Bonita Road - Railroad SERIAL LETTER 119
PUBLIC UTILITY-COMMISSIONER OF OREGON
.
VICTOR ATIYCR LABOR & INDUSTRIES BUILDING, SALEM OREGON 97310 PHONE (503)
GOcERNOR 378 - 6351
•
A
October 11, 1983 '
Larry Rice, Director of Public Works
Washington County
Administration_:Bldg
150 N First Ave
•
Hillsboro OR 97123
•
RE: Roadway Widening of Crossing No. 3E -33.5 and
No. FD- 749..7, SW Bonita Road, Tigard
•
PUC Order No. 77 -436, entered June 29, 1977, in SXF 850,
authorized the alteration of the SW Bonita Road railroad
highway grade crossing and.the tracks of the Southern
Pacific Transportation Company by widening the roadway to
30 feet, consisting of two paved 13 -foot travel lanes and .
• two 2 -foot gravel shoulders, and the installation of auto-
matic protective devices. PUC Order No. 77 -443, entered
June 29, 1977, in SXF 848, authorized the alteration of
SW Bonita Road railroad - highway grade crossing and the
track of Burlington Northern (Oregon - Washington) Inc. in
a similar manner.
•
•
Washington County, by letter dated June 3, 1977, requested
permission to widen the roadway to 30 feet, which was
authorized in the two above -cited orders. Both railroads'
installed the automatic protective devices to accommo- .. .
date the widened. 30 -foot roadway. All signals have been
installed 21 feet from the centerline of the roadway,
the appropriate distance, taking into consideration the
13 -foot paved travel lanes, 2 -foot shoulders, and 6 -foot
distance from the face of guardrail.
The roadway has not been.widened.at either of the two
crossings and the paved portion of the roadway remains at.
less than or equal to 23 feet on each side of each of the
crossings.
By letter dated September.21, 1983, Washington County
stated that widening the roadway would not result in
•
any benefit, that the surface at both BN and SP tracks
would have to be widened, that additional right -of -way
. acquisition would probably be necessary, and that the
road was now under the jurisdiction of the City of Tigard.
•
•
Larry Rice
October 11, 1983
Page Two
•
•
Informally, EN, SP, and the City of Tigard have indicated
their agreement that the existing roadway satisfactorily
meets the needs of the motoring public and that the
authorized roadway widening would not serve the public
safety, convenience, and general welfare.
Under the circumstances cited above, it appears that the
roadway widening will not be required at this time.
Copies of this letter will be filed copies of the
Orders cited above and in the respective crossing files
to serve as confirmation that these crossings will remain
at 23 feet in width.
•
•
David J. As le •
Assistantpommissioner •
Rail- Air.Program
alm /0090N
cc: Frank Currie, City of Tigard
Duane Forney, SPTCo
Charles A. Lundgren, EN
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
14 ( � � ASHI1�1GTEI�1 COUNTY
i { ADMINISTRATION BUILDING — 150 N. FIRST AVENUE .
HILLSBORO, OREGON 97123
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS September 21, 1983 DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS
W ES MYLLENBECK, Chairman ROOM 201
BONNIE L. HAYS, Vice Chairman (503) 648886
EVA M. KILLPACK
OHN E. MEEK
UCILLE WARREN
,\ Mr. De nis Baxter
Transp rtation Specialist
Rail ate & Service Division
PUC
Labo & Industries Building
V . Sale , OR 97310
k V .
RE: Review of Project Completion for
..` SW Bonita Road, Crossing No. FD -749.7
Dear Mr. Baxter:
I have received your letter concerning your office's field
review of the crossing and have field checked the crossing.
In regard to the first two items in your letter dated
August 18, 1983, i.e., advance warning signs and guardrail --
\ the advance. warning signs were installed, per a.ur records,
and maintained prior to and following the project; the
signs were missing and I've scheduled their reinstallation
A on a rush basis. The guardrail has been damaged and is .
scheduled to be repaired by November 15, 1983. The subject
11 . . N, crossing is now under the jurisdiction of the City of
Tigard. The road width is not 26 feet in width but is
close to 22 feet on the easterly'approach to the crossing,
and 23 feet on the westerly approach. From a functional
a1 standpoint, widening the road to 26 feet as shown on the
j PUC order would not result in any benefit. If . the road
were widened to 26 feet, additional right -of -way for a
slope easement would most likely be necessary and the grade
`�
, crossing surface at the tracks would have to be widened at
both the Burlington Northern and the Southern. Pacific tracks •
to accommodate the wider roadway.
If I can be of assistance in this matter, please call me
at 648 -8820.
Sincerely,
. ;,.._____..g.____....._.__C__________
Earl Reed, P.E.
Traffic Engineer
ER:ss
CC: R dy Lapo
ank Currie
arry Rice an equal opportunity employer
•