HomeMy Public PortalAbout03-26-87 TRAFFIC & PARKING COMMISSIONAGENDA ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATIONtAT
THI; REGULAR MEETING OF THE a'
LY.NWOOD TRAFFIC AND PARKING COMMISSION
1 'BE HELD ON MARCH 26, 19$7 AT 6:30 P.M.
AMENDED COP) R EC E I V E D
CITY OF LYNWOOp
CITY CLERKS OFFICE
OPENING CEREMONIES' NEAR 9 3 1987
AM PTO
1. CALL. FOR ORDER — CHAIRMAN WRIGHT 7 181911011111211121314016
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
s. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF POSTING
4. RUL,I, CAL,I, OF COMMISSIONERS
ROBER'P ARCHAMBAULT
WILLIAM CUNNINGHAM
RONALD WRIGHT
�
o. SWEARING IN CEREMONY OF NEW COMMISSIONERS BY CITY CLI'Rk
6
JOE BAT"PLE, III
VICTORIA SIMPSON
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
SCHEDULED MATTERS `
7. HANDICAP ST'REFT PARKING REQUEST.
INF'ORMAT'IONAL ITEMS
0
COMMISSION ORAL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
t
T02.45u
i
i ,
I
n �
P t
4
THE REGULAK NAFTING uF THE TRAFFIC AND PARKING (OMMISSIC.N 00 THI
CITY OF LY, WOOD
.t
february Z6, 1987
A regular meeting of thy, Traftic and Parking Cnmmis,sion of th,- ( K!
of Lynwood was held on the above date: is the. COUncLI Whambars nt'
Lynwood Ci.Ly Hall, 11330 BuJIi.s Road, Lynwood, t „ii al 6 .i(i I) m,
CALL TO C1RhER
The meeting; was ca Lied to order by Vice Chairman Arci'rambault
Commissioners Cunningham and Simpson, answered roll call. Pren.nt
were Joseph Wang, P.R., Director of Public Works /City En' i ueer,
JamessDevore, Associate Civil Engineer, Deputy Rosenbaurei, '
J,ynwoud Sherit'f's Department, and Ovethn Williams, Engineering
Division.
r
a Y7
At,KNOWLEDGkHENT OF POSTING
James Devore stated that the minutes were pnswo 76 noucs, as
required, prior to the scheduled meeting.
s
APPROVAL oF MINUTES
Commissioner Cunningham motioned to accept the mi,nui.es pf Jn urar%
w 22, 1987. The motioned was seconded by Vice. Chairman Archmmbau.It..
It. was passed unanimously. z
PUBLIC OR.AL(COMMUNLCATTONS A
There were none. ;
SCHEDULED MATTERS
6. h'LFCTION OF TRAFFIC AND PARKING COMMISSION CHAIRMAN.
Commissioner Cunningham motioned to move the eIe( t.ion ..I
Chairman Co the neat` regular scheduled Tra1'i n a nod Parkin. -,
CO171MISS1.011 meeting of March 26, 1987. It was seconded by
Commissioner_ Archambault, and passed unanimously.
4
1
0
�r
A.
:
• •
,,
i RRX I Ll� OF PAR.k I NG LOT IMPRO4 EMENTS FOR C I'l'l' HAL L. i oIMPLE\
Jam(--ti re explained that, the City Hall, pa ri,irig lot, wiIl be
slut v sealed by the contractor. The parking 'tot wi i] I m.
rest.riped, directional signs wi l l be vepi,ace;d anti , :ite, 1. ttari
ramps wtl.l. be installed.
Lie asked it the project had been submi teed to l,our,� ,1 her
approtial.
James ilevore re pi led that thc; money hat alre;,dy be,,n :tlI uatcJ.
Ile stated that thtc st:ri pi rig , slur r•y seal ing and lr, emeut t,l i 1
cost approximately $3,000 and all uthee woi k+', wi II uusi,
appro`i mate Ly $5,000. lie informed the Commission I'hai. t.L,
lighLing, landscaping and irvegation wiil. be Jon,- by C.tty
forces. He stated that the City has al.locar -ed money for sign
modif'i.uat:.ion for the City Hall.
F
Commissioner Cunningham expressed concerned about damaged
z curb nn Imperial Highway. He asked if' the contra Ivor LRrtt
performed work on Lutperial will be responsihle for rc:pairtrlg
the curb. t
James Uevore stated that the contractor is responsible to t'ix
the damaged curb.
A map was viewed by the the Commissioners of the proposed
parking lot improvements for the City .Hall Comply:, for which
Chairman aright, had originally reques,ed mor,� lighting at.
Bateman flail.
i
h
Commissioner Simpson asked if additional lights will Ill, add,.;d.
Jamee. Uevore replied that there will be additional lights
insta -l.eci and that some of the shrubbery around the r.r,res
will be. removed for better visabi.lity.
.8. REV.IEh OR BUS STOP LOCATIONS ON C'ENTURI BOUJ,EVARD.
s At the request of Commissioner Cunningham, Iten was
inclu to the mi- nutes. James Devore stated that rnt.tte
changes had been brought to the Cbmmission a number <,i' mout,h,.
ago. Bus Route No. 260, and other buses were :l running :,long
Cenl,uiy Boulevard since 6ernwoorl Avenue was closed due to
freeway construction. Since then, Enginet Di had
received a number of complaints.
Commissioner Cunningham asked if the public is no sattsfi.ed
with tht changes.
Y
James Uevore stated that several. changes were made. At
Ernestine Avenue on Century Boulevard, the stop was changed
from the near side: of the street to the far side. At hit trrs
Avenue, the stop was moved from the near side to the far
t
v —
• i
e 1
Commissioner Cunningham expressed concern ;,t,H r, >c;r„•st, 1i
Was made approximately one year ago to R'i;). ,y re, ,;l liu +! t,;u
made to have the bus stop moved to the far side of J,mt,erical
Highway, West of Century Boulevard. lie st,�f,ed t,hfl,t, t ;ht bus
sits ;It the corner on the near side. fie exert -ssei ,•un,.::rn of
potenti.a.l accidents.
9. DISCUSSION OF PARKING PROBLEM RP LATED TO PAHk I N(i Ov 'I'I11•
SIUEIvALh.
Commissioner C'unning'ham commended the Sherift`'s Ut:prartmr,irt
in their'effort to alleviate the parking problr:m of cars
blo.,ki.ng the public right of way and being in violation
of the City's ordinance. However, he expressed enn,:teru (it'
vehicles that are co.ntinously in violation.
i
Deputy Rosenhaurer asked Commissioner Cuaini -ngham for the
„
locations.
•1 Commissioner- Cunningham handed a copy of a list, inuLuding
ttrreu %ehi.cles it violation to Deputy Ros,.
