|
Bay Crossings Newsmaker
WHEN WILL HIGH-SPEED FERRY
SERVICE ARRIVE IN THE NORTH BAY?
The case for ferries to
provide fast, efficient commuter service
and relieve Highway 101 gridlock
By F. Weston Starratt, P.E.
Wes Starratt is a professional engineer who served as manager
of business development for Kaiser Engineers (builder of the Larkspur Ferry
Terminal) and Morrison-Knudsen’s northern California operations before
establishing his own consulting firm.
The Bay Area Water
Transit Blue Ribbon Task Force calls for a "Bay Area High-Speed Water
Transit System for the 21st
Century." In its $2-billion first-phase, the recommended system would
comprise 28 new ferry terminals and 75 high-speed ferries, but it is far from
certain that any of them will serve the North Bay. The reason is environmental
concerns that have been raised about the most likely North Bay site, Port
Sonoma. To allay the concerns of environmental activists the Task Force decided
to give Port Sonoma provisional status only as a proposed terminal location.
This uncertainty has prompted a storm of criticism from
representatives of Marin and Sonoma counties, who are faced with providing
alternative transportation services to alleviate the mounting commuter traffic
gridlock.
From Sonoma County, Supervisor Tim Smith states emphatically
that, "we are not happy". Supervisor Mike Cale, vice chairman of the
Sonoma County Transportation Authority, says, "We were not aware of the
plan until the report came out … Sonoma County is in need of all forms of
high-speed transit".
From Marin, Supervisor Cynthia Murray emphasizes that "I
was really taken aback" by the decision. "The earlier we get traffic
off Highway 101, the better," she said, referring to drivers from northern
Marin and Sonoma counties. Supervisor Murray expressed these views in a letter
to Task Force Chairman Ronald Cowan, " The transportation needs of North
Bay residents are not addressed by Task Force’s plan as currently written. The
current plan continues to force Sonoma County and northern Marin County
residents to travel to Larkspur or further south to gain access to water
transit."
|
The Case for Ferry Service
to Port Sonoma |
 By
James L. Harerson
James I. Harerson served
Southern Sonoma Cou .
Early
in the Twentieth Century, before the bridges
were built and the North Bay’s love affair with the automobile
became preeminent, the water transit
system in the Bay Area carried millions of passengers. In the 1940’s
it began a steady decline to the point of near extinction. It wasn’t
until 1970, when the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation
District began its Sausalito to San Francisco operation, that ferry
service began to make a comeback. Golden Gate presently operates five
ferries between San Francisco and the North Bay. Now with congestion
on Highway 101 approaching total gridlock, ferry service is receiving
even more interest.
The
recently adopted Sonoma County Transportation Vision Statement
recognizes this trend toward water transit use and has a positive view
of future ferry service to Sonoma County:
"Using existing
waterways will allow Sonoma County commuters, recreational users and
travelers to get to their destinations quickly and efficiently.
Whether it’s to a sporting event, the museum or the airport, ferries
will become an excellent alternative for people. As part of our
seamless transportation system, it is critical that ferry service be
linked to rail, bus and multi-use paths, and provide adequate
parking".
"Ferry service linked to
train service will also provide tourism opportunities for our local
economy. People visiting from other countries – or those just
wanting a wine weekend getaway – will be able to incorporate the
water transit as part of their tourist experience.
Sounds ideal, doesn’t it?
The best news is that this day may be closer that anyone thinks. Port
Sonoma, an existing marina-commercial complex located at the mouth of
the Petaluma River, is presently under consideration as a ferry
terminal.
Port Sonoma has been in
operation for nearly a quarter of a century and has never been
successful, economically or environmentally. Over the years, several
development schemes have been proposed for the site. Bizarre ideas
such as a four story-parking garage, huge bingo parlor and RV storage
facility have been proposed and immediately — and justifiably —
shot down.
Now, Simons and Brecht, an
architectural and development firm with a long history of involvement
with transportation planning in Sonoma County, has taken an option on
the property with the goal of helping establish a ferry terminal on
the site.
Jim Brecht, a partner in the
firm, recently stated, "We have three goals for Port Sonoma.
First, we want to not only protect but also enhance the environment of
the area. Secondly, we want to provide practical alternatives to the
single passenger automobile. Finally, we believe that this site is
uniquely suited to serve the tourism industry in Sonoma County".
