Conkey/Clifford

Reinvestment
District

Proposal

Version 6c, 7/24

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District Proposal—Contents:

I. Overview Page 1
II. Study Area Characteristics Page 3
III. Mission Statement Page 3
IV. Rationale Page 3
V. Goals Page 4
VI. Evidence of Investment Page 5
VII. Partnership Page 5
VIII. Models and Precedents Page 6
IX. Program Page 8
X. Future Page 10
Figures Page 10
Appendices After Page 12

I. Overview

Executive Summary
To be written last!

Revitalize abandoned, underutilized, declining structures and spaces. Create density,

diversity, and vitality (healthy neighborhoods).

Origins of the initiative

This project began at the grassroots, with an interest by veteran house rehabbers and
lovers of local heritage in preserving the housing stock in the midst of a neighborhood
which had clearly seen difficult times, but seemed to have the potential to revitalize. The
history of Rochester shows clearly that those with similar interests and skills have been
responsible for sparking neighborhood revitalization in places such as Corn Hill and the
Atlantic/University Neighborhood.

After several months of exploratory discussions and study with the assistance of the
Rochester Regional Community Design Center (hereafter RRCDC), efforts to develop a
proposal began in earnest as a result of RRCDC’s Design Matters IV Conference in
March, 2007, with its theme, “Emergence of Forgotten Neighborhoods.”

The conference brought together developers, planners, community leaders and city hall
staff – not only from Rochester, but from other major cities as well – all for the purpose
of learning from others’ experiences and then forming a set of ‘best practices’. The
program involved three days of speakers, neighborhood tours and panel discussions,
culminating in a charrette for each of four potential project areas within Rochester.

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 1

What emerged was a new approach to community revitalization that like earlier, urban-
renewal-style approaches aimed to reinvigorate deteriorated urban spaces and to provide
support for residents of blighted areas. But unlike past programs, the new approach
emphasizes preservation over demolition, the viability of the public realm over profit-
based models, focusing on assets instead of problems, and integrated, comprehensive
projects over compartmentalized, piecemeal efforts.

The Conkey / Clifford Reinvestment District project is intended not just to revitalize one
city neighborhood, but to establish proof of concept and to serve as a platform of
experience for the benefit of future revitalization projects citywide.

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 2

Figure 1—Reinvestment district study area

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 3

II. Study Area Characteristics
1) History

The area included in our district is a very special place. The neighborhood was
built by German immigrants on farmland cleared by earlier Irish immigrants. It
was the home of Patrick Henry O’Rourke, Rochester’s preeminent Civil War
hero. It is the subject of “Mount Allegro”, the famous novel by Jerry Mangione
about the Italian-immigrant experience growing up in a working class
neighborhood in America. It housed a steady supply of workers to the mills and
factories that located along Saint Paul Street in the 19th and 20th centuries and
made Rochester an industrial dynamo. It continues to welcome newcomers and to
support diversity as home to Latinos and African Americans, and other diverse
ethnic groups.

2) Assets (need assets from list being prepared by Children’s Zone)

o Inside district boundaries
 Housing stock
• Built to last
• Affordable
• Spacious rooms
• Deep lots
• Historic architecture
 Diversity: ethnic/age/economic
o Outside district boundaries—list of neighborhood assets is being
developed for the Rochester Children’s Zone; preliminarily:
 Proximity to arts and entertainment venues
 Proximity to transit
 Proximity to river and trails

3) Demographics (Design Center—census data)

4) Housing market characteristics (which data to use?)
5) Current conditions (from survey)
6) Western Edge of Rochester Children’s Zone

III. Mission Statement—Ideas from 6/25 meeting

What is our mission?

Density, diversity, and vitality characterize all healthy urban neighborhoods. Our
purpose is to promote these strengths in targeted neighborhoods in Rochester using a
holistic, or community-based approach to revitalization.

