4 20 68 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/8344ad5eb6d344daf2b7fa2cff50129b.pdf 660c1759ffd70c5e1dc0ce5d5758c9b8 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. GEORGIA • • • • • FULTON COUNTY THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1969, by and between the City of Atlanta, Georgia (hereinafter called the City) and Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. (hereinafter called the C. A. P. ) . WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, detailed Central Atlanta planning as called for in the City's Approved Land Use Plan, is needed on a continuing basis; and WHEREAS, the Central Area Planning Policy Committee w as establishe d to guid e development of this continuing planning process, said committee consisting of: the Mayor of Atlanta , Chairman of the Al d ermanic Financ e Committee, Chairman of the Aldermanic Planning and Development Committee, Chairman of C. A. P. E x ecutive C o mmittee, and the Pr e sident of C. A. P . ; and WHEREAS, the City Plannin g D e partme nt and the Director of Plannin g fo r C . A. P. hav e deve lop e d a stud y de sign , e ntitle d "Central Ar e 2. Planning Pro g ram" , w h i ch outlines organization , w orkin g arrang eme nt , w o rk p rogr a m a nd fin an cing f or the planning pro cess; an d WHEREAS, t h e U . S. D e pa rtm ent o f T r ansp orta tion, U . S. D e partment of Hou sing a nd Urban D eve lopmen t, a:;pd v:;ir i 9ttB local ageHei0e h a ve m a tching �2. funds and/or services available to finance Central Area studie s; and WHEREAS, a Sub-Area Transportation Study, for w hich C.A. P. has pledged substantial financial and p e rsonal support, is a pre-requisite for r e ceiving the max imum amount of such funds; NOW, THEREFORE, ~ ii!S: :~:< Section 1 ~4, The City and the C. A. P. a g r ee to ...undertake a C e ntral Atlanta Planning Pro g r a m as outlined in the Study Design for the C e ntr a l Atlanta Plannin g EJ"1.~.-+"'A._ Proc e ss w hich i s includ e d a s iil:=P e f o r eR~e . S ect ion 2 a n d t he C . A. P. m a y m ak e a ny chan A t l anta P l a nning P rogram . • A . P . agrees to commit $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 c a s h e City 1 s share of $15 , 0 0 0 c a sh an d $ 2 9 , 0 0 0 in - kind financ e t h e Planning P rogram. 9 �Section 3 The City Agrees to exercise all possible dili~ent efforts to obtain any and all financial assistance that rni~ht be 8Vailatle from the Federal Government for the purpose of financing the Central Atlan t a Planning Program. Section 4 In the event federal financial assistance is made available) CAP.L ..... does hereby agree to pool its financial resources available for the Central Atlanta Planning Pro~ram with the resources of the City for the financing~ of the program. Specifically, CA.P,.sitz agrEJes, in the event federal assistance is ava ilafule, to pay over to the city $25,000 in c a sh and further to provide staff and other support of the pro~ram, the full cost of which shall not be . less than $~3,000. CAP,, agrees to document said sta.ff and support costs in the manner acceptable to the grantin g agency a nd to provide the City the full documentation of such costs when requested to do so by the City. V~maxkm• The City agrees bo assume the f ull financial administration of the g rant project. Jw,., �3. Section 4 --- immediate :y:-i B.-applying to the U. S. 0 Department ~ Developm :.a-t , and various local agencies for any available matching funds. Witnesses: City of Atlanta By: Mayor Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. B y: Presid ent � 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 GEORGIA..... FULTON COUNTY THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1969, by and between the City of Atlanta, Georgia (hereinafter called the City) and Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. (hereinafter called the C,A,P,). WITNESSE TH: WHEREAS, detailed Central Atlanta planning as called for in the City's Approved Land Use Plan, is needed on a continuing basis; and WHEREAS, the Central Area Planning Policy Committee was established to guide development of this continuing planning process, said committee consisting of: the Mayor of Atlanta, Chairman of the Aldermanic Finance Committee, Chairman of the Aldermanic Planning and Development Committee, Chairman of C,A,P. Executive Committee, and the President of C.A.P.; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Department and the Director of Planning for C,A,P, have developed a study design, entitled ''Central Area Planning Program", which outlines organization, working arrangement, work program and financing for the planning process; and WHEREAS, the U. S. Department of Transportation, U. S. Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Development, andxwarieus-tocel-eseneies have matching at funds and/or services available to finance Central Area studies; and WHEREAS, a Sub-Area Transportation Study, for which C,A.P. has pledged substantial financial and personal support, is a pre-requisite for receiving the maximum amount of such funds; NOW, THEREFORE, oe - pal - Section 1 | ees The City and the C,.A.P. agree to jundertake a Central Atlanta Planning Program as outlined in the Study Design for the Central Atlanta Planning Ehb. bt “A * Process which is included as a+eferercee. Section 2 and the C,A,P, may make any chan deemed desirable ed to carry out the Central in the study design's work program, which will be Atlanta Planning Program, Section 3 The CcA, P, agrees to commit $25,000 cash*and $43, 000 in-kind funds with the City's share of $15,000 cash and $29, 000 in-kind ds to help finance the Planning Program, Section 3 The City Agrees to exercise all possible diligent efforts to obtain any and all financial assistance that might be available from the Federal Government for the purpose of financing the Central Atlanta Planning Program. Section In the event federal financial assistance is made available, CAP, 4m. does hereby agree to pool its financial resources available for the Central Atlanta Planning Program with the resources of the City for the financings of the program. Specifically, CAPS. agrees, in the event federal assistance is available, to pay over to the city $25,000 in cash and further to provide staff and other support of the program, the full cost of which shall not be less than $H3,000. CGAP, Be, agrees to document said staff and support costs in the manner acceptable to the granting agency and to vrovide the City the full documentation of such costs when requested to do so by the City. Upsnxkka The City agrees to assume the full financial administration of the erant project. Section 4 oO _ The City-agr to proceed immediately in-applying to the U. S. —_—_— Department of Transportation;-the U. S. Departmen —_— ——— Development; and various local agencies for any available matching funds, ra sing and Urban Witnesses: City of Atlanta By: Mayor Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. By: President  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 4, Folder 15, Document 60 Box 4 Box 4 Folder 15 Folder topic: Central Atlanta Progress | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/5b6becf6541bd66e137e4002932c8943.pdf e7f36d11b6f4db91b3f6f504b145b3e7 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. MINUTES GRANT REVIEW BOARD _MARCH 14, 1969 The City of Atlanta Grant Review Board met Friday, March 14, 1969, at 10:30 a. m. with the following in attendance: Dan Sweat, Chairman Jay Fountain, Member Collier Gladin, Member E. H. Underwood, Member Don Ingram, Central Atlanta Progress I The Grant Review Board has reviewed the proposal entitled "Study Design for the Central Atlanta Planning Process." We find that to conduct this proposed study is in the best economic and physical development interests of the City. At the present time we can find no conflict with other studies and activities, nor do we find any duplication of effort. We believe that all the coordination necessary at this time has been achieved. Further, indications are that an adequate amount of coordination will be maintained by the agencies invol.ved during the course of the study. We have examined the City's portions of the proposed funding for the study and find everything to be in order. The City's cash share amounts agree with the amounts listed in the Planning Department's 1969 budget for these purposes. Further, the Planning Department is prepared to make the necessary sta_ff commitments to generate the required non-cash credits. The recommendation of the Grant Review Board is that the Mayor forward the above mentioned proposal, along with a suitable letter to the Secretaries of the Department of Transportation and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Mayor's transmittal letter should request their review, approval and determination of the most appropriate federal funding program to be used in financing this study. Upon their reply, the City should submit a formal application tci the appropriate department under the program specified . A copy of the Central Atlanta Action Program Outline is attached . Chair man DS :f y '• ' ·i •, . .. ... .. . 