Box 3, Folder 6, Complete Folder

Box 3, Folder 6, Complete Folder

ATLANTA,Gll!:ORGIA
ROUTE SLIP
TO:
~•
FROM: Dan E. Sweat,
Jr.
D
For your information
D
Please refer to the attached corres pondence and -make the
necessary reply.
D
Advise me the status of the attached.
<.Q~ ? .
F ORM 25-4-S
�I
Aug ust 6,, 1968
Mr . Edwar d H . Baxter
Regional Admin istrato r
Department of H ousing and
Urban Dev e lopment
645 Peachtree-Seventh Building
Atlanta, G e orgia 30323
Dear Mr. Baxter;
I have bec ome inc reasingly concerned with the c onditions existing in
an area of Atlanta that is designated as the Bedford-Pine Urban
Redevelopment Area , Ga R-101.
I have recently made several tours of this area and find the structures
in an extremely bad and often dangerous state of repair. In reviewing
this with the City's Building Inspectol', he has advised me of the
practical difficulties that he has in requiring a p:roperty owner to make
a substantial investment when it is anticipated that the property will
oon be acquired as a result of urban renewal.
The City already has expended over $1,600,000 of its own fwids in
this area to acquire street and sew r rights of way s well s properties
of thos persons who, if was felt, w re uffering a ev r hardship
because of the impending urban renewal ctiv!ty. It is now obvious th t
ev ry l'esident nd property owner in this rea is suff .ring a hardship
and the City Comptroller has advised me that,. even lf funds were
avail bl ,. there is considerable risk involved in dvancing funds for
any further acquisitions that -re outside letter of consent areas . This
ls because of the rule that requires us to · ccept the amount we paid,
or th
pprai ed value, which ver is lower , at the time we eventu Uy
r · sell the pl"op rty to th proj ct.
l
m co · lzant of the f ct that th combin tion of th origin 1 Butt rmilk
Bottoms, R -91, Proj ct with th Bedfoa-d ... Pin P:roj ct,. R .. 101, Project,
�/
Mr . Baxter
Page Two
August 6, 1968
after we had received Part I approval on the original project, may have
caused some problems and delays that might not otherwise have occurred ,
I am sure that any such delays were caused by factors occurring at all
levels , including our own. Regardless of the reasons for the delays,
however, I am sure that you can appreciate the plight of the residents of
this area as a result of living with the impending urban renewal activity
for this period of time ,
The situation in this area is now critical. In reviewing the situation with
everyone concerned, it seems to be the concensus thnt immediate approval
of the urban renewal project would be the single most effective factor in
meeting the problem. For this r ason , this letter is to request that the
processing of this application be placed on an emergency status . I would
sincerely appreciate any assistance that you personally can provide in
obtaining this approval as quickly as possible .
Needless to say , your continued cooperation and assistance in helping
Atlanta me et its problems is very much · ppreciated.
Sincerely yours,
Ivan All n ,
M yor
lAJr:fy
cc~ Mr . John Edmund
J.,.-.
,
�/
BEDFORD-.PINE URBA N REDEVELOPMENT AREA, GA R-101
CHDONICAL OF EVENTS
A UGUST 6, 1968
November 27, 1963
R-91 S urvey & Planning A pplic ations filed
February 4, 1964
GNRP Application authorized by Board of A ldermen
February 27, 1964
GNRP Application filed
April 3, 1964
R-91 Survey & Planning approved
May 6, 1964
Contract for R -91 planning services executed
June 9 , 1964
GNRP Application a p proved
July 17., 1964
ELA - A ud itodum area submitted
GNRP terminated by C i ty
S & P , R-101, authorized
July 20, 1964
R-101 Survey &: Planning Application submitted
N ovember 17, 1965
R -101 S urvey & Planning Application approved
February 2, 1966
R - 101 contract for planning s ervice a e x ecuted
Ma rch 7. 1966
E L A -Hill School site s ubm itted
J une 15, 1966
Sub m itt d P artl, R - 91
Sept mb r 20 , 1967
Combined S & P Applic t ion., R-91,-R -10~ submitte d
Novemb-
r 30, 1967
F b ruary 5, 1968
Combined Surv y & P l anning
pproved
S ubmitted Part I, R -101
Definitions :
Original B utterm ilk Bottom s P r oj ct Area d e s i gnation
R-101 .
Ori · a.1 Bedford ... Pin Project de sign tlon nd, late r,
the d s i.gnation of th cornbin d pl'oject ar a
GNRP
Ci n ral Nei ghborhood R n w 1 Plan
s
S ul'v y and Planning
p
ELA
Early Land Acqui ltlon
�A TLANTA, GEORGI A
PHON E JA . 2•4463
Ivan All e n , Jr. , Mayo r
0/IAL
kt?a/-
JMul clot1 ~ lut't/A,t
d?
~
(Yofp~_:
&vo

b'rable Ivan Allen, Jr.

~or
City of Atlanta
City Hall
Atlanta, Georgia 30303

Subject:

Bedford Pine UR Redevel opment Project

Dear Mayor Allen:
As waa stated in our Conference, this project area, sometimes called
Buttermilk Bottoms, contains some of the worst housing in Atlanta. Much
of the worst housing was removed in clearing the l and for t he relief
sewer and the City Auditorium. The condition of the remainder has been
aggravated by the long period of waiting for Federal approval to execute
the Project.

In an effort to give some relief, the following actions have been taken:

(1)

The Housing Ccxle Department, worldng with our Project employ-ees,
have made and are making inspections of the buildings which appear
to be in the wort condition.

(2)

As complaints are received from tenants,or representatives of tenants,
the structures in which they 11ve are also inspected.

(3)

The Housing Code Enforcement Department notifiesthe owner of the
work which must be performed in order to correct those conditions
which ar an immediate threat to health or safety. Our Project
employees go to the owners and attempt to persuade them to make
the corrections immediate:cy-. This approach is achieving a large
measure of su.cceas.

(4)

In those cases where the owner will not correct the conditixms,
the structure is placarded and the own r is ask d to vacate t.he
building and board it up.

��CITY OF ATLANTA
OFFICE OF COMPTROLLER
CITY HALL

Atlanta, Georgia

30303

CHARLES L. DAVIS
COMPTROLLER

EDGAR A. VAUGHN, JR.
DEPUTY COMPTROLLER

September 12, 1968

Mr. Dan E. Sweat, Jr.
Director
Governmental Liaison
City Hall
Dear Dan:
We have reviewed the amended application for the Rockdale
Urban Redevelopment Project R-21 which was approved by the Board
of Aldermen on September 3, 1968. Basically, we are in agreement
with the proposed amendment, however, there are certain factors
we feel should be taken into consideration and brought to light
at this time. This amendment results in additional cost to the
City of Atlanta of $169,369.00. Of this amount $102,960.00 is
attributable to increases in administrative costs ($30,360) and
interests on temporary loans ($72,600). The major portion of the
increases are due solely to the extension of the project execution
period by 36 months.
It is our understanding that this extension in the project
execution period principally results from the reluctance of the
FHA to approve the release of construction funds over a short
period of time. They apparently have some doubt about the economic feasibility of this type of project and believe that by
staging the project some degree of the risk can be removed.
However, since this extension results in an increase in
Federal Government costs of more than $200,000.00 in addition to
the $169,000.00 increase in the City's share, it would seem apparent
that a reduction in the period of this extension would benefit all
parties involved. Perhaps proper channeling of this cost information
might result in a review of the risk supposedly involved and a
prompter release of funds.

�September 12, 1968
Page 2
We are in no way objecting to the project amendment and
realize that there are certain Local Grant-in-Aids that might
also delay completion of the project. However, a shortening of
the project by even 12 to 24 months should result in substantial
savings while still allowing a reasonable period for completion.
Any assistance you can give us in this matter would be greatly
appreciated.
Very truly yours,

Charles L. Davis
Comptroller
CLD:cs

�D

�September 5, 1968

MrQ Dan E. Sweat, J r.
Ci ty Hall
At lanta , Georgia
30303

Re:

Parcel C-1
Thomasville Urban Redevelopment Area
Project Georgia R-22
Shopping Center Site

Gentlemen:
The Housing Authority of Atlanta is now offering for sale and
redevelopment as a shopping center the above described property.
We are sending a sales brochure which gives full details of the
offering and the dimensions of the property.
It contains 10.38
acres, or 452,232 square feet, and has a minimum established
price of $330,000.
The site is located in, but not dependent on, an area containing
400 new homes and a Public Housing Project of 350 units now under
construction.
The New Town in Town housing development will be
started soon and ·is only a few blocks away .
The terms of the offering are very favorable.
The Redeveloper
is required to make a 5% Proposal Deposit with his proposal.
If
the proposal is accepted, the Redeveloper has a year to sign the
contract, at which time a total earnest money deposit of 20% is
required.
Then, if he wishes, he has six months in which to
close the transaction.
Proposals are to be opened in the office of the Housing Authority
at 10 :·00 A. M. on February 5, 1969, and must be made on the forms
to be furnished upon request by the Housing Authority .
Very truly yours,

143.215.248.55

Philip E. Vrooman, ~hief
Real Estate Disposition Section
PEV:hcn
Enclosure

�of :t,......u11,.a
City Ball

Ci

Atl

In

(1)

(2)
C,)

I uuolrlC'~la

303

�(S}

�August 23, 1968

Mr . Lester Purcell,
puty Dir ector
At lanta Housing uthority
Hurt Bu~lding
tlant;a, Georgia

r Mr. Purcell•
As a participant in the Cornerstone Proj ect,
lcx:ated at 493 Martin Str et, $ • • , Atlant , Georgi a ,
I sat in on n inform 1 seminar with Daniel S
tin
whic h he outlined Atlant •s effort to improve physical
and sooi 1 conditions in tlanta • s "ghettos,_. • ..Among
the item he mention d w s th Atlanta Housi ng Authority • s
plans to use mobil home industry techniques to c onstr uc t
tempora r y r l ocation hou ing i n · n urban renew l ar a.
this Agency 1 pl nning to construct int r im r l oc t i on
housing in an urban ren al a~
in · shingt on, D. C.,
I as'lted Mr . Swat for furth rd tail about the project
and he suggested that I cont ct you.
In Washington we r att pting -co con truct
e<:onomically f sible interim housing module which
will me t th cod r~irement of the District of
Colu.mbi ~ W h v not y t advertised for bids but
w exp t to do o hortly. In view of th experiment 1
n tur of thi und rtaking, w would lik to l rn as
mu h
po ibl from other oiti ' exp ri nc
in
dev loping t por ~y reloc tion housing .
ther for
would ppreci te 1 · if you could end us ny m terial
you£ l fr
tor l
e t this tim concerning how
tlanta h s pproach
th
truction oft _ por ry
r location housing in
ar
nd wh th
bUilding
cod r
uir
t wer
how th
wer m t 8

�-

2 -

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

CC:

Dani ·1 sw t ,
Coorain tor of Federal Programs
Mayor • s Office
City Hall
Atl.ant, Georgi
~It' .

�MINUTES
GRANT REVIEW BOARD
August 28, 1968

I

The Grant Review Board met on Wednesday, August 28, 1968,
at 10:00 a. m. to consider ari amendment to the Loan and Grant
Contract Project Ga. R-21, Roc;kdale Rede~elopment Area.

,

. ·'

Present were:
,,.-' .

Dan Sweat, Chairman
George Berry.'
Woody Underwood
James Henley, Chief, Program Services
,Branch, Atlanta Housing Authority
Daryl Chaney, Redevelopment Assistant,
Atlanta Housing Authority

j


i
'

The amendment is necessary to extend the Project Execution Period
and to provide additional funds for Real Estate Purchases, Project
Improvements, Legal Services, A dministrative Costs, and Real
Estate Acquisition Expenses. It will have no effect on the City's
cash r e quirement b ecause of existing non-cash credits.
'

.

The amendment will increase the Capital Grant by $513, 284 from
$2,700, 257 to $3,213,541 and ;nill increase the Temporary Loan by
$513,284 from $3,720,058 to $4,233,342.
The Review Board r ecommends approval of this amendment.

e-s pe ctfully,

Chairman
DS:fy

�August 28, 1968

Mr . Dan E. Sweat, J r .
City Hal l
At lant a, Geor gia
30303

SUBJECT:

ADDENDUM
DEVELOPMENT COMPETITION ON FEDERAL SURPLUS
LAND TO MEET CRITICAL NEEDS
GA. R-22 - THOMASVILLE URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AREA

Dear Sir:
This letter constitutes an Addendum to an Invitation to Buy
and Develop land in the Thomas v ille Urban Redevelopment Area,
Project Georgia R-22, dated June 10, 1968. The Offering is
an invitation to bid on a development competition encompassing approximately 96 acres of Federal Surplus Land lying in
two parcels designated BB-1 and CC-1.
The Offering states
that proposals will be opened September 5 , 1968. The opening
date is hereby changed to OCTOBER 24 , 1968 at 10:00 A. M. at
the offices of the Atlanta Housing Authority , 824 Hurt Building, Atlanta, Georgia, 30303.
The Housing Act of 1968 contains provisions which propospective
Redevelopers may wish to us e in this competition.
It is anticipated that most of the pertinent details concerning this Act,
and particularly Sections 235 and 236, will be known within the
nex t few weeks.
It is anticipated also that the supplemental
Appropriations Act, funding the new Sections, will be passed on
or be f ore October 1 . We are a nnou n cing the new bid opening date
of October 24, 1968, to prov ide an opportuni'ty for Redev elopers
to submit proposals based on the possibilities provided in the
new Housing Act .
During the past s everal weeks a number of prospective Redeveloper s have asked qu e stions, the answers to which we believe
shoul d hav e ge neral circulation . These answers a r e to be considere d Adde n d a to the Offer i ng, a n d are as follows :

�2.

