RFP 19-80 Geotechnical Investigations and Report Fossil

RFP 19-80 Geotechnical Investigations & Report: Jean & Ric Edelman Fossil Park Addendum #1

Page 1 of 14

ADDENDUM #1 & ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

To: All Vendors Date: June 25, 2019

Changes to Specifications

# Item Description

1 Questions & Answers Questions & Answers have been posted as part of this Addendum.

The information contained herein revises, supplements and/or supersedes the specific parts of the documents referred to and shall be attached to and become part of those documents as if originally forming a part thereof. Except herein as modified, all other provisions of the documents shall remain in full force and, unless otherwise described in this Addendum, shall comply with the requirements originally specified. All other conditions of this project will remain in effect.

Office of Contracting & Procurement website: https://sites.rowan.edu/procurement/bids/index.html

Please direct any questions to [email protected]

ADDENDUM # & ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I acknowledge that I have received and reviewed this Addendum.

Company Name (please print)

Name (please print)

Signature

Date

THIS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IS REQUIRED WITH SUBMISSION.

https://sites.rowan.edu/procurement/bids/index.html

mailto:[email protected]


Page 2 of 14

Questions & Answers

1 Question & Answer What is the estimated footprint of the proposed museum?

The estimated footprint is 32,000 GSF.

2 Question & Answer What is the estimated lower floor elevation?

The estimated lower floor elevation is 54’-0”.

3 Question & Answer In addition to the museum borings, would additional shallow borings for the proposed parking lot and borings for record cores be part of the project budget?

No, borings for any proposed parking lots are not part of this RFP.

4 Question & Answer Is there a source of water on site that can be used for drilling purposes?

Yes.

5 Question & Answer What geotechnical properties of the large spoils pile north of the pond are required?

We are interested in knowing if the Kirkwood Formation material in the spoil pile is suitable for construction fill, such as for grading, foundation fill and road bases. Provide lab testing results for the following parameters: natural moisture content, mechanical grain size analysis, and modified proctor compaction testing. Provide soil test for planting to stabilize the dirt mound: soil PH, soil physical properities, soil chemical properties, soil biological properties, and percentage of organic matter.

6 Question & Answer What geotechnical properties of the site soils are required to satisfy the design of the storm-water management system?

Provide depth of groundwater elevation and depth of seasonal high groundwater elevation.


Page 3 of 14

7 Question & Answer Would the university be willing to cut and clear areas of brush or small trees in order for a drill rig to access those areas for testing?

The areas of investigation are clear and no cutting of trees will be necessary. The University will not be responsible for cutting or removal of vegetation if required for testing.

8 Question & Answer Can the drilling spoils be left on location at the holes or would they need to be moved to a specific area?

Drilling spoils may remain on site at a location determined by the University. It is anticipated that the spoils will be moved a short distance to the woods’ edge, clear of the dirt roads and lawn.

9 Question & Answer Project Overview – Section I.B – The structure is expected to be two-story, approximately 32,000 square feet (sf). Assuming the plan footprint is approximately 16,000 square feet, New Jersey Building Code (Section 1803.3.1) calls for one boring for every 2,500 sf of built- over area. If this is the case then 6 borings would be required in the building footprint, whereas the Boring Location Plan provided by Marathon shows two groups of 3 borings in what we interpret to be two potential building locations. Please clarify the intent of the two groups of borings and if borings need to be added to meet the Building Code requirements, or is additional exploration anticipated once the building site is selected?

It has been determined that the testing should be in compliance with code. Provide six borings at a minimum of 40’ and one boring at a minimum of 100’ for the site between the pond and the quarry. Provide one core for research purposes as noted in the response to question 10. Provide two borings at the alternate building site at a minimum of 40’. The total number of borings for the site should ten.

