Bidder Inquiries
Caltrans Bidding Connect Account:
Sign In (Sign in is required to access Project Plans)
Create Account (Click here to create a Caltrans Bidding Connect Account)
Viewing inquiries for 03-3F5104
Submit new inquiry for this projectInquiry #1: Special provision page 61, section 49-2.01C(4), table for the pre-drilling at abutment # 6 shows bottom of hole elevation at 4385 feet. This elevation is not correct. Please provide the correct bottom of hole elevation for pre-drilling of piles at abutment # 6 ?
Inquiry submitted 07/24/2019
Response #1:(#1)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 07/24/2019
Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 1, issued on Friday, August 16, 2019. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 08/20/2019
Inquiry #2: After Review of the Seismic reports and the cross sections there is unrippable material in the proposed cuts, and with no controlled blasting bid item like the last project that is still under construction .5 miles east on Hwy 20, is it the states intent to pay for any controlled blasting that will be needed under CCO or add a controlled blasting bid item?
Inquiry submitted 07/30/2019
Response #1:(#2)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 07/30/2019
Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 1, issued on Friday, August 16, 2019. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 08/20/2019
Inquiry #3: Will Caltrans allow the Zoneguard Steel Barrier be used in lieu of Temporary Railing Type K?
Thank you,
Inquiry submitted 07/31/2019
Response #1:(#3)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/01/2019
Response #2:
Any proposed modifications will only be considered by the Engineer after the contract has been awarded.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 08/12/2019
Inquiry #4: A - Plan Sheet 101 indicates rock stain in some of the rip rap sections. Typically there is pay item for "Rock Stain" for this work. Please clarify...
B - Plan Sheet 101 indicates concreted rip rap in some of the rip rap sections. Typically there is a "Concreted Rock Slope Protection" pay item for this work. Please clarify...
C - For locations where RCP is required for "Alternative Pipe Culvert" bid items, what D-loading is to be used? This is not specified.
D - Item 17 for REAPs is 110 Each while Item 18 for SW Sampling & Analysis Day is 200 Each. A REAP is required at 50%+ probability of rain 48 hours out from time of work whereas the SW sampling occurs only when there actually is a qualifying rain event. So, I believe the quantity for Item 18 is vastly overstated and my be more like 50 Each?.. Please verify.
E - Quantities shown on Drainage Quantity portion of plans do not indicate any "miscellaneous iron & steel" or "bar reinforcing steel" relating to the "Structural Concrete, Headwall". Is the iron/rebar for headwalls incidental to the headwalls?
F - Item 44 pertains to temporary high visibility fencing. Is there removal needed? If yes, is the removal of this temporary fencing paid through Item 143 "Remove Fence"?
G - The Contour Grading Plans are not much of plans. They only provide contours for the fill at the bridge abutments. There is around a quarter million cubic yards of material that, according the roadway excavation quantities on sheet 227 (Q-2), appears to be attempted to balance on the project. However, a simple chart like this does not provide near the amount of data needed to more specifically calculate and estimate the earthwork. Are there more contour grading plans available depicting the 266,859 CY of roadway excavation and the 263,162 CY of embankment or CAD files or Cross Sections?
H - There are four PCMS that appear in the stage 1 traffic handling plans. They somewhat appear on the subsequent stages but in fainter graphic detail. Do the four PCMS remain throughout the lifetime of the project?
Inquiry submitted 07/31/2019
Response #1:(#4)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/01/2019
Response #2:
A- An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 1, issued on Friday, August 16, 2019.
B- An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 1, issued on Friday, August 16, 2019.
C- Refer to Standard Plan A62D for Minimum class and D-load per method and maximum height of cover.
D- Multiple sampling and analysis days may be needed for a multiday rain event.
E- The cost of the reinforcing steel for the pipe culvert headwalls is included with the price of the concrete by cubic yard.
F- The price per LF to place the high visibility fencing includes the removal too.
G- Bidder withdrew question.
F- Yes, they remain through the entire project.
