 |
 |
 |
| |
| 
|
| Citizens
for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge |
| Robert M. Guernsey |
| Founder
& Chairman of the Board |
| Director
Schweiger |
Director
Kirkbride |
|
Meeting of
October 25, 1996 |
|
TO:
Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District
Board Of Directors
From: Citizens
for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge©
Subject: Posting of the 45
M.P.H. signs And Golden Gate Transit Bus Ads |
|
|
| Background:
STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF the 45 m.p.h. speed limit
on the Golden Gate Bridge appears to be paying off.
Cars are moving more slowly, says California Highway
Patrol. That's great. But the success of the higher
fines and increased patrols should not obscure the
need for the Golden Gate Bridge District to continue
to seek a barrier system that will prevent dangerous
head on collisions. |
| Speeding,
it turns out, was a clear factor in only one of this
summer's four head on bridge crashes, which killed
one and sent 12 others to the hospital. An effective
barrier would probably have prevented those accidents.
The bridge district should continue to encourage Barrier
Systems Inc., the company currently testing a new
barrier design for the bridge. And in December, the
district should, as promised, conduct an independent
test on the Barrier Systems design to determine if
it meets federal standards. The district has, in the
past, shown interest in the barrier, only to drop
the ball when estimates proved costly or designs were
flawed or inappropriate.
(source Marin IJ Oct 16, 1996) |
|
Citizens for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge©, would
like to know the status of the BSI barrier engineering
progress to develop it "New" one foot movable barrier
and when will the testing of this barrier begin.
Wilson OK a bill to 'ensure safety'
SACRAMENTO It's going to cost more to speed on the
Golden Gate Bridge, thanks to a bill signed into law
yesterday. Gov. Pete Wilson signed a measure that
adds the bridge to an existing pilot program intended
to reduce fatalities on dangerous state highways.
"We must ensure the safety of our
highways and protect California motorists from those
who disregard the traffic laws and put innocent people
at risk," Wilson said. Senate Bill 1367, by Sen. Jack
O'Connell, D Carpinteria, would double the base fines
for speeding and other traffic violations on the bridge. |
The bill becomes law immediately,
but it wasn't clear late last night when it actually
would be put into effect. Bridge officials say they
hope to post signs next week at each end of the bridge
notifying drivers of the bolstered penalties. The
new law is part of a legislative war bridge directors
declared on speeders after a June 24 head on crash
on the bridge killed a San Francisco woman, sent four
other people to the hospital and tied up North Bay
traffic for hours. Two more head on crashes happened
on the bridge earlier this month. Hours before Wilson
signed the bill yesterday, bridge directors voted
unanimously to begin a two month experiment in which
mini vans displaying the 45 m.p.h. speed limit will
drive back and forth on the bridge every day to discourage
speeding.
(source I J .Sacramento bureau Sept 14,
1996) |
The Board of Directors
has approved a proposal to display advertising on
the sides of Golden Gate Transit buses. The Board
awarded an advertising services contract to Transportation
Displays, Inc. (TDI) that will generate more than
$1.3 million over two years to help fund the Golden
Gate Bridge Seismic and Wind Retrofit Project. "We've
put off bus side advertising for years now," said
Bridge District General Manager Carney J. Campion.
"But with the Seismic Retrofit Project looming, the
Board was willing to take another look at the ads
because they could raise revenue without directly
impacting our customers.
In a competitive bid process, four
companies responded to the District's Request for
Proposals. After careful evaluation, the Board awarded
the contract to TDI, based locally in San Francisco.
TDI guaranteed $1,350,000 over the two year base term
of the contract, and $3,700,000 if the District exercises
three additional one year option terms. The contract
will officially begin next month, and the non permanent
adhesive vinyl bus side ads will appear shortly thereafter.
TDI has extensive experience in moving outdoor media,
and works in every major market in the country. Locally
TDI represents San Francisco Mini, AC Transit and
Santa Clara County Transit among others. The District's
Marketing Department has sold "bus back" advertisements
on Golden Gate Transit buses.
(source GGB,H&TD August 23, 1996) |
Citizens for a Safe
Golden Gate Bridge© Would like to know if the
Golden Gate Transit Bus Divisional Manager Wayne Diggs,
has Plans in the future to affix the "Drive 45 on
the Golden Gate Bridge" Bumper Stickers on the Golden
Gate Transit Buses to show good faith, also does the
Bridge authority directors have plans for these bumpers
stickers to be placed on their own personal vehicle
as part of the overall plan to reduce the speeding
on the bridge, under current law now being enforced.
