The responses to bidder's inquiries, unless incorporated into a formal addendem to the contract, are not a part of the contract and are provided for the bidder'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 availability or use of information provided in the responses to bidder's 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.
Q1) There is a Caltrans Crib Wall specified on this job (Crib Wall Plan page R-9). Would you approve as an alternate the Caltrans approved Keystone Keysystem I a MSE wall system? Would you also issue an addendum showing the system as an alternate?
A1) Reinforced concrete crib walls shall be constructed as shown on the plans. If the Contractor wishes to propose an alternative for the referenced crib wall, and if the proposal meets design criteria and fulfills the project requirements, it may be submitted as a value engineering change proposal. Refer to Section 4-1.035B, "Value Engineering Change Proposal," of the amended Standard Specifications. An addendum will not be issued to provide an alternate system. 17Feb11.
Q2) Plan Sheet 1110 shows the Limits of Approach Slabs at the EBMUD Aqueduct UC. It does NOT show stepped/staggered approaches, but rather has ends that are parallel to the adjacent bridge. Plan Sheets 1113 and 1114 show that stepped/staggered approaches are required when the bridge skew is greater or equal to 10 degrees. The skew of this bridge is greater than 12 degrees. Do the approach slabs at this bridge have to be stepped/staggered, and if so, please revise the Plan Sheets accordingly.
A2) The configuration for Type N(30D)(New) and Type R(30D)(Replace) structure approaches to terminate parallel to the paving notch for the EBMUD Aqueduct Undercrossing is acceptable as shown on project plan sheet 1110 of 1132. 11Mar11.
Q3) Similar to above - The same situation exists at the Fourteen-Mile Slough UC (Sheet 895 - Skew ~20 degrees). Do the approach slabs at this bridge have to be stepped/staggered since the skew is greater than 10 degrees?
A3) Approach slabs (Type N and Type R) for the Fourteen Mile Slough Bridge shall terminate parallel to paving notch, as shown on project plan sheet 895 of 1132. 11Mar11.
Q4) Plan Sheet 1024 shows the limits of Approach Slabs at the March Lane UC. It does NOT show stepped/staggered approaches, but rather has ends that are parallel to the adjacent bridge. Plan Sheet 1025 (Type N Approaches) requires stepped/staggered approach ends when the bridge skew is equal to or greater than 20 degrees. Plan Sheet 1026 (Type R Approaches) requires stepped/staggered approach ends when the bridge skew is equal to or greater than 10 degrees. The Bridge Skew is over 12 degrees (Sheet 1013); Do the Type R Approach Slabs at this bridge have to be stepped/staggered, and if so, please revise the Plan Sheets (and Bid Quantity) accordingly.
A4) Approach slabs (Type N and Type R) for the March Lane Undercrossing shall terminate parallel to paving notch, as shown on plan sheet project 1024 of 1132. 11Mar11.
Q5) Similar to above - The same situation exists at the Swain Road UC (Sheet 1070), where the skew is over 16 degrees. Do the Type R Approaches at this bridge have to be stepped/staggered, and if so, please revise the Plan Sheets (and Bid Quantity) accordingly.
A5) Approach slabs (Type N and Type R) for the Swain Road Undercrossing shall terminate parallel to paving notch, as shown on project plan sheet 1070 of 1132. 11Mar11.
Q6) We note that the bridge structures were designed by three different design companies. One company requires stepped/staggered slabs for both Type N and Type R aproaches whenever the skew is equal to or greater than 10 degrees, the second has different skew criteria (10 & 20 degrees) depending on the type of approach slab (N or R), and the third goes both ways. Does Caltrans want consistent criteria, and if so, please revise the Plans accordingly.
A6) Unless a contract addendum is issued, bid per the current contract bid documents. 11Mar11.
Q7) Existing Approach Slab thicknesses are provided for the Michigan, Calaveras River, Alpine, and Telegraph bridges. Existing thicknesses are NOT provided for all of the other structures (see Plan Sheets 895, 921, 1024, 1046, 1070, and 1110). Can we assume that the existing slab thicknesses at these bridges are 1.0' (12")? If not, please provide the existing dimensions.
A7) Section 10-1.71, "Structure Approach Slab (Type R)," of the Special Provisions states that compensation for removing and disposing of portions of existing structures and pavement materials is included in the price for structural concrete, approach slab (Type R). Per Section 2-1.12B, "Bid Item List and Bid Comparison," (page 13 of 283) of the Amendments to the Standard Specifications, please "submit a bid based on the work item quantities the Department shows in the Bid Item List." 11Mar11.
Q8) At the Swain Road Bridge, Plan Sheet 1070 indicates that the NW corner approach slab is a Type R approach slab, but Plan Sheet 1059 indicates that that this NW slab is a Type N slab. Please clarify, and if necessary, revise the bid quantities accordingly.
A8) The NW corner approach slab is Type N (New), as shown on project plan sheet 1059 of 1132. 11Mar11.
Q9) At the Benjamin Holt Drive UC, the dimensions provided on Plan Sheet 1046 appear to be off by a factor of +/- 12. Please clarify.
A9) Per Section 2-1.12B, "Bid Item List and Bid Comparison," (page 13 of 283) of the Amendments to the Standard Specifications, please "submit a bid based on the work item quantities the Department shows in the Bid Item List." 11Mar11.
Q10) The engineer’s estimate (EE) seems insufficient when tested with the unit costs from the 2009 Caltrans cost history. Please confirm that the stated budget is adequate for the shown improvements for roadway and structural concrete scope. What cost history was used to develop the EE?