Response posted 08/20/2019
Inquiry #5: please ignore previously asked question "G - The Contour Grading Plans are not much of plans. They only provide contours for the fill at the bridge abutments. There is around a quarter million cubic yards of material that, according the roadway excavation quantities on sheet 227 (Q-2), appears to be attempted to balance on the project. However, a simple chart like this does not provide near the amount of data needed to more specifically calculate and estimate the earthwork. Are there more contour grading plans available depicting the 266,859 CY of roadway excavation and the 263,162 CY of embankment or CAD files or Cross Sections?"...
DGN and X-Section files within "Supplemental Info" appear to provide the necessary information.
Inquiry submitted 07/31/2019
Response #1:(#5)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/01/2019
Response #2:
Question withdrawn as requested.
Response posted 08/12/2019
Inquiry #6: please ignore previously asked question "G - The Contour Grading Plans are not much of plans. They only provide contours for the fill at the bridge abutments. There is around a quarter million cubic yards of material that, according the roadway excavation quantities on sheet 227 (Q-2), appears to be attempted to balance on the project. However, a simple chart like this does not provide near the amount of data needed to more specifically calculate and estimate the earthwork. Are there more contour grading plans available depicting the 266,859 CY of roadway excavation and the 263,162 CY of embankment or CAD files or Cross Sections?"...
DGN and X-Section files within "Supplemental Info" appear to provide the necessary information.
Inquiry submitted 07/31/2019
Response #1:(#6)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/01/2019
Response #2:
Question withdrawn as requested.
Response posted 08/12/2019
Inquiry #7: Where are the nearest water source(s) for the project for construction water?
Inquiry submitted 08/02/2019
Response #1:(#7)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/02/2019
Response #2:
Your attention is directed to section 10-6, "WATERING" of the Standard Specifications. You are responsible for developing a source of water.
Response posted 08/20/2019
Inquiry #8: Will Caltrans please extend the project bid date a minimum of two weeks?
Inquiry submitted 08/07/2019
Response #1:(#8)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/12/2019
Response #2:
A change in the project bid opening date is not being considered at this time.
Response posted 08/14/2019
Inquiry #9: Spec page 25 notes pickup truck and driver solely dedicated to patrolling for fire control. What item pays for this?
Inquiry submitted 08/12/2019
Response #1:(#9)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/12/2019
Response #2:Your attention is directed to the fourth paragraph of section 9-1.03, "PAYMENT SCOPE" Fire prevention work is specified in Division I.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 08/15/2019
Inquiry #10: Relating to Inquire #4 (H) about PCMS... spec page 29 states to provide 2 additional PCMSs. Is this in addition to PCMS shown on plans? Please clarify quantity of PCMS for this project...
Inquiry submitted 08/12/2019
Response #1:(#10)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/12/2019
Response #2:
Yes, this is in addition to the PCMS shown on the plans.
PCMS is a lump sum bid item. It is up to you to determine the number of PCMSs needed and bid accordingly.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 08/15/2019
Inquiry #11: Spec page 24 states that a fire break of 20 feet wide must be cleared before clearing and grubbing. However, after looking at the plans, it is not clear where the limits and locations of clearing and grubbing are to occur. Please clarify where clear and grubbing limits are.
Inquiry submitted 08/12/2019
Response #1:(#11)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/12/2019
Response #2:
Your attention is directed to section 17-2, "CLEARING AND GRUBBING," of the Standard Specifications. In addition, cut and fill lines are shown on the Layout sheets and provided in supplemental_info.
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 08/21/2019
Inquiry #12: At the prebid, it was mentioned to expect substantial quantities of heavy rock excavation of metamorphic green stone that would require blasting due to this particular material's strength/composition. However, the item #48 for structure excavation (rock) is only 194 CY in quantity? This does not make sense?..
Inquiry submitted 08/16/2019
Response #1:(#12)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/19/2019
Response #2:
Your attention is directed to section 19-3.01A of the Standard Specifications for information regarding what is included in structure excavation and section 19-3.01A of the Special Provisions for information regarding "Structure Excavation (rock)."
