Center School Building Site Assessment & Economic Development Planning Project

Transcription

1 Center School Building Site Assessment & Economic Development Planning Project Prepared for: Town of Hatfield, MA Prepared by: HAI Architecture, Inc. Bartram & Cochran Lindgren & Sharples Barry Engineers & Constructors Final Report - June 25, 2014

2 T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S A. Study Overview & Planning Process 4 B. Building & Infrastructure Assessment Guidelines for Physical Improvements a. Physical condition of the building & recommendations i. Building Envelope ii. Interior iii. Structure iv. Mechanical/HVAC, Plumbing, Fire Protection, Electrical b. Presence of Health & Safety Hazards i. Building Code Analysis ii. Hazardous Materials c. Undeveloped Land - Analysis of the Surrounding Property d. Potential for New Construction and Site Improvements e. Preliminary Evaluation Relative to Best Use 2. Recommendations & Cost Analysis for Infrastructure & Utility Improvements a. Necessary Improvements to Site Infrastructure b. Necessary Improvements to Utilities c. Required Accessibility Modifications 3. Recommendations & Cost Analysis for Physical Improvements to the Building a. Necessary Building and Site Improvements i. Summary of preliminary cost estimates for B.1a - B.2c

3 C. Marketing Assessment Context, Marketing Strategy & Action Plan a. Executive Summary b. The Report i. Demographics ii. Information Interviews iii. Parking iv. Control c. Alternatives d. Action Plan e. Sources & Interviews D. Development Recommendation Scenarios for potential development & new construction a. Overview, Goals & Parameters b. Proposed Site Development c. Center School Unit Layout Options d. New Construction Unit Layout e. Preliminary Cost Estimate E. Appendix Exhibit A: 58 Main ST, Hatfield, MA Summary of Demographics 2. Exhibit B: Case Studies 3. Exhibit C: Economic Multipliers 4. Exhibit D: RIMS Easthampton Summary Table 5. Exhibit E: Soil Boring Test Results

4 A. Study Overview & Planning Process 4

5 A. Study Overview & Planning Process A. Study Overview & Planning Process Introduction The Center School Site Assessment and Economic Development Planning Project is a comprehensive analysis and re-use study. It will develop a marketing strategy, identify and prioritize economic development and use options for the building, and provide an analysis of the building to determine what improvements are needed for the types of uses identified. 5

6 A. Study Overview & Planning Process As stated in the original project RFQ, the immediate objectives of the project are to: Assess infrastructure and utility needs and identify necessary site improvements. Identify the major physical needs and limitations of the site and building including accessibility and areas to be rehabilitated. Identify and prioritize economic development including housing and mixed use alternatives through a market analysis of the town and sub-region. Assess and identify spatial requirements of each alternative. Identify zoning constraints for alternatives and make general recommendations. Develop preliminary cost and feasibility analyses for the options and strategies identified. The study will serve as a guide in the transformation and development of the former Center School into a viable facility and site, and will provide the information to be utilized in both development and implementation. The 6.27 acre property is located at 58 Main Street Hatfield, MA. It has one structure on it, which was built in 1914 and was the town s middle school. Its last occupant was the Western Massachusetts Regional Library, but the building has remained vacant for approximately ten years. The building is two stories, with a walk out basement and an attic space; each level is approximately 6,650 SF. 6

7 A. Study Overview & Planning Process Existing Basement Floor Plan 7

8 A. Study Overview & Planning Process Existing First Floor Plan 8

9 A. Study Overview & Planning Process Existing Second Floor Plan 9

10 A. Study Overview & Planning Process Existing Attic Floor Plan 10

11 A. Study Overview & Planning Process Acknowledgements Committee Members Robert Bartlett Betty Porada Buster Symanski Linda Wendolowski John Wilkes Town Administrator Paul Boudreau Pioneer Valley Planning Commission James M. Mazik, AICP Architect HAI Architecture Consultants Bartram & Cochran Real Estate Consultants Lindgren & Sharples Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing, & Fire Protection Engineers Barry Engineers & Constructors Structural Engineers 11

12 12

13 1. Guidelines for Physical Improvements a. Physical Condition of the Building i. Building Envelope Roofing The building s slate roof appears to be original and would therefore be over 100 years old. It is possible that it may have been replaced at some point, but not likely within the past 50 years, based on its observed condition. According to the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service Preservation Brief, the U.S. roofing slate industry reached its highest point in both quantity and value of output in the period from 1897 to 1914, putting this roof within that range. The town has indicated that some minimal repairs have been performed on the roof in recent years, but the observed condition of the slate, as viewed from the ground, is such that more than 27% of the slates show signs of deterioration (chipping, cracking, bibbing, broken slates, missing slates, displacement). This percentage is the industry threshold suggesting that replacement of the entire slate roofing system is required. 13

14 As observed from the ground, it can be seen that the slates are now relatively thin, a product of a lifetime of wear (slates naturally deteriorate by shedding material as water, snow, and ice sheet over the exposed surface, making them more susceptible to damage from impacts and the effects of ice damming, etc.). The existing thickness, and presumed age, contribute to our assertion that the slates are nearing the end of their serviceable life. Of additional concern is that the original copper nails securing the slates deteriorate from the penetration of water coupled with the accelerating effects of acid rain. The service life of copper nails is presumed to be 50 years or greater, but can be shortened by the deterioration of flashings, which allow moisture to infiltrate the roofing system, and corrode the nails along the shank. It is principally the deterioration of the flashings with which we are concerned in this case, as the flashings on the Center School Building are beyond their serviceable lifespan. The evidence of this advanced deterioration can be seen along the parapets of the gable ends, along the roof valleys, etc. From within the attic space, daylight is visible at various points through the roof surface above. This is largely related to the failure of the aforementioned flashings, and the absence of wood trim and/or architectural building components that have deteriorated. The structural members forming the roof valleys are undersized, as evidenced by deflection apparent through visual observation. This deflection has placed stress on the 14

15 flashings in this area, which will be discussed in the Structural Physical Condition of the Building Analysis portion of the report. These framing members also show evidence of water damage, particularly at the lower portion. Water damage, either current or previous, is also visible along the edges of the roof decking at the gable ends, and around the brick chimneys. Areas of roof sheathing (solid wood planking of unknown dimension), therefore, anticipated to be in need of replacement. Although there are signs that some of the building s flashings has been repaired, visual observation indicate that the totality of the flashings between the roofing elements and all other architectural assemblies require complete replacement. Incidental roof flashings such as those protecting vent piping, as well as larger flashing assemblies forming crickets (diverting water around an element or projection above the line of the adjacent roof surface) should likewise be replaced. Determinations regarding historic roofing repairs should be evaluated for effectiveness, as some of the original conditions may be responsible for (or contributing factors to) the deterioration of other architectural assemblies and/or components. This is particularly apparent at the decorative limestone work comprising the building s main entrance, where cascading water from the building s roof has degraded these façade elements. 15

16 Dormers There are two dormers on the east side of the roof with windows facing east, featuring side walls covered in slate tiles, and slate roofs. As they are positioned asymmetrically in an otherwise a mostly symmetrical building, it is not certain if they were designed as such, or added during construction (or thereafter). They are certainly very old and their intent seems to have been to provide natural light into the attic space. Most of this window glass, however, is completely broken, and plywood now secures these openings (which blocks out all of the light). Paint on the wood frames of these windows is significantly deteriorated, but the wood itself appears to be relatively thick and solid. These windows assemblies could hopefully be stripped, refinished, primed and painted, and windows sashes re-glazed to restore the openings to their assumed original condition. As the dormers are minor elements of an otherwise complicated roof structure, no structural assessment of these elements were undertaken. 16

17 Gable Parapets The limestone capping atop the parapets at the building s gable ends (as well as those atop the projecting gabled bays at the West Elevation) and the limestone pediment over the entrance gable are riddled with joint failures. These failures emanate from a lack of proper inspection and routine maintenance, relating to re-grouting and re-caulking of the capstones, and the aforementioned deterioration of flashings. Segments of these capstones have failed, and through freeze and thaw cycles, masonry elements have become compromised (some limestone elements are spalling) and masonry assemblies are now being adversely affected (water is seeping into the parapet, which is the uppermost portion of the multi-wythe bearing wall). This can be seen by the presence of calcite deposits along the line of gable parapets, whereby calcium-rich construction minerals, through a water-borne transfer, lose these calcites to the drying surface of the exterior wall assembly. Photographs of the various capping conditions suggest that: 1. There are a number of locations where joints between capstones have failed, permitting water to weep into the bearing wall assembly; 2. There have been previous attempts to fill the joints with undefined material, but these repairs have also failed with time; 3. A number of decorative limestone elements and segments of the limestone capping have spalled and are crumbling; 4. The original copper flashing (or terne-coated steel, in some locations, possibly a repair/replacement) is damaged and/or missing; 5. The water damage from Item 1. has caused damage to the masonry bearing wall assembly. All of the aforementioned conditions point to the fact that the limestone capping requires removal, re-setting, and re-caulking. 17

18 18

19 Overhangs The overhangs were constructed with decorative wood purlins extending about 2 feet beyond the face of the building. Exposed below, the outside edge is capped with a decorative wood fascia, leaving approximately 2 inches of the purlin uncapped for a dental design effect. Some areas are in good condition, while in other areas, the fascia is missing or the purlins show the effect of water damage. From within the attic, there is a significant amount of light visible along perimeter of the roof, suggesting that the entire overhang requires repair and re-flashing. The building currently has no gutter or downspout system, and there is no evidence to suggest that there was one on the building historically. 19

20 Chimneys There are two masonry chimneys with concrete caps, both of which appear to be original to the building. One of the chimneys serves the boiler in the basement, while the function of the other is not evident. The brick of both chimneys is generally in poor condition at best and, at a minimum, re-pointing of each will be necessary. Both chimneys require a new concrete cap due to large cracks visible from the ground. Minor cracks appear to have been skim-coated with a cementitious material or caulked, and one of the caps is wound with a small gauge wire, presumably to tether the broken sections together. The major cracks in each chimney extend into the brickwork and suggest that the chimneys would be torn down to a level near the building s roof, and properly re-built. 20

21 Cupola The existing octagonal cupola is a large, well-detailed design element of the building which appears to be original. It likely provided ventilation for the attic, as well as some light. It features a copper roof, a decorative wood structure, a slate tile clad base with copper flashing to the slate roofing. The cupola is supported by elements of the original roof structure, which will be discussed in the Structural Physical Condition of the Building Analysis portion of the report. Overall, the elements of the cupola show significant weathering/wear, but it appears to be both substantial and attractive, and it is presumed to be repairable. There are wooden louver slats missing, as is most of the paint, but the underlying wood appears to be in good condition. There is, however, an active pigeon population living within the cupola, and there is a significant amount of fecal material and decaying bird carcasses, which creates an environment hazard that must be remedied prior to the undertaking of any repair work. 21

22 Brick Masonry Overall the buildings brick masonry exterior walls, which are load-bearing, are in good condition, though there are many areas that require repair and/or re-pointing. In general, the brick needs more attention near the foundation, at window openings, and near the roof parapets. There appears to have been a number of repairs and re-pointing efforts, most of which displays quality workmanship, although the mortar selection is thought to be inconsistent with that of the original construction. There are some areas that require re-pointing beyond that which was anticipated at the onset of our study, as can be seen below all of the window groupings on the east façade for the width of each window by six (6) courses below the sill. There is another area of concern near the south end wall. The north and south facades are in the best condition, while the east façade is by far in the worst condition. There are diagonal crossing patterns executed in the base building brick color, along with a darker accent color brick, panelized and bordered by decorative limestone quoining and banding. These are located under subtle brick arches which seem designed to alleviate weight over wide sections of windows or respective paneled sections, especially on the north and south facades. 22

23 23

24 The lack of a gutter and downspouts system and/or water diversion system around the building and its impact on the buildings masonry needs to be re-evaluated. While it is significantly better for the performance and longevity of the roof as well as the wall surfaces near the roof to not have a gutter, there are other consequences for the structure, especially the masonry at grade. There is significant evidence of water splashing against the masonry on the lower portion of the wall below the water table, with the result being erosion of the mortar, continuous dampness at the Basement Floor Level, leading to the failure of finishes and the development of mildew/mold. There is no evidence of any method of drainage around the building s perimeter, so all of the water from the roof falls adjacent to the foundation on the east and west sides, where it migrates into the Basement. Limestone Accents There are numerous limestone accents throughout the masonry, most intensively on the west façade of the building, but also on the north and south end wall facades, and to a much lesser and more simplified extent on the east façade. On the west façade, there is a base course, water table, an elaborate classical entryway, window headers, sill, and quoin jambs, brick panels accented with limestone surrounds, corner coining, accent bands and details, medallions and carvings, and gable capstones. The effect is a rich architectural design that makes the building aesthetically appealing and a landmark for the Town. 24

25 There are however a number of defects, discolorations, and other visible issues with the limestone that will need to be addressed. There is a lack of drainage around the building foundation, exacerbated by rainfall from the roof due to a lack of gutters and downspouts, and apparent snow and ice buildup against the building, which have all contributed to making the base course and lower courses of masonry wet for long periods of time, and coated with dirt from splashing due to the lack of a maintenance strip of gravel or other material adjacent to the building. Moisture damage below limestone sills is also visible. There is a significant crumbling deterioration on a section of the water table near at the southeast corner. A number of capstones have deteriorated as noted in the Gable Parapets section above. 25

26 Entry Stairs & Landings The entry stairs, a combination of original limestone and concrete patches are in poor condition. There are gaps between the treads and risers, and the top landing is too small for current egress requirements. A complete replacement, likely tied into a new accessibility ramp, is the most expected outcome. The concrete landings and steps on the north and south ends of the building at the stair exits are in reasonably good condition. Windows There are a significant number of large windows in the building, some of which are original, while others have been modified. Most of the windows on the west façade are original and are in the best condition, and are in need of refinishing and painting. Those over the entrance and the two projecting portion off the west of the interior corridor are inoperable, while the remainder are double hung, which have not been checked for proper operation. One fixed window on the second floor in the north end of the east façade has been modified to insert a window air conditioner which will need to be removed and the window restored to original conditions to match the others. 26

27 All of the windows on the east and north façades of the first and second floor (except one window on the northeast corner on the first floor) have been modified with replacement aluminum window sashes within the existing wood frames. They appear to be at least years old, and though they are in reasonable condition given their age and these windows are likely nearing the end of their life cycle. The windows on the Basement Level of the east facade are original and are in need of some restoration and repainting. 27

28 Doors/Entrances There is one monumental entrance on the west façade, one entrance on each of the north and south sides of the building that serve as exits from the stairwells, and four on the Basement Level of the east side of the building (one of which is blocked by the shed structure). The remaining wood doors, including the double doors at the main entry and the four doors at the ground level on the east side, are all in very poor condition from cracking and rotting, and will all have to be replaced. The wood frames are mostly able to be refurbished and refinished, though they are in worse condition near the bottoms. 28

29 Louvers/Infills/Pipes There are numerous openings and penetrations in the façades, particularly concentrated on the east side. These include rectangular plywood infills, metal panels over the first and second floor windows on the east side (the sills are limestone), one small metal louver, and a few capped cast iron pipes. If the latter two items are abandoned, they should be removed and the wall patched. 29

30 There are 8 of the rectangular openings about 14 x 48 in size, which appear to have been cut into the wall after its construction, presumably for a mechanical unit of some type. These have subsequently been removed and the openings are infilled with unpainted plywood which should be removed and the wall patched appropriately to adjacent construction. The metal panels over the strips of windows on the east side are about 25 to 30 feet in length and 1-6 in height. It is likely that there no limestone headers at these locations and that there were steel lintels with wood infill panels which had to be covered with the metal panels, which are now rusted. These should be removed and the conditions beneath investigated for necessary repairs. Storage Shed There is a wood sided shed with overhead door used by the Town for vehicle storage positioned against the south end of the east façade. There is flashing tied into the building. Under virtually any development scenario, this shed will need to be removed. After removal, the sill of the windows adjacent to the storage shed will have to be investigated for water damage and etc. due to the overlap of the shed roof and the window sills. 30

31 1. Guidelines for Physical Improvements a. Physical Condition of the Building ii. Interior Attic The attic is an unfinished, unheated, and uninsulated space with wood frame construction. As the roof slope is a fairly steep 12:12 pitch, it is a large open space. The north stair goes up to the attic level, but the south stair does not, so there is only one means of egress. While the wood framing and sheathing boards are in relatively good condition, there are signs of water leaks and the valet and hip rafters over the main entrance gable and projected section of the building on the west side, appear to have been undersized, show signs of rot, and are sagging. One approximately 8 SF area of the underside of the roof deck, other than along an edge, also shows signs of water damage, as do areas near the roof vents. There is also residue from previous moisture damage apparent in the wood planks framing the roof deck surrounding the chimneys. 31

32 Significant steel reinforcing, which is addressed further in the Structural Analysis section, has been added at some point in the past to the wood structure, likely around 1950 due to the square bolt heads used in the steel construction. The original wood framing and the new steel reinforcing make the attic space unusable despite its overall volume, except possibly for mechanical units, though this would require a structural analysis. There is a small amount of material stored in the attic, but it is generally empty. Mineral fiber insulation is located under the attic floor boards and provides the only visible insulation for the second floor below. As noted in the Building Envelope section, the roof perimeter at the top of wall has numerous gaps where daylight can be plainly seen, and at the north end along the west wall, there was even snow accumulation in the attic at the time of our field visit. There is a ducted sheet metal gravity ventilator tied into the cupola, the base of which is an elevated enclosed space wood framed space covered with plywood and accessed by a wooden ladder and door. There is a significant presence of pigeon droppings and dead carcasses concentrated particularly in the cupola enclosed space, but they re also are scattered in the attic in general. All of this material should be appropriately remediated before any work is conducted in the attic. 32

