|
Caltrans > Dist4 Internet > Dist4 Construction > Contract Inquiries > EA 04-253784 Inquiries |
CONTRACTOR'S INQUIRY RESPONSES
December 1, 2008
CONTRACT NO. 04-253784
WIDENING, ROADWAY REHABILITATION,
County Route: ALA-680-0/3.4SCL-680-7.4/9.9
The responses to contractors' inquiries, unless incorporated into a formal addenda to the contract, are not a part of the contract and are provided for the contractor's convenience only. In some instances, the question and answer may represent a summary of the matters discussed rather than a word-for-word recitation. The responses may be considered along with all other information furnished to prospective bidders for the purpose of bidding on the project. The availability or use of information provided in the responses to contractors' inquiries is not to be construed in any way as a waiver of the provisions of section 2-1.03 of the Standard Specifications or any other provision of the contract, the plans, Standard Specifications or Special Provisions, nor to excuse the contractor from full compliance with those contract requirements. Bidders are cautioned that subsequent responses or contract addenda may affect or vary a response previously given, and any such subsequent response or addenda should be taken into consideration when submitting a bid for the project. Inquiries submitted within seventy-two (72 ) hours of the bid opening date might not be addressed.
The Caltrans District 4 Office is located at 111 Grand Avenue, Oakland, CA 94612. Send Contractor Inquiries via email to the Duty Senior at Duty_Senior_District04@dot.ca.gov. The mailing address is P.O. Box 23660, Oakland, CA 94623-0660. The Duty Senior's telephone number is (510) 286-5209 and the fax number is (510) 622-1805. All inquiries must include the contract number.
| Inquiry No. | Inquiry | Response |
|
1.0 |
Are cross sections available? |
You can download the following documents below:
Site Investigation Report (pdf, 25.3mb) Project cross sections (zipped, pdf 22.9mb) Transportation Management Plan (pdf, 81kb) RWQCB permit (pdf, 400kb) USFWS Biological Opinion(pdf, 650kb) |
|
2.0 |
There does not seem to be any way of distinguishing what HMA being placed, will be paid for as "Place Hot Mix Asphalt (Miscellaneous areas)", as there is not a quantity chart as to the locations and type of work. Please provide the areas/locations that will be paid for as "Place Hot Mix Asphalt (Miscellaneous areas)" Bid item 87 | We have revise sheet Q-6 to show this quantity and is included in Addendum 1. |
|
3.0 |
As shown on sheets L-13 & L14, there is a "shoulder repair" legend. In the typical X-sections, this work is not shown. What work is involved in this area? | An addendum to address this question has been requested. |
|
4.0 |
Does Spec section 10-1.62 on page 186 "Minor Concrete (Gore paving)" , pertain to bid item 144 "Minor Concrete (brushed concrete)" - as all of the brushed concrete, as shown in the table on Sheet Q-2 of the plans, is in the Gore areas. Payment for item 144 is per M2, and Spec section 10-1.62 says it is paid for as Minor Concrete (Minor Structure), which only seems to have enough qty to cover the inlets as per DQ-18 of the plans, as is a final pay quantity. Please clarify. | An addendum to address this question has been requested. |
|
5.0 |
Typical Section on page 339 of the plans (R-1) shows an excavation slope of ½ :1, this is not allowed per OSHA , even if the excavation is in rock, the minimum slope is ¾ : 1. Also in this detail, what are the pay limits for Structure Excavation Retaining Wall? Is it the same as Structure Backfill? Is all of the Structure Backfill to be paid as part of Structure Backfill Retaining Wall? | The slope is read as 2:1 or 1:1/2. The slope is correct but it is labeled (excavation line) incorrectly. The line (slope) represents the pay limit of the structural excavation and backfill. The 2:1 slope limit was a Geotechnical recommendation. All of the Structure Backfill is paid as part of Structure Backfill Retaining Wall. A correction for the label (deletion) will be requested for an addendum. |
|
6.0 |
Due to the bid date being only the 2nd day after the Thanksgiving holiday weekend, we request a 1-week postponement to ensure all small-business subcontractors have an opportunity to bid. |