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 4

While our focus will be on the built environment, our work will encompass other
causes of blight.

We recognize the fundamental importance of working with existing neighborhood

resources and assets. Our emphasis will be on re-purposing abandoned or vacant
properties and engaging existing community residents and stakeholders in
problem-solving processes.

We will adopt best practices gleaned from the experiences of a range of experts in areas
relating to community revitalization.

A target neighborhood will be capable of sustaining or improving levels of occupancy,

investment, and security by itself as a result of our efforts.

What is our strategy?

We talk about capital when referring to the level of resources a community can draw
upon in order to develop or sustain itself and to solve ongoing problems. Thus,
blighted inner-city neighborhoods can be thought of as capital-depleted. Likewise,
revitalization can be thought of as building a community's capital to the point where it
can once again sustain itself.

Revitalization is many people working in many roles to build a community's capital. The
roles include stabilizing the built environment, collaborating among stakeholders,
empowering residents, attracting investment, and improving the desirability of the
neighborhood as a place to live, visit or just bike through.

IV. Rationale
With an organized effort of sweat-equity home rehabilitators, and with strong
neighborhood association and non-profit community development corporation backing,
this is an ideal project to serve as a pilot for new strategies and policies for dealing with
abandoned properties and areas of disinvestment.

This project area is largely contained between active industrial properties to the south,
and the outstanding, well-maintained homes of Huntington Park to the north. It is nestled
between the significant natural and recreational resources of the Genesee River gorge to
the west and planned El Camino Rail-Trail to the east.

All around, and soon to be within the study area, have been projects investing in the
neighborhood. Infill housing has been constructed to the north and west, and the adjacent
Buena Vista Manor project by Ibero Development has recently transformed one of the
most blighted former industrial properties in the northeast into a thriving development.

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 5

Just to the east, adjoining St. Michael’s Church, ISLA Housing and Conifer Development
recently cut the ribbon on new housing. Bisecting the project area is the Clifford Avenue
corridor, along which Ibero Development has invested $20 Million in the last decade.
And at the heart of the project area, the intersection of Conkey and Clifford Avenues,
where we propose to rehab the first house in this project, the City will be investing
$100,000 to create a pocket park, and Ibero Development will be converting a former
commercial building into an educational center.

Encompassing several blocks, the proposed project area is both large enough to be able to
bring about meaningful impact, yet small enough to be doable with a solid understanding
of neighborhood conditions. It has a very representative mix of vernacular house
architecture which, combined with the prevalent street trees, and occasional storefront
commercial buildings, makes this neighborhood, potentially, a very appealing urban area.
This project’s initial emphasis on preventing new vacancies, then a program of
revitalization, followed by redensifying through appropriate infill, makes ideal use of this
neighborhood’s condition, characteristics, and circumstances. It also represents a
manageable Rochester “laboratory” for testing the impact of greening strategies as have
been done in Philadelphia, and discussed in the Rochester planning department document
Rightsizing and Green Infrastructure for the City.

In terms of timing, this project dovetails nicely with the recent surge of interest in
preservation and reuse of abandoned properties and older buildings as highlighted by the
recent Op-Ed piece published in the Democrat and Chronicle by the Landmark Society
(see Appendix ?). Also, as the City has largely caught up on its backlog of demolitions,
the time is now right to take a look—as other cities are—at our policy regarding the role
of abandoned buildings and vacant properties in Rochester.

Keeping this community fabric intact will avoid the fate of the nearby Mount Allegro
neighborhood, where nothing remains south of Upper Falls Boulevard of a formerly
vibrant community, other than the St. Bridget’s church campus and the writings of Jerre
Mangione. And adding to the preservation significance of this focus area is that it bridges
two state and national register-eligible historic districts: Huntington Park, and St.
Micheal’s (see Appendix ?)