33 First & Second Floor These two floor levels are nearly identical in design layout, finishes, and condition, and are little changed from their original construction, despite their use for the Western Massachusetts Regional Library for a number of years. Each floor is accessed by the stairs at the north and south ends of the building and are connected by an 11-8 wide main corridor running the full length of the building adjacent to the west exterior wall. Each floor consists of four classrooms, with smaller access hallways between them for a total of three hallways. There are also additional rooms within each of the projections from the east façade on the west side of the main corridors. On the second floor, each of these projected spaces also contains a toilet room accessed from within the main room, and another accessed from the main corridor. 33

34 There are lavatory sinks in the main corridors along the west wall, one at the north and one at the south ends on each floor, with both of those on the south end having been removed, but with the plumbing still in place. The wood and glass double doors and wall framing separating the main corridors on each end from the stairs remain intact. The ceilings throughout these floors retain the original plaster and lath surfaces. Much of it is in good condition, except for areas along the north and east perimeter walls, mostly in the second floor classrooms where there is water damage and the paint is peeling. There are a few rooms in which 2x2 lay-in ceiling tile on metal grid has been installed, though the original plaster ceilings are likely intact above. These include, on both floors, the center hallways and the north and south projected rooms on the west side. The walls retain nearly all of the original finishes which include painted plaster throughout, high wood wainscots in the hallways (simulated in the main corridors with brown paint on plaster), and an extensive use of dark, thick wood trim base, chair rail, trim around doors, louvers windows and other openings, and some crown molding. The classrooms still have the original chalkboards, though a few have been removed which has exposed the terra cotta block. The interior doors are all of the same solid dark wood, and have much of the original hardware. 34

35 In general, there is original wood flooring through nearly all of the spaces, and though in need of refinishing, they are in good condition, with some buckling and warping in certain areas. Exceptions are two to three classrooms on each of the first and second floors and the first floor center hallway, both of which have carpet which is in poor condition. It is likely that all of these still retain the wood flooring underneath the carpet. Basement The basement originally included classrooms, locker rooms, shower/bathrooms, and the boiler mechanical room. The lockers, benches, and showers/bathrooms have been removed. The basement is empty except for the north classroom which is used for storage. All of the small windows along the west, north and south walls have been infilled with plywood which makes the basement very dark and damp. Along the main corridor, the concrete floor is raised several inches in the center section of the building. This is possibly due to the need to cover and level the remains from the removal of the shower/bathrooms. The floor slopes down to the north and south from this area. The concrete floor in the mechanical room includes some uneven slab sections, and a depression under the old boiler which will have to be addressed if this room is reused for another purpose that requires a smooth level surface. The basement includes a significant amount of material that would need to be remediated which is discussed further in the Presence of Health and Safety Hazards section of this report. The materials readily observable include what appears to be 35

36 peeling lead paint on the brick walls, the extent of which also indicates a moisture problem, peeling paint where the concrete floor has been painted, mold mainly along the west, north and south walls, vinyl asbestos floor tiles in three of the classrooms and a bathroom, asbestos pipe insulation, and asbestos integral to the boiler system. The extent of peeling paint on the wets wall is suggestive of a moisture problem likely due to the lack of gutter, downspouts, and drainage around the foundation perimeter. There are four oil tanks in the mechanical room above the floor slab, but there may also be one or more original oil tanks under the floor slab near the boiler as indicated by a filler gauge and pipe down to the floor on the west wall near the boiler. The removal or presence of this original oil tank should be confirmed and investigated for remediation requirements. 36

37 1. Guidelines for Physical Improvements a. Physical Condition of the Building iii. Structure Overview The Hatfield Center School site was visited to view existing visible structural conditions. The International Existing Building Code 2009 (IEBC) structural requirements were also reviewed as they would pertain to the potential renovation to the property. The applicable building codes used are as follows: Commonwealth of Massachusetts State Building Code, the 8 th Edition, the Massachusetts Amendments to the IBC International Building Code 2009 (IBC) International Existing Building Code 2009 (IEBC) The building was originally constructed for use as a school and subsequently was used as a library until it closed approximately a decade ago. The building has reportedly been vacant since that time. There are various proposed uses for the building. In addition, the building could in the future be classified as a Historic building, if desired by the town and/or a developer. As a result IEBC Chapter 11 Historic Buildings would apply in addition to Chapter 4, Classification of Work, and Chapter 9 Change of Occupancy. The proposed work is also likely to be governed by Chapter 5- Repairs and Chapters 6-8 Alteration Level 1-3. A Level 3 alteration applies where the work area is more than 50% of the aggregate area of the building. All provisions for Level 1 and Level 2 work apply where the project is deemed a Level 3 Alteration. Building Description Masonry The building is a two-story (3-level) building with wood framed floors, attic and roof and interior brick bearing walls and exterior brick veneer on clay tile masonry bearing walls. The exterior wall is multi-wythe brick (at the basement) or brick and clay tile which appears to vary between 12 and 16 thick depending on the level. Brick masonry chimneys extend up through the roof and are used as support for the roof and floor framing. A full height brick masonry wall exists at the front side of the basement. The rear of the basement has a walkout to the lower grade at the rear and has a brick frost wall (assumed to go below frost levels). 37

38 While the existing masonry envelope is in fair condition for the age of the building, it is anticipated that some repairs and pointing will be required especially at the basement level. It is also recommended that the exterior of the foundation be exposed and waterproofed/insulated as part of any renovation to the property to prevent water infiltration and deterioration of the foundation. The following issues with the existing masonry walls have been noted: 1. The joints at the stone copings of the parapets at the gable end walls have failed allowing water infiltration to occur. Removal and replacement of these copings should be done with revised flashing and anchorage details. 2. The exterior brick and masonry walls are unattached at the attic floor level. Anchorages at the floors were not able to be confirmed. Anchorages will need to be confirmed or established when renovating. 3. The base of the brick piers and exterior basement foundation walls exhibit deterioration due to water wicking or infiltration. It is also likely that the outside face of the exterior foundation walls has sustained similar damage. This masonry will need to be repaired and/or rebuilt during renovations and waterproofed at the exterior face to prevent further deterioration. 4. The top of the masonry walls supporting rafters was originally untied to the floor framing. Movements in the masonry are noted at the ceiling of the second floor corridor. Ties were added presumably to correct this problem. 5. Exterior walls have numerous locations where cracking has occurred and been repaired in the veneer brick. Additional and continuing repairs are likely to be necessary. 6. Repairs to chimney masonry and flashing above the roof level are needed. Framing The existing first floor framing is not visible but based on the our measurements, it is our opinion that the framing is likely to consist of 2x8 lumber spanning to steel girders at mid-span (with varying spans of up to approximately 18 ). A hump in the floor over this girder is likely to be the result of differential shrinkage between the flush framed steel girder and the wood framing. Without some destructive testing of finishes, the condition or capacity of the framing is uncertain. However, considering the spans that exist and the relatively level floor systems, it is our opinion that the first floor framing is likely to be capable of supporting the Code required 40 pound per square foot (psf) live load, which would be adequate for a residential type occupancy. The second floor framing appears to clear span the open first floor rooms to corridor bearing walls. This span is twice as long as the first floor. Again the framing is not visible so that definitive statements concerning its capacity are not possible without opening up the ceilings to determine the framing size and spacing. However, the floor 38

39 surface is relatively level given the age of the building and the long spans that exist. In addition, residential-type live loads would be less than would be expected from the building s previous uses. As a result, it is our opinion that the floor live load capacity of the second floor is likely to be capable of supporting code required loads for residential type use. The attic post and beam framing and trussed frames supporting the roof are supported by the exterior brick masonry bearing wall and interior bearing walls and 8x8 timber beams or trusses. The top of the exterior masonry bearing wall has a continuous wood sill but anchorage to the masonry will need to be confirmed. The top of the masonry wall cantilevers above the top of the attic framing. Intermittent knee braces were added to brace the top of the masonry wall probably as a response to the top of the wall kicking out. The slight cracking at the second floor ceiling to perpendicular beams is evidence of this. The existing wood trusses and post and beam framing were reinforced with steel trussed framing sistered to the existing timber frames. Although the complete analysis of the existing building framing is beyond the scope of this report, several observations are worth noting: 1. The existing rafters are 1 ¾ x 6 ¾ rafters spaced at approximately 20 on center. These span approximately 10 from the exterior walls to a purlin or truss and then to the ridge line and are adequately sized to support the required snow loads. 2. The reaction at the ridge must be resisted by the tie to the attic floor framing since the ridge is not a structural ridge. While intermittent ties have been added from the rafters to the attic framing, additional ties should be added at all rafters. 3. The existing purlin over the corridor had transfer beams added between the exterior wall and the corridor wall to reinforce the existing supports. The size and condition of all of these will need to be exposed and evaluated on renovation. 4. The existing trussed girders which were reinforced with steel framing are supported at the exterior walls and at masonry walls at the chimneys. It is assumed that the chimneys will not be functional in the future. Examination of the wood framing for rot where it is embedded in the masonry was not possible without opening up the masonry walls. Structural analysis of the trussed framing is beyond the scope of this report. 5. The existing valley rafters are undersized and have been exposed to leaking of the valleys. These will need to be reinforced and re-supported. 6. The existing roof planes remain relatively straight and no failures of the roof framing were noted. Given the heavy loads that this roof has been subject to over the life of the building and that re-roofing could be accomplished with a slate roof, it is our opinion that the majority of the roof is probably capable of supporting 39

40 reasonable snow loads. However, renovation of the building (including re-roofing with a lighter roofing material) would not require reinforcement of the existing roof under the current code since roof loads would not be increased with re-roofing. 7. The existing cupola construction will need complete refurbishing. The existing masonry envelope is in fair condition for the age of the building. It is anticipated that some repairs and pointing will be required especially at the basement level. It is recommended that the exterior of the foundation be exposed and waterproofed/insulated as part of any renovation to the property to prevent water infiltration and deterioration of the foundation. Renovation Scope of Work It is our understanding that the future use of the property could be as a multi-family residential use and undergo a historical renovation and that the previous use was as a Library. It is our understanding that the amount of work required to renovate this project will result in a work area more than 50% of the aggregate area of the building which will trigger Level 3 alteration requirements of the IEBC. As previously indicated, the change of occupancy will also require structural evaluations under IEBC requirements. The following building design parameters are referenced. Occupancy 1. IBC Table a. Category II no change to a higher Category III or IV 2. IEBC Table a. Residential use R Hazard 3 < Business Hazard 4 3. IEBC Table and ASCE7 a. Occupancy Category II i. Seismic Importance Factor = 1.0 ii. Wind Importance Factor = 1.0 iii. Snow Importance Factor = 1.0 Gravity and Wind Loads 1. Design Wind Speed a. Original unknown b. IBC new construction Hatfield 100 mph 2. Design Ground Snow Load a. Original unknown b. IBC new construction Springfield 55 psf + drift 3. Residential Floor Live Load 40

41 a. Existing Conditions Average 40 psf b. IBC new construction i. Residential - 40 psf ii. Business 1. Office - 50 psf 2. Library area Book loadings or 100 psf minimum. 3. Corridor entry first floor 100 psf 4. Corridor second floor 80 psf Due to plaster finishes, the joists were not visible. Openings will need to be made in select locations to see and test the existing framing. As a result, the structural capacity of the wood framing is not certain and was not able to be field verified or tested. Seismic Design The original building codes would not have had seismic load requirements. The buildings are located in a seismic zone and geotechnical report based on soil borings for Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and a Conical Penetration Test (CPT) were not performed and are not available at this time. Before preparing plans for renovation of the building, borings will need to be performed to determine the seismic site class and to determine whether existing soils are liquefiable. An initial boring did not show any issues, however a more complete investigation will need to be conducted for new construction. Summary of IEBC Requirements Chapter 5 Repairs The IEBC Repairs sections would apply for proposed remedial work Scope Repairs as described in Section 402 shall comply with the requirements of this chapter. Repairs to historic buildings shall comply with this chapter except as modified in Chapter 11 Historic Buildings Conformance. The work shall not make the building less conforming than it was before the repair was undertaken. 506 Structural General. Structural repairs shall be in compliance with this section and Section Regardless of the extent of structural or non-structural damage, dangerous conditions shall be eliminated. Regardless of the scope of repair, new structural members and connections used for repair or rehabilitation shall comply with the 41

42 detailing provisions of the IBC for new buildings of similar structure, purpose and location. 1. Brick masonry and wood framing require repairs. Under the IEBC, structural repairs are permitted for damage less than substantial structural damage, repairs shall be allowed that restore the building to its pre-damage state using materials and strengths that existed prior to the damage. New structural members and connections used for this repair shall comply with the detailing provisions of the IBC for new buildings of similar structure, purpose and locations. 2. There is no major or observable substantial structural damage. The main structural gravity and lateral load resisting systems are not being altered and no special code requirements are triggered. Specific wood framing members and connections require reinforcing. 3. Unreinforced Masonry (URM) Bearing Walls. Under the MA Amendments Section , the expected work area may be more than 50% of the building area so that the provisions of Appendix A of the IEBC will need to be evaluated during renovations. The exterior URM bearing walls do not show signs of structural damage and are not dangerous by code definition. Standard repair of the exterior brick masonry is expected to be performed including repointing and replacement of cracked bricks and masonry repair of chimneys. Chapter 6 Level 1 Alteration A future reroof is likely and the code requirements are summarized below for a reroof. 1. Roof Anchorage a. The wood sill top plate at the top of the URM exterior bearing walls may not be adequately anchored to the rafters with suitable hold-down anchors. These will need to be added during any renovation. The attic is open and anchorage would be possible without undergoing a reroof at this time. BECI recommends that anchorage of the roof framing to the URM bearing walls be performed at the time of renovation. 2. Bracing of Parapets and Chimneys a. Parapets require bracing where excessive height to thickness (h/t) ratios exist. Existing parapet heights are not excessive. However the chimney condition (height and thickness) will need to be determined and if h/t ratios are greater than 2.5 it will need to be braced. The architect of record and 42

43 engineer of record for the chimney repairs should verify that the chimney bracing requirements are met. Chapter 7 Level 2 Alteration The minimum design loads on existing elements of a structure that do not support additional loads as a result of an alteration shall be the loads applicable at the time the building was constructed. The proposed alteration is not expected to increase the design loads on structural members. No visible major structural damage or dangerous conditions exist. Structural members will be replaced, repaired or strengthened. New members and connections will have to meet the requirements of the IBC for new construction. Chapter 8 Level 3 Alteration General. Where buildings are undergoing Level 3 alterations including structural alterations, the provisions of this section shall apply New structural elements. New structural elements shall comply with Section Existing structural elements carrying gravity loads. Existing structural elements carrying gravity loads shall comply with Section Structural alterations. All structural elements of the lateral-force-resisting system in buildings undergoing Level 3 structural alterations or buildings undergoing Level 2 alterations as triggered by Section shall comply with this section. Exceptions: 1. Buildings of Group R occupancy with no more than five dwellings or sleeping units used solely for residential purposes that are altered based on the conventional light-frame construction methods of the International Building Code or in compliance with the provisions of the International Residential Code. 2. Where such alterations involve only the lowest story of a building and the change of occupancy provisions of Chapter 9 do not apply, only the lateral-force-resisting components in and below that story need comply with this section Evaluation and analysis. An engineering evaluation and analysis that establishes the structural adequacy of the altered structure shall be prepared by a registered design professional and submitted to the code official Substantial structural alteration. Where more than 30 percent of the total floor and roof areas of the building or structure have been or are proposed to be involved in structural alterations within a 12-month period, the evaluation and analysis shall demonstrate that the altered building or structure complies with the International Building Code for wind loading and with reduced 43

44 International Building Code level seismic forces as specified in Section for seismic loading. For seismic considerations, the analysis shall be based on one of the procedures specified in Section The areas to be counted toward the 30 percent shall be those areas tributary to the vertical load-carrying components, such as joists, beams, columns, walls and other structural components that have been, or will be removed, added or altered, as well as areas such as mezzanines, penthouses, roof structures and in-filled courts and shafts Limited structural alteration. Where not more than 30 percent of the total floor and roof areas of the building are involved in structural alteration within a 12-month period, the evaluation and analysis shall demonstrate that the altered building or structure complies with the loads applicable at the time of the original construction or of the most recent substantial structural alteration as defined by Section Any existing structural element whose seismic demand-capacity ratio with the alteration considered is more than 10 percent greater than its demand-capacity ratio with the alteration ignored, shall comply with the reduced International Building Code level seismic forces as specified in Section The engineer of record will need to evaluate the existing masonry walls based on the above requirements depending on the final alterations that are planned. Chapter 9 Change of Occupancy Under IEBC Snow and wind loads, the change of occupancy under this unchanged Category II, Residential use Hazard 3 and Wind and Snow Importance Factor =1.0, the building does not require new IBC wind and snow load compliance checks and the design loads at the time of original construction apply. Under IEBC Compliance with IBC seismic forces, the change of occupancy under this Category II Residential use Hazard 3 and Seismic Importance Factor =1.0, the building does not require seismic load compliance checks. Chapter 10 Additions Any proposed new addition would be required to meet the code requirements for new construction under the IBC and no additional loads on the existing building would have to be identified. It is recommended that additions be isolated with expansion joints so that lateral loads are not increased on the existing unreinforced masonry building. Chapter 11 Historical Buildings If in the future, the building is re-classified as a historic building, then under IEBC , Historic Buildings Change of Occupancy and , Historic Buildings 44

45 Structural, the existing floor live load operational control can be met by posting the maximum occupancy and live load. The current live load capacity is likely to be appropriate for the intended residential use as discussed above. Summary The subject project is a historic building and is changing occupancy use from business to residential or other use. Selective floor framing may require addition of structural members to reinforce existing conditions as well as installation of Simpson style connectors at existing framing connections. Some existing wood beams may also require reinforcing. The previous required floor live load capacity is 50 psf which is more than the residential live load requirement of 40 psf, and the IEBC allows for posted live load limits for historic buildings with change of occupancy. It is our opinion that the current Live Load capacity is likely to be sufficient for the majority of the floor areas for the intended residential use. The wood roof framing does not appear to be adequately anchored to the URM exterior bearing walls. The attic is open and anchorage could be installed at the time of renovation. It is recommended that the IEBC required roof anchorage be performed at that time. Also, the brick chimney will need to be evaluated have an h/t ratio greater than 2.5 and BECI recommends that they be braced at the time of the masonry work and chimney restoration. 45

