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 11-430434
Submit new inquiry for this projectInquiry #1: Information Handout for 11-430434 Includes MTS Railroad Insurance Requirements.
Does the contractor need Railroad insurance for this project? If So, what Limits do we need to cover this request?
Inquiry submitted 04/21/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/21/2022
Response #2:Please refer to the Information Handout and the MTS Standard Construction Notes for information regarding insurance as well as where to find full insurance requirement guidelines.
Response posted 04/26/2022
Inquiry #2: "On plan sheet no. 9, drawing L-3, there are two locations shown on these plans to Adjust Frame and Cover to Grade that are not shown on the quantity table on drawing SCQ-2. Please verify.
On plan sheet no. 74, drawing SCQ-2, the locations of the frames to be adjusted are not shown nor called out on the plans. Please clarify.
On plan sheet no. 74, drawing SCQ-2, under the ""ADJUST FRAME TO GRADE"" section there is descriptions saying stage 7. There is no stage 7 shown on the construction sheets. Please confirm."
Inquiry submitted 05/02/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/02/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #3: Reference drawing L-1 thru L-3. Please confirm where the beginning of the concrete barrier removal starts for the run of removal that ends at station "SD-8" 853+90.09.
Inquiry submitted 05/02/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/02/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #4: Please review the engineer's quantity for JPCP (RSC).
Inquiry submitted 05/02/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/02/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #5: Can you please confirm the Type 60A barrier to be removed on the El Cajon OH bridge (shown on plan sheets 190 & 195) will be paid for under bid item102 "Bridge Removal, Location A"?
Inquiry submitted 05/04/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/04/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #6: Item No. 106 : 18" Alternatives Pipe Culvert - What are the alternatives for the pipe as well as gauge?
Item No 108: 12" Downdrain - What is the required gauge?
Inquiry submitted 05/09/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/09/2022
Response #2:This inquiry is for a different project.
Response posted 05/11/2022
Inquiry #7: Please confirm that the sawcut and removal of AC pavement & Base along the concrete barrier to be removed (shown on L1, L-2 STA 827+56.22 through 836+35.82) is incidental to item 124, remove concrete barrier. If Not, please advise where this material will be paid.
Inquiry submitted 05/09/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/09/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/24/2022
Inquiry #8: Please confirm that the intention of the "Roadway Excavation" on SCQ-3 under the Stage Qty's is for the removal of the Temporary Pavement (both AC & Base) show on plan sheet SCD-5.
Inquiry submitted 05/09/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/09/2022
Response #2:Please refer to sheet No. 71 of the plans for stage construction details and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/13/2022
Inquiry #9: Please provide a Typical Cross Section for Concrete Barrier Type 60M at STA 866+80.00 through 869+00.00
Inquiry submitted 05/09/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/10/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #10: Can you please add STA data for the ISR (RSC) plan sheet Q-3, or a plan sheet depicting the Postmiles where the slab replacements are?
Inquiry submitted 05/09/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/10/2022
Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 05/13/2022
Inquiry #11: It appears that the majority of the Individual Slab Replacement panels (per the provided postmile identifications) on qty sheet Q-3 are outside the "End of Construction" marker as shown on the cover sheet @ Marshall Ave OH bridge (PM 14.9); please confirm this is correct; this will impact all the Construction Area Sign placements.
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/10/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #12: Bid Item 115 (200' of chain link railing) there is no start or end location noted for the chain link railing on bridge #57-0362.
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/10/2022
Response #2:Please refer to sheet 187, note 5 and plan view, for bridge No. 57-0362 chain link railing type 7 (mod) information.
Response posted 05/12/2022
Inquiry #13: On Plan sheet SC-13 there are 2 different call outs for where the K-Rail ends on the WB 8. Can you clarify which is to be used?
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/10/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #14: On Plans Sheet SC-14, there is a call out at station 835+72.62 WB 8 to remove exiting K-Rail but the plan also shows K-Rail continuing for approx. 160’ Please clarify which is correct.
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/10/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #15: On Plan Sheet SC-23 there is a call out that points out 2 different rows of K-Rail on the WB 8 however Section F-F at the top of the page only shows the 1 row. That being said, Plan Sheet SC-28 calls out 2 rows of K-Rail in Section G-G and the Deck on Deck details pages 2 & 3 (PDF 191-192) show 2 rows of K-Rail. Please clarify which are correct.
