Reuse_Study_7_18_25~1.pdf

Prepared by the Northern Middlesex Council of Governments through the District Local Technical Assistance Program and

Spencer Preservation Group

Town of Dunstable - June 24, 2024

UNION SCHOOL BUILDING

REHABILITATION AND REUSE PLAN

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan June 24, 2024

Town of Dunstable Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse

Plan

Acknowledgements

This plan was prepared by the Northern Middlesex Council of Governments (NMCOG), the Regional

Planning Agency serving the Towns of Billerica, Chelmsford, Dracut, Dunstable, Pepperell, Tewksbury, Tyngsborough, Westford, and the City of Lowell. This work was supported by a NMCOG District Local

Technical Assistance grant funded by the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities (EOHLC).

This plan would not be possible without the support of the Town of Dunstable Union Building

Rehabilitation Committee and the Town of Dunstable Town Administrator’s office.

Town of Dunstable

Jason Silva, Town Administrator

Select Board

Ronald Mikol, Chair

Leah D. Basbanes, Vice Chair

Kieran Meehan

Union Building Rehabilitation Committee

Walter Alterisio

Leah D. Basbanes

Alan Chaney

Tim DiNicola

Sherry Kersey

Suchitra Mumford

Jeff Rosen

Bebe Wood

NMCOG

Jennifer Raitt, Executive Director

Kelly Lynema, Deputy Director

Christopher Glenn Hayes, Housing and

Economic Development Manager, Project

Manager

Spencer Preservation Group

Lynne Spencer, Preservationist

Doug Manley AIA, Principal-in-Charge/Architect

Shawn Willett AIA, Report Coordinator

Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ i

A. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... ii

B. About the Union Building .................................................................................................................. ii

C. Key Findings ..................................................................................................................................... iii

D. Proposed Alternatives ...................................................................................................................... iv

Existing Conditions

A. What is the Union Building?

B. What is the Union Building Rehabilitation Committee and the goals of this Report?

C. Union Building and the Master Plan

D. Character-Defining Features

1. Exterior Features

2. Interior Features

E. Existing Conditions Drawings

F. Architectural Analysis

1. Exterior Assessment

2. Exterior Restoration Cost Opinion

3. Interior Assessment

G. Regulatory Analysis

1. Change of Occupancy

2. Rules And Regulations of the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board (MAAB)

3. Code Summary

Public Input

A. Public Workshop 1: Kick-off Workshop

B. Public Survey

C. Public Workshop 2: Summary Results Workshop

D. Public Input Conclusions

Alternative Analysis

A. First Floor Use Alternatives

1. Membership-Based Space

2. Event Rental-Based Space

3. Youth, Daycare, or Community Center Space

B. Second Floor Use Alternatives

1. Artist Studios

2. Private or Shared Office

Capital Improvement Recommendations

A. Proposed Interior Rehab Drawings

B. Interior Restoration Cost Opinion

1. Historically appropriate improvements to finishes and features

2. Building Code upgrades/compliance due to “Change of Use”

3. Accessibility Code upgrades/compliance for users of all abilities

4. Building System (heating, cooling, power) upgrades

Funding & Action Plan

A. Next Steps

1. Undertake Exterior Improvements as Soon as Possible

2. Seek Funding for Design and Construction of “White Box” Interior Improvements

3. Solicit a Grassroots or Established Nonprofit and/or a Property Management Company

B. Possible Funding Sources

1. Economic Development Oriented Sources

2. Preservation Oriented Sources

3. Cultural Enrichment Sources

C. Project-Specific Fundraising Plan by Deadline

Master Plan Goals and Actions

A. Goals

B. Actions

Public Outreach Results

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan Executive Summary, June 24, 2024 Page 1 of 4

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan

Executive Summary

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan Executive Summary, June 24, 2024 Page 2 of 4

A. Introduction

The Dunstable Union Building Rehabilitation Committee, acting through the Town Administrator, requested assistance from Northern Middlesex Council of Governments (NMCOG) to identify a viable re-use for the Union Building and potential funding sources for rehabilitation. The Town also released a

Request for Proposals (RFP) and chose Spencer Preservation Group for architectural and planning services to coordinate closely with NMCOG and complete an adaptive reuse feasibility study and restoration plan for the building.

This report details the results of that study. The overwhelming takeaway from community members, both at public workshops and through a survey with nearly 200 responses, is that the Union Building is a beloved structure that should be preserved. In addition, using the building for a mix of community-focused uses and private revenue-generating uses is ideal. This study notes several cases of other historical buildings in Massachusetts that were renovated and adaptively reused for this sort of mix and shares the lessons those cases impart. Finally, the team’s analysis concludes that the Union Building is still very structurally sound, but exterior improvements should be made as soon as possible to avoid cost escalation and further degradation to critical features.

B. About the Union Building

Located in Dunstable Town Center, the Union Building was built in 1895 and operated as a community school from 1896 through the early 1960s. Since then, the building served as an accessory building to the Swallow Union School, providing auxiliary classroom and childcare space, yet also sitting vacant periodically.

Now nearing 130 years old, the Union Building both significantly contributes to the historic nature of

Dunstable Town Center and shows its years due to deferred maintenance. The building is in need of critical preventive maintenance to preserve the exterior, upgrades to interior systems and materials to adapt it for productive reuse, and accessibility improvements to allow visitors of all ages and abilities to access the building.

Through a collaborative public process, the Union Building Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan evaluated the building’s ideal ownership structure (town- or privately-owned), viable and productive potential future uses of the building, associated costs for renovation, and possible funding and grant sources for renovation and maintenance of the building.

