KENT, Conn.—The Swift House Investigative Committee will finalize its report to the Selectmen this week with three recommendations for the Board of Selectmen.
The committee had submitted an earlier report recommending that the town encourage formation of a Friends group to undertake fundraising for the restoration of the 18th/19th century building. Failing that, a secondary recommendation was that it be sold.
The town has owned the building, considered to be the oldest structure in the village center, since the 1970s. It has been closed since before the Covid pandemic and cannot be opened again until it is brought into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, at least in the areas open to the public.
No matter what the town decides to do with the building, the committee determined that a preservation easement should be placed on it, preventing its demolition and preserving its historic façade. It also wants National Register of Historic Places recognition for it, which will make grants easier to obtain.
The selectmen asked the committee to seek updated estimates of costs for restoration from local contractors. The architectural firm Silver-Petrucelli prepared a plan for restoration in May 2024 that would have cost more than $2 million, a sum most thought too rich for the public to embrace.
The investigative committee worked through each Silver-Petrucelli recommendation to determine which could be postponed, ignored or phased in, but the cost remained formidable.
“I’ve spoken to several people who say prices are up and up and up, and they don’t want to do any more,” said committee member Marge Smith at last week’s meeting. “I would really like to put the option of selling it on the table. If we’re waiting three-four-five years to [raise funds for its restoration], things are only going to get more expensive.”
Smith, Kent’s town historian, is passionate about the building’s preservation but feels the best road forward is to put an easement on it and find an “interested buyer who would love the house as a house.” A private restoration would remove the costly ADA compliance.
She acknowledged that the fair market value of the property in swanky Kent would go down with the historic preservation restriction, but added, “it would make it more attractive to this kind of buyer, and, in return, it is taken off the town’s shoulders.”
At least one local person has indicated interest in purchasing the building and preserving it.
Other possible options include going out to bond to pay for all the upgrades at one time, making the building functional for any town purpose assigned to it, and a phased-in restoration with a Friends group doing fundraising for restoration outside of the town’s budget.
Committee member Jason Wright, who is also a member of the Board of Finance, said he does not believe finance members would endorse the idea of bonding. “The Board of Finance would not be thrilled about throwing away our bonding capacity for Swift House,” he said. “We’ve worked really hard to keep that line available. We have been very stringent with our budgets and [the town is] not in debt.”
Still, he acknowledged, the Selectmen can always propose that course of action.
The third option, the phased-in restoration over four or five years “is worrisome for the overall health of the building,” members agreed.
Wright pledged to work on developing a list of five or six people who might be willing to fulfill the Friends role and at the same time to draft the language for the phased-in option for the report to the selectmen. Smith said she would work on the language arguing for the sale of the building.
The group will present the report to the Selectmen by Sept. 14.