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 MINUTES GRANT REVIEW BOARD MARCH 14, 1969 The City of Atlanta Grant Review Board met Friday, March 14, 1969, at (10:30 a.m. with the following in attendance: Dan Sweat, Chairman Jay Fountain, Member Collier Gladin, Member E. H. Underwood, Member Don Ingram, Central Atlanta Progress , The Grant Review Board has reviewed the proposal entitled "Study Design for the Central Atlanta Planning Process.'' We find that to conduct this proposed study is in the best economic and physical development interests of the City. At the present time we can find no conflict with other studies and activities, nor do we find any duplication of effort. We believe that all the coordination necessary at this time has been achieved. Further, indications are that an adequate amount of coordination will be maintained by the agencies involved during the course of the study. We have examined the City's portions of the proposed funding for the study and find everything to be in order. The City's cash share amounts agree with the amounts listed in the Planning Department's 1969 budget for these purposes. Further, the Planning Department is prepared to make the necessary staff commit- ments to generate the required non-cash credits. The recommendation of the Grant Review Board is that the Mayor forward the above mentioned proposal, along with a suitable letter to the Secretaries of the Department of Transportation and the Department of Housing and Urban Develop- ment, The Mayor's transmittal letter should request their review, approval and determination of the most appropriate federal funding program to be used in financing this study. Upontheir reply, the City should submit a formal application to the appropriate department under the program specified. A copy of the Central Atlanta Action Program Outline is attached. R ,) ae an Ww 2 Chairman DS :fy  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 4, Folder 15, Document 61 Box 4 Box 4 Folder 15 Folder topic: Central Atlanta Progress | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/71cb82f7acc29f8658229d9de8fed6e4.pdf c0a78b8d090dc1977bc9c45c0a0b321b Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. • ,. _ - , . -...,... ,,.· ...... - ~ -.a".. ·ei·.;;"<'te~~-., -·;. ~-- ----------------~--:·- -------'-'--'-.. .....,-' . :.... w.-~~ ~ Secretary Romney -" ·:..:~-~--· i cc: I Secretary Volpe . - ------- -· -··------- - '" -----·- ·-- - ---------··- ------ --- - --· ···-- .. . __..._. ..... _ . . , w - ~...... - · --- - . :- - ._ ~~ - ~ -- -- - - •.:.........t_. - ~ -- . .... -· - - . ' . -- ~ _ _ __ _, ___ ._ _,_. __ _..:. _ ·-.~ -- ·---'--'----"' . ... -·- __ _ .. _ _. __ _-::=:_..:.. __ __ ..,_ . . . l ... ; INTRODUCTION "'-1: -: :. :" . • ~ ·: :- ,_~.: ·;. - '_J C.. ! .., · --: , ...... . I~ - - • . - 1 ,·. - ,I • -·• , · · \. ... ·- · · .. . .;.. . . __... .._~; ·_. . ~ ~ ..:. ~ . -. :·") ·· . ·,.. I \ · This study design describes a process for d~veloping an action program. The overall study covers a total of_18 months. Part I of _this process, covering the first ten months, will provide a review of major imminent projects as well as produce a preliminary plan. Dµ~ing Part II, the . last eight moriths of the study, a comprehensive planning program will . be developed for adoption along with a method for continuous planning •. and programming for the future. l I -. : .. __ .\ ~- _-; . . \ . - ·· .. .,.__. . : - ._ -. .. :_:_ ~ ... .. The study design emphasizes planning and programming in accordance I wi_th specific goals and objectives. Provision is made for frequent re- I view of the goals and objectives and proposed programs by public officials, ,.-_ - the businessmen and citizens concerned with the central area. ,. . .. pose ~f this continuing policy review is two-fold. The pur-· - . First, the plan and - < ' · the program resulting from the proc~ss will reflect the desires and '· aspirations of the people who will_ live, work and do busines_s in the area. Second, it will generate support for the program. - .... - . - ... · ;; -- y-, . . . - .. ~ --· . - . .. . .. ._. _. •. :. . · 1 . . . .- - -. .s.. The program will be carried out by a special team to be created and staffed by local government and ·business through the City of Atlanta and - Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. (CAP), with staff assistance from tech. nical consultants. The community will be involved in special aspects J' • - • •.- ' of the study program. In particular, it is intended that private industry and/ or local colleges be involved in special studies of urban problems as they at:fect the Central Atlanta Area. The involvement of the business community is considered essential. CAP will be responsible for con- . tinuing liaison, reporting and solicitation of suggestions frorl?- the businessmen who w~ll be most affected by downtown plans. - ., . - . ..,· .. :.• ., _, . :.: \.=. . .·- . . I"- ·.J I ..-.· . • .- . ...:~-. . -~ , _.. ..... --..._. • w-4 • •, -lt- • .- - · - · , ,c• ._.. ,., • ' •... _ r �> ~_l I i =:t ~,P -···- 1 i.., - __., _ ---- ----- -· -.. ·- ·-··- --···-- .--·--·- -·· -- -- -·--- -----·-- ·--··· - ·-· ···· ··-: · ··-.---- --- --- --- ------ · - -- -· __ .,._______ . . . ·- ·,-" ·- ......- - ,. .....,....~·- · - - ······ - --- ! --~~·__~~ / w S e cretary Volpe · ···- - - · ---·· ~ -- - ~ -- - - -· - - -· - ~ · · - · · - ·- - ··· - - ~ - - - · · · ,_ ....,._ · -. · . ~ . ~ - · ~ · . .......... - · ·- ·· - .. . - - - · · · - · - - -· - · - . l .-2,. The work program places primary emphasis on t~e ;:i.nalysis and inter. pretation rather than the collection ?f data. . Most of the information wh~~h will be neede~ is already available from studies (co...:cnpleted or in ,/ ·-, . .:. .:i progress) by the City of Atlanta, the State Highway . Department of Georgia, . . . the Atlanta Area Transportation Study, the Atlanta Regional Metropolitan Planning Commission, and the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transi't Authority. This coordination is essential for the successful implementation of both studies. The timing is designed to exploit the general findings of the cur- rent area transportation study. The Central Atlanta Study and the area transportation study are mutually complementary. ! ' •: Figure 1 indicates the work program by tasks and time sequences. It is intended that this model be used as a guide for man8:gementJor the study program. I ··' ..-· .·. · i, i' . It is recognized that all studies are subject to modifica- . tion and adaptation to the exigencies of unforeseen circumstances. How- ever a it i8"believed that the schedule as indicated in Figure 1 is reasonable and can be accomplished with satisfactory results in the time periods indi- cated. Inherent in this study design is a flexibility which will permit the constant evaluation of proposed projects that are relevant to the Central Area while the study is in progress, to give views on the impact of these projects on the interim plans and objectives for Central Atlanta. T' . ,, STUDY AREA ~ ·t ... .; . • I •. I ~ ·~ The proposed study area is shown in Figure 2. The boundary which is f.· ·l defined by the circumferential railroad lines will permit analy~is of various projects on the downtown core. The core area itself w'ill be th~ subject of .. the most intensive analysis wherein data collection, analysis and fore custs ' ,. : J .1 . will be related to"· small zones, usually blo.c ks. . .: \. . •. . ·.·:.:. "·i .:,-:. ~ ~- ~ -. . . ! lj i i I . i =-1 transportation alternatives and reflect the impa ct of major r e dev elopment -- I . l ·. ,, ~ i �~- ..-~ ....- ---·- · -· -~ -· - · . ~·- ,;---~,: :, )\low;# cc: . ··----,-- - - - - -----'------...:.-.-.....-"-'--""".,._,""--=...a.;.,...~.;....,.,~·.·•:.. ··"'c.._·..,.~ ...:..-....,..-'.'-"- -..::.-·~---~ · ---·~·"'··- SecreU1ry Romney Secretary Volpe -~ ---~....._ __ 'I, / .. -· --- ........... - ---·· . . - ~.,,_ .. - - - . - - ~ - . ' --- ·· ~ ----·- -------------- - ·----- - - -·· . ---- . . . .. i...-... ' . •• -· - - - ' -- ~ -~- - · ·· - · - - - - - ~ . - - ·- - - · ·· • • - - - - -- - · -- - -- · . , _, • ___ ,.,_ . ___ _ _ ..._ . , _ _ _ _ _ ,. .., ..·-. .• . __ .: Figure 2. �~:-::.:--.::~~=::-"""'=-:S.:·:::...--::~.:: ~-.·,:~. ~. .2;.:::-2.._J.~:.:__~,_-_,.__. -~ . . _-;;;_:.:.,.·2:=.f-;S~:t--~.:-~ --~~:;., ·r.:=- Z ·· ~ .... -··· c ... . Sc cn:br y Ho mn c y S e c r etary Volp e ·:1•i ·. i __... --- --·------·-- ---- .. :f a --:.~--•.-:- · ~- ~ - -----· -- -~- -- --- . - -..... - .. -·---:--.--13:12, 29 December 2017 (EST)__,_%:-:~-.: .. · \ · ·· · ·11 ·· ________..,_ -- - \ . ·---:-~-- -.- --- ----~-·-·--· ---·----~ -· --1 J. ____ __.-~-_: -~-·-----~~---- -~----:-----~·----~-- ·:: 1 . - --·- ------ -- ·-·. _··.... --- ~ , ! ~- J, - - • - - • ,....,~.--, ·- - ·- , ___,__ ..:, ~-~---·-·-- --- - - ··- -~ ·~ --~-.,...--~---- · -·. -· . -. .. ~ .. . .' •· 1 .. -_ • ... · , ; ,·-·- ' - . , " .. "": t ·,; .. _.. i:. ....:. .· ·.. t. .- , ·· :::- · .- ·-~-·- . -. ·. ~ . J I I.. ·I I . ·1 ._- _.. . ·. ··::.< ·... ; ", ·: POLICY REVIEW PROCESS .- . , .-., : · .:.:,I :: :.· . T •PUBLIC RELATIONS r I lI •j -~ .. ..... ·-· STUDY DIRECTOR~' LEAD CONSUL TANT TECHNICAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE I l ' .I '· l .t !,. l . Figure 3. .' , .•· ., I , .· .· f' . t .,.. . 1 ,,_ I r !"1, • • S- • , .. . ' • . . .. . ,-:-~~ \~-143.215.248.55?~~:~;-143.215.248.55:;!?:~:,~,J,; ~:::·? :,-,·143.215.248.55/ ~~ .,_';'.";';~?::-~ ):. ~_:-=_::?::~~:t;,'.t'-~--~:~~t:-·~-143.215.248.55?:'.':\-·~?~f.-:-'·-~· :·:.~~-7tJ'.~'-;-'.J.·~'.\ -,~.'7:.143.215.248.55U:.1:~_~.>r_.:t :Y:.'~>~~/,:1·/~. .. .: . .. - ... ' ~ ,, . ..,.. • ' • . •• , ·-;, - ,._. • • • ~ • I • ' • ,,' .:.'