|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
3/13/2024 5:07:20 PM
|
|
We were unable to make an accurate judgment of how much cover is over the crown of the pipes. Could the Owner/Engineer please share this information for each location? If not, please share the as-built drawings showcasing the plan and profile for the said locations.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
3/19/2024 7:50:37 AM
|
|
The “Project Narrative” contains the approximate cover depth for each location; please bid accordingly. As-builts for each location are not available.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
3/15/2024 4:16:47 PM
|
|
Please ignore this question, we see the info in the project docs
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
2/22/2024 3:10:19 PM
|
|
We performed a site visit for Location #5: (D605), per the coordinates shared on the sheet LOCATION MAPS UPC 121743 which is 37.4035,-77.5373. At this location, we found just one pipe segment and it did not match the pipe size and length mentioned in PROJECT NARRATIVE 121743 for Location -5. Could the Owner/Engineer please provide the correct coordinate that will match the data listed on PROJECT NARRATIVE 121743?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
3/8/2024 2:26:29 PM
|
|
Coordinates have been updated via the addendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
3/13/2024 4:56:58 PM
|
|
Thank you for your prompt response. We've noticed that the coordinates have been revised in addendum 2. Here are our two inquiries regarding the mentioned locations:
Given the presence of guardrails on both sides, could the Owner/Engineer kindly advise on the most effective method for accessing the pipes at these locations? This information would enable us to assess the conditions accurately.
Despite the updated GPS coordinates, it appears that the map has not been revised, leading to confusion. Could the Owner/Engineer please update the map accordingly? This would ensure that we are referencing the correct segments and avoid any misunderstandings.
|
|
Answer
1 previous answer(s)
|
Date:
|
3/14/2024 5:44:32 PM
|
|
Upon further review it's been determined that the locations shown on the maps are correct. No changes are required. Also, the Contractor is responsible for determining how to access the site to perform the repair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
3/8/2024 12:09:59 PM
|
|
Hello, could you kindly provide clarification on this matter? We may need to conduct another site visit based on your response.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
3/8/2024 2:26:58 PM
|
|
See addendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
3/8/2024 12:09:56 PM
|
|
Hello, could you kindly provide clarification on this matter? We may need to conduct another site visit based on your response.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
3/8/2024 2:27:09 PM
|
|
See addendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
3/8/2024 12:09:54 PM
|
|
Hello, could you kindly provide clarification on this matter? We may need to conduct another site visit based on your response.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
3/8/2024 2:27:21 PM
|
|
See addendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
3/8/2024 12:09:51 PM
|
|
Hello, could you kindly provide clarification on this matter? We may need to conduct another site visit based on your response.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
3/8/2024 2:27:34 PM
|
|
See addendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
2/22/2024 12:34:00 PM
|
|
Are there any work time restrictions on the said locations? If yes please specify this concerning each location. Additionally, if we intend to setup at least 10-15 away from the shoulder of the highway will we still be subjected to these work time restrictions?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
3/8/2024 2:25:26 PM
|
|
Please see "Limitation of Operations & Allowable Work Hours" on page 228 of the contract for shoulder only closures and site-specific allowable work hours.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
2/22/2024 12:32:58 PM
|
|
There are some pay items associated with the project, could the Owner/Engineer please specify under which scenarios are we going to use the below:
• BEDDING MATL,
• REGULAR EXCAVATION (Where does the Owner/Engineer see the need for excavation?)
• SILTATION CONTROL EXCAVATION
• AGGR.BASE MAT.TY. I NO.21A OR 21B (Where does the Owner/Engineer see's the need for us to use this ?)
• FLOWABLE BACKFILL (is this item related to invert repair? If not where does the Owner/Engineer see’s the need for flowable backfill?)
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
3/8/2024 2:28:46 PM
|
|
See Addendum. The Pay items were included in error and have been removed via the addendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2024 1:29:53 AM
|
|
During our site visit, we encountered an eastern river cooter resting inside one of the segments. Could the Owner/engineer please advise if there are any particular procedures we should adhere to for their removal or to facilitate their unimpeded movement during the rehabilitation process?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
2/20/2024 4:00:22 PM
|
|
This species is not threatened or endangered, therefore there are no provisions or specific procedures in the contract pertaining to removal of the species.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2024 1:18:33 AM
|
|
Due to several unanswered questions, could the owner/engineer consider extending the bid due date by two weeks? This would allow all contractors bidding on the job ample time to fully understand, respond, or pose counterquestions as necessary
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
2/20/2024 3:59:42 PM
|
|
The bid letting will remain the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2024 1:13:38 AM
|
|
Could the Owner/Engineer kindly specify whether the design thickness will be measured from the crest or the valley of the corrugation? The variation between the two approaches pertains to filling the corrugation. Measuring from the crest would entail filling the corrugations before applying the designed thickness, resulting in a smooth surface and a better Manning's n coefficient for increased flowability.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
2/20/2024 3:59:14 PM
|
|
The corrugations shall be filled to produce a smooth surface as indicated in the question. The design thickness shall be determined by the Contractor's Engineer using the references in the contract considering maintaining the existing hydraulic capacity and required structural properties.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2024 1:01:00 AM
|
|
Under PROJECT NARRATIVE 121743, for location #2 it is mentioned that the pipe segments are located over Bull Hill, could the Owner/Engineer please confirm this?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
2/20/2024 3:58:35 PM
|
|
The coordinates included in the contract are correct. Location #2 is labeled as Rte. 295 over Bull Hill, but the water feature is not identified in Google maps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
2/15/2024 11:03:21 AM
|
|
1. What is the ground cover over each of the 7 culverts?
2. Are PE design analysis required for each culvert?
3. Typically, there are 'thickness limits' of the material specified; is there any for this project?
4. All the debris within the culverts, can it be spread onsite, or does it have to be hauled away to an approved disposal site?
5. The thin tar coating that exists on the CMP's, does it have to be totally removed?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
2/20/2024 3:30:14 PM
|
|
1. Fill depths for each location is noted in the Project Narrative starting on Page 219 of the contract.
2. Please see Special Provision for Pipe Rehabilitation starting on Page 90 of the contract about PE design analysis requirements.
3. Thickness is limited by the design meeting the required structural properties while maintaining the existing hydraulic capacity as stipulated in the contract on Page 94.
4. Debris must be hauled away. Please see Page 224 of the contract.
5. Pipes shall be cleaned as required in the contract. It is not required to remove tar coating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
1/25/2024 10:53:47 AM
|
|
Mention of Good Faith Efforts and forms C-111, C-112, and C-49(if applicable) are listed as requirements if awarded contract, however, no DBE / MBE / WBE goals have been established for this letting.
Will VDOT please confirm if Good Faith Efforts are to be performed in attempt to achieve DBE participation regardless of the fact that there of no DBE participation goals established for this letting?
Further, if Good Faith Efforts are not required, is Form C-111 still required?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
1/25/2024 11:23:41 AM
|
|
The goal is set at 0% and will be added via addendum. The C-111, C-112 and C-48 forms should be submitted according to proposal documents in order for the Department to track programmatic DBE participation.
|
|
|
|
|