S Discussion followed,
Deputy Rosenbaurer stated that the State law allows vehicies
to park in the driveway into. the apron.
e
10. REQLif}SPl FOR COMINI- ISSIONER LOWELL SMTTII i
At t,hF, request of the City Clerk, a moment of silcnr..e: t.as
,
held 1.n recognition of the late Lowell Smith. A reao.luc_i.ori
will be prepared and gi�.en to the Widow, Mrs. Smith, for
Commissioner Smith's ser•v.ices to the 'feat'£ is and Parl .in❑
Commission.
d
Commissioner Archambault motioned for a nri. nut,: of sil „nt•e.
TNFOR.MATfONAL ITEMS
,J explained the Informational Items and .informed
Commissioner Simpson that copies of other mUt'Arial are usu;tll.y
included with the agenda package, such as, LACTC information,
other Committ.ies information, newspaper articles relating to
transportation information and information on
COMMISSIONIER ORALS
Commissioner Cunningham expressed concern of Ii,r tack ,;i' 1'1agm, e,
at the .inter of Fernwood Avenue and Imp, --riul Highwu�
He stated that, without the flagmen, a possible accident, may occur
Commissioner Cunningham wntcomed Commissioner Simpson to I.1w
' ?.
Committee.
.3
4
,
{ 1
t
fl
�i
}
0
3
i
he- an assons t„
the Cnmmin: inn,
tt
k
.James De:vnrL hriefl.y esplained to Commissioner
simpson he( rolls
0
3
i +zk
rr
i
Y
i t
IF0
}
m
t
N
9
F�
1 CommLsstonwr 4juipson replied that she hopes to
he- an assons t„
the Cnmmin: inn,
tt
.James De:vnrL hriefl.y esplained to Commissioner
simpson he( rolls
on the C such as, concerns of parking
probl,ms, trarlia,
r
tralfic si gnals, transportation, trucks, etc,
'
Oommisn onwr Cunningham e_apresned concern of a
stre L jig ht, ouL .in
tront of McD"aaids Restaurant on the edesL side
ail hLv SLrret gntng
south.
James Devnrc stated that the light will be rvpwi
tad.
ADJ V URNP b Y T
n A motion "as made h3 Lnmm.issirn,ev Archumbai,.i,
to .adjourn
a the neNL i�gulav scheduled meeting, 4th inursdav,
`larch A,
19717_, aL b 30 p.m., of the Traffic: and PaikihM
t'nmw,issiun to Lh,:
City Cou,u3 l Chambers. Meeting adjourned at iP
iG p.m.).
F L
c
i +zk
rr
i
Y
i t
IF0
}
m
t
N
9
F�
tt
a ,
4
R
i
d
O
DATE. MARCH Lfi, 1987
TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
TRAFFIC AND PARKING COMMISSION
FROM: JOSEPH Y. WANG, P.E., DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC Woos/
CITY ENGINFFR.
SUBJECT: HANDICAP STREET PARKING REQUEST'
PURPOSIE'
To recommend that the Traffic and Parking Commission support
staff's recommendation to have the petitioner of a handicap
street parking fill out forms and pav fees. Staff will det.ermrnc
if the applicant qualifies and install and the handicap street
parking.
BACKGROUND:
A request for a handicap street parking zone has heen received
from Mrs. Mark Gomez, of 5149 Lavinia Avenue, Lynwood. The
request is for the school bus that picks up her right, (K) year
old daughter daily in front of the home.
ANALYSIS:
City Council Resolution 79 -89 sets the nonditions for the
installation of handicap street parking (see Attachment, A). A
form is to be filled out by the petitioner and include=, a portion
to be filled out by the doctor. A fee of s15.00 is in he paid for
the processing of the application, investigation, installation,
etr. (see Attachment di). Staff recommends that the peLil.iunr-is
fill "at, the required form and pay the processinq fee. Stafl
will determine if the applicant qualifies under the guidclinv�
set by Resolution 79 -89. If the appliranL qualifies, the
handicap street parking zone will be installed.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Traffic and Parking Commissinn support,
staff's recommendation to have the petitioner fill. out the
required form and pay fee. Staff will make a determination it'
the petitioner qualifies and install the handicap street, parking.
T02,430
0
RESOLUTION NO. 79 -89
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LYNWOOD REQUIRING THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION
FORM FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ON- STREET HANDI-
CAPPED PARKING ZONES
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lynwood adopted
Resolution No. 77 -89 recognizing the need to provide disabled
persons handicapped.parking zones, and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lynwood intends
to provide such handicapped parking zones in an orderly fashion,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Lynwood that:
Section 1 . Any requests for the installation of handicapped
parking zones shall conform to Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" attached
hereto and made a part by this reference to be known as Instruc-
tions and Application for Disabled Persons on Street Parking, res-
pectively.
Section 2 . Any handicapped parking zones existing at the date of
execution of this Resolution will be required to con.forn to Section 1
herein within 90 days thereafter, except that the initial application
fee shall be waived for these existing handicapped parking zones.
Section 3 . The Public {Yorks Director is herebv ordered to
administer the application and installation of Handicapped Parking
Zones as required herein and to remove Non- Conforming Handicapped
Parking Zones as required by Section 2 herein.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 6th day of
November , 1979.
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
/s/ Laurene Coffev
LAURENE COFFEY, City Cler__
City of Lynwood
/s /•F. L. Morris.
E.L. MORRIS, !Mayor
City of Lynwood
EXHIBIT A
® 0
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.:
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, the undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Lynwood, do hereby
certify that the above and foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the
City Council of said City at a regular meeting thereof held
in the City Hall of said City on the Fth day of NnvPmhpr
19 79 , and passed by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN BYORK, GREEN, HIGGINS, ROWE, MORRIS.
NOES: COUNCILMEN NONE.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN NONE.
/s/ Laurene Coffey
City Clerk, City of Lynwood
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss..
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I. the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Lynwood, and clerk
of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the above and
foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of Resolution No.7 -89
on file in my office and that said resolution was adopted on the date
and by the vote therein stated.
Dated this qth day of November , 1979 .
�i
City Clerk, City od
0
DISABLED Yt:RSONS ON- STREET PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS
INSTRUCTIONS
The City of Lynwood does not provide on- street parking for private
individuals. It must be emphasized that even "disabled parking
zones" do not constitute "Personal reserved parking," and, that
any person with valid disabled persons" license plates (DP or
VT plates) may park in such stalls. Persons parking in such stalls
without valid DP or VT plates may be cited and towed away as
resolved by City Council Resolution No. 77 -89.
Normally, in establishing on- street parking facilities for the
disabled there shall be a reasonable determination made that the
facility will serve more than one disabled person and that the
need is of an on -going nature. The intent is to prevent the pro-
liferation of special parking stalls that may be installed for a
short -term purpose but later are seldom used. Unjustified
installation of.such parking stalls unnecessarily increases the
City's maintenance and operations costs reduces available on- street
parking for the general public and detracts from the overall
effectiveness of the disabled persons parking program.