In order to assure that the
environment is protected, Simons and Brecht has taken an option on 500
acres directly across Highway 37 from Port Sonoma. This property
already has an easement, which prohibits development. Historically
this land has been used for agricultural operations. However, it is
Simons and Brecht’s intention to convert a portion of this property
to wetlands.
Over the years the Bay Area
has suffered a lost of wetlands. This project is unique in that it
will help reverse that loss. Simons and Brecht has already instigated
contacts with environmental regulators and environmental groups in
order to ascertain their concerns so that they can be incorporated in
the plan.
Since this property is
surrounded either by San Pablo Bay, the Petaluma River or land that is
protected by conservation easements there is no possibility that this
project will lead to more development in this area.
The site offers many
transportation advantages. The most important is that the Northwestern
Pacific Railroad tracks run through the site. This fact raises the
intriguing possibility of a true mass transit system for the North
Bay. Indeed this ferry/rail interface exists in only a few places in
the Bay Area. Since the railroad operates the length of Sonoma County
and much of Marin County, it is possible that a major reduction in
traffic is possible. With the advent of high-speed catamarans on San
Francisco Bay, ferry service is now feasible in the North Bay. Indeed,
when the Golden Gate District began such high-speed service from
Larkspur, ridership exploded upward.
Tourism opportunities are
also presented. Connection to a tourist train (perhaps a Sonoma County
version of Napa’s Wine Train) is a top priority. The existing
railroad tracks connect the Port Sonoma site with Railroad Square in
Santa Rosa, downtown Petaluma, and the California Welcome Center in
Rohnert Park. Indeed, the tracks transverse seven of the nine Sonoma
County cities. Since only San Francisco Bay separates Sonoma County
from San Francisco, the convention capital of the United States, a
ferry/train trip is an ideal excursion.
However, one of the first
opportunities may well involve ferry trips to the Pacific Bell Park to
see a Giants baseball game. Literally thousands of autotrips can be
eliminated by this service. Imagine being able to avoid driving
through the monster traffic associated with a major league sporting
event.
Also, the proposed San
Francisco Bay Trail goes through site. This important and popular
trail segment would also have access from the ferry and rail
connections. Eventually, connections to San Francisco International
Airport might be offered as well.
No decision has been made on what else could
be located on the site. Further development could include a limited
commercial/residential concept (the "pedestrian pocket") or
it could be a visitor serving facility such as a hotel. The design and
environmental process will determine that outcome. What is certain is
that water transit now has a reasonable chance to return to Sonoma
County. v |
The City of Novato has particularly forceful views on the
importance of a full-fledged North Bay Terminal in the ferry plan. Novato Mayor
Pat Eklund stresses, "We need to have a North Bay site to ensure that there
are multiple transportation options to relieve the incredible traffic congestion
in our area." And the Novato City Council, in a letter to the Bay Area
Council, stated that, "Our Council is disturbed by the fact that the
potential for future terminals in the North Bay have been eliminated from
immediate consideration by the current water transit study. The Novato City
Council supports in the strongest terms possible a North Bay ferry terminal that
is operational as soon as possible."
Following the completion of the Bay Area Water Transit
Initiative last year, State Senator Don Perata drew up Senate Bill 428 calling
the for the formation of a San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority. The
bill passed the Senate and the Assembly, was signed by the Governor, and now
awaits funding and the appointment of the final authority members. In the bill,
the authority is required to hold hearings on the plan in all nine Bay Area
counties and have it reviewed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC),
thus providing an opportunity for the inclusion of ferry service to the North
Bay.
"Why were
potential terminals and ferry service to the North Bay left out of the Bay Area
Water Transit Initiative?
Planners agree that ferry expansion to the North Bay is a
priority. However, the motivation to downplay North Bay terminals was to avoid
controversy with environmental groups, as they seek to sell the plan to the
state legislature.
As stated by the Bay Area Council, "the Task Force began
its work by adopting an ethic of respecting the majesty and ecological integrity
of San Francisco Bay. Historically, few endeavors to tackle the transportation
challenges have been so dedicated to protecting and preserving the
environment."