Key facts about the Union Building include:

• The building features two above-ground stories and a basement.

• Each of the four classrooms (two on each story) is 624 square feet.

• The basement is not considered usable for the purposes of this report.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan Executive Summary, June 24, 2024 Page 3 of 4

C. Key Findings

As part of this report, the project team developed a study of existing conditions, undertook two public workshops to gather input along with facilitating a survey with over 190 responses, developed case studies of key alternatives, and created programmatic capital cost estimates for interior and exterior renovations that would meet the needs of those alternatives. Key findings include:

• The building is structurally sound with evidence of prior successful stabilization work, namely by roof framing reinforcement in the attic.

• Accessibility could be created through a side entrance and Limited Use Limited Application

Elevator (LULA) in the vestibule, allowing access from grade to both main and upper levels.

• Participants in the public engagement process overwhelmingly preferred preservation of the

Union Building as a Town-owned property, however there was no preference as to whether the

Town or a private or non-profit organization managed the building.

• Participants also overwhelmingly preferred future use of the building as space for creative, cultural, non-profit, or community-serving uses.

• This report draws a distinction between uses participants wished to see in Town Center as whole compared to uses that could feasibly be hosted within the building after adaptation sensitive to the building’s historic architecture.

This report also includes detailed estimates of the cost of rehabilitating the exterior and interior. The interior rehabilitation would include repairs and alterations necessary for any use, broken into two phases: the first for general usability, accessibility, and regulatory compliance, and the second to upgrade heating, cooling, power, and lighting systems. All costs presented below are inflated to 2025.

Table 1: Summary of Capital Cost Estimates

Phase Elements Architecture &

Engineering Construction Contingency Total

Exterior

Repointing masonry; replace or repair trim, pediments, moldings, and selective siding; repair fascia and soffit; replace section of roofing; strip lead-containing paint and repaint; restore flagpole.

$128,344 $777,837 $77,784 $983,963

Interior

Phase 1

Accessible entry, LULA lift, kitchenette, trimwork, new interior doors, replaster and paint walls and ceilings, toilet rooms, fire sprinkler system, power/lighting. New fire sprinkler exterior water service line cost not included in estimate.

$104,415 $696,102 $69,610 $870,128

Interior

Phase 2

Additional suspended ceiling work, refinish hardwood floors, new heat pump system, additional power/lighting, renovation of lower level finishes.

$83,737 $558,246 $55,825 $697,807

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan Executive Summary, June 24, 2024 Page 4 of 4

D. Proposed Alternatives

Utilizing the key findings, the project team developed three feasible alternatives for the first floor and two feasible alternatives for the second floor. All first-floor alternatives are compatible with second-floor alternatives, and two first floor alternatives could be possible with one in each first-floor classroom. Although these alternatives are broadly feasible, a key factor in any alternative’s feasibility is interest generated by a grassroots committee or outside nonprofit, potentially responding to a Request for Proposals (RFP) for lease and management of the space. Such an RFP would be released by the Town in the future.

First floor alternatives include:

• Membership-Based Space (a shared maker space with tools such as a laser cutter, 3D printer, and sewing machines and textile technology)

• Event Rental-Based Space (an empty box space with tables, chairs, and AV equipment available for rental for small meetings or parties)

• Youth, Daycare, or Community Center Space (a space with regular educational programming for youth and/or adults or childcare rented by a nonprofit or business)

Second floor alternatives include:

• Private artist studios

• Private or shared office space

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 1 of 59

CHAPTER 1

Existing Conditions

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 2 of 59

A. What is the Union Building?

The Union School Building, more commonly known as the Union Building, is an

“extremely important” building in the historic character of Dunstable Town Center.1 More than that, it is a beloved symbol of the town, embodying the transformation of Dunstable from a settlement to a town, symbolizing

Dunstable’s commitment to education, and integrated into the federally recognized

Dunstable Center Historic District.

The future of the Union Building is at a crossroads, as the Town is acquiring the building and property after it was declared surplus by the Groton-Dunstable School

District due to the completion of the Florence Roche Elementary School. It is an incredible asset, but also has several challenges such as its proximity to the Swallow Union School, relatively small size, and limited parking availability during the school day. This report explores the feasibility of various new uses for the purposes of planning and fundraising.

The Union Building was designed by Warren L. Floyd in the Classical Revival style and constructed in

1895 behind the 1831 Evangelical Congregational Church. It represented a union of five separate school districts, hence its name. The school was built with two classrooms on each floor, situated symmetrically so they could be heated by a central source.

At first, several classes met simultaneously on each floor of the Union Building, and from 1896 to 1908, it housed the Dunstable Public Library on its first floor. When a 1910 fire destroyed Evangelical

Congregational Church, the church was rebuilt to the east to allow the Union

Building greater visibility. It was replaced by a village green in front of the school, which was eventually partially replaced by a parking lot.

By 1962, the Swallow Union Elementary

School was built to make room for

Dunstable’s growing population. The school district built a connection between the original Union Building and

1 National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, Dunstable Center Historic District, 2018

Undated Historic Photo, documenting the over-painted original colors.

Undated Historic Photo, documenting the original two-tone color scheme.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 3 of 59 the new Swallow Union School via a small structure with a staircase. Further additions were made to the

Swallow Union School in 1980 and 1995. However, because it is sited on a downhill slope, the Swallow

Union School and subsequent additions have minimal visibility from either Main or Pleasant streets.

Most recently, the Union Building housed Groton-Dunstable district school programs and other children’s activities.