(1) The price for the land offered has been questioned.
In clarification , we point out that it is our desire
that the Redeveloper should have the most complete
freedom possible in ~is approach to land use.
Some
commercial land will be ne cessary to serve the convenience needs of the imme diate neighborhood.
We
have limited this to six acres.
Part of this six
acres may be ut ilized for service stations located
near the on and off ramps of the Lakewood Extension
Freeway, which us e would increase the value of the
commercial land great l y .
The commercial usage should
be subordinate to the s b.opping center to be built at
the corner of Mor e laEcl Avenu e a nd McDonough Boulev ard.
It is our belief, sl;a:cecl b y FHA, that the land for
lowest income hous ing should be included in housing
development cos ts at ·t ::_,P. l owest possib l e v alue in
order to achi eve th 2 lowest possible rents or sales
prices.
For tha t n~ason, we have stipulated that
this land woul d be accept.ea. b :-{ F.SA at a rnaxim-c.m value
o f $4 , 500 p er acre f o;::- SP.ct_i o n 221 d ( 3 ), Section 23 5
and Section 23 6 deve l opr,1ents .
The remaining residential land might be acceptab le for mortgages under
other programs , incl 0d i n q convention al f i nanc ing , at
a some~1at higher val ue .
When the fore c:;'.oing C,'.)nsidc!;.-ations are lumped together ,
we arrive d at an avera7e p ri c e p er acre of $7,650. We
b e lieve t hat the Redev ~loper and his adv isers should
be abl e to allocat.e va l-.Jcs to individual portions for
each portion.
We realiz0. u --.at. -this (ave rage price of
$7,650 ) approach c.. o t..l·· c sa l e of l and w-ill mean t hat
the Redeve lop 1c:~r will P e ed more t han u s ual capital since
he will buy r es i d e n t ial J.-'l~:-c:. prior to the purchase and
development of tb e corn.rn~rcial land.
It is our hope
that this disadvantaGe will be outweighed b y the many
advantages g ain ed b y h;::i.vin q comp l ete freedom to develop
land use s fo:;_· t l~, 0- total arna .
(2)

The Off e r i ng req u i n"'s dP. v e lopme nt of 300 dwe lling units
a vai l able t o t.hP- lcwcst i ::cor,, e farnili es .
The wording
"lowest incorn€' far,1ilies is c3 e lib eJ.:- ate , and is in contrast t ,J t >e words l o vJ--r e i-, ~- p l~b li c h ol, s ing ".
I t is
our belief tha t tLe u se o f Se ction 221 d (3 ) in it s various appli cat ion s , s ~c tio n 2?5 and/ or Se ction 23 6 ,
toc:rAt h e J.:- witl-:i U S<" o f ~_;:.-:::: l,c;-·t Suppl e me nt Progr am , can
provide for many o f ~he s e fami lies .
It may be that
11

�3.

Some quantity of low-rent public housing may be
found necessary. Each pro spec tive Redev eloper
should analyze this phase of the development in
order prope r ly to arrive at a solution .
It is
our hope that no low-rent public h o using will be
necessary to me et t his goal of the deve lopment.
However, if public hou sing, e i ther Turn-- key or
preferably Leased , is co:::sidered n ecessary, it
should not exceed 50% of the 30 0 dwe llings .
Our analysis of the low- rent p ublic housing situation in Atla~ta, as it concerns high-rise for
elderly, leads 1.1s to the conclusion that this
type of public hou sing would n ot be acceptable in
this development .. We do not, however , rule out
high-rise for one and t wo per son familie s financed
through other programs.
(3)

After the bid opening , all proposals will be delivered to a Jury compos ed of nationally recognized
authorities in the field of h o us ing. The Jury is
being supplied with the same info rmat ion as that
supplied to prospective Redev elopers . This Jury
will review all proposals a nd will select the
successful proposal to recomme n d to the Hou sing
Authority Board of Commissioners for the award.

(4)

It should be apparent from the for e going that the
criter ia for judging the proposals will b e based
solely o n t he wri tten info rmat ion which h as been
supplied both to the prospec t i v e Redeve lopers and
to the Jury.
The types of q u estions , therefore,
that our staff i s prepare d t o answe r relat e to
the methods of s ubmitt i ng p ropo sal s r athe r than
to the contents o f the proposals .
Si ncere l y y our s ,
A

J

I

.

tY)-r.LJ_~L,,~'--€..J~__d,)
M. B. Satte rf i e lc:'0
Exe cut ive Di rec~
MBS :hcn

�EDWIN L. STERNE

M. B. SATTERFIELD

CHAIRMAN

E X ECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND SECRETARY

LESTER H . PERSELLS
GEORGE S. CRAFT

ASSOCIATE

EXEC UT .IVE O IRECTOR

VICE CHAIRMAN

CARL TON GARRETT
DIRECTOR

J. B. BLAYTON
FRANK G. ETHERIDGE
JACK F. GLENN

OF FINANCE

GILBERT H. BOGGS

~

/

.' \ .J

X0'

{

DIRECTOR OF HOUSING

,0a'

HOWARD OPENSHAW
DIRECTOR

824

Y6'q_:

J

I

./'

HURT BUILDING

OF REDEVELOPMENT

GEORGE R.

ATLANTA, GEORG IA 30303
JACKSON 3-6074

July 24, 1968

Mr. Dan Sweat

Government Liason Director
City of Atlanta
City Hall
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Dear Dan:
We have received Part I approval from the Department of Housing and
Urban Development for Amendment 7 to the Loan and Grant Contract in
our University Center Urban Renewal Area. This will reduce the
Federal Capital Grant $218,548, from $5,420,508 to $5,201,960. We
will request that the reduction in the Capital Grant be applied to
our Thomasville Urban Renewal Area to partially offset the increase
in its Capital Grant for the development of the Federal Surplus
Land.
Please take this matter before the Grant Review Board for its approval at the earliest possible date.
Sincerely yours,

~

Howard Openshaw
Director of Redevelopment
HO:ab

SANDER

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR

·

�C ITY OF .ATLANT.A
CITY HALL

August 6, 1968

ATLANTA, GA. 30303

Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404

IVAN ALLEN, JR., MAYOR
R. EARL LANDERS, Admin istrative Assistant
MRS. ANN M. MOSES, Executive Secretary
DAN E. SWEAT, JR ., Director of Governmental Liaison

Mr . . Edward H. Baxter
Regional Admini s trator
Department of Housing and
Urban Development
645 Peachtree-Seventh Building
Atlanta, Georgia 30323

Dear Mr. Baxter:
I have become increasingly concerned with the conditions existing in
an area of Atlanta that is designated as the Bedford-Pine Urban
Redevelopment Area, Ga R-101.
I have recently made several tours of this area and find the structures
in an extremely bad an d often dangerous state of repair. In reviewing
this with the City's Building Inspector, he has advised me of the
practical difficulties that he has in requiring a property owner to make
a substantial investment when it is anticipated that the property will
soon be acquired as a result of u_rban renewal.

~

The City already has e x pended over $ 1, 600, 000 of its own funds in
this area to acquire street and sewer rights of way as well as properties
of those persons who, if was felt, were suffering a severe hardship
because of the impending urban -renew al activity. It is now obvious that
every resident and property owner in thi ~ area is suffering a hardship
and the City Comptroller has advised me that, even if funds w ere
available, there is considerable risk involv ed in advancing funds for
any furth e r acquisiti on s tha t a r e outsid e l e tt e r of consent areas. This
is because of the rule that requires us to accept the amount we paid,
or the apprais e d va.lue , whicheve r is low er, at the time we eventually
resell the prope rty to the project .

.

. I am cognizan t of the fact that the combin ation of the original Butte rmilk
Bottoms , R-91 , P r oj e ct with the Bedford - Pine Project, R-101, Project,

�Mr. Baxter
Page Two
August 6, 1968

after we had received Part I approval on the original project, may have
caused some problems and delays that might not otherwise have occurred.
I am sure that any such delays were caused by factors occurring at a _ll
levels, including our own. Regardless of the reasons for the delays,
however, I am sure that you can appreciate the plight of the residents of
this area as a result of living with the impending urban renewal activity
for this period of time.
The situation in this area is now critical. In reviewing the situation with
everyone concerned, it seems to be the concensus that immediate approval
of the urban renewal project would be the single most effective factor in
meeting the problem. For this reason, this letter is to request that the
processing of this application be placed on an emergency status. I would
--sincerely appreciate any assistance that you personally can provide in
obtaining this approval as quickly as possible.
/

Needless to say, your continued cooperation and assis·tance in helping
Atlanta meet its problems is very much appreciated.

IAJr:fy
cc: Mr. John Edmunds

-

�BEDFORD-PINE URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AREA, GA R-101
CHRONICAL OF EVENTS
AUGUST 6, 1968

November 27, 1963

R -91 Survey & Planning Applications filed

February 4, 1964

GNRP Application authorized by Board of Aldermen

February 27, 1964

GNRP Application filed

April 3, 1964

R -91 Survey & Planning approved

May 6, 1964

Contract for R -91 planning services executed

June 9, 1964

GNRP Application approved

July 17, 1964

ELA-Auditorium area submitted
GNRP terminated by City
S & P, R -101, authorized

July 20, 1964

R-101 Survey & Planning Application submitted

November 17, 1965

R-101 Survey & Planning Application approved

F e bruary 2, 1966

R-101 contra ct for planning s e rvices e xe cuted

March 7, 1966

ELA-Hill School site submitted

June 15, 1966

Submitted Part I, R -91

Septembe r 20, 1967

Combine d S & P Applic a tion , R -91 ;-R -101, submitte d

November 30, 1967

Combined Survey & Planning approved

February 5, 1968

Submitte d Part I, R -101

..

Definitions:
R-91

Original Butte rmilk Bottoms Project Area d e signation

R - 101

O riginal Be d ford- P ine Project d es i gnation and, l a t er,
the designation of t h e combined pr oj ect a rea

GNRP

G eneral N e i ghbo r h o od R enewal P l an

S&P

Surve y and Planning

ELA

Early Land Acquisition

�I

C ITY OF .ATLANT.A
CITY HALL

August 6, 1968

ATLANTA, GA. 30303

Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404

IVAN ALLEN, JR., MAYOR
R. EARL LANDERS, Administrative Assistant
MRS. ANN M. MOSES, Executive Secretary
DAN E. SWEAT, JR., Director of Governmental Liaison

Mr. Edward H. Baxter
Regional Administrator
Department of Housing and
Urban Development
645 Peachtree -Seventh Building
Atlanta, Georgia 30323
Dear Mr. Baxter:
I have become increasingly concerned with the conditions existing in
an area of Atlanta that is designated as the Bedford-Pine Urban
Redevelopment Area, Ga R -101.
I have recently made several tours of this area and find the structures
in an extremely bad and often dangerous state of repair. In reviewing
this with the City's Building Inspector, he has advised me of the
practical difficulties that he has in requiring a property owner to make
a substantial investment when it is anticipated that the property will
soon be acquired as a result of u_rban renewal.
The City already has expended over $1,600,000 of its own funds in
this area to acquire street and sewer rights of way as well as properties
of those persons who, if was felt, were suffering a severe hardship
because of the impending urban -renewal activity. It is now obvious that
every resident and property owner in thiel area is suffering a hardship
and the City Comptroller has advised me that, even if funds were
available, there is considerable risk involved in advancing funds for
any further acquisitions that are outside lett~r of consent areas. This
"'is because of the rule that requires us to accept the amount we paid,
or the appraised va_lue, whichever is lower, at the time we eventually
resell the property to the project .

.

I am cognizant of the fact that the combination of the original Buttermilk
Bottoms, R -91, Proj e ct with the Bedford-Pine Project, R-101, Project,

.,,..

�Mr. Baxter
Page Two
August 6, 1968

after we had received Part I approval on the original project, may have
caused some problems and delays that might not otherwise have occurred.
I am sure that any such delays were caused by factors occurring at all
levels, including our own. Regardless of the reasons for the delays,
however, I am sure that you can appreciate the plight of the residents of
this area as a result of living with the impending urban renewal activity
for this period of time,
The situation in this area is now critical. In reviewing the situation with
everyone concerned, it seems to be the concensus that immediate approval
of the urban renewal project would be the single most effective factor in
meeting the problem. For this reason, this letter is to :i;equest that the
processing of this application be placed on an emerg_e ncy status. I would
sincerely appreciate any assistance that you personally can provide in
obtaining this approval as quickly as possible.
Needless to say, your continued cooperation and assistance in helping
Atlanta meet its problems is · very much appreciated .

IAJr:fy
cc: Mr. John Edmunds

...

�BEDFORD-PINE URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AREA, GA R-101
CHRONICAL OF EVENTS
AUGUST 6, 1968

November 27, 1963

R -91 Survey & Planning Applications filed

February 4, 1964

GNRP Application authorized by Board of Aldermen

February 27, 1964

GNRP Application filed

April 3, 1964

R-91 Survey & Planning approved

May 6, 1964

Contract for R - 91 planning services executed

June 9, 1964

GNRP Application approved

July 17, 1964

ELA-Auditorium area submitted
GNRP terminated by City
S & P, R -101, authorized

July 20, 1964

R-101 Survey & Planning Application submitted

November 17, 1965

R-101 Survey & Planning Application approved

February 2, 1966

R-101 contract for planning services executed

March 7, 1966

ELA-Hill School site submitted

June 15, 1966

Submitted Part I, R -91

September 20, 1967

Combined S & P Application, R -91:-R -101, submitte d

November 30, 1967

Combtned Survey & Planning approved

February 5, 1968

Submitted Part I, R -101






Definitions:
R-91

Original Buttermilk Bottoms Project Area designation

R - 101

Origina l B e dford-Pine Proj e ct d es i gn a tion a nd, l at e r ,
the d e si gnation of the c o m bine d proj ect a r ea

GNRP

G e n e ral Ne ighborhood Rene wal Plan

s

Surve y and . P l anning .

& p

ELA

Early Land Ac quisition

�EDWIN L. STERNE

M. 8 . SATTERFIELD

CHA IR~ AN

EXECUT IVE DIRECTOR ANO S ECRETAR Y

LESTER H. PERSELLS

GEORGE S. CRAFT

ASSOCIATE

VICE CHAIRMAN

EXEC UT .IVE DIA ECTOR

CARL TON GARRETT
DI R ECTOR O F

J. B. SLAYTON

FINANCE

G I LBERT H . BOGGS
DIRECTOR OF HOUSING

FRANK G. ETHERIDGE

HOWARD OPENSHAW

JACK F. GLENN

DIRECTOR OF REDEVELOPMENT

824 HURT BUILDING

ATLANTA , GEORG IA 30303

GEORGE R .

