CK and your ilk,

It is people like you that make Seattle the pretentious, condescending, uptight iceberg that it is. Just because you don't want to walk somewhere, that right and route should be taken from everyone else. That bridge happens to be a great place to take photographs from. It is nice to walk in the late evenings as well. Should those of us that do enjoy walking on the bridge or need to use it so we don't have to drive our car, be prohibited because of a very small number of people? Ridiculous as it is, I guess because you don't see the benefit in it, go ahead and prohibit pedestrian traffic. Paradise for self centered control freaks.

"someone could easily pull over and jump as is the case in I5 ship canal bridge."

Ditto for a fence....fyi I5 has had very few jumpers because peds are banned.

Close the bridge to foot traffic, spend the money on the schools. Other wise, have a fundraiser in Fremont and you guys pay for uglifying the bridge.

suthii, how would closing the bridge to pedestrians SOLVE the problem? someone could easily pull over and jump as is the case in I5 ship canal bridge.

its a good TEMP idea - something to do in the interim before a barrier is built - but we need a permanent solution, and closing down ped access won't cut it.

How many bicycles use that bridge daily?

"we all would be happy to see every cent of that $7.4 million be put towards a fence"

I'd rather see it spent in our schools and we keep the view.

Close the bridge to foot traffic. Problem solved. Hell, they could even add a lane then for buses.

Now about that Robin Williams suicide comedy they're making in Wallingford......

Friend of a Jumper, I sympathize. I too, know of someone who died in this fashion.

Suicide is crime, in as much as it is a mental health issue. It is a murder. Literally. We close the parks at night. Why? To prevent crimes.

As a cyclist, it pains me that we must declare a right of way, unsafe. The truth is, it is, and should be closed.

Are you guys all fucking serious?
First of all, refer to the link above; jumping is proven to be an impulsive act, which means putting a fence would deter most any one, and they would NOT go find another way.
Second, try living, working, or being under the bridge, and seeing someone jump. Better yet, why don't you try being someone who KNEW someone who jumped off of it. I highly doubt you all would be making sarcastic remarks if you knew what it was like to drive by the place where your friend died, knowing that anyone else could do the same thing.

And it isn't just the families and friends who area affected by the suicides, although that's plenty. Everyone who works or lives under that bridge, and has seen the aftermath knows a barrier is necessary. Those people, and the ones who have been affected personally ... we all would be happy to see every cent of that $7.4 million be put towards a fence, to prevent anyone from ever having to experience anything like that ever again.

where is the data to support the theory, "if someone really wants to die they will find another way..?"

there is TONS of research out there that shows restricting means not only deters the "impulsive" jumpers, but also those who've pondered suicide for a long time.

http://www.seattlefriends.org/faq.html#FAQ_q3

The fence is to protect people and property under the bridge. There are people going to work trying to park their cars and had a jumper land in their passenger seats. Boaters have experienced the same. If someone really wants to die, they will. But if building a fence and losing a view is what it takes to protect the innocent, so be it.

i was on the bridge when they grabbed the guy. drove right by. crazy stuff.

nina is nailing it on this one.

Suthii - I'd have to agree with Jason - your remarks aren't helpful, don't bring anything to the discussion and are for the most part, insensitive and uncalled for.

That being said, I don't think that they are trying to lower the number of suicides in general, I think they are trying to lower the number of suicides that take place on the bridge. I don't necessarily want to see a big privacy fence go up along Aurora either, but obviously the signs they have up for the suicide hotline aren't doing the trick and I really do feel bad for the people living and working below the bridge that have to worry about witnessing something this horrible on a somewhat regular basis.

If it were up to me, I'd block pedestrian traffic from being able to get on the bridge, I think that would cut back on the number of suicides greatly. It won't eliminate them totally, but it would deter a lot of people I think.

Jason, the troll could buy or sell you right now, you know, 'cause he's so successful. AND he has a hot wife! AND he definitely does not live in his mother's basement.

Also, the cumulative time he's spent making enemies on the internet gives him the experience and understanding of this issue that most of us lack.

$1.4 million dollars that could go to transportation or something really necessary… I agree they should just close the bridge to foot traffic.

That would solve the suicide problem, and save our tax dollars for something more useful. Not trying to be insensitive with this comment, it's just that fencing off the foot bridge would be cheaper than fencing off the whole sides of it.

I think I speak for a lot of people who read this blog when I say I am sick of your immature, snarky , antagonistic trolling posts. We are talking about suicide right now, keep your insensitive sense of humor to your self.

'Move to the East Coast if you want fences'

That's why I don't want one on the bridge.

