Purchasing Department 530 Water Street Oakland, CA ADDENDUM No. 1. Bid No /03 LED Street Light Conversion Project

Transcription

1 Purchasing Department 530 Water Street Oakland, CA Date: August 14, 2015 ADDENDUM No. 1 Bid No /03 LED Street Light Conversion Project This Addendum modifies the original Bid documents for the above Bid. Acknowledge receipt of this addendum in the space provided on the Bid Form (Attachment 2). Failure to do so may disqualify your bid. The following corrections have been made to the above referenced Bid: A. Correction: On the Product Specification, page 3 of 3, under item D. Bid Alternate, delete the word or without under the second paragraph, first sentence. The Bid Alternate is for Tilted Alternate LED Street Light. On the Bid Form, page 4 of 6, under section II. Bid Alternate, where it states B. Non-Tilting Cutoff LED Street Light Conversion. This is a typo error and the correct reference should be A. Tilted Alternate LED Street Light Conversion. AutoCAD File correction: Figure 2 and 3. Minimum Port Light Level Requirements are corrected to match Product Specification, page 3 of 3, under Section C. Lighting Level Requirements. B. Updated Bid Form (Page 4 of 6): Attached to this addendum is an updated page 4 of 6 of the Bid Form for the changes mentioned above. Make sure to use the updated page when submitting a bid alternate (along with the required documentation). C. Updated AutoCAD files (Figure 2 and 3): Figure 2 and 3. Minimum Port Light Level Requirements are corrected to match Product Specification, page 3 of 3, under Section C. Lighting Level Requirements. Make sure to use the Updated AutoCAD files for the required Photometric Calculations included as part of this addendum. There are no other changes to Bid No /03. Bid No /03 Addendum No. 1 Page 1 of 5

2 The following questions were submitted by the deadline and are answered in this addendum. 1. Question: Please clarify, the Port LED Street Conversion project (Bid No /03) is only to furnish the goods. No installation will be required. Answer: Correct, this project is to purchase materials only. No installation will be required. Port staff will perform the required installation. 2. Question: What is the cost estimate/range of this LED Street Conversion Project? Answer: The project estimate is $150K. 3. Question: Does the Port have any preferred manufacturers? Answer: As stated in the standard specification of the bid document, the LED luminaires for street and parking lot lighting shall be manufactured by Philips, Holophane, GE, Lumec, Cooper, BetaLED, or approved equal. The LED s shall be manufactured by a recognized major LED chip manufacturer (Cree, Philips, or approved equivalent). The Port will accept approved equivalents, but the Port reserves the right to determine equivalency. If bidding an equivalent product, bidder shall submit all manufacturer s specifications and warranties. The Port will be the sole determinant if the product meets the Port s operational needs and specification. 4. Question: Can suppliers/vendors visit sites with their team at a later time, and will they have access to the sites. Answer: Yes, all street light poles are publicly accessible and are located along the public roadways and can be visited at any time. The Port will not field meet with any suppliers during the bidding period. Any questions should have been submitted by August 12 th, 2015 by 4:00PM. 5. Question: Is the Port planning to retrofit existing fixtures or replace the entire fixtures with new LED fixtures? Answer: The Port is soliciting competitive bids to furnish and deliver complete new LED street lighting luminaires (fixtures). No retrofit kits. 6. Question: Does the Port intend to seek utility rebates for this project? Answer: Yes, the Port will work with PG&E directly for LED rebates. Rebate processing service will not be required. 7. Question: The Bid Form requires an 8-week delivery; does that mean the Port will be providing installation? Will this include staging space? Answer: Port will store all LEDs at the Harbor Facilities Warehouse. No installation will be required for this project. Port staff will be performing the installation. Bid No /03 Addendum No. 1 Page 2 of 5

3 8. Question: If a supplier is submitting or equal fixtures, what is the deadline? Answer: All bids are due on September 1, 2015 until 2:00pm. 9. Question: Per the bid instructions, Cobra head style lights will be replaced with LEDs. Do the LEDs need to be "cobra head" style that slide right on the mount? Or can they be shoebox style with a tilt adjustable bracket. Answer: Yes, the cobra head LED replacement needs to be cobra head style. Mounting shall be similar to existing 4 bolt slip fitter bracket type. 10. Question: Is the Port planning to install mast arms on the existing flood light poles? Answer: No. 11. Is the Port planning to keep dual arm poles (two lighting fixtures along Embarcadero)? Answer: Yes 12. Question: Does the Port require full cutoff or cutoff luminaires? Answer: The Port requires full cutoff luminaires. 13. Question: What is the diameter of the arm attachments for each of the bid items? Answer: The diameter is typically 2-3/ Question: What is the dimension of the mounted flood lights post top tenon? Answer: 2-3/8 X 4 L 15. Question: Does the Port have an issue with light spill outside the roadway? Answer: Not particularly, the Port s requirement is to ensure compliance with light level requirements for roadway lighting only (face of curb to face of curb). 16. Question: In reference to Section B-1 (Street Lighting Specification), item no. 4 and Section D (Bid Alternate) where it states Mounts shall not be made of aluminum. Does the Port have a preference on the type of mounts and accessories? Answer: Mounts can be powder coated steel, galvanized steel, or stainless steel. 17. Question: When should shields be required for flood lights? Answer: If a luminaire needs to tilt to achieve the light level requirements set forth, shielding will be needed. If the luminaire can be mounted horizontally with no tilt, shielding is not required. However, if additional shielding enhances the performance of Bid No /03 Addendum No. 1 Page 3 of 5

