16000_Parking_Lot-Questions_and_Answers_(002).pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

502D AIR BASE

WING JOINT BASE

SAN ANTONIO

MEMORANDUM FOR 502D CONS/JBKAD 21AUG2017

ATTENTION: MSgt. DAVID P. COWAN

FROM: 502D CES/CENMP 1555

GOTT STREET

LACKLAND AFB TX 78236-5645

SUBJECT: Questions - FA3016-17-R-0064 - Construct Parking Lot Bldg. 16000

The response (August 19, 2017) to Contractor question from site visit (August 08, 2017) for construction of parking lot building (bldg.) 16000. Questions have been received and reviewed. The following are the

Contractor’s questions and the Government’s response.

Contractor Question 01

Our team has preliminarily laid out the new parking lot per the layout and dimensions required per paragraph

1.4.2.1. Based on this layout the new parking lot will overlap the existing concrete sidewalk and curbing parallel and close to Military. The conceptual drawing in the RFP inaccurately does not show the lot extending this far. Paragraph 1.4.1 “Demolition” does not make any mention of potential demolition of this sidewalk/curb. This demolition scope will add cost to the project that bidding contractors may not include since the RFP documents do not indicate. Since this is an LPTA project, this potential oversight may result in a low bidder who might issue change orders and delays due to this unclear scope of work. In order to ensure all bids include any required demolition of existing concrete sidewalk and curbing will the Government revise

Figure 2.1 and Paragraph 1.4.1 to more accurately capture this demolition scope of work?

Government Response 01

Demolition - Contractor shall demo exiting curb of adjacent parking lot as part of new parking lot construction. The new parking lot ramp shall connect to existing parking lot in this location (Fig2.1) connections appearance (only) as shown in figure 2.2 (Location at figure2.1)

Contractor Question 02

Please confirm the required size of the parking spaces. Are they 9’x18’ or 10’x20’?

Government Response 02

Parking spots shall be 9’x18’

Contractor Question 03

What percent or how many ADA compliant spaces are required for this project by the Owner? Is van accessible parking spaces required?

Government Response 03

For this location there will not be Handicapped designated spaces, there are no van spaces required.

Contractor Question 04

Please confirm the entire construction zone parameters and how far beyond that is accessible for construction activities, storage, etc.

Government Response 04

Contractor Question 05

Is temporary or permanent irrigation required for the landscaping?

Government Response 05

The only grass to be restored shall be laydown boundaries. There are no landscaping areas with in the parking lot.

Contractor Question 06

Please confirm if the Quality Control (QC) person is required to be onsite fulltime. Can the Quality

Control (QC) role function be provided by another acting person, such as the Superintendent?

Government Response 06

The QC is not required to be on site at all times however, the QC shall be responsible to answer questions from Government inspector concerning QA. The Superintendent can answers questions if necessary. Superintendent cannot act as QC conflict of interest PM can serve as QC if necessary.

Contractor Question 07

Please clarify Bus and Tractor Trailer parking. Will they need their own parking spots?

Government Response 07

No, there will not be any parking for Buses or tractor trailers. The parking lot shall be designed to support buses and tractor trailers for turnaround purposes and or short term parking.

Laydown Boundaries Construction Boundaries

Contractor Question 08

Do we need to have a Geotechnical Engineer perform soil borings in order to provide a pavement recommendation?

Government Response 08

It is highly recommended/encouraged however, not required. Please be advised the base has very expansive soils, and Contractor shall be responsible if the soils do not support the new parking lot.

Contractor Question 09

Please clarify if the Photocell LED Lighting can be 100% solar.

Government Response 09

The LED lighting should not be 100% solar due to the fact 100% solar lighting does not always provide sufficient lighting for desired areas, however if Contractor has 100% solar lighting with ability to provide 100% solar lights with the same lumens as photocell LED lights with back ground powered backup. Please provide the submittal for review and acceptance.

Contractor Question 10

Please provide the required time for the government review of the design documents?

Government Response 10

The Government review period is 14 work days.

Contractor Question 11

Do the liquidated damages apply to each of the CLINs or just to the overall duration?

Government Response 11

Government Response – Liquidated Damages will be assessed in accordance with FAR Clause

52.211-12. The Government will take into consideration any delays it has caused the contractor.

