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 04-0G3604
Submit new inquiry for this projectInquiry #1: Contract 04-0G3604 ($87 mil) and Contract 04-1Q5824 ($130 mil) bid on June 10 and June 11 respectively. These are very large projects in District 4. Please consider a 1 week gap between the bid dates of these two projects.
Inquiry submitted 04/21/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/23/2025
Response #2:At this time Caltrans does not plan to change the bid opening date.
Response posted 04/24/2025
Inquiry #2: Please provide CADD files with project stationing.
Inquiry submitted 04/22/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/23/2025
Response #2:The CADD files are not provided. The design alignments are provided in the link below.
http://website.dot.ca.gov/dist4/construction/contracts/04-0G3604/04-0G3604-Design-Alignment-Files.zip
Response posted 06/03/2025
Inquiry #3: FYI-Caltrans to-All Bidders- How do I register for Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting?
Inquiry submitted 04/23/2025
Response #1:Please do not use the Bidder Inquiry platform for Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting registration; It is for inquiries related to bidding on the project contract. Register in advance of the Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting, and no later than 1 hour before the meeting time, by sending an email with bidder information to D4.Construction.Duty.Senior@dot.ca.gov Please include the project number & "Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting", within the subject of the email.
Response posted 04/23/2025
Response #2:Companies that attended the Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting: BAY CITIES PAVING & GRADING, INC. • BT TRUCKING INC. • DESILVA GATES CONSTRUCTION • GEOSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERING INC • GHILOTTI BROS., INC. • GHILOTTI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. • GRAND ELECTRIC & CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. • HB+A ARCHITECTS • K&K CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY (DBE) • K14FPM • LINDA MECKEL CONSULTING • MARTIN BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION • MCM CONSTRUCTION, INC. • PHANTOM BUILDERS INC • S KWOK ENGINEERS, INC.
Response posted 05/07/2025
Response #3:For the contact list, click on the link: http://website.dot.ca.gov/dist4/construction/contracts/04-0G3604/MPBM%20Contact%20List%2004-0G3604.pdf
Response posted 05/07/2025
Inquiry #4: 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 04/28/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 04/29/2025
Response #2:Please see DQ-1 (Sheet No 359) for APC Allowable Pipe Material and Protection table and special provisions for further details.
Response posted 04/30/2025
Inquiry #5: Will Caltrans consider increasing the quantity for Bid Item No. 39? It does not make sense that there are 62 EA for water quality sampling and analysis day, but only 1 EA for water quality monitoring report.
Inquiry submitted 05/05/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/05/2025
Response #2:Refer to Addendum No.2 dated June 3, 2025. Section 13-3.01A has been modified.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Response #3:Refer to Addendum No.2 dated June 3, 2025. Bid Item List has been modified.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Inquiry #6: Section 13 of the Special Provisions says the SWPPP must include RUSLE2 modeling. Lake Merritt Channel and Oakland Estuary are not listed in Attachment H of the CGP with TMDLs applicable to construction stormwater discharges. Please reconsider the requirement for Contractor to provide RUSLE2 modeling for this project.
Inquiry submitted 05/05/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/05/2025
Response #2:Refer to Addendum No.2 dated June 3, 2025. Section 13-3.01A has been modified.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Inquiry #7: Can you please post the attendance list from the mandatory virtual webex meeting? Thank you!
Inquiry submitted 05/07/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/07/2025
Response #2:List has been posted under bidder inquiry #3.
Response posted 05/07/2025
Inquiry #8: The detail on Sheet 221 for Aerially Deposited Lead (Type Z-0) Roadway Excavation/Structure Excavation shows limits of excavation. Please clarify the required slope. If the material in the sloped portion is removed as part of Roadway Excavation, is the corresponding backfill to be considered as Embankment?
As the typical depth of the ADL material is around 2'-3' on this project, it does not stand to reason that the depth at this location would be considerably greater (up to 10.16'). Please review and comment Also, would the sub-excavation called out on Sheets 687 & 688 be considered Type Z-0?
Inquiry submitted 05/07/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/07/2025
Response #2:Refer to Addendum No.2 dated June 3, 2025. Embankment quantity has been revised on plan sheet 221 of 1154.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Inquiry #9: The Limits of Payment for Structure Excavation and Backfill for the Ground Anchor Wall shown on Sheet 1096 shows Excavation behind the Shotcrete. Is Excavation behind the Shotcrete required? Please clarify and, if necessary, revise the quantity.
