Author Topic: Lack of railroad fencing - another death  (Read 6641 times)

Offline just watching

  • Long-time poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 928
  • Karma: -25
    • View Profile
Lack of railroad fencing - another death
« on: October 21, 2012, 07:28:42 PM »
I see that there was ANOTHER pedestrian death along railroad Avenue. How many people have to die here before the railroad installs a fence ???  A fence from Anderson Street to Essex Street, on the east and west side of the tracks.  A simple 6 foot chain link fence will stop at least 99% of all people looking to cross the railroad here, and less than 1% would climb the fence and cross anyway. . Something like the fence along the railroad in downtown Ridgewood. Why do the people of Ridgewood deserve this kind of safety, but the people of Hackensack do not ?  The article states that the person went around the crossing gates and was trespassing on the tracks. I don't know all the details, but I'm inclined to believe that fencing would have been a deterrent.

Not too long ago, a young boy was killed along the railroad at Clay Street, and now another person dies here along the same corridor, only 2 blocks away  There have been others in the past.

It's the railroad's responsibility (NJ Transit), and if the Hackensack City Council, The Record, and our newspaper The County Seat complain and get vocal about it, maybe a fence will finally be installed. Maybe some help from our State Legislators, because NJ Transit will listen to them even more. 

The Record article even states that NJ Transit has been improving safety at various crossings in NJ, specifically to reduce deaths. "Improvements included the installation of new signs, fencing or bollards at 14 stations, grade crossings or railroad rights of way where trespassing incidents were found to be most persistent to restrict pedestrian access to the tracks."  But nothing for Hackensack.

http://www.northjersey.com/hackensack/Hackensack_woman_struck_killed_by_train.html
https://www.questia.com/newspaper/1P2-36199856/woman-killed-by-train-identified
« Last Edit: May 10, 2018, 11:08:04 PM by Editor »



Offline Editor

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4430
  • Karma: 17
    • View Profile
    • Hackensack Now
Re: Lack of railroad fencing - another death
« Reply #1 on: October 21, 2012, 11:32:45 PM »
Related topic.

Justwatching: I'm not picking a fight. I just want to know how you make a distinction between the Pascack Valley line, the Susquehanna line, the Hackensack River, River Street, Essex Street and any other potentially dangerous crossing in Hackensack. Which ones get fences and which ones don't? I'm almost certain that there have been fatalities at all of them. 

This incident (like the last) happened near a crossing- where you couldn't possibly put a fence.  There are 12 crossings at Temple, Main, Euclid, Clinton, Anderson, Passaic, Berry, Clay, Central, Atlantic, Sussex and Essex Streets. That's over 1.5 miles.  That's 3 miles of fence both ways, - broken up at least 12 times on each side.  So how will this fence actually prevent people from getting on the tracks? I'm curious about why your plan stops the fence at Anderson? There have been fatalities north of Anderson. Also- why would you need a fence on each side?

Finally, from what I understand about Ridgewood, the fence at the station is meant to make commuters use the underground tunnel and not cross the tracks.  The fence does not run the length of the town, does it?

I was saddened to read about this. I'm all for a solution.  I don't think the fence is the answer but I keep an open mind. 

Thanks.  FYI:

NJ Transit Fencing Policy
« Last Edit: October 21, 2012, 11:40:33 PM by Editor »

Offline just watching

  • Long-time poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 928
  • Karma: -25
    • View Profile
Re: Lack of railroad fencing - another death
« Reply #2 on: October 22, 2012, 07:27:42 AM »
Sure, I'll give an explanation.

There are so many street crossings of the railroad between Passaic Street and Temple Ave (6 of them), that there is little need for a pedestrian to try and cross between the street crossings.

The greatest need is at Clay Street, and if a fence cannot be installed, the second choice would be a designated pedestrian crossing, with a gate, such as at Beech Street. Given the choice, I'm sure NJ Transit would fence it. There's a huge "need" for people to cross the tracks there, in order to get from the Carver Park neighborhood to the Park Street area, State Street, or the downtown.  Lots of people cross there, and I would guess that more than 50% of the unauthorized pedestrians on the tracks in Hackensack are right there at Clay Street.

It's also very dangerous at Gamewell Place, Myer Street, and Sussex Street, precisely because people WANT to cross the tracks there, to get from one neighborhood to another, or from a neighborhood to the downtown.  Wherever there is a street that lines up perpendicular to the railroad, but does not cross the railroad, there will always be people who will want to cross the tracks there. If the street lines up on both sides of the railroad, that's even more likely to encourage pedestrians to want to cross Another example is Stanley Place, but there is nothing to get to on the east side, there's just a few warehouses there.  A case could be made for the stretch from Euclid Ave to Main Street, because people might want to cross at Ross Ave. However, for whatever reason, there are simply less people crossing at Ross Ave than Clay Street.

North of Temple Ave there is no neighborhood, it's industry on one side, cemetary on the other. Little need for pedestrian traffic.  The same can be said for south of Essex Street.  There is no neighborhood on the west side, or any streets that line up to the east side perpendicular to the railroad. For instance, Kansas Street and King Street stop at Green Street, they don't stop at the railroad. And even if they did, there is nowhere to go to, there is no reason for anyone in the First Ward to want to cross the tracks. Who wants to get to the back fence at PSE&G, for instance. There's no incentive.

So if I was pressed to make a case and to set priorities, I would say the greatest need is Essex Street to Berry Street, about 1 mile. Between those two streets there is only two streets that cross the railroad, which are Central Ave and Atlantic Street. I think that would solve 90% of the problem, and it's not a stretch to ask NJ Transit to fund something that would save lives.

Thank you for asking me for the opportunity to explain further.

Offline BLeafe

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4162
  • Karma: 26
    • View Profile
    • Bob Leafe Photography
Re: Lack of railroad fencing - another death
« Reply #3 on: October 23, 2012, 01:02:06 AM »
Too bad it's not economically feasible to do what they did in Teaneck a long time ago on the West Shore Line at West Englewood Ave: go under.

Like music? Like photography? Step into my office: http://xrl.us/BobL - - - - - - - http://xrl.us/BobsDarkness

Offline just watching

  • Long-time poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 928
  • Karma: -25
    • View Profile
Re: Lack of railroad fencing - another death
« Reply #4 on: October 24, 2012, 10:13:46 AM »
Yep, back when things were cheap to build.  Something like that would work where there aren't urban problems like the homeless, drug dealing, muggings, etc.

Offline Skipx219

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
  • Karma: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Lack of railroad fencing - another death
« Reply #5 on: October 24, 2012, 12:32:08 PM »
The Teaneck tunnel floods at times & the young people do thing in private late at night, Most of the people walking to worship... simply walk across the tracks.

 

anything