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/10/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #16: On Plan Sheet SC-33 Please clarify where the k-Rail ends on the EB 8 side. There are 2 different call outs.
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/10/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #17: On Plan Sheet SC-36 WB 8 station 865+25 shows a new segment of K-Rail that is being shifted from the previous stages. However on plan sheets SC-33, SC-28 this is shown as 2 rows of K-Rail (it is placed in on Plan Sheet SC-24). Please clarify if this is staying in the two row configuration or is this now a single row. There is no section at the top of the page to compare.
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/10/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #18: Can you please confirm your K-Rail quantities by stage are correct?
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/10/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #19: It is stated in the notes on the "SC plan pages" that Structural Section #6 will be used to construct temporary pavement during stage construction, but the existing pavement section is Structural Section #1 which is a thicker section; please confirm the use of structural Section #6 for temporary pavement.
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/10/2022
Response #2:Yes, structural section #6 is as intended, to construct temporary pavement. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/13/2022
Inquiry #20: On Plan sheet SC-10, the plan view shows the K-Rails doubled up on the East Bound side of "SD-8", but section B-B above on the same sheet shows the second row of K-Rail on the West Bound side of the highway, please confirm which is correct.
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/10/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #21: There is a discrepancy between some of the "Typical Cross Sections" and the Sections shown on the Stage construction plans as to which side of the Highway (EB or WB) is higher/lower in finish elevation and where the temporary pavement is going (all typical cross sections depict EB at a lower elevation). Specifically STA 842+00.00 shown on SC-10 vs (same STA) shown on SC-14. Please revise to show correct configuration.
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/11/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #22: There is K-Rail in Stage 3 shown to be removed on SC-18 that is not shown to be installed in Stage 2 on SC-14 (STA 843+21.9 through STA 848+50) which is the correct configuration?
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/11/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #23: Piggie Back off my last question - IF there IS supposed to be K-Rail on sheet SC-14&18, it is not accounted for on the Stage Construction Qty sheet, SCQ-2, please confirm & revise if necessary.
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/11/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #24: Please confirm there are no Alt Temp Crash Cushions needed for the K-Rail taper on sheets SC-16 & SC-20 (shown on qty's but not plan sheets).
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/11/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #25: Plan Sheet SC-23 shows double K-Rail on the WB I-8, is this correct?
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/11/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/24/2022
Inquiry #26: K-Rail Placement starts on both EB & WB at ~STA 822+50; at Stage 2, we break & taper the K-Rail leaving everything to the West on both EB & WB sides in place @ STA 836+50; Stage 3, all that remains the same; Stage 4a, the WB K-Rail moving west disappears @ STA 863+50; Stage 4, more K-Rail disappears; same configuration @ Stage 5; finally, at Stage 6, when we are instructed to "Construct Median SD-8 concrete barrier", plans do not show K-Rail for the new barrier between STA 827+50 (beginning of new barrier) to 839+50 (shown on plan sheet SC-34). When do we remove all the K-Rail that "disappeared", it was my understanding that that K-Rail stayed in place until Stage 6? and when do we construct the new barrier between STA 827+50 to 839+50?
Inquiry submitted 05/10/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/11/2022
Response #2:Please refer to the stage construction plan sheets for callouts regarding the removal of temporary railing (type K) within the different stages of construction. Please refer to Addendum #2 Dated 5/20/22 for when to construct the median barrier.
Response posted 05/24/2022
Inquiry #27: What exact portion of work is Caltrans referring to for Lane Closure Charts G3 & G6? They both state that they are only allowed to be used for a maximum of (1) time only. For example, in the remarks on Lane Chart H1 (and all other applicable charts), it clearly states that this Chart H1 "must be used for the removal & replacement of the overhead sign structure".
Inquiry submitted 05/11/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/11/2022
Response #2:The traffic charts included within the Special Provisions correlate with the stage construction and traffic handling plans. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 05/19/2022
Inquiry #28: What is the indented use for Lane Charts G1 & G4?
Inquiry submitted 05/11/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/11/2022
Response #2:The traffic charts included within the Special Provisions correlate with the stage construction and traffic handling plans. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 05/19/2022
Inquiry #29: It is a little confusing which K-Rails need to be pinned & which do not; Stage 1 construction, SC-1 labels Type K Railing (PINNED) for "EB" and not the rest. Is that the intention - to only pin the EB K-Rails when set or shifted?
