243 20 10383 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/ac034dcb31b7d8796b735653db7a9409.pdf 620a273f16971d6dedc658b5acf9cc2f Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. MI NUTE ~ S- MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD EXECUTIVE BOA..~D Wednesday, May 14, 1969 10:30 a~rn. The monthly meeting o.f the Model Neighborhood Executive Board was held on Wednesday, May 14, 1969 at 10:30 a.m. in Com..~ittee Room #2, City Hall. The following membars were present: Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., Chairman Mrs. Mattie Ansley Mr. Clarence Coleman Alderman E. Gregory Griggs Mr • John Hood Alderman G. Everett Millican Mr. J. D. Newberry Deacon Lewis Peters Dr. c. Miles Smith Mr. Bill c. wainwright Mrs. Martha Weems Mr. J. c. Whitley Absent: Mr. Sam Caldwell Mr. Walter Mitchell Other City Department Heads; representatives from Arthur Andersen and Company, Eric Hill Associates and the Atlanta Housing Authority; representatives from neighborhood organization; the general public and the press were also present. Vice Chairman Everett Millican called the meeting to order. He then entertained a motion for the adoption of the April 15 Minutes. It was so moved and unanimously approved without correction. The Chairman, Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., then proceeded with the meeting. REPORT OF THE MASS CONVENTION STEERING COMMITTEE Deacon Peters stated that he had no report of the Mass Convention Steering Committee because of the postponement of the regular meeting of the convention. �Page Two NEW BUSINESS The Mayor read the letter received from Floyd H. Hyde, Assistant Secretary for Model cities, which stated that "the city of Atlanta comprehensive city demonstration program has been approved and that a grant agreement in the amount of $7,175,000 has been authorized for carrying out the first year action program." The Mayor congratulated Mr. Johnson and the Model Cities Staff for making Atlanta one of the first three cities in the nation to receive funds for implementation of its Model Cities Program. He th~n moved that the Aldermatic Board be asked for a resolution accepting the grant agreement. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. REPORT FROM MAYOR ON REVIEW COMMITTEE PROCEDURE FOR EXECUTION OF DELEGATE AGENCY CONTRACTS The Mayor reported that the Review Committee that was authorized at the last meeting has met three times to review the projects contained in the program. The members of the committee are: Dr. C. Miles Smith, Mrs . Martha Weems, Alderman Everett Millican, Mr. Walter Mitchell and the Mayor. The committee has reviewed over fifty percent of the projects and will continue to have review sessions in the coming weeks. Mr. Johnson had previously suggested that since the staf f must review each project f or f inal action before implementation that the s taff be allowed to make recommendations to the Review Committee for actbn. Mr. Wainwright moved that this procedure be appr oved. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved without discussion . REPORT FROM FINANCE COMMITTEE ON DESI GNATI ON OF BANK FOR GRANT FUNDS Ma yor Alle n reported for t h e Fina nce Commi tte e on the designation of t h e bank to receive the letter o f credit for t he $7, 175, 000. It was the recommendation of the Committee that t h e Citizen ' s Trust Company be the designated bank. Alderman Griggs moved that the Board accept the recommendation of the committee. The motion was seconded and unanimou sly approved. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION ACCEPTING GRANT AGREEMENT Mr. Johnson explained that it would be necessary to draw up a new resolution authorizing the Mayor to enter into contract with the Federal Government because of some changes by the Nixon Administration in the handling of the fundso The money allocated under the �r Page Three grant agreement was allotted by components rather than projects and this called for some changes in the wording of the resolution. Mr. Wainwright moved that a new resolution be adopted to be in keeping with the requirements of HUD. Mr. Coleman asked if line items were transferable. J:vlr. Johnson answered that line items were transferable by 10% or $100,000, whichever is less. Mr. Coleman then asked who was authorized to make adj.u stments or transfers. It was concluded from the discussion that followed that the Staff and the Executive Board could make recommendations to the Board of Aldermen for any adjustments in a line item. The previous motion by Mr. Wainwright was then seconded and approved unanimously by the Board. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Mr. Johnson presented two groups to give reports to the Board. Mrs. Roslyn Walker, Evaluation Analyst-Model Cities Staff and Mr. Dave Houser of Arthur Andersen & Company presented a report on the Evaluation and Management Information Systems. Mrs. Walker outlined the staff activitie s to date with i t s latest work being the preparation of an evaluation framework for the Model Cities Program projects. Mr. Houser explained the management information and control system. He presented a sl ide presentation o f the actual print -out from the computer of the fi nancial and evaluation reports of the projects in the program. Mr. Louis Dismuke s and Mr . Paul Muldawer presented the report on the housing study, "Lowering the Cost of Housing", which was compiled by Eric Hil l Associates . The study was a research study to provide background information on the problem of housing in the Model Neighborhood Area. Mr. Dismukes listed the procedure followed in conducting the study and the conclusions drawn from the study. Some of the conclusions were: ( 1 ) there are no easy answers (2) the cost of housing can be reduced about 30 or 40 percent by (a) inducing new technologies, (b) removing local constraint~ (c) programming housing production to the needs of individualized families and (d) using maximum housing assistance programs. Mr. Muldawer discussed various housingpatternsthat could be applicable to certain neighborhoods in the Model Neighborhood Area. A discussion followed after the presentation which resulted in Mr. Hood suggesting that the Physical Planning Committee of the Board work with the consultants and review the proposals in the study and bring a report back to the Board. Mr. Coleman then moved that the report be accepted as information and be referred to the Physical Planning Committee for consideration . The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. �Page Four Mr. Coleman also moved that the City Attorney be asked to give a ruling on who has the authority to ma1<e adjustments in line item contained in the budget. OLD BUSINESS Mr. Griggs said that he had been contacted by Mr. Clarence Ezzard concerning Southside Day Care Center, which is located in the Model Neighborhood Area. He stated that the Board should give some statement as to whether Mr. Ezzard's center will be included in the program. Mr. Johnson stated that it was the recom.rnendation of the Model Cities Staff to proceed with the Day Care Program as it is outlined in the comprehensive plan, which excludes Mr. Ezzard's program. Southsid e Day care Center is funded already by EOA and it is expected that they will maintain their effort. Mr. Coleman moved that the Executive Board meet with the Board of Trustee of Southside and make some decision at t he next meeting. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. Mr. Millican sugge sted that in the future consultant reports be given at meetings separate from general business meetings so as to conserve time. Mr. John son introduc ed the latest addition to the Model Cities Staff who is Mr. Frc11k Keller, Physical Planner . The meeting was adjourned at 1 2:2 0 p .m . APPROVED: Johnny-- ,C. John"Son, Director Mode l cities -Program · Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., Chairman Mode l Neighborhood Executive Board � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD EXECUTIVE BOARD Wednesday, May 14, 1969 10:30 a.m. The monthly meeting of the Model Neighborhood Executive Board was held on Wednesday, May 14, 1969 at 10:30 a.m. in Committee Room #2, City Hall. The following members were present: Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., Chairman Mrs. Mattie Ansley Mr. Clarence Coleman Alderman E. Gregory Griggs Mr. John Hood Alderman G. Everett Millican Mr. J. D. Newberry Deacon Lewis Peters Dr. C. Miles Smith Mr. Bill C. Wainwright Mrs. Martha Weems Mr. J. C. Whitley Absent: Mc. Sam Caldwell Mc. Walter Mitchell Other City Department Heads; representatives from Arthur Andersen and Company, Eric Hill Associates and the Atlanta Housing Authority; representatives from neighborhood organization; the general public and the press were also present. Vice Chairman Everett Millican called the meeting to order. He then entertained a motion for the adoption of the April 15 Minutes. It was so moved and unanimously approved without correction. The Chair- man, Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., then proceeded with the meeting. REPORT OF THE MASS CONVENTION STEERING COMMITTEE Deacon Peters stated that he had no report of the Mass Convention Steering Committee because of the postponement of the regular meeting of the convention. Page Two NEW BUSINESS The Mayor read the letter received from Floyd H. Hyde, Assistant Secretary for Model Cities, which stated that "the city of Atlanta comprehensive city demonstration program has been approved and that a grant agreement in the amount of $7,175,000 has been autho- rized for carrying out the first year action program." The Mayor congratulated Mr. Johnson and the Model Cities Staff for making Atlanta one of the first three cities in the nation to receive funds for implementation of its Model Cities Program. He then moved that the Aldermatic Board be asked for a resolution accepting the grant agreement. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. REPORT FROM MAYOR ON REVIEW COMMITTEE PROCEDURE FOR EXECUTION OF DELEGATE AGENCY CONTRACTS The Mayor rdéported that the Review Committee that was authorized at the last meeting has met three times to review the projects contained in the program. The members of the committee are: Dr. C. Miles Smith, Mrs. Martha Weems, Alderman Everett Millican, Mr. Walter Mitchell and the Mayor. The committee has reviewed over fifty percent of the projects and will continue to have review ses- sions in the coming weeks. Mr. Johnson had previously suggested that since the staff must review each project for final action before implementation that the staff be allowed to make recommen- dations to the Review Committee for action. Mr. Wainwright moved that this procedure be approved. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved without discussion. REPORT FROM FINANCE COMMITTEE ON DESIGNATION OF BANK FOR GRANT FUNDS Mayor Allen reported for the Finance Committee on the designation of the bank to receive the letter of credit for the $7,175,000. It was the recommendation of the Committee that the Citizen's Trust Company be the designated bank. Alderman Griggs moved that the Board accept the recommendation of the Committee. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION ACCEPTING GRANT AGREEMENT Mr. Johnson explained that it would be necessary to draw up a new resolution authorizing the Mayor to enter into contract with the Federal Government because of some changes by the Nixon Administra- tion in the handling of the funds. The money allocated under the Page Three grant agreement was allotted by components rather than projects and this called for some changes in the wording of the resolution. Mr, Wainwright moved that a new resolution be adopted to be in keeping with the requirements of HUD. Mr. Coleman asked if line items were transferable. Mr. Johnson answered that line items were transferable by 10% or $100,000, whichever is less. Mr. Coleman then asked who was authorized to make adjustments or transfers. It was concluded from the discussion that followed that the Staff and the Executive Board could make recommendations to the Board of Aldermen for any adjustments in a line item. The previous motion by Mr. Wainwright was then seconded and approved unanimously by the Board. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Mr. Johnson presented two groups to give reports to the Board. Mrs. Roslyn Walker, Evaluation Analyst-Model Cities Staff and Mr. Dave Houser of Arthur Andersen & Company presented a report on the Evaluation and Management Information Systems. Mrs. Walker outlined the staff activities to date with its latest work being the preparation of an evaluation framework for the Model Cities Program projects. Mr. Houser explained the management information and control system. He presented a slide presentation of the actual print -out from the computer of the financial and evaluation reports of the projects in the program. Mr. Louis Dismukes and Mr. Paul Muldawer presented the report on the housing study, "Lowering the Cost of Housing", which was com- piled by Eric Hill Associates. The study was a research study to provide background information on the problem of housing in the Model Neighborhood Area. Mr. Dismukes listed the procedure followed in conducting the study and the conclusions drawn from the study. Some of the conclusions were: (1) there are no easy answers (2) the cost of housing can be reduced about 30 or 40 percent by (a) inducing new technologies, (b) removing local constraints (¢) programming housing production to the needs of individualized families and (ad) using maximum housing assistance programs. Mr. Muldawer dis-~ cussed various housing patterns that could be applicable to certain neighborhoods in the Model Neighborhood Area. A discussion followed after the presentation which resulted in Mr. Hood suggesting that the Physical Planning Committee of the Board work with the consultants and review the proposals in the study and bring a report back to the Board. Mr. Coleman then moved that the report be accepted as information and be referred to the Physical Planning Committee for consideration. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. Page Four Mr. Coleman also moved that the City Attorney be asked to give a ruling on who has the authority to make adjustments in line item contained in the budget, OLD BUSINESS Mr. Griggs said that he had been contacted by Mr. Clarence Ezzard concerning Southside Day Care Center, which is located in the Model Neighborhood Area. He stated that the Board should give some state- ment as to whether Mr. Ezzard's center will be included in the pro- gram. Mr. Johnson stated that it was the recommendation of the Model Cities Staff to proceed with the Day Care Program as it is outlined in the comprehensive plan, which excludes Mr. Ezzard's program. Southside Day Care Center is funded aiready by EOA and it is expected that they will maintain their effort. Mr. Coleman moved that the Executive Board meet with the Board of Trustee of Southside and make some decision at the next meeting. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. Mr. Millican suggested that in the future consultant reports be given at meetings separate from general business meetings so as to conserve time. Mr. Johnson introduced the latest addition to the Modei Cities Staff who is Mr. Frmk Keller, Physical Planner. The meeting was adjourned at 12:20 p.m. APPROVED: JohnnyC. Johnson, Director Model Cities Program Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., Chairman Model Neighborhood Executive Board  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 57 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/6598bab301264e91358c0a45fe67c326.pdf 6ccc5b4083e2ce0fb0662a32780dd180 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. May 28, 1969 OFFICE OF MODEL CITIES PROGRAM . 