SANDER

TECH NICAL DIRECTOR

JACKSON 3·6074

May 10, 1968

The Honorable Ivan Allen, Jro
Mayor of the City of Atlanta
City Hall
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Re:

Rawson...washington Street
Ur ban Redevelopment Area
Project Georgia R~lo

Dear Mayor Allen:
The Department of Housing and Urban Development has this date advised by
telegram the approval of a $1,600, 894000 grant increase for the 353 acre
Rawson~Washington Street Urban Renewal Project in Atlantao This amendment
will permit the Atlanta Housing Authority t o proceed with the acquisition
of three additional blocks of land east of Whitehall Terrace for a new
elementary school, park, and community facility buildingo
The Housing Authority submitted the Part I Application for Loan and Grant
on this project on February 10, 1967, and received HUD approval on February
26, 1968 (12 months). Ten days later on March 7, 1968, the Authority sub~
mitted the Part II (following a public hearing and approval of the Mayor and
Board of Aldermen and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners) and received
approval on May 10, 1968 ( 2 months)o The above dates demonstrate the extra~
ordinary time required for Federal review and approval of urban renewal
applications, and accounts for the substantial delays in the urban renewal
processo
The Housing Authority will proceed expeditiously with the acquisition of
the land required for the school, park, and conununity facilityo
Very truly yours,

Howard Openshaw
Director of Redevelopment

�May 15; 1968

MEMORANDUM

To: Mr. Stan Martin
From: Dan Sweat
Subject:

Meeting of Gr nt Review Board - Application
for Grant to Develop Open Space Land - Daniel
Stanton Pal'k and Harper Pa:rk

The Grant. Review Bo rd met Tuesd y, May 14. to review proposed
application to the U . S . Department of Houslng and Ui-ban Development for a.pplic tion for grant to develop land undet" Titl Vll of
th Housing Act of 1961.
This application cov :re Ph se 2 nd Phase 3 development of
Daniel Stanton P rk and P hase l d velopment of Harper Park.
The sUmate of total proj ct cost is $99. 590 wlth a non ..federal

sha.i,e of $49, 795.
The Grant Review Bo rd found this application to be prop rly
prepar- d with deqllate loc 1 hare financing substantiated. We,
therefoi- 1 i- commend approval of this ppUcation fot eubmis ion.

DS :fy

�...,.._
.

.....o.,......,_,._,~"'-'-~~-----t.u,·c...-->·, -~

'l

SITE DESIGN PLANS
The site design plans for Daniel Stanton Park and Harper Park are
attached in this code and illustrate proposed development in
successive stages. The City of Atlanta clearly desires to develop
completely these parks now, but the lack of funds prohibits this
accomplishment. · This application concerns only the first phase
development of Harper Park and the second and third phases of
development of Daniel Stanton Park. The first phase development
of Daniel Stanton Park was accomplished without Federal assistance.
These stages of developme nt for each of these rarks are more fully
described on the following pages.

j

I

.(

I
Code OS 141

"";·· , ,.

�--

.,,,,.i

.f

.•

~

~

J

'

.



1





' l


J



DANIEL STANTON PARK MASTER PLAN

If
t

I

I.

t

I
I

I

'

I

First Phase Development :

'j

I

. rI\i
' ; 1

I1

'

The first phase of development includes t he haulingin of a large quantity of earth to cover the site
which at one time was a landfill area . In addition
suffi c ient grading was done t o provide vehicular
access, useable level areas , and a workable drainage
network .

!1

Sp e c ific Items Include :

Ij

!.
i

.' I

• l

• i

l

I

a.
b.
c.
d.

I

ll

i
I

II.

Storm Drainage System
Drive and Parking
Softball Diamond
Pre-school Chil<lrens Play Area With Spray
Pool

Se c ond Phase Development:

j

,t l
!l

I:

1
i
I

1~

I:' '
l

a.
b,
c.

I
t

d,
e.

i

III.

Pedestrian Circulation
Multi - use Court Area
Sitt in g - Outdoor Meeting Ar ea , Adjacent to
Pre - school Play Area
Climbing Play Apparatus
Grassing

Third Phase Deve1ouw.ent :

I

a,
b,
c,

d.
e.

f.

Bicycle Track
Maintenance Storage Building
Additional Pedes trian Walks
Enclo sing Play Apparatus Area With Curbing
and Filling with Sand
Compl ete Landscaping to Include Trees and
Shrubs
Li gh t ing of Parking Lot, Pedestrian Walks,
Softb a ll Field and Multi-use Courts

Code OS llfl

'·,

I

�I

I
i'

l

I

HARPER PARK MASTER PLAN

t.

I.

First Pha se Devel~pme nt:
The first phase of development will include all the site
preparation necessary to make the area usable. Because
of the rou gh terrain, grading will make up a large portion
of the site preparation.
Specific Items Include :
a.
b.
c.

d.
e.
II.

Second Phase Developmen t:
a.
b.
c.

d.
e.
f.
III.

Storm Drainage System
Drive and_ Parking
Battery of Paved Basketball Courts
Fencing
Wa lkways

Tennis Courts
Childrens Play AreAs
Senior Citizens Game Area
Picnic Ar eas With Pavilions
Additiona l Walks
General Park Lighting

Third Phas e Development:
a.
b.
c.

Code OS l Lfl

Recreation Building
Maintenance Storage Building
Complete Lands c aping

�M.

EDWIN L. STERNE

B . SATTERFIELD

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ANO SECRETARY

CHA IA:MAN

LESTER H . PERSELLS
GEORGE S . CRAFT

ASSOCIATE

EXECUT .IVE DIRECTOR

VICE CHAIRMAN

CARL TON GARRETT
DIRECTOR

J.

OF FINANCE

GILBERT H. BOGGS

B. SLAYTON

DIRECTOR OF HOUSING

FRANK G. ETHERIDGE
HOWARD OPENSHAW
JACK F. GLENN

/

DIRECTOR
824 HURT BUILDING

ATLANTA, GEORG IA 30303
JACKSON

OF REDEVELOPMENT

GEORGE R.

3-6074

July 10, 1968

Mr. Dan Sweat, Jr., Director of Governmental Liaison
The Mayor's Office
City Hall
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Dear Mr. Sweat:
More new low rent housing for Atlanta!
Wednesday, July 17, 1968 at 10 a.m. the Atlanta Housing
Authority will be host at ground-breaking ceremonies for 350 new
apartments of public housing to be constructed in the Thomasville
Urban Renewal Project area.
Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. will officially break the ground for
this low rent public housing to be built on urban renewal land. This
project has been made possible through the efforts of Lake McDonald, Inc.
as contractors and Finch, Alexander, Barnes, Rothschild and Paschal
as architects.
To reach the site, go to the end of Boulevard, turn left
at the Federal Penitentiary on McDonough, and turn left again on
Henry Thomas Drive. Directional signs from that point will be posted.
We hope you will be present at this ceremony which initiates
the construction of more housing for the lower income family in Atlanta.

Edwin L. Sterne
Chairman
ELS :mr

SANDER

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR

�DEPARTMENT O F HOUSING AND UR BAN DEVELOPM ENT
PEACHTREE SEVENTH BUILDING, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323

Room 645
April 15, l968

REGION Ill

I N REPLY REFER TO:

3CP
Mro Wayne Moore, Jr.
Coordinator
Metropolitan Atl anta Council
of Local Goverl'l.ments
900 Glenn Building
Atla.~ta, Georgia 30303
Dear lf1 r. Moore:
Subject:

Urba.ri. Pla.l'l!ling Assistance Program
Funding One Areawide Planni ng Agency
per Metropolitan Area

Thi s offi ce is in receipt of notific ation from our Washington offi ce that
it is the present departmental policy to support only one areawi de agency
per metropolitan areao The re a sons why grants should not be made to t wo
agencies , a s is the c ase i n the Atlant a metropolitan area, as set forth
by the Washington office are:
l . Lack of ne ces sity . There is no distinction in the 701 Program
between Organi zations of Public Officials and metropolitan planning
c ommissions with regard t o eligible work . Although Section 701(g)
and Pla...rming Agency Letter #50 emphasi ze coordination of governmental
regulations and services , such studies were eligible before the
enactment of 701(g).
2 . Value t o the community of a single areawide agency . Having one
areawide agency responsible for developing and coordinating multij urisdict_ional plans, programs and policies on all front s - social,
physical, economic, health, administrative, etc. , - is of ultimate
benefit to the connnunity. It reduces confusion on the part of
electe d officials and the people as to where this responsibility
rests, and it reduces divisive competition between agencies .
Specific 701- assisted work items c an be subcontracte d t o other
agencies, but the legal responsibility should lie with the central
agency.
3. Conservat ion of scarce pe ople and dollar s. There is a serious
shortage of competent public administrators and high-level professional
people t o fill top staff positions on these agencies. !HID should avoid
generating unnecessary additional demand for such personnel. Also,
grant funds are scarce. Again, we should avoid creating unnecessary
additional demand.

�2

~-. Federal policy or coor dination i n m -ci-jurisdictional a.reas o The
multiplicity of fe 'eral and state assistance p:rogram.s -· o u:c-oan areas
requires that these programs be coordinated at t _e etropolitan or
regional level. P--resident Johnson has c alled for such coord · nation,
and the Bureau of the Budget has lid out guideli es in c:rcula.r _-8o.
It is unlikely that funding t wo a.rea,-Tide agencies in t he sane area
thro' gh 701 wou d e : the spL it o '-h s - - c..:.tive ::?ro. cur..cer Gnts .

5. Conflicting plans and programs ., Dual agencies provide no
mechanism f or resolving inconsistent plans and programs which li ely
will be developed by each agency. A policy of dual grants opens the
door for ser~ous disputes in the future over the proper role of each
agency.
We have been advi sed also not to accept further applicat ions from two areawide
agencies i n t he s a..me metropolitan area without clearance of such action
with the Washington office .
It is our i nterpretation of the information at hand and fro_ discussions with
Washington office personnel that .,_he department does not discour age the
creation of two areawide agencies, but that, in the future, it will receive
and fund applic ations from only one such agency. We understand that one
areawide agency may file an application fo_ the work program of the second
agency and contract the work back to it.
In view of the current relationship existing between etropolitan Atlanta
Counc il of Loccl Governments and Atlanta Region 1etropolitan Planning
Commission, consideration should be given at an early date as to the future
organizational arrangements for submittal of and administration of UFA
applicationso
We will be pleased to meet with representatives of both agencies as may be
required.

7
I ; 'tr'

Si~ erely y~urs,
,1i r

IJ,~

1/ l

!.
-

,

u/I',:

l/1

, ,

l ~-1

-v

(I

/~.

l
~
lr,,( ,.1..t. :·, ; , /\
./(? /

A. Frederick Smith,
'
Assistant Regional Administrator
Program Coordination and Services
Division

�CITY OF ATLANTA
OFFICE OF COMPTROLLER
CITY HALL

Atlanta, Georgia

30303

CHARLES L. DAVIS
COMPTROLLER

EDGAR A. VAUGHN, JR.

October 1, 1968

DEPUTY COMPTROLLER

Mr . Louden C . Hof £man

A~sociate Planner
Greenville County Planning Commission
18 Thompson Street
Greenville, South C rolina
Dear Mr. Hoffman:
Your reque t for information regarding th City of Atlanta'
Urban Renewal Program was referr d to my office by Mayor Allen,
Unfortunately, we were unable to supply the amount of expenditures
for urban renewal projects by year
ince we are on a project b i •

I have .attached a chedule of project budge~ed cost for our
ten urban renewal proj ct and hop that thi will supply you with
the information you nod .
Yours very truly,

t7t';~ <a_,,,.._
Charles L. Davi
Comptroller
CLD:c

cc:

Mr . D n Swe t ,

�Urban Renewal Prujects
Schedu l cofProjectBudgeLedCost•
Septe1:1b c r30,l968
Butler St re et
!.of Net
$

~::~~:~r:;~v:urvey_
Legel Servi c e
143.215.248.55112:55, 29 December 2017 (EST) 0 :peoses
Dispos a l,LeaseRel e ntion Cost
~~:~;:~/r Site Improvemen t

160,38&
501,832
70,005
167,256
205,011
102,067
991,000
180,130

8,267;204
-S367535

Real Estate Pu rchases
Sa l e Pr ice of Land

...b~

,.,
,.,

,.,
'-'
'-'

-686456
6454671

Nel Projec t Costs

$173, 151
442,177
71,984
192,496
233, 687
59,350

,.,

1,013,500
149 , 935

¼Ji

8,652,367
-2851501
5800661

l5.4

,.,
o.,
,.,
..,

~

-10.6
100,0!.

- 335770
12 51~ 582

$225,281
512,331
40,258
]44,869
12 2,608
28,l76
517,438
77,279

94, 54 9
264,217
64,294
88,269
59 ,202
33,086
662,000
357,900
28 , 586

7 ,162,2 94
·3078972
4 0 83 322

2,246,209
.,. - 985375
1260834

'·'

.6.6

TI:J

7749~

$

$

...
o.,
..,

12 . 6

'-'

100.0

~

Federal C11pital Gunt

4 , 303 ,1 14

5, 166,198

7,742,476

CityofAtla,;ita

Non-Cash
Cash&Rca1£st a tcTaxCrcdit•

1,863,771
287786
2,151,557
$6454671

=~:;;:r. ~:I~:!~::~i~:.
~=~:~7 ~ ~::t~:~'";143.215.248.55ts

28,87
4.46
3:\,.33

4,7L4,606
58.SOO
4,773, 106

37,67
~
36, 14

~
2,583,100

213,718

2,817,845
-7L 2 900
2,104945
1,372,373

54.8

-1336iA

.:.1.:1

5 258,303

I 00 . 0

4254861

3838,096

100 . 0

7 - 23-59

48.25

-1L..Q..Q£

33 . 33

2,558,046

·"

48,65

1,887,017

~
u
1,8.92 , 034

106, 564
318,640
4l,250
16 2,500
216,000
23,500
443,457
300,000
288,322

4,912,203
-993287
3918916

$706,407
1,446,378
76,400
431 , 782
8!6,708
260,400
836,306
1,900,000
1,135,966

,.,
,.,
,;

,.o

,.,
,.,
56,8
-ll.5

~

8,165,277
,..JOl.3802
5 121 475

75. l ·
-~
~

2,963,873
- 194338

44 ,1 1

.........,]_§;
44.47

2,462,223

64 . 15

1,372,373
_1..1Q2
1,375, 87 3

35.76
. 09
35.85

17,819,8S5
- 5233227
12 586 628
7,430,196

-1.8

.......l.ll...,

10870860__!.QQ.,__Q

27778~

$

,.,
,.,.,

l0,450
26,185
554
4,108
9,8}3

,oo

'-'

15,807
3,144

-~

~

~

~

286,900

,.,
"'
..,.,
"'.,
lOS,6
-31. 4
74,2

4,014

-~
~

Tot a l
!. of Net
$ 1 ,950,442

4,:~~:i~: .

