Seattle’s Second Terminal Gets Closer to a Green Light


Building anything related to an airport in the US is nearly impossible. If you’re lucky, it will take years and cost an absurd amount of money. After a long, long road, it seems that Seattle/Tacoma (SEA) has now passed one of the big remaining hurdles standing in the way of its next phase of growth. This is hugely important considering how the place is bursting at the seams today, but on the downside… it will probably need even more capacity by the time this is done.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has now approved a “Final Environmental Assessment” and a “Finding of No Significant Impact/Record of Decision” for SEA’s big master plan that it hopes to have completed by 2032, five years behind the previous schedule. That has been a very long road just to get to this point.

This project sounded a lot more impressive long ago when there were fewer passengers using SEA. But as Alaska and Delta continue to grow, the airport hit a record of 52.6 million passengers in 2024. It will probably be a little higher this year. When the work is done in 2032, it will put the airport in a position to handle… 56 million. That’s not a lot of growth, but it’s a start.

The centerpiece of this plan involves a second terminal built to support 19 new gates. This new terminal plan looks like some kind of Rohrschach test. You wouldn’t design something that looks like this in your wildest fever dream, but welcome to SEA where space is at a premium.

The current terminal is in red above. There are four concourses that radiate out of that terminal and then the two satellite concourses. The S gates are where the international operators are, but other than that, there are really two sides here.

On the left side of the image you see concourses A and B. Those are mostly for Delta and WestJet, but there are some other cats and dogs in there too. On the right, you have concourses C and D along with satellite N. Those are all Alaska and a little American. The red terminal in the middle is where the airlines meet for their weekly rumble.

It’s the green bit on the right that will be a new terminal. If this looks weird, it’s because you need more context. The airport is hemmed in on pretty much all sides, so any growth requires some creativity. Here’s some more detail with all of the projects that are planned..

Up is to the west, if that helps to orient you. But as you can see, a lot is going to change. Just to be able to build Terminal 2, SEA has to clear the area out. Airport maintenance, the fire station, and airline support services have to move out with maintenance heading to the top of the picture, the fire station going to the left between the ends of the runways, and airline support going a little to the right. Southbound lanes that head into the terminal also have to go away into a different configuration.

Then there are other expansions and changes as you can see in the map above. If you want more detail, this doc has a little. Or you can go to the master plan website if you find yourself having trouble sleeping at night.

Once all this work is done, I imagine Alaska and Delta will have competed their way right past that 56 million capacity number. It seems like SEA should think about starting now on the next phase which is already part of the plan. They will just create a mirror image of the new terminal to the north (right) to double the gates.

But wait, that’s looking too far ahead. Next up is a State Environmental Policy Act review with public comment sometime in 2026. Even once that is fully approved, well, the FAA says that are 17 issues that have to be dealt with during design and construction, “including potential impacts on air quality, biological resources, land use, historic resources, and hazardous materials.”

Even now the timeline seems to have started to slip with projects now expected to be either done or underway by 2032, meaning not everything will be finished then. I think the terminal is likely to be open by then, barring any further hurdles taking longer than expected.

Get Cranky in Your Inbox!

The airline industry moves fast. Sign up and get every Cranky post in your inbox for free.

Brett Avatar

43 responses to “Seattle’s Second Terminal Gets Closer to a Green Light”

  1. ChuckMO Avatar
    ChuckMO

    The layout vaguely resembles the current STL setup minus the satellites, planned to be a more condensed layout in the future. SEA is working with what they’ve got but it looks to be a right mess going forward.

  2. SEAN Avatar
    SEAN

    This being the US I expect the costs to skyrocket over the next several years. In addition, with the way things are I believe the passenger projections appear quite rosy. Then again who knows & my comments could be all for not.

    On the Delta side of things, at least all their flights can become consolidated in one area rather than the scattershot arrangement they have today.