Addendum 2 changed the Bid Open Date to December 16, 2008. |
|
7.0 |
Per the two lower typical cross sections on sheet X-8 (sheet 9) of the plans, it shows the curb that is to be removed. Since the new B2 curb is higher, what replaces the gap that is created by the removal? | Submitted for consideration. |
|
8.0 |
a) Several of the Drainage Systems are in work areas where the existing pavement is not shown to be removed. These Drainage Systems are generally located in the median from Scott Creek to Mission or in the shoulder from Grimmer to Mission. For example, Drainage System 36, Drainage Unit B is installed in the shoulder where the existing pavement section receives cross slope correction and an overlay. We are assuming that the existing pavement that is removed during drainage system installation will need to be replaced to match the existing section. Please confirm. b) We are also anticipating that any AC, PCC, LCB, AS (4), Perm Mat'l or other material needed to match the existing sections that are being replaced (within in the contract limits) will be paid for as a Change Order. Please confrim. |
a) The existing pavement that is removed during drainage system installation will be replaced to match the existing section. b) The material can be paid for as a Change Order with the review and approval of the Engineer. |
|
9.0 |
Several of the Drainage Systems are in work areas that are not behind K-Rail shown on the Stage Construction and Traffic Handling Plans. These Drainage Systems are generally located in the median from Scott Creek to Mission or in the shoulder from Grimmer to Mission. Some of these systems are too deep and extensive to install under lane closures without K-Rail. For example, Drainage System 30, Drainage Unit J is a DI that is 5.63 m tall and located in the shoulder next to the Mission SB Collector Road. The excavation, backfill and temporary surfacing for this Drainage System can not be completed under a lane closure in one evening. We are anticipating that any additional K-Rail not shown on the plans that is needed to safely construct the work (within reason) will be paid for as a Change Order. Please Confirm. |
Please see Section 7-1.09, of the Ammendments to the Standard Specifications (pg 308 in the Special Provisions). Furthermore, Section 7-1.09 of the Standard Specs also says:
|
|
10.0 |
The Utility Plans do not exist for the following areas: STA 385+20 to STA 389+00 (corresponds to sheet D-4) STA 404+20 to STA 411+60 (corresponds to sheets D-8 & D-9) STA 415+20 to STA 419+00 (corresponds to sheet D-11) STA 426+40 to STA 430+20 (corresponds to sheet D-14) STA 440+50 to STA 452+00 (corresponds to sheets D-18, D-19 & D-20) Is there any information regarding the presence of existing utilities in these areas? This information is needed to quanitify potholing needed for the job and to determine if there are any conflicts between new and existing utilities. |
Note that the numerical designation of the Drainage sheets, Utility sheets and Layouts do not correspond in some sheets due to specific work areas; e.g. L-1, D-1, and U-1 are not covering the same areas. Please rely on alignment stationing. All existing drainage are shown on D sheets. D-4 - corresponds with U-5 and any missing coverage would mean we have no utilities to show. D-8 and D-9 - No utilities in these limits. D-11- No utilities in these limits. D-14 - No utilities in these limits. The closest utilities are shown on U-10 and U-11, which are near but outside the limits of D-14. D-18, D-19, and D-20 - No utilities in these limits. |
|
11.0 |
After reviewing the Erosion Control plans (EC-1 thru EC-27) and ECQ-1, we are to place about half of the Temp Fence (Type ESA) on the East side of the freeway, an area this project has nothing to do with. Is it the States intention to place it in this contract, for a future one? | The temporary fence, ESA, installed on the East side of the freeway is a permit requirement to exclude the areas from being used during construction. Although much of the work is done on the West side of the freeway, we want to make sure the areas are not used. Bid per contract documents. |
|
12.0 |
Is the detail for AC Paved Ditch on plan sheet #138 (DD-4) correct, as it shows wire mesh in the middle? This detail is usually for a concrete lined ditch. The detail for Unpaved ditch on the same page, shows a 1:10 slope 4m or greater. Does this means that the area adjacent to the ditch up to the northbound edge of shoulder, need to be re-graded? |