Citizens for
a Safe Golden Gate Bridge© Would like to know,
under current advertising campaign to raise revenue
for seismic upgrades through bus side ads, will some
of the revenue be used to expedite the movable barrier
testing program, in light of the public's interest
in, and the importance of the movable median traffic
barrier on the bridge?
Respectfully submitted:
Robert M. Guernsey
Founder & Chairman of the Board |
|
| |
| Citizens
for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge |
| Robert M. Guernsey |
| Founder
& Chairman of the Board |
| Director
Schweiger |
Director
Kirkbride |
| Meeting of
November 22, 1996 |
TO: Golden Gate
Bridge, Highway and Transportation District Board
Of Directors
From: Citizens for
a Safe Golden Gate Bridge©
Subject: Resolution NO. 84-172 and
the use of Rumble Strips
|
Background: On June
8, 1984, this board adopted Resolution NO. 84-172..
Which established the standards.. To be required of
all barrier systems for use on the Golden Gate Bridge.
|
The first standard
says: (a.) The
barrier system shall give adequate audio-visual clues
to the driver when vehicle approaches barrier. This
may be in the form of raised pavement markers adjacent
to the base of the barrier.. or some other warning
device to alert a driver that corrective action must
be taken to avoid contacting the barrier.
|
The second standard
says: (b.) The barrier system
shall give advance physical warning to impending barrier
encroachments. There is a big difference between
a car drifting into a barrier and drifting into another
car that is traveling forty-or fifty- or sixty miles
per hour in the opposite direction!
|
1.
Accident reports show that many cross-over accidents
on the bridge were caused by drifters who could have
corrected their drift if they had only been alerted!
2. The new barrier on Highway
37 has been provided with rumble strips to keep drifters
from going into the barrier.. or even going off the
pavement onto an empty shoulder!
3. The cost of rumble strips
is almost nothing! They can be installed on the whole
bridge in a couple of weeks. They don't need two months
of testing. They've been tested for fifty years. They
save lives. |
Citizens for a Safe Golden Gate
Bridge© question is: Why haven't the Bridge
Authorities installed "Rumble Strips" years ago? And
why don't they immediately do so Now?
Respectfully submitted:
Robert M. Guernsey
Founder & Chairman of the Board |
|
| |
| Citizens
for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge |
| Robert M. Guernsey |
| Founder
& Chairman of the Board |
| Director
Schweiger |
Director
Kirkbride |
|
Meeting of
November 25, 1996
|
TO:
Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District
Board Of Directors
From:
Citizens for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge
Subject: Inquiry
for information Resulting in the installation of a
Movable Median Barrier.
|
Background: STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF
the 45 m.p.h. speed limit on the Golden Gate Bridge
appears to be paying off. Cars are moving more slowly,
says California Highway Patrol. That's great. But
the success of the higher fines and increased patrols
should not obscure the need for the Golden Gate Bridge
District to continue to seek a barrier system that
will prevent dangerous head on collisions.
|
1.
Speeding, it turns out, was a clear factor in only
one of this summer's five head on bridge crashes,
which killed one and sent 12 others to the hospital.
An effective barrier would probably have prevented
those accidents. The bridge district should continue
to encourage Barrier Systems Inc., the company currently
testing a new barrier design for the bridge. And in
December, the district should, as promised, conduct
an independent test on the Barrier Systems design
to determine if it meets federal standards. The district
has, in the past, shown interest in the barrier, only
to drop the ball when estimates proved costly or designs
were flawed or inappropriate.
(source Marin IJ-Oct 16, 1996)
|
Citizens for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge:
1. Would like an up-date on BSI's barrier
engineering and development progress report for
its "New" one-foot movable
barrier.
2. When will the testing of the BSI barrier
begin,
3. When will the results of such testing
be published.
