Current Issue Archives Search Chapter Home Editor
The Loma Prietan
May/June 2002What's Up at the Airport?
by Richard Zimmerman
Given the drop in air traffic due to the bad economy and the tragic events of September 11, you might think San Francisco International Airport's proposed expansion of runways into the Bay had fallen by the wayside. Wrong. The project is moving ahead at close to full speed.
A brief review of the project: The starting point is subject to interpretation, but the SFIA studied new runways in the Bay around 1990. In February 1998 SFIA officials again stated that they were studying new runways in the Bay. This came two years after swearing, in a letter to the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, that no new runways would be needed.
In September 1998, SFIA said they wanted to "reconfigure" the runways and fill "300 to 400 acres" of the Bay.
By December 1998 SFIA said they would complete environmental studies in 1999 and "break ground" for the new runways in 2000. By this time the fill required for the alternatives under study had grown to as much as 1,400 acres. SFIA officials did not indicate an interest in pursuing alternatives that did not require Bay fill. Today, they still appear interested only in projects that include filling the Bay.
In July 1999, the Loma Prieta and San Francisco Bay Chapters came out against the runways, saying we opposed "Bay fill." SFIA's total commitment to building runways is obvious in their response: They said they were looking at floating runways and runways built on pilings, not just "Bay fill."
But SFIA never mentioned alternatives that didn't require building new runways.
Current situation
Traffic at SFIA has dropped in the past two years. Operations at SFIA in 2001 were down by 11% from 1999, the busiest year in the past decade.
Due to the decline in operations, SFIA lost over $90 million in the last fiscal year on record. And while SFIA likes to take credit for the Bay Area economy, the drop in SFIA's business was due to the bad economy, not the other way around. Of course, the flying public's concerns about the lack of security also contributed to the decreased demand.
Even with the business slump, Mayor Willie Brown and SFIA officials have indicated the project is forging ahead even as other projects are shelved or delayed.
As an example, SFIA has been cited over 80 times for polluting the Bay due to inadequate sewage treatment facilities. But a $5 million improvement to the sewage treatment plant was on a back burner because, according to SFIA, they just didn't have the money.
The runway project expected to spend over $630 million over two fiscal years, 2001 to 2003. And that's only for planning.
Current proposals
Click on above picture to see map showing Plan BX-R While SFIA, and its partner the FAA, withhold documents from the public, the current configurations under study are close to the ones included in the original feasibility study. One, known as BX-R, seems to be the leading alternative (see diagram, below right). The current fill required has not been updated for some time but is thought to be on the order of 900 surface acres for BX-R.
While that amount of fill is huge, it doesn't begin to tell the whole story. SFIA says that the source of the fill material would be just off Bay Farm Island; or the San Francisco Bar, just outside the Golden Gate; or possibly Vancouver, B.C. The cost increases with distance. SFIA estimates that 97 million cubic yards of Bay mud and sand would need to be dredged or moved to build the runways.
The annual average dredged in the Bay over the past 50 years was six million cubic yards. The massive dredging required for the proposed runways would kick up dangerous pollutants and leave the entire Bay in bad shape for a number of years.
There is a way out
The current situation at SFIA shows the solution to the delay problems doesn't require new runways. According to the Department of Transportation, arrival delays at SFIA decreased by 57% in 2001 compared to 2000. In the same period, operations declined by slightly more than 9%.
This relationship, according to aviation experts, holds: A small reduction in flights leads to a large reduction in air traffic delays. It is not a proportional relationship, however. Delays are a complex issue and over 80%, according to aviation consultants, are due to reasons other than air traffic control.
Demand management is a technique by which airlines and airports can reduce the number of flights while still serving passengers' needs. The above information shows is that it doesn't take draconian measures to reduce delays significantly.
New air control technology, on the other hand, can increase an airport's capacity. New technology achieves this by allowing planes to fly closer together with more safety.
Thus, demand management coupled with new technology can achieve the same or better results as new runways. With some push by SFIA, the improvement would come before runways could be built. Either the combination of technology and demand management or runways addresses 20% of the delay problem, however. In fact, it's unlikely that new runways could ever address more than 20% of delayed flights.
Thus our position is that demand management and technology will provide quicker solutions to the region's air transportation problems than runways in the Bay. And with no environmental damage to San Francisco Bay, an irreplaceable national treasure.
Half Moon Bay City Council Passes Resolution in Opposition to Runway Expansion into Bay
On April 2, the Half Moon Bay City Council unanimously passed a resolution stating:
"The Half Moon Bay City Council hereby urges the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors to pledge to oppose any major runway extension and Bay fill construction project at SFO unless all alternatives to reduce delays are implemented and exhausted, and unless it is in the clear and compelling interest of the people of San Mateo County that such a project should be approved."
Special thanks to Half Moon Bay Council member Debbie Ruddock for taking the lead on this important step.
Learn about SFIA's Plan to fill the Bay at Richard Zimmerman's website: www.ProtectOurBay.com