Search (100 results)
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 11
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 11
- Text: MINUTES GRANT REVIEW BOARD DECEMBER 31,1968 The City of Atlanta Grant Review Board met in the office of the Director of Governmental Liaison at 9:30 a.m. on December 31, 1968, to review the Atlanta Model Cities Program application to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for Supplemental Funds. In attendance were: Dan Sweat, Director of Governmental Liaison, Chairman, Grant Review Board Collier Gladin, Planning Director, Member, Grant Review Board George Berry, Deputy Comptroller, Member, Grant Review Board Johnny Johnson, Director of Model Cities George Aldridge, City Planner Carl Paul, Deputy Director of Personnel Jay Fountain, Senior Accountant The Grant Review Board discussed with Mr. Johnson several major points of concern, primarily procedures for approval by responsible City departments and agencies; administrative organization; and personnel requirements. In view of the complexities of the Model Cities Program and the need for full understanding by all responsible City officials, the following concensus of the Grant Review Board membership is hereby presented: The Model Cities Program as established by the President and Congress of the United States is perhaps the most comprehensive and optimistic grant-in-aid program ever offered to America's cities. : The concept and intent of the Model Cities Program is good. It provides for the legally responsible local governing authority to exercise its authority and influence in demonstrating bold new techniques of urban planning and development. It provides maximum opportunity for real involvement and participation by citizens of neighborhoods in the planning and execution of programs which effect their daily lives. Page Two And it promotes coordination among local, state and national agencies and departments of the limited resources which are available. The successful planning and execution of a Model Cities Program can be a valuable experience for any city in its search for orderly and timely solutions to its multitude of urban problems. Atlanta's City Demonstration Agency has attempted to meet the challenge and intent of the Model Cities legislation. Citizens of all six neighborhood areas encompassed by Atlanta's Model Cities Program were actively involved in organizing and planning for Model Cities more than a year in advance of the beginning of the City's formal planning stage. Local, state and federal public agencies and numerous private groups participated in the preparation of the required planning grant application. The Mayor and Board of Aldermen endorsed and supported the planning effort, The Model Cities planning staff worked long and hard to prepare the documents necessary for successful funding of the first year program. The final documents detail a bold and innovative plan of attack on the major problem areas in the Model Cities neighborhood. The-Model Cities staff has made an admirable attempt to live up to the concept of the Model Cities program. To a great extent they have met both the needs and wishes of the citizens of the area and the requirements of planning and administration of the City and federal governments. The Model Cities Program also places on all City departments and agencies the requirement for cooperation, coordination and approval of program components, There are indications that this requirement has not been met, Where it has not done so, each department and agency is obligated to review and pass on the specific components of the program which assigns execution responsibility to that department. Each committee of the Board of Aldermen should review and approve/disapprove each program component which falls within the responsibility and authority of the committee. The Planning and Development Committee should exercise its responsibility for overall planning of the city by reviewing the Model Cities plan and making Page Three the determination as to the compatibility of the Model Cities Program with overall city plans. The Finance Committee should determine the financial feasibility of the program and the capability of the City to meet the requirements placed upon it by the program. The full Board of Aldermen should carefully consider the priorities involved in the Model Cities execution, its impact on the area served and the entire city as weil. The Grant Review Board believes these approvals should be given before Aldermanic sanction is granted. We feel that if the provisions of the Model Cities application are understood and accepted before final approval is granted a much stronger program will result. It should be understood that this is not intended as criticism of the planning grant document or the work of the Model Cities staff, but is an effort to gain full understanding and support of the strongest program in the best interest of all citizens of Atlanta. It is therefore recommended that the Mayor and Board of Aldermen require written acceptance or denial of each component of the Model Cities plan by the departments and agencies responsible for the execution of each component before final approval of the grant application is given. Respectfully, lu’ Dan Sweat Chairman he KB George‘Berry, Member = Qadus S0.0.s Collier Gladin, Member é. i. Ue, dined E. H. Underwood, Member bee
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 15
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 15
- Text: MANUFACTURING CORPORATION Menlo, Ga.30731- 404 862-2302 January 24, 1969 The Hon. Ivan Allen, Jr. Office of the Mayor Atlanta, Georgia Dear Mayor Allen: Knowing of your extreme interest in things good for Atlanta, | am submitting an Idea for your consideration, If the proposition seems to you that it has possible merit, | would be happy for you to suggest a time for me to come to your office and discuss the matter in detail. Please understand fully that | do not approach you posing as a philanthropist. Professional and financial advantages to me personally are also involved. My idea is, over-simplified, that if money for training purposes is available from the ''Model Cities'' or ''Economic Opportunity'' programs [In Atlanta, | can provide 200 to 500 permanent jobs, mostly for women, sewing cotton work gloves. Further, the operation could be located wherever desirable from your over-all planning standpoint and, over a period of time, would be completely self- liquidating financially. Your investigation would verify that | started this business from scratch in 1951 and we are at present a factor in our industry, nationally, giving steady jobs to over 500 people. If you wanted to get more information on the telephone, | can be reached at this office or at home during the evening, Rome 234-5064. | would appreciate an Indication of your possible interest at your convenience. Yours very truly, “Tew Lo, aoe Roy W. Mann br
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 19
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 19
- Text: SE ee a SS ae a a a a a 8 ee ee ee ee ee October 15, 1968 | Mr. Sam Steen | Metropolitan Area Director ; | Georgia State Employment Service Georgia Department of Labor State Labor Building Atlanta, Georgia Dear Mr. Steen: The City of Atlanta has made a great deal of progress in the area of manpower development and training in identifying and creating new employment opportunities for the citizens of our city. Much of the credit for the manpower progress in Atlanta must go to Don Bryant, Georgia State Employment Service's Manpower Representative for the Atlanta Area, Mr. Bryant's coordination of GSES manpower pro- grams with Economic Opportunity Atlanta from the inception of the community action agency was a key factor in the orderly growth of these programs over the past several years. Lately, a Concentrated Employment Program, as well as various other outreach programs which Mr. Bryant has coordinated have made significant contributions to Atlanta's growth. He has also been a valuable asset in assisting the City in development of a successful Model Cities implementation document. This is just to offer my congratulations to Mr.. Bryant and for his contributions and to the Georgia State Employment Service for making his services available in a meaningful way to all the City of Atlanta. Sincerely yours, Dan Sweat
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 6
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 6
- Text: Cc. F. G. ° : February 11, 1969 1969 MODEL CITY PROJECTS 1969 Rehabilitation Project R-1l 1. Replace 5 old style fire hydrants with 5~4 1/4" fire hydrants @ approx. $ 1,085.45 1969 Rehabilitation Project R-2 1. Replace 4 old style fire hydrants with 4-4 1/4" fire hydrants @ approx. $ 868.36 2. Install 800' - 8" water main in Primrose St. from Atlanta Ave. to South Ave. ~ @ approx. $ 6,656.00 3. Install 800' - 8" water main in Connally St. from Atlanta Ave. to South Ave. @ approx. $ 6,656.00 4. Install 800" - 8" water main in Greenfield St. from Vanira Ave. to Ormand St. @ approx. $ 6,656.00 5. Install 800' — 8" water main in Martin St. from Vanira Ave. to Ormand St. @ approx. $ 6,656.00 1969 Rehabilitation Project R-3 1. Replace 8 old style fire hydrants with 8 4 1/4" fire hydrants @ approx. $ 1,736.72 2. Install 1000' - 8" water main in Rosedale Ave, from Home St. to Delmar Ave. @ approx. $ 8,320.00 Total Estimated Cost for Rehabilitating Areas $ 38,634.53 1969 Clearance Project C-1 1. Plug 8" main in Berrele St. from Coleman St. to McDaniel St. @ approx. $ 128.00 2. Plug 6" main in Middle St. from Coleman St. to McDaniel St. @ approx. $ 128.00 1969 Clearance Project C-2 1. Plug 8" main in Richardson St. from Winsor St. to Cooper St. @ approx. $ 128.00 2. Plug 6" main in Cooper St. from Richardson St. to Fulton St. @ approx. $ 128.00 1969 Clearance Project C-3 1. Plug 6" main in Cherokee St. from Martin St. to Connally St. @ approx. $ 128.00 1969 Clearance Project C-4 - no work Total Estimated Cost for Clearance Areas $ 640.00 Grand Total $ 39,274.53
