HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-09-25-TAC-minT.A C MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 25 1990
Present were: 8. Mix, S. Castleman, S. Arnold, N. Santosuosso, L. Andrews,
A. Greene, L. Neumann, ~. McLaughlin, P. Burke
I. Evaluative criteria for three year contract (REP 91-34)
There was discussion between TAC and the evaluators present about going
on record by identifying certain evaluative criteria as being more
important (having more weight) than others when determining the composite
rating so that evaluators can use this if there is a tie among the
proposers. It was pointed out that the evaluators can weight as they see
fit when doing their composite rating. They are not bound by this opinion.
However, it was agreed that the discussion was valuable because it allowed
the evaluators to consider the weighting of criteria prior to seeing the
bids.
Those present individually decided which criteria were most important.rv~
After discussion, it was determined that the top five were:
Vehicle Maintenance Program
Management and Organization
Personnel
Quality of Experience
Professionalism
If evaluators lack sufficient time and need to cut the investigative
process short, it was decided their priorities should include: 1) analysis
of proposal, 2) verification of references, and 3) interview with bidder.
The question came up as to whether the evaluators can interview the
proposers. P. Burke will check with Town Counsel.
II. Items for Pre-Bid Conference, Wednesday, September 26
Certain items should be pointed out to prospective bidders:
Explain that all bids have to be above "Unacceptable" to be recommended.
Fiberglass is the bus body of choice but price is most important. If there
is a dilemma, suggest proposer bid both vehicles.
If questioned about weighted ratings, proposers should be told that
consensus indicated the above criteria were felt to be most important.
III. Addendum to be prepared:
General Instructions, page G-5, - Evaluative criteria for #7b. should read,
"Proposer has minimal experience, meeting one or none of the above
criteria."
Specifications, page S6-4, first paragraph - Any negotiated changes should
be at Town's expense, not added to bid price.
Same page, third paragraph - Sentence should be added in case new vehicles
are not available on January 1, to identify vehicles as meeting specs far
non-fleet back-up vehicles, or another vehicle approved by the Town.
c;~~
IV. Route and schedule problems in new six route system.
A) Route #3 - Request that 8:30 run go into Countryside Village. People
going to Ma71 have to wait until 10:30. Timewise, no reason not to.
TAC said OK.
B) Route #4 - Request to have bus go to hairdresser on Bedford Street
that is block beyond Sunnyknoil. TAC recommended it can be done on
request only to drop off, not pick up.
G) Route #6 - 3:00 run on way back to Center take Estabrook students
to Hayden by turning onto Revere Street, left on Bedford, right on
Worthen Rd to Hayden skating rink parking lot and return to Depot.
Big problem on this run is time. Full bus leaves Depot Square, picks
up more students at Diamond and does not have a lot of time at end
of route. TAC suggested P. Burke monitor to see if it can be done.
D) Route #2 - Wednesday only, there are several (four) students on 2:00
run who want to go to far end of Concord Avenue {near Spring). Bus
goes to Brookhaven this run and Wednesday Brookhaven does not have
~:~~ any bus service. TAC says follow up to see how many use Brookhaven.
E) Route #2 - 3:00 run every day goes to Hayden on request. However,
'j~ a student from Clarke takes it home to Waltham and Winthrop Rd. every
day. Mother is concerned about child. If he gets off at
intersection of Waltham and Worthen there are no sidewalks on that
.b,
°- side of street, etc. Only solution at this paint is driver is
~"' taking student to Winthrop and then taking left on Forest to Mass
Ave and going to Hayden and return to Depot Square. In bad weather,
he will not have time for both. P. Burke had suggested student wait
at Clarke until 4:00 run but mother said there is no place to wait.
She will follow up to see if any other solution.
V. Handicapped accessibility issue
TAC needs to draft letter far Selectmen to send to MBTA with signed FY'91
agreements indicating what Lexington is going to da to increase
accessibility. Something along the lines of telling what we do now with
Share-A-Ride and possibility of working out schedule to increase the number
of hours available gradually over the next five years. in process, may
need more funding, etc.
VI. MBTA Grant recommendation
Has not been on Selectmen's agenda yet, maybe next meeting October 15.
TAC should prepare recommendation to Town Manager and Selectmen to accept
$25,000 and what we will do with it. S. Arnold and P. Burke will work on
draft.
VII. Refund of Pass Money
Student purchased yearly pass in July, can no longer use pass because of
schedule change of Route #8 to odd route. She goes to school in Boston.
TAC says to return pro-rated value, possibly considering three-month pass.
Prepared by P.Burke
tacmn925.bus