"Status Up-date:"
As of this date-1996, seven out of ten proponents
of Movable Median Barriers or MMB's, have contacted
the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway & Transportation
District, behind closed-doors and have provided them
with some detailed information concerning their MMB's
for the bridge. (Note: As of this date December
24, 1999, all proponents of Movable Median Barriers
have been turn down. The only survivor that is still
standing is "Barrier Systems Inc, of Carson City,
Nevada.
|
Citizens for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge: Would
like to know if the District, and Bridge Engineer
are looking into other proposed MMB's designs for
future use on the Golden Gate Bridge.
Respectfully submitted:
Robert M. Guernsey
Founder & Chairman of the Board |
|
AGENDA - ITEM No. 11
GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT
|
 |
|
MERVIN C. GIACOMINI,
RE.
DISTRICT ENGINEER
Nov 26, 1996
For: Dec 06, 1996
TO:
Building & Operating Committee
FROM:
Mervin C. Giacomini, District Engineer
SUBJECT:
GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE Movable MEDIAN BARRIER-STATUS REPORT
|
INFORMATION: The Board, by Resolution
No. 96 161, authorized District participation in the
cost, not to exceed $42,500, of crash testing a Movable
median barrier by Barrier Systems, Inc. (BSI), pursuant
to National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP)
Report No. 350, and certification by an independent
testing agent. BSI will research design, develop,
and construct a Movable median barrier suitable for
crash testing. A letter of intent, pursuant to Board
Resolution No. 96 161, was signed by BSI July 30,
1996.
|
In addition, Board Resolution No. 96 161 authorized
the General Manager to expend up to $50,000 to engage
Northwestern Traffic Institute (Northwestern) and,
if deemed necessary or appropriate, additional traffic
engineering and safety consultants to evaluate and
make appropriate recommendations to the Board of Directors
pertaining to BSI's proposed resolution of certain
technical issues raised by the District Engineer,
and to evaluate and make recommendations to the Board
of Directors concerning traffic, operation, and safety
trade-offs between installation of such barrier and
the operation of the Bridge without the barrier.
Based on staff negotiations with
Northwestern, a Notice to Proceed was issued effective
September 12, 1996, for an amount not to exceed $25,000,
on a time and materials basis for the following scope
of work: (A. Analyze the following information and
data for other bridges on which Movable Median Barriers
(MMB) have been installed:
|
A.
Traffic volumes on these other facilities total and
average daily and peak hour both before and after
installation of the particular MMB:
|
1.
Traffic volumes for buses, trucks and other wide vehicles;
2. Lane widths, lane
configurations and total roadway width before and
after the installation;
3. Accident
history before and after installation, including:
(a.
Overall accident rates and statistics;
(b.
Accident rates and statistics by type of accident-
(e.g., fatal, serious injury, crossover,
near end, side swipe, hit object, etc.);
(c.
Experience and accident rates for buses, trucks and
other wide vehicles, especially in lanes less than
eleven feet wide;
(d.
Accident statistics for vehicles adjacent to the MMB;
(e.
Frequency and magnitude of deflection of the MMB upon
impact;
(f.
Accident rates for collisions of vehicles on the
opposite side of a deflected barrier (e.g., with the
barrier itself or involving a vehicle attempting to
avoid a deflected barrier);
(g.
Accident rates where was or may have been a reduced
sight distance causal factor.
4. With respect to
the Golden Gate Bridge, traffic volumes, lane widths
and accident history as described above, as well as
all other relevant safety, operational, physical and
natural conditions applicable to the Golden Gate Bridge.
5. All other
information and data which warrants the Traffic Institute's
consideration.
|
B.
Perform a preliminary comparative risk, safety and
operational analysis of the one-foot MMB if installed
on the Golden Gate Bridge versus the condition without
any median barrier in terms of:
|
1.
Type, frequency and severity of accidents;
2. Traffic speeds and
flow and capacity rates;
3. Emergency vehicle
access;
4. Geometric conditions
pertaining to the Golden Gate Bridge and its approaches
including, e.g., sight distance and lane width limitations;
5. Barrier end treatments;
6. Barrier vehicle
operation;
7. Any other features
of the one foot MMB or the Golden Gate Bridge which
warrant the District's consideration.
|
C.
Make recommendations concerning possible lane widths,
configurations and striping in the event a one foot
MMB is installed on the Golden Gate Bridge, and to
the extent possible, make other recommendations concerning
the standards and/or performance characteristics to
which the one foot MMB should conform.
|
The above scope of work constitutes a first phase
of the engineering work. Final conclusions with respect
to the one foot MMB impact on traffic flow, safety,
and capacity will be preliminary and subject to modification
once the MMB deflection characteristics are determined
by testing.