However, exceptions may be made, in special hardship cases, provided
all of the following conditions exist:
(1) Applicant (or guardian) must be in possession of valid license
Plates for "disabled persons" or "disabled veterans" issued by the
California Department of Motor Vehicles on the vehicle.
(2) The proposed disabled parking space must be in front of the
disabled persons place of residence.
(3) Subject residence must not have off - street parking available
or off- street space that maybe converted into disabled parking.
(4) Applicant must provide a signed statement from a medical doctor
that the disabled person is unable (even with the aid of crutches,
braces, walker, wheelchair or similar support) to travel more than
50 feet between his or her home and automobile-without the
assistance of a second person.
(5) Applicant must pay an initial fee of $15.00 to cover the cost
of field investigation, installation, maintenance and future removal.
(6) Applicant must pay an annual fee of $10.00, after the first
year, to cover the cost of yearly investigation to confirm the pre-
sent need for-the handicapped parking zones.
Note: Please do not send check until after this application has
been reviewed by the Traffic and Parking Commission and approved
by the City. -
Return application:
' City of Lynwood
Public Works Department,
Transnortation Division
11330 Bullis Road
Lynwood, CA 90262
0
EXHIBIT B
® i
CITY OF LYNWOOD
APPLICATION
DISABLED PERSONS ON- STREET PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS
Important Please read instructions on reverse side before filling out
(Please Type or Print)
Applicant's Name
Address
City Zip Code
Telephone No.
1. Is the above address the proposed location for the disabled
parking space?
Yes No
2. Do you own the property at this address or are you renting it?
I own the property I am renting it other
If other, explain
3. Is the applicant the disabled person? Yes No
If not, what is the relationship to the disabled person?
Spouse Parent_ Guardian_ Relative_ Other_
4. Do you have valid "disabled persons" license plates (DP or VT
plates) issued by the California Department of Motor Vehicles
on your vehicle?
Yes No
5. Is there a driveway or other off - street space available at this
address that may be used for off- street parking?
Yes No
6. is thr.re sufficient space in front of this address to accommodate
un on- street parking space?
Yes No
I have read and understand the preceding instructions and have answered
the above questions truthfully and to the best of my ability. I also
understand that the disabled parking space is not exempt from street
sweeping parking restrictions or other applicable part -time parking
prohibitions at this location.
.applicant's Signature Date
MEDICAL DOCTOR'S STATEMENT
I testify that the subject "disabled person" in this application
constitutes a special hardship case who is unable to travel more than
50 feet (even with crutches, braces, walker, wheelchair or other
support) without the assistance of a second person.
Doctor's Signature Date
(Please Type or Print Following)
Doctor's Name
Address City Zip Code
Telephone Number
s
RESOLUTION NO. 7q -89
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LYNWOOD REQUIRING THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION
FORM FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ON- STREET HANDI-
CAPPED PARKING ZONES
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lynwood adopted
Resolution No. 77 -89 recognizing the need to provide disabled
persons handicapped parking zones, and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lynwood intends
to provide such handicapped parking zones in an orderly fashion,
NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Lynwood that:
Section 1 . Any requests for the installation of handicapped
parking zones shall conform to Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" attached
hereto and made a part by this reference to be known as Instruc-
tions and Application for Disabled Persons on Street Parking, res-
pectively.
Section 2 . Any handicapped parking zones existing at the date of
execution of this Resolution *ill be required to conforn to Section 1
herein within 90 days thereafter, except that the initial application
fee shall be waived for these existing handicapped parking zones.
• Section 3 . The Public Works Director
administer the application and install
Zones as required herein and to remove
Parking Zones as required by Section 2
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED
November , 1979.
is herebv ordered to
ition of Handicapped Parking
Non- Conforming Handicapped
herein.
this 6th day of
/s/ F. L. Morris.
E.L. MORRIS, Mayor
City of Lynwood
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
/s/ Laurene Coffey
LAUREHE COFFEY, City Cler..
City of Lynwood
EXHIBIT A
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, the undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Lynwood, do hereby
certify that the above and foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the
City Council of said City at a regular meeting thereof held
in the City Hall of said City on the Fth day of November
19 79 , and passed by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN BYORK, GREEN, HIGGINS, ROWE, MORRIS.
NOES: COUNCILMEN NONE.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN NONE.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss..
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
/s/ Laurene Coffey
City Clerk, City of Lynwood
I, the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Lynwood, and clerk
of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the above and
foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of Resolution No.7 -89
on file in my office and that said resolution was adopted on the date
and by the vote therein stated.
Dated this 9th day of _November , 1979 .
City Clerk, City of Ly' wood
` ® •
DISABLED eERSONS ON- STREET PARSING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS
INSTRUCTIONS
The City of 'Lynwood does not provide on- street parking for private
individuals. It must be emphasized that even "disabled parking
zones" do not constitute "Personal reserved parking," and, that
a_ y person with valid "disabled persons" license plates (DP or
VT plates) may park in such stalls. Persons parking in such stalls
without valid DP or VT plates may be cited and towed away as
resolved by City Council Resolution No. 77 -89:
Normally, in establishing on- street parking facilities for the
disabled there shall be a reasonable determination made that the
facility will serve more than one disabled person and that the
need is of an on -going nature. The intent is to prevent the pro-
liferation of special parking stalls that may be installed for a
short -term purpose but later are seldom used.. Unjustified
installation Of -such parking stalls unnecessarily increases the
City's maintenance and operations costs reduces available on- street
parking for the general public and detracts from the overall
effectiveness of the disabled persons parking program.
However, exceptions may be made, in special hardship cases, provided
all of the following conditions exist:
(1) Applicant (or guardian) must be in possession of valid license
plat for "disabled persons" or "disabled veterans" issued by the
ac lifornia Department of Motor Vehicles on the vehicle.
(2) The proposed disabled,parking space must be in front of the
disabled persons place of residence.
(3) Subject residence must not have off - street parking available
or off- street space that maybe converted into disabled parking.
(4) Applicant must provide a signed statement from a medical doctor
that the disabled person is unable (even with the aid of crutches,
braces, walker, wheelchair or similar support) to travel more than
50 feet between his or her home and automobile without the
assistance of a second person.
(5) Applicant must pay an initial fee of $15.00 to cover the cost
of field investigation, installation, maintenance and future removal.
(6) Applicant must pay an annual fee of $10.00, after the first
year, to cover the cost of yearly investigation to confirm the pre-
sent need for - handicapped parking zones.
Note: Please do not send check until after this application has
been reviewed by the Traffic and Parking Commission and approved
by the City.
Return application:
r�
City of Lynwood
Public Works Department,
Transnortation Division
11330 Bullis Road
Lynwood, CA 90262
EXHIBIT B
CITY OF LYNWOOD
APPLICATION
DISABLED PERSONS ON- STREET PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS
Important Please read instructions on reverse side before filling out
(Please Type or Print)
Applicant's
Address
City Zip Code
Telephone No.
1. Is the above address the proposed location for the disabled
parking space?
