Menu
‘Calling All Artists’ — Photos by Corey Sciuto
If they could come back to visit, what would Jack Kerouac, Bette Davis, James Whistler, and other distinguished creative artists linked to our city think of the giant sign on the side of the Appleton Mills building that is “Calling All Artists” to Lowell. What an amazing statement, invitation, and declaration of what the city has become, especially given the continuing challenges a place of this size and complexity faces every day. To paraphrase Bob Dylan, “It’s not light, but it’s gettin there.”
See Corey Sciuto’s pictorial chronicle of the Appleton Mills area here.
Web photo courtesy of Corey Sciuto
How does one quality as an artist?
I consider “artist” to be a much broader category than is commonly thought, but as a Supreme Court judge said in reference to pornography, “it’s hard to define, but I know it when I see it.” I’d say the same is true for artists. But one thing I know for sure, Tony: your wonderful photographs certainly place you in the artist class.
Appleton MIlls folks have a review and selection process going on right now. Check their website. You go to an interview and show your a portfolio of creative work. I don’t know all the guidelines.
I agree with Dick about a loose construction of the term artist. In the scope of Lowell’s creative economy, we are talking about writers, painters, scientists, graphic designers, culinary artists, craftsmen and craftswomen (craft-makers), architects, inventors and engineers, teachers, historians, medical professionals whose work is both an art and a science—all kinds of people in professions that require imagination, critical thinking, and special knowledge—people whose work cannot be turned over to robots or outsourced to interchangeable laborers off-shore.
The qualifications are both “artist” and income level.
Nice set of pictures. A lot of progress in just 3 months, and it appears that Trinity is on track to have occupation start a little ahead of schedule in early Spring.
Now to get a business into the Freudenberg building so they can start some new work.
I don’t know if I would get that loose Paul . . . perhaps artist as a classification i.e. one who makes art, just as scientist is one who engages in the pursuit of scientific knowledge?
Artists have had a horrible time being recognized as engaged in a ‘real’ profession, witness the fact that in most economic surveys we are classified not as artists but as designers. The Mass Artist Leaders Coalition has been working for a while to gain recognition for artists as being in a valid, economically viable profession.
Just a thought . . .
While the renovation of this area is crucial to future successes downtown and the buillding is looking great, I’ve had very mixed feelings about this whole project. I went into this on my last post on this project (http://coreysciuto.blogspot.com/2010/08/appleton-mill-april-2010-august-2010.html)
They’re not calling all artists – only those with low incomes. I only wish what Dick said were true – I’d love for the government to give me a home with exposed brick, high ceilings, marble countertops, and stainless steel appliances because they value me as part of the “creative economy.” As it stands, a frycook that can glue macaroni to paper qualifies to live in this building, but I’m paying way too much for way too little space just next door because I went into engineering instead. And if I ever wanted to rent my space out, now I have to compete with this heavily subsidized project!
Program Guidelines: http://www.liveappletonmills.com/Apartments/module/website_documents/website_document%5Bid%5D/21865
Corey as I understand it, this is an artist preference situation, not an artist only situation. In order to qualify according to income guidelines you either have to make 30% (approximately 16k to 18k for a single person for a $400 unit) of the area median or 60% (approximately 29k to 37k for a single person to pay around $800 for a unit) of the area median. (And that gets you anywhere from 450 to 800 sf, there are some larger 2 bedroom units but federal guidelines prohibit single individuals from inhabiting two bedroom units in tax credit projects).
In a study done by the Artist Foundation in 2009 it was found that after deduction of work related expenses the median income of the 1049 respondents was 20k.
I can tell you that after doing a major amount of research for our live/work project, that most artists don’t necessarily want hardwood floors, granite counter tops and stainless steel appliances (well maybe the stainless . . . easier to get paint off of stainless than regular appliances).
It is a laudable project and one that I hope will provide a place for artists who are struggling to survive because they didn’t choose engineering. But getting upset about Appleton Mills means that you need to get upset about River Place Towers, a middle income tax credit project with the best views in the city and any other number of low income housing properties in the city.
I looked at Appleton Mills and I can’t live there . . . not because I make too much to qualify, but because, I, like many of my friends fall between the cracks.
Maxine, I agree that there’s a difference between “artist” and creative economy worker. Although I don’t go for everything he has written or proposed, I believe Richard Florida uses the term “creatives” when he talks about creative economy workers, which opens up the frame. Art and science are different disciplines, but both involve imagination, invention, innovation—all words associated with creativity. That’s one of my priorities now. Encouraging creativity across disciplines, trades, professions, and fields. Former UMass Lowell President Bill Hogan used to talk about “climbing the innovation ladder” and how that is so essential if Massachusetts is going to be a state that can compete economically and offer a high quality experience socially. As tough as economic times are, our state is faring better than the average state, in part, maybe in large part, because of strengths in education and innovation.