1,6l2,891
2, 013 , 55 9
714, 781
3,J/+3,796
6,262,645
2, 206,l 74

,.,
,.,

,.,·'
LS

,,.,

62,599,154
-24012635

-~

~

~

28,082,499

·Ll
100.0

3 8 38.096

100.00

5,70 4,176

7,507,743

19,724,584

181,107

57,854,705

2,894,\77

2,963,873
3 99244
3,363, 117

7,430, 196

---.ll'.L.TI.!

4,014
~
90 , 554

28,082,499
1708,052
29790S5l

~
2,949,177

8,053,987

87645256
147,465

22,806

--1.dl!Q

How,1rd Stree t
J;of Net

..,
,.,
.,

7·3-62

2,362,8 27

2,537,046

--1..,_.Ql

Ge org laTec h
Amount
t ofNet

$

2,894,177

-165688

34 , 426
244,100
--2,..!!22

165,000
91,657

4.3
2. 4

1,877,0!7

100,00

~~:~e1\ts

14. 3

0.5
3.2

.:1..J!

2,700,257

2,425,426

~

20,311
121,064
22,340
54,393
12,500
7,141

-19 1 680

6 -28-60
Allu~ at ion of Projec t Costs:

64,343
23 1 , 108
36,060
82, 218
33,030
75,761
999,435
352,000
6!,l63

2,269,000
- 1660586

2, 537,046


..b]_



100.0t

l

Georgia Stace
!.of Net
Arnqunt

Univcrsity Ccnt-,r
t ofNet

A.-nount

2,425,426

4,7L4,606

L,863,771
ProJcctloco:ne

Rawson -Wa,hington
Amount
!. of Net

633,485

616,302

ill.....:!.ll

....!.Q__,_Q_QQ

1L2~

6,547
2,128,204

~
$281! 720

.,

32 . U
33,9

�ATLANTA, GEORGIA

OF THE CITY OF
824

HURT BUILDING•

ATLANTA 3,

GA .

•

JACKSON

3-807•

November 1, 1968

Mr . Dan E. Swea t , J r .
City Hal l
At l anta, Georgia
30303

~

if)

Q -

u1
w.l

_(

Gentlemen:

08
PAD-C~L@

8d

I

I-'

(J ([l

_=-- 7_

0a,o
0
Ocs
-o
<-9

Re:

Parcel 24
West End Urban Redevelopment Area
Project Georgia R-90

We h ave issued an invitation for proposals to purchase this
small tract of Commercial land located on the east side of
Lee Street 109 feet nor t h of Gordon Street in the West End
Urban Redevelopmen t Area .
It is z o ne d C-2 and has a minimum
estab lished price of $8,500.00 .
Proposals are to be opened in the office of the Housing Authority on December 18 , 196 8, at 10:00 A. M.
If an acceptable
proposal is not received , the Authorit y will continue to
receive proposals and to open them as received for a period
of twelve months or u n til the trac t is sold.
Proposals must be made on our forms which we will gladly send
upon request.
Very truly yours,

~ 6

'C//c::-o-o~,1-1-,

tt

v

\

,·

Philip E. Vrooman, Chief
Real Estate Disposition Branch
PEV : hcn

�,RtC
.

,tb·.·
......,.

/---/

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,..,-

t.

WASHINGTON, D . C. 20410


,,J.


i -

\ ~\

0CT14196B?t,.. -~
••

I

.•-(/{.£~/

<"

--r-.--.---,4-:::.
.-f
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY
FOR RENEWAL AND HOUSING ASSISTANCE

CIRCULAR

9-18-68
TO:

Local Authorities
Regional Administrators
Assistant Regional Administrators for Housing Assistance

FROM:

Don Hummel

SUBJECT:

Families With Children to be Located in Low-Rise Buildings

The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 (Section 15(11)) specifies
that "except in the case of housing predominantly for the elderly, • • • ,
the Secretary shall not approve high-rise elevator projects for families
with children unless he makes a detennination that there is no practical
alternative."
This prohibition applies to projects placed under Annual Contributions
Contract on or after August 1, 1968. It does not apply to a project in
this category if the Regional Administrator makes a finding that, prior
to August 1, 1968, development of the project had reached a stage wh:l-ch
would make it impractical to require the Local Authority to change its
housing program.
Pending experience with the above-cited provision of the statute, the
following policies are established to assure compliance with the
legislation:
1.

Dwellings for families with children shall be provided in structures
which do not exceed three stories in height.

2.

Projects proposed for families with children shall be designed not
to exceed a net dwelling density of 45 per acre nor a net building
coverage in excess of 35 percent.

The Regional Administrator shall make the required finding as to whether
there is 11 no pra ctical alternative" under Section 15(11) at the earliest
stage. Such .a finding may be made under the following circumstances:
(Cont'd)

I

I

r- -_/
/- ,

�2
..
...

a.

Compliance _with the limitation at the selected site would
result in room costs exceeding the statutory limits, and
there are no other acceptable sites available, or

b.

Current land value of the site proposed and the going
construction cost produce an average development cost per
famiJ.y dwelling which is unacceptably high in comparison
with current costs of sale or rental housing for family
dwellings of the same size and character in other residential neighborhoods within the local area, and other
sites cannot be obtained, or

c.

The housing is being leased by the Local Authority for
family occupancy on a short-term basis, and there is no

housing available which satisfies the policies established
above for family dwellings.
A finding of "no practical alternative" on the basis of any other circumstances requires the approval of the Assistant Secretary for Renewal and
Housing Assistance.

In those instances where the Regional Administrator makes a finding pursuant
to the provisions of this Circular, a statement setting forth the basis for
such finding shall accompany the Annual Contributions Contract list submitted
to the Assistant Secretary for Renewal and Housing Assistance.

=)

~~r-e""
'\-:-ar--..y----------~

...J
231841-P

HUD-Wash., D. C.

�I/JW RENT PUBLIC HOUSING APPLICATIONS
ON HA.ND

Efficiency

189 )

1 Bedroom

267 )

2

II

433

3

n

327

4

"

191

5

II

57

TOTAL

AS OF ll/4/68

265 Elderly

1,464

All applications apparently eligible on basis of
income unverified.

�,.

DISTRIBUTION OF ONE PERSON FAMILIES
TOTAL 8,878 FAMILIES as of 6/30/68

Techwood
Clark Howell
Palmer

APrS

BR

391

7ll

52

216
199*

30+ %

100

50

248
200

15.5%

( 6

49*

76
199*

13.9%

( 4. %
( 9.9

82

10 %

56
55-*

14. 7%

56

172
154-x108

24

92

2.8%

223 )

365

Harris Homes
John O. Chiles

95)
232 )

327

Capitol Homes

238

Grady Homes
Graves II
II
Eagan

15.3 )

4~-

108

192)
91 :

65

345

3.9%

pa.....rver Community

71

194 .

3 %

Perry Homes

49

148

2.1%

Bowen

63

no

2.7%

20

297

1 %

Leased

II

(12.8%

180}
231 }

142 )

II"

1

API'S

300)

University
John Hope

Herndon

EFF.

2,345

599






2,892

Designed for elderly only.

100

%

( 1.1 .

( 9.9

( 9.5%

(6.5% ·
(8.2

�TWO l1E:HBER FAHILIES HAVING NO HI NORS, NOT
ELDERLY

NOR DISABIED

6-1 )
6-9 )

Techwood.
Clark Hm·r ell

30
10

6-2)
6-10)

University
John Hope

17
23

6-3

Capitol

15

6-4

Grady

13

6-5 Rl

Eagan

21

6-5 R2

Herndon

6-6

Carver

17

6-7

Harris

2

6-8

Perry

10

6-12

Ba.rnn

7

6- 18

Leased

21

5

202

(710 units elderly not incl.)

out of 8,811 Units

�BEDFORD-PINE PROJECT AREA
R-101

Re:

Individuals and Families of two (2)
Composition

In the Bedford-Pine Project Area we are showing by family sum,--nary:

148 Indi v:i.duals

HANDICAPPED

Over 62

Apparently eligible for Pub. Hsg.

122

35

3

Apparently ineligible for Pub. Hsg.

26

6

0

_______

_____ ___

.....,._
Families of two __,_
(2) Compositi
ons

-

223

- Apparently Eligible for P.H.

.

Eligible

Combination of Co~position:

·Did not
Ineligible give Income

( 178 )

126

48

Two (2) Females

( 32 )

25

7

Two (2) Hales

( 13)

5

5

3

60

7

Male

&

Female

4

.- TOTAL

Of above:

(223 )

Case s where both over 62

Handicappe~ Cases
NOTE:

156

16
9

Apparently eligibl e for Public Housing
category is ba sed on families 1 s t aterr.ent
of incor.:e un verified.

�On\? HOUrl

TiZ V
'-~'l 1·-

""RIil
-i·- t1r~;. ilrt'· . _. ugi t f .f.,ill1I j k"J_
,tpn
!JUJ
~

.ll)

355 Boulevard, N. E.

• Ationto, Georgia 30312

, _ _ _ _ _ _ _...:,__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___,_ _ _ _ _ _ __

c1•r 1~11s.

iEG. U. S,
MT.OFF.

THE :.1OST

rn

D.RY CL-EAHING

HERBJRT 0. W ALDRI?

Octobe~ 28, 1968

Mr. Lester

li. Par3ells
Atlanta Housing -~thority
Hurt Building
· Atlg_nta, Georgia

Dear llr. Persells, ·
Your information to our group last Thursday vi:is _a3:rpreciated.
Any aid in keeping the line of" information o_pen to tho neighborhood,
rather than getting it out of the pa:9ers, v1ill be o-f great service to
ell of us.
The sugge3tion of 1:r. Cook and others to ch?n;:;e tha pl2.11S in
the public housi::ig along North Avenue s.nc. aroU!ld the park in the
Bedford-Pine ?l'in is ala_'l'"I11i~. .A.ft er ya ·l l's of planning by your group
· and by the architects, the ma.'1euver to make the aNa U!lbala.TJ.ccd doe.s
not seem realiastic. To have all, or a 5 reat portion, of older
people or only couples viould no more fill the needs of the neighborhood
than to not con.sider them at all.
Therefore, we plea d th at the ori ginal :pla.'ls be kept as
discus sed this yec?.l', and 2-ll efforts to maka last r:u.n.ut e major cb.211sas
be rejected.
We were als o disturbed e.t the :p l9.n to enlarge the araa in th;;
East ·Avenue, }!acI~nzie Drive ar ea by dis:;,lo.cing so:rae 88 f amilies. Tl1is
. fype move should be g iven far more co!lsideration than the fe v1 da.y.s you
say will be g i-van before t he r c:: cofilz,enc1at i on is !;1c:i.de . Remenb 9r, we h·::. d
not bee!l. ad.vised. ab:Jut tb.i.s bef-:i re ~hurs c1:;;y, and you ind icated a
decision had to be ma1e this week .
We again recor:T'.snd tha t the orig ina l bou.nd.ry end plan be

adhered to and tha t no expamion be co~s idered until the original area
is recon3tru.ctad and fini3hed.
Again, better c-:>mmunic ation in t;J.e :planning st 20 e, rather the.n
near the execution stago, should eli:nin3.te m:1D.7 of the doubts and fe ars
that have existed in p a st ye ars .
Sincerely,

�ATLA..l"IJTA HOUSING -AUTHORITY OF T~CITY OF ATLANTA
DATA ON BEDROOMS
I

No. of
Name of
No. of
No. of
Units
Project GA.
Project
Rooms
Howell, Clark
6-1
630
2675
Hope, John
606
2282
6-2
815 ·
Capitol
6-3
3578
Grady
616
2610
6-4
Eagan, John J.
6-5Rl
548
2338
Herndon, Alonzo
6-5R2
2278
520
Carver
6-6
4687
990
Harris, Joel C.
510
6-7
2477
Perry
6-8
1000
4844
Techwood
6-9
604
2371
6-10
University
2640
675
.6-11
Graves, Antoine
210
709
Bowen
6-12
650
3245
6-13
Chiles, John O.
250
854
Palmer
6-14
250
854
Perry Ext.
6-15
140
848
6-16
HcDaniel-Glenn
650
2834
Thomasville Urban
6-17
350
Renewal (334 Conv.) (16 Elderly)
6-20
Hollywood Road
202
6-28
Bankhead Highway
500
6-21
Gilbert Road
220
Prison Creek
6-29
175
East Lake
800
6-30
(Garden
(650)
(Elderly Hi-Rise)
(1502 -lHETOTAL
11,911
6-18
Leased Housing
ll026
GRAND TOTAL
12,937
At the recorranendation of HAA, the following percentages
of apt. sizes are furnished Turnkey Developers and
Architects for guidance in planning

Allor part (listed below) specifical~ designed for


the elderly:
Antoine Graves
- All
Bowen
- 48 - 1 BR
Chiles
- All
Palmer
- All
McDaniel-Glenn
152 1 BR
23 - Eff.
Thomasville
16 - 1 BR

No. of Bedrooms
2
Eff. 1
216 228
52
200 277
50
82 471
108
172 294
56
108 320
56
24
92 339
194 486
76 226
148 h62
397 157
100
248 327
154-il1
55*
llOll- 240
49* 199-lE- 1
49* . 199* 1
23*

4

194
158
JOO

116
78

12

200
1
1
78
213
80

70

30

46
10
80

88 88
60 170
84 80
64 59
87 223

10
150
20
22
204

60
8
6
54

60
3209 4399 2485 856
297 654 .51 12
3506 5053 2536 868

228
12
240

326* 66
40* 120
16
60
28
24
76

90
728
0
728

~

3
134
79
154
94
64

11.7

65

50

6
~

50

~

16
12

30

ll.7 34.3 31.4 9.9

6
..