Much of San Francisco Bay is very shallow and surrounded by
sensitive habitat areas ardently defended by a politically active environmental
community. For the council to gain acceptance of the plan, it was necessary for
the sensitivities of that community to be taken into consideration. Thus,
according to Russ Hancock, the Bay Area Council’s project manager for the
Water Transit Initiative, "We’ve made a commitment not to put a terminal
or boat anywhere that will have serious ecological consequences". In regard
to the two potential terminal sites suggested for the North Bay,
"everybody, including the Point Reyes Bird Observatory, agrees the
environmental issues at both sites are huge."
Thus, any consideration of either Hamilton Field or Port
Sonoma, the two sites initially proposed for North Bay terminals, was stopped
before the plan was completed. There were no other potential sites for a North
Bay ferry terminal; so, the North Bay was completely eliminated from the ferry
plan.
But, the "environment first" approach by the Bay
Area Council, particularly in regard to ferry terminals in the North Bay, is in
sharp contrast to studies made by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC).
MTC’s "San Francisco Bay Area Regional Ferry
Plan," updated in March 1999. examined existing passenger Bay Area ferry
services and potential new ferry routes including Berkeley/Albany, Martinez, and
Port Sonoma. No other sites in the North Bay were considered.
According to MTC’s senior planner, Rod McMillan, Port
Sonoma "needs another look" since, "with its high potential
patronage, it could be a successful service", and "get traffic off the
freeway as far north as possible." The Plan goes on to note that "A
Port Sonoma to San Francisco ferry route appears to be a feasible new route from
ridership demand and access perspectives." It would require "35-knot
ferry technology, comparable to that provided by new Vallejo and Golden Gate
vessels".
MTC compares ferry service from Port Sonoma to the very
successful two-vessel, and future three-vessel, service from Vallejo, which is
currently carrying as many as 1,200 commuters per work day, for a total of some
700,000 passenger trips annually. The "analysis indicates that ferry
service from Port Sonoma could generate enough ridership to be a successful
operation", but MTC notes that "landside and waterside impacts (e.g.
shoreline impacts, waterfowl impacts, etc.) need to be analyzed as part of
environmental analysis, as does any potential for growth inducement, a major
Sonoma County concern."
So, MTC believes that future ferry service from Port Sonoma
could be as successful as the high-speed ferry service from Vallejo has proven
to be. But, before we take a closer look at Port Sonoma, let’s examine the
shoreline of the North Bay to see if there are other potential ferry terminal
sites.
First, let’s define what we mean by the North Bay: All of
the west side of San Francisco Bay bordering Marin and Sonoma counties, starting
north of the Larkspur Ferry Terminal and including the tip of the San Quentin
Peninsula, San Rafael Bay, San Pedro Peninsula, and the large, shallow San Pablo
Bay extending to the extreme north end of the Bay at Port Sonoma where the
Petaluma River enters the bay.
u
San Quentin Peninsula:
Consideration has been given to the possibility of a ferry terminal at the
end of the San Quentin Peninsula, adjacent to the Richmond San Rafael Bridge,
possibly connected to the Northwestern Pacific by an extension of tracks from
San Rafael. There is a strong feeling in some circles (perhaps it should be
called wishful thinking) that the San Quentin State Correctional Institution
would be closed in the next few years. Even if that proves to be the case, one
might ask if it would make sense to duplicate the nearby Larkspur Landing ferry
service of the Golden Gate Bridge District. Furthermore, without a rail
connection, such a terminal would do nothing to relieve traffic on Highway 101.
In any case, waiting for San Quentin to close, would not appear to be a sound
premise upon which to plan a ferry operation.
u
San Rafael Bay:
Continuing northward is San Rafael Bay, a shallow body of water with a narrow
channel at the center of the bay for use by pleasure boats. On the landside in
downtown San Rafael there would be no place for a ferry terminal nor for
parking, although a site possibly could be found along the north shore of the
bay if one of the yacht harbors were closed. Nevertheless, the channel would
appear to be far too long, too narrow, and too shallow to meet the requirements
for a ferry operation. Furthermore, without a rail connection, such a terminal
site would do nothing to relieve Highway 101 traffic.
u
San Pedro Peninsula:
On the north wide of San Rafael Bay is San Pedro Peninsula, an area of
multimillion dollar homes and yacht clubs with inadequate road access, no rail
access, and little space for parking. At the tip of the peninsula, almost on the
main ship channel, there is a barge loading facility for crushed rock that has
been in operation for many years. But on the landside, there are too many
problems to seriously consider the site for a ferry terminal.
