District project managers and consultants gave the Facilities Committee an update on recent capital work, 2026 design development and a campus athletics assessment during the Oct. 13 meeting.

What the committee heard: completed 2025 projects included a track replacement, a dust‑collection system at the high school, door replacements, bollards at the transportation facility and a BAS upgrade at West Rock Hill. For 2026 the district has a $5.6 million capital program that includes generator replacements, domestic hot‑water systems, temperature controls, a boiler‑plant replacement and a roof project at Central Middle School; design drawings are at the 75% stage for many items and the district expects to bid documents in November and present bids in Dec–Jan for board approval.

Stadium and campus athletics assessment
Consultants from Schrader Group and T&M reviewed campus constraints and two concept approaches to resolve multiple issues: non‑regulation practice fields, slope and drainage problems, overuse of natural turf, lack of lighting on upper fields and proximity of the transportation (bus) facility to the baseball field. Key points from the site analysis:
- Zoning: School and recreation uses are permitted by right, but steep‑slope disturbance limits, required vegetative buffers adjacent to residential property and local rules about whether synthetic turf counts as impervious surface could require relief or design accommodations. Lighting taller than 70 feet could require zoning relief; consultants flagged that lighting heights and impervious calculations should be clarified with the township.
- Stormwater: Synthetic turf options typically require underground stormwater storage; consultants said underground systems are feasible but township interpretation of turf as impervious could trigger additional review or relief.

Two conceptual schemes and budgets
- Concept 1 (natural‑grass focus): Regrades and retaining walls to create regulation‑size baseball and softball fields, separated throwing‑event areas and expanded practice fields. Consultants estimated a conservative construction budget of about $9,200,000. That option preserves grass surfaces but requires substantial earthwork, retaining walls, irrigation and maintenance.
- Concept 2 (adds synthetic turf and lighting): Keeps the upper natural area largely as‑is, expands lower stadium facilities as in Concept 1, and adds one or two synthetic multipurpose fields with lighting to extend playable hours. Consultants estimated that option at roughly $13,000,000 and noted the added imperviousness, lighting and netting requirements would increase complexity and require coordination with township zoning and stormwater review.

Next steps and caveats
Consultants advised the district to: (1) verify subsurface conditions with geotechnical borings (to reduce cost uncertainty from rock excavation), (2) clarify township interpretations of synthetic turf as impervious and lighting limits, (3) refine stakeholder priorities and schedule permitting and (4) consider piecemeal phasing (for example, a single turf field first) because the full concepts exceed available funds. The consultants noted typical procurement and construction timelines that push completion beyond a single year and stressed that rock and earthwork are major cost drivers.

Bus‑stop approval
The committee also reviewed the annual approval of bus routes and stops for the school year (required annually); staff said routings change day‑to‑day but the board must record an annual approval. The committee noted it had approved the routes administratively for the year.

Ending: Administrators and consultants will return with detailed cost breakdowns, geotechnical test results and further zoning coordination if the board asks the administration to advance a preferred concept toward design and permitting.