Department of Public Works Colorado Street Bridge – Suicide Mitigation Enhancements Project Design Commission November 26, 2019
Project Background Department of Public Works • Concept of installing a suicide deterrent system on the Colorado Street Bridge has been explored at various intervals over the last several decades • In recent years, number of suicides off the bridge have dramatically increased • June 2017 – Temporary 10-foot tall fencing installed around the bench alcoves • September 2018 – Temporary fencing extended along entire length and on both sides of the bridge 2
Project Background (cont’d) Department of Public Works • Fall 2017 - Colorado Street Bridge Task Force formed, assessing various permanent deterrent measures based on stakeholder and community input • On April 23, 2018, the City Council unanimously approved the Task Force recommendation to deter suicide attempts on the Colorado Street Bridge through the implementation of a vertical barrier system; and, directed staff to further study and return to Council with a proposed project and appropriate environmental review. 3
Project Goal Department of Public Works • To seek a responsibly designed permanent barrier as an effective deterrent, while preserving the bridge’s national historic character and significance • To allow the community to experience and enjoy the Colorado Street Bridge, as well as the Arroyo as a safe and beautiful environment. 4
Project Scope Department of Public Works On May 20, 2019, City Council authorized City Manager to enter into a contract with Donald MacDonald Architects for environmental and design services, including: • Preliminary engineering and development of alternative designs for a vertical barrier • Preparation of project-level environmental reports • Conceptual design development of a preferred vertical barrier • Construction plans and specifications to be prepared after a conceptual design is approved by City Council 5
Project Site Department of Public Works Proposed Project Location 6
Task Force Recommendations Department of Public Works Design and Install: • Full Length Vertical Barriers • Minimum height above highest toehold of 7’-6” • Extend both sides of the bridge for its entire length • End Treatments • Deter a person’s ability to walk the outside ledge to a location where a jump would cause serious injury or death • Complimentary Measures • Work in concert with the measures above to mitigate suicides and suicide attempts from the bridge to the greatest extent possible 7
Public Meetings Department of Public Works • September 26, 2019 – Community Meeting • Goals: • Present the project scope and schedule for the design of a vertical barrier system • Solicit comments and public input on potential mitigation alternatives • October 29, 2019 – Community Meeting • Goals: • Summarize the community’s comments and ideas from the September 26, 2019 community meeting • Present guiding principals and concepts for the design of a vertical barrier • Solicit community’s feedback on presented design concepts 8
Public Meetings - Continued Department of Public Works • November 19, 2019 – Historic Preservation Commission • Goals: • Summarize comments and ideas from community meetings • Present guiding principals and concepts for the design of a vertical barrier • Solicit Commission’s feedback on presented design concepts 9
Guiding Principals of Design Department of Public Works
Guiding Principal - Effectiveness Department of Public Works
Guiding Principal - Effectiveness Department of Public Works
Guiding Principal - Effectiveness Department of Public Works
Guiding Principal – National Register Eligibility and Character Defining Features Department of Public Works
Guiding Principal – Bridge Aesthetics Department of Public Works
Concept Study Department of Public Works
Concept Study Department of Public Works
Concept Study Department of Public Works
Concept Study Department of Public Works
Bridge End Treatment Department of Public Works
Bridge End Treatment Department of Public Works
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards A2 Mesh Department of Public Works 14’ A2 Vertical Frame/Flexible Mesh (w/o Intermediate Posts) 22
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Secretary of the Interior’s Standards A2 Mesh A2 Mesh Department of Public Works Vertical Frame/Flexible Mesh A2 (w/o Intermediate Posts) 23
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards A2 Mesh Department of Public Works Vertical Frame/Flexible Mesh A2 (w/o Intermediate Posts) 24
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards A2 Mesh Department of Public Works Vertical Frame/Flexible Mesh (w/o Intermediate Posts) A2
Department of Public Works Vertical Frame/Flexible Mesh A2 (w/o Intermediate Posts) 26
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards A2 Mesh Ver 2 Department of Public Works 14’ A2 Vertical Frame/Rigid Mesh (w/ Intermediate Posts) 27
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards A2 Mesh Ver 2 Department of Public Works Vertical Frame/Rigid Mesh A2 (w/ Intermediate Posts) 28
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards A2 Pickets Department of Public Works A2 Vertical Frame/Rods/Pickets 29
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards A2 Pickets Department of Public Works A2 Vertical Frame/Rods/Pickets 30
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards A2 Pickets Department of Public Works A2 Vertical Frame/Rods/Pickets 31
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards A2 Pickets Department of Public Works Vertical Frame/Rods/Pickets A2
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards A2 Pickets Department of Public Works Vertical Frame/Rods/Pickets A2
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards B2 Mesh Department of Public Works 13’ B2 Curved Frame/Rigid Mesh (w/Intermediate Posts) 34
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards B2 Mesh Department of Public Works B2 Curved Frame/Rigid Mesh (w/Intermediate Posts) 35
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards B2 Mesh Department of Public Works Curved Frame/Rigid Mesh B2 (w/Intermediate Posts) 36
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards B2 Mesh Department of Public Works Curved Frame/Rigid Mesh (w/Intermediate Posts) B2
Department of Public Works 38
Comparative Heights of the Options Department of Public Works 39
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Analysis Department of Public Works The project is being designed to avoid significant impacts and is expected to fall under a Categorical Exemption or Statutory Exemption under CEQA, which will be achieved through the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation: 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. 40
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Analysis Department of Public Works Standard 2 Less in compliance Least in compliance Most in compliance Standard 9 In compliance In compliance In compliance Standard 10 In compliance In compliance In compliance 41
Top of Barrier and Lights Department of Public Works 42
Comparative Table Department of Public Works 43
Connection Concepts Department of Public Works 44
Community Consensus Department of Public Works • Keep all alcoves open • Position the barrier on top of the existing balustrade • Position the barrier on the bridge side of the lamp poles to increase effectiveness • Keep the existing lamps but modify the height to maintain visibility on the bridge 45
Pros and Cons Department of Public Works A2 B2 Flexible Mesh Rigid Mesh Rods/Pickets Curved Rigid Mesh - Effective - Effective - Less effective - Most effective - Fewer vertical posts - Additional vertical posts - Introduction of - Decorative look - Doesn’t look institutional compared to flexible mesh horizontal toe holds - Contingent on - Maximizes transparency -Doesn’t look institutional - More traditional look finding an acceptable - Contingent on finding an -Maximizes transparency - Vertical rods present flexible mesh pattern acceptable flexible mesh -Fewer vertical posts at limited transparency pattern that prevents toe alcoves looking down the bridge holds - Contingent on finding an acceptable rigid mesh pattern that prevents toe holds 46
Recommend
More recommend