10 Question & Answer Project Overview – Section V.C – “Two additional borings are to be taken and preserved, one per each site location, as record cores handed over to the University for research purposes.” Should these borings use the same sampling intervals as the geotechnical borings? For reference, Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) in typical geotechnical borings is performed on 2.5-foot centers in the upper 10 feet and then on 5-foot centers to the termination depth. In some cases, continuous SPT sampling is warranted but generally speaking the standard sampling interval is sufficient. It should be noted this sample type is disturbed. If less disturbed samples are desired then thin-walled tube samples (i.e., Shelby tubes) may need to be obtained in lieu of SPT samples. Please clarify.

Only one core is required for research purposes for the site between the quarry and pond. It needs to be cored at the K/Pg boundary, which is located ~20cm above the Navesink/Hornerstown boundary. A core should be taken 5’ above and 5’ below the K/Pg boundary. The upper part of this hole can be bored, not cored.


Page 4 of 14

11 Question & Answer Project Overview – Section V.D – Is the minimum boring depth of 100 feet truly anticipated for this site? The Building Code does not give hard and fast direction but rather states the borings should be advanced to “rock or to an adequate depth below the load-bearing strata” (Section 1803.3.1).

Only one 100’ boring is needed. It is not anticipated to hit bedrock within the 100 feet depth mark.

12 Question & Answer Project Overview – Section V.E – Do we need to hire a subcontract surveyor? Or would a hand-held GPS unit or GPS boosted smart phone App (i.e., sub-meter accuracy) be sufficient for recording boring locations and elevations?

Each Boring location is to be staked by contractor to identify location when testing is completed. Contractor to provide approximate gps location of each boring site based on hand held gps unit.

13 Question & Answer Project Overview – Section V.G – We have assumed we will need to excavate two to three test pits in the two stockpiles at the site and do some lab testing to determine if the soils are suitable for reuse as structural soil fill? Lab testing for this exercise would typically consist of a standard Proctor and some index testing (i.e., Atterberg limits, gradation) for the two stockpiles. Please clarify.

Provide lab testing results for the following parameters: natural moisture content, mechanical grain size analysis, and modified proctor compaction testing.

14 Question & Answer Project Overview – Section V.I – This section states we can’t drill through tree roots. Common guidelines suggest a tree’s root system can extend out a radius of one foot for every one inch of trunk diameter, but this is just a rule of thumb. A multitude of factors (i.e., depth to bedrock, tree species, soil compaction, water table, etc.) can influence a tree’s root system. Will an arborist be available to consult on our drilling locations to help insure we do not impact any trees? Or should we assume we will need to drill at locations that are some minimum distance from any trees? Or can there be some relaxation in this requirement to allow drilling at the requested locations?

It is not anticipated that tree roots will be a conflict to boring. Flexibility in the exact location of the boring is acceptable to avoid potential conflicts.


Page 5 of 14

15 Question & Answer Project Overview – Section V.M.23 through 25 – Providing seismic design criteria (i.e., SDS and SD1) is a common geotechnical requirement for explorations, but evaluating slope instability, liquefaction, and surface rupture/lateral spreading is a whole different level of analysis. What is the true intent in including these requirements? Are problematic subsurface conditions anticipated (i.e., Seismic Site Class E or F conditions)?

Since this is a minimally active seismic area, the minimum seismic investigation required by the building code is acceptable. We are interested in the long-term stability of the proposed building on this particular site, adjacent to the pond and quarry. We are interested in understanding if slope stability is an issue, particularly on the quarry side, and want to confirm the setbacks from the quarry and pond.

16 Question & Answer Project Overview – Section V.M.29 – Infiltration rates can be estimated/obtained from a variety of test methods (i.e., packer testing in a borehole, double ring infiltrometer testing at the ground surface, slug testing in a well/piezometer, etc.). Please clarify the intent and/or required test method in requesting this parameter.

Infiltration testing method will be up to the contractor to select, however the Infiltration testing results and procedure selected shall be in accordance with the NJDEP BMP Manual Appendix E requirements.

