(Updated June 16, 2026 at 2:24 p.m.)
By Linda Scott
Watertown Resident
I want to mention three meetings, one that I attended on June 5th that City Council President Mark Sideris conducted. These meetings are a relatively new concept as a result of our last Charter review. Each councilor is required to have one community meeting a year and invite the public. It’s a good idea.
I also want to mention the Watertown Planning Board meeting on June 10th on zoom that I attended (thank you to my friend who kept track of this stuff and mentioned it to me when I was otherwise occupied).
And, finally, the last City Council meeting, where two residents came together to advocate for the City to fundamentally ask what do Watertown residents really want? Revolutionary!
So, here goes. City Council President Mark Sideris held his annual public meeting last week. I attended this and found it to be instructive. First, this was more of a “mixed crowd.” It would appear that many Watertown viewpoints were represented. Nice to see.
This was quite different from some of the politically charged “pep rally” meetings that we’ve had recently, which drowned out residents with opposing views. All contributed to the conversation. Mark has committed to another meeting in September. Keep an eye out for it.
If you were at this meeting, you would have heard that the open house for the demonstration project (AKA “the garage in the CVS parking lot”) on May 20th at 9 Galen Street was well attended and that “surprisingly” a very large parking garage was not a hit, according to resident feedback.
It sounds like our City Manager, George Proakis, was surprised, but undaunted. They’re back to the drawing board, spending our tax dollars … I’m guessing to find another way to repackage this albatross, not change the concept.
Because Mark’s meeting was a politically mixed crowd, it seemed obvious to me by the comments that all groups had some problem with the garage concept, just for very different reasons.
It’s at meetings like this that residents and councilors learn, for instance, that an alarming amount of our City’s young, newly planted trees are dying. As I was riding along Highland Avenue, I counted at least five dead saplings … not that I doubted the resident who shared this information. He always has his facts straight!
Some highlights were provided by an astute city resident, who asked very focussed and basic questions. Some examples (I’m paraphrasing):
- In regard to the “new” Saltonstall Park (a $2 million endeavor). Why are there so few benches and the benches there are are not conducive to gathering? Isn’t that what parks are for? Places for folks to sit and talk and gather?
- On the profusion of unleased bio lab space: I’m not a genius, but how come I knew that overbuilding for one industry was a bad idea, and the City didn’t? That’s the nature of business. It ebbs and flows.
- Do you really think that Watertown Square will be a “destination”? If we all wanted to go out after this meeting for a cup of coffee, where would we go? Mark conceded this and mentioned that the one place, the Dunkin’ Donuts on Mt. Auburn Street, will disappear once the developer’s plans for that building are executed.
There were laments about uninspiring new architecture. There were new ideas involving ways to highlight the delta to give the Square a “sense of place.” There were positive comments about road work, comments, I might add, without a two minute limit. These meetings are really a good idea! Thank you, Mark.
Mark said that he would be meeting with six businesses who had permits to build and have not started their projects to see what he can do to help get things going.
Which brings me to meeting two, a Watertown Planning Board meeting on June 10th. I haven’t attended one of those for a while. I am glad I watched! It was enlightening! If you’d like to see what you missed, here’s a link to that meeting, whose main focus was to answer the question, “What’s happening at the Russo’s site?” (See: http://vodwcatv.org/internetchannel/show/4605?site=3 to watch this meeting)
In this meeting Saracen Properties, owners of the Russo’s site, came forward to ask for an extension on their building permit. They first permitted for this land about four years ago. Their latest extension of their permit expires next November, so I commend these folks for this proactive effort.
Saracen wants another two year extension on this building permit. When asked what the plan was, they mentioned that they still have hopes of building a bio lab, but they’re also looking at housing and a possible medical building … Something besides a bio lab and housing … very
interesting … something that serves the community, that brings folks into Watertown from
outside, that’s a pretty “clean” and quiet business … maybe even open in the early evenings to keep the street activated? They reiterated that their best hope and first choice, where they have already made plans and deem financially most beneficial, is a lab.
A note: the lab that they’ve already built by the river, in back of the Russo’s site, is considered one of the noise polluters across the river in Newton. Tonal noises. Read up on them. Will adding another lab on that site increase the noise pollution there, possibly affecting the Watertown housing just across the street?
After this explanation, Payson Whitney, who is a respected and long time member of the Planning Board, spoke up respectfully to say, “I’m concerned that you’re still holding out hope on life sciences. Hope is not a strategy …”
If Saracen were to actually pick option two, housing of 200 to 220 units, the zoning for this area would actually need to be changed, and yet our Watertown planning staff is encouraging this concept. There are lots of issues, as explained in this meeting.
