpha Another driving force behind the rehabilitation of Taxiway Alpha in the near future is its present condition, particularly the length between Runway 33 and Runway 24. As part of Phase I of the master plan effort, a detailed pavement inventory was undertaken in September The segment between Runways 33 and 24 was assigned a rating of poor (0-2 years remaining pavement life) and the remainder a rating of fair (5-10 years remaining pavement life). A taxiway (or a runway) in such poor condition can pose a serious hazard to aircraft engines, particularly jet engines. Debris on the taxiway also can damage another aircraft if thrown back by jet blast or propwash of an aircraft before it on the taxiway. FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5380-5B Debris Hazards at Civil Airports specifically addresses the problems of debris at airports. The problem is serious: foreign object damage (FOD) costs one major airline $15,000 per aircraft, which represents an industry 3 Project Development & Justification 3-2

3 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport cost of over $60 million. 1 Paving materials are specifically referenced as a foreign object, and pavement repair and maintenance are addressed in the advisory circular at Paragraph 6(e) and 6(g)(3) Taxiways Bravo and Delta Taxiways Bravo and Delta presently intersect with Runway 6-24 at skewed angles. Such angles make it difficult for most aircraft to perform certain turning movements and prevent the larger aircraft from making certain turns. As part of the Taxiway A to FAA Standards project, Taxiways Bravo and Delta will be aligned as right-angled exit taxiways to Runway 6-24 per AC 150/ Airport Design, Section 413. The width of the taxiways will be 50 feet with the appropriate taxiway shoulders. There is a net reduction in impervious area of 0.72 acre due to the realignment of the two taxiways Holding Aprons With an ARC of C-III, the two existing holding bays at the ends of Runway 6-24 do not meet FAA design standards. The far edge of pavement is 123 feet from the runway centerline with a centerline taxiway stripe located 25 feet off the pavement edge. The distance from this taxiway stripe to the runway centerline is 98 feet. Considered as parallel taxiways, the FAA design standard calls for a separation of 152 feet (AC 150/ , Table 2-3). As part of the Taxiway A to FAA Standards project, all future holding bays will be designed and striped to position aircraft in the bays at 152 feet from the runway centerline, thus providing the appropriate, safe dimensions between aircraft. 3.2 SOUTHEAST RAMP [PROJECT #2] Given the projections of future aircraft activity at MVY, additional aircraft parking is necessary to accommodate this demand. Accordingly, approximately 21 acres of an existing area of oak forest, maintained turf and sparsely vegetated sections of significant disturbance will be paved for new aircraft parking to address a portion of this demand. A new drainage system will be installed and Best Management Practices will be employed to treat and return all stormwater to the ground Transient Aircraft Apron Parking Requirements Currently, the existing aircraft parking areas are at capacity during peak (summer) periods, i.e., the existing 93 tie-downs are consistently full. The airport manager reports high turnover rates on busy summer weekends: an itinerant tie-down, at least twice 1 FAA Advisory Circular 150/5380-5B Debris Hazards at Civil Airports, July 5, 1996, Para. 5(a). 3 Project Development & Justification 3-3

4 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment daily, and an apron spot opposite the popular restaurant in the main terminal, as much as three times. Given the limited available parking, the impact placed on that parking by the growing physical size and numbers of corporate aircraft visiting MVY, the airport staff is required to spend a considerable amount of time and resources actively managing the existing aircraft parking facilities. The arrival of two of the larger corporate jets may force the airport operations staff to reposition as many as five aircraft. In addition to larger parking area, the large corporate aircraft require wider taxilanes, the corridors through which aircraft move in parking areas. Whereas the smaller GA aircraft (the one- and two-engine aircraft) require taxilanes 79 feet in width per FAA standards, the larger business jets at MVY require taxilanes 162 in width for safe, secure movements. The impact of larger aircraft and related taxilanes on ramp space at MVY is illustrated in Figure 3-1. Other factors to consider are FAA design requirements which have evolved to reflect the general increase in wingspan even among small GA aircraft. For example, a parking configuration with two rows of parking (four GA aircraft in each row) with a taxilane in between formerly required an area 180 feet by 121 feet or 21,780 square feet (0.50 acre); under today s FAA standards, this same configuration requires an area 280 feet by 205 feet totaling 57,400 square feet (1.32 acres), an increase of 164 percent! The two parking configurations are compared in Figure 3-2. The projected transient activity the underlying demand for aircraft parking (tiedowns) is determined by applying a 1.8 percent annual increase to transient activity according to the FAA national average projections for itinerant GA aircraft operations growth over the period (FAA Aerospace Forecasts FY ). However, given the attractiveness and popularity of Martha s Vineyard as a day or weekend trip destination, it is likely that unconstrained growth in transient activity may be considerably more than the national average; therefore, a scenario doubling the national FAA average was prepared to demonstrate a higher growth rate. The resulting demand for transient aircraft parking spaces is presented in Table 3-1. The projected transient activity tie-down requirements translate to a need for an average of 10 additional tie-downs every five years if using the FAA national growth averages, and 24 additional tie-downs every five years if using twice the FAA national growth rate. Translating the demand for aircraft parking through 2020 to numbers of tie-downs yields the tie-downs listed in Table 3-2. For subsequent planning purposes, the scenario using twice the FAA average will be used to configure future aircraft parking at MVY. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-4

5 ELEVATION VIEW TAXILANE (GROUP I & II) 41' 79' 41' 41' BEECH BARON 96' 162' TAXILANE (GROUP III) GULFSTREAM-V PLAN VIEW FILE:FIG 3-1 RKD Hoyle, Tanner 150 DOW STREET, MANCHESTER, NH (603) , WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DDS DR. BY & Associates, Inc. DES. RKD BY DATE: 4/19/04 SCALE: NTS MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT VINEYARD HAVEN, MASSACHUSETTS IMPACT OF BUSINESS JETS ON APRON REQUIREMENTS FIGURE 3-1

6 OLD STANDARDS 121' 81' 17' 45' 180' 21' 24' 280' 60' 205' 17' 70' 49' 60' 79' 21' NEW STANDARDS FILE:FIG 3-1 RKD Hoyle, Tanner 150 DOW STREET, MANCHESTER, NH (603) , WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DDS DR. BY & Associates, Inc. DES. RKD BY DATE: 4/19/04 SCALE: NTS MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT VINEYARD HAVEN, MASSACHUSETTS "NEW" vs. "OLD" FAA TIE-DOWN DIMENSIONS FIGURE 3-2

7 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport Table 3-1 Projected Transient Activity, 2005 and 2010 FAA National Average 1 2 x FAA National Average 2000 Base Notes: 1. Historical data for itinerant GA aircraft operations at airports with either FAA or contract air traffic control service grew 1.8 percent annually between 1994 and 1999, and FAA projects this same level of growth over the period (FAA Aerospace Forecasts FY , Table 32, p. X-34) Twice the projected FAA average is equal to 3.6 percent. 2. MVY 2000 base is derived from Table 3-20 (MVY Master Plan Phase I Report) assuming 71 transient spaces turn over twice and 20 restaurant spaces turn over three times, plus miscellaneous helicopter and military activity. Table 3-2 Projected Transient Activity Aircraft Parking Requirements, 2005 and 2010 FAA National Average Transient Tie-down Reqts Restaurant Tie-down Reqts Misc. Tie-down Spots Total Tie-downs x FAA National Average Transient Tie-down Reqts Restaurant Tie-down Reqts Misc. Tie-down Spots Total Tie-downs Based Aircraft Apron Parking Requirements The projected based aircraft activity using 2000 base numbers for peak (summer) periods was determined by applying annual increases in the piston aircraft fleet (1.5 percent) and turboprop/turbojet aircraft fleet (5.3 percent) according to the FAA national average projections for GA aircraft fleet growth over the period (FAA Aerospace Forecasts FY ). Table 3-3 outlines the based aircraft during the peak (summer) period for the 2000 base year as determined in the Phase I master plan effort. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-7

8 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment Table 3-3 Based Aircraft, Summer and Total Peak Period, 2000 Dedicated Hangar Aircraft Operator 3 ME Piston Barry Stott Hangar 9 Duchess Aviation (8 SE and 1 ME) 30 Condo Hangars 48 Subtotal Dedicated Hangar Aircraft Apron Aircraft 40 80% SE and 20% ME 2 Weekend Aircraft 3 2 Falcon 50 3 Gulfstream IV 2 Challenger 6 Citation Conquests 8 Cessna 300/Beech Baron 58/Piper type aircraft (non-cabin class aircraft) 24 Subtotal Weekend Aircraft 112 Subtotal Summer Based Aircraft 4 22 Total Year-Round Based Aircraft 134 Total Peak Period Based Aircraft Notes: 1. Seasonal or summer-based aircraft are aircraft owners that pay the airport an annual landing and parking fee (the aircraft use the airport enough to justify paying an annual fee); however, these aircraft typically are not "registered" with MA officials as being based at MVY. 2. Fleet breakout provided by the airport manager. 3. The majority of the weekend aircraft are associated with fractional ownership programs. 4. Subtotal Summer Based Aircraft = Subttl Dedicated Hangar Aircraft + Apron Aircraft + Subttl Weekend Aircraft. Source: Airport Manager, November 2000 Contained within FAA Aerospace Forecasts FY are forecasts of the active GA and air taxi fleets through 2011 (FAA, Table 26, p. X-28). Over the period , FAA projects that 1,090 SE Piston aircraft, 82 Turboprop and 402 Jet aircraft are to be added to the GA fleet each year. Over this same period, no increase in the ME Piston aircraft fleet is predicted. The average growth explicit in these figures is assigned to the based fleet using tie-downs at MVY in Note that this excludes hangared aircraft. The results, in 5-year increments, are depicted in Table Project Development & Justification 3-8

9 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport Table 3-4 Projected Based Aircraft Requiring Apron Space, 2005 & 2010 Single Engine Aircraft Multi Engine Aircraft Turboprop Turbojet Total Note: Average annual growth rates implicit in this table are as follows: SE Aircraft: percent; ME Aircraft: 0 percent; Turboprop Aircraft: 1.2 percent; Turbojet Aircraft: 4.8 percent Summary, Transient and Based Aircraft Apron Parking Requirements The total apron parking requirements of transient and based aircraft by 2010 are presented in Table 3-5. Table 3-5 Total Transient and Based Apron Parking Requirements, 2010 Percent of Fleet Mix 1 3 Project Development & Justification 3-9 Total Projected Transient Aircraft Spaces 2 Total Projected Based Aircraft Spaces Total SE/ME Turboprop Jet Notes: 1. Developed by the firm of Edwards & Kelcey, Inc. in 2000 during the conduct of a noise study for MVY. 2. Assumptions: A) Total Transients are in all aircraft types, including jets. B) All aircraft geared to restaurant are SE/ME. C) Miscellaneous Transients assigned to Jet category. 3. Weekend aircraft Aircraft Parking Options Based and transient aircraft present separate and distinct needs. Based aircraft are less dependent on services provided in the MVY terminal, i.e., restaurant, car rentals, etc. The owners of based aircraft are generally island residents of some duration (year-round or seasonal), obviously know their way around the island and have access to personal automobiles. Properly badged for airport security considerations, they are free to access the airfield and their planes at any time. Their principal demands on the airfield are for space for their aircraft, parking for their automobile and fuel. Accordingly, siting based aircraft away from the premium apron areas in proximity to the terminal creates little hardship on these aircraft owners and opens up additional valuable parking for transient aircraft.

