Colorado Street Bridge Task Force

Transcription

1 Colorado Street Bridge Task Force Community Meeting Maranatha High School 169 S. St. John Ave. Pasadena, CA February 20 th, :30 to 8:00 PM

2 Why a Task Force? - Recap On July 19, 2017, due to a recent and alarming trend, City Staff provided the City s Public Safety Committee a presentation on the Colorado Bridge; its history relative to suicides, statistics and literature on the subject, how others have dealt with similar issues, and several sample treatments or deterrents. After which, the City s Public Works Director assembled a Task Force with Community Members and representatives from the Historic Preservation Community, First Responders (Police and Fire), Public Health, Mental Health, Architects, and Engineers in hopes of developing options that are amenable to all stakeholders and the Community at large. 2

3 Task Force Recap Who We Are Ms. Claire Bogaard Mr. Melvyn Green, SE Ms. Sue Mossman Mr. Chris Peck, AIA, PE Ms. Andrea Rawlings Ms. Patricia Speelman, Dr. Ying Ying Goh, MD Detective Darryl Harris Mr. Michael Johnson Mr. Ara Maloyan, PE Ms. Kris Markarian, PE Mr. Brent Maue, PE Corporal Brad May Ms. Takako Suzuki Deputy Chief Jon Trautwein Pasadena Heritage, Pasadena Resident Structural Engineering Consult., Melvyn Green & Assoc. Pasadena Heritage, Pasadena Resident CM Peck Consulting, Pasadena Resident Architect, Pasadena Resident Division Director, Suicide Prevention Center - Didi Hirsch Health Officer, Pasadena Public Health Pasadena Police Department Director of Public Health, Pasadena Public Health Director of Public Works, Pasadena Public Works City Engineer, Pasadena Public Works Assistant City Engineer, Pasadena Public Works Pasadena Police Department City Council District Liaison Pasadena Fire Department 3

4 Task Force Recap Mission and Vision MISSION The mission of this Task Force is to engage the community in developing solutions that will deter people from attempting suicide on the Colorado Street Bridge while preserving its national historic character and significance. Vision Allow the community to experience and enjoy the Colorado Street Bridge and the Arroyo as a safe and beautiful environment now and in the future. 4

5 Task Force Recap Amended Timeline Oct. 18, 2017 Nov. 9, 2017 Nov. 16, 2017 Nov. 29, 2017 Dec. 13, 2017 Jan. 18, 2018 Feb, 1, 2018 Feb. 20, 2018 Mar Apr Task Force Meeting Introduction; Define Mission and Vision Task Force Meeting Create agenda for Community Meeting Task Force Meeting Bridge Site Visit Community Meeting Introduction, Listen, Learn; Solicit ideas from Community Members Task Force Meeting Evaluate ideas expressed at Community Meeting; Begin to define options Task Force Meeting Further refine options Task Force Meeting Determine feasible options to be presented to community for review and comment Community Meeting Present vetted options to community for comment Public Safety Committee Present Alternatives for Committee recommendation to Council City Council Meeting Present Alternatives for Council action Tentative Date Tentative Date 5

6 Task Force Recap - What are the Problems? With an overall height of 7 feet 6 inches, the existing barrier would appear to be adequate but there are several problem spots. 6

7 Task Force Recap - What are the Problems? Existing Barrier = Concrete Balustrade + Fencing Existing Combination Provides Footholds for Climbing 3 6 Fence Possible Footholds 4 Balustrade Footholds reduce effective vertical height to 4 feet easing effort needed to scale barrier. Multiple Peer Reviewed Studies indicate a minimum height with no footholds of 7-6. Existing Balustrade and Fencing Cross-Section of Ex. Barrier and Fencing 7

8 Task Force Recap - What are the Problems? Alcoves Seating area, balustrade/concrete rail, and light pedestal combine to provide steps to an elevation where jumpers can climb over the fencing. Gaps in the fencing at the light pedestals allow for even easier access. There are 20 alcoves on the bridge 10 on each side. Alcove on the Colorado Street Bridge 8