In addition, making use of the new housing market study data for the focus area, the
entire section (see figure below) between North Clinton Ave. and the River is the largest
area of northeast Rochester to be rated (in terms of overall neighborhood characteristics)
as being above the lowest measure. The one exception within that area is our focus area
and several largely contiguous blocks. The revitalization of our focus area, then, will
enhance the stability and revitalization of that entire section of the northeast along the
river, forming an improved western anchor for revitalization of the northeast and
Rochester Children’s Zone.

And strictly in terms of dovetailing on other planned investment, given the recent and
planned projects in and around the focus area (see Section VI—Evidence of Investment),

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 6

this proposal fits in well with, and leverages, ongoing efforts by the City and others, and
makes a great deal of sense from this position alone.

V. Goals—Framework:
1. Stabilization

Compile a property survey to define the current state of the district. Form partnerships
with neighborhood groups, non-profit agencies, developers and city government,
including NET. Reach out to owner-occupant residents. Work with law enforcement via
PAC-TAC to combat crime and drug traffic. Assist code enforcement proactively. Work
on general appearance by greening vacant lots, setting out planters and flower boxes, and
removing litter. Market vacant properties by maintaining lawns and signage to project an
image of ‘availability’ versus ‘abandonment’. Contact private owners of abandoned
properties and facilitate their needs.

2. Collaboration

Use internet, meetings, networking, and functions (conferences and events) to connect
with existing stakeholders like Ibero, Group 14621, Rochester Children’s Zone, CONEA,
etc, to share ideas, plans, information and resources. Don’t re-invent the wheel.

3. Empowerment

Organize neighborhood groups, do coaching, enabling and training where needed, and
encourage participation among residents.

4. Investment

Organize marketing campaigns such as neighborhood tours (like City Living Sundays),
approach funding sources, pursue financial assistance for homeowners and home buyers.

5. Desirability

Connect external assets such as the river trail, El Camino rail-trail, Saint Michael’s
Church, and La Avenida and La Marketa to become an activity ‘hub’. Highlight ethnic
identities. Become a place of choice. Create vibrant street life, walkable distances, and a
sense of place.

VI. Evidence of recent, current, and future investment

We need to get an exhaustive list (including dollar amounts) of:
• Recent investment:

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 7

 o Ibero, Group 14621, St. Michael’s, Habitat, RHA, Huntington Park (75,
79?), Home Rochester, and individuals (like me) have all invested in
housing
o RG&E incorporated a pedestrian bridge in the project at Middle Falls
• Current investment:
o ISLA project (St. Michael’s II)
o Home rehabs underway
• Planned investment:
o Ibero housing
o Rail-Trail

14621 has this information. Note that these projects will be mostly outside the target
area, since the target area has been the victim of disinvestment.

VII. CCRD Partnership—possible partners (as this proposal is

refined, we should outline by type of partner, and indicate
something about the potential contribution/role of each):
• Architects, landscape architects available to provide consultation
• 14621
• Conea
• Ibero
• Huntington Neighbors
• City of Rochester
• NET
• Sector planning committees
• El Camino Rail Trail project
• Genesee Land Trust
• St. Michael’s Parish
• Landmark Society of Western New York
• Rochester Children’s Zone
• PAC-TAC
• Pathways For Peace
• SHPO (State Historic Preservation Office)
• Preservation League of New York State
• Enterprise Community Partners
• MCC Carpentry program? Edison?
• Greater Rochester Housing Partnership?

VIII. Models and precedents

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 8

Rochester, NY: Susan B. Anthony Collaborative
Perhaps the most relevant model for the Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment effort is the
successful initiative by several partners to revitalize the Susan B. Anthony Neighborhood
by addressing the abandoned property situation there. Although several entities played
key roles in this effort, including the Susan B. Anthony Neighborhood Association,
Landmark Society of Western New York, Preservation League of New York State,
Housing Opportunities, Flower City Habitat For Humanity, and the City of Rochester,
much of the actual work and financial commitment was made by committed “sweat
equity” investors. This group, which now forms the nucleus of one of the most active
and engaged neighborhood associations in the city has worked cooperatively to stabilize,
show, and rehab houses.

