Winona Bridge Project

Transcription

1 Winona Bridge Project Visual Quality Manual February 11, 2014

2 Acknowledgements Minnesota Department of Transportation Consulting Team SRF Consulting Group TY LIN Illumination Arts 2 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

3 Visual Quality Review Committee David Bittner, Main Street Program Coleen Bremer Tom Choinski, Let s Go Fishing Vicki Englich, Chamber of Commerce, Winona State (Retired) Lynn Englund, Heritage Preservation Committee Pamela Eyden, Winona City Council Jason Gilman, Winona County Joanne Gove Jordan Hoel, Chamber of Commerce Mike Kennedy, Levee Park Committee Leone Mauszycki Liz Reach, Winona State (student) Dominic Ricciotti, Winona State (Retired) Peggy Sannerud, Winona State (faculty) Tom Stoa, Winona Bicycle Advisory Committee Jack Stoltman Chad Ubl, City of Winona Keith Molnau, MnDOT Bridge Office Scott Robinson, MnDOT Landscape Architecture Unit Melissa Schultz, MnDOT Bridge Office Terry Ward, MnDOT District 6 Project Manager Kristen Zschomler, MnDOT Cultural Resources Unit Janet Gronert, SRF Consulting Group Dan Flittie, SRF Consulting Group Sean Jergens, SRF Consulting Group Michael Jischke, SRF Consulting Group Dave Nelson, SRF Consulting Group Faith Baum, Illumination Arts Bob Frame, Mead & Hunt Christina Slattery, Mead & Hunt ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 3

4 Table of Contents Acknowledgements Executive Summary 1. Introduction 1.1 Purpose and Intent 1.2 Project Context 1.3 Context Sensitive Approach 1.4 Visual Quality Review Committee 1.5 Project Overview and Background 1.6 Significant Views 2. Existing Bridge 5900 Visual Overview 2.1 Overview 2.2 Through-truss 2.3 Deck-trusses 2.4 Main Piers 2.5 Approach Areas WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

5 3. Design Elements 3.1 Bridge Piers and Overlooks 3.2 Abutments and Retaining Walls 3.4 Railings and Barriers 3.5 Colors and Finishes 3.6 Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation 3.7 River Connection and Landscaping 3.9 Signage 3.10 Lighting Design Summary Appendices Appendix A - VQRC Meeting Notes Appendix B - Preliminary Bridge Plan Architectural Details Appendix C - South Approach Area Stormwater Design Appendix D - Preliminary Roadway Lighting Design for Bridges TABLE OF CONTENTS VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 5

6 Executive Summary Project Background and Overview The Winona Bridge Project will rehabilitate and augment a portion of the Trunk Highway 43 Mississippi River Crossing which includes the existing Bridge 5900 and Bridge 5930 over the North Channel. The project limits include the intersection of Winona Street and 4th Street at the southern end extending to Latsch Island on the north. Purpose and Intent This Visual Quality Manual (VQM) for the Winona Bridge project documents the visual quality review process and specific aesthetic design decisions made for the project during preliminary design. The primary purpose of the VQM is to lay out actionable design guidelines for the new proposed Bridge and other aspects of the approach roadways in the context of the planned rehabilitation of the existing Bridge Hereafter, Bridge will be referred to as the New Bridge and Bridge 5900 will be referred to as the Existing Bridge. Both span the main channel of the Mississippi River. Project Context The VQM responds to the natural, cultural, and transportation environments. In the project vicinity, the Mississippi River and its environs include high quality natural areas and recreational opportunities. Culturally, the City of Winona endeavors to revitalize downtown and nearby Levee Park by better utilizing its proximity to the river. The Trunk Highway 43 route passes through downtown Winona and adjacent neighborhoods approaching the river crossing and connects to Highway 35 and 54 in Wisconsin which are part of the designated Great River Road. Visual Quality Review Committee Process The VQM development was guided by MnDOT s technical staff and included a public input process with a Visual Quality Review Committee (VQRC). Over the course of seven meetings during the fall of 2013, the VQRC reviewed wide-ranging aspects of the project including: bridge piers, overlooks, abutments, retaining walls, pedestrian railings, traffic barriers, colors and finishes, pedestrian and bicycle circulation, river connections and landscaping, signage, and lighting. The VQM represents the VQRC s combined input. Nevertheless, throughout the course of the input process, there were several items for which complete consensus was not achieved. In such cases, the concept options preferred by a majority are noted as such, recognizing that the inherent subjectivity of some decisions resulted in some dissenting opinions. Full meeting notes are included in Appendix A. VQRC participants should be 6 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

7 commended for their commitment and creative input. Subsequently, all recommendations in the VQM are subject to City of Winona staff and council review and approval. MnDOT will facilitate ongoing discussion with the City regarding the design cost and maintenance responsibilities of all the recommendations herein as the project progresses into the final design phase, in order to develop a cooperative agreement. Design Approach A primary objective of the VQM is to provide aesthetic design guidelines for the new companion bridge and supporting elements that sensitively complement the unique existing structure and context. The Existing Bridge is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and therefore subject to review in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. As designs were developed for the New Bridge, the relationship to the Existing Bridge was always a key consideration. Intentionally, the design concepts leave some latitude for refinement to the final design team. The VQRC will have ongoing involvement with the final design team to provide further input. Additionally, several aspects of the design are dependent on further coordination and permitting with other jurisdictional agencies and ongoing coordination with the MnDOT Cultural Resources Unit responsible for guiding the project to meet the United States Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. In discussions with the VQRC, the notion of Reconnecting to the Mississippi River emerged as a central theme that was explored figuratively in the forms and patterns of structural features, and literally through improved pedestrian and bicycle connections. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 7

