Addendum_1.pdf

Purchasing Services 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way

Building C, Room 303 Viera, Florida 32940

Sykes Creek Phase II Muck Removal Project

B-8-26-36 July 23, 2026

ADDENDUM 1

TO ALL PROSPECTIVE BIDDERS

This is an Addendum to and shall be considered as part of the original bid package for the above-mentioned bid. Please acknowledge receipt of Addendum 1 in space provided on Price Sheet. Bidders are requested to acknowledge receipt of this addendum with their bid.

CLARIFICATION TO QUESTIONS RECEIVED

Question 1: Was a topographic survey conducted of the Nandivida Property that can be provided?

Answer: No site-specific topographic survey of the Nandivada DMMA site was performed as part of the design of the Sykes Creek Phase II Muck Removal Project. The available information concerning the site and the separate Nandivada Multi-Use Facility Phase I improvements is shown in the Construction Drawings and the WSP Phase I drawings included as Attachment D-8 to the Invitation to Bid. Taylor did not develop a separate topographic surface or survey dataset for the Nandivada site under this Project.

Following award, the Contractor shall perform the Pre-Construction Survey of the DMMA required by Section 02 21 00 Surveys, before mobilizing equipment to the site. That survey must document existing site features, ground elevations, and contours throughout the proposed disturbance area and extend 100 feet beyond the disturbance limits. The survey will establish the existing-condition baseline for the Contractor’s final DMMA design and subsequent site restoration.

Any additional survey information held by the County and approved for release will be provided to all bidders via Addendum No. 1.

Question 2: Is there a preferred color for the acoustical barrier material?

Answer: The acoustical barrier shall be a neutral, natural color, such as green or tan that blends with the surrounding vegetation. The final color shall be submitted with the required product data and is subject to Owner approval.

Question 3: The plans show the generalized pipeline route passing through multiple seagrass areas.

Is the intent for the contractor to relocate the dredge pipeline around these areas or somehow factor disturbances/impacts into his bid price?

Answer: The dredge pipeline alignment shown in the Construction Drawings is generalized and does not constitute an approved construction corridor or final pipeline alignment. The Contractor shall develop a final pipeline route that avoids seagrass and submit the route as part of the Dredging and Material Transfer Plan.

For purposes of bidding and construction, a minimum 15-foot setback from seagrass beds and vegetated shorelines shall govern. The reference to a 10-foot seagrass setback in Section 01 35 43 Environmental Protection is hereby revised and superseded by the 15-foot requirement. Anchoring, spudding, laying pipeline, storing materials, or deploying equipment on, in, over, or through submerged aquatic vegetation is prohibited.

Bidders shall include the costs of developing, installing, operating, and maintaining a compliant pipeline route that avoids seagrass impacts. Bidders shall not assume that disturbance of seagrass is authorized.

If the Contractor proposes an alignment or means and methods requiring additional regulatory authorization or modification of an existing permit, the Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining such authorization and for all associated costs and time.

Question 4: The specifications indicate that Dredged Material Handling and Dewatering and Dewatered Muck Transport and Permanent Disposal will be paid based on in-situ volume removed by the dredge. Would like to confirm that it is the responsibility of the contractor to estimate and quantify the bulking factor realized for these two unit items, as moisture content, sediment types, and unknown additional volume for over-depth dredging to meet required grade will have an impact. Please note these factors could effectively double the total in-situ CY identified for these line items.

Answer: The Contractor is responsible for estimating the relationship between the accepted in-situ dredging quantity and the actual quantities that must be conveyed, dewatered, handled, transported, and disposed of. The Contractor shall account in its applicable unit prices for moisture content, sediment characteristics, carrier water, dewatering efficiency, retained water, material density, treatment processes, truck capacity, and its selected means and methods.

Payment for Dredged Material Handling and Dewatering and Dewatered Muck Transport and Permanent Disposal will be based solely on the accepted in-situ volume payable under Bid Item 18.X, Muck Removal Dredging. No adjustment to the payable quantity will be made based on slurry volume, dewatered volume, truck-measured volume, weight, number of loads, or another post-excavation measurement. The Owner does not represent or warrant a specific bulking or conversion factor and does not confirm that the quantity processed or transported will be twice the in-situ quantity.