Inquiry submitted 05/14/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/15/2025
Response #2:For Retaining Wall No. 117, excavation behind the shotcrete is not required. The excavation quantity is based on the Limits of Payment for Structure Excavation and Backfill provided on Sheet 1096. Bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 05/19/2025
Inquiry #10: Where the Retaining Walls show Sub-Excavation, it is unclear what the Backfill limits are. Is only the Sub-Excavation Structure Backfill? How is the increased width Backfill (to Grading Plane) to be be accounted for? Is that volume included in the Final Pay Quantity?
Inquiry submitted 05/15/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/16/2025
Response #2:For Retaining Wall Nos. 107, 121, 122L, 122R & 14, the excavation and backfill quantities are based on the over-excavation limits shown in the Retaining Wall Plans and GP/FS shown in the Limits of Payment for Excavation and Backfill in Std Plan A62B.
Response posted 06/04/2025
Inquiry #11: Question 10 pertains to Retaining Wall Nos. 107, 121, 122L, 122R & 14.
Also, please clarify the limits of Structure Excavation(Retaining Wall)/Structure Excavation(Type D) at Walls 117, 120 and 13. Typically the material in front of the wall to the Grading Plane is considered Roadway Excavation and is paid as such.
Inquiry submitted 05/19/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/19/2025
Response #2:For Retaining Wall Nos. 117, 120, and 13, the excavation quantities are based on the Limits of Payment for Structure Excavation and Backfill. Refer to sheets 1096, 1117, and 1138. Please bid per plan.
Response posted 06/04/2025
Inquiry #12: What is the binder grade for the 700 tons of 1/2" HMA-O? Thank you.
Inquiry submitted 05/21/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/22/2025
Response #2:Refer to section 39-2.04 of the standard specifications and HDM Table 632.1
Response posted 06/04/2025
Inquiry #13: Please clarify the type of temporary fence that is required for Bid Item #298 - Temporary Fence. Is this a 6' high steel driven post or Standing Panels or is this an 4' high orange plastic type of temporary fencing. Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 05/23/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/23/2025
Response #2:Fence type is the 4' high orange plastic temporary fence.
Response posted 05/27/2025
Response #3:For Bid Item 298, Temporary Fence, see Specification 16-2.03, Temporary High-Visibility Fencing.
Response posted 05/27/2025
Inquiry #14: Due to the magnitude and complicity of the project and another large Caltrans ($130 Millions) Project scheduled bid open on the 06/11/25. Please extend the bid opening of this project at least 4-weeks from the original bid date of 06/10/25 so Contractors and Subcontractors have enough time to analyze the project in intelligent.
Inquiry submitted 05/25/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/27/2025
Response #2:Caltrans has no plans to delay the bid open date at this time.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Inquiry #15: For Bid Item #59 Roadway Exc. (Topsoil). Where is that take place on the plan? Please provide typical detail for this work.
Inquiry submitted 05/30/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/30/2025
Response #2:Refer to plan sheet 39-50 and section 19-2.03D(2) of the special provisions.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Inquiry #16: Please provide a detail for the end connections & turnbuckle configuration of the 3/8" Stainless Steel Cables for the Temporary Pedestrian Rail (Sheet 237).
Inquiry submitted 05/30/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 05/30/2025
Response #2:See section 83-2.09 of the special provisions concerning the pedestrian handrailing, including requirements for turnbuckles. Attention is directed to Standard Plan B11-47 with 1/4” cable. Note, this project requires 3/8” cables.
Response posted 06/04/2025
Inquiry #17: Please clarify the location and structural top rail support for the Pedestrian Barricade.
Bid Item 0351, Pedestrian Barricade 110 LF, is shown as 1 1/2 NPS Galv Std Pipe with an OD of 1.9 “. The Pedestrian Barricade is called out as 102 LF Total on Sheet Q 11. No reference is given to the location of the Pedestrian Barricade on Q 11, nor does it appear to be called out separately on the Construction Detail or Layout plans.
Please advise as to the location of the Pedestrian Barricade and whether there is another 8 LF lurking somewhere in the plans to bring the total LF up to the Bid Item LF.
Please provide a detail that supports the top rail along the 110 LF length.