A10) Design typically prepares the Estimate based on the latest bid item cost information available to the Department. The Estimate is provided for the bidder's convenience, and bidders are expected to prepare their own estimate based on their costs for performing the work covered in the Bid Item List. Please refer to Section 2 "Bidding" of the Amendments to the 2006 Standard Specifications. 3Mar11.
Q11) Special Provisions Section 13 addresses Railroad Relations and Insurance. The only areas where the there appears to be railroad facilities anywhere near the work is near Station 1472+, where a BN& SF track is shown, and possibly near Station 1525+. The only work that appears to be required near these areas is some traffic marking, and this occurs on the bridges over the RR tracks. There is no mention of required RR insurance in the Special Provisions or in the Amendments to the Standard Specs (7-1.12). Is there any Railroad Protective Insurance required, and if so, please provide details (limits and who the named insureds are).
A11) No, this contract does not require Railroad insurance. All Railroad requirements are identified in Section 13 of the Special Provisions. For other insurance and protection requirements, refer also to Sections 5-1.18, "Property and Facility Preservation," and 7-1.12, "Indemnification and Insurance." 1Mar11.
Q12) We independently agree with Bidder’s Inquiry “Q10” regarding the Engineer’s Estimate. Utilizing the 2009 Caltrans Historical Cost Data, it appears the project will be nearly 40% over the Engineer’s Estimate $77M. Question: Will the project be awarded if bid results reflect such a large discrepancy?
A12) The Estimate provided for this contract is a reasonable estimate of cost for the planned work. 8Mar11.
Q13) The Drainage Plans call out a "paved ditch" at various locations. The details provided on plan sheet 173 only include a "PCC ditch". Please confirm that the call out "paved ditch" referes to the "PCC ditch" detail on sheet 173.
A13) Yes, the ditch flow line identified as "paved ditch" on the Drainage Plans refers to the PCC Ditch typical section shown on Drainage Details D-11 (Sheet 173 of the plans). 7Mar11.
Q14) Typical Caltrans Projects call for all CMU on bridges to be High Strength, but in the Bridge Sructural Plans it calls out for the CMU to be Light Weight. The Specs. also call for all Block on Bridges not to exceed 38 lbs. It is not possible to make a block High Strength and light weight and less than 38lbs. Are we to disreguard the Standard Plans and just make the block for bridges Light Weight?
A14) The weight of concrete masonry units for walls on bridges shall not exceed 38 pounds, in accordance with Section 10-1.73, “Sound Wall,” (page 236) of the special provisions. If a discrepancy exists between any two contract documents, Section 5-1.04, “Contract Components,” (page 25 of 283) of the Amendments to the Standard Specifications shall apply. Unless a contract addendum is issued, please bid according to the current contract bid documents. 24Mar11.
Q15) In the Structurals on Bridges it shows the Vertical Steel to be #6 at 8in. OC. Is this to be full height or will there be a splice?
A15) Unless otherwise noted on the plans, the #6 @ 8” vertical reinforcing steel for the masonry block sound walls shall be full height as shown on Sheets 899, 1071 and 1111 of 1132. Unless a contract addendum is issued, please bid according to the current contract bid documents. 24Mar11.
Q16) On The current Stage plans it only shows a 10ft. work area for the construction of the Sound Walls. With over 200,000 block to be laid this is not enough room for scaffold and equipment and will greatly increase costs fue to lane closures and night time work. Is it possibel to construct the Sound Wallls at the same time as the road construction in order to have more room?
A16) The sound walls and pavement could be constructed at the same time if it doesn’t affect the traffic flow and construction schedule. Refer to Section 10-1.01 "Order of Work" of the Special Provisions: "Nonconflicting work in subsequent stages may proceed concurrently with work in preceding stages, provided satisfactory progress is maintained in the preceding stages of construction." 12Mar11.
Q17) Please refer to the various traffic handling plan sheets for Stage 1 construction, specifically the typical sections showing the krail placement and limits of construction. Some of the details show constructing 30 ft wide on the NB while others only show constructing 18 ft wide. Why isn't the 30 ft constructed the entire length?
A17) In Stage 1, the median right of centerline will be constructed 18 ft. wide where shown on the Traffic Handling plans, so that Northbound traffic will not have to travel on the outside shoulder. 15Mar11.
Q18) In stages 2A, 2B, 3A and 3B how is the onramp and offramp traffic supposed to transition from the existing pavement to the new pavement when there are grade differences between the existing and the new? Additionally, since the entire width of the NB median is not constructed in Stage 1 isn't the traffic at the on and off ramps going to be driving over dirt?
A18) An HMA overlay will be placed for transition between existing and new pavement where there are grade differences. Temporary HMA pavement (0.75’) will be constructed between the existing pavement and the new median where the median is 18 ft. wide, to provide traveled way for on- and off-ramps as needed. 15Mar11.
Q19) Regarding the UDBE Participation: Has Caltrans established the actual “Market Areas” for the Prime Contractors to obtain qualified UDBE subcontractors and suppliers?
A19) Please refer to Section 2-1.03 "Disadvantaged Business Enterprises" of the Special Provisions. It's the bidder's responsibility to search for UDBE subcontractors and suppliers as you would for DBEs in order to meet the UDBE goal. The Office of Business & Economic Opportunity provides a query form to search the "list of DBEs certified by the California Unified Certification Program": http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/bep/find_certified.htm. 17Mar11.