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 16
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 16
- Text: 2 oe ee ee ee eee eS ae ee ee ee Ce eS a a February 19, 1969 Mr. Marvin A, Andrews Assistant to the Manager City of Phoenix Phoenix, Arizona Dear Marv: I had remembered to ask for copies of the Model Cities documents upon my return and was glad to get your letter. We are in the process of reprinting and won't have additional copies for a few more weeks, However, I have enclosed Mayor Allen's copy of Volume I and my copy of Volume II along with a copy of the "Management Information and Control System" document for your use, I would ask that you hold on to these and I will yell if I need them back. I enjoyed the opportunity to be with you in Boston and hope that I have the privilege of meeting you again in the future. Sincerely yours, Dan Sweat DS:fy Enclosures
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 31
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 31
- Text: CITY OF ATLANTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL POSITION PAPER RELATION OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO MODEL CITIES EXECUTIVE BOARD AND STAFF —— PROBLEM STATEMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS——— Respectfully submitted, ON eNO Collier B. Gladin Pianning Director February 13, 1969 The purpose of this paper is to identify certain problems which have arisen in the comprehensive planning process in Atlanta over the past year. The problem centers around a misunderstanding of the responsibilities of the Model Cities Program staff and Executive Board in relation to the responsibilities of Planning and Development Committee and its professional staff arm, the Planning Department. In November 1967, the Planning and Development Committee of the Board of Aldermen sponsored and recommended approval of a resolution establishing the Model Cities Executive Board. This resolution was subsequently adopted by the Board and approved by the Mayor on November 20, 1967. The resolution specifically stated that "the Model Neighborhood Executive Board is hereby created for the purpose of administering the planning phase of (the Model Neighborhood) program." The Planning Department invested a great deal of time and effort both in preparing the Model Neighborhood Application and subsequently in assisting in developing the Model Neighborhood Plan. In fact, much of the material contained in all the Model Cities reports and applications originated and was refined in the Planning Department by its staff personnel. It was and still is our intention to work closely with the Model Cities staff in assuring the success <9 of this program. There appears now to be a lack of understanding on the part of the Model Cities staff as to the role and responsibility of the Planning and Development Committee and the Planning Department. The committee, using the department as its staff arm, is charged with the responsibility of reviewing all plans and programs concerned with urban growth, development, and redevelopment throughout the city. The Model Cities Program, on the other hand, is a special purpose six neighborhood detioreration program primarily concerned with one tenth of the city's residents and less than five per cent of the city's area. For conaislenoy sake, obviously the Planning and Development Committee should review the physical programs, plans and proposals developed by this agency for the Model Neighborhood area as it would review plans and programs of any other area of the city for conformance with overall city policy and goals. The Planning Department's concern is not control over the Model Cities Program. Instead, the department is simply exercising those functions for which it is responsible as staff arm to the Planning and Development Committee and as set forth in the Code of the City of Atlanta. The department, as a general planning agency, must have the opportunity to review plans. When in the department's professional judgment inadvisable proposals have been advocated that lack any justification in view of existing city policy, then the department must have the opportunity of reporting such situations with positive recommendations for improvement to the Planning and Development Committee “Zin and eventually the Board of Aldermen. We had assumed at the beginning that conflicts could be resolved through a close inter-staff relationship between the city planning agency and the Model Cities agency. Unfortunately and renusnely because of conflict communications have broken down and this has not been achieved. The source of conflict has been a disagreement over the necessary degree of conformity between Model City plans and programs and City overall goals and objectives. The Planning Department has attempted to explore and resolve this problem with the Model Cities staff. However, the Model Cities staff seems to interpret this action as a Planning Department attempt to run their program. An analysis of their lack of understanding indicates no apparent realization of the fact that the planning effort for a portion of the city should be coordinated with the city's overall planning effort. It is important to point out here that we are not attempting to stiffle the Model Cities Program or to prevent innovative approaches to problem solving. To take such a view ignores the fact that through the leadership and effort of the Planning Department, with much assistance from other agencies, Atlanta was awarded one of the first Model Cities Grants in the nation. Perhaps this whole misunderstanding is based on the Model Cities staff's perception of the Planning Department as a line department. Planning transcends traditional departmental lines, is a staff function, and established responsibilities as defined in the Code of the City of Atlanta must be met. One of HUD's underlying goals for the Model Cities Program was to bring into clear focus -4- problems in governmental organization. The department has been well aware of such problems in the Atlanta governmental system as witnessed in the PAS report, a product of the CIP and planning. Though that report found fault with the governmental system, it indicated that the present system has worked very well, primarily on the basis of mutual trust and cooperation. In order to avoid further conflicts it is imperative that such a cooperative atmosphere be established. It is inadvisable that the aldermanic committee system be used at times and ignored at others, depending on which happens to serve one's purpose best at a particular time. It is difficult enough to make the system work now. The proposed approach being offered by the Model Cities Program (which is to ignore the aldermanic committee system) would invite chaos, unless a suitable and acceptable overal! reform is accomplished. The Planning and Development Committee expressed its concern over this problem in its meeting of January 17, 1969. Chairman Cook asked the Model Cities director several questions concerning the role of the Planning and Development Committee, other aldermanic committees, and city departments in the Model Cities Program. Mr. Johnson took the position that the Model Cities Executive Board would report to the full Board of Aldermen through the two aldermanic members of the Executive Board. This procedure, in effect, bypasses the Planning and Development Committee and to a large extent ignores the aldermanic standing committee concept under which the Atlanta City Government presently operates. In effect, the Model Cities area is thus -5- treated as a separate entity, apart from the total city. It offers no opportunity for the Planning and Development Committee to review Model Cities plans and to make recommendations to the Board of Aldermen concerning plan conformity with city general plans. Chairman Cook further fidicaed that the Planning Department had certain reservations about physical plans for the Model Cities area and asked what role would be played by the Planning Department in further testing plans for the area. Mr. Johnson stated that he felt the physical plans for 1969 required no change. Here lies the crux of the problem. Mr. Cook stated that the Planning Department was responsible for all planning activities throughout the city, therefore, the Planning and Development Committee has the responsibility to review and evaluate physical plans developed for the Model Cities area. This paper deals with a confrontation in responsibilities between the Model Cities staff and Executive Board, the Planning Department and Planning and Development Committee of the Board of Aldermen. We strongly suspect that the fundamental problems and issues involved here could spread. Thus, other confrontations could develop between other departments and their aldermanic committees and the Model Cities staff and Executive Board. In this light, we offer the following recommendations: The adoption of a formal review procedure by the Board of Aldermen that is consistent with the existing aldermanic committee system is warranted. In other words, every resolution, ordinance, etc., when introduced into the Board se of Aldermen meeting, must be referred to a standing committee of the Board of Aldermen unless such a rule of procedure is waived by majority vote of the full Board of Aldermen. A time limit on the period of review by the standing committee of the Board of Aldermen could be specified. As with all issues concerning the city, the matter will eventually be resolved on its | merits by the full Board of Aldermen. The value of such formal review procedure by the Board of Aldermen should be fairly apparent. It keeps the appropriate aldermanic committees and department staffs informed of proposals and offers an opportunity for reviewing, making recommendations and achieving coordination. As mentioned earlier, to ignore the sficeeiaite committee system is to invite chaos, unless a