"Right now this is the 2nd most popular spot in the US to commit suicide "

Is this something they mention on the Ducks?

How about we compromise and just fence up the parts not over water? People get their views, nobody gets hit by falling bodies, nobody has to clean up a big splat, everyone's happy!

(Well, the jumpers probably aren't happy but if they were happy in the first place they wouldn't be jumpers.)

and to follow up, I like walking on the bridge - the view is great and despite the traffic there is something sublime about walking up there on something from the 30's 150 feet up from the canal. Move to the East Coast if you want fences and no access signs everywhere..

You guys should check out some of the other designs outline in the report - they are a bit more creative than this schlock. I particilated in the charette that they had during the first round. Hopefully WSDOT will allow some more creative designs than a looming, depressing suicide fence disguised as "historical".

Oh, and as far as the whole suicide barrier - is it worth it discussion? I think 1.4 million on something like this will go alot farther towards preventing suicide than 1.4 million dropped into the very large mental health bucket. Right now this is the 2nd most popular spot in the US to commit suicide - and it will take a multipronged effort to make that less frequent.

I think someone should start a bungy jumping company off the side of the bridge. Then, people can still jump without the current harmful side effect.

If you want to keep your taxes down, you might want to move to a state that doesn't care about social services or silly things like fighting over Dennys/monorail.

I think you are in the wrong place.

"$1.4 million should be delegated to mental health in washington"

Is it an either or case?

How about $5000 for a big circus net to keep our taxes down?

$1.4 million should be delegated to mental health in washington.....

There was actually a really interesting article in the New York Times Magazine just last week disputing the idea that barriers do not prevent suicides:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/magazine/06su...

How about a big net underneath? PT Barnum wouldn't be as much fun.

I'm sure they could figure out a way to hold the weight. After all, that new steel pedestrian barrier gonna weigh something....

"why don’t we fund the mental health programs better so we don’t need a fence?"

Who's the 'we' you're speaking for?

"I’d rather see the money used to put a divider between the north and southbound lanes to prevent head-on collisions. A jersey barrier would also save lives and keep drunks on their side of the road."

So would I, but to do so would mean a massive retro-fitting (read tear-down and rebuild) of the bridge. Ever wonder why the concrete barriers stop on one side and then pick up again on the other? It's because the bridge wasn't engineered to hold the weight. It was designed to hold a full compliment of commercial trucks from one end to the other, and no more. If they put barriers across the bridge and then through some unlucky circumstance of traffic conditions 200 5-ton commercial trucks lined up end to end, that bridge is going into the drink.

This is why I usually take the Fremont bridge.

I'd rather see the money used to put a divider between the north and southbound lanes to prevent head-on collisions. A jersey barrier would also save lives and keep drunks on their side of the road.

Hmm, I hate to ruin the beautiful view with such an ugly fence. Will his really lower suicide rates? If so, fine but I highly doubt it will. If someone wants to take their life, they will find a way to do so.

Instead of trying to put a fence up, why don't we fund the mental health programs better so we don't need a fence?

Who wants/needs to walk across aurora bridge anyway? Try walking across the bridge sometime (esp against the traffic flow) and you'll probably want to kill yourself too. It's like taking a nice jaunt along the shoulder of the freeway, with roaring cars on one side and a 100-foot drop on the other. Close the bridge to pedestrian traffic entirely, let folks walk through Fremont instead.

Does anyone really think walking on this bridge is a necessity (to walk from Dexter to North Aurora for a hooker or to buy some meth?)

I like the drawing of the tophatted gentleman strolling along the Aurora bridge, with a friendly VW bug passing by (waving out the window no doubt)

Truly though something must be done... I've seen first hand at least 4 jumps from the bridge in the past 3 years. 2 of which ended on pavement. A truly traumatic experience for rescue crews that have to do their best to rescue this broken person on the pavement or in the lake. Of course sometimes they survive, which would be an awful fate. But folks jumping from a bridge aren't really thinking about consequences.

Great, ruin one of the best views in town and waste more tax payer's money.

I watched this unfold from the Nickerson Street Saloon. You could see the guy sitting up there. Just didn't look right to me. A few minutes later a couple patrol cars showed up and took the guy away.

I agree, if someone really wants to commit suicide they will find a way. However, a wall like this might prevent someone who is drunk and considering suicide from making it over or from accidentally falling off the bridge.

It's a noble cause. Jumpers really create havoc for those of us who live or work under the bridge. But I'm skeptical about the results. If they really want to jump, they'll find a way over that shiny new wall...