According to today’s Clackamas Review article, a petition signed by hundreds of local residents (including the Mayor’s wife) has encouraged the inclusion of an alternate route proposal in the SDEIS process.
The new route would run closer to the heart of downtown Milwaukie, perhaps split along Main St. and SE McLoughlin Blvd.
The article states that the Mayor, who is a member of the South Corridor Phase II Steering Committee as well, has requested a pause in the SDEIS process so it can be determined whether to include a study of a new alternative route.
Personally, I am curious if anyone can remember the entire history of the route selection process. I seem to remember that a decade ago, light rail was slated to go through the heart of Milwaukie’s downtown, but local opposition at the time got the proposal shifted to behind the school along the Union Pacific ROW. If so, this new petition would represent an interesting turn of events.
38 responses to “A shift in plans for Milwaukie Light Rail?”
At the time, I believe the businesses downtown thought a Main St or McLoughlin alignment would have been too disruptive so they pushed for the UP alignment. This was also BEFORE Waldorf moved into the old abandoned school and at the time, there was talk of possibly redeveloping the entire school site.
I’ve put up a custom Google Map of downtown Milwaukie Light Rail points of interest which should help clarify some of the route options being discussed.
(Note that the satellite photo is a bit out-of-date as the North Main Village condo project is mostly complete now.)
Please let me know what other items should be bookmarked on the map.
– Bob R.
Wouldn’t it make the most sense to run it along the rail corridor, as it would allow the easiest, most straight-shot link to OC?
The Internet Archive has a copy of Metro’s South/North web site, including a high-level map. I’m pretty sure a difference is that trains are now planned to continue south through/past more of downtown.
I just have to re-emphasize, Waldorf moved into their new location KNOWING that the UP line was the preferred corridor for light rail. To now say that they are worried for their childrens’ safety is a little disingenuous. And since when are they letting kids play on the railroad tracks anyway? Unsupervised? The whole “protest” just rings a little hollow to me. It’s like saying they want to close off Harrison Street in front of the school because they’re worried about the childrens’ safety (even though the street’s been there 100 years). Why isn’t anybody calling their bluff?
The whole idea of regional rail is to connect centers, so it would be awful for MAX not to go downtown (Milwaukie)
Since we’re not supposed to “encourage” low-density development, and that the area between Milwaukie and Oregon City isn’t even an incorporated community, isn’t it in Metro/TriMet’s interest not to encourage development of this area, but rather to concentrate it in town center areas?
If so, wouldn’t it make more sense for TriMet and Metro, along with ODOT and Marion County, to forgo an expensive MAX line and instead build true Commuter Rail (not the cheap version being built in Washington County, but the “real thing” as used in Vancouver, BC and San Francisco, CA, along with Seattle, Salt Lake City, Los Angeles, San Diego, Chicago, and a dozen other cities) between Portland and Salem, with “town center” stops in Milwaukie (which would link with local light rail), Oregon City (with neighborhood bus routes), Canby (with CAT busses), Woodburn (with local busses), and Salem – which would also have the benefit of directly reducing traffic that would otherwise be on I-5? (Considering that the train stations in Oregon City, Canby and Woodburn would be smack in the middle of each town’s downtown area.)
Even with adding a second track onto the existing UP mainline, even with having to rebuild the Clackamas River Bridge, the Oregon City viaduct, massive re-engineering of the line from Oregon City to Canby, and rebuilding the Molalla River Bridge, the cost of a commuter rail line could easily beat the cost of a shorter, less functional MAX line.
Plus, the Commuter Rail line could, instead of using Union Station, terminate at an Eastside train station (between the Morrison and Hawthorne Bridges) that could create an eastbank transit center, linking MAX, Streetcar and bus lines all together, along with Amtrak service.
Plus, for all of the “we need more not less density”, it wouldn’t “subsidize” the horrible, horrible unincorporated suburbs between Milwaukie and Oregon City, with their large home lots.
Erik Halstead Says:
I agree totally. A real train would be FAR more functional. It would cover FAR more of its costs, and technically could be used extensively in addition to involving the communities more directly than what light rail does.
Real town centers could popup instead of psuedo town centers that may or may not be viable. If for any other reason just because a real commuter rail train would actually be stopping in town centers and probably provide a much more feasible transit option into downtown, or east side PDX. Light rail past 10 miles is no longer a viable option except to the most dedicated. Commuter rail is a viable alternative up to 40-60 miles out. Allowing for lower cost development, more family homes and also high density town centers.