8 This page left blank intentionally 8 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

9 1. Introduction 1.1 Project Overview and Background 1.2 Project Context 1.3 Purpose and Intent 1.4 Context Sensitive Approach 1.5 Visual Quality Review Committee Process 1.6 Significant Views 1.1 Project Overview and Background The Winona Bridge Project will rehabilitate and augment a portion of the Trunk Highway 43 Mississippi River crossing which includes the Existing Bridge over the Main Channel and Bridge 5930 over the North Channel which is unaffected. The project limits include the intersection of Winona Street and 4th Street at the southern end extending to Latsch Island on the north. Primary aspects of the work include: rehabilitation of the Existing Bridge, a new parallel bridge, approach roadways with retaining walls, and the Winona Street and 4th Street intersection reconfiguration. See Figure 1.2 for an overview map of the project area. Completed in 1942 at the onset of World War II, the river crossing was jointly designed by the Minnesota Department of Highways (MHD) and the Wisconsin State Highway Commission. Historically, it was vital to the economy of Winona and the movement of defense materials during World War II. As an engineering challenge, the project was the largest undertaking ever at the time by MHD. The Existing Bridge is significant as the state s only surviving example of a cantilever through-truss dating from before The views are referenced on the above maps and photographs are included on the following pages. 1.2 Project Context Natural Environment In the project vicinity, the Mississippi River and its environs include high quality natural areas and recreational opportunities. Latsch Island is a unique geographic feature that divides the river into the Main Channel and the North Channel. The landscape is characterized by floodplain forest and wetlands near the river. Steep bluffs with exposed outcroppings frame the valley in the distance on both sides of the river. Cultural Environment For most of its history dating back to the 1850 s, Downtown Winona was the city s central business district, and the riverfront has been active moving freight on barges. Completed in 2007, the city s Downtown Revitalization Plan strives to reverse more recent trends of businesses moving away from the center of town and reconnect with the river. In close proximity to the project, the Broadway Residential Historic District and the Commercial Historic District include a number of CHAPTER 1 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 9

10 Introduction historical architectural resources that enhance the visual character of the community. Within immediate view of the project, Levee Park comprises most of the shoreline adjacent downtown. Originally designed at the turn of the 20th century in a formal style, the park was redesigned to its current form in the 1980 s when the levee system to protect the city was implemented. Across the main channel on Latsch Island, there are enclaves of resident boathouses, a marina, and swimming beaches. Transportation Environment The layout of downtown and other neighborhoods near the project is a traditional grid of streets aligned with the river. As a result, the Trunk Highway 43 route takes a zigzag path through the street grid approaching the bridge from the south. Along the south riverfront, an active freight rail line connects industrial areas west of the project to the port but also restricts access to the river from downtown. Across the channel in Wisconsin, Highways 35 and 54 are part of the designated Great River Road. The route winds along at the base of tall bluffs and past expansive wetlands with a notably more rural character contrasting the urban environment on the Minnesota side. The narrow sidewalk on the Existing Bridge was not part of the original construction. Added in the 1980 s, it will be removed as part of the bridge rehabilitation and replaced by a trail on the upstream side of the New Bridge. The Waterfront Trail is a simple bituminous path that connects Riverview Drive to Levee Park on top of the levee. Sidewalks exist on most of the local streets immediately adjacent to the project. Figure 1.1 The Existing Bridge is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places 10 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

11 Introduction 2nd St. 3rd St. 4th St. Riverview Dr. Harriet St. Municipal Marina Huff/ Lamberton House Mississippi River Main Channel Waterfront Trail Railroad W. Broadway Huff St. YMCA New Bridge Existing Bridge 5900 Bridge 5930 Levee Winona St. Washington St. Courthouse Latsch Island Boathouses Waterworks Boathouses Mississippi River North Channel Johnson St. Levee Park Figure 1.2 Project area map (illustrating the conceptual layout) CHAPTER 1 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 11

12 The Winona Bridge should reflect the current era while respecting the past. The existing bridge is a visual icon for the city, and so the new bridge should defer its prominent visual presence. The new bridge should celebrate the river s natural beauty and the cultural history of Winona that is intertwined with the river. Together, the two bridges should symbolize a welcoming gateway to beauty, culture, and prosperity. Visual Quality Review Committee Project Vision Statement 12 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT CHAPTER 1 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL

13 Introduction 1.3 Purpose and Intent This Visual Quality Manual (VQM) for the Winona Bridge Project documents the visual quality review process and specific aesthetic design decisions made for the project. The primary purpose of the VQM is to lay out actionable design guidelines for the New Bridge and other aspects of the approach roadways in the context of the planned rehabilitation of the Existing Bridge. Prepared during the preliminary engineering phase, it builds upon previous project studies and documentation with relevance to visual quality including: Historic American Engineering Record for the Winona Highway Crossing, National Park Service Winona Bridge (Bridge 5900) Bridge Significance and Character-Defining Features, Mead & Hunt, September 2009 Phase I and II Architectural History Evaluation for the Winona Bridge Study, Landscape Research LLC, May 2011 Winona Bridge Rehabilitation Package, SRF Consulting Group, Inc. and Mead & Hunt, March 29, 2012 Intentionally, the VQM will not restate this large body of previous work. If more detailed background is desired, consult these references directly. The Existing Bridge is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and is subject to review in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. As designs were developed for the New Bridge, the relationship to the Existing Bridge was always a key consideration. Generally, the intent was to complement the Existing Bridge, not replicate its features. Without knowing the final outcomes of the historical review process, the VQM aims to be consistent with the advisement of MnDOT s Cultural Resources Unit provided to date. By the nature of its grand scale, the Winona Bridge project includes a visually distinct pair of structures set within the picturesque Mississippi River environment and integrally linked with the City of Winona s waterfront and neighborhoods. It is visually present from many different vantage points complementing the surrounding bluffs and architectural towers in Downtown Winona. The primary objective of the VQM is to provide aesthetic design guidelines for the new companion bridge and supporting elements that sensitively complement the unique existing structure and context. The VQM development was led by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) District 6 and also included the Bridge Office, Cultural Resources Unit, and Landscape Architecture Unit. MnDOT contracted with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. to provide preliminary design and engineering including bridges, roadways and supporting infrastructure, including team members TY LIN and Illumination Arts. Collaboratively, the consultant team facilitated the visual quality planning process and prepared the Visual Quality Manual. 1.4 Context Sensitive Solutions Approach During project development, MnDOT and the consultant team applied a Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) planning and design approach that recognizes every project is unique within its own context. The project s setting, community values, and the needs of transportation users are all contributing factors that must be evaluated and considered together. CSS is a multi-disciplinary, collaborative approach that involves stakeholders to develop a transportation facility that fits its physical CHAPTER 1 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 13

