Montana Department of Transportation

Contractor's System Project Question & Answer Forum

Contractor's System Question & Answer Forum

Current Questions and Answers

Ask a Question | Read Archives

Bid Letting Dates:

November 14, 2017

November 29, 2017

December 7, 2017

301 - I-90 BRIDGES - BONNER - November 14, 2017

Notifications

-1-
Submitted: Friday    30-JUN-2017 10:20 AM
The Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) is soliciting construction and design services for the design-build project identified below. Contractor and consultant teams (Firms) are encouraged to submit a Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) response electronically to the email address in the RFQ or in hard copy to the Montana Department of Transportation - Engineering Division, Contract Plans Bureau, Room 101, 2701 Prospect, Helena, Montana by 11:00 a.m., local time on August 3, 2017.

I-90 Bridges - Bonner
IMIP 90-2(149)110
This project includes design and construction activities to replace the two interstate bridges over the Blackfoot River near Bonner, MT. The project is located on Interstate 90 at milepost 110.19 approximately 0.46 miles southeast of the Bonner I-90 Interchange in Missoula County. This project includes removal of the existing structures, grading of the abutment slopes, and installation of the new structures on the current alignment.

The project RFQ is at the following link:  RFQ

-2-
Submitted: Thursday 17-AUG-2017 8:30 AM
SOQ Ranked Short List

1       Kiewit Infrastructure West Co./WGM Group/Shannon & Wilson
2 Frontier West, LLC/Morrison Maierle Inc.
3 Sletten Construction Company/HDR Engineering, Inc.

-3-
Submitted:  Friday 17-NOV-2017 04:04 PM

MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AS READ BIDS
For the Letting of November 14, 2017

CALL NO. 301
Project No(s):  IMIP 90-2(149)110
Project Name(s):  I-90 Bridges Bonner
Contract No:  DBB17
UPN(s):  8164000
District:  Missoula
Count(ies):  Missoula
FIRM(S) BID PRICE PROPOSAL AMOUNT TECHNICAL PROPOSAL TOTAL SCORE "APPARENT" BEST VALUE*
Kiewit Infrastructure West Co./WGM Group/
Shannon & Wilson
$ 16,747,538 74,570 78.31
Frontier West, LLC/Morrison Maierle, Inc. $ 14,997,000 91,600 93.70
Sletten Construction Co./HDR Engineering, Inc. Non-responsive 78,730 n/a
The highest value is considered the best value proposal.
* Note: "Apparent" Best Value score is contingent on Selection Committee review and approval and Transportation Commission review and approval of recommended award.


Addendums

No Addendums available for this project.


Clarifications

-1-
Submitted: Tuesday 05-SEP-2017 03:05 PM
The following questions were asked prior to the Pre-Proposal Meeting:
1)  The survey file appears to only contain terrain data, will the planimetric information be made available?   Linked is the Map file showing terrain and existing bridges.
2)  Is the SUCON mapping file available to complete the control traverse?
Linked is the TIN file from Survey
MAP AND SURVEY
If these are not the requested files, please provide additional clarification with a follow-up question.

-2-
Submitted: Wednesday 06-SEP-2017 09:45 AM
All related MDT Headquarters files for the I-90 Bridges – Bonner DB Project have been compiled and are in the Geotechnical Section Office. These files are available for review by appointment at (406)444-6281 or email

-3-
Submitted: Wednesday 06-SEP-2017 12:00 PM
Linked are the Letter of Map Revision Files:  LETTER OF MAP REVISION FILES

-4-
Submitted: Wednesday 06-SEP-2017 12:08 PM
Linked are the Pre-Proposal Meeting Minutes:  PRE-PROPOSAL MEETING MINUTES

-5-
Submitted:  Friday 15-SEP-2017 2:15 PM
Linked is the updated Public Involvement Firm Special Provision:  PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT FIRM SPECIAL

-6-
Submitted:  Wednesday 27-SEP-2017 4:00 PM
Linked is a spreadsheet from the USGS with elevation and section data around the Bonner bridge piers. MDT cannot guarantee the accuracy of the data, nor does any data in this file supersede the data in the contract documents. The information is being provided for information only. USGS SURVEY DATA

-7-
Submitted: Friday 20-OCT-2017 10:11 AM
Linked is the Updated Bid Price Proposal Form:  UPDATED BID PRICE PROPOSAL FORM
Revised:
Submitted: Friday 20-OCT-2017 03:24 PM
The conversion from cubic yards to tons has been updated in the linked form:
  REVISED BID PRICE PROPOSAL FORM
Submitted: Wednesday 01-NOV-2017 09:59 AM
Linked is the Final Bid Price Proposa Form:
  FINAL BID PRICE PROPOSAL FORM

-8-
Submitted: Tuesday 07-NOV-2017 01:02 PM
Linked is the updated Stainless Reinforcing Steel Special Provision.  Changes are in blue.
STAINLESS REINFORCING STEEL

-9-
Submitted: Thursday 10-NOV-2017 03:07 PM
Permit fees for permanent facilities will be covered by MDT.