46 Picture 1 Existing parapets at front wall with stone copings. Copings are loose with signs of water infiltration into masonry below; likely as a result of inadequate flashing and anchorage. 46

47 Picture 2 Exterior masonry; refer to report for repairs required to exterior masonry. Continuing repairs and pointing of masonry are likely to be required. 47

48 Picture 3 Cupola condition requires repair and rebuilding. Brick chimneys also need repairs above the roof level. 48

49 Picture 4 Exterior masonry walls have brick veneer on clay tile back-up. 49

50 Picture 5 Base of brick piers and walls (in background) are deteriorating probably as a result of wicking of water or infiltration of water at walls. 50

51 Picture 6 Space between attic floor and clay tile at exterior wall shows lack of anchorage between masonry and floor framing at parallel wall. 51

52 Picture 7 Steel reinforced wood girders with valley rafter framing to it. Valley rafter is undersized for required loadings. Leaking at valley is evident and appears to be ongoing. 52

53 Picture 8 Roof purlin over corridor does not align with bearing wall at corridor. Steel transfer girders and posts were added to transfer post loads to masonry bearing walls below. Knee braces from rafters at top of masonry bearing walls to attic floor framing to resist horizontal thrust at top of wall were installed after the original construction. 53

54 Picture 9 Some movement between the exterior walls and transfer beams is evident. This was likely caused by the horizontal thrust of rafters at the top of the masonry wall prior to installing the transfer beams and attic knee braces. These areas will need to be exposed to determine extent of repairs that are necessary. 54

55 1. Guidelines for Physical Improvements a. Physical Condition of the Building iv. MEP Facility Assessment Introduction Lindgren & Sharples, P.C., a mechanical and electrical consulting engineering firm located in Springfield, Massachusetts, was commissioned in January of 2014 by HAI Architecture, Inc., to assess the existing fire protection, plumbing, HVAC, and electrical systems in the Hatfield Center School. Field visits were made by company personnel to verify conditions and identify deficiencies as it related to code compliance, age, and condition. General The former Hatfield Center School Building is a three level masonry and wood framed building which encompasses a gross area of approximately 19,950 SF. The building is currently classified as Type B-Business occupancy and is a type 3B Construction with limited insulation and a moderately high glass-to-wall ratio. Many of the existing plumbing, HVAC, and electrical systems are original to the building, are over 50 years old, and their longevity is questionable. Under the current Massachusetts Existing Building Code, other than life safety systems (i.e.: fire alarm, exit and emergency lighting system) it is not required to replace existing mechanical/electrical systems to meet current codes unless the building undergoes a major renovation (the cost of which exceeds 1/3 the assessed value of the building) or a change of use. The code does state, however, when building systems are pre-placed (for example, a boiler fails and must be replaced), the new building system must meet current codes. It is the opinion of this office that any long-term planning for this building should include costs to replace the existing plumbing, HVAC, and electrical systems and install an automatic fire protection system in this building. Short-term plans would include replacing the existing boilers and installing a new electrical service to the building. The following is an assessment of the existing mechanical and electrical systems currently serving the building: 55

56 A. MECHANICAL / HVAC Existing Conditions The HVAC systems currently serving this facility appear to have been installed as part of the original construction in the early 1900 s. With the exception of the boiler feed pumps, the heating and ventilating systems are over 100 years old and have exceeded their life expectancy. The building is heated by a single oil-fired steam boiler (H.B. Smith Mills sections) that is approximately 60 years old. A two pipe steam distribution system is connected to cast iron radiators and/or unit ventilators in each room. The existing ventilation system consists of a steam fed gravity distribution system that is no longer in operation. The toilet exhaust systems consist of operable windows and do not meet current codes. Temperature controls are limited to one master zone valve for the entire building and a number of pneumatic thermostats that serve dedicated rooms. Boiler feed and condensate return pumps were recently replaced and are in good condition. Fuel oil is stored in four (4) 330 gallon above ground tanks located in the basement level mechanical room. The interior tanks do not meet current fire prevention regulations. Deficiencies Air conditioning is limited to window units located in the limited spaces. All of the existing HVAC equipment, piping, and controls, due to age, need to be upgraded and/or replaced. These include: 1. Building Ventilation Systems The gravity ventilation system is no longer operational, and operable windows are currently the means of ventilation for the building. The current systems will meet code; however, they are not practical from an energy conservation standpoint. 2. Steam Heating Equipment/Piping The existing steam radiators, unit ventilators, and piping distribution system are over 60 years old and a total system replacement should be considered. 3. Temperature Controls The existing pneumatic controls are over 60 years old, in poor condition, and should be replaced. 4. Boiler/Burners/Oil Storage Tank The boilers and burners are over 50 years old and in poor condition. These must be replaced. The oil tanks should be removed and replaced with a new double wall unit or the heating plant converted to natural gas. 56

57 B. PLUMBING Existing Conditions The majority of the existing plumbing fixtures, piping, and equipment appear to be original to the building construction, are over 50 years old, and should be replaced. The water distribution piping is a combination of brass and copper. Sanitary and vent piping is cast iron and galvanized and has exceeded its life expectancy. The existing plumbing fixtures are china and do not meet current ADA and water conservation regulations. The building s domestic water service consists of a 4 ductile iron entrance that does not appear to have a meter or pressure reducing valve. This 4 service serves the plumbing fixtures throughout the building as well as a standpipe riser with a tapping on each floor. The building sanitary is discharged to the City sewer system on Main Street. The hot water for the building is generated from a heat exchanger fed from the boiler. There is an electric tank type water heater on the second floor feeding a kitchenette sink. Deficiencies The domestic hot water generating systems is approaching the end of its life expectancy including all related system components. All plumbing fixtures and related piping are original to the building and have reached the end of their useful life span. In addition, the existing plumbing fixtures are not A.D.A. compliant. C. FIRE PROTECTION Existing Conditions The existing fire protection systems are limited to stand pipes located in the corridors. The building is not currently served by an automatic fire protection system. D. ELECTRICAL Existing Conditions Power Distribution The service consists of an existing 200 Amp, 208Y/120, 3 phase Service. Main service is connected from three 25 KVA pole mounted utility transformers via overhead lines. 57

58 The distribution system consists of several new panel boards located in basement for service entrance, in the boiler room next to a fusible panel, and two on the second floor. The fusible panel located in the boiler room that is more than 60 years old and in poor condition. One of the panels on the second floor is small with a capacity for only 12 circuit breakers. There is no formal electrical room. The existing power distribution system from the main panelboard in the basement to the other panels consists of both pipe and wire and flexible conduit with wire. The feeder to the fusible panel in the boiler room is well beyond its expected life and should be replaced due to its age. The existing electric service is inadequate to support adding one elevator and adding air conditioning. If both of these are required by development or new construction, an electrical system upgrade would be required. The general lighting consists of a mix of surface mounted and pendant fluorescent light fixtures with two T12 lamps and cross baffles. Due to the age of the fixtures, the potential exists that the ballasts contain PCB. New lighting, which would be much more efficient, should be considered throughout the building. Fire Alarm The existing fire alarm system consists of old manual pull stations and bells for alarm annunciation. The notification devices do not meet the requirements of the current fire alarm code and does not comply with the Accessibility Code. The Fire Alarm system did not appear to be a working system due to the observation of one pull station that appeared to be in the alarm position. Technology Telephone and data wire distribution was observed with both telephone and blue data wiring run through the attic. The main telephone demarcation location is adjacent to the existing main service panel. 58

59 1. Guidelines for Physical Improvements b. Presence of health & safety hazards i. Building Code Analysis 1. BUILDING USE: Historic: The building was originally constructed in 1914 as a Middle School for the Town of Hatfield. It is a three story masonry structure of bearing wall construction composed of multi-wythes of common red brick. The building volume is predicated upon a very common, turn-of-the-century architectural typology which features a common corridor stretching across the building s principal façade, leading to a progression of equally-sized and equally-fitted classrooms (in this case, numbering four on each of the two floors). The building is not on the Historic Register, but is located within a designated Historic District. Current: The Center School is a currently unoccupied building owned by the Town of Hatfield: a. Basement Floor level: unoccupied b. First Floor level: unoccupied c. Second Floor level: unoccupied d. Attic Floor level: unoccupied 2. BUILDING OCCUPANCY: a. Basement Floor level: 23 persons (6,650 gsf; Accessory storage areas, mechanical equipment 300 gross); b. First Floor level: 294 persons (6,508 gsf / 5,877 nsf; Educational Classroom 20 net); c. Second Floor level: 294 persons (6,508 gsf / 5,877 nsf; Educational Classroom 20 net); d. Attic Floor level: Unusable space 3. BUILDING USE GROUP: Educational Use (E) 4. CONSTRUCTION CLASSIFICATION: Unknown; assumed Type 3B (2 0 0) Unprotected; or, Type 4 (there appears to be some timber framing of the structure) 5. LOT DESCRIPTION: This municipal lot measures acres (or 273, sf). 59

60 1. Guidelines for Physical Improvements b. Presence of health & safety hazards ii. Hazardous Materials Overview The basement includes a significant amount of material that would need to be remediated which is discussed further in the Presence of Health and Safety Hazards section of this report. The materials readily observable include what appears to be peeling lead paint on the brick walls, the extent of which also indicates a moisture problem, peeling paint where the concrete floor has been painted, mold mainly along the west, north and south walls, vinyl asbestos floor tiles in three of the classrooms and a bathroom, asbestos pipe insulation, and asbestos integral to the boiler system. 60

61 The extent of peeling paint on the wets wall is suggestive of a moisture problem likely due to the lack of gutter, downspouts, and drainage around the foundation perimeter. There are four oil tanks in the mechanical room above the floor slab, but there may also be one or more original oil tanks under the floor slab near the boiler as indicated by a filler gauge and pipe down to the floor on the west wall near the boiler. The removal or presence of this original oil tank should be confirmed and investigated for remediation requirements. 61

62 Asbestos 9x9 Floor Tiles Abatement Estimate Floor Room Area (SF) Removal Cost Cost per SF Classroom $5 $3, Storage Room 232 $5 $1, Basement Public 40 $5 $ Bathroom 011 Classroom $5 $4, Classroom $5 $3, Total 2,452 $5 $12, First Floor 0 $5 $0.00 Second Floor 0 $5 $0.00 Attic 0 $5 $0.00 Subtotal Cost $12, Overhead 10% $1, Subtotal $ Profit 5% $ Subtotal $14, Location Cost Factor 4.3% $ Total Cost $14,

63 Asbestos Insulation Pipes Abatement Estimate Items Length (LF) Horizontal Length (LF) Vertical Total Length (LF) Removal Cost per (LF) Flat Cost Total 4 Dia. or $ $1, less Pipe 4-8 Dia. Pipe $ $10, Basement Boiler (6 x10 x6 ) $10,000 $10, Flue $ $2, (20 Dia.) 4 Dia. or $ $60.00 less Pipe First Floor 4-8 Dia $ $2, Pipe 4 Dia. or $ Second Floor less Pipe 4-8 Dia $ Pipe 4 Dia. or $ less Pipe Attic 4-8 Dia $ Pipe Subtotal $26, Overhead 10% $2, Subtotal $29, Profit 5% $1, Subtotal $30, Location Cost Factor Total Cost 4.3% $1, $31,

64 Lead Paint Abatement Estimate Floor Room Wall Area (SF) Basement Ceiling (SF) B. Building & Infrastructure Assessment Wall & Ceiling (SF) Removal Cost (per SF) Cost Classroom ,485 $1.21 $1, Mechanical Room 1, ,140 $1.21 $2, Storage Room $1.21 $1, Public Bathroom $1.21 $ Classroom 004 1, ,950 $1.21 $2, Classroom ,545 $1.21 $1, Corridor A & North Alcove 1, ,300 $1.21 $2, Corridor B 1, ,780 $1.21 $2, Corridor C & South Alcove 1, ,300 $1.21 $2, Sub Total $17, First Floor Classroom 105 1, ,860 $1.21 $2, Access Hallway $1.21 $ Classroom 107 1, ,875 $1.21 $2, Closet 107A $1.21 $ Access Hallway $1.21 $ Classroom 109 1, ,903 $1.21 $2, Closet 109A $1.21 $ Access Hallway $1.21 $ Classroom 111 1, ,840 $1.21 $2, Closet 111A $1.21 $ North Office ,057 $1.21 $1, Closet 104A $1.21 $ South Office ,062 $1.21 $1, Main Corridor 101 2, ,260 $1.21 $3, Sub Total $18, Classroom 205 1, ,870 $1.21 $2, Access Hallway $1.21 $ Classroom 207 1, ,870 $1.21 $2,

65 Second Floor Closet 207A $1.21 $ Access Hallway $1.21 $ Classroom 209 1, ,903 $1.21 $ Closet 209A $1.21 $ Access Hallway $1.21 $ Classroom 211 1, ,870 $1.21 $2, North Office $1.21 $1, North Office $1.21 $ Bathroom 204A North Office Closet $1.21 $ B Staff Lounge $1.21 $1, Staff Bathroom $1.21 $ A Public Bathroom $1.21 $ Public Bathroom $1.21 $ Main Corridor 201 2,400 1,020 3,420 $1.21 $4, Sub Total $19, Attic Sub Total - Stairs North Stair 1, ,315 $1.21 $2, South Stair 1, ,315 $1.21 $2, Sub Total $60, Overhead 10% $6, Subtotal $67, Profit 5% $3, Subtotal $70, Location Cost Factor Total Cost 4.3% $3, $73,

66 Hazardous Material Estimate Summary Item Cost Asbestos 9x9 Floor Tile $14, Asbestos Insulated Pipe $31, Lead Paint $73, Total $120,

67 1. Guidelines for Physical Improvements c. Undeveloped land - Analysis of the surrounding property View looking west The undeveloped land behind the Center School building consists primarily of town playing fields including Field Hockey to the east, closer to the Connecticut River, and a baseball field to the west, closer to the Center School parking area. These fields are surrounded on three sides by a flood control earthwork, all except the north side adjacent to the residential area. There is a one-way flap gate within the south dike bank which allows water that is collected on the site to flow out to the field/woods to the south of the site and prevents the site from flooding. The south side dike bank, also serves as the vehicle access from Main Street all the way to the Connecticut River. View looking southeast 67

68 View looking north The earthwork provides a walking path along the river s edge toward the north and vehicle access toward the south. Access to the river from the town center is an important amenity that should be maintained. View looking south The school system has indicated that they would like to maintain the field hockey field, at least until an alternate location is found. There is no specific parking area associated with the field and there are no bathroom facilities available during games. There is a public water fountain available on site on the north end between the paved parking area 68

69 and the baseball fields near a fire hydrant. The town s recreation committee controls the baseball field, but it is seldom used and is currently exploring alternatives. Regardless of the specific use, the town has indicated that it is essential to maintain the direct access to the river from the center of town. Even if alternative locations are found for the playing fields, it would be desirable to maintain a portion of the property near the river for community use. View looking northwest There are currently no connections to the series of driveways that serve the commercial and residential properties on the north side of the site. Depending on the ultimate use of the building and property, it might be beneficial to explore the possibility of creating vehicular and/or pedestrian connections to this development. This would require coordination with the property owner(s) and determining whether the access road that connects the properties is public or private. 69

70 1. Guidelines for Physical Improvements d. Potential for new construction and site improvements The Town of Hatfield Municipal Zoning, Zoning Bylaws, identify the Center School property with a Town Center District (TC) designation. Highlights of TC Zoning Uses 1.0 Residential Uses Allowed One- and two-family residential uses. SPA - allowed by special permit with site plan approval from the planning board Multi-family dwellings/townhouses, open-space community, nursing homes, and continuing care retirement community SPB - allowed with special permit from the planning board Assisted living facilities and convalescent homes 2.0 Community Facilities Allowed Child-care center (adult-care center is not allowed). SPA - allowed by special permit with site plan approval from the planning board For-profit hospital or medical facility SPB - allowed with special permit from the planning board Charitable medical facility or private club SPR - allowed by site plan review- administrative review from the planning board Public or private school, recreational, government, municipal, public library 3.0 Agricultural Uses Allowed Agriculture, commercial greenhouse (kennel and veterinarian are not allowed). SPR - allowed by site plan review- administrative review from the planning board Farm business 4.0 Retail & Service Uses Not Allowed 70

71 Large scale retail, adult uses, fast food, hotel, motel - professional, medical, and business offices and services > 15,000 sf entertainment, scientific research facility, SPA - allowed by special permit with site plan approval from the planning board Convenience store, tavern, inn - professional, medical, and business offices and services < 15,000 sf telecommunications business SPB - allowed with special permit from the planning board Package store SPR - allowed by site plan review- administrative review from the planning board Small scale retail, restaurant 5.0 Wholesale Transportation & Industrial Uses Not Allowed Manufacturing or processing, warehouse and storage, wholesale trade and distribution, research offices, millwork, renewable of alternative energy r&d, SPA - allowed by special permit with site plan approval from the planning board Printing 6.0 Accessory Uses Allowed Any accessory use, solar energy system SPA - allowed by special permit with site plan approval from the planning board Home occupation, solar energy cooperative SPR - allowed by site plan review- administrative review from the planning board Family day care home, elder care 7.0 Mixed Uses SPA - allowed by special permit with site plan approval from the planning board All proposed uses require SPA Parking Requirements (General) Office and Mixed Use: Zoning requires 4 cars per 1,000 square feet, which would equate to 80 spaces if all three floors of the building were used for this use. Community Use: Zoning requires 5 cars per 1,000 square feet, which would equate to 100 spaces if all three floors of the building were used for this use. 71

