Advertisements   Division Home   Bid Results   Bid Tabs   Ad Report   VDOT Forms   Login Or Create Account    
Project Info
Order Number UPC State Project Number Last Date to Post Questions
I08 106829 (NFO) 0606-016-624, B640 6/19/2015
Search Questions
Search
Question Type  
    The last date to post questions has passed. Any questions posed 72 hours before the letting date may not be answered. Export Q&A    
Question List
Subject: Barges Type: Proposal
Question Date: 6/18/2015 5:20:36 PM
Could you provide a little clarification of the Special Provision for "Limitations Governing the Movement of Barges or Flexifloats in Shallow Water" as it pertains to this project. In particular, if we assume the draft of the barge is one to two feet, is there any "shallow water" other than the area directly bordering the shoreline that would preclude the use of barges around the piers and within the project limits? Will a new permit authorization or modification of the existing permit authorization be required to allow the use of "spuds" to anchor the barge in place? We note the Special Provision uses the word "may". If a new permit or modification of existing of the existing permit is required, will the Engineer provide an extension of time? We note the Special Provision uses the word "may". $5000 a day is a lot to gamble on something totally out of both of our hands. Lastly, is there something special in or to the Poni River (i.e. turtle, spiny mussel, etc) that we should be aware of or that could possible preclude the use of barges and/or a barge anchorage?  
Answer   Date: 6/22/2015 9:11:40 AM
“Refer to plan sheet# 19(3B) which indicates contours of stream bed in the vicinity of the bridge, and Sheet 1 of 19 indicates ordinary high and high water elevations. The use of spuds has been allowed in regulated waters. There will be no adjustment to the incentivized substantial completion date and the fixed completion date. The Mattaponi drainage is documented for the presence of the dwarf wedge mussel, a federally protected species. No site specific survey has been made for this specie for this project. It can be assumed that unless fill (soil, stone, or other unconsolidated media) is proposed to be placed below ordinary high water to support access thereby requiring a 404 permit there would be no effect to the Dwarf wedge mussel.”  
 
Subject: Bid Item - MOT Phase 1 (Maintain Detour Signs, Concrete Barriers and Barricades) Type: Plan
Question Date: 6/18/2015 10:53:54 AM
The bid item - MOT Phase 1 (Maintain Detour Signs, Concrete Barriers and Barricades) by name appears to indicate the Contractor is only responsible for maintaining the detour and associated maintenance of traffic items. But there are several notes and plan sheets throughout the plans that indicate the Contractor may be required to install and remove the detour. Is the Department providing all the materials required to maintain traffic during Phase I, i.e. barricades, concrete barriers, signs, sign posts and foundations? Furthermore is the Department installing and removing the detour or is this work included in the work for the Contractor?  
Answer   Date: 6/18/2015 1:51:43 PM
“The department has already placed the detour MOT including barricades and signage. This detour and the Department’s equipment is to remain in place during construction until the roadway opening at substantial completion. The contractor shall be responsible for maintaining the in place equipment during construction. After substantial completion is acknowledged, the signage, barricades, and the other traffic control items belonging to the Department shall be removed and returned by the contractor to the address provided in Plan Sheet#19(1B).”  
 
Subject: Completion Date Type: Proposal
Question Date: 6/4/2015 4:35:06 PM
C-7 lists the completion date as April 15th, 2016 however page 9 of the proposal lists the completion date as November 23, 2015 with incentives specified and penalties for not meeting the November date. It also states that no allowance for weather will be given. The letting date of 6/24/2015 plus 2 months for contracts at a minimum only leaves 3 months for construction. Please confirm that this is correct.  
Answer   Date: 6/8/2015 1:23:43 PM
It’s the Departments intent to expedite the award process (see revised Section 103 in the proposal) and to facilitate to the low bidder upon notification to proceed with submission of shop drawings before PRE-CON; this will allow additional construction time. The Department has reviewed the timeframe and feels the incentivized date of November 23, 2015 is achievable to open the bridge to traffic. To clarify, the project Fixed completion date is April 15, 2016 and the incentive/disincentive based on opening the bridge to traffic is November 23, 2015.  
 
Question Date: 6/8/2015 4:31:08 PM
Page 9 still has a $5,000.00 disincentive clause per day if the bridge is not open by November 23, 2015. By the wording it can be interpreted that this fee will accrue from November 23rd until opening even if it meets the fixed completion date of April 15, 2015. Please clarify the intent. Please also list the plank supplier that the department has discussed the timeline and indicated they can meet your requirements.  
Answer   Date: 6/11/2015 7:43:02 AM
It is the intent of the Department to have the Bridge open by November 23, 2015 for safe crossing by the travelling public. This date is our target for substantial completion and as such is subject to an incentive/disincentive clause. The incentive/disincentive amount only applies to the work specifically required to safely open the bridge to the travelling public, the remainder of the work may be completed by the April 15, 2016 date without incurring disincentive. Furthermore, the department has included in the contract documents an amended version of Specification Section 103. This supplementary specification is intended to allow the apparent low bidder, upon notice of intent to award, to proceed with shop drawings and submittals for the precast planks while awaiting execution of the contract. It is the intent of the department to have submittals for this long lead item by the preconstruction meeting. In consideration of this provision and our analysis it is the department’s opinion that the allotted time is sufficient for construction.  
 
Subject: Request for As-Builts Type: Plan
Question Date: 6/4/2015 11:24:16 AM
Will the Department be posting as-builts to Falcon? If not, how may they be requested?  
Answer   Date: 6/4/2015 2:23:20 PM
The as-builts have been posted to falcon, there are eight sheets and all have an upload date of 06/04/2015.  
 

Displaying questions 1 - 4 (of 4)
Page: 1 First Previous Next Last 

Construction Advertisement Bulletin Board (CABB)
Update Profile
CABB v2.0 © 2008 Virginia Department of Transportation 5/20/2024 11:36:25 PM 2008