Graham’s city council is slated to consider a range of options on Tuesday from two contractors that have submitted bids to rebuild Sesquicentennial Park.
The city has received these rival bids from Graham-based H.F. Mitchell and Pinam Construction of Durham as it continues to mull the fate of the 24-year-old pocket park, which is currently shuttered due to a sinking foundation.
At this point, Graham’s city council has not yet decided whether to raze or rebuild the iconic park, which is situated at the northwest corner of Court Square on the original site of the Graham Soda Shop.
The park, which opened to great fanfare in 2001, was funded through private donations to commemorate the city’s 150th anniversary in 1999, and it continues to have fond associations for many area residents. Its future has nevertheless been imperiled by the earlier structure’s underground remnants, which have caused the park’s decorative brick walls to subside and forced the city to gate its two entrances.
In order to assist in the council’s deliberations, the city’s administrators have asked H.F. Mitchell and Pinam to submit bids for several competing options, including both the park’s wholesale reconstruction and its utter demolition.
The first scenario that the two contractors have been asked to price out is the park’s reconstruction, which would include the preservation of its peaked pergola and antique-style post clock as well as an “anticipated additional undercut.” Pinam ultimately submitted the low bid for this option, which it has agreed to undertake at a cost of $379,425. Mitchell has proposed a higher fee of $470,701 for this same work.
As an alternative to a complete restoration, each contractor has also submitted bids for the removal of its various structures and their replacement with a graded, grass-covered surface. This option would also include the preservation and storage of the pergola, post clock, and benches, as well as the “memorial” bricks that were sold to fund the park’s construction – and which bear the names of the donors or the loved ones they wanted to honor. In this instance, Mitchell has submitted a slightly lower bid of $76,500, while its Durham competitor has put the cost of this job at $81,432.
In addition to these two opposing scenarios, the city’s administrators have requested bids for a variety of intermediate options that call for varying degrees of preservation and demolition. These options have drawn all sorts of figures from the two contractors – with some conspicuous gaps in some of the bids.
As an added possibility, the city’s administrators have also offered the council a do-it-yourself proposal for deconstructing the park. According to a staff report that accompanies the council’s agenda, this option would involve the “in-house removal and storage of pavers, benches, and clock,” followed by the sale of the park’s grounds, whereby “the burden of side remediation [would be] placed on the purchaser.”
All of these options are scheduled to come before the council when its members convene their next meeting on Tuesday, May 13 at 6:00 p.m.
