The Most Dangerous Half Mile in Davis
What is the most dangerous half mile in Davis? If you have been involved with Davis politics lately, you might think that it’s 5th street, because one of the motivations for the 5th Street Corridor Project is safety. If you have seen Davis politics for a very long time, you might think that it’s Richards Boulevard, because there was also a ballot measure to rebuild the Richards underpass with four lanes, again partly for the sake of safety.
While safety has been bandied about with various proposed public works projects, it’s hard to to get a sense what really is the most dangerous location in Davis, and by that measure the spot that most deserves a construction project. Now, the safety question can be posed in many different ways, but let’s look for the half-mile stretch of Davis that has seen the most fatalities in the past 15 years. Not long ago I revised the Tragic Events page in Davis Wiki; this page is a compilation of accidental and violent deaths reported in the Davis Enterprise and elsewhere. My experience with this page drew a likely answer to my attention.
To my knowledge, the most dangerous half mile in Davis is the stretch of railroad tracks parallel to Olive Drive and Second Street, from the train station to the old Kendall Way. Four people have died on this half mile of track in recent years: Nanda Butler in 1998, Patrick Allison in 2004, Samuel Carrasco in 2005, and Fred Nightbear Iyotte in 2007. The city should take this morbid record as a call to action.
It has been easy to overlook the problem for various reasons. At least one of these incidents was a suicide, and at least two cases were alcohol-related. But alcohol-related deaths are still preventable, and even many suicides are preventable according to the “opportunity theory” of suicide. The problem has also been overlooked because of overlapping jurisdiction with train companies such as Union Pacific and Amtrak. But these train companies would certainly like to see fewer deaths on their tracks, because of disruption of service and liability as well as for the moral reason.
The obvious solution is to fence the tracks, at least for the half mile stretch where these deaths occurred. We cannot fence all of the train tracks in the region, but according to opportunity theory, we aren’t obliged to do so. A few people may go to great lengths to get hit by a train, but most do not; usually people get hit by trains because it’s “convenient”. The tracks along Olive Drive are particularly convenient and therefore particularly dangerous, because they are near streets and also at street level. However, just fencing the tracks is not enough. There also needs to be a railroad crossing or a tunnel from Olive Drive to Second Street.
In fact, the train tracks along Olive Drive have attracted the city’s attention on at least two occasions. The Bicycle Advisory Commission has proposed a railroad crossing or tunnel for bicyclists. Separately, families who live on Olive Drive have asked for a railroad crossing or tunnel so that their children can safely get to school. But the message has foundered because it has been split into parts. Bicycling alone has not led to a railroad crossing. Children alone have not led to a railroad crossing, because only about 50 would need it and (thankfully) none of them have yet been killed by a train. The real fatalities have been adult males, and they haven’t been the type of people to press the city for safety. All three reasons together should be plenty reason enough for the city to take action. A tunnel would be the most expensive option, but it would not be as expensive as four separate fatalities in 15 years.
If the train tracks along Olive Drive are the most dangerous half mile in Davis, what is second? The answer from DavisWiki is the other easily accessible stretch of railroad tracks, near the Arboretum. Just this year, a homeless man was killed there. In 2007, Robert Landy was killed at the train crossing. And in 1992, Andrew Mockus was pushed into a train and killed there. The city should fence both stretches of railroad, and it should enhance the safety of the crossing at Old Davis Road.
But the first step to making Davis safer is to want to. To some extent, safety has been a pretext for projects that are popular for other reasons. Yes, non-fatal injuries are also a serious concern, but fatalities ought to be our greatest concern. I am all for the 5th Street Corridor Project. But it doesn’t look good to spend so much time on that project in the name of safety, while doing so little where the city’s tragic deaths actually occur.
Greg, that was 1992, not 1984.
Thanks for that correction! I just copied the wrong number from DavisWiki. I can’t change the article any more, but I think that Kemble can fix the date.
The date of Andrew Mokus’ death has been corrected.
A study of this area was conducted by a UCD undergraduate class in 2008 and is available at https://davis.csbaagendaonline.net/cgi-bin/WebObjects/davis-eAgenda.woa/files/MTI2ODgzNTcyMjM1OC9kYXZpc2VBZ2VuZGEvMTExLzIwNzkvRmlsZXM=/105-28-09_-_olive_drive_report_final.pdf.
The study was the basis of a discussion at the joint City Council/Davis School Board meeting in May 2009 (available at http://djusd.tv/content/may-28st-2009-joint-city-school-board-meeting.)
Subsequently, an op-ed appeared in the Davis Enterprise: http://search.davisenterprise.com/display.php?id=56163. (You will need to be a subscriber to the Enterprise to view this article.)
The concerns of this neighborhood have not yet been addressed.
The study has some interesting extra information and I did see the article in the Enterprise. I argue that the city is just not seeing the whole elephant. When the topic was school children on Olive Drive, the city concluded that, well, a solution would be too expensive for just 50 school children. But those children are not the only concern here.