  3. emil Avatar
    emil

    Brett, Maybe a dumb question because I don’t know this airport as much as many others; can’t they acquire land on their borders to expand? And since I asked the question why can’t MDW do the same?

    1. Alex B. Avatar
      Alex B.

      They can, and the plan does show them acquiring land for relocating uses displaced by the new terminal.

      The bigger issue is that beyond just land ownership, other stuff is in the way that the airport needs to function, or that would be extraordinarily disruptive to relocate.

      A big parcel like the adjacent cemetery is a mixed bag. Sure, it would be helpful to have that land, but relocating a cemetery is a extremely fraught political process, and there are some advantages – the dead don’t complain about airport noise, for example. It’s not a bad buffer land use.

      MDW is a totally different animal – Chicago already has another airport to use, there’s zero reason to invest in expanding the footprint of MDW to add airfield capacity.

      1. Lester Pinkkey Avatar
        Lester Pinkkey

        But doesn’t MDW restrict the jets that can land there because of runway length? What happens in the future when there are more jets like the Airbus 321XLR

        1. BMurphy Avatar
          BMurphy

          The 757 used to be a somewhat common sight at Midway, via the old Northwest, the late National and possibly Delta. The -320 and -321 families are able to operate on runways of MDW’s length, depending on load (fuel, pax, etc.) and wx (temp, winds). Aside from adding some additional gates to the existing terminal layout, nothing of value is gained by footprint expansion, with the cost from occupied land acquisition being much too high from a monetary and a political standpoint (at least for the very long-term).

          1. JB14-Hrbek Avatar
            JB14-Hrbek

            ATA also flew a lot of 757s at MDW.

          2. Remington Steele Dossier Avatar
            Remington Steele Dossier

            Taking off in a 757 from MDW is a trip! They spool the engines up with the wheel brakes engaged until their at something like 50% then release the brakes and punch it. So much fun.

    2. CraigTPA Avatar
      CraigTPA

      My impression from a recent visit there is the the main problem with that idea isn’t just the cost of acquiring land, it’s that that land, pretty much right up to WA-99, is hilly. Flattening even relatively small hills really runs up the costs.

      And there’s the problem of being pinned in by highways on three sides too.

      Can it be done? Sure, in theory, if you’re willing to spend the money. And that’s where any footprint expansion for SEA (and a lot of other US airports) runs into political issues.

    3. SEASFO Avatar
      SEASFO

      They did that to open runway 16R/34L in 2008 and there was a large amount of opposition by the surrounding communities that resulted in the project being delayed a significant amount of time. The other issue is that the airport sits on a plateau-like formation, with especially steep drop-offs to the north, south, and west, so there would also be a large amount of work to fill in land to make any new structures level.

    4. O'Hare Is My Second Home Avatar
      O’Hare Is My Second Home

      You don’t touch MDW because people live there. My aunt, for one.

    5. JT8D Avatar
      JT8D

      But to the west, for instance, there’s a pretty sheer drop. Indeed, the western-most runway was built on fill about 20 years ago and that was a pretty heavy lift as I recall.

  4. Sean Avatar
    Sean

    Looks like they could connect the new terminal with the D Concourse and add 7-9 more gates (right now it looks like planned airplane parking.)

    1. John G Avatar
      John G

      It’s funny to contrast this and the mess at LAX with how easily DFW just decides to build a new terminal.

      1. Bill from DC Avatar
        Bill from DC

        It certainly makes the logic of all of the land surrounding DFW, IAD, DEN, etc. seem like very wise decisions.

        At the time, I’m sure the majority opinion in each place was “why are you putting the airport out THERE?” so each of those definitely involved some great forward thinking.

        1. CraigTPA Avatar
          CraigTPA

          Definitely, although they had the advantage of having areas relatively nearby that were both not that built up at the time and pretty flat.

          Topography really limits Seattle’s options.

        2. Brad Avatar
          Brad

          Yes, we used to joke that DEN was in western Kansas when it first opened.