10 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment Pilots and passengers in transient aircraft, however, are greatly reliant on airport services and facilities, i.e., bathrooms, restaurants, ice, fuel, tourist information, transportation and so on. Martha s Vineyard is a desirable destination for many recreational fliers. Placing itinerant aircraft in proximity to the terminal and airport services is a desired goal to consider when laying out parking areas at an airfield. Three aircraft parking options were developed within the MVY master plan. The three parking options all of which incorporate the taking of the first row of hangars in the existing Southwest Ramp -- are described in Table 3-6. Table 3-6 Aircraft Parking Options Option No. Descriptive Title Description 1 Based & Transient Mixed Based corporate jets assigned to proposed Southeast and Northwest Ramps. Corporate hangar development at Northwest Ramp. Transient corporate jets at existing Southwest Ramp. Transient SE and ME accommodated around T-hangars. Transient and based SE, ME and Turboprop aircraft at proposed Northwest Ramp. 2 Based & Transient Separate Based corporate jets assigned to proposed Southeast and Northwest Ramps. T-hangar development at Northwest Ramp. Based SE, ME and Turboprop assigned to Northwest Ramp. Transient corporate jets at existing Southwest Ramp. Transient SE and ME accommodated around T-hangars. 3 Based & Transient Separate Based corporate jets, Turboprops, and SE/ME assigned to proposed Southeast Ramp. Corporate hangar development at Northwest Ramp. Transient corporate jets at existing Southwest Ramp. Transient SE, ME and Turboprop at Northwest Ramp. Of the three, the Client Group selected Option 3. This option separates the based and itinerant aircraft, placing all based aircraft in a proposed new Southeast Ramp, while allocating the existing ramp areas (the so-called Southwest Ramp) for transient or visiting aircraft. Based aircraft presently parked on the Southwest Ramp will be moved to the new Southeast Ramp upon its completion. Thus, the varying needs of the aircraft owners can be addressed separately and efficiently in distinct areas of the airfield. The Southeast Ramp is thus proposed as a critical component of the MVY improvement program. The existing and proposed conditions of the Southeast Ramp are depicted in Figures 3-3 and 3-4, respectively. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-10

11 BARNES ROAD EAST LINE ROAD AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK 100' X 5500' RUNWAY TAXIWAY "B" TAXIWAY "A" (EAST).90" N.11" W EL.63.03' EQUIPMENT SHED NORTH LINE ROAD 26A FILE: FIG 3-3 Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. 45 BROMFIELD STREET- SUITE 1001, BOSTON, MA (617) FAX: (617) WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DR. BY DES. BY DATE: SCALE: RKD DDS RKD 4/19/04 1"=300' MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FIGURE EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPOSED SE RAMP & AIRLINE ROAD 3-3

12 TAXIWAY B 100' X 5500' RUNWAY FUTURE TAXIWAY "B" HANGAR PROPOSED SE RAMP RGO NTER TAXIWAY "A" (EAST) TAXIWAY A (EAST).90" N.11" W FREIGHT PROPOSED AIRLINE ROAD EL.63.03' PROPOSED FIRE FLOW TANK EQUIPMENT SHED EAST LINE RD. NORTH LINE RD FILE: FIG 3-4 Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. 45 BROMFIELD STREET- SUITE 1001, BOSTON, MA (617) FAX: (617) WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DR. BY DES. BY DATE: SCALE: RKD DDS RKD 4/19/04 1"=300' MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FIGURE PROPOSED 3-4 SE RAMP & AIRLINE ROAD

13 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport The proposed Southeast Ramp will be constructed with a state-of-the-art drainage system which will collect all stormwater flowing across the new impervious surface. All stormwater will flow through an oil-water separator before being discharged back to groundwater through leaching galleries. The drainage system also includes an in-line below-ground storage tank specifically designed to intercept and collect any spills prior to their reaching the leaching galleries. By closing a gate valve all flows to this tank are isolated and kept from flowing through to the leaching galleries, thus protecting the underlying sole source aquifer from the impacts of future spills, if any, on the Southeast Ramp. In addition, the Southeast Ramp will contain a designated area for the deicing of aircraft in winter operations. During deicing events, drainage from this pad will be conveyed to an underground storage tank (10,000-gallon capacity) for storage. In all others periods, i.e., nondeicing periods, summer/spring/fall days, a gate valve will convey drainage from the deicing pad to the oil-water separator and eventually to the leaching galleries. Plans for Phase I of the Southeast Ramp and the accompanying Phase I of the rehabilitation/relocation of Taxiway Alpha are presented in Appendix C. 3.3 INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT: AIRLINE ROAD [PROJECT #3], FIRE FLOW CAPACITY TO SUPPORT HANGAR DEVELOPMENT AT SOUTHEAST RAMP [PROJECT #4] Given the desire and need to develop the Southeast Ramp, additional infrastructure must be provided to support the future development of this area. The required infrastructure consists of the following: A paved access roadway (Airline Road) 1,450 feet in length with two travel lanes, each 12-feet wide, and related utilities; and Sufficient fire flow capacity (approximately 100, ,000 gallons) to support hangar development in the Southeast Ramp. Such capacity will be provided in a below-ground storage tank with booster pumps Airline Road Development of the Southeast Ramp will require construction of a new access roadway called Airline Road. Airline Road would extend approximately 1,450 feet between North Line Road and East Line Road in the airport business park (see Figures 3-3 and 3-4 for existing and Future Build conditions). The road is envisioned to have two 12-foot paved travel lanes with 2-foot paved shoulders and Cape Cod berm, and provide power, telephone/media connections, water and storm drainage along its full length (see Figure 3-5 for a typical cross-section of proposed Airline Road). 3 Project Development & Justification 3-13

14 AIRSIDE LANDSIDE 9' WIDE VEGETATED SWALE TO CATCH RAIN FROM BUILDING ROOFS 50' ROW 9' WIDE VEGETATED SWALE CARGO 4' GRAVEL SHOULDER 24' 4' GRAVEL SHOULDER FACILITY OR 21'± 2 x 12' TRAVEL LANES GV HANGAR FINISHED FLOOR 4:1 4:1 6:1 CUT TO DAYLIGHT EXISTING GROUND 6:1 FILL TO DAYLIGHT HYDRANT NOTE: CAPE BIRMS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO PREVENT DRAINAGE RUNOFF SEWER WATER POWER COMMUNICATIONS SUBBASE FREE DRAINING STORMWATER CATCH BASINS, PER EXISTING PARK STANDARD FACING NORTHEAST FILE: AIRLINE-RD-1 Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. 45 BROMFIELD STREET- SUITE 1001, BOSTON, MA (617) FAX: (617) WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DR. BY DES. BY DATE: SCALE: RKD DDS RMF APRIL 2004 NTS MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FIGURE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION AIRLINE ROAD 3-5

15 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport Fire Flow Capacity The industry standard for determining fire flows to aircraft hangars is NFPA 409 Standard on Aircraft Hangars. 2 Of the three hangar groups defined in NFPA 409, two were considered in the Airline Road development: Group I, for aircraft with tail heights over 28 feet, and Group II, a hangar with an access door height of 28 feet or less (for aircraft with tail heights less than 28 feet). The aircraft projected to be hangared at MVY have tail heights less than 28 feet and thus the fire flow requirements are based on Group II hangars. The water supply requirements for Group II hangars are specified at Section 4-8 of NFPA 409. For sprinkler systems, the design standard is for 60 minutes of flow at the design rate and pressure; where foam-water systems are installed (as presumed at MVY), the water supply duration is reduced to 30 minutes for Group II hangars. (Note: A foam-water system uses water forced through a foam concentrate at pressure to inundate a hangar with fire fighting foam.) In addition to these requirements, the water supply system also must accommodate an exterior hose stream allowance of 500 gallons per minute. Of the three delivery systems considered, two high expansion and low expansion foam systems were considered feasible. The technical details of the two foam delivery systems and the facilities and equipment required to supply the appropriate water under pressure are presented in Table 3-7. Table 3-7 High Expansion and Low Expansion Foam Systems Item High Expansion Foam System Low Expansion Foam System Fire Flow Required, gallons per minute 4,100 7,200 Safety Factor 50% 50% Fire Flow with Safety Factor, gallons per minute 6,150 10,800 Water Pressure in Fire Flow, pounds per square inch Total Dynamic Head (TDH), feet No. of Pumps (including standby pump) 3 3 Minimum Pump TDH, gallons per minute 3,075 5,400 Storage Volume Provided, gallons of water 227, ,250 Underground Tank Size, length x width x height in feet 60 x 40 x x 40 x 16 1-story Pump House, length x width in feet 24 x x 20 2 NFPA 409 Standard on Aircraft Hangars, 1995 Edition, National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-15

16 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment Two options for water storage were considered: a below-ground tank with booster pumps and an elevated storage tank, where the elevation of the tank would serve the function of the booster pumps. In a preliminary discussion of the airport improvement program with staff of the Martha s Vineyard Commission, MVC staff viewed an elevated tank with some disfavor, expressing concerns about the aesthetics of such an elevated tank. Accordingly, MVY management made a decision early-on to go with a below-ground storage tank in deference to the views of the MVC staff. A below-ground concrete tank 60 feet long by 40 feet wide and ranging in depth between 14 and 16 feet will be cast in-place at a location roughly opposite the Mobil gas station in the airport business park (corner of East Line and North Line Roads. The only surface feature to be seen will be a 1-story pump house 24 feet long by 20 feet wide, which will be designed to match similar structures within the business park. The below-ground tank and related pump house are illustrated in Figure CONNECTOR ROAD AND IMPROVEMENTS TO AIRPORT ROAD [PROJECT #5] This project consists of the following discrete elements: Construction of a new Connector Road approximately 2,800 feet long linking the Airport Road to the airport business park at South Road/East Line Road. Improvements to the existing Airport Road, the main access roadway to the terminal area. Said improvements are to include left- and right-hand turn lanes at the intersection of the road with the Edgartown-West Tisbury Road. Widening and an upgrade of existing Amelia Way to serve as the new primary access roadway to the T-hangar complex. An extension of 250 feet to existing Amelia Way to provide access to the T-hangar complex. Improvements to Edgartown-West Tisbury Road, including a bypass lane for eastbound traffic and a right-hand deceleration lane for entry to the airport via Airport Road. (Note: See Chapter 6 Parking, Traffic for more details on these improvements.) The new Connector Road will consist of two 12-foot travel lanes plus 2-foot paved shoulders. The roadway will be configured with Cape Cod berm and provide power, telephone/media connections, water and storm drainage along its full length (see Figure 3-7). The length of Connector Road is 2,820 feet. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-16

