Some of you may remember when South/North was voted down (on a close vote) in 1998. In the wake of that vote, Metro studied every possible "high capacity transit" option EXCEPT light rail in that corridor.
Residents of SE Portland and later Milwaukie urged Metro to put MAX back in the mix, which to their credit they did. Note that in Portland the South/North bond measure ($400M) passed by a 3-2 margin.
Light rail rose to the top because it had the potential to attract the most riders and operate at the lowest cost. All affected jurisdictions (cities, counties, Metro) approved that option (LPA) and have all kicked in the local match funds.
If you think another option should have been selected, its time you ran for office or supported a candidate at the City of Portland, Metro, Clackamas County on a "No More MAX" platform. Good luck.
The shortcoming of the Milwaukie project is that it fails to get to Oregon City, just as the Yellow Line in north Portland, thanks to our neighbors in Clark county, fails to get to Vancouver WA. Both will only fulfill their potential when they make it to those end stations.

Glad somebody picked up on that one, Scotty!

And the failure of Eastside MAX is it's failure to go to Sandy.
The Failure of Westside MAX is it's failure to go to Forest Grove.
The failure of WES is it's failure to go to Salem.
The failure of the Green Line is it was built in the wrong location.

Milwaukie Light Rail has not been advanced because of public demand. That is pure fabrication.

Any legitimate poll or vote would show a super majority rejection with an even bigger majority rejecting paying for it.

The local funding match shares have not been kicked in. Milwaukie and Clackamas County have zero source for their $30 million share.

The rest of the local shares rely upon bonding backed by raiding revenue from current and future operations and essential services without any regard for priority or fiscal responsibility.

There's been no measure of merit at all.
Only the push for more rail transit without any due diligence. If it costs $23 million to move one business so be it. If the price soars to $2 billion so be it.
Millions taken from schools to help fund it doesn't matter. Nothing matters but advancing.
Light Rail is so good it is more important than anything.

Only the most reckless thinking can gin up how TriMet can afford theit $40 million share.
But here again it doesn't matter.

Steve wrote:

And the failure of Eastside MAX is it's failure to go to Sandy.

Actually, Metro looked at rail to Sandy, and concluded that it is not viable. And given the ridership of the Eastside line, it is difficult to characterize it as a failure. What level of ridership, do you think, would be necessary for it to be considered a "success"?

The Failure of Westside MAX is it's failure to go to Forest Grove.

Here, again, Metro has examined the extension you suggest, and considers it low-priority--this despite the existence of a little-used freight ROW which runs from the current Westside terminus into Forest Grove.

The failure of WES is it's failure to go to Salem.

This position I agree with--Beaverton to Wilsonville is not a good route for commuter rail--a service which works best over long distances and with infrequent stops.

The failure of the Green Line is it was built in the wrong location.

Again, ridership on the Green Line makes it hard to characterize it as a "failure"--what would make it a success, by your standards? If you think that the present routing is silly--it's long been noted that many of the busses which cross the Green in its southernmost segment provide a faster trip to the PSU-Pioneer Square segment--one possibility that I'm surprised hasn't been discussed is the swapping of Red and Green west of the river--have the Green head out to Beaverton, and have the Red run between PSU and the airport.

Milwaukie Light Rail has not been advanced because of public demand. That is pure fabrication.

Any legitimate poll or vote would show a super majority rejection with an even bigger majority rejecting paying for it.

And you know this because? The elected government of the City of Milwaukie has taken a strong pro-rail position, and last I've checked, they haven't been punished by voters. Back in the 1990s, when North-South was first discussed, there WAS much vocal community opposition in Milwaukie--but that seems to have vanished. At any rate, the good people of Milwaukie have demonstrated an ability to object to a project they dislike, and they seem to be embracing MLR rather than rejecting it. And, if it is true that Milwaukie has not provided its portion of the project costs--by all means, the voters of Milwaukie have a perfect opportunity to derail (heh) the project, by referring the funding to the voters and killing it. Likewise with Clackamas County.

By all means! If the voters in Clackamas County think MLR is a bad idea, they are welcome to try and torpedo the project!

Re: Green Line being built in the wrong location, if this is alluding to the fact that it runs parallel to 205 as opposed to down the middle of 82nd Ave, it's a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't-situation.... considering the Yellow Line is being criticized in certain circles for NOT being built alongside a freeway.

