Committee seeks pipe-by-pipe scoping after inspection finds cast-iron piping compromised; $25–30K estimate sought for engineering and cost study

The School Facilities Committee on Monday said a recent video scoping and inspection show cast-iron plumbing throughout the old school is compromised and that the group needs detailed, pipe-by-pipe documentation before it can give the selectmen reliable cost estimates for temporary reuse.

“We need somebody who did the scoping to be present when everybody’s looking,” a staff member said, describing a report the committee received only the day before. The staff member summarized the inspection as saying “all the pipes are compromised.”

Committee members said that answer is not specific enough. One member said the group needs to know whether individual bathrooms and main runs are damaged so they can decide whether to isolate parts of the building and reroute sanitary flows to an existing large tank. “We need to ask Brian questions,” the Chair said, arguing the committee should meet with the consultant before any joint session with the selectmen.

The committee discussed technical options for repair. One member noted vendor claims that certain pipelining methods can last decades—“every one of them said their system lasts 50 years”—while another said an outside consultant had suggested lining might be worthwhile for only about five years. Members emphasized that pipelining can be practical for continuous, untied sections of main pipe but that every tie-in or junction typically requires excavation and a new connection.

To resolve the uncertainty, staff reported they had asked consultant Brian Hume for a quote to produce a two-phase engineering and cost estimate; staff said the consultant estimated roughly $25,000–$30,000 to provide an engineered scope and a professional cost estimate (phase 1 and phase 2 workplans). The committee agreed it needs that study and precise pipe-location mapping—ideally with the scoping technician present to interpret the video—before presenting numbers to the selectmen.

Cost context remained unsettled in the meeting. Members referenced a previously circulated temporary-occupancy figure of about $450,000 that did not include the newly identified compromised pipes; staff also said earlier planning-level numbers for full renovation ranged in preliminary remarks from roughly $8 million to $12 million, figures staff described as high-level, pre‑study estimates. For demolition of the unwanted portion of the building, one contractor’s rough quote (noted at the meeting) was about $11.50 per square foot for 35,500 square feet, or roughly $408,000, and members cautioned asbestos removal, mastic, and possible PCB work would add to cost.

Health- and building-code considerations factored into the discussion. A code official told the committee that converting classroom space to assembly or municipal uses can trigger selective compliance—for example, ADA improvements such as automatic doors or accessible restrooms—without necessarily forcing full-system retrofits, but that any touched plumbing fixtures would need to be brought to code.

Committee members also discussed septic capacity at the site: participants described three tanks on the property (one cited as a 12,000‑gallon tank, and two smaller tanks of about 7,000 and 4,000 gallons). Several members said understanding which pipes drain to which tank is critical for evaluating whether the parts of the building the committee wants to retain can be routed to an adequate leach field.

The committee voted earlier in the meeting to accept minutes unanimously. As next steps the group asked staff to secure pipe-location mapping from the scoping contractor (Robert Auer or whoever performed the video scoping was suggested) and to get the $25,000–$30,000 engineering/cost estimate. The committee agreed not to meet jointly with the selectmen until it has the scoping clarification and the cost detail it can present.

The committee set a follow-up timeline of at least a month to obtain plumbing-location details and contractor estimates and to prepare scenario-based cost numbers tied to different occupancy options; it also discussed meeting in workshop format with the selectmen once that preparatory work is complete.