In 2018, the Union Building was included as a contributing property to the new Dunstable Center

Historic District. In addition to the Union Building, the district has many significant buildings from the late 1700s and early 1800s styles such as Colonial, Federal, Greek Revival, Gothic Revival, Victorian, and

Colonial Revival.

B. What is the Union Building Rehabilitation Committee and the goals of this Report?

The Union Building Rehabilitation Committee was created in early 2023 by the Dunstable Select Board and tasked with making recommendations on the rehabilitation and restoration of the Union Building.

Key recommendations include establishing a long-term plan and strategic actions for the building’s restoration and rehabilitation, identifying desired future uses of the building to reactivate it as a central feature of Town Center, estimating costs of restoration and adaptation for those uses, and creating a plan to advance the rehabilitation and restoration of the building based on its future use and funding availability. The Committee is tasked with reviewing all existing studies and documents as well as identifying and determining funding availability.

The Committee has a total of seven members, including a member of the Select Board, one representative from the GDRSD, one person with experience in either residential or commercial development, one member with a background in finance, and three community members.

Shortly after its formation, the Committee, through the Office of the Town Administrator, requested assistance from Northern Middlesex Council of Governments (NMCOG) to:

• Review all existing studies and documents developed in association with the building and its condition,

• Recommend a rehabilitation approach (phased or one project),

• Identify a viable re-use(s) for the building, and

• Identify funding sources for the project.

The Town also released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for architectural or planning services to coordinate closely with NMCOG and assist with this planning, including an adaptive reuse feasibility study and restoration plan for the building. Spencer Preservation Group was chosen for this role.

C. Union Building and the Master Plan

The 2018 Dunstable Master Plan mentions the Union Building by name only in its listing of historic buildings in Dunstable, list of completed CPA projects, and the history of Dunstable. However, several

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 4 of 59 goals of the Master Plan should guide the re-use of the Union Building. In addition to broad goals, the

Master Plan lists many specific actions. These goals and actions are listed in Appendix 1.

In summary, a common theme throughout the Master Plan is the preservation of historic buildings, increasing pride in historic buildings and cultural resources, and utilizing historic buildings and other resources to make Dunstable a historic and agricultural destination.

The Master Plan suggests several community uses and economic development goals that the Union

Building could possibly advance:

• Housing for elderly, young families and low- and moderate-income households;

• A Senior Center or community room space;

• A museum space for both exhibits and historic records;

• A space nurturing small arts and crafts businesses;

• A space for local food businesses; and/or

• A way to attract cafes, farm-to-table restaurants, country stores, antique shops, and artist lofts to Town Center.

As noted in this report, not all of these uses are feasible for this location, but all were considered and evaluated by the Union Building Rehabilitation Committee, NMCOG, and Spencer Preservation Group.

Potentially feasible uses that are supported by the Master Plan were included in the Public Survey (See

Chapter 2).

D. Character-Defining Features

Every old building has a distinctive identity and character. Character-defining features are the significant observable and experiential aspects of a building that define its architectural power and personality.

These are the features that should be retained in any restoration or rehabilitation scheme in order to protect the building’s historic integrity and to maintain eligibility for preservation grant funding, rehabilitation tax credits, and protections afforded to historic properties.

Character-defining elements include the overall shape of the building and its materials, craftsmanship, decorative details and interior spaces and features, as well as the various aspects of its site and environment. They are critically important considerations whenever building work is contemplated.

Inappropriate changes to historic features can undermine the historical and architectural significance of the building, sometimes irreparably.

This survey of the Union Building in Dunstable identifies the features that contribute to the unique character of the building and its site. The bulleted items listed in this section should be considered defining historic elements of the building and changes to them should be made only after careful consideration. They are consistent with the character defining features described in the September 20, 2018, National Register Nomination Form for the Dunstable Center Historic District, with the Union

Building as a Contributing Building.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 5 of 59

1. Exterior Features

Setting: The topography, population density and other influences that are noteworthy to the property.

• Located on a deeply set-back parcel from Main Street, abutting the Congregation Church property (another Contributing Building).

• Sited on the east side of the parcel, with open landscape to the west, creating an intentional viewshed from Main Street.

Shape: The form of the building. The massing that gives the initial visual impression of the structure.

• Church massing creates a strong Classical-revival picturesque silhouette.

• 2 ½-story square plan with hipped roof and deep pedimented front pavilion.

• Wide, central chimney, flanked by (non-original) ventilation hoods.

Roof and Roof Features: Typically, the most dominant element of a building. Often the element that most informs the shape of the building.

• Square hipped roof.

• Wide rectangular chimney, flanked by (non-original) copper ventilation hoods.

• Deep gable roof at unbroken pedimented front pavilion.

• Closed (mitered) slate hips and open slate valleys.

• Simple clean eaves absent of gutters.

o Note: half-round gutter hangers and corrugated round downspout hangers are present but are likely not original based on historic photos.

• Narrow gable roof at entrance pediment.

Openings: Windows and doors. These often reflect the hallmark features of specific architectural styles.

• Generally symmetrical window and door placement.

• Generous height double-hung windows at upper level, narrower at front pavilion.

• Modest height double-hung windows at main level, narrower at front pavilion.

• “Palladian-esque” double-hung windows centered in the front pavilion pediment.

• Basement windows set within foundation, tight to sill plate.

• Double stile-and-rail doors with lite set within the entrance pavilion.

• Entry door sidelights and transomlite.

• Rear access doors, not aligned to the window grid.

Trim and Secondary Features: Casings at windows and doors, moldings, cornices, watertables and other additive features.