San Pablo Bay: The large circular body of water north of
the San Pedro Peninsula is San Pablo Bay. For the most part, it is relatively
shallow, with only one federally maintained shipping channel, extending from the
main ship channel near the eastern shore of the bay to the mouth of the Petaluma
River and extending up that river to the turning-basin at Petaluma. The western
shoreline of San Pablo Bay is too far from that ship channel for serious
consideration as the site for a ferry terminal.
u Hamilton
Field: Also excluded from
consideration is the site of the old Hamilton Air Force Base where the US Army
Corps of Engineers is in the process of flooding the old runway for
transformation into a wetland with the addition of dredged material from San
Francisco Bay channel deepening projects. The property will be transferred to
the California Coastal Conservancy along with adjacent property near Bel Marin
Keys, taking the entire area out of any serious consideration for a ferry
terminal.
That leaves Port Sonoma where the Petaluma River enters San
Pablo Bay as the only serious contender for a ferry terminal in the North Bay
bordering Marin and Sonoma counties.
The Petaluma River has a tradition of river traffic for the
movement of goods and farm products since the days of the Spanish Empire in
California. Shortly after California became a state, the City of Petaluma was
founded at the head of navigation on the river and became a key trans-shipment
point in the North Bay. River traffic included schooners, barges, and tugs for
the movement of feed, grain and other products. In 1872, the San Francisco and
North Pacific Railroad first reached San Francisco Bay on the lower Petaluma
River where a terminal was built at a spot called Donahue’s Landing on the
east bank of the river a mile below Gilardi’s on the Lakeville Highway. A long
wharf was built along the water’s edge so the trains could pull out alongside
the steamboats. Side-wheeler steamers provided daily passenger and freight
service to San Francisco for over a decade until railroad tracks reached
Tiburon. So, ferry service would be nothing new to the Petaluma River, while
barge and pleasure-boat traffic continue to this day up and down the Petaluma
River and along the channel into San Pablo Bay.
Waterside Aspects of Port Sonoma
Because of continuing river traffic, the Petaluma River is
dredged from the turning basin in Petaluma to the river mouth at Port Sonoma and
into San Pablo Bay, making Port Sonoma the only point on the North Bay with a
federally maintained shipping channel. That channel is 200 feet wide and 8 feet
deep at low tide for a distance of about four miles into San Pablo Bay where it
reaches deep water. In the Petaluma River, the channel is 100 feet wide and 8
feet deep to the turning basin in Petaluma. Dredging by the US Army Corps of
Engineers is required only every three to four years to maintain the channel,
since siltation in the channel does not appear to be a greater problem than
elsewhere in San Francisco Bay.
|
The Environmental
Perspective PORT
SONOMA AND ITS ENVIRONS |
| By
George Ellman
George Ellman is an emeritus member of the UCSF faculty
residing in Sonoma County. He has been the Mayor of Tiburon, a member of
the Marin Transit District board, and the Metropolitan Transportation
Commissioner from Marin in the late 1970’s. He was chairperson of the
Sonoma County Transportation Coalition. He is presently vice-chairman
of the Citizens Advisory Committee of the Sonoma County Transportation
Authority. He has been a long time member of the National Audubon Society,
serving on the boards of the Marin, and later on the Madrone (Sonoma
County) Audubon Society as chair of the Conservation Committee and
President of the Society. He was elected in 1990 to the board of the
National Audubon Society by chapters in the states of California, Nevada,
Oregon and Washington. He and his wife, Phyllis, were recently named Elder
Earthkeepers of the 20th Century.
Several individuals and organizations have suggested
that Port Sonoma could become a viable ferry port, connecting Sonoma and
northern Marin to the central SF Bay region. The Metropolitan
Transportation Commission and others have studied the viability of
increased ferry service and Port Sonoma is considered among the most
promising possibilities for relieving choked traffic on Highway 101.
I first became interested in this area in the early
1980’s shortly after we moved here. I was and continue to be active in
the local(Madrone) Audubon Society. One of my new acquaintances, Martha
Bentley, asked me if I would accompany her to the Port Sonoma area to
consider the bird population there, and possibly to arrange a display for
the people who used the Port regarding the bird population.
