Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Creekside Park Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Johns Creek staff recommend $33.8M Creekside Park contract, urge building permit‑heavy alternates first
Summary
City staff recommended awarding a $33.8 million base contract to Reeves Young for Creekside Park and urged council to approve three permit‑heavy alternates (3, 5 and 7) now; council members expressed support and discussed adding alternates 1 and 2 using TSPLOST 2 funds and a decking‑material choice that could save about $148,000.
City staff presented the Creekside Park construction contract and alternate‑bid strategy at the July 8 work session, recommending a $33.8 million base contract with selected add alternates to preserve permit approvals and control future costs.
Director Haggard (Director Haggard) and a staff presenter, Erica (S11), described eight bid alternates — trail connections, overlooks, decks, a playground and sidewalk links — and recommended funding alternates 3, 5 and 7 because those items are most entangled with environmental permits. "Those 3 probably had a lot to do with that permit and impact. So if you try to do them later, those would be the hardest to do later," Haggard said.
Staff proposed funding alternates 1 and 2 (two trail connections) using unprogrammed TSPLOST 2 funds if the council wished to include them in the contract; Haggard said alternates 1 and 2 must be added at award to be in the base contract, whereas alternates 4, 6 and 8 could be deferred to be added later as change orders subject to available contingency.
Haggard also raised a materials choice for decking: an alternative wood type (described on the record as an "e‑pay" substitution) could yield an estimated $148,000 savings compared with Ipe. He said staff had procured a $400,000 EPD grant for environmental work tied to the project and requested council consensus on the contract award, which they would finalize following the public hearing.
Councilmember Chris (Chris, S8) and several colleagues signaled support for staff recommendations and some also supported adding alternates 1 and 2 funded by the TSPLOST 2 account. Staff noted roughly $5 million in overestimated receivable revenue currently sitting in an account that could be used to fund additions if council chooses.
Council members asked for a more granular construction timeline once a contractor is under contract; staff said the contractor will provide a look‑ahead schedule after award and that the overall contract requires completion within 18 months. The council moved to recess to the scheduled public hearing; that motion was made by Councilmember Chris (S8) and supported by S6, and the council recessed to the hearing.