Inquiry submitted 05/11/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/11/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #30: Bid item 101 "Place Polyester Concrete Overlay" is found on the bridge deck and approach slabs for El Cajon OH on plan sheet 187, per plan sheet legend. On sheet 188, bid item 101 is only found to be placed on the bridge deck for Marshall Ave OH. Using these areas, we determined the quantity to be significantly less than the bid schedule quantity. Please confirm whether bid item 101 "Place Polyester Concrete Overlay" is also placed on the approach slabs for Marshall Ave.
Inquiry submitted 05/12/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/12/2022
Response #2:At Marshall Avenue OH, per the details on Sheet 188 of 204, polyester concrete is to be placed over the entire bridge deck and on the roadway pavement as shown, but not over the structure approach slabs. Please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 05/24/2022
Inquiry #31: Temp HMA Quantity Sheet "SCQ-3" does not match call outs on the Stage Construction Plans. Neither matches the direction of work indicated
Clarify and correct the HMA scope for Temp HMA so that it can be priced accordingly
Inquiry submitted 05/13/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/13/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3, dated 6/2/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/02/2022
Inquiry #32: There multiple inconsistencies in the traffic control plan that make it difficult to determine the quantity of work for the Class 2 Base, HMA paving and the Roadway Excavation involved in the construction of the temporary paving. Stage Construction Plan SC-12 is inconsistent with Stage Construction Detail SCD-5. SC-12 shows the widening for the temporary paving to be left of center line on the westbound lanes with the westbound lanes being the low side. SCD-5 shows the widening for the temporary paving to right of center line on the eastbound lanes with the eastbound lanes being the low side.
Inquiry submitted 05/16/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/16/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #33: SCD-5 is not clear on the structural section required for the temporary paving. The HMA paving should be identified with a max thickness & variable where it is less than the max thickness. Also provide the grade differential at center line to determine the total temporary paving thickness.
Inquiry submitted 05/16/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/16/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3, dated 6/2/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/02/2022
Inquiry #34: Can you Please confirm the limits of the Polyester Concrete @ each Bridge: El Cajon & Marshall? Per Plan sheet 188 & 11, Marshall Ave, the Polyester is placed on the Grind Existing AC & PCC roadway and Bridge Deck, but NOT the approach slab (Type-R). Per Plan sheet 187, 196 & 9, El Cajon bridge, the Polyester is placed on the Approach slab and Bridge Deck, but NOT the roadway. Please confirm this is correct.
Inquiry submitted 05/17/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/17/2022
Response #2:At Marshall Avenue OH, as shown on the plans, polyester concrete is to be placed over the existing roadway pavement and the entire bridge deck, but not over the structure approach slabs. At El Cajon OH, as shown on the plans, polyester concrete is to be placed over the entire bridge deck and over the structure approach slabs to be constructed on this project, but not over the roadway pavement. Please bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 05/24/2022
Inquiry #35: There multiple inconsistencies in the traffic control plan that make it difficult to determine the quantity of work for the Class 2 Base, HMA paving and the Roadway Excavation involved in the construction of the temporary paving. Stage Construction Plan SC-12 is inconsistent with Stage Construction Detail SCD-5. SC-12 shows the widening for the temporary paving to be left of center line on the westbound lanes with the westbound lanes being the low side. SCD-5 shows the widening for the temporary paving to right of center line on the eastbound lanes with the eastbound lanes being the low side.
Inquiry submitted 05/18/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/18/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #36: SCD-5 is not clear on the structural section required for the temporary paving. The HMA paving should be identified with a max thickness & variable where it is less than the max thickness. Also provide the grade differential at center line to determine the total temporary paving thickness.
Inquiry submitted 05/18/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/18/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3, dated 6/2/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/02/2022
Response #3:Please refer to Addendum #3, dated 6/2/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/02/2022
Inquiry #37: Is Caltrans responsible for paying MTS Railroad Flagging Costs?
Inquiry submitted 05/18/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/18/2022
Response #2:Yes, please refer to Federal Code of Regulations 23 CFR 635.205 (b) Finding of cost effectiveness. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/19/2022
Inquiry #38: The project plans show the MTS Trolley Catenary Wires 6†below the existing soffit at the El Cajon Bridge. Will MTS shut down the Catenary system to allow for the new Overhang Construction.