673 Capitol Avenue, S.W. Atlanta . Gs. 30315 404-524 -8876 Iva n Alle n Jr., Mayor J. C. Johnson, Director N O T I C E The Mode l Ne ighborhood Exe cuti v e Board wi ll hold its regular monthly meeting on Tue s day, J une 1 0, in City Hall, Co mm it t e e Room # 2 at 1 0:00 a .m . vlc � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document CUDDY May 28, 1969 OFFICE OF MODEL CITIES PROGRAM 673 Capitol Avenue, S.W. Atlanta, Ga, 30315 404-524-8875 Ivan Allen Jr., Mayor J. C, Johnsen, Director 2 jo {4 jn 1a fea) The Model Neighborhood Executive Board will hold its regular monthly meeting on Tuesday, June 10, in City Hall, Committee Room #2 at 10:00 a.m. vic  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 56 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/7e119de79fb8f5ec2e35f1eef910f491.pdf 5d27536e3ad2786d2be165b718e61e7d Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD EXECUTI VE BOARD Commi ttee ~ss i g n me nts FI NANCE COMMI'I"l'EE Alderman Everet.t Milli.can .Mr. Clur ence Coleman iV.ir. Walter Mi t chel l PERSONN.EL COM.M ITTEE Ald erman E. Gregory Griggs Dr. c. Mi les Smith ~tr . Cl a r ence Cole man CITI ZENS PAR'l1ICIPATION COMMI 'l"T'EE Alderman E. Gr e gory Grig gs Deac on Lewis Peter s Mr . J. D. Newb e r ry Dr. c. Mi l es Smith SOCI AL PLANNI NG COM.tvlITTEE Mr . J o e Wh itley Mrs . Martha Weems Mr . Sam Caldwel l PHYSICAL PLANNING COMMITTEE Mr. Bill Wainwright Mrs . Mattie Ansley Representative Joh n Hood REVIEW COMMITTEE Alderman G. Everett Millican Dr. c. Miles Smith Mr s. Martha We ems .M r. Walter Mitche l l � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD EXECUTIVE BOARD Committee Assignments FINANCE COMMITTESR Alderman Everett Millican Mr, Clarence Coleman Mr. Walter Mitchell PERSONNEL COMMITTER Alderman EB. Gregory Griggs Dr. C. Miles Smith Mr. Clarence Coleman CITIZENS PARTICIPATION COMMITTEE Alderman EH. Gregory Griggs Deacon Lewis Peters Mr. J. D. Newberry Dr. C. Miles Smith SOCIAL PLANNING COMMITTEE Mr. Joe Whitley Mes. Martha Weems Mr. Sam Caldwell PHYSICAL PLANNING COMMITTEE Mr. Bill Wainwright Mrs. Mattie Ansley Representative John Hood REVIEW COMMITTEE Alderman G. Everett Millican Dr. C. Miles Smith Mrs. Martha Weems Mr. Walter Mitchell  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 55 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/8bc40bb4add073350cf51ec659d684b5.pdf ec768d471d5ae46734ec8c716194ed2e Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. M !_ N U T E S MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD EXECUTIVE BOARD Tuesday, June 10, 1969 10:00 a.m. The monthly meeting of the Model Neighborhood Executive Board was held on Tuesday, June 10, 1969 at 10:00 a.m. in Committee Room #2, City Hall. The following members were present: Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., Chairman Mrs. Mattie Ansley Mr. Clarence Coleman Mr. John Hodd Alderman E. Gregory Griggs Alderman G. Everett Millican Mr. Walter Mitchell Mrs. Martha Weems Mr. Joe Whitely Absent: Mr. Sam Caldwell Deacon Lewis Peters Mr. J. D. Newberry Dr. c. Miles Smith Mr. Bill Wainwright Other City Department Heads, representatives from neighbor hood or ganizations and the press were also present. The cha irman, Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., called the meeting to or der. He t hen entertained a motion for the adoption of the May 14 Minute s . I t was s o moved and unanimously approved without correction . REPORT OF THE MASS CONVENTI ON STEERI NG COMMITTEE Mrs . Weems reported f or the Mass convent ion St eering Committe e. She said that seve ral r e s o lutions wi l l be present ed t o the Board follow1 the Mass Convention me eting on Sunday , June 15. Mrs. Weems also reported that the Steering Committee had bee n incorporate d under the name of Stadium Heights, Inc., and have now been designated to be the recipient of a $72,000 grant of OEO/HUD funds for training assie tance to Model Neighborhood reside nts. The purpose of the Mass Convention Meeting will be to get its approval before proceeding fu.t ther with compliance of the requirements to receive the grant. �2 RECOMMENDATION FROM REVIEW COMMITTEE Mr. Millican read the recommendation from the Review Committee which approved the projects for implementation and recommended the execution of contracts with the Atlanta Board of Education and the Georgia State Employment Service. A list of these projects were distributed to all Board members. Mr. Mitchell moved that the recommendation be approved by the Board. Mrs. Weems seconded the motion. The Mayor then asked if there was any discussion of the motion and recommendation. Mr . Coleman said that he felt that he was not in a position to give an intelligent vote because of his lack of information about the projects involved. He said that he as a Board member should be more informed and that the community should be more inf ormed. The Mayor outlined the procedure that has been followed in disseminating information about the projects and activities of the Model Cities Program to the Board members and the Model Neighborhood Area residents. He also gave background information on the formation and function of the Review Committee that he appointed to review all projects in the program and to make recornr.lendations to the e n tire Board . He invited Mr . Cole man to s e rve on that Committee and i nvited other Board members to sit in on the meetings if they desired. Mr. Coleman accepted the seat on the Review Committee. Mr. Coleman then suggested that the Board be divided into committees t o correspond with the a r eas included in the program and that these committe es should meet regularl y wi th the Model Cities Staff . Mr. Johns on s t ated that the Staff would b e happy to meet wi th a ny o f the Boa rd members a t a ny time. He also stated tha t ther e were a l ready existing Board committees that correspond with the a r eas of the progr am, a nd that these commi t t ee should be utiliz ed r a the r than establi sh ing new ones. A vote was then t aken on the prev i ous mot ion to approve the rec ommendation of the Rev iew Committee. The motio n was approved by the Bo ard DIRECTOR'S REPORT Mr . Johnso n a sked f or the Board's approval to transfer funds from Pro ject HR-OO 3N to the Mul t i- Pur pose Facil i ty Pr oject . It h as bee n necessary to i n crease the size o f the build i ng fr om 15 , 000 feet t o 20, 1 00 fee t , and t he co s t has increased from $180 , 000 to $280 , 000 . Mr. Hood mov ed that t he t r ansfer be app roved and the contr a ct be awarded to the bidde r. The motion was second ed and u nanimously approved. Mr. Johnson also asked approval to reimburse the Georgia State Employ ment Service in the amount of $21,966 for salaries of the staff they provided the program last y e ar and this year . Mr. Griggs moved that the Georgia State Employment Service be reimburse the $21,966. The motion was se~onded and unanimously approve d. · �3 Mr. Johnson then asked for approval to proceed with Project No. EM-014N for staffing only The project needs two employees to do the intitial paper work and interviewing to get the project in motion. A discussion followed on whether the two employees would be area residents. Mr. Fulp from the Georgia State Employment Service said that the two positions called for professional interviewers with experience in the State Employment System. Further discussion followed on the steps taken to actually seek out Model Neighborhood residents for positions available in the Model Cities Program. As a result of the discussion, the Mayor proposed that Mr. Coleman make a motion that the GSES be required to hire Model Neighborhood residents to fill the two positions in Project No. EM-014N. Mr. Hood seconded the motion. Mr. Johnson then stated that the Board should concern itself with the greater issue of employment rather than two individual positions and suggested that a general policy be established as a guide for the employment practices of all agencies involved in the program. ~~- Hood then offered an amendment to the motion to state that priority be given to community residents for the positions in Project EM-014N. Mr. Coleman accepted the amendment and the motion was approved. The Mayor then re-emphasized the fact that no one should be hired for any job unless a basic effort has been made to hire from the Model Cities Area. He then appointed Mr . Coleman, Mr. Millican and Mrs. Weems to draft a policy statement that outlines the Board's position that an all out effort must be made by agencies under contract with the program to hire all of their personnel from the Area or to provide tra i ning for residents to fill other positions. The special committee is to report at the next Board meeting . Mr. Johnson introduced two new members to the staff. Samuel Russell, Jr . Director of Pr ogram Management They are: Howard E . Turnipseed Contract Administrator NEW BUSINESS Mr. Whitley brought tottle Boar d' s attention that there is a different policy by the Board of Education for condeming and taking property needed for school expansion. There is n o assistance offered for families who are displaced. Mr. Johnson concurred with Mr. Whitley's report. He stated that Project HR- 041N provides special relocation assistance for families that are displaced and a r e not in a clearance area. This project was designed because of the failure of some agencies to provide relocation assistance. The Mayor asked Mr. Whitle to get a full report on the amount of property that will be taken by the Board of Education and to give a report at the next meeting. Mr. Hood commented that committees are constantly being appointed to handle different activities rather than using the ones that alrea~~ exist. Mr. Coleman requested that each Board members receive a list of the committees and their members. He also proposed that the Bo.ard discuss the function and structure of the conunittees at the I next meeting. �4 The meeting was adjourned at 11:50 a.rn. APPROVED: Mayor Ivan Alien , Jr., Chairman Model Neighborhood Executive Board � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD EXECUTIVE BOARD Tuesday, June 10, 1969 10:00 a.m. The monthly meeting of the Model Neighborhood Executive Board was held on Tuesday, June 10, 1969 at 10:00 a.m. in Committee Room #2, City Hall. The following members were present: Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., Chairman Mrs. Mattie Ansley Mr. Clarence Coleman Mr. John Hood Alderman E. Gregory Griggs Alderman G. Everett Millican Mr. Walter Mitchell Mrs. Martha Weems Mr. Joe Whitely Absent: Mr. Sam Caldwell Deacon Lewis Peters Mr. J. D. Newberry Dr. C. Miles Smith Mr. Bill Wainwright Other City Department Heads, representatives from neighborhood organizations and the press were also present. The chairman, Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., called the meeting to order. He then entertained a motion for the adoption of the May 14 Minutes. It was so moved and unanimously approved without correction. REPORT OF THE MASS CONVENTION STEERING COMMITTEE Mrs. Weems reported for the Mass Convention Steering Committee. She said that several resolutions will be presented to the Board followi the Mass Convention meeting on Sunday, June 15. Mrs. Weems also reported that the Steering Committee had been incorporated under the name of Stadium Heights, Inc., and have now been designated to be the recipient of a $72,000 grant of OEO/HUD funds for training assis tance to Model Neighborhood residents. The purpose of the Mass Convention Meeting will be to get its approval before proceeding fur ther with compliance of the requirements to receive the grant. RECOMMENDATION FROM REVIEW COMMITTEE Mr. Millican read the recommendation from the Review Committee which approved the projects for implementation and recommended the execu- tion of contracts with the Atlanta Board of Education and the Georgia State Employment Service. A list of these projects were distributed to all Board members. Mr. Mitchell moved that the recommendation be approved by the Board. Mrs. Weems seconded the motion. The Mayor then asked if there was any discussion of the motion and recommendation. Mr. Coleman said that he felt that he was not in a position to give an intelligent vote because of his lack of information about the projects involved. He said that he as a Board member should be more informed and that the community should be more informed. The Mayor outlined the pro- cedure that has been followed in disseminating information about the projects and activities of the Model Cities Program to the Board members and the Model Neighborhood Area residents. He also gave background information on the formation and function of the Review Committee that he appointed to review all projects in the program and to make recommendations to the entire Board. He invited Mr. Cole man to serve on that Committee and invited other Board members to sit in on the meetings if they desired. Mr. Coleman accepted the seat on the Review Committee. Mr. Coleman then suggested that the Board be divided into committees to correspond with the areas included inthe program and that these committees should meet regularly with the Model Cities Staff. Mr. Johnson stated that the Staff would be happy to meet with any of the Board members at any time. He also stated that there were already existing Board committees that correspond with the areas of the program, and that these committee should be utilized rather than establishing new ones. A vote was then taken on the previous motion to approve the recommen- dation of the Review Committee. The motion was approved by the Board DIRECTOR'S REPORT Mr. Johnson asked for the Board's approval to transfer funds from Project HR-003N to the Multi-Purpose Facility Project. It has been necessary to increase the size of the building from 15,000 feet to 20,100 feet, and the cost has increased from $180,000 to $280,000. Mr. Hood moved that the transfer be approved and the contract be awarded to the bidder. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. Mr. Johnson also asked approval to reimburse the Georgia State Employ ment Service in the amount of $21,966 for salaries of the staff they provided the program last year and this year. Mr. Griggs moved that the Georgia State Employment Service be reimburse the $21,966. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. Mr. Johnson then asked for approval to proceed with Project No. EM-O14N for staffing only The project needs two employees to do the intitial paper work and interviewing to get the project in motion. A discussion followed on whether the two employees would be area residents. Mr. Fulp from the Georgia State Employment Service said that the two positions called for professional inter- viewers with experience in the State Employment System. Further discussion followed on the steps taken to actually seek out Model Neighborhood residents for positions available in the Model Cities Program. As a result of the discussion, the Mayor proposed that Mr. Coleman make a motion that the GSES be required to hire Model Neighborhood residents to fill the two positions in Project No. EM-O14N. Mr. Hood seconded the motion. Mr. Johnson then stated that the Board should concern itself with the greater issue of employment rather than two individual positions and suggested that a general policy be established as a guide for the employment prac- tices of all agencies involved in the program. Mr. Hood then offered an amendment to the motion to state that priority be given to com- munity residents for the positions in Project EM-O14N. Mr. Coleman accepted the amendment and the motion was approved. The Mayor then re-emphasized the fact that no one should be hired for any job unless a basic effort has been made to hire from the Model Cities Area. He then appointed Mr. Coleman, Mr. Millican and Mrs. Weems to draft a policy statement that outlines the Board's position that an all out effort must be made by agencies under con- tract with the program to hire all of their personnel from the Area or to provide training for residents to fill other positions. The special committee is to report at the next Board meeting. Mr. Johnson introduced two new members to the staff. They are: Samuel Russell, Jr. Howard E. Turnipseed Director of Program Management Contract Administrator NEW BUSINESS Mr. Whitley brought tothe Board's attention that there is a different policy by the Board of Education for condeming and taking property needed for school expansion. There is no assistance offered for families who are displaced. Mr. Johnson concurred with Mr. Whitley's report. He stated that Project HR-041N provides special relocation assistance for families that are displaced and are not in a clearance area. This project was designed because of the failure of some agencies to provide relocation assistance. The Mayor asked Mr. Whitle to get a full report on the amount of property that will be taken by the Board of Education and to give a report at the next meeting. Mr. Hood commented that committees are constantly being appointed to handle different activities rather than using the ones that already exist. Mr. Coleman requested that each Board members receive a list of the committees and their members. He also proposed that the Board discuss the function and structure of the committees at the next meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 11:50 a.m. APPROVED: Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., Chairman Model Neighborhood Executive Board  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 54 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/73f212b77b82232b0f9edaefa9f177c4.pdf df2b9db9b472bc2b3f060a27a7089c00 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. YP1 CITY OF ATLANTA Ju OFFICE OF MODEL CITIES PROGRAM 673 Capitol Avenue , S.W . Atlanta, Ga . 