RFI_1_Columbia_Exterior_Tuckpointing_(1).pdf

COLUMBIA FEDERAL BUILDING & US COURTHOUSE (TN0010ZZ)

EXTERIOR TUCKPOINTING

SOLICITATION NUMBER: GS-04-P-16-EX-C-7078

RFI’S #1

DATE: 8-17-2016

1. The project solicitation SOW section 5.2.3 states that “All work in traffic areas (Alley and Parking Lot) shall be completed after hours and/or all avenues of approach shall be block and monitored with written GSA approval.” & in another section of the solicitation SOW, 5.7 it states “All work must be conducted between 6:00 am and 6:00 pm CST including weekends unless noted otherwise.”

a. Please confirm that we should anticipate working regular daytime shift hours (6:00am – 6:00pm) for entire project on all elevations of the building.

GSA Response: All work must be conducted between 6:00 am and 6:00 pm CST including weekends unless noted otherwise. All work, which may affect normal building operation, must be closely coordinated with the GSA Building Manager.

2. On original solicitation document it states that there is an option to remove coping stone & install metal flashing under coping stone in lieu of coating over coping stone. Please confirm this will be an option, along with specifying location extent of option work, metal type/thickness, and flashing profile in order to propose accurately.

GSA Response: No option exists for removal of coping stone and to install metal flashing under coping stone.

Contractor shall coat the coping top cap at the parapet roofs of the entire building. The tops of the coping stones shall be coated with a reinforced, fluid-applied waterproofing compound to prevent moisture infiltration through the porous limestone and through cracks in the material. The horizontal joints between the stones should also be repointed and/or sealed with lead “T” inserts.

3. Project SOW section 5.2.2 describes the coating system as “a reinforced, fluid-applied waterproofing compound”. This type of system would potentially affect the historical appearance and color of the existing coping stone.

a. Please confirm correct coating system and its reinforcing components, along with the coating extent for coping stone (horizontal & vertical surfaces).

GSA Response: The fluid-applied waterproofing coating is recommended only for the tops of coping stones and wall caps. These locations are hidden from public view. Therefore, coating them won't impact historic elements, i.e., it's no different than coating the roof.

4. Please identify the 10 individual stone to be pinned, and correct method & materials to pin stones back to concrete superstructure called out in SOW section 5.2.2

GSA Response: This task or action has been removed from the SOW. Contractor is not required to perform this task or action.

5. Please confirm locations on building of the “two to three” stone panels to be removed to investigate condition of the anchors supporting the stone panels. It is suggested that corner panels be chosen for access and to mitigate potential damage to stone panels while removing from façade. What is the method of anchoring the stones when reinstalling the stone panels?

GSA Response: This task or action has been removed from the SOW. Contractor is not required to perform this task or action.

6. Please confirm extent of 100% building tuckpointing on building façade, Including;

a. brick façade/area well mortar joints, GSA Response: Contractor not to tuckpoint this area. Contractor to price as an option to the contract.

b. basement area wells, GSA Response: Contractor not to tuckpoint this area.

c. site masonry walls not a part of building envelope, and

GSA Response: Contractor not to tuckpoint this area.

d. granite entranceway

GSA Response: 100% Tuckpointing for Entire Granite and Marble Building Façade and Entranceway.

Contractor to remove the damaged or fractured existing mortar joints to a minimum depth of 1".

7. Please confirm coping joint repair details;

a. Are coping bed joints to be tuckpointed with mortar or be caulked against metal flashing?

GSA Response: Caulked against metal flashing.

b. What is the correct width lead tees should be figured at coping stone head joints?

GSA Response: Contractor to determine size of lead tees.

c. Should lead tees be installed in mortar or sealant?

GSA Response: Sealant. GSA to provide an attached document with an example of the Lead Tee Joint Closures for Coping Stones manufactured by Litsco or Equal.

8. Will 20’ storage trailer be allowed to be stored on-site while project is active?

GSA Response: Contractor to speak with the city for adequate non-metered parking.

9. What will be the location & footprint size of the available laydown area on-site for contractors tools & equipment, and dumpster?

GSA Response: Side location is available and what is available from the city.

10. Should contractor anticipate renting porta-johns for on-site crew.

GSA Response: Yes

11. Will building electric and water sources be available for contractor use on-site for performing work?

GSA Response: No.

12. Please confirm that façade cleaning is not part of this project, only spot cleaning contractor-created stains/residue from tuckpointing/repair activities.

GSA Response: No.

13. Section 5.2.1 in project SOW states to “Repair existing masonry units that are cracked or fractured. Contractor is required to survey building prior to bidding to identify damaged marble requiring repair”.

a. Please confirm that pre-bid survey by contractors is not part of the process to identify masonry repairs in order to bid project.

GSA Response: This task or action has been removed from the SOW. Contractor is not required to perform this task or action.

b. Please confirm that GSA will identify correct method and unit amounts of potential stone repair in order to bid project accurately and competitively.

GSA Response: This task or action has been removed from the SOW. Contractor is not required to perform this task or action.

14. Please confirm that no joint sealant replacement at current stone-to-stone joints, control joints, window perimeters, where roof meets back of parapet walls, or skyward facing stone joints are included in this project scope of work.

GSA Response: Contractor to replace all sealants and joint materials associated with the exterior walls, including but not limited to window perimeters, wall penetrations, expansion joints, joints between exterior walls and pavements, and other miscellaneous joints.

15. Please confirm roof drain pipes currently are not clogged or blocked, and motivation for adding this “routing/cleaning” scope is for contractor to be responsible for protecting drains, and any construction-produced debris to be cleaned out of the drain pipes at end of project that is hindering storm water flow thru the roof drain pipes. Please confirm locations of available storm water cleanouts in building if necessary to clear pipes.

GSA Response: Yes.Contractor to be responsible for protecting drains, and any construction-produced debris to be cleaned out of the drain pipes at end of project that is hindering storm water flow thru the roof drain pipes. Contractor does not have to replace the existing roof strainers with new basket-type strainers that can be fastened to the existing clamping ring unless the existing strainers are damaged by the Contractor.

16. Page 7 of the solicitation, paragraph II.D – Technical Proposal (1) Experience on Similar Projects bullet proof #3 requires demonstrating experience in “all of the following disciplines – architectural, civil, structural, HVAC, plumbing, electrical, fire alarm, elevator and telecommunications”. This requirement seems to be outside the scope of work for this Exterior Tuckpointing project. Please clarify if Experience on Similar projects should be revised to read, “all of the following disciplines – masonry restoration, tuckpointing, masonry coating applications.”?

GSA Response: Scope of Work Revised to masonry restoration tuck pointing and masonry coating applications.

17. Page 7 of the solicitation, paragraph II.D – Technical Proposal (1) Experience on Similar Projects bullet proof #6 requires demonstrating experience hazardous material abatement. There are no requirements for hazardous material abatement on this project. Should this requirement for the technical proposal be removed?

GSA Response: Deleted

18. Page 7 of the solicitation, paragraph II.D – Key Personnel – Can the Onsite Superintendent and Quality Control Manager be the same person? Can Project manager and project scheduler be the same person. The size/magnitude of this project does not seem to justify dedicated full time persons for each of these roles.

GSA Response:Yes.Yes.

19. Page 8 of the solicitation, paragraph IID. – Past Performance – requires offeror to provide a GC Reference Form for each reference. Please confirm if this form is provided by the GC? Or is this form a standard form contained in the solicitation? If so please provide. We are not able to locate this form in the solicitation package.

GSA Response: Form Provided – Changed to Past Performance Form.