72 Residential: Zoning requires a minimum of 2 cars per unit, with the exception of housing for the elderly, where 1 car per unit is stipulated. In both cases, visitor parking must also be added. Therefore, other than reuse as elderly housing, 10 units would require 20 parking spaces 40 units would require 80 spaces and 60 units would require 120 spaces plus visitor parking. H AI s analysis shows that the spaces for a 40-unit development would fit on the baseball diamond. A 60-unit development would require the entire site. 72

73 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements Existing Site The existing site is located in the middle of the historic center of Hatfield. The site has several unique features including that it borders the Connecticut River along the eastern boundary of the site, a man-made dike to the south, east and partially at the north boundaries to prevent flooding on the site as well as for the town. Main Street borders the western edge of the site, running north and south, parallel to the Connecticut River. Across Main Street is the Hatfield Memorial Town Hall as well as other municipal buildings such as the volunteer fire station and a small memorial park. The north boundary has a diverse typology of buildings which ranges from commercial to multi-family to single family housing. The acre site is currently owned and maintained by the Town of Hatfield. The existing building, built in 1914, was the previous middle school; however it has been vacant for roughly 10 years after last being the Western Massachusetts Regional Library. Behind the building, is a small paved parking lot that is dedicated for the building. The remaining usage of the site is for athletic fields for the school systems (a field hockey field) and parks and recreation department (a little-league baseball field). 73

74 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements Maximum Parking on Existing Site To achieve the town s desire to maintain control and access to both playing fields behind the existing building, a preliminary layout was developed to find out the maximum number of parking spaces that can fit on the existing site without affecting the playing fields. To accomplish this, it is suggested to make the existing access roads around the building a one-way vehicle route, entering and exiting the site at the current curb cuts off Main Street. Entering into the site would be at the northern curb cut and exiting would be at the southern curb cut. The existing parking layout would be modified to be a double loaded, angled parking. In addition, parking would be added to the northern portion of the entrance access road and to the southern portion of the exit access road to allow more parking on the site as well as handicap parking. The maximum number of parking that can be created is 37. It is enough for a developer to transform the existing vacant building into a 12 unit multi-family apartment building or perhaps a mix-use scenario that would allow a small portion of the building to be for community or commercial use with the majority of the building being multi-family apartments. 74

75 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements Existing Building to Become Commercial/Professional Offices Above is a preliminary scenario to demonstrate how much parking would be required if the entire existing building were to become used for commercial (professional offices) and to see how it would affect the existing playing fields behind the site. The building is 6,650 SF per floor x 3 floors = 19,950 SF Parking requirement for Professional offices is 1 space per 250 SF of building: 19,950 SF / 250 SF = 79.8 = 80 parking spaces. The rough area of parking (which is representative in the light green color above) is: 80 Spaces x 300 SF per Space = 24,000 SF The light green color box is wide x long. This scenario shows that the building can be completely occupied with professional offices, with the required amount of parking to support it; however the town would have to allow the little-league baseball field to be either removed, or relocated deeper into the site and likely overlap the field hockey field. 75

76 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements Existing Building to Become Community Spaces(s) Above is a preliminary scenario to demonstrate how much parking would be required if the entire existing building were to become a community use and to see how it would affect the existing playing fields behind the site. The building is 6,650 SF per floor x 3 floors = 19,950 SF Parking requirement for Community purposes is 1 space per 200 SF of building: 19,950 SF / 200 SF = = 100 parking spots. The rough area of parking (which is representative in the light green color above) is: 100 Spaces x 300 SF per Space = 30,000 SF (175-0 wide x long) This scenario shows that the building can be completely occupied with community purposes, with the required amount of parking to support it; however the town would have to allow the little-league baseball field to be either removed or relocated deeper into the site and may need to overlap the field hockey field. 76

77 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements Existing Building with Commercial Offices Addition Added This scenario was designed to show the existing building with a 3-story addition added to the east facade of the building of the same width as the existing building, all for commercial/professional office use. Existing building is 6,650 SF per floor x 3 floors = 19,950 SF Addition is 20,600 SF per floor x 3 floors = 61,800 SF Total building SF = 19,950 SF + 61,800 SF = 81,750 SF Parking requirement for professional offices is 1 space per 250 SF of building: 81,750 SF / 250 SF = 327 parking spots. The rough area of parking (which is representative in the light green color above) is: 327 Parking Spots x 300 SF per Parking spot = 98,100 SF The light green color box is wide x long. This scenario would mean that both the little-league baseball field and the field hockey field would have to be removed and relocated to another site. 77

78 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements Existing Building with an Addition for Community Usage Added This scenario was designed to demonstrate the existing building with a 3-story addition added to the east facade of the building, all for community use. Existing building is 6,650 SF per floor x 3 floors = 19,950 SF Addition is 20,600 SF per floor x 3 floors = 61,800 SF Total building SF = 19,950 SF + 61,800 SF = 81,750 SF Parking requirement for professional offices is 1 space per 200 SF of building: 81,750 SF / 200 SF = 409 parking spaces. The rough area of parking (which is representative in the light green color above) is: 409 Parking spaces x 300 SF per Parking spaces = 122,700 SF The light green color box is wide x long. This scenario would mean that both the little-league baseball field and the field hockey field would have to be removed and relocated to another site. 78

79 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements Existing Building with an Additional Acre for the Building This scenario was designed to demonstrate the existing building with additional acre designated for the building for parking. This concept was identified by one of the developers interviewed; to meet parking requirements by town zoning as well as to create a buffer space between the developed area and the playing fields. The extra acre extends beyond the existing parking lot approximately into the site. This would potentially allow for 70 parking spaces for vehicles to support the function of the building and still have over 40-0 of buffer space from the edge of the new parking lot to the extended boundary. This scenario would mean that the little-league baseball field would have to be either removed or relocated deeper into the site. Some overlap between the field hockey field and the little-league field may need to occur to keep both fields on the site. These sports are generally played at opposite times of the year which may allow of overlapping use of the fields to transpire. 79

80 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements 40 Apartment Units While Utilizing the Existing Building This scenario was designed to show the existing building with an addition for apartments added to the site. 40 units was the minimum amount of apartments that many of the interviewed developers thought to make a housing project like this viable for them. We assumed that 8 units would be located in the existing building and 32 units would be built in a new construction building on the site. 40 apartment unit development Existing building units: 8 Number of units in new construction: 1000 SF/Unit = 32,000 SF New construction with approximate circulation area: 32,000 SF x 20% = 38,400 SF 2 Story new structure to reduce ground footprint 38,400 SF / 2 = 19,200 SF Parking requirement for apartments is 2 spaces per apartment plus room for visitors: 40 Units x 2 spaces per Unit = 80 spaces x.25 add. Spaces for visitors = 90 spaces 90 Parking Spaces x 300 SF per Parking space = 27,000 SF 80

81 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements Max Number of Apartment Units While Utilizing the Existing Building This scenario was designed to demonstrate how many apartment units we could fit on the site, while meeting the zoning requirements and utilizing the existing building. Many of the developers that were interviewed wanted at least 60 units on the site. We assumed that 8 units would be located in the existing building and the rest of the units would be built in a new construction building on the site Area of site 273, SF x 15% max footprint for multifamily (per zoning) =41,026 SF Existing building footprint =6,650 SF New building footprint = 34,376 SF x 2 floors = 68,752 SF (Total new building area) Approx. circulation area = 20% leaves a total area for units = 55,002 SF / 1000 SF per Unit = 54 Units in new building + 8 units in existing building = 63 Total units Parking requirement for apartments is 2 spaces per apartment plus room for visitors: 63 Units x 2 spaces per Unit = 126 spaces x.25 add. spaces for visitors = 142 spaces 142 Parking Spaces x 300 SF per Parking space = 42,600 SF 81

82 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements Maximum Commercial Addition While Utilizing the Existing Building This scenario was designed to demonstrate the existing building with the maximum developed site for commercial/professional office use and the existing building. Area of site 273, SF x 25% max footprint for commercial (per zoning) =68,378 SF Existing building footprint is 6,650 SF Addition footprint is 61,728 SF (single floor) Total commercial area = 6,650 SF x 3= 19,950 SF + 61,728 SF = 81,678 SF Parking requirement for professional offices is 1 space per 250 SF of building: 81,678 SF / 250 SF = 327 parking spots. The rough area of parking (which is representative in the light green color above) is: 327 Spaces x 300 SF per Parking spaces = 98,100 SF (313-0 wide x ) This scenario would mean that both the little-league baseball field and the field hockey field would have to be removed and relocated to another site. More commercial area could be added (having 2 stories) to this scenario; however more parking would need to be added to keep the 1 space per 250 SF of building area as required by zoning. 82

83 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements Maximum Community Addition While Utilizing the Existing Building This scenario was designed to demonstrate the existing building with the maximum developed site for Community use. Area of site 273, SF x 25% max footprint for commercial (per zoning) =68,378 SF Existing building footprint is 6,650 SF Addition footprint is 61,728 SF (single floor) Total commercial area = 6,650 SF x 3= 19,950 SF + 61,728 SF = 81,678 SF Parking requirement for professional offices is 1 space per 200 SF of building: 81,678 SF / 200 SF = 409 parking spots. The rough area of parking (which is representative in the light green color above) is: 409 Spaces x 300 SF per space = 122,700 SF (325-0 wide x ) This scenario would mean that both the little-league baseball field and the field hockey field would have to be removed and relocated to another site. More building area could be added (having 2 stories) to this scenario; however more parking would need to be added to keep the 1 space per 200 SF of building area as required by zoning. 83

84 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements Demolish the Existing Building; Maximum Number of Apartment Units This scenario was designed to demonstrate how many units we could fit on the site, while meeting the zoning requirements and demolishing the existing building. Area of site 273, SF x 15% max footprint for multifamily (per zoning) =41,026 SF New structure footprint = 41,026 SF x 2 floors = 82,052 SF Approx. circulation area = 20% Total Area for units = 65,641 SF / 1000 SF per Unit = 65 Total units Parking requirement for apartments is 2 spaces per apartment plus room for visitors: 65 Units x 2 spaces per Unit = 130 spaces x.25 add. Spaces for visitors = 147 spaces 147 Parking Spaces x 300 SF per Parking space = 44,100 SF This allows for the most apartments on the site; however both athletic fields would have to be removed and relocated to another site and the Town of Hatfield would lose a historic structure. 84

85 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements Demolish the Existing Building; Maximum New Commercial Building This scenario was designed to demonstrate the existing building being demolished and to develop the site for max commercial/professional office use. Area of site 273, SF x 25% max footprint for commercial (per zoning) =68,378 SF Total commercial area = 68,378 SF (single floor) Parking requirement for professional offices is 1 space per 250 SF of building: 68,378 SF / 250 SF = 274 parking spots. The rough area of parking (which is representative in the light green color above) is: 274 Parking Spaces x 300 SF per Parking space = 82,200 SF The light green color box is wide x long. This scenario would mean that both the little-league baseball field and the field hockey field would have to be removed and relocated to another site and the Town of Hatfield loses another historic structure. 85

86 d. Potential for new construction and site improvements Demolish the Existing Building; Maximum New Community Building This scenario was designed to demonstrate the existing building being demolished and to develop the site for maximum community use. Area of site 273, SF x 25% max footprint for commercial (per zoning) =68,378 SF Total commercial area = 68,378 SF (single floor) Parking requirement for professional offices is 1 space per 200 SF of building: 68,378 SF / 200 SF = 342 parking spots. The rough area of parking (which is representative in the light green color above) is: 342 Parking Space x 300 SF per Parking space = 106,600 SF The light green color box is wide x long. This scenario would mean that both the little-league baseball field and the field hockey field would have to be removed and relocated to another site and the Town of Hatfield would lose a historic structure. 86

87 1. Guidelines for Physical Improvements e. Preliminary evaluation relative to best use Recommendations Given the current state of the Center School Building, there is no use that would be recommended without at least some necessary repairs being performed to stabilize the structure and reverse its decay. The preliminary cost estimate at the end of Section B.2 of this report, Recommendations & Cost Analysis for Infrastructure & Utility Improvements, will identify the cost for such repairs based on a range, from minimal repairs to those necessary for more intensive uses. The following use options coordinate with those identified in the Marketing Analysis. 87

88 Use Option Suitability Impacts Commentary Building remains vacant Building Demolished Public Sector Uses (town hall, school, library, senior center etc.) Building is deteriorating rapidly and requires immediate maintenance and repair to alleviate conditions which will become dramatically more significant in a 5-year period. Demolition can be accomplished without endangering nearby structures. Designed as a public use building, this may represent one of the least intensive renovation options in general terms. A library or other load bearing use would require structural reinforcing. Costs associated with stabilization will be identified in Section B.2 Costs associated with demolition will be identified in Section B.2 Accessibility will have to be added to the building through both a ramp and an elevator. Not recommended Not recommended Recommended if the Town has a defined need. Mixed Public/ Private Use (day care, music school, community center, health club share the building) Market rate housing (8-12 units) Market rate and/ or subsidized housing (40 units+) 58, 076 SF A mixed use would complicate the necessary renovations and could require fire separations. This is a common conversion scenario. This is a common conversion scenario, but has an extensive site impact. Any large groups uses would require significant parking expansion. Estimated cost of construction is $3,693,000; annual taxes $46,790. (1) Estimated cost of construction of 40 units is $11,010,300; annual taxes $139,500. (1) The building could be made to accommodate these uses and can be explored. The building could be made to accommodate this use and is recommended. The baseball diamond would need to move. Higher density in the historic district. Market rate and/ or subsidized housing (60 units+) 82,076 SF This is a common conversion scenario, but has an even greater site impact than the 40 units above. Estimated cost of construction of 60 units is $15,960,500; annual taxes $202,220. (1) Both playing fields would need to move. Highest density in the historic district Office The building could be made to accommodate this use. One tenant or many small suites would create a range of impacts. High parking requirement would require giving up at least the baseball diamond. Marketing analysis does not support this use. Inn Inn use allowed with special permit and with site plan approval. Hotel use not allowed. Additional construction likely necessary to make functionality appropriate. Building not big enough, high parking, layout not ideal for inn. Zoning prohibits hotel occupancy. Marketing analysis does not support this use. 88

89 2. Recommendations & Cost Analysis for Infrastructure & Utility Improvements a. Necessary improvements to site infrastructure Parking The existing parking area is limited to the east side of the building, with about 18 designated spaces. A change in occupancy will likely require an expansion of parking area requirements and could encompass the sides of the building. Currently, the parking area abuts the buildings east façade directly and would be improved, and made more safe, by the addition of a walkway. There is also no curb adjacent to the grass area on the east edge of the parking area, and combined with a steep slope down to the baseball field within 2 feet of the parking spaces, is not an ideal condition for chemical run-off, or a safe condition for a rolling vehicle. There are also 2 areas, one in the middle and another at the north end that extends the pavement down the slope and ending in the grass. There is a fire hydrant at the termination of the north extension protected by two bollards, though these have been displaced. View looking at east façade of building 89

90 B. Building & Infrastructure Assessment Pavement The pavement should be considered a failed system. There are numerous significant cracks and uneven areas that have been repaired on more than one occasion, but the current condition is not corrected and should be considered for complete replacement in all areas from the street, along the side driveways, and the entire parking area. View looking at north entry of site View looking at south entry of site Hatfield Center School - Town of Hatfield, MA 90 Final Report June 25, 2014

91 B. Building & Infrastructure Assessment Walkways The walkways surrounding the building, primarily on the west side are a combination of concrete slabs sections and bituminous concrete asphalt. The asphalt is used to both add additional walking surfaces and to patch areas where the concrete has been removed. The existing walkways parallel to Main Street and the walkway that leads to the building s main entrance will have to be removed and replaced. Looking south Looking north Hatfield Center School - Town of Hatfield, MA 91 Final Report June 25, 2014

92 Curb Cuts There are two existing curb cuts on the site that connect the side to Main Street. One is location on the north side and the other on the south side of the center school. These curb cuts are only wide enough for one way traffic, though traffic flow is not clearly labeled and defined. Modifications will need to be carried out either to widen each, in order to create two-way traffic for each entrance, or define which curb cut is the exit is and which is the entrance to the site. North Curb Cut South Curb Cut 92

93 Site Stairs & Retaining Walls There are concrete stairs and retaining walls at both the north and south ends of the building. They separate the higher north, south, and west side of the center school from the lower east side, which allows for the existing walkout basement. The south stair (shown above and to the left), has several cracks in the stairs and along the retaining walls. Plants have begun growing though the cracks. The retaining wall has begun to tip over towards the parking lot due to the pressure/weight of the soil behind it as well as roots from the nearby tree. Guard rails and handrails are also missing from the stairs and along the edge of the retaining wall for public safety. 93

94 B. Building & Infrastructure Assessment The north stair (shown above and to the left), is adjacent to the north side of the building has several cracks in the stairs and along the retaining walls. Plants have begun growing through the cracks. The retaining wall has begun to tip over towards the parking lot due to the pressure/weight of the soil behind it as well as roots from the nearby tree. It also shows signs of chipping and breaking apart due to water infiltration and water expansion during the cold winter months. A handrail is located in the middle of the stair, however it is not up to code and it is very rusty. Guard rails and handrails are missing along the edge of the retaining wall for public safety. Hatfield Center School - Town of Hatfield, MA 94 Final Report June 25, 2014

95 B. Building & Infrastructure Assessment Landscaping There is very little or no designed landscaping around the building, There are only grass areas and some large mature trees to the north and south of the building, and at the north end of the west side adjacent to the street. Many of the large mature trees need pruning and removal of dead branches, etc. To the rear of the site is a large lawn that the recreation department uses for a little league baseball field and the school system uses for the field hockey field. To the east side of the site (along the river s front) is dense trees and brush that are overgrown and have not been maintained. There are several large mature trees scattered along the edges of the site. West Façade (south side) West façade (north side) Hatfield Center School - Town of Hatfield, MA 95 Final Report June 25, 2014

