Hard to argue the hard fact that crime has increased, no matter how some may want to spin it. Expect the Sheriff to make few friends among other elected types when bringing anything forward other than good news about mass transit.

Are you suggesting that criminals will use the slowest form of transportation in the city to get to and away from the scenes of their crimes?

I'm no fan of the MAX, but the whole argument that every increase in crime on the increasingly shady east side of Portland is the result of it is getting tired. Crime has dropped along Interstate since the Yellow Line went in--but that isn't a result of the MAX line decreasing crime. The Clackamas Town Center has been a craphole for some time now. In my neighborhood the sketchy criminals just ride the bus--but I don't blame the bus routes everytime we have another incident of shots fired near a bus stop.

“Our community sets the tone. Our residents care about what goes on in their community and they call us. And when they call, we respond.”

The city also has the ability to prosecute crimes at its municipal court, an ability many other jurisdictions do not have.

“I am confident in LO that we aren’t going to have any major issues at all with whatever option might be chosen. We’re safe,” said Forman.
====

In Lake BigEgo, we are special. We are different here, we care about our town. Unlike the losers in other parts of Portland Metro, we are safe. And special. And different. But mostly, we are just plain better than the rest.

Portland's vehemently denied what experts around the country have known for a long time: transit increases crime, for several reasons. For example:

www.uctc.net/papers/550.pdf

From that publication:

Transit crime is a well known but underreported trend in urban centers. Criminologists agree that public transit tends to frame opportunities for crime, as it moves large proportions of high-risk populations around the city, along a limited number of paths and destination points.

Specifically, *light rail* transit is the worst. The data is there, easy to access, and known across the country.

I'm indifferent about the street car, but I find the argument that it would significantly increase crime to be absurd. In Chicago, Boston and many other cities, the subways, street cars, elevated trains, etc., all serve communities that are a lot wealthier than Lake Oswego. I lived in Coolidge Corner, in Brookline, for years. I never heard any concerns that the subway was bringing in too many criminals. What it brought in were commuters, mainly, but also a few customers for the local shops.

Crime isn't even the primary issue here.
They are:
1) We don't have the money to squander
2) If we did, it could be better spent elsewhere
3) In what universe does it make sense to put in a streetcar or lightrail to one of the wealthiest pocket communities in Oregon where most residents drive, would rather drive and object to the streetcar or lightrail project?

The terminus is at Safeway which doesn't even help Marylhurst students who might want to ride it. It's still a hefty walk from downtown Lake O to the Marylhurst campus.

I don't understand this project at all and have to believe that it's some insane combination of contractor gravy and a lemming-like leap at "use it now or lose it" matching federal funding.

It's not just the transit. The density infill that is the real agenda of the streetcar (and MAX nowadays) is going to result in the construction of junk housing that the people who currently live in L.O. would never want. And with it is going to come a brand of resident that they haven't met yet.

Exactly - LOL - I can picture these new denizens hanging out at Bishop's Close, at one of the country clubs or in the emerald-green acreage of a carefully manicured Dunthorpe estate. Where, exactly, will even the smallest ticky-tacky condo fit between downtown and Lake O along this route?

Gibby said, "Expect the Sheriff to make few friends among other elected types when bringing anything forward other than good news about mass transit."

Yeah and the Sheriff and Clack.Co. Fire Chief both got grief after they both commented at a public TriMet board meeting opposing the funding for Milwaukie Light Rail that uses Urban Renewal financing.

They tell the truth and the county commissioners throw a tantrum.
Those county commissioners are no better than Adams.

While LOPD Acting Chief Don Forman is a nice guy, he isn't the smartest guy around. He is just repeating the lines LO Mayor Jack "Streetcar" Hoffman feeds him in hopes he will become the new chief in LO. Pretty pathetic really...

I lived in LO in the early 60's and then they complained about Okies. So the prissy comments about "How special" fall on deaf ears here.