30315 404 -524 -8876 Ivan Allen Jr., Mayor J. C. Johnson, Director J. l tin o tr 2., Cit y. u ly 1 •••• , t ,oo • • � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document YP CITY OF ATLANTA June 24, 1969 OFFICE OF MODEL CITIES PROGRAM 673 Capitol Avenue, S.W. Atlanta, Ga. 30315 404-524-8876 Ivan Allen Jr., Mayor J. €. Johnson, Director HOftics A Special meeting of the Model Neighborhood Executive Board has been calied for Tuesday, Juiy 1, at 10:00 a. m, in Committee Room $2, City Hall. HRRREERD  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 53 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/734e7a5362f03c8311e0f4e64a1730c7.pdf 01432b2b31cc5438fc484ef8c051e205 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. DEPAR T M E N T OF JPJ' H O USI N G A N O URB AN DE V ELO PME,NT .., 1969 PE AC HTREE SEVENTH BUILDING, ATLANTA , GEORGIA 30323 Room 645 December 26, 196~ REGION Ill Offi c e of the Regional Admini s t r ator IN REPL Y REF ER T O: 3DM Mr. Johnny C. J ohns on Director Cit y Demonstrati on Agency 673 Capitol Avenue Atlanta , Georgia 30315 Dear Mr . J ohns on : As you know, t he Regi onal Int er a genc y Coordinat ing Commi t t ee has compl eted its r evi ew of the At lanta Compre hensive Cit y Demons trati on Progr am . During ou r meeting with you and your staf f on Decem be r 18 we conveyed a number of r ecommendations conc e rning alter ations and improvements whi c h s hould be made in various parts of your program inclu ding , i nte r alia , your proposed adminis trat i ve budget f or 1969 . As previ ously i ndicated , the committ ee bel ieves t hat t he foll owi ng changes shoul d be cons ide red i n the staf fin g pattern set f orth i n your administrative budge t : 1. Add one planner and one pro gram· mana r,e r to your Econom i c Development Di vision to assist the Di vision Director in carrying out the numerous tasks arising out of con tinued planning a s well as i mplementat ion of the first year program . 2. Add at least two fiscal management pers onnel , preferably i n the Administrative Division to assist in monitor inG t he nume rous r equis itions from local opera ting arrenc iPs and in carryi ne out the numerous otner t asks which wi ll need to be performed in order to comply wi th the procedures spelle d out in CDA Lett er -/IB . 3. Add res ident trainees to the various divisions of the CDA staff, where a ppropria t e , f or the purpose of pr ovi<.lin;~ sufficient on-the- j ob ~nd technical or academic traini nr, to enable each trainee to at t ain competence in his or her field of i nterest . In a ddi t i on to the a bove ma tters which pertain to your admini strative budget, it will be necessary for the CDA to submi t to this o ff ic e soon �Page 2 a fter approval of the Comprehensive Program a work program which identifies the planning activities to be undertaken in 1969, and which specifies the activity, the-responsible entity, the source and amount of funds, and the staff and time period required to carry out the activity. I would encourage you to subnit a revised administrative budge t reflecting the foregoing rec0111nendations as soon as pos sible to permit review by this office prior to final action by HUD on your a~plication for supplemental grant funds. Sincerely yours, Earl H. Metzger, Jr. Assistant Regional Administrator for Model Cities � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 2S LS ae a a ea ar ; Pa Op JAN 3 1969 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT PEACHTREE SEVENTH BUILDING, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 “Pranza Room 645 December 26, 1966 * = ny ows” yen a % REGION III Office of the Regional Administrator IN REPLY-REFER TO: 3DM Mr. Johnny C. Johnson Director City Demonstration Agency 6735 Capitol Avenue Atlanta, Georgia 30315 Dear Mr. Johnson: As you know, the Regional Interagency Coordinating Committee has completed its review of the Atlanta Comprehensive City Demonstration Program. During our meeting with you and your staff on December 18 we conveyed a number of recommendations concerning alterations and improvements which should be made in various parts of your program including, inter alia, your proposed administrative budget for 1969. As previously indicated, the committee believes that the following changes should be considered in the staffing pattern set forth in your administrative budget: 1. Add one planner and one program manager to your Economic Development Vivision to assist the Division Director in carrying out the numerous tasks arising out of continued planning as well as implementation of the first year program. 2. Add at least two fiscal management personnel, preferably in the Administrative Division to assist in monitoring the numerous requisitions from local operating arencies and in carrying out the numerous otner tasks which will need to be performed in order to comply with the proce- dures spelled out in CDA Letter #8. 3. Add resident trainees to the various divisions of the CDA staff, where appropriate, for the purpose of providine sufficient on-the-job 2nd technical or academic training to enable each trainee to attain competence in his or her field of interest. In addition to the above matters which pertain to your administrative budget, it will be necessary for the CDA to submit to this office soon a a a a aa aa ee Perr Page 2 after approval of the Comprehensive Program a work program which identifies the planning activities to be undertaken in 1969, and which specifies the activity, the-responsible entity, the source and amount of funds, and the staff and time period required to carry out the activity. I would encourage you to submit a revised administrative budget reflecting the foregoing recommendations as soon as possible to permit review by this office prior to final action by HUD on your application for supplemental grant funds. Sincerely yours, ma WERh OES Cane “Yy by ds AT ¥ a Earl H. Metzger, Jr. Assistant Regional Administrator for Model Cities  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 52 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/2b9bd25e94e3d69dc092733c9cd6f6d7.pdf 05e58dcd93432042e706cfc4492980b9 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. • ~ u~• UNITED' STA~ GOVERNMtNT <.?, 66> Memorandum CDA DIRECTORS RmIONAL ADMINISTRATORS TO DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DATE: December 30, 1968 In reply refer to: Attention: ARA for Model Cities ADMINISTRATIVE MEMO NO. 13 FR.OM Walter G. Farr Model Cities Administr at~on SUBJEC'l': Letters to Proceed f r,r Admi n1 strative Costs Incurred a:rter Submission -of Com:pr ensive City DeJJ10us~ration Program It is essential that the p~riod between the submission by the CDA of its comprehensive demonstratic/n prQg1'am &ii the date of execution of the grant agreement for the execution phase be used effectively in gearing up for the administration of the program. This memorandum sets forth the procedure for the issuance of Letters t o Proceed, which are designed to provide the CDA with a statement from HUD that :f'unds expended in conformance with an approved budget a.re eligible for r eimbursement from the administration grant peyable under the grant agreement. This grant will pay for a maximum of 80 percent of the eligible costs of program administration. 1. The CDA's Request a . The chief executive of the City may request a Letter to Proceed. as soon as (a ) the City ' s comprehensive demonstration program has been submitted t o the Department of Hous ing and Urban Development and (b) the local gover ning body has authorized that submission. This request may appropriately be filed with th~ comprehensive <lemonstration program. b . The CDA's l etteT of request (See Attachment A) should be filed with the fol lowi ng back-up documents: (i) (ii ) Budget Schedule (Use Att a.chment _ 1 to CDA Letter No. 6, HUD 7039* ) J ustif ications (Use Attachments 3a and 3b to CDA Letter No . 6, HUD 7042 811d 70~3** ) ( iii) Work Programs -- The work programs may be brief and need not present detailed time schedules nor provi de work descriptions for individual staff members . The work program may include such items as : In the headi ng of column B, strike out the phrase "Year a.nd insert in lieu t hereot: "90 days". --- of Program" , Ins er t i n l i ne 2 of each form the following: "Program administration prior to execut ion of grant agr eement". �,.. 2 (1) Prepare ame~nts or additions to the comprehensive progr am subsequent to discussion -11th Federal officials. (2) Prepa r e fund applications for categorical grant-in-aid progr ams . (3) Develop administrative procedures for execution period. (4) Survey possible locations for neighborhood facility. c. It is expected t hat grant agreements will be executed for most cities within 90 dey-s from the dat.e the local governing body authorizes submission · of the program.. However., times will vary and no CDA will know exactly the . length or time in which ad,plinist~ative costs will pe incurred prior to execution of the gra.nt 96reenient. · All budgets . supporting Letters to Proceed should be for a 90 de.y period. 2. . HUD Action mm Model Cities Regional staff will provide cities with any assistance needed. in requesting Lett ers to Proceed. Requests will be reviewed prompt~ and when approved, Letters to Proceed will be issued by the Regional Administrators, in the form indicated in Attachment B. The Letter is effective as of the date of issue. It should be noted that the issuance of the Letter to Proceed does not represent a Federal commitment of funds. Accordingly, if the city's program is not approved, there is no basis on ·which reimbursement can be obtained by the CDA. 3. Allowable Costs a. Continuing Items. Most expense items which will be necessary for this period in which the administration of the program commences are continuing items : ·salaries for staff of CDA, delegate agencies and neighborhood groups, travel, rent, etc. Many of these items have been eligible planning costs du.ring the planning period. It is, · of course, assumed that eligible planning costs will be ~aid for under the planning budget · until p,lanning :funds (both the Federal planning grant and the non-Federal contribution) are exhausted. b. New Items. In addition,' CDA's ms;y, du.ring this period, add certain central sta.:ff which will be essential to the operation, and preparation foroperation, of the comprehensive program. These ma,y include fiscal, lega.l and central administrative personnel who will be needed regardless of the exact pattern of First Year Action components. However, the Letter to Proceed should not cover costs in connection with new capital projects and activities. The Letter to Proceed ma,y cover costs of reproducing the federa.lly-required number �. ... . 4 3 of copies of the c omprehensive program. 4. Non-Allowable Costs While the followi ng list does not purport to. be exhaustive, you should be alerted to the fac t that the following costs should not be covered by the Letter to Proceed: a. b. c. d. 5. Costs· PS¥able under the planning budget for which planning funds are available . Costs incurred in connection with new projects and activities. New third party contracts or significant amendments to existing contracts. Costs not allowable under CDA Letter No. 8~ Relationship to First Year Action Budget In preparing its fi rst year action budget in accordance with CDA Letter No. me.y prepare an administrative budget for a period up to 15 months-the presumed 90 d~y period under the Letter to Proceed plus the 12-month period commencing with the execution of the grant agreement. In the alternative, the CDA me.y submit a 12 month administrative budget at the time the comprehensive program is submitted , and then amend this before the execution of the .grant amendment so as to add the period for which reimbursement is sought for expenditures under the Let ter to Proceed. 6, CDA's ~;;t?jj /4.Msr,/kJ~ -f-Y-' Director Attachments ~ �ATTACHMENT A Request for Letter to Proceed Dear (Regional Adminj.;trator J The City of _ _ ___________ requests a Letter to Proceed for a 90 day period so that costs incurred in prep~ing for the administration of our comprehensi,,e city demonstration program may be eligible for reimbursement f'rom the gra.r,t f or a.dministrative costs under section 105(b) of the statute. A budget and work program for costs estimated to be incurred during this period to susta ~n such activities is attached. This attachment includes a statement of t he 20 percent non-Federal share of these costs. I understand that reimbursement cannot take place unless and until the Secretary of t he Department of Housing and Urban Development has approved (-city name) ' &i program and a Grant Agre·ement is executed between (city name) and HUD. Sincerely yours, (Local chief executive) Attachment �..-. ... ATTACHMENT B Letter to Proceed, for Execution Phase Na.me of Chief Executive Title City Address Dear -- Your comprehensive demonstration program submission has been received. Although the Department ha s not yet acted upon your program, it has no objection to your commencing prepar~t ion for the execution phase. Costs incurred on and after the· date of this letter which are in accordance with the attached budget and work program. will be eligible for reimbursement if a grant agreement is executed and i f the terms and conditions of the agreement and CDA Letter No. 8 (copies of both attached,) are satisfied.* Sincerely yours, Regional Administrator Attachment Modify this sentence appropriately if CDA Letter No. 8 has already been sent to the CDA or if a draf't has been or is being sent•, � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document =e af AuD-96- 7.66) . UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF ; 7 HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ~ Memorandum te ) TO : CDA DIRECTORS DATE: December 30, 1968 REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS : In reply refer to: Attention: ARA for Mociel Cities ; ADMINISTRATIVE MEMO NO. 13 FROM : Walter G. Farr b Model Cities Administration ae Fs SUBJECT: Letters to Proceed for Administrative Costs Incurred after Submission of Comprehensive City Demonstration Program It is essential that the period between the submission by the CDA of its comprehensive demonstration program arid the date of execution of the grant egreement for the execution phase be used effectively in gearing up for the administration of the program. This memorandum sets forth the procedure for i the issuance of Letters to Proceed, which are designed to provide the CDA with a statement from HUD that funds expended in conformance with an approved si budget are eligible for reimbursement from the administration grant payable i: 2 under the grant agreement. This grant will pay for a maximum of 80 percent of the eligible costs cf program administration. 