The AC Paved Ditch shall not have the wire mesh. The unpaved ditch detail should show various toe side slope. |
|
13.0 |
As shown on the layout drawings, there are 2 locations to extend irrigation (382+60, 419+63), 3 locations for capping (425+75, 428+80, 434+25), and possible modifications at 9 other crossover locations. How do the irrigation modifications get paid? | Bid per current bid documents. |
|
14.0 |
What is the traffic index (TI) and subgrade R-Value used in the mainline pavement design? |
TI for the widening - 14 An R-value of 15 has been selected for designing the structural section, except between Jacklin Road and Route 262 (Mission Boulevard) where and R-value of 10 has been selected for the pavement. |
|
15.0 |
Some of the new ac dike will have a new 60 mm dike base (see summary on plan sheet Q-2, middle bottom of page). Is this work paid for under bid item #87 "AC, Misc. Areas" ? | The dike bases are going to be paid under bid item 87. An addendum has been requested to address this question. |
|
16.0 |
Plan Sheet X-3: Is there a difference between paving sections "E" and "J" ? Plan sheet X-3: Paving sections "O" and "P" - why is the asphalt listed as two separate lifts of 135 MM and 150 MM instead of one lift of 285 MM ? |
Paving sections "E" and "J" are the same structural section. We just want to make a distinction where they are applied. Section "J" is used over existing HMA pavement, whereas section "E" is used over PCC pavement that will be cracked and seated. The intention is to have the last layer done concurrently with the overlay of the existing PCC and HMA pavements. |
|
17.0 |
Re: Plan Sheet Q-3, Earthwork Quantity Summary (upper right corner): The earthwork for the median road widening from Sta 441+50 to 453+10 is not included in the chart. |
An addendum will be requested to address this question. |
|
18.0 |
The construction details, sheets C-8 and C-9, show removal of curb and gutter on Warren Ave. from C Line Sta. 9+88.588 to 11+07.324 and 10+47.672 to 11+07.370. This quantity of 178.434 m differs from the remove concrete curb quantity of 850 m indicated on C Line Sta. 9+29.143 to Yakima Dr. on sheet Q-6. Please clarify which is correct. Also, if you are removing 178.434 m of curb and gutter, does the same amount get replaced back in? If so, why does the layout sheet, L-30, show new curb going in only from C Line Sta. 10+02.72 to 10+25.06 and why does the sidewalk quantities table on sheet Q-6 show the curbs going from C Line Sta. 10+18 to 10+25.06? Which new curb quantity is correct? Will an addendum be issued to correct this matter? | Submitted for consideration. |
|
19.0 |
a) Section 5-1.16 ROLLING OWNER CONTROLLED INSURANCE PROGRAM (ROCIP) Please clarify the excess liability insurance requirements for subcontractors: Required Contractor Furnished Insurance Limits item 4. Umbrella or excess liability insurance: states: "A $5,000,000 minimum limit requirement shall apply annually on a per occurrence and aggregate basis. No umbrella or excess liability insurance is required of an eligible and enrolled subcontractor who performs less than $100,000 of the work." Contractor's Insurance Cost Identification and Deduction item 3. Umbrella or excess liability insurance (for Contractor only) states: "There are no excess liability insurance requirements for subcontractors." Are subcontractors performing more than $100,000 of the work required to maintain $5,000,000 umbrella or excess liability insurance? b) Section 5-1.16 ROLLING OWNER CONTROLLED INSURANCE PROGRAM (ROCIP) ROCIP Insurance Coverage states: "The Contractor and subcontractors shall consult the actual policies for coverage details. A copy of the primary general liability policy and the excess liability policy will be available from the ROCIP administrator." Please provide copies of the general liability and excess liability policies to bidders to assist bidders in accurately determining the coverage provided by ROCIP. c) Section 5-1.16 ROLLING OWNER CONTROLLED INSURANCE PROGRAM (ROCIP) ROCIP Insurance Coverage item 3. Umbrella or Excess Liability Insurance states: "limits are not less than $100,000,000 per occurrence and in the aggregate." The ROCIP covers a number of large projects statewide. Please advise the excess limit of liability dedicated specifically to contract 04-253784. |