Inquiry submitted 05/30/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/02/2025
Response #2:Each 1 ½” NPS, Galvanized Standard Pipe Post extends up to and is connected to the top rail via a 1/8 minimum fillet weld.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Inquiry #18: The material specification for Pedestrian Railing, Bid Item 0347, 4340 LF, does not work with the base plate details as shown on C-177. The material requirement is called out on Det 3/C-171 and Det 6/C-177 as “Galv 2” Ø X-Strong Pipe, Schedule 80”- 2 3/8” OD per Standard ANSI Pipe Schedules. The Base plate Det 5/C-177 shows adjacent base plates separated by 1/8” with spacing between pipe edges of 3 7/8 Max. The detail appears to be predicated on the assumption that 2” Schedule 80 pipe is actually 2” OD. The actual OD dimension of 2 3/8 eliminates the 1/8” Gap and turns 3 7/8” Max to 3 7/8 minimum, eliminating all adjustment. The Pedestrian Barricade is comprised of 1 1 /2” Pipe, (OD 1.9) as is the Bicycle Barrier. Can the Pedestrian Railing be fabricated from 1.9 OD, 1 1/2” Schedule 80 to comply with the requirement for pipe with an actual OD of 2”. The answer would entail considerable cost saving on both pipe costs and galvanizing as well as making existing details workable. Please advise
Inquiry submitted 05/30/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/02/2025
Response #2:The contract details match the existing pedestrian railing installed in the tube under EA 04-4A4804. Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/04/2025
Inquiry #19: Bid Item 0369 Concrete Barrier (Type 60 MC Mod) LF 910, is shown on C 153 as containing a Pedestrian Railing with a unique mounting system setting the posts into 9’ pockets. Does the Pedestrian Railing run the full distance of 910 LF? What are the material requirements and design for this specific pedestrian railing ? What bid item are the pedestrian railings in this location to be included under?
Inquiry submitted 05/30/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/02/2025
Response #2:Refer to plan sheet 31, 36 and 212 of the contract plans for location and limits of bid item 369, Concrete Barrier (Type 60MC Mod) and plan sheet 68 and 84 thru 90 of the contract plans for location and limits of bid item 347, Pedestrian Railing. For bid item 347, Pedestrian Railing, refer to 83-2.09 of the special provisions and plan sheet 236 of the contract plans.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Inquiry #20: Plan sheets 726 thru 729 need to be revised to reflect the legend on all sheets.
The tables on sheets 728 and 729 do not accurately depict tree count nor do plan sheets 727 thru 729 show trees to be removed. Plant removal summary table on Plan sheet 729 shows plants to be removed but does not show where they are located on the plan sheets and they are not itemized as such in the legend.
Will this be forthcoming?
Inquiry submitted 05/31/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/02/2025
Response #2:Refer to sheet PR-1 for legend. Refer to Addendum No. 1 dated May 27, 2025. Trees to be removed have been added to plan sheets 727, 728 and 729 of 1154.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Inquiry #21: What is the cost to obtain the Encroachment Permits from City of Alameda, City of Oakland and Bart Encroachment Permit? Please provide an Allowance Costs for these Permits.
Inquiry submitted 05/31/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/02/2025
Response #2:Contractor is responsible for securing various permits from Oakland and other entities as needed and will be reimbursed for any fees and other expenses based on actual costs via a change order.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Response #3:Caltrans will reimburse the contractor for the direct fees and costs charged by the other government agency for encroachment permits with no markups. Any other costs are the contractor’s responsibility.
Response posted 06/11/2025
Inquiry #22: How many times may Chart No. L3 be used? Remark 1 calls out 4 times and Remark 8 calls out 8 times. 4 times, 8 times or 12 times?
Inquiry submitted 06/02/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/02/2025
Response #2:Chart No. L3 can be used 8 times.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Inquiry #23: Please explain Lane Closure Charts M1-M10. If there is only 1 existing lane and 1 lane is to be provided, are no closures allowed?
Inquiry submitted 06/02/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/02/2025
Response #2:Work is permitted at certain times, and you must maintain one travel lane per direction during those times. Alternatives could include narrowing or shifting lanes, including into parking or shoulder area if available. Note, taking parking may require additional approval and permitting by authority having jurisdiction.