Questions

-1-
Submitted: Friday    28-JUL-2017 08:07 AM  
Company: Frontier West, LLC  
Contact: Mike Murphy
Can electronic copies of the existing structures as-builts, including the plans for the seismic retrofit and slope stability mitigation be provided?  The I-90 Bridge Stabilization Design and Construction Summary Report indicates two major reports consisting of a Milltown Bridge Infrastructure Mitigation Hydraulics Report, October 2006 and a Geotechnical Report for the Milltown Reservoir Bridge Mitigation Projects, December 2006 were prepared.  Can electronic copies be provided?
Answer:
Submitted: Friday 28-JUL-2017 01:14 PM
The files linked below represent the as-built drawings for the structures. MDT provides them for informational purposes only. They do not include drawings for modifications to the structures, such as joint replacements and guardrail revisions and may not completely represent current conditions. Thus, some of the information contained in these documents may be out of date or not applicable with regard to the advertised project. The contractor should not rely solely on the as-built drawings provided for bidding purposes nor does any data in these files supersede the data in the contract documents:


The As-built plans for the original construction, the 1994 widening and the 1999 retrofit are at the following link:  AS-BUILT PLANS

The plans attached in the I-90 Bridge Summary Report Final (linked with the RFQ) for the seismic retrofit and the slope stability mitigation are the only plans.  There are no as-built plans for this work.

 

The 2006 Hydraulics Report is at the following link:  HYDRAULIC REPORT
Updated:
Submitted: Tuesday 01-AUG-2017 10:51 AM

The 2006 Geotechnical Report for the Milltown Reservoir Bridge Mitigation Projects is not available. The 2007 Milltown Bridge Infrastructure Mitigation Slope Stabilization Summary Report includes relevant information and can be found at the following link:  SUMMARY REPORT

-2-
Submitted: Monday    28-AUG-2017 11:15 AM  
Company: WGM Group  
Contact: WGM Group  

After reviewing the reports, could MDT please see the below for a list of additional documents and provide them if possible?
Geotechnical Report for the Milltown Reservoir Bridge Mitigation Project, CH2M, December 2006.
Milltown Bridge Infrastructure Mitigation, Inclinometer Installation and Survey Technical Memorandum, CH2M, April 5, 2007.
Milltown Bridge Infrastructure Mitigation, Jet Grout Test Column Evaluation, CH2M, 2007.
Independent review of jet grout approach and design, Donald A. Bruce/Geosystems LP, February 1, 2007.
Milltown Bridge Infrastructure Mitigation, Slope Stabilization Package, CH2M, March 2, 2007
Micropile Modification to the Milltown Bridge Infrastructure Mitigation, Slope Stabilization Package, CHM.
Any slope stability design calculations.

In addition, can you request monitoring data at the existing bridges for:
Inclinometers
Piezometers
In-place inclinometers

Current traffic volumes and data for the project area?
Answer

Submitted: Thursday    31-AUG-2017 04:00 PM  
Reports and Additional Documents:
Linked is the December 2006 Geotechnical Report for the Milltown Reservoir Bridge Mitigation Project.
December 2006 Geotechnical Report. 
MDT is compiling all other available information on the I-90 Bridges Bonner project into one location for the Firms to access and review the information. A location and time will be provided for Firms to view the information.

Traffic Volumes and Data:
2016 traffic volumes are available on MDT’s traffic web page.  The data can be access on the interactive web map: 
TRAFFIC DATA MAP
In the interactive web map, there are 3 layers and you can click on those features in the map and a pop up box will open with additional attributes – like traffic AADT’s.  Use your mouse to zoom in and out or use the zoom tools in the upper left corner or use the search bar to query Bonner, MT.  Zoom all the way in past the orange county layer until the points and lines start to show up.  You can zoom in all the way to street level.  The points are the actual traffic collection points and at the end of the year all the point data is applied to segments of road to make a complete traffic network.