14 Introduction Figure 1.3 Floodplain forest on Latsch Island Figure 1.4 River bluff Figure 1.5 Huff-Lamberton House is historically eligible residential district setting and preserves scenic, aesthetic, historic, and environmental resources, while maintaining safety and mobility. CSS principles include the employment of early, continuous, and meaningful involvement of the public and all stakeholders throughout the project development process. This approach leads to successful design and implementation of a project that is acceptable to stakeholders and communities alike. Figure 1.6 Building in Downtown Winona commercial historic district 1.5 Visual Quality Review Committee Process The Visual Quality Review Committee (VQRC) is comprised of a diverse cross-section of local stakeholders, MnDOT technical staff, and the consultant team. The local stakeholders participation and ongoing commitment in advising the project contributed local knowledge of values, issues, and other planning efforts. Seven VQRC meetings were held in the fall of 14 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

15 Introduction Figure 1.7 Levee Park Figure 1.8 Municipal Marina on Latsch island Figure 1.9 4th St. (TH43) Figure 1.10 Winona St. (looking north towards the bridge) Each meeting included presentations of design considerations and concepts for visual quality elements, and the interaction of stakeholders through question and answer discourse. Full meeting notes are included in Appendix A. The VQRC created a project vision statement that established a philosophical underpinning for the design development: The Winona Bridge should reflect the current era while respecting the past. The existing bridge is a visual icon for the city, and so the new bridge should defer its prominent visual presence. The new bridge should celebrate the river s natural beauty and the cultural history of Winona that is intertwined with the river. Together, the two bridges should symbolize a welcoming gateway to beauty, culture, and prosperity. Committee members identified preferred aesthetic concepts for project design elements from the range of options presented by the consultant team. The VQM represents the VQRC s combined input. Nevertheless, throughout the course of the input process, there CHAPTER 1 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 15

16 Introduction VIEWS: KEY GRAPHIC Bridge 5930 Municipal Marina 14 Back Channel 5 Floodplain Forest, typ. 4 Latsch Island Boathouses 7 Riverview Dr. 2 3 Waterfront Trail New Bridge 1 Bridge 5900 Boathouses 4 Swimming Beach Railroad Mississippi River Grand St. Wilson St. W. Broadway Huff- Lamberton House Broadway Residential Historic District 12b YMCA 9 11b 12a 11a Courthouse Monument Works Figure 1.11 Key views to and from the bridge in the immediate area. Harriet St. Huff St. 13b Winona St. 8 10a Washington St. 13a Johnson St. 10b Water Works Main St. 5th St. 4th St. 3rd St. Center St. 6 Front St. 2nd St. Commercial Historic District Lafayette St. Walnut St. Levee Park Market St. 5 were several items for which complete consensus was not achieved. In such cases, the concept options preferred by a majority are noted, recognizing that the inherent subjectivity of some decisions resulted in some dissenting opinions. The VQRC s recommendations are advisory and are subject to change in final design pending further review by MnDOT, the final design team, and other jurisdictional agencies. VQRC participants should be commended for their commitment and creative input. Subsequently, all recommendations in the VQM are subject to City of Winona staff and council review and approval. MnDOT will facilitate ongoing discussion with the city regarding the design cost and maintenance responsibilities of all the recommendations herein as the project progresses into the final design phase, in order to develop a cooperative agreement. 1.6 Significant Views The VQRC stated strong preferences for a project that visually fits the surrounding natural landscape and built environment and respects the aesthetic of the Existing Bridge. Understanding the importance of specific views helped the project design team anticipate the visual experience for multiple user groups including motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, river recreational users, and adjacent properties. Anchored in an urban 16 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

17 Introduction VIEWS: KEY GRAPHIC DETAIL 15 Actual View 15 Location off Map 16 Surrounding Bluff Tops 16 Wisconsin Approach Highways 35 and 54 (Great River Road) Bridge 5900 Bridge 5930 Latsch Island Wildlife Refuge 17 Mississippi River Downtown Winona 16 Bluffside Park Lake Winona Surrounding Bluff Tops 16 Garvin Heights Park (View Shown in Figure 1.15) TH 61 and US 14 Sugarloaf Park 16 Figure 1.12 Key views to and from the bridge from the surroundings. area and spanning a natural resource environment with high recreational usage, the project will be visible from many vantage points. The following list summarizes key views identified during the Environmental Assessment Visual Resources Analysis and subsequent input from the VQRC that are part of the comprehensive visual quality of the project area. The views are referenced in the above maps, and photographs are included on the following pages. Key Views List 1. Views from Existing Bridge along the Mississippi River (Fig 1.14) 2. View from Riverview Drive (Fig 1.15) 3. View from Waterfront Trail (Fig 1.16) 4. View from the Latsch Island shoreline (Fig 1.17) 5. View from the river surface (Fig 1.18) 6. View from Levee Park (Fig 1.19) 7. View from shoreline boathouses (Fig 1.20) 8. View from the 4th St. and Winona St. intersection (Fig 1.21) 9. View from the West Broadway and Winona St. intersection (Fig 1.22) 10. View from the Winona County Courthouse (Fig 1.23) 11. View from 2nd St. (Fig 1.24) CHAPTER 1 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 17