17 HEF (HIGH EXPANSION FOAM SYSTEM) WITH SPRINKLER SYSTEM,HYDS,INTERIOR HAND HOSES 4,098 GPM TOTAL 100 PSI ( 231 FEET) ASSUME 3 PUMPS 4,100 GPM X 1.5 ( 150% = 6,150 GPM 2 PUMPS TO SUPPLY CAPACITY REG'D ONE STANDBY PUMP EACH PUMP = 3, FEET TDH CONC. TANK DESIGN SIZE 60' X 40' X 14' = 33,600CFT ~227,408GAL 40' LEF (LOW EXPANSION FOAM SYSTEM) WITH SPRINKLER SYSTEM,HYDS, INTERIOR HAND HOSES 7,198 GPM TOTAL 100 PSI ( 231 FEET) ASSUME 3 PUMPS 7,200 GPM X 1.5 ( 150% = 10,800 GPM 2 PUMPS TO SUPPLY CAPACITY REG'D ONE STANDBY PUMP EACH PUMP = 5, FEET TDH CONC. TANK DESIGN SIZE 60' X 40' X 16' = 38,400CFT ~287,252GAL PROPOSED CONC TANK 60' OPTION LAY-OUT FOR THE PROPOSED PUMP BUILDING USING VERTICAL TURBINE PUMPS OPTION LAY-OUT FOR THE PROPOSED PUMP BUILDING USING HORIZONTAL PUMPS 24' ' FILE: CONCTANK1 Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. 45 BROMFIELD STREET- SUITE 1001, BOSTON, MA (617) FAX: (617) WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DR. BY DES. BY DATE: SCALE: RKD RPM RPM 4/19/04 1"=100' MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROPOSED BOOSTER PUMP BUILDING AND TANK FOR FIRE FLOW FIGURE 3-6

18 JAILSIDE (NO SIDEWALK) 6' TURF 5' SIDEWALK 50' ROW 11' 2 x 12' TRAVEL LANES SUBBASE 2' PAVED SHOULDER 12' 12' 2' PAVED SHOULDER POWER/ COMMUNICATIONS WATER SEWER FREE DRAINING STORMWATER CATCH BASINS, PER EXISTING PARK STANDARD CAPE BIRMS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO PREVENT DRAINAGE RUNOFF FACING SOUTHWEST FILE: AIRPLINE-RD-1 Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. 45 BROMFIELD STREET- SUITE 1001, BOSTON, MA (617) FAX: (617) WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DR. BY DES. BY DATE: SCALE: RKD DDS RMF APRIL 2004 NTS MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FIGURE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION CONNECTOR ROAD 3-7

19 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport This roadway will provide an internal on-airport link between the main terminal area and the airport business park. As such, development parcels along this roadway are created and the roadway enables terminal-related activity, namely rental cars and remote parking, to be sited at the business park. In addition, it provides a new means of exiting the business park, one that bypasses the busy Barnes Road/Edgartown-West Tisbury Road intersection. As detailed in Chapter 6 Parking, Traffic, this has the effect of improving conditions and level of service through this busy intersection. Connector Road also will serve as the primary route to/from the proposed county jail (Project #14). Also as noted in Chapter 6, the provision of left- and right-hand turn lanes at the main airport entrance provides for smoother flow for traffic exiting the airport and improvements to the bicycle crossing across the Airport Road. Improvements to the Airport Road/Edgartown-West Tisbury Road intersection include improvements to Edgartown-West Tisbury Road which will facilitate traffic movement for both airportand non-airport-related traffic. Amelia Way is an improved dirt road providing access to several businesses located along and just off the main Airport Road. This roadway is extremely narrow at approximately 18-1/2 feet. This roadway is intended to serve as the future main entry to the T-hangar complex located west of the Airport Road and south of the existing Southwest Ramp. Accordingly, it is proposed to be widened to 24 feet along its existing 385 feet to allow for two 12-foot travel lanes, paved and lengthened by approximately 250 feet to access the T-hangar complex. The upgrade and development of Amelia Way will enable traffic to/from the T-hangars to bypass the busy terminal roadway circulation system, thus removing some increment of traffic from this congested area. 3.5 TERMINAL 2/ARFF/IMPROVEMENTS TO CURB AT MAIN TERMINAL [PROJECT #6] This project consists of the following elements: A new building of approximately 25,500 square feet (two levels plus basement) serving as an expanded general aviation terminal and an Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) facility, and accommodating various airport operations and administrative functions; A new roadway circulation system and new access curb; Expanded parking for employees and GA passengers; Renovation of the existing GA terminal; and Improvements to the curb at the existing main terminal. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-19

20 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment The existing main terminal, access, curb and associated parking were reviewed previously by MEPA under EOEA #6503. Existing conditions are depicted in Figure Terminal 2/ARFF Phase I of the master planning effort documented existing levels and projected the large numbers of general aviation passengers expected to use MVY into the future. For every three scheduled air carrier passengers through MVY in 2020, an additional two GA passengers are projected. This translates to over 95,000 GA enplanements in GA passenger activity today is handled through a small 2,500-square-foot freestanding building adjacent to the main terminal. This building, which houses MVY operations, the offices of the airport manager, a small conference room used by the airport commission and retail space, increasingly is inadequate to deal with the growing GA demand. In the course of Phase II of the master planning effort, the study team prepared and evaluated four development options for a new GA terminal and Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) facility. The four options are noted in Table 3-8 below. Table 3-8 Terminal 2/ARFF Facility Scenarios Considered in MVY Master Plan Scenario Main Terminal Area Airport Business Park 1 Combo Bldg 2 GA Terminal ARFF/SRE 3 ARFF/SRE GA Terminal 4 Combo Bldg Key: ARFF Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting SRE Snow Removal Equipment GA General Aviation In the development of the master plan, the Client Group thoroughly discussed the scenarios. The airport manager was most concerned that any option that split the ARFF and terminal options (Scenarios 2 and 3) or that would remove the GA terminal from the main air carrier terminal (Scenario 4) would require airport management to increase staff markedly. At present, the airport staff is cross-trained to serve both in an operating capacity and in a rescue/fire-fighting capacity. Thus, staff members are capable of handling multiple roles in the course of a day. This multiple role-handling, however, requires the staff to be in close proximity to both the terminal/ramps and ARFF vehicles/equipment so as to minimize time to the emergency response vehicles. The airport manager s arguments proved compelling, and Scenario 1, a building combining both an expanded GA terminal and ARFF facilities, was selected for further development. Scenario 1 is the development option proposed in the airport improvement program. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-20

21 FILE: FIG 3-3 Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. 45 BROMFIELD STREET- SUITE 1001, BOSTON, MA (617) FAX: (617) WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DR. BY DES. BY DATE: SCALE: RKD DDS RKD 4/19/04 1"=100' MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS TERMINAL ACCESS, CURB, PARKING FIGURE 3-8

22 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment Subsequent to selection of Scenario 1, the master plan study team proceeded to develop a series of four building configurations and related curb and parking arrangements. The pros and cons of each layout scenario were discussed with the Client Group on July 1, The principal concern brought out by the airport manager was the maintenance of a clear means of entry to the airfield. Given that the airport is party to a mutual aid/response agreement among the island public safety units, an access that is clearly marked and understood and designed for the turning movements of large emergency response vehicles was a key consideration. In addition, the placement of the ARFF vehicles within the building and access routes to the airfield from these locations were critical considerations as well. Also, mindful of the airport s service role as a Fixed Base Operator, the airport manager wanted an efficient movement and flow of GA passengers both to/from the airfield and to/from the curb and parking areas. After thoroughly discussing the four layout options, Site Layout 2A was selected for further development by the study team. The proposed development program and floor plans of Terminal 2 and its associated ARFF are presented in Chapter 12. The new GA terminal will be accessed by a new roadway which will provide direct access (Figure 3-9). There are a number of attractive features about this new roadway and circulation pattern: 1. It removes GA traffic from traffic patterns related to the main passenger terminal, thus segregating traffic by airport origin and destination. 2. It provides convenient pick-up and drop-off curbside at the new terminal. 3. It provides, for the first time, a dedicated area for busses of the Martha s Vineyard Transit Authority in close proximity to BOTH the main and general aviation terminals. 4. It facilitates the transfer of GA passengers from the airside to the landside, an important service consideration for airport management. 5. It maintains direct access to the airfield for emergency vehicles and safety personnel. 6. It accommodates additional parking and improves access to several parcels located to the southwest of the terminal area. 7. It includes a landscaping component that blends in with the attractive grounds of the existing main terminal. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-22

23 UG ET ONCRETE PROPOSED GA TERMINAL ARFF EMERGENCY ACCESS TO AIRFIELD EXISTING TERMINAL PICK-UP AND DROP-OFF-10' ' ' 18' PEDESTRIAN WAITING AREA 10' TAXI PARKING ' MEADOW SPACES ' 12' BUS WAY 54 5 PEDESTRIAN WAITING AREA 10' ' ' G.A. TERMINAL PARKING SPACES N EMPLOYEE PARKING SPACES TOWN OF EDGARTOWN TOWN OF WEST TISBURY APPROXIMATE TOWN LINE CONCRETE WALKWAY BITUM CONCR FILE: FIG 3-4 Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. 45 BROMFIELD STREET- SUITE 1001, BOSTON, MA (617) FAX: (617) WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DR. BY DES. BY DATE: SCALE: RKD DDS RKD 4/19/04 1"=100' MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROPOSED ROADWAY AND PARKING AT PROPOSED GA TERMINAL FIGURE 3-9

24 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment Curb Improvements at Main Terminal The existing main terminal curb is stressed severely at peak periods, due to a design meeting minimal design requirements and actual use of the curb. Regarding the former, the original design memorandum lists the 2002 peak hour passenger demand at the curb as 86 passengers. Twenty-five cars and one van/bus are projected to handle this demand. Six car slots and one van or transit bus (excluding taxi requirements) are allotted with a total curb length of190 feet to accommodate this demand. The existing curb is 190 feet long, which is the curb length calculated to handle enplanement volumes of 82,000. MVY enplanement volumes peaked in 1999 at 76,355 in 1999 before dropping since in keeping with general trends in air travel since September 11, 2001 and the national economy. Given the congestion experienced with the existing curb length and configuration, it can be assumed that the design bases for the original curb design require closer scrutiny in the allocation of future terminal curb. Regarding the actual use of the curb frontage, striping of the curb as a fire lane confuses drivers. While legally allowed to park over this striping (and close to the curb) to pickup or discharge passengers, most drivers park outside the striping and thus into the adjacent travel through lane. This frequently creates a bottleneck with cars unable to maneuver quickly and efficiently around the parked car. Furthermore, as noted by the airport manager and readily observable, a driver s side car door carelessly left open is sufficient to block traffic from moving along the curb. As a result of the curb inefficiencies, MVY airport management places a police officer at the curb for hours per day during peak periods, 7 days per week. Two alternate curb configurations were developed and analyzed by the master plan transportation study team member. The two curb configurations, designated Curb 1 and 2, are described in Table 3-9. The demand for curb, like the demand for all terminal facilities at MVY, is seasonal, with peak demand on the weekends in the busy summer months. Modes of getting to and from the terminal are these: long term park; pick-up/drop-off; rental car; taxi/limo; and transit bus. The curb configurations in Curbs 1 and 2 provide additional curb by stacking curb along the existing terminal face. This arrangement provides two rows of parking along the inner curb (assigned to passengers) and also at the outer curb (assigned to high occupancy vehicles). Movements to/from the double rows of parking are through a series of weaving movements executed at low speeds. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-24