Response posted 06/04/2025
Inquiry #24: Page 113 includes specifications to be added to the end of section 13-3.01A that starts with the number 9. There are no parts 1-8 in this section to be added to. Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 06/02/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/02/2025
Response #2:Refer to Addendum No. 2. Section 13-3.01A has been modified.
Response posted 06/10/2025
Inquiry #25: Please provide sections/details/sequence of approach embankment called out in section 19-6.03D.
Inquiry submitted 06/02/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/02/2025
Response #2:Refer to 19-6.03D of the special provisions. A 14-day settlement period is required at Route 980/260 Sep (Mod) (Br No. 33-0485K) Abutment 1. The embankment should be constructed by extending the grading plane (GP) in the Elevation view of the Bridge Embankment Surcharge detail in Std Plan A62B horizontally to the centerline of the abutment. No additional details will be provided at this time.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Inquiry #26: As the access on this project is very limited, please detail the exact location of K-Rail on each Traffic Handling plan in order to determine how much room is available and how much shoring may be necessary.
Inquiry submitted 06/02/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/02/2025
Response #2:Refer to bidder inquiry No. 2 for the alignment information.
Response posted 06/10/2025
Inquiry #27: Please comment regarding the likelihood of postponing the bid opening as addressed in Inquiry #14.
Inquiry submitted 06/02/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/02/2025
Response #2:Caltrans has no plans to delay the bid open date at this time.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Inquiry #28: The details for the 4340 LF of Pedestrian Rain, Bid Item 0347, are given on Detail 6/ C-177. That Detail shows a 15 ft section of railing with no 3/16” plate wrapped around the top section in the center. It is bordered by a Detail callout on the right hand side showing a “Galv. Pl 3/16’ WRAPPED AROUND RAILING (PEDESTRIAN/BICLYCLE WALKWAY ONLY) Con’t UON, See Detail 1 /C-172”. On the left hand side of the unwrapped center railing is an arrow pointing to a similar configuration as on the right hand side but with a different note that calls for “ ¼ GAP STAINLESS STEEL CABLE EDGE’S OF PLATES ATTACHED TO Ped RAILING PIPES (Typ)”
Please specify the limits of the 3/16 plate wrapped at the “PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE WALKWAY ONLY”. Detail 1/C-172 shows a Gate Hinge Detail and the section Detail on C-173 does show the extent of the plate locations. There is a Bid Item for the Pedestrian Railing, and a separate Bid Item, and drawing for the Bicycle Barrier, but no Bid Item that describes a Pedestrian/Bicycle Walkway combined.
Please provide direction as to the meaning of the comment on the left hand side of Det 6/ C-177. There no stainless steel cable in that location.
Inquiry submitted 06/02/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Response #2:The 3/16” galvanized plate is required on the middle section of Detail 6/C-177. The note on left hand side of Detail 6/C-177 should refer to the “PLATE AT Ped RAILING DETAIL” on C-173.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Response #3:“PLATE AT Ped RAILING DETAIL” on C-173 refers to Detail 6/C-177.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Inquiry #29: We cannot locate the loction of Bid Item #345 - the Chain Link Railing (MODIFIED) and also Bid Item #354 Cable Railing (MODIFIED). Pleae clarify where we can find both loctions for Bid Items #345 & #354.
Inquiry submitted 06/03/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Response #2:For bid item no. 345, Chain Link Railing (Modified), refer to Addendum No. 1 dated May 27, 2025. Plan sheet 511A has been added.
For bid item no. 354, Cable Railing (Modified), refer to plan sheets 1027-1035, Madison St UC (Mod), Br No. 33-0198, and plan sheets 1094-1114, Retaining Wall No. 117, Br No. 33E0092.
Response posted 06/04/2025
Inquiry #30: The Sections included in Addendum No. 2 (Sheet 221) do not appear to take into consideration the sub-excavation required for Retaining Wall No. 107. It is unclear as to whether the additional material required to be sub-excavated (and laid back at 1:1?) is to be considered Type Z-0 material. Also, the section is very misleading as it shows the excavation daylighting to the existing (unprotected by Temporary Barrier) surface when, in reality, part of the wall will require >25.5' shoring to not impact the traffic on NB 880.
If this area does need to be shored, it makes more sense to not remove the material shown in the section and to just shore to the back of the sub-excavation. Please consider and provide direction/revise.
Inquiry submitted 06/03/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/03/2025
Response #2:Refer to Addendum No. 5 dated June 12, 2025. The section on sheet 221 has been revised. Excavation is per contractor’s means and methods. Current contract plans show one option available.