18 Introduction 12. View from 3rd St. (Fig 1.25) 13. View from 4th St. approach (Fig 1.26) 14. View from Latsch Island entering Minnesota (Fig 1.27) 15. View from the Great River Road (Fig 1.28) 16. Views from surrounding bluff tops (Fig 1.29) 17. Bird s eye view looking upstream (Fig 1.30) 1a Figure 1.13 View from the Existing Bridge upstream 18 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

19 Introduction 1b Figure 1.14 View from the Existing Bridge downstream 2 Figure 1.15 View from Riverview Drive CHAPTER 1 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 19

20 Introduction 3 Figure 1.17 View from the Waterfront Trail atop the flood protection levee 4 Figure 1.16 View from Latsch Island Shoreline upstream 20 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

21 Introduction 5 Figure 1.18 View from the river surface 6 Figure 1.19 View from Levee Park CHAPTER 1 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 21

22 Introduction 7 Figure 1.21 View from shoreline boathouses 8 Figure 1.20 View from the 4th St. and Winona St. intersection 22 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

23 Introduction 9 Figure 1.22 View from the West Broadway and Winona St. intersection 10a Figure 1.23 Above: (10a) View to the Winona County courthouse from the Existing Bridge CHAPTER 1 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 23

24 Introduction 10b Figure 1.25 View from the courthouse at street level 11a Figure 1.24 View from 2nd St. looking east 24 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

25 Introduction 11b Figure 1.26 View from 2nd St. looking west 12a Figure 1.27 View from 3rd St. looking west CHAPTER 1 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 25

26 Introduction 12b Figure 1.28 View from 3rd St. looking east 13a Figure 1.29 View from 4th St. looking west 26 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

27 Introduction 13b Figure 1.30 View from 4th St. looking east 14 Figure 1.31 View from Latsch Island entering Minnesota CHAPTER 1 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 27

28 Introduction 15 Figure 1.33 View of the Great River Road in Wisconsin 16 Figure 1.32 View from surrounding bluff tops looking north (City of Winona in foreground) 28 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

29 Introduction 17 Figure 1.34 Bird s eye view looking upstream (City of Winona at left/latsch Island at right) CHAPTER 1 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 29

30 This page left blank intentionally 30 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

31 2. Existing Bridge 5900 Visual Overview 2.1 Overview The Existing Bridge, completed in 1942, has been determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A-Transportation, as a major river crossing important to Winona s economy. It is also eligible under Criterion C-Bridge Design and Engineering, as the State s only surviving example of a cantilever through-truss design used for long spans and built prior to Character defining features are physical elements that represent a property s historical significance. Previous evaluation of the Main Channel Bridge established three main character defining features: Steel, riveted, cantilever through-truss, design and construction Deck-truss design and construction for approach spans Architectural stylistic elements used in design of concrete bridge piers for the cantilever spans and deck-truss approach spans Figure 2.1 View of Existing Bridge from Latsch Island CHAPTER 2 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 31

32 Existing Bridge Visual Overview As designs were developed for the new bridge and evaluated by the VQRC, the compatibility to the iconic quality of the Existing Bridge was always a key consideration. Following is a select compilation of images of the bridge illustrating the character defining features that contribute to its visual quality. Figure 2.3 Through-truss Figure 2.2 Main span 32 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

33 Existing Bridge Visual Overview Figure 2.5 Main piers Figure 2.4 Deck truss CHAPTER 2 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 33

34 Existing Bridge Visual Overview Figure 2.7 North abutment Figure 2.6 Approach spans Figure 2.8 South abutment and wing walls 34 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

35 This page left blank intentionally CHAPTER 2 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 35

36 This page left blank intentionally 36 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

37 3. Design Elements 3.1 Design Approach 3.2 Bridge Piers and Overlooks 3.3 Abutments and Retaining Walls 3.4 Railings and Barriers 3.5 Colors and Finishes 3.6 Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation 3.7 River Connection and Landscaping 3.8 Signage 3.9 Roadway Lighting 3.10 Aesthetic Lighting 3.11 Design Summary 3.1 Design Approach A primary objective of the VQM is to provide aesthetic design guidelines for the new companion bridge and supporting elements that sensitively complement the unique existing structure and context. The Existing Bridge is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and therefore subject to review in compliance with the Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. As designs were developed for the New Bridge, the relationship to the Existing Bridge was always a key consideration. Visits to the project site and research into the original plans for the Existing Bridge served as key sources of inspiration for the project design. The notion of Reconnecting to the Mississippi River emerged as a central theme that was explored figuratively in the forms and patterns of structural features, and literally, through improved pedestrian and bicycle connections. This theme resonated with the VQRC, whose members emphasized the importance of the river to the community and ongoing challenges in efforts to overcome physical barriers limiting access and enjoyment of the riverfront. As a result, design efforts broadened beyond the bridge to develop a conceptual vision for the immediate surroundings affected by the project as recreational public space. Figure 3.1 Aerial View of the Mississippi River near the Project Area CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 37