Q20)Has Caltrans obtained "written consent from the Department Operating Administration" as it applies to the paragraph in 49 CFR 26.55 below? (5) The DBE may also lease trucks from a non-DBE firm, including from an owner-operator. The DBE who leases trucks from a non-DBE is entitled to credit for the total value of transportation services provided by non-DBE lessees not to exceed the value of transportation services provided by DBE-owned trucks on the contract. Additional participation by non-DBE lessees receives credit only for the fee or commission it receives as a result of the lease arrangement. If a recipient chooses this approach, it must obtain written consent from the appropriate Department Operating Administration. Example to this paragraph (d)(5): DBE Firm X uses two of its own trucks on a contract. It leases two trucks from DBE Firm Y and six trucks from non-DBE Firm Z. DBE credit would be awarded for the total value of transportation services provided by Firm X and Firm Y, and may also be awarded for the total value of transportation services provided by four of the six trucks provided by Firm Z. In all, full credit would be allowed for the participation of eight trucks. With respect to the other two trucks provided by Firm Z, DBE credit could be awarded only for the fees or commissions pertaining to those trucks Firm X receives as a result of the lease with Firm Z.
A20) No. The Office of Business and Economic Opportunity has prepared a request to FHWA to allow contractors DBE credit for using a DBE who leases trucks from a non-DBE firm, as described in 49 CFR Part 26.55. Approval is pending. 24Mar11.
Q21) We are in the understanding that the State has set-up a pre-bid meeting. We are also in the understanding that State is using this meeting as a “get in touch with” the local small and UDBE business. What we are having a tough time understanding is why is the State only providing these UDBE business seven working days to finalize their proposal with the Primes. We are requesting a 2-week postponement past the current established bid day to allow the UDBE subcontractors and this Prime to meet and finalize the potential subcontracts with UDBE subcontract.
A21) There are no plans to postpone the bid date. The mandatory prebid meeting is scheduled on March 23, 2011, and the bids are scheduled to open on April 6, 2011. This allows 9 business days for bidders to finalize their proposals. 17Mar11.
Q22) Plan Sheet 10 - We notice that the State has designed two structural sections for CRCP. They are stuctural section #2 and #3. We have notice the CRCP for the median is 1.0' and the future travel/truck lanes are 0.75' in thickness. Can the State confirm that they are designing this project with a thicker section in the median over the future travel/truck lanes?
A22) Refer to the Typical Cross Section plans. The thickness of continuously reinforced concrete pavement (CRCP) for both median and future HOV lane is 0.75’, as specified for Structural Section #3 on X-1 (Sheet 10 of the plans). Structural Section #2 (CRCP thickness 1.00') applies to all other lanes.17Mar11.
Q23) Can the State please confirm that they will eliminate the Standard Specification section 19-5.05 Relative Compaction (95 percent) for structural section #2,#3 and #4 which is found on plan sheet 10. The State is designing this project with SEG (subgrade enhancement geotextile)thus telling us there is an issue with compaction in these areas (below grading plane)? If the State is not considering the elimination of this section please forward the as-builts of where and what type of material this section of roadway was build with. Was this material dredger spoils from the Stockon port? Please provide R-values and SE data as well. Additional data is needed to have a better understanding for pricing of this operation in this contract?
A23) Section 19-5.03 "Relative Compaction (95 Percent)" of the Standard Specifications will not be eliminated or revised. No problems with compaction are anticipated. Subgrade Enhancement Geotextile (SEG) used in this application is expected to provide improvements for the overall performance of the new concrete pavement.17Mar11.
Q24)Bid item quantity is listed as 1,380 sqyd. Totaling the call out quantity for each structure, listed with Groove Polyester Concrete Overlay, totals to 13,380 sqyd. Please clarify.
A24) Refer to Addendum No. 1, dated March 28, 2011, for revised Bid Item List. 4Apr11.
Q25) The plans call for on sheet #243 for the Construction Project Funding Identifications being installed on Type M laminated post. Type M laminated post are generally used for permanent installations. Are we installing these tempoary signs on Type M Laminated post? If they are being installed on Type M Laminated post, then State should be supplying them under State Furnished Materials according to Section 56-2.02C Laminated Wood Box Post.
A25) Submitted for consideration. 18Mar11.
Q26) AASHTO Test Method T336-09 "Coefficient of Thermal Expansion(CTE) of Hydraulic Cement Concrete"
•This method measures expansion and contraction of hardened concrete specimens over a temperature range of 10 ± 1°C (50 ± 2°F) to 50 ± 1°C (122 ± 2°F).
•Caltrans specification requires that the CTE not exceed 6 x 10-6 inch/inch at 68°F.
•The method requires Coefficient of Thermal Expansion (CTE) to be calculated as:
CTE = ( delta L/L0) / delta T
Where: delta L = Length change of specimen
L0 = Initial measured length change of specimen
delta T = Temperature change
•Results are reported in micro strains / °C
•Test results are not reported at a particular temperature, rather as micro strain per degree of temperature change.
Because length change measurements are made at only two temperatures (10°C and 50°C), there is no provision to obtain data at the specified 68°F. Additionally, the Caltrans CTE requirements do not specify a baseline temperature for calculating CTE at 68°F. It appears Caltrans is rewriting a test method with no engineering basis for the associated with the actual test procedures. ?
A26) Submitted for consideration. 18Mar11.
