Architects present $174M–$179M Green Village campus plan; PennDOT Highway Occupancy Permit flagged as critical path
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Architects for Chambersburg Area SD presented designs for a K–3 Green Village elementary and a 4–6 intermediate school, described site circulation and alternates (turf field, auxiliary gym), and presented a combined base‑bid estimate of $174M with add‑alternates up to $179M; civil team identified the PennDOT HOP and DEP/NPDES reviews as schedule risks.
District and design teams presented detailed schematic‑to‑design development updates for two campus projects on Feb. 10. Anthony Kolstock of Crabtree and Chris Linke of RLPS summarized the program, site planning, budgets and near‑term approvals for the Green Village K–3 building and a 4–6 intermediate school.
Kolstock and RLPS outlined the site plan (parent circulation separated from bus/van loops), one artificial‑turf field as base bid with additional turf as add alternates, and athletic/parking layouts. The teams proposed bidding the site development as one contract covering both schools; some field and track items would remain add alternates depending on final bids.
The designers presented a combined base project‑cost estimate of $174,000,000 and a budget range to $179,000,000 if the board elects add alternates (additional classrooms, auxiliary gym, walk‑in clinic and other scope choices). Kolstock explained the range reflects recent site cost estimates and added square footage in the intermediate school program.
Traffic and permitting emerged as a principal schedule risk. Civil engineering work by KCI recommended signal consolidation at the SR‑11/997 corridor to manage queuing and suggested a roundabout to handle anticipated site flows; the team warned the Highway Occupancy Permit (HOP) from PennDOT is a state review and could be a critical‑path item taking months (potentially up to a year) to resolve. The architects also noted DEP/NPDES permitting for Falling Springs Creek adjacent to the site could affect the land‑development timeline.
Designers explained procurement options and recommended separate prime contracts for general construction and a large site package to capture efficiency and scheduling clarity. They also discussed add alternates that would allow the board to reduce or expand scope at bid day (for example, six additional classrooms or an auxiliary gym at the intermediate school).
Schedule and next steps: design development milestone is targeted for April, Act 34 (Pennsylvania school code) hearings are anticipated in July (board action required to adopt maximum project costs and Act 34 booklets), construction documents are planned for completion in the fall and a bid release is anticipated in late 2026 or early 2027 with construction starting in 2027, contingent on agency approvals.
Public comment at the meeting emphasized program priorities in the new schools: a tech‑ed teacher urged preservation of middle‑school woodshop spaces in the new design. Board members asked for more granular cost breakout for ad alternates and confirmation of tree‑preservation and stormwater outcomes during future design development sessions.