38 Design Elements DESIGN RENDERINGS Figure 3.2 View of the project looking upstream from the Waterfront Trail near Levee Park Figure 3.3 View of the project looking downstream from the Waterfront Trail near Riverview Drive 38 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

39 Design Elements DESIGN RENDERINGS Figure 3.4 View of the project from the existing bridge traveling northbound towards Latsch Island Figure 3.5 View of the project from the new bridge traveling southbound towards Winona CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 39

40 Design Elements 3.2 Bridge Piers and Overlooks The alignment of the new bridge piers with the piers of the existing bridge serves both functional and aesthetic aims. Functionally, the required navigational clearance is maintained. Aesthetically, the two bridges will appear in harmony with each other and maintain a consistently clear view of the river channel under the main spans. All pier concepts were intended to be distinct from, but complementary to, the Existing Bridge. Two alternative concepts are illustrated herein. Concept A has a historical aesthetic referencing features of the existing bridge s architectural design. Concept B has an organic aesthetic inspired by the floodplain forest. The committee generally preferred Concept B. Overlooks 12 deep x 50 long will be incorporated into bridge design. Further confirmation of the overlook size will occur during final design including refinement to the supporting brackets based on the structural requirements of the twin-wall pier type. Refer to the Preliminary Bridge Plans in Appendix B for further detail. The committee also desires to see an interpretive plan developed including multiple stopping points that would focus on historical and natural resources and can CONCEPT A Figure 3.6 Concept A - view of main span looking downstream 40 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

41 Design Elements be informative to both residents and visitors alike. The overlooks will offer unmatched views of the grandeur of the Mississippi River and would be two primary focal points to incorporate interpretive elements within the overall experience. CONCEPT B Figure 3.7 Concept B - view of main span looking downstream (preferred by VQRC majority) CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 41

42 Design Elements CONCEPT A 4-6 Railing Height 12 x 50 Overlook Twin Pier Walls with Surface Relief Pier Base Figure 3.8 Concept A - view of main river pier 11 CONCEPT B 4-6 Railing Height 12 x 50 Overlook Twin Pier Walls with Surface Relief Pier Base Figure 3.9 Concept B - view of main river pier 11 (preferred by VQRC majority) 42 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

43 Design Elements CONCEPT A Figure 3.10 Concept A - view of approach piers looking north towards the river CONCEPT B Figure 3.11 Concept B - view of approach piers looking north towards the river (preferred by VQRC majority) CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 43

44 Design Elements 3.3 Abutments and Retaining Walls South Abutment The Existing Bridge s south abutment will be reconstructed consistent with the original aesthetics including architectural corner pilaster features but conforming to the new roadway alignment. The New Bridge s south abutment will be connected to the Existing Bridge, but separated by a shallow recess to create a subtle visual break between the two. The concept for the new abutment and retaining wall surface aesthetics also included prominent corner pilasters and referenced the SOUTH ABUTMENT PLAN Abutment Wall Existing Bridge s architectural design including vertical pilasters and arches as surface relief. North Abutment The Existing Bridge s north abutment will remain in place. As in the south approach area, the New Bridge s north abutment will be connected to the existing bridge, but separated by a shallow angled recess. The concept for the new abutment and retaining wall also included prominent corner pilasters and referenced the Existing Bridge s architectural design, similar to the south abutment. 3rd St. View, Figures 3.13, 3.14 New Pilaster New Retaining Wall New Bridge Abutment Connection Shallow Recess Existing Corner Pilaster Replaced in Kind Existing Bridge Retaining Wall Replaced in Kind Replace Original Corner Pilaster that Was Removed when Existing Walk Was Added South Abutment Area Figure 3.12 South abutment area plan view Key Graphic 44 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

45 Design Elements SOUTH ABUTMENT CONCEPT A Flat Slab Span with Haunches 6 Railing Height over Street Transition to 4-6 Railing Height Corner Pilaster Wall Surface Treatment 3rd St. Figure 3.13 Concept A: South abutment at 3rd St. SOUTH ABUTMENT CONCEPT B Flat Slab Span with Haunches 6 Railing Height over Street Transition to 4-6 Railing Height Corner Pilaster Wall Surface Treatment 3rd St. Figure 3.14 Concept B: South abutment at 3rd St. (preferred by VQRC majority) CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 45

46 Design Elements NORTH ABUTMENT PLAN View, Figure 3.15 Limestone Rip Rap below Bridge Abutment New Corner Pilaster Retaining Wall New Bridge Stone Slope Paving Replaced below Bridge Abutment Connection Recess Existing Bridge Existing Corner Pilaster Trail below Bridges Replace Original Corner Pilaster that Was Removed when Existing Walk Was Added North Abutment Area Key Graphic Figure 3.15 North abutment area plan view 46 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

47 Design Elements Potential Refinements Refer to the Preliminary Bridge Plans in Appendix B for more detail on wall surface treatments. During the initial stages of the final design phase, a retaining wall alignment will be reviewed in further detail to best balance reconstruction of the historic wall, historic railings, historic lighting, shoulder geometrics and snow storage needs. NORTH ABUTMENT CONCEPT Corner Pilaster 4-6 Railing Height 4-6 Railing Height Wall Surface Relief Trail with Fence Limestone Rip Rap Slope Treatment Latsch Island Access Road Figure 3.16 North abutment area CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 47

