Fence on Third Street bridge -why?

[cmyers]

Any idea why work has stopped on the fence? The Y-bridge in Akron also needed a fence, but they did a great designed. I am surprise Columbus is allowing a chain-link after doing a nice job with other public improvements downtown.

[ohbr]

cmyers wrote:

Any idea why work has stopped on the fence? The Y-bridge in Akron also needed a fence, but they did a great designed. I am surprise Columbus is allowing a chain-link after doing a nice job with other public improvements downtown.

That was a massive undertaking and a major part of the reason for the more pleasing design was the type of fence they were using needs more than steel posts for installation. They needed to prevent people from climbing it all together to commit suicide rather than just prevent people and objects from falling off of it. Ultimately, the design came out of the necessary function whereas the 3rd street bridge allows for a chain link fence. But yes, the city really should have tried to do something more aesthetic regardless of the function.

[CivilE]

Dedicated bike lanes (and pedestrian paths) on an overpass require a minimum 4′ high barrier. The existing concrete barrier on the bridge is 32″ and does not meet that requirement. Anti-vandal fencing (high, sometimes curved fencing that prohibits throwing heavy objects up and over the fence) is required if the crossing is over a highway or railway, but not a conventional road, as far as I can tell. The fencing will be required to be there when the dedicated bike lane is open. Some possibilities why standard chain-link fence is used: Standard chain-link is also used further north on Third St. (albeit this is anti-vandal fencing because it is over a freeway); Decorative is cost-prohibitive for the budget for the project; A future bridge project may be programmed to replace the chain like with decorative; Or the 4′ barrier requirement may have been missed in the design/review process and the fence was added as change order or addendum, thus requiring the least expensive option to achieve the design requirement.

[CMH2579]

CivilE wrote:

Dedicated bike lanes (and pedestrian paths) on an overpass require a minimum 4′ high barrier. The existing concrete barrier on the bridge is 32″ and does not meet that requirement. Anti-vandal fencing (high, sometimes curved fencing that prohibits throwing heavy objects up and over the fence) is required if the crossing is over a highway or railway, but not a conventional road, as far as I can tell. The fencing will be required to be there when the dedicated bike lane is open. Some possibilities why standard chain-link fence is used: Standard chain-link is also used further north on Third St. (albeit this is anti-vandal fencing because it is over a freeway); Decorative is cost-prohibitive for the budget for the project; A future bridge project may be programmed to replace the chain like with decorative; Or the 4′ barrier requirement may have been missed in the design/review process and the fence was added as change order or addendum, thus requiring the least expensive option to achieve the design requirement.

+1

[smegs]

Though I would’ve preferred having a more aesthetically pleasing fence, the chain link presents an opportunity for a possible low-cost art instillation. Since the bike lane is next to the fence, beautification might increase ridership and the attention to the lane. Obviously to a different scale, but I pass this fence on Hudson between High & Summit…

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Author]

Posts