Questions and Answers For:

Design/Build Services for Accelerated Bridge Construction of Bridge No. 653 - I-95 Over Oxford Street 7554650 / 2017-DB-022

Please Note: If this is the first time accessing our system on our new web site, you will be required to reset your password.

The ask question function is now disabled;
please call 401-222-2492 x4100 with any new questions.

Date Asked: 10/04/2017 Date Answered: 10/05/2017
Poster: Michael McCullough Company: J.F. White Contracting Co.
Question:
Addendum 4 Volume 3 Drawings 15 and 16 - Please Clarify whether joints at O'Connell and Public Streets are saw & seal or Asphaltic joinths.
Answer:
The joints at O'Connell and Public Streets are saw & seal joints.
Date Asked: 10/04/2017 Date Answered: 10/05/2017
Poster: Jim caroselli Company: cdr/maguire engineering
Question:
Can you clarify the limits of paving. The specification contained in Addendum # 6 states that paving terminates at Eddy Street while the drawing contained in the same Addendum (Attachment A) points to Blackstone as the northern limit of paving. As well initially the southern limits of paving was 50 feet south of Oxford. Does that limit remain the same or has the limits moved further south to allow for changes in traffic patterns, striping, striping removal and restriping of the existing road surface.
Answer:
The mill and overlay limits to the south of Oxford Street remain as specified in the contract documents.
Date Asked: 10/04/2017 Date Answered: 10/05/2017
Poster: Jim caroselli Company: cdr/maguire engineering
Question:
During construction there will be several shifts in traffic patterns on Rte. 95 on both north bound and south bounds lanes of travel. Will these shifts have an impact on the ability of the tolling equipment to monitor truck traffic. If so will adjustments/ recalibrations in the monitoring equipment be required and if so who is responsible for these adjustments and the costs associated with any modifications
Answer:
Please refer to Addendum 6, Part 2 Technical Requirements for clarification of the tolling requirements. If any damage causes the toll system to stop collecting revenue, the tolling system contractor would need to perform the repair/fix of the toll system (as directed by RIDOT) but the DB team would ultimately be responsible financially.
Date Asked: 10/04/2017 Date Answered: 10/05/2017
Poster: Jim caroselli Company: cdr/maguire engineering
Question:
Will there be price escalations specifications added to the contract to allow for unknown market fluctuations on costs for steel, liquid asphalt and diesel since the contracted will be awarded in late 2017 however work will not commence to the middle of 2019?
Answer:
As part of the price proposal, the D-B team should determine and account for price escalations for items of work to reflect the current project schedule with construction to begin in 2019.
Date Asked: 10/03/2017 Date Answered: 10/05/2017
Poster: Michael McCullough Company: J.F. White Contracting Co.
Question:
Page JS-1A of Addendum 6 calls out Cleaning/flushing of pipes all sizes, to be completed as part of this contract at the completion of paving. Please define the limits and locations of this item of work. Are structures to be cleaned as well?
Answer:
Yes, the structures should be cleaned following the resurfacing of I-95.
Date Asked: 10/03/2017 Date Answered: 10/05/2017
Poster: Michael McCullough Company: J.F. White Contracting Co.
Question:
In our analysis of the revised construction window of July 5 – November 5 combined with the travel lane constraints spelled out in this contract, we don’t believe there is enough time to reconstruct the bridge in the time allowed given the restrictions. Can the Northbound barrier/retaining wall reconstruction be excluded from the definition of the bridge structure and be completed in advance of the July 5, 2019 start date for the bridge structure?
Answer:
The 30% design schedule agrees with the present construction duration from July 5 to November 5 (this duration does not include the roadway resurfacing work). The northbound barrier/retaining wall reconstruction could be completed in advance of the July 5, 2019 start date through implementation of a lane shift utilizing the existing roadway shoulder.
Date Asked: 10/03/2017 Date Answered: 10/05/2017
Poster: Dan Kelley Company: Aetna Bridge Company
Question:
Previously answered Q&A's had indicated the paving limits would be extended to repair damage from temporary pavement markings installed and removed for the phased construction. As of addendum #6 only the paving limits to the north of Oxford Street have been extended. Please clarify the mill and overlay limits to the south of Oxford Street.
Answer:
The mill and overlay limits to the south of Oxford Street have not been extended and remain as specified in the contract documents.
Date Asked: 09/29/2017 Date Answered: 10/05/2017
Poster: Linda Tardiff Company: S&R Corporation
Question:
Should the completion of Bridge 539 extend beyond July 5th, 2019, will the bridge open date shown on the Project Milestone Schedule for Oxford St. Bridge be extended on a day for day basis? Can RIDOT provide the schedule for Blackstone? Also, should the schedule push for a considerable amount of time, how will RIDOT address work into winter months?