-3-
Submitted: Monday    11-SEP-2017 08:53 AM
Company: Kiewit
Contact: Kevin Rozendaal
Will the EB I-90 loop area formed at entrance/exit ramp #109 just west of the railroad bridges be available as a contractor staging area during construction?
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday    12-SEP-2017 09:20 AM
Yes, but the contractor must secure a written agreement with MDT Maintenance.  In addition, access must be detailed in the traffic control plan for approval prior to use.

-4-
Submitted: Monday    11-SEP-2017 08:57 AM
Company: Kiewit
Contact: Kevin Rozendaal
Existing guardrail doesn't appear to meet current standards. Is it acceptable to leave existing guardrail that is undisturbed?
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday    12-SEP-2017 10:04 AM
Yes. Transition sections must be included to connect existing rail to the new rail.

-5-
Submitted: Monday    11-SEP-2017 09:01 AM
Company: Kiewit
Contact: Kevin Rozendaal
RFP page 33 of 42, section IV, requires bidders to submit three different graphic representation options that are large scale and suitable for display at a public meeting. Will electronic files satisfy this requirement for the proposal, and then the selected proposer can provide actual large scale samples? If samples are to be provided, please establish the minimum size.
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 13-SEP-2017 09:07 AM
Submit three different graphic representation options showing proposed aesthetic treatment for the new structures.  The representations should be 24" x 36" and suitable for mounting and display at a public meeting.  It is acceptable to provide 11" x 17" with each three ring binder as long as at least one copy of each aesthetic treatment on 24" x 36" is submitted with the proposals.

-6-
Submitted: Monday    11-SEP-2017 03:30 PM  
Company: Frontier West, LLC  
Contact: Mike Murphy
Clarifying our request on the request for survey data: The provided files do not contain the line work, ie topographic breaklines such as edge of pavement, end of bridge etc.  Is this information available?  The survey does not include control diagram or control abstract for the survey to allow us to match MDT survey control.  Is this additional information available?
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday    12-SEP-2017 02:35 PM  
No, all available line work has been provided.  

There are additional survey files included in the attached link. The two .txt files explain the various .zip files.

SURVEY FILES

-7-
Submitted: Friday    15-SEP-2017 03:06 PM
Company: Kiewit
Contact: Kevin Rozendaal
The original Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks plans for the Milltown State Park showed lighting for the proposed trail that included lights at both edges of the I-90 Structures. During Milltown State Park bidding, addendum #1 deleted the lighting in the MDT right-of-way between Milltown State Park and the Railroad bridge.  Does MDT intent to provide trail lighting under the I-90 Bridges under the I-90 Bonner Bridges contract?  If so, will those lights be connected to the trail lighting circuit installed by the Milltown State Park project?
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday    19-SEP-2017 09:34 AM

Yes, provide trail lighting under the I-90 bridges. Connect to the trail lighting circuit installed with the Milltown State Park project. Coordinate the design of the lighting and the circuit connection with Jon Maxwell, FWP Project Manager, at 406-841-4002.

-8-
Submitted: Tuesday   19-SEP-2017 11:44 AM
Company: Kiewit
Contact: Kevin Rozendaal
Has the US Army Corps of Engineers provided a Jurisdiction Determination (JD) and/or wetland boundary verification for the wetland delineation performed on September 8-9, 2014 as described in DOWL’s March 4, 2015 Biological Resources Report and Biological Assessment (Activity 182)? If so, will MDT provide a copy of that documentation?  If not, will MDT pursue the Corps of Engineers verification prior to Notice to Proceed to help expedite permitting?
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 20-SEP-2017 10:33 AM
No, MDT and the DB Firms will assume the wetlands are jurisdictional and will not pursue a Jurisdictional Determination.

-9-
Submitted: Monday    02-OCT-2017 12:15 PM  
Company: Morrison-Maierle  
Contact: Jim Scoles  
Riprap revegetation requirements are unclear. Is riprap revegetation required above OHWM? If required, please provide an example special.
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 10-OCT-2017 08:58 AM
Yes, provide riprap revegetation above the ordinary high water mark following the linked special provision and detail.  The riprap revegetation special and detail are examples only and the final product will be dependent upon the D-B teams design ensuring the revegetation that is installed does not negatively impact slope stability.