25 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport Airport management selected Curb 1 for inclusion in the master plan and this plan is incorporated into the airport improvement program. Figure 3-10 depicts the proposed curb improvements at the main terminal. Table 3-9 Curb Configurations Considered Curb 1 Curb 2 One 10-foot (wide) pick-up and drop-off lane One 18-foot lane which accommodates a second pick-up/drop-off lane and a through travel lane One 10-foot pedestrian curb One 10-foot taxi queue lane One 22-foot lane which accommodates a second taxi queue lane and also serves as a through travel lane for taxis One 10-foot (wide) pick-up and drop-off lane One 18-foot lane which accommodates a second pick-up/drop-off lane and a through travel lane One 10-foot pedestrian curb One 10-foot taxi queue lane One 18-foot lane which accommodates a second taxi queue lane and a through travel lane for taxis One 10-foot pedestrian curb One 30-foot lane which accommodates regional transit buses plus shuttle buses and a through travel lane 3.6 ACQUISITION/RELOCATION OF HANGARS, SOUTHWEST RAMP [PROJECT #7] This project will consist of the acquisition of three (3) privately-owned hangars on the existing Southwest Ramp in order to expand the future Southwest Ramp. The acquisition of such parcels is subject to Federal and state regulations, most notably the (Federal) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (Uniform Act). Impact to the property owners and affected businesses will be mitigated by the payment of fair market value (as determined by property appraisals) and relocation payments. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-25

26 x x E EXISTING TERMINAL PICK-UP AND DROP-OFF-10' PEDESTRIAN WAITING AREA 10' TAXI PARKING MEADOW UMINOUS CONCRETE N x x x ' 18' FILE: FIG 3-5 Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. 45 BROMFIELD STREET- SUITE 1001, BOSTON, MA (617) FAX: (617) WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DR. BY DES. BY DATE: SCALE: RKD DDS RKD 4/19/04 1"=40' MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FIGURE PROPOSED CURB IMPROVEMENTS AT MAIN TERMINAL 3-10

27 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport The Impact of Reconfiguring Taxiway Alpha As noted in Section 3.1 above, Taxiway Alpha will be reconfigured to a 400-foot offset from the Runway 6-24 centerline to comply with FAA design standards. The net effect of this is to reduce the width of the existing Southwest Ramp by 37 feet. 3 In discussing the issue with the airport manager and the impacts this would have on the available area for aircraft parking, the master plan study team suggested that the first row of hangars be acquired and relocated to the proposed Southeast Ramp. Presently, there are four hangars and one vacant hangar parcel along hangar row; the airport owns one hangar (the Hadley hangar) and the vacant parcel. The remaining three hangars (Duchess, Stott and Direct Flight hangars) are privately-owned on land leased from the airport. The acquisition and relocation of these hangars would allow the Southwest Ramp to nearly double in width, providing available ramp back to the first row of T-hangars. This concept was adopted subsequently by the Client Group and made an integral part of the final master plan. The acquisition of such parcels is subject to Federal and state regulations, most notably the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (Uniform Act) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act The Uniform Act is the Federal law that codifies minimum real property acquisition policies and requires the uniform and equitable treatment of persons displaced as a result of a Federally assisted project. The provisions of the Uniform Act and its implementing regulations at 49 CFR part 24 apply to all (Federal) Airport Improvement Program (AIP)-assisted projects in any phase or portion of the project, e.g. the planning, design, land acquisition or construction phases. 4 An AIP-assisted airport project or program cannot proceed or receive FAA approval until the airport sponsor provides assurance of conformance to the Uniform Act. Also, for development projects, the sponsor must provide assurance, satisfactory to the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, that good title is held to the landing area of the airport or that the airport will acquire the site. This latter point is of no concern to MVY airport management as the County of Dukes County has a clear and unencumbered title to the airport proper. 3 At present, the controlling dimension is the taxiway object free area, which results in aircraft parking no closer than 463 feet from the Runway 6-24 centerline. With an ARC of C-III, the aircraft parking area limit is 500 feet from the runway centerline. The difference of 463 and 500 is FAA AC 150/ Land Acquisition and Relocation Assistance for Airport Improvement Program Assisted Projects provides guidance to assist airport sponsors in meeting these requirements. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-27

28 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment Funds for acquiring the three privately-owned hangars and relocating the affected businesses and individuals are included in the airport s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Figures 3-11 and 3-12 depict the existing and proposed Future Build conditions at the Southwest Ramp and highlight the three hangars to be acquired. 3.7 SOUTHWEST RAMP [PROJECT #8] The entire Southwest Ramp will be rehabbed and expanded to the south (Figures 3-11 and 3-12). An inventory of pavement conditions in September 2000 rated the condition of this ramp as poor, defined as surface cracks of 2 inches or more unraveling pavement, potholes, and cracked and crumbling edges. In addition, the ramp has an antiquated stormwater management system which will be replaced completely with a state-of-the-art system meeting or exceeding all applicable Federal, state and local regulations regarding stormwater. The Southwest Ramp will contain a designated pad for aircraft deicing similar in design to that to be provided in the Southeast Ramp. An area to the west of an existing taxilane from the T-hangar complex will be paved to add additional paved area for parking aircraft. Three privately-owned hangars will be acquired and relocated in the process of rehabbing and expanding the Southwest Ramp. For additional detail regarding the justification and need for this ramp, see Section 3.2 above. Section 3.2 addresses the aircraft parking requirements at MVY. 3.8 FIRE FIGHTING TRAINING FACILITY [PROJECT #9] A non-profit consortium of seven emergency response agencies is proposing the construction of a Fire Fighting Training Facility at Martha s Vineyard Airport. The purpose of the facility is to provide an estimated 300 on-call local firefighters and rescue personnel with a training environment that complies with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1402 Guide to Building Fire Service Training Centers. The facility will help simulate various emergency response scenarios and test fire equipment in an environmentally responsible manner. Training days are estimated at 200 daytime and 100 evening sessions per year Background Currently, all realistic firefighter and rescue training must be conducted off-island at great inconvenience and loss of personal revenue to on-call personnel. Most mainland trips, even for a short refresher course, require an overnight stay. An existing onairport training area west of the proposed facility does not have the infrastructure to support increased levels of skilled training. As a consequence, training is limited and 3 Project Development & Justification 3-28

29 VASI RWY 6-24 TAXIWAY "D" TAXIWAY "C" TAXIWAY 'A" EDOWNS & XIWAYS DETENTION BASIN EXISTING HANGARS SW APRON TERMINAL BLDG TOWER CCESS OADS AND SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT EDGARTOWN-W. TISBURY ROAD AIRPORT ROAD DETENTION BASIN FILE: FIG 3-6 Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. 45 BROMFIELD STREET- SUITE 1001, BOSTON, MA (617) FAX: (617) WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DR. BY DES. BY DATE: SCALE: RKD DDS RKD 4/19/04 1"=300' MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FIGURE EXISTING CONDITIONS SW RAMP 3-11

30 W W RUNWAY TAXIWAY "C" PROPOSED SW RAMP EXISTING TERMINAL APRON TOWN OF WEST TISBURY TOWN OF EDGARTOWN HANGARS TO BE ACQUIRED FUTURE LEASE LOT 8 25,148 SF FUTURE LEASE LOT 7 52,055 SF FUTURE LEASE LOT 10 16,200 SF FUTURE LEASE LOT 6 33,607 SF FUTURE LEASE LOT 1 11,708 SF FUTURE LEASE LOT 2 11,748 SF DETENTION POND SHRUBS FUTURE LEASE LOT 5 COUNTY OF DUKES COUNTY HOT TIN ROOF LEASE PARCELS NOT SHOWN NOTE: 16,171 SF 39,001 sq.ft acres 5,000 sq.ft. Bldg. LOT A 99,288 sq.ft acres 20,000 sq.ft. Bldg. TOWN OF EDGARTOWN TOWN OF WEST TISBURY MHB FND TIPPED LOT D LOT E 30,001 sq ac 3,750 sq.ft. Bldg. 3,750 sq. LOT B 51,802 sq.ft acres LOT 51,80 3, FILE: FIG 3-7 Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. 45 BROMFIELD STREET- SUITE 1001, BOSTON, MA (617) FAX: (617) WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DR. BY DES. BY DATE: SCALE: RKD DDS RKD 4/19/04 1"=300' MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FIGURE PROPOSED SW RAMP 3-12

31 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport firefighters lack the hands-on experience needed for certifications and confidence building General Facility Description As detailed in Figure 3-13, the proposed facility is a rectangular parcel, approximately 250 feet wide by 800 feet long (4.59 acres), located on the north side of the airport. The short-term plan for the facility includes the following elements: 50-vehicle crushed gravel parking lot; 2-story masonry Training and Command/Control Building for classrooms; 3-story masonry Live Fire Training Building/Smokehouse for interior fire suppression/rescue training; 30,000-gallon Drafting Pit/Tank that recycles non-potable water needed to test and certify fire suppression operators and equipment; 3-story wooden Drill Tower for pumper/ladder training; 30,000-gallon Detention Pond to recycle non-potable water used during ladder pipe and deck gun drills; Fire Suppression Training Pit for hand-held fire suppression exercises, bermed/lined with concrete and fueled with hay bales, straw, wood pallets or propane for live fire drills; Fuel Tanker/Aircraft Fuselage Trainer; Confined Space Trainer; Lighting; and Security fencing. Training water will be supplied by a new well to be drilled in the vicinity of the facility. The site will be graded towards the airport, away from the property line Consortium Organization The facility will be administered by a consortium of emergency response representatives from six local towns plus MVY airport management. The consortium will lease the property from the airport, establish maintenance agreements, schedule training and comply with airport airspace provisions Utilities Due to the remote location of the facility and its undeveloped existing condition, commercial water and electrical power are not envisioned at the site in the near future. Potable water will be trucked to the site. Non-potable water for fire vehicles and live fire 3 Project Development & Justification 3-31

32 DETENTION POND FIRE SUPPRESSION TRAINING PIT PROPANE SUPPLY TANK (BERMED) DRAFTING PIT/ 30,000 GAL UST HYDRANT FUEL TANK/AIRCRAFT FUSELAGE TRAINER TRAINING/COMMAND & CONTROL BUILDING HOSE LAY AREA LIVE FIRE TRAINING STRUCTURE/SMOKEHOUSE POTABLE WATER TANK NORTHERN FIRE ROAD CONFINED SPACE TRAINER HYDRANT DRILL TOWER FIRE TRUCK PARKING 50 CAR PARKING VOR ROAD FILE: DIRT-ACCESS-2 Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. 45 BROMFIELD STREET- SUITE 1001, BOSTON, MA (617) FAX: (617) WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DR. BY DES. BY DATE: SCALE: RKD DDS DDS 4/19/04 1"=300' MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FIGURE PROPOSED 3-13 FIRE TRAINING FACILITY