Answer:
Interim completion of Bridge 539 is December 7, 2018. Substantial completion of Bridge 539 is May 19, 2019. Standard winter shutdown period shall apply to the Oxford St Bridge 653 contract.
Date Asked: 09/29/2017 Date Answered: 10/05/2017
Poster: Linda Tardiff Company: S&R Corporation
Question:
How is the completion of the Superstructure Replacement of the Blackstone Street Bridge No. 539 defined? (Substantial Completion, Final Completion, or a certain Milestone)
Answer:
The following interim and substantial completion dates have been established for Bridge 539 as Advertised as part of the I-195 Corridor Bridges project: Interim Completion - December 7, 2018 and Substantial Completion - May 17, 2019
Date Asked: 09/29/2017 Date Answered: 10/05/2017
Poster: Linda Tardiff Company: S&R Corporation
Question:
Will the DB team be allowed to stage any construction assemblies either adjacent to or within either NB or SB I-95 roadway prior to the July 5th date, and what lane closure parameters will the DB Team will be under prior to July 5th (from NTP until then).
Answer:
Construction of Oxford Street Bridge 653 utilizing lane closures will not be permitted until July 5th 2019 or at the completion of Superstructure Replacement of Blackstone Street Bridge 539, whichever occurs first. However, the northbound barrier/retaining wall reconstruction could be completed in advance of the July 5, 2019 start date through implementation of a lane shift utilizing the existing roadway shoulder.
Date Asked: 09/29/2017 Date Answered: 10/05/2017
Poster: William Tyrrell Company: Northern Construction Service, LLC
Question:
Will the RFP Price Proposal Form be changed to include the resurfacing work added or can the design build team add in the items as necessary?
Answer:
RFP Form 3 will not be revised. The respondents shall include the cost for the additional work to the line items specified on the Form 3. The respondents are not authorized to add additional line items to the form.
Date Asked: 09/25/2017 Date Answered: 09/29/2017
Poster: Linda Tardiff Company: S&R Corporation
Question:
In Addendum 4, page 2A was added about the toll collection equipment. Please provide clarification of what an “adverse impact” is, whether or not any operation, even if previously “approved” by RIDOT, triggers a penalty to the DB team, and who determines when an “adverse impact” occurs and who is responsible for the cure.
Answer:
An ‘adverse impact’ is intended to mean any damage that causes the toll system to stop collecting revenue. RIDOT determines when an ‘adverse impact’ occurs. The tolling system contractor would need to perform the repair/fix of the toll system (as directed by RIDOT) but the DB team would ultimately be responsible financially.
Date Asked: 09/21/2017 Date Answered: 09/29/2017
Poster: Michael McCullough Company: J.F. White Contracting Co.
Question:
Addendum 4 adds sections to the Technical requirements for paving that call out unit price items for some of this work, however there have been no changes made to the schedule of values included in the Instructions to bidders. In addition, there are references made to "Addendum 7" in Addendum 4. Please Clarify.
Answer:
Clarification has been included as part of the latest addendum, dated 9.28.17. The reference to "Addendum No. 7" was an error and all changes should be identified as part of Addendum No. 4.
Date Asked: 09/21/2017 Date Answered: 10/05/2017
Poster: Michael McCullough Company: J.F. White Contracting Co.
Question:
Addendum 4 Volume 3 General plans Have a disclaimer that the plans are not true to scale and that all distances and dimensions should be verified in the field. Where this is a Lump Sum project including the paving work and quantity risk is on the contractor, can RIDOT provide more accurate information so the DB Teams can quantify the amount of paving, milling and striping work required?
Answer:
For bidding purposes, the respondents may use the chart (to be included in Addendum No. 7), which provides quantities for resurfacing. Prior to construction, the respondents are required to verify in the field all distances and dimensions.
Date Asked: 09/21/2017 Date Answered: 09/29/2017
Poster: Michael McCullough Company: J.F. White Contracting Co.
Question:
We are in receipt of Addendum 4, which among other changes has added a Volume 3 to the base Technical Concept Plans. These plans imply added paving scope which is in line with the Questions and Answers previously addressed, however the scope of the work is not clear. Volume 3 plans reference I-95 resurfacing from Elmwood Ave to Eddy street, however the plans actually show areas from Oxford Street north to Eddy Street only. In addition, it appears that there is no paving work to be done on the Blackstone Street Bridge deck, or on I-95 Northbound from Blackstone Street to Eddy Street. No changes were made to the Volume 1 Highway plans which overlap Volume 3 at the Oxford Street Bridge creating conflicts in what work is to be carried out. Example - Volume 1 calls for a 2" micromill and overlay, where Volume 3 is a varied depth micromill and 1-1/2" overlay. There is no information changing the Project Limits or what is to be done south of Oxford Street. Please Clarify.
