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
A11
113535
0017-034-911, B646, C501
8/21/2026
Search Questions
Search
Question Type
All
Plan
Proposal
Bid Sheet
Permits
Specifications
Other
Question Type must be selected.
Export Q&A
Question List
Subject:
113535 Grading Table
Type:
Plan
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
Date:
Subject:
UPC 116867 Grading Table
Type:
Plan
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:
Subject:
Grading Table - Root Mat
Type:
Plan
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:
Subject:
Bid Item #0370 – Select Matl. Ty. 1 Min. CBR-30
Type:
Bid Sheet
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:
Subject:
Unsuitable Excavtion
Type:
Bid Sheet
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:
Subject:
Rock Excavation
Type:
Proposal
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:
Subject:
Bridge Girders
Type:
Other
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:
Subject:
Ref No. 1330 Temporary Signs
Type:
Bid Sheet
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.
Subject:
Deck Drainage System plans
Type:
Plan
Question
Date:
7/16/2026 3:28:27 PM
About the Deck Drainage System plans subject; a question was answered about a revised sheet 19 that would be included in the next addendum. That sheet 19 didn’t come with any revision on the last addendum. It is very important to provide more detail and more information about this whole System. Please resolve accordingly.
Answer
Date:
7/17/2026 11:32:29 AM
An addendum is forthcoming.
Question
Date:
7/14/2026 8:08:33 AM
It appears that Addendum #4 did not address this, will another addendum be released?
Answer
Date:
7/17/2026 11:29:36 AM
An addendum is forthcoming.
Question
Date:
6/15/2026 2:28:16 PM
Please provide plans of the Deck Drainage System as indicated in the special provisions and a Bid Item, NS DECK DRAINAGE SYSTEM STR. NO. 1078
Answer
Date:
6/18/2026 4:17:31 PM
Details and locations for the Deck Drainage System are shown on Sheets 14 and 19. Sheet 19 has been revised to more clearly identify the deck drain locations on the Deck Plan. The revised sheet will be included in the next addendum.
Question
Date:
7/14/2026 8:08:33 AM
It appears that Addendum #4 did not address this, will another addendum be released?
Answer
Date:
7/17/2026 11:29:36 AM
An addendum is forthcoming.
Subject:
Bridge Stages
Type:
Plan
Question
Date:
7/13/2026 2:47:10 PM
After reviewing traffic control and plan sheets, is there a specific reason as to why the Bridge is being constructed in stages? Can the construction of the Bridge be done in a single stage or elements done in a single stage? (E.G. – Substructure single stage, Concrete superstructure two stages)
Answer
Date:
7/15/2026 7:50:11 AM
The intention of separating the bridge into two stages is to reduce concrete cracking. The Contractor will be required to construct the substructure and deck in two stages as shown in the plans.
Displaying questions 1 - 10 (of 82)
Page:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
First
Previous
Next
Last
Construction Advertisement Bulletin Board (CABB)
Update Profile
CABB v2.0
© 2008 Virginia Department of Transportation
7/21/2026 5:18:47 PM
2008