Winona Bridge Project Manual - MnDOT · The Winona Bridge Project will rehabilitate and augment a...

February 11, 2014

Visual Quality Manual

Winona Bridge Project

W I N O N A B R I D G E P R O J E C T2

Minnesota Department of Transportation

Consulting Team

SRF Consulting Group

TY LIN

Illumination Arts

Acknowledgements

3A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S V I S U A L Q U A L I T Y M A N U A L

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 Offi ce

Scott Robinson, MnDOT Landscape Architecture Unit

Melissa Schultz, MnDOT Bridge Offi ce

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


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 Signifi cant 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

5

6

7

7

8

9

9

9

13

31

31

32

33

33

34

5T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S V I S U A L Q U A L I T Y M A N U A L

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

3.11 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

35

35

40

44

47

49

52

55

58


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 specifi c 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 85851 and other aspects of the approach roadways in the context of the planned rehabilitation of the existing Bridge 5900. Hereafter, Bridge 85851 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, traffi c barriers, colors and fi nishes, 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

7E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y V I S U A L Q U A L I T Y M A N U A L

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 fi nal 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.

In discussions with the VQRC, the notion of “Reconnecting to the Mississippi River” emerged as a central theme that was explored fi guratively in the forms and patterns of structural features, and literally through improved pedestrian and bicycle connections.

Intentionally, the design concepts leave some latitude for refi nement to the fi nal design team. The VQRC will have ongoing involvement with the fi nal 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.


This page left blank intentionally

9C H A P T E R 1 V I S U A L Q U A L I T Y M A N U A L

1. Introduction


1.2 Project Context


1.4 Context Sensitive Approach

1.5 Visual Quality Review Committee Process

1.6 Significant Views


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 unaff ected. 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 reconfi guration. 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 signifi cant as the state’s only surviving example of a cantilever through-truss dating from before 1946. 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 fl oodplain forest and wetlands near the river. Steep bluff s 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

W I N O N A B R I D G E P R O J E C T1 0

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 bluff s 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

1 1C H A P T E R 1 V I S U A L Q U A L I T Y M A N U A L

Introduction

Figure 1.2 Project area map (illustrating the conceptual layout)

New Bridge 85851New Bridge 85851

Mississippi RiverMississippi River

Main ChannelMain Channel

Mississippi RiverMississippi River

North ChannelNorth Channel

Huff St.

YMCA

Huff /

Lamberton

House

Courthouse

Winona St. Bridge 5930

Harriet St.

Washington St.

Johnson St.

Waterworks

Levee Park

Existing Bridge 5900Existing Bridge 5900

BoathousesBoathousesBoathousesBoathouses

Wa

terf

ron

t T

rail

Le

ve

eR

ive

rvie

w D

r.

Ra

ilro

ad

2n

d S

t.

3rd

St.

4th

St.

W. B

roa

dw

ay

Municipal MarinaMunicipal Marina

Latsch IslandLatsch Island

C H A P T E R 1 V I S U A L Q U A L I T Y M A N U A L

The Winona Bridge should refl ect 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




This Visual Quality Manual (VQM) for the Winona Bridge Project documents the visual quality review process and specifi c 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 Signifi cance and Character-Defi ning 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 fi nal 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 diff erent vantage points complementing the surrounding bluff s 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 Offi ce, 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 fi ts its physical

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

Figure 1.6 Building in Downtown Winona commercial historic 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.

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 eff orts. Seven VQRC meetings were held in the fall of

Introduction


Introduction

2013. 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 refl ect 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 identifi ed 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

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)


Introduction

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 fi nal design pending further review by MnDOT, the fi nal 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 fi nal design phase, in order to develop a cooperative agreement.

1.6 Significant Views

The VQRC stated strong preferences for a project that visually fi ts the surrounding natural landscape and built environment and respects the aesthetic of the Existing Bridge. Understanding the importance of specifi c 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

9

14

12a10b

11a

11b

12b

4

5

7

6

5

4

2 3

CommercialHistoricDistrict

Courthouse

MonumentWorks

Water Works

YMCA

Huff-Lamberton

House

Broadway Residential Historic District

Boathouses

Boathouses

Back Channel

Bridge 5930

Municipal Marina

Bridge 5900New Bridge

LatschIsland

2nd St.

Front St.

Railroad

Waterfront Trail

Riverview Dr.

3rd St.

4th St.

5th St.

