The Conewago Valley school board held an Act 34 booklet review on Monday evening to review information on the New Oxford Elementary School construction project.
Connor Phiel and Anthony Colestock represented Crabtree, Rohrbaugh & Associates, the architectural design firm working with the school district. Garrett Moore represented PFM, the financial advisor for the project for the district.
Colestock presented for the majority of the meeting and gave the board a page-by-page tour of the Act 34 booklet, highlighting the different sections including cost estimates, the history of the building project, and floor plans.
Overall, the process echoed the path the district previously took for the Conewago Township Elementary School project.
“The maximum building construction cost, just like the CTE project, it includes more than just the bricks and mortar,” Colestock said. “It also includes design professional fees, furniture and equipment, minus site costs. This is put in place by the Department of Education to make sure you’re familiar with the Taj Mahal Act, to make sure that districts aren’t overbuilding and they’re also sharing with the community all the details of the project, what’s the need for the project, and how are you going to finance it.”
The booklet also includes financing options and details as well as information on enrollment capacity for the building.
One reason a rebuild was chosen over a renovation was to minimize the disruption to students, according to Colestock.
Colestock said the plan is to add on to the current kindergarten wing and once students are out of the building asbestos abatement and demolition will continue.
Should the building be renovated, the roof would be removed and the building exposed.
“I do think that every district, when they look at renovating or replacing, one thing that you have to consider is the disruption to the education of the students and how much disruption would you want to cause moving them into modulars for two years or keeping them in a renovated building for two years,” Colestock said. “The additional cost for new construction, because new construction is going to be more expensive, that’s justifiable. There are also some unknowns that you’ll have with renovation with existing conditions that once you start tearing into the building or into the ground, just know what you’re going to uncover.”
Superintendent Sharon Perry said minimizing affecting the students was a priority identified at the beginning of the elementary school project discussions.
“That was one of our guiding principles was to reduce the education disruption,” Perry said. “So even when we began the feasibility study back in June 2021, that was the number one highest-rising point of the board, and suggesting that we did not want the disruption for the children, especially after COVID and the disruption that it caused.”
Five areas of the project will go out to bid in March: general construction, site construction, electrical, plumbing, and mechanical construction, according to Colestock.
The district will not ask for bids for asbestos abatement until later.
“It would not be bid until we’re close to demolishing the existing school,” Colestock said. “We feel that it’s advantageous and you’re going to get better numbers if you bid it closer to when the time of work would occur. Otherwise, a general contractor or, excuse me, an asbestos abatement contractor would have to hold their number for two years because it’s not going to be for about two years into the project that the existing building would be ready to be abated.”
An asbestos consultant estimated the district will spend about $660,000 on abatement, according to Colestock.
The project budget also includes a construction contingency fund of $1.2 million, which is equivalent to about 2.5% to 3% of the project.
Should the bids come in over estimate, Colestock said the district will have to decide what to do.
“Just like the previous project from CTE, in the event that the bid comes in higher than the estimate, you are permitted to move forward with the project if you wanted to, if it was still within your budget,” Colestock said. “In the event that the bids come in 8% higher than this estimate, you would need to have a second Act 34 hearing based upon the bid amounts. If it’s less than 8%, you can still move forward with with the project without having the need for a second Act 34 hearing.”
Another portion of the project cost includes indirect costs, which can include ongoing needs and are described as “additional custodial supplies, additional utilities, additional contracted maintenance and repairs, and additional insurance premiums” in the Act 34 booklet.
Ongoing indirect costs are estimated at a total of $63,862.
The maximum building construction cost, listed as “new construction costs, design fees, movable fixtures and equipment, less site costs,” are $37,416,109.
Additional costs, described as “existing renovation and site costs and remaining project soft costs,” are listed at $14,324,915.
In all, the maximum project cost is estimated at $51,741,024.
Board member Lindsay Krug voiced concerns that the planned building capacity may be higher than what the school needs are.
“This also gives you some flexibility because it is a 20-year project,” Colestock said. “You don’t want to be at 100% capacity when you open the building. You want potentially room to grow that if you do have enrollment growth. Not that you would do this, but then it also gives you potential for redistricting, as well.”
Board member Michael Campbell, who recently joined the board, asked whether tariffs could affect the pricing estimates.
Colestock said that discussions about tariffs were held last year as the district discussed the overall costs for both elementary schools, particularly focusing on CTE as it was the first project in line.
“All the steel needs to be American, U.S. steel,” Colestock said. “In the event, one of the things that we could potentially anticipate with the tariff impact, it was kind of those wait and see. I would say right now we’re still not, at least with school construction in Pennsylvania, still not really seeing much of an impact. There has, when we did the CTE bid, there was some material price increase for some steel, some sheet metal, there’s a couple of other items that we identified.”
Colestock said material pricing won’t be known for sure until the project goes out to bid and prime contractors receive estimates.
The board will hold a regular meeting at 7 p.m. Monday, Jan. 12 in the district boardroom and will vote on the maximum building construction cost and total project cost. The board will vote on a resolution accepting those costs.
If the resolution is approved, the Act 34 booklet will be available to the public on the school district website under the feasibility study section as well as available for reading in the district administrative office.
Pending approval of the resolution, an Act 34 hearing will be held at 6 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 12 in the New Oxford Elementary School cafeteria.