At another time, the Davis Bicycle Commission included a tunnel or a crossing at Olive Drive for better bicycle access to the I-80 bike path. I don’t have a documented answer, but I expect that the feeling was, well, that would be too expensive just for some bicyclists.
Then you have the four actual deaths on these tracks. Unfortunately the families of these four people aren’t an organized constituency. The city might not have thought to do any more than express condolences.
That is not even counting the similar Arboretum area. When Andrew Mockus died, the city and the schools surely talked a lot about bullying. Did they also talk about fencing the railroad tracks?
If you take all sides of the railroad hazard in these two areas, then I can’t think of anything else that the city is doing that is particularly more important.
Greg, wouldn’t a $1,000 fine and 30 days in jail for crossing the tracks be a much more effective and fiscally responsible solution. Absent that, given the aesthetic blight that the fencing you propose would create, is there any way to make the fencing invisible?
Matt, I don’t see that a $1,000 fine and 30 days in jail would have prevented any of the deaths on the tracks in Davis. Mockus was pushed into a train during a fight between teenagers. Since years in prison did not deter his attackers, then a fine and 30 days in jail would not have phased them at all. Carrasco was drunk and laid down on the tracks at night, possibly just to see what would happen. If there had been a police patrol there to issue a citation, then they would first have rescued him. The other cases are all generally like that.
Would a fence be too ugly? First of all, the railroad tracks aren’t Michelangelos, and neither is the barbed wire fence on the other side that keeps people off of the freeway. A new fence could be livably attractive, certainly better than barbed wire. Here is some nice-looking fence.
On the other hand, if there is a fence, then an additional fine could be a good idea.
The other issue here is that a lot of people are crossing the tracks because it’s a pain to go all the way around. If a shortcut is too good to pass up, you can’t just fine people to get them to stop; you need to provide an alternative.
The relevant data is not how many people live on the other side of the tracks, but the number of unsafe crossings that occur on a daily basis. With each crossing, there is potential for an accident.
It is my opinion that creating a legal crossing point where most people cross, with fencing to funnel people to it, would address the accessibility and safety needs of the neighborhood and significantly decrease the likelihood of an accident.
Susan, I totally agree. How many people cross the tracks (too many) is as relevant as how many have died on the tracks (too many).
It is striking that no one has died in the past 15 years on another section of the track, along H street. That section has a tunnel, and a steep slope to keep people from walking across. It is not even as big of an obstacle as a good fence, but it is enough. One person was killed at 8th street, but this was not at the elevated section.
Greg, you hit the nail on the head when you said, “The other issue here is that a lot of people are crossing the tracks because it’s a pain to go all the way around. If a shortcut is too good to pass up, you can’t just fine people to get them to stop; you need to provide an alternative.”
That is indeed the crux of the matter. The way to stop the risky, self-indulgent behavior is to make it an even bigger pain to continue that behavior. Spending 30 days in jail is going to wreak havoc with the academic career of any students who choose the more painful route and get caught. I would imagine a 30-day jail term would put a crimp in the job security of non-students as well.
Spending 30 days in jail is going to wreak havoc with the academic career of any students who choose the more painful route and get caught.
I have nothing against a fine for people who trespass on the railroad tracks. But you can’t solve problems like this with punishment alone. Good fences make good laws, and so do good alternatives.
Besides, the way that you’re talking about it is not aligned with the facts. The students who cross those tracks are not UC Davis students, they are elementary school and junior high school students. You can’t just throw little kids in jail for a month. As for the adults, if a drunk guy lays down on the tracks at night to see what will happen, then job security just isn’t the point.
I just saw this and would like to add something. Nanda Butler was my brother who was struck by a train in 1998. He was extremely intoxicated and was not far enough away from the track when the train came and it struck his right side killing him. I lived in Davis for 16 years of my life and have always thought the tracks needed fences. You could easily put up fences and then have over pass kind of things go over the tracks and fences for pedestrians to pass. A fine is maybe a good idea but jail time is only going to cost the tax payers more money and the jails are already full!
I truly hope that the city does something about this even though in all reality I doubt it will happen. It will cost a ton of money and not be aesthetically pleasing to the eye. Maybe some kid of light and loud signaling sound every 1/2 -1 mile of track in the public areas so people can be better warned about the train coming and also a mark as to where to stand if you are waiting for the train to pass, as that was Nanda’s problem he just needed to be a few feet further from the track and he would be alive today!!!
Rachel, I am totally with you.
Greg, an excellent, well-researched arrticle. And my heart goes out to Ms. Butler — how sad it is to now read about some misinformed souls, including some on our city council, flying in the face of reason by claiming that crossing the tracks in question is safe, and no fencing is needed.
Having safely crossed the tracks some 8,000 to 9,500 times at the standard crossing installed by SP no many years ago, I know that many college students cross there also, and probably have for over ninety years.
A fence without a gate for the safe crossing at the Amtrak station would insultingly disregard the hundreds of Olive Drive people who regularly use that crossing.