How is it that the same result occurred in neighborhoods that did not have
Penn or UCD, or for that matter, the Center City District? I'm not aware of
the other groups demanding a forced tax, yet they are delivering the same
result.
Karen Allen
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Misleading quotes from Al [Was: Re: [UC] Investments in
neighborhoods.....]
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 18:32:45 EST
This kind of long-term, multifaceted approach has been adopted by
community development or service organizations, including the Girard
Coalition, Mount
Airy USA, New Kensington CDC, the Center City District, and the University
City District, as well as the University of Pennsylvania - whose
neighborhood
reinvestment strategy initially was a response to high crime levels in the
early 1990s.>>
<<Increased police presence must be combined with comprehensive, targeted
investment in neighborhoods - creating an environment that looks and feels
safe;
restoring abandoned housing and rebuilding vacant lots; creating well-lit
corridors, and attracting new businesses, residents and development.
This link between strong neighborhoods and low crime has been studied
since
the 1960s. It makes sense. Neighborhoods free of vacant properties, with
vibrant shopping and people out at all hours, are places with lower crime
rates
that feel safer. There are more eyes on the street and more stakeholders
protecting the community.>>
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