W. Broadway Huff S

t.

Was

hingto

n St.

John

son S

t.

Main

St.

Cente

r St.

Lafay

ette S

t.

Waln

ut St

.

Marke

t St.

Harrie

t St.

Wils

on S

t.

Gran

d St.

Wino

na S

t.

SwimmingBeach

FloodplainForest, typ.

Levee Park

Mississippi River

1

13b8

10a

13a

Figure 1.11 Key views to and from the bridge in the immediate area.

VIEWS: KEY GRAPHIC


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 identifi ed 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)

Introduction

17

16

15

16

16

1616

Highways 35 and 54 (Great River Road)

SurroundingBluff Tops

Bluffside Park

Garvin Heights Park

(View Shown in Figure 1.15)

Sugarloaf Park

SurroundingBluff Tops

Mississippi River

Bridge 5900

Bridge 5930

LatschIsland

TH 61 and US 14

DowntownWinona

Lake Winona

Actual View 15Location off Map

Wildlife Refuge

WisconsinApproach

Figure 1.12 Key views to and from the bridge from the surroundings.

VIEWS: KEY GRAPHIC DETAIL


Introduction

Figure 1.13 View from the Existing Bridge upstream

1a

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)


Introduction

Figure 1.14 View from the Existing Bridge downstream

1b

Figure 1.15 View from Riverview Drive

2


Introduction

Figure 1.16 View from Latsch Island Shoreline upstream

4

Figure 1.17 View from the Waterfront Trail atop the flood protection levee

3


Introduction

Figure 1.18 View from the river surface

5

Figure 1.19 View from Levee Park

6


Introduction

Figure 1.20 View from the 4th St. and Winona St. intersection

8

Figure 1.21 View from shoreline “boathouses”

7


Introduction

Figure 1.22 View from the West Broadway and Winona St. intersection

9

Figure 1.23 Above: (10a) View to the Winona County courthouse from the Existing Bridge

10a


Introduction

Figure 1.24 View from 2nd St. looking east

11a

Figure 1.25 View from the courthouse at street level

10b


Introduction

Figure 1.26 View from 2nd St. looking west

11b

Figure 1.27 View from 3rd St. looking west

12a


Introduction

Figure 1.29 View from 4th St. looking west

13a

Figure 1.28 View from 3rd St. looking east

12b


Introduction

Figure 1.30 View from 4th St. looking east

13b

Figure 1.31 View from Latsch Island entering Minnesota

14


Introduction

Figure 1.32 View from surrounding bluff tops looking north (City of Winona in foreground)

16

Figure 1.33 View of the “Great River Road” in Wisconsin

15


Introduction

Figure 1.34 Bird’s eye view looking upstream (City of Winona at left/Latsch Island at right)

17


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 1946.

Character defi ning features are physical elements that represent a property’s historical signifi cance. Previous

evaluation of the Main Channel Bridge established three main character defi ning 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

2. Existing Bridge 5900 Visual Overview

Figure 2.1 View of Existing Bridge from Latsch Island


Existing Bridge Visual Overview

Figure 2.2 Main span

Figure 2.3 Through-truss

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 defi ning

features that contribute to its visual quality.



Figure 2.4 Deck truss

Figure 2.5 Main piers



Figure 2.7 North abutment

Figure 2.6 Approach spans Figure 2.8 South abutment and wing walls


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 fi guratively 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 eff orts to overcome physical barriers limiting access and enjoyment of the riverfront. As a result, design eff orts broadened beyond the “bridge” to develop a conceptual vision for the immediate surroundings aff ected by the project as recreational public space.

3.1 Design Approach







3.8 Signage

3.9 Roadway Lighting

3.10 Aesthetic Lighting

3.11 Design Summary3. Design Elements

Figure 3.1 Aerial View of the Mississippi River near the Project Area


Design Elements

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

DESIGN RENDERINGS


Design Elements

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

DESIGN RENDERINGS


Design Elements

Figure 3.6 Concept A - view of main span looking downstream

CONCEPT A


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 fl oodplain forest. The committee generally preferred Concept B. Overlooks 12’ deep x 50’ long will be incorporated into bridge design. Further confi rmation of the overlook size will occur during fi nal design including refi nement 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


Design Elements

CONCEPT B

Figure 3.7 Concept B - view of main span looking downstream (preferred by VQRC majority)

be informative to both residents and visitors alike. The overlooks will off er unmatched views of the grandeur of the Mississippi River and would be two primary focal points to incorporate interpretive elements within the

overall experience.