33 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport trainers will be supplied by a new well to be installed in the vicinity of the complex. With the 30,000-gallon capacities of both the Detention Pond and the Drafting Pit, extraction will be limited to initial filling and replenishment of water evaporated during training. The well and the Training and Command/Control Building will be powered by a portable generator. Portable toilets will be situated throughout the site and serviced regularly Detailed Facility Descriptions Training and Command/Control Building This building will be a 2-story masonry building, 40 feet by 60 feet, on a concrete pad with a pitched metal corrugated roof. Typical doors, windows and lighting will be provided. The building will house classrooms, administrative space, 1-bay vehicle storage and a 10-foot-by-10-foot cab mounted on the roof for command and control of training operations Live Fire Training Building/Smokehouse This building will be a 3-story masonry building, 30 feet by 40 feet, not to exceed 32 feet in height, on a concrete pad with a flat roof. The building will have exterior and interior stairs. This building will be used for training exercises in interior fire suppression, fire spread, rescue, ventilation and other unique building scenarios. Interior training fires will be simulated by burning straw, hay bales, cooking oil and propane. Smoke generators fueled with oil (such as paraffin) will create white smoke with light scattering properties. Floors can be divided into multiple rooms by portable sheet metal partitions. The exterior of the building can also be used for rappelling exercises. Typical training exercises at a Live Fire Training Building/Smokehouse Drafting Pit/Tank A buried tank holding approximately 30,000 gallons of non-potable water will be used to train firefighters in the proper procedure for drafting water and to ensure fire truck pumps are tested at least annually. The pit includes a return pipe from a target area to 3 Project Development & Justification 3-33

34 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment the tank, allowing water to be circulated for continuous use. Used water from the upstream Detention Pond will be recycled at this facility Drill Tower This is a 3-story wooden structure, 20 feet by 20 feet, on a concrete pad with internal stairway. This facility will be used to instill confidence in pumper and ladder truck trainees and further their abilities to work at various heights in a skilled manner. No live fires will be conducted at this facility. Typical Drill Tower Detention Pond A 30,000-gallon (40 feet by 40 feet by 3 feet) Detention Pond will be constructed to reclaim and recycle non-potable water and fire fighting foams during ladder pipe and deck gun drilling. The pond will be lined with concrete and interconnected with the Fire Suppression Training Pit (upstream) and the to the Drafting Pit/Tank (downstream) Fire Suppression Training Pit A 70-foot-by-20-foot concrete-lined pit will be constructed to provide firefighters realistic training with hand-held dry chemical fire extinguishers. Fires will be fueled mostly with hay bales, straw or wood pallets. An optional propane source will be used as the complex is modernized. Excess water will be captured and forwarded to the Detention Pond for reuse Fuel Tanker/Aircraft Fuselage Trainer A 5,000-gallon tank will provide students with dual-use training: the facility will simulate a fuel tank and an aircraft fuselage Confined Space Trainer The complex will include a 1-story confined space trainer, including a catwalk, 10-foot-by-10-foot cage and egress hatches Potable Water Storage Tank A 2,000-gallon storage tank will provide potable water to students and staff Existing Site Conditions The proposed site for the facility is at the intersection of the Northern Fire Road and the VOR Road on the north end of the airport (see Figure 2-3). This area is characterized as scrub oak forest, with occasional white oak and pitch pine interspersed. Both the scrub 3 Project Development & Justification 3-34

35 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport oak community and the disturbed site have been assigned an Environmental Sensitivity Rating of 1 Low Sensitivity. The water table is approximately 18 feet below grade, with a deep well (greater than 70 feet deep) located west of the facility. More detailed assessments of the environmental impacts of this facility are presented in various chapters of this DEIR/EA Fire Suppression Chemicals To ensure firefighters are receiving realistic fire suppression training, dry chemicals (monoammonium phosphate and ammonium sulfate), Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF, consisting of water, butoxyethoxy ethanol, triethanolamine, methyl-1 H- benzotriazole) and Class A foam (water, hexylene glycol, and propylene glycol t-butyl) will be used at the Fire Fighting Training Facility. The Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for dry chemicals indicates waste disposal must be in accordance with appropriate Federal, state and local regulations. This chemical, if unaltered by use, may be disposed of by treatment at a permitted facility or as advised by the local hazardous waste regulatory authority. The approximate quantity of dry chemicals expended per year is 250 pounds, and this relatively low amount is not expected to adversely impact the environment. The MSDS for AFFF indicates it poses low health risks, will not adversely impact the environment, plants, animals or aquatic life. Waste disposal must be in accordance with appropriate Federal, state and local regulations. This chemical, if unaltered by use, may be disposed of by treatment at a permitted facility or as advised by the local hazardous waste regulatory authority. The MSDS for Class A foam states waste may be discharged to waste treatment plants in accordance with appropriate Federal, State and local regulations. Class A foam is not toxic and is not expected to adversely impact the environment, affect plants or animals or cause harm to aquatic life. The approximate quantity of combined AFFF and Class A foam to be expended per year is 500 gallons Live Fire Suppression Facilities Live Fire Training Building/Smokehouse Dual agent handlines or hoses will be used to suppress training fires in this facility. Agents to be used include dry chemicals and Class A foam. The key Best Management Practice (BMP) for training at this facility will be collection of residual materials after each training session, transferal to 55-gallon containers and disposal as hazardous waste. Residual liquids will leave the building and evaporate, runoff into treatment areas or be collected by a closed drainage system. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-35

36 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment Fire Suppression Training Pit Hand-held fire extinguishers containing dry chemicals will be used in this facility to extinguish small fires fueled by hay bales, straw, cooking oil and propane. As part of the site s Best Management Practices (BMP s), residual materials will be collected after each training session, transferred to 55-gallon containers and disposed of as hazardous waste. Storm and training water collected in the pit will be piped to the Detention Pond Long Term Development Depending on demand and funding availability, the consortium may consider making capital improvements to the facility. These improvements may include: Converting live fire trainers to propane-fired trainers, with a larger collection basin lined with concrete or a polypropylene membrane and outfitted with an oil/water separator. Waste liquids will be collected and stored in tanks, and a storage area for recycled water will be provided. Multiple suppression techniques could be implemented, including those involving hand-held extinguishers, handlines from trucks, deck guns and ladder pipes. Paving the access road and parking lot. Installing area lighting throughout the facility. Providing potable water and electrical power service from Barnes Road. Installing permanent bathrooms and shower facilities with a septic tank. Waste will be trucked to the airport s wastewater treatment plant. Although these improvements should not impact the environmental, further analysis and approval from Federal, state and local regulators as applicable will be sought prior to implementing any long term improvements. 3.9 MULTIMODAL CENTER/RENTAL CAR CONSOLIDATION FACILITY [PROJECT #10] The principal components of this project are: Remote parking ( spaces) for the Woods Hole, Martha s Vineyard & Nantucket Steamship Authority; and A rental car consolidation center for 400 cars. Existing and proposed Future Build conditions are illustrated in Figures 2-1 and 2-3, respectively. Airport management has been an active participant in island-wide transit discussions among the Martha s Vineyard Commission; the Woods Hole, Martha's Vineyard & 3 Project Development & Justification 3-36

37 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport Nantucket Steamship Authority (Steamship Authority); the Martha s Vineyard Transit Authority; representatives of a number of rental car companies; and the island communities in regards to a multi modal transit center on the airport. Such a center is a priority improvement in the island s transportation plan (see Chapter 13 Consistency with Existing Plans for additional information). 5 The center is intended to reduce traffic flow to the two busy ferry terminals in Vineyard Haven and Oak Bluffs by providing an on-island version of the Steamship Authority s mainland remote parking-shuttle operation. Island residents could park here and be bussed to the ferry terminals in high occupancy vehicles, i.e., one bus of 30 people vs. 15 autos with 2 passengers each. To this end, the Steamship Authority intends to build a auto paved parking lot off of South Road on land leased from the airport (see Figure 2-3). This facility will cover approximately 2.1 acres. A rental car consolidation center is a second key component of the multi modal center. Individuals/families arriving by ferry and seeking a rental car would be bussed from the busy terminal environs to this center, where the rental car pick-up (and future return) would take place. The rental car counters presently in the main airport terminal would be moved in the peak summer months to the center as well. Air passengers would be shuttled to/from the rental car center along the future connector road. Presently, approximately 100 spaces in the paved parking lot adjacent to the main terminal are allotted to rental car companies, plus storage for 200+ more in the turf areas adjacent to the paved lot. Moving these cars to the rental car consolidation center would permit these spaces to be allotted to air passengers in the summer months when demand for parking in close proximity to the terminal is at its highest. Allowing the rental car companies to return to the airport terminal in the off-peak months would i) provide a higher level and more convenient service to rental car customers in these offpeak periods (when demand for passenger parking is at its lowest) and ii) permit airport management to cease the shuttle operation during the off-peak periods. Use of this land as ready lots for rental cars is an excellent and efficient use of airport land, as much of the land east of West Line Road is subject to height restrictions governed by the Part 77 transitional surface of the future shifted/lengthened Runway (Note: The future extension of Runway is in the post-2010 timeframe and is not evaluated in this DEIR/EA. Such an extension is subject to further review and approval by FAA and MAC.) The siting and design of the actual rental car center will respect these future height limits. The consolidation center itself would consist of a number of components. Chief among these is a small administrative building for rental car transactions. Surrounding this facility would be paved areas for ready rental cars and for rental car returns. Farther 5 Martha s Vineyard Regional Transportation Plan 2003 Update, Martha s Vineyard Commission, Draft dated July 23, Project Development & Justification 3-37

38 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment from the building would be a larger area(s) for car storage and pooling; cars are drawn from this pool as necessary to meet rental car demand. It is envisioned that the center would accommodate as many as 400 rental cars per day in the peak summer period; that is, 400 spaces for parked rental cars in ready-to-pick-up lots, drop-off areas, car storage areas, cleaning areas and so on. Total paved area is approximately 6.1 acres. Finally, a car wash facility would be located somewhere within the consolidation center. Through various lease terms, airport management will require this facility to minimize water use, recycle and reuse its wash water and have its water discharge treated at the on-airport sewage treatment plant. All paved areas would employ Best Management Practices to treat and handle stormwater runoff. See Chapter 5 for a discussion of the proposed means of addressing stormwater in the rental car consolidation center REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING [PROJECT #11] Sited in the vicinity of the Steamship Authority parking and the rental car consolidation center is land set aside for a future remote parking lot for air passengers and/or airport employees (Figure 2-3). This lot, 250 spaces, would be used in the peak summer months, as needed, or during the heavy travel periods of Thanksgiving and Christmas as overflow or satellite parking. To maximize spaces available to air passengers in the lots close to the terminal, employees of MVY and the businesses in the terminal would be required to park in this remote lot. Frequent shuttle service would connect the lot with the terminal area FUTURE, RELATED OR INDUCED GROWTH [PROJECT #12] Airport management is aware that once a number of the projects included in the MVY development program are in place, economic forces in the development market likely will generate development proposals, i.e., corporate hangars in the new Southeast Ramp, office/retail development along Connector Road and so on. Table 2-4 lists the projected future, related or induced growth evaluated in this DEIR/EA. Through various lease terms, airport management will require the private developers to employ Best Management Practices to handle stormwater runoff from the developed parcels. Potential developers also will be made aware of the airport s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and its provisions. Traffic associated with this future growth has been projected and addressed in the traffic analyses prepared for this DEIR/EA (see Chapter 6 Parking, Traffic for additional details). 3 Project Development & Justification 3-38

