Methacton board advances high school schematic design, hires ICS CMTA for owner’s rep work

The Methacton School District Board of Directors voted Oct. 28 to advance schematic design for the district’s proposed high school renovation and to retain ICS CMTA as the construction manager/owner’s representative for the project’s schematic phase.

The board approved a contract with Schrader Group to proceed into schematic design at a cost not to exceed $672,576 and separately approved ICS CMTA to proceed into schematic design at a cost not to exceed $69,615. Both motions carried on voice votes, recorded as “motion carries 7 to 0.”

Why it matters: schematic design establishes the project’s program and the general layout of spaces, site configuration and high‑level systems before the district advances to detailed design and permitting. The construction manager role covers cost estimating, scheduling, phasing and field oversight to align construction staging with the architectural plans.

The district presented the two approvals as separate scopes: the architect (Schrader Group) will develop the design documents and program; ICS CMTA will provide construction‑management services including cost estimating, scheduling and site phasing during schematic design and beyond. Dr. Zerbe, the superintendent, introduced the items and asked the board to consider the recommended firms.

The board also heard a presentation from the ICS team before the vote. Mike Lang, director of business development for ICS CMTA Group, said, “I’ve got about 25 years working with public school districts in Pennsylvania, and I’ll be assisting the team throughout the entire project at the executive level.” Other ICS staff identified themselves for the record, including Tim Guider (director of development and engineering), Doug Taylor (director of design services), Yanni Vardaniotis (senior project manager), Mike Harding (director of site services) and Gary Stauffer (field superintendent).

Public comment focused strongly on the high school planning process and community engagement. Resident Jim Malik urged the board to pause and narrow the scope, criticizing the district’s use of consultants and the process used to form the high school planning committee. “This whole thing stinks,” Malik said, arguing the district had not done sufficient due diligence and urging officials to determine what is essential before committing to a large project.

Board members asked for clarifications on roles and timelines during the discussion. District staff explained schematic design will culminate in a programmatic plan and site layout; design development would follow once schematic design is approved. The district indicated schematic design work is intended to proceed through January, at which point the board will consider moving into the next phase.

No financial mechanisms (bonds, borrowing or Act 1 index assumptions) were approved at the meeting; board members and public commenters raised questions about future financing assumptions and the long‑term tax impact, but no bond or budget approvals occurred that evening.

What’s next: schematic design documents from Schrader Group and cost/schedule input from ICS CMTA will return to the board for review before the district moves into design development and formal financing decisions.

Provenance: Topic introduction at 00:47:08 in the meeting where ICS presented the team and scope; discussion and the eventual vote recorded at 01:01:54 (transcript timestamps).