Q27) Reference the bridge deck drainage system estimated quantity in the bid sheet. There appears to be a significant variance between the declared weight of 32,270 lbs and approximate weight of drain pipes, drains, grates, and accessories shown on plans. On at least two of the bridges (Alpine Ave. & Telegraph) the declared weight appears to be roughly double the weight of the items on the plans. Please clarify.
A27) Refer to Section 2-1.12B, "Bid Item List and Bid Comparison," (page 13 of 283) of the Amendments to the Standard Specifications, please "submit a bid based on the work item quantities the Department shows in the Bid Item List." 5Apr11.
Q28)Page 199 Submittals talks about "if epoxy coated rebar is used..." while page 205 Measurement and Payment mentions "epoxy coating of reinforcment...", please confirm epoxy coating of the CRCP rebar is required or not.
A28) Epoxy-coated steel is not required for continuously reinforced concrete pavement (CRCP). 4Apr11.
Q29)Please verify that the area for Groove Polyester Concrete Overlay should be the same area as the Place Polyester Concrete Overlay.
A29) Refer to the quantity for Groove Polyester Concrete Overlay as revised by Addendum No. 1, dated March 28, 2011. Not all bridge decks will be grooved. 4Apr11.
Q30) The referenced section addresses materials that are eligible for materials-on-hand (MOH) payments. Item J notes "Bar Reinforcing Steel", but limits it to Bridge, Retaining Wall, and Box Culverts rebar. There is approximately 10,000,000 pounds of rebar required for the concrete pavement items, plus additional steel required for dowels. The pricing of these materials is very volatile. Can the rebar required for the CRCP, and any steel embeds (dowels and tie bars) required for the CRCP and JPCP be added to the eligible MOH materials?
A30) Yes, the listed materials for CRCP and JPCP will be eligible for partial payments as MOH. 5Apr11.
Q31) Will the Contractor be allowed to install a temporary creek/water diversion system for all the structures within the Calaveras River, Fourteen Mile Slough and the Five Mile Slough?
A31) No, the temporary creek diversion system applies only to the Five Mile Slough location. 30Mar11.
Q32)What is meant by special falsework? A 15-foot minimum vertical clearance seems excessive for City streets. A hanging falsework system has safety issues and may not resolve the limited clearances in all cases. Jacking and lowering the bridges is not an option without redesigning the abutments. Can we temporarily lower the city streets during construction?
A32) Submitted for consideration. 24Mar11.
Q33) Is the given flow rate of 215 cfs based on storm data or continual feed of the waterway?
A33) Refer to Section 10-1.22, TEMPORARY CREEK DIVERSION SYSTEM, of the Special Provisions. The flow rate of 215 cubic feet per second (cfs) is based on pumping rates for upstream storm drain pump stations discharging into Five Mile Slough at the same time. 29Mar11.
Q34)Is the intent of the diversion system for emergency pumping or continual flow? Are cofferdam systems other than gravel embankments allowed?
A34) The temporary diversion is for both continual flow and emergency pumping. Section 10-1.22 of the Special Provisions requires that "the Contractor shall submit to the Engineer for approval, drawings showing the Contractor's proposed method of construction, and details." 29Mar11.
Q35)The specifications indicate the system should be capable of handling channel flow from the "construction site" of 215 cfs. Should this be through the site?
A35) The diversion system must be capable of handling a flow rate of 215 cubic feet per second (cfs). 29Mar11.
Q36) The Supplemental Project Information includes permits issued by various Regional, State, and Federal agencies (7 each). Five of the seven permits note that temporary trestles will be used at Calaveras River and 14-Mile Slough to access the water work. Additionally, specific and often conflicting means and methods are noted for the installation/removal of the trestle (i.e. the San Joaquin Flood Control's 12/7/09 letter addressing 14-Mile Slough notes the trestle to be supported on "H-Piles", the Fish & Game permit (Pg 2 of 11) notes the trestle to be supported on "CIDH Piles", other Permits just reference "piles"). Please clarify (1) if trestles must be utilized to perform this work, and (2) if there are any specific means and methods required to perform this work if required.
A36) Temporary trestles are an optional construction method to perform work in the waterways at the Calaveras River and 14 Mile Slough. Refer to Addendum No. 1, dated March 28: "The use of impact or vibratory hammers for the installation of temporary or permanent piles is prohibited at (all waterways)." The Contractor's construction methods will also need to be approved by the appropriate permitting agencies prior to installation. 4Apr11.
Q37) The Regional Water Quality Board's Permit states in one provision (Page 4, #17) that "When work in a flowing stream is unavoidable, the entire stream flow shall be diverted around or through the work area.... using gravity flow through temporary culverts/pipe or pumped around...." But in the following "Project Information" section (Page 8, 2nd para), the requirement for temporary trestles is noted. Please clarify these apparently conflicting requirements.
A37) The statement in the RWQCB permit noted above is applicable to the construction activities for the Five Mile Slough RCB culvert only. Temporary trestles are an optional construction method to perform work in the waterways at the Calaveras River and 14 Mile Slough. 4Apr11.
Q38) Several of the referenced permits, Regional Water Quality Control Board (Page 7, last para) and Fish & Game (Page 2, 2nd para) state that the "in-water work will last one 1 season" and infer that this will be the 2011 season. Given that award of this project likely won't be until June, numerous submittals must be generated and approved prior to any in-water work, and the apparent (requested to be clarified) requirement for 3 different trestles at 14-Mile Slough (NB outside, Median, and SB outside), does all of the in-water work truly have to be done in one season?
A38) Refer to Addendum No. 2, dated April 1, 2011. 4Apr11.