a) Yes, subcontractors performing more than $100,000 of work are required to maintain $5,000,000 umbrella or excess liability insurance to cover losses that are not covered under the ROCIP. The clause, "there are no excess liability insurance requirements for subcontractors," is only applicable to the "Contractor's Insurance Cost Identification and Deduction" section. In this section, only the prime contractor (bidder) is required to identify and deduct from their bid the cost of the typically required $25,000,000 umbrella or excess liability insurance under a non-ROCIP contract. b) Please contact the Department's Office of Risk Management at 916-654-4347 for a copy of the ROCIP primary general liability and excess liability policies. c) Excess Liability Insurance limit provided under ROCIP is $300,000,000. This limit is shared by all ROCIP projects administered by the Department. The ROCIP consists of approximately 8 contracts, with a combined construction value of about $750 million. Actual project dedicated excess liability insurance limit provided under ROCIP for Contract # 04-253784 is not available. |
|
20.0 |
I am having trouble with the column casing weights at Calaveras Blvd Sep ( RTE 237 (WIDEN). The engineer's estimate on sheet 549 of 594 shows 15,321 KG, but my take offs are much higher approx weight is 37000 KG. Can you please confirm? |
Submitted for consideration. |
|
21.0 |
This question is in reference to Spec. Section 10-1.34 under the seed application table. Achillea millefolium is referenced as Tomcat Clover. Should Achillea millefolium actually be White Yarrow instead? | Yes, Achillea millefolium is White Yarrow. |
|
22.0 |
Plan sheets X-3 and X-4 says to "see note 6". Plan sheet X-5 says to "see note 7". I only see 3 notes on page X-1. Where are notes 6 and 7 and what do they say? | Notes 6 and 7 were redundant notes that were deleted. Note 6 and 7: For exact locations of DTBB and HMA side gutters, see layout plans. |
|
23.0 |
Where will the new backflow preventers per bid item # 73 be installed? They don't show on the plans. | Backflow preventers are not proposed for this contract. An addendum request has been submitted to address this question. |
|
24.0 |
Plan sheet SCQ-4 shows remove concrete station C 16+12 to 16+30 which I can't find. Should this be station CA 16+12 to 16+30 instead? | The correct alignment is CA (Calaveras). |
|
25.0 |
a) Sheet L-28 shows new Type A1-200 Curb in CA 16+14.46 to 16+23.30 Lt & Rt. The table on the summary of quantities (Q-6) shows new Type A2-200 Curb in the same location. Please clarify what type of curb is to be installed in CA 16+14.46 to 16+23.30 Lt & Rt. b) Sheet L-29 shows Type A1-200 Curb in J 15+20.50 to 15+27.50 Lt & Rt. The table on the summary of quantities (Q-6) shows new Type A2-200 Curb in the same location. Please clarify what type of curb is to be installed in J 15+20.50 to 15+27.50 Lt & Rt. |
a) Sheet L-28 shows accurately what type of concrete curbs will be built. The median will have A1-200 and the shoulders/sidewalk will have A2-200. Sheet Q-6 summarized everything as A2-200, which is not correct. b) The same goes for L-29. The median will have A1-200 and the shoulders/sidewalk will have A2-200. |
|
26.0 |
a) Is Bid Item #81 (HMA Leveling) to be placed below the GPI as 30mm HMA (A)-Leveling Course as shown in the Typical Cross Sections (X-3), or will it be placed above the GPI as 30mm to Maximum Thickness HMA (A)-Cross Slope Correction? b) Will the 30mm HMA (A)-Leveling Course below the GPI, or the 30mm to Maximum Thickness (A)-Cross Slope Correction above the GPI be paid for as part of Bid Item #81 (HMA Leveling)? |
a) Sheet X-3 shows correct sequence of the structural section. The HMA (A) levelling course is below the GPI and the HMA (A) for slope correction (30 mm to max) will be on top of the GPI. b) Only the HMA (A) levelling course will be paid as such (item #81). The HMA (A) for slope correction (30 mm to max) will be paid as Hot Mix Asphalt (item #80). |
|
27.0 |
a) Re: Sheets 538 & 539, please provide the "HE" dimension for the type 736 SV barrier. b) RE: bid item #109- 900 KG rebar. What is this rebar for? |