4 the luminaire to meet light level requirements, the IES file used in photometric calculation shall match the necessary shielding. 18. Question: In reference to the AutoCAD file, will a file for the Bid Alternate be available as well? Answer: The AutoCAD file will include all bid elements, including bid alternate. 19. Question: Are there photometric calculations required for the backside (sidewalk) fixtures along Embarcadero? Answer: No, fixtures facing backside shall not be included in photometric calculation. All bidders shall conduct calculations using the AutoCAD basemap with luminaires facing the roadways provided as part of this addendum. 20. Question: Regarding the Photometric requirement, does the Port want photometric calculations for the fixture alone, installed, or both? Answer: Photometric calculation for fixture alone is not required. Please use the provided AutoCAD basemap for all photometric calculations. All photometric calculations shall be representative of installed conditions. 21. Question: Confirm that site Embarcadero (Figure 1 of 3 Bid Item # A.1) is to have a single output LED solution representing 150W & 250W to be replaced. Answer: Correct, the Port s preference is to purchase one single output LED fixture to replace all existing street lights on Embarcadero per Bid Item A Question: Confirm that site Embarcadero (Figure 1 of 3 Bid Item # A.1) is representing only Section C Item 1 of the Lighting Level Requirements (only one analysis run required). Answer: Correct. 23. Question: Confirm that site 7 th Street (Figure 2 of 3 Bid Item # A.2, A.3 & A.4) is to have single output LED solution representing 250W & 400W to be replaced. Answer: Correct, in reference to Bid Items A.2 and A.3, the Port s preference is to purchase one single output LED fixture to replace all existing cobra head street lights on 7 th Street. Please refer to footnote on Figure 2 or 3 for Bid Item A Question: Confirm that site 7 th Street (Fig. 2 of 3 Bid Item # A.2, A.3 & A.4) is representing Section C Items 2 (7 th St. East of Middle Harbor Rd.), 3 (7 th St. West of Middle Harbor Rd.) & 4 (Middle Harbor Rd.) of the Lighting Level Requirements which is indicating only one analysis run is required for these three Section C Items. Answer: Correct, we require one photometric analysis for site 7 th Street (Figure 2 of 3). Bid No /03 Addendum No. 1 Page 4 of 5

5 25. Question: Confirm that site 7 th Street (Figure 2 of 3 Bid Item # A.2, A.3 & A.4) is indicating incorrect average footcandle requirement of 1.1 with 4:1 Ave./Min. uniformity. Should bidders follow Section C of the Lighting Level Requirements table indicating 1.4 average footcandle with 3:1 Ave./Min instead? Answer: For site 7 th Street (Figure 2 of 3) Footcandle requirements shall be 1.4 average footcandles with uniformity ratio (Avg/Min) or 3:1 or better. A revised AutoCAD file with the revised Minimum Port Light Level Requirement for 7 th Street (Fig. 2 of 3) is included with this addendum. 26. Question: Confirm that site Maritime Street (Figure 3 of 3 Bid Item # B.1 & B.2) is to have a single output LED solution representing 400W to be replaced. Answer: Correct. 27. Question: Confirm that site Maritime Street (Figure 3 of 3 Bid Item # B.1 & B.2) is indicating incorrect average footcandle requirement of 1.1 with 4:1 Ave./Min. uniformity. Should bidders follow Section C of the Lighting Level Requirements table indicating 1.4 average footcandle with 3:1 Ave./Min instead? Answer: For site Maritime Street (Fig. 3 of 3) Footcandle requirements shall be 1.4 Average footcandles with uniformity ratio (Avg/Min) or 3:1 or better. A revised AutoCAD file with the revised Minimum Port Light Level Requirement for Maritime Street (Fig. 3 of 3) is included with this addendum. 28. Question: Confirm that a total of 3 non-tilted analysis runs are required upon confirmation of questions above per Section C (Lighting Level Requirements) items 1,2,3,4 & 5 of the Product Specification with potentially one tilted analysis run upon confirmation of question 26 above per Section C (Lighting Level Requirements) Item 5. Answer: Port will require photometric analysis for the corresponding LED fixtures you plan to bid on. 29. Question: Confirm pole setback in feet from face of curb for each photometric analysis base map Figures 1, 2 & 3. Answer: For all locations/figures, the pole setback behind face of curb is 2.5 feet. 30. Question: Should Attachment 2, Bid Form, page 4 of 6 (Bid Alternate) say B. Tilted Alternate rather than B. Non-Tilted Cutoff? Answer: See page 1 of 5, titled A. Correction, second bullet point. Bid No /03 Addendum No. 1 Page 5 of 5