RIPRAP REVEGETATION
RIPRAP REVEGETATION DETAIL

-10-
Submitted: Monday    02-OCT-2017 12:17 PM  
Company: Morrison-Maierle  
Contact: Jim Scoles
Requesting additional technical proposal page limits was discussed in the pre-bid meeting. We are requesting 5 additional pages in section 2 (from 10 pages to 15 pages) and 20 additional pages in section 4 (from 60 pages to 80 pages). All content will be kept concise.
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday    04-OCT-2017 09:23 AM  
The maximum allowed pages for Evaluation Criteria #2 is changed from 10 pages to 15 pages. The maximum allowed pages for Evaluation Criteria #4 is changed from 60 pages to 80 pages.

-11-
Submitted: Monday    02-OCT-2017 12:18 PM  
Company: Morrison-Maierle  
Contact: Jim Scoles  
What is the required top mat stainless steel deck reinforcing clear cover?
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday    03-OCT-2017 09:44 AM
The required top mat stainless steel deck reinforcing clear cover is 2.5 inches.

-12-
Submitted: Tuesday   03-OCT-2017 02:11 PM  
Company: SK Geotechnical  
Contact: Cory Rice
The existing boring locations and depth of rock core do not satisfy the field investigation requirements of MDT's Geotechnical Manual.  To better meet the design schedule, can the encroachment permit process necessary for the required additional field investigation be waived by MDT, and are any other permits required?
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday   04-OCT-2017 02:26 PM
The encroachment permit process cannot be waived. It is up to the Firm to determine necessary permitting requirements.

-13-
Submitted: Wednesday 04-OCT-2017 09:28 AM
Company: Kiewit
Contact: Kevin Rozendaal
Page 56 of the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks plans for the new Milltown State Park show several sections of vinyl coated chain link fence within MDT right-of-way that are not included in the Milltown State Park contract.  Does MDT intend for the that fence to be included in the I-90 Bridges - Bonner contract?

Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 04-OCT-2017 04:31 PM
Yes, include fencing to match the new fence installed with the Milltown State Park project.

-14-
Submitted: Thursday  05-OCT-2017 09:17 AM  
Company: Morrison-Maierle  
Contact: Jim Scoles  
AASHTO Guide Specification for LRFD Seismic Design is not listed in the governing regulations. Is use of the seismic code allowed or preferred?
Answer
Submitted: Thursday 05-OCT-2017 11:49 AM
Yes.  The AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design governs MDT's seismic bridge design procedures.

-15-
Submitted: Thursday  05-OCT-2017 09:19 AM  
Company: Morrison-Maierle  
Contact: Jim Scoles  
RFP requires as-built materials list and material tracking. Since MDT is providing CE services in-house and MDT is providing QA and IA as detailed in MT-601, is an as-built material list, etc. required to be provided by the Design Build Firm or will MDT be developing this?
Answer
Submitted: Thursday 05-OCT-2017 03:18 PM
An as-built materials list is not required to be provided by the DB Firm.

-16-
Submitted: Thursday  05-OCT-2017 06:16 PM
Company: Kiewit
Contact: Kevin Rozendaal
Section III of the Draft Design-Build Contract notes that liquidated damages will be charged for each calendar day of late completion.  Since crossed-over traffic will not be allowed during winter shutdown, the design-builder could be charged liquidated damages during the entire winter shutdown period if there are items that cannot be completed before winter shutdown and have to wait until spring.  Would MDT be willing to change the liquidated damage clause in the draft DB contract to be based on Working Days?
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday  11-OCT-2017 02:52 AM
No.  Liquidated Damages will be assessed for days after the completion date.

-17-
Submitted: Friday    20-OCT-2017 09:16 AM  
Company: Morrison-Maierle  
Contact: Jim Scoles
There is no mention of load rating included in RFP.  Is load rating with AASHTOWare required?
Answer
Submitted: Monday 23-OCT-2017 08:12 AM
Yes.  MDT requires a load rating and an AAASHTOWare bridge model to be submitted with the as-builts.

-18-
Submitted: Sunday    29-OCT-2017 10:28 AM
Company: Kiewit
Contact: Kevin Rozendaal
The effective LOMR data contains integrated topographic, bathymetric, and LiDAR surveys for this river reach; which will be utilized for the eventual LOMR and is considered sufficient for hydraulic modeling purposes. Will any additional pre-construction or post-construction survey effort be required per Chapter 11 of the MDT Survey Manual for the LOMR effort?  Performing additional Hydraulic Survey as required in Chapter 11 would appear to result in gathering redundant information.  Please confirm that no additional surveying is required outside the project limits or indicate specifically which tasks will need to be completed to satisfy MDT requirements for this Project.
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 01-NOV-2017 09:40 AM
No additional survey is required outside of the project limits.   However, a post-construction survey within the project limits will be required to produce the proposed condition hydraulic model and the as-built plans for the LOMR.  The post-construction survey data will need to meet the requirements in FEMA's MT-2 Application Form  and Instructions.