          Back then, it took me an hour to get to/from the airport from the northwest, today it is 35 minutes from the same spot. The toll road that followed airport construction (at least on the north end, some of the south was already there) and the train from downtown have helped draw the airport closer in terms of time to travel there.

          Stapleton had become an overcrowded dump by the time DEN opened. When Stapleton was built it was somewhat “out there” but development surrounded it and then people started to complain about airport noise. The development also precluded doing much about expansion. Remember the runway across I-70, they wanted to expand more in that direction to the north but neighbors blocked that.

          DEN had few non-bovine neighbors when it opened, now they have and are building thousands of houses close to DEN and to nobody’s surprise the noise complaints are back.

      2. JT8D Avatar
        JT8D

        But despite all the land, DFW is pretty messed up too. So just because you have the land, doesn’t mean you have an efficient airport.

  5. NedsKid Avatar
    NedsKid

    So they are building the new terminal landside portion/parking on the narrow spit of land between the airport roadway and the cemetery. I think there’s a third party parking lot and the Gate Gourmet facility there today.

    I’m guessing moving the graveyard isn’t an option….

    1. southbay flier Avatar
      southbay flier

      It’s not a small graveyard. It sits between the airport access road that most people use from 518 and 99.

    2. Anthony Avatar
      Anthony

      Moving the cemetery is not an option, but the airport will close that Doug Fox parking lot you alluded to.

  6. Anthony Avatar
    Anthony

    The timeline and complexity for this project are dramatically understated and it simply will not happen before 2032. The only hurdle cleared is environmental review. There are existing buildings including a firehouse that need to be relocated, roadways need to be moved and buildings cleared before it can even start construction on the new terminal. Not to mention, the state environmental review will take years. The airport is also facing the full phased reconstruction of its main international concourse (S) and a full replacement of the train system.

  7. GG Avatar
    GG

    Eventually they’d need to add yet another runway too so you’re not just limited on gets.

    At the end of the day SEA may ultimately be maxed out on geographic footprint and maybe that’s ok. PAE is a good alternative and has plenty of room for growth, I’ve also heard rumors of another PAE-like terminal someday opening in the Olympia area that could be a relief valve. Maybe the long-term outcome for Seattle isn’t a single mega-airport but having additional facilities like how BUR and LGB take pressure off LAX

    1. Anthony Avatar
      Anthony

      The issue is with the size and topography of surrounding airports. Tacoma-Narrows, Renton Municipal, Auburn Municipal, Thune Field are all existing airfields in the region but all are tiny and in densely populated areas or surrounded by water/mountains. There is room to build in Enumclaw but it’s very far from Seattle without great highway connectivity and intense pushback from the cows…I mean community. The only viable option would be to turn JBLM into a mixed military/commercial airport like CHS, but that would require the cooperation of the military.

      1. Jake Avatar
        Jake

        It would physically work to flatten Vashion Island for a 4-6 runway airport, though I suppose the locals might have feelings about that.

        1. CraigTPA Avatar
          CraigTPA

          I’d noticed Vashion Island on the map, but figured it wouldn’t work for the same reason as my oft-stated goal of a new NYC airport to replace EWR, JFK, and LGA by using a huge chunk of Staten Island won’t work. Although the couple of street views I looked at for Vashion made it look much nicer than SI.

    2. DW Avatar
      DW

      Local resident here: The rumored new airport is basically dead in the water after too much outcry from residents came out. They also looked at Joint Base Lewis McChord but if I remember right that isn’t gonna fly either.

      PAE is basically the only option to grow locally and maybe to an extreme sense, BLI, but you would need high speed rail going before that would make too much sense for the Seattle area.

