Ohio Department of Transportation - Prebid Questions

Transcription

1 Project No Sale Date - 8/25/2011 HAM CR-CR (WINTON/ S. GILMORE ROAD) 8/22/2011 9:56:54 AM Pole E on plan page 323 shows that 2" anchor bolts should be used for this pole. However, manufactures have ran calculations and have found that 2" is not large enough. Can these poles be reviewed if 2" is correct for this pole. Please see sheet Item 632 Signal SupportMisc.: Special Design - 6th line of the note - Which states "The Design of the signal support shall be provided by the manufacturer and shall be incidental to the cost of the signal support." Based on their calculations, different manufacturers may arrive at slightly different designs. Each manufacturer is responsible for providing a pole and anchor bolts that meets their design calculations. 8/11/ :33:44 AM Ref Nos 182, 266 & Conduit Jacked or Drilled, Do we have the option of using Sch 80 HDPE? Also, is potholing to be included for utility location, if required? Please see forthcoming addendum - which will require the contractor to use conduit and sch 80 HDPE is not an option. Potholing is considered incidental to the conduit jack or drilled pay item. Please see Existing Utilities plan note on sheet 288, it is the contractors responsibility to determine in the field the actual locations and elevations of all existing utilities. The cost for this is to be included in the price bid for the various items. 8/10/2011 2:29:34 PM Item 168 is for relocating the existing 12" meter vault under spec states that the contractor, "furnish and install new meter settings and appurtenances when the existing meter settings and appurtenances do not meet current GCWW standards or are not suitable for relocation. Do the existing meter settings and appurtenances meet GCWW standards and are they suitable for relocation? Please clarify what will need to be replaced and how any new fittings will be paid. 8/10/ :25:05 AM Reference #421 referenced on the job indicates "Special" and the description is "Structure Misc". Typically this type of ornamental fencing would be classified 607 and would require all parts to be hot dip galvanized and polyester powder coated after fabrication. This item designation appears to be classified as a 514 item which is a structural steel designation and would carry the 514 paint spec. of prime coat and a epoxy urethane finish. Needless to say that spec. will not work on the various components that make up the finish product. We need clarification as to what spec. ODOT wants to designate for this project and that will dictate our participtation, please advise. The special provisions clearly address the galvanizing and painting requirements/alternatives. The special provisions states the following: Part 1 - General Description : Galvanize all steel fence with decorative arches components as per the requirements of these notes and CMS After galvanizing, paint the indicated items as per these requirements all applicable portions of CMS 514 'NOT' expressly covered in these notes. " The department feels the special provisions - 'NOTES' clearly describe the contract requirements and that 514 is referenced - to address anything NOT covered in the special provisions. Please refer to Part 3 of the special provisions for detailed description. 8/10/ :29:05 AM The plans call for 1530 SF of item 514 surface prep and prime coat for painting. What is the location of this 1530 SF? Is it for beam ends with new end cross frames and expansion joints? Is it for the new stiffiners added to the existing fascia girder which will now be an interior girder? Or is it for both? The 1530 SF quantity for Item 514, Surface Preparation of Existing Structural Steel and Item 514, Field Painting of Existing Structural Steel, Prime Coat is for Beam B1, the existing left (or western) fascia beam, which will still be a fascia beam in the proposed typical section. The limits for painting of Beam B1 are shown in the Left Parapet Detail on Sheet 428/464. Page 1