Q39) The Fish & Game permit notes restrictions regarding when certain protected species can be evicted/disturbed, etc... Bats can only be evicted from structures between February 15th and April 1st, vegetation can't be removed or exclusionalry devices installed for Nesting Migratory Birds except between August 15th and February 15th, and Burrowing Owls cannot be disturbed between February 1st and August 31st. If any of these species are found at or near critical structures that have other work schedule restrictions (i.e. Calaveras River Bridge and 14-Mile Slough Bridge), construction could be significantly delayed. How will this be addressed by Caltrans?
A39) Please refer to Addendum No. 2, dated April 1, 2011. 4Apr11.
Q40) Caltrans Letter dated June 14, 2010, which is attached to and referenced in the Coast Guard's Bridge Permit, addresses certain "means and methods" that the contractor will use in the construction of the Calaveras River and 14-Mile Slough bridges. These include but are not limited to (1) installing trestles that leave openings in the middle, (2) installation of any required casings required for CIDH construction via "spinning" or "oscillating" methods, and (3) steel pipe pile supports for the temporary trestles (this differs from other permits, that note "H-Pile" or "CIDH Pile" as trestle supports)
A40) Please refer to Addendum No. 2, dated April 1, 2011. 4Apr11.
Q41) Please clarify if epoxy reinforcing is required for the continuously reinforced concrete paving.
A41) Epoxy-coated steel is not required for CRCP.4Apr11.
Q42) What type of joint is to be constructed between the CRCP and the JPCP? Is it to be sawed and sealed? Which joint detail?
A42) The joint between CRCP and JPCP is a longitudinal construction joint. Refer to Revised New Standard Plan (RNSP) P4, "Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement," for details. 4Apr11.
Q43) The plans do not define a burial location for the ADL contaminated soil as required per the Specifications. Please define a burial location or specify if the material shall be offhauled and disposed of.
A43) Section 10-1.45 "MATERIAL CONTAINING HAZARDOUS WASTE CONCENTRATIONS OF AERIALLY DEPOSITED LEAD" of the Special Provisions requires the Type Y-1 ADL material to be placed and covered with a minimum 1-foot layer of nonhazardous soil or pavement. The Contractor is required to report their burial locations, as stated in subsection "SURVEYING TYPE Y-1 MATERIAL BURIAL LOCATIONS." 4Apr11.
Q44)The Information Handout provided does not contain the referenced Foundation Reports. These documents are essential for bidding purposes. Please provided the necessary reports as soon as possible.
A44) Please refer to Addendum No. 2, dated April 1, 2011. 4Apr11.
Q45) Per Sheet C-19 (64 of 1132)the Terminal Joint Type E continues into the JPCP shoulders from the CRCP section at Approach Slabs. Is this correct?
A45) Yes, the Type E terminal joints continue into the JPCP shoulder. 4Apr11.
Q46) Per Sheet C-19 (64 of 1132) The WF beams at both the Terminal Joints and the Expansion Joints continue into the JPCP shoulders from the CRCP section at Approach Slabs. Is this correct?
A46) Yes, the wide flange beams continue into the JPCP shoulder. 4Apr11.
Q47) After download and review of the Information Handout, and review of documents noted on the cover sheet, we are unable find the following:
Foundation Reports by Parikh Consultants, Inc. October 15, 2009 for the following structures:
Country Club Blvd UC (Br. No. 29-0189)
Michigan Ave. UC (Br. No. 29-0190)
Alpine Ave. UC (Br. No. 29-0191)
Telegraph Ave. UC (Br. No. 29-0192)
Calaveras River Bridge (Br. No. 29-0174)
EBMUD Aqueduct UC (Br. No. 29-0226)
March Lane UC (Br. No. 29-0193)
Fourteen Mile Slough (Br. No. 29-0175)
Swain Road UC (Br. No. 29-0215)
Benjamin Holt Drive UC (Br. No. 29-0194)
Five Mile Slough Culvert
Can this document be provided for immediate download and review?
A47) Refer to Addendum No. 2, dated April 1, 2011. 4Apr11.
Q48) Plan Sheet 769 shows details for the CRCP (Wide Flange Beam Terminal). Section A-A and Detail B shows a bondbreaker on top of the LCB sections, but does not provide a thickness. Please clarify how thick this bondbreaker is, and confirm that it is to be expanded polystyrene.
A48) Submitted for consideration. 28Mar11.
Q49) Plan Sheet 769 also shows 6" x 12" and 1.5" x variable height (depending on CRCP thickness) "polyethylene foam" sections within this work. Please confirm that this material is to be polyethylene foam, whereas the bondbreaker is to be expanded polystyrene.
A49) Submitted for consideration. 28Mar11.
Q50)REFERRING TO THE BRIDGE PLANS FOR EACH STRUCTURE, AND THE AS BUILT DRAWINGS OF TYPE R APRROACH DEMO MATL TO BE REMOVED, THE QUANTITY OF AGGREGATE BASE (APPROACH SLAB) SEEMS TO BE LOW BY A FACTOR OF (3), COMPARED TO THE PAY QUANTITY OF 258 CY. PLEASE CONFIRM THIS QUANTITY IS CORRECT.
A50) Refer to Section 2-1.12B, "Bid Item List and Bid Comparison," of the Amendments to the Standard Specifications: "Submit a bid based on the work item quantities the Department shows in the Bid Item List." 5Apr11.
Q51) Please provide the existing section for the inside shoulders along I-5 and there widths for North bound and South bound.
A51) Submitted for consideration. 28Mar11.