Design Elements

12’ x 50’ Overlook

4’-6” Railing Height

Twin Pier Walls with Surface Relief

Pier Base

Figure 3.9 Concept B - view of main river pier 11 (preferred by VQRC majority)

CONCEPT B

CONCEPT A

12’ x 50’ Overlook


Twin Pier Walls with Surface Relief

Pier Base

Figure 3.8 Concept A - view of main river pier 11


Design Elements

Figure 3.11 Concept B - view of approach piers looking north towards the river (preferred by VQRC majority)

Figure 3.10 Concept A - view of approach piers looking north towards the river

CONCEPT A

CONCEPT B


Design Elements

Figure 3.12 South abutment area plan view

New Bridge

New Retaining Wall

Abutment Wall

Retaining Wall Replaced in Kind

Replace Original Corner Pilaster that Was Removed when Existing Walk Was Added

Abutment ConnectionShallow Recess

New Pilaster

View, Figures 3.13, 3.14

Existing Corner Pilaster Replaced in Kind

Existing Bridge

3rd

St.SOUTH ABUTMENT PLAN


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

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.

Key Graphic

South Abutment Area


Design Elements

Figure 3.13 Concept A: South abutment at 3rd St.

Figure 3.14 Concept B: South abutment at 3rd St. (preferred by VQRC majority)

Transition to 4’-6” Railing Height

Transition to 4’-6” Railing Height

Wall SurfaceTreatment

Wall SurfaceTreatment

Flat Slab Span with Haunches

Flat Slab Span with Haunches

3rd St.

3rd St.

6’ Railing Height over Street

6’ Railing Height over Street

Corner Pilaster

Corner Pilaster

SOUTH ABUTMENT CONCEPT B

SOUTH ABUTMENT CONCEPT A


Design Elements

New Bridge

Abutment

Retaining Wall

Limestone Rip Rap below Bridge

Trail below Bridges

Stone Slope Paving Replaced below Bridge

Existing Bridge

Abutment ConnectionRecess

New Corner Pilaster

Existing Corner Pilaster

Figure 3.15 North abutment area plan view

Replace Original Corner Pilaster that Was Removed when Existing Walk Was Added

NORTH ABUTMENT PLAN

View, Figure 3.15

Key Graphic

North Abutment Area


Figure 3.16 North abutment area


Wall Surface Relief


Corner Pilaster

Latsch Island Access RoadLatsch Island Access Road

Limestone Rip Rap Limestone Rip Rap Slope TreatmentSlope Treatment

Trail with FenceTrail with Fence

NORTH ABUTMENT CONCEPT

Design Elements

Potential Refi nements

Refer to the Preliminary Bridge Plans in Appendix B for more detail on wall surface treatments. During the initial stages of the fi nal 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.


Figure 3.17 View of railings and barriers near an overlook

Concrete Parapet with Metal Tube Railing

Overlook with Paddle Wheel Motif Pedestrian

Railing

Arching Branches Motif Pedestrian Railing

Design Elements


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 Pacifi c 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 fl oodplain forest. The committee also suggested the idea of incorporating a “paddle wheel” motif at the overlooks. In the committee’s view, additional refi nement 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 3.21.

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.


Figure 3.18 View of railings and barriers near an overlook - close-up

Figure 3.19 View of railings and barriers near an overlook - along the trail

Concrete Parapet with Metal Tube Railing

Arching Branches Motif Pedestrian Railing

Overlook with Paddle Wheel Motif Pedestrian

Railing

Design Elements


Figure 3.20 Elevation view of railing with height transitions (heights are from walk surface)

Figure 3.21 Elevation view of alternative railing panel detail

4’-6” Railing Height 5’-3” Railing Height

Stepped Transition

Stepped Transition

6’ Railing Height 10” Tall Curb

10” Tall Curb

Design Elements

4’-6” Railing Height 5’-3” Railing Height 6’ Railing Height


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)

Design Elements


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 fi nal fi nish specifi cations for the existing bridge requires further investigation during fi nal 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 fi t better with the existing bridge. Paint colors for railings are illustrated in a gray intended to resemble the gray fi nish of the existing truss.

