Planning Commission certifies final EIR for SFO airport development plan despite air-quality finding

The San Francisco Planning Commission on Nov. 20 certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the San Francisco International Airport (SFO) Recommended Airport Development Plan, concluding the document is "adequate, accurate, and complete" for the Commission—s purposes.

Kei Zucchini and Audrey Park of the Planning Department and SFO described the plan as a long-range landside development framework that would add contact gates, a multimodal ground-transportation hub and, if demand warrants, a maintenance hangar. Park emphasized the RADP does not change runways or flight paths, which fall under Federal Aviation Administration jurisdiction, and said projects would be built only when passenger demand triggers them.

Staff—s final EIR, prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), analyzes the proposed projects and three feasible alternatives, including a reduced-development option intended to avoid the plan—s projected operational air-quality impacts. The EIR finds most significant impacts can be mitigated to less-than-significant levels but identifies "significant and unavoidable operational air quality impacts." Planning staff recommended certification despite that conclusion because the document and response-to-comments package address the issues raised during the draft EIR period.

Commissioners asked how the city would ensure mitigation measures are implemented. Chelsea Fordham, manager of the environmental monitoring team, said the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) spells out responsibilities for implementation, requires departmental review and approvals before construction, and establishes reporting frequencies for ongoing operational measures.

Commissioner Lebron moved to certify the Final EIR; the motion passed unanimously 5–0 with Commissioner Campbell recused. The decision does not authorize construction work; it affirms the environmental review documentation and allows SFO and project sponsors to continue subsequent project‑level approvals and permitting processes.

The Planning Commission record notes staff received letters from Palo Alto and other commenters raising concerns about the adequacy of responses to comments; staff concluded those letters did not raise new environmental issues requiring recirculation.