Jack,

I don't know how you write all this anti-urban, transit fear mongering balderdash, and yet still see yourself as "progressive."

Transit is good and it is a fundamentally urban transportation mode, and nothing could be better for the environment.

I understand the reticence to support (expensive!) streetcar projects.

But there is are existing and un-used streetcar tracks and right of way that travel--right now as I type these words--between Portland and Lake Oswego. Just go walk them some time. I sure hope we can make use of those tracks at a price that makes sense. We ought to be able to. (The east side line is another story (of waste))

Finally, there is already "dense" housing in downtown Lake O. And guess what: It's nice and people want to live there, and it gives the downtown a nice feel. Please don't blame planners for real estate that sells. It's not all 5 story mc-apartments with subway on the ground floor.

If "progressive" means spending money that we don't have on another streetcar while the Sellwood Bridge falls down, then I'm proud to say I'm not "progressive."

Transit makes sense. But we have transit. It's called a bus. It's cheaper than a train and no less harmful to the environment. It works fine -- or it did, until we started dismantling it for trains and toys.

Just because there are tracks doesn't mean there needs to be a passenger train on them. Look at WES. Colossal freakin' disaster.

If you don't think the streetcar is going to bring the same particle board-Subway-boxy garbage to L.O. that it did to Portland, you're free to indulge in that hope. As for whether the people in L.O. want more apartment dwellers around, in the absence of any reliable empirical data I'd intuit that the majority don't. But hey, I haven't lived there in 18 years -- maybe they've changed.

phil P, you're wrong that a new trolley line to L0 will be going down the "existing and unused" tracks. In a good share of the Johns Landing area the tracks are proposed to do down 43-SW Macadam. Talk about congestion, now with over 38,000 vehicle trips per day and an additional 32,000 if SoWhat is ever built out, it will be a disaster.

And does it really make sense to place height and density that trolley's call for right along our river? Metro Planning!

I'll bet Phil thinks WES was a savvy idea with some new shiny commuter rail cars running on an existing rail line along with every other bald faced lie.

Like it goes to the wonderful transit oriented development Villebois and stops at Washington Square etc.

Neither are true and every single rail, tie, ballast and crossing had to be replaced for WES along with added spurs and a long term maintenance agreement.

The same things will be required for the streetcar. That's why it costs $1/2 billion.

"fear mongering" is a hoot Phil. If you knew how insolvent TriMet is and how close we are to having NO transit you'd be pissed.

We have Metro admitting the Green Line was built in the wrong location. Imagine what that means.

The relative small pocket of "density" in downtown Lake O is not the kind of density that is transit supporting. The amount of people in that small pocket who would use it regularly is far less than WES.

Downtown LO doesn't need a costly toy train for it to feel good.

I spent a number of years working in retail. It was well known that shoplifters would steal something from one store on or near a Max line and get on Max and refund that same stolen product at another store at the end of the line. Rip something off from XYZ in Lloyd Center and return at XYZ in Gresham an hour later.

And I think I read something a year or so ago about a woman or maybe two from LO who had a pretty hefty shoplifting deal going. Maybe running up to six figures.

Lee:And does it really make sense to place height and density that trolley's call for right along our river? Metro Planning!

No it does not make sense unless the plan is to redo every inch of our area until we no longer recognize the place. Please stop this before we have lost all the charm and character of what was once our City of Roses.

This whole idea of stuffing people in through the propagandized plan the community for the most part initially bought on this UGB, I see is backfiring.
I have brought this up before -
Extreme Sprawl = Negative Horizontal
Extreme Density = Negative Vertical
There were other options.

By the way, the transit and the density plan here has been harmful to the environment as groves of huge trees have been cut been cut time and time again for developments throughout our city. How green is that?

clinamen... didn't you learn anything from Prez Raygun who in 1981 famously said "Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do."

LucsAdvo,
I tell you what I did learn, we were going into a world of hurt with a quote like that from our Prez.

I learned how to deal with shock then, just couldn't believe what was happening, and suppose we could say all that was a preview to prepare us - look how far we've come!

