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 04-264724

Submit new inquiry for this project

Inquiry #1: On plans sheet 449 sign # E C48 call for the size to be 144"x 90" on type l box posts.
Caltrans actually revised the size of the C48 to 144"x90" has been replaced with 132"x78".
This change also eliminated the use of box posts.
Can you confirm the C48 will be 132"x78" on 6"x6" or 6"x8" posts.
Inquiry submitted 10/25/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/25/2021


Response #2:See Addendum 1.
Response posted 12/22/2021



Inquiry #2: There is no detail for the metal(barrier mounted sign) for bid item 210 on the plans.
Can you provide a detail for these signs?
Inquiry submitted 10/25/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/25/2021


Response #2:2018 Caltrans standard plans A76BA and A76BB shows details for Concrete Barrier Type 60MP and Type 60PR with the barrier mounted sign post embedded. Please see L-sheets for locations of Type 60MP and Type 60PR concrete barriers.
Response posted 10/28/2021



Inquiry #3:
There Information Handout, We keep getting a network error when trying to download. We think it is something on the state's end. Can you please check your systems, so we can download the IH files for this project?

Inquiry submitted 10/26/2021

Response #1:It's currently working. It's about a 362 MB pdf file.
Response posted 10/26/2021



Inquiry #4: For the anti-graffiti bid item, the are no specs in the special provisions or on the plans. Should we be going by the anti-graffiti section of specs in the 2018 Caltrans Standard Specifications ?
Inquiry submitted 10/28/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 10/28/2021


Response #2:Correct, there are no project specific changes to the Caltrans Standard Specifications related to Anti-Graffiti Coating. Section 78-4.06 Anti-Graffiti Coating of the 2018 Caltrans Standard Specification applies.
Response posted 10/29/2021



Inquiry #5: Are potential subcontractors required to attend the mandatory virtual prebid meeting?
Inquiry submitted 11/13/2021

Response #1:The pre-bid meeting is only mandatory for prime contractors bidding the project.
Response posted 11/15/2021



Inquiry #6: Section 60-2.02C(1) requires that protective covers not encroach within 15 feet vertically of the roadway. This section also requires that Temporary supports at Bridge No. 27-0090L not encroach with 22.5 vertically of the SMART track.

The plans show that the permanent clearance at Bridge No. 27-0090L is 22.93' +/- and the permanent clearance at 27-0092L is 15.71' +/-. It appears that these conditions do not allow for falsework material. Please confirm the required clearances during construction, thank you.
Inquiry submitted 11/15/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/15/2021


Response #2:For Bridge No 27-0092L, the Elevation on the General Plan (Sheet 1 of 19) the existing permanent vertical clearance at the left bridge is anticipated to be on the order of 16’-5”+. The Contractor will need to construct low profile falsework to maintain a minimum of 15’-0” temporary vertical clearance and construct the widening. This strategy was used in previous widening.

For Bridge No 27-0090L, submitted for consideration.
Response posted 11/18/2021


Response #3:See Addendum 2, issued on Dec. 17, 2021.
Response posted 12/22/2021



Inquiry #7: Does bid item #143 include the vault/chamber as shown on plan sheet 302?
Inquiry submitted 12/02/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/02/2021


Response #2:The item is paid by EACH. It includes everything shown in the Caltrans Std Plans for GSRD including vault/chamber.
Response posted 12/03/2021



Inquiry #8: On Plan Sheet #919, it shows us removing and replacing the slope paving all the way up to the face of the abutments. Plan Sheet 918, at least in the area of the crash wall replacement, shows us only removing and replacing as much slope paving as necessary to construct the wall. Are we redoing all of the slope paving under the left bridge?
Inquiry submitted 12/02/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/03/2021


Response #2:Sheet 919 (of 972) Slope Paving Details is correct and takes precedence over sheet 918 (of 972) Crash Wall Details related to the details and limits related to the slope paving removal and reconstruction.
Response posted 12/12/2021



Inquiry #9: This job has an item for Segment corrections (Full and Partial Width).