9 Task Force Recap - What are the Problems? Ends/Approaches Potential jumpers can climb to the outside of the barrier at these end points and walk the ledge to greater heights over the Arroyo. Light pedestal and concrete balustrade combination provides climbing ease for jumpers to get over any additional fencing extension that may be installed. West Bound Approach NE Corner of Colorado Street Bridge 9

10 Task Force Recap - What are the Problems? Ends/Approaches Cont. Once over the barrier, the outside ledge or Cornice allows a potential Jumper ease to move along bridge span, creating difficulty for First Responders. Negotiator setup affected Firefighter/airbag setup is hindered Existing Ledge Ledge or Cornice Is 7 inches wide 10 Section Through Cornice

11 Task Force Recap What s Been Done: Temporary Measure Alcove Fencing As a result of the recent uptick in suicides and attempts from the bridge, City Staff contracted the installation of temporary fencing at the alcove locations. a. Fencing is 10 feet tall located at all 20 alcoves. b. This fencing prevents entry to the locations which provide the easiest access over the barrier. c. This fencing is a temporary measure until a more permanent solution is identified and implemented. 11

12 Task Force Recap Temporary Measure: Alcove Fencing 12

13 Task Force Prior Community Meeting Oct. 18, 2017 Nov. 9, 2017 Nov. 16, 2017 Nov. 29, 2017 Dec. 13, 2017 Jan. 18, 2018 Feb, 1, 2018 Task Force Meeting Introduction; Define Mission and Vision Task Force Meeting Create agenda for Community Meeting Task Force Meeting Bridge Site Visit Community Meeting Introduction, Listen, Learn; Solicit ideas from Community Members Task Force Meeting Evaluate ideas expressed at Community Meeting; Begin to define options Task Force Meeting Further refine options Task Force Meeting Determine feasible options to be presented to community for review and comment Feb. 20, 2018 Community Meeting Present vetted options to community for comment On November 29 th, 2017 the Task Force met with the Community at the La Casita Del Arroyo to Mar. introduce 2018 the Public function Safety of the Committee Task Force, Present provide Alternatives background for information Committee on the suicide issue at the Colorado Street Bridge, and listen recommendation to the Community s to Council experiences relative to this issue Apr. as 2018 well as their City ideas Council for solutions. Meeting Present Alternatives for Council action 13

14 Prior Community Meeting Nov. 29 th, 2017 Dr. Ying Ying Goh 14

15 Prior Community Meeting Summary of Ideas 15

16 Physical Measures 1. Partial Vertical Barriers focus on weak points in the existing barrier. Pros Literature suggests a significant reduction in suicides Efforts are focused so potentially less aesthetic/visual impact Could be installed relatively quickly Cons Remaining barrier still relatively easy to circumvent Less effective than other measures researched Will affect aesthetics 2. Full Length Vertical Barriers barriers are installed for the full length of the structure Pros Literature suggests most effective measure in suicide reduction Increase chance of intervention Most preferred by survivors of suicidal jumps Cons May have large aesthetic impact Design likely to present structural challenges Partial Barrier (Excludes Piers) Clifton Suspension Bridge UK 16

17 Physical Measures Continued. 3. End Treatments barriers are installed perpendicular to the bridge to prevent access via the ends or approaches to the bridge Pros Reduces a potential jumper s ability to get out onto the ledge or cornice Could eliminate the need for cornice modifications Cons Affects bridge aesthetics If barrier is circumvented, would make return more difficult Existing Temporary End Treatment 17

18 Physical Measures - Continued. 4. Ledge Modifications surface could be modified to create a more difficult walking surface Pros Potential jumpers may be deterred from making an attempt if unable to use ledge for access or mobility Cons Modification would have an aesthetic impact If barrier is circumvented, return may be more difficult Existing Outside Bridge Ledge 18

