Easton administrators recommend building new high school at site by baseball fields after geotech review

Easton Area School District administrators told the school board they will recommend selecting the parcel by the baseball fields as the location for a new high school, after evaluating four test-fit locations and new geotechnical data.

The administration presented comparative site layouts, preliminary traffic and geotechnical scanning results, and an initial cost range for the full project. "We are looking to open for the 2031-2032 school year," school architect Randy Gallioto said, outlining the schedule that includes schematic design this year and an Act 34 public hearing in January 2026. "The phase that we're in now, which is the programming phase."

Administrators said the recommended site (option 4) scores best overall when the team balances construction phasing, subsurface risk and total cost. "When we took the entire package into account, our recommendation as administrative team is that number 4," Dr. Ziatick said. The recommendation follows a 2-D resistivity geotech survey that identified areas of karst geology and shallow bedrock across the campus; Andrew Mather summarized the results by saying, on the survey maps, "areas of pink are are not not great." The district's team said that work to stabilize bedrock or inject grout has been performed on other local projects but would raise cost and risk if a more geotechnically challenging parcel is chosen.

Project size and cost: the team reported an educational program that initially targeted about 535,000 square feet but said they are still refining that number. Test fits on the four sites produced buildings in a range near 450,000 to 480,000 square feet for some options, with a target square-foot-per-student figure near 150 in line with national benchmarks. The total probable project cost across the locations was presented as roughly $290 million to $320 million; presenters said they are planning for high-end scenarios for budgeting and expect the final figure to depend on site and final design.

Schedule and next steps: administrators asked the board to consider the recommendation and vote on a site at the Jan. 28 board meeting, which would allow the district to begin schematic design, order long-lead items and pursue potential grant funding. "We want to begin schematic design and move in from conceptual design and programming in February," Gallioto said.

Traffic, athletics and phasing: presenters noted trade-offs at each location. Options that place the new building farther from 25th Street reduce daily traffic conflict and limit academic disruption during construction but affect athletic fields and require more site rebuilds; options closer to the current building minimize athletics impact but complicate construction phasing. The team said the recommended parcel allows the district to construct the new school while keeping the current building online, then demolish and reconfigure the site.

Financing and risk management: administrators said they will pursue multiple funding strategies including grant applications tied to the site's state-road frontage, bond financing spread over multiple years, and capital reserve planning. "We're thinking about what is the worst financial case scenario and plan for that and hope to land in a much better spot," an administrator said. Board members asked for follow-up briefings with the district's financial advisors and requested more detailed cost and phasing numbers before a final commitment.

Board action scheduled: the administration will place a formal site-selection motion on the Jan. 28 agenda. The board will decide whether to accept the administrative recommendation to move schematic design forward for site 4, or to select an alternate location based on the additional detail provided during the intervening two weeks.