a) Submitted for consideration. b) A addendum request to delete Bid Item #109 has been submitted. |
|
28.0 |
Between stations 444+31.363 to 453+21.641 on the cross sections, the left shoulder shows two separate existing grade lines. Which line is the correct existing grade so we can accurately compute our earthwork takeoff? | The outer grade line is the existing. |
|
29.0 |
Reference Special Provisions section 10-1.19, "Maintaining Traffic" and project plan sheet 215 of 594, "Stage Construction and Traffic Handling Plan Calaveras Blvd., Stage 2 Phase 3." In section 10-1.19, of the special provisions, it calls for two traffic openings on Calaveras Blvd. of 19.2M. This same location on project plan sheet 215 depicts a traffic configuration of 3 lanes in each direction at 3.3M wide or an opening width of approximately 9.9M: this lane configuration is what is used on sheet 216, which is the superstructure construction stage. To provide a 19.2M opening the contractor will need to use 36" deep steel beams to make the necessary span. But, with the required falsework opening height of 4.9M there is only 0.51M (20") of space for falsework material; not enough room. However, if the openings are changed to match what is shown on the plans there will be sufficient room for falsework material: beam depth requirements are dramatically reduced. Please revise the falsework opening width for Calaveras Blvd. to match the stage construction plans. | Submitted for consideration. |
|
30.0 |
Reference Special Provisions section 10-1.19, "Maintaining Traffic" and project plan sheet 216 and 220 of 594. Why is the contractor required to provide pedestrian openings (per the special provisions) in the falsework at Calaveras Blvd. and Jacklin Rd. when the stage construction plans clearly show the sidewalks at both locations in both directions are closed? Please revise the special provisions to match the stage construction plans. | Submitted for consideration. |
|
31.0 |
Reference project plan sheet 528 of 594, "North DWR UC (Widen), Typical Section." What is the thickness of the closure pour shown? Please review and clarify. | Bid per current contract documents. |
|
32.0 |
Due to the postponement of 04-4A5204 to 12/10, a 2-week postponement of this project to 12/16/08 is respectfully requested. | Addendum 2 changed the Bid Open date to December 16, 2008. |
|
33.0 |
Construction of the Bent 2 footing at Calaveras Blvd requires shoring. Sheet SC-43 (215 of 594) shows a 4.5 meter offset from centerline of Bent 2 to the edge of the lane line. After subtracting 0.15 meters for the stripe and 0.61 meters for K-rail, the k-rail will intrude into the footing by .055 meters. There is no room to place shoring or footing forms. Please review and clarify. | Staging shown on sheet SC-43 indicates that there's enough room to make the necessary adjustment to build Bent #2 footing. The 4.5-meter offset can be adjusted. |
|
34.0 |
Bid Item #87 - "Place AC - Misc. Areas", bid quantity = 7,460 M2 I am not what areas are paid for by this bid item. Is it possible for Caltrans to include a table in the "Q" sheets to summaries the areas paid for by this bid item? |
See response to BI#2. |
|
35.0 |
Reference project plan sheets 559 of 594 (Calaveras Blvd Bent Details), and 563 of 594 (Calaveras Blvd Bridge Removal). The limits of removal for the construction of the new Bent 2 footing at Calaveras Blvd is shown as 8440MM on sheet 563 but the footing is dimensioned 10400MM on sheet 559 and will require a minimum of 11000MM for the construction of bent 2. Please revise. | Bid per current contract documents. |
|
36.0 |
Reference project plan sheets 41 of 594 (L-28), and 563 of 594 (Calaveras Blvd Bridge Removal). Sheet 563 shows reconstruction of the raised median for new bent 2 at Calaveras Blvd and for the retrofit work required (Column Casings) at the existing columns in the median. A note on sheet 563 states, "Limits of removal and reconstruction see 'Road Plans'", which is sheet 41 and the only removal and reconstruction shown on sheet 41 is for the construction of the new bent 2 and nothing for the retrofit work. At this time the reconstruction of the median at Calaveras Blvd. should be included in the appropriate roadway items (Minor Concrete, AC Paving, etc), but a review of the "Summary of Quantities" indicates that only the sidewalks at Calaveras Blvd. are being replaced. This scenario repeats itself for the work in the median shown on sheets L-29 and L-30 (Jacklin Road and East Warren Ave.).Please revise the plans and associated bid items to include this work. | Submitted for Consideration. |