• Classical motifs expressed through trimwork: pilastered cornerboards supporting faux-architrave and frieze at eaves; rakes at the unbroken pediment of the front pavilion;

denticulated, unbroken entry pediment with pilastered entablature.

• Paneled arch entry portal to beadboard-lined portico.

• Clapboard siding, absent of watertable trim at foundation sill plate.

• Deep window sills with brackets below aligned with mullions.

• Pedimented head casings at main level windows.

• Arched head casing trim at “Palladian-esque” windows.

• Circular, architectural flagpole support within main pediment.

• Lightbox(?) within entrance pediment, likely not original.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 6 of 59

Materials: The visible kit of parts that comprise the exterior envelope of the building.

• Copper valleys and ridge caps.

• Brick chimney.

• Copper ventilation hoods.

• Slate shingle roofs.

• Wood trim.

• Wood clapboard siding.

• Wood sash (originally). Presently aluminum.

• Granite stone foundation.

• Wood doors.

• Wood beadboard portico walls/ceiling.

2. Interior Features

Individual Spaces: Individual spaces that are character-defining.

• Entrance Vestibule within the Pavilion, open to primary staircase in the main body.

• 1:2 Ratio “classrooms” flanking the stair on each level.

• Generous storage rooms within the Pavilion serving each classroom.

Features and Details: Notable characteristics of the interior spaces

• Plaster wall and ceiling finishes.

• Wooden door casing millwork, profiled and with plinth/corner blocks.

• Wooden window casing millwork similar to doors.

• Wooden decorative staircase newels.

• Closed stringer staircase (unconfirmed if original).

• Hardwood floors throughout.

• Double-hung wood sash windows.

• High ceilings, approx. 10-ft (presently lowered by hung panels).

• Open, unpartitioned classrooms.

E. Existing Conditions Drawings

The following pages comprise existing conditions drawings (floor plans, roof plan, and exterior elevations) of the Union Building, derived from hand-measurements and photographs. They were used as the basis for this team’s conditions assessment of the exterior and interior, and in the preparation of proposed building-use schemes.

MATERIALPRODUCTTRADENAMEMODELNUMBER

MODELNUMBERTRADENAMEPRODUCTMATERIAL

UP

UP

DN UP

UP

PLATFORM

CHIMNEY

SHAFT

EX- 101

EXISTING CONDITIONS

BASEMENT PLAN

1 EXISTING BASEMENT PLAN

1/8" = 1'-0"

GIRL'S

RESTROOM

BOILER

ROOM

CONNECTOR

TITLE:

SHEET:

PROJECT:

PREPARED FOR:

STATUS:

OUTPUT: LINEWEIGHT

CHECK

TRANSPARENC<

CHECK

SHEET

CHECK

COLOR

CHECK

FULL SIZE SETPRINT SIZE

CHECK MEASURES 1"

UNION SCHOOL

BUILDING

522 MAIN STREET

DUNSTABLE, MA 01827

#2109

N

EW

O

LDAPR 10, 202401

PL

O

T

SI

ZE

AN

SI

A (8

.5 x

.0

In ch es

PL

O T

ST

YL

E:

P

LO

T D

A

TE

: 4 /1

9/

:2

PM

P

LO

TT

ER

: N on e

SEAL:

41 Valley Road | Suite 211 Nahant, MA 01908

(617) 227-2675 www.SpencerPreservationGroup.com

© 2021 Spencer Preservation Group, Inc.

N

W E

S

UP

11R

UP 6R

FCU

FCU

FCU

DN

8R

UP

10R

FC

U

FC

U

1 EXISTING FIRST FLOOR PLAN

1/8" = 1'-0"

TITLE:

SHEET:

PROJECT:

PREPARED FOR:

STATUS:

OUTPUT: LINEWEIGHT

CHECK

TRANSPARENC<

CHECK

SHEET

CHECK

COLOR

CHECK

FULL SIZE SETPRINT SIZE

CHECK MEASURES 1"

UNION SCHOOL

BUILDING

522 MAIN STREET

DUNSTABLE, MA 01827

#2109

N

EW

O

LDAPR 10, 202401

PL

O

T

SI

ZE

AN

SI

A (8

.5 x

.0

In ch es

PL

O T

ST

YL

E:

P

LO

T D

A

TE

: 4 /1

9/

:2

PM

P

LO

TT

ER

: N on e

SEAL:

41 Valley Road | Suite 211 Nahant, MA 01908

(617) 227-2675 www.SpencerPreservationGroup.com

© 2021 Spencer Preservation Group, Inc.

EX- 102

EXISTING CONDITIONS

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

T.

N

W

DN

9R

FCU

FCUFC

U

FC

U

FCU

1 EXISTING SECOND FLOOR PLAN

1/8" = 1'-0"

TITLE:

SHEET:

PROJECT:

PREPARED FOR:

STATUS:

OUTPUT: LINEWEIGHT

CHECK

TRANSPARENC<

CHECK

SHEET

CHECK

COLOR

CHECK

FULL SIZE SETPRINT SIZE

CHECK MEASURES 1"

UNION SCHOOL

BUILDING

522 MAIN STREET

DUNSTABLE, MA 01827

#2109

N

EW

O

LDAPR 10, 202401

PL

O

T

SI

ZE

AN

SI

A (8

.5 x

.0

In ch es

PL

O T

ST

YL

E:

P

LO

T D

A

TE

: 4 /1

9/

:2

PM

P

LO

TT

ER

: N on e

SEAL:

41 Valley Road | Suite 211 Nahant, MA 01908

(617) 227-2675 www.SpencerPreservationGroup.com

© 2021 Spencer Preservation Group, Inc.

