At the Select Board meeting tonight, the Chair of the Permanent Building Committee (PBC) Dan McIntyre presented a progress report on the committee’s Facility Planning Study, which included a diverse mix of five options for the Center School and other buildings in Hopkinton.
Originally formed to contemplate the future of the Center School, the committee’s scope was expanded last March to include Town Hall, the Elmwood School and the Fruit Street complex.
To preface his report, Mr. McIntyre told the Select Board that the committee had held multiple meetings with town employees across several departments, two public forums, and had met with the Planning Board, Historical Commission, Parks and Recreation, the Hopkinton Chamber of Commerce, and abutters to the Center School. “We converted those needs into physical space requirements,” said McIntyre. One of the main takeaways, he said, was that the town needs about “30% more space than is available”.
He stressed at the outset that there is “still work to be done”, and he said the committee focused on the primary goal of meeting the needs of town departmental services first, and then evaluated the remaining sites to meet other goals, based on the responses from the public input sessions, board meetings, and the business community.
Option A: Split town staff between Town Hall and Center School
In this scenario, all town staff would continue to work at Town Hall, while HYFS, Parks & Recreation and the Integrated Pre-K would move to a remodeled Center School. The town would renovate the 1928 building and add community meeting spaces. They would also add activity rooms for use by Parks and Recreation and Hopkinton Youth and Family Services (HYFS).
This would leave the Elmwood school available to be retained for future use, to raze the building and keep the land, or to sell it outright for housing. The parcel is currently zoned for Single Family homes, but could be rezoned for multi-family housing, which would increase tax revenue.
The Fruit Street complex would get a new gymnasium, the Facilities department (who are currently working out of their vehicles) would receive a small, inexpensive office, and affordable housing units would be built, which was previously planned for the site.
- Advantages: It would provide adequate facilities for current town staffing levels and potentially offers affordable housing.
- Disadvantages: It is one of the most expensive options, due to the anticipated renovation costs of Center School.
Option B: Expand Town Hall
Town Hall would undergo a renovation, adding space for critical town functions. The footprint of the building would certainly expand into the parking lot, which would necessitate an agreement with Bill’s Pizzeria to expand their lot.
Center School would be available to sell for commercial development, contingent on voters approving a rezoning of the parcel. The town could retain some of the property for additional parking, and the 1928 facade would be preserved.
For Elmwood and Fruit Street, the same options as above are available: Keep or sell Elmwood, and perform limited development at Fruit Street.
- Advantages: It meets town staff space requirements and expands our commercial tax base. This is also the lowest cost option.
- Disadvantages: It exacerbates an already serious parking problem downtown and does not provide future space to expand Town Hall.
Option C: Consolidate all Town Services to Center School
Center School would be renovated and become the new municipal services complex. The town may also move school administration to the Elmwood School, who are in a space that we currently lease at a cost of $125,000 per year. Town Hall could be sold for development, housing or retail space, with the lack of parking an anticipated barrier.
The Center School is large enough to accommodate current and future town staffing. The new facility would include a gymnasium, outdoor recreation space, and a spot for the Integrated Pre-K program.
The Elmwood school could be kept or sold, and the Fruit Street complex would receive only a small building for the Facilities department.
- Advantages: it meets all municipal needs and offers room to grow. It provides adequate parking and supports our open space and affordable housing goals.
- Disadvantages: It is likely the most costly option and does not allow us to increase our commercial tax base.
Option D: Consolidate all Town Services to Elmwood, Sell Town Hall and Center School
We abandon Town Hall and move all government functions to the Elmwood School. We also move school administration to the Elmwood School, saving $125,000 per year. Town Hall could be sold for development, housing or retail space, with a lack of parking being the primary anticipated barrier.
Elmwood is a large building and offers more space than the town needs at this time. Additionally, it has a gymnasium onsite, space for outdoor recreation, and reserve space for the Integrated Pre-K program.
Town Hall and Center School would be sold for commercial development, and no construction would be needed at Fruit Street, as Facilities would be housed at Elmwood.
- Advantages: It meets all our municipal needs and offers room to grow. It provides adequate parking and supports our open space and affordable housing goals.
- Disadvantages: There are few in this scenario, since we already own the building and would increase our commercial tax revenue by selling Town Hall and Center School.
Option E: Consolidate all Town Services to Elmwood, Keep Town Hall, Sell Center School
This is fundamentally the same as Option D, except Town Hall would be retained and converted to a Youth Center.
- Advantages: Same advantages as Option D
- Disadvantages: It reduces our commercial tax revenue since we’d be keeping Town Hall.
Evaluation Matrix
Mr. McIntyre presented a slide summarizing the comparative advantages and disadvantages for each option, with green indicating the metric had a net positive benefit and red a net negative.
