Oops

Posted 8/12/14

According to neighborhood reports, this is one of two pieces of equipment working on the extension of the safety area at the end of Runway 16-34 that sunk into the Buckeye Brook wetlands last week. …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in

Oops

Posted

According to neighborhood reports, this is one of two pieces of equipment working on the extension of the safety area at the end of Runway 16-34 that sunk into the Buckeye Brook wetlands last week. The project being done by Cardi Construction requires the replacement of peat with more stable material so as to extend the safety area should aircraft roll off the end of the runway. To mitigate the loss of Buckeye Brook wetlands, the Rhode Island Airport Corporation will create additional wetlands north of Lakeshore Drive. As the runway area is closed to the public, the incident came as news to Mayor Scott Avedisian. In an email yesterday to the Beacon, RIAC spokeswoman Patti Goldstein said, “this was an unfortunate incident on a large construction project. Thankfully there were no injuries. This was a construction matter, which we have closely coordinated with the appropriate agencies, including RIDEM.”

Comments

8 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here

  • RichardLangseth

    "This was a construction matter, which we have closely coordinated with the appropriate agencies, including RIDEM.” -- Not true. This is a much bigger story than it first appears to be. Beacon needs to contact RIDEM to get its side.

    Tuesday, August 12, 2014 Report this

  • allent

    had to have been a state worker

    Wednesday, August 13, 2014 Report this

  • Unionthug

    HEPDOG = JEALOUS

    Wednesday, August 13, 2014 Report this

  • Scal1024

    Hepdog, try getting out of your mothers basement once in awhile

    Wednesday, August 13, 2014 Report this

  • bloodhound

    Who CoOrdinated with RIDEM? It's more like RIDEM had to step in to get RIAC to comply with its wetlands permit - Because RIAC was not doing so on its own.

    RIAC can't be trusted. Not for one second.

    Why didn't Mr. Howell write about RIAC violating its wetlands permit? Placing unauthorized gravel fill in the wetland. Not using soil stabilization mats.

    And why didn't he write about RIAC not having an environmentla monitor on-site as is required by law? If RIAC had complied with its wetlands permit, this likely would not have happened. There is a reason RIAC has a fence with opaque material to block the public's view. They operate behind closed doors, at their headquarters and out in the field so thte public cannot monitor them. Because they violate the law. And one more. Why didn't Mr. Howell write about the fuel that spilled into the watershed before they placed boom? Boom Boom. How many gallons spilled? Once again RIAC damages the community.

    Friday, August 15, 2014 Report this

  • Rhode_rage

    @bloodhound-spot on with your analysis of the RIAC and their need for unauthorized fill in a wetland. Typically when working in wetlands one would use timber mats to spread the weight load and not use gravel. As one that has always opposed wetland fills for airport expansion, its disheartening to see how things are being done.

    Created wetlands never replace the functions and values of those that are being filled/lost. Just the airport bullying the state into anything it wants.

    Friday, August 15, 2014 Report this

  • bloodhound

    Rhode_Rage is on target, Wha'ts with the Beacon not reporting the whole story?

    Other media outlets indicated a formal complaint was filed with RIDEM. Bloodhound is always on target.

    Thanks Rhode_R

    Thursday, August 21, 2014 Report this

  • georgecarver

    What a mess, I have heard that they would have dumped 3 excavators into the water but "Curly" lost the keys down a sewer drain.

    Anyway, DEM got RIAC to respond to the compliance inadequacies and Thankfully according to DEM, the location that Cardi trashed is not of vital ecological concern and that appropriate environmental actions are being taken and that a monitor is now onsite. Where is OSHA in the mix??No idea one way or the other.

    Monday, August 25, 2014 Report this