Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Easton board hears Phase 1 bid results for new high school; low bids under budget, teams recommend risk-mitigation alternates
Loading...
Summary
Bids for Phase 1 of Easton Area SD's new high school came in below the project budget, the district's design and construction team told the board. Teams recommended accepting selected alternates—including engineered fill and a small schedule-flex charge—to reduce site risk and keep the overall program on track for a 2031 completion.
The Easton Area School District on Tuesday received competitive bids for Phase 1 of its long-planned high school project and the district's design team recommended accepting several alternates intended to reduce construction risk and protect the project schedule.
Design consultant Mike DePauwin and the district's construction advisers told the board that general-construction bids clustered between roughly $12 million and $14 million, with the apparent low bidder at $11,499,000. Electrical work drew two qualified bids; the low electrical bid was $2,975,000.
Those bids left room, the team said, to include a set of optional alternates without exceeding the Phase 1 budget. The board packet and the presentation identified several recommended additions and deductions. The recommended risk-mitigation items included adding 12 inches of engineered fill under the artificial-turf areas (GC price about $300,000) and specifying that excavation for rock be treated as an owner-classified item with known unit pricing, which the team said reduces delay claims and keeps the work moving.
"We have spent a lot of time with the design team and our civil engineer doing a lot of investigation, clean fill analysis, pit infiltration testing," the design team said, explaining the engineered-fill recommendation as a response to historic subsurface variability and sinkhole risk on parts of the site.
The team also recommended a schedule-flex alternate: a modest $45,000 add that would compensate a contractor for meeting the same substantial-completion date if permitting slips required an accelerated construction effort. The project team said building that flexibility into the bid package is cheaper than negotiating a change order later. "Had we come to contractors afterwards, that $45,000 would be $450,000," one presenter said.
Other alternates included product substitutions and athletics-specific items. On turf fields, the designers recommended deleting shock-pad underlayment for the baseball and softball turf (a deduct) after consulting athletic staff, who said the pad confers less benefit for baseball/softball than for multipurpose football fields.
The district and consultants emphasized that Phase 1 is primarily site and infrastructure work: new stormwater detention sized for Phase 2, a large underground duct bank to carry power for future buildings and stadium lighting, upgraded irrigation and drainage, and new varsity baseball and softball venues with supporting utilities and lighting. The team recommended awarding the work at the April 28 meeting so construction could begin in late spring to preserve the schedule toward a 2031 campus completion target.
Next steps: staff said they will finalize contract documents, and if the board approves the recommendation at the April 28 meeting the district will issue notices to proceed and execute contracts. The recommended alternates and unit-price protections were presented as ways to limit risk during early site work and to preserve contingency funds for later phases.