Contractor Question 12

Are there any plans that reference grade elevations, as in existing elevations versus proposed elevations?

Government Response 12

No there are no as-built for the site. The old facility in that area has been removed to many years.

Contractor Question 13

Is there a Geotechnical report of soils study or do we need to have a Geotechnical engineer perform soil borings in order to provide a pavement recommendation?

Government Response 13

Please see Government Response 08

Contractor Question 14

Is permitting with the City/County and/or other local agencies required?

Government Response 14

The construction site is on base so there should not be any outside/local agency permitting required.

This process will take some time to complete, however the base is in the process of privatizing all the utilities on base so there may have to be some coordination with public utilities if the site has been privatized.

Contractor Question 15

Do we need to provide a landscaping/irrigation plan?

Government Response 15

Please see Government Response 05

Contractor Question 16

Please clarify if the Photocell LED lighting can be 100% solar.

Government Response 16

Please see Government Response 09

Contractor Question 17

Paragraph 1.3.8 states “Contractor shall insure/design all crosswalks surfaces comply with ADA standards.

Contractor shall use permanent truncated domes.” During the site walk, Government representatives noted that the parking lot should be “ADA compliant,” however, the Government representative also stated that we are not required to provide an ADA compliant sidewalk or pathway from the parking lot to the building. An

ADA compliant pathway from this parking lot to the building would be an extensive amount of work to include in this limited budget. We do not see the need to add any ADA parking spaces, or respective ADA compliant pathways, since we are not adding building square footage. The original parking lots should have been designed to provide a certain number of ADA compliant parking spots and ADA compliant pathways from those spots to the building. Since no ADA parking spots or pathways appear to be necessary we do not see the need to provide ADA compliant crosswalks. Will the Government confirm that no ADA crosswalks or areas within ADA grade tolerances are included in this scope of work?

Government Response 17

No there is no need for ADA compliant crosswalks please see government Response 03.

Contractor Question 18

Paragraph 1.4.2.9 states “Replace non-reinforced curb and gutter per “For Construction design package” including and not limited to soil, asphalt, and concrete. The RFP documents do not include a “For

Construction design package” nor does it define any extents of the “non-reinforced curb and gutter.” Will the

Government clarify the extents of “non-reinforced curb and gutter” that requires replacement under this contract?

Government Response 18

The only curbs that require replacement due to construction are stated in Government Response

01, as well as any curbs or gutters damaged due to contractor negligence

Contractor Question 19

Please confirm requirement for standard stand up curb in lieu of header/flush curb. Using a flush curb with wheel stops for vehicle stop instead of standard curb will allow drainage to remain in sheet flow conditions and prevent erosion and concentrated discharges.

Government Response 19

The type of curbs shall be designated by contractor during design/review phase of project.

Contractor Question 20

RFP makes no mention of wheel stops as being required. Please confirm whether wheel stops need to be included.

Government Response 20

Please see Government Response 19

Contractor Question 21

Paragraph 1.3.6 states “design for a Primary Parking Structure for Bus and Tractor-Trailer Traffic.” During the site walk the Government representative noted that a tractor-trailer or bus may occasionally access the parking lot to turn around. It was noticed during the site walk and in reviewing the aerial views that the existing west parking lot does not include adequate turning radii for a tractor-trailer or bus to access the proposed parking lot. Based on what appears to be an inadequate tractor-trailer path to the proposed parking lot, will the Government require the new parking lot to be designed for the occasional truck/bus (enhanced pavement design and increased turning radii)?

Government Response 21

See Government Response 07

Contractor Question 22

Paragraph 1.3.6 states “design for a Primary Parking Structure for Bus and Tractor-Trailer Traffic.” During the site walk, the Government representative indicated that they expect a tractor trailer truck driving through the new parking lot approximately once every 1-3 months. Will the Government please confirm the expected bus/tractor-trailer truck axle type (single or tandem), axle load (2,000 to 50,000), and frequency of travel?

Government Response 22

See Government Response 07, the Government cannot give speculated response to question. Facility customer has a classified facility therefor the information is need to know only.

