Watertown Infill and Small Developments

racerc03 said:
Hopefully a growth in density around Watertown, particularly the Aresnal Mall which is said to be in talks for a mixed use development, will help bring better transportation options.

The town itself is similar in density to places like Somerville/Cambridge, esspecially if you remove the cemetary from the equation, but Watertown doesn't have a green line/red line, which may make people less likely to live there if they want to mainly use public transportation.

I'd like to see Arsenal Street get a dedicated bus lane to help speed up travel times between Watertown and Cambridge.
Click to expand...

Arsenal definitely needs better transit opportunities. Hopefully in the future the town will be able to reconstitute the Watertown Branch ROW to the Square and they can branch the Green Line from Union/Porter down alongside the Watertown Greenway to the Square. Could also reuse the old Watertown Yard that the A-line used.

Something like this:

1rYd1hh.png


This would be contingent on Watertown being able to line up the real estate, some of which is being used. So not anytime soon, but definitely feasible someday with enough advocacy.
 
I thought they made that into a bike path? The part from Arlington st to arsenal.

That will never happen btw...the only option is increased bus service.
 
I always wonder about routes like that anyway... is it really going to be time-competitive even with the trackless trolley to go all the way up to Porter Square, then back around to Lechmere and North Station? It's nice from an interconnectivity standpoint I suppose but I doubt it would be Watertown's preferred way into the city.
 
617 said:
I thought they made that into a bike path? The part from Arlington st to arsenal.

That will never happen btw...the only option is increased bus service.
Click to expand...

It's wide enough for both if it ever gets patched back together. Never say never... :)

novitiate said:
I always wonder about routes like that anyway... is it really going to be time-competitive even with the trackless trolley to go all the way up to Porter Square, then back around to Lechmere and North Station? It's nice from an interconnectivity standpoint I suppose but I doubt it would be Watertown's preferred way into the city.
Click to expand...

It would be on a dedicated ROW so it would move much faster than the trackless trolleys. I definitely isn't Watertown's preferred way into the city, but it's better than no connection to the city. Certainly would be faster than the old A line (which I think should be brought back someday also).

Yikes. I apologize for turning this into a transit pitch thread. I suggest replying to this topic in one of those threads in Design a Better Boston.
 
When biking along the Charles River Path adjacent to the Pleasant Street corridor there is an impressive (at least for Watertown) amount of development that has been built just over the past couple years alone. Also, from Arsenal Street to the Back Bay is just a 25 minute bike ride with only 3 street crossings, all of which are getting zapped via bridge underpasses in Allston.
 
Watertown Branch is not going to be a transit line for decades upon decades. The ROW is only protected to School St. Past there it was abandoned in 1960 and reverted to private ownership. Because it's still mostly intact and because that whole 3/4 mile along Arsenal from the Lexus dealership to the Square is little more than fugly industrial property, parking lots, and generally mediocre land usage the city is targeting all that for a gradual redevelopment into street-facing mixed use. And that means flipping each individual piece of fugly property and getting all redevelopment to commit to giving full-width trail easements in the back. All those those muffler shops, used truck rental places, floor tile and cinderblock suppliers, and small electric repair shops would have to go...along with all their excessive and butt-ugly parking. It's going to take an enormous and sustained amount of time to do all that, and there quite likely will be some stubborn property owners holding out. Meaning, probably a frustrating couple parcels of trail gap that last for decades.


If you're thinking transit line here...that's out-of-range of any conventional planning because it's not known if this ROW can be united. Or united in those backlots at the necessary width to provision for more than a 5 ft. wide slab of asphalt. Watertown's merely codified that at every opportunity they get they will try to secure easements. And then as Arsenal is inevitably redeveloped have their full shit together on widening those easements and making those easements contingent on getting any tax relief from the town on the redevelopment. They've got a long way to go. That path from Arlington St. to School on the RR ROW is freaking wide as hell...wide enough that it probably could fit trolley w/trail. The real property lines on the Waterown ROW are many times wider than the overgrowth around that single track would ever indicate. But it's going to be hard as hell to secure similar width to the Square. Real odds probably very low if you're trying to pin a % to it.

