Architects present three options for Elizabethtown secondary‑school complex; costs range $107M–$178M

RLPS Architects and Barton Engineering told the Elizabethtown Area School District board on Sept. 9 that the district's secondary complex has multiple systems beyond typical life cycles and offered three paths forward: perform required maintenance and repairs to the existing facility; build strategic additions and renovate most of the building (including a new middle school wing); or build a new combined middle and high school. The architects gave high‑level cost ranges and phasing implications and said the district will hold a public information session on Sept. 16 and a final feasibility presentation in October.

The options differ in what they solve and how long construction would disrupt students. RLPS partner Chris Linky said, “The last time we came to talk to the board was in May,” and described work since then to develop options, refine cost estimates and incorporate feedback from tours and a town‑hall questionnaire. The firm reported that the existing facility totals about 433,000 square feet, but only about 250,000 square feet is used for classrooms and instructional space, creating operational inefficiency.

Why it matters: architects told the board several core systems have reached or passed typical life spans and are driving recurring failures and rising operating costs. The study singled out sanitary sewer piping that runs through the building, a failing roof with more than 200 rooftop mechanical units and miles of gas piping, and widespread aging HVAC/electrical/plumbing systems that have parts no longer available. RLPS said these are "must haves" to fix regardless of the option chosen.

What each option would do: - Required maintenance and repairs (estimated low/high: $107M–$137M) would replace mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems, repair the sanitary sewer, replace the roof and single‑pane windows, and address ceilings and finishes. RLPS warned this approach keeps the same overall building footprint and inefficiencies, requires long phasing timelines (36–39 months in the architects' estimate) and likely temporary classroom trailers during construction. The firm noted temporary classroom costs are typically not recovered. - Strategic additions and renovations (estimated $119M–$143M) would include the new middle school construction (about 121,000 sq ft) and demolition of a portion of the current middle school, allowing the district to occupy new space while renovating remaining areas. RLPS said this option can largely avoid temporary trailers, reduce net square footage by roughly 30,000 sq ft compared with today, and shorten construction impacts (about 30 months estimated). - New combined middle+high school (estimated $159M–$178M) would build a new facility sized more efficiently (approximately 375,000 sq ft in the firm's model), move athletics and fields as required and demolish almost all of the existing building except the sixth‑grade wing proposed for district office use. RLPS estimated this option could be built in 24–30 months, avoid many escalation risks tied to long phasing, and provide the largest operating‑cost savings over time.

Costs and schedule caveats: RLPS said cost ranges include escalation to a 2027 bid date and construction‑impact contingencies; the architects noted escalation could add millions per year if the project slips. They also emphasized unknowns that expand cost ranges (site work, bid climate, and unforeseen conditions discovered during demolition or renovation).

Board discussion and next steps: Facilities committee chair Jim Emery told the public he will collect board questions for RLPS and route answers by email. Emery emphasized the district faces a baseline need even under the maintenance‑only scenario and asked the board to weigh the $12M premium between options 1 and 2 or the roughly $42M–$52M premium for a full replacement. The architects and the board discussed traffic circulation, bus loops, temporary classroom siting and athletic‑field contingencies. RLPS scheduled a public information session hosted by the firm on Sept. 16 from 6–8 p.m. and will return to the board in October with a final feasibility study.

No formal policy decision or vote occurred at the Sept. 9 workshop; the board asked for public comment and further details before any direction or commitment to a funding path.