But I digress. The question remains, is anyone realistically looking at this in the Portland area?
Real town centers could popup instead of psuedo town centers that may or may not be viable
Real Town Centers:
Portland, Beaverton, Hillsboro, Garden Home, Multnomah Village, Tigard, Tualatin, Sherwood, Lake Oswego, West Linn, Oregon City, Hawthorne, Sellwood, Gresham, Troutdale.
Pseudo Town Centers:
Orenco Village, Quatama, Bridgeport Village, Clackamas.
I **REALLY** like the idea of a commuter train service between Portland and Salem! Any idea how much it would cost? I would take it one step further, though…. Commuter service between Eugene and Vancouver, WA. Maybe we could have more frequent runs between Portland and Vancouver, just a few less for the Portland – Salem run. Amtrak just doesn’t cut it – any problem “up north” can result in a significant delay in when the train even shows up to take one down to Salem. I had this problem happen the other night. Somewhere up by Kelso a train derailed and the train to Salem was delayed over 2 hours! Has anyone given a serious look into the possibility of a Willamette Valley Commuter train service? I think this would be excellent! I think they could even collect enough in fares to make it self sustainable. Even a $20 round trip between Salem and Portland would be well worth it. How much does Greyhound currently charge? It’s always packed!
Regarding Aaron’s comments about the Waldorf school, here is a timeline I was able to put together for an old thread over on BlueOregon:
FYI, the former Jr. High school site as a potential rail alignment was discussed at a number of public meetings in 2001, including several times at this Milwaukie City Council discussion of the South Corridor process (PDF format) from May 2, 2001.
The alternatives were formally presented by TriMet for public discussion on May 31, 2001, approximately 45 people attended the meeting, and several public comments in support of the Jr. High site were recorded in these minutes. The chair of one neighborhood association described that site as “critical” and urged for its selection.
In the minutes for a June 18, 2001 council work session, it says “Neighborhood leaders Ed Zumwalt, Rob Kappa, Teresa Bresaw, David Aschenbrenner, Jean Michel, and Ray Bryan assured Council of their solidarity on the issues of light rail and future of the Jr. High School property.”
It sounds like the alignment was becoming a done deal by summertime.
The Waldorf School’s bid to purchase the site was accepted on August 16th, 2001.
– Bob R.
Thanks for the timeline, Bob. So Waldorf bought the property *knowing* it was on the preferred alignment for MAX. Now they want to cry wolf… oh, we have to save the children!! Sorry, I’m not buying it.
Regarding commuter rail to Salem via Milwaukie, OC, Canby, Woodburn, Keiser… I’m 100% for that, and now is the time to plan and build it. However, Erik, not as a substitute for MAX to Milwaukie, and ultimately OC, but in addition to MAX. Commuter rail cannot serve the “horrible, horrible unincorporated suburbs between Milwaukie and Oregon City”. The best way to encourage higher densities in this area is to incorporate light rail along the McLoughlin corridor and change the zoning to allow high densities at station areas.
The fine people of Oak Grove and Jennings Lodge may take exception to your description of their neighborhoods as “horrible, horrible”. Also, Gladstone is incorporated, and in fact, 2011 is their 100 year anniversary.
Aaron & Erik –
Not everyone in “horrible, horrible” Oak Grove is opposed to light rail. I grew up there, my parents still live there. As a kid, I rode my bike along the old rail alignment – everyone I knew at the time was aware that trains used to run there and might run again someday.
Support and/or opposition will boil down to specific proposals and alignments.
– Bob R.
I don’t think the people who live in Oak Grove think of their neighborhoods as “horrible, horrible”, rather I think they enjoy it as it is an unincorporated area, with lower taxes and more property freedoms than other areas. There aren’t massive 20 story towers with no green space, everyone has their own green space, with plenty of room for the kids to grow up; and homes are less expensive.
It is Metro/TriMet/urban planners who despise Oak Grove, for the exact same reasons. Less expensive homes = less property tax revenue. Green space = less density (and less property tax revenue). More freedoms = less support for transit.
