Methacton board hears schematic update for MacFachin High School; all‑in cost estimate $206M–$219M

Architects and engineers updated the Methacton School District Board of Directors on the schematic design phase for the MacFachin High School project, presenting a site plan that favors a three‑story academic wing, new athletic fields and upgraded stormwater controls and estimating an all‑in project cost between $206 million and $219 million.

Devin Bradbury of The Schroeder Group said the schematic design phase began in October and "it's going to take us through March"; if the board approves the next steps the project would move into design development and then construction documents. Bradbury described a timeline that stretches into 2029: public bidding in March 2026, construction starting in spring–summer 2026, student move‑in targeted for the winter break of December 2028, and demolition/site restoration in summer 2029.

The schematic plan shows a roughly 333,000 gross‑square‑foot building (about 222,000 net square feet of educational program), including approximately 12,000 square feet of district administration space, and a courtyard and separate zones for public functions and academics. "We're pursuing a 3‑story academic wing for this building," Bradbury said, arguing the vertical option reduces the footprint and preserves on‑site fields and parking.

Why it matters: the design and approvals the board reviews now will determine how the district approaches borrowing, bidding and neighborhood impacts. The project will require township land‑development approvals, a statutory Act 34 school‑construction public hearing and conservation‑district signoffs; Josh Grice of CHA warned conservation approvals and some permitting could take up to 12 months.

Key details and engineering notes

- Cost and size: the team presented a current conceptual all‑in estimate of $206,000,000 to $219,000,000, which includes soft costs; grossing factors led to the 333,000 gross‑square‑foot figure and a net program of about 222,000 square feet.

- Program choices: the district administration area remains in the building and could be converted later to provide eight additional classrooms (about 200 students) if required; shared science labs remain under discussion; the pool shown in the schematic is a standard 25‑meter, eight‑lane pool with a bid alternate to expand to a larger pool with a bulkhead.

- Site layout and circulation: the plan separates bus, student and parent access with three distinct entry points to reduce queuing on neighborhood roads and to improve on‑site flow. Bradbury said the goal is to keep most traffic and queuing on site rather than on adjacent local streets.

- Athletics and fields: the plan restores varsity baseball, adds a varsity softball field (both planned with lighting), and preserves and resurfaces existing tennis courts rather than relocating them. Designers showed multipurpose practice areas to replace some existing open space.

- Stormwater and geotechnical work: Grice said on‑site infiltration testing and geotechnical borings are ongoing; because codes now require stormwater capture for the entire disturbed area the team plans both above‑ground basins and underground detention under parking and fields to address neighbor concerns about runoff and erosion.

- Traffic and neighborhood engagement: a traffic impact study is scheduled to start in February; the design team reported they met with adjacent property owners and with Worcester Township on Jan. 11 and Jan. 13 to gather feedback and to identify zoning and circulation concerns for future township hearings.

Questions from board members

Board members pressed the team on parking and student capacity. Josh Grice and the civil engineer said they are still finalizing parking calculations; one designer said "somewhere in the 500 range" had been discussed but cautioned that number was preliminary. The administration clarified the design intent was to provide parking for all seniors and roughly half of the junior class, which the architects estimated could translate to about 600 spaces depending on final decisions about staff/visitor allocation.

Board member Kathleen Cleary asked the difference between net and gross square footage; the architects explained the 222,000 figure is the programmatic net and a grossing factor was applied to reach the 333,000 gross number to account for corridors, mechanical and support space.

Next steps and approvals

The team said the schematic design phase runs through March, after which the board will be asked to approve moving into design development. An Act 34 public hearing on the plans, program and budget is planned in design development. The architects reinforced that subsequent phases will require separate board approvals and public permitting, and that any final construction borrowing will be timed to market conditions and to board direction.

Ending note

Designers asked the board to expect additional public input opportunities at the township and district level as the team finishes schematic work and begins technical submissions. The board did not take a construction vote at the meeting; the discussion was limited to the schematic design update and the schedule and next review points.