|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
8/11/2026 9:41:03 AM
|
|
Some of the Addendum 4 updated plan sheets are "digitally certified and cannot be combined".
Please provide a Merged Plan Set of the updated sheets.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
8/12/2026 11:30:43 AM
|
|
A11_113535 Plan Set.set: Individual plan, cross-section and bridge sheets for Rt 50 (113535). Duplicative Millwood files removed.
A11_116867 Plan Set.set: Individual plan and cross-section sheets for Millwood Ave.
A11_113535 Merged PDF Plan Set.set: Contains 3 merged PDF files, one each for the bridge, road plans and cross-sections
A11_116867 Merged PDF Plan Set.set: Contains 2 merged PDF files, one each for the road plans and cross-sections.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
8/5/2026 4:19:25 PM
|
|
The following plan sheets seem to be missing on ProjectWise. Please confirm they are released.
- 0017-034-911c501_01j(15)_R2
- U000-138-R43c501_01_R2
- U000-138-R43c501_01d_R2
- U000-138-R43c501_02b_R2
- 302-15_002r1
- 302-15_009r1
- 302-15_019r1
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
8/7/2026 7:49:07 AM
|
|
It has been confirmed all plan sheets are now posted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
8/11/2026 9:56:05 AM
|
|
If all the Addendum 4-updated plan sheets have been posted, can you please clarify where Bridge Plans 302-15_002r1, 302-15_009r1, and 302-15_019r1 are located?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
8/12/2026 11:31:14 AM
|
|
The individual sheets are contained in the SET file “A11_113535 Plan Set.set” and the merged SET file “A11_113535 Merged PDF Plan Set.set”
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/21/2026 5:14:04 PM
|
|
For Project 113535, on sheet 2B(1) the grading summary shows a total of zero for the borrow quantity as there is excess excavation. On sheet 2B(2), the grading summary references UPC 115717 and has a borrow quantity of 7,606 CY. How do the locations on 2B(2) grading summary coincide with the previous table on 2B(1) as some of the locations seem to be the same? Please clarify.
|
|
Answer
1 previous answer(s)
|
Date:
|
7/23/2026 2:37:31 PM
|
|
The UPC 115717 project includes construction of the additional WB Rte. 17/50/522 lane from the beginning of the project to just east of the Rte. 522 intersection, and contains a substantial amount of fill at the proposed bridge approaches. The inclusion of the borrow quantity was a conservative approach to allow the contractor to be able to begin the earthwork for the bridge approaches and abutments without having to advance construction elsewhere, but ultimately the execution of the work is based on the Contractor's means and methods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/21/2026 5:06:33 PM
|
|
The grading table on Sheet 2B for Project 116867 appears to have an error for totaling Regular Excavation for Millwood Ave. and is excluding the unsuitable material. Please clarify as this would also affect the borrow calculation.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/23/2026 2:36:47 PM
|
|
The values shown in the Unsuitable Material Below Subgrade column were mistakenly placed and represent the volumes of existing pavement to be removed and replaced with fill material. The materials identified as unsuitable for embankment between Sta. 101+00 and Sta. 105+50 will be added to the table and the excavation and borrow quantities updated in a future addendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/21/2026 4:56:37 PM
|
|
Please clarify what the engineer assumed for root mat thickness in calculating total volumes.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/23/2026 2:36:20 PM
|
|
The root mat was assumed to be 6" thick for the earthwork calculations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/21/2026 4:54:24 PM
|
|
Please clarify what Bid Item #0370 – Select Matl. Ty. 1 Min. CBR-30 of 120 Tons is for.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/23/2026 2:35:30 PM
|
|
The 120 Tons of Select Material Ty. 1 Min. CBR-30 is to be placed below the proposed RW-3 retaining walls for the UPC 116867 project as shown on typical section sheets 2A(1) and 2A(4)."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/21/2026 4:52:47 PM
|
|
The grading table on Sheet 2B for Project 116867 shows 1,044 CY of unsuitable material and has a note at the bottom of the table that from Sta. 101+00 to Sta 105+50 the soils won’t meet the borrow / embankment requirements. The table also shows areas of unsuitable material for Mall Blvd and Apple Blossom that are outside those station ranges. Can more clarification be provided how the engineer calculated the 1,044 CY?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/23/2026 2:37:56 PM
|
|
The values shown in the Unsuitable Material Below Subgrade column were mistakenly placed and represent the volumes of existing pavement to be removed and replaced with fill material. The materials identified as unsuitable for embankment between Sta. 101+00 and Sta. 105+50 will be added to the table and the excavation and borrow quantities updated in a future addendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/21/2026 4:50:46 PM
|
|
The Geotech surveys provided reference bedrock at the abutments and also IGM at other borings. Was there a rock excavation quantity assumed to be included in Regular Excavation?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/24/2026 11:37:49 AM
|
|
No separate rock excavation quantity was estimated or assumed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/17/2026 7:38:47 AM
|
|
For the Bridge Girders, an answer was posted about the structural steel required as follow, “The structural steel is required to be both Grade 50W and painted. All surfaces shall be painted (other than the anchor bolts, as called out in the plans.” Please Clarify the VDOT “painted requirement”, it is not that clear reading through the different specs, if it will be sufficient a shop painted with a primer and also the Girders will need any Field Coating.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/23/2026 5:24:58 PM
|
|
Per Road and Bridge Specifications Section 411.06, new steel structures shall be painted with System B. From VDOT's Materials Approved List, both 3 coat and 2 coat systems are accepted. The specifications do not state that the finish coat must be applied in the field, but any damaged areas of the coating must be cleaned and repainted. This would include contact points between the overhang brackets and the exterior girders webs, areas around bolt assemblies, and anywhere that concrete splatter has adhered to the girders. To avoid excessive touchup painting, it is encouraged for the Contractor to apply the finish coat in the field after the deck pour has been completed and formwork is removed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/16/2026 6:50:35 PM
|
|
Please confirm the quantity for bid item REF 1330 temporary sign. The addendum #4 quantity provided in the bid item list does not appear to match the total between the two plan sets.
|
|
Answer
3 previous answer(s)
|
Date:
|
7/21/2026 4:09:44 PM
|
|
The summaries have been reviewed and confirmed to be correct. Summary sheet 2F(4) from the Exit 313 Plan set contains Temporary Sign quantities in both the UPC 113535 and UPC 115717 MOT summary tables.
|
|
|
|
|