39 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport 3.12 OBSTRUCTION REMOVAL AT APPROACH TO RUNWAY 6 [PROJECT #13] This project entails the removal of objects which penetrate the so-called approach surface to Runway 6. These penetrations interfere with the safe navigation of the airspace around the airport and must be removed for the safety of the traveling public. The requirements for safe navigable airspace are defined and codified by the FAA at 14 CFR Part 77. The slopes and boundaries identified at 14 CFR Part 77 are referred to frequently as Part 77 surfaces. The approach to Runway 6 is defined as a non-precision approach with an approach surface with a slope of 34 run:1 rise. Runway 6 is therefore classified as a nonprecision instrument runway. According to 14 CFR Part , Nonprecision instrument runway means a runway having an existing instrument approach procedure utilizing air navigation facilities with only horizontal guidance, or area type navigation equipment, for which a straight-in nonprecision instrument approach procedure has been approved, or planned, and for which no precision approach facilities are planned, or indicated on an FAA planning document or military service military airport planning document. The May 1995 NOAA obstruction chart for MVY was consulted. 6 The NOAA chart lists 10 numbered obstructions: five trees, two navigation aids (LOC, DME) and three ground obstructions. The three ground obstructions represent a small area of ground located to the north of Runway 6 and to the west of Taxiway E. The NOAA obstruction chart data is superimposed on an aerial photograph of the Runway 6 end in Figure In addition to the numbered obstructions, the NOAA chart identifies an area of forest where large expanses of the canopy penetrate the Part 77 surface. FAA mandates that an airport owner and operator maintain clear approaches free of any obstructions to the runway ends. This is a fundamental aspect of airspace navigation and a critical safety element. Accordingly, MVY airport management proposes to remove the offending trees south of the Runway 6 as appropriate to remove the potential air navigation hazard. This removal may take either of two forms: i) the complete removal of the tree or ii) the topping of the tree to remove only the offending height of the tree. In the latter case, the tree height is reduced to 10 or more feet below the Part 77 approach surface to provide some leeway for future growth. MVY airport management intends to remove all trees as this i) permanently removes a potential air navigation hazard, ii) provides a habitat more suitable to the establishment of sandplain grasses and iii) is considered a more aesthetic treatment given the rural setting of the Edgartown-West Tisbury Road and the adjacent public bike path. Where the odd and 6 Airport Obstruction Chart Martha s Vineyard Airport, OC 694, 9 th Edition, NOAA, May Field surveys noted as dating from September Project Development & Justification 3-39

40 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment substantial hardwood tree is encountered, however, the airport manager will make a field decision as to whether the tree should be topped/pruned or removed. Of key concern is the possible occurrence of rare, endangered or threatened species of plants or animals. This area was reviewed in the field in May 2002 by qualified specialists. The upper canopy is dominated by pitch pines with occasional white oaks. Understory species include black huckleberry, lowbush blueberry, wild sarsaparilla, sweet fern, wintergreen and trailing arbutus. Due to the shade provided by the dense upper canopy, this area was assigned an Environmental Sensitivity Rating of 1 Low Sensitivity. Therefore, no impacts to rare or priority habitats are envisioned. Additional data on this subject are presented in Chapter 9 Rare Species. In fact, the clearing of the obstructions, in removing the tree canopy, will create habitat more conducive to sandplain grassland species located in and around the Runway 6 end. In fact, an area of the airport-owned/-controlled Part 77 approach surface south of the Edgartown-West Tisbury Road will be cleared selectively and maintained as habitat for the Barrens Buckmoth. Additional details are provided in Chapter 9 Rare Species. There are no wetlands in the areas to be cleared of trees COUNTY JAIL [PROJECT #14] Introduction The Dukes County Office of the County Sheriff has long been an advocate of a new county jail/house of corrections for Dukes County. In the fall of 1998, the Office of the County Sheriff sought and received a $90,000 grant from the Violent Offender Incarceration and Truth-in-Sentencing Incentive (VOI/TIS) Program administered by the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety. The stated purposes of the VOI/TIS Program are to build or expand correctional facilities to increase bed capacity for the confinement of persons convicted of a Part 1 violent crime; build or expand temporary or permanent correctional facilities, for the purpose of freeing up suitable existing prison space for the confinement of persons convicted of a Part 1 violent crime; build or expand jails. Dukes County received the maximum grant amount ($90,000) available to study the feasibility of upgrading the security and expanding the capacity of the Dukes County Jail and House of Correction presently housed in facilities dating to Subsequently, the Dukes County Commissioners developed a Dukes County Jail Task Force and tasked it with the following: Study the feasibility of expanding or renovating the existing correctional facility or building a new facility. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-40

41 PARCEL TREE 104 U T IL IT Y PARCEL N E A S E M E N T A P P R O X IM A T Y 5"E N85 22' ' C.B. FND. TREE ' W ID E ED) 3"E (DE N85 22'3 ' C.B. FND. 3 4 TREE 82 C.B. SET 6 ANT ON BLDG AT OL DME 75 C E L 7 N ' "E ' HTA PROJ. NO.: DRAWING NO SCALE: 1" = 100' Tel: (617) NBD DES. BY WEB PAGE: DATE: FEBRUARY 2003 Fax: (617) NBD DR. BY RMF CHKD. BY PENETRATIONS 3"W S85 22' ' 45 BROMFIELD STREET, 10TH FLOOR * BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS "W S85 08' ' DRAWING NAME Consulting Engineers FENCE 7 61 Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. PROJECT DESIGNER R PENETRATIONS TO R/W 6 PART 77 SURFACE OBSTRUCTIONS M.H.B. FND. 2 OL ON LOC 64 REV. NO. DATE FAR PART 77 SURFACE 6 C.B. SET 82.07' BY REVISIONS S ' "W ' DESCRIPTION N RUNWAY ' M.H.B. FND. 66' "W 2 '5 ' S ' 1000' MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT VINEYARD HAVEN, MASSACHUSETTS N88 04'02"E ' 19.82' ' ' "E N88 04'02"E ' PARCEL N.B. FND. 1 "W 2 5 ' ' S C.B. FND. S ' "W ' A "W. P 5 N04 41' TREE 105 N ' " ' E TREE 79

42 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment This page left blank intentionally.

43 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport Assess and evaluate the impacts of expansion, renovation or new construction, including, but not limited to, the following issues: Financial Social Safety Law requirements Population trends Staff requirements Other Periodically report progress to the County Commissioners. Determine the proper course of action. Make a recommendation to the County Commissioners. In 1999 the Office of the County Sheriff selected a consultant to study the feasibility of expanding or relocating the county jail/house of corrections. The analyses contained in this section are drawn heavily from the final report prepared by this consultant for the Jail Task Force. 7 This final report is reprinted in its entirety in Appendix D. A chronology of key events in the history of the Dukes County Jail/House of Corrections is presented in Table Table 3-10 Chronology of Key Events in the History of the Dukes County Jail/ House of Corrections 1873 Facility built with capacity of 12 persons in 12 cells 1982 Plumbing added to cells 1985 Six modular cells added 1986 Statewide master study ( the Vitetta Study ) found deficiencies in facility and calls for renovation/expansion on site. Costs estimated between $534,000 and $654,000 in 1986 dollars ($1+ million in 2004 dollars) State develops five options for capital improvements. Preferred option is to build a new facility at the Martha s Vineyard Airport FAA rejects site for new jail, concluding that facility would affect the VOR, a vital piece of navigation equipment at the airport 1990 State study completed without new site for county jail 1998 The Office of the County Sheriff applies for and receives a Federal VOI/TIS Grant from the MA Executive Office of Public Safety 7 Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, Project Development & Justification 3-43

44 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment 1999 The Office of the County Sheriff selects a consultant to study the feasibility of expanding or relocating the present county jail facility Dukes County Commissioners form the Jail Task Force 2001 The Dukes County Sheriff makes a presentation to the Martha s Vineyard Airport Commissioners and the Planning Advisory Team concerning the use of airport land for a new county jail. Site presented is that rejected by the FAA in The Martha s Vineyard Airport Commission agrees to consider the environmental consequences of a county jail on-airport but proposes a different on-airport location 2003 Environmental assessment begins of county jail in revised location (off the future/proposed Connector Road) Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, Purpose and Need General The existing facility is a dangerous place. It is dangerous for both inmates and staff in that there are many areas that are not well monitored either by line of sight or electronic systems. It is dangerous also because of limited emergency systems for alarms and controlled egress, and a configuration that results in dead end corridors and severely limited egress. The existing facility is noncompliant with a majority of security, operations and housing requirements for county jails and houses of correction. The existing facility has a number of floor finishes, wall finishes, furnishings and mechanical and electrical components that are damaged or badly worn. These conditions, while inevitable given the facility s age, are matters of concern and have been cited by the MA Department of Pubic Health in its annual inspection of the county jail. Security The perimeter does not meet the definition of a secure perimeter. There are numerous conditions where there is only one door to freedom. The site fencing also does not meet the standard of a secure perimeter. Operations The layout of the facility does not allow for the needs of the County Sheriff to properly segregate and classify inmates. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-44

45 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport The existing facility performs the multiple roles of holding facility, jail and house of correction. As a holding facility, it must accommodate the needs of Dukes County by detaining suspects arrested by local law enforcement officers. In its jail function, non-convicted individuals held over for trail are housed. The house of correction component accommodates Dukes County inmates serving sentences of up to 30 months. Each of these groups requires different housing and programs and must be housed separately. These needs are not being met by the present county jail/house of correction. Central Control is inadequate. Its location is not central and it has very limited line of sight and/or electronic monitoring capability. The facility s electronics are inadequate, with little monitoring of cells and cell areas, day room areas or inmate areas. The armory is inadequate at the booking and central control area. The Office of the County Sheriff is forced to make procedural compromises to cope with the configuration and size of the central control area. The mechanical, electrical and emergency systems are inadequate. Fire detection and control are limited. There is no direct communication to the local fire department. The wiring of the entire facility is of a residential standard and is not appropriate for a correctional facility. Refrigerator and water temperatures are not compliant with state standards. Monitoring of inmates and officers is limited. Central Control has limited capability in this regard. The facility is not designed in accordance with contemporary standards. Corridors are short and have many areas out of direct line of sight. There are many corners and small spaces which provide opportunities for clandestine activity. These areas require significant staff time to adequately monitor The facility is not accessible for people with disabilities. Both public spaces and the jail facilities do not meet accessibility standards for people with disabilities. Renovation to accommodate these requirements would be extremely difficult given the current configuration of the facility. The kitchen does not have required plumbing facilities such as a service sink and hand wash sink. Housing The facility is too crowded. The original facility was built in 1873 to house 12 inmates. In 1985 six modular single bed housing units were added to increase capacity to 18. However, the cells in all units are usually double-bunked, raising capacity to 36 inmates. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-45

