At Tuesday’s meeting, the Lowell City Council discussed newly enacted state legislation called “Ollie’s Law” which is intended to improve the safety and regulation of pet boarding facilities, particularly dog kennels and daycares. The law was inspired by the 2020 death of a puppy named Ollie who died from injuries sustained in a dog fight at a daycare facility. The incident highlighted a lack of consistent state oversight of pet boarding facilities. The new law updated existing licensing rules for kennels and requires daycares to be licensed. It also delegates to cities and towns the responsibility for enforcing the law.

On Tuesday, councilors, dog owners, and daycare owners raised two concerns. The current Lowell ordinance apparently lumps daycares and kennels together, making dog daycares in the city subject to the stricter requirements imposed on kennels where the animals are kept overnight. The proposed remedy for this, to amend the city ordinance to treat daycares separately, would free them from the stricter rules and would be easy to implement since it can be done by the Council.

The second concern was a requirement of the state law that all dogs at both kennels and daycares must always wear their collars. Several speakers (including two councilors) said this was a safety hazard in that when dogs fight (or play in a way that resembles fighting to us), it would be easy for a collar to become snagged and to strangle or otherwise injure a dog. Because this is a statutory requirement, the council cannot unilaterally change it so they will contact our elected officials at the State House and urge them to propose a modification of the law.

The primary purpose of the collar requirement, as I understand it, is so each dog will continuously display their rabies tag and municipal dog license tag which both must be attached to the collar. The rabies tag is issued to the dog owner by the veterinarian who administers the rabies vaccination to the dog.

The dog license is an annual thing, with the license expiring on December 31. Prior to that, dog owners are required to submit an application for a new or renewed license, a certificate of vaccination from the veterinarian, and the applicable fee (usually $10 or $20), to the City Clerk’s office, either by mail or in person. If you are late, there is a $5 per month surcharge assessed. If you file your application by mail, a few days later a new dog license tag will arrive back to you in the mail.

More information about Lowell’s dog licensing process is available online (although you can’t get the license online).

****

The future of the Smith Baker Center arose again on Tuesday with a joint motion by Councilors John Descoteaux and Kim Scott that the council rescind its January 14, 2025, vote to demolish the building “for the specific purpose of issuance of an RFP with strict time and financial parameters.”

Councilor Descoteaux explained that although he supported the motion to demolish the building, he brought this motion now in response to the council’s refusal last week to authorize representatives of the “Save Smith Baker” group to enter the building for further investigation of its condition. Councilor Scott added that “we owe it to the group to give them a chance to respond to an RFP.”

Most councilors who spoke seemed inclined to allow an RFP to be issued provided it could be done quickly and that it contain strict timelines for performance including a rapid “wrapping” of the building to catch any debris that might fall from the roof or the façade. The city solicitor suggested that an RFP could be issued and responded to in approximately two months.

In the end, Councilors supported the RFP motion by a 9 to 2 vote with Councilors Corey Belanger and Erik Gitschier voting against it.

****

Councilor Gitschier also had a motion to revisit an earlier decision by the council, this one on the parking requirements of Lowell’s implementation of the state’s MBTA Communities zoning law.

The fight against this law has occurred mostly in communities that oppose the construction of multifamily housing. Because Lowell already has so many multifamily districts and because the new law would not affect any single-family zones (where opposition to multifamily housing would be as intense as it has been elsewhere), the zoning changes needed to implement the law sailed through the council with self-congratulations but not much scrutiny.

Now, a new multifamily development on the former Hynes’s Tavern site on Gorham Street near the end of the Lowell Connector is being constructed in accordance with the new Lowell Zoning Ordinance which requires little or no on-site parking. Because that stretch of Gorham Street often sees bumper to bumper traffic and because the people already living in the neighborhood find parking to be a substantial challenge, the expected addition of new vehicles competing for on street parking has generated concern.

This motion was referred to the City Manager for a response.

The MBTA Communities Act seeks to increase housing density near MBTA stations. While it doesn’t mandate specific parking ratios, it acknowledges that excessive parking requirements hinder housing development by increasing construction costs, reducing the amount of land available for housing, and encouraging dependence on cars, so the law encourages communities to re-evaluate their parking requirements.

While the theory behind reducing parking requirements offers significant potential benefits, imposing “no parking required” rules in isolation will predictably result in chaos (as we are witnessing now, in small scale). To be successful, the adoption of no parking required rules must be part of a larger, carefully planned strategy that engages the public and convinces decision-makers to rethink traditional approaches to urban development.

Such a strategy would engage those most affected by the changes, namely the people who already live in the area and who face their own parking challenges. In addition to addressing their concerns with things like greater availability and enforcement of residents only parking ordinances, the benefits of the “less parking” strategy should be communicated. These would include increased walkability, improved public spaces, and enhanced quality of life. Then, instead of allowing wholesale use of the new law by developers, limited pilot programs should be tried with their effects monitored and with adjustments made to future projects. It would be complicated and would take a long time, but the potential payoff would be huge for the city.

I suspect one of the reasons there is little enthusiasm for trying to save Smith Baker (outside of the aforementioned group that’s valiantly defending the structure) is that many are skeptical it could succeed as a public entertainment venue due to the lack of public parking located close to the site. That attitude was illustrated a few years ago when Smith Baker came before the council and then Councilor John Leahy pessimistically said, “But there’s no parking,” to which the DPD representative addressing the council replied, “There are 2500 parking spaces within a half mile of the place.” Leahy responded, “People want to park nearby.”

Although Leahy is no longer on the council, his opinion about the need for nearby parking remains strong in the city and will always be an obstacle to new projects. That’s why changing attitudes and opinions is so important for future economic development.

****

The long-awaited Lowell 311 system debuted on Tuesday, just in time for the council meeting. It consists of an app, a website, and a voice telephone line. In his memo to councilors, City Manager Tom Golden wrote, “Lowell will now have a fully integrated work order system for citizen requests, one which interfaces with our financial system and will allow for department heads to manage citizen requests in a manner to maximize efficiency and promote the effective use of resources.”

The city urges residents to create an account which can be used across the platforms and then download the app from the applicable app store. The city’s website also has a dedicated page for the 311 system.

****

This week on richardhowe.com:

In “Henry Knox and Evacuation Day”, Rich Grady writes about an amazing feat of military logistics that occurred close to here 249 years ago this week.

In “George Washington at Dorchester Heights”, I explain how Washington followed up on the accomplishment of Henry Knox.

Massachusetts native and current Chicago resident John Suiter writes of a recent encounter with “a good citizen.”

Louise Peloquin translated a 1924 article from L’Etoile, Lowell’s French language newspaper, about a big festival in the city and the city’s building boom.

****

From the mid-1980s until the onset of the Covid pandemic in 2020, the annual St. Patrick’s Day breakfast (later a dinner) was a big event in Lowell. One reason the event was so popular was the spontaneous humor of the Master of Ceremonies, Ken Harkins, a local real estate agent and auctioneer.

As a reminder to those who experienced the breakfast and as an introduction to those who did not, here are a couple of YouTube clips of Harkins in action at the 1989 breakfast.

Clip one (8 minutes)

Clip two (4 minutes)

Happy St. Patrick’s Day