19 Post Attempt Measures 1. Horizontal Barriers netting could be installed below the bridge deck to catch or otherwise discourage jumpers Pros Studies show significant reduction in suicides Limited effect on views from bridge Cons Significant impact on overall aesthetics of bridge Presents new challenges for First Responders extraction from netting Nothing prevents jumpers from completing a second jump Rendering of Bridge Netting 2. Plant Trees plant trees below the bridge to cushion landing or otherwise discourage jumping attempts Pros Positive effect on aesthetics Cons Weak evidence of effectiveness no verifying scientific data Long time to maturity Can t be planted along entire length 19

20 Post Attempt Measures Continued Areas Where Planting Trees Not Possible Planting Trees is not possible at several locations along the bridge alignment, including: At the bridge s highest point above the channel Over Arroyo Boulevard Over the portions of the alignment which are private property These locations total 320 or just over 20% of bridge s length 20 Trees in the Arroyo

21 Active Measures 1. Intercoms install intercoms or call boxes Pros Allow for almost immediate interaction once alerted Cons Installations at other locations have been largely ineffective 2. Volunteer Patrols utilize volunteers to patrol bridge Pros Human contact may be important in deterring suicide attempts Cons Weak evidence of effectiveness Patrols would require training May increase liability risk Intercom or Call Box 21

22 Active Measures Continued.. 3. Cameras install cameras that could monitor bridge activity Pros Would allow for remote monitoring Would allow First Responders to observe and assess situation before responding Cons Privacy concerns Who has monitoring responsibility Unknown effectiveness Requires response before any intervention can take place Closed Circuit Camera 4. Motion Sensors install devices that detect motion and alert responders Pros Earlier detection of potential jumpers Cons False alarms Unknown effectiveness 22

23 Change Environmental Conditions 1. Modify Lighting modify lighting to increase visibility or otherwise alter bridge environment Pros Additional lighting may serve as a deterrent Cons No evidence of effectiveness May have negative environmental effects on residents and wildlife 2. Plant Hedges plant hedges or landscape to provide positive psychological messages Pros Could have positive aesthetic effect Cons No evidence of effectiveness Would require a great deal of maintenance Lighting on Colorado Street Bridge 23

24 Self Help Measures Sign on Golden Gate Bridge 1. Signs Install signs with positive messages which include contacts for counseling Pros Evidence of reasonable effectiveness Utilize existing services Low time to deployment Cons Rely on suicidal individual to take action 2. Phone Line advertise/implement use of self help phone line Pros Utilize existing services No/low time to deployment Cons Rely on suicidal individual to take action 24

25 Self Help Measures Continued.. 3. Text Line advertise/implement use of self help phone line Pros Evidence of reasonable effectiveness Utilize existing services Low time to deployment Data shows teens and young adults much more likely to use text services Cons Rely on suicidal individual to take action Text Support Sign on Golden Gate Bridge 25

26 Summary of Ideas - Revisited 26

27 Mitigation Measures: How Do We Choose? Measure Type Physically Expected Environmental Effect On Time To Full Prevent Jumps? Effectiveness Aesthetics Impact Emer. Services Implementation Partial Barriers at Weak Points Yes Intermediate Full Length Barriers Yes Intermediate End Treatments Yes Intermediate Ledge or "Cornice" Modifications Possibly Intermediate Planting Trees No Many Years Horizontal Barriers (Netting) No Intermediate "Cushioning" Landscaping No Short to Inter. Additional Lighting No Short to Inter. Landscaped Encouragement No Short to Inter. Cameras No Intermediate Motion Sensors No Intermediate Volunteer Patrols No Short Speakers/Intercoms No Intermediate Signage No Short "Self Help" Text Line No Short "Self Help" Phone Line No Short Evaluation Matrix 27