17 Question & Answer Project Overview – Section VI.C – We do not anticipate encountering bedrock at the site. Is debris anticipated at the site that might require rock coring to penetrate?

No, it is not anticipated to hit bedrock within the requested boring depths.

18 Question & Answer The RFP indicates all work shall comply with the 2015 International Building Code – NJ Edition (IBC). IBC requires a minimum boring coverage of one boring per 2,500 SF of built over area. We understand the museum will have a footprint of about 16,000 SF. Can you please clarify the number of borings that will be required for the preferred museum site and the alternate museum site location?



Page 6 of 14

19 Question & Answer The specified boring depth of 100 Feet was discussed at the pre-bid walk as being overly conservative. Is the boring depth left up to the professional engineer to determine as long as the requirements of IBC and ASCE 7-10 are satisfied? Please clarify.

One boring shall be at a minimum of 100’. The remaining borings to be at a minimum of 40’ as long as the requirements are met as noted.

20 Question & Answer Are the un-factored max anticipated loads really anticipated to be 250 to 500 kips? This seems high for the type of building discussed during the site walk.

Yes, these are the anticipated loads.

21 Question & Answer Section V(C) of the RFP states that 2 additional borings shall be taken and preserved for research purposes. However, during the site walk it was requested that one additional boring be taken in order to retrieve an intact core sample through the K‐T boundary. Please clarify how many cores are required.

Only one core is required for research purposes for the site between the quarry and pond. It needs to be cored at the K/Pg boundary, which is located approximately 20cm above the Navesink/Hornerstown boundary. A core should be taken 5’ above and 5’ below the K/Pg boundary. The upper part of this hole can be bored, not cored.

22 Question & Answer Should we put the additional core sample collection under an optional bid item?

Yes, the second core for research purposes should be included as an optional bid item. This second core would be at the alternate building site.

23 Question & Answer During the site walk we discussed methods of core collection for the additional sample. Please specify the minimum core length and diameter needed. Is the preference to collect the sample in a clear PVC liner?

The core needs to be 10’ in length, centered on the K/Pg boundary. The rest of the hole can be bored. The core should be collected in a PVC liner.


Page 7 of 14

24 Question & Answer What is the elevation of the K‐T boundary in the project area?

The elevation is approximately 20 cm above the Navesink/Hornerstown boundary, roughly 45’ below the surface. When the core is taken, Rowan researchers can be there to guide the process.

25 Question & Answer The vertical datum on the provided boring location plan appears to be in NAVD88. Is this correct?

Yes, the Vertical Datum for the project site is the North American Vertical Datum 1988.

26 Question & Answer In order to collect the necessary subsurface information in accordance with NJIBC we will need to perform 6 borings within the proposed building footprint. Will Rowan be updating and reissuing the boring location plan to be consistent with this?


27 Question & Answer Is there a conceptual layout that can be shared? This would be helpful in designing the field investigation program.

The Jean & Ric Edelman Fossil Park of Rowan University is a new two-story building that will function as a museum and visitor center. The gross area of the proposed building is 32,000 GSF. The project will include permanent galleries, a hands-on fossil laboratory, research laboratory, theater, and various public spaces. The lower level of the building is anticipated to be located at 54’-0” and the upper level at 70’-0”. The new museum building is proposed to sit in the middle of the 65 acre site on a ridge overlooking the dig site, between the existing quarry and pond. Site and landscape feature include parking lots, a rain garden, habitat restoration, stormwater management, children’s playground, and a community garden.


Page 8 of 14

28 Question & Answer Per discussions during the site walk, SB1 through SB3 are located in the preferred museum location and SB4 through SB6 are located in a potential secondary location. Also per our discussions, if the primary site is deemed acceptable for the building, the secondary site will be used for parking. In order to collect data for pavement design recommendations we will need to collect soil samples in the secondary area and run laboratory testing. Should this investigation be included in the primary bid? Or should it be separated as an option?