suitable and acceptable overall reform is accomplished. A second alternative approach to the current situation would be to immediately move toward establishing a Department of Administration in the Mayor's Office as recommended by the PAS Report. Such a department would include the following functions: Planning, Budgeting and Management, Personnel, Public Information, and Data Processing. The Model Cities Program, with its innovative approaches and demonstrations, would serve as a testing vehicle for administrative and technical purposes and would be responsible to the Mayor and Board of Aldermen through the Department of Administration. — EXHIBITS Chapter 32 ‘wo URBAN RENEWAL* Sec. 32-1. Duties of planning department. See. 32-2. Duties of planning engineer. Sec. 32-3. Determination of phasing and of allocations to be devoted to project areas. Sec. 82-4. Determination of locations of projects. Sec. 32-5. Rezoning recommendations. Sec. 32-6. Processing applications embracing subdivisions, requests for building permits. Sec. 32-7. Commitments by builders. Sec. 32-8. Minimum structural requirements. Sec. 32-9. Vacying specifications in description of materials. Sec. 32-10. Designation of changes in “description of materials”. Sec. 32-11. Restriction on issuance of building permits. Sec. 32-12. Technical committee, Sec, 32-138. Feserved. Nu Sec. 32-1. Duties of planning department. N Urban renewal activities of the city shall be conducted in the department of planning under the general supervision of the mayor and board of aldermen through the planning and development committee. The department of planning shall study the urban renewal requirements of the city, to determine ways and means for their accomplishment, and to promote and facilitate timely coordination and orderly development of urban renewal plans, projects and other related activities throughout the city. (Cum. Supp., § 564.3; Ord. of 6-1-64, § 2; Ord. of 12-21-64) Editor’s note—The planning and development committee has been substituted for the urban renewal committee in §§ 32-1, 32-2 and 32-13, pursuant to Ord. of Dec. 21, 1964 abolishing the urban renewal com- mittee and transferring its functions to the planning and development committee. Sec. 32-2. Duties of planning engineer. The planning engineer shall devote particular attention to the requirements and commitments of the “workable pro- gram’, as defined in the National Housing Act of 1954, as amended, and shall call upon the various departments, agen- *Cross references—Minimum housing standards, § 15-21 et seq.; responsibility of department of -building inspector relative to demoli- tion of buildings, § 8-12; director of urban renewal emeritus, § 21-75(y). State law reference—Powers of municipalities as to urban renewal, Ga. Code, Ch. 69-11. Supp. No. 5 = = . 1617 ‘ § 32-2 ATLANTA CODE ‘ § 32-5 cies and agents of the city, as required, to carry out their re- sponsibilities thereunder to include annual revisions for re- certifications of the “workable program’. The planning en- gineer shall insure coordination of capital improvement proj- ects with urban renewal project plans in order to obtain the best possible advantage for the city. He shall frequently con- sult with the mayor and chairman of the planning and de- velopment committee of the board of aldermen and keep them informed as to urban renewal requirements and the state of development of the city’s urban renewal plans, and shall make recommendations thereon for facilitating progress of urban ‘renewal in the city. (Cum. Supp., § 564.3; Ord. of 6-1-64, § 2; Ord. of 12-21-64) Note—See editor’s note following § 32-1. Sec. 32-3. Determination of phasing and all allocations to be devoted te project areas. The planning department, in coordination with the housing authority of the city, will determine the phasing considered desirable for construction of F.H.A. 221 housing allocations and what portions thereof, if any, should be devoted to urban renewal project areas, and shall make recommendations ac- cordingly to local F.H.A. officials. (Cum. Supp., § 56A.4; Ord. of 6-1-64, § 2) Sec. 32-4. Determination of locations of projects. The planning department will study proposed locations for such projects and determine those considered most suitable from the city’s standpoint for 221 housing projects and shall coordinate thereon with local F.H.A. officials. (Cum. Supp., § 564.5; Ord. of 6-1-64, $ 2) Sec. 32-5. Rezoning recommendations. The Atlanta-Fulton County joint planning board will make timely recommendations to the zoning committee for rezoning such areas as it considers appropriate in order to facilitate the 221 housing program. (Cum. Supp., § 564.6; Ord. of 12-21-64) Editor’s note—Ord. of Dec. 21, 1964 redesignated the planning and zoning committee as the zoning committee. Supp. No. 5 1618 Na a § 2-39 ATLANTA CODE § 2-40.1 recommendations with references to civil defense; to super- vise the expenditure of appropriations made to civil defense by the city for civil defense purposes, and to handle all matters in connection therewith. (Code 1958, § 28.11; Ord. No. 1966- 46, § 2, 6-20-66) Amendment nete—Ord, No. 1966-46, § 2, enacted June 20, 1966, and effective December 31, 1966, amended § 2-39 to add the provisions codi- fied herein as subsection (b) , Cross references—Duty to grant permits to places selling sandwiches, soft drinks, §§ 17-159, 17-160; duty to formulate rules and regulations for police department, § 25-1(a); duty to pass on permits and licenses, § 25-1(b). Sec. 2-40. Special duty of finance committee relative to annual tax ordinance. In addition to the powers, duties and authority set forth in sections 2-29 and 2-31, the finance committee shall prepare and report to the mayor and board of aldermen the annul tax ordinance. (Code 1958, § 28.12) Cross references—Duty of building and electric lights commiitee to supervise department of building inspector, § 8-3; power of tax com- mittee to cancel business license penalties and fi. fa. costs, § 17-24; petitioris for license to peddle articles not enumerated in annual tax ordinance to be referred to finance committee, § 17-323. _ See. 2-40.1. Planning and development committee. (a) Creation. A committee of the board of aldermen is hereby created to be entitled the planning and development committee. (b) Membershsip. The planning and development commit- tee shall be composed of six members and a chairman (total of seven) to be appointed by the mayor. The mayor shal! appoint the planning and development committee so that a representa- tion is obtained of aldermanic committees concerned with community development, redevelopment and improvements. (c) Functions, responsibilities. This planning and develop- ment committee shall have the primary responsibility to re- view and coordinate the long range plans and programs of all city efforts in the fields of community development, redevelop- ment, facilities and improvements, and to make suggestions to other appropriate aldermanic committees or recommend actions and policies for adoption by the board of aldermen to Supp. No. 4 7 52 = «Nt § 2-40.1 ADMINISTRATION § 2-41 insure maximum coordination and the highest quality of urban community development. This responsibility shall in- clude the review and evaluation of the elements of the com- prehensive (general) plan development by the planning de- partment with guidance from the Atlanta-Fulton County Joint Planning Board; this comprehensive plan to be composed of at least a land-use plan, a major thoroughfare plan and a community facilities plan with public improvements program. The committee shall further be responsible for developing policy recommendations on all other matters concerning the planning and coordination of future city developments in- cluding, specifically, the community improvements program (CIP), the 1962 Federal Highway Act, the workable program for community improvement, urban renewal preliminary and project plans, and other related urban renewal matters. (Ord. of 12-21-64) Editor's note—Ord. of Dec. 21, 1964, from which § 2-40.1 is derived, did not expressly amend this Code, hence the manner of codification was at the discretion of the editors. That part of said ordinance abolish- ing the urban renewal committee and providing for transfer of its functions and activities to the planning and development committee, has not been codified as part of this section. ; Sec. 2-40.2. Urban renewal policy committee; membership. There is hereby established a standing committee of the board of aldermen to be known-as the urban renewal policy committee, to consist of five (5) members of the board of aldermen, to be appointed by the mayor, including the chair- man, the vice-chairman and one other regular member of the planning and development committee, and two members to be appointed by the chairman of the Housing Authority of the city. (Ord. of 1-18-65) Editor’s note—Ord. of Jan. 18, 1965 did not expressly amend this Code, hence the manner of codification was at the discretion of the editors. The preamble to said ordinance recited the fact that said com- mittee, pursuant to resolution, is ccordinating urban renewal activities and programs between the city and its urban renewal agent, the housing authority. Sec. 2-41. Duties of zoning committee. The duties of the zoning committee shall be to hold any public hearing required to be held by the provisions of the . Zoning and Planning Act of the General Assembly of Georgia approved January 31, oe and contained in Georgia Laws Supp. No. 5 = 53 eng
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 32
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 32
