Northborough forum outlines nine options for Peasley School; committee seeks input on grade consolidation and new construction

Erica Hall, chair of the Town of Northborough School Building Committee, opened a community forum to present options for the Peasley School project and to solicit resident feedback via a survey and QR code. “The goal of this community forum is to provide an update on the Peasley building project and also get some input from this community,” Hall said.

Kent, an architect from Landsberg Design, walked through the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) process and nine conceptual options the design team has developed. He said the project is in the preferred schematic report (PSR) phase and the team will submit a single preferred option to the MSBA board for review on June 25. “The PDP has been submitted to the MSBA … we're in the PSR phase,” Kent said.

Why it matters: Northborough was accepted into the MSBA program after submitting a statement of interest in 2023 and the town allocated funds at the 2024 town meeting for a feasibility study. MSBA participation can bring state reimbursement for qualifying work; the committee framed two central choices for residents: keep neighborhood PreK–5 schools or consolidate grade spans so Peasley would serve grades 3–5, and whether to pursue renovation/addition or build a new facility.

What was presented: Kent said the existing Peasley School (original construction cited as 1962) is roughly 45,000 square feet and has multiple deficiencies the MSBA identified — leaking mechanical systems, aging boilers, single-glazed windows, undersized cafeteria, library and gym, and limited special-education spaces. He described three families of options: a code-compliant renovation that retains the existing footprint (A-series); neighborhood PreK–5 options with additions (B-series); and grade-span 3–5 options (C-series).

Space and cost tradeoffs: Kent said a neighborhood new-build scenario would yield roughly 55,000 net square feet and about 76,000 gross square feet after accounting for circulation and support spaces; a grade-span option could produce a net area near 90,000 and a grossed total near 107,000 square feet. He warned that some renovation approaches would require temporary modular "swing" classrooms during construction and estimated modular swing-space costs at about $3.5–$4.0 million — costs the MSBA would not reimburse. “We were looking between 3.5 to $4 million. That's not reimbursed for this option,” Kent said.

Site and utility constraints: The design team noted wetlands and regulatory setbacks on the eastern side of the site that constrain building locations, and they identified roughly one acre at the Maple Street frontage and about three acres behind the school (including adjacent DPW property) that affect where additions or new construction can sit. Kent said construction access via the DPW property is a logistical advantage and that the team has had meetings with the local sewer commission to evaluate tying the site to town sewer, which would be a day-one activity if chosen.

Public questions and concerns: Residents asked whether students could remain in the existing building during construction; Kent said a north-build approach was intended to allow the school to remain operational while a new building is constructed. Attendees raised after-school and before-school care needs, circulation and parent/bus pickup, and whether nurses' suites would include separate isolation space; Kent said operational and programmatic details, including community use and health-suite layout, will be refined during the PSR phase in consultation with district administration.

Next steps: The design team will refine options and architectural character in future community forums, incorporate landscape and site design, and submit the preferred option to the MSBA on June 25. The committee is collecting resident feedback via the distributed survey and will return to present additional design detail in subsequent meetings.

No formal votes or decisions were taken at the forum; the session was informational and intended to gather public input ahead of the PSR submission.