California Department of Transportation

Contract 05-1F950(05A1765)

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)P. 17, section 15-2.02B(3)(a) General, note 1, second sentence of the Special Provisions, states the following – “Preserve existing traffic striping, markings, markers, and survey monuments whenever possible.” Section A-A on plan sheet 2, shows the grinding going all the way up to the ETW.  The true ETW is typically two (2) inches outside of the ETW.  Is it the State’s intention to save the striping or to grind off the existing fog line?  If we are to bid it per the plans, that means that the fog line will have to be re-striped in the areas where we would be grinding/paving the right wheel tracks.  In addition, (if we have to re-stripe) under which bid item will cover this cost? 

A1) Re-stripe the fog line under a pay item # 10 - Paint Traffic Stripe , 2-Coat, that we added in the Addendum #1 dated Mar. 19, 2015. 20Mar15

Q2)After driving the job, we noticed that there is a significant amount of centerline striping that is solid yellow line with the skip line.  Again, according to Section A-A on plan sheet 2, it shows the grind/pave portion going to within six (6) inches of the centerline.  My concern, is that there are a significant amount of markers that will get wiped out during the process, either by the grinder or rollers, etc.  Is it the State’s intention to preserve such markers?  If not, and we bid per the plans, under which item shall we put the cost of replacing the markers?


A2)Replace the damaged markers under Item #11- Pavement Marker, Retroreflective,  that we added in the Addendum #1. 20Mar15

Q3) On plan sheet 2, under section A-A, there is a note for “Asphaltic Emulsion” (Fog Seal Coat) Exist Dikes.  What is the method of payment for this item?  Do we place the labor & equipment under the Tack Coat item or shall we include it under the Hot Mix Asphalt item? 

A3) Per the Pavement Structure Quantities Table on Sheet Q-2, "Fog Seal at Existing HMA Dike" is included in the 0.1 Tons of "Tack Coat". 20Mar15