Clinamen - It was rhetorical but yeah Raygun, Quayle and that ilk was the beginning of scariness that's progressively gotten worse. Palin makes me want to puke and puke

LucsAdvo,
Well get some bags ready. We may be in for it. Keep them in your car in case you hear the news. In jest, we may need more plastic baggies than ever the way things are going.

I was at a reunion recently, most are so disgusted with Congress and didn't matter which party. One telling comment was that we were so busy and asleep at the wheel. What has happened to our country?

Phil P: But there is are existing and un-used streetcar tracks and right of way that travel--right now as I type these words--between Portland and Lake Oswego. Just go walk them some time. I sure hope we can make use of those tracks at a price that makes sense. We ought to be able to.

Phil, I think WES is a perfect example of being sold something on the cheap, only to find that it is much, much more expensive than it appears to be.

WES was sold to the public on the premise that "there's a train track there, let's use it for a passenger train." Well, there's just one little problem.

Just like you can't put 20,000 trucks doing 55 MPH on a quiet residential street - just because there's a railroad track there doesn't mean it's suitable for a different use. The WES tracks were fine for the occasional slow moving (20 MPH) freight train, but not for high speed passenger service. Woodchips and lumber don't care about sway, hunting and jointed rail, but people do. The light rail/commuter rail/streetcar supporters love to chime in on how great rail is and how awful bus rides are...riding a train on bad track is worse than any bad bus ride can be.

In the end, building WES (which, by the way, was sold to us as an $80 million project; it ended up costing $161 million) required completely removing the existing rail infrastructure and rebuilding it from the subroadbed up. Every rock, every tie, every tie plate, and every rail is brand new. Nearly all of the crossing signals are brand new, even though most of the crossings already had signals. A brand new signal system had to be installed. It's for all intents and purposes a brand spankin' new railroad that just happened to have been built where an old railroad used to be.

The Willamette Shores Line, a.k.a. the Jefferson Street Branch, is in far worse condition than the WES line was. Even the tourist trolley that currently uses the line can't go more than 10-15 MPH, and when riding the trolley you feel the joints and the car swaying from side to side. The trolley must come to a complete stop at each and every road crossing. And the right-of-way has been encroached on in many places - there are homeowners who must walk across the tracks just to get to the front door of their home; or when they open their garage door - just backing up the car requires crossing the tracks. That is simply unacceptable for a streetcar line in which a streetcar will pass every 7 1/2 minutes.

The short answer is that this project will not be cheap. And Lake Oswego simply does not - and will not - have the critical mass needed to make a streetcar line successful. Lake Oswego is not going to see Pearl District/South Waterfront/Downtown/San Francisco/Seattle/Vancouver/New York/Amsterdam style density. It's a small town. The route between Lake Oswego and John's Landing is simply not suitable for dense development; it's barely suitable for the type of development that it has right now. And the leading proposal is actually not to use the right-of-way, but instead use Highway 43 as the route - which would be even more expensive as not only are we building a railroad - we're also rebuilding a road. (Not to mention, we would forfeit the railroad right-of-way under federal law, and the adjacent landowners would automatically receive title to the right-of-way next to their property. It will NEVER be used as a bike trail. In fact, there is a legal reason why the tourist trolley runs on the track.)

Jack is right on all counts. My spouse and I have lived in LO for over 80 years combined. We like(d) the small town feel of the city, and though we didn't always fit in with the wealthy set, most everyone we have dealt with over the years has been very nice.

We can't believe what has happened to our city government in the last few years. Instead of serving the citizens, the mayor and most councilors have jumped on the legacy bandwagon and, like Portland's elected officials, are wannabe developers using OPM. They have an insatiable desire to manipulate and make over the city to fit their vision, which happens to look a lot like Portland's (with fewer bikes).