29 Question & Answer Who will be reviewing the Storm-water Management Plan? Mantua Twp.? NJDEP? This will influence what test methods can be used to determine soil hydraulic conductivity in support of BMP design.

Stormwater Management will be reviewed by the Township, NJDEP and Gloucester County. All Stormwater Management will be designed in accordance with the NJDEP BMP Manual Guidelines. All provided infiltration testing procedures must be done in accordance with the NJDEP BMP Manual Appendix E standards.

30 Question & Answer 1A private mark-out will be required before conducting soil borings. Should we include the fees associated with this in our proposal?

Yes, boring contractor is responsible for the cost of mark-out.

31 Question & Answer Considering the amount of questions asked during the site walk as well as lead times for driller quotes, can the deadline to submit the proposal be extended 7 ‐ 10 business days?

No, the deadline will not be extended.


Page 9 of 14

32 Question & Answer Borings: As discussed during the site walk-through, the proposed approx. 16,000 sf building footprint requires 6 borings per NJ-IBC. As such, the number of borings required for the building (6), the core sampling (2), and exploring the alternate building site (6) exceeds the 8 allocated by the Boring Location Plan given in the RFP ( 3 in prime location + 3 in alternate location + 2 core borings). The RFP appears allows for adding boring to meet code requirements (section V.C page 4). Also, additional borings or test pits will be required in the parking areas to obtain samples for the testing required to determine the soil properties for pavement design. Is the above line of thought consistent with Rowan’s expectations?


33 Question & Answer Boring depth is stated to be 100’ for all borings in the RFP. However, it was discussed during the walk-through that only one boring needed to go to a depth of 100’, while the rest may be shorter. Will Rowan be setting the required depth of the borings or will it be up to the consultant?


34 Question & Answer No defined investigation and laboratory testing scope is provided for the “stockpile” study. Is it to be assumed that this scope is to be developed by the consultant?

Provide lab testing results for the following parameters: natural moisture content, mechanical grain size analysis, and modified proctor compaction testing. Provide soil test for planting to stabilize the dirt mound: soil PH, soil physical properities, soil chemical properties, soil biological properties, and percentage of organic matter.


Page 10 of 14

35 Question & Answer Very limited information is provided in regards to the proposed structure(s) and site development. The ‘Dirt Mound’ figure does show a conceptual configuration. Can Rowan provide additional information regarding the conceptual design and configuration of the structure and the site plan? Also, can anticipated finished floor elevations be provided?


36 Question & Answer Information is required for the probably locations of the infiltration testing required by the RFP. Neither the Boring Location Plan nor the conceptual configuration noted above shows locations of any storm-water management features. It was stated that these features would likely be surface rain gardens, bio-swales or something similar. Is it possible that Rowan can provide potential locations for the infiltration testing and conceptual information on these features so that the infiltration program can be developed in according with NJDEP requirements?

This information is beyond the scope of this RFP.

37 Question & Answer The RFP does not require a temporary groundwater monitoring well to be installed. Other than using the existing pool elevation in the former quarry, are there any existing wells on site for accurately determining the groundwater elevation?

Please consult NJDEP database for possible existing wells on site.

38 Question & Answer What are the SBE/MBE/FBE/VBE set-aside requirements for the project?

None.


Page 11 of 14

39 Question & Answer Can the University provide a schematic proposed conditions plan showing the proposed museum and other proposed site features?


40 Question & Answer Please provide the finished floor elevation of the lowest level of the proposed museum building, if known.

The estimated lower floor elevation is 54’-0”.

41 Question & Answer For bid purposes, please clarify the total number of test borings requested for the proposed museum, considering that the IBC requires one test boring per 2500 square feet of building footprint area.


42 Question & Answer Are borings and sampling required for proposed parking areas? If so please confirm number and depth of borings for bid purposes.

No, borings for the any proposed parking lots are not part of this RFP.