Contractor Question 23

Paragraph 1.3.2 states “The contractor shall be responsible for developing design analysis, plans, and specifications to accomplish the provisions of this SOW (complete design-build);” however, paragraph 1.3.4 states “design a 100-spot illuminated parking area (6-inch pad)”. Is the Government requiring 6” thick pavement or is the contractor’s engineer of record required to determine pavement thickness that might be more or less than 6”?

Government Response 23

The Design Engineer (Texas Licensed P.E.) can make the determination.

Contractor Question 24

An important variable in pavement design is required service life. The RFP does not indicate a minimum required service life. Will the Government please indicate minimum required service life so LPTA designs are not simply one-year warranty designs? Generally, a 25 Year Design Life is specified.

Government Response 24

Contractor shall provide standard 25 year design life specification.

Contractor Question 25

Paragraph 1.3.6 states “photocell LED is requested/preferred”. Paragraph 1.4.c states “parking lot shall have adequate photocell LED lighting.” Will the Government confirm that the exterior site lighting is required to be photocell LED lighting and not just requested/preferred?

Government Response 25

Yes the photocell LED lighting is required, this is the current TxDot standard. Also see Government

Response 09

Contractor Question 26

Paragraph 1.3.6 states “photocell LED lighting is requested/preferred”. Per UFC 3-530-01, other lighting sources are allowed for parking lots. Can other light sources be used?

Government Response 26

See Government Response 09 and 26

Contractor Question 27

Paragraph 1.4.d states “Replace any curbs that are missing, broken, or are out of alignment.” The RFP documents provided do not indicate any areas of “missing, broken, or out of alignment curbs.” Will

Government quantify “missing, broken or out of alignment curbs” to be included in scope of work as noted so that Contractors are not guessing at quantities in pricing/scheduling? Our understanding of the scope of work is we are providing a new parking lot so are not clear on the limits of where our repairs would be taking place.

Government Response 27

See Government Response 18

Contractor Question 28

Paragraph 1.4.2.12 states “curbing to set at same elevation, unless it is shown to be broken/fallen more than ½ inch or needing repairs to help keep the street working as planned.” Will the Government please clarify what this means and any locations and extents where this applies so that Contractors are not guessing at quantities in pricing/scheduling?

Government Response 28

See Government Response 18

Contractor Question 29

The RFP does not appear to require geotechnical testing; however, pavement design is highly dependent upon adequate testing. If an engineered signed/sealed pavement and light pole base design is required, geotechnical testing must be performed. Will the Government please indicate whether the Contractor is required to perform a geotechnical investigation?

Government Response 29

See Government Response 08

Contractor Question 30

Section 1.4.2.14 states “Contractor shall pour parking lot as a monolithic concrete pour.” Please confirm that new parking lot is required to be Portland cement concrete and not hot mix asphalt concrete.

Government Response 30

The Contractor shall pour parking lot and curbs monolithically. As long as the curbs parking lot section are placed at the same time the monolithic requirement is met.

Contractor Question 31

Section 1.4.2.14 states “Contractor shall pour parking lot as a monolithic concrete pour.” During the site walk, the Government representative clarified that this statement meant that the curb joints must align with pavement joints. Will the Government please clarify in detail what is meant by “monolithic a concrete pour.”

Government Response 31

See Government Response 30

Contractor Question 32

Paragraph 1.3.16 states that the contractor shall submit for government review and approval…50%, 75%, and 100% design packages.” Paragraph 5 states “at a minimum, the contractor shall allow 3 weeks for government review of all submittals for approval or disapproval.” Section B – Supplies or Services and

Prices indicates “30 calendar days for contractor to produce” each design package (50%, 65%, and 100%).

If the Government uses 3 weeks to perform design review this only leaves our design team one week to review and interpret Government comments, schedule and participate in a design review meeting, incorporate design review comments, and re-issue the next design package. This is not a reasonable expectation. Based on the limited scope of this project will the Government consider reducing the required packages to two (65% and 100%) and the Government design review durations to two weeks in lieu of three?

Government Response 32

The design phases are 50%..75…and 100%, the Government review period is 14 working days.

Each phase of design will have separate NTPs. Once the contractor delivers design documents. The

Government will not issue the next NTP until the design drawings are approved.