The site is about 1500 feet inland from where the
Petaluma River enters San Pablo Bay. The entire area is part of the north
bay/lowlands/wetlands. The area has been extensively dredged to provide
for the Port Sonoma marina.
BCDC PERMITS MARINA
Currently, Port Sonoma has permits from the SF Bay
Conservation and Development Commission for 40 floating boat slips,
pilings, a 425 ft. opening in a dike along the Petaluma River, and for
flooding 32 acres of previously excavated bay land. The permits set
special conditions for plan reviews, water quality, levee safety, sewage
facilities, use of marine toilets, and discharges to the Bay. Landscaping
changes require special permission and public access plans were set up.
All in all, the marina project was determined to not have adverse effects
on the Public Trust aspects of the area.
LARGE CUSTOMER BASE
How could this port be used as a ferry-landing site for
North Bay residents? Most thinking on these issues suggests that a viable
port needs several components: a large population of residents who can
easily get to the site, access, parking for vehicles, etc.
NO CITY NEARBY
Clearly, at present, none of these conditions are
available at Port Sonoma. Yet, there are some potential prospects: the
port is located on Highway 37 connecting the East Bay across the north end
of San Pablo Bay to Marin. Highway 37 (portions are two lanes only) is
heavily used during morning and evening hours daily. Adding further
traffic to this route is not a good idea.
But a railroad, connecting Vallejo, Santa Rosa and San
Rafael, might work well with a ferry connection at Port Sonoma. There is a
rail line, which parallels Highway 37 and could bring ferry patrons from
Santa Rosa, San Rafael, Vallejo, and Marin, Napa, Solano Counties to the
port. This railroad has a right of way adjacent to the south boundary of
Port Sonoma; much of the public could leave their vehicles at home, ride
the train to Port Sonoma; it would probably be a 3 to 5 minute walk to the
ferry-landing site.
No detailed examination of these possibilities has been
made, but certainly there are residents of these urban areas that would
ride a train to the ferry port, followed by a pleasant water trip to San
Francisco and other parts of the Bay Area.
Meanwhile, there are other activities that support the
starting of passenger rail services that could make real the potential for
public access to Port Sonoma, without extensive development at the site.
If funds were available for starting the rail operations soon, it would
probably be a few years before trains started running.
DEVELOPMENT ALLOWED IN THE AREA
These ideas need careful consideration. The immediate
area around the port is a major wetland, and provides habitat for water
birds, migrating species areas that remain unchanged from the time before
the 19th century brought an influx of people to this area. Some of the
area has been diked and is a productive agricultural region. The Sonoma
County General Plan specifies that these uses continue and any changes
will not be well received by the residents of Sonoma County. More likely
there will be considerable opposition.
The residents of Petaluma, Sonoma, and Novato (the
principle cities in the area) will scrutinize any proposed developments.
Presently, the lands around Port Sonoma are zoned for agricultural uses.
Many of the properties are owned or controlled by the Sonoma County Land
Trust, Nature Conservancy and other land preservation agencies. However,
not all areas are protected from development in these ways. There is
potential for development of homes in the hills surrounding the north end
of San Pablo Bay; yet for those of us who see the need for protecting the
visual aspects of these remaining regions, it is important to develop
regulations that prevent significant intrusion on these magnificent open
vistas.
RURAL HERITAGE INITIATIVE
In the past, the County Supervisors have rejected many
proposals to develop the lands in this area. Of course, no present Board
can commit a future Board to such actions. The General Plan is the public’s
recourse to prevent or cause such future activities. There is activity in
Sonoma County to amend the General Plan with what is known as the Rural
Heritage Initiative. It would maintain the present zoning for a period of
30 years. If the public approves this initiative, there will be fairly
strong protection of these lands for that period.
I am often asked whether railroad operations are inimical to wildlife.
