Question:
Is there a pre-tender meeting for this?

Answered on 29/Oct/2026 01:05 PM:


As per clause 5.4 Tender Briefing of the Conditions of Tendering, a tender briefing will not be available for this procurement exercise.

Question:
Good Morning,

Clarification Requests:

1.GC Item 12 (Contract Information) vs Scope 6.4 Table 9

Time for Completion is 22 calendar weeks after Date of Contract in the General Conditions but 30 weeks from Letter of Award in Scope Table 9.

Which time for Completion governs, and from which date (Date of Contract or Letter of Award)? Is it the same for Lump Sum and Additional Scope work?

RFI

Time

Scope 5.5; Table 8 HP13; Pavement Design Report 25.1041-DRb

No minimum or maximum cure / trafficking period between the AMC7 primerseal and the 14/7 S15R secondary treatment is stated. HP13 only requires the Principal to inspect surface texture, curing and weather.

What cure period does the Principal require before the secondary treatment (and is a winter gap acceptable)?

RFI

Time

Scope Table 8 HP8; Scope 4

Additional Scope Items need a written direction (HP8) but no latest date for the direction is given. Late directions extend the stabilisation sequence.

By when will Additional Scope Items be directed, and will time be extended for directed items?

RFI

Survey

Document Register items 36-52; G71; Scope 5.8

Survey control files are provided for only 2 of 16 drawing sets (DM01573, DM01765). See 'Drawing & Model Register'.

Please provide survey control files (coordinates, AHD heights, mark IDs) for all sections, or confirm the PM/SSM marks on each drawing are to be used.

RFI

Survey

24050-1573-Survey-Control.csv; 24050-1765-Survey-Control.xlsx

The two control files provided have unnamed points with Z = 0 (no AHD heights), and the .csv file is actually an Excel workbook.

Please re-issue the control files with point IDs, MGA2020 coordinates and AHD heights.

RFI

Design

Document Register; DM00802, DM00816/DM01749, DM01142/DM01748, FRRB-PAV00002

No DWG / 3D model is issued for Sections 5, 17-21 and 22-23 or the FRRB pavement drawing (PDF only).

Please issue DWG / 3D export models for these drawing sets (machine guidance and set-out).

RFI

Design

Document Register numbering

Register numbering skips items 31-35 and item 38 appears twice. DM00817, DM00820, DM00823 and DM01750 have no separate PDF (they appear only within combined drawing sets).

Please confirm the register is complete, that no documents are missing, and that DM00817/00820/00823/01750 are fully covered by the combined sets.

RFI

Specification

IFC drawing notes vs Scope Table 10

The drawings reference TfNSW R11 (stormwater drainage), which is not listed in Scope Table 10.

Does R11 apply to culverts, headwalls and subsoil drains, or the NRLG manuals?

RFI

Specification

Scope Table 10; R75

Specification editions are 'current at the tender posting date'. MJS has priced TfNSW R75 (TS 03268.1) Ed 3/Rev 1 (Jun 2020).

Please confirm the R75 edition and supply any project-specific annexures (Annex L testing frequencies, hold points).

RFI

Specification

Scope 5.5 vs Pavement Design Report s. 8 / Table 18

Scope 5.5 nominates S15R for both secondary applications plus an AMC7 primerseal; the PDR adopts a 14/7 C170/S15R double/double with no primerseal.

Please confirm the binder for the first secondary application (S15R or C170) and that the AMC7 primerseal is required.

RFI

Scope

Scope 5.1 d) (starred sections)

Pre-pulverising / cross-blending of starred sections has no separate pay item.

Is the pre-pulverise pass paid within R75P1 or as a separate item?

RFI

Testing

Scope 5.4 e); REF Safeguard 10

The Principal arranges classification testing of material near former dip sites and banana horticulture (Sections 2, 5, 17, 18).

What turnaround does the Principal allow for classification results, and are holding costs paid?

RFI

Commercial

Pricing Schedule; Scope 4.7

Sprayed sealing is Remeasurable on litres at 15 C and m3 of aggregate.

Will any bitumen price adjustment (e.g. TfNSW bitumen index) apply?

Answered on 05/Nov/2026 04:40 PM:


Please refer to Addendum 3.

Question:
**Clarification request – minimum project experience requirements**

Please clarify the requirement for successful completion, as Principal Contractor, of at least three road pavement rehabilitation or reconstruction projects within the Northern Rivers region in the last five years, with a minimum contract value of $5 million:

1. Is this a mandatory pass/fail criterion, with non-compliance resulting in exclusion from further evaluation?

2. Does the $5 million minimum apply to each of the three projects, or to their combined contract value?

3. Must each reference project include in-situ stabilisation, sprayed sealing and associated drainage works?

4. Would Council accept equivalent experience demonstrated through multiple lower-value contracts of comparable scope and complexity undertaken outside the Northern Rivers region, supported by client references, project performance records, and evidence of resources and financial capacity?

If equivalent experience is not currently permitted, would Council consider amending the criterion through a formal addendum to allow otherwise suitably experienced and capable contractors to participate?

Answered on 05/Nov/2026 04:40 PM:


Please refer to Addendum 3.

Question:
We reference the updated Mandatory Participation Criteria communicated in Addendum 2 being “The Tenderer must demonstrate successful completion, as a Principal Contractor, of at least 3 road pavement rehabilitation or reconstruction projects in the last 5 years, involving in-situ pavement stabilisation, sprayed sealing and associated drainage works within the Northern Rivers region of NSW, with a minimum contract value of $5 million”.

We kindly request whether this is considered a strict mandatory criterion for involvement in the tender. Our organisation has substantial experience in the delivery of stabilisation projects as the Principal Contractor supported by specialist subcontractors throughout QLD. The precise wording for the above mandatory criteria indicates a precise level of expectation which we do not strictly meet. We would appreciate advice from Lismore City Council whether this will preclude our organisation from tendering this package of works if we cannot satisfy each of the key criteria outlined above.

Answered on 05/Nov/2026 04:41 PM:


Please refer to Addendum 3.

Question:
The 3D export models issued contain the design surface only, with no existing/natural surface.

DGB20 is placed “0 mm to full stabilisation depth” to correct shape and levels (SoW 5.2) To allow the tender to verify the DGB20 quantity as per SoW Cl4.5.

Please issue the existing surface (detail survey TIN/DTM) used for the design, for each section.

Answered on 11/Nov/2026 04:54 PM:


Refer to Addendum 4.

Question:
Hi LCC,

Given the extent and complexity of the works, the detailed technical requirements and the amendments issued through recent addenda, additional time would allow tenderers to complete a thorough review of the documentation, obtain accurate supplier and subcontractor pricing, and prepare comprehensive and competitive submissions.

Could Council please consider a further two-week extension to the tender closing date, currently scheduled for 24 November 2026?

An extension to Tuesday 8 December 2026 at 12:00 pm would be appreciated.

Thank you for your consideration.

Answered on 11/Nov/2026 04:55 PM:


Tender is extended to 12pm 8 December 2026. Refer to Addendum 4.