Contractor Question 33

Paragraph 1.4.2.22 states “Contractor shall provide all testing, transportation and fees associates with fill dirt, spoils, and debris. Contractor shall add cost to proposal for removing any materials off base or testing of any materials. 502 CES Environmental are the ones who determine if soil needs to be tested.” The RFP does not indicate if any existing soils are contaminated; however, old aerial photographs indicate that this site was the location of two skeet shooting ranges. Based on this there is an elevated chance of the soils being contaminated. During the site walk, the Government representative indicated that all spoils must leave the site because Lackland AFB has no available spoils disposal areas. The Government representative also indicated that all spoils leaving the site must be tested for contamination, and per the RFP the

Contractor will be responsible to pay for any fees necessary to dispose. Disposing of contaminated soils can incur a significant unknown cost dependent upon what contaminants are discovered. For the purpose of pricing, will the Government allow the bidding contractors to assume that all soils are clean from contaminants and if contaminates are discovered the costs associated with disposal will be handled as an equitable adjustment to the contract (keeping in mind that CLIN 004 has a CCL of $1,000,000, therefore assuming disposal of contaminated soil in our pricing could have a significant cost impact.)

Government Response 33

There are no spoil locations on JBSA at this time. Contractor shall have spoil tested and disposed of properly. Be advised if the soil does not show any excessive contamination (contamination beyond standard soils samples for reign) the soils can go to any soil collection facility.

Contractor Question 34

RFP documents appears to indicate existing underground domestic water, fire water, and gas lines located at where the new parking lot “ramp” will be located. The depth of these lines is not provided.

The bidding contractors have to assume that these lines are deep enough to accommodate the new pavement and don’t require re-work of the existing utility lines. Will the Government please provide depth to these underground lines or treat any required re-work determined after award as an equitable adjustment to the contract?

Government Response 34

At this time the Government shows no underground unities in the area, however to dig on JBSA-

Lackland the Contractor shall have an approved dig permit which requires locates.

Contractor Question 35

Paragraph 1.4.2.2 states “Contractor shall install orange plastic safety fencing per approved site plan.”

Paragraph 2.3.1 states “Contractor shall construct and maintain 6-foot high chain link fence around the exterior of the project site perimeter.” Will the Government clarify the requirements for the temporary project fencing?

Government Response 35

Contractor shall ensure construction/laydown area is properly fenced to avoid theft of Contractor property and prevent public from entering construction area. Typically the laydown yard has 6 foot fencing and construction area has orange plastic fencing.

Contractor Question 36

Numerous references are made throughout the RFP that the new parking lot is required to accommodate

100 new parking spots. Figure 2.2 “Conceptual Drawing” provided in the RFP only indicates 96 new parking spots. Will the Government confirm that the conceptual layout provided in the RFP is inadequate and all bidding contractors must provide an adequate parking layout that provides a minimum of 100 spots?

Government Response 36

The Contractor shall provide 100 parking spot parking lot. Drawing is a Government concept.

Contractor Question 37

1. There are existing power poles in the footprint of the proposed parking lot. Will the Government please confirm that the power pole(s) can remain in place?

Government Response 37

The power pole can remain in place.

Contractor Question 38

If the existing power pole(s) within the parking lot footprint are allowed to remain does the Government require bollards around power pole(s)? Will a striped no parking area suffice?

Government Response 38

No bollard required no parking area will suffice.

Contractor Question 39

There appears to be 3 options for providing power to the new pole mounted lights to serve the parking lot.

Option 1 is to reuse the existing CPS pole mounted transformer. Option 2 is for CPS to provide a new pole mounted transformer. Option 3 is to route underground conductors back to Building 16000. Option 3 would be the most expensive option and require significant additional information including the location of the electrical room, available capacity, desired underground route, existing underground utilities in the pathway, and potential patching of existing pavements, penetrations to the building, etc. As CLIN 004 has a CCL of

$1,000,000 we assume that Option 3 is not desirable. Please confirm the source of power for the new parking lot lighting.

Government Response 39

The power supplied to the parking lot lighting shall be determined my DOR. This is a design-build project.

Contractor Question 40

There is an existing CPS pole mounted transformer in the center pole with the line conductors cut off.