From what I have been able to learn, the operation of a train through a
wetlands area does not have significant effects on the numbers of birds or
other wildlife who utilize such areas. Building a railroad, however, can
cause discernable losses in available habitat area, and can diminish their
numbers. Thus, in a place such as Port Sonoma, where the rail already
exists, the operation of trains, even, for example, 3 trains an hour
during early and late commute times, and less frequent trains at other
times of the day, would be expected to have minimal effects on wildlife. v |
Ferries:
It is estimated that the 22-mile trip from Port Sonoma to San
Francisco would require 45 to 47 minutes in high-speed catamaran (twin hull)
ferries such as are used in Vallejo and Larkspur service. MTC estimates that a
minimum of approximately $11 million would be required to purchase a single
high-speed, 325-350 passenger vessel or $20 million for two vessels to provide
service for some 1200 commuters or 2400 commute trips per day, which is about
the level of patronage on the Vallejo service with two catamaran ferries.
In discussions with ferry builders, it appears that the
Petaluma River Channel, both in the river and out into the bay, is adequate for
the operation of these high-speed (36 knot/hour) catamarans. One such builder,
Dakota Creek Industries, states that "The draft of these vessels is
approximately five feet in the full load condition" but six feet at the
stern when not fully loaded. Modifications in the vessel design could be made,
such as "wider hulls to reduce draft, at the expense of a couple of knots
of speed and an increase in wake wash." But, wake wash may not be a serious
problem, since these vessels would largely be operating in the open bay. Some
have suggested air-cushion ferries that would require little, if any, dredging,
but they would not be appropriate at Port Sonoma, since they "are very
noisy and subject to vibration and very high maintenance cost."
Landside Aspects:
The bay and Highway 37 bound Port Sonoma at the mouth of the
Petaluma River. On the landside is property controlled by the California Coastal
Conservancy. Simon and Brecht, a Santa Rosa based architectural and development
firm, has an option to build on the Port Sonoma site.
The site is blessed with the greatest abundance of landside
transportation facilities of any potential ferry terminal site in the Bay Area.
Not only is it traversed by the "Bay Trail" with its biking potential,
but also by four-lane Highway 37 joining Highway 101 in Novato and connecting
with network of highways leading to Petaluma, Sonoma, and Napa. In addition, the
site is traversed by the Northwestern Pacific right-of-way, with tracks leading
westward to Novato and then northward to Petaluma, Santa Rosa, and Cloverdale,
and eastward to Sonoma and Napa. Federal funds have recently become available
for the upgrading of the track through Port Sonoma to Novato and northward. At
the same time, major efforts are underway in Marin and Sonoma counties to
restore railroad passenger service as a means of alleviating traffic congestion
on Highway 101.
Certainly, the movement of commuters by bike, road, and rail
to Port Sonoma and onto high-speed ferries would be the most effective way of
reducing freeway gridlock in both Marin and Sonoma counties. It appears that
few, if any, ferry terminal sites have the advantages offered by Port Sonoma,
which would have easy land access for a ferry trip to San Francisco in less than
one hour. In addition, a Port Sonoma ferry operation has the potential of
removing commuters from their cars and reducing traffic congestion on Highway
101 in Marin and Sonoma counties.
So what are the problems that caused the Bay Area Council to
downgrade Port Sonoma in its ferry plan?
Will Travis, Executive Director of BCDC, the Bay Conservation
& Development Commission, points out that the Commission "encourages
the increased utilization of the Bay for ferries," but is concerned about
some sites such as Port Sonoma that might have "silting problems". He
also recognizes that there is a concern that new ferry terminals could be
"growth inducing."
David Lewis of Save San Francisco Bay Association points out
that new ferry terminals "may create serious environmental impacts on the
land and shoreline of the Bay. Buildings, roads and parking lots may destroy
wetlands and other sensitive habitat." He notes "Several North Bay and
South Bay locations listed by the Task Force for potential ferry service once
boasted active marinas which have been closed because maintenance dredging there
was not economically feasible." Furthermore, the "Operation of
watercraft may have detrimental impact on sensitive habitat."
Barbara Salzman, President of the Marin Audubon Society
points out that both Hamilton and Port Sonoma were rated by the Blue Ribbon Task
Force as "Category 3" meaning that severe environmental impacts were
anticipated. Furthermore she points to "induced growth",
"increased traffic", a terminal that "would be a city," and
finally the potential for an "Indian casino" on property several miles
distant.
And how do North Bay ferry supporters respond to these
issues?