Q52)RERERRING TO THE UTILITY PLANS (U1-U19) IN THE CONTRACT DRAWINGS, THE HIGH VOLTAGE OVERHEAD POWER LINES, THAT APPEAR TO BE IN CONFLICT WITH THE NORTHBOUND/SOUTHBOUND RETAINING WALL/SOUNDWALL CONSTRUCTION, SEEM TO HAVE START/STOP DRAWING BREAK POINTS ON THE UTILITY PLANS. ARE THESE LINES CONTINUOUS ALONG BOTH NB/SB WALL ALIGNMENTS, CAN THEY BE SHUT OFF OR DE-ENERGIZED, AND WHICH SECTION OF THE SPECIAL PROVISIONS DEAL WITH THESE UTILITY OBSTRUCTIONS?
A52) All of the overhead high voltage lines that parallel I-5 near the project are outside of State right of way and are not in conflict with any of the retaining or sound walls. There are several high voltage overhead lines that cross the freeway that the Contractor will be required to work under. 4Apr11.
Q53)Plan Sheet 482 – The State has indicated that 15,320 HMA tons are coming from the "detour plans" - However the State has not provided a Lane Closure Chart for a multitude of these streets. Please clarify the State intent regarding the local road closures. We are assuming the since the State has not addressed these local roads -- that these local roads will be closed to “all traffic for the purpose of construction” along with the State method of payment for local roads traffic control will be covered under the Force Account method of payment. We are seeking this information via Addendum.
A53) Refer to Addendum No. 2, dated April 1, 2011. 4Apr11.
Q54)Additional information regarding A18) - The State is indicating that additional HMA will be placed on the on and off ramps to cover the elevation and driving on dirt problem/issue - however the State does not indicate method of payment - Since this is not covered in the plans are we to assume the State will pick up the bill at force account? If not, please forward the additional information in an Addendum. We need the following: a) Square footage and elevations for transition paving
b) HMA - additional tonnage per location
c) Tack - additional tonnage per location
d) Traffic Control - How long can the ramps be closed in order to pave this multiple lift pavement (at each locations)?
A54) Unless a contract addendum is issued, bid per the current contract bid documents. 5Apr11.
Q55) We are unable to find a specification section pertaining to Bid Item #7 – Public Safety Plan. What are the requirements of this bid item?
A55) Refer to Section 10-1.80 "Polyester Concrete Overlay" of the Special Provisions. Details for the public safety plan are listed in "Submittals" under subsection "General." 28Mar11.
Q56) The Stage drawings show that only 18' of the 30' Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement ("CRCP") section gets placed in most of the Northbound median in Stage 1, leaving 12' of this section (Section 3, 0.75' thick) to be completed in Stages 2A & 2B. The paving adjacent to this 12' width to be done in Stages 2A & 2B is Section 2, which is 1.00' thick. We can't find any specifications that restrict the paving of Section 2 CRCP (= 1.00' thick) concurrently with Section 3 CRCP (= 0.75' thick). But given the different transverse rebar requirements, and concerns about longitudinal cracks developing at the 3-inch subgrade plane change, it would be our exectation that the remaining 12' of Section 3 median pavement to be paved in Stages 2A/2B has to be placed separately from the adjacent Section 2 pavement. Given that longitudinal construction joints require special tie bars and Type C joints (preformed compression seals) per Plan Sheet 758 (RNSP 4) Note 4, and the red! uced productivity associated with paving 12' widths as opposed to wider paving passes, this response is critical to properly pricing this work. Please advise.
A56) As long as the Contractor meets specification and plan requirements, including placement of steel, there is no requirement that would prevent CRCP with different thickness from being placed concurrently. Longitudinal construction joints are required to be placed at the longitudinal joint locations shown on the plans. 5Apr11.
Q57) For the LCB and PCC support slabs underneath the WF Terminal Beam and Expansion Joint, will the contractor be required to perform quality control testing as per section 40-1.03 of the standard specifications?
A57) The support slabs (LCB and PCC) for the wide flange beam will not be subject to QC/QA requirements. 4Apr11.
Q58) Please provide the list of Prime Contractors who attended the "Mandatory" pre bid meeting of 3/23/11. Please confirm that only those Prime Contractors will be considered Reponsible Prime Bidders for this Contract.
A58) Bay Cities Paving and Grading Inc., C. C. Myers, Inc., Coffman Specialties, DeSilva Gates Construction, Flatiron West, Inc., George Reed Construction, Granite Construction, R & L Brosamer, RGW, Teichert Construction, and Top Grade Construction, Inc. Yes, in accordance with Section 2-1.01, "Mandatory Prebid Meeting," of the Special Provisions. 5Apr11.
Q59) Please confirm that Item "U- Railing" includes Metal Beam Guard Railing, Thrie Beam Barrier Rail both new and reconstructed, and the associated end treatments, which will be included under this provision of the contract.
A59) Yes, all of the items in question would be considered for partial payment for materials furnished but not incorporated in the work under "U. Railing," as stated in Section 5-1.11 "PAYMENTS" of the Special Provisions. 4Apr11.
Q60) Please review, confirm and delete by addendum, the 5th through 10th paragraphs on page 60 of the Order of Work. These paragraphs dealinfg with temporary protection of exposed ends of MBGR and Barrier are not likely to occur as you have clearly directed this work to be performed behind Temporary K Rail as shown on the staging and traffic handling plans.