EX-103

EXISTING CONDITIONS

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

N

W

+9

+9+9

+9

+9 +9

EX-104

EXISTING CONDITIONS

ROOF PLAN

1 EXISTING ROOF PLAN

1/8" = 1'-0" TITLE:

SHEET:

PROJECT:

PREPARED FOR:

STATUS:

OUTPUT: LINEWEIGHT

CHECK

TRANSPARENC<

CHECK

SHEET

CHECK

COLOR

CHECK

FULL SIZE SETPRINT SIZE

CHECK MEASURES 1"

UNION SCHOOL

BUILDING

522 MAIN STREET

DUNSTABLE, MA 01827

#2109

N

EW

O

LDAPR 10, 202401

PL

O

T

SI

ZE

AN

SI

A (8

.5 x

.0

In ch es

PL

O T

ST

YL

E:

P

LO

T D

A

TE

: 4 /1

9/

:2

PM

P

LO

TT

ER

: N on e

SEAL:

41 Valley Road | Suite 211 Nahant, MA 01908

(617) 227-2675 www.SpencerPreservationGroup.com

© 2021 Spencer Preservation Group, Inc.

UNION SCHOOL

EX- 201

EXISTING CONDITIONS

NORTH ELEVATION

1 EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION

1/8" = 1'-0"

TITLE:

SHEET:

PROJECT:

PREPARED FOR:

STATUS:

OUTPUT: LINEWEIGHT

CHECK

TRANSPARENC<

CHECK

SHEET

CHECK

COLOR

CHECK

FULL SIZE SETPRINT SIZE

CHECK MEASURES 1"

UNION SCHOOL

BUILDING

522 MAIN STREET

DUNSTABLE, MA 01827

#2109

N

EW

O

LDAPR 10, 202401

PL

O

T

SI

ZE

AN

SI

A (8

.5 x

.0

In ch es

PL

O T

ST

YL

E:

P

LO

T D

A

TE

: 4 /1

9/

:2

PM

P

LO

TT

ER

: N on e

SEAL:

41 Valley Road | Suite 211 Nahant, MA 01908

(617) 227-2675

EAST

EX-202

EXISTING CONDITIONS

EAST ELEVATION

1 EXISTING EAST ELEVATION

1/8" = 1'-0"

TITLE:

SHEET:

PROJECT:

PREPARED FOR:

STATUS:

OUTPUT: LINEWEIGHT

CHECK

TRANSPARENC<

CHECK

SHEET

CHECK

COLOR

CHECK

FULL SIZE SETPRINT SIZE

CHECK MEASURES 1"

UNION SCHOOL

BUILDING

522 MAIN STREET

DUNSTABLE, MA 01827

#2109

N

EW

O

LDAPR 10, 202401

PL

O

T

SI

ZE

AN

SI

A (8

.5 x

.0

In ch es

PL

O T

ST

YL

E:

P

LO

T D

A

TE

: 4 /1

9/

:2

PM

P

LO

TT

ER

: N on e

SEAL:

41 Valley Road | Suite 211 Nahant, MA 01908

(617) 227-2675

EX-203

EXISTING CONDITIONS

SOUTH ELEVATION

1 EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION

1/8" = 1'-0"

TITLE:

SHEET:

PROJECT:

PREPARED FOR:

STATUS:

OUTPUT: LINEWEIGHT

CHECK

TRANSPARENC<

CHECK

SHEET

CHECK

COLOR

CHECK

FULL SIZE SETPRINT SIZE

CHECK MEASURES 1"

UNION SCHOOL

BUILDING

522 MAIN STREET

DUNSTABLE, MA 01827

#2109

N

EW

O

LDAPR 10, 202401

PL

O

T

SI

ZE

AN

SI

A (8

.5 x

.0

In ch es

PL

O T

ST

YL

E:

P

LO

T D

A

TE

: 4 /1

9/

:2

PM

P

LO

TT

ER

: N on e

SEAL:

41 Valley Road | Suite 211 Nahant, MA 01908

(617) 227-2675

EX-204

EXISTING CONDITIONS

WEST ELEVATION

1 EXISTING WEST ELEVATION

1/8" = 1'-0"

TITLE:

SHEET:

PROJECT:

PREPARED FOR:

STATUS:

OUTPUT: LINEWEIGHT

CHECK

TRANSPARENC<

CHECK

SHEET

CHECK

COLOR

CHECK

FULL SIZE SETPRINT SIZE

CHECK MEASURES 1"

UNION SCHOOL

BUILDING

522 MAIN STREET

DUNSTABLE, MA 01827

#2109

N

EW

O

LDAPR 10, 202401

PL

O

T

SI

ZE

AN

SI

A (8

.5 x

.0

In ch es

PL

O T

ST

YL

E:

P

LO

T D

A

TE

: 4 /1

9/

:2

PM

P

LO

TT

ER

: N on e

SEAL:

41 Valley Road | Suite 211 Nahant, MA 01908

(617) 227-2675

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 15 of 59

F. Architectural Analysis

1. Exterior Assessment

In 2021, Spencer Preservation Group was engaged by the Town of Dunstable to prepare a conditions assessment of the building envelope, including prioritized treatment recommendations for its restoration. While the report is a detailed standalone document, a summary is provided here to address both exterior envelope work and related accessibility improvements.

1.1. Roofing and Rainwater Control

Slate shingles appear in good condition and require selective replacement where cracked or missing.