46 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment Frequently the facility operates in excess of this capacity and during peak summer months the number of detainees can rise to near 60. Accordingly, the facility is noncompliant in available housing space, program areas and services. This condition has been noted by the MA Department of Public Health (DPH) in prior annual inspections. Sanitation is extremely difficult. Plumbing is obsolete in many areas. For example, some of the inmate showers have toilets within the shower area. Cells do not meet current requirements for double occupancy. Ventilation is inadequate. MA DPH has cited the absence of outside windows in the cells as a matter of concern. There is insufficient program and day room space. Currently, one of three day rooms is used for housing and the two remaining areas accommodate all inmate recreation, study and dining. These areas do not meet regulatory guidelines. Female and juvenile housing is noncompliant. A single cell, isolated from the rest of the housing and program areas, serves as the only facility for holding a female or juvenile. While in the cell the detainee is adequately sight- and sound-isolated, no movement within the facility would be adequately isolated. Consultants to the Office of the County Sheriff reach the following conclusions: The existing Dukes County Jail and House of Correction is obsolete. While the Sheriff and the Dukes County Sheriff s Department have done an admirable job of their management and operation of the facility, as currently configured it poses a danger to both the inmates and the staff. Given the critical nature of the existing conditions and the protracted period required for appropriation, planning and construction of its replacement, immediate action needs to be taken to address its deficiencies. Despite these considerable deficiencies, however, we believe that the existing structures can be made a part of a compliant facility through a program of substantial renovation and expansion. In the absence of any alternative sites that are immediately available for analysis, we recommend that the Department investigate the feasibility of expansion and renovation on site. [Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, Task B: Review of Existing Facilities, p. 16] 3 Project Development & Justification 3-46

47 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport Population & Capacity Analysis The following material is drawn from Population and Capacity Analysis, dated May 7, 1999 and prepared for the Jail Task Force. The analysis was presented and discussed at the kick-off meeting of the Jail Task Force held May 10, Executive Summary Dukes County has a critical need for additional jail capacity. The current population of 36 inmates in the jail, which was built in 1873, exceeds design capacity (18 beds) by 100 percent. Despite an extraordinary management performance by the Sheriff and his management team, the size and layout of the existing building prevent corrections officials from attaining compliance with basic professional standards for operation of an adult male correctional facility. Lack of housing capacity and spatial limitations, combined with a steadily growing inmate population, pose a significant risk to the County in terms of security, public safety and control. Conditions block any reasonable attempt at inmate programming and limit the ability of the Sheriff to operate a modern, efficient corrections program. A review of economic and demographic forecasts indicates that Dukes County will experience slow, steady growth in general population through the coming decade. Examination of criminal justice variables suggests that recent changes and developments in law and criminal justice practice will result in more offenders serving increased periods of incarceration. In corrections terminology, the average length of stay (ALOS) has doubled in the last decade and will continue to grow. Any national or state reports concerning gradual drops in crime ought not suggest a reduced need for jail space. On the contrary, while jail admissions are dropping, such conditions are more than offset by a steadily increasing length of stay for inmates. Of special importance within Dukes County is the seasonal factor that results in a substantially larger population in the 6-month period May through October, further taxing limited jail resources. The average daily jail population during May- October 1998 was 34 percent higher than during the remainder of the year. The report Population and Capacity Analysis concludes that Dukes County should proceed immediately to build a facility with at least 80 beds to solve existing deficiencies, meet current requirements safely and efficiently and accommodate expected growth over the coming five-ten years. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-47

48 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment Methodology The methodology used in analyzing correctional population and capacity requirements included several steps. Analysts first identified those variables (general population and criminal justice) that are most likely to impact growth or decline. Table 3-11 lists these variables. The study included on-site visitation to the jail, interviews with jail managers and local criminal justice officials. Information collected by jail staff and local court and law enforcement officials was reviewed. Interviews with state police, regional planners and Census Bureau officials were also conducted. Table 3-11 Population Forecast Variables General Population State Population County Population Births Deaths Age Distribution Migration Criminal Justice Jail Population/Capacity Crime Volume Arrest Volume Admissions Length of Stay Peak Season Impact Policy Shifts - Drug Offenses - Females - Juvenile Crime - Court Schedules Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, An analysis and estimate of the degree to which recent policy and management trends will impact jail admissions, daily population and length of stay was conducted. A separate assessment of the impact of general population factors under a constant incarceration rate, reflecting today s level, was calculated. Finally, a projection of impact was developed under low, moderate and high growth scenarios in order to give planners several options. Consideration was also given to the management factor to ensure that jail officials have sufficient flexibility to house not only a growing population but a changing group of inmates with a wide range of public safety risks and program needs. A separate analysis of the peak season variable was conducted by separating the seasonal data from the yearround information. The population forecasts presented below are not based on a statistical model designed to pinpoint the precise number of offenders estimated to be in the jail at a future point. Instead, based on assessments of available data and analyses of key demographic and 3 Project Development & Justification 3-48

49 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport policy trends, the report offers three growth scenarios and the impact on requirements under each trend Population Components Table 3-12 shows the components of growth for the general population in Dukes County. The table suggests that the number of births is and will continue to be substantially larger than the number of deaths in Dukes County. That relationship will impact population growth more than migration. For every net increase of one new resident (inmoves minus out-moves) there will be three births between That ratio will grow to 1:4 between Table 3-12 Population Growth Components Decade Death Births Natural Increase Residual Change ,123 1, ,245 1, Note: 1. Residual change = the base population minus the natural increase. Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, Such conditions distinguish Dukes County from its off-island neighbor Barnstable County where the number of deaths is higher than the volume of births. Table 3-13 shows an age distribution for cohorts most likely to be involved with crime and the justice system through the projection period. Table 3-13 Dukes County Age Distribution (10-35 yrs) Total County Population 12,800 14,080 14,900 15, ,320 1,660 1,870 2, ,400 2,140 1,720 1,690 Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, Review of the population components and age distribution offers some important information for jail planners. With the projected number of births exceeding deaths, the make-up of the population will include substantial numbers in the child bearing/parent group that matches up fairly consistently with the crime-prone age group. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-49

50 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment The numbers within that age group will remain strong through the decade. As the other group (20-34 yrs.) declines, the aging of the younger group offsets the loss, resulting in a steady year cohort through the decade. The data suggest that the age distribution will contribute to growth in rather than the decline of the jail population. Conventional forecasts have concentrated on the year cohort and have not always recognized the growth and impact of younger juveniles on the feeder group Criminal Justice Variables The study s methodology is based on an assumption that reliable corrections population estimates must include examination of demographic data and criminal justice factors and variables. The study included a review of several criminal justice data sets that impact jail population growth or decline. The information included crime volume, nature of offense, arrests, average daily population, gender, age and length of stay. Crime Volume. Within Dukes County, nine law enforcement agencies initiate arrests and transport inmates to Dukes County for processing and holding. The nine agencies include police departments for each local jurisdiction on the island and two State law enforcement agencies. The review of crime data includes analysis of Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), the federal government s measure of selected offense categories as reported on a voluntary basis by local police departments through the State Police for inclusion in periodic federal reports. Edgartown and Tisbury are the largest population centers in Dukes County and have the most consistent record of participation in the UCR program. Table 3-14 shows the volume of crimes reported to the UCR unit over an eleven-year period. The data show a substantial drop (33 percent) in UCR reported crimes in Edgartown and a slight increase in Tisbury (9.2 percent). It is essential to note that during the same eleven-year period, both Edgartown and Tisbury experienced substantial general population growth. The Dukes County Jail serves as the regional lock-up for all law enforcement agencies within the County. In order to understand arrest and charge trends, the study included a review of statistical reports developed within the jail for the period from 1993 through Project Development & Justification 3-50

51 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport Table 3-14 Uniform Crime Reports, Crime Volume, Edgartown and Tisbury, Year Edgartown Tisbury Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, Jail Population and Capacity. The Dukes County Jail has a design capacity of 18 beds and consists of an original unit constructed in 1873 and a smaller modular housing unit added in the early 1980 s. On April 22, 1999, there were 36 inmates residing in the 18-bed jail. That population included all adult males and represented a mix of detainees and sentenced offenders, felons and misdemeanants, with a range of charges or offenses from probation violation to murder. The substandard space was being used to house four different security levels (maximum, medium, minimum and work/pre-release) with only two limited housing options for separation or custody differentiation. There is no female housing space. There is no juvenile housing space. Between 1993 and 1998, annual number of females brought to the Jail grew from 145 to 203 inmates, an increase of 40 percent. Under current limitations, the Sheriff s Office must arrange for transport of all females off-island to another facility. In emergency situations, which will recur with growing population, the jail managers arrange for a special, very limited holding area. During the same period, the number of juveniles brought to the jail rose from 18 to 47 young offenders, a 161 percent increase, highlighting a trend that is evident throughout the Commonwealth and nationally. As with females, the jail does not maintain housing capacity for juveniles except under emergency conditions. Officials must arrange for their movement off-island. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-51

52 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment The substantial growth among juveniles and females shows the changing requirements of the jail system and also a policy shift relating to both female and juvenile cases. Data from other jurisdictions show comparable increases in female incarceration rates relating to drug use. Linking these policy shifts with the demographic indicators detailed above showing a solid base of young males and crime-prone-age females begins to illustrate the trend toward higher incarceration rates. The current incarceration rate in Dukes County is.0024 (2.4 inmates per 1,000 residents). Average Daily Population. Table 3-15 shows the average daily jail population from Table 3-15 Average Daily Population (ADP), Dukes County Jail, Year ADP Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, While the County experienced a 75 percent increase in average daily jail population through the 1990 s, the ADP measure does not fully reflect the complexity and severity of the population management problem. Peak Factor. Because of the nature of Martha s Vineyard tourist and vacation industry, large seasonal shifts occur in the Island s population from May through September each year. Table 3-16 shows the average daily jail population for the peak season (May- October) over the period Table 3-16 Average Daily Population (ADP), Peak Season (May-October), Year ADP Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, During the peak season, the average daily population between 1987 and 1998 has increased by 101 percent - more than doubling the jail s capacity requirement. In any jail system there are three sets of variables that impact jail population. They include admissions, length of stay and releases. Admissions. Table 3-17 shows that jail population in Dukes County is growing substantially despite a gradual decline in the number of admissions. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-52

53 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport Table 3-17 Average Monthly Admissions, Peak Season (May-Oct), Year Admissions Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, Average Length of Stay. Table 3-18 shows a trend within the Dukes County Jail toward steadily increasing periods of longer confinement. Table 3-18 Average Length of Stay, Year ALOS Note: 1. Average Length of Stay in days. Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, The use of averages in relation to length of stay has limited validity. In any jail population there are two very distinct pools of inmates -- very short term and longer term. However, the concept shows that when a distribution of the total population in relation to total days served in jail is developed and measured over time, it becomes evident that the amount of time in jail per inmate is growing steadily in most jurisdictions. Policy Variables. The study identified several policy variables that appear to be contributing to the growth in length of stay. Implementation of more aggressive law enforcement policies in matters relating to domestic violence is one such variable. Such policies involve immediate incarceration of more defendants; and also result in more restrictive bail conditions. A second policy relates to court procedure. In recent years adjustments have been made in scheduling practices concerning the amount of time between arraignment and pretrial conference hearings. That period has been extended from 10 days to 30 days in certain cases, thereby automatically extending periods of incarceration for certain offenders. A third policy area examined was the extent to which alcohol and drug cases are involving jail time. The study included a limited review of admissions by type of charge/offense between 1993 and For each year in this period, between 49.8 percent and 54.5 percent of all cases involved alcohol and substance abuse charges. In the same time period, drug related charges nearly doubled from 6.8 percent to 11.4 percent of the total admissions. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-53