Please feel free to consult the breakdown by precinct of the 1998 vote, which was not just on South/North LRT, but included $400M to pay for it. Two precincts along the proposed line in North Portland were the only two to vote negative...Arbor Lodge and E.Kenton.
Doing the Green Line before the Milwaukie line was at the request of Clackamas county commissioners, who I think are elected. The route down I-205 is of course not great for TOD, but the ROW was there waiting to be utilized.
Like the Interstate Line, LRT on 82nd Avenue would have been transformational.

Like the Interstate Line, LRT on 82nd Avenue would have been transformational.
Is that what you call ruining a perfectly good boulevard?
Transformational? Into what?

As for the Green Line. Metro said it was built in the wrong location.

Swell. How irrational is that line then. Just because the ROW was there build it? Real good due diligence and prudence with tax dollars.

And it wasn't simply Clackamas county "requesting the line first". It was the line of least resistance.

WES was the same ROW story and a total lack of care or regard for cost and benefit.

I predict that Milwaukie residents will certainly prevent their $5 million share and likewise Clakamas County voters will prevent their only source of funding, Urban Renewal.

That may not be sufficient to stop the project given the all out gang warfare blitz to raid every coffer imaginable.

Transferring ginned up savings from the Sellwood Bridge. Despicable.

The pretense of public or voter support for MLR is nothing but avoiding the obvious.
Just like you avoid the fiscal calamity TriMet is in.

MLR is not affordable. Lipstick is not funding.

Gotta say I like Interstate a lot more now than I did in 2003. There's been some nice infill and a new residents drawn to the area b/c of the convenience of getting to downtown in less than 20 minutes.

Portland to Salem commuter rail seems to make sense, but would there be enough ridership? I'm not even sure where you would even put a route since the most logical lines were paved over years ago.

I disagree about MAX on 82nd. The claim is it could change the character and the land use on 82nd, I think this makes no sense at all. Nevermind it would be much slower than I-205 MAX, there is nothing for LRT to build upon on 82nd. The building stock and built environment on 82nd is built entirely for cars, everything has a huge lagoon of parking surrounding it and is spread out. You'd only get perhaps a lane in each direction for motor vehicle traffic going with a dedicated LRT trackway, its virtually assured that would never get support. There's hardly any existing building on 82nd built in a pedestrian or transit oriented form, it would require a complete transformational change along the route which I think is extremely unrealistic. 82nd is currently 10 miles of continuous strip malls, drive-thru fast food dining and tire/oil change/gas/car wash/dealerships. In my opinion, there's much, much better fish to fry for LRT to transform a major arterial, upper MLK comes to mind.

SE/NE 82nd, SW Barbur and SE McLoughlin IMO are too much of a lost cause for pedestrianization and are way too auto-centric in present form to change, except perhaps when oil is $300 barrel.

Eastside and Westside MAX are very successful as they are now terminating in Hillsboro and Gresham. The problem with WES are the minimal number of runs a day in the two short travel windows it operates within the 5 out of 7 days it runs. Everytime I've been on WES its been full but when it makes only 8 roundtrips a day, its not many people a day.

Theres two options with LRT: faster suburb-to-city travel on its own RoW (Westside/Airport/Clackamas) vs. arterial median running light rail line (Interstate). Both are about transportation but one weighs faster travel times, the other weighs land use transformation. It all depends on the corridor as to which makes more sense.

SE/NE 82nd, SW Barbur and SE McLoughlin IMO are too much of a lost cause for pedestrianization and are way too auto-centric in present form to change, except perhaps when oil is $300 barrel.

We did this to our cities in mere decades, why couldn't we do something else in the next decades?

Whoops, I read "except" as "even", I thought you were making a much bigger leap.

Also, 82nd carries the busiest bus line on the system, so I think it's hard to argue that the autocentric uses don't support light rail...

Light rail on 82nd sure would have been cool.

One potential good thing about the green line on 205 however is I believe the gateway area is (or was?), according to Metro, going to become some sort of regional town center or some title to that effect. I remember reading (a couple years ago) about how it was going to be a second downtown someday. If that actually happened it would probably be nice having a bunch of rail (and the freeways) converging there.

Kind of hard to imagine that wasteland ever becoming anything approaching downtown-like, though.

Also, 82nd carries the busiest bus line on the system, so I think it's hard to argue that the autocentric uses don't support light rail...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
bus is not light rail. the whole point of suggesting LRT on 82nd was for its envisioned land use transformation into something dense and walkable. clearly the presence of the busy 72 bus now is not changing 82nd into a transit oriented corridor. the 72 is popular for shopping and working at big box stores and fast food establishments. light rail in a median on 82nd with limited turns and less motor vehicle capacity would not be compatible with the current auto oriented businesses and therefore politically it wont happen.