Viewing inquiries for 04-153304

Submit new inquiry for this project


Inquiry #1: RSP A77N4 calls for a 12" ("Actual size) block. Section 83-1.02B (paragraph 11) allows the tolerances established by the American Softwood lumber standard (3/4" less than nominal for S4S timber). Which are suppose to follow when building these blocks?

MGS shows no detail allowing the contractor to nest or omit post like we're allowed to do when the current MBGR. Do you have a current detail showing us what to when we need to omit a post.

The cross section sheets only shows 3' from face of rail to the hinge point. With the new system we need to have 4' to use the standard 6' post. Can you provide us with clarification on to which post to use for this project.

Inquiry submitted 11/25/2013

Response #1:RSP A77N4 is specifically for the positioning of dikes or curbs in relation to MGS. The 2010 Standard Specifications Section 83-1.02B does also allow the tolerances established by the American Softwood Lumber Standard. I would also like to add that Section 83-1.02B, paragraph 12 states "Wood posts and blocks must be rough or S4S. The size tolerance or rough sawn blocks in the direction of the bolt holes must not exceed ±1/4 inch. Bidder is to adhere to the tolerances referenced in the Standard Specifications noted.


We did not find any situations where a MGS post would need to be omitted. The post omission detail has not been updated to reflect MGS (as opposed to MBGR), however it is recommended that that MGS positioning be adjusted to avoid this type of situation. If necessary to omit a post, then the current post omission detail is to be used. You can find this post omission detail from the Traffic Manual. A link is available below, see page 7-31, Figure 7-9.

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/saferesr/Chapter-7-Traffic-Manual-1-2012.pdf

Regarding the posts, the two obvious locations in question are at the loop onramps 10a and 11c. At these locations the face of rail to HP will be as per RSP A77N3. Therefore a 4’ face of rail to HP (Detail A - Typical Roadway Installation) should be considered throughout both ramps. But at ramp 10a from approximately 13+50 to 14+50 and at ramp 11a from approximately 13+25 to 14+25, use 3’ face of rail to HP (Detail B - Narrow Roadway Installation).
Response posted 12/03/2013




Inquiry #2: There are approximately forty (40) Programmed Visibility (PV) Signals proposed on this project. There is currently only one manufacturer of these PV Signals, and they are only available from one distributor. We would like to request that the PV Signals be State Furnished to allow for competitive bidding on the rest of the electrical equipment. As an alternative, would you allow the use of Louvered Signals? Louvered Signals are the standard in the State of Nevada for Ramp Metering Signals.
Inquiry submitted 11/26/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/01/2013


Response #2:Please refer to the link below for the pre-qualified products.
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/approved_products_list/pdf/led_traffic_signals.pdf

Basically there are various suppliers as shown in the list. Signals shall remain as per contract (not Department Furnished). Louvered Signals will not be allowed.

Response posted 12/04/2013




Inquiry #3: What type of material is the Department referring to in SP 15-2.03A(2)(b) and is salvaging this material for the Department a Contract requirement?
Inquiry submitted 11/27/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/03/2013


Response #2:The only items to be salvaged are electrical related items. They are clearly marked in the electrical plans and therefore are a contract requirement.
Response posted 12/03/2013




Inquiry #4: Plan sheet number 323, E-114,the detail "TRENCH IN PAVEMENT" shows the existing AC pavement section of approx 5" in depth. We would ask that Caltrans provide accurate depths as they relate to the existing AC sections that will be encountered throughout the project at the various locations. The trench details should be provided in the same format as are the "typical cross sections". If the detail remains unchanged and the project goes out to bid then Caltrans will be paying a lot more in change orders due to "Deferring Site Conditions". In short the detail should reflect actual existing AC pavement depths and not be misleading in nature nor contain ambiguity. THANK YOU!
Inquiry submitted 12/04/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/04/2013


Response #2:Plan Sheet number 323, E-114 is specifically a Fiber Optic Trench Detail sheet. The "TRENCH IN PAVEMENT" detail is specifically meant to show the relative positioning of fiber optic and standard electrical conduit if trenched. The detail does show the presence of the pavement, hence "TRENCH IN PAVEMENT" detail title but does not represent a specific thickness. This project takes place over a 26.7 mile stretch, it is not necessary, practical, nor feasible to show every possible existing pavement structural thickness for electrical trenching. Assuming it is 5" thick is not practical nor accurate, the plan clearly states "NO SCALE".

The plans were reviewed and the "TRENCH IN PAVEMENT" detail is an alternate method to Directional Drilling method and is not anticipated to be implemented in these three situations:


  • Transversely across Route 101 (Loc 11, E-25), (Loc 32, E-84)

  • Transversely across Local Street (Loc 11, E-26). (Fyi. Loc 30, E-73 use Surface Mounted Conduit To Existing Bridge Detail on E-118).

  • Transversely across on/off ramps (Loc 11, E-26), (Loc 30, E-72), (Loc 30, E-75).