- Text: a iP SAR a SE “Py, UM & PES or © BO tf 3OORUM & PEASE “ January 31, 1949 A meeting of the Planning and Development Committee of the Board of Aldermen was held on Friday, January 31, 1969 at 2:30 P. M. in Committee Room #2, Second Floor, City Hall. All committee members were present as follows: Rodney Cook, Chairman Gregory Griggs, Vice Chairman John Flanigen Charlie Leftwich Jack Summers Q. V. Williamson George Cotsakis Other Aldermen present: Everett Millican, Fifth Ward Sam Massell, Vice Mayor Other city officials, department heads, representatives of civic organizations, the Atlanta Housing Authority, Model Cities Program, and the press were also present. . j Chairman Cook explained the purpose of the meeting is to meet with a group of Congressmen from predominately rural and suburban areas to provide them with an opportunity to see and discuss first hand the problems of our inner cities and to assess the adequacy of current Federal programs in alleviating urban problems. This tour is being sponsored by the United States Conference of Mayors and is intended to be educational, rather than investigative. He then recognized and welcomed to the meeting the following people: Honorable Wendell Wyatt, (R) Oregon Honorable James Mann, (D) South Carolina Honorable James Hastings, (R) New York Honorable Paul McCloskey, (R) California Honorable William S. Stuckey, (D) Georgia Mr. Lowell Beck, Urban Coalition Mr. Eugene J. Murphy, U. S. Conference of Mayors _Mrs. Janet Kohn, U. S. Conference of Mayors Chairman Cook gave a brief opening statement on how Atlanta has approached and dealt with urban problems to date; there was then a free exchange between the Congressmen and city officials. ‘ Following this discussion, Mr. Cook asked the members of the Planning and Minutes Planning and Development Committee January 31, }969 - Page Two Development Committee to retire to Commitiee Room #1 to conduct a business session of the Committee. He asked the Congressmen to keep their seat for a presentation by the Department of Finance, after which they would take a tour of the Model Cities area and continue their itinerary for the day. The Committee reconvened in Committee Room #1 at 3:30 P. M. and the * following business was considered: STATUS OF URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT AREAS - CLOSE OUT Howard Openshaw, Director of Redevelopment for the Atlanta Housing Authority, presented each committee member present a written status report of Atlanta's Urban Renewal Program as of January 29, 1969. (See copy attached to original of these minutes). Because of the lengthy agenda only the Butler Street, Rawson-Washington, and University Center Projects were discussed at this meeting. The highlights of the discussion on each project follows: (Secretary's note - the discussion on each project centered around the Status Report and reference should be made thereto.) Butler Street: The Butler Street Project is the closest to completion, awaiting only the construction contract of the middle school and disposition of a small area of land. The conversion of the school from elementary to:middle has caused a delay in that the architects had to start over. It appears now that the earliest date construction can start will be the middle of August. The Chairman then requested that Mr. Openshaw prepare a letter.for his signature to Dr. Letson urging that every step possible be taken to expedite this matter, , It was pointed out that a Resolution had been passed by the Board of Aldermen designating the area around Ebenezer Baptist Church as a historic site (Martin Luther King, Jr. memorial) and the Housing Authority subsequently removed the property from the market for commercial reuse; while this will not prevent the close out of the project, it does need to be resolved before the Housing Authority can complete their work. ‘ Chairman Cook also asked Mr. Openshaw to draft a letter to Mr. Baxter of Minutes Planning and Development Committee January 31, 1969 - Page Three the Department of Housing and Urban Development urging rapid approval on Parcel C-5 and to send him a carbon copy with a note reminding him to personally call Mr. Baxter about the matter. Chairman Cook continued to ask questions and make these requests because of his concern, and the Committee as a whole shared his concern, about the mounting cost to the city, through interest charges, resulting from delays in closing out the urban renewal projects. Rawson-Washington: The Chairman asked Mr. Openshaw to report what the project situation would be (relative to the 95% disposition requirement) if any two of the three parcels (Ebenezer Project, park and school) were disposed of; specifically, could the project be closed out under the condition that the community facilities buildings 14% non-cash credit would be lost. He also asked Mr. Persells to verify with HUD whether or not the credit would, in fact, be lost, since he was not positive about the requirement. Jay Fountain of the Finance Department was asked to explore the possibility of the city carrying out its commitment in this project through the use of '63 Bond Funds. : Mr. Cook requested that Mr. Openshaw write Mr. Baxter of HUD requesting that amendment #9 (reference status report) be carried out as quickly as possible. Relative to amendment #9, the question arose as to the disposition of the land in the blocks bounded by Georgia Avenue, Capitol Avenue, Bass and Washington Streets. It was pointed out that the city's Land Use Plan and previous project plans called for some type of commercial reuse for the area. However, a conflict exists with this proposal and the Model Cities proposal, which calls for the _ development of temporary office facilities and a Housing Center on the sites. Mr. Cook asked who has control of the Rawson-Washington Project and comménted he didn't see how we could plan an area if along the way “half the area gets usurped." Mr. Gladin emphasized that this problem is stalemated on the basis of two aldermanic decisions and needs to be resolved. It was noted that the Model Cities people expect to occupy their new offices by March 19. Mr. Cook stated the Model Cities people had well reach some sort of agreement ame 7 a ie EASE “RE BOORUM & P ® pe? BOORUM & PEASE “NGIE Minutes Planning and Development Committee January 31, 1969 - Page Four or compromise and he entertained a motion to notify them that the entire area south of Georgia Avenue would be considered for commercial reuse. Mr. Openshaw stated he felt we owed them this kind of direction; further, he didn't think anything should happen to urban renewal project land without the approval of the Housing Authority, Planning Department and this committee. It was the consensus of the committee that Mr. Gladin notify the Director of Model Cities Program that the entire area in question will be considered for commercial reuse and request that they consider another location. It was also felt there needed to be further clarification on the line of authority > in this matter. University Center: The committee unanimously approved the Housing Authority proceeding with an amendment deleting from the University Project seven (7) Fulton County owned lots on the south side of Hunter Street, as recommended by the Housing Authority. The elimination of the grade separation at Northside Drive and Hunter Street will require a plan change to permit disposition of the property; commitments by Central Methodist Church and the Celotex Corporation to acquire and develop the land will be required. In discussing close out of the Project, Mr. Persells stated to keep in mind the expansion discussions with Atlanta University. KREKEREREREKREKE BEDFORD-PINE HOUSING PROJECT After a brief discussion, the committee unanimously approved the preliminary Bedford-Pine Housing Project Site Plan, as revised January 31, 1969. Mr. Cook asked Mr. Persells if the number of units now proposed vrais Id take | care of the people in the area who want to remain there, to which Mr. Persells replied affirmatively, stating there would be a total of 66 additional units. Mr. Openshaw stated the revised plan is the best one to date and the architects have indicated they can live with it. In response to questioning by Mr. Cook, Mr. Persells also stated the revised plan had been before the Bedford-Pine Committee and approved by them. KEKEKEEERERERRE < iJ CL 300ORUM & BOORUM & PEASE “N Minutes Planning and Development Committee January 31, 1969 - Page Five Being a member of the Model Cities Executive Board, Mr. Griggs left the meeting to attend the Model Cities Tour with the visiting Congressmen. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Cook excused himself from the meeting to keep a previous appointment. KRREKEKEKREKREEEEKEE JOINT RESOLUTION BY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCE COMMITTEES SUPPORTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM Mr. Gladin presented this Resolution, explaining it will give more status to priority items. Mr. Flanigen stated he felt the Resolution should specifically spell out that the Planning Department would have the responsibility for implementing the program. Mr. Gladin explained that the Finance Department will ultimately establish the procedures for scheduling of these programs consistent with the Capital Improvements Program; that the intent of this particular Resolution is that the expenditures be based on the program, rather than upon the independent actions of the various committees. Mr. Flanigen reiterated he felt the Planning Department should have this responsibility. There was no further comment. Upon motion by Mr. Williamson, seconded by Mr. Cotsakis and unanimous vote, this Resolution was adopted. : KREKKEKEKREEKEREKRE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW HOUSING CODE COMPLIANCE PROGRAM Mr. Gladin presented each Committee member present with a copy of a letter (dated January 10, 1969) to Mayor ‘Ivan Allen from himself and Bill Wofford outlining the procedures for the development of a new Housing Code Compliance Program. Appended to this was a cover letter (dated January 24, 1969) from Earl Landers, Administrative Assistant to the Mayor, stating that Mayor Allen is agreeable to proceeding with the development of the new program as outlined in said Jetter and Mr. Gladin requested the Committee's support.