1. Can Cal Trans please provide the EXIST data in a PPF format for the "S" Line construction?
2. Also, most of the design is either section 13 or 3 on the "S" line over the EXIST roadway. Can Cal Trans confirm that the contractor can utilize the "Segment Correction" Item on the HMA before the RHMA-G is placed rather than on the EXIST pavement? This would make a lot more sense for smoothness purposes.
3. Also, Section 3 refers to the .15 HMA as CSC (Cross Slope Correction). Will this be counted towards the total thickness of the Asphalt? This would make a difference in the pay adjustment for this section.
Inquiry submitted 12/07/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/07/2021



Inquiry #10: We would like confirmation that this project will fall under the "Buy Clean California Act". There is no mention of it in the specifications, plans, or Addendum #1.
Inquiry submitted 12/07/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/07/2021


Response #2:The project will not fall under the "Buy Clean California Act".
Response posted 12/15/2021



Inquiry #11: Due to the upcoming holidays and the size and complexity of this project, will the Department consider a postponement to the current bid date of January 5th for this project by at least two weeks. We have been in contact with several major subs and suppliers, both DBE and non DBE firms who will be shutdown for the holidays and not working on estimates or pricing for any projects during the next few weeks. In consideration of the extremely high DBE goal on this project, participation from any and all the sub and suppliers will be needed for competitive bids.
Inquiry submitted 12/14/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/15/2021


Response #2:Addendum 2 moved the bid date from Jan. 5, 2022 to Jan. 20, 2022.
Response posted 12/23/2021



Inquiry #12: Can Caltrans provide supplemental CAD info electronic files, existing and proposed DTM files.

Inquiry submitted 12/14/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/15/2021


Response #2:You can download the dgn files below:
http://website.dot.ca.gov/dist4/construction/contracts/04-264724/CAD_Files.zip
Response posted 12/27/2021



Inquiry #13: 1. Can you provide the footing elevations for the existing footings at the columns we are retrofitting on the Franklin Ave. bridge? Also, the foundation plan only shows two footings left of the new columns but General Plan #2 shows four columns left of the new columns. Can you update the foundation plan?

2. Can you provide better existing elevation information for the areas under the Franklin Ave. bridge?

3. Can you provide a plan that shows the limits of bridge structure excavation and backfill for the Franklin Ave. bridge?
Inquiry submitted 12/16/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/17/2021


Response #2:1) Please build per plan unless addendum is issued.
2) As-builts were used to check vertical clearance and prepare quantities. The ground areas under the Franklin Ave. bridge was not surveyed.
3) Excavation and backfill limits will be per Caltrans Standard Plan A62B and A62C. Actual limits of excavation and backfill will be dependent on Contractor’s method and means.

Response posted 12/24/2021


Response #3:1) Unless an addendum is issued, please bid per the current contract documents.
2) Please refer to Section 2-1.06B, "Supplemental Project Information," of the Standard Specifications for information regarding bridge as-builts. Bid per the current contract documents.
3) Please refer to Standard Plans A62B and A62C, as shown on the list of "2018 Standard Plans" on contract plan sheet 896 of 972 and bid per the current contract documents.

Response posted 12/28/2021



Inquiry #14: On the plans for the Franklin Ave. bridge, it says to relocate the existing 30" CMP as required and at the direction of the Engineer. The drainage plans do not show any work at the Franklin Ave. bridge. Can you give us a plan of what will be required or will this work be Extra Work?
Inquiry submitted 12/16/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/17/2021


Response #2:The 30" CMP is located adjacent to the existing crash wall, but does not appear to be in conflict with the crash wall. Exact condition will be determine after the ground is excavated and if relocation of this CMP is needed, it will be paid as extra work.
Response posted 12/21/2021



Inquiry #15: For UDS #216 on plan sheet SB-6, we calculate 330 CY of roadway excavation within the cross hatched area shown for Type 3 bioretention area. The quantity in the table is shown as 411.2 CY of roadway excavation. Can you show us the what the pay limits are for the Roadway Excavation associated with the subsurface drains? A couple other systems we checked seem to have similar disparities.
Inquiry submitted 12/16/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/17/2021


Response #2:Unless if an addendum is issued, bid per contract documents.
Response posted 12/21/2021



Inquiry #16: On plan sheet 384, you show that the material difference between the box culvert excavation and backfill is to be used as embankment. Since this job is an export job, shouldn't this material be offhauled?
Inquiry submitted 12/16/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/17/2021


Response #2:The material difference between the box culvert excavation and backfill can be used as embankment or off-haul. This project is an export job and the contractor has to plan accordingly.
Response posted 12/21/2021



Inquiry #17: In the areas where we are reconstructing the road (Sections 6 & 7), are we completely removing the existing concrete roadway, ETW to ETW, or are we removing only certain areas? For example, at SB Station 355+00, we are only removing 12.1' of the concrete roadway even though the concrete portion looks to be at least 24' wide according to the typical section for this area. There is also no sawcut line shown on the plan to show we are only removing part of the concrete roadway.
Inquiry submitted 12/16/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/17/2021