Response posted 06/12/2025
Inquiry #31: The response to Bid Inquiry #25 requires further clarification. The Foundation Report states "Based on the settlement calculations at Abutment 1, the maximum ground settlement is expected to be 1.5 inches, and a settlement period of 14 days is recommended for abutment pile construction". Does this mean that the CIDH can be constructed prior to the settlement period, or will the 16.5' fill (which would only be required on the Left side as the Right side is already higher than finished grade) be placed along/over 5th Street and then removed after the 14 day settlement period has expired? Also, please show the limits of the temporary fill around the Abutment and along the Wingwalls/Retaining Walls 122 L/R.
Inquiry submitted 06/03/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/04/2025
Response #2:For 980/260 Sep (Mod) Abutment 1, CIDH piles cannot be installed until after the end of the settlement period. The limits of the embankment should extend 150ft from the bridge abutment. Please refer to Std Spec 19-6.03D for further information.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Inquiry #32: Reference is made to the responses to Inquiries #10 & #11. The Standard Plan shows Retaining Wall Excavation & Backfill limits 1' outside of the footing. As the sub-excavation is outside of these limits, additional information is required to show how this work is measured and paid. Please provide sections showing pay limits or revise all the Structure Excavation and Backfill items to be measured quantities (not Final Pay).
Inquiry submitted 06/05/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/05/2025
Response #2:Refer to Addendum No. 5 dated June 12, 2025. Pay limit sections have been added to plan sheets 689, 697, 702, 709 and 715 of 1154.
Response posted 06/12/2025
Inquiry #33: It is apparent from all the questions being asked about the roadway excavation and structural excavation that the work has not been identified properly on the bid schedule. This needs to be reevaluated by Caltrans and contractors given the proper time to analyze the work. Please postpone the bid date for a minimum of two weeks.
Inquiry submitted 06/05/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/05/2025
Response #2:The bid open is expected to be delayed ONE week. Official notice of bid open delay is provided through addendum only.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Inquiry #34: The Special Provisions on page 167 has a quote of materials to be installed for the City of Oakland. Some of the quantities on the list do not match those on the bid items. The quote listed, for example, has 38 ea 1" Gate Valves. The bid item 111, however, only shows 15 ea 1.5" gate valves.
Please clarify under what item is the 1" gate valves are paid.
Inquiry submitted 06/05/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Response #2:Quantities shown in 20-2.01B(1) of the special provisions are for City of Oakland irrigation components only. Quantities in the bid item list include quantities for both City of Oakland and Caltrans irrigation components.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Inquiry #35: How can there be three Stage 1A Stage Construction Drawings that show the same locations (Sheet 425, Sheet 430 and Sheet 433)? Also, please label Sheet 427 and Sheet 434 just to confirm which stages are being shown.
Inquiry submitted 06/05/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Response #2:Sheet 425 is Stage 1A, Sheet 430 is Stage 1C and sheet 433 is Stage 1D. Work to be performed is shown and called out using notes. Refer to traffic handling plans for additional details. Sheet 427 is Stage 1B and sheet 434 is Stage 2A/2A.1.
Response posted 06/10/2025
Inquiry #36: Why weren't the quantities shown on the added Sheet 511A not included in the pay quantities? Is this work performed by others or paid another way?
Inquiry submitted 06/06/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Response #2:Refer to Addendum No. 5 dated June 12, 2025. Quantities have been added to bid item list of the special provisions.
Response posted 06/12/2025
Inquiry #37: Please define/describe "Long Term Closure" as it is used multiple times in the Stage Construction Drawings and referred to in the Lane Closure Charts.
Inquiry submitted 06/06/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Response #2:Long term closures identified on the stage construction plans correspond to 24/7 closure layouts on the traffic handling plans. These closures are required to perform the work shown and will be left in place during the duration of that stage for work to be performed.
Response posted 06/09/2025
Inquiry #38: Please provide loading conditions for vertical ground anchors for RW-117 and RW-120.
Inquiry submitted 06/06/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Response #2:Refer to plan sheets 1104, 1123 and 1124 for loading conditions for vertical ground anchors.