The brick chimney mortar is deteriorated and should be repointed, while inspecting the copper ventilators flanking each side for damage. The cornice along the unbroken pediment in the pavilion is covered with aged asphalt shingles and should be replaced with copper. Extant gutter brackets and downspout straps should be removed, as the generous eaves appear to adequately shed water.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 16 of 59

1.2. Walls, Siding, and Trim

Before paint is removed, a historic paint analysis should be conducted to determine any original paint colors at multiple sites (siding vs trim). Using safe lead-management practices, completely strip, contain, and dispose of paint throughout the building. All woodwork should be repainted using approved historic colors and a high quality, oil-based alkyd primer with water-based latex topcoats. Damaged and missing woodwork elements (cornerboards, rakes, etc.) should be selectively replaced or repaired, and loose wood moldings should be refastened. Stair handrails should be re-coated/painted. Consider re-introducing the missing historic flagpole in the pediment.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 17 of 59

1.3. Openings, Windows, and Doors

The deteriorated Palladian window in the pediment, including trim, sash, glazing, and hardware should be restored. Metal and missing boiler room doors should be replaced at the rear elevation.

Inappropriately colored doors should be repainted and damaged window-related trim should be selectively replaced. To allow access for a Limited-Use/Limited-Application (LULA) elevator in the main lobby, a new opening in the east elevation of the front pavilion should be created by eliminating the basement window and cutting a new opening in the monolithic foundation for at-grade entry. The sill plate, wall, and floor structure should be re-framed to allow half-level entry at grade.

1.4. Foundation and Grade:

The monolithic granite foundation and coarse stone retaining wall should be repointed at the west elevation. The basement window should be infilled at the east elevation of the pavilion and a new doorway should be cut into granite for LULA entrance. A new accessible entry approach should be re-graded/re-landscaped as required.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 18 of 59

2. Exterior Restoration Cost Opinion

The 2021 exterior assessment report evaluated the condition of the building envelope and used construction data on similar firm projects to develop a prioritized cost opinion for treatments in restoration and grant-planning. Spencer Preservation Group has refined the cost opinion to account for inflation/escalation from 2021, projected to 2025, for a combined envelope restoration total of

$983,963, much of which considers the safe management/abatement of lead paint. Accessibility improvements, which are largely interior-focused, are evaluated in a subsequent section.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 19 of 59

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 20 of 59

3. Interior Assessment

3.1. Floors, Stairs, and Transitions

There are hardwood floors on the main and upper levels, the latter in slightly better condition. The wood appears to be intact and able to be refinished. Wood thresholds at doorways appear acccessiblity-compliant and intact – any thresholds that are too tall, or without an appropriate beveled-edge should be modified or replaced.

The entry vestibule appears to be covered in vinyl-composition tile (VCT), presumably over the same hardwood flooring. The VCT should be removed and the underlying wood floor refinished (if possible) or replaced if marred by the tile. Artificial (non-wood) baseboard mouldings line each hardwood floor at the wall (VCT or rubber, likely the former) and would do well to be replaced with an appropriate wood base.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 21 of 59

The main stair in the entry vestibule has undergone changes, one being the elimination of balusters

(presumed) and change from an “open” stringer to “closed” by panelizing the handrails; the other being metal and vinyl covers on the stair treads themselves, presumably to stave off replacement of deteiorated or cracked treads and nosings. At a minimum, the tread covers would do well to be removed and the woodwork restored. At most, the panelized handrails could be brought back to their original state of balusters if exploratory investigation suggests there were any.

3.2. Walls, Windows, and Doors

Walls throughout are finished with plaster, and in fair or good condition with minimal buldging, cracking, or damage. The plaster may not be original, as the wall plane is further out than expected when seen next to door casings (the surfaces are nearly flush). This may be due to a layer of wallboard with veneer plaster attached to the original lathe-and-plaster walls. The most historically-faithful pursuit would be to remove the wallboard and veneer plaster and repair or replace the underlying lathe-and-plaster system with new wallboard and veneer plaster to bring the wall back to its original plane. However, the good condition of the veneer plaster makes this difficult to justify. Where wall-mounted switches and fixtures are removed, the plaster should be patched and painted as part of an overall repainting campaign throughout the interior.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 22 of 59

Windows are largely aluminum replacements with simulated divided lites and in working order. Although replacement windows are seldom preferred over original wood sash, these aluminum replacements appear well-proportioned and sympathetic to what would be the original configuration. Interior window casings are intact with no obvious sign of damage. Missing wood aprons below the interior stool (sill) are obvious and leave the windows feeling a bit unbalanced – new ones should be installed to correct the imblance. The obscured top-portion of windows are addressed in a subsequent section.

Original doors are long-gone, instead replaced with veneered “classroom” style doors with kickplate and vision lites. While functional, the doors and hardware are out of character for the building’s typology and should preferably be replaced with more traditional stile-and-rail wood doors, with centered lites if

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 23 of 59 warranted and appropriate. Door casings are in similar condition to windows, with corner- and plinth-blocks in good condition.

3.3. Ceilings and Lighting

Plaster ceilings at roughy original height remain in the entry vesitbule, upper level hall, and classroom storage rooms. The ceiling plane is presumably furred-out similar to the walls as a means to avoid removing lathe-and-plaster, instead adhered wallboard and veneer plaster directly to the original wall finish. That said, the ceilings exhibit more deflection and cracking than the walls, especially in the entry vestibule and storage rooms, where wallboard joints appear cracked. The attachment of wallboard should be evaluated during repairs and if firmly attached, the cracked joints retaped/plastered and feathered. If not secure, the ceiling should be re-plastered with new board substrate. Whereever else plaster is damaged, it should be selectively patched before finishes are repainted.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 24 of 59

In all main and upper level classroom spaces, the ceiling has been dropped with hung 2×4 tile. The tile is in good condition, though not particularly aesthetic, with no sign of discoloration, staining, leaking, or other damage. There are no conceled ducts or other systems between the hung tile and the plaster ceiling above, suggesting that the tile was hung to accommodate standard 2×4 light fixtures. The dropped ceiling otherwise reduces natural daylight from the windows by interuppting the upper sash at its mid-point.