Since industry standard is Directional Drilling for these situations, the detail is only for when directional drilling is not an option. With Directional Drilling there would be no "Deferring Site Conditions" since as per Standard Specifications conduit depth is a minimum of 18" or 30" below finished grade, well below any AC of PCC structural section.
Response posted 12/06/2013




Inquiry #5: Regarding Inquiry #2, there are indeed several suppliers of the LED Modules for the Programmed Visbility (PV) Signals. However, there is only one supplier of the PV Signal Hosuings, and the Housing represents approximately 90% of the total cost of a complete PV Signal. Please forward a copy of the Public Interest Finding that allows the use of this sole source equipment.
Inquiry submitted 12/04/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/04/2013


Response #2:There are various suppliers for the PV Signal Housings.

Here are 3 of them:

1. Western Pacific
15890 Foothill Blvd
San Leandro, CA 94578
(510) 276-6400 Ext 113 (Monica)

2. JTB Supply Company
1030 N. Batavia St. #A
Orange, CA 92867
(714) 639-9498

3. McCain
2365 Oak Ridge Way
Vista, CA 92081
(760) 727-8100

This is not an endorsement. Bidders may use other suppliers that meet spec.


Response posted 12/11/2013


Response #3:You can download the Public Interest Finding from the link below:
www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/construction/contracts/04-153304/04-153304_PIF.pdf
Response posted 01/09/2014




Inquiry #6: In order to accurately quantify cut/fill volumes for this project, please provide PDF cross-sections.
Inquiry submitted 12/05/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/06/2013


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

http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/construction/contracts/04-153304/XSections.zip (zipped pdf files, 21MB)
Response posted 12/06/2013




Inquiry #7: In response to Caltrans response to bid inquiry #4, The "trench in pavement" detail provided does not need to be to scale to be able to determine the existing ac depth depicted. The detail is provided with physical measurements starting with the tracer wire which is 12" in depth. The existing ac section is depicted at over 50% higher than the tracer wire and nowhere on the detail is it noted that the existing AC "VARIES IN DEPTH" from that which is depicted on the prevailing detail. The notion that boring is an industry standard is not correct either. Though directional drilling may be an "option" it is not the "option" that I will base my bid upon. Any contractor that owns multiple trenching wheels would base there bid and production rates upon the "trench in pavement" method knowing that 2 miles of installed conduit a day utilizing the "trench in pavement" method verses 500 linear feet a day "directional boring" is cheaper and meets scheduling demands and greatly reduces overall cost. I will base my bid upon the detail as it is depicted since it appears that Caltrans does not even know how thick the existing pavement sections we may encounter are. THANK YOU!!
Inquiry submitted 12/06/2013

Response #1:Comment noted.
Response posted 12/06/2013


Response #2:1. The electrical portion of this project consists of 35 Locations over 26.7 miles. Based on the project electrical plans the majority of the trenching is NOT within pavement and consists of power, telecommunication, fiber optic, lighting, etc. conduit lines placed longitudinally in non-paved areas.

2. The electrical detail "Trench In Pavement" in question on Electrical Detail plan sheet E-114 (pg. 323) is only applicable when there is a proposed Fiber Optic line to be placed under pavement. This situation is only found at a few locations which are listed below.


    Route 101 Mainline
    (Loc 11, E-25)
  • 235’ Transverse Trench across Route 101 and NB Leavesley Rd off ramp (1 off ramp lane, 6 mainline lanes, with shoulders, and unpaved median with Thrie Beam Barrier).

  • See X-7 for typical existing mainline structural section. Use on ramp typical structural section shown on X-3 for off ramp structural section.


  • (Loc 32, E-84)
  • 180’ Transverse Trench across Route 101 (8 mainline lanes, with shoulders, and unpaved median with concrete barrier).

  • Structural Section consists of: Outside Shoulder (NB, SB) 6” AC, 18” AS, 12” Perm Material. Mainline Lanes 3 & 4 (NB, SB) 6” AC, 2” ATPB, 8” CTB, 9” AS, 12” Perm Material. Mainline Lanes 1 & 2 and inside shoulder (NB) 11.5” PCC, 4” CTPB, 6” LCB, 8” AS. Lanes 1 & 2 and inside shoulder (SB) 11.5” PCC, 6” LCB, 8” AS.


  • Local Streets
    (Loc 11, E-26)
  • 155’ Transverse Trench across Leavesley Road local street (6 mainline lanes, 2 turn lanes, shoulders, and 20’ PCC sidewalk)

  • Structural Section consists of: 6" AC, 9" CTB, except sidewalk which is 4” PCC, 6” AB


  • (Loc 30, E-73)
  • Use Surface Mounted Conduit To Existing Bridge Detail on E-118.

  • 55' Transverse Trench. Fyi: Not practical to trench at this location due to steep embankment, however if trenching, Coyote Creek Golf Dr below is 1 lane in each direction with 2 MBGR protecting bridge columns. No Structural Information available.


  • Ramps
    (Loc 11, E-26)
  • 60' Transverse Trench across SB 101 Leavesley Rd off ramp, 4 lanes off ramp and shoulders.