Among the contributions by the City have included modifications to standard policies for
demolishing and marketing houses. A process favoring stabilization of abandoned
houses, and partnership with the neighborhood association to market to owner-occupants
willing to invest sweat equity in rehab has resulted in nearly all the once-abandoned
properties improved by committed owner-occupants. Buildings still awaiting purchase
have been stabilized by the City, and carefully monitored by the neighborhood
association. In one case, the City paid to have a commercial building reroofed to keep it
structurally sound until a buyer could be found.

The two housing organizations involved have constructed infill housing on several vacant
lots using designs carefully selected and executed to be compatible with the existing
architecture of the neighborhood, which is a designated historic district. Among other
key contributions to the effort, the Landmark Society has assisted with marketing the
houses, and served as a resource for the home owners for rehabilitation of the properties.

Buffalo, NY: West Side Community Collaborative (WSCC)

Rochester is indeed fortunate to have a model in a neighboring city of a dynamic, highly
effective, and successful community revitalization effort, focused on reinvestment in
existing neighborhood housing stock while addressing the conditions which led to
neighborhood disinvestment. With no paid staff or budget, the collaborative works on a
block-by-block basis by initially addressing crime and building social capital, then
proactively engaging with property owners, city inspectors, and housing court to take
specific actions with targeted abandoned properties.

Ongoing efforts on their project blocks include trying to proactively address issues with
properties and ownership before they result in abandonment, and organizing volunteer
efforts to secure and monitor houses, mow grass, and plant gardens, essentially assuming
community responsibility for properties where and when necessary. Also where and
when necessary, the collaborative markets buildings on behalf of the community, in some
cases using volunteer efforts to paint and spruce up façades and ground to make the
buildings more appealing. They also actively and continually recruit urban homesteaders
and small business people to purchase, occupy, and invest in properties.

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 9

Because the group has been able to achieve successes where previous efforts have either
failed or been nonexistent, and are able to take steps that the City of Buffalo does not
have the funding, staff, or mandate to carry out, they have achieved remarkable success in
garnering cooperation and action of the various stakeholders in the area in which they
operate, and in bringing new partners to the process to invest time, energy, and resources
in revitalizing Buffalo’s West Side.

Although not a direct parallel, the West Side Community Collaborative has much to offer
as a model, as there are several common characteristics between Buffalo’s West Side and
our project area, such as a comparable level of disinvestment, proximity to a major river
corridor, and architecturally vernacular yet well-built and attractive housing stock once
inhabited by a largely immigrant population. Also, their focus, like ours, has been to
proactively preserve and revitalize housing stock and blocks using a variety of low-cost
strategies, leverage existing community assets, and partner with existing organizations.

Buffalo, NY: Crescent Village Revitalization Project

This $5 Million project was launched this year in the Broadway/Fillmore area of
Buffalo’s east side, and area which has seen the highest degree of disinvestment and
blight in the city. The project area is severely economically challenged (one of the census
tracts involved has a 60% poverty level). The partners in this project, including a
community revitalization organization, developer, architect, and faith community are
determined to show that they can reverse the trend of disinvestment. In addition, they
determined from the beginning to rehab whatever houses in the project area could be
salvaged and rehabbed. U.S. Representative Louise Slaughter secured $472,000 in
federal funds for demolition of 40 of the 72 houses in the project area identified as
unsalvageable. The developer addresses the houses deemed rehabable by acquiring
property that is vacated, derelict or close to being vacated, either from the city or from a
private owner, then rehabilitate it and resell it at a reduced price from what it would cost
for a new build or a subsidized home. Infill housing will use a design by a Buffalo
architect which reflects the historic style of the neighborhood. This project also received
assistance from the Federal Home Loan Bank and the City of Buffalo.