2 8/9/ :21:56 AM At a minimum ODOT needs to allow the contractor to install the new waterline being bored under 275 and the corresponding tie-ins prior to February 1st of This waterline must be relocated in order to build the new substructure of the bridge as the existing waterline run right under the new proposed substructure. If the existing waterline can be shut off and disconnected without installing the new there is no problem, however, if the new waterline is needed to take the old waterline out of service, ODOT must let the contractor perform that work this fall or change the interim completion date as this line consists of almost 2000 LF of waterline and 2 bores one under I-275 that all must be completed prior new substructure excavation. If we have to wait until February 1st of 2012, weather will impact temporary striping, the bore will take some time, and the earliest you could start substructure construction is March of 2011 which is when you would need to be setting the new steel to make the completion date. Please revise the note allowing for waterline construction or extend the project iterim completion date as well as the project completion date. The addendum will allow the contractor to perform the water relocation work between station to station prior to Feb 1, 2012 with specified work limitations. 8/8/ :03:31 AM RE: Maintenance of Traffic Although the contract allows the contractor to begin the roadway work for Phase 1 on February 1, 2012; the months of February and March are generally not good months for constructing subgrade, placing 304 aggregate base, and asphalt pavement. It is likely that this work really would not occur until April, which would result in other delays for the construction of the project. Addendum 3 shortened the already tight interim completion date for the project by 1 month. Given the limited amount of work required for the construction of Phases 1.1 and 1.1A and the fact that work in these phases is limited to off peak hours, will ODOT allow the contractor to complete these phases this fall during more favorable weather? After reviewing the Proposal, Plans and Specifications - No errors exist in the plans. The plans intent is clear. Contractors should bid according to the current plan requirements. 8/8/2011 7:20:22 AM Due to the fast pace of this contract, can the interim date be extended to October 31st of 2012 to allow the full season for painting, or can the structural steel painting be exempt like many other contracts from the interim date and be completed at the beginning of the 2013 season? Please see addendum 'c' Which exempted the structural steel painting from the October 1, 2012 interim - so that it may be accomplished in Addendum 'c' also revised the completion date so that the painting could be done in better weather. 8/5/2011 2:53:27 PM Sheet 238 shows a proposed Encoder Meter Touch Read Pad per the City of Fairfield. Can the existing remote equipment be used? Please provide details for this equipment if the contractor is required to purchase. See forthcoming adendum. 8/5/2011 2:52:10 PM Sheet 239 states that All water mains located outside of the pavement area shall utilize Granular Backfill in lieu of the Control Density Fill. Some of this conduit is 15 ft deep and would require a very substantial amount of granular backfill to complete. For areas outside of the pavement, could 203 embankment be utilized above 12 over the top of pipe? 8/5/2011 2:44:22 PM Lagging panel detail SHT 6/12. Detail shows an overall thickness of 6" on the lagging panel including the formliner. This does not appear to be structurally sufficient if the unspecified thickness of the random stone liner detailed is used. Should this SHT 6/12 detail be a 6" structural panel with an additional thickness to accomodate the formliner? 8/4/2011 3:30:38 PM Page 354 shows a light pole being replaced on IR-275 at station Will the NJ Shape Barrier be paid through the light? Also, is the NJ Shape Barrier Wall the only wall item that receives conduit? Page 2

3 8/4/2011 3:09:55 PM Due to the very limited time to build this project in phases, can the bridge painting be performed after the interim completion date listed on sheet 21? 8/4/2011 3:01:43 PM RE: 30 Day Limited Working Durations Maintenance of Traffic plan notes listed on page 51 and page 55 limit the work in phase 1.2 between Sta and Sta and between Sta and Sta to 30 day duration. 1.Does the 30 day limited durations refer to working days or calendar days? 2.Will the 30 day limited durations receive extensions for inclement weather per C&MS ? 8/4/2011 3:00:07 PM RE: Interim Completion Date A general note on page 21 refers to a Contract Requirement that all items of work except final pavement markings, RPM s, and Asphalt Surface Course are to be completed by November 1, Will any liquidated damages be assessed if the contractor fails to meet this interim completion date? 2. Will the interim completion date receive extensions for inclement weather per C&MS ? 8/4/ :16:57 AM Standard Drawing BP-2.3 (p2/3) shows 17' of pavement being replaced with the pressure relief joint. This drawing only references pressure relief joints at existing approach slabs. Is it the department's intent to replace 17' of pavement with the pressure relief joint? If so under which items will the pavement removal and replacement be paid? As per SCD BP the 17' of pavement would need to be removed to construct the joint as per standard drawing. Payment will be as noted in SCD BP-2.3 (sheet 3) under Method of Payment - "Payment shall be Liner Foot of Item Special Pressure Relief Joint, Type A and shall include saw cutting & removal of existing pavement, Items 305 & 448, and all labor, materials and incidentals needed to construct the joint as shown, except for the pipe underdrain." 8/4/2011 9:25:16 AM The notes regarding the 6" Stamped Concrete on page 24 call for color hardener to be used. Will the department allow the use of integrally colored concrete as this will significantly reduce labor costs? The stamped concrete on page 24 shall be built as the plans currently detail. The plan requirements of the color hardener on sheet 24 will not be revised to allow the use of any substitute material for this item. The plan requirements are clear and shall be bid accordingly. 8/4/2011 9:20:12 AM Per the detail on page 4 of the plans the 304 under the curb is paid with the curb and gutter. Is this the intent? If so, please consider revising the plans as the 304 under both the pavement and curb will likely be placed in the same operation. The detail on sheet 4 is correct - for the 304 material to be included with the bid of Item 609 Curb and Gutter, Type 2, As Per Plan. The detail is clear and that is the plan intent. The department will not revise the detail. Many locations for the Curb and Gutter Type 2, APP is being replaced without pavement widening or the placement of 6" of 304 for pavement. Therefore for uniform calculation and estimation purpose, the contractor is able to estimate the amount of 304 required as per the detail - for all Curb and Gutter Type 2, as per plan and not separate locations. The pavement calculations are included in the plan set for use. 8/4/2011 9:19:57 AM Per the detail on page 4 of the plans the 304 under the curb is paid with the curb and gutter. Is this the intent? If so, please consider revising the plans as the 304 under both the pavement and curb will likely be placed in the same operation. Page 3