. • - ~ '• > •., ,• • • • '• 'I � 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 Faritn eS ‘eon Secretary Romney ° Secrctary Volpe ; : \ ee el a ae me Te ms a Eee le ieee ee ete ae abe” Seat en me eal wo lan a el “Rae INTRODUCTION | : = a one sis F te * 7 ats i ey . *% f ai f This study design describes a process for developing an action program. The overall study covers a total of 18 months. Part I of this process, covering the first ten months, will provide a review of major imminent projects as well as produce a preliminary plan. During Part II, the | last eight months of the study, a comprehensive planning program will be developed for adoption along with a method for continuous planning and programming for the future. ieee The study design emphasizes planning and programming in accordance with specific goals and objectives. Provision is made for frequent re- view of the goals and objectives and proposed programs by public officials, . the businessmen and citizens concerned with the central area. The pur- 4 | pose of this continuing policy review is two-fold, First, the plan and ‘ the program resulting from the process will reflect the desires and aspirations of the people who will live, work and do business in the area. Second, it will generate support for the program. if aeagig we The program will be carried out by a special team to be created and staffed by local government and business through the City of Atlanta and Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. (CAP), with staff assistance from tech- nical consultants. The community will be involved in special aspects of the study program. In particular, it is intended that private industry , and/or local colleges be involved in special studies of urban problems — as they affect the Central Atlanta Area. The involvement of the business communityis considered essential. CAP will be responsible for con-. tinuing liaison, reporting and solicitation of suggestions from the businessmen who will be most affected by downtown plans. "Si valet hes pid nthe oneal i Secretary Volpe f 5 * o ee | ee rt ee a te tt Ee ee te eed ae te a ew, a : ‘ : : -* ‘ F “ The work program places primary emphasis on the analysis and inter- ' pretation rather than the collection of data. Most of the information which will be needed is already available from studies ccoipleted or in: io progress) by the City of Atlanta, the State Highway Department of Georgia, - the Atlanta Area Transportation Study, the Atlanta Regional Metropolitan Planning Commission, and the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority. This coordination is essential for the successful implementation of both studies. The timing is designed to exploit the general findings of the cur- rent area transportation study. The Central Atlanta Study and the area transportation study are mutually complementary. Figure 1 indicates the work program by tasks and time sequences. It is intended that this model be used as a guide for management for the study program. Itis recognized that all studies are subject to modifica- tion and adaptation to the exigencies of unforeseen circumstances. How- "ever, it isebelieved that the schedule as indicated in Figure 1 is reasonable and can be accomplished with satisfactory results in the time periods indi- cated. Inherent in this study design is a flexibility which ‘will permit the constant evaluation of proposed projects that are relevant to the Central Area while the study is in progress, to give views on the impact of these projects on the interim plans and objectives for Central Atlanta. STUDY AREA | Ghee Bue te ee: ose The proposed study area is shown in Figure 2. The poundasy which is defined by the circumferential railroad lines will permit analysis of various transportation.alternatives and reflect the impact of major redevelopment projects on the downtown core. The core area itself will be the subject of © the most intensive analysis wherein data collection, analysis and forecusts will be related to’ small zones, usually blocks. Le eek RE a ip eee endo cei mage ap Meee eer SEE Ce TREES Tee =H Sa ee  Figure 2. afeawra "ce: Secretary Romney | } Secretary, Volpe : : i Paes il al ake eect pa ii al lr clad I ahs SrA Pa aloe thee on A A pee ee a ge gd eek mer gag ee : "i 4 ‘ r ‘ oo L eo = A aid wad pA i Te — een ot eet ms et Sei sac dee RN al Li wie cat a a te i : , i a te ee Ee een de coe ce at ds Pisa oo? ECONOMICS, FINANCE & PROGRAMMING STAFF & CONSULTANT, TRANSPORTATION & PARKING STAFF & CONSULTANT, , = : yi MAYOR & BOARD CENTRAL AREA C.A.P. : OF ALDERMAN POLICY COMM: T 1 EE -\ BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY . REVIEW * PROCESS > . v Me STUDY "PUBLIC DIRECTOR 2 SecanE LS A LEAD CONSULTANT _ COMMITTEE —_— LAND USE & URBAN DESIGN STAFF & CONSULTANT Sep aS a Bi eS eee Seana ew. «= Seerciary Romney | ¥ » Secretary Volpe , 4 wi / Boe iter eS eterisesee Sara aS noes ~ eae | OS Re) pn ere emeee are ee teecre oy . i * i Figure 3. j » -* ; ; : t 5 t : = r ic i . ” 5 = ae e sean a ler . - } —— ° 2 = ee =. oe rv Se eee ee LS ee SS ee eet ee ey et ets wae : * ; “. Suet otha aw Meee age “ ered fe as a mY  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 4, Folder 15, Document 62 Box 4 Box 4 Folder 15 Folder topic: Central Atlanta Progress | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/9f8d474e4913ec8f3454b11a1e53d926.pdf afd558e09b0203c07cb5532e0b8ee642 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. c .A.P.,Inc. and City 3/18/69 OUTLINE STUDY DESIGN FOR THE CENTRAL ATIANTA PLANNING . PROCESS --~ ·= INTRODUCTION STUDY AREA ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT i POLICY REVIEW PROCESS WORK PROGRAM 1. Review of Goals and Objectives 2. Development of Short Range Principles 2.1 Review Projects 2.2 Develop Short Range Principles 2.3 Develop Long Range Goals 2.4 Define Special Studies 3. Conduct Special Studies 4. Inventories and Base Mapping T 5. 4.1 Assemble Basic Data and Data Collection Schedules 4.2 Prepare Basic Maps 4.3 Update Land Use Inventory Economic Trends, Forecasts and Policy Alternatives 5.1 . Analyze Functions and Activities 5.2 Forecast Space Needs 5.3 Identify Development Factors 5.4 Develop Policies to Achieve Goals 5.5 Governmental Center St.udy 6. Conduct Downtown Attitude Survey 7. Urban Design 7.1 Review of Urban Design ., - .. . ·\ . .. . . ;;; · . , ... . ·' .. ~ �2 7. 8. Urban Design (Continued) 7.2 Develop Alternative Design Concepts 7.3 Prepare Working Models Transportation and Parking Program 8.1 Develop System Network i 9. 8.2 Develop Alternative Transportation Concepts 8.3 Update Transportation Data 8.4 Conduct Trip Generation Studies 8.5 Conduct Pedestrian Studies Review Projects 10. Policy Review and Guidance 11. Seek Possible Demonstration Projects 12. Financial Planning 'I' 13 ·. ' 14. 12.1 Inventory of Financial Resources and Tax Program 12.2 Evaluate Tax Revenues 12.3 Plan Financial Alternatives 12.4 Prepare Financial Plan Development of Preliminary Plans 13.1 Develop Alternative Transportation Plans 13.2 Forecast Travel Needs 13.3 Make Preliminary Evaluation Draft Report 15. Policy Review and Decisions 16. Develop Continuing Program 17. Prepare Land Use and Design Standards . I ., - -··-----·· ... . . .-- --. ·· . - ~ ··- - .. .--- . ··- ·· -·-. .. ------ . . .! · ··. -· . .. .• . --- ··-- ·-- -- - ----- - - - - - -- -I' .,._ i l .... ..- . I ~ �3 18. Refinement and Evaluation of Alternative Plans 18.1 Refine Alternative Plans 18.2 Assign and Evaluate I 19. Policy Review 20. Develop Plan and Program 21. Build Physical Model 22·. Policy Review 23: · Revision 24-. Adoption 25-~ Report on Part I. 2·6:· · Final Report r I ·i .~· ... ,; " .._ . ·.· : . 1 .· .. .,._ \, �.. , • ! • POLICY REVIEW PROCESS PUBLIC RELATIONS STUDY DIRECTOR & LEAD CONSULT ANT TECHNICAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE T II • • Figure 3. ~; ,, . I . ·rT I t .. - -· .... < .. I I! iI ' I � 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 C.A.P.,Inc. and City 3/18/69 OUTLINE STUDY DESIGN FOR THE CENTRAL ATLANTA PLANNING PROCESS INTRODUCTION : : STUDY AREA | ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT POLICY REVIEW PROCESS WORK PROGRAM 1. Review of Goals and Objectives 2. Development of Short Range Principles 2.1 Review Projects 2.2 Develop Short Range Principles 2.3 Develop Long Range Goals 2.4 Define Special Studies 3. Conduct Special Studies 4. Faneaeaeies and Base Mapping 4.1 Assemble Basic Data and Data Collection Schedules 4.2 Prepare Basic Maps 4.3 Update Land Use Inventory 5. Economic Mendes: Worecasts and Policy Alternatives 5.1. Analyze Functions and Activities 5.2 Forecast Space Needs 5.3 Identify Development Factors 5.4 Develop Policies to Achieve Goals 5.5 Cogecniantsl Center Study 6. Conduct Downtown Attitude Survey 7. Urban Design 7.1 Review of Urban Design pe Saito Deere «0 5 7 a 7. Urban Design (Continued) 7.2 Develop Alternative Design Concepts 7.3 Prepare Working Models 8. Transportation and Parking Program 8.1 Develop System Network 8.2 Develop Alternative Transportation Concepts 8.3 Update Transportation Data 8.4 Conduct Trip Generation Studies 8.5 Gonidict Pedestrian Studies 9. Review Projects 10. Policy Review and Guidance 11. Seek Possible Demonstration Projects 12. Financial Planning 12.1 Inventory of Financial Resources and Tax Program 12.2 Evaluate Tax Revenues 12.3. Plan Financial Alternatives *P12.4 Prepare Financial Plan 13. Development of Preliminary Plans 13.1 Develop Alternative Transportation Plans 13.2 Forecast Travel Needs 13«3 Make Preliminary Evaluation 14. Draft Report 15. Policy Review and Decisions — 16. Develop Continuing Program 17. Prepare Land Use and Design Standards »  18. Refinement and Evaluation of Alternative 18.1 Refine Alternative Plans 18.2 Assign and Evaluate 19. Policy Review 20. Develop Plan and Program 21. Build Physical Model 22. Policy Review 23. Revision 24. Adoption 25. Report on Bact t. 26. Final Report | Plans i cae oes ! adi  MAYOR & BOARD OF ALDERMAN PUBLIC RELATIONS TRANSPORTATION & PARKING STAFF & CONSUL TANT, CENTRAL AREA POLICY COMMITTEE POLICY REVIEW PROCESS STUDY DIRECTOR & LEAD CONSULTANT C.A.P. , BOARD OF DIRECTORS TECHNICAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE ECONOMICS, FINANCE & PROGRAMMING STAFF & CONSULTANT, LAND USE & URBAN DESIGN STAFF & CONSULTANT, Figure 3.  