Proposal to Repair Bridge Sparks Debate

Compared to its towering arches and pillars, the chipped and rust-stained walls along each side of the Colorado Street Bridge are a minor feature that ordinarily garner little attention.

The arches, all nine of them, stretching 1,468 feet across the Arroyo Seco, cut an outline against the sky that inspired artists and impressed travelers driving along what used to be Route 66.

The guard walls, on the other hand, mainly kept pedestrians from falling off.

But now, 75 years after the bridge was built, the humble guard walls have become the focus of a preservation debate that could have an important influence on the future of the landmark bridge.

The city last week unveiled a $10.7-million plan to save the deteriorating span, which could fall apart in 10 to 15 years because of widespread rust and cracking concrete.

Although the plan would preserve the arches and pillars that give the bridge its graceful profile, the guard walls, which include quaint seating alcoves and cast ornamentation, may have to be replaced or obscured by modern traffic barriers to meet federal safety standards.

Local preservationists, who recently waged a losing battle to prevent the modernization of the historic Huntington Sheraton hotel, say that changing any part of the bridge would be an architectural loss for the community.

“The bridge has got to be repaired, but let’s not go overboard and lose the reason why we are renovating it in the first place,” said Sue Mossman, program director for Pasadena Heritage, a preservation group.

“If you think the uproar over the Huntington was bad, just wait and see what happens if they try to do something to the bridge.”

Pat Gelb, chief planner for the San Francisco-based engineering firm De Leuw, Cather & Co. , which presented the proposed alterations at a public hearing last Wednesday, conceded the changes would slightly alter the architectural character of the bridge.

But she added that if they are not made, the city could risk losing millions of dollars in federal subsidies that require a project to meet highway safety standards.

The one point that both sides concede is that if some work is not undertaken soon, the bridge could deteriorate beyond repair.

The main problems stem from cracks in the concrete that have allowed water to seep in and corrode steel reinforcement bars embedded in the arches and pillars.

Patches of dark rust stain the sides of the bridge. A network of cracks weave around many of the supporting columns, and chunks of concrete occasionally break off the span, smashing to the pavement below.

“There’s been concern going back to the ‘60s, but really there’s been no money to do anything about it,” said City Engineer Mitsugi Hino.

Hino said the bridge is in no danger of collapsing, but because of its age, the state has restricted traffic on it since 1976 to passenger cars and trucks weighing under 11 tons.

Much of the bridge is still in good condition, considering how old it is and how little maintenance has been done, Hino said.

The foundation is firm and the arches, despite some cracking, can be repaired, according to a city report done in 1983.

Built in 1913

The bridge was designed by engineer John Alexander Low Waddell and built in 1913 by the Mercereau Bridge and Construction Co. of Los Angeles at a cost of $202,000.

It was designed not only as convenient route across the Arroyo Seco, but also as an impressive gateway into the City of Pasadena.

Its neo-Gothic arches soon became a fixture in the paintings of the colony of artists who lived near the Arroyo Seco in the early part of the century, and its design became an engineering landmark because of the length and height of the bridge.

Perhaps because of its height, about 160 feet above the arroyo, 95 people have committed suicide from the span, which over the years has also become known as “Suicide Bridge.”

According to the Police Department, about 30% of the suicides occurred during the Depression, when there were 9 to 10 suicides a year. There have been two suicides this year.

Community Opposed Demolition

The state has proposed tearing down the bridge three times in the past, most recently in 1977. But the community rallied to save it, and Pasadena Heritage has staged several fund-raising parties on the span, including one earlier this month.

The publicity helped the cause and the state eventually turned jurisdiction over the bridge over to the city.

The bridge was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1981 and the American Society of Civil Engineers’ Register of Civil Engineering Landmarks in 1975.

Hino said the city and its consulting engineers have tried to find a way to repair the bridge that is both historically accurate and structurally sound.

Eight alternatives, ranging from doing nothing to tearing down the bridge and building a new one at a cost of about $12 million, were originally considered.

Could Extend Life 75 Years

But the city eventually settled on a $10.7-million plan that would leave the arches intact but replace the columns and road deck above them. The appearance of the bridge would remain the same and its life expectancy would be extended 50 to 75 years, Hino said.

A major advantage would be that the federal government would reimburse the city for 80% of the construction costs if the project met several requirements. One is that the project must cost more than $10 million; another is the proviso that it meet all highway safety standards, Hino said.

“This project is asking for a significant amount of federal money,” Gelb said. “They want to make sure that what gets built is up to standards.”

Doesn’t Meet Standard

The plan would maintain the original appearance of the bridge and fulfill the federal requirements except in the case of the guard walls.

The safety standards require that the concrete walls be able to withstand a 60-m.p.h. crash, be at least 32 inches high and have a smooth surface that would deflect oncoming cars.

To meet those requirements, the city would have to either remove the seating alcoves and ornamentation on the rails or build a new barrier next to the roadway.

Neither alternative appeals to preservationists.

“The sleek modern look is just unacceptable,” said Claire Bogaard, executive director of Pasadena Heritage. “It would no longer be the Colorado Street Bridge for me.”

The state Office of Historic Preservation has also voiced concerns about the guard wall design and urged the Federal Highway Administration to bend in its demands for a standard road barrier.

Federal Standards Questioned

Bogaard said that although safety was important, the 60-m.p.h. crash barriers seems ridiculous in light of the fact that the posted speed limit is 25 m.p.h. for cars and 15 m.p.h. for trucks weighing more than five tons.

“The fact is, there are no accidents on that bridge,” she said. “We should be concerned about safety, but let’s try to be reasonable.”

The engineering report showed that about 5,400 cars travel over the bridge each day, and there are about four accidents a year on it.

Gelb said she understood the concerns about the guard walls, but she said making them meet safety standards “does not seem to be a negotiable point” with the Federal Highway Administration.

She said the community should focus on choosing a compromise design that would protect the bridge’s important historical features and also meet the safety requirements.

Not All Bad

“The options are limited, but that doesn’t mean they are all bad,” she said.

At the public hearing Wednesday, only one of the 25 people in attendance urged the city to abandon its plans to change or build new guard walls.

“There hasn’t been any great public outcry,” Gelb said. “The community wants the project and it sounds to me like they are willing to compromise.”

But Bogaard said, “The community hasn’t spoken yet, and that will have a big impact.”