Email us!
Lowell Area Bloggers/Forums
Lowell Politics
Mass Bloggers
- - Leftyblogs MA Blogroll - Almost all of my favorite lefty blogs in Massachusetts can be found here. Linking here keeps my own blogroll short but still up to date! Below are some other MA blogs which are not listed at LB.
- H2Otown (Watertown, MA)
- MargeBLOG (Williamstown)
- Michael Forbes Wilcox (Western MA)
- The Gazebo (Worcester area)
Media in Lowell
- Community Connections The online archive of many of WUML's radio shows.
- LTC :: Our community cable access channel (8 & 10). Excellent people, I've worked with them before.
- Open Source :: Chris Lydon's new show, broadcast on WUML and WGBH locally.
- The Lowell Sun :: Love it or hate it, it's the big newspaper in town.
- WCAP radio :: Talk radio in Lowell - still locally owned, and in transition.
- WUML :: The student- and community-run radio station of UMass-Lowell. Lynne hosts a radio show, Thinking Out Loud, 10am on Fridays.
Media in MA
Other Daily Reads
Politics Online
- City Council Agenda Past City Council agendas, posted in a mostly timely manner
- Lowellma.gov Official city website
Progressive Local Orgs
Snark and politics
The Arts in Lowell
- 119 Gallery - Art gallery with exhibitions of many local artists, interesting events, and living, breathing culture.
- Arts League of Lowell (ALL) - Artist community group, a recent but welcome addition to the arts scene in Lowell.
- Brush Art Gallery - Come and meet working artists in their natural habitats!
- Cultural Organization of Lowell (COOL) - Great local calendar of events.
- Lowell Opera Company - Community opera.
- Lowell Philharmonic Orchestra - Local community orchestra.
- Lowell Poetry Network
- Lowell Rocks - List of live music events
- Merrimack Repertory Theatre - A local theatre "presenting an exciting mix of contemporary and new plays in historic downtown Lowell."
- OUtlET - Paper and online 'zine making a splash locally with events in art, poetry, music, and everything in between!
- Revolving Museum Contemporary, local, public art space with a plethora of children's programs and art by and for the community.
- The Fine Print - Socially aware, themed, arts and issues periodic publication available throughout Lowell.
- The Image Theater - Theatre company which puts on all original works by local playwrights.
- Whistler House Museum - A great collection of contemporaries of Whistler at his historic birthplace.
July 16th, 2008 at 9:11 am
But Mimi, the ZBA is protecting the interests of industrial property that currently exists. What will happen is, the more people that make the trek down, work or live in that area of the Acre, will turn an eye to the ill kept properties all around. This will lead to folks asking questions about illegal dumping, contamination issues, and so forth.
And still there is another ZBA brd. member who cites the reason that he turned it down the first time, was because, he was “victimized” as a business, when the JAM Loft Conversion began (because of complaints from residents in the neighborhood). So he would in turn be opposed to converting any more industrial to residential.
My question is, why did Western Ave developers, even bother going back before the ZBA (what a tremendous waste of time), when there are “other” avenues that could be taken to get where they want to be?
July 16th, 2008 at 9:56 am
The WAS decision was actually postponed to August 11th, to address public safety issues.
It was pretty hard to get the ZBA board members who were concerned about public safety issues to clarify what they considered to be public safety issues. As much as we could tell . . .
The ZBA wants the Fire Department to address the fact that one side of the proposed development is on the Pawtucket Canal and that it would be difficult to bring trucks around to that side of the building in the event of fire. (This serious public safety hazard will indeed be a tremendous shock to the folks who live at Canal 2 and 3, Loft 27, 50 Stackpole St. and the Boott . . . not sure if the River Walk is wide enough for trucks to protect Renaissance on the River, or the driveway on the canal behind Prescott Street Lofts or the grassy patch on the Concord River behind Bagshaw Mills . . .and should one wonder about the Patio area in back of the Doubletree?)
ZBA members also appeared to be concerned about the possibility that 5 or 10 years down the road, residents in the artist live/work might have children, and those children might play on the property of the industrial tenants on Western Ave. and that the children might get hurt while playing on the property of the industrial tenants and that the industrial tenants might face ruin because the parents of the hypothetical children might sue. . . and the ZBA apparently wants to know what the developer is planning on doing to prevent this.
The developer, in conjunction with the artists at WAS and in response to one ZBA member concern that the project wasn’t really for artists, adapted the Boston Redevelopment Authority Artist Certification process for potential loft buyers . . . this requires that the applicant have a documented exhibition or performance record, slides or cd’s of their work and references. It acknowledges the fact that most artists can not support themselves solely on their artwork and establishes criteria based on the commitment that artists have made to doing their work, despite having to work part or full time at non-art related occupations. This did not satisfy the ZBA member who wants the project restricted only to those who make a living full time doing art . . . in other words . . . the individuals, for whom this project was developed, would not be qualified to buy.