Status
Com. 11/5/1~40
Com. 9/16/1940
Cmµ. 4/7/1942
Com. 8/6/1942
Com. 4/1/1941
Com. 10/22/1941
Com. 2/17/1953
Com. 10/1/1957
Com. 4/12/1955
Com. 8/15/1936
Com. b./17/1937
·· Com. 11/2/1965
Com. J/10/1964
Com. 10/15/1965
Com. 6/3/1966
Com.
1968
Com.
1968
Under Construction
Under construction
. Under Construction
Contract signed 9/68
HUD,Wash.D.C •
Prelim.Planning phase

6

-

6

1.0



Note: New HAA regulations require at least




6~ of apartments in high-rise be efficiency
apartments

�i
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING ANO URBAN DEVELOPMENT
PEACHTREE SEVENTH BUILDING, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323

Room 645
October 18, 1968

REGION Ill

Housing Assistance Office

,•

'
IN REPLY REFER TO:

3RD
Mr. M. B. Satterfield, Executive
TheHousing Authority of the
City of Atlanta, Georgia
824 Hurt Building
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Dear Mr. Satterfield:
This acknowledges your letter of October 16, 1968, enclosing a copy of
Mr. Rodney Cook's letter to you of October 11, 1968, for our observations,
since many of the points raised involve matters which eventually require
approval of this Office.
We are always encouraged when a man of Mr. Cook's stature gives as much time
and thought to a program as is reflected in his letter. We wish to point out,
however, several complications in his proposal that arise based on our local
and national e xp erience with the Low-Rent Housing Program.
The first matter that concerns us greatly is the fact that construction costs
are at least $2,000 more per unit on high-rise than on low-rise structures.
Further, if we constructed all our larger units in a project without an intermix of smaller units, we would e xpe rience an e x ceptionally high aver~ge cost
per unit.
Since the smaller units in a high-rise would cost us a t least $2,000
per unit more than normall y experienced, we could not even average two projects
t(?gether to get an acceptable unit cost.
In other words, this policy will result
in an extra unacceptable construction cost to the Government.

Of grave additional concern to us is the fact that concentrating the large
families with their high density of children in projec~s such as proposed will
greatly increase maintenance costs as well as management problems. We hav e
found this true even when we concentrate the larger units in one section of a
project.
In fact, in project planning, we endeavor to intermix larger and
smaller units to avoid this larger unit concentration.
Wifh this type conc~ntration, increas ed juvenile crime and delinquency, increased
frequency of juveni le gangs, increased peril to the personal safety of tenants,
an increase in social problems an d difficulty in h a ndling them all become factors
with which Management has to cope.

The stabilizing effect of older families is lost under any system which involves
up-rooting and moving them to high-rise proj ec ts. Many older ~amilie8 also do
not like high-rise living and wou ld only move into the environment under protest.

�2

Young families moving into the high-rise in turn would be requir e d to move
when they began to have children. The practice of concentrating t wo-person
or less families in one group and larger families in another group creates
an unnatural type conununity.

In the past, . we have altered unit sizes in existing projects only on a case
basis where the market had changed.
In some instances, we created more units
by the conversion of larger units and in other instances we created fewer units
by conversion of smaller units to make larger units. In most instances, this
has been a costly process, justified only because a vacancy problem over a long
period of time had developed.
Further, because of the physical layout of
existing units, the amount of conversion to larger or smaller size units that
can be made is usually quite limited.
~t must also be realized that when you
reduce the number of units in a proj e ct, you also reduce the rental income,
while at the same time, as indicated above, you increase the maintenance cost.
We could not agree to any such plan in Atlanta merely to relocate families in
high-rise structures.
There a-re instances throughout the Country now where, because of the high
density of children and large families involved, consideration has been given
to abandoning the projects to a different design concept.
-The present polic y in public housing programming f av ors disbursing the units
into smaller clusters and avoiding the large pro ject d e v e lopments. L a nd a n d
construction costs in a l a rge city usu a lly prohibit the d e v e lopme nt of single
family units under our program
The plan outlined by Mr. Cook reflects serious and r e sponsible thinting and
concern on his part; howe v er, it do e s not take into consideration some of the
problems known to us th a t would make it una cc e pt ab le to this Ad min i s trati on.

_;~~ut .

Sincdere~/,;
y

- /, , / t / / · [.I
(I./// / ;;.-~
-: > ..

A. R. ½-IANSON. ,

Assist an t Reg i o n a l Adm inis tr a tor
I
for Ho u sin g Ass i st a nce

�EDWIN L. STERNE

M. B. SATTERFIELD

CHAUIMAH

CX£CUTIVE DIRECTOR AND S ECRETARY

LESTER H . PERSELLS
GEORGE S. CRAFT

ASSOCIATE

&:XECUTIVE DIRECTOR

VICE CHAI .. MAN

CARL TON GARRETT
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE

GILBERT H. BOGGS

J. B. BLAYTON

DIRECTOR OF HOUSING

FRANK G. ETHERIDGE
HOWARD OPENSHAW
DIRECTOR OF REDEV£LOPMENT

JACK F. GLENN
824 HURT IIUILDING

ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303

GEORGE R.

SANDER

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR

JACKSON 3· 6074

November 15, 1968

Mr. Rodney M. Cook
34 - 10th St. N. E.
Atlanta, Georgia . 30309
.Dear Rodney:
Your letter of October 11 concerning low-rent public housing and the
approaches which you feel the Housing Authority should take have led
to a restudy of the current situation and the future course of action
with respect to the development of high and low-density housing.
The overall objective for housing in Atlanta is contained in the Community Improvement Program study as adopted by the Board of Aldermen.
As restated by you, it is: "Place greater and intensified emphasis on
creating higher density (high-rise} housing and preserving and promoting
additional single family dvrellings; garden type apartments must be deemphasized in the future development and redevelopment of Atlanta. 11 Our
studies indicate, and we believe this to be implicit in the CIP Study,
that housing for higher income families should be largely in high-rise and
single family structures, and that housing for low-income families should
be largely in garden type apartments and high-rise for the elderly structures.
Though we know of no study which indicates the extent of need and the degree
of acceptability of high-rise structures by elderly low-income families in
Atlanta, our experience, on the whole, has been favorable. The Housing
Authority is, therefore, placing very considerable emphasis on this type of
housing even though the Federal program is de-emphasizing elderly housing
at the present.
We referred your letter to the Regional Housing Assistance Office with a
request for their comments. We are attaching a copy of their l etter and a
.,, ·
copy of HUD Circular of 9/18/68 which also relates to these matters.
Mr. Hanson I s letter clearly states the position of the ·Federal Agericy with
respect to the low- income housing program.

�-2Weha.ve also reviewed much of the literature concerning the development of
planned communities and neighborhoods. In addition to this, we have discussed
such developments with developers and planners of national and international
stature. The general consensus is that a desirable neighborhood is one that
contains a· reasonable cross-section of family sizes and income groups. Our
observation is that in Atlanta most of the privately developed housing consists of one and two bedroom .units, except for higher-income single family
residences. There is apparently a very great need for a large number of 3,
4 & 5 bedroom units for lower income families.
We have attached a listing of the low-rent public housing projects in Atlanta,
giving data on apartmem, by bedroom size. Please note that the older projects
included no four or five bedroom apartments, and were heavily weighted toward
efficiency and one bedroom units. The more recent developments have been increasingly weighted toward apartments with a larger number of bedrooms.
· Your letter requested certain statistical information with respect to one and
two person families. As of June 30, 1968, we were serving 2,345 one person
families. Of these, 1,926 are elderly (62 years and over}, and the remainder
consist of handicapped persons, widows or widowers whose spouses have deceased
during their tenancy, and a very few single persons displaced by Urban Renewal
or other governmental activities. In low-rent public housing are also 1,972
two person families, of which 202 are families having no minors and who are
neither elderly nor disabled. We have included a listing showing the projects
in which these two person families live.
Because of the great demand for admission to low-rent public housing, which
stays fully occupied with an average waiting list of approximately 1,500
applications, it is clear that the family sizes accommodated in low-rent housing
is controlled by the size apartments which have been built, and, as mentioned
above, the early program was heavily weighted toward the smaller size apartments.

In the light of the foregoing, it would appear that the policies being followed
by the Housing Authority in the construction of new low-rent public housing is
the proper course of action, and, in the light of the current laws and regulations,
achieves to the maximum degree possible the objectives which you advocate.
With respect to the Bedford-Pine Project, GA. R-101, and the public hous:Lng
presently planned for that project, we believe that fill consideration has
been given to the objectives outlined in your letter and to the objectives of
the project as agreed in meetings with the project residents. We enclose an

�-3-

analysis of one and two person families now living in the Bedford Pine
Project area. Our past experience indicates that most of the 148 individuals will insist on being self-relocated for a variety of reasons
such as contemplated marriage, illegal occupations, alcoholism. Most of
the elderly and handicapped will probably move into public housing. Of
the 223 two person families, most will be satisfactorily relocated by our
staff, and it is our hope that most of those eligible for public housing
will take advantage of their opportunity. It would appear that the public
housing for the elderly planned for this area will acconunodate all those
who are likely to move in, and will leave a small surplus.
The Project Advisory Committee, with whom this matter has been discussed,
feels strongly that the very limited land area available for residential
reuse should be devoted to housing which will serve the people living in
the area. The 353 apartments, of which 149 will be for elderzy, is designed
to accomplish this. We are attaching a letter from the Project Advisory
Committee stating their feelings in this matter. We reconunend and urge that
these 353 apartments be constructed in the apartment sizes presently planned. ·
The constructive approach which you are taking to this matter is greatly
appreciated, and we appreciate also the thoughtful and constructive policies
which you and the Policy Committee present for the guidance of the Urban
Renewal program.
Sincerely yaurs,
,/J

~

r.

lLd' _

// __.,,,,-

,/
v ~ ·

MBS/IBP:sd
CC:

AHA Board Members
UR Policy Committee Hembers

_
/,

-

L.

•"

1

\.;L.J.;.:cz:z,-,~ /4-e-f.--#U

1;·

M. B. Satterfield
Executive Director ~
Enclosures

/

·

�ihe G~u:i"\t!lk:11::ni

Life Insurance Company of America
LIFE INSURANCE AND ANN/.!ITIES -

HEALTH INSURANCE -PENSION PLANS -

RODNEY M. COOK, C.L.U.

GROUP INSURANCE

THE MATTINGLY AGENCY

1967 Qualifying Member of Mi llion Doi/or Round Table

34 Tenth Street, N.E. • Atlonto • Georgia 30309
Phone, 892,1561

October 11, 1968

Mr. M. B. Satterfield
Executive Director
Atlanta Housing Authority
824 Hurt Building
Atlantaj Gebrgia 30303
Dear Satt:

0

I want to make it perfectly clear what my position was
at the r _e cent Urban Renewal Policy Committee meeting concerning
public housing and what course of action I feel the Authority ·
should take as soon . as possible.
First, let ·me set forth the objective I feel we must
set for ourselves in Atlanta.
Simply stated, we should:
Place g:reater and intensified emphasis on creating
higher density (high - rise) housing and preserving and promoting
additional single · family dwellings; garden type · apartments must
be de-eraphasized in the future development and redevelopment of
Atlanta.
In pursing this objective, the approach must be to: .
1.

Plan and construct additional high rise public
housing units;

2.

Move eligible families from low rise (garden
type) public housing units into new high rise
public housing units.

3.

Eliminate efficiency and one bedroom units in
low rise (garden type) public housing units,
and consolidate efficiency and one bedroom units with
abutting units to create larger dwelling units ~

ln pursuing this objective and the above approach,
it would be incumbe nt upon the AHA to:
1.

Surv ey the actual number of one person families
by age bracket, ma rital status, physically
handicapped, with and without child, etc., who

A MUT UAL COMPANY-ESTA BLISHED 1860 • HOME OFFICE, 20 1 PARK AVENUE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NEW YOR K 10003

- .. ~~-- --- ... --~ ---

--·-------- -- - -

�_.:- ·.1-\\JL

J. , ·, \.)

Mr. M. B. Satterfield
October 11, 1968

live now in low rise (garden type) public
housing units by project for the purpose of
developing a market for additional high rise
public h6using units.
·
2.

Study the feasibility of eliminating efficiency
and one bedroom units in low rise (garden type)
public housing units through ·their · consolidation
with abutting units for purposes of creating
larger dwelling units, and
·

3.

Study the feasibility of discbntinuing altogether
the construction of:
(a)
(b)

low rise public housing projects, and
if it is determined that the construction of
low rise public housing projects must continue
· to be built, then the · feasibility of eliminating
efficiency and one bedroom units in future low
rise public housing projects should be studied.

Based on studies we have made, however, I am convinced
that in order to maintain our fin e single family residental areas
across the city, we must go high rise in those areas that are
suitable for apartments ind it does not make sense to me to do
just the opposite in our urban renewal and public housing areas.
Let me repeat, once more, that I am not talking about putting large
families in high rise structures but I am especially concerned ·
when I find that 49% of our public housing units are occupied by
one and two person families and only 8% 6f our units are in high
rise buildings.
·
Should you have any questions concerning this, please let
me know.
. Sinc e r e ly yours,

Rodney M. Cook
R.V,:C: cl
CC:

Members of the Board of AHA

�EDWIN L . STERNE

M . 8 , SATTERFIELD

CHAIRMAN

E X ECUT I VE DIREC T O R AND S ECRETAR Y

LESTER H. PERSELLS

GEORGE S . CRAFT

ASSOCIATE

E XE C U T } VE DIA EC TOR

VICE CHAIRMAN

CARL TON GARRETT
D IRECTOR OF FINAN CE

J, 8. SLAYTON

GILBERT H. BOGGS
DIRECTOR

OF' HOUS ING

FRANK G. ETHERIDGE
HOWARD OPENSHAW

JACK F . GLENN

DIRECTOR
824 HURT B U ILD IN G

GEORGE R .

A T LANTA, GEORGIA 30303
JACKSON

OF REDEVELOPMENT

SANDER

T ECHN IC AL DIRECTOR

3-6074

November 8, 1968

Mr. Dan Sweat
The Mayor's Office
City Hall
Atlanta, Georgia
Dear Mr. Sweat:
You are invited to attend the ground-breaking ceremonies
for the 220-units of low r ent housing to be constructed under the
turnkey method to be held on the Gilbert Road site Tuesday, November 19,
1968 at 10:00 a.m. The site is located in southeast Atlanta at the
intersection of Gilbert Road and Flynn Road, as indicated on the
attached map.
Mayor Ivan Al len, Jr . will officially break the ground
f or this $4-million development. This project has been made possible
through the very fine effor ts of Claridge Towers Company as developers
and The Whiting-Turner Contracting Company as contractors.
We hope you will be present at this brief ceremony which
marks another stride forward in Atlanta ' s low rent housing program.
Sincerely,
~

Vy,:_,'-\

--?
-1--- •

Edwin L. Sterne
Chairman
ELS: ab
Enclosure

~

�I'

>-

r- f-

~I

-

~:

�"f'p--,.c ,.,+.;,

n,,-:+ r.:i d For Fa,j_rness

i~AHRO, PLlASi

ROTBCT US FROM TEE ATLA .!TA HOUSING AUTHORITY!!!!!!!!!