The fi nish system specifi cations are undetermined. Options would include standard “special surface fi nish” (a cementitious coating with integral color) or a stain that penetrates the concrete surface. All fi nal color selections for both concrete and steel surfaces will be made during fi nal design utilizing the Federal Standard Color System.


Figure 3.23 Gray tone concrete surface finish color comparison

Figure 3.24 Buff tone concrete surface finish color comparison (preferred by VQRC majority)

GRAY TONE

BUFF TONE

Design Elements


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).


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 fl ooding 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 fi nal 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 fl ood elevation.

• Reconstruction of stone slope paving and integration of the trail with existing stone steps requires further collaboration with project historian.

Design Elements


Figure 3.26 South approach area pedestrian and bicycle circulation routes

Huff St.

Win

ona

St.

New Bridge 85851

Existing Bridge 5900

3rd

St.

4th

St..

2nd

St.

Exis

ting

Wat

erfr

ont T

rail

Shor

elin

e

Railr

oad

MRT Trail Shoulder Bikeway (Existing)

Potential Path at Ground Level (Proposed)

At-Grade Trail (Existing/Portions to be Reconstructed)

Bridge Trail (Proposed)

Key Graphic

Sidewalk (Existing/Portions to be Reconstructed)

Riverview Dr.

Abutment

Potential Stair

Potential Trailhead

0 100

South Approach Area

SOUTH APPROACH

Design Elements


Key Graphic

Figure 3.27 North approach area pedestrian and bicycle circulation routes

At-Grade Trail (Above 100 Yr Flood Plain Elevation)

Bridge Trail (Proposed)

Bridge Trail (Existing)

North Approach Area

NORTH APPROACH

Shor

elin

e

New Bridge 85851

Stone steps to remain

Connection to trail across north channel railroad bridge, under development by others

Fence adjacent steep slope

Historic stone slope paving below bridge 5900

Abutment

BusinessMarina Parking

Existing Bridge 5900 Existing Bridge 5930

Boathouses

Main Channel

North Channel

0 100

Design Elements


SOUTH APPROACH

Figure 3.28 South approach river connection and landscape plan

Huff St.

New Bridge 85851


3rd

St.

4th

St..

2nd

St.

Wat

erfr

ont T

rail

Shor

elin

e

Railr

oad

Small Performance Space

Infi ltration Basins

Stormwater Pond, typ.

Paving Under Bridges

RR Crossing

Cross Walk, typ.

Riverview Dr.

Kiosk

Overlook Terrace and Trailhead with Kiosk

ApprApprApprpprApprox. ox. oxo 1 Ac1 Ac AcAc1 A re Are Are Arre Are Ar Availvailvailvailva ableableableablefor for ffor fo RedeRedeRedeRedeReRedevelovelovelovelovelopmenpmepmenpmenpmenem ttttt

Entry Plaza

ApprApprApprApprprApprox. ox. xoxoxox. 1 Ac1 AcAcAc1 AcAcre Are Are Are Are Availvailvailvaivai ableableableableablebablefor for for for for RedeRedeRedeRedeRedeRed velovelovelovelovelopmenpmenpmenpmepmenntttttt

ApprApprApprApprApp ox. ox. oxox.x.ox. 1 Ac1 Ac1 AcAAc AcA re Are Are Are Are Availvaivailvailvaila ableableablebableablefofor for for for RedeRedeRedeR eedeveloveloveloveloeloppmenpmenpmenpmpmenpmenttttt

Historic Paver Area

Approx. 0.2 00 AcreAvailablbbb e for

Redeveloooopment

Terraced Plantings

Boulder Terraces

Planting Bed and Low Wall, typ.

Stone Seat Walls, typ.

Potential Stair

0 100

Win

ona

St.


South Approach

The physical makeup of the space under and around the south approach area will change signifi cantly 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

Design Elements


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

• A small informal performance space

• A trailhead for the Waterfront Trail

• Landscaping emphasis on native plants

• Select cultivars where applicable in specifi c site locations

• Tree and shrub groupings to defi ne 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 traffi c can be accentuated by landscaping. Specifi c 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

Design Elements


Figure 3.31 North approach river connection and landscape plan

Figure 3.32 View of native prairie seeding and tree and shrub massings along the trail beneath the bridges

Shor

elin

e

New Bridge 85851

Stone Steps to Remain

Connection to Trail across Back Channel Railroad Bridge under Development by Others

Fence adjacent steep slope

Abutment



Boathouses

Main Channel North Channel

Trail Under Bridges Tree and Shrub Massings and Native Prairie Seeding

Native Wet Meadow Seeding Around Ponds

0 100

Historic stone slope paving below Bridge 5900

NORTH APPROACH

Design Elements


Figure 3.33 Example overhead 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

Figure 3.34 Example cantilever sign structure

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 traffi c entering Minnesota

from the North Approach area. The specifi c 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.

