Dublin Core
Title
Box 1, Folder 3, Document 58
Text Item Type Metadata
Text
May 9, 1969
Mr, John T.Edmunds
Assistant Regional Administrator for
Renewal Assistance
645 Peachtree-Seventh Building
Atlanta, Georgia
Dear Mr. Edmunds:
RE: Georgia Demolition Grant
Recent events have led us to believe that a brief summary of our progress in the
Demolition Grant Program would be in order.
This program, as first envisioned, provided for an estimate of 157 buildings to
be razed under the Grant. No provision or allowance was made for owner demolitions.
Under the amended and expanded Grant, this total was increased to an estimated 282
structures. The Grant fund was not increased.
Through April 30, 1969, a cumulative total of 194 structures have been removed. The
actual funds spent are still running far below the initial estimate because, of the
194 demolitions, 141 have been demolished by the owners, only 53 under contract.
Under existing law, the owner has the privilege to demolish himself if he so chooses.
In addition to the above, we have an estimated 50-case workload of active cases. We
should add some 30 more during the remaining course of the program. It thus appears
thet the program will be 100% successful in its mission, i.e. to remove the undesirable
buildings in the Grant area.
To get a completely rounded picture of the situation, it is also necessary to take
into account the properties which the owners have chosen to repair, inadvisedly perhaps.
Nevertheless, under law, the owners do have the right to rehabilitate if they so choose.
We estimate that some 65 of our case structures have been repaired in the area during
the life of the program to date. These would have to be deleted from our total as
reported. There will probably be some 15 to 20 more repaired by the end of the Grant
program.
Mr. John T. Edmunds
May 9, 1969
Page 2
To summarize:
Total estimated to be demolished 282
Actually demolished, April 30 194
Active cases 50
To be added 30
Repaired (est.) _65
Total 339
Overage 57
In view of the above figures, we feel that the Program will be successfully concluded.
It is also felt that as general policy in our overall City program, including the
Demolition Grant Program, it is always desirable to gain the voluntary compliance of
the owners, if possible. This creates a better public image, aids in Public Relations,
and reduces the number of possible lawsuits both as to the demolitions and as to any
damages that might occur to person or property.
We hope the above will present a more helpful and clearer picture of what we have
and expect to accomplish. We are always most happy to cooperate with your office and
‘greatly appreciate your assistance.
Sincerely yours,
24 etl afpeee—
W. R. Wofford
Building Official
Mr, John T.Edmunds
Assistant Regional Administrator for
Renewal Assistance
645 Peachtree-Seventh Building
Atlanta, Georgia
Dear Mr. Edmunds:
RE: Georgia Demolition Grant
Recent events have led us to believe that a brief summary of our progress in the
Demolition Grant Program would be in order.
This program, as first envisioned, provided for an estimate of 157 buildings to
be razed under the Grant. No provision or allowance was made for owner demolitions.
Under the amended and expanded Grant, this total was increased to an estimated 282
structures. The Grant fund was not increased.
Through April 30, 1969, a cumulative total of 194 structures have been removed. The
actual funds spent are still running far below the initial estimate because, of the
194 demolitions, 141 have been demolished by the owners, only 53 under contract.
Under existing law, the owner has the privilege to demolish himself if he so chooses.
In addition to the above, we have an estimated 50-case workload of active cases. We
should add some 30 more during the remaining course of the program. It thus appears
thet the program will be 100% successful in its mission, i.e. to remove the undesirable
buildings in the Grant area.
To get a completely rounded picture of the situation, it is also necessary to take
into account the properties which the owners have chosen to repair, inadvisedly perhaps.
Nevertheless, under law, the owners do have the right to rehabilitate if they so choose.
We estimate that some 65 of our case structures have been repaired in the area during
the life of the program to date. These would have to be deleted from our total as
reported. There will probably be some 15 to 20 more repaired by the end of the Grant
program.
Mr. John T. Edmunds
May 9, 1969
Page 2
To summarize:
Total estimated to be demolished 282
Actually demolished, April 30 194
Active cases 50
To be added 30
Repaired (est.) _65
Total 339
Overage 57
In view of the above figures, we feel that the Program will be successfully concluded.
It is also felt that as general policy in our overall City program, including the
Demolition Grant Program, it is always desirable to gain the voluntary compliance of
the owners, if possible. This creates a better public image, aids in Public Relations,
and reduces the number of possible lawsuits both as to the demolitions and as to any
damages that might occur to person or property.
We hope the above will present a more helpful and clearer picture of what we have
and expect to accomplish. We are always most happy to cooperate with your office and
‘greatly appreciate your assistance.
Sincerely yours,
24 etl afpeee—
W. R. Wofford
Building Official
Comments