“We need housing.” It’s a prevailing mindless mantra here in Watertown. We also need services for the people in this housing, so that they don’t have to leave town for the basics. And by the way, the housing that’s getting built is not affordable for our vulnerable members of the Watertown community. And it is not conducive to families with kids living here.
It occurs to me that Watertown’s recent development history is first, we focused on housing, lots and lots of it. We got mentioned for our efforts … one of the top three housing producers in the State! Then bio labs … lots and lots of them. At the end of 2025, almost half in Watertown was empty. Now back to almost exclusively building housing. Do we learn? Quite possibly we do not.
A comment from a resident at Mark Sideris’ meeting: “Three times the housing that was required in Watertown Square for the MBTA plan isn’t enough!?!”
I call your attention to an article that was sent to me. It was in Banker and Tradesman on May 26, 2026, and it’s titled: “Greater Boston Apartment Leasing Slumps as Vacancies Hit 6.9%.” Wasn’t this the kind of news that started filtrating into our news feeds before the lab market collapsed? ”Bio Lab Market Softening,” etc. You know, the articles we were told to ignore!
Rachel Scott (no relation), also a thoughtful, newer member of the Planning Board, talked about the lack of identity on Pleasant Street. Pleasant Street: rows and rows of more uninspiring architecture and little access to the river, with areas of empty cement spaces and random businesses, most not catering directly to the public.
People involved in the previous zoning of this area will tell you that the relatively new zoning
done for Pleasant Street was done with a whole other concept in mind. Sadly, it’s been
reduced to anonymous rows of apartments and condos.
Is there another chance at redemption for Pleasant Street, given that this large site and the Cannistraro site (now owned by Broder) are still undeveloped? As I remember, besides the bio lab, the original Broder plan had planned businesses that acknowledged its place near the river and all of the activity involved in that recreational spot.
Meeting three was the June 9th City Council meeting, where during Public Forum two citizens got up to speak. Why was this notable? Because the citizens were Bruce Coltin and Josh Rosmarin, two guys that have found themselves on opposite sides of a few issues.
They’ve come together to advocate for this City to get its act together and go to the people with questions, don’t expect them to come to you. With an election non-participation rate of almost 80%, the system is broken in Watertown. My copying their words would not do this justice. Click here to hear them speak, minutes 4:34 to 9:04: http://vodwcatv.org/internetchannel/show/4602?site=3
All food for thought, my friends.
Linda, as usual you did a great job of summarizing three important meetings of late. I also attended or watched on Zoom all three of them.
At Mark Sideris’s meeting although there wasn’t a two-minute time limit, we did have a limit of two questions and I had about ten questions/comments. My first point was that many people still are not aware of Watertown News and all the stories that are in it. (Some people are still asking questions on the Watertown Post Office and whether it will be coming back to Main St.) This topic has been covered in depth, but yet the City has not been publishing any updates on it – that the chances of it coming back are pretty much nil.
My second point was that many people, including myself, have raised questions in the open forum sections of the Council meetings, and under Council rules they are not allowed to answer the questions at that time. We never get the answers and that process (or lack of one) discourages people from getting involved and taking the time to speak up. There needs to be a way for the City officials to get the answers and communicate them either at the next Council meeting or in some other vehicle, perhaps Watertown’s What’s Up. If the City actually wants people to participate, they need to respect them when they do and respond in a timely manner.
Mark mentioned that his Communications Team is working on expanding their communications to us. Perhaps this can be one of the first issues that they address.
It will be interesting to see if we get a status update of Mark’s meeting with the undeveloped sites’ owners. People living around some of them, like Broder (Cannistraro), and Sterritt Lumber are still waiting for answers. Hopefully the owners are considering other viable businesses than labs.
Tutor Intelligence’s Data Factory on Pleasant St. is a great example of alternative manufacturing with its AI robots performing numerous tasks. Our City leaders need to encourage these types of new businesses in order to provide a myriad of jobs for people with skills other than those just related to labs and life science.
I hope that Mark Sideris does have another meeting because many people did not hear about this meeting and I’m sure there are many residences with questions needing answers. Hopefully they raise some of their questions at their own District Councilor annual meetings and that they get answers that night or follow up materials are provided to them. People get very frustrated with government these days and want transparency and answers.
Thanks, Joan.
You bring up some good points. I, too, am interested in any updates that Council President Sideris can provide on the progress the City is making on these issues. So often, they go “out into the ether”, never to be brought up again. I hope that this is a sign of the end to that practice.