Design Elements


Figure 3.38 South approach primary signage plan

SOUTH APPROACH

New Bridge 85851


3rd

St.

4th

St..

2nd

St.

Wat

erfr

ont

Trai

l

Shor

elin

e

Railr

oad

Overhead Sign Bridge (Sign 1)

SIGN 1 MESSAGES

SIGN 2

MESSAGE

Cantilever Overhead Sign(Sign 2)

Win

ona

St.

Design Elements


Figure 3.39 North approach primary signage plan

NORTH APPROACH

SIGN 3

MESSAGE

Shor

elin

e

New Bridge 85851



Boathouses

Main Channel North Channel

Potential State Entrance Sign

Trail Under Bridges

Cantilever Overhead Sign(Sign 3)

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 fi xed 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 classifi cation, 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-verifi ed based on fi nal fi xture 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 fi xture option for lighting on the new bridge. Final selection will be determined in fi nal design and involve coordination with the City on costs and maintenance.

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)

EXISTING BRIDGE NEW BRIDGE OPTIONS

Design Elements


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

50’ Approx.

MnDOT Standard LED Light Pole

(Approx. 35’ Mounting Height)

Original Light Standard

(Approx. 25’ Mounting Height)

Figure 3.43 “Base” lighting design cross section view (looking north) at approach spans

ROADWAY LIGHTING

Design Elements

ROADWAY LIGHTING

New Bridge

• Single-side layout on barrier between trail and roadway

• Lights both trail and roadway

70’ A

ppro

x.

50’ Approx.

Peak

Hei

ght o

f Th

roug

h-tr

uss

Replica Original Light

Fixture(Mounted to

Truss Bracing)

MnDOT Standard LED Light Pole

(Approx. 35’ Mounting

Height)

Existing Bridge

• Reproduce historic lighting standards

Figure 3.44 “Base” lighting design cross section view (looking north) at main span


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, unifi ed 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 unifi ed 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

Figure 3.45 Schematic illuminated night view of the new bridge main spans over the river

AESTHETIC LIGHTING - NEW BRIDGE

Design Elements


Design Elements

Figure 3.46 Schematic view of existing bridge lighting Figure 3.47 Schematic view of new bridge girder underside lighting

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 unifi ed nighttime image. Mounted on the pier footings and aiming up, narrow beam fl oodlights 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. Refl ected 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 fl oodlights mounted near the main span and back span piers wash the undersides of the haunched box girders, revealing the beautiful curved forms and refl ecting them in the water


Figure 3.48 Illuminated night view of the project looking upstream from the Waterfront Trail near Levee Park

Design Elements

below. The outside edges and inside “archways” of each pier of the new bridge will be illuminated with narrow beam fl oodlights 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 refl ectance from snow or ice might result in excessive light trespass.


Figure 3.49 Illuminated night view of the project looking downstream from the Waterfront Trail near Riverview Drive

Design Elements

Figure 3.50 Illuminated night view of the project from the existing bridge traveling northbound towards Latsch Island


Design Elements

Figure 3.51 Illuminated night view of the project from the new bridge traveling southbound towards Winona


Design Elements

3.11 Design Summary

Intentionally, the design concepts leave some latitude for refi nement to the fi nal design team. The VQRC will have ongoing involvement with the fi nal 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.

The design concepts developed for the New Bridge and supporting features are a coordinated family of elements that respond to the unique urban and natural context of the Winona riverfront and the historic Existing Bridge. The elegant arching form of the New Bridge will complement the Existing Bridge through the visual alignment of the main piers, minimal above deck elements that would be visual obstructions, and details that reference its character-defi ning features without replicating them. When constructed, the New Bridge will fulfi ll the VQRC’s Project Vision Statement and reshape Winona’s relationship to the riverfront.

Winona Bridge Project Manual - MnDOT · The Winona Bridge Project will rehabilitate and augment a...

Documents

Transcript of Winona Bridge Project Manual - MnDOT · The Winona Bridge Project will rehabilitate and augment a...