Response #2:The existing concrete road will be removed ETW to ETW under the new roadway sections unless the new roadway is 4ft or higher than the existing pavement. When the bottommost layer of the proposed Pavement Section is below the existing PCC, the removal of PCC is included in Roadway Excavation. When the bottommost layer of the proposed Pavement Section falls within the existing PCC layer, the PCC will be removed and paid separately.
Response posted 12/22/2021


Response #3:Please see addendum #5. Existing concrete pavement within the roadway prism, regardless of type or material, must be removed; removal is generally covered under the Roadway Excavation or Structural Excavation bid items, per the Caltrans Specifications. However, in locations where the existing concrete pavement straddles (resides beyond or below) the roadway prism, or as shown in the plans, or as directed by the Engineer, removal will be accomplished through the Remove Concrete Pavement bid item, including any overlying material located above the existing concrete pavement, which is considered fully compensated with the removal of the concrete pavement. Underlying material beneath the existing concrete pavement located beyond or below the roadway prism may remain, provided it meets the requirements under Caltrans Specification Section 41-11, Removing Concrete Pavement and Bases.

Since the removal of the concrete pavement is complete and covered under roadway excavation, structural excavation and remove concrete pavement, sawcut lines are not shown and although permissible, are considered as contractor means and method in the removal of the pavement materials.

Response posted 02/08/2022



Inquiry #18: Can you please specify is the micro-surfacing aggregate is Type II or Type III.
Inquiry submitted 12/17/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/17/2021


Response #2:Per the City of Novato, Type III Micro-Surfacing shall be provided.
Response posted 01/03/2022


Response #3:Per the City of Novato, Type II Micro-Surfacing shall be provided.
Response posted 01/19/2022



Inquiry #19: In reference to Drawings ECD-2 and ECD-3 (Sheet Nos. 743 and 744), what Detail applies to the slopes in order to quantify the Note labeled "Erosion Control Materials" shown for all EC Type 1 Details?
Inquiry submitted 12/21/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/21/2021


Response #2:The side slopes and widths of the LBAs are shown on the on Subsurface Drainage Details. The longitudinal slopes of the LBAs can be found on Subsurface Drainage Plans. And finally, the areas of the EC-1 are found on Erosion Control Plans.
Response posted 01/05/2022



Inquiry #20: In reference to Drawings ECD-2 and ECD-3 (Sheet Nos. 743 and 744), what Detail applies to the slopes in order to quantify the Note labeled "Erosion Control Materials" shown for all EC Type 1 Details?
Inquiry submitted 12/21/2021

Response #1:Same question as above.
Response posted 12/21/2021



Inquiry #21: It appears that the quantity for bid item #142 maybe overstated, based on the same details and locations listed in both the ECQ and SCQ for EC Type 1. Could the State please review the overlap?
Inquiry submitted 12/30/2021

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 12/30/2021



Inquiry #22: The CA High Design Manual Section 850-34 dated December 30th, 2015 warns against specifying plastic pipe in areas with a potential for fire. This project lists Alternative Pipe Culvert in the Bid Schedule. Will Caltrans still allow for plastic pipe to be used on this project?


Inquiry submitted 01/03/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/03/2022


Response #2:Per HDM, Section 855.5, Material Susceptibility to Fire, “plastic pipe is not recommended for overside drain location where there is high fire potential (large amounts of brush or grass or areas with history of fire), and where the overside drain is placed or anchored on top of the slope.” This project does not have overside drain located where there is high fire potential or anchored on top of the slope.
Response posted 02/08/2022



Inquiry #23: What is Bid Item #132 used for?
Inquiry submitted 01/05/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/05/2022



Inquiry #24: Please confirm that item Rolled EC Product (Step 4) - EC Type 1 & 4 on EC Legend/ ECL-1 and ECL-2 is Blanket Type C or Netting Type C. If it is Blanket Type C, does that item belong to Bid item #70?
Inquiry submitted 01/06/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/06/2022



Inquiry #25: For bid item 161 - 703233 - Grated Line Drain- 1,460ft
If a capacity(Q) listed for a GLD area (given in the Drainage Quantity sheets) exceeds the capacity capabilities of a the stipulated 4" width and 12" depth, should we bid a wider 8" wide option?
With that, if an 8" wide GLD is required on ONE or more runs, then do ALL the runs need to be 8" wide or will Caltrans allow a mix of 4" wide and 8" wide systems. Per specifications, mixing different size systems on a project is not allowed. Please advise.

More detail -
Below are some of the runs that appear to be difficult to achieve the needed capacity as per the description with a 4" wide and 12" deep system GLD(W=4";D=12"). The site slope may help us on some of the runs(difficult to determine exact) but an 8" may be required on the others. Caltrans then stipulates that they want the same system to be used throughout the project(no mixing of systems on the same project).

