May 7, 2014
ADDENDUM #1
To: All registered users for the Request for Proposal entitled “design services FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION AT WEST MAIN STREET& PITCHER’S WAY, HYANNIS” dated April 14, 2014.
Due Date: May 14, 2014, no later than 2 pm
Please be advised that Addendum #1 is being issued to provide question and answer pertaining to this RFP:
- Page 3 of the RFP indicates that the improvements will “consist of new signal mast arms and signal heads, pedestrian crossing facilities and improvements to the sidewalks and ADA ramps.” Is the intent that the footprint (i.e. curbline) of the intersection is being retained and that sidewalks would be added adjacent to the existing curbline? Or, does the project anticipate modifications to the alignment, drainage modifications, cross section (crown) modifications, profile modifications, drainage upgrades, etc. ANSWER: THE PROJECT ANTICIPATES RETAINING THE CURRENT ROADWAY CONFIGURATION WITH NEEDED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE DETERMINED VIA THE DESIGN.
- Are the subsurface soils investigations limited to just the mast arm foundation designs, or are additional test pits for pavement design and drainage design also required? ANSWER: APPROPRIATE TESTING FOR STRUCTURAL AND PAVING, DRAINAGE DESIGN IS REQUIRED
3. Is a full pavement design, in accordance with MassDOT procedures required? ANSWER: YES
4. The RFP indicates that the MADOT standard matrix of expected tasks with man-hours, etc. is required. Please confirm that the hourly matrix and subsequent price proposal must be completed using the MassDOT standard Man Hour forms as there are several items in the MassDOT Scope that may not be applicable to this project.. ANSWER: THE MADOT MATRIX SHOULD BE COMPLETED, THOSE ITEMS NOT INCLUDED WILL BE LEFT OFF THE MATRIX.
5. The RFP indicates that field survey base plans will be provided by the town, does the survey include underground utilities, rim inverts, etc.? ANSWER: YES
6. The RFP indicates the town will provide a detailed field survey base plan. Will the Town provide the survey base plan in accordance with the consultants AutoCad standards (MassDOT Standards) or is the consultant responsible for converting the Cad files provided by the town and preparing the base plans. ANSWER: THE SURVEY BASE PLAN CAD DETAILS ARE OUTLINED IN THE RFP AT C. TECHNICAL SCOPE OF WORK.
7. The RFP does not mention any coordination with Utility companies for potential relocation of utility poles. Is it anticipated that the Consultant will coordinate meetings with the impacted utility companies and coordinate potential relocations with the impacted utility companies, or will the Town be coordinating this effort? ANSWER: THERE SHOULD BE JOINT COORDINATION WITH UTILITIES.
8. The project anticipates providing sidewalks. Is there sufficient ROW available to provide sidewalks? If not, will the Town be acquiring the needed right of way and preparing subsequent plans or would the consultant be responsible for the preparation of any ROW alterations or permanent easements that may be required? ANSWER: NO ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY TAKING IS ANTICIPATED, BUT IF REQUIRED, THE TOWN WILL PREPARE EASEMENT AND/OR TAKING PLANS.
9. Does the project anticipate roadway widening to provide bicycle accommodations (4-5’ shoulders)? If this requires additional ROW, will Town be responsible for ROW (see question 3)? ANSWER: IF SO AND IF REQUIRED, THE TOWN WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR EASEMENT AND/OR TAKING PLANS.
10. Please confirm Construction Phase Services, (Bidding, Pre-Con Meetings, etc.) are not part of scope. Project is complete with submission of 100% Design Plans, Specifications, Cost Estimate and Detail Sheets. ANSWER: CONFIRMED – CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES ARE NOT PART OF THE SCOPE.
11. Section C outlines three (3) review meetings with the town (after 25% , after 75% and after 100%). There is no mention of public meetings. Are just the 3 project meetings all that are required? ANSWER: 3 MEETINGS ARE THE LIMIT OF THE SCOPE.
12. Are three full submissions required (25%, 75% and 100%) or can a Preliminary (50%) and Final (100%) be substituted to reduce costs? ANSWER: SUBMISSIONS ARE AS STATED IN THE RFP.
13. Scope does not mention any Permitting that is required or anticipated. Please clarify if any of the following (or other permits/meetings) are anticipated as be part of the scope:
a. Con Com Meetings (RDA or NOI applications)
b. Planning Board
c. Scenic Road
d. Tree Hearings
ANSWER: THE HEARINGS STATED ABOVE ARE NOT ANTICIPATED.
- Is street lighting part of this project scope? ANSWER: NO
- Section IV A Item 2 states that a Professional Land Surveyor shall be included however Section IVC states that the town is providing Survey. Is a professional land surveyor required for this project? ANSWER: Yes a professional land surveyor Is required - the Town will provide the base survey but we require a surveyor at the consultant to communicate as required.
- Is this a local project or will the design go through the MADOT process? ANSWER: THIS PROJECT IS FUNDED BY CHAPTER 90 (STANDARDS TO MEET MADOT), REVIEW BY LOCAL OFFICIALS.
Please acknowledge Addendum 1 on your RFP cover letter. All other terms and conditions remain the same as previously stated.
Johanna F. Boucher
Purchasing Agent