For 30 years, Lewiston and Auburn have searched, with only limited success, for the magic formula to spark a downtown renaissance. This month, the magic formula was delivered to our doorstep – in the form of a delegation from Lowell, Mass.

A team of longtime civic leaders who helped oversee the rebirth of Lowell spoke March 17 at the Great Falls Forum at the Lewiston Public Library. They described decades of unremitting effort which have led to an extreme makeover of Lowell, imparting lessons which are instructive for resolving our own dilemma.

There are many parallels between the proven solutions to Lowell’s problems and the potential solutions for Lewiston-Auburn’s.

In the post-World War II era, Lowell’s large textile industry cratered, leaving the city with a decrepit economy, high unemployment and soaring crime rates.

It was an ironic and bitter ending to one of America’s greatest success stories. In the early 1820s, Lowell had become the first successful planned industrial city in America, harnessing water power from the Merrimack and Concord rivers, integrating all phases of textile manufacturing in one locale, employing mass production techniques and virtually inventing the American Industrial Revolution — a feat which earned it the nickname, the “Lowell Miracle.”

Prosperous, bustling and inhabited by a largely immigrant population of Irish, French-Canadians, Greeks, Poles, Italians and Portuguese, among others, the city was practically synonymous with U.S. industrialism for more than a century.

However, by 1980, in the words of George Eliades, former chair of the Lowell Historic Board, the best high-school graduation present you could get was a ticket out of town. The gritty resignation of the generation which came of age in that period is poignantly portrayed in the recent hit movie, “The Fighter.”

Then, in the late 1970s, Paul Tsongas, Massachusetts congressman and later U.S. senator, entered the picture. An energetic, determined reformer, he spurred federal, state and municipal agencies, as well as local bankers and businessmen, into working together to remake the city.

The linchpin of his plan was to highlight Lowell’s storied past — its canal system, red-brick mills and handsome 19th century urban architecture — all of which, if properly preserved, restored and developed, could make the city a uniquely desirable place to live and work.

In 1978, Tsongas persuaded Congress to authorize the Lowell National Historic Park, the first urban park in the National Park Service’s history, as well as the Lowell Historic Preservation Commission. Using the National Park as a platform, he and his political disciples initiated measures that became a model for progressive urban planning around the country. They include the following:

* A carefully crafted code of design specifications to rid downtown development of neon signs, billboards and building facades incompatible with the architectural character of the urban core.

* Lining industrial canals and riverfronts with aesthetic walkways and greenery.

* Locating a university campus, community college, high school, arena and auditorium in the downtown rather than the outskirts

* Placing a moratorium on development of additional public housing (which, at its height, constituted 80 percent of rental housing stock) and constantly courting developers to renovate old mills into market-rate condominiums, apartments, offices, retail stores, loft space for artists and light manufacturing

* Pressing commercial banks to lend to downtown development projects and establishing the Lowell Development & Financial Corporation to supplement commercial lending with semi-public incentive financing.

* Holding regular monthly meetings of public and private stakeholders, including representatives of public agencies, businesses and banks, to coordinate development efforts.

Today 80 percent of the millions of square feet of mill space in Lowell has been renovated and occupied, and additional projects on the drawing board could bring that total to more than 90 percent.

Why can’t Lewiston-Auburn achieve what Lowell has accomplished?

Even lacking some of Lowell’s significant advantages (a population of more than 100,000, more compact geography, much closer proximity to Boston and the presence of a national park), we can still replicate a lot of Lowell’s success.

We already have many of the ingredients in place, but for the Lowell model to work, we need political leadership which has a clear vision for the future, perseverance, respect for historical heritage and the courage to fund infrastructure critical for inner-city redevelopment, even in hard economic times.

The Twin Cities have already achieved some progress, including redevelopment of the Bates Mill complex, creation of the River Walk, Simard-Payne Park, downtown improvements under Auburn’s ACT plan, the Lisbon Street Gateway and several new parking garages.

Progress, however, has been fitful. Periods of energetic creativity by the two city councils have alternated with periods of inertia, lack of foresight and downright hostility towardsmunicipal investment or involvement in preserving the history, and improving the aesthetics and livability, of L-A’s urban core. Lofty public goals have given way to the lowest common denominator of local politics — reducing taxes and filling potholes.

Ironically, Lewiston followed the Lowell model in the 1850s, when Benjamin Bates and his associates developed a planned industrial city along the banks of the Androscoggin River.

We would do well to follow Lowell’s lead a century-and-a-half later.

Elliott L. Epstein, a local attorney, is founder of Museum L-A and an adjunct history instructor at Central Maine Community College. He is the author of “Lucifer’s Child,” a recently published book about the 1984 oven-death murder of Angela Palmer. He may bereached at [email protected].