Yes No
2. Do you own the property at this address or are you renting it?
I own the property I am renting it other
If other, explain
3. Is the applicant the disabled person? Yes No
If not, what is the relationship to the disabled person?
Spouse_ Parent_ Guardian_ Relative_ Other__
4. Do you have valid "disabled persons" license plates (DP or VT
plates) issued by the California Department of Motor Vehicles
on your vehicle?
Yes No
5. Is there a driveway or other off - street space available at this
address that may be used for off- street parking?
Yes No
6, is these sufficient space in front of this address to accommodate
an on- street parking space?
Yes No
I have read and understand the preceding instructions and have answered
the above questions truthfully and to the best of my ability. I also
understand that the disabled parking space is not exempt from street
sweeping parking restrictions or other applicable part -time parking
prohibitions at this location.
Applicant's Signature Date
MEDICAL DOCTOR'S STATEMENT
I testify that the subject "disabled person" in this application
constitutes a special hardship case who is unable to travel more than
50 feet (even with crutches, braces, walker, wheelchair or other
support) without the assistance of a second person.
Doctor's•Signature Date
(Please Type or Print Following)
Doctor's Name
Address City Zip Code
Telephone Number
r ry r
INFORMATIONAL ITEM
5
1. ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
IIYER.IAL HIGHWAY AND ATLANTTC AVENUE.
This project, currently under construcr, ion, iu\oives the
complete reconstru�.bion of the first, aLley sou Lit or im4,a:t ial
Highway and ease of Atlantic Avenue. the recouo-.Ltut Lion
includes new asphalt pavement and conncrete ribbon gut Lets
s `Clip. project is'being constructed by Sully- MiIIer Cot, si.rut]Liou
Gom at a Bost of $55,091.00.
k : 1
'L. SLURRY SEAL PROJECT FY 86 81
This project involves the slurry sealing of st.ree LS
throughout the City'. The work, completed on March I1 1987,
was performed by ravement, Coating Company. The total tn•uject
` cost, was $100,000 with half the funds coming from H(J)A and
's ha.1'f Gas Tax.
.,i �'c r
3. LYNWOol) FIXED ROUTF TROLLEY
y At the request: of the City Council, staff is preparing a
a study investigating the addition of a third trol.lev bus
' to the existing system. Staff will review route
modifications and additions, stop .lucaLions and system
ht- :adways .
r i
4. BUS PAD INSTALLATION q
Plans and specifications are being prepared for the
installation of eight concrete bus pads throughout. the tit.v.
The kus, pads are installed to eliminate the pavemenP
tM deter "'i -ation at bus stops on asphalt streets. This pr..jt•ct
v is estimated to cost. $50,000 and funded with Prop A mont;y.
t �yt i
I r i; •� l u u
r A
f ) r
• ! ' i �' f � r t 1 l .
T02.410
y t
T
t F
4
f
et
Funds Wi11 & for Transit
S.F. Municipal Fee on New
Office Buildings Upheld
By PHILIP HAGER, Times Staff Writer
SAN FRANCISCO —A pioneer-
ing, multimillion- dollar municipal
fee that was imposed on new
downtown office buildings to pay
for increased, public transit use has -
' been upheld by a state appeals
court here.
The decision was hailed,by attor-
neys for the city, who said that it
could lead other communities - to
use the same approach to meet
growing urban needs. But lawyers
for developers assailed the ruling
as creating a "giant loophole" in
Proposition 13, -the tax- limitation
initiative enacted in 1978:
Under the transit -fee ordinance,
apparently the first of its kind, in
the nation, developers are charged
,up to $5 per square foot of new
office space to finance the antici-
pated costs of accommodating new
bus, cable car and rail riders result-
ing from the current downtown
building boom.
Rising Transit Costs
The San Francisco Board of
Supervisors, in enacting the fee in-
1981, based the charge on the
projected' increased transit costs
generated over the 45 -year aver-
age life of each new office building.
a By the turn of the century; an
additional 100,000 people are ex-
pected to be working in the down-
town area
The measure is one of a series of
controversial development fees en-
acted here in recent years to
provide support for municipal pro-
grams. Others require developers
to subsidizx low- income housing
projects, pay for art to be displayed
in new buildings and provide or
finance child -care facilities.
The three - member panel of the
state Court of Appeal unanimously
rejected a far- ranging legal -chal-
lenge to the transit fee made in
behalf of 6,000 downtown property
owners. The opponents said. the -
measure; if upheld, would give
municipalities virtually unlimited
power to subsidize transit or other
public programs at the expense of a
small group of property owners.
But Appellate Justice Harry W.
Low, in a 36 -page opinion filed
earlier this week, upheld the fee
against the developers' challenge.
Among other things, the court
ruled that the fee was not a "special
tax" that would have required a
two - thirds voter approval under
provisions of Proposition 13.
r.
The court found'that the fee was
not aimed at replacing revenue lost
under the initiative but was a
reasonable'charge tied to an in-
crease in ridership created by new
development. Unlike most taxes,
the fees are not "compulsory," but
imposed only on developers who '
choose to create new office space,
the court said.
The panel also upheld the city's
calculation of the projected costs of
expanded transit use brought on by ;
new development.
"We are mindful of local govern-
ment's need to generate revenue to
maintain the quality of life the ;
residents of the city have come to ;
expect," Low wrote. "This has
become increasingly difficult in-the
post- Proposition 13 era. The transit .
fee imposed falls within permissi-
ble bounds." .
However, by a separate 2 -1 vote,
the court also ruled that developers
who had obtained permits and had
begun construction before the ;
measure was enacted were not
subject to its requirements:
Raises $25 Million :j
The ordinance thus far has gen-
erated an estimated $25 million for
the city's Municipal Railway, with
another $46 million anticipated in
the next three decades. Funds
collected are being held in escrow
pending final resolution of the case.
Such development fees have
been used increasingly in the state
to pay for expanded school, park or `
road needs —but San Francisco's is
apparently the first use of the
device to pay for citywide public
transportation, according to attor-
neys in the case. ,
"We're obviously very pleased
with the decision," said Jerome B.
Falk Jr., a San Francisco attorney '
representing the city "Once the
legality of such a fee is well- estab-
lished, other cities could be expect-
ed to emulate this city "
Allan N. Littman of San Francis-
co, an attorney for. the firms that
challenged the fee, said a rehearing
will be sought before the appeal
court but that if such review is
denied, the issue will be taken to
the state Supreme Court.
If this is upheld, cities and
counties will use it as a giant
loophole to avoid complying with
Proposition 13;' Littman said. "If
they can do this for transit, they
can do it for almost anything you
can imagine.
