Town of Northborough committee selects new-build Peasley School option; project estimates mid-$90 million before reimbursements

The Town of Northborough’s Peasley Building Committee announced it selected option B1—a new-build neighborhood elementary school for grades pre-K through 5—after narrowing nine preliminary options. Kelly Guanette, a member of the school committee and chair of the Peasley Building Committee Subcommittee for Communications, said the committee voted last night to advance the new-construction plan as the preferred option.

“Out of all nine options, it actually was the least expensive of all of them,” Kelly Guanette said, explaining the committee’s choice and the intent to keep costs conservative as designs are refined. The committee emphasized that further work in schematic design could lower the estimate.

Ian Sheridan, the owner’s project manager with PMA Consultants, said the project is “trending in the mid‑$90 million range,” a figure he emphasized does not include Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) reimbursement. Sheridan said both PMA’s estimator and the design team’s independent estimator produced similar cost ranges, giving the team confidence in the current estimate.

Jenna of PMA outlined expected state support: the MSBA typically reimburses 47–49% of eligible building costs and can provide up to an additional 4% for energy‑efficient/green initiatives. She cautioned that certain costs—most notably modular classroom rentals and some site work—are generally ineligible for reimbursement, which influenced the committee’s preference for new construction over phased add/renovate plans.

The consultants mapped a project timeline tied to MSBA milestones and local procedures. The Peasley team plans to submit the preferred schematic report (PSR) to the MSBA on June 25; MSBA board review is expected in August 2026, schematic‑design review in February 2027, and the town vote is planned for April 2027, contingent on MSBA approvals and design refinements. The committee scheduled an internal vote on June 23 to formally approve the PSR for submission.

On program size, MSBA calculations put K–5 capacity at about 310 students (pre‑K is counted separately); presenters said current K–5 enrollment is roughly 275. Consultants said the building will be sized to avoid unnecessary empty space while meeting projected enrollment over the coming decade.

Energy and site systems were discussed as cost and reimbursement levers. The team is using a geothermal closed‑loop baseline to maximize MSBA reimbursement and explore potential federal incentives under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA); consultants noted prior projects recouped substantial federal tax‑related value but warned federal programs’ availability and tax timing can change. The presenters also discussed backup power options—fixed generators, photovoltaic readiness and, in rare cases, battery trailer storage—cautioning that atypical storage approaches can trigger local permitting and safety concerns.

Other technical points included site circulation and parking: the preferred plan builds north of the existing building in a single‑phase sequence to keep school operations running, adds a continuous loop road to move parent drop‑off traffic off Maple Street, anticipates about 145 parking spaces and restores playfields after demolition. The design team said the existing septic would be replaced with a municipal sewer connection the town has agreed to accommodate.

Committee members acknowledged taxpayer concerns about the project’s fiscal impact and said the town will analyze tax effects during upcoming phases. “I want to know exactly what this school build is going to be the tax impact on our community members,” Kelly Guanette said; she indicated detailed tax‑impact information will be developed as schematic design and reimbursement values are finalized.

Next steps: the Peasley Building Committee will meet June 23 to finalize and vote to submit the PSR; consultants expect to file the PSR with the MSBA on June 25. If the MSBA advances the project on its schedule, the town could face a warrant article and vote in April 2027. The project remains subject to MSBA review, schematic‑design adjustments and final cost reconciliation.