Northborough forum hears preferred "B‑series" plan for Peasley Elementary, preliminary $75–90M cost range and MSBA reimbursement guidance

At a May 27 community forum in Northborough, the Peasley school building committee presented preferred schematic options for a rebuilt Margaret E. Peasley Elementary School and answered community questions about cost, funding and schedule.

Erica Hall, chair of the Peasley building committee, opened the meeting and said the forum’s purpose was "to give you an update on this building project and also collect feedback and questions" as the committee prepares a preferred schematic report for the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA).

The district’s analysis, presented by Superintendent Greg Martin, narrowed nine design scenarios down to a neighborhood preK–5 model known in the materials as the "B series." Martin said the district evaluated options across four categories (student learning and programming; student supports; school community and student experience; and operations/transportation) and concluded that consolidation scenarios would not meet the district’s space and program needs.

Architects and the owner's project manager described four variants within the B series. Option B1 is new construction behind the existing building and would allow students to stay in the existing school during roughly 24 months of construction. Options B2 and B3 are additions that would require temporary modular classrooms for swing space (presenters estimated modular units at about $3.5–$4 million and noted those modular costs are not reimbursed by MSBA). A larger‑addition variant (presenters labeled it B4) would add more square footage, avoid modular swing space and place the new cafeteria and gym in the addition while retaining part of the existing structure.

On cost, presenters emphasized that numbers are preliminary and under active refinement by two independent estimators, but gave ranges multiple ways in the presentation. One presenter cited a baseline construction figure "around $75 million" while also saying an overall figure "in the kind of $90 million range" when discussing B‑series options; presenters stressed that those figures are preliminary and that final project and town shares depend on the MSBA’s determination of eligible costs. The team said the MSBA baseline reimbursement for eligible costs was being described in the meeting as roughly 48%, with sustainability incentives (for example, all‑electric provisions) potentially adding a few percentage points of additional reimbursement.

Multiple attendees asked about the tradeoffs among options. Linda Brankle asked for comparative costs; the team replied that refined cost estimates would be available in June. Leslie Rutan asked whether the larger‑addition option would unduly reduce play and field space; the architect replied the site has flexibility and that play areas and buffering from Maple Street can be adjusted in schematic design.

On enrollment, the team said it used a demographer’s projections covering 2026–2036 and reported that MSBA’s demographer and district work pointed to a planning enrollment around 310 students with roughly 25 students of built‑in flexibility. Presenters said the B‑series was chosen to meet those projected ceilings.

Next steps: presenters urged public attendance at the June 2 school building committee meeting, where the building committee intends to confirm a single preferred schematic option so the project team can complete paperwork for MSBA submission later in the month. Presenters reiterated the remaining schedule milestones discussed at the forum: MSBA review of schematic materials, local funding approval at Town meeting in April 2027 and a projected construction start in 2029.

The forum included a reminder that a public survey (open through June 1) had received over 500 responses and will inform schematic‑design refinements.

What remains unresolved or preliminary is the final cost and exact MSBA reimbursement percentage; meeting presenters repeatedly characterized dollar figures and dates as draft estimates that will be refined in schematic design and after MSBA review.