A60) Refer to Note 1 on Traffic Handling Plan TH-1 (Sheet 252 of the plans): "Traffic handling plans do not show all work. Work not necessary for traffic handling may be completed at any time and is not shown." 4Apr11.
Q61) Ref Plan Sheet 252- Please confirm that the Detail for " Accesss Median Work Detail", including Note 6, will apply to any Stage of the Work involving Median Work, not just for Stage 1.
A61) The "Access Median Work Detail" shown Sheet TH-1 could be applied for any stage construction involving median work. 4Apr11.
Q62) Please review, confirm and revise by addendum, Traffic Chart # 5 to provide at least 6 hours of full freeway closure to allow crews to SAFELY remove Existing Two Post Sign # G in Stage 1 and SAFELY install new Two Post Sign # H in Stage 4 as shown on your stage plans.
A62) Chart No. 5 for Complete Freeway/Expressway Closure Hours in Section 10-1.28, "Maintaining Traffic," of the Special Provisions cannot be revised. 4Apr11.
Q63) Will Caltrans award this project if the lowest bid is 40% over the Engineer's Estimate? Please provide a Yes/No answer.
A63) Submitted for consideration. 30Mar11.
Q64) Please clarify the required type of sign panels to be installed on your new Overhead Sign Structures. The Plan Details on sheets 471, 472 and 473 and Quantity Sheets 480 and 481 call for Formed panels. However sign detail plan sheets 468,469 and 470 are calling for Laminated Type A panels for Signs K,L, N, O.
A64) Sign panels to be furnished for overhead sign structures are typically Laminated Type A. If a change becomes necessary, it will be handled by Contract Change Order proposed by the Engineer. 4Apr11.
Q65) On sheet 474 of the plans the general design for the sound wall mounted signs does not provide sufficient information regarding the length of the 4" pipe post. Assuming the length of the post is close to the 18'5" shoulder clearance shown on the plans, that will mean the post weighs close to 300 lbs by itself. Each of the sound wall mounted signs are listed as 220 lbs a piece. Therefore I am either way too high on my length assumption or the weights listed are incorrect. Please advise.
A65) Submitted for consideration. 30Mar11.
Q66) The Stage drawings show that only 18' of the 30' of Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement ("CRCP") section gets placed in most of the Northbound median in Stage 1, leaving 12' of this section (Section 3, 0.75' thick CRCP) to be completed in Stages 2A and 2B. The CRCP adjacent to this remaining 12' is Section 2, which is 1.00' thick. We can;t find any specifications that restrict the paving of Section 2 and Section 3 pavements concurrently. But given the different transverse rebar requirements (per the Table on Plan Sheet 758) and concerns about longitudinal cracks developing at the 3-inch subgrade plane change that may not conform to the control joint at the top of the slab, it would be our expectation that the remaining 12' of Section 3 median pavement to be placed in Stages 2A/2B has to be placed separately from the adjacent Section 2 pavement. Please advise.
A66) As long as the Contractor meets specification and plan requirements, including placement of steel, there is no requirement that would prevent CRCP with different thickness from being placed concurrently. Longitudinal construction joints are required to be placed at the longitudinal joint locations shown on the plans. 5Apr11.
Q67) Note 4 of Plan Sheet 758 states that joint seals at longitudinal construction joints shall conform to... RSP P20 Type C Joint (preformed compression seal). Is this detail also required at the centerline joint (assuming that this is a construction joint)?
A67) Yes, if the centerline joint is a construction joint. 5Apr11.
Q68) Note 4 of Plan Sheet 758 states that joint seals at longitudinal construction joints shall conform to... RSP P20 Type C Joint (preformed compression seal). Is this detail required at the longitudinal construction joint between the CRCP and JPCP pavements (assuming that this is a construction joint)?
A68) Yes, type C joint is required between CRCP and JPCP. 5Apr11.
Q69) Is it the Contractor's choice to use either wood or steel post and the appropriate block, for the Reconstructed MBGR, STBB and DTBB on this job?
A69) Refer to Section 10-1.40 EXISTING HIGHWAY FACILITIES, subsection "RECONSTRUCT METAL BEAM GUARD RAILING AND THRIE BEAM BARRIER," of the Special Provisions: "New posts, blocks, and hardware shall be furnished and used to reconstruct metal beam guard railing and thrie beam barrier" using the same materials as the existing railing or barrier. 4Apr11.
Q70) According to the layout and sectionals all of the long crossovers from the west to the east sides on Hwy 5 will be installed under the existing roadway. If practical, may the irrigation crossover conduit be welded steel pipe installed by jacking per Standard Specifications 20-5.03B instead of CHDPE installed by open cut?
A70) Section 10-1.50 "IRRIGATION CROSSOVERS" of the Special Provisions requires conduits for crossovers to be placed in open trenches. The existing roadway pavement will be removed and replaced with new pavement; therefore, CHDPE pipe crossovers should be installed before new pavement construction. 4Apr11.
Q71) What size WF beam for a pavement thickness of .75'? NSP P32B has a minimum slab thickness of .80'.
A71) Use W14 x 68 for pavement thickness of 0.75’. 6Apr11.
Q72) The CRCP on this project is being poured in 5 separate stages with 2 different thicknesses. Are we required to field penetration weld at the joints between the various lengths of 2 different depth WF beams required by stage construction and pour width constraints?
A72) Yes. Provide field penetration weld at the joints. 6Apr11.
Q73) Instead of the field penetration welds in Question 2 would it be permissable to use individual lengths of WF beams with 3/8" plates at each end and just butt the together? They will be held in place by the sleeper slab.
