Question on the pigmented concrete item 106,sheet 20 section 8 Thickend edge shows concrete with expansion all the way down to bottom of curb. We've seen this with a 9" ledge down from top of curb supporting the concrete. This application has been used on city of Fargo on their projects as well as DOT. We came off the 32nd ave DOT project this year with application and other projects. My question is, Can we use this application or bid this like the current detail shows? thanks Al

The specifications for Slip-Form Paving and Slip-Form Curbing reference automated machine guidance (AMG) or stringless paving. They state that AMG is not permitted for Slip-Form Paving but may be an option for Slip-Form Curbing. If it is allowed for curbing, will the NDDOT or City allow it for mainline paving?

Per SP 657(24) Temporary Pedestrian Facilities, bid item 34 will be measured down the middle of the walkway while making 90 degree turns when measuring around corners. It looks as thought the total LF of pedestrian channelization was measured to get the bid quantity and not measured down the middle of the walkway. Will the contractor be paid per LF of pedestrian channelization or will the walkway be measured down the middle per the SP? If measured down the middle, the bid item should be roughly half quantity of what it is currently.

Under Plan Not 722-P03, it calls for flowable fill. Would blowing sand into the abandoned pipe be an acceptable method?

Who will be the admistrating the Construction of the project for the City of West Fargo?

Will the City/DOT allow the use of the Maturity Curve for Concrete Compressive Strength, or will it rely on cylinders for achieving strength? In the past few years, the Fargo District has allowed the use of Matuirty Curves with great success. Thanks

Can breakaway banner arms (Banner Saver Pro) be used in lieu of the specified non-breakaway banner arms?

The plans and specifications reference both an Aggregate Laboratory and a Contractor’s Laboratory for material testing. Given that there are two predominant independent testing agencies with main offices located along this project corridor, please clarify: What is the reasoning for requiring both an Aggregate Laboratory and a Contractor’s Laboratory on this project, rather than utilizing a single independent testing firm? Additionally, please confirm: Whether the Contractor is responsible for retaining both laboratories, and If duplicative testing is anticipated throughout the project.

Plan Note 203-P02 references Common Excavation Subcut of 500 CY's, but the quantity within the bid items calls out 667 CY. Which one is correct? Additionally, was any of this subcut factored into the Common Excavation numbers?

Under plan note 203-P03, it references Common Excavation-Type A, Topsoil, and Borrow-Excavation as plan quantities. It doesn't reference Common Excavation-Waste. How will Common Excavation-Waste be measured and paid for?

The Topsoil item is included as a plan quantity; however, per the notes on Section 11 / Sheet 1, if less than 4 inches of existing topsoil is encountered, the balance of material is to be paid under Borrow – Excavation. At this time, Borrow – Excavation is not included as a pay item in the project. If the project encounters less than the assumed topsoil depth and the contractor is required to import additional topsoil, please clarify: How will the contractor be compensated for the additional imported topsoil material and associated placement costs?

Do the manholes need to be blocked out and poured separately? Or can the contractor pour them in with the paving operation?

Please advise if the attached Valmont decorative aluminum poles with a breakaway transformer base would be acceptable to bid as an equal to the light standards specified in section 770-P06 on sheet 6-9. These poles would have the same bolt circle as the poles specified and have a round pole shaft in lieu of a multisided shaft and the Valmont poles will have a wall thickness to meet AASHTO requirements with the banners and banner arms being proposed. Please advise if the attached Valmont poles would be acceptable to bid as an equal to the poles specified in section 770-P06. Thank You

Can the City/NDDOT provide any information regarding the existing soil information within the project limits?