First off Maxine, hello, nice to meet you. I’m embarrassed to admit I went inside WAS for the first time in the six years I’ve been in Lowell during the open studios right before Christmas and was really impressed with both the space itself (and The Space!) and the work done there. However, I’d think you’d be at least a little unhappy about how things are going on in the Appleton buildings, with tens of millions of dollars of money flowing into a subsidized housing project that will largely compete with your own, as far as I’ve heard, market rate, development.
Lynne over at Left In Lowell and I had this discussion (http://www.leftinlowell.com/2010/08/24/move-in-date-next-spring/) a few months back so I’m going to try to not repeat myself too much.
Yes, it’s artist-preference not artist-only, but isn’t that almost worse? If they can’t fill it with artists who don’t make much money, they’ll fill it not with artists who do make good money or non-artists who pull higher salaries and would like to live in a nice loft with interesting people, it’ll revert to standard low-income housing, which Lowell is the dumping ground for in this region, to our detriment. So you don’t misunderstand me, poverty isn’t the problem – concentrating poverty via government interference is.
A lot of my beef is this: Find me another low-income housing project in Lowell (or anywhere!) that cost $60m, or nearly half a million dollars a unit. Large colonial homes in mid-upper range suburbs cost that! The market-rate mill conversion next door, Canal Place III, cost $11m, or $100k each unit. They’re far, far less luxurious, but to be able to afford the approximately $100k mortgage or so on a unit, you’d have to be making a lot more money than you’re allowed to make to live in the exclusive club our tax dollars (indirectly as they were largely tax credits for MetLife) paid for next door. The development, by my math, is going to take about 60 years to pay off its construction costs, so I hope the people who are chosen to live there are really, really economically stimulating. Lynne argued that a cheaper renovation would simply not have saved that much money, but looking at the price discrepancies between these two tumble-down rebuilds, I’m not convinced.
Riverplace towers is a little different. First off, to my understanding, anybody can live there, it’s just subsidized for those who qualify (http://www.riverpl.com/rates.html). The rent is what it is and they work with programs that help pay it – mixed income developments are good things, and if they did that at Appleton Mill, I’d be a lot less upset. Secondly, the location isn’t nearly as good and it looks like what it was originally built to be – a housing project. It’s just not all that nice inside to make up for the view so it’s not really competition with the market-rate condos in the neighborhood. I only know a few people who have lived in Riverplace Towers past and present, and one is a classic story of a Lowell as a low-income dumping ground story: a suburban kid I went to high school with who became mentally ill and disabled, and got dumped in Lowell by his parents and put on government benefits because the suburbs surely don’t want to have to pretend they can produce problems like that and his family can’t handle him.
I mean, it’s harsh, but nobody should go into art expecting to make good money. Like with any career, you sign up for both the kind of work you’re going to do and the lifestyle it’ll grant you. I think it’s highly unfair, no matter how “vibrant” Lowell’s art scene is or what they add to the community (and it certainly has been a lot, I can’t stress that enough, this isn’t a beef with the artists themselves at all), to expect those of us who made different economic choices and also add value to the community, to heavily subsidize housing we are not allowed to live in that is superior to our own.
First off Maxine, hello, nice to meet you. I’m embarrassed to admit I went inside WAS for the first time in the six years I’ve been in Lowell during the open studios right before Christmas and was really impressed with both the space itself (and The Space!) and the work done there. However, I’d think you’d be at least a little unhappy about how things are going on in the Appleton buildings, with tens of millions of dollars of money flowing into a subsidized housing project that will largely compete with your own, as far as I’ve heard, market rate, development.
Hi Corey, glad you made it over to WAS . . . next time you come by, do stop in and say hi! To be honest, while there are some things about Appleton Mills that I am not happy with . . . size of the units (too small to be true live work space), fittings (have you ever seen what painters do to hardwood floors?), lack of parking. Appleton Mills isn’t in competition with The Western Avenue Lofts because WAL doesn’t have income restrictions.
I understand what you are saying about concentrating poverty, and I wish it were not so. But the housing is needed. And at least this way there is a chance that the building will become integrated with the rest of the Hamilton Canal District rather than being isolated.
A lot of my beef is this: Find me another low-income housing project in Lowell (or anywhere!) that cost $60m, or nearly half a million dollars a unit. Large colonial homes in mid-upper range suburbs cost that! The market-rate mill conversion next door, Canal Place III, cost $11m, or $100k each unit. They’re far, far less luxurious, but to be able to afford the approximately $100k mortgage or so on a unit, you’d have to be making a lot more money than you’re allowed to make to live in the exclusive club our tax dollars (indirectly as they were largely tax credits for MetLife) paid for next door. The development, by my math, is going to take about 60 years to pay off its construction costs, so I hope the people who are chosen to live there are really, really economically stimulating. Lynne argued that a cheaper renovation would simply not have saved that much money, but looking at the price discrepancies between these two tumble-down rebuilds, I’m not convinced.