54 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment In summary, daily population in the Dukes County Jail is increasing steadily from an average daily population of 17 inmates in 1987 to an actual daily count in April 1999 of 36 inmates, an increase of 111 percent (more than a doubling). While average monthly admissions have declined in recent years, the impact of that variable is more then offset by a sharply increasing length of stay (ALOS) among inmates. The composition of the inmate population also is changing to include younger, higher-risk offenders and larger numbers of females, for whom no housing space is available within the County. While crime data show a drop in certain areas of reported crime, policies pertaining to arrest, prosecution and sentencing in other key areas, including violent crimes and substance abuse cases, are fueling jail population growth through longer periods of confinement. These impacts suggest a growing demand for additional beds in Dukes County. The key policy areas include, but are not limited to, the following: Prosecution of younger offenders Involvement of more females in the justice system Court scheduling changes Sustained growth of substance abuse and alcohol cases Population Forecast Based on a limited review of economic and demographic forecasts, combined with analysis of criminal justice trends and practices, a reasonable framework for determining capacity requirements during the coming decades includes consideration of the impact of annual corrections population growth at three levels: low, moderate and high. Table 3-19 provides jail population forecasts set at low, moderate and high, representing annual growth rates of 5, 7 and 9 percent, respectively. Based on analysis of both general population variables and criminal justice factors, the study shows that the key variables on which the projection should be based include: General population growth Jail admissions Jail Average Length of Stay (ALOS) 3 Project Development & Justification 3-54

55 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport Table 3-19 Jail Population Forecast, Year Low (5%) Moderate (7%) High (9%) Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, The population requirements projections presented in Table 3-20 are based on three key assumptions: 1. General population in Dukes County will grow at an annual average rate of 2 percent through the coming decade. The estimate is slightly higher than existing projections but consistent with recent census counts. 2. Average monthly jail admissions will remain fairly constant with growth to allow for general population increases. 3. Average length of stay (ALOS) will increase steadily as a result of key policy shifts described above. Table 3-20 Population Requirements Projections, 2005 and 2010 Projected Population Average Average Length of Stay (ALOS) Year Monthly 8 days 10 days 12 days 14 days 16 days Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, Project Development & Justification 3-55

56 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment Summary and Recommendations The information in Table 3-20 represents projections of jail population for Dukes County with average length of stay set at varying points. For example, with a current length of stay of 8 days, the 48-inmate level for 2005 would assume no change in policy conditions and a 2 percent annual rate of general population growth. The decision on any new facility requires a determination about capacity. Based on the analysis, this study recommends that the County pursue design and construction of a new facility with a capacity of beds. The recommendation is based on conclusions that: General population will grow at approximately 2 percent annually through the decade. Average Length of Stay will gradually increase from the current 8 days to approximately 12 days. The County should support the use of a combined 15 percent Management/ Peaking factor. Local planners are strongly urged to monitor and measure the impact of policy shifts on length of stay. The Management/Peaking factor is intended to incorporate in any design adequate flexibility to manage a diverse mix of offenders who require separate classifications in housing space. Corrections design standards conventionally call for a 10 percent management factor above the estimated population and a separate peaking factor calculated on the basis of the actual seasonal peak. In the event that planners select a lower population projection, it is strongly recommended that any facility design include adequate infrastructure to accommodate expansion, and sufficiently flexible dormitory housing space to manage peak periods Alternative Considered: Existing Main Street Site General Description An alternative to the airport site explored by the Dukes County Jail Task Force was expansion of the existing downtown Edgartown facility. This facility was built in 1873 and is located on a small parcel of land of approximately 40,000+/- square feet at the corner of Main and Pine Streets (Figure 3-15). Since that time it has served its purpose continuously as a jail, holding facility and house of correction without any major 3 Project Development & Justification 3-56

57 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport renovations. The facility has been modified piecemeal over time, retrofitting building systems, such as electricity and plumbing, as they were introduced. Figure 3-15 Site Plan, Existing County Jail Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, The existing facility consists of three major components. The front portion, located along Main Street at the south end of the property, originally served as the Sheriff s residence. It is a 2½-story wood frame Victorian era house set on a masonry foundation. Single story wood frame additions have been added at the sides of this structure. The original back portion of the structure, the cellblock, is a 2½ story masonry structure. A third major component that has recently been added to the rear of the facility is a wood frame modular housing unit. The front house no longer serves as a residence for the Sheriff. It has been fully incorporated into the detention facility function. A fenced yard area has been developed at the west side of the facility behind the front house and along side of the cellblock and modular structures. This yard serves as both the secure vehicle drop-off point and inmate outdoor activity space. The yard immediately abuts an adjacent residential property with only a tall privet hedge at the residential property providing visual privacy. A single security fence provides the only secure enclosure. No acoustic separation exists. The rear of the property, extending as a long rectangular form toward the north running parallel to Pine Street, is flat and open. Most of it is paved and is used for facility parking and storage of miscellaneous Sheriff s Department property. 3 Project Development & Justification 3-57

58 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment Expansion/Renovation An expansion and renovation of the existing facility would require extending the existing structure toward the north end of the site parallel with Pine Street. Since the proposed program requires a facility of approximately 44,000 square feet and the existing site is approximately 40,000 square feet, a multiple story structure would be needed. This approach was explored previously and presented to the Task Force in August Further elaborations on this concept including a potential massing scenario that begins to address the residential characteristics of the neighborhood are depicted in Figures 3-16 through Figure 3-16 Conceptual Site Plan, Expansion/Renovation of Existing County Jail Source: Attachment C-1, Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, Figure 3-17 Massing Study, Expansion/Renovation of Existing County Jail Source: Attachment C-3, Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, Project Development & Justification 3-58

59 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport Figure 3-18 Conceptual Building Diagram, Expansion/Renovation of Existing County Jail Source: Attachment C-2, Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, Utilities. There is sufficient electrical, water, communications and sewage for an expanded facility available at Main Street. The Town of Edgartown has two sewer mains at Main Street available for the facility to connect to. The Town s new sewage treatment plant has adequate surplus capacity to handle the facilities projected 16,000 gallons per day of wastewater. Environmental. The site lies one block away from the downtown historic district. Due to the high visibility of the facility, the aesthetics of the downtown district will be respected. Every effort would be made to conform to the design guidelines of the district. The facility would be articulated to reflect the overall massing patterns of the existing streetscape in the area and attention to important details such as window sizes and siding textures would be carefully considered. The close proximity to residences in the neighborhood must be considered when locating windows and exterior inmate and access areas. The design would incorporate 3 Project Development & Justification 3-59

60 Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment devices to assure the visual and acoustic privacy as well as the security of the neighboring residences. Access. Vehicular access to the expanded existing facility would maintain the current configuration with entry along Pine Street via Main Street. Expansion will exacerbate the existing congestion at Main Street during peak periods. Examination of the existing traffic arteries around the facility would need to be examined for possible mitigation approaches. Maintaining this location also continues the longer travel distances now required by other municipal law enforcement officers and residents of other communities of Dukes County having business at the Sheriff s Department or at the detention facility. Zoning. The existing facility lies in an R-5 district. This is a residential district. Although local zoning does not apply to this facility due to the ownership by a higher governmental authority, consideration should be given to the local ordinances relative to building height, setbacks and aesthetic principals. Construction Costs. Due to the intricate and detailed nature of the construction and the requirement that existing facility remain in operation during construction, a premium of at least 30 percent must be added to the projected cost for the construction on a virgin site at the airport. Therefore, a cost of approximately $13.3 million (2000 $) is projected for this approach. Other Factors. The existing facility has a prominent location at the intersection of two main thoroughfares, Main Street and West Tisbury Road. As it exists, the view from across the street, as approached from West Tisbury Road, is that of a large Victorian house. The view from Main Street down Pine Street reveals some of the more functional aspects of the facility, such as the security fencing and modular housing units. If an expansion of this facility is pursued, the prominence of the facility will be greatly increased when viewed from both vantage points mentioned above. Even the most sensitive aesthetic treatments will not reduce the presence of the mass required for the undertaking Proposed County Jail at Airport Site The proposed county jail is to be situated on approximately seven acres off the proposed new Connector Road, east of the existing County Manager s office. Much of the area is vegetated at present, although several large lots immediately adjacent to the sandy road which now exists have been cleared and are leased for lay-down areas and bulk storage. The proposed facility is to be approximately 44,500 square feet in area on one floor and contain 79 beds and ancillary facilities. Additional detail on the projected use of the 79 3 Project Development & Justification 3-60

61 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport beds is presented in Table The use of the area within the proposed county jail is presented in Table 3-22, along with a comparison of similar space use in the existing county jail. A conceptual site plan is illustrated in Figure The conceptual floor plan of the proposed facility is presented in Figure Table 3-21 Total Beds Breakdown Facility Beds Holding Facility Adult Male 4 Adult Female 2 Juvenile 3 Jail Adult Male 26 Adult Female 5 House of Correction Adult Male 30 Adult Female 5 Male Segregation 4 Total Beds in Facility 1 79 Note: 1. No medical beds, observation cells or holding areas included. Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, Table 3-22 Existing versus Proposed Area Item Existing Facility Area (square feet) Proposed Facility Area (square feet) Outside Administration 563 1,741 Inside Administration 0 2,324 Public Entry Lobby Central Control Booking Area 243 2,993 Holding Facility 81 1,625 Jail Facility 488 3,404 House of Correction 2,556 5,016 Medical Unit Inmate Program Space 447 5,556 Support Space 346 5,248 Subtotal, Total Net Area 5,008 29,643 Grossing Factor 18% 50% Grossing Area 1,117 14,822 Total Facility Area 6,125 44,465 Source: Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, Project Development & Justification 3-61

62 N ACRES MAIN LOBBY PARKING/RECREATIONAL AREAS WEST TISBURY EDGARTOWN CONNECTOR ROAD AIRPORT ROAD 19 EDGARTOWN-W. TISBURY TOAD FILE: FIG 3-19 Hoyle, Tanner & Associates, Inc. 45 BROMFIELD STREET- SUITE 1001, BOSTON, MA (617) FAX: (617) WEB: HOYLETANNER.COM CHKD. BY DR. BY DES. BY DATE: SCALE: RKD DDS RKD 4/19/04 1"=300' MARTHA'S VINEYARD AIRPORT AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FIGURE COUNTY JAIL LAYOUT 3-19

63 MVY Martha s Vineyard Airport Figure 3-20 Conceptual Site Plan, Proposed County Jail Source: Attachment B-2, Dukes County Jail Task Force Report to the Dukes County Commissioners, February 7, Project Development & Justification 3-63