302 - MISSOULA ADA UPGRADES - November 29, 2017

Notifications

-1-
Submitted: Monday    28-AUG-2017 11:00 AM
The Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) is soliciting construction and design services for the design-build project identified below. Contractor and consultant teams (Firms) are encouraged to submit a Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) response electronically to the email address in the RFQ or in hard copy to the Montana Department of Transportation - Engineering Division, Contract Plans Bureau, Room 101, 2701 Prospect, Helena, Montana by 11:00 a.m., local time on September 22, 2017.

Missoula ADA Upgrades
CMDO 8199(141)
This project includes design and construction of ADA compliant sidewalk and ramps along the following routes:  
Higgins Ave ADA – Brooks St to E Main
Broadway St ADA – Owen St to Van Buren St
Higgins Ave ADA – W Front St North side
Orange St ADA – N 2nd St W to Broadway St
Orange St ADA – S 1st St W to S 6th St W
5th & 6th St ADA – Higgins Ave to Arthur Ave on both streets
Stephens Ave ADA – S 6th St W to Mt Ave.

Not all intersections will be included in this project, a spreadsheet with the estimated sidewalk quantity and the number and location for ADA ramps and approaches will be developed for the RFP.

The project RFQ is at the following link:  RFQ

-2-
Submitted: Tuesday  03-OCT-2017 08:15 AM  
SOQ Ranked Short List

1     Knife Rive Corporation / WGM Group, Inc.
CMG Construction, LLC / Dowl, LLC


Addendums

No Addendums available for this project.


Clarifications

-2-
Submitted: Friday 20-OCT-2017 08:02 AM
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION

-3-
Submitted: Monday 30-OCT-2017 03:53 PM
Linked is the updated scope of work spreadsheet.  Ramps at Stephens and Tremont have recently been completed and have been taken out of the scope of work for this project.  Changes associated with this update are highlighted in green in the spreadsheet.  UPDATED SCOPE OF WORK SPREADSHEET
Revised: Tuesday 31-OCT-2017 10:06 AM
Linked is the updated scope of work spreadsheet.  Ramps at Stephens and Tremont have recently been completed and have been taken out of the scope of work for this project.  Changes associated with this update are highlighted in green in the spreadsheet.  Previous updates are shown in blue.  REVISED SCOPE OF WORK SPREADSHEET

-4-
Submitted: Monday 13-NOV-2017 02:47 PM
Linked is the Updated Bid Price Proposal Form:  UPDATED BID PRICE PROPOSAL FORM


Questions

-1-
Submitted: Thursday  31-AUG-2017 09:11 AM  
Company: Construct Connect  
Contact: Stacey Mighton  
Are there any union requirements?
Answer
Submitted:  Fridayday  01-SEP-2017 08:27 AM  
MDT does not have any union requirements for this project.

-2-
Submitted: Friday    13-OCT-2017 08:46 AM
Company: WGM Group
Contact: Cody Thorson
Do areas of existing pavers and colored concrete requiring full removal for project upgrades need to replaced with the same materials?
Answer
Submitted: Monday 16-OCT-2017 08:12 AM
No.

-3-
Submitted: Friday    13-OCT-2017 09:26 AM
Company: WGM Group
Contact: Cody Thorson
Are the sidewalks within the medians along Stephens Ave. considered a pedestrian refuge?
Answer
Submitted: Friday 13-OCT-2017 01:44 PM
Refer to PROWAG R305.2.4 for information defining Pedestrian Refuge Islands.
R305.2.4 PEDESTRIAN REFUGE ISLANDS

-4-
Submitted: Friday    13-OCT-2017 10:16 AM
Company: WGM Group
Contact: Cody Thorson
Page 7 of the RFP states that single lane closures will be permitted, and two-way traffic must be maintained overnight and during non-working hours.  Please clarify that single lane closures will be permitted overnight as long as two-way traffic is maintained. Additionally, please clarify the intent of Section F, page 29 of the RFP where it states temporary short-term lane closures of less than 4 hours will be permitted.  Specifically, that this provision does not limit lane closures to 4 hours?
Answer
Submitted:  Wednesday 18-OCT-2017 09:33 AM
Yes, single lane closures will be permitted overnight as long as two-way traffic is maintained.  Lane closures are not limited to 4 hours.  The language in Section F, page 29 of the RFP "of less than 4 hours" is rescinded from the RFP.