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 4, Folder 15, Document 63 Box 4 Box 4 Folder 15 Folder topic: Central Atlanta Progress | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/3eeb7fd734d178c3ee8237a237af8faa.pdf 9fe1bbdf25f34d77cfc9376854a38b85 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. RESOLUTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE WHEREAS, detailed Central Atlanta planning as called for in th e City 1 s Approved Land U se Plan, is needed on a continuing basis; and WHEREAS, the Central A.rea Planning Policy Committee was established to guide development of this continuing planning process, said committee consisting of: the Mayor of Atlanta, Chairman of the Aldermanic Finance Committee, Chairman of the Aldermanic Planning and Development Committee , Chairman of Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. Executive Committee, and the President of Central Atlanta Progress, Inc.; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Department and the Director of Planning for Central Atlanta Progress have developed a study design, \ . entitl~d 11 C entral Atlanta Planning Program 11 , which outlines organization, working arrangement, work program and financing for the planning process; and WHEREAS, the U. S. Department of Transportation and the U . S. Departme nt of Housing and Urban Deve lopm.ent have matching funds and/ or services available to finance Central Area studies; and WHEREAS, a Sub-Area T ran spo rtation Study, for which Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. has pledged substantial financial and personal support, is a pre -r e quisite for receivin g the maximum a1nount of s uch funds; NOW, THERE F ORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the_ Mayor and Board of Aldermen of the City of Atlanta that the M a yor b e and is hereby authorized to exe cute a n agreem e nt with C e ntral Atlanta Pro g r ess , Inc . T his agr ee - ment provides for the joint participation of C e ntral Atlanta Progr es s , Inc. with the City in th e C e ntral Atlanta Pla nning Program and presents the fin a n cial commitme nt by Ce ntr a l Atl a nta Progress , Inc. to the proj ect. � 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 RESOLUTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE WHEREAS, detailed Central Atlanta planning as called for in the City's Approved Land Use Plan, is needed on a continuing basis; and WHEREAS, the Central Area Planning Policy Committee was established to guide development of this continuing planning process, said committee consisting of: the Mayor of Atlanta, Chairman of the Aldermanic Finance Committee, Chairman of the Aldermanic Planning and Development Committee, Chairman of Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. Executive Committee, and the President of Central Atlanta Progress, Inc.; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Department and the Director of Planning for Central Atlanta Progress have developed a study design, entitled "Central Atlanta Planning Program", which outlines organization, working arrangement, work program and financing for the planning process; and WHEREAS, the U. S. Department of Transportation and the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development have matching funds and/or services available to finance Central Area studies; and WHEREAS, aSub-Area Transportation Study, for which Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. has pledged substantial financial and personal support, is a pre-requisite for receiving the maximum amount of such funds; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the KiSess and Board of Aldermen of the City of Atlanta that the Mayor be and is hereby authorized to execute an agreement with Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. This agree- ment provides for the joint participation of Central Atlanta Progress, Inc, with the City in the Central Atlanta Planning Program and presents the financial commitment by Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. to the project.  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 4, Folder 15, Document 64 Box 4 Box 4 Folder 15 Folder topic: Central Atlanta Progress | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/13d72afa4bc02672255474e46289e6ea.pdf ee677b0dd8080f264c0350c525baf996 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. RESOLUTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE WHEREAS, detailed Central Atlanta planning as called for in the City 1 s Approved Land Use Plan, is needed on a continuing basis; and WHEREAS, the Central Area Planning Policy Committee was established to guide development of this continuing planning process, said committee consisting of: the Mayor of Atlanta, Chairman of the Aldermanic Finance Committee, Chairman of the Aldermanic Planning and Development Committee , Chairman of Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. Executive Committee, .and the President of Central Atlanta Progress, Inc.; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Department and the Director of Planning for Central Atlanta Progress have developed a study design, entitled 11 Central Atlanta Planning Program 11 , which outlines organization, working arrangement, work program and financing for the planning process; and WHEREAS, the U. S. Department of Transportation and the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban De velopment have matching fund s and/ or services available to finance Central Area studies; and WHEREAS, a Sub-Area Transportation Study, for which C e ntral Atlanta Progress, Inc. has pledged substantial financial and personal support, is a pre-requisite for receiving the maximum amount of such funds; NOW, THEREFOR E , BE IT RESOLVED by the M a yor a nd Board of Ald e rmen of the City of Atlanta that the Mayor b e and is hereby authoriz e d to execute an agreement with C e ntrai Atlanta Pro g r es s, Inc. This agr ee - ment provid es for the joint participation of C entral Atlanta Progr ess , Inc. with the City in th e C e ntral Atlanta Planning Program and pr esents the fin anc i a l commitme nt by Ce ntr a l Atl a nta Progress, Inc . to the project. 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 RESOLUTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE WHEREAS, detailed Central Atlanta planning as called for in the City's Approved Land Use Plan, is needed on a continuing basis; and WHEREAS, the Central Area Planning Policy Committee was established to guide development of this continuing planning process, said committee consisting of: the Mayor of Atlanta, Chairman of the Aldermanic Finance Committee, Chairman of the Aldermanic Planning and Development Committee, Chairman of Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. Executive Committee, and the President of Central Atlanta Progress, Inc.; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Department and the Director of Planning for Central Atlanta Progress have developed a study design, entitled 'Central Atlanta Planning Program", which outlines organization, working arrangement, work program and financing for the planning . process; and WHEREAS, the U. S. Department of Transportation and the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development have matching funds and/or services available to finance Central Area studies; and WHEREAS, a Sub-Area Transportation Study, for which Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. has pledged substantial financial and personal support, is a pre-requisite for receiving the maximum amount of such funds; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the sidyés and Board of Aldermen of the City of Atlanta that the Mayor be and is hereby authorized to execute an agreement with Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. This agree- ment provides for the joint participation of Sent Atlanta Progress, Inc. with the City in the Central Atlanta Planning Program and presents the financial commitment by Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. to the project.  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 4, Folder 15, Document 65 Box 4 Box 4 Folder 15 Folder topic: Central Atlanta Progress | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/bac7d079d277081f3471d77ebabfc62e.pdf 85f736146f658d2a1471c5a04774eb9c Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. Reprint "ATIANTA" From the April 1969 Issue of Forum Magazine Reproduced for the Directors of Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. �ATLANTA Almost everything that catches your eye in the aerial photo at right is less than ten years old. The freeway network; the bigleague sports stadium (1); the auditorium-convention center (lower right-hand corner); the 41story First National Ba.nk Building (2)-highest in the city, but not for long )-and the six-building complex known as Peachtree Center (3)-tbese are only the most conspicuous landmarks of a $1.5-billion downtown building boom that, in less than one short decade, has transformed Atlanta from a slow-paced Southern town to what its boosters like to call a "national city." What they mean by that term is that Atlanta now exerts powerful economic force beyond its region. The spectacular boom didn't just happen by itself. It is mostly the result of a vigorous promotion campaign called "Forward Atlanta" which was launched in 1961 by government and business leaders. The campaign bas been so successful that more than 130 cities have sent delegations to Atlanta, hoping to learn the secret of its success. They would be well advised to start by getting a mayor like Atlanta's Ivan Allen Jr., who took office in 1962. As president of the Chamber of Commerce in 1961, Allen was instrumental in getting the Forward Atlanta program started. After that, as mayor, Allen saw to it that the city participated fully in the public-private effort. Virtually all of Forward Atlanta's advertising campaign ("Atlanta: a new kind of city" ) bas been