Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutQ&A No 1 - CAG-24-109S 7th Street Corridor Improvements Questions and Answers No. 1 Page 1 of 3 S 7TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS Federal Aid Number: CRPUL-CM 1292(003) TIB Number: P-P-102(P03)-1 City Project Number: CAG-24-109 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 1. Question: I am sending this email requesting clarification on the luminaire poles on plan pages IL01-IL04 as the referenced drawings noted in construction note #1 are conflicting, specifically 117.1B. The foundation detail on 117.1A is universal to the arterial street decorative luminaire pole and the arterial street small cell decorative luminaire pole however, the 117.1B has a much different shroud (decorative base) than the 117.1 pole. Please confirm if these poles are standard arterial decorative per 117.1 & 117.1A or are arterial small cell decorative poles. Answer: Standard arterial poles (COR Standard 117.1) is the intended design. Plans have been updated to reflect the specific pole, issued with Addendum No. 2. 2. Question: We are the distributor for JSF Technologies in Washington and have a few inquiries from contractors for a bid on RRFB’s and material for this project for The City of Renton. The spec is calling out for Carmanah or Approved Equal. I have attached our PI Sheets for engineering review. JSF has been used throughout Washington and is on the WA ITS #04616 contract for ease of purchasing in the future. Our RRFB’s offer: Digital Controller with the ability to add up to 8 LED modules per one controller, enclosed solar panel with batteries and controllers,5-year warranty, ease of installation – from the solar cabinet, two Deutsch connects go down the pole, one for the push button and one for the light bar, Push Button Agnostic Radio Distance up to one mile with line of sight, 64 independent radio settings to avoid any cross talk with other systems Please let us know if the city will allow us to bid JSF to the contractors for this project. Thank you. Answer: The City will issue a PIF (Public Interest Finding) for the Carmanah RRFB. 3. Question: I’m looking at this project and i wanted to confirm that on sheet 19 (PV02) that the areas in green are 7" HMA. The road section (RS01) does not specify for the coordinates. Can you advise me. Answer: The 7" HMA section detailed on RS01 applies to all pavement restoration areas. 4. Question: Looking at the Bid form, Bid Item A62 : 8.20 : Conduit Pipe 3 In Diam shows a length of 2,266 LF. The plans do not show conduit runs that contain this length of conduit, nor to the specs talk about this pipe in measurements and payments. Please clarify where this conduit is represented on the project. S 7th Street Corridor Improvements Questions and Answers No. 1 Page 2 of 3 Answer: The conduit noted on the bid form is located under the sidewalk on paving sheets PV02-PV03, construction note 14, and detailed on PVD06. The specification for this item is standard WSDOT Section 8-20. 5. Question: We are interested in the landscaping work for this project. Since this is a bid item proposal, I wanted to point out some significant discrepancies between the Schedule A bid items qty’s for plant material compared to the plant schedule provided on plan sheet LP-01. Plant Schedule totals below represent all species with that size added together. 1 Gallon Plants Plant Schedule = 3,912 (450 + 765 + 880 + 1817) Bid Schedule = 5,310 2 Gallon Plants Plant Schedule = 532 (17 + 210 + 143 + 57 + 105) Bid Schedule = 420 5 Gallon Plants Plant Schedule = 24 (6 + 9 + 9) Bid Schedule = 28 Can the Bid Schedule qty’s be revised to match the plant schedule qty’s which look to be accurate? Answer: Discrepancy in the bid schedule has been addressed. New bid schedule issued as part of Addendum No. 2 6. Question: Bid item A15 “Roadway Excavation Incl. Haul” – This quantity appears to be very low, please review and adjust accordingly. Answer: Bid item A15 “Roadway Excavation Incl. Haul” does not include removal of existing asphalt or concrete. Removal is quantified under bid item A13 “Removal of Structures and Obstructions”. The following estimated quantities are included in the lump sum for bid item A13:  Asphalt removal, incl. haul = 12,966 SF  Concrete removal, incl. haul = 4,538 SF  Gravel removal, incl. haul = 6,859 SF In addition, the following estimated quantities are included in the lump sum for bid item B10:  Asphalt removal, incl. haul = 120 SF  Concrete removal, incl. haul = 694 SF The depth of all removed asphalt is assumed to be 7 inches and all removed concrete is assumed to be 4 inches. Gravel is of variable depth, assumed to be a minimum of 4 inches. 7. Question: Is there going to be any saw cutting bid items added to the proposal, if not, where should this scope be covered? Answer: Addendum No. 2 includes a special provision and modification of the bid proposal to include saw cutting bid items for Schedules A and B. S 7th Street Corridor Improvements Questions and Answers No. 1 Page 3 of 3 8. Question: I want to verify that all the driveways in this project are concrete. The Hatch mark indicate asphalt but the plan notes say refer to STD PLAN 104.4 which only shows concrete details. If they are indeed asphalt, what depth do I use? Answer: The driveways are concrete where the sidewalk crosses. Tie-ins to existing surfaces are asphalt. Depth of asphalt should be a minimum of 4 inches, or match the existing depth. 9. Question: Good morning, we are a landscape contractor bidding on this project. I have a question regarding the topsoil. Spec Section 8-02.3(4)A Topsoil Type A shall conform to 914.2(1) of these special provisions. There are no 9-14 specs at all and WSDOT standard states to refer to SP also. Please advise. Answer: Additional specifications, including 9-14, are added via Addendum 2.