Left In Lowell

The Sunday Papers

13 Responses to “The Sunday Papers”

1. waittilnextyr Says:
   March 2nd, 2008 at 2:48 pm

   Construction jobs do not lend themselves to the same measure as most jobs in that they are temporary. The 30,000 number could well be correct, if each “job” averages about 6 months duration. During contruction jobs come and go, so rather than the number of jobs for contruction, a better measure would be the amount of construction man-hours anticipated to build the 3 casinos. The Globe is measuring these jobs as if they exist for the entire 3-year construction period. Although some will, most won’t.

2. Michael in Pawtucketville Says:
   March 2nd, 2008 at 5:03 pm

   I’ve been catching up on my readings on the economy and it sure looks dismal out there with the twin problems of inflation and recession. I’m not sure how this will affect college admissions at UMass Lowell as more students and parents may pick state schools over private schools but I think that the housing issue is one that won’t be going away.

   I wonder about the attraction of East Campus as the kids have a fairly long walk to get to both North Campus and South Campus but perhaps the kids want to be living closer to the recreation building and the towers where the food is reportedly better.

   I saw the email about the proposal for rental housing off campus with students taking the bus to get to classes. The distance limit was two miles and they asked questions about living arrangement preferences.

3. Bob F Says:
   March 2nd, 2008 at 7:34 pm

   We should not be surprised thta the casino job numbers seem to be so far off from reality. As is typical when things like this happen, the sides choose someone to do research who is already well identifed as for or against the development project in question. Then, the numbers work out the way they are intended. This is not the way good research should be done. The idea that building three casinos would produce more construction jobs than the Big Dig simply boggles the mind. And, however you feel about the issue, we should all be angry that this stuff passes as ‘objective’ when we are asked to make difficult choices about the future of what is fast becoming a miserable economy.

   On the dorms at UMass this is an interesting issue and furthers the discussion about the ways in which the university has grown up over the years. My guess is that lots of students would in fact prefer East Campus for its proximity to the terrific Rec Center and the ball field and arena as well. There is also a nice community of students there to relate to. But, this presents a problem in terms of making some long-term investments on South Campus so as to make it attractive to students - perhaps a new ‘green’ library, better shuttle transportation to the downtown, greater wifi access everywhere, recprograms thta utilize the river, classes being offered in teaching rooms set up in the dorms. If things keep being built only on North than the university’s social sciences and humanities, criminal justice, its School of Health & Environment and the music and art programs will continue to enjoy what many of us feel is ’second class status’ to folks on North who, for reasons related to their research and teaching, get the most expensive equipment for their work.

4. kpem Says:
   March 2nd, 2008 at 8:08 pm

   The length of time that even the electrical, painters, masons etc.. would be on a job of this scale would be long term. But, many jobs of this size pull labor from other states so I hope that would be stipulated.

5. Dan MacNeil Says:
   March 2nd, 2008 at 11:55 pm

   Marty represents the University, not Lowell, not condo owners.

   Students want to live in dorms near other dorms, a very nice rec center and a great walking/running path (riverwalk) Students don’t want to live in dorms near an (loud!) active railroad in not bad but certainly not great neighborhood.

   People living on Marginal aveneue apparently feel replacing a deralict factory with a dorm will help their property values.

   People living in the Riverside condos apparently just now noticed that they live a block from dorms and prefer empty space to more dorms.

   I think it is ok that Marty’s alliegence is with University students and not some NIMBY jokers. I think it is ok that he’s not rushing forward to volunteer UML students for urban renewal work.

   Hey, maybe the riverside condo people can move into the abandoned factory instead of the students and everyone will be happy?

6. Shawn Says:
   March 3rd, 2008 at 8:54 am

   So why did Reps. Golden and Nangle who both represent Chelmsford, where a major fight over a Prop 2 ½ override is underway, voted against this measure?

   Because they know that it is dangerous to touch proposition 2-1/2 in any way.

   Once we let them start, the legislature will bite at it over and over until the only protection we have against the slow creep of government growth is gone and excessive government finishes off the state.