Columbus, OH: Home Again approach

• Initiated by Mayor Coleman in early 2006
• For demolition, the City initially identified and targeted 1/10 of the abandoned
houses in the city in the worst condition.
• $25 Million bonded for 6 years dedicated to program
• The City initiated the formation of a non-profit Housing Trust to work in
partnership with the City
• Code enforcement expedited through more aggressive inspection and prosecution,
and streamlined by the reworking of procedures
• Goal: 1,000 vacant homes (out of 3,200) put back into productive use in 6 years
• The City and Housing Trust identified a “Model Zone” in which they could get to
work immediately and refine details of the program
• Bureaucratic obstacles to rehab removed or reduced

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 10

 • 5 components (acquisition and rehabilitation were outsourced to the Housing
Trust):
o Enforcement
o Prevention
o Acquisition
o Rehabilitation
o Demolition (as last resort)

Philadelphia, PA: New Kensington Neighborhood Pilot Study

Although a Brookings Institution report has raised questions about Philadelphia’s overall
approach to neighborhood reinvestment, this single-neighborhood study of place-based
investment strategies; specifically “cleaning and greening” suggests a significant
component that should be part of any neighborhood reinvestment strategy. Among the
findings deemed most significant to our study group are:
• Cleaning and greening of vacant lots can increase adjacent property values by as
much as 30%.
• Planting a tree within 50 feet of a house can increase its value by about 9%.
• Location of a house within 1/4 mile from a park increased values by 10%.
• Neighborhood blocks with higher concentrations of unmanaged vacant lots
displayed lower house prices, about 18%.

Providence, RI: SWAP (Stop Wasting Abandoned Properties)

SWAP was established in 1975 by a group of concerned Providence residents troubled by
the negative effects associated with the unchecked demolition of abandoned properties.
Their goal was to establish an organization that would renovate abandoned houses or
build new housing on vacant lots for low to moderate income working families. To date,
nearly 1,000 SWAP-assisted housing units are spread throughout the city, and SWAP has
become one of Rhode Island’s busiest and most productive community development
corporations. Executive Director Carla DiStephano came to Rochester as a key
participant in this year’s RRCDC conference Design Matters IV, The Emergence of
Forgotten Neighborhoods.

On Pine Street, where SWAP has its offices, freshly restored historic houses sporting
window boxes of colorful flowers line a street once blighted with abandoned houses and
littered vacant lots. With a strategy of working neighborhood-by-neighborhood, SWAP
has now revitalized essentially every pocket of vacant properties in South Providence,
and is now looking to other areas of Providence and Rhode Island.

IX. Project program and phases (in relation to project goals)

Based on researching other models and initiatives, and after researching the
characteristics, assets, current conditions, and potential of the study area and surrounding
neighborhood, the study group proposes this 5-year program to meet the goals initially set
out: to stabilize, revitalize, and redensify the project area.

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 11

We propose to reach the goals of this project over 5 years, in roughly 3 phases. The
investigation/proposal phase will be considered closed with the acceptance and initiation
of this proposal. Consistent throughout the phases will be a year-by-year moratorium on
new demolitions in the study area. Also, although evaluation will be ongoing, extensive
review will be anticipated for the annual renewal of the demolition moratorium—with the
realization that, as in many new initiatives which address challenging and complex
community issues, positive results may not be immediate, and it may take time to reverse
the existing trend toward disinvestment.

Stabilize—year one
For the first year, the goal will be stabilization of both the housing stock, and
neighborhood environment, with an eye toward establishing progress to demonstrate for
the first yearly renewal of the demolition moratorium. Primarily low-capital strategies
will be used to both stabilize abandoned buildings and improve the appearance and civic
involvement of the neighborhood. A major focus will be on attracting and forming
partnerships with organizations, and individual owner-occupants willing to invest
resources and sweat equity in rehab of abandoned buildings in the project area. Above
all, the goal of the first year of this program is to begin to disrupt the cycle of
disinvestment that has led to the current level of blight. Among specifics are the
following:

1) Complete a property survey of the project area

2) Marketing:

The marketing component in this phase will introduce residents and stakeholders to
the project. It seeks to create a positive image of opportunity to replace negative
images of abandonment, via the Adopt-a-Lot and Adopt-a-House projects, and by
conducting tours primarily for partners and potential investors.

