Box 18, Folder 11, Document 40

Box 18, Folder 11, Document 40

HOUSING RESOURCES COMMITTEE
Topics for discussion with the Mayor

May &, 1967

1. Swmary of April 20, Housing Resources Committee report shows:

Estimate when available







Caterory No. Units 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971

Firm 3556 (1312) (1928) (316) - -

Probable 3553 - (1681) (672) (500) (760)
Total 7109 In Sight (1312) (3609) (988) (500) (700)

Being Considered L569

Doubtful 3088

Total Proposed 1,766 units
Of the 71 proposals contained in this report, 19 of the best ones
and those which until recently were considered among the most promising
(comprising 6,50) units) have either been turned down or are in jeoperdy.
The principal reasons for this, together with some suggestions to improve
the situation,were included in letter of April 12, to the Chairman of the
Housing Resources Committee. The problem areas of greatest concern are

indicated in the accompaning list.

2. Effects of the problem encountered with the NAACP and the Inter-group
Relations Section of HUD is beginning to be felt locally in FHA also.
It is apparent that the position taken by the Inter-group Relations Section

of HUD has been brewing for some time and now has the support of HUD in

my a

Washington. Thus far we have depended primarily on private developers to

come in with proposed sites, Unless the current situation can be materially
improved soon, it may behoove the City to go into the business of systemically
determining sites for low cost housing and acquiring the land needed for such

use, by condemnation if necessary, in much the same manner as is done by the

Scnool Board for needed school sites,

3. Of the 9400 unit goal for the first two years of the low cost housing

progrem, allocation breakdown specified by the Mayor in the Housing Conference


ad %
Public Housing 57% = 5586 units (560 allocated)
Private Developers 30% = 2940 units

f s.-
(conventional)

221d{(3) Non-profit 134 = 127k units

Total 9800
It seems that the 221d(3), co-op is the most popular approach to the non-
profit development and is best for both the City and the purchaser-occupant.
The prospective home owner gets more for his money in this type of home
ownership than in any other manner thus far proposed. The failure and
foreclosing rate nationally on these developments is negligible. This
type development should be able to account for a greater proportionate

share of the overall requirement than the 13% previously indicated; it

should be widely encouraged.

4, An article by Alex Coffin in the Atlanta Constitution, April 17,

stated that 25% of Atlanta is in vacant lots. If this be true, our most
available resource for low-cost housing, both public and private, is on
scattered sites. Incidentally such procedure would create a minimun of
neighbornoca objection and political difficulty. Eoth private developers
and the Housing Authority should be called upon to pursue this principle

to the maximum.

5. The Housing Code inspections on Boulevard have produced offers for

sale by owners of at least 103 units.

6. No additional sites under the Public Housing leasing program have been

acculred since previous Housing Resources Committee report of February 20,
$ £ > +

fF
= a we j 5 4 ; ; oie ce
it aopears that most of the time of the Housing Authority representative .
nReetinanna = Taig” am 51 3 5 sw AS ae - pS
assigned to leasing is taken up in processing individual tenant leases for pow 3
Yur f
occupancy of the leased units rather than devoting the main effort to
os
securing leases for additional units. The leasing of additional projects ve
/ po
> so, i . ; , . ny
for Public Housing should be pushed.


7. Although rehabilitation of sub-standard dwelling units does not pro-
vide additional housing (and such is not included in Housing Resources
Committee tabulation totals of prospective housing units), still this
feature adds materially to the available resources of standard housing
and tends to reduce the requirement for new housing. Consequently it
is desirable for the Housing Resources Committee to have current infor-
mation on the extent of rehabilitation and principal areas involved.
This information is contained in routine monthly reports of activities
of the Housing Code Division and has been requested several times, but
has not been received since January and only partial information was
provided for December and Januery. There appears to be no logical reason gt
yh
why copies of the Housing Code Division's monthly reports should nov be cae: it

made available to the Housing Resources Committee. Ww 4

260

8. Although some of the difficulties confronting the low-cost housing Wo an
program may be beyond the ability of the City, however the outcome of

zoning petition number Z-67-33G (denial of rezoning from M-1 to A-1)

is typical of situations over which the City does have control and where

rezoning may have to be accomplished in order to provide ample locations

for development of low-cost housing.

9, There are still 157 single family lots in the Thomasville Urban
Renewal Project which have not been sold for 221 development. Minimum he yl
prices have been established on all of these lots, ranging from $900 to Ww iB

/ ~

$2100 each. In order to encourage development of these lots, recommend pow

cr
He
fuk}
ct
'S

rice reductions be made for multiple purchases, as shown on the fo 4.
attached card and that publicity be given to that effect. Mr. Gates,
our FHA consultant, concurs with this principle, The suggested reduction

has been shown to a reoutable and experienced developer who agrees that

it is practical and should result in development of these lots,


= by «

10, In order to keep the interest and confidence of prospective developers
in the low-cost housing field, suggest that a conference be called by the
Mayor with the Board of Aldermen and that some of the most interested low-
cost housing promoters and developers be invited to present their views

and comments on the program. Several have indicated that they would welcome
such an opportunity. Such meeting might produce some helpful ideas. In
any event it would provide an opportunity for them to state their side of
the problem and should serve to clear the currently confused atmosphere.

.

Also suggest that the Press be invited to such a meeting.

Encls: Suggested price reductions on Thomasville lots
Memo dated April 21, 1967