That doesn't mean you don't try to grab what you can if the intent is redeveloping that whole stretch of Arsenal. So what if they don't get a wide enough trail on some parcels, or some fugly industrial property won't go away...well, by trying you get a much more actively utilized trail behind MOST of those properties and can dress up the fringes where it's constrained. On the 2% chance they get all that width and can consider a transit line in 2040...fine, even better. But they didn't embark on this plan to chase that 2%. They did it to set course for the best accessibility deal they can wring out of trying to flip those properties. Which is smart advance planning even if they come up empty-handed.



Watertown pretty badly needs a bus to Alewife. For an area so close and set up so well for fast road connections there's bupkis you can do to get around. Whenever GLX makes it to Route 16 there's going to be need to institute a new route down 16 linking the Red and Green termini. That might be the ideal anchor for throwing down a Watertown route continuing up 16 from Alewife.

And then of course if the Worcester Line ever gets 'Fairmounted' with a Newton Corner station it's almost a must-have to extend the 71 to loop there since so many people will want to use that to get to Harvard Sq. Maybe use that build as the opportunity to streamline the entire 71 route for faster boarding, articulated buses, denser schedule, etc. It'll have the attraction of a fixed route--wires to Corner, rails to downtown--and get much more heavily patronized than the Pike express buses. The fact that H2O Sq. won't be the arse-end of a long bus transfer off a rail line will make it seem a lot geographically closer even if it takes a long time to ramp rail service up to levels where the transfer @ Corner looks as good on a clock and on frequencies as it does on a map. Perception is everything. If you can't place Watertown Sq. relative to 2 nodes on the spider map, does 50% of the public even know it exists?
 
Would it be super-imperative that the ROW extend all the way to the square? If the Arsenal is redone, you can end the ROW at School Street and use parallel street running pairs on Arsenal and North Beacon until they converge:

rcOGB3R.jpg

EDIT: I guess you can get even a better path through the Arsenal by running the inbound side further through the Arsenal adjacent to Kingsbury Ave and then merging back into the ROW via the part of the path that now splits down towards the mall parking lot (near "Enanta Pharmaceuticals" on the above map).

I know that parallel pairs aren't ideal (it puts the inbound side a few blocks further from the residential area north of Arsenal) but this would be much more acceptable than trying to squeeze a large median onto Arsenal Street alone. In any case, these are short stretches with almost no major cross streets until the square, so it would be extremely straightforward.
 
Last edited:
You could, but try convincing the T to do that. They have to be convinced to take GLX to Porter first, and that's not for lack of effort on Somerville's and Cambridge's part

This is one of those cases where the trail is going to be so mega-utilized they can't not build it, and so there is the inevitable question a la Minuteman past Arlington Heights about whether people will accept a trail downsizing later after years of the trail itself being a de facto transit line. In this case the trail upside is so worth it they really don't need to get hung up about needs in 30 years. If it gets trailed to Fresh Pond it'll be packed with walkers, riders, and guys in business suits pedaling their way to the Alewife bike cage TOMORROW. Much like the Minuteman to Arlington Ctr. has its own daily rush hour. Having lived right by Fresh Pond for the last decade I know how sorely needed this is. It either takes an extra 40 minutes zigzagging on foot through Belmont or braving the speeding Greenough Blvd. traffic on that terrifyingly narrow sidewalk. Most of the time it's just "Aw, fuck it...get in the car" when I need to get some tiny little hand-carryable thing at Home Depot. And it pisses me off every time that there isn't a better way to do this. I am totally one of the people who would be on that thing nearly every day using it like a real transit line to get from destination to destination.