Gladstone, on the other hand, is only a couple thousand people. There’s a vast expanse between Gladstone and Milwaukie. Tualatin has over 25,000 people – where is Tualatin’s MAX line to compliment our “Commuter Rail”? (At least Gladstone has multiple bus routes that serve the region with frequent service. Tualatin doesn’t but has a population several times that of Gladstone…)
Agreed. In fact, I’m sure most people in the area are very much for light rail. And with two perfectly feasible alignments (McLoughlin and the old rail alignment), the debate shouldn’t be about whether MAX should be built, but which alignment best serves the communities and the future potential development within those communities. I’m personally partial to the McLoughlin alignment because there are larger developable lots and potential for higher densities. Then the old rail alignment could become a formal hike/bike path.
It is Metro/TriMet/urban planners who despise Oak Grove, for the exact same reasons.
Nonsense. What Metro is working toward is increased density along major transportation corridors, coming from the viewpoint that purely-low-density development is difficult to sustain in the future. Oak Grove, in fact, saw increased development back when an interurban streetcar served the town center.
By the way, the unincorporated area near Oak Grove has a precedent for high density condo towers (8+ stories tall) going back to the 1950’s: See Willamette View Manor.
[Edit: typo in link name corrected]
– Bob R.
Just to clarify, I agree with Bob above.
Erik, I seriously doubt that Metro/TriMet despises Oak Grove because they have large lots and low property values. And who’s to say that there couldn’t be a string of 20-story towers along McLoughlin at some point in the future. But to get to that point, we’ll need MAX in that corridor to support the density.
Having two streetcar routes emerging from downtown Milwaukie would be cheaper and provide twice the service that the proposed MAX route would. The line northward could split at SE Tacoma St. with one route going over the Sellwood Bridge and another continuing somewhere up the eastside to connect at OMSI.
If there is a need for extra capacity at peak commuter times, simply run more cars and park them the rest of the day so that they don’t wear out as fast.
Eventually a streetcar could link Milwaukie to LAke Oswego over an existing bridge and also provide an outlet for residents of Willamette View Manor. There could possibly be a line from Milwaukie out to Clackamas TC on an existing right of way. Extending also to Oregon City would be relatively cost effective
This two route system would enable all the potential residential and infill development needed for that area. This has already been amply demonstrated in the Pearl District to SOWA corridor.
And who’s to say that there couldn’t be a string of 20-story towers along McLoughlin at some point in the future.
Who’s to say that Tualatin won’t, either? But there is a very clearly articulated opposition (on this forum) to furthering transit options in Tualatin.
On the other hand, who is to suggest that McLoughlin will remain as is, because its residents don’t want to incorporate or grow? Damascus voted out TriMet, Bull Mountain turned down incorporation, and there are several communities (namely, Durham, Maywood Park and Rivergrove) that incorporated so that they could have a voice against county/regional decisions and not simply become another neighborhood of a larger city. Gladstone is clearly humming to its own tune.
Is Aloha better off because it got MAX, and has three bus routes (52, 57 and 88)? TV Highway and Farmington Road are still extremely congested, and there are no jobs in Aloha (other than a lone Intel campus, and a few retail establishments).
I don’t recall anyone saying that Tualitan shouldn’t have high density development, towers or otherwise. Or more transit options, for that matter. Your other statements (about whether or not areas have incorporated) aren’t really pertinant to regional transportation decisions. Wilsonville opted out of TriMet, but they’re still getting commuter rail service. I hadn’t heard about Damascus opting out, but they’ll likely still be getting an extension of MAX via Clackamas and/or Foster Rd.
Aloha, like Bull Mtn, had a chance to incorporate and turned it down. Now Aloha is being divided up between Beaverton and Hillsboro. Bull Mtn will be swallowed by Tigard. Neither eventuality will affect Metro’s regional transportation planning.
But there is a very clearly articulated opposition (on this forum) to furthering transit options in Tualatin.
Oh, come on now… who here has opposed “furthering transit options” in Tualatin? Please link to an example of this “clearly articulated” opposition.
– Bob R.
Having two streetcar routes emerging from downtown Milwaukie would be cheaper and provide twice the service that the proposed MAX route would.
I don’t think either one of those two statements is correct. Streetcar and light rail serve different types of trips. A light rail line is going to provide much better connections to the entire region with its own right of way and limited stops. Streetcar functions best as a circulator for local trips with frequent stops and sharing its ROW.
We can see what happens to MAX downtown when it tries to function as both a circulator and a regional transit system. And it still operates in its own right-of-way.
A streetcar operation is too slow and low capacity to be used to move people between regional centers except in very limited situations. Lake Oswego may be an example of the exception. There is an existing dedicated right-of-way for a relatively low volume of demand and an existing streetcar line that can be extended to provide regional service.