BSI is continuing with research
and development of a prototype one foot barrier in
conjunction with its own internal testing necessary
to finalize the design. In addition to changing the
width and shape of the barrier, BSI is re designing
the hinge mechanism between the barrier segments to
reduce the barrier's lateral deflection upon impact.
They have fabricated approximately 100 feet of the
300 feet of barrier needed for testing. Crash testing
at BSI's plant is tentatively scheduled for mid December.
Upon the completion of BSI's testing, an independent
testing agency will perform crash testing of BSI's
one foot Movable median barrier for certification
under the National Cooperative Highway Research Program.
Staff is currently reviewing independent testing agencies
for this testing.
Northwestern is collecting and
analyzing information and data for other bridges on
which Movable median barriers have been installed.
(See scope of work item "A" above.) Staff met
with Caltrans on November 20, 1996, to discuss the
application of the one foot Movable median barrier
to the Doyle Drive Viaduct and their participation
in the project. Caltrans expresses interest and will
be meeting with staff to define their participation.
Founder and Board Chairman Robert
M. Guernsey for Citizens for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge;
Presented a report recommending rumble strips to the
Board at its November 22, 1996 meeting, and asked
the question, "Why haven't the Bridge Authorities
installed 'Rumble Strips' years ago? And why don't
they immediately do so now?" The lane lines
on the Golden Gate Bridge are provided by 3/4 inch
high pavement markers. The markers are spaced 4 feet
2 inches apart and consist of a repeating sequence
of four 4 inch diameter white ceramic markers followed
by one 4 inch square reflective marker.
The lane markings on the Golden
Gate Bridge are consistent with Caltrans standards
and provide both a visual and auditory warning to
the motorist. Rumble strips as proposed by Citizens
for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge are inconsistent with
Caltrans standards.
|
|
| |
| Citizens
for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge |
| Robert M. Guernsey |
| Founder
& Chairman of the Board |
| Director
Schweiger |
Director
Kirkbride |
| Meeting of
December 6, 1996 |
TO:
Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District
Board Of Directors
From:
Citizens for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge
Subject: Golden
Gate Bridge Movable Median Barrier-Status Report
|
| Meeting
of the Board Of Directors Item No. 11 for Dec 06,
1996/Page 3 |
Mr. Robert M. Guernsey, Founder
and Chairman of the Board for Citizens for a Safe
Golden Gate Bridge, presented a report recommending
rumble strips to the Board at its November 22, 1996
meeting, and asked the question, "Why haven't the
Bridge Authorities installed 'Rumble Strips' years
ago? And why don't they immediately do so now?"
Engineer's Response: The lane lines on the Golden
Gate Bridge are provided by 3/4 inch high pavement
markers. The markers are spaced 4 feet 2 inches apart
and consist of a repeating sequence of four 4 inch
diameter white ceramic markers followed by one 4 inch
square reflective marker.
The lane markings on the Golden
Gate Bridge are consistent with Caltrans standards
and provide both a visual and auditory warning to
the motorist. Rumble strips as proposed by Citizens
for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge are inconsistent with
Caltrans standards.
|
"Citizens for a Safe Golden
Gate Bridge:"
Response by Founder & Chairmen
of the Board, Robert M. Guernsey: "What seems to be
inconsistent is how you use Caltrans Standards and
the pursuant to National Cooperative Highway Research
Program (NCHRP) in protecting your Engineering Professional.
Mr. Giacomini, are you afraid to admit, that there
is no problem with your present day Yellow Plastic
Peg markers, and their relationship between all cross-over's
on the bridge "
Note: Improving Highway Safety:
Kerry Mazzoni has been
an outspoken advocate of both traffic safety and traffic
reduction in Marin and Sonoma counties. After numerous
deaths and injuries alone Highway 37, Kerry successfully
fought for the construction of a median barrier to
save lives along the nine-mile stretch of roadway
known as "Blood Alley."
Comment: This stretch of road has been provide with
both visual markings and auditory "Rumble Strips,"
to warn the motorist, if they drift towards the barrier
or towards the shoulder of the road. Caltrans Authority
installed a permanent barrier and "Rumble Strips"
along nine miles of Highway 37 after countless deaths.