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 08/27/2019
Inquiry #13: The specifications indicate a lump sum for the working days. However, the AASHTO software to turn in the bid indicates $19,200 per day multiplied by contractors choice of 350-495 days. This is contradicting.
Inquiry submitted 08/16/2019
Response #1:(#13)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/19/2019
Response #2:
Working days for time-related overhead are shown as a lump sum value because the Department can't predict your overhead costs associated with your bid.
The bid book is a separate calculation. Because this is a cost-plus-time bid, there are two components to the bid:
1. Sum of the item totals
2. Total bid for time. For this portion of the bid, there is a fixed value for the cost per day of $19,200
Your attention is directed to section 3-1.02A of the Standard Specifications, and the bid book, for information regarding cost-plus-time bidding.
Response posted 08/20/2019
Inquiry #14: The specifications indicate a lump sum for the working days. However, the AASHTO software to turn in the bid indicates $19,200 per day multiplied by contractors choice of 350-495 days. This is contradicting.
Inquiry submitted 08/19/2019
Response #1:(#14)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/19/2019
Response #2:
Working days for time-related overhead are shown as a lump sum value because the Department can't predict your overhead costs associated with your bid.
The bid book is a separate calculation. Because this is a cost-plus-time bid, there are two components to the bid:
1. Sum of the item totals
2. Total bid for time. For this portion of the bid, there is a fixed value for the cost per day of $19,200
Your attention is directed to section 3-1.02A of the Standard Specifications, and the bid book, for information regarding cost-plus-time bidding.
Response posted 08/20/2019
Inquiry #15: When will the mandatory pre-bid sign in sheets be provided for primes / subcontractors? It was not included with Addendum #1. Please provide this as soon as possible.
Inquiry submitted 08/19/2019
Response #1:(#15)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/21/2019
Response #2:
The mandatory pre-bid meeting attendees can be found at this link.
https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/district-3/documents/03-3f510-ada-signin-roster-ada1.pdf
Response posted 08/22/2019
Inquiry #16: Can you please identify where on the plans the Temporary Creek Diversion System is to be anticipated to be used on the project.
Inquiry submitted 08/19/2019
Response #1:(#16)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/21/2019
Response #2:
Temporary creek diversion systems are anticipated to be used at drainage systems 27 and 40. DS 27, extend 5'x5' box culvert conveying Sandford creek. DS-40, NID irrigation canal crossing.
Response posted 09/23/2019
Inquiry #17: Where can we find the Mandatory sign in sheet from the Prebid?
Inquiry submitted 08/19/2019
Response #1:(#17)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/21/2019
Response #2:
The mandatory pre-bid meeting attendees can be found at this link.
https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/district-3/documents/03-3f510-ada-signin-roster-ada1.pdf
Response posted 08/22/2019
Inquiry #18: The California Water Boards Permit and the Department of Fish and Wildlife Permit provided in the project informational handout both state that the project is to be constructed June 1 through October 31. What work can take place outside this June 1 – Oct 31 work window?
Specifically, can any of the following work take place outside the June 1 to Oct 31 work window:
i. Construction of Bridge Superstructure
ii. Roadway Excavation / Embankment Fill
iii. Tree Removal (during pre-bid it was mentioned tree removal can take place between Oct & January)
Inquiry submitted 08/22/2019
Response #1:(#18)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/23/2019
Response #2:
Your attention is directed to Condition 2.1 and Table 2 of the 1600 permit. The work window is June 15 - October 31, NOT June 1 - October 31, as shown in your inquiry, and is specifically for those project activities covered under the 1600 permit. In addition, the work window is only applicable to the 14 locations shown in Table 2.
If tree removal is scheduled during the nesting season of protected raptors and migratory birds (typically February 1 to September 30), a focused survey for active nests of such birds must be conducted by a qualified biologist within 15 days prior to tree removal. However, if tree removal is done outside of the nesting season (October 1 to January 31), then no nesting bird surveys are needed prior to tree removal. Please see Condition 2.14 of the 1600 permit.