Beyond this reduction in daylight, the hung tile negatively impacts the historic character of the classroom spaces, and would do well to be removed, with the ceiling finish treated appropriate and new period-appropriate light fixtures installed. Elsewhere in the building, surface-mounted 2×4 fluorescent light fixtures should be similarly replaced with period-appropriate fixtures.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 25 of 59

3.4. Systems and Equipment

The building neither equipped with a fire monitoring system (fire alarm) or fire suppression system

(sprinklers). By changing the building occupancy classification (use) to “A” Assembly, both will be required to conform to building codes for new construction. This would require running new supply lines underground on the site, perhaps from the existing adjacent school, and installing feeds throughout the interior spaces.

The electrical service appears to be 200A on the main panel, which feeds a second, nearby sub-panel.

For light to moderate building use, this appears to be adequate, and may be so for future program as part of the long-term rehabilitation.

The building is heated with a commercial gas-fired boiler in the basement, supplying forced hot water to standing radiators throughout each level. The boiler appears to have had regular inspections in years past, and be in fair condition, along with the radiators and supply/return lines. However replacement may be warranted as part of a comprehensive building rehabilitation project.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 26 of 59

A force-air ventilation system runs through the continuous, central chimney space to supply and return air corresponding to each rooftop ventilator flanking the chimney. It doesn’t appear as though cooling is provided as part of the ventilation system. A comprehensive rehabilitation project should consider utilizing the chase for new ductwork to carry cooled and heated air into each space, supplied by a heat-pump in lieu of basement boiler. The rooftop ventilators could be re-used, along with the genrous attic space. At-grade heatpumps could be located in a descrete location at the rear of the building.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 27 of 59

3.5. Lower Level

The lower level/basement has long been used as a storage/mechanical space, and it is understood to likely continue as such (and not for public access). Ceilings are aged and deteriorated hung tile, in need of full replacement or removal. Walls are a combination of finished gypsum wallboard and unfinished metal studs; the former which could be patched and painted, the latter of which could be finished or removed/reconfigured entirely. Floors are similar VCT to the main level and in poor condition, requiring total replacement. Two abandoned school bathrooms for girls and boys are unsalvageable and site atop a 6-in raised floor (above the rest of the lower floor level). Beyond a full renovation to these spaces, the floors would need to be demolished and lowered to allow access – which could be a considerable and unwieldly cost depending on their construction. Limited “refreshing” of the interior finishes for continued storage use have been considered in the phase 2 interior work.

3.6. Connector Addition

When the Swallow Elementary School was constructed behind and adjacent to the Union Building, a narrow, multi-story fire-rated connector was built to provide a second means of egress for the historic structure. The connector was built with concrete block walls and metal stairs, with structure and finishes all in good condition. The connector continues to provide a safe means of egress for all levels of the building and should remain in its current state.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 28 of 59

With the advent of the Union Building changing use from a controlled access, ancillary space for the elementary school to a new private- or community-function, the need for student safety is critical, as the connector bridges both buildings and serves as an additional means of egress for at least the school library. The doors to the school in the connector appear to be solid-core doors with vision panel and safety-glass sidelight. To preserve one-way access out from the school-controlled spaces, door hardware or locksets should be replaced accordingly. Based on the ultimate use of the Union Building and the determination of the Swallow Elementary School, the sidelights could also be removed and blocked-on, or additionally the solid wood doors be replaced with steel, including, or excluding vision light.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 29 of 59

G. Regulatory Analysis

This section of the report briefly describes the applicability of the 9th edition of the Massachusetts State

Building Code (2015 International Existing Building Code – with Massachusetts Amendments) and architectural access regulations (521 CMR Regulations of the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board, or MAAB).

The Commonwealth adopted the 9th Edition of the Massachusetts State Building Code (2015

International Existing Building Code – with Massachusetts Amendments in this case for an existing building), on October 20, 2017. The code went into effect, as of January 1, 2018.

The purpose of the building code is to:

• establish minimum requirements to safeguard public health, safety and welfare;

• provide life safety from fire and other hazards to building occupants;

• protect the building from loss or damage due to fire or other environmental events; and

• provide safety to fire fighters and emergency responders during emergency operations.

In general, existing buildings are not required to retroactively conform to the current building code, except where existing health and safety conditions are considered hazardous by the local building official.

The International Building Code for new construction (IBC) would be referenced for any substantial renovation of the existing building, or if a new addition was contemplated. In the case of the Dunstable

Union Building, the proposed Change of Occupancy Classification will require that much of the new work will reference the IBC. Existing buildings are governed by the International Building Code for Existing

Construction (IBCEC).

1. Change of Occupancy

The present Use and Occupancy Classification is E, Educational. A proposed change of use to allow public assembly would change the Classification to A-3 Assembly, or possibly to B, Business.

All work and building systems (electrical, plumbing, fire alarm, etc.) within the area of Alterations will need to conform to the building code for new construction (IBC). The change of occupancy to Assembly

Use will also require that the building be equipped with an automatic sprinkler system. It should be noted that the gross square footage of the building exceeds 7,500 square feet and therefore alterations might also trigger the requirement for sprinkler under M.G.L. c148 s26G, depending on the Fire

Department’s judgement on water availability.

