Haywood County Schools hears $75M–$125M options for new schools; board urged to identify site in 2026

An unidentified presenter for the consulting team told the Haywood County Schools board that consultants had modeled four broad facility alternatives — from a standalone ball‑field acquisition to building a new high school and renovating the existing high into a middle school — and provided updated cost and timeline guidance to help the district choose a path.

The presenter said the consultants used standard DCI case profiles to size buildings and added a new "field amenities" line to reflect shared athletic complexes. "If you built a high school, we wouldn't normally see the middle school locker rooms in the high school," the presenter said, explaining why concessions, public restrooms and separate home/visitor locker rooms were included in the amenities estimate.

Consultants showed a decision‑support timeline that runs from 2026 to 2031. They recommended the board "select one of these alternatives and identify, not purchase, but identify a site in 2026," then complete predesign work so a grant application could be competitive. The presenter said targeting funding in 2027 is reasonable if a predesign and vision package are in hand: "If you could acquire funding in 2027, then you see about how long design and then the bidding and construction would take and move in."

Cost estimates varied by option and amenities. The consultants gave a high‑level project bracket of roughly $75,000,000 to $125,000,000 across the alternatives; they emphasized the figure is a planning range and that site costs in Western North Carolina tend to increase per‑square‑foot prices compared with other regions. On amenities specifically, the presenter described a roughly $7,000,000 line for field amenities and said about $2,000,000 of that could be for a hillside‑integrated grandstand; a fully precast freestanding grandstand could cost multiple millions more depending on configuration.

On sequencing, Alternative 3 would build a new high school first, move students into the new building, then renovate the old high school into a middle school — a phasing approach the consultants said could shorten the program's overall delivery when managed carefully.

Board members and the presenter discussed site realities. One member said the district’s first practical problem is "finding the property," and the consultants warned many candidate parcels will need substantial grading and earthwork; the presenter cited an example site that required moving roughly 220,000 cubic yards of dirt. A specific property acquisition amount of about $6,500,000 was shown in the timeline tool as a sample site‑acquisition estimate during the presentation.

The consultants also described funding pathways mentioned in the presentation — a needs‑based grant and the "PCI lottery" as examples — and said districts that present a clear vision and predesign improve their odds with grant reviewers. The presenter offered to assist with predesign and noted their firm has helped multiple districts with needs‑based grant packages.

No vote or formal decision was recorded during the presentation. Next procedural steps the presenter recommended were for the board to identify a preferred alternative and a site in 2026, direct or authorize a short predesign effort (the presenter suggested administration could be given three months to prepare materials), and prepare to apply for needs‑based funding timed to the grant cycle.

The board acknowledged the information and thanked the consultants; further site‑selection and predesign work were left as the district’s forthcoming tasks.