1. The CDA's Request a. The chief executive of the City may request a Letter to Proceed. as soon as (a) the City's comprehensive demonstration program has been submitted to the Department of Housing and Urban Development and (b) the local governing body has authorized that submission. This request may appropriately be filed with the comprehensive demonstration program. b. The CDA's letter of request (See Attachment A) should be filed with ee the following back-up documents: (1) Budget Schedule (Use Attachment 1 to CDA Letter No. 6, HUD 7039*) fs ' (ii) Justifications (Use Attachments 3a and 3b to CDA Letter No. 6, HUD 7042 and 7043%*) (iii) Work Programs -- The work programs may be brief and need not present detailed time schedules nor provide work descriptions a | for individual staff members. The work program may include . such items as: bi Peis * In the heading of column B, strike out the phrase "Year of Program", and insert in lieu thereof "90 days". ** Insert in line 2 of each form the following: "Program administration prior to execution of grant agreement”. = . - i ld lar ee a i (1) Prepare amendments or additions to the comprehensive program subsequent to discussion with Federal officials. (2) Prepare fund applications for categorical grant-in-aid programs. (3) Develop administrative procedures for execution period. (4) Survey possible locations for neighborhood facility. ec. It is expected that grant agreements will be executed for most cities within 90 days from the date the local governing body authorizes submission of the program. However, times will vary and no CDA will know exactly the. length or time in which administrative costs will be incurred prior to execution of the grant agreement. All budgets supporting Letters to Proceed should be for a 90 day period. ‘ 2. HUD Action HUD Model Cities Regional staff will provide cities with any assistance needed in requesting Letters to Proceed. Requests will be reviewed promptly and when approved, Letters to Proceed will be issued by the Regional Admini- strators, in the form indicated in Attachment B. The Letter is effective as of the date of issue. It should be noted that the issuance of the Letter to Proceed does not represent a Federal commitment of funds. Accordingly, if the city's program is not approved, there is no basis on which reimbursement can be obtained by the CDA. 3. Allowable Costs a. Continuing Items. Most expense items which will be necessary for this period in which the administration of the program commences are continuing items; salaries for staff of CDA, delegate agencies and neighborhood groups, travel, rent, etc. Many of these items have been eligible planning costs during the planning period. It is, of course, assumed that eligible planning costs will be paid for under the planning budget until planning funds (both the Federal planning grant and the non-Federal contribution) are exhausted. b. New Items. In addition, CDA's may, during this period, add certain central staff which will be essential to the operation, and preparation for operation, of the comprehensive program. These may include fiscal, legal and central administrative personnel who will be needed regardless of the exact pattern of First Year Action components. However, the Letter to Proceed should not cover costs in connection with new capital projects and activities. The Letter to Proceed may cover costs of reproducing the federally-required number va  3 of copies of the comprehensive program. is 4, Non-Allowable Costs } While the following list. does not purport to be exhaustive, you should be : alerted to the fact that the for ene costs should not be covered by the Letter to Proceed: : 7 @. Costs payable under the planning budget for which planning funds are available. b. Costs incurred in connection with new projects and activities. + c. New third party contracts or significant amendments to exteb ine contracts. d. Costs not allowable under CDA Letter No. 8. 5. Relationship to First Year Action Budget In preparing its first year action budget in accordance with CDA Letter No. 6, CDA's may prepare an administrative budget for a period up to 15 months-- the presumed 90 day period under the Letter to Proceed plus the 12-month period commencing with the execution of the grant agreement. In the alternative, the CDA may submit a 12 month administrative budget at the time the comprehensive program is submitted, and then amend this before the execution of the grant amendment so as to add the period for which reimbursement is sought for expendi- tures under the Letter to Proceed. tK. Sea YE- ‘Y eS et Attachments — SS se to ATTACHMENT A Request for Letter to Proceed Dear (Regional Admin: :trator ) The City of i requests a Letter to Proceed for a 90 day period so that costs incurred in preparing for the administration of our comprehensive city demonstration program may be eligible for reimburse- ment from the grar/t for administrative costs under section 105(b) of the statute. A budget and work program for costs estimated to be incurred during this period to sustain such activities is attached. This attachment includes a statement of the 20 percent non-Federal share of these costs. I understand that reimbursement cannot take place unless and until the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development has approved (city name)'s program and a Grant Agreement is executed between (city name) and HUD. Sincerely yours, (Local chief executive) Attachment 1 ATTACHMENT B Letter to Proceed, for Execution Phase Name of Chief Executive Title City Address Dear : Your comprehensive demonstration program submission has been received. Although the Department has not yet acted upon your program, it has no objection to your commencing preparation for the execution phase. Costs incurred on and after the date of this letter which are in accordance with the attached ah budget and work program will be eligible for reimbursement if a grant agree- ment is executed and if the terms and conditions of the agreement and CDA Letter No. 8 (copies of both attached) are satisfied.”* Sincerely yours, Regional Administrator Me Attachment fr t *Modify this sentence appropriately if CDA Letter No. 8 has already been { sent to the CDA or if a draft has been or is being sents § ao .  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 51 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/1eea31b46ce8e7c38f4e4d965acd5f0d.pdf d9568dafe5f549894a1bed6500d6cc33 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. Cll"Y OF AT DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE 501 CITY HALL ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 CHARLES L . DAVIS DIRECTOR OF FINANCE EDGAR A . VAUGHN, JR . DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE GEORGE J. e·ERRY DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE / January 13, 1969 Mr. Johnny Johnson Director Model Cities Program Atlanta, Georgia Dear Johnny: While I realize that we are both aware of the following facts, I feel that it is important that they be pointed out and emphasized at this time so that there will be no chance of a misunderstanding. The federally approved budget under which the Model Cities Project is now operating is authorized only through January 31, 1969. While we have noted in the press that the Model Cities execution grant containing the 1969 administrative budget has been approved, there has been no indication that the City will receive a binding commitment from the federal government in time for the Budget Commission and Board of Aldermen to act on it at their nex t regular meeting on January 20, 1969. I am aware that your staff is now preparing a request for an ex tension of the present planning budget until such time · as a new administrative budget can receive official federal and city action. Again, time is of the essence in receiving a federal commitment for this ex tension. If it is not received in time for action on January 20, the nex t regular meeting of the Board is on February 3 which is after your current budget e xpires. It is, therefore, ex tremely important that we receive some definite commitment from the federal agency prior to January 20, 1969 . Please call on me if there is anything that I can do to assist in obtaining federal agency approval . I would also like to advise that all of the staff positions that have been authoriz ed by the new administrative budget were cr eat ed �Model Cities Project Budget January 13, 1969 Page 2 by action of the Finance Committee on January 6, 1969. These positions, however, were contingent upon federal funds being available and therefore none of the positions can be filled until we receive a specific federal commitment to funding these positions. Very truly yours, d vv~---- ;?JZ~ Charles L. Davis Director of Finance CLD:cs cc: Messrs. Earl Metzger Earl Landers Dan Sweat Milto~ G. Farris Everett Millican Gregory Griggs Carl Paul Tom Stephens � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ff *s-twys Cc P, 5 ff sa 7 & iH baie # 4 a é 3 q 4 gf Xs I a 6d © j Fr I LAAIN Ff S DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE 501 CITY HALL ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 CHARLES L. DAVIS DIRECTOR OF FINANCE EDGAR A. VAUGHN, JR. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE GEORGE J. BERRY DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE January 13, 1969 \ a Mr. Johnny Johnson Director Model Cities Program Atlanta, Georgia Dear Johnny: While I realize that we are both aware of the following facts, I feel that it is important that they be pointed out and emphasized at this time so that there will be no chance of a misunderstanding. The federally approved budget under which the Model Cities Project is now operating is authorized only through January 31, 1969. While we have noted in the press that the Model Cities execution grant containing the 1969 administrative budget has been approved, there has been no indication that the City will receive a binding commit- ment from the federal government in time for the Budget Commission and Board of Aldermen to act on it at their next regular meeting on January 20, 1969. I am aware that your staff is now preparing a request for an ex- tension of the present planning budget until such time’as a new administrative budget can receive official federal and city action. Again, time is of the essence in receiving a federal commitment for this extension, If it is not received in time for action on January 20, the next regular meeting of the Board is on February 3 which is after your current budget expires. It is, therefore, extremely important that we receive some definite commitment from the federal agency prior to January 20, 1969. Please call on me if there is anything that I can do to assist in obtaining federal agency approval. I would also like to advise that all of the staff positions that have been authorized by the new administrative budget were created Model Cities Project Budget January 13, 1969 Page 2 by action of the Finance Committee on January 6, 1969, These posi- tions, however, were contingent upon federal funds being available and therefore none of the positions can be filled until we receive a specific federal commitment to funding these positions. Very truly yours, Be Zo Charles L. Davis Director of Finance CLD:cs cc: Messrs. Earl Metzger Earl Landers Dan Sweat Milton G. Farris Everett Millican Gregory Griggs Carl Paul Tom Stephens  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 50 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/8834b090c25a55c15f3d4e6e12596f4b.pdf 10608641cd89b6adc170a690465b9e1f Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. r ~ . _,.,.I+. ,- 0 ~•ENr 0 ,. /~ ~ <S' ·* \ \ /1, . ..0 !). , . , . C /I ~ "1 ( D- EPARTM JAN 21 1969 NT OF H '. U SING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ............~ T R E E SEVEN 'd BUILDING, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 >~~- .,...--" " _,..-- 645 \ Jan ry 16, 1969 REGION Ill otf'ice of the Regional Administrator IN REPLY REFER TO: Mr. Johnny C. Johnson Director City Demonstration Agency 673 Capitol Avenue Atlanta, Georgia ):) 315 De&r Mr. Johnson: Subject: Model Cities Program Following review by the Regional. Inter ency Coordinating COllllittee the Atlanta Comprehensive City Demonstrat i on Program (CCDP) has now been reviewed by the Washington Interag cy Committee, and, as indicated in our letter to Mayor Allen or January 14, 1969, the Departaent of Housing and Urban Development e.nno\.Dlced approval of the Atlanta Program on January 8, 1969. The folloving work items must be accomplish id, however, before a grant contract can be ottered by HUD: Submission ot your revised .bmget for program adm:Jn:Jstration (See rq letter dated December 26, 1968.) 1) 2) Submission ot your statement ot non-federal contribution ahow1Dg eligibility for the supplemental grant of t,,175,000. As you know, all. projects tor which the CM claims "base" must 'be aubmitted to lltl> in accordance with CJ». 17 and CDl '4-, Pa8e 16. Where they exist, you ray Yiah to submit project descriptions or a\Dll&l'i.ea thereof' i"rom exiating applications 3) Submiasion of a letter from the area CAMPS cOllllittee stating that the committee has renewed and approved the CCDP. I UDCl.erst&Dd this was accomplished on January 6 and a letter troa the CAMPS coad.ttee so stating will be sutticient. �In addition to the foregoing, I V&Dt to 8hare with you the tollovil:ig ccaaent• and receaaendatio • tl o:>DCerning varioua components ot your plan baaed 011. the W ah1ngton rev1 and on your cenversatiena on January 14 with Don Dodge, Area Deak ott1 1 r, and Tom W111181118 1 Atlanta Coordi.Dator: Beaident Involvement - I UDder• and that you diacwaaed with Maaara. Dodge and Williama project• ll-002B i BB-0031' aa veil u projects CD -OOlll Uld CD-Ol2B, all ot wbich are to be operated by the Atlanta Youth Co 11. It would be helpful 11' you vould upplelllnt the existing project deacriptiona with• short atataent deac tlting the Atlanta Youth Co\JDCil and 1Dd1eat1ng the relationahip among these tour project•. ~ ~or Job-training actirttiea, there vi need to be further cenaideratiOD ot taat part ot the project which c~>Dteaplates training tor aevi.Dg whine operator• aince it appears the Depu t ot Labor he.a turther queationa concerning the propoaal.. Mr. Willi will be in touch with you in the near future to arrange a meeting lfit~\ appropriate membera ot your •tatf' and the state and :federal agencies CO\ cerned. l(!plt>yment - With regard to Projec~~ D(-014:N which pl'CYidea J;collODlic Devel.opllent - One of the cone1erna noted during the Waabington review was that there appeared to be ntl link between the Development Corporation (!X::-OOJ.B) and the 01.ttreach ,Project (!C-OO)C). BoveTer, I UDderatalld. that the same sponsor 111 contemplated tor IX:-003C and tor the Si.ngl.e-Purpoae Develepn.e~t Corporation (IX:-0055) and that both project• rill work vith the financial pool to be C.! re&ted. under IC-001. I also UDderatand that you are aubmitting an a .lication for t 1mcUng to the Bconomic Dffelopaent Administration and that some change• 1n project descriptions and budget& may be necesaitat,"1 depending on the reault of this application. Bducation - As indic:ated during your meeti vi.th the Interagency Ceo~ting Comittee, a statement clar1ty11,g the cit:,•• 11&.iPt-enenc of effort in this cc.ponent should be submit in the near future. It would also be advill&bl.e to have letters :fra t.he Atlallta Board ot Education and the State Depe.rtment ot BducatiOn 11141catin8 renew azad · concurrence in your pl.an. I vould al.ao like t4I> reiterate the concern previeua~ expressed to you by the RICC that the program.a propoaed 1n this cm.ponent do not appear to provide the e.Aa to make the educational system more responsive to the felt need.a a.nd e.xpreaaecl rtew• ot reaic\enta. 'l'hie should be f'urtber conaidered by the CDA. t!or the purpose ot cleaigning remedial propoaala. With regard to Project 11)-0~•, I UD4erataacl this ia tor the purl)C)ae of assisting the CDl to nal.