Committee reviews negotiated $14.99 million contract for Horizon South Chamberlain Connector; moves item to consent
May 13, 2026 | Board of Commissioner Meetings, Columbia County, Georgia
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Development Planning Services Committee reviewed a recommended contract award on May 12 for the Horizon South Chamberlain Connector project, a roadway intended to link Chamberlain Road and Horizon South Parkway and continue to Gateway Boulevard.
Presenter (speaker 5) told the committee bids for the project were opened March 12 with three responses; the lowest bid was reported at about $18,200,000. After negotiations and value engineering the presenter said the negotiated contract amount is $14,991,088.23 and that the work would be funded from SPLOST 2328. “We’ve negotiated with them… the negotiated amount that we’ve come to agreement with Gehrig is $14,991,088.23 to be funded out of SPLOST 2328,” the presenter said. The presenter also noted a roughly 500-foot bridge on the route will likely be the project’s critical path.
Committee member (speaker 2) said the project should help “alleviat[e] traffic on Horizon South Parkway, Chamberlain Road, Williams Parkway,” and expressed support for moving the project forward. When asked about schedule, staff (speaker 3) responded “600 days.” The presenter described that timeline as roughly a couple of years and reiterated the bridge as the likely critical path; the Chair asked whether completion would be in 2028–29 and the presenter replied “weather permitting.”
Following the presentation, a motion to place the item on consent was made and seconded; the presenter thanked the committee and the Chair stated, “So moved.” The transcript records the motion and second but does not include a roll-call vote or a recorded tally.
The committee also received several informational staff reports, including planning department workload updates (April 26 and March 26), the development services monthly report and the financial report. A copy of temporary alcohol permit listings was attached for information. The Chair announced there were no legal matters and adjourned the meeting at 08:56.
What happens next: staff recommended approval of the contract and the committee moved the item to consent during the meeting; the transcript does not record a formal roll-call vote or the administering body’s final signature on the contract. Any final award or contract execution, and schedule confirmations such as the exact contract period start date and milestone dates for the bridge, were not specified in the transcript.
Presenter (speaker 5) told the committee bids for the project were opened March 12 with three responses; the lowest bid was reported at about $18,200,000. After negotiations and value engineering the presenter said the negotiated contract amount is $14,991,088.23 and that the work would be funded from SPLOST 2328. “We’ve negotiated with them… the negotiated amount that we’ve come to agreement with Gehrig is $14,991,088.23 to be funded out of SPLOST 2328,” the presenter said. The presenter also noted a roughly 500-foot bridge on the route will likely be the project’s critical path.
Committee member (speaker 2) said the project should help “alleviat[e] traffic on Horizon South Parkway, Chamberlain Road, Williams Parkway,” and expressed support for moving the project forward. When asked about schedule, staff (speaker 3) responded “600 days.” The presenter described that timeline as roughly a couple of years and reiterated the bridge as the likely critical path; the Chair asked whether completion would be in 2028–29 and the presenter replied “weather permitting.”
Following the presentation, a motion to place the item on consent was made and seconded; the presenter thanked the committee and the Chair stated, “So moved.” The transcript records the motion and second but does not include a roll-call vote or a recorded tally.
The committee also received several informational staff reports, including planning department workload updates (April 26 and March 26), the development services monthly report and the financial report. A copy of temporary alcohol permit listings was attached for information. The Chair announced there were no legal matters and adjourned the meeting at 08:56.
What happens next: staff recommended approval of the contract and the committee moved the item to consent during the meeting; the transcript does not record a formal roll-call vote or the administering body’s final signature on the contract. Any final award or contract execution, and schedule confirmations such as the exact contract period start date and milestone dates for the bridge, were not specified in the transcript.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
