HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-2000-164 A&A Motorcoach Agreement ExtensionRESOLUTION NO. R 2000 - 164
A RESOLUTION authorizing and directing the City Manager of the City of Yakima to
extend an agreement with A & A Motorcoach, Inc. where by said entity
shall operate City of Yakima Transit Division Fixed -Route #3 for a
period of six additional months ending midnight June 30, 2001.
WHEREAS, the City of Yakima desires to further engage the existing private
contractor A & A Motorcoach Inc., to operate Transit Division Fixed -Route #3 for a period
of six additional months ending midnight June 30, 2001 and,
WHEREAS, the City Council Transit Committee has reviewed the recommendation
for an agreement extension; and
WHEREAS, the City Council Transit Committee recommends that the City extend
the agreement on the basis of their review; and
WHEREAS, The City Council deems it in the best interest of the City of Yakima to
extend the agreement with A & A Motorcoach to operate Transit Division Fixed -Route #3 in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the original agreement for a period of six
additional months ending midnight June 30, 2001; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA:
The City Manager of the City of Yakima is hereby authorized and directed to extend
the agreement with A & A Motorcoach, Inc., whereby the entity shall operate City of Yakima
Transit Division Fixed -Route #3 six additional months ending midnight June 30, 2001.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 19`h day of December 2000.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
LZ.e-
?ry Place, Mayor
2001 Amendment to the Transportation Provider Agreement
between the City of Yakima and A & A Motorcoach, Inc.
This Amendment is made and entered into this T''f day of ,..2-444,t2... , 200$
44
by and between the City of Yakima and A & A Motorcoach, Inc., a Washington
business corporation.
In consideration of the mutual covenants and promises made here in the Fixed -
Route #3 Transportation Provider Agreement Between the City of Yakima and A &
A Motorcoach, Inc., dated the 20th clay of August 1999 (City Contract Number 99-93)
is hereby amended as follows:
4. Term of Agreement This Agreement shall become effective upon full and
complete execution by the City and the Contractor and shall terminate at midnight
on June 30, 2001, unless terminated earlier by either party in accordance with
Section 33 of the Agreement.
The City shall pay A & A Motorcoach an amount not to exceed $75,000 for Fixed -
Route #3 transportation services from January 1, 2001 to midnight June 30,2001.
Except as expressly amended herein, all the other terms and conditions in the
Agreement between the City of Yakima and A & A Motorcoach Inc., (City Contract
Number 99-93) shall remain in full force and effect.
City of Yakima
By:
Dick Zais,ity Manager
Date: l c_e-,o,.-A0-e--v o a
City Contract Number: 2000-107
Resolution No. R-2000-164:
2001 Rte 3 Extension Agreement
A & A Mo . coa Inc
B
Its: 44‘37
Date:-_JA4uc5
1 i Zeta/
ITEM TITLE:
BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. * 1 s
For Meeting Of 12/19/00
A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Extension
to an Agreement with A & A Motor Coach to Operate Fixed -Route #3
Service from January 1, through June 30, 2001
SUBMITTED BY: Chris Waarvick, Director of Public W+rk
John A. Haddix, Acting Transit M
CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: John A. Had 575-6005
• SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
It is recommended that the Agreement with A & A Motorcoach be extended for 6 months
(January 1 -June 30, 2001). This will allow more time for the Transit Committee and Staff
to review and evaluate the demonstration project. Considerations include: 1) whether or not
the City should continue Fixed -Route #3 (Mead/Fruitvale), 2) whether or not a small or
large bus is best suited for the route, and 3) whether or not the route should remain in
private operation or returned to City operation.
The estimated cost for approving the extension is $75,000. The extension will not require
any budget appropriation. Staff programmed the bus service expenditure for 2001 while
recognizing the uncertainty of providing this bus service in the future. Staff met with Mr.
Ammerman, on December 13,2000 and he has agreed to our extension proposal.
A final City Council decision on Fixed -Route #3 is needed by March 2001. This decision
point is based on an established seasonal timetable for completing bus operator
assignments (bidding on available work) and the printing and distribution of "Bus Books"
containing the summer operating schedules. (Continued)
Resolution: X Ordinance: Other (Specify):
Contract Modification X Mail to: A & A Motorcoach PO 9364 Yakima, WA 98909-0364
Phone: 575-3676 Funding Source: (462) Transit Operating Fund
APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL:
City Manager
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution Extending the Agreement with
A & A Motorcoach to provide Fixed -Route #3 service through June 30, 2001.