Response posted 06/09/2025
Inquiry #39: Refer to sheets PP-2 and PP-3, per the plant materials symbols, plant are to cover the entire area between Route 880 and the off-ramp, and per sheets IR-2 and IR-3, new irrigation valves, lateral lines, and heads will also be installed to irrigate the new planting areas. Confirm that existing plants and vegetations between Route 880 and the off-ramp will be removed for the proposed planting and proposed irrigation system installation. Otherwise, please advise.
Inquiry submitted 06/06/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Response #2:Yes, existing plants and vegetation will be removed. Refer to plan sheet 39. Work is covered under bid item 55, clearing and grubbing (LS).
Response posted 06/09/2025
Inquiry #40: Per irrigation sheet, IP-3 addendum #1, only a portion of the mainline at the manifold is new; the mainline along the planter is existing. Confirm that the continuation section on sheet IP-2 is to follow the same concept. Otherwise, please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 06/06/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Response #2:Mainline along the planter shown on sheet IP-2 is existing.
Response posted 06/09/2025
Inquiry #41: No wire symbol is shown for the proposed remote control valves on sheets IP-2 and IP-3. Clarify if the contractor shall run the new wires to the point of connection or to the existing controller's location.
Inquiry submitted 06/06/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Response #2:New wires shall be run to all new valves from the controller.
Response posted 06/09/2025
Inquiry #42: There are two different irrigation sprinkler schedules, ISS-1 (city of Oakland) and ISS-2 (CALTRANS). Please confirm that irrigation components shown within the limits of the city of Oakland shall follow the city of Oakland details as shown on sheets ID-1 to ID-3, and irrigation components that are shown within Caltrans limits shall follow Caltrans standard details. Otherwise, please advise.
Inquiry submitted 06/06/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Response #2:Please refer to the legend symbols and follow what is shown on the plans. Any equipment shown on the ISS-1 sheet shall be per City of Oakland details and all equipment shown on the ISS-2 sheet shall be per Caltrans Details. City of Oakland details are shown on ID-1 thru ID-3 and Caltrans details are shown in the Caltrans Standard Plans.
Response posted 06/09/2025
Inquiry #43: A callout out on sheet IP-9 indicates that "adjust existing irrigation to provide 100% coverage to new and existing planting, avoiding overspray as much as possible. Coordinate with city to match city equipment requirements. (Bid item - Operate existing irrigation facilities)". However, there is no bid item for operate existing irrigation facilities on the bid items list. Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 06/06/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Response #2:Refer to bid item 96, Check and Test Existing Irrigation Facilities and Section 20-10.02C(2) of the special provisions.
Response posted 06/09/2025
Inquiry #44: Refer to section 20-2.06B(2)(a), the controller components prices are expired. Confirm the pricing is good for bidding purposes. Otherwise provide the updates pricing.
Inquiry submitted 06/06/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Response #2:Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/10/2025
Inquiry #45: What is the difference between Item 47 and Item 284?
Inquiry submitted 06/06/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/06/2025
Response #2:Bid item 47 covers vibration and crack monitoring for structures, residences and buildings listed in 14-8.03 of the special provisions. Bid item 284 covers vibration monitoring for existing utilities listed in 14-8.03 of the special provisions, also refer to 5-1.36C(2) of the special provisions.
Response posted 06/10/2025
Inquiry #46: Retaining Wall No. 14 quantities are not included for Prepare and Paint Concrete (Item 292) and Anti-Graffiti Coating (Item 293). Please update the bid quantities to reflect this work in one of the forthcoming addendums.
Inquiry submitted 06/06/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/09/2025
Response #2:Refer to Concrete Barrier Quantities Summary Table on sheet 684 of 1154 of the contract plans. Prepare and Paint Concrete (Item 292) and Anti-Graffiti Coating (Item 293) quantities are correct.
Response posted 06/10/2025
Inquiry #47: Do any as-builts exist for the Pylon that is to be relocated? If yes, please provide.
Inquiry submitted 06/06/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/09/2025
Response #2:Kindly see the link below for the as-built from the 1950s: http://website.dot.ca.gov/dist4/construction/contracts/04-0G3604/Pages%20from%20PoseyTube_Original.pdf
Response posted 06/10/2025
Inquiry #48: What is the Miscellaneous Metal (Bridge) at Retaining Wall No. 13 intended to pay for?
