Bidder Inquiries

Sign In | Create Account

Viewing inquiries for 04-4G1154

Submit new inquiry for this project


Inquiry #1: Please provide PDF cross sections for this project.
Inquiry submitted 10/11/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/12/2017


Response #2:You can download from the link below:

www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/construction/contracts/04-4G1154/4G1154_XSections.zip
Response posted 10/26/2017




Inquiry #2: Where is the sign structure that is to be removed on the contract? Bid Item 72.
Inquiry submitted 10/19/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/19/2017




Inquiry #3: Please provide existing pavement structural sections adjacent to new structural sections shown on sheets X-2 and X-3.
Inquiry submitted 10/19/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/19/2017


Response #2:• SB Stoneridge (Diagonal) On-Ramp Structural Section(s): Per Contract No. 04-113514 (NPID3-8902), dated March 30, 1989 show several sections along the ramp alignment including:
0.50’ AC(A); 0.25' ATPB; 0.80' AB(2)); 0.65' AS(4) + Edge Drain 0.75’ AC(A); 0.25' ATPB; 0.50' AB(2)); 1.00' AS(4) + Edge Drain 0.55' AC(A); 0.95' AB(2)); 1.00' AS(4)

• SB Stoneridge (Loop) On-Ramp Structural Section(s): Per Contract No. 04-113514 (NPID3-8902) dated March 30, 1989 show several sections along the ramp alignment including:
0.75' AC(A); 0.25' ATPB; 0.80' AB(2); 0.65' AS(4) + Edge Drain 0.75’ AC(A); 0.25' ATPB; 0.50' AB(2)); 1.00' AS(4) + Edge Drain 0.55' AC(A); 0.95' AB(2)); 1.00' AS(4) 1.3’ AC(A)
0.33 PCC; 0.25’ AS(4)

• NB and SB Bernal On-Ramp Structural Section: Per Contract No. 04-149804, dated July 19, 1965 shows: 0.25' AC(B); 0.67' CTB (A); 1.00' AS(1).

Response posted 10/31/2017




Inquiry #4: Bid item is for removal of irrigation facilities. I am having trouble finding this work on the plans. Would you please tell me what plan sheet shows this work?
Inquiry submitted 10/19/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/26/2017




Inquiry #5: Bid Item #24 - "Temporary Gravel Bag Berm". Would you please assist me in finding the location of this work on the plan sheets?
Inquiry submitted 10/19/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/26/2017




Inquiry #6: Plan sheet 153 of 344 indicates there are 10 roadside signs that need to be removed on this project. Would you please provide a bid item for this work?

Bid item #28 is for disposal of treated wood waste. Is this waste from removed road signs or removed MBGR?

Inquiry submitted 10/20/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/26/2017


Response #2:• Item No. 100 (Item 820250) - Remove Roadside Sign will pay for the removal of 10 roadside signs.
• Item No. 28 (item code141120)-Treated Wood Waste is from the posts of the MBGRs that will be salvaged.

Response posted 10/31/2017




Inquiry #7: Would you please clarify bid item #37 "Ditch Excavation". The Drainage Quantity summary on plan sheet DQ-2 states this item is for work between BR1 Sta 1043+87 to 1044+87 (100 LF). Plan sheet DD-2 shows the work between BR1 Sta 1032+00 to 1043+57 (1,157 LF). Which is correct? Is the bid quantity of 30 CY correct?
Inquiry submitted 10/24/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/26/2017


Response #2:The quantities on DQ-2 is correct. Ditch excavation is from 1043+87.95 to 1044.87.95 (100 LF). Please see the Construction Details, plan sheet C-10.
Excavation shown on sheet DD-2 is included in Roadway Excavation.

Response posted 10/26/2017




Inquiry #8: Please refer to plan sheet Q-2 AC Dike Summaries:
1) When I summarize the total under "Type E" dike my total is 2,105 LF. Please check.
2) Bid Item #51 is for 20 LF of Type A dike. Where is this 20 LF located?

Inquiry submitted 10/24/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/26/2017


Response #2:1) Your calculation is correct. The total length for AC dike type E is 2,105 LF.

2) Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/26/2017




Inquiry #9: Bid Item #57 Place AC (Misc. Areas) - bid quantity is 33 SY. The only summary for this work that I can find is on storm drain summary page DQ-4. The summary is for 19.18 SY. Where is the remaining 14 SY of this work?
Inquiry submitted 10/24/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/26/2017




Inquiry #10: Are there any seasonal limitation to "ground disturbing activities" imposed on this project? This is important to know and understand since this is an A+B project.
Inquiry submitted 10/25/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/26/2017


Response #2:Please follow the project SSP Section 14-6.03A for restriction on ground disturbing work.
Response posted 10/31/2017




Inquiry #11: I noticed that cross sections for this project where requested on 10/11/17 (2 weeks ago). What is the delay in providing this very valuable information?
Inquiry submitted 10/25/2017