43 Question & Answer Please confirm the number of stockpiles requiring characterization; two stockpiles are referenced in the RFP.

There is one spoil pile requiring characterization.


Page 12 of 14

44 Question & Answer There are several references to a “contractor” throughout the RFP. Please clarify whether this refers to the construction contractor, the drilling contractor, or the geotechnical consultant.

Contractor refers to all three.

45 Question & Answer Please provide location and elevation of field infiltration tests required as part of this scope of services.


46 Question & Answer Please confirm whether “core samples” for research purposes can be taken from the geotechnical test borings.

No, research core sample may not be utilized for geotechnical testing procedures.

47 Question & Answer Can the University provide an electronic file of the existing topographic conditions (for use in evaluating slope stability)?

Yes, at time of award.

48 Question & Answer Can Rowan please provide a proposed building location plan along with building specifications, including details of the proposed lower level observation tunnel, etc.?


48 Question & Answer A parking area is proposed for the museum. Will Rowan require geotechnical samples for this area? Please provide the proposed location for the parking area and the proposed design (asphalt, DGA, etc.)



Page 13 of 14

49 Question & Answer Please confirm non-potable water is available at the site and if there is a hydrant/tap available for use by the drilling contractor

Yes.

50 Question & Answer Please confirm the minimum core sample diameter for the research cores.

3 ½” diameter core sample.

51 Question & Answer Please confirm if Rowan would like continuous research cores to 100’ or if they are looking for targeted intervals.

Only one core is required for research purposes for the site between the quarry and pond. It needs to be cored at the K/Pg boundary, which is located ~20cm above the Navesink/Hornerstown boundary. A core should be taken 5’ above and 5’ below the K/Pg boundary. The upper part of this hole can be bored, not cored.

52 Question & Answer Please provide a plan showing any known subsurface utilities on the site.

No known utilities are in locations of proposed borings. However, the contractor is responsible for utility mark-out prior to commencing boring activities on site.

53 Question & Answer Section V.G – What is required for the structural and compositional analysis of the soil stockpiles on site? Can we assume that the material in the pile is homogeneous and we can take surface grab samples? Or should we anticipate digging test pits or conducting borings within the pile to sample material deeper in the pile? If the intent is to be used as fill, will the analysis require laboratory sieve and proctor tests?

Provide lab testing results for the following parameters: natural moisture content, mechanical grain size analysis, and modified proctor compaction testing. Provide soil test for planting to stabilize the dirt mound: soil PH, soil physical properities, soil chemical properties, soil biological properties, and percentage of organic matter.


Page 14 of 14

54 Question & Answer Section V.L requires recommendations for the storm-water management facilities. Will in-situ permeability testing be required for the storm-water management facilities? Will these facilities require testing to meet the permeability rate defined in the New Jersey Best Management Practices Manual?


55 Question & Answer Will California Bearing Ratio (CBR) sampling and tests be required for the pavement recommendations?


56 Question & Answer Section V.M item 29 requires the infiltration rates of soils. Are these to be determined by permeability testing in the field or laboratory permeability tests only?

Infiltration testing method will be up to the contractor to select, however the Infiltration testing results and procedure selected shall be in accordance with the NJDEP BMP Manual Appendix E requirements.

57 Question & Answer Within the RFP it states that a minimum of 3 borings at each site (with one additional at each location for research purposes) will be performed. In accordance with the NJUCC the proposed building will need a minimum of 7 borings to meet the footprint requirement based on a 16,000 sq. ft. building footprint. Should we assume that additional borings, under a separate contract, will be conducted upon site selection at a later date? Or should we propose with 7 borings at each site location?


If you submitted questions to [email protected] by the due date indicated in the RFP document, but they were not received and answered here, please contact:

Robert Yufer Office of Contracting & Procurement [email protected] 856.256.4196



Documents

RFP 19-80 Geotechnical Investigations and Report Fossil