In October's Portland Magazine, an article makes it appear that Lake Oswegan's are for the streetcar while those living in Dunthorpe are against it. This is far from the truth. Most LO residents, when given the facts, are appalled to learn that this is happening here. Not that we are so special (despite what self-proclaimed LO mouthpiece Ellie McPeak says), but that we are a small town and don't need, want, or can afford such expensive, expansive silliness.

To read some serious criticism of the streetcar proposal from Lake Oswegans, check out the link to a guest column in the LO Review this week. (Link below.) Serious Lake Oswegans are very afraid of a city government, driven by city "staff" (mostly rabid planners), a developer wannabe (Mayor Hoffman) desiring a legacy and a plaque memorializing his "vision", groups of citizens and councilors who have been dazzled by their assumed importance and appointments to committees at Metro and City Hall, transportation bigwigs, bureaucrats and consultants who want to expand their kingdoms and preserve their jobs, and finally, the consultants and developers who feed at the public trough. We are afraid that working together they might just win. We are afraid that this train wreck might be unstoppable. We are afraid of losing our quiet city. This is lunacy, and hopefully in November, Lake Oswegans will turn this around before it is too late. If we don't, it isn't because we want the streetcar or tacky condos in Foothills, or the Sensitive Lands ordinances -- it is because most people just want to be left alone to lead their lives and wrongly assume that their government won't harm them.

Streetcar: What it delivers, what it costs
http://www.lakeoswegoreview.com/opinion/story.php?story_id=128580270859732000

I don't know how you write all this anti-urban, transit fear mongering balderdash, and yet still see yourself as "progressive."

When did "transit" become an integral part of "progressive"? That doesn't even make sense--unless you're selling transit.

Transit is good and it is a fundamentally urban transportation mode, and nothing could be better for the environment.

Not all transit is alike--and there's a stunning lack of evidence for your claim about the environment.

I understand the reticence to support (expensive!) streetcar projects.

Then why not explain clearly why it's worth it to spend for it?

But there is are existing and un-used streetcar tracks and right of way that travel--right now as I type these words--between Portland and Lake Oswego.

There are *no* "unused streetcar tracks" between PDX and LKO. You might be cnfused about what kind of tracks are required for light rail.

Finally, there is already "dense" housing in downtown Lake O. And guess what: It's nice and people want to live there, and it gives the downtown a nice feel.

Which is all your opinion, just like Jack's is his.

Part of the problem with MAX is that the system isn't "closed". When someone gets on a bus, they have to pay the fare. On MAX, a person is supposed to have a ticket to even stand on the platform, proving they've paid. Problem is, there are no turnstiles or control of who rides the train. Therefore, it becomes free. Fare inspectors issue written warnings to those they catch without a ticket. Second offense may result in an exclusion from the system. Third offense may result in the person being arrested for interfering with public transportation (a misdemeanor charge).

Part of the reason for the change in the crime rate on the Green Line is arrests for that charge - persons warned multiple times for not paying or creating other problems, who were then told to leave and not come back for one year. Of course they continue to ride and create havoc, and are eventually arrested.

Tri Met figured this out, and as part of the P.R. war has cut fare inspectors and Wackenhut security, and ordered transit officers (sworn personnel) to stop arresting people for interfering with public transit. Fewer enforcement personnel + lack of enforcement will equal a drop or flat line in crime along the line. That's a really shady way to do it - they've ignored the stats for years and years. Now that everyone has seen via empirical proof that the emperor has no clothes, Tri-Met goes about it a different way.

MAX doesn't pay for itself and has no chance if half of the people who ride it don't even pay the minimal fare. Absolutely zero percent of any MAX ticket fee is designated for security or law enforcement along the line. Tri-Met tries to play a game of semantics and denies the people they are importing into target rich communities are creating problems. Yes, it might be a small percentage of the total ridership, but it's something.