With that, if one run requires 8 inch wide, then we historically would need to go all 8" wide.

Below are runs that specifically call out in Description on Drainage Quantity sheets -" GLD;D=12";W=4"; (REQ) CFS ".

D2-4-a - 189.4ft - 1.16 CFS
D3-6-g - 150ft - 3.01 CFS
D4-8-b - 150ft - 4.06 CFS
D4-8-f - 84.7 - 2.32 CFS

Some others that do not call out the 4" width in the description but may require 8 inch wide to meet the capacity.

D12-25-b - 2.39 CFS
D12-26-g - 1.49 CFS

Thank you for your direction.

Inquiry submitted 01/06/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/06/2022



Inquiry #26: Reference is made to SC-33 through SC-39 – Temporary Drainage Profile, SCQ-1 through SCQ-3 - Temporary Drainage Quantities, and DQ-1 through DQ-25 - Drainage Quantities. The temporary drainage profiles show several inlets to be temporarily capped. These temporary drainage profiles also show several Partial G2 inlets. Column headed Partial G2 Inlet w/Temp Cap (N) on sheet DQ-24 shows a total of 33 each.

Bid Item 177 – Adjust Inlet has a bid quantity of 28 each. Bid Item 179 – Cap Inlet has a bid quantity of 10 ea.

Is the intent to pay for only adjust existing inlets under Bid Item 177, or to pay for both adjust existing and temporary (to become permanent) inlets under Bid Item 177?

Is the intent to pay for only cap existing inlets under Bid Item 179, or to pay for both cap existing and temporary inlets under Bid Item 179?

Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 01/10/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/10/2022


Response #2:a) Yes, the intent is to pay for only adjust existing inlets under Bid Item 177.

b) Yes, the intent is to pay for only cap existing inlets under Bid Item 179.
Response posted 01/13/2022



Inquiry #27: Information Handout Exhibit C provides a Template for the SMART ROW Entry Permit. Is there an executed ROW entry agreement in place with SMART for this project?? If not, is the General Contractor the responsible party to obtain the SMART ROW Entry Permit? If yes, what is the time frame or lead time for obtaining the permit?

Inquiry submitted 01/12/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/12/2022



Inquiry #28: Please provide expected train traffic frequency for the SMART Tracks passing under the Franklin OH bridge. How many flaggers would be required for the work around the SMART Tracks - The Information Handout Exhibit C states that one or more flaggers may be needed. What would are the minimum number of hours to be charged for flaggers in a given requested day?

Inquiry submitted 01/12/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/12/2022


Response #2:As of 2020, 2 Freight per week (no schedule for freight) and 34 transit trains per day (schedules may be available online). The number of flaggers depends on the type of work. If a crane is being used, there may be two flaggers. This will be covered in detail by SMART at the RR pre-construction meeting. Usually, one flagger is all that is required. Flagging was calculated at $1,000 per day. If flaggers are required, 8 hours is the minimum.
Response posted 01/14/2022



Inquiry #29: Plan Sheets: ECL-1 and ECL-2 clearly show RECP Blanket Type C on Tables EC Type 1 and EC Type 4. there is no Bid Item for this Material. Please add Bid Item 210280-RECP (Blanket) for a quantity of 255,000 sf. This quantity is shown on Plan Sheet ECQ-2 as Type C in the RECP column. Total for Bid Item #70 210270 (Netting) is 75,000 sf as shown in the adjacent column on Plan Sheet ECQ-2.
Inquiry submitted 01/12/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/12/2022



Inquiry #30: Is Caltrans paying for railroad flaggers as necessary to do the work?
Inquiry submitted 01/13/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/13/2022


Response #2:Yes.
Response posted 01/14/2022



Inquiry #31: Good morning, since this bid date is being postponed would you considered holding another mandatory pre-bid meeting? Thank you.
Inquiry submitted 01/14/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/14/2022


Response #2:No, Caltrans is not considering a second prebid meeting.
Response posted 01/19/2022



Inquiry #32: Drainage System 21b crosses Route 221 Bypass in an area where no pavement reconstruction/overlay occurs. Stage construction with temporary K-rail is not shown in this area. Will concrete backfill with steel plating be required up to pavement grade or will concrete backfill (RSC) be required without plating up to pavement grade? If concrete backfill up to existing pavement grade is not allowed, provide a detail for HMA placement above the concrete backfill.

