News
Advertisements for Port Sonoma sound romantic: “There’s a ferry in your future.” The idea of boarding a ferry at Port Sonoma [California], where Highway 37 crosses the Petaluma River, and taking a relaxing and scenic ride to the San Francisco Ferry Building has appeal.
However, there are good reasons to question this ferry service. These reasons should be carefully considered now because Sonoma County is revising its transportation plan and the directors of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority will weigh the inclusion of Port Sonoma ferry service during their April 14 meeting.
Scheduled ferry service to Port Sonoma was first proposed in a very different time. Since then, many changes have occurred that make that proposal much less attractive.
The Water Emergency Transit Authority performed an environmental analysis of expanding ferry service on the Bay. The final environmental impact report published in June 2003 recommended against including service to Port Sonoma in the planned ferry startups.
The Sonoma Marin Rail Transit District will have a ballot measure this fall to fund a passenger rail and trail system starting at Cloverdale, ending at a high-speed ferry terminal at Larkspur, and providing transit connections between major population centers in Sonoma and Marin and San Francisco. The fraction of commuters who travel to San Francisco is decreasing and there is no need for a second ferry port to serve them.
Public awareness of climate change issues has increased. Data from the WETA analyses indicate that starting ferry service to Port Sonoma would increase carbon dioxide emissions by about 170,000 pounds per day. Those emissions are five times the emissions that would result if all ferry passengers drove alone to the Ferry Building. It is inherent in ferries that they use more energy than other forms of transit. A central theme of the new Sonoma County transportation plan is to decrease greenhouse gas emissions. Starting ferry service to Port Sonoma would be a major step in the wrong direction.
Opinions on urban design have changed. Bay Area planning agencies are now advocating more dense development around transit hubs, where many passengers can walk or bicycle to transit. The new developments in Windsor, Santa Rosa, Rohnert Park/ Cotati and Petaluma are following this model, but there is currently no dense development near Port Sonoma.
Sonoma County’s frontage on San Pablo Bay represents one of the only landscapes free of development still existing on the 600-mile bay frontage. For 30 years citizens have fought casinos, industrial parks, new towns, boat harbors, power plants, aqueducts and storage yards while patiently finding the public and private funds to buy this unspoiled landscape. The 4,000-acre open space asset will be threatened by an inevitable housing development if this dubious ferry proposal comes into being.
These important changes have occurred since ferry service to Port Sonoma was first proposed and make that project even less desirable. Ferry service to Port Sonoma is now in the Sonoma County transportation plan because owners and representatives of Port Sonoma have advocated for it and have persuaded a Congressman from Alaska to add a $20 million earmark in the most recent federal highway bill. This same congressman added the infamous $223 million “bridge to nowhere” earmark to the same highway bill. The owners are continuing to seek public funds and public sponsorship for ferry service because they want to develop their 70 acres of land at Port Sonoma, which are surrounded by protected lands and far from government services.
Both Supervisor Mike Kerns and Councilmember Mike Harris represent the Petaluma area. Other people can go to www.sctainfo.org/ board.htm to learn who represents them on the SCTA. Advise your director how to vote on this vital issue.
(Willard Richards is chair of the Sonoma County Transport-ation and Land Use Coalition. He has a Ph.D in physical chemistry and is retired from work as a consultant and project manager for air quality studies. Bill Kortum is a retired large animal veterinarian and is president of Sonoma County Conservation Action.)
However, there are good reasons to question this ferry service. These reasons should be carefully considered now because Sonoma County is revising its transportation plan and the directors of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority will weigh the inclusion of Port Sonoma ferry service during their April 14 meeting.
Scheduled ferry service to Port Sonoma was first proposed in a very different time. Since then, many changes have occurred that make that proposal much less attractive.
The Water Emergency Transit Authority performed an environmental analysis of expanding ferry service on the Bay. The final environmental impact report published in June 2003 recommended against including service to Port Sonoma in the planned ferry startups.
The Sonoma Marin Rail Transit District will have a ballot measure this fall to fund a passenger rail and trail system starting at Cloverdale, ending at a high-speed ferry terminal at Larkspur, and providing transit connections between major population centers in Sonoma and Marin and San Francisco. The fraction of commuters who travel to San Francisco is decreasing and there is no need for a second ferry port to serve them.
Public awareness of climate change issues has increased. Data from the WETA analyses indicate that starting ferry service to Port Sonoma would increase carbon dioxide emissions by about 170,000 pounds per day. Those emissions are five times the emissions that would result if all ferry passengers drove alone to the Ferry Building. It is inherent in ferries that they use more energy than other forms of transit. A central theme of the new Sonoma County transportation plan is to decrease greenhouse gas emissions. Starting ferry service to Port Sonoma would be a major step in the wrong direction.
Opinions on urban design have changed. Bay Area planning agencies are now advocating more dense development around transit hubs, where many passengers can walk or bicycle to transit. The new developments in Windsor, Santa Rosa, Rohnert Park/ Cotati and Petaluma are following this model, but there is currently no dense development near Port Sonoma.
Sonoma County’s frontage on San Pablo Bay represents one of the only landscapes free of development still existing on the 600-mile bay frontage. For 30 years citizens have fought casinos, industrial parks, new towns, boat harbors, power plants, aqueducts and storage yards while patiently finding the public and private funds to buy this unspoiled landscape. The 4,000-acre open space asset will be threatened by an inevitable housing development if this dubious ferry proposal comes into being.
These important changes have occurred since ferry service to Port Sonoma was first proposed and make that project even less desirable. Ferry service to Port Sonoma is now in the Sonoma County transportation plan because owners and representatives of Port Sonoma have advocated for it and have persuaded a Congressman from Alaska to add a $20 million earmark in the most recent federal highway bill. This same congressman added the infamous $223 million “bridge to nowhere” earmark to the same highway bill. The owners are continuing to seek public funds and public sponsorship for ferry service because they want to develop their 70 acres of land at Port Sonoma, which are surrounded by protected lands and far from government services.
Both Supervisor Mike Kerns and Councilmember Mike Harris represent the Petaluma area. Other people can go to www.sctainfo.org/ board.htm to learn who represents them on the SCTA. Advise your director how to vote on this vital issue.
(Willard Richards is chair of the Sonoma County Transport-ation and Land Use Coalition. He has a Ph.D in physical chemistry and is retired from work as a consultant and project manager for air quality studies. Bill Kortum is a retired large animal veterinarian and is president of Sonoma County Conservation Action.)