Question 5: The information provided to the contractor from one or both landowners for disposal differs from what is provided in the bid documents.

1. Price identified is more than price in bid documents

2. Permits for disposal are not provided.

Answer: According to the landowner proposals, pricing shall remain firm provided that the property owner and the dredging contractor execute an agreement within one (1) year of the proposal date.

The proposals were submitted in January 2026. It is the responsibility of the dredging contractor to obtain copies of all existing permits held by the property owner, as well as secure any additional permits or permit modifications that may be required to complete the work.

Question 6: Based on recent global geo-political situations and fuel increases, we respectfully request Brevard County to consider adding a fuel escalation clause in the bid documents given the long term nature of this project.

Answer: Contract terms may be negotiated after the lowest, responsible bidder has been determined.

Question 7: We respectfully request a copy of the pre-bid sign in sheet.

Answer: Pre-bid sign in sheet attached.

Question 8: Was a site-specific geotechnical investigation of the Nandivada Site performed, or are any soil reports, borings, or other subsurface data available to bidders?

No site-specific geotechnical investigation of the Nandivada site was performed as part of the design of the Sykes Creek Phase II Muck Removal Project. Any additional geotechnical information made available by the County will be provided to all bidders via Addendum No. 1. The Contractor remains responsible for performing the investigations and testing necessary to support its proposed design and means and methods. Any such investigation or testing shall be performed by the Contractor, and the Contractor should include such investigations or testing and any associated costs in its Bid.

Question 9: Are the permanent upland disposal sites identified by the County through RFP-8-26-01 guaranteed to be available for use by the Contractor?

Answer: No. The permanent upland disposal sites identified through the County’s RFP-8-26-01 are optional. The County does not guarantee their availability, capacity, timing or suitability for the Contractor’s proposed operations.

The Contractor remains solely responsible for selecting, securing, permitting, coordinating, and using an acceptable permanent upland disposal site approved by the Owner. If the Contractor elects to use a site identified through RFP-8-26-01, it shall contract and coordinate directly with the landowner and independently verify the site’s current availability.

Question 10: Were any gopher tortoises or potentially occupied gopher tortoise burrows identified at the Nandivada site?

Answer: No gopher tortoises or potentially occupied gopher tortoise burrows are identified in the Bid Documents. A formal gopher tortoise survey was not performed as part of the design of the Sykes Creek Phase II Muck Removal Project. Accordingly, the Bid Documents should not be interpreted as confirmation that gopher tortoises or burrows are absent from the site.

The Contractor shall comply with Section 01 35 43 Environmental Protection, and all applicable wildlife-protection requirements. If a gopher tortoise or potentially occupied burrow is encountered, the Contractor shall notify the Owner and Engineer and implement the required protective measures before disturbing the affected area.

Question 11: Why is “Pre-Dredge Surveys (Including Photo Documentation)” included as a separate lump-sum Bid Item for the Base Bid under item 17 and repeated as item 17.X for each optional dredge area?

Answer: Separate pay items allocate the cost of the required pre-dredge surveying and documentation to the Base Bid and to each optional dredge area actually awarded. Survey coverage is required for every awarded area.

The Contractor may coordinate field data collection and submittals for multiple awarded areas but shall provide the required coverage and documentation for each applicable area. No payment will be made for an optional area that is not awarded or authorized.

The items are separated so that the Contractor is compensated for the required survey and documentation associated with the Base Bid and only those optional dredge areas actually awarded.

No payment will be made for surveying an optional dredge area that is not awarded or authorized.

Question 12: Have specific dredging Acceptance Sections been established, or is the Contractor responsible for proposing those limits?

Answer: The dredging zones are established in the Construction Drawings; however, separate fixed Acceptance Sections are not predefined.

An Acceptance Section is a subarea of a dredging zone proposed by the Contractor and approved by the Engineer for purposes of surveying, determining payment quantities, and accepting completed dredging. The Contractor shall identify its proposed Acceptance Sections and month-by-month dredging sequence in the Dredging and Material Transfer Plan submitted before Notice to Proceed 2.