It appears drainage systems 14c, 25b, 25d, 52b & 55a are in areas on Route 29 where overnight road closures will be necessary to complete a portion of these systems. Provide details including if concrete backfill with plates or RSC will be required for Drainage Systems not protected by K-rail.
Inquiry submitted 01/19/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 01/20/2022


Response #2:Route 221 bypass - whih plansheet is that?
Response posted 01/25/2022


Response #3:Route 221 bypass - which plansheet?
Response posted 02/10/2022



Inquiry #33: In reference to Addendum No. 5, the Remove Concrete Pavement Table on Q-8 (Summary of Quantities, Sheet No. 671) increased the thicknesses of the pavement significantly, however, the PCC Pavement thicknesses shown on the Typical Cross Sections (X-8 thru X-25) do not match the Remove Concrete Pavement Table. Which is correct - the thicknesses shown on the Typical Cross Section or the Remove Concrete Pavement Table?
Inquiry submitted 02/07/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/07/2022


Response #2:Existing concrete pavement within the roadway prism, regardless of type or material, must be removed; removal is generally covered under the Roadway Excavation or Structural Excavation bid items, per the Caltrans Specifications. However, in locations where the existing concrete pavement straddles (resides beyond or below) the roadway prism, or as shown in the plans, or as directed by the Engineer, removal will be accomplished through the Remove Concrete Pavement bid item, including any overlying material located above the existing concrete pavement, which is considered fully compensated with the removal of the concrete pavement. Underlying material beneath the existing concrete pavement located beyond or below the roadway prism may remain, provided it meets the requirements under Caltrans Specification Section 41-11, Removing Concrete Pavement and Bases.
Response posted 02/08/2022



Inquiry #34: In reference to Addendum No. 5, the Remove Concrete Pavement Table on Q-8 (Summary of Quantities, Sheet No. 671) increased the thicknesses of the pavement significantly, however, the PCC Pavement thicknesses shown on the Typical Cross Sections (X-8 thru X-25) do not match the Remove Concrete Pavement Table. Which is correct - the thicknesses shown on the Typical Cross Section or the Remove Concrete Pavement Table?
Inquiry submitted 02/07/2022

Response #1:Same question as above.
Response posted 02/07/2022



Inquiry #35: Most, if not all, of the Type 836A Barrier shown on the Layout Sheets and quantified on Sheet 669 are not founded on anything. Should these Barriers (and Transitions) be redescribed and paid as Type 836B?
Inquiry submitted 02/09/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/10/2022


Response #2:Concrete Barrier (Type 836A) are at the Reinforced Concrete Box (RCB) and wingwalls of culverts crossing US-101 and for retaining walls No. 3, 6, 7, 8, & 10.

No, the Concrete Barrier (Type 836A) should be paid as (F) Concrete Barrier (Type 836A), Bid Item No. 233 (Item code: 839742).

Response posted 02/10/2022



Inquiry #36: How is the Railroad Exclusion Fencing described on Sheet 895 and shown on Sheet 897 paid?
Inquiry submitted 02/10/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/10/2022


Response #2:There is no separate Pay Item for Railroad Exclusion Fence. It is part of the Contractor Means and Method. The fence has to be approved by SMART under the permit.
Response posted 02/11/2022



Inquiry #37: Could Franklin Avenue be closed for substructure construction? Is there a Lane Closure Chart that addresses Franklin Avenue?
Inquiry submitted 02/10/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/10/2022


Response #2:Traffic Handling plans show contractor shall provide pedestrian, bicycle, and emergency vehicle access during construction at Franklin OH. Contractor may close the path under the bridge between 12 am and 5 am only, for installation of falsework.
There is no Lane Closure Chart for the path underneath Franklin Avenue OH.

Response posted 02/11/2022



Inquiry #38: Sheet No. 718, ECL-2, shows straw as a component for Step 2 Hydroseed. Shall we assume to include straw material cost and labor in the Hydroseed Bid Item No. 74 for Erosion Control Type 4 seeding, or is the straw component for Erosion Control Type 4 already assumed in the total SQFT for Straw, Bid Item No. 73? Please clarify. Thank you.
Inquiry submitted 02/10/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/10/2022


Response #2:Sheet No. 718, ECL-2, Straw is a component of Step 2 Hydroseed of the Erosion Control Type 4. No separate pay item for Straw for Erosion Control Type 4.
Response posted 02/11/2022



Inquiry #39: On sheet ECL-2, there is Fiber Rolls Type 2 on Erosion Control Type 3 and Type 4, but not shown on plan. Please provide quantity and location for Fiber rolls Type 2.
Inquiry submitted 02/10/2022

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 02/11/2022

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.