QA Forum

Contract Information

Project Name	BILLINGS DISTRICT ADA UPGRADES
Advertise Date	06/18/2018 08:00 AM
Close Date	10/02/2018 05:00 PM
Let Date	10/09/2018 11:00 AM

Notifications

-1-
Submitted: Monday 18-JUN-2018 10:40 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 July 13, 2017.

Billings District ADA Upgrades
CMDO STWD(590)

This project includes design and construction of ADA compliant sidewalk, ramps, and approaches in the following communities and along the following routes (See Attachment A – Project Maps):
W 1^st Ave and E 1^st Ave – Stock St to Bramble St (just past the wye) – Big Timber
McLeod St – W / E 1^st Ave to W 9^th Ave – Big Timber
1^st Ave W – 7^th St W to Main St – Roundup
Main St – 1^st Ave W to 2^nd St W – Roundup
8^th Ave E – Main St to 4^th St E – Roundup
Center Ave – W 3^rd St to 8^th St – Hardin
Mitchell Ave – W 3^rd St to 2^nd St S – Hardin

Not all intersections will be included in this project, a spreadsheet with generally estimated quantities 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 31-JUL-2018 01:45 PM
SOQ Ranked Short List
1 – Riverside Contracting Inc. / DOWL
2 – Century Companies, Inc. / Stahly Engineering / Peaks to Plains Design

-3-
Submitted: Thursday 11-OCT-2018 10:56 AM
AS-READ

Addendums

No addendums found for this contract

Clarifications

-1-
Submitted: Friday 17-AUG-2018 02:38 PM
Linked are the Preproposal Meeting Minutes with Attendance Sheet: PREPROPOSAL MEETING MINUTES

-2-
Submitted: Wednesday 22-AUG-2018 11:54 AM
Regarding Question 11 in the posted Preproposal Meeting Minutes in Clarification 1, dates for the community events have not been officially announced. Listed below are three community events, anticipated dates, and links to previous events/dates to be aware of:

1. Sweet Grass Fest in Big Timber, typically held last Friday – Sunday in June, SWEET GRASS FEST
2. Roundup Independence Days, typically the first week of July, ROUNDUP INDEPENDANCE DAYS
3. Little Big Horn Days events in Hardin, typically the third week of June, LITTLE BIG HORN DAYS

At a minimum, schedule and perform no construction activities during the above events, or the day immediately preceding or following the actual days of the events. No lane or complete sidewalk closures will be permitted during this timeframe. Ensure vehicle and temporary pedestrian access is maintained with the least possible inconvenience and disruption to the public during these times. Consider planning and phasing the project so that ADA ramps, sidewalks and streets associated with these events are not disturbed during the event dates. Ensure the public involvement plan and implementation includes communicating with MDT, community leaders and event sponsors.

-3-
Submitted: Thursday 30-AUG-2018 03:54 PM
Linked below are as-built files retrieved from our database. These are posted as a clarification in response to a request received by a proposing Firm. MDT provides them for informational purposes only. Some of the information contained in these documents may be out of date or not applicable with regard to the advertised project. The Firms 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. AS-BUILTS

Questions

-1-
Submitted: Thursday 05-JUL-2018 10:10 AM
Company: Stahly Engineering & Associates
Contact: Byron Stahly
The Certification Of Right Of Way form provided in the SOQ information, makes reference to a DB Firm providing this verification. Please clarify if indeed this is a requirement.
Answer
Submitted: Monday 09-JUL-2018 11:05 AM
Right-of-Way Certification by the DB Firm is required for the project.

-2-
Submitted: Thursday 05-JUL-2018 11:36 AM
Company: Stahly Engineering & Associates
Contact: Byron Stahly
What is the extent of "replace surfacing section" and "plant mix surfacing" identified for McLeod Street in Big Timber?
Answer
Submitted: Monday 09-JUL-2018 11:15 AM
The extent of replacement will need to be designed by the DB Firm and will depend on existing features and topography.

-3-
Submitted: Tuesday 07-AUG-2018 04:44 PM
Company: Century Companies, Inc.
Contact: Estimating
Can MDT provide the approximate number of locations for mid-block sidewalk/approach replacement, mid-block curb and gutter replacement, and mid-block sidewalk replacement. Quantities for said mid-block improvements were provided, however, determining work efforts necessary for items such as survey, design, subsurface utility investigation, environmental consideration, right of way certification sidewalk and approach construction agreements (from each adjacent landowner), and mobilization are all dependent upon the number of locations.

Answer
Submitted: Thursday 08-AUG-2018 04:48 PM

Refer to Attachment M of the RFP. There is a General Summary for each community that gives the quantity for developing the bid price proposal.

Big Timber: The existing alley approach locations to be replaced (5) are shown for P-91. We anticipate the number of additional mid-block sidewalk replacement locations to range between 15 and 20. A few of these mid-block sidewalk locations will also be associated with approaches (other than the 5 alley). We anticipate the number of mid-block curb and gutter replacement locations to be less than five, with a few of these also being associated with approaches. The C & G replacement areas all correspond with sidewalk or approaches.

Roundup: We anticipate the mid-block sidewalk replacement locations to range between 15 and 20. Only a couple of these are associated with approaches. The majority of additional sidewalk replacement areas occur on Main Street.