48 Design Elements 3.4 Railings and Barriers The minimum pedestrian railing height required in most locations is 54 above the trail surface. Where the bridge crosses over local roadways and the railroad, taller heights are required. A 72 railing height will be used over City streets. MnDOT will seek a variance from Union Pacific Railroad for the railing height over the railroad tracks to be 72 rather than the 120 standard height. Railing height transitions, where needed, should be gradual rather than abrupt. The committee expressed a desire to have the exterior pedestrian railing be as visually open as possible to allow views to the river. In conjunction with Concept B piers, the pattern of the metal work in the railing panel concept is inspired by the arching branches of the surrounding floodplain forest. The committee also suggested the idea of incorporating a paddle wheel motif at the overlooks. In the committee s view, additional refinement is desired to the concept to minimize visual obstructions to children and people using wheelchairs while maintaining the aesthetic intent. A potential alternative is illustrated in Figure The vehicle barrier will be a low concrete parapet (Type P-2 TL-4) with a metal tube railing (Type T-1) on top for both the interior and exterior conditions to maximize visual openness. Refer to MnDOT s standard details. Concrete Parapet with Metal Tube Railing Overlook with Paddle Wheel Motif Pedestrian Railing Arching Branches Motif Pedestrian Railing Figure 3.17 View of railings and barriers near an overlook 48 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

49 Design Elements Figure 3.18 View of railings and barriers near an overlook - close-up Overlook with Paddle Wheel Motif Pedestrian Railing Concrete Parapet with Metal Tube Railing Arching Branches Motif Pedestrian Railing Figure 3.19 View of railings and barriers near an overlook - along the trail CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 49

50 Design Elements Stepped Transition 4-6 Railing Height 5-3 Railing Height 6 Railing Height 10 Tall Curb Figure 3.20 Elevation view of railing with height transitions (heights are from walk surface) Stepped Transition 4-6 Railing Height 5-3 Railing Height 6 Railing Height 10 Tall Curb Figure 3.21 Elevation view of alternative railing panel detail 50 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

51 Design Elements 3.5 Colors and Finishes The concrete features of the Existing Bridge have a cool gray color generally, with some variation in the south approach area where some areas have been painted over time. The final finish specifications for the existing bridge requires further investigation during final design in consultation with MnDOT CRU. For initial comparison purposes, the new bridge is illustrated in both a cool gray and a buff color reminiscent of the native limestone geology. A majority of the committee preferred the buff color since it had a warmer appearance and made a connection to the local natural character of the limestone outcroppings, but some committee members felt that using gray on the new bridge would make it fit better with the existing bridge. Paint colors for railings are illustrated in a gray intended to resemble the gray finish of the existing truss. The finish system specifications are undetermined. Options would include standard special surface finish (a cementitious coating with integral color) or a stain that penetrates the concrete surface. All final color selections for both concrete and steel surfaces will be made during final design utilizing the Federal Standard Color System. CONCRETE COLOR PALETTE OPTIONS STEEL RAILING COLOR PALETTE OPTIONS Figure 3.22 Color palette options (colors shown are approximate and do not represent actual Federal Standard swatches) CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 51

52 Design Elements GRAY TONE Figure 3.23 Gray tone concrete surface finish color comparison BUFF TONE Figure 3.24 Buff tone concrete surface finish color comparison (preferred by VQRC majority) 52 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

53 Design Elements 3.6 Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation Further review of the pedestrian and bicycle circulation system within the preliminary roadway layout led to a number of proposed revisions to address several issues: safety concerns at approach to the Winona St./4th St. intersection, improved connections to the riverfront, and potential flooding of the trail on Latsch Island. South Approach Proposed Revisions The trail approach from the bridge to the Winona St./4th St. intersection is realigned in an S curve away from the roadway to address safety concerns. A pedestrian route is proposed from the Winona St./4th St. intersection under the bridges towards the riverfront. The route would cross both 3rd St. and 2nd St. at grade. It would veer west approaching the railroad towards Huff St. and Riverview Drive and could potentially cross the railroad at grade at the same location that these roadways currently do. A new sidewalk is proposed along the east side of Huff St. between 2nd. St. and the railroad where none currently exists to facilitate connections to the riverfront. A potential stair is under consideration from the trail on the new bridge down to ground level in the vicinity of 2nd St. At this location, the height would be approximately 37. This location would also facilitate better connections to the downtown commercial area. The stair design details will be resolved in final design. North Approach Proposed Revisions The trail under the bridges on Latsch Island is relocated up the slope where it would be above the 100 year flood elevation. Reconstruction of stone slope paving and integration of the trail with existing stone steps requires further collaboration with project historian. Figure 3.25 Conceptual view of potential stair near 2nd St. in the south approach area (graphic is intended to illustrate the approximate size and location of the stair. Structural support and railing details require further development in final design). CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 53

54 Design Elements SOUTH APPROACH Potential Trailhead Riverview Dr. Huff St. 3rd St. 2nd St. Potential Stair Railroad Existing Waterfront Trail Shoreline 4th St.. New Bridge Winona St. Abutment Existing Bridge 5900 Bridge Trail (Proposed) At-Grade Trail (Existing/Portions to be Reconstructed) Sidewalk (Existing/Portions to be Reconstructed) MRT Trail Shoulder Bikeway (Existing) Potential Path at Ground Level (Proposed) South Approach Area Key Graphic Figure 3.26 South approach area pedestrian and bicycle circulation routes 54 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

55 Design Elements NORTH APPROACH Marina Parking Business New Bridge Abutment Existing Bridge 5900 Main Channel Fence adjacent steep slope Stone steps to remain Existing Bridge 5930 Historic stone slope paving below bridge 5900 Shoreline North Channel Boathouses Connection to trail across north channel railroad bridge, under development by others Bridge Trail (Proposed) Bridge Trail (Existing) At-Grade Trail (Above 100 Yr Flood Plain Elevation) North Approach Area Key Graphic Figure 3.27 North approach area pedestrian and bicycle circulation routes CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 55