Will it be acceptable to the Government and CPS to reuse this pole mounted CPS transformer for the parking lot lighting circuit?

Government Response 40

That is acceptable to the Government however, the Contractor will have to get permission from

CPS at no cost to Government.

Contractor Question 41

Will the Government provide an allowance for CPS Energy related costs associated with reuse of existing CPS transformer or addition of new transformer if required by CPS? CPS generates their own design/cost when a work order is put in, and will not respond to contractors pricing inquiries associated with a Design-Build RFP.

Government Response 41

No, contractor’s electrician should be able to properly estimate a reasonable cost.

Contractor Question 42

If the government requires the power for the new parking lot lighting to be provided from Building

16000, please provide the location of the existing electrical room, available capacity and information pertaining to the equipment to be connected to, desired underground route, location of existing utilities within the underground route, details on existing pavements to be cut if required, etc.

Government Response 42

Contractor will not be allowed to use or tap into building 16000 for power.

Contractor Question 43

Additional impervious cover will result in increased flows off-site. Please confirm no detention or other mitigating facilities will be required.

Government Response 43

The only facility is the parking lot, with sidewalk on North end. As stated on site visit sidewalk shall end when it reaches existing connecting parking lot.

Contractor Question 44

Please confirm no permanent water quality facilities (EISA or LID) for projects over 5,000SF are required as part of this project.

Government Response 44

This is a parking lot addition for an existing facility. There are no water features in parking lot.

Contractor Question 45

Additional impervious cover will result in increased flows off-site. Please confirm no detention or other mitigating facilities will be required.

Government Response 45

The only facility is the parking lot, with sidewalk on North end. As stated on site visit sidewalk shall end when it reaches existing connecting parking lot.

Contractor Question 46

Paragraph 1.3.4 dictates that the ramp shall not exceed a 25-degree angle. A 25-degree angle is a 46.6% slope, which is well in excess of a drivable surface. Typical maximum slopes for trucks are limited to

10%, or 14% in extreme instances. Having such an extreme slope will also lead to “bottoming out” as you enter and leave the sloped area as grades transition. Please amend the maximum slope requirement as necessary, suggested 10% maximum.

Government Response 46

Slope of ramp shall ensure motor vehicles/vehicle types will be to access (and or translon between connecting) the parking lot shall not be damaged due to slope of ramp.

Contractor Question 47

Paragraph 1.3.12 (a) dictates a requirement of cut/fill, as well as profiles views for the design package.

This is not a typical requirement as a plan view of grading is sufficient for construction. Please confirm need for these plans. Profiles will be done on any storm drain needed as part of the project.

Government Response 47

The profiles shall be required for as needed only. Any areas where a plan view are excitable for review are acceptable.

Contractor Question 48

Paragraph 1.4.2.10 dictates repair by concrete encasement of any unexpected utility. It is not possible to include in our proposal costs for unexpected utilities. While we understand that this will be the repair requirement should an unexpected utility be encountered, this cost would not be included in our proposal as it is not possible to quantify. As CLIN 004 of this project has a CCL of $1,000,000 we do not want to include unnecessary contingencies in our proposal. Please confirm this will be treated as a differing site condition.

Government Response 48

See Government response 34.

Contractor Question 49

Paragraph 23 states that the contractor shall use a certified/licensed surveyor to conduct a survey for use in the as-built drawings. We plan to use a certified/licensed surveyor to conduct a survey prior to design, as required, and incorporate this survey and final grading into design documents. Construction will be in accordance with these design documents. Please confirm that the government wants the contractors cost to include a second survey after construction.

Government Response 49

As long as the licensed surveyor’s notes, drawings, etc. are part of the as-built there is no need for a separate surveyor for the as-built.

Contractor Question 50

Paragraph 1.4.2.22 states that 502nd CES Environmental will determine if soil needs to be tested. For the purposes of accurately pricing this project, we need to know the frequency of testing that will be required on material that will leave the site so we can quantify this testing expense as part of our proposal. As

CLIN 004 of this project has a CCL of $1,000,000 we do not want to include excess testing that will not be necessary. Please advise on testing frequency.

Government Response 50

The Government cannot recommend frequency, Contractor has to make determination based on spoils excavated.