Response posted 08/28/2019
Inquiry #19: The special provisions state to start job site activities within 55 days after receiving notice that the contract has been approved. If the contractor can not start construction until June 1 will this 55-day requirement still apply? If work cannot start prior to June 1 are working days suspended until then?
Inquiry submitted 08/22/2019
Response #1:(#19)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/23/2019
Response #2:
Your attention is directed to the sixth paragraph of section 8-1.04B of the Special Provisions. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/23/2019
Inquiry #20: Are working days suspended between the work windows? If work is only allowed to occur between June 1 to October 31 are working days between November 1 & May 31 suspended?
Inquiry submitted 08/22/2019
Response #1:
(#20)-Your attention is directed to section 1-1.07B, "GLOSSARY," of the Standard Specifications for the definition of a working day. If no work can be done it is not considered a working day. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 08/23/2019
Inquiry #21: The special provisions state that before clearing and grubbing, clear a minimum fire break of 20-foot width at the outer limits of the areas to be cleared and grubbed. The erosion control quantities do not appear to account for the additional quantities needed for the fire break. Will the fire breaks require erosion control? If additional erosion control is needed due to fire breaks will it be paid at unit prices of the erosion control items or will Caltrans adjust these quantities prior to bid to account for the fire breaks?
Inquiry submitted 08/22/2019
Response #1:(#21)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/23/2019
Response #2:
The special provisions state that before clearing and grubbing, clear a minimum fire break of 20-foot width at the outer limits of the areas to be cleared and grubbed. The erosion control quantities do not appear to account for the additional quantities needed for the fire break.
Response:
Permanent erosion control, and permanent erosion control quantities, shown on the plans are not applicable to the clearing and grubbing operations.
Will the fire breaks require erosion control?
Response:
Any erosion control that is required will fall under temporary erosion control items.
If additional erosion control is needed due to fire breaks will it be paid at unit prices of the erosion control items or will Caltrans adjust these quantities prior to bid to account for the fire breaks?
Response:
The adjustment is covered under section 9-1.06 of the Standard Specifications.
Response posted 09/23/2019
Inquiry #22: The special provisions state that all stage construction work must be completed in order as shown and that all previous stage work must be completed prior to starting work on the next stage. However, the stage construction plan, SC-3, for stage one notes that bridge construction (bent 2, 3, 4 and 5, and superstructure) shall be completed prior to stage 3B. Please confirm that the bridge construction may be completed over multiple construction stages.
Also stage 1 generates excess spoils that can be used to make a fill at beginning of stage 2 on the A-1 Line from station 257+00 to 263+00. Can this fill at stage 2 be done concurrent with the work on stage 1?
Inquiry submitted 08/22/2019
Response #1:(#22)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/23/2019
Response #2:
Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/23/2019
Inquiry #23: In the Foundation Report it states that the Abutment fills must be excavated in the upper 2 feet of the existing surface prior to placing the fill. Has this quantity been included in the Roadway Excavation Quantity?
Inquiry submitted 08/22/2019
Response #1:(#23)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/23/2019
Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 5, issued on Friday, September 20, 2019. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/23/2019
Inquiry #24: Specials Section 49-1.01A 7.2 states that if an oscillator or rotator is used, that a soil or rock plug of 10' must be maintained until the specified tip is reached. This statement precludes the use of only (or partial) casing to competent material. Was the intent of this statement to require casing full-depth when an oscillator or rotator is used? What happens if the casing can't be advanced full depth?
Inquiry submitted 08/23/2019
Response #1:(#24)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/26/2019
Response #2:
It actually states "Maintain a minimum 10-foot soil/rock plug within the casing until the drill rod reaches the specified pile tip elevation".
There is more than 1 type of construction method and more than 1 type of material listed in this same paragraph under section 49-1.01A, item 7.2, beginning with "Expect difficult pile construction for CIDH concrete (rock socket) piles at Timbuctoo Bridge (Bridge No. 16-0054) due to the following conditions..." It is up to the Contractor to determine the alternative/s to construct the 90" Cast-In-Drilled-Hole concrete (rock socket) piles and to accomplish the work under the conditions encountered.