56 Design Elements 3.7 River Connection and Landscaping South Approach The physical makeup of the space under and around the south approach area will change significantly with the construction of the New Bridge and the associated right of way acquisition. Recognizing an opportunity to build upon the goals of the City s Comprehensive Plan to strengthen riverfront connections, the committee established a priority for development of the ground level area as an attractive and programmed public space. The south approach concept is characterized as an informal urban promenade. Stormwater treatment areas combining rain gardens with open water features are envisioned as amenities with landscaping and opportunities to teach about environmental stewardship. Further development of the plan requires coordination between MnDOT and the City, including agreement on long-term maintenance responsibilities. Key features of the South Approach River Connection and Landscape Plan include: An entry plaza at the Winona St./4th St. intersection Pathways extending under the bridges towards the riverfront Preservation and rehabilitation of the historic paver area under the existing bridge between 2nd St. and 3rd St. Integrated stormwater treatment basins SOUTH APPROACH Stormwater Pond, typ. Paving Under Bridges RR Crossing Small Performance Space Riverview Dr. Overlook Terrace and Trailhead with Kiosk Huff St. 4th St.. Approx. 1 Ac re Avail able for Redevelo velopmen e t Entry Plaza Terraced Plantings Kiosk 3rd St. Approx. 0.2 Acre Availabl e for Redevelopment 2nd St. Boulder Terraces Appr ox. 1 Ac re Avail able for Rede edeveloe elopmen pment Potential Stair Railroad Shoreline New Bridge Existing Bridge 5900 Winona St. Approx. pr 1 Acre Avail able for Rede velopmen pment Infiltration Basins Historic Paver Area Stone Seat Walls, typ. Planting Bed and Low Wall, typ. Cross Walk, typ. Waterfront Trail Figure 3.28 South approach river connection and landscape plan WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

57 Design Elements A small informal performance space A trailhead for the Waterfront Trail Landscaping emphasis on native plants Select cultivars where applicable in specific site locations Tree and shrub groupings to define paths and spaces Massings of perennials and grasses to provide seasonal color and texture Native limestone planter seat walls Lighting and additional furnishings (not illustrated currently) North Approach The north approach landscape concept enhances the existing natural site character, planting along contoured embankments around the abutment area, the trail route, and stormwater treatment ponds, will blend with the surroundings. The Minnesota state entry sign facing southbound traffic can be accentuated by landscaping. Specific features include: Floodplain forest clusters on embankments and around pond edges Native prairie seeding on open upland areas Native wet meadow seeding around stormwater treatment ponds and any impacted shoreline Figure 3.29 View of rain gardens and pedestrian paths where a window of sky opens up between the bridges, south approach Figure 3.30 View of pedestrian path and landscaping approaching 3rd St. on the west side of the new bridge CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 57

58 Design Elements NORTH APPROACH Marina Parking Business Native Wet Meadow Seeding Around Ponds New Bridge Abutment Existing Bridge 5900 Existing Bridge 5930 Main Channel Shoreline Fence adjacent steep slope Stone Steps to Remain North Channel Historic stone slope paving below Bridge 5900 Boathouses Connection to Trail across Back Channel Railroad Bridge under Development by Others Figure 3.31 North approach river connection and landscape plan Trail Under Bridges Tree and Shrub Massings and Native Prairie Seeding Figure 3.32 View of native prairie seeding and tree and shrub massings along the trail beneath the bridges 58 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

59 Design Elements 3.8 Signage Three sign structures are proposed on the new bridge in the following locations: An overhead sign bridge near the south abutment A cantilever sign structure at Pier 9 (transition pier) A cantilever sign structure at Pier 12 (transition pier) The MnDOT Site Development Unit has initially selected a Type 3 state entry sign (same as the existing sign) oriented towards southbound traffic entering Minnesota from the North Approach area. The specific area would be located on the west embankment adjacent the roadway entering Minnesota from Wisconsin. The committee expressed interest in reconsidering the potential for either a Type 1 or Type 2 sign in the interest of enhancing the visual appeal of the area for tourism. Further discussion on selection of the appropriate sign type is warranted. Figure 3.33 Example overhead sign structure Figure 3.34 Example cantilever sign structure Figure 3.35 Type 1 state entry sign Figure 3.36 Type 2 state entry sign Figure 3.37 Type 3 state entry sign CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 59

60 Design Elements SOUTH APPROACH Overhead Sign Bridge (Sign 1) Cantilever Overhead Sign (Sign 2) 4th St.. 3rd St. 2nd St. Railroad New Bridge Winona St. Existing Bridge 5900 Waterfront Trail Shoreline SIGN 1 MESSAGES SIGN 2 MESSAGE Figure 3.38 South approach primary signage plan 60 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

61 Design Elements NORTH APPROACH Cantilever Overhead Sign (Sign 3) Potential State Entrance Sign Marina Parking Business New Bridge Existing Bridge 5900 Existing Bridge 5930 Main Channel Shoreline Trail Under Bridges North Channel Boathouses SIGN 3 MESSAGE Figure 3.39 North approach primary signage plan CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 61