concentrated in the North. "They're the cats with the bread," explains Opie L. Shelton, executive director of the Chamber of Commerce. So far, downtown Atlanta's spectacular boom has been mostly a matter of quantity, not quality. The towering new office buildings are impressive more for their size than for their design, and they have been plunked down with 42 little regard for the environment (the handsome Equitable Building ( 4) is the first to have a landscaped plaza at its base, for whatever that may be worth) . Public projects have fared no better. For all its closeness to downtown, the stadium might as well be miles away, since it is cut off from the core by a massive freeway interchange. And the auditorium-convention center is inconvenient to the hotels which generate most of its use-and are, in turn, supported hy it. A third civic project, the multipurpose Memorial Arts Center completed last year, would have been a natural for downtown, but it was built in a residential neighborhood. Possibly, a new kind of city Atlanta's civic and business leaders are now waking up to the fact that "bigger" and "bette1·" are not always synonymous, and they have begun laying plans to assure that the future growth of downtown embodies both. Their plans-and hopes- are centered on six key developments that could serve as catalysts for making downtown Atlanta the "new kind of city" its boosters now claim it to be. One is Architect-Developer John Portman's Peachtree Center, which is already Atlanta's biggest and best downtown development, and promises to become much more so. Three others are large air-rights developments flanking the core of downtown: Developer Raymond D. Nasher's Park Place project (5 ), the Georgia State College campus (6), and Developer Thomas G. Cousins' project (7) . The fifth and sixth elements are a proposed . metropolitan rapid transit system converging at the center of downtown, and a small-scale pedestrian movement system looping the downtown area. These sL'l: developments, and what they could mean to downto,yn Atlanta, are discussed on the following eight pag es. ���( ., Portman's Peachtree Center is the first major step toward Atlanta's goal of "a new kind of city" Durmg the '60s, while the rest of downtown Atlanta was booming chaotically, J ohn Portman was creating, step by step, the city's only cohesive complex of integrated buildings and spaces. Peachtree Center stands r ather aloofly apart from the clutter at the downtown core and has, in fact, become a little downtown all of its own. The visitor to Atlanta could easily have all of his needs at tended to within the six buildings that currently compose the complex. Both Peachtree Center and John Portman's remarkable career as an entrepreneur-architect got off the ground in 1961 with the 22-story Merchandise Mart ( 1 on plan). Before he designed and built the Mart, Portman-with his partner, H . Griffith Edwards- had been practicing ar chitecture in the conventional way, and beco ming increasingly frustrated. Portman wanted to design large-scale urban developments, but no such commissions were coming his way. So he decided : "If I co me up with an idea and promote and develop it myself, there won't be any question about who is going to be the architect." The first idea Six buildings now compose Peachtree Center: (1) the Merchandise Mart; (2) the Peachtree Center office building; (3) a Trailways bus termi nal topped by a four-level parking garage; (4) the Regency Hyatt House Hotel with a revolving resta urant above its roof; (5) t he Gas Light- office t ower; and (6) the Twin Tower. A 200-room circular addit ion to the Regency is now under construction (7); and a 70-story officeapartment tower is scheduled to get under way this year (8). Another structure, as yet undisclosed, will rise on a block adjacent t o the center (9). FORUM-APRIL-1969 In 1957, after P ortman had promoted a successfu l furniture exhibition in a r emod eled downt own building, he came up with the idea that Atlanta could support a big, new merchandise mart, and that he could promote and design it. Portman formed a development corporation and secured an $8-mi llion loan from Metropolita n Life Insurance Co ., plus additional backing from Atlanta Realtor Ben lVIassell and Dallas Developer Trammel Crow. With Portman in complete control of its design and financing, Peachtree Center was on its way. In 1965, three years after the Mart opened, Portman added th e Peachtree Center Building, a 30story office tower (2). Then, in r apid succession, he built the Trailways Bus Terminal topped by a fo.ir-deck parking structure (3); t.he 21-story, 800-room Regency Hyatt House Hotel (4) ; the 25-story Gas Light Tower (5); and its mirror-image Twin Tower (6). He also douuled the size of the original Mart to 2 million sq. ft. in 1968, making it the second largest in the world ( after Chicago's). Now under construction is a circular, 200-roorn addition to the Regency ( 7). And later this year, on a site behind the twin towers (8 ), construction will start on Peachtree Center's (and the city's) tallest building: a 70story tower containing 57 floors of offices topped by 13 flo ors of "corporate apartments." The apartments will be leased by ro mpanies for housing and entertaining visiting executives and important guests. A harmon ious whole With one notable exception-the soaring interior of its hotel (see page 47)-Peachtree Center is not a showcase of exciting ar chitecture. But the co mplex adds up to more than the sum of its parts. The individual buildings, if not distinguish ed in design, are at least harmonious in their r elationships. And Portn1an has added pla zns, landscaping, outdoor seulplure, and other tou ches that ti e the co mpl ex together at ground level. J\ t night, P eachtree Center r emains bustling with activity long after th e r est of downtown has closed up. The hotel, of course, is the major nighttime nttraction, but Portman has placed a number of r estaurants in and among th e other buildings to assure afterhours activi ty throughout th e center. Two of the restaurants are located ben ea th the plaza that separates the twin towers, and two others are in the Martone on the ground floor and another on the roof. Portman has also linked the buildings with a series of en closed p edestrian bridges, and cla ims th at "you can go anywhere in Peachtree Center without going outside." The claim is true, as far as it goes . But if, for example, you want to get from the hotel to the lobby of the Peachtree Center Building without goi ng outside, ~-ou ham to cross a bridge leading from the hotel lohh)· ( 4) to the base of the G'as Light Tower (5 ); take an elevator to the 23rd floor ; cross a bridge spanning Peachtree Street to the roof of the Mart(l); cross another bridge connecting th e Mart with the 23rd floor of th e P eachtree Center Building (2); and, finally, take another elevator down to the lobby. Nevertheless, the bridges are a convenience for th ose people who work in th e three office buildings. f>romotion vs. design Some architects take a dim view of Portman's dual career, claiming that his ro le as a developer compromises his integrity as an architect. Portman denies that there is any conflict of interest, and he cites his design of the Regency Hotel as a case in point. Portman asserts th at the Regency, with its spectacular interior courtyard rising the full height of the building, would not ha ve been built if he had designed it for a hotel client. (It was sold to the Hyatt House chain after construction was nearly completed.) One arch itect in a large New York firm agrees. "We tried to get one of our hotel clients to accept an interior courty ard, and got nowhere," he said. " Th e clien t's firs t a nd last r eaction was 'Look at all that wasted space !' " The present Peachtree Center, says Portman, is only th e nucleus of wh at will eventually beco me a "city within a city," conta ining apa rtments, shops, theaters, and a wide variety of other functions. Portman is continually acquiring parcels of land in the area, the lates t being a lease on an adjacent state-owned site (9) occupied by an old hotel, which will be demo lished. One of Portman's future plans involves th e city's proposed rap id tr ansit system. If it gets built, one of its routes will probably burrow underneath Peachtree Street, wh ich bisects Portman's complex . At the same time, an underground roadway could be built, a nd th e street could be turned into a pedestrian mall (see page 50). A pedestrian mall closing off Peachtree Street would not only enhance P eachtree Center, it would provide a vital conn ecting link between the center and th e rest of downtown At lanta. 