I � —T - r/, /) n < V , ni >: KI,0 V ni/ /CG'S
LAC M
LOS ANGELES COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 403 West 8th St Suite 500, Los Angeles, CA 90014 (213)626-0370
San Gabriel Valley
Transportation
Zone
On December 11 1986, the County of
Los Angeles submitted the full San Gabriel
Valley Transportation Zone application The
application contains a complete operations,
implementation and financial plan, and esti-
mates anticipated cost savings in excess of
the required 25 percent— compared to the
existing service Currently, the county is seek-
ing resolutions from the affected cities in sup-
port of the formation of the zone
The implementation of the zone is
scheduled to be phased by the formation of
six competitive procurement packages over a
period covering two fiscal years In addition,
the zone will contract with the SCRTD for
services such as customer information, time-
table production, and distribution, and use
of the El Monte Bus Station
The application states that the San
Gabriel Valley Transportation Zone will pro-
vide an increase in mobility to the region By
saving more than 25 percent in costs, the
zone will allow the continuation of transit
service as well as possibly increase service on
current lines, provide new service not cur-
rently available, and /or maintain low fares
Finally the zone application states that
service continuity will be maintained as the
transition between the SCRTD and zone
takes place This will be accomplished by
using the existing line numbers and fare struc-
ture and by the phased contracting of the six
bid packages
Currently, LACTIC is reviewing the appli-
cation and meeting with the county and the
SCRTD to resolve any issues requiring imme-
diate attention Final Commission action on
the zone application is tentatively scheduled
for mid -May Approval will require eight -
affirmauve votes
LACTC'S New Chairperson
Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley is the
1987 Chairperson of the LACTC, replacing
Los Angeles County Supervisor Deane Dana,
who will remain active as a Commission
member Mayor Bradley served as Vice-
Chairman during 1986, and automatically
assumed the chairmanship for 1987
Los Angeles County Supervisor Kenneth
Hahn was elected vice - chairman and will
automatically become chairman in 1988
Supervisor Hahn represents the County s
Second District
Lynwood Trolley Makes It's
Debut
During its December 5, 1986 annual
Christmas Parade, the City of Lynwood
unveiled its new fixed route transit service
Passengers may ride anywhere along the
Lynwood Trolley route at no cost Regular
hours of service for the two 26- passenger
trolley type buses are 9 00 a m to 5 30 p m
daily The new trolleys, painted bright fire
engine red with gold trim, pick up passengers
along its route at specially marked bus stops
throughout the city every 10 to 20 minutes
In an effort to promote the new transit
system, a citywide contest was held to select
the names of the two troiley buses Of the
numerous responses, 'Lynwood Express
and 'Spruce Caboose were the winning
entries
Congratulations City of Lynwood, we
wish you great successl
TRANSPORTATION
MANAGEMENT
ASSOCIATIONS
EDITOR'S NOTE. This article briefly reviews
the concept of Transportation Management
Associations )TMAs) as an entity to address
local transportation- refated problems.
While certain functions and activities of a
TMA are eligible for Proposition A Local
Return funds, the actual level of Proposi-
tion A funding will depend largely on the
specific activities undertaken by the TMA.
Transportation Management Associations
(TMAs) are private, non - profit organizations
created to address local transportation- related
problems TMA s consist of a joint effort
between employers, developers, retailers and
local public officials to take direct action, such
as providing service, and /or involving the
private sector in public sector transportation
(Continued on reverse side)
muuuuunuuumuumm�uu
CONTRACTING
FOR SERVICE ?
Here Are Some Pointers
from Seattle Metro
Seattle Metro has contracted out for para-
transit services for several years In a speech
at the Annual Transportation Research Board
Conference in Washington, D C Karen
Rosenzweig of Seattle Metro gave some
pointers for low cost, successful service con-
tracts We thought it was a particularly good
list and are reprinting it here
• Be flexible on vehicle specifications —often
a small modification can save- money
• Be specific on mid -term contract adjust-
ments When will they be allowed? For
what purpose?
• If you choose a provider based on low bid,
walk through the bid and cost components
with the contractor before you sign the
contract
• Paying your contractor s bills quickly can
save you money in the long run
• Be clear on your performance requirements
Not giving a clear message from the outset
can confuse a contractor and lead to less
responsive service
• Get to know your contractor Visit opera-
tions facilities, maintenance yards and get to
know the people who run them
• Establish a paper trail with the contractor on
complaints and maintenance problems —
and how they were resolved
• Ride and monitor the service regularly and
develop a relationship with the drivers of
the vehicles Often they can report on main-
tenance problems before they become a
real problem
• Make the contractor and drivers feel that
they re a part of your agency
• Listen to your contractor s suggestions If
you reopen to change and experiment you
can end up with a more efficient and
responsive service
Ifyou d like advice on how to implement
any of these suggestions in your own city,
contact your Local Assistance representative
uuunmrfuummumnuunm
•
0
sw1RTs
JANUARN 1, 1986 - DFUMBER 31, 1986
T02.440
RUN 03/02/87 REPORT 1.
MOTOR
VEHICLE
'INVOLVED WITH FOR COLLISIONS
AND VICTIMS
BY SEVERITY
i
NCIC
CA1943 PAGE 1
QUARTERLY 10/01/86
THRU 12/31/86
'
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
COLLISIONS *xxxx * *xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx ** VICTIMS xxxxxxx�ixxxxxxx
MOTOR VEHICLE INVOLVED WITH
TOTAL
xxx FATAL xxx xx INJURY xxx
xxxx POO
xxxx
TOTAL KILLED
INJURY
SEVERE
OTHER
COMPLNT
COUNT
COUNT
PCT COUNT PCT
COUNT
PCT
INJURY
VISINJ
OF PAIN
NON- COLLISION
3
3 2.54
3
3
1
1
1
PEDESTRIAN
19
1
18 15.25
20 1
19
5
9
5
OTHER MOTOR VEHICLE
219
77 65.25
142
72:44
138
138
8
42
88
MOTOR VEHICLE ON OTHER ROADWAY
1
1
.51
PARKED MOTOR VEHICLE
39
7 5.93
32
16.32
8
8
2
5
1
TRAIN
BICYCLE
7
4 3.38
3
1.53
4
4
2
2
ANIMAL
FIXED OBJECT
26
8 6.77
18
9.18
12
12
6
6
OTHER OBJECT
1
1 .84
1
1
1
NOT STATED
TOTAL
315
1
118
196
186 1
185
16
65
104
n
LJ
t
i
RUN 03/02/87 REPORT 1.