I can't say with a straight face that the possibility there *might* be a need for rail transit here in 30+ years and umpteen places down the priority pile trumps the need to get people moving today. It would not be fair to slap a chastity belt on that ROW for something no one can predict may or may not happen 1-2 generations in the future. It's beyond-scope. Attitudes about rail trails may be very different in 2040; today's NIMBY's aren't a predictor that far deep as to whether the needs will be acute enough to bust the Minuteman in Lexington down to a side path next to speeding Red Line trains, or the likewise here in Waterown. Watertown may become Cambridge IV by 2030, or it may not; they have to execute so many interdependent redevelopment pieces without a university or centralized planning authority pushing money around in order to make it all work. So their spectrum of gains runs the gamut from "much-improved" to "destination" to "hot destination" to "Cambridge IV center-o'-the-_____-universe". Those ideas are just being committed to paper now. And in the meantime they need more people visiting the Square ASAP to gain traction for building this bigger Waterown.

So...yeah, I think this one is well worth the risk if the trail happens go Minuteman-mega and become too popular to displace. And I don't say that very often about rails-to-trails because few of them do rise to the level of transit-like utilization. This one can, and soon. Whatever happens in 30 years can't be breached until the T has solved its downtown circulation problems with many other necessary projects. If that day comes then many, many areas will be in Watertown's boat with options for exponential transit expansion. I'm sure they'll have a very healthy debate about that. But to put them in the position to have a healthy debate about that they might as well be put in the best position to grow today.



In the meantime...there's lots they can do with rubber tires and 71 wires to fill in some of the blind spots on the bus map. Watertown only seems remote because the buses going to it from Boston and Cambridge are so narrowly distributed east-west on the riverbank. Nothing crossing Allston-Brighton like the 64/65/66/86 shortly downwind, nothing whatsoever hitting Brookline/BC, nothing whatsoever to North Cambridge or within walking transfer of Somerville. How are those places that all have one thing in common--sharing a border and a Charles Basin with City of Boston--supposed to know that there's another town in there with that same thing in common if they can't get there?
 
Watertown councilors approve measure that would allow a 7-story hotel near Arsenal Mall

Jaclyn Reiss, Boston.com Staff

Watertown Town Councilors passed a new ordinance amendment this month that would make it easier for developers to build a seven-story hotel across from the Arsenal Mall.

Councilors passed the zoning amendment Feb. 11 to allow hotels to build to a height of 79 feet or seven stories in the "Industrial 1" zoning district, an area mostly dominated by the Arsenal Mall and the Watertown Mall shopping plaza, said Watertown planning director Steve Magoon.

Previously, hotels could have been built up to 50 feet or five stories, Magoon said.

"We are hoping this will result in a hotel being developed in town, which has been long identified by members of the community as a need," he said.

The new measure comes after Athenahealth Inc. and Boston developer Boylston Properties bought the Arsenal Mall and two nearby properties last summer. Boylston Properties has been pushing for a seven-story hotel on the former Charles River Saab site for months.

The developer still has yet to submit to the town a formal application for building a hotel, but Magoon said they hope to have it in by this spring.

"They have to submit some plans and go through the site plan and special permit process, and then it goes for a public hearing before the Planning Board and the Zoning Board," he said. "They will certainly have community meetings in there as well."

Magoon said the development would likely be a mid-range quality hotel.

"It wouldn’t be a budget hotel, but it wouldn’t be a full-service hotel either," he said. "It would be something with limited services but very nicely done."

The variance amendment also comes as Watertown planners are reviewing a proposed development for Arsenal Street that would add 300 residential units and 37,100 square feet of retail and restaurant space to the area.

Developers from the Hanover Co. submitted a plan late last year to raze a vacant industrial building and other offices at 202-204 Arsenal St. and 58 Irving St. to make way for the mixed-use complex, said Watertown planning director Steve Magoon.