62 Design Elements 3.9 Roadway Lighting Implementation of continuous roadway lighting from the Winona St. and 4th St. intersection across the New Bridge and Existing Bridge is consistent with the current lighting extents and will connect with existing lighting on the Bridge 5930 across the North Channel to Wisconsin. Good visibility on roadways at night results from lighting (both fixed and vehicular), which provides adequate pavement illumination with good uniformity and appropriate illumination of adjacent areas. Using AASHTO intermediate level guidelines for the principal arterial classification, a 1.2 foot-candle lighting level is recommended for the roadway and a 0.8 foot-candle level for the trail on the bridge and approaches. The proposed design can achieve these lighting guidelines, but should be re-verified based on final fixture selection and location. See Appendix D for further detail on lighting guidelines and photometric analysis. Existing Bridge Accurately reproduce the historic lighting standards Replica light standards (poles) on the approach spans (approximately 25 tall) Replica down lights mounted within the truss over the roadway Further development of the lighting scheme for historic Bridge 5930 requires continued collaboration with the project historian. New Bridge Base option - MnDOT standard LED light poles mounted on the barrier between the roadway and trail with recessed lens (approximately 35 tall) focused on both the roadway and trail Enhanced option - similar layout with an upgraded pole and luminaire The committee expressed strong interest in minimizing stray light and preferred the appearance of the enhanced fixture option for lighting on the new bridge. Final selection will be determined in final design and involve coordination with the City on costs and maintenance. EXISTING BRIDGE NEW BRIDGE OPTIONS Figure 3.40 Historic light standard Figure 3.41 MNdot standard base led option Figure 3.42 Potential enhanced option ( Hestia model by Schreder or approved equal) 62 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

63 Design Elements ROADWAY LIGHTING MnDOT Standard LED Light Pole (Approx. 35 Mounting Height) Original Light Standard (Approx. 25 Mounting Height) 50 Approx. New Bridge Single-side layout on barrier between trail and roadway Lights both trail and roadway Existing Bridge Reproduce historic lighting standards Staggered layout both sides of bridge Figure 3.43 Base lighting design cross section view (looking north) at approach spans ROADWAY LIGHTING MnDOT Standard LED Light Pole (Approx. 35 Mounting Height) Replica Original Light Fixture (Mounted to Truss Bracing) 70 Approx. Peak Height of Through-truss 50 Approx. New Bridge Single-side layout on barrier between trail and roadway Lights both trail and roadway Existing Bridge Reproduce historic lighting standards Figure 3.44 Base lighting design cross section view (looking north) at main span CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 63

64 Design Elements 3.10 Aesthetic Lighting Approach Though the new Winona Bridge and the existing, historic truss bridge are separate structures being designed and constructed under separate contracts, the aesthetic lighting of the two must be treated as a single, unified nighttime image. In keeping with the Secretary of the Interior s standards for historic structures, the truss bridge must take visual precedence at night. In order for the two to work as a unified vision, the lighting of each must be independently designed with both in mind. After reviewing a number of options, the committee provided the following guidelines for aesthetic lighting: The lighting should be subtle The two bridges should act as one Light pollution is of concern Use white light, not colored or color changing lighting Use washes of light, rather than necklace or other direct view lighting Pier lighting is desirable Existing Bridge Committee input: The height and form of the above deck truss should be visible at night Grazing light on the truss members is an attractive goal Light the edges and interior arches of the piers The lighting of the historic truss bridge will create the sense of a portal through which drivers will pass on their way from Winona to Wisconsin while controlling AESTHETIC LIGHTING - NEW BRIDGE Figure 3.45 Schematic illuminated night view of the new bridge main spans over the river 64 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

65 Design Elements the amount of light escaping into the surrounding environment. The roadway-facing sides of the angled, vertical truss members will be washed with light from above, creating inverted V s of light. Grazing luminaires will wash the top horizontal truss members with light, creating a series of illuminated bands as one crosses over the bridge. Lighting of the piers will connect the bridge to water and land, provide illumination for pedestrians under the elevated structure over land and create an opportunity for the two bridges to have a unified nighttime image. Mounted on the pier footings and aiming up, narrow beam floodlights graze the outer edges of the pier legs. In the archways created by the pier legs, pairs of spotlights are cross-aimed to illuminate the opposite faces of those inner surfaces. Reflected light off of the piers will illuminate the developed area under the bridge around and between the land piers. Further development of the lighting scheme for historic Bridge 5900 requires continued collaboration with the project historian. New Bridge Committee input: Wash the underside of the haunched girder with light Light the edges and interior arches of the piers Light the space between the twin walls of the main piers Since there is no above-deck structure to compete with the view of the existing bridge, the aesthetic lighting of the new structure will be more visible to those on water and land. Linear, grazing floodlights mounted near the main span and back span piers wash the undersides of the haunched box girders, revealing the beautiful curved forms and reflecting them in the water Figure 3.46 Schematic view of existing bridge lighting Figure 3.47 Schematic view of new bridge girder underside lighting CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 65

66 Design Elements below. The outside edges and inside archways of each pier of the new bridge will be illuminated with narrow beam floodlights mounted on the underside of the deck. At the two, unique main span piers, linear wall grazer luminaires mounted between the pier legs will illuminate the interior faces of those surfaces, creating a unique view of the main span from every angle. Critical to the success of the lighting design, a dimming control system will allow for balance to be achieved in the brightness of the two bridge structures. This internet or Ethernet-based system will also allow the aesthetic lighting to be remotely extinguished to address particular environmental conditions such as bird migration paths or heavy cloud cover or to be dimmed when reflectance from snow or ice might result in excessive light trespass. Figure 3.48 Illuminated night view of the project looking upstream from the Waterfront Trail near Levee Park 66 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT

67 Design Elements Figure 3.49 Illuminated night view of the project looking downstream from the Waterfront Trail near Riverview Drive Figure 3.50 Illuminated night view of the project from the existing bridge traveling northbound towards Latsch Island CHAPTER 3 VISUAL QUALITY MANUAL 67

68 Design Elements Figure 3.51 Illuminated night view of the project from the new bridge traveling southbound towards Winona 68 WINONA BRIDGE PROJECT