28 Mitigation Measures: How Do We Choose? Measure Type Physically Expected Environmental Effect On Time To Full Prevent Jumps? Effectiveness Aesthetics Impact Emer. Services Implementation Partial Barriers at Weak Points Yes Intermediate Full Length Barriers Yes Intermediate End Treatments Yes Intermediate Ledge or "Cornice" Modifications Possibly Intermediate Planting Trees No Many Years Horizontal Barriers (Netting) No Intermediate "Cushioning" Landscaping No Short to Inter. Additional Lighting No Short to Inter. Landscaped Encouragement No Short to Inter. Cameras No Intermediate Motion Sensors No Intermediate Volunteer Patrols No Short Speakers/Intercoms No Intermediate Signage No Short "Self Help" Text Line No Short "Self Help" Phone Line No Short This Column Guided Our Recommendations 28

29 Mitigation Measures: How Do We Choose? Measure Type Physically Expected Environmental Effect On Time To Full Prevent Jumps? Effectiveness Aesthetics Impact Emer. Services Implementation 1. Prevent most attempts from even Partial Barriers at Weak Points Yes occurring. Intermediate Full Length Barriers Yes Intermediate End Treatments Yes These 2. Show prevention rates Intermediate between 80% Ledge or "Cornice" Modifications Possibly and 100%, depending Intermediate on design Planting Trees No variables. Many Years Horizontal Barriers (Netting) No 3. Would significantly reduce Intermediate or nearly "Cushioning" Landscaping No Short to Inter. eliminate strain on first responders. Additional Lighting No Short to Inter. Landscaped Encouragement No 4. Are passive and would Short therefore to Inter. not Cameras No require human oversight Intermediate or Motion Sensors No intervention to mitigate Intermediate an attempt. Volunteer Patrols No 5. Would require primarily a Short single up Speakers/Intercoms No Intermediate front installation cost and minimal Signage No Short on-going or legacy costs. "Self Help" Text Line No Short "Self Help" Phone Line No Short This Column Guided Our Recommendations 29

30 Mitigation Measures: How Do We Choose? Measure Type Physically Expected Environmental Effect On Time To Full Prevent Jumps? Effectiveness Aesthetics Impact Emer. Services Implementation Partial Barriers at Weak Points Yes Intermediate Full Length Barriers Yes Intermediate End Treatments Yes Intermediate Ledge or "Cornice" Modifications Possibly Intermediate Planting Trees No Many Years Horizontal Barriers (Netting) No These Then Intermediate "Cushioning" Landscaping No Become Short to Inter. Additional Lighting No Short to Inter. Landscaped Encouragement No Short to Inter. Cameras No Intermediate TT Motion Sensors No Intermediate Volunteer Patrols Primary No treatments and all others are Short Speakers/Intercoms No Intermediate complimentary in nature Signage No Short "Self Help" Text Line No Short "Self Help" Phone Line No Short 30

31 Recommendation The Immediate Future First Step Update signage to incorporate more widely used hotline number and text line Existing Signage Suggested Signage 31

32 Recommendation Future Objectives Design and Install: 1. Full Length Vertical Barriers With a minimum height above highest toehold of 7 6 Which will cover both sides of the bridge for its entire length, including the existing weak points 2. End Treatments Which deter a person s ability to walk the outside ledge to a location where a jump would cause serious injury or death 3. Complimentary Measures Will work in concert with the measures above to mitigate suicides and suicide attempts from the bridge to the greatest extent possible 32

33 Next Steps - Timeline The task force tentatively expects to present recommendations to City Leadership according to the following timeline: Mar Apr Public Safety Committee Present Alternatives for Committee recommendation to Council City Council Meeting Present Alternatives for Council action 33

34 Next Steps Project Design & Environmentals Upon Council approval and appropriation of funds, City Staff will generate a Request for Proposals to solicit interest and select a consultant whose tasks will include: Development of a vertical barrier design concept and completion of required environmental studies Public Outreach at critical steps in the design process, ensuring the stakeholders have a voice in the final design Complete Final Design and construction documents for a barrier system and complementary components meeting the criteria determined by the task force After completion of the tasks above, Staff will return to City Council for project approval and appropriation of construction funds. 34

35 We would like to open the floor for comment. For more information, please visit the City s Website at:

36 Additional Information and References