45 �.. Left: two of the four enclosed pedestrian bridges that connect the buildings of Peachtree Center. The one at top spans Peachtree Street from the 2 3rd floor of the Gas Light Tower to the roof of the Merchandise Maf1, where a restaurant is located . The bridge in the photo at left connects the Mart with a parking garage. Right: the skylit interior courtyard of the Regency Hyatt House Hotel. The space 1s 223 ft . high and 140 It. across, enclosed on all four sides by ca ntilevered balconies which serve as corridors f9r the 800 guest rooms. Th e g la ssed -i n e l ev a tor cars rise along t he outside of a rectangular core at one side of the courtyard . ���' The Cousins, Nasher and Georgia State projects could be the start of a vast "platform city" FORUM- APRIL- 1969 W ,. a little luck and a lot of coordinated p lanning, the three projects pictured on these pages could be the spr ingboard for making downtown Atlanta a multile,·el "platform city," in which all the t ransportation and pedestr ian activities would be sorted out and meshed in a series of interrelated levels. • The flat-topped parking structure pictured on the opposite page is the first phase of what wi ll probably be the largest of the three projects. It will be built on air rights over a downtown railroad yard. Its developer, Tho111as G. Cousins of Atlanta, has not released details of his plan, but it has been reported that the development will represent an investment of some $500 million and will contain office buildings, apartments, hotels, stores, and possibly a sports arena. Architects for the develop111ent are Toombs, Amisano & ·wPils of Atlanta. • On a pie-shaped site adjacent to Atlanta's state-county-city govern111ent center, Dallas De,·eloper Raymond D. Nasher will build Park Place, an 18-acrc, $200-million complex that will also rise above railroad tracks. Ifs first building, a 22-story office stru cture, is now being designed, a nd plans call for construction of a hotel, additional office buildings, apartments, and a shopping concourse beneath a landscaped plaza. Architects are Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (New York) and Finch, Alexander, Barnes, Rothschild & Paschal of Atlanta. • The third development, the Georgia State College campus, is already under way in a 40-acre area lying adjacent to the Park Place site. When it is completed in 1975, the campus will rest on a pedestrian platform built over existing streets. The focal point of the campus will be a 500,000sq.-ft. Urban Life Center (model photo) designed by Finch, Alexander, Barnes, Rothschild & Paschal. It will draw upon all the school's departments to carry out co111prehensive studies of the nrban ecology. Georgia State's master plan was prepared by Robert & Co. of Atlanta. The al111ost simultaneous emergence of the three multilevel de- �I_ velopments flanking the center of downtown has suddenly made , the possibility of creating a "platform city" more than just a dream. "The potential is fantastic," says Planner Robert W. Bivens. "This thing is absolutely loaded. Bivens is executive director of Central Atlanta Progress Inc. (CAP), a unique public-private planning organization set up by -the city's civic and business leaders to coordinate and guide the future development of down-town. Working with funds provided by the business commun~ty, the city, and the federal government, CAP is now conducting planning studies that eventually will lead to a comprehensive set of guidelines for creating the "platform city." In addition to the three big air-right projects, CAP has these three major elements to work with: • A proposed rapid-transitsystern ( dotted lines on conceptual diagram at right) converging at a downtown Transit Center located between the three new platform developments. Its underground mezzanine would tie in with the three developments to form a continuous pedestr ian concourse. (A referendum to construct a 44mile metropolitan transit system was defeated at the polls last November, but its advocates consider the turndown only a temporary setback. The plan is now being restudied by the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, and a revised proposal will be presented to the voters at a later date. ) • A small-scale movement system ( dotted lines) serving pedestrians in the downtown area. Atlanta-along with Dallas, Denver, and Seattle-was selected last month by the Department of Transportation to participate in a $1.5-million "action program" leading to the development of cent ral transportation systems that will blend with the human environment." • " Railroad Gulch," a vast area of downtown railroad yards crisscrossed overhead by a network of elevated street viaducts. The gulch and its viaducts p rovide a built-in f ramework for development of the "platform 50 . city." The _ .1er and Cousins projects, both of which use air rights over sections of the gnlch, are the first to take advantage of this framework, and Georgia State's platform over existing, grade-level streets will tie in with it. CA.P's plan will establish guidelines for incorporating future projects into the framework. (There are likely to be many opportunities to do so, since the size of downtown is expected to double by 1983, and the gulch will be the most desirable area for the growth ·to take place.) Multilevel network If CAP is able to coordinate and guide all of these converging elements, the result could be a downtown something like the model pictured on the opposite page. It was prepared by Houshang Fahadi, a member of CA.P's staff, to stimulate community discussion leading to the development of a master plan. At the upper right-hand corner of the model photo are the Georgia State campus, the Nasher development, and the government center (note the dome of the State Capitol); at the lower lefthand corner is the Cousins project; and between them is the circular Transit Center. From this nucleus, a network of traffic-free pedestrian platforms spreads out in all directions to tie in with the existing downtown and with new developments in the railroad gulch. Beneath the platforms are separated levels for cars and transit, plus a mezzanine-level pedestrian concourse lined with shops. Atlanta's "platform city" is a long way from fruition, but the city's decision-makers, both public and private, have already demonstrated that they consider it more than just a vague possibility. As the first year's publicprivate effort, they have jointly provided some $300,000 to finance studies by CAP and the city's planning staff. "This represents a new dimension," says Planner Donald G. Ingram, CA.P 's associate director, who is coordinating the effort. " With both the city and the business community committed to it, we think we can make it happen ." The conceptual diagram above and the model pictured on the opposite page are the initial steps in down• town Atlanta's plan for becoming the nation's first "platform city. The plan centers on four large existing or proposed downtown developments: (1) the Georgia State College campus; (2) Park Place; (3) a third large air-rights development; and (4) Peachtree Cen· ter. Incorporated In the plan are a proposed rapid-transit system (dotted lines) converging at a Transit Center in the downtown core, and a "minisystem" (dashed lines) for transporting pedestrians througt,out the downtown area. The result would be a multilevel network separating cars, t ransit, and people in a series of interrelated levels. PHOTOGRAPHS: Page 43, Wray Studio; pages 44 and 48 (top); William A. Barnes. FORUM- APRIL-1 969 ��• • CENTRAL ATLANTA PLANNING PROffiAM Joint Study by Central Atlanta Progress, Inco and the Ci ty of Atlanta Planning Department � 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 42 Almost everything that catches your eye in the aerial photo at right is less than ten years old. The freeway network; the big- league sports stadium (1); the au- ditorium-convention center (low- er right-hand corner); the 41- story First National Bank Build- ing (2)—highest in the city, but not for long)—and the six-build- ing complex known as Peach- tree Center (3)—these are only the most conspicuous landmarks of a $1.5-billion downtown build- ing boom that, in less than one short decade, has transformed At- lanta from a slow-paced South- ern town to what its boosters like to call a “national city.” What they mean by that term is that Atlanta now exerts powerful eco- nomie force beyond its region. The spectacular boom didn’t just happen by itself. It is mostly the result of a vigor- ous promotion campaign called “Forward Atlanta” which was launched in 1961 by government and business leaders. The cam- paign has been so successful that more than 130 cities have sent delegations to Atlanta, hoping to learn the secret of its success. They would be well advised to start by getting a mayor like At- lanta’s Ivan Allen Jr., who took office in 1962. As president of the Chamber of Commerce in 1961, Allen was instrumental in getting the Forward Atlanta program started. After that, as mayor, Allen saw to it that the city participated fully in the public-private effort. Virtually all of Forward At- lanta’s advertising campaign (“Atlanta: a new kind of city’’) has been concentrated in the North. “They’re the cats with the bread,” explains Opie L. Shelton, executive director of the Cham- ber of Commerce. So far, downtown Atlanta's spectacular boom has been mostly a matter of quantity, not quality. The towering new office buildings are impressive more for their size than for their design, and thev have been plunked down with little regard for the environment (the handsome Equitable Build- ing (4) is the first to have a landscaped plaza at its base, for whatever that may be worth). Publie projects have fared no better. For all its closeness to downtown, the stadium might as well be miles away, since it is eut off from the core by a mas- sive freeway interchange. And the auditorium-convention center is inconvenient to the hotels which generate most of its use— and are, in turn, supported by it. A third civie project, the mul- tipurpose Memorial Arts Center completed last year, would have been a natural for downtown, but it was built in a residential neighborhood. Possibly, a new kind of city Atlanta’s civie and business leaders are now waking up to the fact that “bigger” and “better” are not always synonymous, and they have begun laying plans to assure that the future growth of downtown embodies both. Their plans—and hopes—are centered on six key developments that could serve as catalysts for mak- ing downtown Atlanta the “new kind of city” its boosters now claim it to be. One is Architeet-Developer John Portman’s Peachtree Cen- ter, which is already Atlanta’s biggest and best downtown de- velopment, and promises to be- come much more so. Three others are large air-rights developments flanking the core of downtown: Developer Raymond D. Nasher's Park Place project (5), the Georgia State College campus (6), and Developer Thomas G. Cousins’ project (7). The fifth and sixth elements are a pro- posed metropolitan rapid transit system converging at the center of downtown, and a small-scale pedestrian movement system loop- ing the downtown area. These six developments, and what they could mean to down- town Atlanta, are discussed on the following eight pages.  