96 2. Recommendations & Cost Analysis for Infrastructure & Utility Improvements b. Necessary improvements to utilities Natural Gas Natural gas service lines are available for connection in Main Street but there is not a branch extending to the building. A new service connection will need to be added if the new heating system is determined to be considered for conversion from oil to gas. The boilers and burners are over 50 years old and in poor condition and must be replaced. The oil tanks should be removed and replaced with a new double wall unit or the heating plant converted to natural gas. Electricity The main power distribution grid lines run north-south on the opposite site of Main Street, crossing to a sub-pole on the northern half of the site and attaching to the building at the second floor projection of the west façade. It then runs down the face of the building and into the basement where the panels are located. 96

97 The service to the building consists of an existing 200 Amp, 208Y/120, 3 phase service which, due to the size of the building should be upgraded to at least a 400 Amp service. Main service is connected from three 25 KVA pole mounted utility transformers via overhead lines. The distribution system consists of several new panel boards located in the basement for service entrance, in the boiler room next to a fusible panel, and two on the second floor. The fusible panel located in the boiler room is more than 60 years old and in poor condition. One of the panels on the second floor is small with a capacity for only 12 circuit breakers. There is no formal electrical room. Distribution equipment should be tested and cleaned. Problems identified during inspection should be addressed. Additional distribution panels should be added if required by proposed building use. Electrical service equipment should be replaced and upgraded to meet the load requirements for an elevator, if proposed, and for air conditioning. 97

98 B. Building & Infrastructure Assessment Water Service The building s domestic water service consists of a 4 ductile iron entrance that does not appear to have a meter or pressure reducing valve. This 4 service serves the plumbing fixtures throughout the building as well as a standpipe riser with a tapping on each floor. There is a water line that leads from the street to the rear of the site. This water line is located to the north of the center school building and leads to the playfields. This line leads to a water fountain for public use as well as to a fire hydrant that is located nearby. The building sanitary is discharged to the Town s sewer system on Main Street. Its location and condition will have to be verified for new usage requirements. There are two fire hydrants located on site, one located at the front of the side along Main Street and the other is located to the rear of the building near the water fountain. Hatfield Center School - Town of Hatfield, MA 98 Final Report June 25, 2014

99 Telephone & Cable/Internet Telephone lines enter the building through the same overhead wiring distribution system as the electrical system. Additional upgrades are likely necessary, especially if a multitenant occupancy is proposed. Technology, whether for the introduction of cable or internet and other special system upgrades, should be considered as required to suit the proposed use of the building. Recommendations for Underground or Overhead Cables Consideration should be given for relocation of overhead cables to an underground trench in order to enhance the aesthetic appeal of the historic building, especially in its prominent location in the center of the Town. 99

100 2. Recommendations & Cost Analysis for Infrastructure & Utility Improvements c. Required accessibility modifications Accessibility The scope of accessibility alterations to the site & the Center School building varies depending on its intended occupancy type. Renovations should be undertaken to provide an accessible means of egress from the street or public way, as well from a designated parking area to at the first floor level, if there is a public use component within the building. Depending on the occupancy determined for further study, and the layout of interior spaces identified to be accessible, the basement level on the west side of the building may not be suitable as an alternative, but will be considered as progress develops. If a ramp to the first floor was required, the easiest location would be adjacent to the steps at the main entrance, which would need to be altered and an accessible ramp with suitable landings at top and bottom, handrails, and other required features, in accordance with 521 CMR and ADA, would be necessary. An elevator, which could be constructed on the east side or within the building, would provide accessibility to all floor levels, if it was required by the identified occupancies or desired by the developer. 100

101 3. Recommendations & Cost Analysis for Physical Improvements to the Building a. Necessary building and site improvements i. Summary of preliminary cost estimates for B.1a - B.2c Building Envelope Items identified as needing attention or repair: 1. Roofing a. Slate i. Existing Slate removal ii. New slate b. Flashing i. Remove flashing ii. New Flashing 1. Gable 2. Valleys 3. Cupola 4. Chimneys 5. Vent pipes 6. Entrance gable 7. Edge of roof 8. Ridge c. Dormers i. Strip/replace ii. Paint d. Gable Parapets i. Remove existing limestone ii. Repoint brick below area as required iii. Replace existing limestone iv. Re-caulking e. Overhangs i. Remove/replace fascia boards as required ii. Repaint fascia/purlins f. Chimneys i. Repoint as required 101

102 ii. Remove concrete caps iii. New concrete caps g. Cupola i. Remove from building ii. Remediate hazardous material iii. Restore iv. Re-install on building h. Sheathing i. Patch and repair as required 2. Masonry a. Brick i. Clean the exterior ii. Repointing 1. Area around water table 2. Area below windows (mostly on the east façade) 3. Area below capstones 4. Miscellaneous areas 5. Fix cracks in brick areas b. Limestone Accents i. Remove damaged sections ii. Clean existing iii. Replace with matching 3. Entry Stair a. Remove existing front entry stair b. Check for proper foundation c. Rebuild with new stair and ramp? 4. Windows a. Original fixed i. Repair existing b. Original operable i. Repair existing c. Existing operable (east façade) i. Removed windows ii. Replace with new to match original 1. Repair sills 2. Repair steel headers d. Basement i. Remove plywood infill ii. Repair rough opening iii. New water resistant windows at basement on west façade 102

103 e. Dormers i. Repair windows 5. Doors a. Front Entrance i. Remove existing ii. Replace with new to match b. Rear doors (5) i. Remove existing ii. Replace with new to match style c. HM side doors i. To remain, repair caulking as required ii. Remove if desired to match style of building 6. Louvers/Infills/Pipes a. Pipe penetrations i. to be removed b. Louver infills i. Fill in with false louver with insulated panel on inside c. Metal Panels (above windows on east façade) i. Remove metal panels ii. Replace with concrete matching material iii. Repair existing wood header as required 7. Storage shed a. Remove existing shed b. Repair existing building at the abutment of current storage shed to existing building i. Area between roof of shed and exterior brick wall 8. Site a. Excavate perimeter b. Provide footing drain c. Water proofing on foundation walls d. Refill with gravel drip edge Preliminary Cost $875,000 Interior Items identified as needing attention or repair: 1. Attic a. Repair valley framing members 103

104 b. Upgrade ceiling or roof Insulation 2. First & Second Floor a. Repair ceiling in multiple classrooms b. Remove carpets in multiple classrooms c. Wood floors i. Sand and refinish ii. Repair as required 3. Basement a. Scrape and repaint walls i. Plaster ii. Brick b. Repair ceiling damage Preliminary Cost $420,000 Structure 1. Seismic Design Information from soil boring results show that no unusual condition existing (see soil boring information included in appendix exhibit E of this report. 2. IEBC Requirements a. Chapter 5 Repairs b. Chapter 6 Level 1 Alteration c. Chapter 7 Level 2 Alteration d. Chapter 8 Level 3 Alteration e. Chapter 9 Change of Occupancy f. Chapter 10 Additions g. Chapter 11 Historical Buildings Preliminary Cost $487,

105 Mechanical/HVAC, Plumbing, Fire Protection, Electrical 1. Mechanical / HVAC B. Building & Infrastructure Assessment Recommendations Due to the age and condition of the existing HVAC system, any long-term plans should include total system replacement. Short-term plans should include boiler replacement. Preliminary Cost Boiler Replacement - $125,000 Total System Replacement - $600,000 - $850, Plumbing Recommendations The existing plumbing fixtures, piping, and equipment are over 50 years old, have exceeded their life expectancy, and do not meet current codes. These systems must be replaced in their entirety as part of any major renovation project. A new domestic water service with a pressure reducing valve and water meter to meet current codes. A new domestic hot water generating system, including all related system components and piping, should be provided. ADA/MAAB compliant plumbing fixtures and related piping should be provided to replace all non-compliant fixtures. Amount of fixtures will depend on building usage. Preliminary Cost $15/SF = $199, Fire Protection Recommendations Recommendations for the Fire Protection systems are based on the current Massachusetts State Building Code and Massachusetts General Law: Article 266 requires all buildings of Use Group B Business (over 7,500 sf in area) to be equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system. This existing building does not meet current code requirements. 105

106 4. Electrical B. Building & Infrastructure Assessment Under the current Massachusetts Existing Building Code, existing building in Use Group B are not required to be retrofitted unless they are substantially renovated or undergo a change in use. Unless the building is substantially renovated, the current codes do not require the building to be retrofitted with automatic sprinklers and/or stand pipes; however, any planned renovation should include this so that the building is not limited to its use in the future. Preliminary Cost $247,000 Recommendations Recommendations for the Electrical systems are based on code compliance, age and condition of the systems, and anticipated loads. The emergency lighting and egress lighting should be provided to comply with the Latest Life Safety Code. Exit signs should be installed, repaired, or replaced to meet the requirements of proposed building use and the requirements of the Life Safety Code. Lighting throughout the school should be upgraded to take advantage of current technology and efficient lighting and meet the requirement of the current Energy Code. Existing ballasts should be tested for PCB and disposed of in a proper manner for hazardous material. Distribution equipment should be tested and cleaned. Problems identified during inspection should be addressed. Additional distribution panels should be added if required by proposed building use. Electrical service equipment should be replaced and upgraded to meet the load requirements for an elevator and for air conditioning. Technology and special system upgrades should be considered as required to suit the proposed use of the building. The fire alarm system should be replaced with a new system that meets current code. Preliminary Cost New Electrical Service- $10,000 + Electric Company back charge (400 Amp Service) 106

107 New Power Distribution - $20,000 (new panels & Mech Equipment) New Lighting Systems - $80,000 New Fire Alarm - $45,000 Upgrade Exit and Emergency Lights $5,000 (Short term)\ Miscellaneous devices and wiring - $35,000 Hazardous Materials Recommendations Remediation is recommended for the materials readily observable including what appears to be peeling lead paint on the brick walls (the extent of which also indicates a moisture problem), peeling paint where the concrete floor has been painted, mold mainly along the west, north and south walls, vinyl asbestos floor tiles in three of the classrooms and a bathroom, asbestos pipe insulation, and asbestos integral to the boiler system. A more detailed survey by a hazardous material consultant is recommended. There is also the possibility that there may also be one or more original oil tanks under the floor slab near the boiler as indicated by a filler gauge and pipe down to the floor on the west wall near the boiler. The removal or presence of this original oil tank should be confirmed and investigated for remediation requirements and would add to this estimate. Preliminary Cost $120,190 (see detailed cost estimate in Section B.1.b.ii) Site Infrastructure 1. Parking 2. Pavement 3. Walkways 4. Curb Cuts 5. Site Stairs & Retaining Walls 6. Landscaping 107

108 Preliminary Cost $152,575 Site Utilities 1. Natural Gas 2. Electricity 3. Water Service 4. Telephone & Cable/Internet 5. Underground or Overhead Cables Preliminary Cost $150,000 Accessibility 1. Ramp & Replacement Steps 2. Elevator & Vestibule 3. Other Site & Building Elements Preliminary Cost $315,000 Demolition Demolition of the entire existing Center School building. Preliminary Cost $140, ,190 for hazardous material remediation = $260,

109 Preliminary Cost Estimate Summary Building Envelope $875,000 Interior $420,000 Structure $487,500 Mechanical/HVAC, Plumbing, Fire Protection, Electrical $1,596,500 (includes new systems) Total $3,379,000 Additional Costs Site Infrastructure $152,575 Site Utilities $150,000 Accessibility $315,000 Hazardous Materials $120,190 Total $4,116,

110 110 C. Marketing Assessment

111 C. Marketing Assessment C. Marketing Assessment 1. Context, Marketing Strategy & Action Plan a. Executive Summary Description of Facility As described in town documents, the former Center School Building is a 1914 Jacobean Revival style building located at 58 Main Street, across from the town hall. After serving as a school for many years, the building was used by the Western Massachusetts Regional Library System as their headquarters, starting in the early 1980 s. This use continued until Fall 2004 with the building being vacant since that time. The Center School contains approximately 13,000 square feet of finished space on its two floors and 6,000 square feet in the basement. The school sits on acres of land, with the rear nearly 5 acres serving as playing fields for the Hatfield Public School System and the Parks & Recreation department. Issues The consultants noted the following issues that will impact the adaptive reuse of the building: Environmental issues such as asbestos and the potential of lead paint, which will need to be remediated. The building is not code and ADA compliant, which will be costly to rectify. The main corridor on each floor is wide and the walls are loadbearing. The main walls that separate the classrooms are also loadbearing. This makes the subdivision of the space problematic. Currently there are parking spaces in the rear of the building. If reconfigured, 37 parking spaces can fit on the site. If the site is going to be developed into anything more than an 8-unit housing complex, then more parking will need to be built. Depending on the development option chosen, it will impact the use of one or both of the playing fields. Recommendations From meetings with the committee and information interviews, it appears that there are no public sector uses for the property in the foreseeable future. The consultant 111

112 C. Marketing Assessment recommends that the Town: Sell, or enter into a long-term land lease, for 3.8 +/- acres to a developer (to be chosen by the RFQ/ RFP process). The RFQ/ RFP will stipulate a master plan that should incorporate: - Converting the Center School to multi-unit housing - Permitting a total of 40 units of multi-family on the site - Creating a conservation easement for the remaining 2.5 +/- acres that front the Connecticut River into a park that will be used for walking trails and passive recreation. In advance of the RFQ/ RFP, determine and obtain funds to mediate the environmental issues in the Center. A more detailed list of Action Items is found in Section D of this report. 112

113 C. Marketing Assessment b. The Report i. Demographics The market area for the Center School located at 58 Main Street in Hatfield is defined by a twenty-minute drive time, rather than just the Town s borders. Using drive times reflects the geography and the commuting patterns of a region. In the case of Hatfield, where bridges to cross the Connecticut River are north and south of the Town, the market area parallels Interstate I-91 from Greenfield to the north and Holyoke to the south. Further analysis was done comparing 5 and 10-minutes to the 20 minute drive time. Source: ERSI Several key points of this analysis stand out: The population is low only 2,058 in the five minute radius and 6,953 in the ten minute radius. It is not until Holyoke, Amherst and Northampton are included that the population rises to 55,620 people. The median income per household is higher in the five minute radius ($57,696) than the balance of the market area, but slightly below the Massachusetts average ($61,000). 113

114 C. Marketing Assessment The population is older in the five mile radius and rising. In 2013 the median age was 48.8, by 2018 that will rise to For the market area the median age is 40.9 and is expected to rise to This is due, in part to the dominance of the Five Colleges in the market area, but outside of Hatfield. But the five minute radius is it still higher than either the Massachusetts median age of 40 and the United States average of Housing vacancy rates are lower in the 5 mile radius (4.8%) than the market (6%), Massachusetts (9.6%) and the United States average (11.2%). In the five-minute radius the median home value is slightly higher and values are expected to grow faster over the next five years when compared to the market area, the State and the United States. Summary The market area has good trends. The five-minute drive time with an aging population and low housing stock would indicate a need for some senior housing. Rising home prices in the Hatfield area accompanied with higher incomes is a positive attribute. ii. Information Interviews Bartram & Cochran interviewed a cross section of elected and appointed government officials, residents of Hatfield, housing directors at local institutions of higher education, local and New England developers and realtors (commercial and residential). The following summarizes those meetings and interviews to date: Uses - Public Sector Town Schools The superintendent reports that the Hatfield schools do not need any classroom space at this time or in the foreseeable future. If Center School had room for the television support station, he could put that space (now housed at Smith Academy) to better use. Smith Academy uses the playing field behind the school for field hockey; the baseball diamond is under the management of the Town s parks and recreation department. When discussing other community needs, he thought that there was demand for a private pre-school due to the long wait times at current facilities and the convenience of having a local alternative. Magnet and/or charter school A few years ago Center School was considered for a magnet school. A committee member interviewed said that the building was too small for that use and too expensive to renovate. 114

115 C. Marketing Assessment Town Offices Due to the recent renovation to the town hall, Town leadership reports that there are no needs anticipated for its use of the building. In addressing other community needs, such as a recreation area for group exercise classes, those interviewed felt that those needs were being met at the two schools and that additional space would probably not be needed. The senior center is now located in the basement of Town Hall. It would be nice to relocate them to a better location as funds allow. Library The Library had considered locating to the Center School several years ago, but it did not score well when compared to other alternatives. Factors considered included the cost of renovations and the existing building layout. They are in line for receiving a State grant of approximately $3.5 million in 2016, which would need to be matched by the Town or a capital campaign to proceed with their planned expansion of their current facility. The expansion would include a teen room with computers and study areas as well as a community room. In a discussion of other community needs, she also vocalized the need for a private day care provider. Performing Arts Center As the building does not have an auditorium it does not lend itself to a performing arts center. As there are several other options in the Valley, raising funds to build a new hall would be problematic. Uses Private Sector Commercial The commercial realtors interviewed reported that while Northampton has a very vibrant office market, it drops off dramatically in surrounding communities. The exception is the areas around exits of I-91, where medical office are doing well and getting strong rents. Northampton has rents in the $20 s, while the outlying area rents are in the mid-teens. Local brokers advised that space in Center School would lease for in the $5.00 to $7.00 per square foot range. Given the costs of renovating the Center School building, a developer would need to obtain in the $20 s. Broker quotes include: Hatfield center is three miles off I-91, and there are many better options for office occupancy. What office market? There is none for Hatfield center. Office space has been available next to Center School and it has been very difficult to lease. 115