Clackamas County commissioners Ann Leninger (Lake Oswego) and Lynn Peterson (Lake Oswego) are vocal proponents of mass transit and are planning to use urban renewal to bring it to the community across the river from them (Milwaukie south to Gladstone, along McLoughlin Blvd). Lake Oswego residents should be relieved at least they're just getting a streetcar rammed down their throats, instead of a MAX line/Urban Renewal scam which will cut money from the county general fund, result in cuts in services and increase crime.

Nolo:We can't believe what has happened to our city government in the last few years. Instead of serving the citizens, the mayor and most councilors have jumped on the legacy bandwagon and, like Portland's elected officials, are wannabe developers using OPM. They have an insatiable desire to manipulate and make over the city to fit their vision, which happens to look a lot like Portland's (with fewer bikes).

Do not let your community be changed in negative ways. We do not live in Lake Oswego, but visit and appreciate that there is a nice place we can still go to get away from the Portland scene.

Are those who are now in your city government newer people in your community?
Elections put these current decision makers in place. Would they still get votes?

If your city government is like Portland, then do not depend on any council hearings to serve democracy. We can have council chambers filled with people saying No and our Council does otherwise. Citizens may think they have a council member on their side and then at the last minute tells them that despite giving consideration, in the final analysis will vote with the rest.

Recall did not work in Portland unfortunately and things have become even more negative. But a Recall could work in a smaller community. If the direction of this plan is moving away from what the citizens want, you may want to consider it rather than wait.

Nolo: "My spouse and I have lived in LO for over 80 years combined."

clinamen: "Are those who are now in your city government newer people in your community?"
----

Newer?? I don't think so... I think those couple dozen people in city government have been in LO for at least 5 years each, so about 120 years combined. Which is 50% more combined years than Nolo and his wife.

The longevity factor is god for reflecting on the vision that has been the driving force for development in LO for many years. Until recently, LO has tried to build and/or maintain a small village atmosphere - very accessible and welcoming.

The problems come from the state and Metro imposing their will on every level of government and its citizens. The admonition that growth will happen and everyone must prepare for it with dense, infill projects takes away the self-determination that each locale wants to make for itself.

Now we have local officials bowing to regional and state pressure (and doing business with developers using OPM) to make over towns and rural areas into something some anonymous hacks have decided and codified into Comprehensive Plans. These are where the "community values" are defined, and how they will be expressed. Never mind that 90% of the citizens have never seen or heard of the comprehensive plan - it is what the community wants and will have (damn it anyway).

No wonder that when citizens go to city council meetings and have their protests shot down, they don't realize that they are about 10-20 years too late. The planning has been going on for too long and involved too many layers of government that local citizens really don't have a say anymore in how their towns and cities will function. The old timers can only wish for a return to a less complex world where towns and cities really had a hope of self-determination.

I keep waiting for our elected officials to stand up to Metro or the State and say the plans are not what our community wants. I am waiting for these councilors & mayor to fight FOR us, not AGAINST us using the Comprehensive Plan and Metro rules as a whip rather than a tool. I'm waiting, but until then, we'll vote for the candidates who seem to know that they are their to serve US and not the state.

I think it's a little late to keep out the "particle board-Subway-boxy garbage". There's plenty of it already there. They might be a little bigger than the Portland boxes and they might cost twice as much but there are McMansions shoved cheek-to-jowl onto flag lots all over the city. And a lot of it's built with the same "quality" you get in Portland infill.

It was well known that shoplifters would steal something from one store on or near a Max line and get on Max and refund that same stolen product at another store at the end of the line.

Because someone with a car would never do such a thing.

Nolo,
Very well stated.
Yes the plan had been put in place for years in ways that tie us in knots.
However, there were instances where codes were in place here in Portland, but the city would allow "adjustments" anyway, and good planning codes that stood in the way were changed. For example, do the people know that in our "supposed" green city that in order to allow more infill, when solar access standards were brought up to prevent some development, the city would just ignore those standards? Do not know the latest status; however, I believe that eventually those standards were deleted.

clinamen - plastic baggies? is that a drug reference? sorry, the 70s are long over for me. Being ready to roll is not a bad idea but Mexico is dangerous and in chaos and I doubt that the Canucks would welcome us.... which is why I have a fishing pole and gear and a gun and ammo (though nothing like some of the private militia types who frequent this site). If I were smart, I should buy a shotgun (since that's what I grew up game hunting with (obviously back East)) and have bird shells and deer slugs in stock.