-5-
Submitted: Friday    13-OCT-2017 10:49 AM
Company: WGM Group
Contact: Cody Thorson
The scope of work excel document (attachment R) includes ramps that have planned upgrades either under construction or scheduled for construction in the near term, with considerably different curb ramp designs versus what would be required for this project.  Please advise how to address these ramps.  Additionally, were ramps inventoried by MDT or an MDT consultant for ADA accessibility?  If so, can any information regarding this inventory be provided?
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 18-OCT-2017 09:29 AM
Ramps that are under construction will be removed from the project.  Ramps planned for construction as a possible future TA project should be designed and bid as scoped in this project.  Ramps were not inventoried as part of this project.  The ADA ramp database can be accessed through the following link:
  ADA CURB RAMPS

-6-
Submitted: Friday    13-OCT-2017 12:05 PM
Company: WGM Group
Contact: Cody Thorson
The project description in the SOQ stated to perpetuate crosswalks.  This statement is not included in the RFP. Is it MDT's intent to match curb ramps to the existing crosswalk striping?  If so, does matching the existing crosswalks take precedence over MDT's preferred ramp configurations within the detailed drawings?
Answer
Submitted: Monday 16-OCT-2017 08:16 AM
No.  Crosswalks should be perpetuated, but the exact placement is up to the Firm's design.

-7-
Submitted: Friday    13-OCT-2017 02:38 PM
Company: WGM Group
Contact: Cody Thorson
Please provide any requirements for the following:
1)  Minimum asphalt patch width.
2)  Transition lengths for curb/sidewalk outside of ramp improvement areas when connecting to damaged or non-ADA compliant conditions,or provide clarification of the project tie-in or transition limits to existing conditions.
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 18-OCT-2017 01:35 PM
1)  The minimum asphalt patch width is two feet.
2)  Transitions for curb should extend to one foot beyond the tangent of the radius or to the next joint beyond that.  Transitions for sidewalk should begin the next sidewalk panel beyond the landing.  Cross slope maximum transition is one linear foot of sidewalk per 1/2 percent of cross slope.  Grade maximum transition is 5% up to the grade of the road.

-8-
Submitted: Tuesday   24-OCT-2017 03:15 PM  
Company: WGM Group  
Contact: Cody Thorson
Please confirm that upgrading existing pedestrian pushbuttons and/or relocation of existing pedestrian pushbutton poles is not in the scope of work.
Answer
Submitted: Monday 30-OCT-2017 02:30 PM
Modification of existing pedestrian pushbuttons is not a part of the scope of work for this project.

-9-
Submitted: Friday    27-OCT-2017 12:46 PM  
Company: WGM Group  
Contact: Cody Thorson
Has a maintenance agreement been executed between MDT and the City of Missoula on this project?  If so, please clarify if City permits will be fee or no- fee.  If not, it is assumed that no-fee permits will be issued by the City, please confirm.
Answer
Submitted: Monday 30-OCT-2017 03:39 PM
See the linked document for the agreement associated with this project.  The permits required from the City of Missoula will be no-fee permits.
  MISSOULA ADA AGREEMENT

-10-
Submitted: Thursday  02-NOV-2017 10:34 AM  
Company: WGM Group  
Contact: Cody Thorson
During the pre-proposal meeting, it was mentioned that resumes do not count toward total page count.  Section III of the Technical Proposal Requirements does not mention resumes.  Would MDT like resumes included, and if so, can the page count be increased to 25 for Section III, or should we include resumes in an Appendix and not include in page count?
Answer
Submitted: Thursday 02-NOV-2017 02:41 PM
Resumes are not required.  The maximum number of pages allowed in Section III is 10.

