Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

City seeks two‑month validation extension and early procurement authority for maintenance center design‑build

Committee for Parks and Environment Sustainability · May 26, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Public Works proposed a contract amendment to extend validation two months to fit the newly purchased H Highleberg site, move into phase‑one design, and allow early purchase of long‑lead items (steel, mass timber, elevators, switchgear). Council asked for clearer budget numbers and an additional touch before final council action.

Public Works Director Aaron Bert and the design‑build team presented an amendment to the progressive design–build contract with Crutcher Lewis for the Maintenance & Operations Center redevelopment.

Bert said the amendment requests three things: a two‑month extension of the validation phase to adapt prior program work to the newly purchased H Highleberg site; authorization to enter phase‑one design and permitting; and budget authority to front‑order long‑lead procurement items such as steel, mass timber, elevators and switchgear to avoid schedule and escalation risk.

"We're asking for a two‑month extension on validation because of the purchase of the H Highleberg property," Bert said, noting the team has completed roughly 85–95% of validation work and needs brief site‑specific review. Owner’s representative Diana Brown said progressive design–build allows overlapping design and procurement to compress schedule and reduce escalation; staff estimated escalation is running near 4% and argued early procurement can mitigate time‑related cost risk.

Councilmembers pressed for clearer, consistent budget figures and for opportunities for additional council review. Staff discussed a range of figures in the meeting—$250 million (prior budget baseline), a $268.5 million number that included land purchase, and a rough pro‑hard construction figure presented as about $160 million after excluding land and certain soft costs. Several councilmembers requested corrected project sheets and suggested bringing the item for further committee or new‑business review before final action. Staff agreed to provide updated numbers and respond to written questions ahead of the business meeting.