I am not privy to the decision making at the city, but my guess is that this was the only way that they could find to preserve what was left of Appleton Mills. Which I am guessing was a part of the deal that Trinity had to make to get the whole kit and kaboodle . . . turning that shell into something liveable/useful was going to cost a gazillion dollars no matter what they put in there. The site is going to be smack in the middle of a construction zone for the next 10 years, put market rate housing in there and it wouldn’t fly because of that, ditto commercial use . . .
Riverplace towers is a little different. First off, to my understanding, anybody can live there, it’s just subsidized for those who qualify (http://www.riverpl.com/rates.html).
Um, actually you have to income qualify to live at River Place Towers. If your income goes up, so does your rent and if you exceed the income guidelines, you pay market rate. But to get in the building you need to qualify and you need to be re-certified every year.
As I understand it, River Place Towers was not built as a low income project, I could have it wrong but I remember folks talking about who lived here and how neat it was to come to parties here. And if you look at it in the context what it offered when it was built . . .
Most of us go into art because we can’t not make it. And for most of us the lifestyle is one we willingly accept . . . we didn’t ask for the finishes Trinity is putting into Appleton Mills. But what you have to understand is that in the late nineties, the city made a concerted effort to draw artists to Lowell. The artists worked with the city to create the artist overlay district and to get the banks to back the concept of live/work space in the downtown . . . only to be priced out of the housing that we helped create. Developers kept building lofts for sale even when it was made pretty clear that many artists don’t qualify for mortgages because we are, as a rule, self employed. In order to maintain a lively arts community, you have to house the artists and you have to give them someplace to work . . . and then you have to give them a venue to sell their work so they can afford to pay their rent and contribute to the economy. We are expected to contribute to the community, on average we get about 5 to 10 requests for donations of work a month. We are asked to volunteer to work in the schools. When we are offered work that corresponds to our particular skills, we are usually offered compensation slightly above minimum wage. I could go on.
I would love to have this conversation in person, rather than through the written word . . . Corey, stop by sometime and let’s talk.
Sorry about the last post . . . I meant to put quotations on Corey’s remarks!
<>
Hi Corey, glad you made it over to WAS . . . next time you come by, do stop in and say hi! To be honest, while there are some things about Appleton Mills that I am not happy with . . . size of the units (too small to be true live work space), fittings (have you ever seen what painters do to hardwood floors?), lack of parking. Appleton Mills isn’t in competition with The Western Avenue Lofts because WAL doesn’t have income restrictions.
I understand what you are saying about concentrating poverty, and I wish it were not so. But the housing is needed. And at least this way there is a chance that the building will become integrated with the rest of the Hamilton Canal District rather than being isolated.
<>
I am not privy to the decision making at the city, but my guess is that this was the only way that they could find to preserve what was left of Appleton Mills. Which I am guessing was a part of the deal that Trinity had to make to get the whole kit and kaboodle . . . turning that shell into something liveable/useful was going to cost a gazillion dollars no matter what they put in there. The site is going to be smack in the middle of a construction zone for the next 10 years, put market rate housing in there and it wouldn’t fly because of that, ditto commercial use . . .
<>
Um, actually you have to income qualify to live at River Place Towers. If your income goes up, so does your rent and if you exceed the income guidelines, you pay market rate. But to get in the building you need to qualify and you need to be re-certified every year.
As I understand it, River Place Towers was not built as a low income project, I could have it wrong but I remember folks talking about who lived here and how neat it was to come to parties here. And if you look at it in the context what it offered when it was built . . .
Most of us go into art because we can’t not make it. And for most of us the lifestyle is one we willingly accept . . . we didn’t ask for the finishes Trinity is putting into Appleton Mills. But what you have to understand is that in the late nineties, the city made a concerted effort to draw artists to Lowell. The artists worked with the city to create the artist overlay district and to get the banks to back the concept of live/work space in the downtown . . . only to be priced out of the housing that we helped create. Developers kept building lofts for sale even when it was made pretty clear that many artists don’t qualify for mortgages because we are, as a rule, self employed. In order to maintain a lively arts community, you have to house the artists and you have to give them someplace to work . . . and then you have to give them a venue to sell their work so they can afford to pay their rent and contribute to the economy. We are expected to contribute to the community, on average we get about 5 to 10 requests for donations of work a month. We are asked to volunteer to work in the schools. When we are offered work that corresponds to our particular skills, we are usually offered compensation slightly above minimum wage. I could go on.
I would love to have this conversation in person, rather than through the written word . . . Corey, stop by sometime and let’s talk.