3) Funding

Flexing RestoreNY funding for stabilization

Flexing RestoreNY funding for program like now-defunct “Fix Rochester”
program

4) Greening for stabilization:

Greening in this phase limits trespass and crime, creates active and attractive spaces,
projects a positive image and encourages neighborly involvement.

a. “Adopt-a-lot”: Greening and fencing of vacant lots to mend the street wall and
project a sense of order and activity.
b. Set out planters and flower boxes to enhance appearance.
c. Develop “standard components” for all lots initially:

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 12

 i. Bollard-fences, trees, benches, walkways
d. Perform trash pick-ups, mowing, and maintenance

5) Properties:

Provide real estate market services that are currently lacking, such as creating a
positive image, advertising availability, providing information, and walk-throughs.

a. “Adopt-a-house”: Maintain land around vacant, city-owned structures. Post

signage as stand-in for realtors’ “For Sale” signs. Apply a visual treatment to
“board-ups”. Perform clean-outs and sponsor walk-throughs under the
supervision of the NET office.
b. Promote a one-year moratorium (with a yearly reauthorization process)
c. Assist code enforcement
d. Encourage property owners to improve curb appeal.
e. Marketing and management of city-owned properties: maintain lawn, clean-
outs, walk-throughs
f. Work with private owners of abandoned properties to facilitate their needs.
This may include enhancing curb appeal via façade improvements and
assisting them in finding a buyer.

6) Organize:
a. Meet and involve residents while performing stabilization activities such as
PAC-TAC walks and lot clean-ups. Contact owner-occupants and learn their
interests.
b. Create public spaces for social contacts
c. Meet people, communicate our vision, and encourage involvement.

7) Public safety:
a. Establish PAC-TAC, involve Pathways to Peace and other community-based
responses to crime, disorder and drugs

Revitalize/Reinvest—years two–three
The focus of the second and third years will be on repairing existing social and physical
assests, including the work of rehabbing the abandoned houses, and building social
capital and leadership in the neighborhood. Additional efforts will be made to increase
investment in the neighborhood and a sense of place, especially through engagement with
the development of the rail-trail, planned pocket park, and planned Ibero projects.
Among specifics are the following:

1) Marketing:

The marketing component in this phase creates an identity for the district by further
enhancing public spaces, building and supporting owner-occupancy, organizing
neighborhood events and broadening public safety. Tours mainly target prospective
investors and promoters.

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 13

2) Funding

3) Greening goes beyond appearance, focusing on formalizing or enhancing the

experience of ordinary uses through the creation of pocket parks, pedestrian paths, or
play spaces. The point is to enhance the day-to-day experience of living in the district
for those already here.

4) Properties:
a. Stimulate rehabs and other low-capital investment
b. Meet current owner-occupants and explore ways to align their interests with
the interests.of the community.
c. Pursue sweat-equity investment opportunities.
d. Home repair program
i. Through collaboration, as in Susan B. Anthony Neighborhood with
John Bero
ii. Through government, as in reinstitution of “City Fix-Up” program

5) Organize:
a. Plan events that encourage participation, pride-of-place and social contacts.
b. Identify and empower neighborhood leaders and organizers.
c. Create public spaces for communicating and problem-solving.