MOTOR
VEHICLE
INVOLVED WITH FOR COLLISIONS
AND VICTIMS
BY SEVERITY
NCIC
CA1943
PAGE 2
CUMULATIVE 01/01/86
THRU 12/31/86
*xx *xxxxx
* * * * *x * *x COLLISIONS
VICTIMS x *
** x *x *xxxx
* *x
MOTOR VEHICLE INVOLVED WITH
TOTAL
* *x FATAL *xx xx INJURY * *x
**xx POO
xxxx
TOTAL KILLED
INJURY
SEVERE
OTHER
COMPLNT
COUNT
COUNT
PCT COUNT PCT
COUNT
PCT
INJURY
VISINJ
OF PAIN
NON- COLLISION
8
6 1.60
2
.27
6
6
1
3
2
PEDESTRIAN
58
4
80.00 53 14.17
1
.13
62 4
58
12
31
15
OTHER MOTOR VEHICLE
721
222 59.35
499
69.40
388
388
21
127
240
MOTOR VEHICLE ON OTHER ROADWAY
8
1 .26
7
:97
1
1
1
PARKED MOTOR VEHICLE
152
28 7.48
124
17.24
37
37
4
23
lU
TRAIN
BICYCLE
53
1
20.00 39 10.42
13
1.80
46 1
45
1
28
16
ANIMAL
1
1
:13
FIXED OBJECT
94
24 6.41
70
9.73
33
33
1
17
15
OTHER OBJECT
3
1 .26
2
.27
1
1
1
NOT STATED
TOTAL
t
1098
5
374
719
574 5
569
40
230
299
1
RUN 03/02/87
REPORT
2. COLLISIONS 9Y
DAY OF
WEEK AND HOUR OF
DAY
NCIC CA1943 PAGE 1
QUARTERLY
10/01/86
THRU 12/31/86
TIME PERIOD
TOTAL
WEEKDAY
WEEKEND MONDAY
TUESDAY
WEDNESDAY THURSDAY
FRIDAY
SATURDAY
SUNDAY
0000 -0059
8
6
2 3
1
1
1
1
1
0100 -0159
4
4
1
3
0200 -0259
5
1
4 1
3
1
0300 -0359
3
3
2
1
(
0400 -0459
1
1
1
0500 -0559
8
3
5
1
1
1
3
2
0600 -0659
4
3
1
2
1
1
•
0700 -0759
14
12
2 5
2
3
2
2
0800 -0859
9
8
1 1
1
1
4
1
1
0900 -0959
7
5
2
2
1
1
1
2
!
i
1000 -1059
10
7
3 1
2
3
1
2
1
1100 -1159
21
15
6 3
3
2
4
3
2
4
1200 =1259
12
9
3
5
4
2
1
1300 -1359
7
2
5
1
1
3
2
1400 -1459
25
18
7 4
1
6
4
3
5
2
1500 -1559
26
19
7 5
4
2
4
4
4
3
t
1600 -1659
25
21
4 3
5
7
6
3
1
1700 -1759
33
24
9 4
4
3
6
7
4
5
•
1800 -1859
24
20
4 5
3
5
5
2
2
2
1900 -1959
23
16
7 2
5
1
3
5
1
6
2000 -2059
13
11
2 4
1
1
5
2
2100 -2159
13
7
6• 4
1
1
1
5
1
t
2200 -2259
11
7
4 1
1
2
3
3
1
2300 -2359
8
4
4 1
1
1
1
3
1
UNKNOWN
1
1
1
- TOTAL
315
219
96 0
41
40
48
43
56
40
t
7
0
I
s
k
RUN 03/02/87
REPORT
2. COLLISIONS BY
DAY OF
WEEK AND HOUR
OF DAY
NCIC CA1943 PAGE 2
CUMULATIVE
01/01/86
THRU 12/31/86
TIME PERIOD
TOTAL
WEEKDAY
WEEKEND
MONDAY
TUESDAY
WEDNESDAY THURSDAY
FRIDAY
SATURDAY
SUNDAY
0000 -0059
27
15
12
5
3
1
4
2
6
6
0100 -0159
18
6
12
3
2
1
4
8
0200-0259
21
7
14
4
3
10
4
0300 -0359
17
4
13
1
3
7
6
0400 -0459
8
4
4
1
1
2
1
3
0500 -0559
16
10
6
1
3
3
3
3
3
0600-0659
15
9
6
1
5
1
2
4
2
0700 -0759
48
38
10
10
5
6
9
8
8
2
0800 -0859
30
24
6
5
4
4
9
2
5
1
0900 -0959
32
23
9
3
7
5
2
6
4
5
1000 -1059
31
23
8
5
4
2
9
3
5
3
1100 -1159
50
34
16
5
7
9
8
5
10
6
1200 -1259
50
35
15
9
8
11
4
3
9
6
1300 -1359
41
26
15
6
6
3
3
8
8
7
1400 -1459
64
44
20
13
7
11
6
7
13
7
1500 -1559
86
63
23
12
10
15
10
16
12
11
1600 -1659
116
90
26
16
19
19
9
27
17
9
1700 -1759
98
72
26
15
16
11
11
19
16
10
1800 -1859
74
52
22
10
6
12
14
10
12
10
1900 -1959
78
50
28
4
7
7
14
18
12
16
2000 -2059
53
29
24
5
5
5
8
6
16
8
2100 -2159
53
28
25
5
2
4
6
11
16
9
2200 -2259
28
18
10
1
1
2
6
8
7
3
2300 -2359
41
24
17
5
2
6
4
7
12
5
UNKNOWN
3
2
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
1098
730
368
145
128
139
142
176
218
150
7
0
I
RUN 03/02/87 REPORT
3. PRIMARY COLLISION FACTORS
FOR COLLISIONS
AND VICTIMS
BY SEVERITY
NCIC CA1943 PAGE 1
QUARTERLY 10/01/86
THRU 12/31/86
x *x * *xxxxxx * *x * *x* COLLISIONS x *xxx *x * * * * *xx
*xx
* * * * *x *xxxxxx *x* VICTIMS x * * xx * * xxx *xx *x
PRIMARY COLLISION FACTOR
TOTAL
*xx FATAL *x* *x,INJURY xxx
xx** POO
* *xx
TOTAL KILLED
INJURY
SEVERE
OTHER
COMPLNT
COUNT
COUNT PCT COUNT
PCT
COUNT
PCT
INJURY
VISINJ
OF PAIN
DRIVING INFLUENCE ALCOHOL /DRUG
41
13
11.01
28
14.28
23
23
4
9
10
' IMPEDING TRAFFIC
UNSAFE SPEED
44
22
18.64
22
11.22
39
39
5
13
21
FOLLOWING T00 CLOSELY
17
5
4.23
12
6.12
6
6
2
4
WRONG SIDE OF ROAD
14
4
3.38
30
5.10
5
5
4
1
IMPROPER PASSING
9
2
1.69
7
3.57
2
2
1
1
UNSAFE LANE CHANGE
12
1
.84
11
5.61
1
1
1
IMPROPER TURNING
43
9
7.62
34
17.34
13
13
7
6
AUTOMOBILE RIGHT -OF -WAY
51
24
20.33
27
13.77
40
40
15
2S
PEDESTRIAN RIGHT -OF -WAY
7
7
5.93
7
7
1
3
3
PEDESTRIAN VIOLATION
7
7
5.93
7
7
2
4
1
STOP SIGNS AND SIGNALS
30
15
12.71
15
7.65
30
30
3
6
21
HAZARDOUS PARKING
1
1
.51
LIGHTS
BRAKES
OTHER EQUIPMENT