116 C. Marketing Assessment A developer would need to have very patient money to lease the building for office space, as it would probably take over a year. I ve been marketing a similar school in Enfield for over three years with no success. Residential Northampton has a very strong rental market, with market one-bedroom rents in the $1,100 to $1,300 (plus utilities) range. Outside of Northampton, one bedroom rents are in the $900 to $1,250 (plus utilities) per month range. Developers interviewed had differing opinions about the ability to make a building of this size economically viable. Two felt that they could just use the original building for 8-12 units. The developers who specialize in subsidized housing reported that they would look to do a blend of different residential uses to allow them to cobble together their funding. They wanted a minimum of 40 units to be viable, preferably more than 60 units. Subsidized housing can be specialized, to include those with disabilities, such as MS, or are focused on a sector such as the elderly or veterans. Smith College houses their graduate students in their campus housing. The director of family housing at UMass said that they have 210 units for graduate family student housing. These units are 505 square feet with two bedrooms and lease for $800 a month. If students want other housing they go to Craig s List. The lack of access, due to few bridge crossings, from Hatfield to the Amherst area schools appears to eliminate the option of graduate student housing. Several local developers felt that there was a need for young professionals who are getting priced out of the Northampton market. Hotel/ Inn In addition to needing a zoning variance, a hotel is not viable at the site. Major hotels want to be close to the highway and would need a larger building or footprint to develop. The building structure does not lend itself to a B&B or Inn. Day Care The Superintendent suggested the idea of a private pre-school since there is such a high demand/wait list for parents in this area. The head librarian also mentioned the need for additional all day pre-schools in the area. In an interview with the director of the Northampton YMCA, he said that the Y had once had a day care program in Hatfield, but pulled out due to low enrollment (5 children). He would be glad to revisit, but pointed out that they typically operate in schools, where they pay only a nominal amount of rent. They have gotten out of the early infant care program. He pointed out that most private providers prefer locations off the highway, so that parents have easy access. 116

117 C. Marketing Assessment General Comments The following statements are taken from information interviews with residents of the Town, and are given without attribution: The walk to the River is part of the loop many walkers take, and should be preserved. The Center School is an historic icon of the town. Citizens will only back a reuse program that will not raise tax rates. Town is by nature financially conservative. The Town is defined by its agricultural heritage. The Town has become a bedroom community. Several voiced the idea of bringing in young professionals Several voiced the need for housing for seniors who want to downsize from the current homes and want to remain in Town. iii. Parking A detailed analysis of parking can be found in Section B1 d) of this report. From a market perspective, any expanded use of the building will require that one or both of the playing fields will need to be re-purposed. The overall development plan will need to incorporate access to the Connecticut River, as the trail to the water is a very popular amenity. iv. Control One alternative that the Town has to maintain control of the property is to not sell, but to enter into a long term building and ground lease. This is an agreement in which a tenant is permitted to develop and is obligate to maintain a piece of property during the lease period, after which the land and all improvements are turned over to the property owner. A ground lease indicates that the improvements will be owned by the property owner unless an exception is created, and stipulates that all relevant taxes incurred during the lease period will be paid for by the tenant. With the amount of capital improvements needed at this site, most lenders would require at least a thirty to forty-year lease. One developer was unequivocal about ownership. He was interested if the building was sold for $1 as-is (he would deal with remediation). His felt that he would need about one more acre to provide for parking and a buffer between the apartment complex of 8-10 units and the playing fields. Other developers expressed an interest to own in fee, but did not preclude other alternatives at this early date at the time of discussion. In either case outright sale or long-term lease the Town should determine the design criteria that the developer would need to meet. The developers said that the cooperation of the town would be a very important element in the success of the project. c. Alternatives The consultants looked to a wide range of alternatives for the Town s consideration. 117

118 C. Marketing Assessment Option Economic Impact Pros Cons The following alternatives would have a low probability of success: Office High Good economic driver for jobs Not economically viable due to the high cost of remodeling and the location of the load bearing walls. High parking requirement would require giving up at least the baseball diamond. Inn (Hotel not allowed by zoning) Moderate, mostly low paying jobs. Good economic generator Not economically viable. Building not big enough, high parking, not close to highway, layout not good for inn. The public sector uses are viable only with Town support; private sector uses are viable: Public Sector Uses Reinforces the town (town hall, school, center and provides library, senior center amenities etc.) Town will bear the costs of renovations and annual operating expenses, to the extent they are not covered by outside grants. Estimated cost of remodeling is $4,116,765. Adds to the town budget, other than grants and donations, no income to offset costs. Annual operating costs estimated to be $4.50/ SF for utilities and basic repair and maintenance, or $89,000 per year. Mixed Public/ Private Use (day care, music school, community center, health club share the building) Could be revenue neutral if private sector can offset public sector uses. As above, cost of remodeling is $4,116,765. Reinforces the town center A harder sell as the tenants are typically not credit worthy and pay low rent. Town would have to pay for renovations of the building. Market rate housing (8-units) Estimated cost of construction is $4,466,765; annual taxes $56,599 (1) Some developers appear to be able to work within the building s footprint. May need to: sell the property do remediation provide incentives. High costs of base building remediation may not make this alternative viable Market rate and/ or subsidized housing (40 units+) 58, 350 SF Estimated cost of construction of 40 units is $12,386,765 annual taxes $156,940. (1) More developers interested in larger project. More feet on the street. Could take care of a market demand, such as the elderly, vets, MS, or other specialty needs. Developer to pay for remediation. Potential for long term land-lease. The baseball diamond and field hockey field would need to be relocated. Higher density in the historic district. 118

119 The following are the default options: Option Economic Impact Pros Cons Building remains vacant Holding pattern - waiting for an opportunity Annual budget of $1,000 for utilities and insurance, plus $25,000 for maintenance. C. Marketing Assessment Building deteriorates over time, no new taxes, no economic advantage Building Demolished Estimated $140,000 to demolish, plus hazardous material remediation costs of $120,190, a total of $260,190. Building site waiting for an opportunity, no holding costs, use as passive recreation No economic advantage, no new taxes, loss of an historic structure (1) Based on a mill rate of $12.67 per $1000 of value (Town of Hatfield s FY2014 rate). 119

120 C. Marketing Assessment d. Action Plan Marketing Strategy The consultant recommends uses the two stage Request for Qualification (RFQ)/ Request for Proposal (RFP) method for choosing a developer. This method allows the maximum response rate, as developers will not have to expend large sums of money to state their case and interest. The RFQ will provide the development community the opportunity to state their interest in redeveloping the Center School and adjoining land into 40 units of housing. Developers will respond with their qualifications and references and answer questions such as their desire to have a land lease or outright purchase and their ability to take the building as-is or need to have it delivered to them environmentally clean. After reviewing the responses a short list is created and those developers will respond to an RFP, which is much more detailed. In advance of writing the RFQ, the Town should: Create a data base The Town will need to create a data base for the distribution of the RFQ. This list should include area developers, architects, engineers, historic preservation groups, as well as residential and commercial brokers. Those that were interviewed as part of this process are a start of this data base. PR The Town should create a press release to get newspaper, radio and television coverage about the project. This would include a contact for interested parties. Developers respond favorably to RFQ/ RFPs that are specific and clear. The Town therefore needs to decide the following: The Property The land to be conveyed will need to be defined. Density In advance of the RFQ/ RFP being issued, the Town should be clear as to the number of units that it will permit. This report recommends 40 +/- units. Property Value A fair market value needs to be established for the property and the development rights to build 40 units. An appraisal should be ordered for this purpose. 120

121 C. Marketing Assessment Purchase vs. Long term Lease The RFQ should ask developers to respond with their interest for either outright purchase or land lease. The Town should be aware that a long-term lease would be between years. Remediation The Town should make every effort to obtain grants to remediate the environmental issues on the property, as developers will place a premium if they need to incorporate the clean-up in their budget. Restrictions If the Town is going to request units are to be set aside for elderly Town residents, Town employees, or any other interest group, that should be made clear. Community Room At the committee level it was discussed asking the developer to incorporate a community room into their design. This amenity could be used by many, including seniors, teens, and community organizations. This can be listed as an option that the Town wants the developer to consider. Funding In the analysis, the consultants looked at ways to fund the environmental costs (estimated to be $120,190), and the general costs of remodeling and bringing the Center School building into code compliance (estimated to be $3,996,575), for a total cost of $4,116,765. Town Funding Paul Boudreau, the Town Administrator, reports there is no funding set aside from the Town for this project. The Community Preservation Committee funding that has been used for accessibility in the past, but there is no designated funding set aside to have the Center School gain funds from that source. If the Town decides to use the building for public sector uses, it will need to raise the money through grants, donations and/or passing the costs to the taxpayers. If the decision is made to sell or lease the building for residential use, The Town will get a better return if they can deliver the building with environmental concerns abated, as developers will take that risk into consideration in the negotiations. Several developers indicated that they would do the remediation as part of their development. Others said that they expect the owner to pay for the remediation, especially if it is a long term lease. In either case, the developer would bear the cost of remodeling to Code 121

122 C. Marketing Assessment If the Town needs to pay for the cost of the clean-up there are several ways of covering that expense including obtaining grants and taking a loan. The loan would be paid back by new revenues created by both new taxes and a long-term building/land lease. - Income from Lease If the Town retains ownership and enters into a land and building lease, the income from that could pay off a loan taken by the Town to pay for the remediation. The lease payments are calculated based upon the value of the property, volatility of the market, credit worthiness of the lessee and terms of the lease (such as subordination). As an example, if the building and 1.3 acres of land is valued at $500,000, an annual lease payment would be in the 5-10% range or $25,000 to $50,000 per year. As noted above, the value of the property with development rights will be determined by an appraisal. - Income from Property Taxes If the Town either sells or enters into a building/land lease, then the developer will pay property taxes on the property, which can offset the cost of any debt. As noted above, the estimated taxes for residential use are estimated to be $56,599 to $156,940 per year, dependent on the density. Capital Campaign If the Town decides to keep the property for the use of its citizens, then a capital campaign with naming rights should be considered, as some citizen might want to pay for the improvements for a senior or teen center. PVPC James Mazik forwarded the following from Andrew Loew of PVPC: PVPC would be able to use our assessment funds as a grant-of-service there if we had the dollars. Right now we don't for asbestos and other hazardous substances, but are applying for more. We already have a waiting list for the very limited amount of money we have left in our current grant. Cleanup is tougher because the Town would have to actually receive any EPA funds through a loan, grant or subgrant, and it sounds like they would be ineligible because they caused the problem. There might be ways around that restriction if they have a redevelopment authority or a local nonprofit (CDC?) who could own the site during the cleanup. MassDevelopment is a potential option if the planned reuse is for economic development purposes, but they are also out of money at least until this coming fall, and have their own eligibility constraints. He will be happy to meet with the town to discuss options. MassDevelopment In an interview with the Massachusetts Housing and Economic Development office, they said that the State grants are focused on renovating buildings 122

123 C. Marketing Assessment (including those with environmental issues) that will have some subsidized housing. This is part of the State s 40B program to have 10% of the housing stick in a community be affordable. This state's finance and development agency, works with businesses, nonprofits, financial institutions, and communities to stimulate economic growth across the Commonwealth. During FY2013, MassDevelopment financed or managed 350 projects generating investment of more than $2.4 billion in the Massachusetts economy. These projects are projected to create more than 7,000 jobs and build or rehabilitate 800 residential units. MassDevelopment has recently issued $17.1 million in tax-exempt bonds on behalf of two affordable housing projects in greater Boston: $11.8 million on behalf of Chapman Arms LLC, a 50-unit apartment facility in Harvard Sq.; and $5.3 million on behalf of Brighton-Allston Apartments LLC, a 60-unit rental housing facility on two sites in Boston's Allston and Brighton neighborhoods. Both will use bond proceeds to acquire and renovate the apartments and preserve the affordable housing units. Affordable Rental Development Housing Development programs provide funding opportunities to for-profit and non-profit developers. The programs offered encourage the development of affordable rental projects that serve both families and individuals with annual incomes at or below 80% of area median income. Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF) Capital Improvement and Preservation Fund (CIPF) Capital Improvement and Preservation Fund (CIPF) is a state funded program that provides funds for the preservation of expiring use properties or for properties with expiring project-based rental assistance contracts. Commercial Area Transit Node Housing Program (CATNHP) Commercial Area Transit Node Housing Program (CATNHP) is a state funded bond program available to municipalities, non-profit and for-profit sponsors to support rental housing production or rehabilitation. Community Based Housing (CBH) The Community Based Housing (CBH) program provides funding for the development of integrated housing for people with disabilities, including elders, with priority for individuals who are in institutions or nursing facilities or at risk of institutionalization. 123

124 C. Marketing Assessment Facilities Consolidation Fund (FCF) Facilities Consolidation Fund (FCF) is a state funded program for non-profit developers to create and preserve affordable rental housing for clients of the Department of Mental Health and the Department of Mental Retardation. HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) The HOME Program is a federally funded program that provides funding to nonprofit or for-profit developers for affordable rental housing production and rehabilitation. Housing Innovations Fund (HIF) The Housing Innovations Fund (HIF) is a state funded program for non-profit developers to create and preserve affordable rental housing for special needs populations. Housing Stabilization Fund (HSF) The Housing Stabilization Fund (HSF) is a state funded program for municipalities, non-profit, or for-profit developers to support affordable rental housing production and rehabilitation. Lead Abatement Program The Massachusetts Lead Abatement Program is a federally funded program for municipalities and non-profit developers serving communities that have been determined to be at "high risk" for lead paint contamination. Local Initiative Program (LIP) The Local Initiative Program is a state housing program that was established to give cities and towns more flexibility in their efforts to provide low and moderateincome housing. Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) The Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program (LIHTC) is a federally authorized program for non-profit and for-profit developers to promote the construction and rehabilitation of affordable rental housing. Often these units are within a larger mixed income development. Qualified Allocation Plan Each year, the state allocating agency for the federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program is required to publish a plan describing how it intends to award the credit. DHCD, as the allocating agency, is responsible for preparing the annual allocation plan and making it available for review by interested members of the public before final publication. Federal/ HUD Grants Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) works to ensure decent affordable housing, to provide services to the most vulnerable in our 124

125 C. Marketing Assessment communities, and to create jobs through the expansion and retention of businesses. CDBG is an important tool for helping local governments tackle serious challenges facing their communities. The annual CDBG appropriation is allocated between States and local jurisdictions called "non-entitlement" and "entitlement" communities respectively. Entitlement communities are comprised of central cities of Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs); metropolitan cities with populations of at least 50,000; and qualified urban counties with a population of 200,000 or more (excluding the populations of entitlement cities). States distribute CDBG funds to nonentitlement localities not qualified as entitlement communities. HUD determines the amount of each grant by using a formula comprised of several measures of community need, including the extent of poverty, population, housing overcrowding, age of housing, and population growth lag in relationship to other metropolitan areas. Historic 20% Tax Credits A 20% income tax credit is available for the rehabilitation of historic, incomeproducing buildings that are determined by the Secretary of the Interior, through the National Park Service, to be certified historic structures. The State Historic Preservation Offices and the National Park Service review the rehabilitation work to ensure that it complies with the Secretary s Standards for Rehabilitation. The Internal Revenue Service defines qualified rehabilitation expenses on which the credit may be taken. Owner-occupied residential properties do not qualify for the federal rehabilitation tax credit. Each year, Technical Preservation Services approves approximately 1000 projects, leveraging nearly $4 billion annually in private investment in the rehabilitation of historic buildings across the country. The building is not on the historic registry, which it would need if developers are to obtain historic tax credits. Two developers felt that would be an important part of the funding. A third developer felt that the building would not benefit from that designation, as the ability to get the funds is low and the cost implications of restoration are high. Consultants recommend that no action be taken by the Town to put on the historic registry until a course of action is decided upon. Massachusetts Preservation Projects Fund (MPPF) Provides funding through the Massachusetts Historic Commission for the restoration and preservation of buildings on the National Historic Register. The funds are typically used for visible improvements such as entrances, windows or certain structural repairs. The funds are typically $100,000 and will require matching amount be raised. 125

126 C. Marketing Assessment e. Sources & Interviews Sources Alvarez & Marsal 35 New South Street website Bancroft School Apartments website BEA of the U.S. Department of Commerce BNIM website ERSI Investopedia Massachusetts Housing and Economic Development Office Pioneer Valley Planning Commission Rent.com Smith College web site Town of Hatfield web site Trulia.com University of Massachusetts web site Interviews Hatfield Residents Town of Hatfield Arch Street Bowles Development Cannon Real Estate CBRE Domus, Inc Fuss & O Neil HAP J.P Dwyer Mercer Development PVPC University of Massachusetts Town of Chesterfield Weld Management Williamson Commercial YMCA John Wilkes (committee member) Buster Symanski (committee member) Betty Porada (committee member) Linda Wendolowski (committee member) Robert Bartlett (committee member) Steve Jasinski (commercial broker) Jeff Boyle, Selectman Paul Boudreau, Town Administrator Jenni Williams, Assistant Assessor John Robert, School District Eliza Langhans. Librarian (also toured site) Colin O Keefe (drove to site) Charles Bowles (toured site) Dan Schachter John Reed Ann Lentini Robert May Michelle McAdaragh Jeff Dwyer Garrett Heher (drove to site) James Mazik Justin Dowd (family housing) Paul Lischetti E. Dennis Walsh John Williamson David Marks 126

127 D. Development Recommendation 127

128 D. Development Recommendation 1. Scenarios for Potential Development & New Construction a. Overview, Goals & Parameters Overview The marketing assessment has led to the determination that residential housing is the most viable development option for both the Center School building and the site in general. Therefore, this portion of the study is focused on providing a design concept for how this could be accomplished. There are three main sections to this development scenario which can be found in the next three sections of this study, followed by a preliminary cost estimate for this new work. The final design solution will be determined through a partnership between a selected developer and the Town, and is likely to evolve significantly through its implementation. Both the marketing analysis and the feedback from the Town were combined and balanced to create this scenario in which 40 units of residential housing are created, with eight in the Center School building, 32 in new construction behind the building, and open space preserved near the Connecticut River for Public use. The property might be either sold or placed into a long-term lease as market demands would dictate. The results would be saving a historic building in the center of Town, adding a complimentary land use, and reinforcing the vibrancy of the Town center. Public access to through the existing right-of-way located on top of the flood control dike would be maintained and enhanced. Goals & Parameters Save, preserve and re-purpose the historic Center School building Add property tax revenue for the Town of Hatfield Maintain the historic/aesthetic appeal of the center of the Town of Hatfield Develop the site while preserving the character of Historic Hatfield through compatible site development Maintain public access to and use of the site near the Connecticut River 128