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 43
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 43
- Text: I, INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Section 10 (a) of the Demonstration and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966 requires the Model Cities to provide "maximum opportu- nities for employing residents of the area in all phases of the program and enlarged opportunities for work and training," and to develop programs which will result in "marked progress in reducing underemployment and enforced idleness." | Ina RCUtee to City Demonstration agencies, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has outlined specific require- ments for implementation of this provision. The City of Atlanta, as City Demonstration Agency (CDA) for the Atlanta Model Cities Program, has been approved for a grant of more than seven million dollars for the current program year. The HUD employment requirements are applicable to the Atlanta CDA and all other agencies participating in the Atlanta Model Cities Program. At present, there are ehiney-Ehred (33) such agencies in addition to the CDA. Existing local policy on Model Cities employment is contained in a resolution approved by the Model Cities Executive Committee and adopted by the Mayor and Board of Aldermen of the City of Atlanta. While more limited in scope than the HUD requirements, the resolution provides that "affirmative action be taken to insure that residents of the Model Neighborhood Area are given maximum opportunity for training and employment," and that "The Model Cities Program and its contracting agencies be encouraged to develop comprehensive systems for progressively training and upgrading workers at all levels ...." The present need is for a comprehensive employment program which will fulfill the HUD requirements, as well as those set forth in the Executive Committee and Aldermanic resolutions. II, DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT William Grant Terry Associates (WGTA) proposes to develop for the CDA and its contracting agencies a comprehensive employment -- personnel management program which will comply with the requirements described above. We further propose to develop and recommend the necessary administrative machinery for coordinating, implementing, monitoring, evaluating, reporting and enforcing the policies and procedures included in this program, and to provide technical assistance and training to make possible a dynamic ongoing program after termina- tion of our services, The project will emphasize rapidly-achievable goals which incorporate involvement of the contracting agencies and Model Cities area residents, with the work performed in three phases during a six-month period. III. WORK TO BE PERFORMED A. PHASE ONE - Analysis and Development (four months) During the initial phase of the project, WGTA proposes to provide the following services: ae Analyze and evaluate the existing personnel policies and Prete teens the CDA and contracting agencies. This will include a review of hiring, training, promotion and grievance procedures. The immediate goal will be to identify and eliminate impediments to employment and upgrading of the disadvantaged. Analyze and revise job classifications for the 350 to 400 job a leases now in use, reducing their number to a minimum, providing program-wide standardization, and eliminating inconsistencies, duplication, overlap and conflicts. Analyze salary schedules and develop a standardized guide to job pricing. Develop a standard procedure for processing job orders. Develop a prototype personnel management system for the CDA and contracting agencies, plus broad minimum guide- lines within which agencies may submit their own policies to fit individual circumstances, a. Items covered will include recruitment and selection, position and compensation, employee benefits, work schedules, in-service and cross- service training, career development, performance evaluation, employee-management relations and nondiscrimination policies. b. Special attention will be given to opportunities for upward mobility through cross-service promotion and the transferability of qualifications and credits for experience among the agencies involved. Develop internal and external communication systems to: a. Inform employees of promotion, training and other advancement opportunities in their own and other agencies. b. Inform Model Cities area residents of employment opportunities generated by the program. Develop a system for reviewing and amending the employ- ment program and for resolving disagreements. The emphasis will be on procedures to enable area residents, including those employed in the program, to: a. Review policies and programs. b. Negotiate for adjustments. c. Participate in resolution of disagreements. Identify the relationships linking the employment program with other supportive programs and services of the overall Model Cities Program, and recommend appropriate adjust- ments in these relationships. Develop a plan for applying the HUD employment require- ments to all construction and rehabilitation work in the Model Cities area. This will include: a. Recommendations for trades union participation and/or alternative methods of assuring improved employment opportunities for the disadvantaged. b. Design of a recruiting and training program to prepare area residents for work on construction and rehabilitation projects. c. Projection of tradesmen needed. d. Development and recommendation of policies giving preference in all construction and réhabilitation work to Model Neighborhood- based contractors, designers, planners, architects and surveyors, and/or those employing significant numbers of area residents. B. PHASE TWO - Presentation and Adoption (one month) The second phase of the project will be devoted to presenta- tion of the employment plan to the appropriate bodies and agencies for their review, amendment and adoption. Amendment of the Executive Committee resolution, if appropriate, also will be scheduled in this phase. WGTA's role during the second phase will be to provide technical assistance to the CDA in the orientation, presentation, clarification, discussion and revision involved in the approval and adoption process. Technical assistance will also be provided to the contracting agencies for establishment of goals and commitments. While scheduled for one month, the actual duration of this phase may be longer or shorter, depending on time necessary for meetings, etc. C. PHASE THREE - Implementation (one month) The third and final phase of the project provides for implementa- tion of the program developed during phase one and approved during phase two. It is during this period that the necessary administrative machinery will be put into operation to implement, enforce, evaluate and report on the employment program. During this phase, the role of WGTA will be to serve in the capacity of trainers and technical advisors, and to provide liaison between the CDA and the contracting agencies. ATTACHMENT STAFF COST AND ESTIMATE As stated in the proposal, we propose to complete this project within six months of its inception. This will require a greater concentration of professional consultants than would be required if the time for completion could be extended. We envision essential- ly three (3) full-time personnel. Our special billing rate for Federally funded programs is $100 per day per man. Your attention is invited to Section III, "Work To Be Performed" on pages 2, 3, 4, and 5 of our proposal. You will observe that extensive visitation in the 33 contracting agencies will be mandatory. Furthermore, considerable time will be required in job evaluation and the writing of job descriptions. The development of plans and systems will require sufficient research in order to acquire the specific designs necessary to assure feasibility. Our fee for the complete project will be $39,000. This is an all-inclusive quotation for professional consulting and research time, secretarial and other clerical costs, design and reproduction of forms, questionnaires, etc. The fee does not include the cost of printing and art work, since the volume of such work will be determin- ed by Model Cities. We render our bills monthly during an assignment. We shall appreciate an opportunity for further discussion of this subject.
