Re: railway line fences(vic)

["Russell Norton" <russelln@iprimus.com.au>]

"Roderick Smith" <rodsmith@werple.net.au> wrote in message
news:397E9654.67491B49@werple.net.au...
> I am very grateful that the fence on the railway opposite my house was
removed.
> Why does the railway need a fence, but not the busy arterial road 200 m
beyond?

Are you serious ???!! ALL railways should be fenced EVERYWHERE, except,
obviously, for level crossings. If you've ever seen the remains of a young
child that has been accidentally hit by a train while running across
unfenced tracks you will also agree with this statement.

The reasons why most roads are not fenced is blatently obvious - to allow
pedestrian access, and to give cars the ability to enter or leave roadside
properties. Roads that do not allow pedestrians, or unrestricted vehicle
access, e.g. the M4 and M5 (Sydney), generally ARE fenced.

> There was a conscious program on the Glen Waverly line in the 1970s to
remove
> fences and beautify the track verges, making travel more enjoyable.
>
> This was negated by the brutal-fence philosophy of the 1990s, which makes
> stations such as Camberwell, Upper Ferntree Gully and Belgrave look like
WWII
> concentration camps.

How can you justify knocking a railway that is attempting to make its
dangerous infrastructure safer by fencing ??? Oh, i'm sorry, it spoils your
f**king view.

Public access to railway lines is prohibited except at approved crossings.
Fences may upset your view or photographs, but they prevent children,
animals, and people who don't know any better, from crossing tracks.

Just remember, motor vehicles can brake suddenly, and/or swerve to avoid
hitting a child, trains can't......

Russ.

> Regards
> Roderick B Smith
> Rail News Victoria Editor
>
>