Station Landing | Wellington Circle | Medford

A major reason why some cites like Hong Kong is able to run, but also run profitably is air rights. As long the MBTA gets a good cut, this would be a good way for the MBTA to get some sorely needed fund. Though why does it feel like the MBTA is dragging its feet to this possible source of money...
 
stefal said:
This will likely have to eventually split into its own thread:

Banker & Tradesman:
Medford to Seek Air Rights Development at Wellington Station

Seems like it's already iffy, but interesting the city is taking a serious look at this...
Click to expand...

:love::love::love: FINALLY!!! :love: :love: :love:

Mixed use multi-family and commercial is a no-brainer and should be to a very high density of mixed uses. While they're at it: solicit the developers to deck over the bus drop-off area and construct a proper, climate-controlled station facility.

Also, I hope developers don't dismiss the site's potential for an air-rights stadium to be constructed her as well. Mixed-use and recreational development aren't mutually exclusive... the Wellington station, yard, and parking lot is MASSIVE.

dshoost88 said:
Build it north of the pedestrian bridge. The pedestrian bridge can be modified into an elevated pedestrian plaza over the tracks lined with shops and services people using this regional, multi-modal transit hub can better access. And then above/north of that would be where the stadium goes.

Here's a to-scale comparison showing the area now vs. with the Red Bull Arena on it.

wellington-revs-jpg.2694

wellington-revs2-jpg.2695
Click to expand...
 
dshoost88 said:
:love::love::love: FINALLY!!! :love: :love: :love:

Mixed use multi-family and commercial is a no-brainer and should be to a very high density of mixed uses. While they're at it: solicit the developers to deck over the bus drop-off area and construct a proper, climate-controlled station facility.

Also, I hope developers don't dismiss the site's potential for an air-rights stadium to be constructed her as well. Mixed-use and recreational development aren't mutually exclusive... the Wellington station, yard, and parking lot is MASSIVE.
Click to expand...

I was just going to bump that... not gonna happen, but a cool picture.

I believe that the MBTA is pretty locked in on Wellington for a bus garage at this point, so I bet we see a separate TOD proposal with a bus facility and commuter garage on the east side of the tracks soon, too.
 
RFI is out for Wellington air-rights, with submissions due 10/31.



Developers will be required to design projects that include a bus maintenance facility that the MBTA plans to relocate from the Fellsway to Wellington by 2029. The projects also should be designed to retain MBTA customer parking and a loss of income to the transit agency.
Click to expand...
 
There shouldn't be ground parking next to any rapid transit station.

Plus the stations landing garage has a bunch of mbta parking that is never full, so surface parking next to the station is totally unnecessary.
 
tysmith95 said:
There shouldn't be ground parking next to any rapid transit station.

Plus the stations landing garage has a bunch of mbta parking that is never full, so surface parking next to the station is totally unnecessary.
Click to expand...
I think there is still a need to have the surface parking lot given that it is significantly closer to the train station and thus, more accessible for anyone disabled
 
The city should have bought the weather station property and combined it with this RFI to make one cohesive area. Another disappointment is the second to last bullet point "Any modification/relocation of customer parking to allow for air rights development should not result in a loss of net income to the MBTA or result in a negative customer experience. " or basically calling for the same amount of spaces.

I have not been keeping up with the fellsway bus facility relocation plan, but if the facility could go where the weather station property currently is that would be ideal, with possibly a condo tower on the river side
 
I'm very curious about what will happen with the 800'+ walkway. It really should be activated with some retail, or at least some benches and vegetation. Maybe even extend Earhart Landing as a pedestrian-only path to the station, and activate that as well. I'm afraid the developer will leave the current bridge alone, which will force pedestrians to take circuitous paths.

Likely outside the scope of the project, but I also see a lot of housing North of Revere Beach Pkwy, but there's no convenient pedestrian connection to the T station. Everyone has to go west to Fellsway, and then go back east again.

DrFreewind said:
Another disappointment is the second to last bullet point "Any modification/relocation of customer parking to allow for air rights development should not result in a loss of net income to the MBTA or result in a negative customer experience. " or basically calling for the same amount of spaces
Click to expand...

Maybe it would be possible to gather some data on how full the parking lot gets. If the lot is never near-full, then it should be possible to cut the number of spaces.

Now, I'm sure someone in this forum will shoot down all my wishful thinking here.
 
W-4 said:
I'm very curious about what will happen with the 800'+ walkway. It really should be activated with some retail, or at least some benches and vegetation. Maybe even extend Earhart Landing as a pedestrian-only path to the station, and activate that as well. I'm afraid the developer will leave the current bridge alone, which will force pedestrians to take circuitous paths.

Likely outside the scope of the project, but I also see a lot of housing North of Revere Beach Pkwy, but there's no convenient pedestrian connection to the T station. Everyone has to go west to Fellsway, and then go back east again.



Maybe it would be possible to gather some data on how full the parking lot gets. If the lot is never near-full, then it should be possible to cut the number of spaces.

Now, I'm sure someone in this forum will shoot down all my wishful thinking here.
Click to expand...

I think it's very unlikely that we'll see anything over the yard proposed anytime soon. "Air rights" is a misnomer for this, which is really focused on the current parking lots.

That's why the pie-in-the-sky dream for a soccer stadium over the yard is such a cool idea - it resolves the whole decking thing at once. Bear in mind that not a single MBTA yard has ever been decked.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: W-4
Equilibria said:
I think it's very unlikely that we'll see anything over the yard proposed anytime soon. "Air rights" is a misnomer for this, which is really focused on the current parking lots.

That's why the pie-in-the-sky dream for a soccer stadium over the yard is such a cool idea - it resolves the whole decking thing at once. Bear in mind that not a single MBTA yard has ever been decked.
Click to expand...

South stations new bus terminal kind of counts. Yea its a terminal and not a yard, but as far as decking over a bunch of parallel tracks its basically the same thing. The tracks are laid out the same as cabot yard, theres just a station at the end.
 
Equilibria said:
I think it's very unlikely that we'll see anything over the yard proposed anytime soon. "Air rights" is a misnomer for this, which is really focused on the current parking lots.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? The B&T article specifies the yard as part of the project, and so does that RFI.
 
W-4 said:
Are you sure? The B&T article specifies the yard as part of the project, and so does that RFI.
Click to expand...

It's part of the RFI, but I doubt it will be anything but a "potential future phase" in any of the proposals. I hope I'm pleasantly surprised.
 
Scanned through, cynical thoughts...
Able -Very ambitious, cover the entire train yard, no expense spared!
Greystar - We will develop the low hanging fruit of the property but disregard any air rights over the station .
HYM - We will help you develop but through Intensive analysis, we guaranty the whole area will be underwater soon.
Preotle, Lane - We will develop the low hanging fruit of the property and we can incorporate the adjacent property who happens to be a client, as well as disregard any air right over the station.
NE Development - A huge garage front and center on the property and labs.
Davis- squeeze a lot of T program and some buildings on the site, no waterfront. At least they gave the T a bus facility.
QuakerLane - We would like to provide anything you imagine.
Rise - Use air rights over a portion of the train yard to build a new bus facility, as requested as well as develop the waterfront.
 
I love the landscaped, retail-activated walkway crossing the tracks on Able's proposal, although I do wonder if a second giant garage is really necessary.

It's the best, so I'm sure a different proposal will win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top