Traffic Safety Outside Braddock Park Pre-School Trailers Questioned By Concerned Citizens

0
213

The following emails and letters to New Jersey State and Federal officials were received by Hudson TV concerning the safety of students and pedestrians outside of the driveway which leads to the Braddock Park pre-school trailers in North Bergen.

They were written by North Bergen resident Robert Walden, long a critic of the local Board of Education’s twenty-plus year placement of the trailers in the park, and West New York resident Mark Bloomberg, also a critic of the trailers and the driveway access to the site, which is a narrow, one lane path.

Included is a Jersey Journal article, with photos, from six years ago after a pedestrian was struck by a car and killed by the driveway entrance.

The first correspondence is from Mr. Walden:

 

Dear State and Federal Officials,

There may be others at State and Federal agencies that should be aware of what is written here – please forward this email to them.

On 06-01-22 the County of Hudson (“HC”) sent relevant State and Federal agencies a “Local Safety Program” application “to enhance safety along Boulevard East between Main Drive and Palisades Triangle Plaza in North Bergen Township.

I, a concerned citizen and spokesperson for the Save Braddock Park-Safe Schools committee am writing to you to inform you that the 06-01-22 Local Safety Program application you received from Hudson County, which was sent to State and Federal officials, is not just incomplete, it contains false information…

You may not be aware that the area of the project on Boulevard East runs parallel to adjacent North Bergen Preschool campus facilities, which also includes playing fields and two parking lots which the preschool utilizes.
A driveway to the preschool (the “preschool road”) is also being moved from its current location to a nearby location.

The area where this is taking place is in Hudson County’s Braddock Park which is located in North Bergen, a NJDEP designated Overburdened Environmental Justice Community.

A brief history:
I found out thru OPRA that neither North Bergen (“NB”) nor Hudson County conducted traffic studies before North Bergen illegally moved its preschool into Braddock Park in 2001.  The preschool’s location violates State DEP regulations.  Further, no document exists to show that North Bergen received NJ DOE permission to move its preschool into Braddock Park.
I complained to Hudson County about the dangerous preschool roadway and its intersection with Boulevard East (aka “JF Kennedy Blvd.”) and NB-HC engineers conducted a traffic study there in 2015.
The resulting NB-HC engineering report recommended widening the preschool road and installing sidewalks (none exist), to meet State guidelines.
On 08-19-16, North Bergen wrote NJDEP:  “The Board has no plans to widen the entrance drive” and to date, these recommendations have not been implemented.
It is quite apparent that these road improvements are being undertaken primarily to improve safety at the preschool’s location and statements by officials bear this out.

Hudson County’s Local Safety Program application has big problems.
On page 5 of the application:
According to the NJDOT crash database, there were 17 reportable crashes during the three-year analysis period of 2017–2019 along this 0.15 mile segment. None involved pedestrian or bicyclist.”
See the attached article – on 11-03-18 a pedestrian in the crosswalk was run over by a car a few feet from the soccer field parking lot which the preschool utilizes.
She died of her injuries.

I note that page 31 of the application states “A minimum of three (3) years should be used for vehicular crash data and a minimum of five (5) years should
be used for pedestrian/bicyclist crash data
.”   Hudson County not only provided a false statement, HC also only provided 3, not 5 years of crash data.

Other problems with HC’s application:

Page 23, question 4:
HC checked the box indicating no environmental studies were undertaken, even though this is project is on protected park land in an Overburdened Environmental Justice community.
This, even though on page 27 of the application HC checked the box stating there are known or suspected hazardous waste sites within the project study area and potential contamination is “TBD”.

Page 23, question 6: 
Will public facilities, schools, churches, emergency services, be affected by the project?”
HC checked “No” – the improvements don’t just affect the preschool, they are being implemented because of the preschool.

Page 23, question 8:
HC checked “No”, claiming the project will not involve more than 1/4 acre – it is believed the project will involve more than 1/4 acre.

Page 24, “B” – HC claims there aren’t any “undisturbed areas” – there is undisturbed forest in the improvement area.

Page 24, “C” – HC claims this is not in a “special protection area” – it is within a NJDEP protected park land.

Page 25 – HC did not check the box indicating the area is “publicly owned parkland”, nor did it check the box which says  it is encumbered by Green Acres, which it is, nor did it check the box indicating there are recreational facilities or school athletic fields, which are adjacent.  There are also endangered wildlife species which inhabit the area which HC didn’t mention.  (In the “Comments” section HC did say the area is “Green Acres encumbered”.)

Page 26 – HC claims the existing area does not need “vegetation management” – it does need it because the preschool road is being removed and placed elsewhere where there is currently forest.

Page 28 – “There are no environmentally sensitive, or NJDEP regulated areas within the corridor.” – I don’t know what is defined as the “corridor”, but very close-by is a protected wetland area.

I am glad that Hudson County is finally  considering safety improvements to a dangerous area, but these improvements should be done properly.

Please acknowledge receipt of this email and keep me informed about what action will be taken concerning this project.

Thank you and Happy New Year.

Sincerely,

Robert Walden
North Bergen

 

Driver in fatal crash avoids serious charges

  •   Updated: Nov. 03, 2018, 10:06 a.m.
  •   |Published: Nov. 03, 2018, 7:00 a.m.By Ron Zeitlinger | The Jersey JournalThe Paterson driver who fatally struck a North Bergen woman last month has been charged with speeding and failing to yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk, but has been spared more serious charges, authorities said.Yeoun An, 60, was crossing a street inside James J. Braddock North Hudson Park, near Bruins Stadium, at 9 a.m. on Oct. 2 when she was struck by Melone Smith, 61, the Hudson County Sheriff’s Office said. An suffered severe head trauma and never regained consciousness, the sheriff’s office said.She died on Oct. 29 at the Jersey City Medical Center.

    A witness, who had stopped to allow An — who was in the crosswalk — to cross the road told sheriff’s officers that An had made it halfway across when a car coming in the opposite direction kept going, forcing An to pause.

    When the 60-year-old continued across the street she was struck by Smith’s 2005 Toyota Camry and thrown in the air, the witness told sheriff’s officers.

    In a news release on An’s death, the sheriff’s office said the investigation into the accident has been closed.

The following correspondence is from Mr. Bloomberg to the Office of the Hudson County Engineer back in 2015:
All,
Here’s some historical information regarding the driveway that currently is, and always has been, the only means of vehicular access to the area of Braddock Park that North Bergen is proposing to permanently divert.  This information raises concerning questions about the completeness of the application.
North Bergen has been aware of the need to widen the driveway for ingress/egress to the proposed diversion site for at least 9 years.  The attached Engineering Report summarizes a Nov. 2015 meeting between Hudson County engineers, North Bergen officials and a North Bergen Township engineer. In addition to discussing the need to widen the driveway, in the final paragraph it notes an action to notify DEP about needing to adjust an existing diversion application.
After North Bergen submitted their Final Application (Part 1) in August of 2024, I emailed DEP to inform you that the latest submission failed to include any mention of the driveway as part of the planned diversion area.  My note to you further provided details on the regulations that set a minimum width requirement for driveways, which the existing driveway is not anywhere close to being in compliance with.
How is it that DEP has accepted the application without requiring that the driveway be included as part of the diversion area?  Why is DEP not requiring more replacement land to be provided as a result of the need to include the driveway?
Did DEP make a determination in 2015, or any time after, that the use of a driveway doesn’t require a diversion?  If so, can you provide a copy of that decision?
Thank you,
Mark Bloomberg

 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here