Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sumner Bonney Lake board hears bond project update; district to pursue GCCM delivery for large high‑school work
Summary
District presenters described early designs for Sumner High School phase 2 and said the district will pursue a General Contractor/Construction Manager delivery method for large bond projects to allow contractor input during design and earlier cost certainty.
Sumner Bonney Lake School District officials told the school board on June 18 that they plan to pursue an alternative project delivery method and showed early architectural renderings for Sumner High School Phase 2.
In a presentation to the board, Marina Tene, the district’s director of capital projects, said the district plans to seek approval from the state Project Review Committee (CPARB) to use the General Contractor/Construction Manager method, often shortened to GCCM. Tene said GCCM would allow the contractor to participate in the design stage, help inform construction phasing on occupied campuses and produce earlier cost estimates.
“The market conditions are very different than they were with the 2016 bond,” Tene said, and the district has “to bring the contractor in and get their input in the design process” for projects such as Bonney Lake High School additions and Sumner High School Phase 3 work that will require demolition while preserving portions of an occupied campus.
John Boatman, facilities manager for development and capital projects, presented renderings and site views for Sumner High School Phase 2, describing the locations for an Animal Sciences building, a future greenhouse and photovoltaic-ready roofs. Boatman said the Phase 2 building exterior will complement the existing Phase 1 facades and that the team will present these slides to the bond oversight committee on June 30.
Board members thanked staff for the transparency and forward planning. When asked about a likely ground‑breaking timeframe, staff replied there was no planned ground‑breaking in the next 12 months.
The presenters emphasized that the GCCM approach remains a competitive process: selection of a contractor will be qualifications‑based with a price component, and subcontract packages will be competitively bid.
If approved by CPARB, staff said the district expects the GCCM method to provide better sequencing and cost information for large, phased work on occupied high‑school campuses.
The presentation and renderings will be shared with the bond oversight committee and as part of continuing design work.