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 81
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 81
- Text: BASIC PREMIS FOR RE-ORGANIZATION OF MODEL CITIES STAFF The concepts of (a) coordination, (b) program management, (c) planning, (d) monitoring and (e) evaluation are all basic staff functions when viewed separately, as any one of them is applied to an organization chart. A. Because each has as an objective to: (1) Formulate policy for others to adopt (2) Make major decisions (3) Provide staff support to delegate agencies (4) Provide planning support to delegate agencies (5) Management of support activities B. Because neither has direct operation or administrative responsibility within its area. Our total responsibility is to act in a staff role to the decision makers. A. Executive Board B. Mayor and Board of Aldermen The Director is chief staff advisor to the Mayor and Executive Board. All functions of the Model Cities staff, i.e. (a) planning and evaluation, (b) program management, and (c) administration should be considered as staff functions to the Executive Board, the Mayor and the Board of Aldermen through the Director. All staff divisions should be organized on a pure functional basis, using the Functional Teamwork Concept. Thus achieving: (1) clear authority and responsibility for each group of functions (2) higher level of efficiency and output within each group of functions (3) relative simplistic organizational structure which elimi- nates duplication and conflicts (4) proper balance among and between functional groups. A practical organizational system requires a natural division of responsibility and then demands that each function coordinate and cooperate with each other function in a team effort aimed at achieving the total program objectives and concepts. The Director, after having delegated effective control over each function, is freed from piddling day to day responsibilities and is able to concentrate on assuring that team work between the functions takes place and to devote more time to other pro- gram responsibilities. THE NEW_ ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE WOULD ASSURE THAT: All functional division heads would have authority and decision- making power in their own functional area. There is a logical sequence of decisions. (1) The overall program policy and decisions are made by the Mayor and Board of Aldermen as recommended by the Executive Board of which the Mayor is Chairman. (2) The Executive Director is responsible for making program and policy recommendations to the Executive Board and the Mayor. (3) Each functional Director is responsible for making program and policy-recommendations to the Executive Director. (4) Each component head is responsible for making recommen- dations within his own functional area. Each level would have its appropriate role and the authority to accomplish its own tasks as dictated by policy from the next highest level. There is moreover the fundamental recognition that teamwork between functions is a necessary element in a comprehensive pregram. BREAKDOWN OF BASIC FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES Planning (a) (b) (c) (da) (e) (£) Problem analysis Develop objectives Program strategies Programming Budgeting Evaluation and revision Program Management (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f£) (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (£) Pre-construction-contract neogtiation Initiate projects Monitor projects Reporting Insure contract compliance Maintain project fiscal control Evaluation Research design Data collection Analysis Synthetize Interpretation and feed-back Provide a basis for decision making 4. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (£) (g) (h) Administration Establish organizational structure and policy Execute program policies Maintain program fiscal control Promote public and governmental relations Provide staff and operational support Recommend program policy Promote community involvement Effect coordination
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 30
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 30
- Text: December 26, 1968 CITY HALL ATLANTA, GA. 30303 Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404_ IVAN ALLEN, JR., MAYOR R. EARL LANDERS, Administrative Assistant MRS. ANN M. MOSES, Executive Secretary DAN E. SWEAT, JR., Director of Governmental Liaison Mr. Tom R. May President _ Lockheed-Georgia Company Marietta, Georgia Dear Tom: The City of Atlanta today was announced as America's second city to receive a grant for execution of its Model Cities Program in 1969. There are so many reasons why our city was able to submit and receive approval of its program ahead of the other major cities -- the support and concern of the residents of the area, the cooperation of public and private agencies in preparing the planning document, the help of the federal agencies and the cooperation and backing of the Board of Aldermen. Another significant and important reason for our success was the direct assistance we received from you and the Lockheed-Georgia Company. We have heard much talk about the involvement of private industry in the resolution of our urban problems. We have also heard expressed the need to provide for the transference of the technologies of modern private industry to our urban governments in order that these problems can be met. The involvement of Lockheed-Georgia in the planning and development of Atlanta's Model Cities Planning document does-both. Without the expert professional and technical capability and the logistical support of Lockheed-Georgia, I think I can safely say that the city could not and would not have been able to complete and submit its planning grant request before well into 1969. Particular thanks are due not only for the most cooperative manner in which the assistance was offered, but also for the personal abilities and interest of the staff members provided. Page Two December 26, 1968 a Mr. Tom May Mr. Hugh Gordon and Mr. Oz Adams recognized and understood the value to the city of Lockheed's participation. © Mr. Richard D. Henderson and Mr. Sheldon R. Dickstein were particularly effective in scheduling and coordinating the overall Model Cities staff effort and providing, through their own technical pro- ficiency, a direction and organization which substantially contributed to the completeness and quality of the planning document and the: timeliness with which it was completed. Many other fine Lockheed citizens contributed in the preparation of graphics and printing of the final document. And, of course, your support and encouragement of everyone who had ' a hand in this effort was essential to its final high achievement. Again, my personal thanks to you and the Lockheed-Georgia Company for demonstrating the civic-minded attitude and sense of overall community responsibility which has long been associated with your fine company. Sincerely, Ivan Allen, Jr. IAJr:hdt
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 57
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 57
- Text: December 17, 1969 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor-Elect Massell From: Dan Sweat Subject: Model Cities Program This memorandum is provided for your general information so that you will be aware of the administrative situation in regard to the Model Cities Program as it is now established. Technically, the Model Cities Program is a part of the Mayor's Office. Its budget, for example, is under the administration of the Mayor, although Mayor Allen has delegated the responsibility for approving the disbursement of project funds to the Model Cities Director. This organizational structure was established in accordance with the Model Cities Act that required the program to be a "Mayor's Program". The same act, however, required broad citizen participation in the program. In attempting to reconcile this requirement with Atlanta's committee system, it was decided that the Executive Board of the program would be chaired by the Mayor and would have on it two Aldermen in addition to citizens and other officials. It was further decided that all resolutions and official actions required fortthe program would come from the Executive Board to the appropriate Aldermanic Committee but, because the Mayor and two members of the Aldermanic Board were on the Executive Board, the other Aldermen would not have to be overly concerned with the details of the program and could act on the recommen- dations of the Executive Board with confidence, This situation has created some problems in determining the Mayor's exactrrole in the administration of the program. Notwithstanding the federal government's position that the program is the responsibility of the Mayor, our Board of Aldermen must, of course, give its sanction to the day to day activities under our system. Further, the citizen a a ee i Memorandum Page Two December 17, 1969 participation requirement must be met. This brings up the question of who can make administrative decisions; the Mayor, the Executive Board, or the Board of Aldermen. At present, the Model Cities Director feels that he is on the staff of the Mayor, but decisions concerning his program are officially made by the Executive Board. Further, the Board of Aldermen should not normally question actions made by the Executive Board if they are within the context of the approved program. Even less clear and of some concern to me is the exact role that the Mayor's Staff is to play in the Model Cities Program. The Director has made it clear in the past that he feels that it is his position that he answer firectly to the Executive Board and especially to the Chairman, the Mayor. This is only important in that you understand and approve this arrangement so thatyyou will not expect that the staff has any responsibilities in this regard. | This is not a problem that requires immediate action, but it is one that obviously needs some direction. Hopefully, this will provide you with some information so that you can be prepared to deal with it after the first of the year. DS:ja