Hardin: We anticipate the mid-block sidewalk replacement locations to range between 10 and 15. Only a couple of these are associated with approaches. The majority of additional sidewalk replacement areas occur on Center Avenue.

It will be up to the selected DB Firm to work with the MDT EPM and MDT staff to further define the locations for mid-block sidewalk and approach work.

-4-
Submitted: Thursday 06-SEP-2018 12:49 PM
Company: Stahly Engineering & Associates
Contact: Byron Stahly
The RFP states no final design activities can be performed before MDT furnishes an approved Environmental Document. The language used in RFP, regarding design documents, is 90% component plans, 100% component plans, and final plans for construction. What does MDT consider "final design activities"?
Answer
Submitted: Monday 10-SEP-2018 08:45 AM
MDT considers 100% Component Plans "final design activities."

-5-
Submitted: Friday 21-SEP-2018 11:52 AM
Company: Stahly Engineering & Associates
Contact: Byron Stahly
There are locations, adjacent to ramps being improved, in which cross-walk pavement markings exist on the non-stop or non-yield traffic lanes. The locations in question are not school crossings. Does MDT want these existing cross-walk pavement markings perpetuated?
Answer
Submitted: 24-SEP-2018 03:32 PM
Perpetuate the existing cross-walk pavement markings on the project. If required by the configuration of new ramps, modify the pavement markings to best fit the new condition.

-6-
Submitted: Friday 21-SEP-2018 01:26 PM
Company: Century Companies, Inc.
Contact: Estimating
On Q-4 of Preproposal mtg minutes Q &A regarding Utilities costs, it was stated that the Design-Build firm “is acting as a representative of the department and in affect, does pay for these costs with the associated lump sum costs of the project”. We certainly understand D/B Team responsibility, as part of project development, to identify and coordinate all utility relocation or adjustments necessary due to project impacts. The issue with being responsible for the associated costs is the significant unknown, specifically with underground utilities, and therefore the significant associated risk. Risk equates to high pricing to mitigate that risk, which ultimately takes critical funding from actual project needs. Would the department be willing to set a determined dollar amount for utility work for the bid? This would mitigate the risk and allow MDT to change order out of the project any excess dollars set-aside, but not needed for utility relocate purposes. If that is not possible, will the department provide the Unit Pricing data described in the MDT Right of Way Operations Manual and an assurance that the Utility Companies will honor that pricing for the D-B Firm?
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday 26-SEP-2018 08:42 AM
MDT will not set a predetermined utility allowance for this project. MDT is unable to share utility unit cost data described in the MDT Right of Way Operations Manual, as that information is proprietary. It is the responsibility of the DB Firm to communicate and coordinate with corresponding utilities to determine costs. The DB Firm is also responsible for following state law when participating with utilities.

-7-
Submitted: Thursday 27-SEP-2018 09:59 AM
Company: Century Companies, Inc.
Contact: Estimating
In response to your last question. We have just been informed by local MDT utility locators that there are utilities owned by MDT themselves that may need to be relocated at some of the corners in Hardin. If this is the case will MDT relocate these utilities and who is responsible for the costs to relocate MDT own utilities on this particular project? Do we pay MDT to move them? If so who at MDT do we talk to about the logistics, cost and schedule?
Answer
Submitted: Friday 28-SEP-2018 03:08 PM
For MDT-owned signal and lighting equipment, it is the responsibility of the DB Firm to either avoid or relocate these facilities without interrupting service.

-8-
Submitted: Monday    01-OCT-2018 04:54 PM
Company: DOWL
Contact: Doug Enderson
During the Pre-Proposal Meeting, DOWL asked for clarification on the definition of “bicycle-friendly” inlet grates. A-2 of the Pre-Proposal Meeting Minutes states that “there are standard details for new styles of bicycle friendly grates. If not impacted by construction, existing grates can be left in place.” Almost all of the inlets on the project corridors do not match MDT’s current standard details, although some of them may be considered “bicycle-friendly.” We are trying to understand what should be considered “bicycle-friendly” for the existing inlet grates that do not match MDT’s current standard details. The Section 4.12.8 of the AASHTO Guide to Bicycle Facilities (2012, 4th edition) states that “care should be taken that drainage grates are bicycle-compatible, with openings small enough to prevent a bicycle wheel from falling into the slots of the grate” and “where bicycle-incompatible grates remain, metal straps can be welded across slots perpendicular to the direction of travel at a maximum longitudinal spacing of 4 in.” A FHWA training course on bicycle transportation as well as some manufacturer standards agree that inlet grate bars should not be parallel to the travel way. Based on this information, our specific questions are:
1)   Does MDT intend to replace all affected inlet grates that do not match MDT’s current standard grates to current MDT standards even if they may be considered “bicycle-friendly” according to AASHTO?
2)   If not, by which parameters should the DB team determine whether the existing inlet grates are “bicycle-friendly” or not?
3)   We interpret the meaning of “bicycle-friendly” to mean: grates that do not contain lateral space exceeding 4 inches in the direction of travel. Is this an acceptable definition?
Answer
Submitted: Wednesday    03-OCT-2018 12:42 PM
1)   No.
2)   Ensure the direction of the slots are oriented transverse to the direction of bicycle travel, or they have safety lugs preventing bicycle wheels from entering slots.
3)   Definition is acceptable.