6) Public safety:
a. Establish a Neighborhood Watch

Redensify—years three–five
Also, attract significant investment in business/retail as well as residential. Working for
the long term, the effort will be to put the project area on a firm footing by making
improvement self-sustaining, and making it and its surrounding neighborhood a location
of choice. Attracting people to the project area will be improvements to the existing
housing stock, and appropriately-designed infill housing. Among specifics are the
following:

1) Market the neighborhood as a destination, a place of choice.

Tours in this phase focus mainly on bringing outsiders into the district to enhance the
district’s image and attract residents, businesses and investment. Streetlamp banners and
gateways identify the district.

2) Funding

3) Greening is done as significant projects such as gateways to solidify neighborhood

identity.

4) Properties:

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 14

 a. Design guidelines are established via zoning overlay
b. The district begins to attract non-residential uses and structures.
c. Opportunities for new construction and infill construction are now
economically justifiable.

5) Organize
a. Neighborhood organizations have elected officers and meet regularly to
resolve community issues.
b. PAC-TAC patrols are common.
c. Festivals and block parties are organized.

X. Future
• Avoiding foreclosures and abandonments
• Redevelopment of vacant lots
• Homesteading
• Return of “Fix-Up Rochester” home repair program

XI. Appendices
A) Recent landmark society op-ed on environmental benefits of preserving older
buildings
B) Sections on Huntington Park and St. Michael’s from historic resources survey
(Mack Report)
C) Data from Rochester housing market study
D) Right-Sizing and Green Infrastructure for the City
E) Study team members

XII. Figures (at end, or interspersed)

1. Demographics
• Percentage owner occupancy
• Income/poverty
• Diversity
• Crime
o Personal
o Property

2. Housing
• Assessment/valuation
• Units completed?
• Code violations

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 15

3. Schools and service areas

4. Project area maps

• project boundaries, properties/survey data
• project area amid larger neighborhood context

5. Metrics
• Residents
o Portion of owner occupancy
o Income statistics
o Diversity measures: ethnic composition

• Housing
o Portion of income spent on housing

• Properties and Structures

o Vacancy rate
o Assessment stats
o Comparables
o Units completed or re-occupied
o Code citations

• Social Connections
o Nr of community organizations
o Nr of community events

• Safety
o Crime statistics (calls per block to 911)

• Schools

XIII. Quotables (Do we want to use any of these? Where?)

“What we ourselves have made, we are at liberty to throw down. With what others have
built with their energies and their wealth, their rights over them do not end even after
death.” - John Ruskin

“For an environment to lift the spirit, attention must be focused on opportunities for
relatedness.” - Dr. Mindy Fullilove, “Root Shock”

“Creating a positive influence requires a blend of public and private commitments

oriented around assets not liabilities.” - Stephen Goldsmith, “Putting Faith in
Neighborhoods”

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 16

“Demolitions are destroying the ability of cities to heal themselves”—Tim Tielman,
Executive Director, Preservation Coalition of Erie County

“The best thing you can do for the environment is preserve older buildings”—Thomas
Hylton, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist

“A city needs to strengthen its heart, without hauling its soul off to the landfill”—Richard
Moe, President, National Trust for Historic Preservation

“Creating livable communities includes creating opportunity for meaningful contact with
our shared heritage”—Ibid

“We haven’t been called to build a fresh new world, but to heal and repair a broken
one”—Father Kennedy, Blessed Sacrament, June 10 homily

“…You don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone. They demolished paradise, and put up
a bollard lot.”—Joni M.

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 17

Nearby neighborhood investment

Recent Projects Completion Amount

Hart Street buildings ? ?

Current Projects Completion Amount

El Camino Rail/Trail (property purchase) 2006 $1.3 Million

Planned Projects Completion Amount

El Camino Rail/Trail (trail development) 2009 $2.2 Million*
Conkey/Clifford Pocket Park 2008 $150,000

* Includes $2 Million from Transportation Enhancements, $150,000 from Kodak grant,

$50,000 in Multi-Modal funding.

Conkey/Clifford Reinvestment District proposal v.6c (7/24) Page 18