  • Use on ramp typical structural section shown on X-3 for off ramp structural section.


  • (Loc 30, E-72)
  • 25' Transverse Trench across Coyote Creek Golf Dr off ramp (1 lane off ramp, MBGR, and shoulders). No Structural Information available.


  • (Loc 30, E-75)
  • 20' Transverse Trench Coyote Creek Golf Dr on ramp (1 lane off ramp and shoulders). No Structural Information available.


3. For the locations listed above, although pavement structural section are being provided, due to site conditions, especially at the Route 101 Mainline and Ramps, it is anticipated that the most economical, practical, and less disruptive to traffic (see Lane Closure Charts) is directional drilling. Contractor of course can opt any method he chooses.

Response posted 12/10/2013


Response #3:See Addendum 1.
Response posted 01/24/2014




Inquiry #8: Regarding Inquiries #2 and #5, while there may be several suppliers of the PV Signals, they are all selling PV Signals from the same manufacturer (McCain). Per the Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual, "The licensing of several suppliers to produce a product does not change the fact that it is a single product and should not be specified to the exclusion of other equally suitable products." This is a Federal Aid project.
Inquiry submitted 12/11/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/11/2013


Response #2:See response to BI# 5.
Response posted 01/09/2014




Inquiry #9: Bid Item No. 96, Place Hot Mix AC, Misc. Areas.
Where does the buy and haul for this AC get Paid ?
It does not appear to be included in Item. No. 92, Hot Mix AC...
Thank You

Inquiry submitted 12/31/2013

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/02/2014


Response #2:Item 96 "Place Hot Mix Asphalt (Miscellaneous Area) is not included in Item 92 "Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A)". Item 96 Place Hot Mix Asphalt (Miscellaneous Area) includes both purchasing, hauling, placing, and compacting in place.
Response posted 01/07/2014




Inquiry #10: Mandatory prebid Meeting, 1 pm to 3 pm, on January 9, 2014, at VTA Auditorium, 3331 North First Street, San Jose, CA, 95134.
Do we need to RSVP for this meeting ?
Thank You

Inquiry submitted 01/02/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/02/2014


Response #2:We were registering people in advance, but we can also take walk-ins.
Response posted 01/09/2014




Inquiry #11: Regarding Inquiries #2, #5, and #8, if the State will only accept one specific brand of Programmed Visibility (PV) Signals, why not include a price arrangement similar to Specification section 86-5.06B(1) of this same project. This will ensure a fair price for the PV Signals and allow the remainder of the Electrical equipment to be more competitively bid.
Inquiry submitted 01/02/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/06/2014


Response #2:The product is distributed by:
Jam Services, Inc
Kelly Momaney (Sales Manager)
958 E. Airway Blvd.
Livermore, CA 94550
(925) 455-5267


The prices shown below include shipping only, sales tax not included.










DescriptionQuantityPrice
PV Traffic Signal Heads w/LED Indications31$1,790 each
PV Traffic Signal Housing Visor93$18 each
PV Traffic Signal Housing Back Plate31$45 each
PV Traffic Signal MAS Ann Mount (8°Tilt)31$120 each

The prices above will be available to any contractor until May 31, 2014.
Response posted 01/09/2014


Response #3:-blank-
Response posted 01/09/2014




Inquiry #12: Regarding Bid Inquiries #2, #5, #8, & #11, there is at least one other product that that will perform the same function as the proposed PV Signals - Geometrically Programmed Louveres (GPL) from Pelco Products (http://www.pelcoinc.com/Portals/0/Documents/Traffic%20Documents/Traffic%20Catalog%202011/Traffic%20Catalog-Sec13-Traffic%20Accessories.pdf). The State of Nevada has been successfully using Louvers for Ramp Metering for several years due to the exornitant price of sole source PV Signals. Not only are GPL less than one third the cost of PV Signals, but they are available through multiple distributors. This could save taxpayers at least $40,000.
Inquiry submitted 01/09/2014

Response #1:Comment noted.
Response posted 01/10/2014




Inquiry #13: Please provide the CAD files for the job.
Inquiry submitted 01/22/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/23/2014


Response #2:Do you have specific files or sheets that you are interested in?
Response posted 01/23/2014


Response #3:
Response posted 01/28/2014




Inquiry #14: Release of Layout CAD files and cross section DGN's would be appreciated.
Inquiry submitted 01/23/2014

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/28/2014


Response #2:Cross Sections in Microstation format can be downloaded below:

www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/construction/contracts/04-153304/XSections_dgn.zip (zipped dgn files)

Layout sheets are not availble in dgn.
Response posted 01/29/2014




Inquiry #15: Is there a list of Contractors that attended the mandatory pre-bid outreach meeting?

Where can this information usually be found?

Inquiry submitted 01/31/2014

Response #1:See the following website -
http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/smallbusiness/outreach_archive.htm

You want the Jan. 9, 2014 meeting.
Response posted 01/31/2014






The information provided in the responses to bidder inquiries is not a waiver of Section 2-1.03, “Examination of Plans, Specifications, Contract, and Site of Work,” 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.