CTLR CONCERNED WITH BTR TXWY DESIGN AND SIGNAGE; WHICH APPEARS TO CONTRIBUTE TO RWY INCURSIONS.

Narrative

DAILY RWY INCURSIONS AT BTR. DUE TO THE CLOSE PROX OF RWY 4R AND TXWY E; BOTH OF WHICH CROSS RWY 13/31; THERE EXISTS A CONSTANT PROB WITH ACFT LNDG ON RWY 13 AND EXITING OF RWY 4R INSTEAD OF TXWY E. THIS IS DUE TO SEVERAL PROBS. THE FIRST PROB; WHICH IS PROBABLY UNCORRECTABLE; IS THAT THE ELEVATION OF RWY 4R IS HIGHER THAN TXWY E. THIS MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR A PLT TO EASILY SEE THE TXWY FROM GND LVL. THE SECOND PROB; WHICH COULD BE CORRECTED; IS THAT THE ARPT HAS PAINTED A SOLID YELLOW STRIPE ON EACH SIDE OF THE WHITE CTRLINE STRIP OF RWY 4R; ALL THE WAY TO THE EDGE OF RWY 13. ALTHOUGH THIS IS INTENDED TO BE A LEAD IN LINE TXWY B ONTO RWY 4R; IT IS MUCH LONGER THAN IT NEEDS TO BE AND IT LEADS A PLT TO BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE SEEING THE YELLOW CTRLINE OF A TXWY INSTEAD OF A RWY. ANOTHER POSSIBLE SOLUTION WOULD BE TO ADD WHITE EDGE STRIPING ON RWY 4R UP TO THE INTXN OF RWY 13. RWY 13; BEING AN INSTRUMENT RWY HAS WHITE EDGE MARKINGS; BUT RWY 4R; BEING A SMALL GA RWY HAS NONE. A THIRD POSSIBLE SOLUTION WOULD BE THE INSTALLATION OF A SIGN (NEXT TO THE SET OF VASI'S FOR RWY 31) THAT WOULD SAY 'NO TURNS NEXT INTXN.' THE MOST RECENT INCURSION WAS AN SF34 LNDG RWY 13 WHO WAS TOLD TO 'TURN R AT THE SECOND INTXN...TXWY E AND CONTACT GND CTL.' THE SF34 TURNED ON RWY 4R ANYWAY AND A C172 WAS ON SHORT FINAL. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR ADVISED THAT RWY 4R IS APPROX 1 FT HIGHER THAN TXWY E. THE TXWY IS NOT IMMEDIATELY VISIBLE AS THE PLT APCHES TXWY E ON RWY 13. THE RPTR BELIEVES HIS SUGGESTIONS WOULD REDUCE RECURRENT RWY INCURSIONS OF PLTS TURNING R ONTO RWY 4R INSTEAD OF TXWY E.