•te nev educatioD&l. programa to be illpl.emuted under the N04el Cit iea plan and ia not tor eT&l.m.tion of exiati.Dg programs. �Pag 3 Health - I understand that a non-profit corporation, entitled the Model Neighborhood Better Health Corporation bas recently been establishe~ composed of elected resident repr sentatives, repre entatives ot t be feur local medical and dental societies and three social service &1 encie which will be responsible for operating the major programs in thi s component. A short statement describing the corporation and its relationship to the local professional agencies would be helpful.. I would also sugge t that the corporation, if it is to be the pcr.llsoring agency for the proposed health facility, should be advised to ·begin discussion with the Atl.aota FHA Insuring otfice at the earlie~/t possible nt. Transportation - I understand that project TR-017N, entitled, Public Facilities Impact Evaluation will in fact be a consultant s 'clliy tor the p\ll'pO&e of developing specific transpci)rtation recouanendatic-,na and is not an evaluation of first year activities in this cmponent. Housing - With regard to project RR-005N, Housing Center, I understand that Messrs. Dodge and Williams discussed with you the 81A.visability ot seeking an appropriate sponsor in lieu of CDl operation of the project and that you are nov in the process of exploring thia nr&tter. I would urge your immediate attention to those items listed above which must be completed to enable us to move toward tendering of the grant agreement. Mr. Williams will, of course, be availabl~ for discussion should you have any questions on these matters. Sincerely yours, F,,. ' ( ';fj lf' ·, I --r1, . ,' ) Earl H. Metzger, J r . Asaiatant Regional .AdmiDistrator tor Model Citiea � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ar) 3=— ee. SS ae) a aa ae aes ‘ ih hails a i dt a a pf a ee 2 = [etn es wae JAN 24 1969 DEPARTMENT OF H \USING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT PEACHTREE SEVEN 4 BUILDING, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 Room 645 Janwi\ry 16, 1969 » A REGION III Office of the Regional Administrator IN REPLY REFER To: 3DM Mr. Johnny C. Johnson Director City Demonstration Agency 673 Capitol Avenue Atlanta, Georgia 30315 Dear Mr. Johnson: Subject: Model Cities Program Following review by the Regional Interagency Coordinating Committee the Atlanta Comprehensive City Demonstration Program (CCDP) has now been reviewed by the Washington Interagency Committee, and, as indicated in our letter to Mayor Allen of January 14, 1969, the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Development annoimced approval of the Atlanta Program on January 8, 1969. | The following work items must be accomplished, however, before a grant | contract can be offered by HUD: | 1) Submission of your revised budget for program administration (See my letter dated December 26, 1968. 2) Submission of your statement of non-federal contribution showing eligibility for the supplemental grant of $7,175,000. As you know, all projects for which the CDA claims “base” must be submitted to HUD in accordance with CDA #7 and CDA #1, Page 16. Where they exist, you may wish to submit project descriptions or summaries thereof from existing applications 3) Submission of a letter from the area CAMPS committee stating that the committee has reviewed and approved the CCDP. I wnderstand this was accomplished on January 6 and a letter from the CAMPS committee so stating will be sufficient. bi ac  ems aE ‘A Re ea NS a ee Page 2 In addition to the foregoing, I want to share with you the following comments and recommendations «oneerning various components of your plan based on the Washington review and on your conversations on January 14 with Don Dodge, Area Desk Officer, and Tom Williams, Atlante Coordinator: Resident Involvement - I unders\and that you discussed with Messrs. Dodge and Williams projects RE-O02N ari RE-OO3N as well as projects CD -0011N and CD-0O12N, all of which are to be operated by the Atlanta Youth Council. It would be helpful if you would supplement the existing project descript- ions with a short statement desc:\ibing the Atlanta Youth gowct) and indicating the relationship among these four projects. % - With regard to Projec\: EM-O14N which provides funds for job-training activities, there wil need to be further consideration of that pert of the project which contemplates training for sewing machine eperators since it appears the Depa tment of Lebor has further questions concerning the proposal. Mr. Willisias will be in touch with you in the near future to arrange a meeting wit) appropriate members of your staff end the state and federal agencies concerned. Economic Development - One of the concerns noted during the Washington review was that there appeared to be n« link between the Development Corporation (EC-001N) and the Outreach Project (EC-O03C). However, I understand that the same sponsor is contemplated for EC-003C and for the Single-Purpose Develepment Corporation (EC-005N) and that both projects will work with the financial pool to be created wnder BC-001. I also understand that you are submitting an application for funding to the Economic Development Administration and that some changes in project descriptions and budgets may be necessitated depending on the result of this application. Education - As indicated during your meeting with the Interagency Coordinating Committee, a statement clarifying the city’s maintenance of effort in this component should be submitted in the near future. It would also be advisable to have letters from the Atlanta Board of Education and the State Department of Education indicating review and concurrence in your plan. I would also like t» reiterate the concern previeusly expressed to you by the RICC that the programs proposed in this component do not appear to provide the means to make the educational system more responsive to the felt needs and expressed views of residents. This should be further considered by the CDA for the purpose of design- ing remedial proposals. With regard to Project ED-030N, I understand this is for the purpose of assisting the CDA to evaluate new educational programs to be implemented under the Model Cities plan and is not for evaluation of existing programs. ei li ae ll a in ol Sa ac i i ee i he ? Page 3 Health - I understand that a non-profit corporation, entitled the Model Neighborhood Better Health Corporation has recently been established composed of elected resident representatives, representatives of the four local medical and dental societies and three social service s,zencies which will be responsible for operating the major programs in this component. <A short statement describing the corporation and its relationship to the local professional agencies would be helpful,. I would also suggest that the corporation, if it is to be the sponsoring agency for the proposed health facility, should be advised to begin discussion with the Atlanta FHA Insuring Office at the earliest possible moment. Transportation - I understand that project TR-O17N, entitled, Public Facilities Impact Evaluation will in fact be a consultant study for the i purpose of developing specific transportation recommendaticns and is not an evaluation of first year activities in this component. Housing - With regard to project HR-OO5N, Housing Center, I understand that Messrs. Dodge and Williams discussed with you the advisability of seeking an appropriate sponsor in lieu of CDA operation of the project and that you are now in the process of exploring this matter. scene a. et dat un I would urge your immediate attention to those items 1/sted above which must be completed to enable us to move toward tendering of the grant agreement. Mr. Williams will, of course, be available for discussion should you have any questions on these matters. Sincerely yours, é c oxy) e ; fae AON Gee DO Earl H. Metzger, Jr. ! Assistant Regional Administrator for Model Cities  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 49 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/bef9befc4ff21ec6eab06afddc38a2b2.pdf 2a62940b83e03e64c68fd6cce749759f Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. COMMENTS ON MODEL CITIES LAND USE PLAN I. Observations which may be of assistance. A. ALL NEIGHBORHOOD AREAS - GENERAL COMMENTS 1. The overall residential densities have been measured anticipating development slightly above average for the density range indicated, i.e., if range is 5 - 10, the 8 unit per acre has been used. This plan can be expected to accommodate the existing resident popJlation. There have been some minor adjustments that will improve the situation. However, care must be taken not to arbitrarily change the present proposed density ranges unless compensations are made in other locations. This means no single family areas should be inserted where high density is now proposed unless densities are increased in another location. An alternative to this is to abandon the no-displacement goal. 2. Some deficiencies still exist in park areas and to overcome this and provide space, obviously densities will have to be increased somewhere also. B. MECHANICSVILLE 1. In the area bounded by the Expressway, Bass StreE;_t, Formwalt, Dodd and Pryor Streets, the plan proposes high density and mixed colillilercial in the next five years; however, redevelopment is not proposed until after 1974 and the present use is mostly single family and vacant. It will be difficult to accomplish the proposed land use in the proposed time period without a program of treatment. �7 - 22. In th e area bounded by th e South and West Expressway, Bas s and Formwalt Stree ts, the pl an proposes l arge are as of commer ci a l and high density resid enti al; however, no treatment is called for prior to 1974 and the present use is now equally div:i.ded be t ween vac ant, commercial and single f amily residences. C. I SUMMERHILL 1. Betwe en the Expressway and Fulton - Glenwood Streets, the plan calls for high de nsity resid ential; however , the treatmeHL. plan only calls for activity after 1974 and the present use is mostly vacant, duplexes and single family residences. This area also extends into the Grant Park neighborhood. Obviously some development of this type will occur, but not enough to achieve the expected population density. D. PEOPLESTmrn 1. It is reconmiended that the frontage along the west side of Washington between Atlanta and Ridge Streets be devoted exclusively to high density residential which is in accord with the present uses there. 2. In the block between Washington and Crew Streets from Weyman to Little Streets, high density residential is called for; however, the treatment plan calls for action aft_:_r 1974 and present use is primarily single family with some apartments maki ng it medium density over all. E. GRANT PARK 1. To compensat e f or t he t wo pr oposed block p arks r edes i gnated for school purposes , t he r ecre ati on pl ann er s propos e that one-half of the block bounded by Ormond, Grant, Atlanta and Hill Street be made a block park. The majority of ·t he structures in this block are substandard and slated for clearance in the period 1971 - 73 . �- 32. The block bounded by Hill Street , Sou t h Avenue , Primr ose and Little Streets is propos ed for commercial use. There appears to be come doubt that the topo of this block is suitable for any kind of unified connnercial development. 3. In the blocks bounded by Grant, Sydney, Orleans Streets and Cherokee Avenue, high density residential is proposed. How~ ever, present use is perdominate ly single f amily and the proposed I treatment is rehabilit a tion in the period 1971-1973. 4. I In the area between the Expressway, Grant, Sydney Streets and Park Avenue, the proposed use is high density residenti ~l. This area is for rehabilitation in 1970 and the present use is primarily single family. To achieve the indicated high density, a significant number of high rise units must be built. 5. The area just west of Grant Park Elementary School is proposed for high density residential. However, no redevelopment is proposed prior to 1974 and the present use is mostly single family or vacant. II. Errors of Fact A. MECHANICSVILLE 1. The plan calls for a government center use in the triangle between the railroad, the Expressway and the Pryor Street School. Since most program administration is to be accomplished at two other locations, there appears to be no justification for this center area. It is recommended that this part icu lar area be used for medium density residential. �[ -4 ~ B. GRANT PARK 1. The Boys' Club is located in the block bounded by Killian, Marion, Burn and Eloise Streets. In the Model Cities pl an this has been indicated as single family use which is a mistake and should be changed. 2. The recreation planners have indicated that the area south of Jerome Jones School designated for park purposes · should be changed to school use. ~- The industrial use existing at the corner of Boulevard and the railroad has been omitted and single family residential use substituted. 4. This should be changed to industrial use, On the east side of Hill Avenue between Grady and the railroad medium density residential is indicated. This is presently_ good single family residential use at low density and no clearance has been proposed. This area should be indicated as low density residential. 5. The recreation planners have indicat~d that the block park to the east of Slaton School should be used instead for school expansion purposes. 6, The block of the proposed educational park bounded by Hill, Primrose Streets, Georgia Avenue and Cherokee Place is .in reality intended for another use, that of some sort of private welfare type activity, either profit or non-profit, and should be indicated as such and not as an educational use. �-5C. Sill1MERHILL 1. An expansion of the small commer cial area at the southeast corner of Atlanta and Capitol is proposed for expansion north and west . The condition of the major structures in the northwest portion is fairly good and there is no progr am of treatment slated prior to 1974. This would indicate that such a change in use is not indicated nor does there · appear to be a need for additional commercial use when there are other commercial areas 11earby. III. Conflicts With Adopted Plans and Policies A. SUMMERHILL 1. This item concerns the park proposed in the blocks bounded by Georgia, Capitol, Little and Crew Streets. The entire Summerhill area needs two twelve acre or more neighborhood parks. The recreational facility proposed at Hoke Smith is not a neighborhood type development and will not serve the neighborhood needs north of Georgia Avenue. This facility south of t;eorgia Avenue is proposed to be a "central park" type facility and, therefore, would not s eem to meet the neighborhood recreational needs of the area south of Georgia Avenue. The northern block of the park is obviously more suitable for commercial devel opment in conjunction with the other blocks along Georgia Avenue immediately adjacent to the stadium. The other two blocks contain a number of substantial standard apartment buildings whose removal would be expensive and undesirable. �- 6~ The mai n just i f ic atio n th at appear s for this site is its proximity to the Capitol Ave nue School; however, the long r ange future of this school ~s questionable in terms 0£ its site and its location relative to the existing and proposed popul a tion to be s e rved. A better p ark location would be nex t to the proposed K,1-3 school mentioned e arlier especially if the Capitol Avenue School could also be relocated to this site. The area adj ac ent to the new school site is proposed for clearance in the period - 1971-1973 - while no treatment is proposed for the pa rk site adjacent to the present school until after the 1974 time period with the exception of the block i mmediately adjacent to Georgi~ Avenue. 2. The plan calls for a school site in the two blocks bounded by Martin, Little, Ami and Kenneth Streets. The school planners reveal this is only to be a K, 1-3 school requiring only three acres at maximum; therefore, w~thout further justifica tion, for example, a new gr ammar school to replace Capitol Avenue, this site appears to be excessively large. 