   Every town already has the right to vote for an override, Chelmsford (and Dracut last year) being a good example.
   If the people think the cause is good enough, they will vote for it.. if they feel they are being snowed they tend to vote against it.

   This bill is designed, intentionally, to get those who are most experienced with political shenanigans from coming out to vote.

   I hear that in the Senate we already have Steve Baddour coming out against it, and our own Sue Tucker leaning the same way. I’m still waiting to hear Panagiotakos’ opinion.

7. Michael in NH and Pawtucket Says:
   March 3rd, 2008 at 11:32 am

   re: Bob F

   I think that the North Campus has received money for purposes that can be externally sold and funded. I find the South Campus to be more attractive in terms of building condition, landscaping and layout. North Campus tends to be dead in the evenings and weekends which surprises me a little. Not sure about South Campus. I guess everything is “happening” over at East Campus.

8. waittilnextyr Says:
   March 3rd, 2008 at 11:34 am

   As for Marty’s allegiance, it should also be to the taxpayers of MA who are footing most of his bills. But I agree, he should not be driven to a solution by outside interests, rather what is most effective housing considering livability, cost and proximity to the University and other resources that the students require.

   The Prop 2 1/2 bill purports to be a break for seniors on fixed income, but may be really intended to loosen the grip on taxpayer dollars. I understand the problems of the seniors who are on fixed income, and that is why they are such a force in controlling costs. Whereas schools are probably the number 1 cost driver and they have little use of that resource, it is not surprising that they don’t want to pay. However, they must consider the whole package, where they are the predominant users of social security and medicare, yet the rest of the populace are the primary payers.

   Rather than coming up with tactics that parse the citizenry, the legislature would be better off developing a strategy that controlled costs and balanced the budget through growth. That will be very difficult in the national environment where the federal government has simultaneously overspent its bank account and facilitated the offshoring of growth industries through destructive tax policies and trade agreements that discount the workers. Although very difficult, it is better than the option of trying to bleed more money out of the citizen stone.

9. KMM Says:
   March 3rd, 2008 at 1:06 pm

   If you look at a map, the Marginal Street location has almost identical attributes and drawbacks as Western Ave. proximity to rail tracks, etc. If the zoning board would not approve Western Ave. residential expansion, how could they possibly approve residential (which students are) units on Marginal Street.

10. kpem Says:
    March 3rd, 2008 at 2:22 pm

    PUBLIC HEARINGS (Scheduled for 7PM)
    Minutes for City Council on September 13, 2005, 06:30 PM
    Ordinance-Amending the Zoning Code by extending the INST Zone on Marginal Street. In Council given 2nd reading and hearing held. Speaking in favor was:
    Atty James Flood spoke for the petitioner.
    Nancy Judge, Highlands Betterment Council
    No remonstrants. Hearing closed
    Adopted on roll call vote 9 yeas. So voted.

    I am curious to know the former zoning as my guess would be light industrial. (light industrial is right next to it on the map and it was an industrial area in the past)

11. Lynne Says:
    March 3rd, 2008 at 3:34 pm

    To be fair, it’s evident the Zoning Board didn’t approve the Western Ave thing for reasons other than desirability. So it’s not a good comparison.

12. kpem Says:
    March 3rd, 2008 at 4:53 pm

    No they did not approve it because Western Ave is an industrial area and neighbors and industry do not mix. But yet they did approve this project moving it from industry to INST. I think there is a good comparison here.

13. Eleanor Rigby Says:
    March 3rd, 2008 at 7:36 pm

    I have heard talk that another site that UMass Lowell is considering is the old Burbeck’s Ice Cream property.

    It’s already zoned INST and the Special Permit allowing condo’s to be built on the site has expired. The talk I am hearing is that Gary’s lease would be bought out and perhaps one or two of the neighbors would sell their homes for the new dorms as well.

    The talk has been confirmed by a RELIABLE source although nothing is in stone, we’ll have to see if Burbecks Falls LLC filed a proposal when the bids are opened on the 25th.

Leave a Reply