129 D. Development Recommendation 1. Scenarios for Potential Development & New Construction b. Proposed Site Development Site Scheme A Summary Under this site scheme, development would add 40 units of residential housing to the site, as the marketing analysis had indicated that this would be the minimum viable number of units that would appeal to developers. In order to limit the impact on the site, and to retain a useable portion of the site adjacent to the river for public use, the 40 units are located on the western perimeter of the site. Improvements to the site include accessibility to the existing Center School and throughout the landscape, and parking for the 40 units as well as extra spaces as mandated by the Town s zoning requirements. In addition, the proposal would include improving the existing right-of-way pedestrian and vehicular road along the south edge of the site and make it more of a public way to the riverfront. The eastern 2.5 acres of the site, adjacent to the Connecticut River, would be a public park for the town or some other public use to be determined. Housing Residential units would be located in the existing Center School as well and in new construction throughout portions of the site. Approximately eight 1-bedroom units could be added to the existing structure, while 32 2-bedroom units would be added as new construction. In this scheme, the concept for the new construction was to separate the 32 units into eight 4-unit clusters to create small neighborhoods on the site. This allows for smaller buildings on the site, which would keep the scale of the overall complex down, and allow the new development to relate to the existing residential infrastructure of Hatfield. The arrangement of the eight 4-unit neighborhoods would be organized in a manner to allow the required parking for the housing units to be dispersed and to eliminate the creation of a single mass parking lot servicing the site. However, this approach spreads the new construction area further across the site, which in turn would require the relocation of the existing hockey field that is used by the Town s high school. 129

130 D. Development Recommendation Parking Parking would be provided to meet site development needs and conform to the Town s zoning requirement for two spaces per unit, plus additional visitor parking, for multifamily housing developments. This proposed site development would allow for approximately 118 parking spaces which would be sufficient for the 40 residential units, visitors, and for community residents visiting the proposed 2.5 acre public area on the eastern portion of the site adjacent to the river. The parking is dispersed across the site to allow for a closer proximity to the units. The creation of multiple, smaller parking areas also reduces the perceived scale of the parking surface when compared to having a singular mass parking lot on the site. Accessibility Improvements Site improvements would include items such as repairing or repaving existing vehicle lanes, parking areas, and sidewalks, as well as adding new ones as needed on the site, all with code-compliant slopes and curb cuts. Public Park & Road Development Throughout the project meetings, Committee Members expressed the need to retain a portion of the site for public use and to maintain access to the right of way that is located on top of the existing dike to the south and to the east of the property. The citizens of Hatfield use this access road, which is adjacent to the main walking loop in the Town, to access the Connecticut River beyond as well as other routes along the river s edge. Several Committee Members suggested adding a public park or accommodating other public uses along the river for ongoing public access the site which will permit ongoing Town control of the public open space, an imperative driven by its proximity to the historic town center, enhancing the connection between the Town and the river. Currently, there are few connection points where the residents of Hatfield can interact with the river. Adding a designated public area where river access could occur would create or enhance a unique feature for the Town. Uses could further include such community inter-connectivity activities such as cookouts and other similar events, much like the existing Lion s Club Pavilion located behind the elementary school. 130

131 D. Development Recommendation 131

132 D. Development Recommendation Site Scheme B Summary This alternate site development scheme incorporates the same number of residential housing units as Scheme A with a total of 40, but utilizes a fundamentally different approach to unit clustering and grouping of parking areas. While the first scheme sought to disperse development, this scheme seeks to group construction together in order to maximize open space on the site. Not only is a portion of the site at the eastern edge along the Connecticut River left open for public use, but a significant percentage of the site along the southern edge is also left undeveloped to maximize open space. As in Scheme A, improvements to the site include accessibility throughout the site, parking for the 40 residential units, and additional spaces as mandated by the Town s zoning requirements. In addition, this proposal would also include improving the existing right of way pedestrian and vehicular road along the south edge of the site and make it more of a public way to the riverfront. The eastern and southern portions of the site, which are about 3 acres combined, would be a public park for the town or some other public use to be determined. Alternatively, while the eastern portion should remain for public use, the southern open space portion could be reserved for residents of the development, such as recreation, gardens, or landscaped grounds. Housing The residential unit allotment would be similar to Scheme A in that eight 1-bedroom units would be added to the existing structure and 32 2-bedroom units would be new construction, for a total of 40 units. Again the 32 units would be arranged into eight 4- unit clusters to create mini neighborhoods on the site; however the arrangement would be different. In this scheme, six of the eight neighborhoods would be located along the north boundary of the site and two neighborhoods would be parallel to the existing Center School. This concentrates the buildings to the north and allows for better solar orientation, as well as allowing for more sun exposure across the site. Parking Parking would be added to the site to conform to the Town s zoning requirements of two spaces per housing unit, plus additional spaces for visitor parking. This proposed site development would accommodate slightly more parking, approximately 122 spaces, which would be sufficient for the 40 residential units as well as additional spaces for visitors, and for public visitors to the proposed open space on the eastern edge of the site adjacent to the river. Unlike Scheme A in which parking is dispersed, parking would be concentrated into two areas on the site. This would create a denser parking pattern, 132

133 D. Development Recommendation reduce the amount of development area covering the site, and provide for more open space for public and/or development use. Public Park & Road Development This scheme also incorporates the town s desire for public space in the historic center of Hatfield. The scheme allows for the maximum available percentage of the site to be designated as public area (2.8 acres). As briefly mentioned earlier, it could also allow for community garden space for the development s residents and other community members. Hatfield is historically a farming community, and a large percentage of the people moving into this new development would be retirees as members of the Town have identified. 133

134 D. Development Recommendation 134

135 D. Development Recommendation 1. Scenarios for Potential Development & New Construction c. Center School Unit Layout Options Introduction The existing Center School is a rectilinear building oriented to the north-to-south. The structure is two stories with a walk-out basement (on the east façade only) and has an unfinished attic space. The first and second floor layout includes a circulation corridor along the west side (Main Street side), stairways at each end, and four classrooms on the east side of the building. The basement layout is similar but has mechanical space in one of the central rooms. The attic contains numerous structural elements and reinforcing metal trusses which are prohibitive to the creation of residential units. Residential Units The proposed Option 1 plan is presented as the least costly design scheme for converting the building to residential use. Options 2 and 3 are presented as alternatives and are described at the end of this section. Option 1 would narrow the existing 11-8 wide corridor to 6-0 and add a one-bedroom unit to each of the original classroom spaces. This would create a total of eight one-bedroom residential units, all of which would be oriented toward the adjacent field and Connecticut River to the east. Each unit would have an entry vestibule with a closet, storage room, kitchen, living room/dining area, bathroom and a bedroom. The exterior masonry walls would be insulated to help reduce thermal bridging and heat loss. The masonry party walls between units could be left unfinished with exposed brick walls as an aesthetic feature. Common Spaces The existing north and south stair would remain and be the primary and secondary means of egress vertically through the building. These stair shafts would need to be enclosed and upgraded to fire current codes. Within the four alcoves on the left of the corridors (two on the first floor and two on the second floor), there is a potential for the creation of a variety of community spaces and shared spaces such as laundry facilities, gathering spaces, mail area, storage, etc. The basement would contain the mechanical and electrical rooms and additional secure storage spaces for the building s tenants. The basement is not suitable for residential occupancy without significant site drainage improvements and building upgrades. 135

136 D. Development Recommendation 136

137 D. Development Recommendation 137

138 D. Development Recommendation Alternative Unit Layouts As noted above, the proposed Option 1 plan is presented as the least costly design scheme for converting the building to residential use. However, Options 2 and 3 are presented as alternatives in order to show that there are a numerous variety of possibilities. These demonstrate that the number of units can vary from at least eight to ten, less if larger units are desired and possibly more if studio-type units had been explored as well. Those layouts presented here include a mix of one, two, and three bedroom units, with some units facing west in addition to the majority that face east, and others having views both east and west. The alternative layout schemes are also presented to demonstrate that an increase in the amount of rentable square footage of space is possible, as well as to create a variety of unit types and sizes in the existing building. However these schemes are more costly as they require more demolition of the existing interior, such as removing a portion of the north and south stairs, and portions of the second floor for construction of new stairs. Option 2 Fundamentally, this option varies from Option 1 in that it creates larger units on the second floor. There are still a total of eight units in the building, and the first floor units still contain four one-bedroom units, but they are slightly smaller than in Option 1 in order to accommodate the new stairs required to access the second floor units. All of these new stairs are accessed from the main corridor on the first floor. The square footage on the second floor is maximized by incorporating all of the existing corridor, extra rooms off the corridor, and the existing stairs. The result is that the second floor contains one two-bedroom unit of approximately 1,150 square feet, and three threebedroom units ranging from approximately 1,335 square feet to 1,575 square feet. Option 3 Demonstrating that more than eight units are possible, Option 3 includes six units on the second floor for a total of ten units. Through a similar strategy as Option 2, it maximizes the area on the second floor, and providing access to units on the northwest and southwest corners of the building through modifications to the existing end stairs. The results on the second floor are four one-bedroom units, one two-bedroom unit, and one three-bedroom unit. These range in size from 770 square feet to 1,335 square feet. There two larger center units also have views to both the east and the west, and the entrances are now more private. 138

139 D. Development Recommendation 139

140 D. Development Recommendation 140

141 D. Development Recommendation 141

142 D. Development Recommendation 142

143 D. Development Recommendation 1. Scenarios for Potential Development & New Construction d. New Construction Unit Layout Overview To further delineate the ideal development scenarios discussed in this feasibility report, the following options depict proposed simple unit housing structures that could serve to fit the requirements set in place by the earlier marketing analysis. As the marketing analysis indicated that a minimal of 40 units of residential housing is needed to attract developers and to make a project such as this financially viable. More units, 50 to 60, would have been more enticing to developers, but was felt to be too large in scale for the center of the Town and significantly reduce available space for public use adjacent to the Connecticut River. As demonstrated in the previous section, a total of 8 to10 units could be incorporated into the existing Center School building on the first and second floors, leaving roughly 32 units to be created though new construction. The marketing analysis and feedback from the Town and Housing Authority indicated that there is a demand for two-bedroom elderly housing in Hatfield. There is also the possibility of focusing unit design for specific groups, such as veterans, the elderly, and other potentially subsidized housing types. The proposed grouping of units creates eight four-unit clusters. In order to mitigate the scale of the development, and more closely relate to the adjacent housing typology in this area of Hatfield. Each four-unit neighborhood would have a common access point from an adjacent sidewalk, which could also serve as a patio. Two units would be ongrade, which could serve accessibility needs, and two additional units would on a second floor. Public areas such as living room, kitchen, and dining room would be located towards the front of the unit, with private areas, bedrooms and bathrooms placed at the rear. The units are arranged so that the bathrooms and mechanical spaces provide a buffer between the adjacent units, as well as to simplify plumbing and mechanical systems. Each unit would have two bedrooms, two bathrooms (one adjoining with a bedroom), storage space, mechanical space, washer/dryer closet, a kitchen and a living room. The first floor units would have a formal dining area, and the second floor units would have an exterior outdoor space. Each unit would be roughly around 930 square feet of aggregate space, in keeping with the marketing analysis suggestion of a 900 to 1,100 square foot target. 143

144 D. Development Recommendation Site & MEP Water, gas, sanitary and electric utilities shall be distributed along the drives and parking spaces to be extended to each new building. Each building should have the water, gas and electric utilities either master metered per building or have individual metering for each tenant. The gas lines and the electrical medium voltage site distribution shall be provided by the respective utility company. Pad mounted utility transformers would be located near the new dwelling unit buildings with secondary electric services to exterior electric metering. The local gas company shall provide piping to gas meters located on the exterior of each building. Each building will have either a single water meter or separate water meters for each dwelling unit in the building, depending how the developer wishes to balance initial cost and features within the development. 144

145 D. Development Recommendation First Floor Second Floor 145

146 D. Development Recommendation 1. Scenarios for Potential Development & New Construction Overview e. Preliminary Cost Estimate The following preliminary cost estimate provides an order of magnitude based on Site Scheme A, and Center School unit layout Option 1. Site Scheme B would be similar in cost to Scheme A, but the alternative Options 2 and 3 (to the existing building) would be more costly, Option 1 is presented here as a lowest case baseline for comparison. New Construction (based on Site Scheme A) 2,000 SF per floor x 2 floors = 4,000 SF per building x 8 buildings = 32,000 SF of new building area + 20% for circulation, systems, & infrastructure = 6,400 SF 32,000 SF + 6,400 SF = 38,400 SF 38,400 SF x $175/SF (Approximate cost per SF) = $6,720,000 Lower level for parking 19,200 SF x $25/SF = $480,000 Site Development at 10% of Construction cost = $720,000 Subtotal = $7,920,000 Center School Building Restoration & Development (based on Option 1) 6,650 SF per floor x 2 floors = 13,300 SF 13,300 SF x $250/SF (Approximate cost per SF) = $3,379,000 6,650 SF basement renovation with minimal development 6,650 SF x $100/SF (Approximate cost per SF) = $665,000 Site Development at 7% of Construction cost = $302,575 Abatement Cost $120,190 Subtotal = $4,466,765 Total Preliminary Construction Cost $12,386,

147 147 E. Appendix

148 58 MAIN ST, HATFIELD, MA SUMMARY OF DEMOGRAPHICS January

149 CONTENTS I. Drive Time Map II. Median Household Income Map III. Median Home Value Map IV. Area Profiles 1. 5-Minute Drive Time Minute Drive Time Minute Drive Time 4. Hampshire County V. Comparison of Demographic Data 149

150 58 MAIN STREET, HATFIELD, MA DRIVE TIME MAP 3 150

151 58 MAIN STREET, HATFIELD, MA MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME 4 151

152 58 MAIN STREET, HATFIELD, MA MEDIAN HOME VALUE 5 152

153 DEMOGRAPHIC SUMMARY - 5 MINUTE DRIVE TIME Demographic Statistics 5-Minute Drive Time Population: 2, Total Households: 915 CAGR 2 ( ) Total Households: 0.5% Total Growth ( ) Total Households: 6.6% CAGR 2 ( ) - Total Households: 0.3% Total Growth ( ) Total Households: 1.3% 2013 Median Age: 48.8 years 2018 Median Age: 50.6 years 2013 Percent Minority Population: 3.9% 2018 Percent Minority Population: 4.4% Housing 5-Minute Drive Time Median Home Value: $283,392 CAGR 2 ( ) - Home Value: 5.4% 2013 Vacancy Rate (All Housing Units): 4.8% Change by 2018 Vacancy Rate: -55 bps 2013 Owner Occupancy: 67.7% Change by 2018 Owner Occupancy: +209 bps Income 5-Minute Drive Time Median HH Income: $57,696 CAGR 2 ( ) - HH Income: 2.7% 2013 Median Disposable Income: $44, Median Net Worth: $142, Per Capita Income: $39,451 Employment 5-Minute Drive Time Unemployment Rate: 7.9% 2013 Top 3 Employment Sectors: Educational Services: 19.1% Health Care / Social Assistance: 14.3% Retail Trade: 13.8% 2013 Top 3 Occupations: Management: 15.2% Sales and Sales Related: 13.1% Education / Training / Library: 12.9% Education 5-Minute Drive Time 1 % of Population with Associates Degree: 19.0% % of Population with Bachelor Degree: 24.5% % of Population with Graduate/Professional Degree: 13.3% 1 ESRI Business Analyst 2 Compound Annual Growth Rate 6 153

154 DEMOGRAPHIC SUMMARY - 10 MINUTE DRIVE TIME Demographic Statistics 10-Minute Drive Time Population: 6, Total Households: 3,218 CAGR 2 ( ) Total Households: 0.4% Total Growth ( ) Total Households: 5.4% CAGR 2 ( ) - Total Households: 0.2% Total Growth ( ) Total Households: 1.1% 2013 Median Age: 46.2 years 2018 Median Age: 47.7 years 2013 Percent Minority Population: 9.3% 2018 Percent Minority Population: 10.1% Housing 10-Minute Drive Time Median Home Value: $273,073 CAGR 2 ( ) - Home Value: 4.9% 2013 Vacancy Rate (All Housing Units): 6.2% Change by 2018 Vacancy Rate: -20 bps 2013 Owner Occupancy: 62.2% Change by 2018 Owner Occupancy: +184 bps Income 10-Minute Drive Time Median HH Income: $55,885 CAGR 2 ( ) - HH Income: 2.8% 2013 Median Disposable Income: $43, Median Net Worth: $109, Per Capita Income: $34,012 Employment 10-Minute Drive Time Unemployment Rate: 7.7% 2013 Top 3 Employment Sectors: Educational Services: 22.0% Health Care / Social Assistance: 18.2% Retail Trade: 12.4% 2013 Top 3 Occupations: Management: 13.0% Education / Training / Library: 11.8% Office / Administrative Support: 10.5% Education 10-Minute Drive Time 1 % of Population with Associates Degree: 13.3% % of Population with Bachelor Degree: 22.6% % of Population with Graduate/Professional Degree: 19.6% 1 ESRI Business Analyst 2 Compound Annual Growth Rate 7 154