Inquiry submitted 06/06/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/09/2025
Response #2:The quantity for Miscellaneous Metal (Bridge) at Retaining Wall No. 13 is for the Manhole Frame and Cover associated with the Deck Access Opening to be provided. Refer to Sheet 1139 of the contract plans.
Response posted 06/10/2025
Inquiry #49: Refer to IP-3 to IP-16; these irrigation plans seem like they are missing irrigation systems for all trees within the limit of Oakland city (bubbler, lateral line, & remote control valve), except sheet IP-6. Provide some instructions for watering those trees/advise.
Inquiry submitted 06/09/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/09/2025
Response #2:Trees and plants in the City of Oakland maintained planting areas that are not irrigated by an automatic irrigation system must be hand watered.
Response posted 06/10/2025
Inquiry #50: There is no irrigation plan corresponding to the planting area on sheet PP-15. Provide some instructions and clarify the method of watering for the plants shown on that sheet.
Inquiry submitted 06/09/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/09/2025
Response #2:Trees and plants in the City of Oakland maintained planting areas that are not irrigated by an automatic irrigation system must be hand watered.
Response posted 06/10/2025
Inquiry #51: Refer to irrigation detail 5/ID-2, it indicates that valve box shall be by NDS, Carson, or equal. On the other hand, NDS valve box is only available in plastic. However, section 20-2.01B(7) requests a polymer concrete valve box. Confirm the design intent is to use plastic valve boxes for the city of Oakland's irrigation systems and polymer concrete valve boxes for Caltrans' irrigation systems. Otherwise, please advise.
Inquiry submitted 06/09/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/09/2025
Response #2:Refer to 20-2.01B(7) of special provisions for Caltrans valve box and refer to Detail 5 on plan sheet 749 of 1154 for City of Oakland valve box.
Response posted 06/10/2025
Inquiry #52: The face of guardrail on Plan Sheet L-8 looks to be less than 4' to the bridge pier behind the guardrail. Will this entire run be quired to be MGS Strengthened Rail? Or is the road curb and gutter being moved further away from the bridge piers?
Inquiry submitted 06/09/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/09/2025
Response #2:Strengthened MGS is not required, as the guardrail has the minimum clearance between the back of the posts and existing column. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/11/2025
Inquiry #53: Some of the sleeves carry wire for the remote control valves.
Please clarify if the sleeves require pull boxes at both ends for sleeve that carry low voltage wire.
Inquiry submitted 06/10/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/10/2025
Response #2:For irrigation conduit under traveled ways, pullboxes are required. Refer to Caltrans Standard Plan H8 for further details.
Response posted 06/11/2025
Inquiry #54: Per bid item 293, for anti-graffiti coating. Our review currently shows the RW 14, and type 60MGC barrier scheduled to receive the coating. Why does RW13 not receive ag coating, the details on both walls seem to be identical.
Inquiry submitted 06/10/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/10/2025
Response #2:Caltrans maintained retaining walls do not specify anti-graffiti coating. Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/11/2025
Inquiry #55: The new sign structures shown are versatile trusses, but the bid item for sign structure is for truss sign structures, not versatile truss sign structures.
Inquiry submitted 06/11/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/11/2025
Response #2:The special provisions take precedence over the plans when there is a discrepancy, per standard special provision section 5-1.02, Contract Components. Please bid the contract item, Truss Sign Structures. Please be aware Plan Sheet SQ-44 quantities are computed for versatile truss.
Response posted 06/13/2025
Inquiry #56: With the limited Temporary Barrier location information provided in the plans it appears that some of the sub-excavation work at Retaining Wall No. 121, in particular the last 200', is under the Barrier and thus not possible to construct. Please provide additional information or an alternate sequence for this work.
Inquiry submitted 06/11/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/11/2025
Response #2:Refer to plan sheets 694 through 700 for retaining wall no. 121 layout and details. Per plan sheet 494, one lane of traffic is to be maintained while constructing retaining wall no. 121. Temporary shoring will be required to maintain one lane for NB-880 on ramp traffic. Night and weekend closures may be used to place temporary shoring, refer to 12-4.02C(3)(i) Chart No. J4 and J5 of the special provisions.
Response posted 06/12/2025
Inquiry #57: What stage is Retaining Wall No. 105 anticipated to be constructed in?
Inquiry submitted 06/11/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/11/2025
Response #2:Retaining wall should be constructed in Stage 1A. Refer to plan sheet 424 of 1154.