Chamber of Commerce Responds
Having seen a summary of the PBC’s findings, the Hopkinton Chamber of Commerce, which represents more than 120 Hopkinton businesses, sent a strongly worded letter endorsing Option D; consolidating town services to Elmwood School and selling Town Hall and Center School for commercial development. “The size and location of the Center School property provides a significant and critical opportunity to make the downtown area a more dynamic and attractive gathering place consistent with our values and desires to protect the unique features of the town while allowing expanding employment, housing, and additional tax revenue,” read the letter. While the Chamber acknowledged that zoning changes would be required, they also endorsed the creation of a new zoning district “celebrating both the arts and historical communities within the town“. The Chamber further noted that the Center School property “should not be classified for potential MBTA zoning overlay as we understand this zoning limits over 55 housing and sets a minimum density that may overwhelm the downtown and destroy the stated goal.“
Next Steps
Mr. McIntyre closed his presentation by informing the Select Board that his committee needed to continue gathering data before making a final recommendation. By the winter of 2024, the committee plans to issue a Request for Proposal to several developers to understand potential commercial options for the Center School. He assured the Select Board that the RFP would be extremely detailed, and would require all participants to commit to preserving the 1928 facade. He expects to receive responses prior to the May 2025 Annual Town Meeting. McIntyre said the committee will also use the data to understand what types of businesses should be located there, which will help them calculate the potential commercial tax impact.
No action was requested or taken by the Select Board, and all members thanked Mr. McIntyre and his committee for their excellent work.
“ Single Family homes, but could be rezoned for multi-family housing, which would increase tax revenue”. Every time an argument is made of this nature it increases the services required and causes a tax increase for the rest of us. We need to stop this half-truth because the ripple effect is far more impactful than the original claim.
The matrix indicates that all options are equivalent in terms of supporting open space. I disagree. Any option that involves selling the Center School land for development is a huge negative in that respect. It’s interesting that the Open Space Preservation Commission was never consulted for input on these plans.
In his presentation, Mr. McIntyre alluded to the option that the Center School (which spans two parcels) might be partially sold, with the town holding the wooded parcel for trails and open space.
I’d love more affordable housing for the elderly. It is a great location for seniors, as it is across from the Common, near regional transportation, trails and withing walking distance to shops and restaurants. Maybe keep a part of the building as community space, including recreational space. It would be great if more seniors could stay in town at an affordable price.
Kim I would love to see more senior housing down on the Elmwood property. Many of our older neighbors just can’t afford to stay in their homes but don’t want to leave town. No added strain on the schools. I think town hall needs to stay in the center of town. I can’t imagine the town selling 2 historical buildings. The town generally doesn’t sell property they already own.
Looks like Options D and E involve reuse of Elmwood for municipal purposes and PreK. It was made clear by the School District and ESBC that the Elmwood School was an “end of life” project and would require extensive work to bring it to current building standards (in the ballpark of 40M according to the ESBC). I hope that cost is being factored into the decision.
I hope as part of these evaluations they are considering the very high potential for hazardous building materials in these older buildings. Particularly Elmwood which was constructed in the heyday of lead, asbestos, and PCB use in buildings. While lead and asbestos abatement are fairly straightforward to address, PCBs are not. Used not only in electrical equipment they were also commonly used in heavy duty commercial paints and caulking and have a tendency to leach from the source material into surrounding porous materials like brick, concrete, and wood. PCB contamination is heavily regulated and can be a nightmare for renovation work. You don’t typically test for these until you are ready to do a project, but given the age and construction type of Elmwood the Town should be assuming they are present for cost estimating purposes until testing proves otherwise.
An excellent point, Mr. Townsley. The word on the street is that just the asbestos removal from Center School is expected to cost upwards of $1mm. If sold, there is little doubt a purchaser would want some concession in the sale price for that.
Thanks to the PBC members for producing their informative “high-level screening” and to the previous commenters for their important input at this stage of the evaluation. Does the PBC intend to conduct a more granular evaluation for the indicated (and perhaps additional) criteria that would enable a more informed decision to be made? For example, each criterion could be scored on the basis of degrees of satisfaction (ideally quantified rather than more subjective) of that criterion’s particular goal (Do we have consensus on these goals at this stage of the process?). Also, each criterion may be assigned a degree of importance relative to the other criteria in the matrix. The resulting “pairwise comparison” of the options may reveal pros and cons more clearly, particularly for Options D&E which appear to be similar from the matrix shown. True, the results of the pairwise comparison would likely change depending on the weighting assigned for each criterion, but one would get a better sense of how sensitive a particular result is to such variation and give rise to increased confidence in the eventual selection. Adopting this approach would first require achieving a consensus on which criteria are more important and then on defining the degrees of satisfaction of each criterion.
Unfortunately the proposal for senior housing will not be affordable for our senior citizens in town. It will be million dollar apartments/ condos for over 55 which we already know from Legacy will include children that will further stress our schools. What we need for Center School is more housing for the elderly like we have at Brampton Circle that we have not added to since the 70’s. Why aren’t we looking to keep our senior citizens in town who have contributed so much?? A developer is looking to make a profit not to help our senior citizens if we sell Center School.
That’s what I was thinking, Dale. Affordable Housing for our seniors like what exists at Brampton Circle. I say let’s do that at Elmwood too! Happy Holidays.
I’m disappointed that housing migrants was not considered as an option. We desperately need more space for those fleeing other countries due to oppression and persecution. We could rename center school the Maura Healy memorial placement center. It would even retain center in its name. Do better folks!