155 DEMOGRAPHIC SUMMARY - 20 MINUTE DRIVE TIME Demographic Statistics 20-Minute Drive Time Population: 55, Total Households: 23,323 CAGR 2 ( ) Total Households: 0.2% Total Growth ( ) Total Households: 2.8% CAGR 2 ( ) - Total Households: 0.1% Total Growth ( ) Total Households: 0.5% 2013 Median Age: 40.9 years 2018 Median Age: 41.8 years 2013 Percent Minority Population: 16.6% 2018 Percent Minority Population: 18.5% Housing 20-Minute Drive Time Median Home Value: $256,781 CAGR 2 ( ) - Home Value: 5.1% 2013 Vacancy Rate (All Housing Units): 6.1% Change by 2018 Vacancy Rate: +58 bps 2013 Owner Occupancy: 54.3% Change by 2018 Owner Occupancy: +83 bps Income 20-Minute Drive Time Median HH Income: $52,187 CAGR 2 ( ) - HH Income: 2.9% 2013 Median Disposable Income: $41, Median Net Worth: $64, Per Capita Income: $31,871 Employment 20-Minute Drive Time Unemployment Rate: 7.5% 2013 Top 3 Employment Sectors: Educational Services: 25.4% Health Care / Social Assistance: 15.6% Retail Trade: 12.3% 2013 Top 3 Occupations: Education / Training / Library: 13.4% Office / Administrative Support: 11.4% Management: 9.4% Education 20-Minute Drive Time 1 % of Population with Associates Degree: 8.9% % of Population with Bachelor Degree: 23.4% % of Population with Graduate/Professional Degree: 23.5% 1 ESRI Business Analyst 2 Compound Annual Growth Rate 8 155

156 1.0% 0.8% 0.6% 0.4% 0.2% 0.0% COMPARISON OF DEMOGRAPHIC DATA Household Growth 9 5 minutes Drive Time 10 minute Drive Time 20 minute Drive Time Hampshire County Massachusetts United States 5 minutes Drive Time 10 minute Drive Time 20 minute Drive Time Hampshire County Massachusetts United States 5 minutes Drive Time 10 minute Drive Time 20 minute Drive Time Hampshire County Massachusetts United States 0.8% 0.6% 0.4% 0.2% 0.0% Household Growth % 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% 2013 Median Age 5 minutes Drive Time 10 minute Drive Time 20 minute Drive Time Hampshire County Massachusetts United States 2013 Minority Population 156

157 COMPARISON OF DEMOGRAPHIC DATA HOUSING DATA $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $ Median Home Value 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10 5 minutes Drive Time 10 minute Drive Time 20 minute Drive Time Hampshire County Massachusetts United States 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% Home Value Growth 5 minutes Drive Time 10 minute Drive Time 20 minute Drive Time Hampshire County Massachusetts United States 5 minutes Drive Time 10 minute Drive Time 20 minute Drive Time Hampshire County Massachusetts United States 2013 Owner Occupancy 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 5 minutes Drive Time 10 minute Drive Time 20 minute Drive Time Hampshire County Massachusetts United States 2013 Vacancy Rate 157

158 COMPARISON OF DEMOGRAPHIC DATA INCOME & EDUCATION $70,000 $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $ Median Household Income 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 11 5 minutes Drive Time 10 minute Drive Time 20 minute Drive Time Hampshire County Massachusetts United States 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% Income Growth 5 minutes Drive Time 10 minute Drive Time 20 minute Drive Time Hampshire County Massachusetts United States 5 minutes Drive Time 10 minute Drive Time 20 minute Drive Time Hampshire County Massachusetts United States 2013 Unemployment Rate 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% 5 minutes Drive Time 10 minute Drive Time 20 minute Drive Time Hampshire County Massachusetts United States 2013 % of Population with Bachelor Degree or Higher 158

159 About The Bancroft School Project Located in Historic Manheim Park Neighborhood in Kansas City, The Bancroft School Apartments are a rehab of The Bancroft Elementary School that opened in 1904 but closed its doors in 2000.The renovation includes half of the 50 units in the school, and the other half in a new building on school grounds. The renovation has a Social Economic Environmental Design (SEED) Competition Design Award. The awards honor extraordinary design projects that are committed to high quality public interest design. Bancroft will include 1, 2, and 3 bedroom apartments with 6,250 square feet of amenity space and onsite parking for residents. Front Elevation Master Plan Bancroft School Apartments is LEED Platinum certified and meets the highest standards of green building. Some of the sustainable features of the building include: a 75 kilowatt solar array more than 400 panels strong - installed the historic building s roof 2,220 gallons of no-voc paint, donated by Benjamin Moore from their Aura and Natura lines 40,000 square feet of Cradle to Cradle certified hardwood flooring and carpet, donated by Shaw Floors from their EPIC flooring line Occupancy sensors to manage energy consumption and costs, donated by Leviton Energy-efficient windows Fresh air ventilation Pervious concrete parking lot Reclaimed brick walkways Native landscaping 159

160 Addition Interior Before and After One bedroom 160

161 Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II) The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) created the Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II), a tool used by investors, regional planners, and government officials to gauge the impact of a change in economic activity on a local community or a particular region of the country. The premise of RIMS II is that an initial change in economic activity leads to additional changes in economic activity in other industries or sectors of an economy for example, an increase in furniture manufacturing leads to more production of wood and textile products. The increased production of wood and textile products, in turn, leads to more logging. Workers benefiting from these increases may also spend more, which adds to economic activity. To account for the relationships between industries and households, RIMS II uses information from BEA s industry accounts. These accounts include the recipes of goods and services used by industries to produce their own products for example, they show how much manufacturers spend on wood and textile products to produce furniture. These accounts also show how much households spend on particular goods and services. RIMS II uses the relationships from BEA s industry accounts data, but adjusts them using regional economic data to account for the fact that many of the goods and services purchased by local industries and households are imported from outside a given region for example, a local furniture manufacturing industry may need to purchase lumber that s imported from another region. These imports result in money leaking out of the economy because they don t aid local economic activity. The adjusted relationships are then used to calculate multipliers, which can be used to estimate the total effect that an initial change in economic activity has on a region. This total effect can be measured in terms of output (sales), value added (gross domestic product), earning, or jobs (full and part time). Each set of multipliers includes six types of multipliers four final-demand multipliers and two direct-effect multipliers. The final-demand multipliers are all per-output multipliers. To use these multipliers, you will need an estimate of the value of the output purchased by the final user (also known as the final-demand change.) The final-demand multipliers times the final-demand change valued in producer prices will provide you with an estimate of total gross output, total earnings, total jobs, and total value added, depending on the final-demand multiplier that you use. The direct-effect earnings multiplier is an earnings-per-earnings multiplier, and the direct-effect employment multiplier is a jobs-per-jobs multiplier. To use the direct-effect earnings multiplier, you will need an estimate of the initial change in earnings. Similarly, 161

162 to use the direct-effect employment multiplier, you will need an estimate of the initial change in jobs. The initial changes in earnings and employment should factor in only those full-time and part-time employees residing in the region who work in the industry producing the final-demand output. This is an important consideration when defining the study region. Jobs impacts estimated using the final-demand and direct-effect employment multipliers include both part-time and full-time employees. The RIMS II multipliers do not provide estimates of jobs in terms of full-time equivalences. RIMS II provides two types of multipliers for estimating the impacts of changes on earnings: Final-demand multipliers and direct-effect multipliers. These multipliers are derived from the table of final-demand output multipliers. The finaldemand multipliers for earnings can be used if data on final-demand changes are available. In the final-demand earnings multiplier table, each column entry indicates the change in earnings in each row industry that results from a $1 change in final demand in the column industry. The impact on each row industry is calculated by multiplying the final-demand change in the column industry by the multiplier for each row. Description of RIMS II Multipliers Multiplier Final-demand output Final-demand earnings Final-demand employment Final-demand value added Direct-effect earnings Direct-effect employment Definition Total industry output per $1 change in final demand Total household earnings per $1 change in final demand Total number of jobs per $1 million change in final demand Total value added per $1 change in final demand Total household earnings per $1 initial change in household earnings Total number of jobs per initial change in jobs Source: BEA Uses RIMS II multipliers have been used by both the public and private sectors. There are numerous examples of their use: Federal Government agencies have used the multipliers to study the local impact of government regulation on specific industries and to assess the local economic impacts of Federal actions such as military base closings. State and local governments have used the multipliers to estimate the regional economic impacts of government policies and projects and of events, such as firms locating within their state, or to assess the impacts of tourism. Businesses and private consultants have used the multipliers to estimate the economic impacts of a wide range of projects, such as building a new sports facility or expanding an airport; of natural disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina; or of special events, such as national political conventions. 162

163 Limitations RIS II does have certain limitations: It is not based on full-time employment, so industries that employ staff on a parttime basis have a higher multiplier. It does not reflect any major changes in the economy There is no time dimension as to when jobs and earnings will be created The need for local supplies can skew the data. For instance, in a rural area there will be more importing of goods that are manufactured than in an industrialized area. If the study area includes both rural and industrialized, the data is more accurate. The study area also makes a difference if new jobs are not being created, but rather just moved from another location in the study area. The data is not used to study housing types. Analysis This analysis is based on the 2006 BEA RIMS II data for Hampshire County. We note that they updated the data in For the purposes of this study the Direct Effect for jobs was used. As an example, if 20 new jobs are created in the renovation of the Center School, the following would be the impact to the economy: Industry Multiplier Direct Effect Employment (Jobs) Jobs add to the total economy Retail Insurance Carriers Hospitals, nursing homes and residential care facilities Performing arts, museums and related activities Accommodations (hotels) Food services Educational Services Source: BEA The largest impact on the economy would be the addition of office jobs, as those 20 employees would use other services in the community. Please note that all these factors are in a relatively tight range. By way of example, certain manufacturing industries have employment multipliers of over 3. Please see the attached document for all industries. 163

164 RIMS II Multipliers (2006/2006) 1 Table 2.5 Total Multipliers for Output, Earnings, Employment, and Value Added by Industry Aggregation City of Easthampton, Hamphire County INDUSTRY Output/1/ (dollars) Earnings/2/ (dollars) Final Demand Employment/3/ (jobs) Multiplier Value-added/4/ (dollars) Earnings/5/ (dollars) Direct Effect Employment/6/ (jobs) 1. Crop and animal production Forestry, fishing, and related activities Oil and gas extraction Mining, except oil and gas Support activities for mining Utilities* Construction Wood product manufacturing Nonmetallic mineral product manufacturing Primary metal manufacturing Fabricated metal product manufacturing Machinery manufacturing Computer and electronic product manufacturing Electrical equipment and appliance manufacturing Motor vehicle, body, trailer, and parts manufacturing Other transportation equipment manufacturing Furniture and related product manufacturing Miscellaneous manufacturing Food, beverage, and tobacco product manufacturing Textile and textile product mills Apparel, leather, and allied product manufacturing Paper manufacturing Printing and related support activities Petroleum and coal products manufacturing Chemical manufacturing Plastics and rubber products manufacturing Wholesale trade Retail trade Air transportation Rail transportation Water transportation Truck transportation Transit and ground passenger transportation* Pipeline transportation Other transportation and support activities* Warehousing and storage Publishing including software Motion picture and sound recording industries Broadcasting and telecommunications Information and data processing services Federal Reserve banks, credit intermediation and related services Securities, commodity contracts, investments (Continued) Region Definition: Hampshire, MA *Includes Government enterprises. 1. Each entry in column 1 represents the total dollar change in output that occurs in all industries for each additional dollar of output delivered to final demand by the industry corresponding to the entry. 2. Each entry in column 2 represents the total dollar change in earnings of households employed by all industries for each additional dollar of output delivered to final demand by the industry corresponding to the entry. 3. Each entry in column 3 represents the total change in number of jobs that occurs in all industries for each additional 1 million dollars of output delivered to final demand by the industry corresponding to the entry. Because the employment multipliers are based on 2006 data, the output delivered to final demand should be in 2006 dollars. 4. Each entry in column 4 represents the total dollar change in value added that occurs in all industries for each additional dollar of output delivered to final demand by the industry corresponding to the entry. 5. Each entry in column 5 represents the total dollar change in earnings of households employed by all industries for each additional dollar of earnings paid directly to households employed by the industry corresponding to the entry. 6. Each entry in column 6 represents the total change in number of jobs in all industries for each additional job in the industry corresponding to the entry. 164 NOTE.--Multipliers are based on the 2006 Annual Input-Output Table for the Nation and 2006 regional data. Appendix C identifies the industries corresponding to the entries. SOURCE.--Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II), Regional Product Division, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

165 RIMS II Multipliers (2006/2006) 2 Table 2.5 Total Multipliers for Output, Earnings, Employment, and Value Added by Industry Aggregation City of Easthampton, Hamphire County INDUSTRY Output/1/ (dollars) Earnings/2/ (dollars) Final Demand Employment/3/ (jobs) Multiplier Value-added/4/ (dollars) Earnings/5/ (dollars) Direct Effect Employment/6/ (jobs) 43. Insurance carriers and related activities Funds, trusts, and other financial vehicles Real estate Rental and leasing services and lessors of intangible assets Professional, scientific, and technical services Management of companies and enterprises Administrative and support services Waste management and remediation services Educational services Ambulatory health care services Hospitals and nursing and residential care facilities Social assistance Performing arts, museums, and related activities Amusements, gambling, and recreation Accommodation Food services and drinking places Other services* Households Region Definition: Hampshire, MA *Includes Government enterprises. 1. Each entry in column 1 represents the total dollar change in output that occurs in all industries for each additional dollar of output delivered to final demand by the industry corresponding to the entry. 2. Each entry in column 2 represents the total dollar change in earnings of households employed by all industries for each additional dollar of output delivered to final demand by the industry corresponding to the entry. 3. Each entry in column 3 represents the total change in number of jobs that occurs in all industries for each additional 1 million dollars of output delivered to final demand by the industry corresponding to the entry. Because the employment multipliers are based on 2006 data, the output delivered to final demand should be in 2006 dollars. 4. Each entry in column 4 represents the total dollar change in value added that occurs in all industries for each additional dollar of output delivered to final demand by the industry corresponding to the entry. 5. Each entry in column 5 represents the total dollar change in earnings of households employed by all industries for each additional dollar of earnings paid directly to households employed by the industry corresponding to the entry. 6. Each entry in column 6 represents the total change in number of jobs in all industries for each additional job in the industry corresponding to the entry. 165 NOTE.--Multipliers are based on the 2006 Annual Input-Output Table for the Nation and 2006 regional data. Appendix C identifies the industries corresponding to the entries. SOURCE.--Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II), Regional Product Division, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

166 Client: H.A.I. Architecture SEABOARD Test Boring/ Location: 59 Main Street,Hatfield, MA DRILLING, INC. Monitor Well ID: B-1 Project: Hatfield Center School P.O. BOX 3026 SPFLD, MA Contractor: Seaboard Drilling, Inc. DRILLING/SOIL LOG Sheet No. 1 of 1 Casing Core Barrel Hammer (Weight-lb./fall-30") Start: 6/21/2014 Type HSA SS N/A 140/30 300/24 Finish: 6/21/2014 O.D. Inch 8-1/2" Rig Type: B-53 Driller: Jeff Nitsch I.D. Inch 4-1/4" Depth (ft.) Blows Sample Recovery FIELD CLASSIFICATIONS AND REMARKS Range No. 0-2' S-1 13" Moist Brown Fine SAND, Trace Silt, Trace Organics. 5-7' S-2 16" Moist Brown Silt, Little Fine SAND ' S-3 17" Dry Brown Fine SAND, Little Coarse SAND. 13' ' S-4 20" Wet Brown Fine SAND, Trace Coarse SAND ' S-5 13" Wet Brown Fine SAND, Trace Silt ' S-6 23" Wet Grey Brown Fine Coarse SAND, Trace Gravel. 25'. SAMPLE PENETRATION RESISTANCE lb. Wt. Falling 30" on 2" O.D. sampler Density Cohesive Consistence PROPORTIONS # of Hammer Blows very loose # of Hammer Blows very soft / soft trace 0 to 10% 0-4 loose med-stiff / stiff little 10 to 20% 5-9 med/dens very stiff / hard some 20 to 35% dense and 30 to 50% very dense 166

167 Client: H.A.I. Architecture SEABOARD Test Boring/ Location: 59 Main Street,Hatfield, MA DRILLING, INC. Monitor Well ID: B-2 Project: Hatfield Center School P.O. BOX 3026 SPFLD, MA Contractor: Seaboard Drilling, Inc. DRILLING/SOIL LOG Sheet No. 1 of 1 Casing Core Barrel Hammer (Weight-lb./fall-30") Start: 6/21/2014 Type HSA SS N/A 140/30 300/24 Finish: 6/21/2014 O.D. Inch 8-1/2" Rig Type: B-53 Driller: Jeff Nitsch I.D. Inch 4-1/4" Depth (ft.) Blows Sample Recovery FIELD CLASSIFICATIONS AND REMARKS Range No. 0-2' S-1 5" Top Soil Dry Brown Fine SAND, Trace Coarse SAND, Trace Gravel. 5-7' S-2 7" Dry Brown Fine SAND, Some Silt ' S-3 19" Dry Brown Fine SAND, Trace Coarse SAND. 12' ' S-4 11" Wet Brown Fine SAND, Trace Coarse SAND ' S-5 12" Wet Brown Fine SAND, Trace Coarse SAND ' S-6 18" Top 9" Wet Brown Fine SAND, Trace Coarse SAND. Bottom 9" Wet Grey Clay, Trace Silt ' S-7 20" Wet Grey Red Clay, Little Fine SAND, Trace Gravel, Trace Coarse SAND ' S-8 18" Wet Grey Red Fine Coarse SAND, Little Gravel ' S-9 24" Wet Red Brown Fine SAND, Trace Coarse SAND ' S-10 24" Wet Brown Grey Silt, Trace Fine SAND, Trace Clay ' 100/3" S-11 0" No Recovery 50'. SAMPLE PENETRATION RESISTANCE lb. Wt. Falling 30" on 2" O.D. sampler Density Cohesive Consistence PROPORTIONS # of Hammer Blows very loose # of Hammer Blows very soft / soft trace 0 to 10% 0-4 loose med-stiff / stiff little 10 to 20% 5-9 med/dens very stiff / hard some 20 to 35% dense and 30 to 50% very dense 167

168