There was a year long experiment done back in 1990, in my home town of Austin. As this was before the internet age, documentation is hard to find except for the odd PDF, but it's out there if you dig. Very famous study, actually.

What was done, was to make the entire bus system free at the point of entry, for over one straight year, from October of '89 through Dec of '90. Totally taxpayer subsidized...and as this was in Texas, which has a sales tax instead of an income tax, it was fairly democratic in principle, in that everyone who purchased taxable goods...including malt liquor and cheap wine...helped to pay for the operation of the bus system, if only a tiny bit.

I was 18 at the time. Thought it was the greatest thing ever. The problem was, from the viewpoint of the City government, that the experiment was a resounding failure. Crime rates soared on the buses and everywhere near them. Vagrants passed out in the back, looking for free air conditioning in the summer and heat in the winter, peeing their pants and vomiting all over the place. High school kids skipped school and joy-rode all day, as did many others.

Officials at Capital Metro described the cost of operation in a fare-free system as
“staggering”

I vividly remember seeing all this, but...again...I was one of the "joy riding youths" the study referred to. We thought it wonderful that on a hot day, you could just hop on a nice cool bus and tour the town for nothing.

Interestingly, the fare operators nearly revolted. In the words of the study,

"...in the Austin, Texas experiment, officials claim that
transit operators came close to “insurrection” as their transit system became flooded with truant
school children, vagrants, and other “dubious categories” of passengers (People for Modern
Transit Technical Committee, 2001).

Here is a PDF which references the experiment I'm talking about, I'm sure there are others if you dig:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CCgQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dot.state.fl.us%2Fresearch-center%2FCompleted_Proj%2FSummary_PTO%2FFDOT_BC137_38_FF_rpt.pdf&ei=ov6nTMCgDMSblge3sc3gDQ&usg=AFQjCNGxgE4_yarla7xZ4IPpzNTcHsYJOQ&sig2=_fnZMKyYBlzr6rhtEwEfMA

Another interesting thing about "density" that Jack mentions and others have commented on, is the misconception about "density" as practiced by Planners.

I was involved in the 1980-1990's Macadam Plan District planning that is the plan that covers the Johns Landing area along SW Macadam. Portland planners insisted that with the improvements to SW Macadam with a boulevard effect, that more density was needed-higher Floor Area Ratio, higher heights, less parking, more street frontage buildings.

The neighborhood association questioned that thinking because even the traffic planners were noting that several intersections were at F-failure. The NA also questioned the increased density requested. We inventoried all the properties in the district and discovered (we suspected it) and proved that the build-out of all properties with the present density zoning (FAR=2:1) was only 1/2 of what the zoning would allow. The Question became-why is CoP increasing density and height when a lot of build out was available?

Planners scoffed at our planning efforts, but we presented our data and asked them to disprove it. They couldn't.

Generally Planning in CoP isn't based on facts but on agenda. Lake Oswego, Dunthorpe and even Johns Landing needs to ask these questions again on density/height.

In actuality, only four additional buildings have been built in Johns Landing in the past twenty years to the maximum density and 35ft max. height. So, even now the density in Johns Landing is barely over the maximum FAR allowed. The Planners have been wrong. And they will be wrong about the trolley to LO if they succeed.

Major correction: in the last paragraph it should read "even now the density in Johns Landing is barely over 1/2 of the maximum FAR allowed."

Generally Planning in CoP isn't based on facts but on agenda.

That sums it up nicely. South Waterfront might be the very best example of that in the past decade.

And if you're Mayor (Vera Katz), you even get a statue of yourself erected in the park for your efforts, while you're still alive.