AHA---- 11 Protects 11 its tenants and encourages beautification of
its ,.,rojects by tearing up tenants I gardens and bullying
project residents.
AHA-------Is rude and imploite when a call is received from any1..ne
with a Negro voice.
·

AHA-----Invades the privacy of its tenants 1 homes by inspecting
apart;nents without notice -- often when no-one is home .

AEA

Does not furnish adequate playground facilities, and
fines tenants whose children are caught playing on the
grass.
AH11---Exercises absolute power over its tenants, who must
surrender all their rights once they enter public housing.
Intimidation is an important part of AHA policy.
YOU THE .il:J.vlBER OF HAiJRO CAN HELP US! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
1.
Iv1ake it clear that tenant participation .,1eans that tenants
should be allowed to take part in the operation of local
housing authorities.
2.
Allow the tenant a prior fair hc:aring o:ti. any sanctions imposed
by the authority.
3.
Establish a Tenant 1 s hearing Panel to hear all complaints of
the tenants and of the Authority.
4.
Establish authority-wide rules governi11g evictions, punishments,
a·1d fines.
It is inco11ceivable that Public Housing should have come to be
known as the "enemy of the por,r", yet this has happened in Atlanta.
We believe HAHRO is truly concerned with the needs and hope of
public housing tenant s .
tJe urge you, therefore, to give us our rights. Remove the power
of intimidation from the hands of pur local tormentors by creating a
tenant hearing panel, empowered to review all decisions of local
housing managers and to hear allThnants complaints. Free us from the
~rbitrary acts of local housing managers.
LET US HELP OURSELVES!! !!!!!!!!
�bee:
Mr . Dan Sweat, Jr.
Economic
.pport
•
n1
y At anta ,
101 .\fa r iect a Stre et Bl dg . '" Arlan ca, Ge org ia 30 30 3
o
T e leph one 688 -1012
T . .\I. Parham
Ex ecu ci,.· e Admin i st rat o r
Dece mbe r 9, 19 68
Mr . F . A . St auffacher, Director
East Point Housing Authority
1 669 Cleve l and Ave nue
East Point, Georgia
Dear Mr . Stau f facher:
Thank you fo r att end ing t h e meetin g of the Citizens Cent ra l Advisory
Council of EOA on Novembe r 19, 19.68 . The m2eting was ver y h e lpful to us
and c reatin g i mproved u nders t a nding of som2 of th e po l icies of th e Housing
Authoritie s .
At th at meeting , r eprese nt a tives of th e Regional Of fice o f HUD, Housing
Assistanc e Se ction, r e ad to th e gr oup from a "circular" dated 3/22 / 68
which was transimtt e d to l oca l Housing Aut h or ities from Washington HUD
( Mr . Don Humme l) in re gar d to "so cia l goa ls for pub lic ho·.1sing ."
Mr . Hummel indicated tha t as a matter of national policy, urgent and
m~jor social obj ectives incl uded :
Mor e att e ntio~ to resi de nt ' s dignity,
privacy , and p ersona l safety. Specia l
at tention should be g iven to the elimination of unne c essary rules and regula tions .
Leade rship t o ~chieve b etter and more
co ordin ~te d soc ia l s erv ice s f,r p roject
te n ants.
Increas e d trainin g and employmen t of tn e ants in proj e ct ma nagemen t.
Th e d eve lopme n t of e qui t ab l e s ystems for
h and ling gr i evances.
Great l y expanded participat ion of t ena nts
in project mana g eme nt affa irs and prog r ams
d es i gned to str engthen the self-su ff icie n cy
o f t ena nts.
�~rr. F . A. Stauffacher
Page t wo
December 9 , 1968
Mr. Humme l's directive indicat e d t hat nat ional and r e gional offi c e s of HUD
s hould give attention to thes e m3.tter s, but st a ted that "i t i s t he l o:::.al
Housing Authoriti e s who ~oJill make th e goa ls a realit y . It i s t hey who
must examine their own oper ati ons an d mak2 t he cha nges ca ll e d for by thei r
finding3 , 11
He reconrnended i mmediate revi ew of the follo wing :
The raising of incom2 limits where the y
have subs t antially fallen be h i ng change s
i n the comnunity .
T~e l ibera l izing of t he definition of i ncom2
wi ih the respect to t he income of minors .
The adjusting of rent a l policies and require men t s for the e xamination of t enants to minimize the di f ference betwee n pub l ic h ous ing
and norma l r ea l es t ate practi~es .
The us e of the statutory authority to c ont inu e in occ upa ncy an over-income fa mi l y
when it i s unab le to find good h ousing
in a suitable ne i ghborhood .
The liberali z ing of r egulations l imiting
the number of employees who J1ay l ive i n a
pr o j ect.
The adoption of a simp l e and equitab l e
l ~ase .
The si mp lification of rules and r egulations .
The provision o f adequate me a~u res for
s afe ty a nd security of tena nts .
The adop tion of proc e dures where t e na nts,
either individ ua ll y or in a group, may
be given a hearing on questions relating to
Auth or ity pol icies and practices, either in
general, or in relation t o an individua l or
family.
The up grading of levels of m3.intenance and
t he appearance of buildings and grounds with
the maximum tenant participation and, where
poss i.b le, tenant employme nt.
·
.
�Mr. F. A. Stauf f a cher
Page t hree
December 9, 1968
Among othe r th i ngs Mr . Hum:ne l a l s o s uggested t hat l oca l Hous i ng Author ities :
Deve l op a two way c o:nmunicati on with
tenants concerning basic po l icy; afford
the t enan ts full opportunity to organ ize ,
i nclud i ng t he provision of m:eting ro oms
a nd a ccess to te nant l i s ts and bul l e tin
boards:
Give r e s idents t he opportunity to participa t e i n the de t ermination of rnanagem2nt
pol icies and pract i ces, subject to gener a l
principles of HA.A, s uch a s ren t al and occu pancy p o l i c ies ; rules and regu l at i ons;
ch a r ges for breakage and dama ge ; eviction
p ol icies, e t c .
The Centr a l Citizens Advisory Co:nmit tee wou ld like to ask wha t a c tion the
Atlanta Housi ng Authority ha s taken or con temp l ates t aking , to c omply wit:h
t he recommenda t i ons of rlr . Hum:ne l . We a re e s pecia lly intere s t ed i n t .h e
p oin t s l isted above an.ct wou l d appr e c iate a r ep l y, i f possible , by December 17 ,
1968 , the da t e of our nex t me et ing .
·
Si~c;erely yours,
I
'i
'·
/
I
~
/
,,,..-
- •
..~
- ~ :... -
·.• • -
I
,
/
," . ,-
\ · :___.. Erwi n-Stevens, Cha irman - - -· · , -.__
~-,
Centra l Citizens Advi sory Co:nmit t ee
ES / gnd
c c:
Mr . Edwar d Sterne, Cha i rman
Ware , Sterne & Griff i n
636 Trust Company of Georg ia Bu i l ding
Atlanta, Georgia
Mr . Frank Eth r idge
Eth ridge and Company
Suite 100
~100 M3.ple Dr ive, N. E.
At l anta, Ge org ia
Mr. Ge orge F . Craft , Vice Chairma n
Cha i rma::i of che Boa rd of
Trust Co:npa ny of Ge org ia
Trus t Co~~any of Ge orgia Bui l ding
Atlanta , Georgia
Mr. J. B. Blayton
Mutual Federal Savings and Loan
205 Aut urn Avenue
Atla~ta, Georgia
Mr. J ack F . Gl enn
Cha irma r.1
Citizens
35 Broa d
At lanta,
of the Bo:1rd 'of
and Sou t hern Na tional Bank
Stree t, N. W.
Ge org ia
�bee:
Mr . Dan Sweat , Jr .
Economi
pport nity Atlanta,
101 i\! a ri etta Srr ee r Bl dg . " Acl a nt a, Georgia 30303 • Telephone 6 88 -1012
T. ;\f P ar~1am
Ex ecu ti\·e A dmi ni st racor
December 9, 19 68
~x. L. F . Ca rs on
College Park Ho~sing Authority
3 713 Coll ege Street
Co llege ~ark, Georgia
Dear Mr-. Carson :
At the June 19, 19 68 mee ting of the Citizens Central Adv isory Council
( CCAC) o f Economic Opportunity Atlanta, Inc. ( EOA) representative s from
the Atlanta and East Point Housing Author ities he l ped with discussions
of some of the probl ems identified.
At that mee ting , r e pr esen tatives of th e Regional Office of HUD, Hou sing
Assistance Section, r ead to the group from a "circular" dated 3 / 22 / 68
which was tr ~nsmi t ted to local Housing Authorities from Washington HUD
( Mr . Don H:-1 ITLn2 l) in r egard to "social goals for public housing. "
Mr . Hu mme l indicated th a t as a matter of nationa l policy, urgent and
major social objective s included :
More attention to resident ' s dignity,
privacy, and persona l safety. Specia l
attention shou ld be give n to the elimi nation of unnec e ssary ru l es and r egula t ions.
Leadership to achieve better and more
co ordinated social s ervices fJr project
tenan ts.
Incr ease d training and emp loyme nt of tenant s in p ro j e ct ma nageme nt.
The deve l opme nt of equ itabl e syste ms for
handling gr i evances .
Great ly e xpande d p ~rt icipation of tenan ts
in pro j ect mana gement a f fai rs and progra~s
designed to strengt he n th e self-sufficiency
of t enants .
�Mr . L. F . Carson
Page two
De ce~ber 9, 19 68
Mr . Humme l ' s directive ind i cated tha t n at iona l and regional offices of h'DD"
should give attention to th e s e ma tters, but st a t ed that " it i s the loc a l
Rousing Authorit ies who wi ll .m3.ke th e goals a reality. It is they ~ho
must e xamine their o-.-m operations and m:1.ke the chang_e s cal l ed for by their
findin gs. "
He rec om.ruended i mme diate rev i ew of the following :
The r aising of i nco~e l imi ts where they
have sub stantially fall e n behind changes
in the commu nit y .
The libera lizing of the de finition of income
wi th t he respe ct to the income of minors.
The adjusting of renta l policies and r e quirements for th e examinat ion of te nan ts to min i miz e the difference betwe en public housing
a nd no rma l real estate practices .
The use of th e statutory au thority t o continue in occup ancy an over-income family
when it is unable to find good hou~ing
in a suit ab l e neighborh ood .
The lib e ral i z ing of re gu l a tions limiting
the nu mbe r of e mp loyee s who may live in a
proj ect .
The adoption of a simple and equitable
l ease .
The si mp lificat ion of rules and r egulations .
The prov is ion of adequate mea sures for
sa fety and s e curity of tenan ts.
The adoption of procedures wh.e re t enants ,
either individua lly or in a group, may
be given a h ear ing on ques tions r e lating to
Au th ority policies and practices , ei ther in
genera l, or in r e l a tion to an individua l or
fa mily.
The upgrading of leve ls of ma inte nance and
the appearance o f bui l dings and gr ounds with
th e max imum t enant par ticip at ion and, where
p ossible, t e na nt employme nt.
...
�:Mr . L. F . Cars on
Page three
December 9, 1968
AmJng other things }1r . Humme l also suggested that l ocal Housing Authorities :
Develop a t wo way corrrnunication with
tenants concerning ba sic policy ; afford
the tena nts full opp ortunity to organize,
including the provision of meet ing rooms
and access to tenant lists and bulletin
boards.
Give reside nts the opportunity to participate in the de t ermina tion of management
p olicies and pr actices , subject to general
princip l es of H~A , such as renta l and occupancy pol icies ; rules and regulations ;
charge s for bre akage and damage; evi ction
p olicies, etc.
·
The Central Citizens Adv i s ory Com.rnitte e wou ld l ike to ask what a c tion th~
Atlanta Housing Authority h a s take n or contemp lates t aki ng , to comply wi th
the recom.'Uendations of }1r . Humme l. We are especially-interested in the
points l isted above and would appreciate a r ep l y , if possible, by December 17,
1968, the date of our next me eting .
Si~c~ r e ly yours,
/
/
/
ES / g nd
cc:
/
-· /,,_,.,'
/