Jim Harberson, retired Sonoma County Supervisor, responds
that there is no Indian land adjacent to Port Sonoma, but, back in 1995,
"there was a casino proposal on a piece of land several miles distant"
but that the project was effectively put to rest by the actions of the board. He
also points out that development could not take place near Port Sonoma
without the acquiescence of the Sonoma Land Trust and the California Coastal
Conservancy which control much of the land adjacent to and near the site of the
proposed ferry terminal. Furthermore, the Sonoma County Board
Supervisors would be directly involved in the land-use planning and active in
reviewing the necessary Environmental Impact Report. It would be up to any
prospective developer to design the ferry terminal that would have the least
impact on the environment.
Regarding traffic, MTC estimates that there is sufficient
capacity on Highway37 and other access routes to accommodate potential
ferry-induced traffic and sufficient space for at least 700 cars adjacent to the
proposed docking site.
The Sonoma Baylands Wetlands restoration project, immediately
adjacent to Port Sonoma, utilized dredged materials that were barged in from the
Port of Oakland to restore the submerged wetlands. In the future, dredged
materials for several wetland restoration projects, including Hamilton Field,
could be provided from maintenance dredging for Port Sonoma; thus, dredging
would, in fact, be helpful to the restoration of wetlands in the North Bay.
Regarding siltation, MTC’s recommended site for the ferry
terminal would be immediately adjacent to the main access channel on the river,
which is "routinely dredged," and would have minimal siltation. For an
expert assessment, we turned to Michael Cheney, a registered civil engineer and
marine development consultant, who has been involved in dredging projects
throughout the Bay Area for more than 25 years and worked in association with
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission,
and other agencies. While it is true that the Port Sonoma Marina has had serious
siltation problems because of its poor location away from the channel, Cheney is
convinced that a ferry terminal built directly on the Federal navigation channel
on the Petaluma River would not experience serious siltation. He also points out
that the Corps of Engineers is able to effectively maintain the channel up into
the river and out into the bay with maintenance dredging required only every
three or four years.
To Cheney, siltation at Port Sonoma would not be a problem if
the ferry terminal is located right on the channel.
Wake created by ferries has been a problem in the channel at
Larkspur and elsewhere. But, it may be less of a problem at Port Sonoma, since
upon leaving the proposed terminal, the ferry would immediately enter the broad
San Pablo Bay, presumably traveling at reduced speed for the four miles in the
channel to reach deep water. In addition, advanced high-speed ferry designs have
been developed to minimize the wake effect, including SLICE technology, which
splits the twin-hull concept into four hulls. The first such vessel is being
designed by Guido Perla & Associates in Seattle under an agreement with
Lockheed Martin for high-speed passenger ferry operation in Puget Sound to meet
the low wake-wash criterion.
Although Port Sonoma with its land access by bike, auto,
rail, and ferry access at the mouth of the Petaluma River appears to be the
ideal site for a ferry terminal, alternative sites have been suggested. Marin
Supervisor Cynthia Murray has recommended a site located several miles up the
river and off on a slough near Marin County’s Gnoss Field, the railroad, and
Highway 101. This site would require additional dredging and the filling of
wetlands, and according to the Audubon Society’s Barbara Salzman, would be
"much worse." A mile or more up the Petaluma River is the site of the
former Donahue’s Landing, which provided a highly successful ferry operation
to San Francisco for over a decade starting in 1872, but it no longer has the
railroad terminal upon which that service was based. Sites previously offered
near Bel Marin Keys are being acquired for wetland restoration projects by the
Coastal Conservancy and thus have been eliminated from consideration. Thus, the
logical location of the North Bay ferry terminal appears to be Port Sonoma at
the mouth of the Petaluma River.
Are there environmental problems that must be mitigated for
the operation of a ferry terminal at Port Sonoma? Yes.
Are environmental problems growing as commuter traffic
congestion continues to increase on Highway 101 in Marin and Sonoma counties?
Yes
BUT, sensible people through effective engineering solutions
can solve both of these environmental problems.
It is up to those involved in designing a terminal and a ferry operation at
Port Sonoma to ensure that environmental concerns are mitigated. There is every
reason to believe that they can be … then urgently needed high-speed ferry
service can be provided to the North Bay … transferring commuters to fast,
efficient trains and express buses, as well as automobiles and bikes. It’s all
there at Port Sonoma, the means to alleviate traffic congestion in Marin and
Sonoma counties with a minimum environmental impact. Ferry dreams can come true!
v |