Response posted 08/30/2019
Inquiry #25: Can you please provide a specification for the Sand Backfill (Item 710370). It appears to be used for the abandonment of the culvert, but no specification is provided.
Inquiry submitted 08/26/2019
Response #1:(#25)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/26/2019
Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 2, issued on Friday, August 30, 2019. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 08/30/2019
Inquiry #26: Can you please clarify the added section of 90-1.01C(8) in the "Revised Standard Specification" Section. Is each CIP Structural Concrete member of the bridge to have its own individual report? Is this broken down by Span or is it the entire length of the Bridge or is it by pour day?
Inquiry submitted 08/26/2019
Response #1:(#26)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/26/2019
Response #2:
Section 90-1.01C(8) identifies labeling for CIP concrete samples to be tested by the Contractor as part of their QC, additional prequalification testing, and where to submit these test results. For overall QC please refer to section 6-2.02.
For CIP concrete QC please refer to sections:
90-1.01C(11) Quality Control Plan,
90-1.01C(12) Concrete Materials Quality Control Summary Report,
90-1.01D(7) Qualifications,
90-1.01D(8) Certification,
90-1.01D(9) Preconstruction Meeting for CIP Structural Concrete,
90-1.01D(10) Quality Control,
90-1.01D(10)(b) Quality Control Plan,
90-1.01D(10)(c) Quality Control Manager.
For CIP piling QC refer to section 49-3.02A(4)(c).
Refer to section 90-1.01D(10)(d) Quality Control Testing Frequencies.
Response posted 08/30/2019
Inquiry #27: The cut fill slopes shown on Layout Plans L-2 and L-3 do not account for construction equipment, access roads and falsework pads required to construct the bridge. The bridge will require extensive clearing, grubbing and earthwork outside the ESA to construct the bridge. Answer to question 11 does not permit clearing, grubbing, earthwork or grading outside the cut fill lines shown on the layout sheets. The area below the bridge is outside the cut fill lines that are shown on the layout sheets. Standard specification section 17-2 does not address clearing and grubbing forest areas within the right away. Bridge construction will require approximately 100’ beyond the edge of bridge deck of clearing, grubbing, tree removal, earthwork, rockwall, temporary erosion control and permeant erosion control work not shown on the plans.
1. Is additional clearing, grubbing and tree removal allowed for access roads, equipment pads and falsework pads required to construct the bridge? If so, what bid item includes payment for this work?
2. The majority of trees within this area require removal. Can all trees outside the ESA and within the right of way be removed as necessary to accommodate access? If so, what bid item includes payment for this work?
3. There will be extensive earthwork and grading to accommodate bridge construction. Is the contractor permitted to widen the existing access road from highway 20 near D line station 40+99 to allow for equipment and material deliveries and to provide 20’ fire break on both sides of the access road? If so, what bid item includes payment for this work?
4. Based on all access roads, clearing, earthwork and grading described above; are the access roads, equipment pads and material pads permitted to remain in between construction seasons with appropriate BMP’s in place? If so, what bid item includes payment for this work?
5. Based on all access roads, clearing, earthwork and pads described above; will the existing rockwalls and slopes require protection in place or reconstruction to match existing prior to project completion? If so, what bid item includes payment for this work?
Inquiry submitted 08/29/2019
Response #1:(#27)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/30/2019
Response #2:
1. Outside of the ESA, and after bird nesting survey requirements have been met, clearing and grubbing is allowed as needed for access and firebreaks.
2. Yes, trees outside the ESA and within the right-of-way may be removed as necessary to accommodate access. Tree removal is covered in the bid item for clearing and grubbing.
3. Yes, you may widen the existing access road as long as all of the regulations covered in the contract are followed. Payment is included in the item for clearing and grubbing and as specified in division II. Your attention is directed to the fourth paragraph of section 9-1.03, Payment Scope, of the Standard Specifications for information regarding payment for work included in division II.
