Viewing inquiries for 06-0G9804

Submit new inquiry for this project


Inquiry #1: There appears to be approximately 30 valve boxes, manholes and other utilities from PM 36.8-38.0. The contractor is supposed to cold plane .2' and place RHMA .15' in these areas. Will the state please identify all utilities to be adjusted and provide a bid item for adjusting both the manholes and valve boxes?
Inquiry submitted 07/26/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 07/31/2017


Response #2:All utilities to be adjusted have been identified. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 08/14/2017




Inquiry #2: There are two Railroad crossings shown in the limits of the project. Will the state please provide construction details for both locations? Will the State be paying for railroad flagging?
Inquiry submitted 07/26/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 07/31/2017


Response #2:Construction details are provided for the northern crossing on Plan sheet no. 23, C-21. The southern crossing is outside of the limits of the work. Per supplemental project information, railroad flagging is State Furnished.
Response posted 08/04/2017




Inquiry #3: On sheet 2 of the plans the typical cross sections for PM 36.8-38.0 show a cold plane depth of .2' for the entire width of Route 65. On sheet 38 and 39 repair failed areas are shown with a depth of .25' from PM 36.8-39.3. As it seems some of the areas will be cold planed and then failed areas will be repaired in the same location, will the State please confirm that the contractor is to first fix the failed areas at .25' and then cold plane .2' from PM 36.8-38.0.
Inquiry submitted 07/28/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 07/31/2017


Response #2:Refer to Addendum No. 1, dated August 11, 2017.
Response posted 08/14/2017




Inquiry #4: In spec section 39-2.01A(4)(i)(iii) table 1 of the 2015 standard specifications shows that if the HMA thickness is greater than .2' the MRI Smoothness requirement is 60 in/mi and if the HMA thickness is .2' or less the MRI is 75 in/mi. However in the project specials the State has changed the requirement. The project specials show that if the HMA thickness is greater than or equal to .1' the MRI is 60 in/mi. The change to this smoothness specification requires that the entire project have an MRI of 60 in/mi or less. From PM 36.8-38.0 (In town portion) there are many obstructions including Manholes, valves, Railroad crossings and intersections. All of these will attribute to less than accurate and higher readings on the profilograph. Will the state consider waiving smoothness from PM 36.8-38.0 or at least reverting back to the standard 75 in/mi in this section?
Inquiry submitted 07/28/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 07/31/2017


Response #2:Refer to Addendum No. 1, dated August 11, 2017.
Response posted 08/14/2017




Inquiry #5: Will Caltrans please identify the Post Mileage limits that bid item #22 (3 pre-pave grinding days) will encompass?
Inquiry submitted 08/11/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/11/2017


Response #2:Per Std Spec section 39-2.01C(3)(e), The post mile limits for bid item #22 (3 pre-pave grinding days) are PM 38.0 to PM 39.6 as shown on Typical Cross Sections.
Response posted 08/17/2017




Inquiry #6: Section 30-5.01D(4)(d) Smoothness states "Correct MRI greater than 75 in/mi for a 0.1-mile section and areas of localized roughness greater than 180 in/mi". Will an Addendum be issued to reflect the latest Standard of "Correct MRI greater than 90 in/mi for a 0.1-mile section and areas of localized roughness greater than 240 in/mi".
Inquiry submitted 08/11/2017

Response #1:Refer to Addendum No. 1, dated August 11, 2017.
Response posted 08/14/2017




Inquiry #7: In response to the State's response of question #1. The contractor has located approximately 30 Valve boxes, Manholes and utilities throughout PM 36.8-38.0. In this segment the contractor is to cold plane .20' and pave back .15' RHMA. The previously mentioned utilities will be .05' above the new Finished Grade if they are not adjusted. Will the state please provide an additional bid item for lowering and raising of these utilities?
Inquiry submitted 08/14/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/14/2017


Response #2:Reference Standard Specification 71-5.04 "PAYMENT... If no item is described for adjust (1) frames, (2) covers, (3) grates, or (4) manholes, payment for adjusting these materials is included in the payment for the type of pavement or type of surfacing involved."

Response posted 08/22/2017




Inquiry #8: Will the Department consider extending the length of the reversing lane control closure beyond the .5 mile now allowed.
Inquiry submitted 08/18/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 08/21/2017


Response #2:No changes will be made to the current contract documents.
Response posted 08/22/2017






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