/
1/----,\---4-------'
I -,-


~


'
/ ,1
. I • ' ( c. ,, ..
/ ,',, "--../
_- Erwin Stevens, Cha irman __ :..
/
Centra l Citizens Advisory Committee
Mr. Edward Sterne, Cha irma n
Ware, Stern e & Gri ff in
636 Trust Company of Georg i a Bu i lding
Atla n ta , Georgia
Mr. Ge orge F . Cra ft , Vice Cha irman
Cha irman of the Board of
Trust Co:npany of Ge orgia
Trust Co:npany of Georg i a Bu ilding
Atlanta, Georg ia
Mr. J. B. Blayton
/
/ .,
,
/ I
Mutuai Federal Savings and Lo an
205 Auburn Avenue
At l a n ta, Georg ia
---
.
I
Mr. Frank Ethridge
Ethridge and Company
Suite 100
3100_ Ma ple Drive , N. E.
Atla nta , Ge org i a
Mr. J ack F . Glenn
Chairman
Citizens
35 Broa d
Atlanta ,
~
of the Board of
and Southe rn Nationa l Bank
Stree t, N. W.
Ge orgia
�bee:
Mr. Dan Sweat, Jr.
Ee
0
ppor· 111i ty At anta,
c.
101 i\b ri ecca Scr ee c Bldg . • Acl an ca, Ge org ia 3030 3 • T el eph on e 688 -1012
t
T. \ L P arl-- am
Ex ecuci ,·e Adminis c: a co r
Dece mber 9, 19 68
Mr . M. B. Sa t t e rf i eld
Exe cutive Di r ect or
Atl a n ta Housi ng Au t horit y
824 Hu r t Bu i ld ing
Atla nta , Ge or gi a
Dear Mr. Sa t te r fie l d :
We wis h t o t hank you for send ing r e p r e sen ta t ive s t o t he mee ting o f the
Centra l Cit izens Adviso r y Comrn i ttee o f EOA on November 19. The m8eting
was very he l pfu l t o u s a nd c r ea tin g improved un der s tanding of s ome o f
the p oli c ies of the Rousi ng Au thoriti es .
At th a t mee t ing , r epr e s e nta tives of th e Reg i ona l Offic e of HUD , Housing
As si stance Section, r e a d to the group f r om a "circula r " da t e d 3/22/68
whic h was tra~s mit t e d t o l oca l Hous ing Au t h ori tie s f rom Washing t on HUD
( Mr. Don Hum..rne l ) i n r egard t o " soc i a l g oa l s f or pub l ic hous ing ."
Mr. Hu mme l ind i ca t e d t hat as a mat t er of na tiona l policy , ur gent and
ma j or socia l obje c tives i ncluded :
Mor e attent i on to r esi de nt 's di gn ity ,
p r i va cy, a nd pe r s ona l safet y . Sp e cia l
a tten tion s houl d be give n to the elimina tion o f u nnecess a ry r ules and regula t ions.
Le a de r s hip to ac h ieve be tter and more
co ordina t ed s oc i a l s ervi ce s fo~ p r o ject
t e na nt s .
I nc reas e d t rai ni ng a nd e mp loyme nt o f t e na nts in p roje ct ma na ge me n t .
The de velopme nt o f e qui t a b l e s y stems for
ha ndlin g gr i evance s .
I
Great l y e x pande d par t icipa tion o f t e na nts
in p r o j ec t mana geme nt affa i r s and pr og r ams
designe d to s t r engthen the s e l f - sufficiency
o f t enan ts.
,.
�-·
M__r. M. B. Satterfield
Pag e t wo
Dece mb er 9", 19 68
Mr . Hummel's directive indicated that national and regional offices of HUD
sho·Jld give attention to the se m3.t ter s , bu t sta te d t ha t "it is the l ocal
Housing Authorities who will m3.ke the goa ls a re a li t y . It is they who
ffi'JS t ex::tmine their own ope ra t ions and m:tke. th e changes called for by t heir
findin gs."
He recommended i mmed iate r ev i e w of the following:
The r a i sing of inco me limits where they
have sub stantially fallen be hind changes
i n the comnun ity.
The libera lizing of t he definition of income
with the resp e ct to the income of minors .
The adjustin_g o f r ·e ntal policies and require me nts for the examination of tenants to minimize the difference between public housing
and nor ma l real es t ate practic es .
The use of the statutory authority to contin ue in occup ancy an over-income family
when it is unab le to find good housing in
a suitab l e ne i gh borhood.
The iib era li z ing of regulations limiting
the number of e mp loyees who may live in a
projec t.
The adopt ion o f a simple and equitable
lease.
The simp lific at ion of rules and r egulations.
The provision o f adequat e mea~ures for
s afety and s ecur ity of tenants.
The adoption o f proced ures where t enan ts,
either i ndiv i dua lly or in a group, may
be given a hea ring on questions r elat i ng to
Au thority policies and p ractices , either in
general, or in relation to an ind ividual or
fa mily.
I
The u pgradin g o f l eve l s of maintenance and
the appe a r a nce of buildings and grounds with
the maxim·Jm t enan t par ticipa tion and, where
possib le, tenant employ~e nt.
�Mr . M. B. Sa tt e rfield
Page three
Dece;:nber 9, 1968
Am~ng o the r thin gs Mr . Huwme l also su gge sted that local Housing Authorities:
Develop a two wa.y c oi.11mun i.ca t ion with
tenant s co ncerning bas ic policy ; afford
the t enants full opportun it y to or ganize,
incl uding the prov ision of meet ing rooms
and a cce s s to t enant lists and b ulle t in
boa rds.
Gi ve r es i dents the opp or tunit y to partic ipate i n th e de te r minati on of manage men t
p olicies and p ractices , subject to general
princ iples of l:l.\A. , such as re nta l and o-:::cup a ncy polici es ; rul es and r egu l ations;
charges for brea ka ge a nd damage ; eviction
pol i c ies , e tc .
Th e Centra l Citize ns Advisory Cormnittee would like to ask what action the
~tlan ta Housing Athorit~_!_aken or c ontemp lat e s t a kin g , to comply with
the r e c om:ne ndat ions of Mr . Humme l. We are especially inter este d in the
point s li sted ab ove and would apprec iate a reply, if possible, by Deceillber 17,
19 68, the dar e o f our ne x t mee tin g.
!
S inc~_x:eJ y y our s,
,,,--/
-/
\
/
--
-
.
I


-


.
,
, 1
f,
t
- --
-
-
- --
,
Er (vin St ev~ns';· Cha irma n : U. - -- - --·
.__,,Centra l Citiz ens Advisory Committ ee
ES/ gnd
cc:
Mr. Ed wa rd Ste rne, Cha ir ma n
Ware , St erne & Griffin
636 Trust Co~pany of Geor g ia Bui lding
Atla nta, Georgia
Mr. George F. Craft, Vice Chairman
Chairma n of th e Board of
Trust Co~pany of Georgia
Trust Coillpany o f Georgia Building
Atlanta, Georg ia
I
Mr. J. B. Bl a y ton
Mu tua]. Fe der a l Sa vings an d Loan
205 Auburn Ave nue
Atl anta, Geor g ia
~rr. Frank Ethridge
Ethrid ge and Company
Suite 100
3100 Map l e Dr ive , N. E.
_Atlanta, Ge org ia
Mr. J a ck
Chairman
Citize ns
35 Broad
Atlanta,
F. Glenn
of the Board of
and Southern Nationa l Bank
Stree t, N. W.
Geor g ia
"'
�EDWIN L . STERNE
M . B. SATTERFIELD
CHAIRMAN
E X ECUT IVE DIRECTOR A ND SECRETARY
LESTER H. PERSEL LS
GEORGE S. CRAFT
ASSOCIATE
EXECUT IVE DIRECTOR
0
VICE CHAIRMAN
CARL TON GARRETT
DIRECTOR OF' FINANCE
J. B. SLAYTON
GILBERT H. BOGGS
DIRECTOR OF' HOUSING
FRANK G. ETHERIDGE
HOWARD OPENSHAW
JACK F. GLENN
DIRECTOR OF REDEVELOPMENT
824 HURT BUILDING
ATLANTA , GEORG IA 30303
GEORGE R.
SANDER
TECH NICAL DIRECTOR
JACKSON 3-6074
February 13, 1969
Mr. Da~ E. Sweat, Jr.
Director of Governmental Liaison
City Hall
68 Mitchell Street, s. W.
Atlanta, Georgia
30303
Dear Mr. Sweat:
ANOTHER FIRST FOR ATLANTA
Tuesday, February 18, 1969, at 11 a.m., the Atlanta Housing Authority
will be the host at a ribbon cutting ceremony for the first Relocatable
Housing Development built under the Urban Renewal Program. The ceremony
will take place at the corn~r of Bedford Place and Merritts Avenue.
This new concept in relocation will provide housing for families
who now live in the public housing site between North Avenue and Linden.
Following the completion of the new housing, these units can be moved
to another site and reused.
It is our hope that you can be present for this important occasion
which writes Urban Renewal history.
Sincerely,
Howard Openshaw
Director of Redevelopment
HO:vw
I
�CITY OF .ATLANT.A
CITY HALL
ATLANTA, GA. 30303
Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404
IVAN ALLEN, JR., MAYOR
R. EARL LANDERS, Administrative Assistant
MRS. ANN M. MOSES, Executive Secretary
DAN E. SWEAT, JR., Director of Governmental Liaison
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Dan E. Sweat, Jr.
FROM:
J. H. Robinson
SUBJECT:
T.U.F.Fo
DATE:
January 13, 1969
(\. .t-1 ' ({
'7}
According to my conversation with Mr. Lester H. Per sells,
Executive Committee of T. U
O
F. F. will meet with the
Housing Authority 1 s Commissioners, January 16, 1969.
JHR:bt
�The following addresses were taken from the McDaniel-Glenn
Apartments list of tenants for the quarter ended September 30,
1968, that moved from alleged substandard living quarters.
Each property was inspe cted by an Atlanta Housing Inspector
and the results briefly stated below:
McDANIEL APT.#
PREVIOUS ADDRESS
1482
526 Whitehal l Terr.
s. w.
Substandard house. This house is to be
demolished for McDaniel-G l enn project.
1483
140 Rosser Street
s.w.
Not substandard. Needs minor
maintenanc e repairs.
1484
2330 Perry Boulevard N.W., Apt 30
Not substandard. Meets requirements of
At l anta Hous i ng Code.
1485
242 Troy Street, N.W.


4


Not substandard. Needs minor
maintenance repairs.
1488
37 Wyman Street , N.E.
Not substandard.
Meets requirements of
A.H. C.
1489
1057 Lookout Avenue, N.W.
Not substandard.
A.H. C.
Meets requirements of
�-2162 7 McCallie Boulevard, NoWo
1490
/tC-2
Not substandar do Needs some minor
maintenanc e repairse
279 Taft Street, S.We
1491
Not substandard. Need s some minor
· maintenanc e repairs o
1223 Hill Street, S.W o (comolied 7-30- 68)
1492
Not substandard.
of A. H. C.,
1493
Meets requirement s
509 McDaniel Street , S.W ..
Part of NcDaniel-Glenn Aptse
?
1494
476 Bolton Road, N.
Not substandard.
w.
Meets requ i rements of
A. H. C.
1495
509 McDanie l Street, S . Wo
?
1499
Part of McDaniel-Glenn Apts.
1014-A Kirkwood Avenue, S.E.
Not substandard. Need~ some minor
maintenance repai rs.
1500
162 Georgia Avenue,


10


S .. W.
v Sub standard building.
Needs repairs.
A case is being processed on this
property.
1503
465 Beard Street,
-
1504
s.w.,
Building demolished.
Glenn project.
420 Boulevard N. E.


4


Part of McDaniel-


5


Not substandard. Needs some minor
maintenance repairs ~ Case being
processed on this property.
�-31505
255 Farrington Avenue, So E.
~
Housing case pending on this property.
112
357 Felton Drive, N. W.
1506
Not substandard. Needs minor
maintenance repairs.
27 Bayard Circle
1507
/fol
Not loc ated i n the City of At l anta.
1468 Lucile Avenue, S.W.
1508
Not substandard.
repairs .
1510
Needs minor maintenance
114
350 Hills Avenue, S . W.
~
1511
Substandard building . Needs repairs.
Case being process ed on this property.
370 Roy Street, S . W.
Not substandard. Building needs
some minor maintenance repairs.
414 Markham Street , S. W.
1513
/
1514
Housing case pending on this property.
961 Simpson Street, N. W.


2


v Sub standard building .
Ne eds repairing.
Case b eing processed on this building.
1326 Thurgood Street, S. W.
1516
Not substandard .
with A. H. C.
151 8
~
This house conforms
354 Richardson Street,
s.w.
Substandard building.
McDaniel project.
Part of
/fa4
�-4926 Pulliam Street, S . W.
1519
Not sub st andard building.
242 Linden Avenue, N.E.
1521
~
Substandard building.
Buttermilk Bottoms.
Located in
2097 Boulevard Drive, S. E.
1 522
r
Housing Case pending on this property .
702 Jett Street, N.W.
1524
Not substandard.
with A.H. C.
This house conforms
174 Buena Vista Avenue , S oW. (left side)
1525
Not substandard. Needs repairs. Case
being processed on this prop erty.
1526
371- B Archer Way , N. W.
No t substandard . Apartment building
needs minor maintenance repairs.
1527
115 Hayne s Street , S . W.
v
1528


2


Hou sing case pending on this property.
221 Richardson Street,
s .w.
Not substandard. Needs some minor
mai ntenance repairs.
1530
420 Victoria Street , N.W.
-
1531


3


Housi ng case pending on this property.
60 Love Street , S . E .
f/5
Not substandard . Ne eds some minor
maintenance repairs.
1533
221 Richardson Street,
Not substandard.
s.w.


1


Needs minor maint. repairs.
�- 5-
/12 6
2 33 0 Perry Bou l evard, N. W.
1 534
Not substandard.
Meets requirements of
A. H. C.
759 Mart i n Street, S.E.
1535
Not substandard .
of A. H. C.
Meets requiremen ts
306 At l anta Avenue,
1 53 6
s . E.


2


Not s u bstan dard . Needs some minor
maintenance repairs.
153 7
32 5 Ric hardson Drive, S.W.
-
1 53 8
Buildi ng demolished.
pro j ect.
Part o f McDaniel
575 Connally Street , S.E.
Not substandard. Needs some minor
maintenance repairs.
1539
300 Sampson Street, N. E.


8


Not substandard. Building will be
demolished for expressway.,
1540
315 Ormond Street, S.E.
House has been demolished - lot clean.
1541
1003 Dimmock Street, S.W.
Not substandard building. Needs
repairing. Case b eing processed on
this property ..
1542
888 Drummond Street , S.W.
v Substandard building.


1


Needs repairing.
Case being processed on this property.
�-6-
1543
w.
451 Magnolia S tre et, N ..
o/
Housi ng case pendi ng on this prope rty.
250 Richardson Street ,
1544
........
1547
s . w. ffl 8
Housing c ase pending on thi s property •
38 Shirley Place N. W..
Not substandard ..
1548
1/1


8


Part of Dixie Hills Ap t s.
1 566 Hardee Street, N. E.


4


No t substandard . Needs some minor
maintenance r e p ai r s.
1549
950 Pryor S t reet , S . W.


9


Not substandard. Ne eds minor
maintenance repai r s. Case being
proc essed on t h ese apartment buildings .
1550
500 Ira Street, S . W. #2
Not substandard .
with A. H. C.
Apt. building c omplies
1915 Perry Boulevard, N. W..
155 6


9


,./'
Not substandard.
1576
Perry Hornes Apts.
296 Glenn Street , SeW. (right side)
Not substandard . Needs repairing.
Case being processed on this property.
568 Ste Charles Way , N. E.
1580
1594
House demolished - lot clean.
2595 James Drive , N.. W.
v
Housing case pending on this property.
�- 7-
1442 North Avenue, N. W.
1595
No t subs t andar d .
,;.;i th A. H. C.
Building con fo rms
371 Boulev a rd N. E.
1597


4


Not sub standard. Needs mi n o r
maintenance rep a i rs .
1598
243 Ric hard so n Stree t,
s .w.


3


Not s u bst andard. Needs minor
maintenance rep airs .
1 628 Foote Street, N. E.
1 601
Not substandard.
of A. H. C.
1602
Mee t s requi rements
849 Oak Street, N. W.
House demolished -
1 607
l ot clean ~
957 Dewey Street, S.W.
Not substandard.
A_- H. C.
1608
House complies with
11 11 Lookout Avenue , N.W .
v
1610


13-B


Housing Case pending on this property.
696 Capitol Avenue , S8W.