There was an amazing show of support for the project, two folks came from the Mass. Cultural Council’s Artistlink to speak of their support for Western Avenue Studios and the Loft project. Peter Aucella came from Lowell National Historical Park to speak in support, the new executive director of the Revolving Museum came, a board member from the Arts League of Lowell, a ton of letters were sent, a petition in support of the project with 133 unique signatures was presented.
At one point, I don’t remember who said it, but a complaint was made that so many people coming out in support of the project was meant to intimidate the board . . . of course if no one had come, then they would have said that no one cared and that the project had no support.
As to why the developers came back to the ZBA . . . because he thought that if he addressed the issues raised in objection to the first project submitted, then there should be no objections . . .
What can I say, he is not from around here . . .
Maxine Farkas
Western Avenue Studios
July 16th, 2008 at 10:26 am
A complaint that there were so many people who bothered to take time out their busy lives on a hot summer evening, to come out to the ZBA to support this project…How dare they! ;0)
I can think of a few CC mtgs (past employee dismissals) where hundreds of people showed up in support of that particular employee…oh and that wasn;t meant to intimidate the CC?
Obviously, if a ZBA member made that comment, then likely they were in fact intimidated. Too bad for them. This is what a public process is all about so that support or opposition w/in the community can be vetted..that’s why they call it a public hearing. To that member that felt “intimidated”..if you don’t like the heat….
July 16th, 2008 at 11:17 am
The best line was when the one ZBA member couldn’t pin down any specific health hazard and finally, after persistent questioning from the developer about these vague, mysterious safety concerns, said, “I can sum it up in one word: surroundings.”
Ah yes, those dreaded surroundings.
It was a pathetic display, really. And it’s sadder in an altogether different way that it hasn’t received one word in the Lowell Sun.
July 16th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
The ZBA has always taken the opinions of abutters very, very seriously, whether the application is to build a deck a little too close to a lot line or to permit a certain retail use near residences.
And those industrial business owners aren’t wrong - having residential uses near industry does lead to people complaining about the trucks and the other impacts, and does limit the development and use potential of the industrial sites. This city has spent a lot of money and efforting sorting out residential and industrial uses in the Acre. This is not a bogus issue.
That said, there are a few factors to keep in mind. First, this isn’t an industrial park out by the highway. It’s a historic area, on a canal, in the heart of the city, with lousy highway access, limited parking, relatively small lots, and residential uses close by. In other words, as industrial property goes, it gets a C. On the other hand, as artist live-work spaces go, it’s a solid B+ or A-. Second, we’re not talking about building a cul-de-sac for the Cleavers to live on, or townhouse rentals, or even condos like Canal Place. We’re talking about artists who want to move into an urban area, and use their space to weld and hammer and paint and engage in other labor that has a whole lot in common with craft-style industrial enterprises. If some industrial property had scrap metal lying about, they should worry more that some sculptor will snag a few pieces for his latest project than that some kid is going to trip playing wiffle ball.
In general, it’s a good idea to keep industry and residential uses apart, but artist live/work spaces are the exception to the rule.
July 16th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
I don’t know why CM Lynch would reappoint members like Knox and Belanger. It makes no sense to me. They have no vision and are hold overs from the previous administration. Oh wait, Knox is a close friend of Mayor Caulfields and Belanger is a Kazanjian pal. The CM made a big mistake with these two. This is obviously being orchestrated behind the scenes by Kazanjian. He has made his conflict of interest pretty clear during the last go around. Remember his quote in the paper that he was a businessman first and out for his own self interest. It doesn’t matter what this developer does, they’re going to shoot him down. He needs to take it to the next level. What’s sad is we’re going to spend money on a lawsuit for a project that a majority of the City Boards approved. These have to be some of the most ridiculous, transparent arguments I’ve ever heard. What did they want the developer to say about the potential for children living in the spaces, that he’d have the artists sterilized? That wouldn’t have satisfied them either. They would have focused on the less than 1% chance that it could reverse itself. I hope the developer takes them to court. What position will the City Attorney take since all of the other Boards (City Council, Planning, Historic) are in favor? With any luck the defense won’t be very vigorous.
July 16th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
As far as I can tell, TLC only has ZBA meetings up through April available for streaming. I hate hearing about these things and then having to wait months before I can see for myself (if I remember by that time).
July 16th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
In response to Kami’s comment on taking the ZBA to court..