6 II. Bid Alternate Bid No.: 15-16/03, LED Street Light Conversion Project (Bid Form (Updated) Page 4 of 6, Addendum No. 1) The bid alternate element shall be the LED equivalent of flood type luminaire with tilting that does not completely meet the uplight mitigation goal stated above. If tilting is necessary to achieve light level requirements in Section B, shielding to mitigate up lighting will be required. The cost of these shields shall be accounted for in the bid alternate element mounts, shields, and accessories as a separate line item. Mounts shall not be made of aluminum. A. Bid Alternate Flood Light LED Street Light Conversion: (for Bid Element No. 2) Replacement brand: A. Tilted Alternate LED Street Light Conversion No. Location/ Mounts and Accessories: Existing Wattage Equivalent LED Wattage LED Luminaire Model No. QTY Unit Cost Total 1. 7 th St. East and West of Middle Harbor Road $ $ 1.1. Mounts, Shields, and Accessories 33 $ $ 2. Middle Harbor Road and Maritime Street $ $ 2.1. Mounts, Shields, and Accessories 106 $ $ Subtotal $ Shipping and Delivery (Taxable : YES NO) $ Sales 9.5% (Alameda County) $ Bid Alternative No. 1 - Total Bid Price $ Note: Refer to Exhibit 3 (Picture D) for actual picture of Flood Light fixture and mounting application pole. Bidder s Name: Initials: Bid 15-16/03, Attachment 2, Bid Form, Page 4 of 6, Addendum No. 1

7 BID ITEM # A.1 MINIMUM PORT LIGHT LEVEL REQUIREMENTS: AVERAGE: 1.1FC UNIFORMITY: 4:1 OR BETTER CALCULATION POINT SPACING: 5' X 5' FEET GRID. PROJECT FACE OF CURB PHOTOMETRIC CALCULATION RESULTS: MOUNT HEIGHT ARM LENGTH TILT BRAND MODEL # COLOR TEMPERATURE WATTAGE LIGHT LOST TOTAL LAMP LUMENS FACTOR AVERAGE - FOOT CANDLE UNIFORMITY (AVG./MIN) IES FILE NAME EMBARCADERO 30FT 8FT 4,000K EXISTING COBRA HEAD STREET LIGHT PORT OF OAKLAND LED CONVERSION PROJECT PHOTOMETRIC CALCULATIONS EMBARCADERO FIGURE 1 OF 3

8 BID ITEM # A.2, A.3 & A.4* MINIMUM PORT LIGHT LEVEL REQUIREMENTS: AVERAGE: 1.4FC UNIFORMITY: 3:1 OR BETTER CALCULATION POINT SPACING: 5' X 5' FEET GRID. PROJECT FACE OF CURB PHOTOMETRIC CALCULATION RESULTS: MOUNT HEIGHT ARM LENGTH TILT BRAND MODEL # COLOR TEMPERATURE WATTAGE LIGHT LOST TOTAL LAMP LUMENS FACTOR AVERAGE - FOOT CANDLE UNIFORMITY (AVG./MIN) IES FILE NAME 7TH STREET 30FT 8FT 4,000K * PHOTOMETRIC CALCS FOR BID ITEM A.4 IS NOT REQUIRED. BID ITEM A.4 SHALL BE THE SAME MODEL SERIES AS A.2 & A.3 WITH HIGHER LIGHT OUTPUT EQUIVALENT TO A 400-WATT HPS COBRA HEAD. EXISTING COBRA HEAD STREET LIGHT PORT OF OAKLAND LED CONVERSION PROJECT PHOTOMETRIC CALCULATIONS 7TH STREET REVISED - FIGURE 2 OF 3

9 BID ITEM # B.1 & B.2 MINIMUM PORT LIGHT LEVEL REQUIREMENTS: AVERAGE: 1.4FC UNIFORMITY: 3:1 OR BETTER CALCULATION POINT SPACING: 5' X 5' FEET GRID. PROJECT FACE OF CURB PHOTOMETRIC CALCULATION RESULTS: MOUNT HEIGHT ARM LENGTH TILT BRAND MODEL # COLOR TEMPERATURE WATTAGE LIGHT LOST TOTAL LAMP LUMENS FACTOR AVERAGE - FOOT CANDLE UNIFORMITY (AVG./MIN) IES FILE NAME MARITIME ST. 40FT 8FT 4,000K EXISTING FLOOD LIGHT WITH SHIELD PORT OF OAKLAND LED CONVERSION PROJECT PHOTOMETRIC CALCULATIONS MARITIME STREET REVISED - FIGURE 3 OF 3