-11-
Submitted: Friday    10-NOV-2017 11:52 AM  
Company: WGM Group  
Contact: Cody Thorson
Multiple traffic signal pull boxes exist within the proposed ADA ramp upgrades. Per discussions with City Traffic Services personnel, they feel many of these boxes cannot be lowered/adjusted without lowering or modifying the existing conduits, which have poor integrity and may need replaced if adjusted.  Additionally, the majority of the boxes are corroded and cannot be opened to verify conduit depth, and as-built drawings are not available to confirm information.  Please provide direction on how to proceed with upgrades to the traffic signal components.
1)  Can MDT maintenance open the boxes to provide access?
2)  Is it possible to provide new boxes in the scope of work of the project, and handle any new conduit/wiring/relocation requirements as an extra work item?
Answer
Submitted: Thursday 16-NOV-2017 08:33 AM
Pull box modifications and related conduit work will be paid for as miscellaneous work in locations as approved by the Project Manager.

-12-
Submitted: Friday    17-NOV-2017 10:33 AM  
Company: WGM Group  
Contact: Cody Thorson
The City of Missoula Administrative Rules state that all traffic control plans with lane or complete closures for arterial and collectors must be designed, maintained and executed by persons trained and certified by an accredited certification agency.  Please clarify if this requirement will be applicable to the MSLA ADA Upgrades project.
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 21-NOV-2017 04:35 PM
City of Missoula and MDT requirements for traffic control will both be applicable for the Missoula ADA Upgrades project.

101 - SIDNEY TO FAIRVIEW - December 7, 2017

Notifications

No Notices available for this project.


Addendums

No Addendums available for this project.


Clarifications

-1-
Submitted: Tuesday 14-NOV-2017 01:27 PM
The following Special Provision – Centerline Pavement Markings – is hereby added to this contract:

Install centerline pavement markings as shown in the detail at the following link:  CENTERLINE RUMBLE STRIPS DETAIL

The solid stripes are to be placed outside the CLRS.  The skip stripe is to be placed on the centerline.  In no passing zones, offset solid yellow stripes 6 inches from the roadway centerline to the edge of the stripe, regardless of rumble strip width.

-2-
Submitted: Monday 20-NOV-2017 11:55 AM
The open ditch that is shown on the plans and cross sections at station 214+24, 75’ right to 221+00, 86’ left, road plans say “ pipeline to be constructed by others”.  This pipeline has been constructed and it is no longer necessary to construct this ditch.  Attached are the revised grading summary frame (sheet 18) showing the change in the quantity for unclassified excavation from 125,769 cubic yards to 125,983 cubic yards.  This change will be made by addenda.  Also attached are the revised cross section sheets 99 through 104, and plan sheet 78.
PLAN SHEET 16
PLAN SHEET 78
X-SEC PAGES 99-104


Questions

-1-
Submitted: Monday    13-NOV-2017 08:21 AM
Company: Riverside Contracting, Inc.
Contact: Estimating
Please post the Geopak design files and any additional geotechnical information available for the project.
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 14-NOV-2017 01:59 PM
 
Attached are PDF Files of the available project alignment and/or structures geotechnical report(s), geotechnical report supplements, and geotechnical laboratory summaries. There is remaining geotechnical information that is voluminous and very difficult to compile in a concise manner. Contractors are welcome to come to MDT Headquarters to inspect rock samples taken for the project that are stored here or to look through the complete set of Geotechnical field investigation notes, laboratory testing, analytical, or other data in our project files. It should be noted that the project may have undergone significant changes during the design process after the original geotechnical report and supplements were issued. Thus, some of the information contained in these documents may be out of date or not applicable with regard to the advertised project. Some of the changes include, but are not limited to: Project splits (for funding, ROW issues, etc.); alignment and grade changes; and changes due to environmental factors (sensitive areas, etc.). The documents can be found at:
  GEOTECH FILES
 
The design files for the requested project are posted on the MDT FTP site for your use at:  DESIGN FILES

The requested files do not represent the staked project, but are only design files. The Department cannot guarantee the accuracy of the electronic data, particularly as it may be called up by your computer, nor does any data in these files supersede the data in the contract documents. In addition, the Department will not make any revisions to the electronic files pertaining to the staked project, change ordered work, or changes that are made during construction to fit field conditions.

-2-
Submitted: Wednesday 15-NOV-2017 09:58 AM
Company: Yellowstone Environmental
Contact: Zac Mader
Will MDT revise the Seeding Provisions to include the 610 220 050 Mulch-Compost Requirements.
Answer
Submitted: Friday 17-NOV-2017 10:57 AM

Revised: Friday 17-NOV-2017 03:28 PM

The seeding Special Provision in Section II has been revised and can be found at the following link:  REVISED SEEDING SPECIAL

An addendum will be issued to add a bid item for Fertilizer - Area 2.  The revised plan sheet #20 can be found at the following link:
REVISED PLAN SHEET 20

102 - BYNUM - SOUTH - December 7, 2017

Notifications

No Notices available for this project.