3. In considering the land use aspects of the Hoke Smith Educational Park, it is our understanding tha t the Parks Department is highly reluctant to buy and develop any large recr eational facilities directly abutting a high school as it feels the fac i lity will be monopoli zed by the school to the de tr i ment of t he re st of the connnuni ty . The School Boar d , on t he ot her hand, believes that the Parks Department shoul d acqui r e the portions of the educational park allocated f or r ecreational use . �- 7The resolution of this pr obl em is no t in the province of the land use pl anners; however, the gr aphic expression of proposed l and use should show a solution tha t either indicates all educ a tiona l facility reduced in size to what the School Board would acquire or a recreation use area that is situated to the satisfaction of the Parks Department. One glinnner of hope is that the school pl anners used $80,000 per acre as an acquisition cost; however, the land is slated for clearance in ~970 and hopefully the l and could be sold to the School Board at cleared land prices of about $20,000 - $30,000 an acre. B. PEOPLESTOWN 1. Neither the recreation planners nor the city wide Land Use Plan and Parks Plan call for a block park to be located at the end of Linam Street just south of Vanira Avenue. C. PITTSBURGH 1. In this area, there appears to be only one major comment to be made. This is that in comparison with the city wide Land Use Plan which propos es a uniform medium density throughout the neighborhood, the Model Cities proposal indicates two high density areas .•• one at the northwest, the other at the southeast. The high density area at the southeast can be adequately served by the existing Pittman Park; however, the high density area to the northwest will provide a large concentration of people who will not be conveniently served by an adequate recreation facility. �- 8D. MECHANICSVILLE 1. All pl a ns call for a community facility .to be loc a ted in the block just east of Dunb ar School, and it is my understanding th a t social progr ams are expected to be administered from here; howeve r, the Land Use Pl an does not indic a te a space for this facility. 2. II Since one block of land tha t was to be used for park purposes in our city wide Land Use Plan has been pre- empted by the school bo ard for a second school in the area accor<l ing to the Model Cities Land Use Plan, it will be necest ary to add the block now occupied by the Atlanta Transit System to the park proposed in the Model Cities plan in order to get adequate space to serve this large population concentration. " ' . - � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Le COMMENTS ON MODEL CITIES LAND USE PLAN Observations which may be of assistance. A. ALL NEIGHBORHOOD AREAS = GENERAL COMMENTS Lis The overall residential densities have been measured anticipating development slightly above average for the density range © indicated, i.e., if range is 5 = 10, the 8 unit per acre has been used. This plan can be expected to accommodate ~ the existing resident popilation. There have been some minor adjustments that will improve the situation. However, care must be taken not to arbitrarily henge the present proposed density ranges unless compensations are made in other locations. This means no single family areas should be inserted where high density is now proposed unless densities are increased in another location. An alternative to this is to abandon the no-displacement goal. - Some deficiencies still exist in park areas and to overcome this and provide space, obviously densities will have to be increased somewhere also. B. MECHANICSVILLE 1. In the area bounded by the Expressway, Bass Street, Formwalt, Dodd and Pryor Streets, the plan proposes high density and mixed commercial in the next five years; however, redevelopment is not proposed until after 1974 and the present use is mostly single family and vacant. It will be difficult to accomplish the proposed land use in the proposed time period without a program of treatment. woe In the area bounded by the South and West Expressway, Bass and Formwalt Streets, the plan proposes large areas of commercial and high density residential; however, no treate ment is called for prior to 1974 and the present use is now equally divided between vacant, commercial and single family residences. C. SUMMERHILL lL; Between the Expressway and Fulton - Glenwood Streets, the plan calls for high density residential; however, the treatment. plan only calls for activity after 1974 and the present use is mostly vacant, duplexes and single family residences. This area also extends into the Grant Park neighborhood. Obviously some development of this type will occur, but not enough to achieve the expected population density. D. PEOPLESTOWN 1. It is recommended that the frontage along the west side of Washington between Atlanta and Ridge Streets be devoted exclusively to high density residential which is in accord with the present uses there. In the block between Washington and Crew Streets from Weyman to Little Streets, high density residential is called for; however, the treatment plan calls for action after 1974 and present use is primarily single family with some apartments making it medium density overall. E. GRANT PARK ls To compensate for the two proposed block parks redesignated for school purposes, the recreation planners propose that one-half of the block bounded by Ormond, Grant, Atlanta and Hill Street be madea block park. The majority of the structures in this block are substandard and slated for clearance in the period 1971-73. i The block bounded by Hill Street, South Avenue, Primrose ani Little Streets is proposed for commercial use. There appears to be come doubt that the topo of this block is suitable for any kind of unified commercial development. In the blocks bounded by Grant, Sydney, Orleans Streets and Cherokee Avenue, high density residential is proposed. Howe ever, present use is perdominately single family and the proposed treatment is rehabilitation in the period 1971-1973. In the area between the Expressway, Grant, Sydney Streets and Park Avenue, the proposed use is high density residential. This area is for rehabilitation in 1970 and the present use is primarily single family. To achieve the indicated high density, a significant number of high rise units must be built. The area just west of Grant Park Elementary School is proposed for high density residential. However, no redevelopment is proposed prior to 1974 and the present use is mostly single family or vacant. II. Errors of Fact A. MECHANICSVILLE ds The plan calls for a government center use in the triangle between the railroad, the Expressway and the Pryor Street School. Since most program administration is to be accomplished at two other locations, there appears to be no justification for this center area. It is recommended that this particular area be used for medium density residential. GRANT PARK Ls The Boys' Club is located in the block bounded by Killian, Marion, Burn and Eloise Streets. In the Model Cities plan this has been indicated as single family use which is a mistake and should be changed. The recreation planners have indicated that the area south of Jerome Jones School designated for park purposes should be changed to school use. The industrial use existing at the corner of Boulevard and the railroad has been omitted and single family residential use substituted. This should be changed to industrial use, On the east side of Hill Avenue between Grady and the railroad medium density residential is indicated. This is presently good single family residential use at low density and no clearance has been proposed. This area should be indicated as low density residential. The recreation planners have indicated that the block park to the east of Slaton School should be used instead for school expansion purposes. The block of the proposed educational park bounded by Hill, Primrose Streets, Georgia Avenue and Cherokee Place is in reality intended for another use, that of some sort of private welfare type activity, either profit ox homepeort es and should be indicated as such and not as an educational use. C. SUMMERHILL Ls An expansion of the small commercial area at the southeast corner of Atlanta and Capitol is proposed for expansion north and west. The condition of the major structures in the northwest portion is fairly good and iiere ds no program of treatment slated prior to 1974. This would indicate that such a change in use is not indicated nor does there: appear to be a need for additional commercial use when there are other commercial areas nearby. III. Conflicts With Adopted Plans and Policies A. SUMMERHILL l. This item concerns the park proposed in the blocks bounded by Georgia, Capitol, Little and Crew Streets. The entire Summerhill area needs two twelve acre or more neighborhood parks. The recreational facility proposed at Hoke Smith is not a neighborhood type development and will not serve the neighborhood needs north of Georgia Avenue. This facility south of Georgia Avenue is proposed to be a "central park" type facility and, therefore, would not seem to meet the neighborhood recreational needs of the area south of Georgia Avenue, The northern block of the park is obviously more suit- able for commercial development in conjunction with the other blocks along Georgia Avenue immediately adjacent to the stadium. The other two blocks contain a number of substantial standard apartment buildings whose removal would be expensive and undesirable. «6s The main justification that appears for this site is its proximity to the Capitol Avenue School; however, the long range future of this school is questionable in terms of its site and its location relative to the existing and proposed population to be served. A better park location would be next to the proposed K,1-3 school mentioned earlier especially if the Capitol Avenue School could also be relocated to this site. The area adjacent to the new school site is proposed for clearance in the period - 1971-1973 - while no treatment is proposed for the park site adjacent to the present school until after the 1974 time period with the exception of the block immediately adjacent to Georgia Avenue, The plan calls for a school site in the two blocks bounded by Martin, Little, Ami and Kenneth Streets. The school planners reveal this is only to be a K, 1-3 school requiring only three acres at maximum; therefore, without further justification, for example, a new grammar school to replace Capitol Avenue, this site appears to be excessively large. In considering the land use aspects of the Hoke Smith Educa- tional Park, it is our understanding that the Parks Department is highly reluctant to buy and develop any large recreational facilities directly abutting a high school as iv feels the facility will be monopolized by the school to the detriment of the rest of the community. The School Board, on the other hand, believes that the Parks Department should acquire the portions of the educational park allocated for recreational use. 1. 1. -7- The resolution of this problem is not in the province of the land use planners; however, the graphic expression of proposed land use should show a solution that either indicates all educational facility reduced in size to what the School Board would acquire or a recreation use area that is situated to the satisfaction of the Parks Department. One glimmer of hope is that the school planners used. $80,000 per acre as an acquisition cost; however, the land is slated for clearance in 1970 and hopefully the land could be sold to the School Board at cleared land prices of about $20,000 - $30,000 an acre. PEOPLES TOWN Neither the recreation planners nor the city wide Land Use ~ Plan and Parks Plan call for a block park to be located at the end of Linam Street just south of Vanira Avenue, PITTS BURGH In this area, there appears to be only one major comment to be made. This is that in comparison with the city wide Land Use Plan which proposes a uniform medium density throughout the nétenbornded: the Model Cities proposal indicates two high density areas...one at the northwest, the other at the southeast. The high density area at the southeast can be adequately served by the extatine Pittman Park; however, the high density area to the northwest will provide a large concentration of people who will not be conveniently served by an adequate recreation facility. =f D. MECHANICSVILLE 1. All plans call for a community facility to be located in the block just east of Dunbar School, and it is my under- standing that social programs are expected to be administered from here; however, the Land Use Plan does not indicate a space for this facility. 2. Since one block of land that was to be used for park purposes in our city wide Land Use Plan has been pre-empted by the school board for a second school in the area accord- ; ing to the Model Cities Land Use Plan, it will be necessary to add the block now occupied by the Atlanta Transit System to the park proposed in the Model Cities plan in order to get adequate space to serve this large population concentration.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 48 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/aa6093c0d6bca9211b5b48b3e742d030.pdf de1be0f4a00d3e5b3bd6915d240d1aef Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. OF' A.TLP~ T~ CITY H ALL A TLAN TA, GA, 30303 Tel . 522·4463 Area Code 404 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNI N G COLLI E R B. GL A DI N, Dir ec tor January 20, 1969 Mr. Johnny Johnson, Director Model Cities Program 673 ·Capitol Avenue, S. W. Atlanta, Georgia Dear Johnny: As you remember the Planning Staff reviewed the proposed Land Use Plan late last November and forwarded their comments discussed them with you and give you a copy of them. I realize impossible to make any changes at that time while the weight of your final report and application was on you. Model Cities to me. I it was nex t to preparing Now that the application has been approved and the program funded, th is would be a good time to continue the planning process through a closer look in order that these 9uesti0ns may be resolved. The original comments have been reviewed again and divided into three categories. The first are observations which we think would be helpful to you but involve no errors of fact nor conflict with plans or policies of the city. The second category involves errors of fact, that is where no difference of opinion exists, somebody just put the wrong color on the map. The third group contains the most serious of these comments, these refer to apparent conflicts between Model City plans as we know them a rid officially adopted plans and policies of the city. I want to take every opportunity th is year to improve our working relationship a nd insure that all the plans and policies that result will facilita te the implementation of the Model Ne ighborhood and are consistent with the overal I goals and plans of the c ity . I am sure you feel the same way . Si ncerely , ~ I B. Co l ie r G la d in Pla nni ng Dire ctor C BG/jp � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document i ok ‘ies Bie = ‘tot, — ae) CITY HALL ATLANTA, GA. 30303 Tel, 522-4463 Area Code 404 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING COLLIER B. GLADIN, Director January 20, 1969 Mr. Johnny Johnson, Director Model Cities Program 673:Capitol Avenue, S. W. Atlanta, Georgia Dear Johnny: As you remember the Planning Staff reviewed the proposed Model Cities Land Use Plan late last November and forwarded their comments to me. | discussed them with you and give you a copy of them. | realize it was next to impossible to make any changes at that time while the weight of preparing your final report and application was on you. Now that the application has been approved and the program funded, this would be a good time to continue the planning process through a closer look in order that these questions may be resolved. The original comments have been reviewed again and divided into three categories. The first are observations which we think would be helpful to you but involve no errors of fact nor conflict with plans or policies of the city. The second category involves errors of fact, that is where no difference of opinion exists, somebody just put the wrong color on the map. The third group contains the most serious of these comments, these refer to apparent conflicts between Model City plans as we know them and officially adopted plans and policies of the city. | want to take every opportunity this year to improve our working relationship and insure that all the plans and policies that result will facilitate the implementation