Answer:
Clarification has been included as part of the latest addendum, dated 9.28.17.
Date Asked: 09/15/2017 Date Answered: 09/22/2017
Poster: Robert Berry Company: J F White Contracting
Question:
Regarding Form O that is to be submitted as part of our technical proposal, in another Design/Build project for the Department, a question was asked and answered as follows below. We respectfully request that the Department consider the same action for this project. Question: FORM O: RIDOT ON-THE-JOB TRAINING ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND STATEMENT OF INTENT, was added in Addendum 3 with no explicit direction or instructions on when this submission is required and whether it should be completed in full, partially completed or acknowledged in the proposal and provide training program after award. Please provide further instruction. Answer: Form “O” shall be DELETED in its entirety. The On the Job Training (OJT) requirements will be requested of the selected Contractor as part of the Department’s Post- Qualification process.
Answer:
The On-The-Job Training Acknowledgement And Statement Of Intent Form will be requested of the selected Contractor as part of the Department’s Post- Qualification process. This Form does not need to be included in Proposal Submission.
Date Asked: 09/13/2017 Date Answered: 09/14/2017
Poster: Linda Tardiff Company: S&R Corporation
Question:
Please clarify as to who is the responsible party for the costs associated with the utility relocations. Will this be the responsibility of the DB team or will RIDOT pay the utilities direct.
Answer:
Utility reimbursement for this project for all work performed or contracted by the private utilities will be made through RIDOT utilizing conventional force account agreements. The Design-Build Team specifically assumes all cost risks and risk of schedule delays associated with the utility work. We anticipate that the Design-Build Team will assign the appropriate value to the risk.
Date Asked: 09/05/2017 Date Answered: 09/22/2017
Poster: Linda Tardiff Company: S&R Corporation
Question:
Will the Design-Build Contract referenced in Section 2.5 of the solicitation be made available to review prior to bid submission on the 13th?
Answer:
Section 2.5 of the RFP states: "Respondents shall base their Proposals on the terms and conditions of the Design-Build Contract included in the latest issued Addendum. The D/B Contract will include all RFP Documents, all documents referenced within the RFP Documents, and the selected Proposal." This statement is revised as follows: "Respondents shall base their Proposals on the terms and conditions included in the RFP Documents, all of the documents referenced in the RFP Documents, and the latest issued Addendum. The final Design-Build Contract issued upon award will include the RFP Documents, all documents referenced within the RFP Documents, the latest Addendum, and the selected Proposal."
Date Asked: 09/05/2017 Date Answered: 09/14/2017
Poster: Michael McCullough Company: J.F. White Contracting Co.
Question:
Addendum 1 Changes the requirements on Page 20 for the Quality Control Manager. This was previously addressed by addendum in the first bid which at that time reduced the requirements for the Quality Control Manager to a part time person with a BS in Civil Engineering. Addendum 1 changes these requirements back to a full time on-site Rhode Island licensed, registered Professional Engineer. Has this change back to the original language been made in error?
Answer:
The requirements for the Quality Control Manager to be a part time person with a BS in Civil Engineering was an error. Addendum 1 has corrected this error, to require a full time on-site Rhode Island licensed, registered Professional Engineer, as stated in Section 4.6.1.
Date Asked: 09/05/2017 Date Answered: 09/14/2017
Poster: William Tyrrell Company: Northern Construction Service, LLC
Question:
This question was previously asked the first time this project was bid. See below: Will the paving limits need to be extended to repair damage done by temporary pavement marking operations? The traffic control plan contained in the RFP depicts temporary striping that extend Northbound 1000 feet south of the bridge and 650 feet north of the bride; and Southbound 450 feet south of the bridge and 450 feet north of the bridge. There is currently a RIDOT contract that is underway that will be placing friction course with in these zones. When temporary striping is utilized to set up the various temporary traffic patterns in the limits described above it will be applied to the fresh friction course. After every traffic pattern these temporary stripes will have to be ground out and replaced with the temporary pavement markings to create the new traffic patterns. Because of the friction material makeup deep gouges will need to be utilized to eradicate the stripes. Can the Department extend the paving limits in this contract on Rte. 95 so that at the completion of the Oxford Street project the final surface has a smooth surface with clean traffic delineation?
Answer:
The paving limits will be extended. This will be clarified in Addendum 4.