Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ithan Elementary Replacement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Radnor board hears Ithan Elementary replacement update; early tree removal proposed to avoid Indiana bat delays
Summary
Board heard a full update on the Ithan Elementary replacement: permitting changes prompted a modest $680,000 escalation, the team plans to bid this winter, and consultants recommended early removal of roughly 175 trees under a schedule that avoids Indiana bat survey restrictions.
Get email alerts on the Ithan Elementary Replacement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Damian Spar, a project manager for SiteLogic Construction Management, told the Radnor Township School District board Aug. 26 that permitting developments and newly-applied state species reviews have altered the timetable for the district's planned replacement of Ithan Elementary School. He said the team will ask the board later this fall to approve an out-of-sequence contract to remove trees, and that early removal would allow work to proceed without delays from Indiana bat surveys.
The project update laid out a multi-phase schedule with construction beginning April 2026, substantial completion and occupancy of the new building planned for January 2028, and demolition of the existing building between April and June 2028. Spar said the team is targeting a board request to release the project to bid in November, a bidding window through early January and contract awards in February.
Why it matters: consultants said recent Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection reviews and a Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) notice—coordinated with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—have flagged potential Indiana bat habitat. That creates a seasonal window for tree removal; to avoid a survey-triggered restriction on April–September tree work, the project team recommends removing about 175 trees during a legal window without survey requirements.
"We are going to be requesting from the board consideration to award a contract to remove trees prior to the construction sequence"—Damian Spar, SiteLogic.
Cost and alternates: Spar and Breslin Architects' Steve Barrons reviewed the construction estimate and said moving bid timing has added a $680,000 escalation to the cost estimate. Presenters showed the hard-construction figure near the $68 million line on the slide and explained that alternates—flooring, roofing types, exterior finishes, MEP conductor choices and several site-work items—remain available to be selected or deferred depending on bids. Spar said early tree removal under a landscape contractor could be more cost effective than removing trees later under the general contractor.
Permitting and schedule confidence: Barrons reported receipt of a clearance letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that advances the DEP planning-module review and said the team expects the planning-module approval in early September and an NPDES/NPDS stormwater permit in December unless multiple rounds of review extend the timeline. Presenters emphasized that recent DEP stormwater regulation changes required plan revisions and additional technical review this year.
Financing and cash flow: district finance staff and advisors (PFM) briefed the board on debt timing and recommended considering a bank-qualified borrowing of roughly $10 million this fall to maintain cashflow flexibility; staff said the borrowing plan is conservative and built into current budget forecasts. Administrators said the total borrowing strategy remains consistent with prior projections and that changes in bid outcomes, not borrowing authority, will determine final fiscal impact.
Next steps: the administration will return with visuals showing exactly which trees are proposed for removal (board members requested maps to help preserve screening for neighbors), provide detailed breakout of recent soft-cost and contingency adjustments, and present a formal request to release bid documents at a future meeting (administration said November is the current target if permits align). The board took no formal action on the project at the Aug. 26 meeting.
Ending: presenters said they will bring more detailed cost and scope clarifications to the board and noted that if permitting comments are heavier than expected, schedules could shift but that the team now has higher confidence than earlier in the summer.