A.) The developers attorney is non other than Jim Flood, K’s go to atty on many of his projects, and
B.) If the developer plays his hand correctly, he wouldn’t even HAVE to go to court, never mind another go round with the ZBA..
July 16th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
I hope you’re right K-R-S. I would love to see this project go through in spite of the efforts of one board to derail it.
July 16th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Mr. Lynne:
LTC will be posting the three (May, June, July) meetings very shortly on their web site. Stay tuned. Meanwhile, if you are not doing anything Friday night at 6:30 p.m. you can watch another replay of that meeting on LTC 10.
July 16th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Has anyone who missed the meeting checked with the library. I thought they were supposed to have copies of all city meetings within a week or so of the meeting. As for the issue, I can only begin to imagine the contamination that must be on some of those properties. City atlases and old city directories (also at the library) could tell us what had been there for last 150 years or so. I know that they go back at least as far as 1879 and I think earlier> And I love the comment about some sculptor snagging pieces for his art. Let’s hope he asks first. LOL
July 16th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
FYI the fire department issue is crap. The only building that has ever been an issue is the last one yet to be developed at Mass Mills because there was access on none of the sides. WAS has access on 3 out of 4.
There are a litany of residential buildings in this city (some good examples cited above) with similar limited access. If the building is sprinklered (and believe me it will be for residential) there will be very little chance of a safety issue.
There is no way to get behind the Lawrence Mills, Bagshaw Mills or Doubletree. But rest assured the LFD can definitely reach across the canal from the parking lots on the other side with the 100 foot ladder trucks.
July 16th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
Tryin’..I was speaking w/ someone this evening and we were talking about this very same issue! Of course the LFD can access the building AND the building itself is “sprinklered” to infinitum…
Would the same scrutiny be out to a project if it was a “purely commercial” property going in? Or is it simply an issue that “an abutter” (ahem..a CC) wanted to purchase a portion of the property and was turned down?
Furthermore, objection from Western Ave Receycling about traffic…please! Have any of you seen the back up in traffic that a train a shopping carts full of beer cans begets? Trust me, on any given day, any traffic, never mind our emergency services, is backed up by the a.) shopping carts full of cans, and b.) trucks and carloads of cans, pulling up to offload.
Geesh, certainly, the development of WAS would only increase the value of the property…BTW…who actually owns the RE at Western Ave Recycling? Hmmmmmm………………….
July 17th, 2008 at 6:55 am
An interesting link to rate your location as to how walkable it is. You can enter your address, or another like the WAS district, to see how walkable it rates.
http://walkscore.com/rankings/most-walkable-cities.php
July 17th, 2008 at 10:09 am
The “hypothetical” children’s safety issue is a faulty argument. Lots of people have grown kids, do not want kids, or decide to move after having kids. Most children in this city do not have a safe play area right out their back door to begin with. (That is why we have such great parks) Maybe the developer should include a small play yard in the plan to appease the board?
July 18th, 2008 at 7:57 am
In theory the July 14th video of the ZBA meeting is available on the LTC website . . . but has anyone had any success in getting it to download?
Maxine
WAS
July 18th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
I got it to work this afternoon on my home computer, but did not have time to watch the meeting. when i went back to it at 10 p.m., it would not load. I thought the problem was with my computer, good to hear that it seems to be universal. I also tried to watch a City Council meeting to see if that would work and it didn’t either.
July 19th, 2008 at 7:49 am
Lowell artist and lowellgirl:
Try again, the streaming video on LTC are now working properly.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:11 am
Nice job backing the right-wing mentality that seeks to eliminate protections for citizens by ramming projects through in the name of economic development.
What’s next, “streamlined permitting” for off-shore oil refineries?
July 22nd, 2008 at 10:53 am
“Nice job backing the right-wing mentality that seeks to eliminate protections for citizens” - exactly what are you referencing here? This is a dead end industrial area that is already overlaid with an artist district. What exactly is overriding protections for citizens? You aren’t being very specific.
No one, for instance, is being displaced. Unlike some gentrification projects, there is no existing housing here or public housing being torn down. And there are specifications in the deeds that say that artists, and only artists, will ever live here. Couple that with the artist overlay district/industrial zoning, and all you have here is a bunch of unused industrial space being used for artist residential.
July 22nd, 2008 at 11:40 am
Gee, the paper finally did a story on it…a week after it happened…but they still aren’t looking into the matter.
If the “reporters” at the paper spent half as much time doing real journalism and asking tough questions instead of bashing the former School Superintendent then maybe readers would find out who and what is behind things going on…or not in this case…in the city.
I guess the paper had to wait until LTC fixed their streaming problem to find out what the various blogs were talking about…cheaper than sending someone