Response #1:See bidder inquiry #1.
Response posted 10/26/2017




Inquiry #12: Would you please check your bid quantity for Item #52 "Rubber-AC"? I think you may have missed rubber-ac quantity for Structural Section #2 (0.2' mill, 0.2' rubber-ac).
Inquiry submitted 10/25/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/26/2017




Inquiry #13: Thank you for supplying the project x-sections. There is one line that was not included - BL1 - the Bernal SB on-ramp. These x-sections are important to me because they cover the ramp with the concrete retaining wall. Please provide x-sections for BL1.
Inquiry submitted 10/26/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/26/2017


Response #2:You can download the cross section below:

www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/construction/contracts/04-4G1154/SB_BERNAL_XSECTION_1_13_14.pdf
Response posted 10/31/2017




Inquiry #14: Plan sheets SC-8 and SC-9 detail Stage 2 traffic control plans for the Bernal Avenue SB on-ramp. Section L-L refers to "gore paving" work, so the purpose for the k-rail is to protect the work zone during the installation of the new concrete gore. Plan sheet L-9 does not show any new concrete gore installation on that ramp. Will there be a new concrete gore section on this ramp?
Inquiry submitted 10/26/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/26/2017




Inquiry #15: Per the cross sections poster on 10/26/2017, there are missing cross sections in Location 13 "BL1" Line station 996+11 to 982+02. Please provide the missing cross sections.
Inquiry submitted 10/26/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/26/2017


Response #2:See response to BI #13 above.
Response posted 10/31/2017




Inquiry #16: Bid Item #50 is for "Prime Coat". The plans do not show a prime coat, and the specification do not address the location or the application rate of the prime coat. Would you please clarify the prime coat locations?
Inquiry submitted 10/26/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/27/2017




Inquiry #17: Bid Item #92 "Remove Concrete (curb...)" = 170 CY. This work is summarized on plan sheet Q-2. The plan sheets L-9 and L-10 show curb removal on the east side of ramp BL1 from station 983+98 to 990+40 = 39.62 CY. I do not think that this curb needs to be removed. Plan sheet X-2 does not show any curb removal on the 0.2' mill and overlay edge of the ramp. Would you please check this?
Inquiry submitted 10/27/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/31/2017


Response #2:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/31/2017


Response #3:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/31/2017


Response #4:Curb and Gutter on the east side of ramp BL1 from station 983+98 to 990+40 (see L-9-L-10) need to be removed .
This is for temporary lane (11ft wide) during construction. See also Stage Construction and Traffic Handling Plan SC-2.

Response posted 11/30/2017




Inquiry #18: Please refer to plan sheet 329 of 344. The plan view of the new retaining wall shows running from Sta 982+75 to 996+11 = 1,336 LF. The elevation views shows the length of the wall at 1,310 LF. Which is correct? Are the pile, structural concrete and rebar quantities correct?
Inquiry submitted 11/01/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/02/2017


Response #2:The sta. 992+75 and 996+11.21 are along "BL1". The Wall length of 1310 ft is along the WLOL.
The plan and quantities are right.

Response posted 11/03/2017




Inquiry #19: After reviewing the cross sections for the Bernal Avenue southbound on-ramp I noticed that the new concrete retaining wall runs very close to the Caltrans right-of-way line. Section 7.2 of the "Geotechnical Design Report" notes that temporary shoring will be required to build this wall.

I visited the project jobsite and noticed that there is a good 30' wide flat area of land on the other side of the Caltrans right-of-way along the area of the new concrete retaining wall. I need to ask the question why Caltrans did not obtain a 30' wide swatch of temporary right-of-way along this project? A temporary shoring system in this area will cost in the range of $500,000. Caltrans could obtain a temp r.o.w. much cheaper than that. Plus if Caltrans obtained the temp r.o.w. easement the wall itself would be easier and cheaper to build.

Would you please obtain the temp r.o.w. easement?

Inquiry submitted 11/02/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/03/2017


Response #2:A temporary construction easement was not obtained for this project. Please bid accordingly.
Response posted 11/16/2017




Inquiry #20: Detail "X" on sheet 337 shows the minor concrete ditch to be poured monolithic with the retaining wall. This is not only looks to be nearly impossible to construct but will also drive the cost up substantially for only a small portion of work. Pouring the ditch monolithic will also obstruct backfill and achieving necessary compaction requirement next to the retaining wall at these locations. Will the contractor be permissible to put a construction joint at the connection between the retaining wall and minor concrete ditch?
Inquiry submitted 11/10/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/13/2017




Inquiry #21: There has been a problem with the cross sections for this project:
1) See bid inquiry #1 - The sections supplied with this response did not include the cross sections for the Bernal Avenue SB on-ramp "BL1".
2) See bid inquiry #13 - The cross sections that were finally supplied for the SB Bernal on-ramp are not correct. Project plan sheet 329 thru 336 show the bottom of the wall footing elevation to be between 320.77 to 317.00. The cross sections supplied thru bid inquiry #13 show the bottom of footing elevation at 310. Why is there a 10' difference between the project plan sheets and the project cross sections?