Inquiry submitted 05/18/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/18/2022
Response #2:Please refer to the MTS STANDARD CONSTRUCTION NOTES in the Information Handout, with particular regard to #10, and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/19/2022
Inquiry #39: Referencing Information Handout, Railroad Relations and Insurance Requirements - MTS Standard Construction Notes, paragraph 3 states, “Additionally, a separate Railroad Protective Liability Policy will most likely be required after project review as deemed necessary by MTS.†Please advise if a separate Railroad Protective Liability policy will be required so that the cost of this insurance can be included in the bid. Please provide the required policy limits as this will impact the cost of this policy. Please provide underwriting information typical of this type of insurance, including train traffic information.
Inquiry submitted 05/18/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/18/2022
Response #2:Permits and Insurance for the Railroad are on a project by project basis. Per the Information Handout, Railroad Relations and Insurance Requirements, information can be obtained at the MTS website listed or by contacting MTS Permits at the email listed. Please inquire with the Railroad directly.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #40: With this project bidding in one week, we would like to request a minimum of a one week bid extension due to the number of unanswered important bidder inquiries for a job of this size and scope and the high DBE Goal amount of 28%.
Inquiry submitted 05/19/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/19/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #41: Correction - I meant to state a 24% DBE Goal rather than the 28% I stated in Bidder Inquiry 40, however, the point of the Inquiry remains the same.
Inquiry submitted 05/20/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Response #2:Correction noted. Please refer to Addendum #2, dated 5/20/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 05/20/2022
Inquiry #42: In addenda 2, SC -29 you added a note to Remove Exist Temp RAILING at SD- 8 Station +0.00 . That section was placed in two rows directly next to each other separating WB and EB traffic. (See new Section F-F from addenda. 2 SC-23) Are we to remove 1 row of that K-rail and what are the exact limits of the removal as there is no Station callout for Remove Exist Temp RAILING at SD-8 866+20( approximately). Please Clarify
Inquiry submitted 05/23/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/23/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3, dated 6/2/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/02/2022
Inquiry #43: Piggybacking off the last question in addendum 2, SC-36 there is the exact same callout to Remove Exist Temp RAILING at SD- 8 Station +0.00 that was on Addendum 2, SC-29 Pointing to the exact same piece of K-Rail. Please Clarify
Inquiry submitted 05/23/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/23/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3, dated 6/2/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/02/2022
Inquiry #44: Referencing Inquiry #2. Per Addendum 2, bid items 107 and 108 quantities changed, but the layout plans do not show the locations for the update bid items. Only two adjust frame and cover locations are shown on the plans that are not shown on the table on revised plan sheet SCQ-3. Please verify.
Inquiry submitted 05/23/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/23/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3, dated 6/2/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/02/2022
Inquiry #45: Per Addendum 2, will there be a detail provided for bid item 143 Adjust Slotted Drain to Grade at the two locations. Please advise.
Inquiry submitted 05/23/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/23/2022
Response #2:Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 05/31/2022
Inquiry #46: Per Addendum #2 & response to RFI #29, please confirm that it is Caltrans intention to pin ALL K-Rail, regardless of EB or WB and regardless of Temporary pavement placement.
Inquiry submitted 05/26/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/31/2022
Response #2:Yes, per sheet numbers 30 through 36, temporary railing (type K) is to be pinned. Please bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 05/31/2022
Inquiry #47: Please confirm which plan sheet is correct for the "Grind existing concrete pavement" @ Marshall OH Bridge bid item; qty sheet Q-1 refers us to the "L sheets" - sheet L-5 has a substantially different take-off qty compared to the bridge plan sheets (2 of 18) - this will also affect the polyester concrete overlay qty.
Inquiry submitted 05/26/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/31/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3, dated 6/2/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/02/2022
Inquiry #48: Please check notes on Summary of Quantities Sheet Q-2, it shows all MGS locations to use RSP A77N3 Narrow Roadway installation with exception of Location 1 and 36. However we only have Locations 1, 2 and 3 also Typical Cross Sections shows all MGS to have minimum 4 ft. distance from the face of the guardrail to the hinge point. Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 05/31/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/31/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #3, dated 6/2/2022 and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/02/2022
Inquiry #49: please confirm that at Stage 4, the traffic switch, the Temporary Pavement will need to be extended over the highway’s concrete panels, and if so, please consider adding a pavement cleaning bid item
Inquiry submitted 06/01/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/01/2022
Response #2:No, temporary pavement will not be extended to the roadway. Please see SCD-5 temporary for temporary paving typical cross sections as well as Addendum #3, dated 6/2/22, for temporary paving design cross sections. Please refer to section 7 for Public Convenience and Public Safety.
