Shippensburg board authorizes traffic study as it weighs multi‑million dollar school construction options

The Shippensburg Area School District Board on April 27 authorized a traffic study for the intermediate school area and continued deliberations over four construction options to address rising enrollment.

Superintendent Bill August told the board the district had received preliminary cost estimates from EI Associates for several designs. Option 3 would move sixth grade to the intermediate school and add classrooms at Nancy Grayson (total project and soft costs estimate in the high‑$20 millions, with a 10‑year staffing projection around $2.23 million). Option 3.5 would move third grade and reclaim space at Nancy Grayson and James Bird (roughly $19.2 million construction estimate). Option 4 focuses on a middle‑school addition (about $30 million). Option 5 — the largest, with courtyard and pod variants — could range from roughly $30 million to more than $40 million depending on configuration.

"These are initial projections. We won't have final costs until design and the bid process," August said, adding the administration used a conservative 20–25% soft‑cost allowance to avoid surprises.

Board members probed staffing assumptions, bond terms and traffic impacts. One board member calculated that a $10 million, 20‑year bond at 5% would imply roughly $800,000 per year in debt service; staff noted annual budget effects would vary by term and total borrowing.

The board voted unanimously to authorize a traffic study for the intermediate school area to determine whether a formal traffic study is required and, if so, to proceed immediately so analysis could be completed before summer. Board member Kirk Nogle made the motion; the study was authorized to be paid from fund balance and reimbursed from bond proceeds if the board later borrows. "That way we can get our options open," Nogle said.

A separate motion to proceed immediately with design and engineering for Option 5 was made and seconded but later withdrawn so the board could place a design vote on a future action agenda and allow public notice and comment. Board members said they supported more design work and phasing studies but several expressed pedagogical concerns about housing much younger children and early adolescents in the same building.

Next steps: the administration will commission the traffic study and return design options and cost refinements to the board. The board indicated it wants a public‑facing action item on any final decision to move forward with a major design so the community may comment prior to a vote.