The commercial space would likely house shops, at least one restaurant, and possibly a grocery store, Magoon said. The site plan is being reviewed by town planners, and a formal proposal will be presented to the Planning Board this spring, he said.
Click to expand...

http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news..._approve_measure_to_help_build_7-story_h.html
 
As these sites become redeveloped, will the Watertown Branch become increasingly viable as an unobstructed transit corridor?
 
^ Only if the City of Watertown can patch it back together. It's a broken RoW in several places north of Arsenal Street.
 
Anyone check out the "Arsenal Project" rebranding of the mall? Its kinda silly, although the mural they put on the old ruby tuesdays storefront is kinda nice.
 
Marriott hotel set for Watertown site

Boylston Properties said Monday it plans to build a 148-room Marriott Residence Inn on Arsenal Street in Watertown, an area undergoing rapid redevelopment as a potential hub for technology related startups and young professionals.

“A quality place for visitors to stay and residents to meet and enjoy is just what Watertown needs,” said William McQuillan, president of Boylston Properties.

Boylston Properties has made a big bet on the future of Arsenal Street, so-named because it was once the home of a massive Army complex to store ammunition and weapons. In the past five years, it has purchased the 225,000-square-foot Arsenal Mall and the adjoining Harvard Vanguard Medical Associates building at 485 Arsenal St., and the neighboring Golfsmith store.

Jonathan Bush, the chief executive of the electronic medical records company Athenahealth Inc., and the Wilder Group are partners with Boylston in the mall project.

Boylston Properties has been a major player in the redevelopment of the neighborhood around Fenway Park, including a 183-room Marriott Residence Inn on Brookline Avenue.

Construction on the Watertown hotel is expected to start late this year or early next year, with an expected opening in the first quarter of 2016. The developer will seek town approval for the project in the next few months.

“This is a fantastic site close to a lot of great amenities, and it’s a market we’ve looked to be in for quite a while,” said Tom Onken, a senior vice president for Marriott International.

ADD Inc. is the architect for the project, in partnership with Group One Partners.

The larger redevelopment of the Arsenal Street area is still in the planning stages. Developers have said they are seeking a more open-air shopping experience, with sidewalks and outdoor cafes as well as more biking and pedestrian paths along the Charles River between Watertown and Cambridge.

In recent years, the East Watertown area has attracted technology companies that want to be close to Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology while paying reasonable rents.
Click to expand...

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business...t-watertown/TpFGKaoSbAODK1P91KJYcK/story.html
 
That's where the Saab dealership used to be, right by Target. Interesting location indeed. I thought they were putting another 'luxury apartments' building there.
 
Not to derail the thread, but everyone needs to go to Armenian Market and Bakery. Best falafel and shwarma in the area, b/w a huge baklava selection.
 
Hotel on Arsenal has fully taken shape (no facade yet, but basic frame is done), saw it today - in person it looks much bigger than in the render and forms a good streetwall on that side...
 
FK4 said:
Hotel on Arsenal has fully taken shape (no facade yet, but basic frame is done), saw it today - in person it looks much bigger than in the render and forms a good streetwall on that side...
Click to expand...

They've got to do more about that closed sidewalk than posting a single "Share the Road" temp sign, though. I walked in front of that thing yesterday not knowing there wasn't any sort of posted detour, and it ended up three minutes of terror sliding my butt sideways along the jersey barrier in a striped shoulder barely wider than my foot size is long...making sure that I was not breaking direct and severe eye contact with every driver screaming along inches away at 45 MPH.

Like...are a few traffic cones with rope tied between them too much to ask for? Close the whole block and send 'em all across at the nearest adjacent signaled crosswalks with bright honking orange construction signage if that's too much to ask for. Jeez. Living in Cambridge too long has got me mistaken that basic-ass safety steps like that are S.O.P. for sidewalk-facing construction. I am apparently well out-of-practice taking a stroll along the Darwinian drag strips of the +1 -removed 'burbs.
eyetwitch1.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top