of the Model Neighborhood and are consistent with the overall goals and plans of the city. | am sure you feel the same way. Sincerely, ¢ Collier B. Gladin Planning Director CBG/jp :  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 47 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/98167b1ea4afce670e3d1eccb0b670bd.pdf 35cb5e42e181e7e71eafb1644bf81ae5 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. CITY OF ATLANTA TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Atla nta , Georg ia 30303 January 27, 1969 KA RL A . BE VIN S Traffi c E ng i n ee r Mr. Johnny C. Johnson, Director Model Cities Program 673 Capitol Avenue, S. W. Atlanta, Georgia 30315 Dear Mr. Johnson: In answer to your memorandum of January 16, 1969, and confirming our conversation with you regarding the projects listed in the Atlanta Model Cities Program Application to HUD for the year 1969, we have the following report. nue · primarily to a 2.172 per cent rate increase on street lighting services which was effective as of December 1968 and which was not anticipated in September of 1968 when our budget request was prepared, there are no funds in our 1969 appropriation accounts to cover your proposed upgrading of street lighting in the Model Cities Area. A sum of $21,000 will be required to cover the cost of the leased street lighting that is proposed in your program. We whole heartedly agree that the street light upgrading program which you propose is necessary as we ll as desirable and we agree that it is ·· particularly desirable that this wor k be completed dur i ng the year .1969. Our a s s i s t ant traffic engineer who handles street lighting will be able to do the neces s ary pl anning and engineering work required to prepare the r eso l utions for cons ider a tion by the Mayor and Boa rd of Aldermen during the time per i od th a t you set forth . We would anticipate complet i-ng our por tion of th i s work with i n three t o f ive month s . Each uni t of the wor k would be passed on to the Geor gia Power Company as soon a s it was completed by us and app r oved by the Board of Aldermen. This would permit the Geor gia Powe r Company t o c omp let e their engineering and installation work at t he ear l ie st poss i ble date . The Georgia Power Company will comp l et e their wor k on proj ects of thi s t ype ten t o fifteen weeks after receiving authorization by the Mayor and Board o f Aldermen. With the positive knowledge that the money wil l be avai l able to finance this project, we could have the first groups o f street lights ready for consideration by the Board of Aldermen at the February 3, 1969, meeting and have a similar group ready at each subsequent meeting, thereby completing our part of this work by May or June of 1969. The Georgia Power Company will then have the months of July, August and September and possibly October in which to complete the projects that were still in their hands when we complete our part of the work in May or June. �= 2 = Mr. Johnny C. Johnson January 27, 1969 If the sum of $21,000 is made available to us during the month of February, we see no reason why the street light upgrading projects should not be completed as requested during the calendar year 1969. If you desire additional information, we will be glad to try to supply it promptly. Sincerely, Karl A. Bevins KAB/fd cc: Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. Mr. R. Earl Landers Mr. Charlie Davis � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document CITY OF ATLANTA TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Atlanta, Georgia 30303 January 27, 1969 KARL A. BEVINS Traffic Engineer Mr. Johnny C. Johnson, Director Model Cities Program 673 Capitol Avenue, S. W. Atlanta, Georgia 30315 Dear Mr. Johnson: In answer to your memorandum of January 16, 1969, and confirming our conver- sation with you regarding the projects listed in the Atlanta Model Cities Program Application to HUD for the year 1969, we have the following report. Due primarily to a 2,172 per cent rate increase on street lighting services which was effective as of December 1968 and which was not anticipated in September of 1968 when our budget request was prepared, there are no funds in our 1969 appropriation accounts to cover your proposed upgrading of street lighting in the Model Cities Area. A sum of $21,000 will be required to cover the cost of the leased street lighting that is proposed in your program. We whole heartedly agree that the street light upgrading program which you propose is necessary as well as desirable and we agree that it is particularly desirable that this work be completed during the year 1969. Our assistant traffic engineer who handles street lighting will be able to do the necessary planning and engineering work required to prepare the resolutions for consideration by the Mayor and Board of Aldermen during the time period that you set forth. We would anticipate completing our portion of this work within three to five months. Each unit of the work would be passed on to the Georgia Power Company as soon as it was completed by us and approved by the Board of Aldermen. This would permit the Georgia Power Company to complete their engineering and installation work at the earliest possible date. The Georgia Power Company will complete their work on projects of this type ten to fifteen weeks after receiving authorization by the Mayor and Board of Aldermen, With the positive knowledge that the money will be available to finance this project, we could have the first groups of street lights ready for consideration by the Board of Aldermen at the February 3, 1969, meeting and have a similar group ready at each subsequent meeting, thereby completing our part of this work by May or June of 1969. The Georgia Power Company will then have the months of July, August and September and possibly October in which to complete the projects that were still in their hands when we complete our part of the work in May or June. Mr. Johnny C. Johnson January 27, 1969 If the sum of $21,000 is made available to us during the month of February, we see no reason why the street light upgrading projects should not be completed as requested during the calendar year 1969. If you desire additional information, we will be glad to try to supply it promptly. Sincerely, Karl A. Bevins KAB/fd ec: Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. Mr. R. Earl Landers Mr. Charlie Davis  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 46 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/dc782208728de3fe4b0ce80623f7f1bb.pdf 0611e53d4fbb76cfc0636b0161c9ede2 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. M. INU TES GRA N T REVIEW BOARD DE C EMBER 31, 1968 The City of Atlanta Grant Review Board met in the office of the Director of Governme ntal Liaison at 9:30 a. 1n. on D e cember 31, 1968, to review the Atlanta Model Cities Program a pplication to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for Supple mental Funds. In attendance were: Dan Sweat, Director of Governmental Liaison, Chairman, Grant Revi ew Boar d Collier Gladin, Plann ing Director, Member, Grant Revil!W Board George Berry, Deput y Comptroller, M ember, Grant Review Board Johnny Johnson, Director of Model Cities Georg e Aldridge, Cit y Plann.er Carl Paul, Deputy Dir e ctor of Personne l Jay Fountain, Senio r Accountant The Grant Review Board d iscussed with Mr. Johnson s everal major points of concern, prima rily proc ed u res for approval by r esponsibl e City d epartments and agencies; adminis tr ative organization; and personnel requirements. In view of the complexities of the Model Cities Pr o gram and the need for full understanding by a ll responsible City officials, the following concensus of the Grant Review Board membership i s hereby presented: The Model Cities Program as establishe d by the President anc:f Congress of the United States is perhaps the most comprehensive and optimistic g.r ant-in-aid program ever offer ed 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 a utho rity and influence in demonstrating bold new technique s 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 t heir daily lives. �Page Two And i t promotes coo rdination a m ong local, state and n ati onal agencies and departments of the limite d res ources which are available . The succe s s ful planning and exe cution of a J\1odel Cities . Program c a n be a valuable e x perience for any city in its search for orderl y and time ly solutions to its multitud e of urban problems. Atlant a's City Demons tration Agency ha s attempted to meet the challenge and intent of th.e Mod e l Cities l e gi s lation . Citizens of all six n e ighborhood areas encompassed by Atlanta's Modd Cities Program were active ly involved in organi z ing and plannin g for Mod e l Ci~ies more than a year i n advance of t h e beginning of the City' s formal planning stage. Local, sta t e a nd fe d e r a l publi c age ncies a nd nume r o u s private g roups p a rticipate d in th e pr e p aration of the r e quire d pl a nni n g g r a nt applic a tion. The Mayor and Boa rd of Alder men endors e d and suppo r t e d the planning effort. T h e M od e l Cities p l anning s t aff worked l ong and h ar d t o prep a r e the d ocum ent s necessary for s u ccessful f u nding of th e fi.rst year pro gram . The final do c u ments d e t ai l a b old a nd innovative pla n of attack o n the m ajo r p roblem areas i n the M o de l Cities n e i g hbo r h ood . T h e ~.fo d el Cities staff h a s made an adm i rabl e a t temp t to live u p to t h e conce2t o f t he M od e l Cities pr o gram. T o a great extent they have m e t b oth t h e needs and wishes of the citizens o f the area and t h e requi reme nts o f planning a nd a dmi nistrati on o f the City and federal governme nts . The Mode1 Cities Program al so places o n ail City departments and agencies the requirement for cooperation, coordination and approval of pro gram components. There are indications that thi s requir ement h as not b e en met . Where it has not done so, each department and agency is obliga ted to ·review and pass on the specific components of th e 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 exe.rcise its responsibility for overall planning of the city by reviewing the Mod e l Cities plan and making �Page Three the determination a s t o the compatibility of the Model Ci.t ie s Program with overall city plans . The Finance Committe e should determine the financia l fea s i bility of the program and the capa bility of the City to meet the require m e nts placed upon it by the progr am . The full Board of Al de rmen should carefully consider the priorities inv olved in the Model Cities e x ecution, its impact c;n the ar ea se r v e d and the entire . city as _well. The Grant Review Board believes. these approvals should b e given before Aldermanic sanction is granted. We feel that if the p r ov1 s 10ns of the Model Cities applic ation ar e und e rstood and accepte d b e fo r e final a pprova l is gr ant e d a muc h stro n ge r prog r a m V{ill result. It should be und e r sto o d that this is not inte nde d a s critici sm of th e plann ing gra n t document o r the w ork o f t he M o d e l C i ties s t a ff, b ut is an effort to g a in f ull unders t a nding a n d s u pport o f the s t r _ongest p rogr a m in th e b es t inte r es t o f a ll citizen s o f Atl anta. It i s therefore recommended tha t the Mayor a n d Board of Alde rmen r e qui r e writt en a c cepta n ce or denial of ea ch com ponent of the M o de l Citie s pl an by the d epartments and age ncies r e sp ons ib l e fo r the e x ecu t i on of each c o mponent b ~fore final approva l o f t h e gra n t a pplicat i o n i s g i ven. Ctairma n DS:fy ?,).· ~AC~ ~ 1,\\ G e o rge '.~err , M emb e~ ~JSz~ C)'J&,~~ Collier G l adin, Member r tJ: ~ &.,,__'\A.-v-tt-ce E. H. Underwood, Member • • . - -· � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document a.) cl) oe ee a ee ee ee 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 F 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. i Sl el il  OE erg etter) rere cesar eres) meron = agai 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. Toa 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 cn the area served and the entire. city as well. The Grant Review Board believes these approvals should be given Betore 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 DS :fy _ oh On ~ George’ Boda, Member 0S HLL a Collier Gladin, Member = KJ. x drtasael E. H. Underwood, Member  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 45 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/5afafce6a71b8bbd74931d985258770c.pdf 2b3923d7982f17e1bb0216034c380cbb Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. fk-o/1 ~1'?  £. MINUTES GRANT REVIEW BOARD DECEMBER 31, 1968 (2..., //01 The City of Atlanta Grant R e view Board met in the office of the Director of Gov e rnmental Liai s on at 9: 30 a. m. on D e c e mber 31, 1968, to r e view the . Atlanta Mode l Cities Progr a m appl ication to the U. S. Department of Hous ing and Urban Development for Supplemental Funds. In attendance were: Dan S w eat, Director of Governmental Liaison, Chairman, Grant Review Board Collie r Gladin , Planning Di re ctor, Membe r, Grant R e vie w Board Georg e Berry, Deputy Comptroller, Member, Grant Review Board Johnny Johnson, Director of Mod e l Cities George Aldridge, City· Planner Carl Paul, D e puty Director of Personne l J a y Founta in, S e nio r A c co unt a nt The Grant Review Board discussed with Mr. Johnson several major points of conce r n , primarily proc e dure s for approval by r e sponsible City d e partme nts and a ge nci es ; a d m inistra tive or ganiza tion ; a nd p e rsonn e l r e quir e m e nt s . In view of th e complexities o f the M odel Cities P ro g r am a nd the n eed for f ull understanding by all responsible City officials, the following concensus o f the Grant Revi e w Board m e mbership is her e by presented: The M od e l Ci ti E:s Pr o gram as es t a bli s h e d by the Pr es ident ancf Con g r ess o f the United S t a t es i s perh a p s the m o s t compreh ens ive a n d o pti m i s ti c g r ant - i n-aid pr o g ram eve r offered to A me ri ca ' s cities . The conce pt a n d intent of the M odel Citie s Pro gram is g ood. It provide s fo r th e l egally r espons ible l ocal g ove r ning a uthority t o exer ci se it s auth o r ity and in fluence in demonstrating b ol d new t echniques o f u rban p l anni ng and d evelopment . It provides max i m u m opp ort unity for r eal involvement and parti cip ation by citi zens of ne i ghborhoods i n t h e plann i ng a nd exec ution of p r ograms whi ch effect the i r 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 ord e rly and timely solutions to its multitude of urban proble1ns. Atlanta's City Demonstration Agency has attempted to meet the challenge and intent o { +he 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 h ~ rd 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 indic·ations 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 e xe cution responsibility to that department. Each committee of th e Board of Aldermen should review and approve/disapprove each program component w hich 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 re_viewing the Model Cities plan and making �_Page Three the determination as to th e compatibility of the Model Ci:ties 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 progr am. The full Board of Aldermen should carefully consider the priorities involved in the Model Cities exe cution, its impact on the area served and the el-- ~-~re city as well. The Grant Review Board believes these approvals should be given before Aldermanic sanction is granted. We feel that if the prov1s10ns of the Model Cities application are understood and accepted before final approval is granted a much stronger pro gram ¥{ill result. It should be understood that this is not intended as criticis1n of the planning grant docume nt or the work of the Model Cities staff, but is an effort to gain full understanding and support of the strongest prog ram in the b es t interest of all citiz ens of Atlanta. It is therefore recommended that the Mayor and Board of Aldermen require written acc e ptance or denial of each component of the :Model Cities plan by the departments and agen cies res ponsibl e for the exe cution of each comp onent befor e final approval of the grant applica tion is given. 