Radnor facilities committee recommends hiring Schrader Group to study renovation of administration building

The Radnor Township School District facilities committee recommended Dec. 9 that administration engage the Schrader Group to develop schematic‑design options for renovating the district administration building.

The committee heard a presentation from David Schrader of the Schrader Group and project manager Seth Hammonds, who outlined three options: (1) exterior and systems repairs (roof, windows, MEP, accessibility and security) to make the building “warm, safe, dry”; (2) targeted interior modifications to improve departmental adjacencies and common spaces; and (3) a larger interior reimagining that would more substantially alter layouts and could create a public boardroom. Schrader said the firm brought historic‑preservation and engineering consultants to the project team.

Why it matters: the administration building scored poorly on a district feasibility study completed five years earlier and now shows worsening mechanical and accessibility conditions, administrators said. The committee was told the building dates to about 1901, has deteriorating pneumatic HVAC controls and nonoperable windows, and must meet ADA and life‑safety standards.

Cost and schedule: administrators said three architect proposals came back with cost ranges that align to a $15–20 million estimate for a renovation, and that an additional borrowing in that range would increase annual debt service by roughly $1 million (at the low end) to a higher figure at the top of the range during the borrowing period. Administration said the design, permitting and bidding timeline would likely put construction in 2027 if the board chooses to proceed. The committee was also shown fee examples tied to project size and noted schematic‑phase work can be stopped with payment only for work performed.

Board debate centered on timing and disruption. Board member Miss Holly said she did not want to take on “another renovation construction project at this point” and preferred to defer a couple of years so administration could focus on student‑centered initiatives and the ongoing Ithan project. Administrator responses emphasized cumulative maintenance burdens and daily operational disruptions that maintenance staff are currently addressing with temporary fixes.

On risk, an architect acknowledged renovation projects often carry change‑order risk—especially for hidden conditions—and said the team would use structural surveys and early demolition/testing steps to reduce unknowns. Committee members pressed on historic flooding and groundwater risks; administrators said recent township stormwater mitigation has reduced flooding and that planned site footings for front‑entry ramps are shallow (about 3 feet) compared with known buried lines at about 7 feet.

Next steps: the committee supported moving to the next step of engaging Schrader Group to proceed into schematic design and asked administration to present numbers and off‑ramp options to the full board at next week’s meeting. The engagement is contingent on the board’s formal approval and includes contractual checkpoints and fees tied to project phases.

The administration said it will return with more detailed cost breakdowns, relocation cost estimates for temporary staff moves and a proposed decision‑point schedule that would allow the district to pause the project at defined moments if cost or timing become unfavorable.