|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
11/10/2011 12:12:45 PM
|
|
What is the min.CBR requirement for the 40,000 CY of borrow on the project ?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
10/21/2011 9:12:34 AM
|
|
Plan 291-39, Sheet 23 of 26 , note 3 states "The barriers, coping and moment slabs for approach pavement shall be precast concrete".
This is contrary to standard practice where barrier units and coping may be precast or cast in place. Moment Slabs are always cast in place due to the need to provide full contact between the bottom of moment slab and the sub-grade to resist sliding during an impact event.
Please confirm that barriers and coping may be either precast or cast in place, and moment slabs shall be cast in place.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
10/25/2011 3:58:38 PM
|
|
The department has no objection to using cast in place concrete for the barriers, coping, and moment slab associated with the MSE wall so long as the finished product is of the same appearance and quality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
10/21/2011 9:09:41 AM
|
|
Plan 291-39, sheet 22 of 26 states that "All MSE coping shall be precast concrete."
This is contrary to standard practice where either precast and/or cast in place coping is used on MSE walls. Precast units are generally 10 ft pieces. Cast in place coping is used at the kinks, offsets, corners and vertical coping sections required by the plans.
Please confirm that cast in place coping will be acceptable for this project.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
10/20/2011 1:49:50 PM
|
|
Will video inspection of UD-4 be measured and paid for under line # 130 - Post Instalation Inspection, or is it incidental to the price for UD-4?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
10/25/2011 11:03:06 AM
|
|
Video inspection is incidental to the cost of UD-4. Please reference the eighth paragraph in Section 501.03 (c), “Prior to final acceptance of the underdrain system, the Contractor shall conduct a video inspection of the installed system in accordance with the requirements of VTM-108.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
10/20/2011 10:58:57 AM
|
|
Sheet 2D of the roadway plans estimates about 9,355 SF of temporary sheet piling will be required to build the MSE Walls. Sheet 1 of the bridge plans shows temporary sheeting between the EBL and WBL on the right side of Route 207. Right side is based on looking upstation. When overlaying the footing elevations shown on Sheet 26 of the bridge plans with the topography shown on Sheet 6 of the roadway plans it is evident that there are deep cuts on both sides of the fills to build the MSE Walls. Since no temporary sheeting is shown on the left side of the fills is open cutting allowed here or is temporary sheet piling necessary here also?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
10/25/2011 11:01:50 AM
|
|
The contractor may excavate left of centerline for the MSE wall using any methods allowed by the earthwork and MSE wall specifications. The surrounding grades do not suggest that temporary sheet pile will be required in this area.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
10/20/2011 10:24:28 AM
|
|
Sheet 6 of the roadway plans shows site topography in the area of the MSE Walls. This sheet shows grade work between the walls and railroad track not indicated on other plan sheets. Is it the intention of the Department that this topography be used to grade the area around the walls once they are completed?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
10/25/2011 11:00:20 AM
|
|
Sheet 6 of the roadway plans indicates the detail of the final grades in the vicinity of the bridge. Sheet 6 shall override any cross sections that are not consistent with this grading plan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
10/20/2011 10:18:40 AM
|
|
The MSE Wall footing elevations shown on Sheet 26 of the bridge plans do not match the wall footing elevations shown on Sheets 21, 22, and 23 of the cross sections? Which set of elevations is correct?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
10/25/2011 10:59:19 AM
|
|
The printed elevations on Sheet 26 of 26 MSE Wall Elevation shall have priority over the graphical depiction of this wall on cross section Sheets 21 through 23.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
10/19/2011 2:32:34 PM
|
|
In order to proceed with the project in a timely manner, the Temporary Detour should be
paved in Jan./Feb. 2012. Will temperature specs be waived for the temporary asphalt?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
10/25/2011 10:58:00 AM
|
|
VDOT expects that the temporary asphalt will be placed in suitable conditions so that the detour will perform throughout its life without regular maintenance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
10/14/2011 3:39:44 PM
|
|
Please identify what limits were used in calculating the quantity for Structure Excavation, Line Item 0840.
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
10/25/2011 2:19:25 PM
|
|
Structure Excavation is measured from the limits of vertical planes 18 inches outside the neat lines of the abutments from the top of the footing to the bottom of the footing. The upper limit of the footing coincides with the limits of A3 concrete in the integral backwall. The quantity of Structure Excavation at Abutment B is the same as the quantity shown in the table of estimated quantities for Abutment A, but a plan error results in this quantity not being included in the table of estimated quantities or the schedule of items.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Question
|
|
Date:
|
10/14/2011 2:51:33 PM
|
|
Sheet 14 of 26 of the bridge plans states that "the cost of the parapet on moment slab is is incidental to the cost of MSE walls". The quantity for Line Item 0820 seems to include the quantity of parapet on moment slab. Which is correct?
|
|
Answer
|
Date:
|
10/20/2011 1:40:46 PM
|
|
The 13th note on Sheet 14 of 26,inidicating that the “[c]ost of parapet on moment slab is incidental to the cost of MSE walls (Retaining Structure)” is a plan error. Line 0820, Item 62010 Concrete Parapet in the Schedule of Items indicates the correct quantity of concrete parapet. The intent of the contract is to pay for Line 0820, Item 62010 Concrete Parapet separately from 0370, Item 13570 Retaining Wall. The order of priority for contract documents in Section 105.12 appears to be sufficient to resolve this conflict as described herein, and no plan revision is planned prior to receipt of bids.
Line 0820, Item 62010 Concrete Parapet in the Schedule of Items indicates the correct quantity of concrete parapet. This is reinforced with the note below the table Estimated Quantities-Superstructure Only on Sheet 2 of 26 which indicates “[c]oncrete parapet quantity includes 80 LF of parapet on the approach slabs and 191 LF of parapet on MSE wall.” Furthermore, the basis of payment in the Special Provision for MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH WALLS (CONCRETE PANEL FACING) 08-02-11 indicates “[u]nless otherwise defined on the plans, payment shall be full compensation for … copings and moment slabs….,” but does not include parapet. Similarly, the fifth note on sheet 23 of 26 indicates “…the cost of the moment slab is incidental to the cost of MSE wall,” without including the parapet. The quantity of concrete parapet in the schedule of items appears to take priority over the note on Sheet 14 of 26.
|
|
|
|
|
Displaying questions 1 - 10 (of 18)
Page:
1 2 First Previous Next Last
|