4 8/3/2011 3:00:36 PM Why is the DOT calling out a sole source proprieatary product(tracc)for Ref. #43 in the proposal? The DOT has approved other products to be bid against the TRACC for this state line item called a Type 2. Please see addendum 1 - the proprietary specification was removed by addendum and revised sheets were issued. 8/2/2011 1:21:49 PM Can you please clarify if pay item 349 -Pavement for Maintaining traffic is an "As directed pay item". I am unable to find this temporary pavement on the plans. 8/2/2011 1:19:42 PM The Temporary Pavement Markings note on 27/464 says all materials and labor associated with the installlation and removal of temporary pavement markings shall be included in the lump sump contract price for item 614 maintaining traffic. There are a number of bid items for work zone pavement marking. Will any temporary pavement marking be included in the lump sum price for item 614 maintaining traffic? If so, which tempoary pavement marking is part of the lump sum price and which will be paid unit price? 8/2/2011 1:09:34 PM Can you please clarify pay item 348, Roads for Maintaining Traffic - 1 LS? I do not see anywhere in the plans indicating the location or what work will be required to perform this item. 8/1/2011 4:23:36 PM Note 2 on sheet 434 requires that the fence anchor bolts be cast into the parapet which will prohibit slipforming. Due to the very agressive schedule on this project, there is not enough time to hand form the parapet in multiple phases. Can the contractor drill and grout the anchor bolts or can the completion date be extended? The fence anchor bolts shall be built as the plans currently require and this requirement will not be revised. The department feels there is ample time and the completion date will not be revised. 7/29/ :03:40 AM The plan note on sheet 226 states that precast lagging panels shall be 3-0 minimum in height. The contractor s takeoff of the precast concrete lagging walls and verification with plan quantities show that the current wall designs do not satisfy this 3-0 minimum panel height. If the Department intends to maintain this 3-0 minimum panel height, please redesign the walls to satisfy this note. 7/27/2011 4:53:03 PM There are numerous approved suppliers for ref #245, 277, & 278 all with varying costs. Per plan note, City of Fairfield will approve the supplier to be used, how should that cost be determined prior to a supplier being chosen by the City of Fairfield? 7/27/2011 3:30:57 PM Where can the detour details be found for the detour signing bid item? 7/27/2011 3:03:35 PM What portion of the structure does line E11100 QC/QA CONCRETE, CLASS QSC2, SUPERSTRUCTURE include? 2:22:21 PM Page 4

5 7/27/2011 2:27:58 PM Item 601-CRUSHED AGGREGATE SLOPE PROTECTION, AS PER PLAN on 386/464 refers to restoring the existing slope protection to a uniform grade as well as adding new protection per Will both the new and restored slope protection be measured for payment for this item? 7/27/2011 1:35:30 PM Sheet 63 shows shifting I-275 EB traffic onto the inside shoulder. The existing inside shoulder appears to be only 3 ft wide with rumble strips. If traffic is to be shifted onto the shoulder there is no bid item for milling and filling the rumble strips. Please clarify. 7/26/ :24:27 AM Why does ref. #43 call out the use of a sole source proprietary product? 7/25/2011 9:38:24 PM on ref. # E60029 Impact Attenuator Type 2 as per plan, 55mph, 24"(TRACC) the proposal has listed a sole source proprietary product when ODOT as approved a number of systems to be bid againist one another. Is this just a typing mistake to list/bid only the TRACC product on this line item? 7/25/2011 9:38:00 PM on ref. # E60029 Impact Attenuator Type 2 as per plan, 55mph, 24"(TRACC) the proposal has listed a sole source proprietary product when ODOT as approved a number of systems to be bid againist one another. Is this just a typing mistake to list/bid only the TRACC product on this line item? 7/25/2011 2:14:28 PM The existing structure description on plan sheet 383/464 indicates the structure was rehabilitated in 1986 and in Will the rehabilitation plans be on the Department ftp site? ftp://ftp.dot.state.oh.us/pub/contracts/attach/ham-83469/ 7/25/2011 2:08:51 PM The abutment elevation views on plan sheets 395/464 and 396/464 indicate the bottom of the abutment pile caps are to match the existing bottom of footing elevations 835.3' and 836.2'. The existing plans indicate the bottom of footing elevations are 835.8' and 836.7'. Why are these elevations different? If the bottom of fotting elevations are different from those shown on the plans, will the adjustment be made in the pile cap or in the abutment? The bottom of abutment footing elevations shown on the plans differ from the existing plan elevations due to a datum correction. All beam seat elevations were surveyed and compared to existing plan elevations to determine the datum correction. We believe that once the proposed elevation is excavated to - the bottom of the existing plan file footing elevations and proposed footing elevations will match. Contractor should excavate to the proposed footing elevations listed on sheet 395 & /19/2011 9:48:31 AM Can the existing structure drawings be posted online? ftp://ftp.dot.state.oh.us/pub/contracts/attach/ham-83469/ 2:22:21 PM Page 5