Addendums

No Addendums available for this project.


Clarifications

-1-
Submitted: Tuesday 14-NOV-2017 01:12 PM
Plan Sheet 19A is hereby replaced with the following:  CENTERLINE RUMBLE STRIPS DETAIL


Questions

-1-
Submitted: Monday    13-NOV-2017 08:23 AM
Company: Riverside Contracting, Inc.
Contact: Estimating
Please post the Geopak design files and any additional geotechnical information available for the project.
Answer
Submitted: Monday 13-NOV-2017 02:27 PM
Attached are PDF Files of the available project alignment and/or structures geotechnical report(s), geotechnical report supplements, and geotechnical laboratory summaries. There is remaining geotechnical information that is voluminous and very difficult to compile in a concise manner. Contractors are welcome to come to MDT Headquarters to inspect rock samples taken for the project that are stored here or to look through the complete set of Geotechnical field investigation notes, laboratory testing, analytical, or other data in our project files. It should be noted that the project may have undergone significant changes during the design process after the original geotechnical report and supplements were issued. Thus, some of the information contained in these documents may be out of date or not applicable with regard to the advertised project. Some of the changes include, but are not limited to: Project splits (for funding, ROW issues, etc.); alignment and grade changes; and changes due to environmental factors (sensitive areas, etc.). The documents can be found at:
  GEOTECH FILES

The design files for the requested project are posted on the MDT FTP site for your use at:  DESIGN FILES
The requested files do not represent the staked project, but are only design files. The Department cannot guarantee the accuracy of the electronic data, particularly as it may be called up by your computer, nor does any data in these files supersede the data in the contract documents. In addition, the Department will not make any revisions to the electronic files pertaining to the staked project, change ordered work, or changes that are made during construction to fit field conditions.

-2-
Submitted: Monday    13-NOV-2017 03:44 PM
Company: Schellinger Construction Company, Inc.
Contact: Estimating
Please verify that Special Provision #15 Contractor Furnished Borrow Source Requirements for CWA 404 Permit Compliance is required for this contract.  Recent project with CWA Section 404 and Section 401 Certification have not required it.
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 15-NOV-2017 08:01 AM
Special Provision #15 - Contractor Furnished Borrow Source Requirements for CWA 404 Permit Compliance is required for this project.

-3-
Submitted: Tuesday   21-NOV-2017 07:52 AM  
Company: Nelcon, Inc.  
Contact: Nelcon, Inc.
With respect to SP #13, will topsoil be measured for payment?
Answer
Submitted: Tuesday 21-NOV-2017 09:15 AM
In accordance with section 105.08.2 I - Quantity sheet amounts for items described under Sections 203 and 209 will be considered final quantities for payment.  Requests for adjustment of bid schedule quantities for these items may be initiated by the Contractor or by the Project Manager if evidence indicates the total actual required in-place quantity varies from the bid schedule quantities by more than 5%.  The party requesting the quantity adjustment must notify the other party in writing and furnish acceptable survey data and calculations to accurately establish any quantity adjustments.

103 - HELENA NORTH HILL-SIEBEN INT & MACDONALD PASS-EAST - December 7, 2017

Notifications

No Notices available for this project.


Addendums

No Addendums available for this project.


Clarifications

No Clarifications available for this project.


Questions

-1-
Submitted: Wednesday 15-NOV-2017 05:03 PM
Company: Pavement Maintenance Solutions
Contact: Joe Tamburelli
What work is to be done under the pay item Contractor survey and layout?
Answer
Submitted: Friday 17-NOV-2017 09:50 AM
The bid item for Construction Survey and Layout is for the pavement markings consisting of the stop bars and arrows painted on interstate off-ramps.  It is the Contractors responsibility to mark and re-paint the words and symbols in the appropriate locations.

104 - CIRCLE-NORTH - December 7, 2017

Notifications

No Notices available for this project.


Addendums

No Addendums available for this project.


Clarifications

-1-
Submitted: Monday 13-NOV-2017 10:53 AM
The General Layout's for the bridges on this project can be found at the following link:  BRIDGE GENERAL LAYOUTS


Questions

No Questions available for this project.

105 - SHELBY-EAST - December 7, 2017

Notifications

No Notices available for this project.


Addendums

No Addendums available for this project.


Clarifications

No Clarifications available for this project.


Questions

No Questions available for this project.