KENT, Conn.—The Swift House Special Investigative Committee rolled up its sleeves last Thursday and began to assess estimated costs for bringing the ancient building into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Selectmen expanded the charge of the committee after they received its original report, which offered two options: restoration of the building by a nonprofit organization or, failing that, a deed-restricted sale to a private entity. Action on the report was tabled at a July 24 town meeting, and the Selectmen have set a Sept. 24 deadline for the committee to provide further information.
Part of the issue facing the committee is a lack of funding. Prior to the end of the fiscal year on June 30 there were residual funds in the 2025-26 budget that could have been used to hire an architectural consultant to assist with getting the property on the National Register of Historic Places. Committee members feel this step to be vital if restoration grants are to be sought.
The fiscal year’s deadline passed, however, without the funds being expended. The only money available for this fiscal year are earmarked line items for maintenance.
The investigative committee had been charged by the Selectmen with reviewing the estimated expenses developed by the architectural firm Silver-Petrucelli in 2024 and to see if local contractors might be able to lower some of that estimated $2 million cost. Believing that the cost estimate was in line with what the town could expect to pay, the committee did not pursue this portion of its charge.
“There were some puts and takes that you could argue one way or the other in the Silver-Petrucelli report, but it seemed accurate and in the right ballpark,” said Committee Chair James Anderson during a July 14 meeting. “So, I didn’t see the point in approaching contractors and asking them to bid on a project that is completely unfunded. I think that is in bad faith.”
The committee settled on a line-by-line review of the report to see what could be adjusted, what is practical and what is affordable. Contractors familiar with historic preservation will be asked for cost estimates, not bids.
At the committee’s July 28 meeting, members assumed continued ownership by the town and the need to comply with ADA requirements so it can be used as a visitor’s center, meeting space or for other possible uses. Member Christine Adams said James Harris, a trustee at Preservation CT and an historic architect, could be a resource for reviewing the Silver-Petrucelli report, and that Dr. Daryn Reymen-Lock could assist in applying for the National Registry.
The primary goal of conferring with local contractors is to identify work necessary to reopen the building to the public. For that purpose, an accessible entrance must be created, and a handicap ramp be added. Silver-Petrucelli placed the door on the south side of the structure and estimated the cost at $28,000 to $40,000. A connecting ADA ramp, originally located on the east side, would have cost $63,000 to $90,000.
The committee eliminated the ramp on the east side of the building and the door on the south side, recommending that both be placed on the west side, which has the best door and an unobtrusive place for handicap parking at the back of the structure. This would preserve the historic façade of the structure.
It found that the second floor has value as a possible residence and could be upgraded overtime. It struck out a provision for a handicap bathroom on that level.
It found that rebuilding and leveling the floor for a storage room should be eliminated if the space is not needed, saying the cost and scope of work would be inappropriate as the area is not original or usable. The committee members also nixed making the staircase to the second floor ADA compliant as a better opportunity exists in another portion of the building. A second set of stairs should be closed to the public and used only by town employees. Cost for the two sets of stairs was estimated $135,000.
Windows could be an expensive item—estimated at $65,000 to $110,000. Adams said the issue should be approached with caution because, if the original windows are removed, it could affect the application for the National Register. Instead, the committee concluded that the original windows should be repaired wherever possible and that interior storm windows be installed.
The figure estimated for repair and replacement of interior walls and ceilings likewise received a skeptical review from committee members. They commented that the $75,000 estimate from Silver-Petrucelli seemed like a “gut job” that would remodel everything and that it needs reconsideration. They also discussed how insulation could be installed behind plaster walls.
Members will talk to the fire marshal about a sprinkler system as the entire building has to be within the fire code, but members went on an elimination binge when it came to a water heater ($2,000); plumbing fixtures ($10,000) a new water distribution system to new fixtures ($1,000) and a second-floor waste and ventilation system ($10,000).
Members worried about a Silver-Petrucelli recommendation to demolish the existing furnace, estimated at $40,000, and the installation of heat pumps at $102,000. Members saw this as an expensive proposition that might endanger the building’s historic nature. They listed it as “an area for a significant revisit.”
The committee decided an $8,400 item for replacement of the electrical service with a three-phase 400A service was “overkill.” And a contractor would be needed to assess rewiring the whole building at a cost of $14,000.
Pole lights in the parking lot would be eliminated if they were designed solely for esthetic purposes, saving $4,900.
Total savings based on the preliminary review of the Silver-Petrucelli report, would range from $803,000 to $932,800, leaving the project cost at about $1.45 million.
The committee will next meet Tuesday, Aug. 11, at 6 p.m.