Response posted 06/11/2025
Inquiry #58: Where is Item 235, Steel Cover, shown on the plans? The Webster Tube Walkway Quantity Table indicates that the work would be shown on Sheet C-26 and C-31, but there are no callouts for Steel Cover on those sheets. It is assumed that the details for Drain Inlet Cover Plate shown on Sheet C-172 are for this work. Please confirm.
Also, please provide details for the Access Cover Hatches (Item 234) and Splice Box Covers (Item 236) that are to be replaced.
Inquiry submitted 06/12/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/12/2025
Response #2:Bid item 235, Steel Cover, is for Drain Inlet Cover Plate shown on plan sheet 231. Drain Inlet Cover Plates are located approximately at the following locations – 2 each at “N” LINE 130+44, 13.25’ Lt and 2 each at “N” LINE 163+86, 11.75’ Lt.
Refer to plan sheet 234 - No details are provided for Access Cover Hatch or Splice Box Cover as the existing hatches and covers are intended to be re-used.
Response posted 06/16/2025
Inquiry #59: What are the limits of Structure Excavation and Backfill for Retaining Wall No. 105 (is excavation for LCC included)?
Inquiry submitted 06/12/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/12/2025
Response #2:Refer to Standard Plans A62B for structure excavation and backfill limits. All other necessary excavation is included in roadway excavation.
Response posted 06/13/2025
Inquiry #60: How are Diaphragm Bolsters measured (inside/outside/per location/per continuous element)? How are cored holes shown on Sheet 1051 paid?
Inquiry submitted 06/12/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/12/2025
Response #2:The bid item for Diaphragm Bolster (EA) is measured per location. Refer to Sheets 1051 and 1054 of the contract plans. The cored holes associated with the Diaphragm Bolsters on Bridge No. 33-0200 are to be constructed in accordance with Caltrans Standard Specification 60-4.05 and bid this work as part of the bid item DIAPHRAGM BOLSTER (EA).
Response posted 06/13/2025
Inquiry #61: The bid item 115 quantity is shown as 10,876 LF on the bid items list and also on sheet IQ-2, which is for main supply side of control valve. However, per the symbol of the main supply line on the irrigation plans for this item, there is a significant difference between the bid schedule and plans. This is fluctuating the bid item unit cost since this is a final pay item. Please revise the quantity based on the actual quantity on the plans.
Inquiry submitted 06/13/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/13/2025
Response #2:Bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/16/2025
Inquiry #62: Per the irrigation legend on sheet SS-1, the lateral line for the Oakland irrigation system is class 200 PVC pipe. However, refer to the irrigation quantities IQ-1, and bid items #112 to 115, they both show schedule 40 plastic pipe. Clarify the material of the lateral line for the Oakland irrigation systems.
Inquiry submitted 06/13/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/13/2025
Response #2:Refer to 20-2.08B(5) of the standard specifications. Plastic pipe supply lines shall be schedule 40.
Response posted 06/13/2025
Inquiry #63: Per the question no. 49 answer, "Trees and plants in the City of Oakland maintained planting areas that are not irrigated by an automatic irrigation system must be hand watered". Confirm that contractors are allowed to provide watering for the specified areas based on the "means and method" that is more beneficial for the agency and the project's intent and not necessary "Hand watering". Otherwise, please advise.
Inquiry submitted 06/13/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/13/2025
Response #2:City of Oakland requires hand watering. Bid per the current contract bid documents.
Response posted 06/13/2025
Inquiry #64: Please confirm that the Concrete Surface Texture at Retaining Wall No. 105 is paid as Chinatown Motif even though it is only Medium and Heavy Sandblast (not Chinatown specific).
Inquiry submitted 06/16/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/16/2025
Response #2:Concrete Surface Texture for Retaining Wall No. 105 is covered under bid item 161. Concrete Surface Texture shall be per plan sheet 722 of 1154, which is medium and heavy sandblast.
Response posted 06/16/2025
Inquiry #65: Please clarify what type of Anchorage detail is to be used and at which wall. There are details showing the flange plate anchorage and also a pocket set achorage. It is not clear which wall requires which type of post anchorage. Please clarify.
Inquiry submitted 06/16/2025
Response #1:The inquiry has been received and submitted for consideration.
Response posted 06/16/2025
Response #2:Please bid per current contract documents.
Response posted 06/16/2025
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.