Milwaukie warrants MAX service. It will have the ridership and it is a transit hub for a large section of the region that is currently underserved.
“I don’t think either one of those two statements is correct. Streetcar and light rail serve different types of trips. A light rail line is going to provide much better connections to the entire region with its own right of way and limited stops. Streetcar functions best as a circulator for local trips with frequent stops and sharing its ROW.”
This is purely based upon stop spacing, frequency, speed, and separation from traffic in differentiating what you define as ‘service.’
Both streetcar vehicles and light rail vehicles can both operate as streetcars, light-rail, and even as a metro. The main difference of the vehicles is their capacity, as they can both travel at about the same speed.
However, in the city of Portland, there has been a decision to operate the Skoda/Trio cars as circulators with ridiculously close stop spacing, and the lightrail vehicles ALSO as circulator streetcar service within downtown and the Lloyd District. We do not have any rapid-transit service in the central city.
OK, so why is Metro interested in an area that is NOT DEFINED by its very own 2040 Growth Concept and furthering transportation options (namely: Oak Grove); while it is clearly neglecting ANY plans for areas that ARE DEFINED (namely: Tualatin)?
http://www.metro-region.org/article.cfm?ArticleID=15318
I’ve offered a proposal for a MAX route that would connect Portland with Hillsdale (a designated 2040 Growth Concept town center), Multnomah Village (a significant neighborhood), Garden Home (a significant neighborhood), Washington Square (a designated 2040 Growth Concept Regional Center), Tigard (a designated 2040 Growth Concept town center), and Tualatin (a designated 2040 Growth Concept Town Center).
Metro and TriMet, on the other hand, have chosen to explore transportation options that don’t even connect as many “town centers” or “regional centers”, and serve an area that has no local planning. (Oak Grove)
Milwaukie warrants MAX service. It will have the ridership and it is a transit hub for a large section of the region that is currently underserved.
Based on what? Do 33 line busses run standing room only? And the 99? And all of the other busses that run through Milwaukie?
How many busses serve the heart of Oak Grove? (I count three, plus an express bus.) Can you walk a mile without touching a bus line? How about a half mile? Based on TriMet’s own maps, the distance between the 32, 33 and 34 lines is about 3/4s of a mile at its widest point, but more typically 1/2 mile or less. There is an area between the 32 line and the 29/31 lines that is wider – but MAX wouldn’t serve these individuals anyways (they’d need a bus connection no matter what).
So I’m very lost as to the “under-served” opinion that is stated; Oak Grove, for not even being a city, seems to be on a map very darn well served by adequate, frequent service bus service. If “under-served” means anything with a bus (God forbid!), then I expect a LONG LINE of people from this forum to line up and DEMAND immediate construction of MAX lines everywhere, including Tualatin and Sherwoood.
Or, we can be more sensible, and use more appropriate, cost-effective, neighborhood friendly bus routes.
Erik –
I think you may be confusing current plans with hypothetical future plans, including ideas offered up in the comments here, but not Metro…
The current Milwaukie light rail proposal does not go to Oak Grove, it ends at the south end of downtown Milwaukie (a town center.)
Any future service to Oak Grove would be due to extending a line to Oregon City (a regional center) which would also serve Gladstone (a town center), or a future extension to Lake Oswego (a town center). Either route would happen to pass through Oak Grove, which makes it important to study and plan, but it is not the sole or primary reason to have such a route.
Regarding your earlier comment about Aloha and MAX, I’ve had difficulty finding a boundary map online, but from this Metro map of the Aloha Town Center area, it appears that MAX does not actually serve Aloha. Google Maps puts MAX over 1 mile away from the northern boundary shown on the Metro map.
– Bob R.
Do 33 line busses run standing room only? And the 99? And all of the other busses that run through Milwaukie?
I can’t speak for all the routes, but I have ridden both 33’s and 99’s which were indeed SRO, and were bogged down in rush hour traffic. The 34 is infrequent and underutilized, but it serves a number of schools and retirement communities and is likely more cost-effective than the paratransit which would have to replace it were it to be discontinued.
(Disclaimer: As a kid, the #34 was my primary bus, and these days it runs by my parent’s property, so I have a personal interest in seeing it continued, but I must admit it seems pretty empty much of the time.)
– Bob R.
This is purely based upon stop spacing, frequency, speed, and separation from traffic in differentiating what you define as ‘service.’