a  Portman’s Peachtree Center is the first major step toward Atlanta's goal of “a new kind of city" Six buildings now compose Peachtree Center: (1) the Merchandise Mart; (2) the Peachtree Center office building; (3) a Trailways bus terminal topped by a four-level parking garage; (4) the Regency Hyatt House Hotel with a re- volving restaurant above its roof; (5) the Gas Light: office tower; and (6) the Twin Tower. A 200-room circular addi- tion to the Regency is now under con- struction (7); and a 70-story office- apartment tower is scheduled to get under way this year (8). Another structure, as yet undisclosed, will rise on a block adjacent to the center (9). FORUM-—APRIL-1969 Durmg the '60s, while the rest of downtown Atlanta was boom- ing ehaotieally, John Portman was ereating, step by step, the city’s only cohesive complex of integrated buildings and spaces. Peachtree Center stands rather aloofly apart from the clutter at the downtown core and has, in fact, become a little downtown all of its own. The visitor to At- lanta could easily have all of his needs attended to within the six buildings that currently eompose the complex. Both Peachtree Center and John Portman'’s remarkable ea- reer as an entrepreneur-archi- tect got off the ground in 1961 with the 22-story Merchandise Mart (1 on plan). Before he de- signed and built the Mart, Port- man—with his partner, H. Grif- fith Edwards—had heen practic- ing architecture in the conven- tional way, and becoming increas- ingly frustrated. Portman want- ed to design large-scale urhan developments, but no such com- missions were coming his way. So he decided: “If I come up with an idea and promote and develop it myself, there won't be any question about who is going to be the architect.” The first idea Tn 1957, after Portman had promoted a successful furniture exhibition in a remodeled down- town building, he came up with the idea that Atlanta could sup- port a big, new merchandise mart, and that he could promote and design it. Portman formed a de- velopment corporation and se- eured an $8-million loan from Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., plus additional backing from At- lanta Realtor Ben Massell and Dallas Developer Trammel Crow. With Portman in complete con- trol of its design and financing, Peachtree Center was on its way. In 1965, three years after the Mart opened, Portman added the Peachtree Center Building, a 30- story office tower (2). Then, in rapid succession, he built the Trailways Bus Terminal topped by a foar-deck parking structure (3); the 21-story, 800-room Re- gency Hyatt House Hotel (4); the 25-story Gas Light Tower (5); and its mirror-image Twin Tower (6). He also dounled the size of the original Mart to 2 million sq. ft. in 1968, making it the second largest in the world (after Chicago's). Now under construction is a circular, 200-room addition to the Regency (7). And later this year, on a site behind the twin towers (8), construction will start on Peachtree Center's (and the city’s) tallest building: a 70- story tower containing 57 floors of offices topped by 13 floors of “corporate apartments.” The apartments will be leased by companies for housing and enter- taining visiting executives and important guests. A harmonious whole With one notable exception—the soaring interior of its hotel (see page 47)—Peachtree Center is not a showease of exciting archi- tecture. But the complex adds up to more than the sum of its parts. The individual buildings, if not distinguished in design, are at least harmonious in their re- lationships. And Portman has added plazas, landscaping, out- door sculpture, and other touches that tie the complex together at ground level, At night, Peachtree Center re- mains bustling with activity long after the rest of downtown has closed up. The hotel, of course, is the inajor nighttime attraction, but Portman has placed a number of restaurants in and among the other buildings to assure after- hours activity throughout the center. Two of the restaurants are located beneath the plaza that separates the twin towers, and two others are in the Mart— one on the ground floor and another on the roof, Portman has also linked the buildings with a series of en- closed pedestrian bridges, and claims that “you can go any- where in Peachtree Center with- out going outside.” The elaim is true, as far as it goes. But if, for example, you want to get from the hotel to the lobby of the Peachtree Center Building without going outside, you have to cross a bridge leading from the hotel lohhy (4) to the hase of the Gas Light Tower (5); take an elevator to the 23rd floor; eross a bridge spanning Peachtree Street to the roof of the Mart(1); eross another bridge connecting the Mart with the 23rd floor of the Peachtree Center Building (2) ; and, finally, take another ele- vator down to the lobby. Never- theless, the bridges are a conven- ience for those people who work in the three office buildings. Promotion vs. design Some architects take a dim view of Portman’s dual career, claim- ing that his role as a developer compromises his integrity as an architect. Portman denies that there is any conflict of interest, and he cites his design of the Regeney Hotel as a ease in point. Portman asserts that the Regen- ey, with its spectacular interior courtyard rising the full height of the building, would not have been built if he had designed it for a hotel client. (It was sold to the Hyatt House chain after construction was nearly com- pleted.) One architect in a large New York firm agrees. “We tried to get one of our hotel clients te aecept an interior courtyard, and got nowhere,” he said. “The client's first and last reaction was ‘Look at all that wasted space!’”’ The present Peachtree Center, savs Portman, is only the nucleus of what will eventually become a “city within a city,’ containing apartments, shops, theaters, and a wide variety of other functions. Portman is continually aequiring parcels of land in the area, the latest being a lease on an adja- cent state-owned site (9) oeeu- pied by an old hotel, which will he demolished. One of Portman’s future plans involves the eity's proposed rapid transit system, If it gets built, one of its routes will prob- ably burrow underneath Peach- tree Street, which bisects Port- man's complex, At the same time, an underground roadway could he built, and the street could be turned into a pedestrian mall (see page 50). A pedestrian mall closing off Penchtree Street would not only enhance Peachtree Center, it would provide a vital connecting link between the center and the rest of downtown Atlanta. 45 = ae fe ee Ee = Ss SS = Left: two of the four enclosed pedes- trian bridges that connect the build- ings of Peachtree Center. The one at top spans Peachtree Street from the 23rd floor of the Gas Light Tower to : the roof of the Merchandise Mart, j where a restaurant is located. The bridge in the photo at left connects the Mart with a parking garage. Right: the skylit interior courtyard of the Regency Hyatt House Hotel. The space is 223 ft. high and 140 ft. across, enclosed on all four sides by cantilevered balconies which serve as corridors for the 800 guest rooms. The glassed-in elevator cars rise along the outside of a rectangular ore at one side of the courtyard.   The parking structure pictured above is the first phase of a $500-million, multilevel air-rights project planned by Developer Thomas G. Cousins. It will contain office buildings, hotels, shops, and possibly a sports arena. Dallas Developer Raymond D. Nasher’s $200-million development will lie be- tween the government center (note State Capitol on model photo below) and the Georgia State College campus (opposite). The buildings will rise above a multilevel platform (right). i The Cousins, Nasher and Georgia State projects could be the start of a vast “platform city” FORUM-APRIL-1969 W,. a little luck and a lot of coordinated planning, the three projects pictured on these pages eould be the springboard for making downtown Atlanta a multilevel “platform city,’ in which all the transportation and pedestrian activities would be sorted out and meshed in a series of interrelated levels. ® The flat-topped parking strue- ture pictured on the opposite page is the first phase of what will probably be the largest of the three projects. It will be built on air rights over a downtown railroad yard. Its developer, Thomas G. Cousins of Atlanta, has not released details of his plan, but it has been reported that the development will repre- sent an investment of some $500 million and will contain office buildings, apartments, hotels, stores, and possibly a_ sports arena. Arehitects for the devel- opment are Toombs, Amisano & Wells of Atlanta. © On a pie-shaped site adjacent to Atlanta’s state-county-city rovernment center, Dallas Devel- oper Raymond D. Nasher will build Park Place, an 18-acre, $200-million complex that will also rise above railroad tracks. Tis first building, a 22-story office strueture, is now being designed, and plans eall for construction of a hotel, additional office build- ings, apartments, and a shopping concourse beneath a landscaped plaza. Architects are Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (New York) and Finch, Alexander, Barnes, Rothschild & Paschal of Atlanta. ® The third development, the Georgia State College campus, is already under way in a 40-acre area lying adjacent to the Park Place site. When it is completed in 1975, the campus will rest on a pedestrian platform built over existing streets. The focal point of the campus will be a 500,000- sq.