      1. GG Avatar
        GG

        I believe JBLM is the rumored location for another location. Creating a new SEA is definitely dead (unless they put it in Moses Lake ;) ), I do think they could put enough capacity at PAE and JBLM over the coming decades to handle all the growth

        1. Anthony Avatar
          Anthony

          JBLM isn’t likely to happen even though it is the best option, but military hasn’t been interested in allowing it. PAE has a plan to expand to 20 gates. You can review their SAMP on their website. Pretty interesting but airlines don’t seem incentivized to fly there unless SEA becomes an IATA level 3 airport and they have no other choice.

      2. CraigTPA Avatar
        CraigTPA

        Even with HSR, BLI is probably too far – 93 miles in a straight line (great circle mapper converted to statute), so at least 110 actual miles? And the right-of-way costs would be astronomical – it’s ROW more than construction costs that are blowing the budget on the CA HSR project.

  8. southbay flier Avatar
    southbay flier

    This is a project that needed to have started at the end of last decade. That airport has been cramped ever since Delta began making it a hub. With Alaska flying 787s around the world, it will only become busier. And then any route Alaska comes up with, Delta is going to make sure they fly it too.

    Too bad you can’t move all the terminals to the west side of the airport complex. It would take tons and tons of landfill to make it happen and that’s a really bad idea in earthquake country.

  9. jfruh Avatar
    jfruh

    Are they building a second stop on the Link light rail for this terminal?

    1. DW Avatar
      DW

      They’ll be adding a people mover system to connect both terminals and the rental car facility.

      1. jfruh Avatar
        jfruh

        Oh, nice. Would be even nicer the people mover had a stop at the current light rail stop, because the walk to the terminals is currently a long schlep through the parking structure.

  10. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    That new terminal looks just as narrow as the current D terminal (which is almost always blocked by people waiting to board because there’s no room). Can’t imagine this new terminal will be a good experience if it gets built.

    1. CEP Avatar
      CEP

      They’ll probably do like they did in the new terminal C at MCO and not have moving walkways, which will lead to looong walks from the check in counters and checkpoints.

  11. Anthony Avatar
    Anthony

    Cranky- Is there something up with the comment spam filter? I tried posting a comment and it is not appearing. Tried again and it’s still not there.

    1. Brett Avatar

      Anthony – I don’t see anything in the comment spam, and this one posted. So I’ll assume it must have just been a temporary issue.

  12. 1990 Avatar
    1990

    I’m sure they’ll right on this… just like the Link Light Rail to Issaquah… by 2041! (Perfect for getting to Poo Poo Point.)

    1. Anthony Avatar
      Anthony

      Hey, the Link light rail in Federal Way is opening ahead of schedule next month…if you ignore the years of previous delays! What comes first, light rail to Issaquah or weekend Sounder service on tracks and with trains that already exist?

  13. Jason Avatar
    Jason

    SEA is already one of the worst hub airports in the country not named Newark and this is just going to make it worse. That airport isn’t designed to handle one major hub, let alone two and I avoid it as much as possible, which is definitely an art form as an AS Titanium. It’s an absolute pain in the you know what to get into, out of, and connect through. If Snohomish County would tell the NIMBY’s to pound sand and build up PAE into a true alternative as opposed to the boutique-y option it is today it would be a big help to that whole metro area.

  14. Eric C Avatar
    Eric C

    Did you mean to say Southwest instead of WestJet?

    This seems a mess of a terminal. It has no secure side connection with the rest unless they want to have a bus shuttle, so it’s exceedingly painful for connections. There aren’t enough non AS / DL partnered airlines to fill it unless you count foreign carriers, but with no immigration facilities it can’t handle them. Meanwhile the constraints and challenges of having only one taxiway service the terminal area and unavoidable runway crossings are magnified with the increased traffic. The airport needed a complete re-think decades ago, when it had the capacity available to contemplate it. But with major recent investments to nearly every existing passenger facility there’s no ability or appetite for major changes. For now it’ll probably be ATC improvements and a single end-around taxiway ten+ years from now as band-aids.

    1. Brett Avatar

      Eric – No, WestJet is there since they have pre-clearance in Canada.

Leave a Reply to SEAN Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Cranky Flier