The IBCEC divides work on existing buildings into “Repairs” and “Alterations.” “Repairs” are considered in-kind replacements of existing materials and systems and would be considered as guidelines for building maintenance. “Alterations” are categorized into three (3) levels depending upon the amount and scale of work involved.

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 30 of 59

Most recommendations for work to be undertaken at the Union Building would be considered a blend of

Repairs and Alterations. Generally speaking, the Code requires any Repair or Alteration work to maintain or improve the life safety of the building. Basically, no condition should be made less code compliant than before work started. An example of a Repair item would be the patching or partial replacement of a damaged wood cornice and gutter assembly.

The proposed interior work scope would largely fall under the category Level 3 Alteration. Level 3

Alterations are those where the work area exceeds 50 percent of the building area. Within the work area, there are a number of requirements that will need to be addressed, such as:

• Fire alarm system is required.

• Sprinkler system is required.

• Existing electrical wiring must be upgraded if it does not comply with NFPA 70.

• Natural or mechanical ventilation must be provided in accordance with the International

Mechanical Code.

• Means of Egress and Accessibility elements must be provided within the work area.

• Adding seismic force resisting elements.

Level 3 Alterations are permitted without requiring the entire building to comply with energy requirements of the International Energy Conservation Code.

APPLICABLE CODES & STANDARDS (MODEL CODE BASIS)

International Existing Building Code (IEBC)

Base Volume (2015 International Building Code with Massachusetts Amendments)

Massachusetts State Building code (780 CMR), Ninth Edition, Base Volume (2015 International Building

Code with Massachusetts Amendments)

Energy Conservation (780 CMR 13.00)

Massachusetts Board of State Examiners of Plumbers and Gas Fitters Regulations (248 CMR)

Massachusetts Comprehensive Fire Safety Code (527 CMR 1.00 – 2012 NFPA 1: Fire Code with amendments)

Massachusetts Electrical Code (527 CMR 12.00 – 2014 NFPA 70: National Electrical Code with amendments)

Massachusetts Architectural Access Board Regulations – MAAB - (521 CMR)

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

Massachusetts Plumbing Code (248 CMR – 2014)

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 31 of 59

2. Rules And Regulations of the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board (MAAB)

Architectural access regulations in Massachusetts (521 CMR) are written to encourage making buildings and spaces barrier free to persons with physical or mental disabilities.

Note that the Union Building is not required to retroactively outfit its facility for Universal Access.

However, there are several “triggers” where work done will need to in-corporate accessibility. Note that the guidelines below describe a minimum standard. Exceeding these requirements is at the discretion of the owner.

Generally speaking, all new work including construction, reconstruction, alterations, re-modeling, additions, and changes in use should conform to the access regulations. This means all additions, reconstruction, remodeling, and alterations or repairs to existing public buildings or facilities which require a building permit.

If the building permit value of the work being performed amounts to less than 30% of the assessed building value and less than $100,000, only new work or renovated spaces would be required to comply.

The Town of Dunstable tax assessment is $2,987,500 so the 30% threshold would be $896,250.

If the work value is under 30% of the assessed building value, but over $100,000, the work must be made accessible and both an accessible entrance and rest room are required.

If the value of the work to be done is determined to be greater than 30% of the “full and fair cash value” of the building, which is $896,250, then the entire facility would have to be made fully accessible. If spaces cannot be made accessible, a variance may be sought to allow their continued use by the public, or for exemption for certain uses.

Whether performed alone or in combination with each other, the following types of alterations are not subject to 521 CMR 3.3.1 and do not count towards the 30% trigger. When performing exempted work, a memo stating the exempted work and its costs must be filed with the permit application or a separate building permit must be obtained. Exceptions not counting towards the 30% trigger are:

• Alteration work which is limited solely to electrical, mechanical, or plumbing systems, to abatement of hazardous materials, or to retrofit of automatic sprinklers, and does not involve the alteration of any elements or spaces required to be accessible under 521 CMR.

• Roof replacement or repair, window repair or replacement, repointing and masonry repair work.

• Work relating to septic system repairs, site utilities and landscaping.

However, if the above work alone or in concert with additional work exceeds the 30% trigger, then it is as if the work is not exempted. Note that the cost of work is tracked over a three-year span, so phased projects may be cumulative.

The scope of the proposed work would trigger full compliance with the applicable MAAB regulations. In a use of the building wherein public use is proposed for the second floor, an elevator would be required.

Should public use of the second floor be desired, elevator access would be required but that service

Union Building School Rehabilitation and Reuse Plan, June 24, 2024 Page 32 of 59 could be provided via a platform lift device or a Limited Use/Limited Access (LULA). This would be permitted as the Union Building is an existing building of 2 stories with less than 3000 square feet per floor.

The summary below identifies some basic information about the Union Building and how it relates to current building code requirements. The review should be used as a guide when contemplating building renovations.

3. Code Summary

3.1. Work Area and Classification of Work

1. Existing building to be repaired or altered: 2 stories plus basement

a. 1st Floor = 1979 NSF +/- (Proposed work area = 1979 NSF)

b. 2nd Floor = 1543 NSF +/- (Proposed work area = 2031 NSF)

c. Basement = 1952 NSF +/- (Proposed work area = 1952 NSF)

c. TOTAL SF = 5,962 NSF +/-

2. It is important to note that the Union Building is a contributing structure to a National Register

District, which qualifies it under the definition of “historic building” under the IEBC. As such, there are exceptions to the building code, described in IEBC, 2015 Edition, Chapter 12, “Historic Buildings,” that apply to the present uses and characteristics of the building.

For…