True enough. Those are important distinctions between light rail and MAX. You can blur that distinction, but once you start talking about operating streetcar with limited stops in its own ROW you have all the same costs as the higher capacity light rail line.
Both streetcar vehicles and light rail vehicles can both operate as streetcars, light-rail, and even as a metro. The main difference of the vehicles is their capacity, as they can both travel at about the same speed.
I think MAX has a higher operational speed, but I doubt that is all that significant. The main distinction between the vehicles is their capacity and their design.
How come this nice thread about Milwaukie turned into a tread about Tualitan? And how come this keeps happening? I don’t mind discussing Tualitan, but this thread is supposed to be about Milwaukie light rail…
Bob. R. and Ross W. keep trotting out the same tired arguments about how light rail and streetcar will fill different niches. Who gave you the right to define what the niche is and where? This should be done by economic calculation, not be how many politicians can jump aboard a bandwagon. The popular sentiment in Milwaukie, to my understanding, has been against the light rail, but some enterprising politicians, not wanting to play second fiddle to the rest of the Portland area, have cajoled up this “groundswell” of support for the Milwaukie MAX and enlisted Tri Met employees as omsbudsmen to the public.
Explain how one MAX line, which for all intents and purposes would be analogous to the riderless Yellow Line, would be more cost effective than a two route system tying into well used lines and going to rapidly densifying areas? Explain why Milwaukie and environs should not have an easy connection to SOWA, OHSU, and Lake OSwego, and not just up to the Rose Quarter TC. Explain what the cost will be to extend MAX to Oregon City, so that taxpayers will understand what lies ahead.
“A light rail line is going to provide much better connections to the entire region with its own right of way and limited stops.”
Indeed stops on the Milwaukie MAX will be limited, as far as I can see, since a great portion of the route goes through parkland. No point in picking up just a few people is there?
“The main distinction between the vehicles is their capacity and their design.”
I agree the capacity is now rather limited. Can’t Portlanders come up with a way to improve that? I thought we were leading the nation in transportation solutions. Besides, running vehicles more frequently will be a bonus for the public. I’m getting rather tired of this argument, because we go over the same points repeatedly.
Bob. R. and Ross W. keep trotting out the same tired arguments about how light rail and streetcar will fill different niches. Who gave you the right to define what the niche is and where?
Although I had not made any arguments about light rail and streetcar filling various niches in this thread (but I’ll start), it is my right as a citizen to do so, same as yours.
This should be done by economic calculation, not be how many politicians can jump aboard a bandwagon.
Can I assume then that you’ve done the economic calculations to come to your conclusions, which you have been arguing here? If not, then you’re in the same boat as a lot of us.
Explain why Milwaukie and environs should not have an easy connection to SOWA, OHSU, and Lake OSwego, and not just up to the Rose Quarter TC.
Much of the debate about the Caruthers Crossing, which is part of the Milwaukie Light Rail proposal, is how to best connect with South Waterfront (and by extension, the tram and OHSU).
The Milwaukie Light Rail proposal does not currently go “just up to the rose quarter” but will in fact be a Yellow Line extension serving the entire transit mall plus N. Portland all the way to the Expo Center, as well as portions of inner SE Portland and the South Waterfront and Riverplace districts. (And someday all the way to Vancouver, I hope.)
I’m getting rather tired of this argument, because we go over the same points repeatedly.
Perhaps the way past this impasse (if it is really an impasse) is through participation in the upcoming city-wide transit corridor planning process which will identify transit corridors and potential streetcar routes within some of those corridors. This process will occur later this summer and will likely conclude prior to Milwaukie LR being fully greenlighted.
That would be a great opportunity to prioritize other routes such as Milwaukie Ave., a future Sellwood Bridge crossing, etc.
I’m not sure why you think I’m opposed to streetcar service to those places… I just think LRT is the more appropriate mode for connecting regional and town centers, given (here it comes) light rail’s faster speed and greater capacity.
– Bob R.
Explain what the cost will be to extend MAX to Oregon City, so that taxpayers will understand what lies ahead.
Other than the cost of the vehicles, I’m not sure the cost would be very different for MAX vs. Streetcar in this corridor segment.
The route would likely either use ROW along SE McLoughlin, in which case costs would be primarily focused on property acquisition, or the existing ROW about halfway between McLoughlin and River Rd, in which case the type of trackwork would be nearly identical between Streetcar and MAX, or perhaps along highway 224.