-ft. Urban Life Center (model photo) designed by Finch, Alex- ander, Barnes, Rothschild & Pas- chal. It will draw upon all the school’s departments to carry out comprehensive studies of the urban ecology. Georgia State’s master plan was prepared by Robert & Co, of Atlanta. The almost simultaneous emer- gence of the three multilevel de- Georgia State College is being devel- oped on a 40-acre downtown site, much of it on platforms above street level (plan below). The campus will in- clude an Urban Life Center (above), in which students and’ practitioners from many fields will explore the social, po- litical, economic, and physical aspects alee un Nis , URBAN LIFE CENTER A . a | a a  velopments flanking the center of downtown has suddenly made .| the possibility of creating a “‘plat- form city” more than just a dream. “The potential is fantas- tie,” says Planner Robert W. Bivens, “This thing is absolutely loaded.” Bivens is executive director of Central Atlanta Progress Ine. (CAP), a unique public-private planning organization set up by the city’s civie and _ business leaders to coordinate and guide the future development of down- town. Working with funds pro- | vided by the business community, | the city, and the federal govern- ment, CAP is now conducting planning studies that eventually will lead to a comprehensive set of guidelines for creating the “platform city.” In addition to the three big air-right projects, CAP has these three major ele- ments to work with: © A proposed rapid-transitsystem (dotted lines on conceptual dia- gram at right) converging at a downtown Transit Center located between the three new platform developments. Its underground mezzanine would tie in with the three developments to form a con- tinuous pedestrian concourse. (A referendum to construct a 44- mile metropolitan transit system was defeated at the polls last November, but its advocates con- sider the turndown only a tempo- rary setback. The plan is now being restudied by the Metropoli- tan Atlanta Rapid Transit Au- thority, and a revised proposal will be presented to the voters at a later date.) ® A small-scale movement sys- tem (dotted lines) serving pedes- trians in the downtown area. Atlanta—along with Dallas, Den- ver, and Seattle—was selected last month by the Department of Transportation to participate in a $1.5-million “action program” leading to the development of eentral transportation systems that will “blend with the human environment.” @ “Railroad Gulch,” a vast area of downtown railroad yards erisserossed overhead by a net- work of elevated street viaducts. The gulch and its viaducts pro- vide a built-in framework for development of the “platform 50 city.” The . «er and Cousins projects, both of which use air rights over sections of the gulch, are the first to take advantage of this framework, and Georgia State’s platform over existing, grade-level streets will tie in with it. CAP’s plan will establish guidelines for incorporating fu- ture projects into the framework. (There are likely to be many op- portunities to do so, since the size of downtown is expected to double by 1983, and the guleh will be the most desirable area for the growth to take place.) Multilevel network If CAP is able to coordinate and guide all of these converging elements, the result could be a downtown something like the model pictured on the opposite page. It was prepared by Hou- shang Fahadi, a member of CAP’s staff, to stimulate commu- nity discussion leading to the development of a master plan. At the upper right-hand corner of the modei photo are the Geor- gia State campus, the Nasher development, and the government center (note the dome of the State Capitol) ; at the lower left- hand corner is the Cousins proj- ect; and between them is the circular Transit Center. From this nucleus, a network of traf- fie-free pedestrian platforms spreads out in all directions to tie in with the existing downtown and with new developments in the railroad gulch. Beneath the platforms are separated levels for ears and transit, plus a mez- zanine-level pedestrian concourse lined with shops. Atlanta’s “platform city” is a long way from fruition, but the city’s decision-makers, both pub- lic and private, have already demonstrated that they consider it more than just a vague possi- bility. As the first year’s public- private effort, they have jointly provided some $300,000 to fi- nance studies by CAP and the city’s planning staff. “This repre- sents a new dimension,” says Planner Donald G. Ingram, CAP’s associate director, who is coordinating the effort. “With both the city and the business eommunity committed to it, we think we ean make it happen.” iy TA JO eontabbepaem TArSies.m0o) HILO RSIS | The conceptual diagram above and the model pictured on the opposite Page are the initial steps in down- town Atlanta's plan for becoming the nation's first ‘platform city." The plan centers on four large existing or pro- posed downtown developments: (1) the Georgia State College campus; (2) Park Place; (3) a third large air-rights development; and (4) Peachtree Cen- ter. Incorporated in the plan are a proposed rapid-transit system (dotted lines) converging at a Transit Center in the downtown core, and a “mini- system” (dashed lines) for transport- ing pedestrians throughout the down- town area. The result would be a multilevel network separating cars, transit, and people in a series of in- terrelated levels. PHOTOGRAPHS: Page 43, Wray Stu- dio; pages 44 and 48 (top); William A. Barnes. FORUM-APRIL-1969  ghee ee  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 4, Folder 15, Document 66 Box 4 Box 4 Folder 15 Folder topic: Central Atlanta Progress | 1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/c3b50b0dc40113a3f31b2f3f749a1c40.pdf 6d6e49d1b663f55871d23007fcab5617 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. rPRE F CE A 1~ .ta' s c ent ra l area will e xperien c e a g row t ra ~e tha t only a hand ~u l o f c ities in t he .-:orld r.ave ever e xpe rienced. Er.ip loyr.icnt, r a v el ari.d ot h er cen tr al area a c tivi t y will dou~le between 19 6 1 and 19 3 . On ly two or t h.:-ee maj o r citic>s on the Nor t h An1eri c .an co n tincn a r c CX?Ccted t o a c hiev e such gro wth . Obvio usl y this growth will impose many trans por ta tion a ~d d evelopment p ro b l ems . Thi s Study Design rep=e sents the j oin t efi o r t o f the Cent r al At l an ta Business community a nd t h e Cit y of Atlant a t o he lp t a ckle these prob lems . Bo t h t he De pa rtme n t o f Tran s por ta t i on and the De?artment o f Hou sing and Urban Dev elopmen t are be i nry asked t o p re scribe those pro gra~s most ap?li~oble t o serv e Atlanta's needs . C �I • • P -. • -· .. _ -. ,; ) �.=-- - . ' ·' .·. POLICY REVIEW PROCESS PUBLIC RELATIONS STUDY DIRECTOR & LEAD CONSUL TANT TECHNICAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE • •· .. ·I"", I Figure 3. ·i ~ �Section 1 The City and c. A. P. do hereby agree to j ointly undentake a Cen t ral Atlanta Plann i ng Program subst a ntially in ac~ord with the Outline of the Study Dei ~g n for the Central Atlanta Plan ~in g Process as contained in the attached Exhibit II A II and made a part hereof by reference . Section 2 That the Work Pr og ram for the Central Atlanta Planning Pl anning Program which is attached as Exhibit " B" and made a part hereof by reference is agreed to as the guide f or the Planning Progr am accompl i shment of the Centra l Atl a nt a ikak except tha t such work pro 7.ram may be altered or chan ged at any time upon the a greeme nt of both the City and C. A. P. Se c tion 3 Ir v vJ l.A.'. o->J f-~ l >, I '13, u~ u 60 7~ 7 ~") i:,___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 / Atl f nta's central areca will experience a growth rate that only a handful of cities in the world have ever experienced. Employment, travel and other central area activity will double between 196] and 1963. Only two or three major cities on the North American continent are expected to achieve such growth. Obviously this growth will impose many trans- portation and development problems. This Study Design represents the joint effort of the Central Atlanta Business community and the City of Atlanta to help tackle these problems. Both the Department of Transportation and the Department of Housing and Urban Development are being asked to prescribe those programs i most applicable to serve Atlanta's needs.  Figure 2.  MAYOR & BOARD OF ALDERMAN PUBLIC RELATIONS CENTRAL AREA POLICY COMMITTEE POLICY REVIEW PROCESS C.A.P. BOARD OF DIRECTORS STUDY DIRECTOR & LEAD CONSULTANT TECHNICAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE TRANSPORTATION & PARKING STAFF & CONSUL TANT, ECONOMICS, FINANCE & PROGRAMMING STAFF & CONSULTANT, LAND USE & URBAN DESIGN STAFF & CONSULTANT, Figure 3. Section 1 The City and C. A. P. do hereby agree to jointly unde~take a Central Atlanta Planning Program substantially in accord with the Outline of the Study Deicen for the Central Atlanta Planrineg Process as contained in the attached Exhibit " A" and made a part hereof by reference. Section 2 That the Work Program for the Central Atlanta Planning Planning Program which is attached as Exhibit "B" and made a part hereof by reference is agreed to as the guide for the Planning Program accomplishment of the Central Atlanta Rkamw except that such work provram may be altered or changed at any time upon the agreement of both the Cit y and Cc. A. P. Section 3 239 7  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 4, Folder 15, Document 67 Box 4 Box 4 Folder 15 Folder topic: Central Atlanta Progress | 1969