OTHER HAZARDOUS VIOLATION
8
4
3.38
4
2:04
5
5
P
3
•
OTHER THAN DRIVER
7
2
1:69
5
2.55
2
2
2
UNSAFE STARTING OR BACKING
14
14
7.14
OTHER IMPROPER DRIVING
2
1
.84
1
.51
3
3
3
_ PEDESTRIAN INFL ALCOHOL /DRUG
UNKNOWN
8
1 2
1.69
5
2.55
3 1
2
2
TOTAL
315
1 118
196
186 1
185
16
65
104
a
RUN 03/02/87 REPORT
3. PRIMARY COLLISION FACTORS
FOR COLLISIONS
AND VICTIMS
BY SEVERITY
NCIC CA1943 PAGE 2 ti
CUMULATIVE 01/01/86
THRU 12/31/86
* * *x *x * * * *xx* *xxxx COLLISIONS x * *x *x * ** *xxxx
* * *x
x * ** *xxxx * *xxxxx
VICTIMS
** *xxxx ** *xxxx*
PRIMARY COLLISION FACTOR
TOTAL
xx* FATAL *xx *x INJURY x *x
xxxx POD
xxxx
TOTAL KILLED
INJURY
SEVERE
OTHER
COMPLNT
COUNT
COUNT PCT COUNT
PCT
COUNT
PCT
INJURY
VISINJ
OF PAIN
DRIVING INFLUENCE ALCOHOL /DRUG
134
47
12.56
87
12.10
77
77
10
37
30
IMPEDING TRAFFIC
1
1
.26
2
- 2
1
1
UNSAFE SPEED
140
54
14.43
86
11.96
89
89
6
26
57
FOLLOWING TOO CLOSELY
66
22
5.88
44
6.11
32
32
11
21
WRONG SIDE OF ROAD
39
15
4.01
24
3.33
25
25
3
14
8
IMPROPER PASSING
26
5
1.33
ZI
2.92
5
5
2
3
UNSAFE LANE CHANGE
49
4
1.06
45
6.25
4
4
2
2
IMPROPER TURNING
151
26
6.95
125
17.38
36
36
1
21
14
AUTOMOBILE RIGHT -OF -WAY
200
86
22.99
114
15.85
142
142
2
" 61
79
PEDESTRIAN RIGHT -OF -WAY
11
11
2.94
12
12
2
5
5
PEDESTRIAN VIOLATION
39
3 60.00 34
9:09
2
.27
40
3
37
7
23
7
STOP SIGNS AND SIGNALS
105
43
11.49
62
8.62
74
74
5
20
49
HAZARDOUS PARKING
3
3
.41
LIGHTS
BRAKES
OTHER EQUIPMENT
OTHER HAZARDOUS VIOLATION
23
1 20.00 8
2.13
14
1.94
12
1
11
4
7
OTHER THAN DRIVER
20
7
1.87
13
1.80
8
8
1
2
5
UNSAFE STARTING OR BACKING
51
2
.53
49
6.81
2
2
2
OTHER IMPROPER DRIVING
7
3
.80
4
.55
6
6
1
5
PEDESTRIAN INFL ALCOHOL /DRUG
1
1
.26
1
1
1
UNKNOWN
32
1 20.00 5
1.33
26
3.61
7
1
6
6
TOTAL
1098
5 374
719
574
5
569,
40
230
299
•
E
RUN 03/02/87
REPORT 4.
MOTORCYCLE, MOPED, BICYCLE, AND
PEDESTRIAN COLLISIONS AND
VICTIMS
BY HOUR OF
DAY
NCIC
CA1943 PAGE 1
QUARTERLY
10/01/86 THRU
12/31/86
TIME PERIOD
xxx M O T O R
C Y
C L E xxx
xxxxxxx M 0 P E
D xxxxxxx
xxxxx B I C
Y C L E
* *
** P
E D E S
T R I A N **
xx COLLISIONS
xx
VICTIMS
xx COLLISIONS xx
VICTIMS
xx COLLISIONS xx
VICTIMS
xx COLLISIONS
xx VICTIMS
FAT INJ
POO
KLD INJ
FAT INJ POO
KLD INJ
FAT INJ
PDO
KLD INJ
FAT
INJ
POO KLD INJ
0000 -0059
2
2
0100 -0159
1
1
0200 -0259
0300 -0359
0400 -0459
0500 -0559
0600 -0659
0700 -0759
2
2
0800 -0859
0900 -0959
2
2
1000 -1059
1
1
1
1
1100 -1159
1
1
1
'
1200 -1259
1300 -1359
1
1
1
1
2
2
1400 -1459
1
1
1
2
2
1500-1559
2
2
1
1 1
1
2
2
1600-1659
1
1
1
1
2
2
•
1700 -1759
1
1
2
2
1
2
1 2
1800 -1859
1
1
1
1900 -1959
1
1
1
- 2000 -2059
1
1
2100 -2159
1
2
1
1 '
2200 -2259
1
1
1
1
2300 -2359
}
= UNKNOWN
TOTAL
13
3
13
1
1
4
3
4
1
20
1 20
RUN 03/02/87
REPORT 4.
MOTORCYCLE, MOPED, BICYCLE, AND
PEDESTRIAN
COLLISIONS AND
VICTIMS
BY
HOUR OF
DAY
NCIC
CA1943 PAGE 2
CUMULATIVE
01/01/86 THRU
12/31/86
TIME PERIOD
*** M 0_T 0 R
C Y
C L E Xxx
**xx*** M 0 P E
D ******X
***** B I C
Y C L E
*****
**x P
E D E S
T R
I A N
**
xx COLLISIONS
*x
VICTIMS
*N COLLISIONS **
VICTIMS
** COLLISIONS MR
VICTIMS
** COLLISIONS
**
VICTIMS
FAT INJ
POO
KLD INJ
FAT INJ POO
KLD INJ
FAT INJ
POO
KLD
INJ
FAT
INJ
POO
KLD
INJ
0000 -0059
2
2
0100 -0159
1
1
0200 -0259
2
2
0300 -0359
1
1
0400 -0459
0500 -0559
0600 -0659
1
1
0700 -0759
2
1
2
2
2
1
1
0800 -0859
0900 -0959
1
2
1
3
1000 -1059
3
4
2
1
2
1
1
1100 -1159
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1200 -1259
2
2
1 2
1
2
4
4
1300 -1359
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
1400 -1459
2
2
2
3
2
3
4
1
5
1500 -1559
3
3
I
4
2
4
8
8
•
1600 -1659
4
2
4
7
2
7
7
7
1700 -1759
4
3
5
4
4
1
6
1
1
6
1800 -1859
2
2
2
1
1
7
'' 1
8
2
2
1900 -1959
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
5
5
2000 -2059
3
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
2
2100 -2159
2
4
2
2
5
5
2200 -2259
1
1
1
1
2300 -2359
1
1
= UNKNOWN
TOTAL
34
13
38
2 1
3
1 39
13
1
41
4
56
2
4
58
c
NCIC CA1943 PAGE 1
PARTIES IN COLLISIONS
FATAL INJURY POO
169 230
11 28
1 8
3 3
1
1 17 40
2 1
8 28
1 210 338
i
14
1
1
1
1 3
1 20
4 3
4 3
0
1 �
1
9
RUN 03/02/87
REPORT 5.
