Several architects have proffered some possibilities for reusing the vacant town garage site on Water Street.

WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — Three different architects appeared before the Board of Selectmen on Monday night to pitch ideas to develop the town-owned former home of the town garage.

 

Each of the professionals presented visions that he or she said would help make use of the current dirt lot at 59 Water St. as part of a revitalization of that end of the Village Business District.

 

The plans shared similarities but also had elements that set them apart.

 

All of the plans discussed involved private development, not the affordable housing that was initially supported by but later rejected last spring by the Board of Selectmen.

 

The ideas discussed Monday night ranged from general to highly specific and from highly dense development to one plan that left more than 40 percent of the site as green space.

 

Tom Bartels took the floor first and explained that he had been thinking about the town garage site since 1989 and had done two proposals — one for the Williamstown Business Association and a second for the Planning Board in 1998.

 

Both Bartels' visions involved mixed-use buildings on the west end of the property, along Water Street, with substantial parking in the rear.

 

His 1989 proposal called for 10,500 square feet of building space on two stories with up to 86 parking spaces created by building a two-level parking structure.

 

At that time, he suggested three buildings joined at the back by a common wing with a central elevator that would serve all three structures. Between the buildings, he designed small courtyard spaces, and the entire development was complemented by plantings along the perimeter.

 

Nine years later, he reconceived that plan with two buildings, a larger courtyard and surface level parking only. Even without the parking deck, Bartels' second plan included 30 parking spaces in addition to the ones that would be triggered by the commercial development on the site.

 

Both Bartels' plans called for development at the site while maintaining some of the lot's current use — as a de facto parking lot.

 

That element of the plan appealed to Realtor Paul Harsch, a member of the town's Economic Development Committee, who attended Monday's meeting and addressed the BOS from the floor.

 

"Whenever there is a major event, [parking] is a significant problem," Harsch said. "Merchants will constantly face the problem of where do the customers park?

 

"As a planner, I'd be thinking about how we can solve the parking congestion problem."

 

Harsch said he is less concerned about developing residential space at 59 Water St., not with 61 apartments set to open later this year at the former Cable Mills site and another 21 townhouses envisioned on the Cable Mills property.

 

"You're talking 82 new housing units in the center of town," Harsch said. "My concern would be as a developer is, 'Can I fill [more]?' "

 

Developer Joan Burns and architect David Westall presented a plan that emphasizes four two-story, 1,500 square foot townhouses on the Water Street property.

 

Westall described a "twofold" development that creates two single-story, glass-enclosed mercantile spaces fronting Water Street with the townhouses behind in a "C-shaped" building that wraps around a central courtyard.

 

The property also would have a large patio on Water Street as it is envisioned by Burns and Westall.

 

"We want to create a new and much more interesting civic space that mimics the inviting spaces in Europe and will foster Williamstown's economic development with start-ups along an improved Water Street," the pair wrote in a document introducing their proposal. "To push forward the resurrection of our town apart from the college. And then, of course, to provide a long-suggested walkway between Spring and Water streets to foster both."

 

The proposal as presented retains 41 percent of the property as green space and includes just 41 parking spaces. But the accompanying document suggests that some of the greenery could be replaced with a two-deck parking structure.

 

"If the college wants to maintain parking there, they should contribute financially to this aspect of the plan," Westall and Burns write.

 

The least specific proposal presented on Monday came from Ann McCallum — like Bartels and Westall an architect but also a member of the town's Planning Board.

 

McCallum said she believes the Water Street lot should be developed as residential space while the town focuses its commercial development on Spring street.

 

McCallum's plan was intentionally vague, merely pointing out the kind of building that could be sited on the property while creating a pedestrian link between Water and Spring streets. (She had proposed a more detailed plan in 2010.)

 

"There is a lot of interest in housing," she said, noting that she has heard of demand from Williams alumni, parents of students and Williamstown residents looking to downsize.

 

"I firmly believe we should concentrate on Spring Street for the shopping experience," McCallum said. "What we need in the rest of the area is more shoppers."