The proposed Acceptance Sections shall remain within the authorized dredging zones and shall not modify the required dredging limits, depths, or sequencing. The pre-dredge and post-dredge surveys for each Acceptance Section must cover the same limits.

Question 13: Is the Contractor’s Dredge Material Management Area (DMMA) design required with the bid, or is it submitted after award?

Answer: A signed and sealed preliminary DMMA and dewatering-system design is required with the Bid as part of the bidder’s prequalification submittal. The preliminary design shall be prepared by a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of Florida and shall contain sufficient detail to demonstrate the feasibility of the bidder’s proposed approach.

At a minimum, the preliminary design shall include:

1. A general plan of the proposed DMMA showing access, staging and material-handling areas, equipment, berms, ponds, drying areas, piping, and other proposed improvements.

2. Typical sections or other vertical information showing proposed grading and planned elevations.

3. The proposed dredged-material offloading and conveyance system.

4. The proposed dewatering and effluent-treatment methodology.

5. A general process schematic accounting for material entering and moving through the

DMMA.

6. The proposed use of polymers, flocculants, or coagulants, if applicable.

7. Proposed temporary and permanent fencing, gates, acoustical barriers, support systems, and access openings.

8. The permitting strategy and anticipated schedule for obtaining required permits, permit modifications, or other authorizations.

9. The design assumptions used in preparing the preliminary design, including assumptions necessitated by the site information available at the time of bidding.

10. Sufficient information to demonstrate that the proposed system can be implemented within the site limits, environmental constraints, Contract schedule, and applicable performance requirements.

The preliminary design shall be based on the information provided in the Bid Documents, subsequent Addenda, the WSP Phase I drawings, the bidder’s site observations, and clearly identified design assumptions. The Bid-stage review will be limited to determining whether the submittal is complete and demonstrates a feasible project approach. Review of the preliminary design does not constitute approval of the Contractor’s final design, calculations, means and methods, or regulatory compliance.

Failure to provide the required preliminary design information may result in the Bid being determined nonresponsive.

Following award, the Contractor shall perform the Pre-Construction Survey of the Nandivada DMMA required by Section 02 21 00 Surveys, and any additional investigation or testing determined necessary by its Professional Engineer. The Contractor shall then prepare and submit its signed and sealed final DMMA design as part of the Dredged Material Management Plan. The final plan shall be submitted at least ten calendar days before the preconstruction meeting preceding Notice to Proceed 2 and must be approved before DMMA construction begins.

Question 14: What construction is currently underway at the Nandivada site?

Answer: Current construction by a 3rd party contractor includes installation of the 18-inch utility pipe intended to convey dredge effluent waters to the designated discharge location and the other improvements shown in Attachment D-8. This construction is currently expected to be completed by September 22, 2026. Those improvements shall remain in place, be incorporated into the Contractor’s proposed DMMA system as required by the Bid Documents and be protected during Dredging operations.

Question 15: The specifications indicate that no payment will be made for over-depth dredging. Is there a tolerance for under-depth dredging? If not, please provide an estimated over-dredge volume that the contractor should anticipate removing to meet required grade.

Answer: No general under-depth tolerance is provided. The Contractor shall use appropriate equipment and operational controls to remove the permitted muck to the required depth while minimizing the remaining surface area of residual exposed muck and avoiding removal of underlying native material and sediments. If native clay or sand is encountered, the Contractor shall notify the Owner and Engineer and proceed as directed.

Over-depth dredging is not authorized, and no estimated over-depth volume will be provided. The Contractor shall include in its Bid all costs associated with achieving the Required Depth, including additional dredging passes and the handling and disposal of any non-payable material inadvertently removed below the Required Depth. No separate or additional payment will be made for over-depth dredging. Payable quantities will be determined in accordance with Section 01 29 00 Measurement and Payment. Nothing in this response authorizes over-depth dredging or modifies the applicable permit requirements.

Attachments:

Pre-bid Sign In Sheet Geotechnical Survey Topographic Survey

Please note that the bid opening date and time have changed to Friday, August 21, 2026 @ 9:00

AM.

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

Sincerely, Mary Bowers Purchasing Manager

END OF ADDENDUM 1