Affordable housing appears to be off the table, but architects have come up with a plan to turn the old high school into municipal offices, much-needed space for the Council on Aging, and recreation department, and other town functions. And they say it can be done in phases, without the $60 million price tag attached to an earlier plan for the enormous property.

Architects from the Brewster Thornton Group presented their concept for reusing the old building to the select board last week. Now the next step is due diligence on the building’s septic system and well, coming up with cost estimates and funding opportunities and then presenting a draft master plan back to the town as well as a timeline or breakdown on how it can be done in phases.

“The building is actually very suited to handling quite a few different (town) departments,” architect Nate Ginserg said.

“We understand that a $60 million budget is not realistic, so we’re going to break it down into bite size pieces to find funding,” added architect Christine Shea.

Currently, the plan access the first and second floors, as well as the basement, via a single entrance, with perhaps a second entrance for students. Under a layout presented last week, a host of office town offices would find a new home in the mostly decommissioned building. They include veterans’ services with at least 510 square feet of space, recreation with at least 6,630 square feet of space, the Council on Agin with at least 12,920 square feet of space and town offices, moved from the town hall annex, filling roughly 3,570 feet of space. There would be 23,800 square feet of shared space, 10,670 feet for school administration and classroom/gym space totaling some 18,300 square feet.

The Council on Aging, which is bursting at the seams at its Reed Road senior center, would have “lots” of space, Shea said. Options include moving the cafe and supportive day program to dedicated and shared spaces, including the gym and auditorium, and moving administrative offices as well.

Housing off the table

Though they spoked to a developer versed in reusing and rehabilitating large public buildings, architects told the town that it doesn’t seem feasible to pursue a housing component given the number of units that could be built.

“They felt like this building would only be interesting to them to renovate if they could get 30 to 40 units in the building,” said Shea. “That would mean probably the whole building.”

“The areas of concern that came up where, how do we separate the building? How do we have a development that has space so the town doesn’t necessarily own the units or rent the units?” Ginsberg said.

Developers’ “margins are so low right now that any kind of obstruction, or any piece where they’re sharing or where the residents have to compromise, is kind of a concern for them. The best possible (plan) for the affordable developer that we spoke to was a clean site.”

Dedicating any substantial percentage of the site to housing would also impact town services that also need the space, Shea said.

“The reality is that the COA, the rec department and the school department, they all have needs. Those are growing needs and you’d have to do one or the other or find space for them” elsewhere.

Housing off the table

The talk of moving away from housing didn’t sit well with select board member Craig Dutra, who serves on the affordable housing board.

He said that while he understands what the architects said, “I also understand that we have a lot of synergy with the council on aging and committee on disabilities. I’m not going to support it as you’re proposing.”

But his fellow councilors said they tend to agree that the time to consider affordable housing in the old building has passed.

“This feels like the closest we have gotten to actually getting somewhere” on the future of the building, which has been studied for five years,” chairwoman Shana Teas said.

“I think that we have to stop talking about affordable housing. I’m for affordable housing (and) if we could find another property, I would absolutely support that. But I think that that is going to get in our way of making any progress. I don’t think we should spend time and money continuing that option — I think that if someone wanted to come in and develop it, they would have come in and purchased it by now.”