Shaler Area School Board hears more options for primary schools |

Shaler Area School Board hears more options for primary schools

An architecture firm on Wednesday presented the Shaler Area School Board with more options on what to do with the district’s five aging primary schools.

Greer Hayden, president of HHSDR Architects and Engineers, based in Sharon and Pittsburgh, added two more options to the three revealed in August’s feasibility/facilities study presentation.

The new options are to renovate Burchfield and Marzolf primaries, close Reserve, Jeffery and Rogers primaries and build a new facility at the Rogers site or to renovate Burchfield, close Reserve, Jeffery, Rogers and Marzolf and build new schools at Rogers and Marzolf.

The fourth option would cost approximately $55.9 million and take seven years to complete. The fifth option would cost $67.1 million and take nine years to complete.

The firm’s original three options were to renovate all five primary schools, close Reserve Primary and renovate the remaining primaries or close Reserve and Jeffery primaries and renovate the remaining primary schools.

The school district, which has about 4,600 students, is projected to grow to around 4,900 by 2020, according to the Pennsylvania Department of Education.

More than 50 people attended the meeting, and a few spoke in defense of keeping Reserve Primary.

“It’s an asset, said Jim Helfrich, a Reserve commissioner. “It’s more than just a physical space. And I just wanted to let you know that it’s a great asset, and if there’s some way to keep it, we’d appreciate it.”

Rachel Farkas is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 724-772-6364 or [email protected]

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.