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 29
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 29
- Text: Tete ee ae sey a ee, Lee es. ee Se ea ee = SP Ss A ee ee eS en a ee January 8, 1969 Mr. Tom R. May President Lockheed-Georgia Company Marietta, Georgia Dear Tom: The City of Atlanta today was announced as America's second city to receive a grant for execution of its Model Cities Program in 1969. There are so many reasons why our city was able to submit and receive approval of its program ahead of the other major cities - the support and concern of the residents of the area, the cooperation of public and private agencies in preparing the planning document, the help of the federal agencies and the cooperation and backing of the Board of Aldermen. Another significant and important reason for our success was the direct assistance we received from you and the Lockheed-Georgia Company. We have heard much talk about the involvement of private industry in the resolution of our urban problems. We have also heard expressed the need to provide for the transference of the technologies of modern private industry to our urban governments in order that these problems can be met. The involvement of Lockheed-Georgia in the planning and development of Atlanta's Model Cities Planning document does both. Without the expert professional and technical capability and the logistical support of Lockheed-Georgia, I think I can safely say that the City could not and would not have been able to complete and submit ite planning grant request before well into 1969, Particular thanks are due not only for the most cooperative manner in which the assistance was offered, but also for the personal abilities and interest of the staff members provided. ea eS | wn =
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 70
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 70
- Text: CITY OF ATLANTA CITY HALL ATLANTS, GA. 30303 Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404 IVAN ALLEN, JR., MAYOR R. EARL LANDERS, Administrative Assistant MRS. ANN M. MOSES, Executive Secretary DAN E. SWEAT, JR., Director of Governmental Liaison October 13, 1969 MEMORANDUM TO: Johnny Johnson FROM: Dan Sweat ALee SUBJECT: Atlanta Youth Council - Model Cities Proposals Several days ago you stated to me that you would inform Mrs. Perdue of the status of Youth Council proposals. Would you please let me know the status of the following: l. Absenteeism Project 2. Central Coordination Services for Model Cities Youth 3. Juvenile Delinquency Prevention 4, United Youth Outreach and the Model Cities Branch of the Atlanta Youth Congress. DESJR:sm
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 77
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 77
- Text: CITY OF ATLANTA CITY HALL ATLANTA, GA. 30303 Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404 IVAN ALLEN, JR., MAYOR R. EARL LANDERS, Administrative Assistant MRS. ANN M. MOSES, Executive Secretary DAN E. SWEAT, JR., Director of Governmental Liaison September 18, 1969 Mr. Johnny Johnson Model Cities Program 565 Hill Street, SE 30312 Atlanta, Georgia Dear Johnny: Iam attaching a letter from Congressman Thompson, point- ing out Mrs. Hinesley's problem, Could you have someone give me the facts in this case, so that I might let Mr. Thompson know what we are doing. Very fruly yours, f) ’ ~ . Sweat, Jr. Chief Administrative Officer DS:sm Enclosure: 1
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 86
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 86
- Text: TRANSPORTATION NDP Action Areas ADAIR PARK -- PITTSBURGH 1969 Clearance - (a) Additional setback should be required for the widening of Stephens, McDaniel, and Rockwell Streets, since these streets are classified as two- lane collectors. Two-lane collectors, as referred to in this analysis, are 60 foot right-of-way, with 40 foot pavement as set forth in the City of Atlanta Revised Street Cross Sections. (b) Berckele Street and Middle Street between McDaniel Street and Coleman Street were constructed in approximatel y 1968, to relieve a drainage problem. It is, therefore, desirable, if possible, to maintain this street as part of the redevelopment plan. 1969 Rehabilitation - Preliminary review shows no transportation problems. 1970 Clearance ~- Additional setback should be required for the widening of Rockwell Street. 1970 Rehabilitation - Preliminary review shows no transportation problems. Long-Range Plans Adair Park |. Major Thoroughfares (a) The existing city street classification does not recognize Allene-Lowndes Street as a collector. (b) Allene-Lowndes Street should not be classified as a collector, since it is one block east of Murphy Street, which is classified as a collector and provides access to the same land. (c) The relocation of the intersection of Allene Street and Lillian Avenue is desirable and eliminates a dangerous intersection. The extension of Allene Street north of Lillian Avenue provides only a slight in- crease in access to the area and would mainly serve the park, which has adequate access without the extension, i.e., we recommend re- location of Allene Street from Pearce Street to Lillian Avenue, as shown but not from Lillian to Lowndes. 2. Minor Streets - Preliminary review indicates all changes desirable. Pittsburgh 1. Major Thoroughfares - (a) (b) (c) (d) If Rockwell and Fletcher Streets are improved to collector standards, it will not be necessary for Mary or Arthur to be improved to these standards. A grade~separation at McDaniel Street, and the railroad, is desir- able and feasible as an underpass. This will affect adjacent land use and needs additional study. Consideration should be given to the widening of University on the north if additional right of way is not available from post office site on south side to provide for four lane arterial. Developing McDaniel Street and Hubbard Street into one-way pairs between Gardner Street and Fletcher Street was mentioned by the consultant and has some merit, particularly since it would allow the two streets to take on collector status without clearing existing commercial on McDaniel. 2. Minor Streets = (a) Bender and Welch Street access to Shelton-Stephens Street should not be allowed. These streets should connect into Humphries Street, which provides access to Shelton-Stephens Street, or some other solution. (b) The streets east of McDaniel Street and north of Gardner Street should be abandoned, and private access should be provided to the adjacent high density residential. (c) If condition of structures warrant clearance, Cohen Street between Welch Street and Coleman Street, Middle Street between Bery| Street and Humphries Street, and Hubbard Street between Rockwell Street and Gardner Street should be abandoned. If these streets are abandoned, it will allow for the accumulation of larger parcels for proposed land use while adequate access is maintained, (d) Access into University Avenue from the north should be limited (close Welch, Sims, Ira , etc. ) and remaining access should align with exits and entrances to the post office. i (e) West Avenue should not intersect with University Avenue due to its position relative to the freeway ramps. Problem of industry would need study. (f) The Fortress Avenue railroad crossing should be maintained and signals should be considered. (g) Traffic Engineering would like the intersection of University Avenue and Pryor Street improved on the northeast corner. We are in agreement with the classification and treatment of streets in the above areas unless commented upon. The improvement of streets to the city street classification standards needs additional study in relationship to the clearance or non=c'earance of adjacent land.