A73) It’s not recommended. 6Apr11.
Q74) Per RNSP P4 the transverse steel spacing varies depending on the "pavement width from edge of concrete pavement or concrete shoulder to nearest edge of of concrete pavement or concrete shoulder". On this project we have 50' or 38' travel lanes at 1.00' thick and a 60' median at 0.75' thick. Is the pavement width for Table 2 160',148',or 136' going all the way across from shoulder to shoulder or is it 50',38', or 60' just counting the 1.00' thickness lanes or the 0.75' thickness median?
A74) For this project, width applies separately for 1.00' and 0.75' sections. 6Apr11.
Q75) What is the transverse steel spacing for a slab thickness of 0.75'? RNSP P4 has a minimum slab thickness of 0.80'in Table 2.
A75) Use the transverse steel spacing for a slab thickness of 0.8’. 6Apr11.
Q76) In Addendun No.1 dated March 28, 2011 it adds the following paragraph, "The use of impact or vibratory hammers for the installation of temporary or permanent piles is prohibited at Calaveras River Bridge (Br. No. 29-0174) Bents 3 through Bent 10, Fourteen Mile Slough Bridge (Br. No. 29-0175)all supports, EBMUD Aquaduct UC (Br. No. 29-0226) all supports, and Five Mile Slough Culvert Modification (Br. No.N/A)." It appears that a trestle will be required to install/reach the CIDH piling @ the Calaveras River Bridge,what methods are proposed to install the bearing piles for the trestle other than impact or vibratory hammers?
A76) Trestle piles may be installed by any approved means or methods, except by impact or vibratory means as stated in Section 10-1.65, "Piling," of Addendum No. 1. (issued March 28, 2011). 6Apr11.
Q77) Where is all the quantity for the longitudinal isolation joint? The ramps account for about 4,600 LF of the quantity, but I can't locate the remainder?
A77) The longitudinal isolation joints are installed around the inlets also. See Standard Plans. 6Apr11.
Q78) Please provide length of paved ditch. Plans are very unclear where paved ditch stops and starts with unpaved ditch.
A78) Refer to paved ditches where shown on the Drainage Plan sheets. Paved ditches begin and end at the following locations:
Sta 1654+09 to 1662+54 (Rt),
Sta 1694+85 to 1705+37 (Rt ),
Sta 1697+50 to 1743+90 (Lt),
Sta 1756+83 to 1769+98 (Lt),
Sta 1757+68 to 1769+78 ( Rt),
Sta 1772+40 to 1780+03 (Rt),
Sta 1772+49 to 1785+11 ( Lt),
Sta 1817+41 to 1832+98 (Rt),Sta 1822+00 to 1834+57 (Lt).
Q79)For bid item no. 159 structural concrete crib wall, Caltrans has 2000 sf for a 708' long wall. This does not look correct. If this is the correct sf how was it calculated?
A79) Submitted for consideration. 4Apr11.
Q80)Can Caltrans please address the removal and replacement of chain link fence that is conflict with construction of the retaining walls? Will Caltrans pay the Contractor force account to handle these operations?
A80) Retaining walls are to be constructed within State right of way. There are no plans to replace existing fence. Refer to Section 15-1.02, "Preservation of Property," of the amended Standard Specifications: "Existing facilities which are to remain in place shall be protected in conformance with the provisions in Sections 5-1.18, "Property and Facility Preservation." 4Apr11.
Q81)Can Caltrans please address the private residence fences that will be impacted by the construction of retaining walls / sound walls (sw#6 & sw#6a)? Will Caltrans pay the Contractor force account to handle these operations?
A81) Refer to the answer to Question 80. The Contractor shall plan their operations for construction of retaining wall and soundwalls within the State right of way so that private property fences are not disturbed. Refer to Section 5-1.18 "Property and Facility Preservation" of the amended Standard Specifications. 4Apr11.
Q82) Reference RNSP P4 for CRCP. Are the JPCP shoulders inclusive of the pavement width utilized in Table #2 Transverse Steel? Please be advised that including these shoulders into the width will add considerable cost to the bid.
A82) The JPCP shoulder width will not be included in Table #2. 6Apr11.
Q83)The Irrigation System Cost Break-Down of the Special Provisions, page 276 to 277, shows 28,640 LF of Armor Clad Conductors. The Irrigation Plans, sheet 639 to 655, show some existing remote control valves being relocated. The plans also show some of the main line being remove and replace with new main line. I have done a take off on Controller A on sheet 639 to 640, I came up with twice the quantity mentioned above. Keep in mind that Controller A, has only 16 of the 45 remote control valves being relocated. Please clarify if the valves that are being relocated get a new control wire from the controller to the valve. Are we using the existing control wires for the valves being relocated? Are there existing control wires? Is the armor clad wire quantity correct?
A83) Submitted for consideration. 4Apr11.
Q84)On Sheet 640, IP-2, the remote control valve on the top right corner reads as follow: 1"-C-9c-12-23. Controller C is shown on sheet 644, IP-6, which is about a mile away. Please clarify if the controller C mentioned above should be A.
A84) Submitted for consideration. 4Apr11.
Q85)Per drainage plans drawings D-1 thru D-17 and details sheet DD-4, the proposed 6" underdrain is to install adjacent to the new or existing walls within the pavement sections. Please provide applicable detail for the terminal riser within this pavement section, since the standard detail D102 illustrates the terminal riser is outside the roadway section. Please clarify.
A85) Submitted for consideration. 4Apr11.