4. If all of the regulations covered in the contract are followed, the access roads and pads will be permitted to remain in place. Your attention is directed to the fourth paragraph of section 9-1.03, Payment Scope, of the Standard Specifications for information regarding payment for work included in division II.
5. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/23/2019
Inquiry #28: Section 12-3.37 mentions the use of Portable Vehicle Speed Feedback Signs. Where are these signs shown on the plans and how are they paid?
Inquiry submitted 08/30/2019
Response #1:(#28)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 08/30/2019
Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 3, issued on Monday, September 09, 2019. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/23/2019
Inquiry #29: The response to inquiry #24 does not answer the question asked. The Foundation Report and the Special Provisions clearly states that if an oscillator or rotator is used, you can't drill out the casing until you reach the specified tip elevation. Although the rock shown is of differing quality, the entire length of the 90" CIDH is deemed a "rock socket". There are portions of the CIDH piling that would not require the use of casing (REC 100%, RQD 100%, UC 20,753 psi), however, the Special Provisions indicate that if an oscillator or rotator (casing) is used it must be taken to the specified tip elevation prior to removing the bottom 10' plug. Contrary to the response provided to Inquiry #24, this Special Provision (Section 49-1.01A 7.2 ) gives very little leeway to the contractor as to how to build the CIDH pile (in regards to the use of temporary casing) as currently written. Was the intent of the Special Provisions Section 49-1.01A 7.2 to require full-depth casing (through rock of all quality) if used?
Inquiry submitted 09/04/2019
Response #1:(#29)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 09/05/2019
Response #2:
Please refer to Addendum No. 3 dated September 9, 2019.
Response posted 09/25/2019
Inquiry #30: Are the Steel Jacking Plates shown in "Jacking Detail" on Sheet 279 considered part of the PTFE Bearings or Miscellaneous Metal?
Inquiry submitted 09/06/2019
Response #1:(#30)-It is miscellaneous metal.
Response posted 09/06/2019
Response #2:
Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 09/09/2019
Inquiry #31: Regarding your response to Bid Inquiry No. 30, there is no item for Miscellaneous Metal. How are the jacking plates to be paid?
Inquiry submitted 09/06/2019
Response #1:(#31)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 09/09/2019
Response #2:
Your inquiry is being reviewed. Unless an addendum is issued addressing your concern, please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 09/09/2019
Inquiry #32: For item #159 Midwest Guardrail System (8' Steel Post) Will Cal Trans require W6 X 9 X 8' posts or W6 X 15 X 8' Posts? They are both listed as options in the standard plans.
Inquiry submitted 09/08/2019
Response #1:(#32)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 09/09/2019
Response #2:
All of the information needed to determine post sizes is included in the bid package. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/10/2019
Inquiry #33: Seed Mix 2, Note 1 suggests there is an ecotype or similar requirement for seed sources. No further information is provided in the plans or specifications. Please advise.
Inquiry submitted 09/09/2019
Response #1:(#33)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 09/10/2019
Response #2:
Your attention is directed to section 2.19, Seeding, of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Streambed Alteration Agreement and section 21-2.01D(3), of the Special Provisions for information regarding seed source requirements. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/12/2019
Inquiry #34: 1.) Please advise if Temporary Reinforced Silt Fence shall be Type 1 or Type 2.
2.) Please advise if Temporary Fiber Roll shall be Type 1 of Type 2.
Inquiry submitted 09/09/2019
Response #1:(#34)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 09/10/2019
Response #2:
1. An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 2, issued on Friday, August 30, 2019. Please bid per the current contract documents.
2. Your attention is directed to section 13-10.03B of the Standard Specifications. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/23/2019
Inquiry #35: Sheet 274 of 284: The Elevation View indicates a No-Splice Zone Starting 18' from the bottom soffit and extending down 45'. Column heights above existing grade vary from 44' to 65'. The Specifications indicate that temporary casing may be required. This No-Splice Zone puts all the risk on the Rebar and Drilling Subcontractors to deal with either coupling a rebar cage below grade (up to 20' below grade) or having to lift casing and equipment up and over a column that extends 44' to 65' above grade. Currently one of the splices lands above the existing grade. Can the No-Splice zone be adjusted to allow for a splice at or near grade for the safety of all involved?