Response posted 06/02/2022
Response #3:Please disregard Response #2. Yes, a portion of the temporary pavement will be extended over the roadway. Please refer the updated design cross sections in Addendum #3, dated 6/2/22, as well as section 7 for Public Convenience and Public Safety. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/21/2022
Inquiry #50: Good afternoon. item 127 8" BKN 12-3 thermoplastic is shown as tape in the summary do you want tape or thermoplastic for this item? Item 133 8" BKN tape is not shown on the plans or summary where is this striping going? item 130 contrast striping the quantity is incorrect you included contrast quantities for the tape items that have contrast included can you please correct these items thank you!
Inquiry submitted 06/02/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/02/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #5, dated 6/20/22.
Response posted 06/21/2022
Inquiry #51: In Addendum 3, Caltrans provided new cross sections and increased the quantity of Bid Item #34 Roadway Excavation from 2,460 CY to 7,390 CY. Stage 4 is un-construable given the existing contract documents. Please provide additional MOT plans, Charts and Staging Drawings to construct this work.
Inquiry submitted 06/03/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/05/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #5, dated 6/20/22.
Response posted 06/21/2022
Inquiry #52: Any update on inquiry # 50? the job bids in two days!
Inquiry submitted 06/07/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/07/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #5, dated 6/20/22.
Response posted 06/21/2022
Inquiry #53: Would Caltrans please consider extending the bid date for this project one additional week? Thank you.
Inquiry submitted 06/07/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/07/2022
Response #2:Please refer to Addendum #4, dated 6/8/2022.
Response posted 06/08/2022
Inquiry #54: We still have not heard back from San Diego Metro on Railroad insurance limits. We need these limits in order to request coverage from our insurance agency. Can Caltrans please help in getting this information for the contractors.
Inquiry submitted 06/07/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/07/2022
Response #2:Per the Information Handout, Railroad Relations and Insurance Requirements, information can be obtained at the MTS website listed or by contacting MTS Permits at the email listed. Please continue to inquire with the Railroad directly and bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/21/2022
Inquiry #55: Will Caltrans require the Contractor to Grind and Groove the El Cajon and Marshall Bridge decks after placement of the Polyester Concrete Overlay?
Inquiry submitted 06/08/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/08/2022
Response #2:Please refer to section 60-3.04B(3)(c) of the standard specifications for the finishing requirements for the polyester overlay. Bid per the current contract documents.
Response posted 06/13/2022
Inquiry #56: If I understand the staging correctly, all the work for the Marshall Avenue OH will be done at nigh under lane closures. Will a bid item for Structural Concrete Approach slab (Type R) Rapid Set Concrete (RSC) be provided?
Inquiry submitted 06/08/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/08/2022
Response #2:No, all structure approach slab work is paid under item 85, Structural concrete, approach slab (Type R). Please refer to section 51-5.02C for approach slab concrete specifications. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/15/2022
Inquiry #57: We still have not heard back from San Diego Metro on Railroad insurance limits. We need these limits in order to request coverage from our insurance agency. Can Caltrans please help in getting this information for the contractors.
Inquiry submitted 06/20/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/20/2022
Response #2:Per the Information Handout, Railroad Relations and Insurance Requirements, information can be obtained at the MTS website listed or by contacting MTS Permits at the email listed. Please continue to inquire with the Railroad directly and bid per current contract documents
Response posted 06/21/2022
Inquiry #58: This job is scheduled to bid 6/30 right before a holiday; there are other large Caltrans projects with required DBE goals as well bidding the same week (the day before); with the scheduled holiday and pre-determined vacations, it will be extremely hard to collect all required DBE paperwork from our subcontractors and get the package submitted on time per the table in section 2-1.33B(2)(b)(ii), note “Bâ€. We respectfully would like to request a one-time change to the standard specification on the timelines allowed for the paperwork submission. If 8 to 10 calendar days were allotted for this project, that would be very helpful OR a bid extension for this project. Please consider allowing more time for after bid paperwork to be submitted after the holiday weekend, allowing everyone to get back from their vacations.
Inquiry submitted 06/20/2022
Response #1:Submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/20/2022
Response #2:The receipt of DBE submittal information is required by Federal Statute 49 CFR 26.53(b)(3)(i)(B). Please bid per current contract standards.
Response posted 06/22/2022
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.