Contractor Question 51

Paragraph 2.2.1 states that electricity will not be provided by the government. This is atypical of projects we have completed in the past at Lackland AFB and therefore want to confirm that this statement is not in error. Please confirm that any power necessary to perform work on this contract and any power for a construction trailer or other temporary power needs would be at the expense of the contractor.

Government Response 51

See Government response 34 and revised SOW.

Contractor Question 52

Paragraph 8.1 of the SOW states that the QC and SSHO can be served by one person. Paragraph 1.2.7 of

Section 01 35 30 states that the Site Super and the SSHO can be the same person. Paragraph 3.4.2 of

Section 01 45 00.00 10 states that QC person can also be the Superintendent. Please confirm whether two full time personnel must be onsite or if one person can serve as QC/Super/SSHO?

Government Response 52

See Government response 06.

Contractor Question 53

Please confirm that the QC Manager is required to be a graduate engineer, graduate architect, or graduate of construction management and also have 10 years of experience. In lieu of the requirement to have both, can this person have one of the degrees referenced or 10 years of experience on similar type projects?

Government Response 53

The QC manager is not required to be graduated engineer, see Government Response 06.

Contractor Question 54

The “Figure 2.2 Conceptual Drawing of 100 spot Parking Lot” in the RFP indicates a new sidewalk connecting the existing “West Parking Lot” to this newly proposed parking lot, yet this sidewalk is not highlighted. Is this sidewalk supposed to be included in this proposed scope of work? If so, what is the minimum width of this sidewalk and is it required to be an ADA compliant pathway?

Government Response 54

The sidewalk shall be 6 feet wide, also see Government Response 17.

Contractor Question 55

The “Figure 2.2 Conceptual Drawing of 100 spot Parking Lot” in the RFP indicates a new parking lot highlighted just south of the existing “West Parking Lot.” Will the Government please confirm that this parking lot is not included in the proposed scope of work?

Government Response 55

The ramp connecting the new parking lot to existing parking lot is only work that shall take place on any existing facilities.

Contractor Question 56

Section 1.3.6 – What types of buses and tractor-trailers will be parking in the new lot? This information is needed to calculate loading requirements for the parking lot.

Government Response 56

See Government Response 22.

Contractor Question 57

Section 1.3.11 – The SOW requires submittal of a road/lane closure plan. Please clarify what lane closures are required, i.e. through the existing parking lot, along Military Dr. (if nearby gate is to be used), haul route from contractors’ gate, etc.

Government Response 57

The selected contractor may be able to enquire with security forces about the gate adjacent to job site, however it is not an approved access point for the base. The site is as shown on site visit other than restricting the existing grass parking areas no other traffic control measures are required.

Contractor Question 58

Can the gate on Military Dr. (just north of the project site) be used as a construction entrance? If not, can a temporary construction road be placed along the east and north sides of B16000? Either option would alleviate parking/access issues. Please see attached Plan View for Access exhibit.

Government Response 58

No temporary access points to JBSA will be granted, however see Government Response 57

Contractor Question 59

Please provide as-built for utility clarification.

Government Response 59

See Government Response 34

Contractor Question 60

Is there an existing storm water piping system in the area of the new parking area? If so can you provide the size and location?

Government Response 60

See Government Response 34

Contractor Question 61

There are some existing grades shown on page 3 of the SOW right above section 1.2.2, are those accurate?

Government Response 61

All drawings as part of SOW are conceptual

Contractor Question 62

It calls for lighting in the new parking lot, can you provide the location of where you need us to tie into at?

Government Response 62

The method of powering the new lighting shall be determined by Contractor.

Contractor Question 63

Can you please provide any existing Geotech reports for Bldg 16000 area?

Government Response 63

See Government Response 34

Contractor Question 64

Can you please provide as-built for all underground utilities?

Government Response 64

See Government Response 34

Contractor Question 65

Can you provide the design plan with the hydraulic calculations for the earthen drainage ditch?

Government Response 65

See Government Response 34

Contractor Question 66

Where would you like the runoff for the new parking lot to go to?

Government Response 66

In the existing ditch between the new parking lot and the building.

Due to facility type and file size the as-built utilities will be provided to selected Contractor only.