COUNCIL TRANSIT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Council Approval of
an Agreement extension with A & A Motorcoach to provide Fixed -Route #3 service
through June 30, 2001.
COUNCIL ACTION: Resolution adopted. RESOLUTION NO. R-2000-164
Background
In August 1999 the Council approved an Agreement with A & A Motorcoach to provide
Fixed -Route #3 bus service. The service Agreement stipulated that it was to be a one-year
demonstration project ending September 30, 2000. The Contractor started bus service on
October 4, 1999. Prior to the expiration date in September the Agreement was extended by
the City Council for 3 months through December 31, 2000.
The Council has agreed that at the completion of the (one-year) demonstration project they
vtould decide whether or not to continue or end the contracted service. The Council
indicated they would base their determination on an evaluation of at least 3 criteria: 1)
cost, 2) service, and 3) public acceptance.
Although the Council Transit Committee and Staff are both recommending that a second
extension be granted, the following preliminary findings are again submitted for Council
information:
Cost of Service: The Contractor charges for 12 3/4 hours of daily work, five days a week.
There is no Saturday bus service provided. The hourly rate charged for providing bus
service is $44.50. This amounts to a daily charge of $567.38 and a weekly charge of
$2,836.88. The weekly charge x 52 weeks amounts to an annual charge of $147,517.50.
The annual charge is slightly higher than the original written lum um bid of $141,731.20.
But in fairness to the Contractor, the original written lump -sum ;::d was based on a best
guess for hours of service at time of bid and not on the City required actual hours of service.
The Agreement allowed for an adjustment in charges once the actual service hours were
known. The Contractor, therefore, is not being held to his original written lump -sum bid.
Service: Observations are that while the provision of service by the private sector operator
is generally acceptable, there are areas needing attention. One area needing attentioTa is
transit system training. Most private sector bus operators begin their job not really
understanding how a public transit system really works (the importance of maintaining
scheduled time points, making transfers, providing customer service information, giving
timely information to dispatch on difficulties encountered, etc.). Private sector bus
operators do pick up on the system of service but only after having many out -of -bus
conversations with City bus operators. While the Contractor does provide basic training,
this has proven not adequate for the job at hand. The Contractor therefore is relying
heavily on his employees to learn the transit system while on the job. At times, this lack of
understanding the transit system results in less than quality service to our customers.
Public Acceptance: The comments received (verbal and written) and the ridership
numbers collected by Staff point to the fact that the smaller bus has not been easily
received by our riding public. At startup, there were many complaints about the use of a
small bus on the route. There were also complaints about the number of people that were
being left behind because the small bus does not have the capacity needed at certain times
of the day.
In a move to solve the capacity problem, Staff requested A & A Motorcoach to provide a cost
estimate to provide additional service on an "as needed" basis. Admittedly, it is some times
difficult to predict when additional bus service is needed but Yakima Transit like most
transit systems, additional capacity needs clearly center on the known peak hours of travel.
2
A & A Moworcoach did respond by fax in November 1999 to the City's request for additional
bus service. Summarizing, they said that their company could not provide "overload"
service on such extremely short notice but if they could be given a 2 -hour advance notice
they could schedule a large bus. Their estimated fee for this "additional" service would be
$150 per hour. A & A Motorcoach suggested that since Yakima Transit normally has a
driver standing by that our response time in such cases would be much faster than theirs.
The City routinely swaps out small buses for larger buses on certain routes during certain
peak hours. This is how the City has handled the lack of capacity problem during peak
hour. However, the lack of capacity problem for Route #3 has never been addressed.
Customers that previously took Route #3 have provided their own solutions to their
capacity challenge. Two of these solutions have been: 1) to stop taking the bus and use
other available means of transportation or 2) to shift to nearby bus routes that are more
accommodating to their needs.
For example, Route #4 has a large bus assigned to it and just happens to run opposite of
Route #3 so, many customers have chosen to cross the street and take the Route #4 bus.
Also, because Route #7 has a large bus assigned to it and covers about the same area of the
City as Routes #3 and #4, customers are taking Route #7 bus instead of Route #3 bus. Our
collected Year -to Date ridership figures substantiate this shift in ridership.
Staff observations and the data collected lend credibility to all the past transit studies that
show that people choosing to ride public transportation are very flexible when it comes to
making their transportation choices. They will apply their preference to ride or not to ride
public transit and adapt their travel plans according to the convenience and quality of the
service being provided.