San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport on Thursday released the final environmental impact report for its long-planned airport expansion project, a document opponents say contains major flaws and demonstrates flagrant disregard for public health.
The report outlines how changes in air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, health hazards and traffic will be addressed if the airport gets approval to modernize and further develop the aging aviation hub in phases over the next six years.
The airport wants to upgrade its two existing terminals and build a new terminal with up to 16 new gates, update its decades-old facilities to meet evolving aviation industry standards and improve operational efficiency and safety for passengers and employees.
The airport’s actual footprint would not expand under the proposal, but existing facilities would be torn down to make room for the expansion of international arrival areas. Parking lots and roadways would also get makeovers.
A draft report was released in July 2023. Among the changes to the final version of the environmental impact report are an updated soil and groundwater assessment, a study to determine if the project will impact burrowing owls’ habitats, and an update to the noise impacts section of the report. The final report also includes a community benefit agreement that will give East Oakland residents more say about the project’s impacts on their community.
“All the studies that we did concluded that it did not change our findings that there are no additional significant impacts,’’ said Colleen Liang, director of environmental programs and planning at the Port of Oakland, which oversees the airport.
But representatives from the leading opposition group, Stop OAK Expansion Coalition, are calling on Port of Oakland commissioners to vote against the final environmental impact report at a meeting on Nov. 21 and return it to Port staff for additional work. If commissioners certify the report, the move will greenlight construction on some components of the project that could begin as early as next year, a Port spokesperson said Thursday.
“We further call on the Port commissioners to engage community stakeholders and develop a modernization plan for the airport that protects public health and looks to an environmentally sustainable future,’’ said coalition steering committee member Kay Guinane in a statement.
Stop OAK Expansion Coalition, which is made up of 78 environmental justice, climate, labor, public health, medical and religious groups, said the final environmental impact report failed to include a Health Impact Assessment as requested by the Alameda County Public Health Department in a letter to the Port last October.
“It is deplorable that the Port staff chose to ignore their own county Public Health Department, refusing to hire a public health agency to do the correct health study that the health department requested, to determine the impact that more flights from airport expansion would have on the health of East Oakland children living under the flight paths. Instead, they hired a consulting company to do an engineering study masquerading as a health risk analysis,” said David Foecke, a coalition steering committee member, in a statement.
Such an assessment would have examined air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and noise and vibration, according to the health department.
The health department, in a letter to the port, said East Oakland residents, many within the airport flight path, are hospitalized or taken to an emergency room for asthma three times more often than people in other parts of Alameda County.
Liang said the final environmental impact report does, however, include a human health risk assessment, which looked at cancer risks, health hazards, emissions exposure from airport operations among other things.
“It was a robust health risk assessment that we used in the environmental impact report,’’ Liang said. “We actually consulted with the air district and it’s very consistent with today’s industry standards and the federal guidelines.”
The final environmental impact report also includes responses from the Port to more than 1,000 public comments. Liang said a majority of those comments centered around air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, impacts to the Oakland community and noise.
“I understand and appreciate the comments provided,’’ Liang said. “ We are doing everything in our authority to push for zero emissions with or without this proposed project. We really want to be cleaner and greener at the San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport.”
Port officials said the project will help the airport meet forecasted regional air travel demand throughout the Bay Area over the next two decades, in line with a projected rise in nationwide air travel. But opponents say the alleged market-based demand for expansion is “pure fiction.”
The airport is seeing about 80% of pre-pandemic passenger levels because many business travelers have opted to meet on Zoom instead of flying. Passenger traffic also fell by 4% between fiscal years 2023 and 2024. Liang said the expansion is needed because the airport projects it will serve nearly 25 million passengers a year by 2038, roughly 14 million more than it served last year.
