|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/16/2026 9:22:22 AM
|
|
Per bridge plan sheet 3 of 11, Note #1 calls out “Existing deck shall be demolished in such a way to not damage existing bridge, including existing reinforcing, shear studs, and stay-in-place forms." Is the intent to keep the SIP forms in place? Can the contractor remove the stay in place forms within the removal area, 2'-10", and cast the deck section with removable forms?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/20/2026 3:27:55 PM
|
|
The intent is that the SIP forms remain in-place. Removal of the SIP forms and the use of removable formwork meeting the requirements of Specification section 404 may be used at the contractor’s option at no additional cost to the Department, including related work such as debris containment over and traffic control on Route 199.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/16/2026 9:17:04 AM
|
|
Per roadway plan sheet 8(1) Drainage Descriptions, Note #7 calls out “Existing Storm Sewer Pipes and Inlets that are Part of the Proposed Network Shall Be Cleaned Out.” Are bidders to understand this includes all the existing storm runs that a profile was provided (plan sheets 8(3) to 8(8))?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/20/2026 2:18:30 PM
|
|
Correct, the existing storm sewer networks shown on these sheets shall be cleaned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/16/2026 9:15:46 AM
|
|
Per roadway plan sheet 1G(1) Transportation Management Plan Notes, under Temporary Traffic Control (TTC) / Maintenance of Traffic (MOT), Note #3 calls out “Normal working hours are 9:00am to 3:00pm Monday through Saturday…” Does this pertain to all MOT phases including the Phase 2 detour?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/20/2026 2:19:04 PM
|
|
Correct, this includes the Phase 2 detour as well. Any exceptions to these working hours shall require prior written authorization from James City County and VDOT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/15/2026 11:26:29 AM
|
|
Please advise what the lead testing items are for since none of the existing steel beams are being demolished.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/16/2026 3:58:38 PM
|
|
These items do not need to be included in the plan and proposal. The items will be removed from the affected sheet(s) in an addendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/13/2026 11:31:37 AM
|
|
regarding the "FOA-5 at bridge terminal delineator detail", if the optional post cap is used, does that eliminate the need for the 48" ground mounted flexible delineator?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/15/2026 2:56:03 PM
|
|
The flex post delineator is to be used to omit the option for a post cap. Addendum forthcoming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/13/2026 11:29:38 AM
|
|
what is the spacing on the flexible post delineators shown on "FOA-5 at bridge terminal delineator detail"?
|
|
Answer
1 previous answer(s)
|
Date:
|
7/15/2026 2:57:14 PM
|
|
Per VDOT RDM, App J-2-7, the flexible post delineator shall be installed at each guardrail post along the length of the FOA and along the guardrail until the posts are more than 3-ft from edge of paved path. Per standard GR-FOA-5, there are 12 posts, while the post spacing on GR-MGS1 is typically 6’-3” or 6.25’. Addendum forthcoming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/13/2026 11:27:13 AM
|
|
are the 48" above grade flexible delineator 2-1/4 dia shown on the "FOA-5 bridge Terminal delineator detail" the same as pay item 1540 - flex post delineator = 86 each?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/15/2026 2:57:52 PM
|
|
The line item referenced above is for temporary work at the intersection of Route 60 and Route 199 Off-Ramp, which can be found on sheet 1G(8A). Delineators for FOA-5 will be added to the project bid items via forthcoming addendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
7/10/2026 4:07:16 PM
|
|
The five (5) revised plan sheets outlined in July 8th revision are still not available on ProjectWise. Please upload/refresh. Thank you!
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/13/2026 1:19:32 PM
|
|
The A74_11512 Plan Set has been revised to include the revised sheets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
6/30/2026 10:05:33 AM
|
|
Roadway Typical Section sheets denote a Standard HR-1. Roadway Plans Sheet 5 denotes a Non-Standard HR-1. Please provide details for the HR-1 required on the project.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/1/2026 3:10:19 PM
|
|
The proposed handrail is non-standard and consists of modifying the VDOT HR-1 standard with black powder coating. The typical section will be revised via an addendum to reflect this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
6/29/2026 5:01:33 PM
|
|
The Reinforcing Schedule on Sheet 11 details 4,181lbs of moment slab rebar. The estimated quantity on Sheet 2 and in the proposal is 17,180lbs. Please clarify where the additional rebar quantity is.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/1/2026 3:10:31 PM
|
|
To address the question, we will need to make a sheet revision to correct the quantity discrepancy. The quantity will be revised via addendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
6/29/2026 4:57:04 PM
|
|
Does the 76CY of A4 Concrete include the moment slab and railing concrete? If not, please verify quantity.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
7/1/2026 3:10:41 PM
|
|
The Concrete Class A4 quantity includes the concrete in the moment slab and approach slab as noted on Sheet 1 of 11. The railings and terminal walls shall be paid under Railing, CPSR 3 Rails. The quantity will be revised via addendum.
|
|
|
|
|
Displaying questions 1 - 10 (of 12)
Page:
1 2 First Previous Next Last
|