ALCOHOL INVOLVEMENT
BY AGE OF
INVOLVED
PARTIES
QUARTERLY 10/01/86
THRU
12/31/86
INVOLVED PARTY
A G
E O
F I N
V O
L V E
D P A
R T Y
* * * *
* * * * * * * **
TYPE AND
0—
15 —•
20—
25—
30—
35—
40—
45—
55—
OVER
NOT
IMPAIRMENT
TOTAL
14
19
24
29
34
39
44
54
64
64
STATED
DRIVER
HAD NOT BEEN DRINKING
399
2
52
82
57
55
39
36
28
18
21
9
HBD — UNDER INFLUENCE
39
2
8
11
5
8
2
2
1
HBD — NOT UNDER INFLUENCE
9
2
2
3
1
1
HBD — IMPAIRMENT UNKNOWN
6
2
1
3
UNDER DRUG INFLUENCE
1
1
IMPAIRMENT — PHYSICAL
IMPAIRMENT NOT KNOWN
58
2
3
1
2
1
1
2
46
SLEEPY /FATIGUED
3
1
1
1
NOT STATED /NOT APPLICABLE
36
2
5
5
2
2
3
4
3
10
TOTAL DRIVERS
549
2
59
103
75
65
52
43
34
24
23
69
PEDESTRIAN
HAD NOT BEEN DRINKING
14
8
1
1
1
2
1
HBD — UNDER INFLUENCE
1
1
HBD — NOT UNDER INFLUENCE
HBD — IMPAIRMENT UNKNOWN
1
1
UNDER DRUG INFLUENCE
IMPAIRMENT — PHYSICAL
IMPAIRMENT NOT KNOWN
1
1
SLEEPY /FATIGUED
NOT STATED /NOT APPLICABLE
4
1
1
2
TOTAL PEDESTRIANS
21
8
1
2
2
1
1
3
2
1
BICYCLIST
HAD NOT BEEN DRINKING
7
5
1
1
HBD — UNDER INFLUENCE
HBD — NOT UNDER INFLUENCE
HBD — IMPAIRMENT UNKNOWN
UNDER DRUG INFLUENCE
IMPAIRMENT — PHYSICAL
IMPAIRMENT NOT KNOWN
SLEEPY /FATIGUED
NOT STATED /NOT APPLICABLE
TOTAL BICYCLISTS
7
5
1
1
_ OTHER NOT PARKED VEHICLE
HAD NOT BEEN DRINKING
HBD — UNDER INFLUENCE
HBD — NOT UNDER INFLUENCE
HBD — IMPAIRMENT UNKNOWN
UNDER DRUG INFLUENCE
IMPAIRMENT — PHYSICAL
IMPAIRMENT NOT KNOWN
= SLEEPY /FATIGUED
NOT STATED /NOT APPLICABLE
1
1
TOTAL OTHER NOT PARKED
1
1
c
NCIC CA1943 PAGE 1
PARTIES IN COLLISIONS
FATAL INJURY POO
169 230
11 28
1 8
3 3
1
1 17 40
2 1
8 28
1 210 338
i
14
1
1
1
1 3
1 20
4 3
4 3
0
1 �
1
9
RUN 03/02/87
REPORT 5.
ALCOHOL INVOLVEMENT
BY AGE OF
INVOLVED
PARTIES
NCIC
CA1943
PAGE 2
CUMULATIVE 01/01/86
THRU
12/31/86
INVOLVED PARTY
A
G E O
F I N
V O L
V E
D P A
R T Y
PARTIES
IN COLLISIONS
TYPE AND
0-
15-
20-
25-
30-
35-
40-
45-
55-
OVER
NOT
IMPAIRMENT
TOTAL
14
'19
24
29
34
39
44
54
64
64
STATED
FATAL
INJURY
POO
DRIVER
HAD NOT BEEN DRINKING
1330
4
183
266
218
162
127
109
99
71
66
25
2
471
857
HBD - UNDER, INFLUENCE
119
13
31
25
16
23
3
3
3
2
37
82
HBD - NOT UNDER INFLUENCE
48
2
10
7
12
5
3
2
4
1
2
17
31
HBD - IMPAIRMENT UNKNOWN
29
4
3
2
3
17
11
18
UNDER DRUG INFLUENCE
11
3
3
3
1
1
6
5
IMPAIRMENT - PHYSICAL
1
1
I
IMPAIRMENT NOT KNOWN
199
6
5
3
6
2
5
3
2
4
163
2
55
142
SLEEPY /FATIGUED
8
2
2
2
1
1
4
4
NOT STATED /NOT APPLICABLE
112
5
16
13
11
7
9
5
7
3
36
1
38
73
TOTAL DRIVERS
1846
4
212
334
269
210
166
133
112
87
74
245
5
633
1208
PEDESTRIAN
HAD NOT BEEN DRINKING
47
30
2
4
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
4
41
2
HBD - UNDER INFLUENCE
2
1
1
2
HBD - NOT UNDER INFLUENCE
2
1
1
2
HBD - IMPAIRMENT UNKNOWN
1
1
1
UNDER DRUG INFLUENCE
IMPAIRMENT - PHYSICAL
IMPAIRMENT NOT KNOWN
3
1
1
1
3
SLEEPY /FATIGUED
NOT STATED /NOT APPLICABLE
9
4
2
1
2
1
8
TOTAL PEDESTRIANS
64
35
2
6
1
4
4
2
4
2
2
2
5
57
2
BICYCLIST
HAD NOT BEEN DRINKING
45
30
7
3
2
1
1
1
35
10
HBD - UNDER INFLUENCE
HBD - NOT UNDER INFLUENCE
2
1
1
1
HBD - IMPAIRMENT UNKNOWN
1
1
1
UNDER DRUG INFLUENCE
2
1
1
1
1
IMPAIRMENT - PHYSICAL
IMPAIRMENT NOT KNOWN
2
1
1
1
1
SLEEPY /FATIGUED
NOT STATED /NOT APPLICABLE
1
1
1
TOTAL BICYCLISTS
53
30
8
3
4
2
2
1
3
1
39
13
_ OTHER NOT PARKED VEHICLE
HAD NOT BEEN DRINKING
HBD - UNDER INFLUENCE
HBD - NOT UNDER INFLUENCE
HBD - IMPAIRMENT UNKNOWN
UNDER DRUG INFLUENCE
IMPAIRMENT - PHYSICAL
1
IMPAIRMENT NOT KNOWN
-
= SLEEPY /FATIGUED
NOT STATED /NOT APPLICABLE
3
3
3
TOTAL OTHER NOT PARKED
3
3
3
9
•