Inquiry submitted 09/09/2019
Response #1:(#35)-Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/10/2019
Response #2:
Please see Addendum No. 5, dated September 20, 2019. Plan sheets 266, 274, 279, and 281 were revised.
Response posted 09/23/2019
Inquiry #36: Several local native nursery vendors are not available to provide acorns for this project. Please advise if acorns are available to collect onsite or nearby.
Inquiry submitted 09/10/2019
Response #1:
(#36)-No, acorns cannot be collected on site or nearby. Your attention is directed to section 20-3.01A(3)(b) of the Special Provisions. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/11/2019
Inquiry #37: Sheet 274 of 284: Elevation View. A No-Splice Zone is indicated starting 18' below the bottom soffit and extending down 45'. The column cage portion of the reinforcing cage extends 44' to 65' above the existing grade. Based on the No-Splice Zone indicated, there are places where the allowed splice will be above the existing grade and other places where the splice is 3' to 19' below grade. There is no consistency. Casing may be required to support the shaft during construction. The rebar subcontractor and the drilling subcontractor is taking on the safety risk to either have to couple the rebar cage in a cased hole or have to support a 44' to 65' column cage while casing and possibly an oscillator is lifted up and over. Having to support the column cage and rig and un-rig the column cage is high risk work. Can the allowable splice zone be consistent at all the CIDH piles and be at or near the existing ground surface?
Inquiry submitted 09/10/2019
Response #1:(#37)- Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/11/2019
Response #2:
Please see Addendum No. 5, dated September 20, 2019. Plan sheets 266, 274, 279, and 281 were revised.
Response posted 09/23/2019
Inquiry #38: Since the project bid date has been postponed for approximately 2-weeks, please reconsider the response to inquiries #35 and 37 regarding the No-Splice zone for the 90" Dia. CIDH piles/ 84" column extensions. The No-splice zone indicated does not take into consideration the height of the column extension and there is no consistency as to where the splice currently lands. Casing will be required to allow for a splice below grade. That casing length varies from pile to pile based on the use of the dimensions provided.
Inquiry submitted 09/12/2019
Response #1:(#38)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 09/12/2019
Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/13/2019
Response #3:
Please see Addendum No. 5, dated September 20, 2019. Plan sheets 266, 274, 279, and 281 were revised.
Response posted 09/23/2019
Inquiry #39: In regards to Bid Item 143 (Remove Fence) there appears to be an existing Livestock style gate on the fence line that is to be removed. The gate appears to be located with in the fence line that is shown to be removed on plan sheet L-2, near 72.88' L+ "D" 28+80.96. My question would be, is this gate to be removed along with the fence? and will the removal of this gate, or any other gates that may be on the fence line to be removed, be payed for under the same bid item #143 (Remove Fence)?
Inquiry submitted 09/12/2019
Response #1:(#39)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 09/12/2019
Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 5, issued on Friday, September 20, 2019. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/23/2019
Inquiry #40: In regards to bid item 161(F) - Cable Railing, project plan sheet DP-20 (72 of 284) calls out cable railing to be installed at Drainage System #20. There is a note to install 9' of cable railing, but this quantity is not mentioned on the summary of quantities sheet Q-3? Plan sheet D-5 does not appear to call out any type of cable railing at Drainage #20 either. If we include these 9 linear feet, this would bump up the overall footage for bid item #161(F) to 134 linear feet, please advice if drainage #20 will require cable railing, and/or if the quantity for this bid item will change?
Inquiry submitted 09/12/2019
Response #1:(#40)-Your inquiry has been received and is being reviewed.
Response posted 09/12/2019
Response #2:
An addendum has been issued to address this bidder inquiry. Please refer to Addendum No. 5, issued on Friday, September 20, 2019. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 09/23/2019
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.