Was Caltrans inconsistent by installing the Rumble
Strips on hwy 37. "What your opinion?
Respectfully submitted:
Robert M. Guernsey
Founder & Chairman of the Board |
|
| |
| Citizens
for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge |
| Robert M. Guernsey |
| Founder
& Chairman of the Board |
| Director
Schweiger |
Director
Kirkbride |
| January 8,
1997 |
TO:
All Media
From:
Citizens for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge
Subject: Movable Median
Barriers Vital Role in Saving Lives on the Span
Background: Their have been
thirty two head-on collisions, resulting in thirty-four
deaths, since 1970. Thousand of citizens in several
counties have exhibited much concern for more than
four decades, and cried out for some type of barrier
on the Golden Gate Bridge span. There have been more
than one hundred independent inventors with designs
and specifications for movable median barriers who
have approached the Bridge District Engineer, but
with no success because the designs did not meet the
bridge engineer's criteria, therefore all barrier
concepts were criticize for one reason or the other.
The barrier issue was put to sleep in 1985 and was
never addressed again until 1996.
|
On June
27, 1996, a Board of Directors meeting was held at
the District Administration Office. Citizens for a
Safe Golden Gate Bridge Committee and many individual
citizens were in attendance. They demanded that action
be taken by the Golden Gate Bridge Authority and the
Board of Directors, for the installation of a median
traffic safety barrier to eliminate all head-on collisions
on the span Now.
|
Citizens for a Safe
Golden Gate Bridge Committee;
Expressed interest and much concern in:
1. The
installation of a median barrier;
2. The
enforcement of the 45 mph speed limit;
3. "Bus
Back" advertisements on Golden Gate Transit buses
as; Back Stickers (double fine zone-driver 45 on the
bridge;
4. A "No-lane
change" policy;
5. CHP
patrol on bike's on the sidewalk during the commute
hours with use of high-speed radar & cameras;
6. Rumble
strips adjacent to the base of the markers/barrier.
|
Since,
June of 1996, the Bridge District has been in many
sessions regarding the issue of and the feasibility
for a movable barrier, including the one foot wide
Quickchange or MMB now being developed by Barrier
Systems, Inc. In July 1996, the District authorized
participation in the cost, not to exceed $42,500,
of crash testing BSI's one foot MMB pursuant to National
Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report
No. 350, and certification by an independent testing
agent. BSI will research, design, develop and construct
a prototype MMB suitable for crash testing.
In addition, the Board has allocated
up to $50.000 to engage the Northwestern University
Traffic Institute again and, if deemed necessary or
appropriate, additional traffic engineering and safety
consultants to evaluate and make appropriate recommendations
pertaining to BSI's proposed MMB, including resolution
of certain technical issues raised by the District
Engineer, and to equate and make recommendations concerning
the various traffic and safety ramifications of traffic,
operation, and safety trade-offs between installation
of the BSI barrier.
|
Citizens for a Safe
Golden Gate Bridge:
We are led to believe, based on
the facts presented thus far, that the Bridge District
has accomplished a great deal to assure traffic safety
by complying with many suggestions presented to and
by the Board of Directors. Thank You.
Citizens for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge:
Feels, in light of the Bridge Districts
actions towards the testing of BSI'S movable median
barrier system, that testing will show that it is
possible to save lives and ensure all commuters their
safety while on the span.
· We further agree:
That the daily commuter shall be granted safe passage
with the installation of a barrier system.
· We are in agreement:
That a Movable Median Barrier is needed for the Golden
Gate Bridge and that the District will see that this
action is taken as soon as possible.
Respectfully submitted:
Robert M. Guernsey
Founder & Chairman of the Board |
| |
|
| |
::Home::
Contact us: info@goldengatecitizens.com
Phone: 415.456.3792
This
web site was developed by Robert
M. Guernsey. Site layout and design by Michael
Dawson. The title: "Citizens for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge"
is the sole property of Robert M. Guernsey & Associates. All material,
documents, records, and news media articles,used within this web site,
is public information. This web site and its information is open to the
public. This web site is under the jurisdiction of "The Freedom of
Information Act" and "The Freedom of Speech Act”
All rights reserved.
© COPYRIGHT 1989-2004 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CITIZENS FOR A SAFE GOLDEN GATE
BRIDGE
|
|
|
|
|
