Horizontal netting
Pasadena’s reviewers recommended against a net at this bridge because of engineering, appearance, and rescue concerns. Some engineering work remained preliminary.
Read the horizontal netting record →What alternatives were studied?
Start with the upright barrier designs. Then choose another approach to see what was studied and what people said about it.
Skip to netting, landscaping, patrols, and technology
The temporary fence and proposed permanent barriers
These images come from the City’s July 17, 2024 presentation. The labels describe the temporary fence and the permanent concepts’ positions in that review.
Earlier curved-mesh mockups and the February 2020 enclosure request belong to different stages of the project. Read the February 2020 record. Images are included to explain the designs and are credited to the City.
Other approaches studied
These reviews took place as the City pursued the Council’s decision to develop a permanent barrier.
Trees & landscaping
The 2018 report found no verifying scientific data for using trees below the bridge to cushion a landing or discourage an attempt. It treated trees as a possible addition to a vertical barrier.
Read the trees & landscaping record →Staffing & patrols
City staff examined cost and practical coverage. They treated human presence as something that could accompany a physical barrier, while repeatedly advising against relying on staffing to replace it.
Read the staffing & patrols record →Cameras & technology
Cameras, sensors, phones, and later remote intervention were considered as ways to detect a crisis or help someone respond. The City’s reviewed approach continued to treat these tools as additions to physical protection.
Read the cameras & technology record →