Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Milwaukie Bay Park topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council weighs river swim access as staff warns of Milwaukie Bay Park funding and permitting gaps
Summary
Milwaukie staff said Milwaukie Bay Park phase 3 will need updated design, new permitting and additional fundraising; councilors asked staff to scope swim access options but agreed not to let the dock proposal delay phase 3 delivery.
City staff told the Milwaukie City Council that Milwaukie Bay Park phase 3, as designed in 2022, is not construction‑ready: earlier land‑use approvals and permits have expired, arborist and environmental studies must be redone, and new tree‑protection and floodplain rules add time and cost.
“Once we get to the point where we're starting construction, you're looking at 11 to 15 months of construction,” Public Works Director Peter Perelli said, adding that the project budget needs updates and staff estimates an additional roughly $40 million will be required to complete the park as designed. He said a $1 million grant application is being submitted and that federal and state grant timelines could push any federally funded construction start to spring 2028.
Council discussion centered on community proposals for swimming access — including buoys, a swim area and a floating swim dock — raised through Metro’s Community Choice and by residents. Council members called swim access an equity issue for residents without air conditioning and urged staff to study options, but many cautioned that a dock would trigger more complex permitting, safety review and higher costs.
Marine and permitting authorities were already flagged by staff as raising safety and navigability concerns: staff said anything below ordinary high water would likely require Army Corps of Engineers, Department of State Lands and Department of Environmental Quality review. Adam Moore, parks manager, noted buoyed swim areas may require permits but likely less scrutiny than a permanent floating dock.
Council directed staff to convene proponents, the Marine Board and permitting agencies, scope a limited technical review (cost and permitting checklist) and return with a staff recommendation at the next quarterly parks check‑in, rather than adding a standalone agenda item immediately. Staff emphasized the council’s “north star” remains delivering phase 3 as efficiently as possible and asked which elements the council would prioritize if additional scope were added.
No formal policy change or appropriation occurred at the meeting; staff will return with a scoped analysis and timeline for how swim access options could be studied without jeopardizing phase 3 schedule.