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 98
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 98
- Text: ; se oo gees peer MODEL CITIES Neat Nae af 4 ane & Pk Fis Begeay EA ON ee ER Te ea LL _ ‘ ‘ “ enietiadty id =m = a a ats Seen — 872 APITOL AVENUE ' OY Cf JO JOUNSON DIRECTOR Ag f oy JS ATLANT4 GEORGIA GLOIS i ef wwe a 404) $77-5200 a” } GEE c- “BT DPA ue ee poe eee greece pa rah nein ecaaann en SNe wi Sle 4 sue ea geacegpene August 13, 1969 EMPLOYMENT Model Cities and its delegate agencies will be hiring hundreds of people for the many jobs which will be included in the program. If you are a residen of the area, simply contact your nearest employment counselor as soon as you can. An employment office is located at each of the 3 EOA Neighbor- hood Service Centers (Sum-Mec, Pitts- burgh and Price). +E: O. D. Fulp, Employment Coordinator, looks over prospective candidates for employment. SOME_EMPLOYMENT REFERRALS TO BE MADE THIS WEEK Model Cities and the Georgia State Employment Service will interview applicants at the Capitol Avenue School this Thursday and Friday (August 14-15), 9 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. Positions available include 75 aide jobs. Only those who are referred by the neighborhood employment office are eligible for these inter- views. Most of the persons who will be referred for these jobs had made application several months or several weeks ago. In addition to the teache aide johs, employment represent me nee ne have interviewed abcut 49 people For 33 other positions which are included in the Model Cities program. CONGRATULATIONS TO MODEL CITIES WORKERS = Model Cities wishes to congratulate Mrs. Edna Lockett of Summerhill and Mrs. Elizabeth Parks of Grant Park. Both women recent ly fualified for their GED high school equivalency certificate and were also recently appointed to high- er positions within the Model Cities proyram. GRANT PARK DANCE A SUCCESS The Grant Park Youth Council raised approximately $100 at a dance last Friday night which was attended by 409 Model Cities residents. The next day, 25 youth of the area participated in a cleanup campaign at a vacant lot (corner of Georgia Avenue and Grant Street). The money raised at the dance will go for equipment to be used on the vacant lot. If you are interested in this lot or helping plan any other recreation activity in the Grant Park area, simply contact Lyle Scott or Bill Hamilton at the Model Cities office (577-5200) - MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD, INC. CONTRACT BEING CONSIDERED The Model Cities Executive Board, Tuesday, appointed a 3-man study committee to help resolve the issues involved in a proposed contract with Model Neigh- borhood, Ince. Model Neighborhood, “ne. is a group of residents interested in participating in the Model Cities eccnomic development program. The proposal is expected to be reconsidered by the full board at the regular meeting next month (10 a.m. the second Tuesday in City Hall) or at a special meeting this month. —
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 91
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 91
- Text: LAND USE SUMMERHILL-PEOPLESTOWN 1970 Activity Areas Future Uses ls (a) Activity areas appear acceptable except for the following item: It has not been firmly resolved that the area slated for clearance west of Martin Street should be the site for the primary school. A decision on this school site and on the location of the adjacent park will be forth- coming shortly. (b) 1970 clearance for school west of Martin Street still not firmly decided. Boyton Street in Peoplestown is currently an unimproved, very narrow street. If this street is paved and widened to two lanes, it will be impossible to obtain a buffer south of Boyton Street as shown on the map. Such a buffer could only be obtained if the city condemned part of the land south of Boyton Street, which is now used as a lumber yard. . West of Capitol Avenue and south of Haygood Avenue are several commercial establishments. This area is shown as high density residential. It appears that a more appropriate use would be neighborhood commercial. . The buffer north of Pope Street and south of the proposed road between Pope Street and Pulliam Street will be difficult to maintain and is too small to provide recreation facilities. Controls may be imposed when the land is redeveloped to require proper shielding from the industrial areas. Other proposed buffers and scenic malls or corridors are shown on the plan. . Park adjacent to E. P. Johnson Elementary School does not meet neighborhood standards. . There is a large amount of neighborhood commercial shown just north and south of Georgia Avenue. This should be changed to general commercial. . If Ormond Street is continued east and west, the park shown west of Fraser Street will be eliminated. Deletion of the park does not appear to be serious because it is so close to the park on Crew Street and the proposed park at Little and Martin Streets. 73 The proposed scenic corridor to the stadium and downtown starting at Love and Crew Streets and extending along the right-of-way of Crew Street to ° Georgia Avenue would eliminate all the trees along the street if a view of the stadium and skyline is the desired effect. The recently constructed Southside Comprehensive Health Center is located at 1039 Ridge Avenue. The center offers preventive health services to all age groups. This site is now shown on the map as industrial and should be public. Careful consideration should be made as to the type of uses to be located near the center. It may be necessary to impose a buffer between the center and other uses to insure the proper climate for the health center. Land use immediately east and south of the stadium needs further study. It is recommended that no plan changes be made in this area until a detailed study can be accomplished and approved.
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 84
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 84
- Text: September 18, 1969 MEMORANDUM Toi Mr, Johnny Johnson From: Dan BE. Sweat, Jr. Subject: Administrative Procedures We have had several discussions in the past concerning the exact admini- strative relationship that the Model Cities organization should have in relationship to the Mayor's Office and the balance of the City organization, This whole discussion is, of course, complicated by the special organization required by the federal government such as the Executive Board and the other citizen participation organizations. There seems to be no doubt on the federal level and in the mind of the general public however, that the administration of the Model Cities Program is a responsibility of the Mayor's Office of the various cities. To date, we have tacitly recognized this and, technically, the administrative procedures have established the organization as a division of the Mayor's Office. In actual practice, however, you have functioned as a department head and your organization has, in effect, been treated as a separate department of the City. We have been fortunate and your staff is to be commended in that we have had relatively good communications and cooperation even though our lines of adrninistrative authority have not always been explicit. Even so, some confusion has existed among the various agencies and departments of the City, Mayor Allen has discussed this overall question with me several times and most recently has directed me to meet with you and develop procedures which will have the effect of bringing Model Cities into the direct admini- strative line of authority of the Mayor's Office. This will, of course, Memo to Johnny Johnson Page Two Septernber 18, 1969 include establishing the Model Cities organization under the administrative supervision of the Staff of the Mayor and Board of Aldermen in practice as well as technically. This will necessarily involve some changes in your day to day operations as far as your relationships with the service departments of the City. In addition, it will involve a greater participation of the Mayor's Office in the planning and operation of the Model Cities Program. I am sure thatyyou, like me, will welcome a more definitive clarification of our respective duties and responsibilities as far as the Model Cities Program is concerned and will be able to work together harmoniously to accomplish even more for the program. When you have had an opportunity to read this, please contact me for a meeting so that we can proceed on this. DESJr:ja
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 93
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 93
- Text: LAND USE GRANT PARK The Sydney-Glenwood one-way pair poses land use problems for the north end of Grant Park. It will be difficult to maintain the area between the one-way pairs as desirable residential and pressure will be strong to turn the narrow strip between Glenwood and the Freeway into commercial. All these factors will be detrimental to the neighborhood. Careful study should be given to extending Fulton Street from Connally as a four-lane two- way collector immediately adiacent to the Freeway and connecting to Glenwood with a grade separation at Boulevard.
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021
Box 15, Folder 4, Document 12
- Result Type: Item
- Item Type: Text
- Title: Box 15, Folder 4, Document 12
- Text: » MANUFACTURING CORPORATION Menlo, Ga.30731- 404 862-2302 March 5, 1969 Mr. Dan E. Sweat, Jr. Office of the Mayor City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Mr. Sweat: Please pardon the delay in replying to your letter of February 25, which was due to my absence from the office. In answer to your questions: 1. A 'minimum'' of about 3500 ft. to start, which would accomodate about 45/50 people. Except for an area approximately 4' x 6', the load would be very light. A truck loading dock, and access would be required. 2. Relatively small quantities of 220V, 3 ph.,60 cy. power. Approx. 25 H.P. to start. 3. No rall access necessary, truck only. 4. Some probably, depending on public transportation available to site selected. 5. Operations one shift only usually, but two shifts feasible, Shift perlods not Important to operations. 6. Average earnings based on production piece rates should be 1,90 to 2.25 per hour. 1.60 minimum, 7. Concentrated training about three months. Nine to twelve months usually required for a trainee to reach full potential. 8. Industrial power sewing machines - Singer class 262-2, or similar. | have just noticed that somehow a couple of paragraphs were omitted fromny letter to Mayor Allen, There would be a requirement for a SBA, or similar, loan, (But, there would be absolutely no question of its security.) scm Mr. Dan E. Sweat, Jr. March 5, 1969 Page #2 | had visualized an all-negro operation but this is, of course, not an essential requirement from my standpoint. Based on actions | took several years ago, there is available a Negro plant manager, and Negro qualified sewing teachers and supervisors. | actually did not plan a branch plant as such but rather the establishment of a successful Negro owned and operated business, with my help and some form of outside financing. Any financial gain to me would accrue indirectly from this company's efforts in marketing the product. This is of course a major factor in the assured financial success of the operation. | would be happy to answer any additional questions you might have. Yours very truly, Roy W. Mann br
- Tags: Box 15, Box 15 Folder 4, Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968
- Record Created: April 18, 2017
- Record Updated: April 30, 2021