|
37.0 |
a)Referring to the log of test borings on Sheets 498/594 (East Warren Ave UC) and 520/594 (So. DWR UC), the drilling was switched to rotary wash method, and the groundwater was not measured. b) Referring to the material handout reports, groundwater elevations are not given for these (2) locations. In order to price the bent excavations, we need the latest groundwater elevations encountered. Please provide this requested information. |
There is no additional information available. Bid per current contract documents. |
|
38.0 |
Reference bid item 141, Slope Paving Concrete. Where is the removal of the existing slope paving concrete paid for? It is not included in the bridge removal item as has been the practice. Is it included in item 45, Remove Concrete? Please review and clarify. | Yes, it is included in the remove concrete (item #45). |
|
39.0 |
Reference bid item 99, Structure Concrete Approach Slab (Type N). The details for the abutment drainage outlet pipe on sheets 495, 518, and 534, say "Outlets, See Road Plans", but there is nothing in the road plans that show contractor what to do with the outlet pipes. Please review and clarify. | Yes, it is included in the remove concrete (item #45). |
|
40.0 |
Can you provide a more detail breakdown to the 120m3 then what is indicated in the summary of quantities table on sheet SCQ-4 for Bid Item No. 45 'Remove Concrete?' | This bid item covers all concrete being removed from construction areas and it includes concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks, slope paving, etc. |
|
41.0 |
Reference bid project plan sheet 586 of 594, "Jacklin Road UC (Widen) Deck Drain Details." A note on the plan of the existing structure directs the contractor to the road plans for the connection of the new deck drain system to "roadway drainage." Where in the road plans is the information located? It doesn't appear to be included in the project plans at this time. Please provide all the required information including a K-rail layout to protect the work area from the traveling public. | Submitted for consideration. |
|
42.0 |
Reference East Warren Ave. UC catcher bent construction. For the construction of catcher bents 1 and 3, in the existing abutment fills what is the method of payment for the removal and reconstruction of the existing slope paving? Unless otherwise specified it will be assumed to be paid as a change order or as extra work once the job is awarded, is that correct? Please review and clarify. | Bid per current contract documents. |
|
43.0 |
At the Calaveras Blvd Separation, Special Provision 10-1.19 shows 2 required falsework vehicle openings of 19.2 m width, applicable to 4 lanes of traffic each direction plus shoulders which do not exist at the bridge location. Stage Construction drawing SC-44 shows only 3 lanes open each direction during super structure construction. Please clarify the required width of vehicle opening during construction. | Submitted for consideration. |
|
44.0 |
For the Calaveras Blvd Separation, Special Provision 10-1.19 shows a minimum falsework vertical clearance of 4.9 m. Based on the contract documents and field measurements, clearance below the permanent structure with the above minimum falsework clearance does not allow for adequate falsework depth (per Highway Design Manual Table 204.8). Please indicate if a reduced temporary vertical clearance will be considered. | Submitted for consideration. |
|
45.0 |
Referring to Sheets 487 and 488 of 594, the dimensions of the column casing is not shown. Also, the height of casing seems to include the existing bridge section height. Please clarify. | Submitted for consideration. |
|
46.0 |
Referring to Sheets 564 of 594, the dimensions of the column casing is not shown. Please clarify. | Submitted for consideration. |
|
47.0 |
Plans for Soundwalls, show a 1 inch deep score for Blocks, Manufacturers says that this score on both sides of wall is not possible with an 8 inch wall, can you confirm? | Submitted for consideration. |