Inquiry submitted 11/14/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/14/2017




Inquiry #22: Addendum #1 deleted bid item #25 "Temp Construction Entrances". We will need at least 4 temp construction entrances for the ramp work at Bernal Avenue and Stoneridge Drive. Why was this bid item deleted?
Inquiry submitted 11/20/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/20/2017




Inquiry #23: Please refer to plan sheet 107 of 344 (SC-8). The MVP on the Bernal Avenue southbound on-ramp needs to be built in stage 2. I believe the temporary k-rail needs to be extended in order to protect the new MVP area during construction.
Inquiry submitted 11/20/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/20/2017


Response #2:The MVP can be built in Stage 1 together with the 2 ft wide full depth AC.
Response posted 11/30/2017




Inquiry #24: Plan sheets 101 and 103 (SC-2 & SC-4) show a 2' wide x 1.49' deep slot at the location of the concrete curb removal along the ramps.
Are the roadway excavation, CL2 base and AC quantities reflected on Summary of Quantities page Q-1?

Inquiry submitted 11/20/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/20/2017




Inquiry #25: Are the trees being removed prior to commencement of this work by a different contract? If so are they leaving stumps?
Inquiry submitted 11/28/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/30/2017


Response #2:Tree removal is included in the bid item Clearing and Grubbing under this contract (04-4G115).
Response posted 12/04/2017




Inquiry #26: On plan sheet 331 Structure sheet no.1 there is a note indicating one test pile at station 12+00 @ RWLOL. Under Notes #4 it indicates for test pile detail see “Structure Plan No.6” sheet. There appears to be no test pile detain on Structure Plan No.6. Can you please provide clarification as to what type of test pile will need to be installed. Would it be a PDA test pile? Static compression or tension test pile? Would the test pile be located in a production pile location or in a sacrificial location?
Inquiry submitted 11/29/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/30/2017


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 12/04/2017




Inquiry #27: There does seem to be a lane closure chart for southbound 680 between Highway 84 and Highway 580. Charts G3 and G6 both refer to NB 680 in this area. Can Caltrans provide a lane closure chart for southbound 680 in this area?
Inquiry submitted 11/29/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/30/2017


Response #2:Freeway Lane Requirements Chart G6 is for the southbound direction.
Response posted 12/04/2017




Inquiry #28: Refer to 87-1.03B(4) of the SP's (sheet 59). Please confirm that all conduit work must be installed in directional drilling. Not all locations may be feasible to be installed in that manner.
Inquiry submitted 11/29/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/30/2017


Response #2:All conduit work shall be done per the Standard Specifications and SSPs, not just the SSPs.
Response posted 11/30/2017




Inquiry #29: On Plan Sheet #338, there is a detail shown for the Class 90 Pile Footing Section. It shows #6 rebar that are in addition to the rebar shown in the Pile Footing Section.

1. Do these rebar extend the full length of the footing over each row of piling?
2. If so, it seems that the bid quantity for retaining wall rebar does not take into account this additional rebar, which we are told is approximately 26 tons. Can Caltrans adjust the quantity for Bid Item #69 to reflect this additional rebar?

Inquiry submitted 11/30/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/30/2017


Response #2:Please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 12/04/2017




Inquiry #30: REFER TO SHEET 247. PLEASE CONFIRM THE FOLLOWING: 1) PAVEMENT RESTORATION DETAILS TO BRING THE CONDUIT STUBS INTO THE BOX; 2) THE TRAFFIC HANDLING PLANS THAT CORRESPOND TO THIS WORK; AND 3) METHOD OF PAYMENT FOR THIS WORK. THE BARRIER WILL BE EXPOSED WITHOUT PROTECTION.
Inquiry submitted 11/30/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/04/2017


Response #2:1. The trench backfill requirements are indicated in the Standard Specifications and SSPS.

2. Please refer to the lane requirement charts provided in the SSPS for lane/shoulder closures.

3. The work to cut the barrier and to install a new section of barrier with pull box and conduit, as detailed on SES-3, is part of the bid item for which this work is shown, either "Modifying Existing Electrical System" or "Ramp Metering System." See the corresponding electrical plan sheet (E-#).

Response posted 12/05/2017


The information provided in the responses to bidder inquiries is not a waiver of Section 2-1.07, "JOB SITE AND DOCUMENT EXAMINATION" of the Standard Specifications or any other provision of the contract, nor to excuse the contractor from full compliance with the contract. Bidders are cautioned that subsequent responses or contract addenda may change a previous response.


Contracting Information

Statewide Alerts and Other Information