1;L D an Sweat Chairman t, DS:fy ~ - (\ vi~,\( ~(\ .:}_\ .~\ Georg e '.i 3err_y, Membe ~ - 143.215.248.55 ~J~~ ~~ <~ ~ Collier Gl a din, M e mber r 1J. Llv,143.215.248.55 E. H. Underwood, Memb e r · � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 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, Dinestor 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. Toa 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 er‘‘re city as well, 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, ly” Dan Sweat Chairman ( 2 DS:fy Nes AC x BV George’ Berry, Member ry ———- O09.5 SOUS Collier Gladin, Member ils ed ieee E. H. Underwood, Member  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 44 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/c3ad498f0946b0cdcebd407f938fda49.pdf 94a9a87dcd51bb81445e9c9ef6da790d Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Description Project Sanitation Services Addition of four crews, one front-end loader, o n e weed cutter, one garbage truck and one open body truck and increase starting salaries for waste collectors to $82.00 per week. Sewer System Study Make application for federal grant from Department of Hou sing and Urban Development for report on combined sewer s y stem problem. Kak e available staff and equipment necessary to comp lete report of feasible remedy for this problem. NDP Clearance Area Sewers and NDP Rehabilitation Are a Re construct 1,620 feet of substandard sewer lines in the NDP clearance area a nd rehabilit a t i on a r ea . Total Cost $171 , 0 00 t. 459 , 000* .. Of this tot a l amount $ 219, 0 00 i s to be in city funds with the remaining $240,000 to c ome from a federal grant from the Departmen t o f Ho u sing a n d Urban Development. 1. The above amount s h ave been a p pro priated in o~r 1969 Budget. 2. The necessary staff and equipment are availabl e within the department to complete this work during the 1969 fiscal year. 3. The application necessary for the grant from the Department of Hous i ng and Urban Development will be completed and all related work performed by our staff. � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Project Description Total Cost Sanitation Services Sewer System Study NDP Clearance Area Sewers and NDP Rehabilitation Area Addition of four crews, one front-end $171,000 + loader, one weed cutter, one garbage truck and one open body truck and increase starting salaries for waste collectors to $82.00 per week. Make application for federal grant from 459 ,000* Department of Housing and Urban Development for report on combined sewer system pro- blem. Make available staff and equipment necessary to complete report of feasible remedy for this problem. d Reconstruct 1,620 feet of substandard sewer { 221,000 ; lines in the NDP clearance area and rehabili- Rete G00 tation area. ~ * Of this total amount $219,000 is to be in city funds with the remaining $240,000 to come from a federal grant from the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Development. 1. The above amounts have been appropriated in our 1969 Budget. 2. The necessary staff and equipment are available within the department to complete this work during the 1969 fiscal year. 3. The application necessary for the grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development will be completed and all related work performed by our staff. ae 2 tereah Be  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 43 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/cac74a5043e2cdc9a9b2e9b0a0f30ecb.pdf 6b10c9104607769bb25b9ab3a84e8510 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. , PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (Street Division) Project Description Total Cos t Pittsburgh Street Resurfa cing Complete resurfacing of Mayland Ave . Stewart to Hobson; Mayland Cir. - University to Mayland Ave.; Hope St. Stewart to Hobson; Hobson St. - Fletcher to Mayland Grant Park Street Resurfacing Complete resurfacing of Park Ave. - Berne St. to Glenwood Ave.; Sydney St., - Hill St. to Park Ave.; Augusta Ave. - Hi l l St. to Cherokee Ave.; Pavilion St. - Cherokee Ave. to Oakla nd Ave.; Berne St. - Bou levard to Park Ave .; Waldo St . - E. Confederate to Glenwood; Rosalia St. - Boulevard to Park Ave.; Gress Ave. - Home Ave. to Mead St.; Marion Ave . - Home Ave. to Ormwood . 60,000 Adair Park Stre et Re s urfaci n g Complete r e surfa cing o f Tift Ave. Pearce S t. t o She l t on Av e.; Bonnie Brae Ave. Allene t o Tif t St. ; El bert St . - Brookline to Allene Ave . 10 , 0 00 Mechanicsville-Pe o p le s t own/ Summerhill Street Resurfacing Comp l ete re sur facing o f streets to be determined a ft er l a nd us e plan is f i n alized. Greenfield-Ormon d t o Van ira, Martin-Ormond to Atlanta. 22,000 Continued $ 8,000 �Public Works Department (Street Division) Page 2 Sidewalk Construction In Peoplestown, add sidewalks to one side of Capitol-Milton to University; in Pittsburgh, add sidewalks to: one side of Hobson Arthur to Rockwell-N. side of UniversityMayland to ~ cDaniel; in Grant Park, add sidewalks to Grant St. - Grant. Cir,. to Atlanta Ave.; additional sidewalk construction as needed according to final land use plan. Extend Fulton St. West from Windsor to Glenn Completion of extension of Fulton St. west fro Windsor to Glenn $40,000 \ ¼a~ ~ .. 1. The above amounts have been appropriated in our 1969 Budget. 2. The n e cess a r y staff a nd equipment within t he depa rtment to ~omplete this work during the 19 69 f i s cal year are ava ilable. No te: Of this amount, $ 300,000 is c omi n g from the s tate and $15 0 , 000 is coming from the Ci t y. � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (Street Division) Project Description Total Cost Pittsburgh Street Resurfacing Grant Park Street Resurfacing Adair Park Street Resurfacing Mechanicsville-Peoplestown/ Summerhill Street Resurfacing Complete resurfacing of Mayland Ave. - Stewart to Hobson; Mayland Cir. - Uni- versity to Mayland Ave.; Hope St. - Stewart to Hobson; Hobson St. - Fletcher to Mayland Complete resurfacing of Park Ave. - Berne St. to Glenwood Ave.; Sydney St., - Hill St. to Park Ave.; Augusta Ave. - Hill St. to Cherokee Ave.; Pavilion St. - Cherokee Ave. to Oakland Ave.; Berne St. - Boulevard to Park Ave.; Waldo St. - E. Confederate to Glenwood; Rosalia St. - Boulevard to Park Ave.; Gress Ave. — Home Ave. to Mead St.; Marion Ave. - Home Ave. to Ormwood. Complete resurfacing of Tift Ave. Pearce St. to Shelton Ave.; Bonnie Brae Ave. - Allene to Tift St.; Elbert St. - Brook- line to Allene Ave. Complete resurfacing of streets to be determined after land use plan is finalized. Greenfield-Ormond to Vanira, Martin-Ormond to Atlanta. $ 8,000 60,000 10,000 22,000 / Continued Public Works Department (Street Division) Page 2 Sidewalk Construction In Peoplestown, add sidewalks to one side $40,000, of Capitol-Milton to University; in Pitts- burgh, add sidewalks to: one side of Hobson Arthur to Rockwell-N. side of University- Mayland to McDaniel; in Grant Park, add sidewalks to Grant St. - Grant Cir. to Atlanta Ave.; additional sidewalk construction as needed according to final land use plan. a vf Extend Fulton St. West from Completion of extension of Fulton St. west from 450, 000* ) Windsor to Glenn Windsor to Glenn pe 1. The above amounts have been appropriated in our 1969 Budget. 2. The necessary staff and equipment within the department to complete this work during the 1969 fiscal year are available. *Note: Of this amount, $300,000 is coming from the state and $150,000 is coming from the City.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 42 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/754712d28e1ca029fa0f9e3521297320.pdf 959274c2a4e372e16638fb5669e66ca9 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. ATLANTA HOUSING AUTHORITY - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - Description Project - - - --- ----- --- ---Neighborhood Deve lopment Progr~n Total Cost -------- - --------- The acquisition of 445 housing units; clearance of 48 ac res; th e rehabilitation of 647 housing units. Also relocation of 431 families and 15 businesses with the goal of having 911 additional MJ:-.JA families living in adequ atel y serviced, s tandard , a f f o rd able ho~sing ~nits by the end of 19 69. $14, 706,000* , - ------1. The above amounts have been appropriated in our 1969 Budget. 2. The ne ces sary staff and equipment are available within the department to complete this work during the 1969 fiscal year. 3. Our sta ff has the capability of filing application for the required fed er al grants and co~pleting t he work r e quired in implementing these d u ring 1969. Note : Of this a mo u nt, $4,076,000 is to be furnished by the city in th e form of non cash grant in aids with $298,000 coming from HUD in the form of relocation grants and $10 ,3 32 , 000 coming f r o m HUD in the form of NDP credit. � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ATLANTA HOUSING AUTHORITY Project . - Description Total Cost ——_ — _ ---— _ -—— —_— _ ——<-- - - — —_—— -—-<_—=— ee ee Neighborhood Development Program The acquisition of 445 housing units; $14,706,000*. clearance of 48 acres; the rehabilitation of 647 housing units. Also relocation of 431 families and 15 businesses with the goal of having 911 additional MNA families living in adequately serviced, standard, affordable housing units by the end of 1969. 1. The above amounts have been appropriated in our 1969 Budget. 2. The necessary staff and equipment are available within the department to complete this work during the 1969 fiscal year. , 3. Our staff has the capability of filing application for the required federal grants and completing the work reguired in implementing these during 1969. *Note: Of this amount, $4,076,000 is to be furnished by the city in the form of non cash grant in aids with $298,000 coming from HUD in the form of relocation grants and $10,332,000 coming from HUD in the form of NDP credit.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 41 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/6a6684e6ef470b02f47a743565e1312a.pdf d3e9daf7a92db55f7910fd758b10ab98 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. PARKS DEPARTMENT Description Project Develop Existing and New Park Land Daniel S t anton Neighborhood Park James L . Key Neighborh ood Park developed . Purchas e Vacant Land fo r Block Parks and Playlots L _! -- - - ~ 3 0,000 * 16, 000* Adair Ne ighborhood Park develop ed 16 , 0 00* Peoples t own Block Park d eve lop e d 36,000* Bl~ck Park and Playlot d e v e loped 12 , 000* Pittsbu r gh P lay lot p urchased; Adair Park P lay lot p urc ha s e d ; Mechanic svi lle P l a y l o t # 1 purc h a sed; Me cha nic svill e Play lot 2 p u rchas e d ; Summer h ill Play lot 2 purch ased ; P eoples.t own Blo ck Park pur cha s ed; Gr a nt Park P l ayl ot p u r chased. -- $ 10,000* Pittman Expanded Neighborhood Par k develope d. ,. - Tot al Cost 13 0, 000** $ 6 0 ,000 i n city funds, $24 , 000 in fund s from Department of Housing a n d Urban Developme n t , $36 , 0 00 in funds from U.S. Bureau of Rec reation. This amount is made of $22 ,000 in city fund s , $43 , 00 0 in supplemental funds and $65 ,000 i n grant funds from HUD . �Parks Department Continued Page 2 Re.creation Programs and Staff Park Recreation Programs Park Recreation Staff Continue existing recreation programs and staff. Add 10 full time recreation professionals. Develop prog rams not existing in park s and establish additional recreation facilities. Public Information Director Add one full time public information director. Recreation Advisory Council Add six citizen advisory councils on recreation and 12 workshops on all phases of recreation and c u ltu ral programming . $ 73 I 000 12 ,000 47,00 0 1. The above amounts have been appropriated in our 1969 Budget . 2. The necessary staff and equipment are available within the depart ment to complete this work during the 1969 fiscal y ear. 3. Pre s ent staff is adequ ate to ~ ake a p pl ic at ion s fo r the required f e deral g rants a nd t o i mp l eme nt the pro g rams a s d e s c ribe d ab o ve d u r i n g t he 1969 fiscal year. � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document PARKS DEPARTMENT Project Description Total Cost Develop Existing and New Daniel Stanton Neighborhood Park = 10;;000* Park Land James L. Key Neighborhood Park 30,000* developed. Pittman Expanded Neighborhood Park developed. 16,000* Adair Neighborhood Park developed 16,000* Peoplestown Block Park developed 36,000* Block Park and Playlot developed 12,000* Purchase Vacant Land for Pittsburgh Playlot purchased; 130, 000** Block Parks and Playlots Adair Park Playlot purchased; Mechanicsville Playlot #1 pur- chased; Mechanicsville Playlot #2 purchased; Summerhill Playlot #2 purchased: Peoplestown Block Park purchased; Grant Park Playlot purchased. * $60,000 in city funds, $24,000 Housing and Urban Development, Bureau of Recreation. *x This amount is made of $22,000 supplemental funds and $65,000 in funds from Department of $36,000 in funds from U.S. in city funds, $43,000 in in grant funds from HUD. Parks Department Continued Page 2 Recreation Programs and Staff Park Recreation Programs Park Recreation Staff Public Information Director Recreation Advisory Council Continue existing recreation programs $ 73,000 and staff. Add 10 full time recreation 12,000 professionals. Develop programs not 47,000 existing in parks and establish addi- tional recreation facilities. Add one full time public information (8,000). director. Add six citizen advisory councils 1,000 ) on recreation and 12 workshops on all phases of recreation and cultural pro- gramming. 1. The above amounts have been appropriated in our 1969 Budget. 2. The necessary staff and equipment are available within the department to complete this work dur- ing the 1969 fiscal year. 3. Present staff is adequate to make applications for the required federal grants and to implement the programs as described above during the 1969 fiscal year.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 40 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/bbec41b1e023ec8484f47c16168d80d6.pdf 27605e1df70c601ef50b0ae59504d20a Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT Project Description Street Light Improvement Total Cost $71,000 1. The above amounts have been appropriated in our 1969 Budget. 2. The necessary staff and equipment are available within the department to complete this work d ur ing the 1969 fiscal year. � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT Project Description Total Cost Street Light Improvement $71,000 1. The above amounts have been appropriated in our 1969 Budget. 2. The necessary staff and equipment are available within the department to complete this work during the 1969 fiscal year.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 39 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/3f50b5652a9bd9dc8e7af5406a744a48.pdf edfda99284d887f54c7cb58f90db9379 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. WATER DEPARTMENT Proje.c t NDP Clearance Area Water Mains and NDP Rehabilitation Area Water Mains Description Plug and install 6,640 feet of substandard water mains. Excavate, haul and install new mains in 26, 4 16 feet of substandard lines. Total Cost $131,000 121,000 1. The above amounts have been appropriated in our 1969 Budget. 2. The necessary staff and equipment are available withi n the department to complete this work during the 1969 fiscal year. � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document WATER DEPARTMENT Project : Description Total Cost NDP Clearance Area Water Mains and Plug and install 6,640 feet of substandard $131,000 NDP Rehabilitation Area Water Mains water mains. Excavate, haul and install 121,000 new mains in 26,416 feet of substandard lines. 1. The above amounts have been appropriated in our 1969 Budget. 2. The necessary staff and equipment are available within the department to complete this work during the 1969 fiscal year.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 15, Folder 2, Document 38 Box 15 Box 15 Folder 2 Folder topic: Model Cities | 1968-1969