The Streetcar’s main trackway cost advantage comes from being able to use a shallow trackbed in existing city streets, along with less utility relocation.
The route to OC would feature mostly newly developed ROW, not in-street construction. Furthermore, the current streetcar vehicles, were they to run in-street, would not even keep up with the current speed limits on McLoughlin.
None of the routes has a significant need for overpasses or grade-separated ROW, so the lighter weights of streetcar vehicles wouldn’t have much impact on that kind of infrastructure cost.
– Bob R.
“The popular sentiment in Milwaukie, to my understanding, has been against the light rail, but some enterprising politicians, not wanting to play second fiddle to the rest of the Portland area, have cajoled up this “groundswell” of support for the Milwaukie MAX and enlisted Tri Met employees as omsbudsmen to the public.” -Ron Swaren
The “enterprising politicians” are not the ones who didn’t want to play second fiddle, it’s the citizens of Milwaukie who were opposed to being left out of the MAX system. The politicians are typically reactive, not proactive. My guess is that there really IS a groundswell of support for MAX to Milwaukie, if for no other reason, because if there was ANY significant opposition to it, THAT would be ALL we hear about. And the Tribune would be all over it like white on rice. I’m actually surprised we haven’t heard more from John Charles and the CPI crowd about the evils of Milwaukie MAX. (knock on wood)
I agree the capacity is now rather limited. Can’t Portlanders come up with a way to improve that?
They did. Its called MAX. It can fit more people into each car and it moves them more efficiently because of fewer stops and dedicated ROW. Those all increase the capacity and lower the operating costs.
There are many of us who have businesses in downtown Milwaukie that are forward thinking enough to know that the revitalization that Milwaukie seeks will be helped along by the Max line running through downtown (main st).
The current “locally preferred” alignment has the Max run through the “backs” of neighborhoods, through two school yards and a lumber yard. That alignment will not encourage people to spend time in Milwaukie but only to pass through it. We are happy to have the support of the Waldorf and St. Johns community in encouraging a fresh look at the alignment. There are many technological difficulties to the current plan that aren’t being discussed, not the least of which is the subterranean crossing of the current RR in an area where the water table is about four feet below the surface.
I think there’s a legitimate concern that the northern station is further removed (3 or 4 blocks) from Main St (the Waldorf station), but not the southern station, which is right at Main St.
Regarding the undercrossing below the water table though, that is not at all technically difficult. In fact, it’s done in just about every city in the world, for both rail and roads.
Mark –
Have local business owners and residents considered, as part of the revival of alternatives, the possibility of light rail operating on a couplet of Main and SE21st Ave?
Such a route would be the most logical straight-line route, giving the most access to the core of downtown Milwaukie. (There doesn’t seem to be a lot of room to run both directions on Main St., and running one direction along McLoughlin may not be practical either given the recent redevelopment.)
The SE21st and Main tracks would converge at Lake Rd.
Of course, there would be problems to solve: 21st doesn’t go through on the north side… the tracks would have to go behind the health club and likely would have to cut through the Pietro’s/bowling alley parking lots.
Just a thought.
– Bob R.
A recent Tribune article stated that, although crime is down overall in our metropolitan area, robbery in the streets is up 25%. As anecdotes they share two incidents near a Max line, where they state most of these incidents are occuring. Sad, but true. We need to figure out how to help these young people. In the meantime, Max needs watchful eyes as much as possible around stations.
TriMet regularly advises that the best deterrent to crime is having people around. A Main St./21st St. alignment in Milwaukie would help keep those statistical numbers lower as stations would be located in the higher density areas indicated by Milwaukie’s Downtown Plan.
Portland to Milwaukie Light Rail is NOT needed, and a big waste of money. Milwaukie is a residential area, a quiet small town with a thriving business community. I think the Mayor is out to ruin the charm of this town. Look at the large condo type units next to the city library. As if that wasn’t planned ahead of time….
I would rather focus on Portland Metro fixing Selwood Bridge, which is restricted now from large trucks and busses. If we could have that fixed, it would create a great deal of transportation.
Also, if those new sky scrapers (condos) in downtown Portland need additional transportation, send the light rail their way, NOT to Milwaukie.
The Portland area MAX, Light Rail system, has always brought danger and violence as far as I can remember. I know someone who was beat up nearly 20 years ago and I heard someone was beat up just last year in 2007.
I am concerned about the light rail being next to the local school and church.