3


Not substandard. This building
complies with A. H. C.
1612
2240 Verbena Street, S.W. #7
Not substandard.
Apartments.
1618
Part of Dixie Hi ll
859 Ashby Place, S.W.
Business use. Now the Afro American
Newspaper building.
�-8-
1108 Sells Av enue, S . W.
1622
No t substandard building. Ne eds
....-- repairing . Case b e i ng processed
on this property .
840 Fox Street, N. W.
162 9
Not substandard. Building needs
minor maintenance o
836 Washington Street, S.W.
1634


1


Substandard building ~ Needs r epairs.
Case being processed on this property.
239 Wellington Street, S.W .
1635
Not substandard. Needs repairs.
Case being processed on this property.
1638
523 Whitehal l Terr. S. W.
v
1639
Substandard house. This house is to be
demolished for McDan iel-Glenn project.
411 Rockwe ll Street, S. W.
~
1 649
(upstairs)
Substandard building. Needs repairso
Case being process e d on this property.
8 0 Bouleva rd H. E .
il2
Hous e d emo lished - lot clea n.
1655
5 52 Humphries Street, S. W.
.
?
1657
Now part of McDaniel project •
310 Atlanta Ave nue, S . E.


10


Not s ubs tand ard. Need s s ome minor
maintenance repa irs.
�-9640 Irwin Street, N. E . ' # 19
1660
Not substandard. Needs some mino r
mai n tenance repairs.
94 Ericson Street, S.E.
1661
Not sub stand ard.
1664


A


l eeds some repairs.
1103 Coleman S t reet, S . W.
Not substandard. House needs minor
mai ntenanc e repairs.
2330 Perr"/ Bou l e vard , N. W.
1668
_fot substandard.
of A. H. C.
~
1676
Me ets requirements
375 Richardson Street, S.W .
1671


26



B-7


Housing case pending on this property.
533 Cooper Street, S . W.
v Substandard building.
Case being
processed on this property.
1677
625 Ashby Stree t


140


Not substandard Apartment building .
1678
943 Washington Street,
s.w.
Not substandard. Needs minor
maintenance repairs .
1680
590 As by S treet, N. W.


7


Not subs ·t andard Apartment building.
�-10-
168 8
75 8 D' Alvig n e y St reet, N. W.
No t subst andard build i ng .
with A. H. C.
1689
Con forms
284 Warren S treet , S . E.
No t s ubstandard o
A. H. C.
1 6 91


1


Meets r equirements of
500 I r a Street, S . W.
1f 5
Not subst and a rd Apartme n t bui l ding .
Compli e s with A. H. C.
1692
1 6 00 Car lis l e S t r e et , N.
w.


D-4


No such addre ss.
1 6 94
5 8 5 Li n d sey Stree t, N. W.


2


Not s ub stand a rd buildi ng . Hous e
n eeds mi n or maintenance repai rs .
1 700
549 High l and Av enue , N. E.


5


Not sub s tandard . Pr operty n e e d s
j un ed autos r emov ed n
1 704
328 Darga n Place
s. tv.
Not substandard . Needs repairs .
Case bei ng processed on this property .
1 70 9
605 Spence r Street , N. W.


10


Not substandard apart ment bui l dings .
Need minor maintenance repairs .
1712
8 62 Smith S treet , S . W.
Not subst and a rd.
A. H. C.
Hous e complies wit h
�-11-
1717
61 I'enyon Street, S.E .
Not substanda rd.
A. H. C.
Meets requirements of
201 Atlanta Av enue , S.W.
1721
No such address.
226 Rawson Street, S . W.
1722
v
1728
Substandard building. Case being
processed on this property~
113
184 Ormond Street, W.W .
r ot substandard. Needs minor
maintenanc e repairs.
876 Washington S treet,
1729
s.w.
t ot sub standard. This apt. building
complies with A. H. C.
1732
374 Griffin Street , N.W.


3


Not substandard. Needs repai rs .
Case being processed on this property.
1733
3 78 Boulevard N.W .


2


.,,,- Housing cas e pending on this property.
1736
522 Mary Str eet , S . W.
Not s ub standard . Needs minor
maintenance repairs.
1737
1 818 Ho llywood Road, 11 .W.
loo--
1738
Housing case pending on this property.
52
I rwin Str~ t, NE.
Not substandard .
A,, H. C,


B~7


Meets requirements of
�-12-
1743
539~ Cooper Str eet, S . W.
~
1745
Substandard buildi ng. Case
being processed on this property.
n. E.
543 Par_<way Drive,
v
1746


B


112
Housing case pending on this property.
600 Whi teha l 1 Terr.
/16
S .1-J.
Not substandard Apartment building.
Complies with A. H. C.
174 7
ff4
5 90 Wh i tehal 1 Terr. S. W.
No.such number.
1752
87 Lucy Street, S.W. #3
Not substandard.
503 Wells Street, S . W.
1753
?
'
1758
Needs some repairs.
Part of VicDa niel Apartments.
680 Fraser Stree t, . S. E.
House d emolis hed - lot cle an.
1760
642- A Foundry Stree t, N. W.
Not sub standard.
with A. H. C.
1765
This house complies
3201 Gordon Road, S . W.
f!E -1
Not s ub s t and ard. These apartment
building s comp ly with A. H. C.
17 66
742 Gariba ldi S t reet , S. W.


3- C


r o t substandard bui l ding. These
apartment b uilding s comp l y with
A. 11. C.
�-13-
710 n orth Avenue, N. Wo #2
1768
n ot substandard . Apartment building
needs minor repairs. Case being
processed on this property.
1769
236 Ormond Street , S.E .
Not substandard .
Need; some repairs.
853 McDaniel Stree-t, 'ft. W.
1770


1 2


iiot substandard. Only one u ni t hous e at
this address - n o ap t. #1 2 .
1771
462 Ira Street, S . W.
V
I 772
Housing case pendinv on t i s property.
176 Chicagmgu a P l ace, S . W.
Not substandard.
with A. H. C.
1773


6


This _1ous e complies
954 Hubbard St reet, S.W.
Not substandard. House needs repairs.
Case being processed on this property.
1774
69 Maple Street, N.W .
/Ill
Hot substandard Apartment building.
1775
1247 Simpson Road, F. w.


20


Not subste.ndard apartment buildings.
Need some minor maintenance repairs.
1777
32 Whiteford Avenue, S$E.
Not substandard.
of A. H. C.
Meets requirements
�-14-
462 Kindricks Avenue , S . E.
1778
r ot substandard .
eeds some mi nor
maintenance repairs .
253 Linden Avenu e, N. E.
17 7 9
House demo l ished - lot clean.
453 Wi n dsor Street, S . W.
1780
,....- Substandard h ouse. Case being
proc essed on this property .
519 Bedford Street, N. E.
1781


18


.- Housing case pending on this property.
409 Formwalt Street, S.W.
1783
v
1784
Substandard house. Case being
processed on this property.
700 Nea l Street , N. W.
.,,, Housing case pending on this property.
1785
710 ,forth Av enue , N. W.
ifo4
i'lot substandard apartment building •
.......- Needs repairs. Case being processed
on this property.
1789
1053 McDaniel Street, S.W.
Not substandard. Needs minor
mai ntenance repairs.
1793
487 Rockwell S tree t, S . W.
Not substandard house.
�-151794
347 Bowen Circle S . W.


1


Not substandard. Hi ghp oint Apts.
Comply with A.H. c.
1807
531 Ir~ Street, S . W.


A-8


Part of Mc Da n ie l project.
e demolished.
Wi ll
�M . B . SATTERFIELD
EDWIN
L . STERNE 1 r/ ; P
CHAI A'44N
GEORGE S . CRAFT
EXECUTI V E DIR.ECTOR ANV SEC RE T ARY
LESTER H. PERSELLS
'
AS SOCI ATE
VICE CHAIR MA N
E X E'..GUT IVE
0
DIRECTO R
CARL TON GAP.RE TT
DIRECTOR
J.
B. SLAYTON
OF
FINANCE
GILBERT H . BOGGS
DIRECTOR OF HOU S ING
FRANK G. ETHERIDGE
HOWARD OPENSHAW
JACK F. GLENN
DIRECTOR
624
HURT BUILDING
ATLANTA , GEORG IA 30303
JACKSON
Of REDEVELOPMENT
GEORGE R.
SANDER
TECHNICAL DIRECTOR
3-6074
January 21, 1969
Mr. John T. F.drnunds
Assistant Regional Administrator
for Renewal Assistance
Department of Housing and Urban Development
6L~5 Peachtree - Seventh Building
Atla.~ta, Georgia 30323
Re:
Project Ga. R-10
Rawson-Washington Urban Redevelopment Area
Project Closeout
Dear Hr. Edmunds:
As you lmow, it is the intent of the Housing Authority and the City of
.Atlanta to complete all activities in the above mentioned project and
achieve project closeout at the earliest possible date. We are, the::- efore,
attempting to clear up all those matters which might delay the closing
of this P-.coject.
·
One of the problems which may affect pr oject closeout involves that area
of the project l ying along Georgia Avenue i..lJl.l~ediately south of the Stadium.
We have- attached a map sh01·rlng the area in question, which is bounded by
Georgia Avenue, Capitol Avenue , Bass Street and Washington Street, and
lies partially within Project. GA. R~lO and partially within Pr oject NDP A~2-3.
Project GA. R-10 illustrates many of the reasons that the NDP appr oach to
renewal activities is wise. The original Ur ban ReneHal _P lan for tl:i. is pr oject
included mult:L-family housing for t he area now occupied by t he Atlanta Stadium .
With that l and use in mind, it was contempl at ed that 'c.he proper l and us es for
the area ilmneoiately south of Georgia Avenue would be for retai l commercial
uses compatible wlth a relatively high density resicJ.ential area. Since t he
Atlanta Stadium has been completed, t he commercial l and use originally cont emplated no longer is achievable. Possible developers have expressed no
intere st in carrying out the r edevelopment as originally proposed. The new
t and Us e Flan of the Cit y cont empl ates conur£rcial reuse for t hi s entire area
of a t ype properly re l ated to the nei ghbor i ng Stadi um. Hi t h t his i n mind,
t he Housi g Authorit y , at t he dir ect i on of t he Ci ty, wishes to a ss embl e t he
entir e area bounded by t he above listed four street s i nto one t ract of l and ,
whi ch Hould t hen be off e1•ed for r edevelopment. This would cont empl at e closing
�-2-
Crew Street between Georgia Avenue and Bass Street. Bass Street west of
Washington Street has been widened to serve its logical use as a connector
to the South Expressway. The City's Land-Use Plan provides fo r the w:i.uening
of Bass S treet betwe en Washington Street and Capitol Avenue so that it can
properly serve its role as a traffic artery.
On December 31, 1968, Part I of l\.Jnendment Nine to Georgia R-10 uas submitted
to your office. .T his Amendment provides for the acquisition and assembly of
all of the land in the su.bject area lying within Project GA. R-10. Already
approved for acquisition is that portion of the subje ct area lying within
Project NDP GA. A-2 -3.
In order to carry out the objectives of the City and to provide for the early
closeout of Pr oject GA. R-10, we recommend that the follOi·rl.ng actions be taken:
(1)
Amenchnent Nine to Project GA. R- 10 involving a Federal Capital Grant
of $479,760.00 and a Relocation Grant of $33,580 . 00 be approved as
soon as possible.
(2): As soon as .Amendment Nine has been approved, that the area, together
with the Federal and local financing,be transferred to the NDP.
This transfer uould not involve a net change in Federal Capital
Grant since the amounts t ransferred from one project to the ot her
would be equal. In fact, such a transfer might result in some
minor de creases due to possible savings in interest and adminis ~
trati ve costs.
(3}
As soon as the l and can be assembled i nto one Urban Renewal activity,
as recommended above , the necessary surveys and appraisals be made ,
and t he entire super block be offered for s ale. An offering of this
type pr obably should be advertised for at least six months. After
the awa.1·d, t he developer pr obably would need 12 - 18 months to obtain
leases, prepare plans, and specifications, and to arrange financing.
It will, therefore, be appr oxi mately t uo ye ars. before const ruction
can start on this development.
At the present t ime , the Model Cities office is located in a movable building
on a small por t i on of this site . The Mode l Cities Plan, as currently appr oved,
contemplates additional relocatable structures in this area to furnish needed
off ice space. The building now located here and others contempl ated are
occupying land hel d under lease lrl.th a 30- day Cancellation Cl ause. It is
contempl a t ed that pr ior to the time construction could start on a permanent
redevelopment t he Hodel Cities Office st r uctur es would be r elocat ed elsewhere .
.
..,,
�-3-
Such a move is
time.
relativel y inexpensive and would consume very little
It is our hope that you will carefully cons ider all the factors outlined above, and if possible, will concur in our recommendation.
It is our sincere belief that t he foregoing affords the best method
of achieving an orderly redevelopment of this area and an early
closeout of Project GA. R~lO.
Sincerely yours ,
.. ·
/!


&$_5/,_t ! ~


Lester H. Persells
Associate Executive Director
Enclosure
cc:
Yir. Earl Metzger
MCP - HUD - Room 852
Mr. Rodney M. Cook
Mr. Charles Davis
Mr . Collier Gladin
Mr. Earl Lander s
LHP :as
�,{I~,.,,


I' " '"""""


M.
C. """
B . SATTERFIELD
E XE CUTI V E DIR E CTOR AND S ECRETARY
<
LESTER H. PERSELLS
GEORGE S . CRAFT
ASSO CI A TE
E X EC U T .I V E O IA ECTOR
VI CE CHAIRMAN
CARL TON GARRETT
DIRECT O R
J,
OF
FIN AN CE
GILBERT H . BOGGS
B. SLAYTON
DIRECTOR
OF HOU S ING
FRANK G. ETHERIDGE
HOWARD OPENSHAW
JACK F . GLENN
DIRECTOR
824
H URT BU I L D ING
ATLANTA , GEORG IA 30303
JAC KSON
OF REDEVELOPMENT
GEORGE R .
SA NDER
TECHNICAL DIRECTOR
3-6074
February 13, 1969
Mr. R. Earl Landers
Administrative Assistant to Mayor
City Hall
68 Mitchell Street, S. W.
Atlanta, Georgia
30303
Dear Mr. Landers:
ANOTHER FIRST FOR ATLANTA
Tuesday, February 18, 1969, at 11 a .,m., the Atlanta Housing Authority
will be the host at a ribbon cutting ceremony for the first Relocatable
Housing Development built under the Urban Renewal Program. The ceremony
will take place at the corner of Bedford Place and Merritts Avenue.
This new concept in relocation will provide housing for famil~es
who now live in the public housing site between North Avenue and Linden.
Following the completion of the new housing, these units can be moved
to another site and reused.
It is our hope that you can be present for this important occasion
which writes Urban Renewal historyo
Sincerely,
Howard Openshaw
Director of Redevelopment
HO: vw

