.MTcwOA.MTcwOA

MINUTES OF THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR URBAN RENEW AL Directors Room Trust Company of Georgia Building Thursday, O ctober 30 , 1969 'Ihe Reorganization meeting of the CACUR was called to order at 2:00 P. · M. by Vice Chairm an A. B. Padgett, by prior arrangement of the Chairman who was delay ed a few minutes due to a conflicting engagement . Those attending the meeting from the Executive Committee were: Messrs. Carlton Rochell; Robert W. Bivens; Henri J ova Art Burks {r epresenting Mr. William J. VanLandingham); W. L. Calloway; Richard Rich; Edgar Schukraft; and Joe C. Whitley. Committee members in attendance were: Messrs. Richard K. Barksdale; Jack Carrollton; Sam I. Cooper; Rev. Joseph L. Griggs; Joe Guthridge; Roy Harwell; Percy Hearle; George Kennedy; Joe LaBoon; James L. Muddey, Jr. {representing Dean Alex Lacy); A. J. Lockhart; Jerry C. Wilkinson (representing Dr. Albert Manley); Jim Meyerholtz; Sanford Orkin; William R. Presley; I. M. Sheffield, III; J. D. Wingfield, Jr.; Mrs. S. M. Waddell; Mrs. Mattie Murcy; Mrs. Mary Ann Blackwood; Mrs. Mary F. Gilmer; Mrs . J. B. Harris; Mrs. Sujette Crank and Mrs. Leonard Haas; for the Atlanta Housing Authority: Mr. Lester H. Persells; Mr. Thomas Eskew; Mr. Howard Openshaw; and Mrs. Margaret Ross; for the Atla nta Planning Department: Mrs. Sally Pickett; Mr. John Mat11i...li.ew?; Mrs. hld e n Mey-c:rs; Mr. Eric Harkness and Mr. George Aldridge, Jr. Invitational Notice, Agenda and other related Documents pertaining to the meeting are attached to file copy of these minutes. Vice Chairman Padgett opened the meeting by welcoming all new and old members. He then introduced Col. Malcolm Jones, Executive Director, CACUR. Col. Jones then read the list of new members and asked each new member to stand to be recognized. Copies of the list of members, Committee appointments and Executive Committee Members were provided each me1nber who attended and are attached to the file copy of these minutes. {Additional copies are available for Committee members who did not attend this reorganization meeting.) Mr. Padgett then called on Mr. Bob Bivens to give the history of the Citizens Advisory Committee for Urban Renewal, (copi es of which were passed out to those in attendance and copy is attached to the file copy of these minutes). Chairman Langdale arrived during Mr. Bivens presentation, at the conclusion of which Chairman Langdale personally addressed the group and welcomed the n e w members . He explained the changed role of Urban Renewal a11d NDP and stated that this called for changes in structure of the Committee and operational procedure . The importance of CACUR advising on Urban Renewal and NDP policy matters was �Page Two stressed. Padgett. The Chairm.an then returned conduct of the meeting to Vice Chairman Mr. Padgett then called on Mr. Jim Wright of the Model Cities Staff to explain the Model Cities Proposed Physical Development for 1969 and 1970. Mr. Wright's presentation consisted primarily of a brochure, prepared in . three components, which was passed out to those in attendance . The components were: (a) Satisfactory Community Envirorun e nt; (b) Transporta tion; (c) Housing. Each component consisted of intemization of proposed projects for 1970; Proposed source of funding and brief statement as to purpose of each project but without any explanation as to the extent of each project, specific timing or priorities. Mr. Wright then offered to respond to q u estions. There were none. Mr. Rich sugg e ste d tha t sinc e the pr e s e nta tion was on physic a l deve lopment that an annotated map showing proposed projects and their specific location would be helpful. Mr. Wright responded tha t he had such a map which any interested person could look at after the meeting. Since Sta te R e pres e nta tive John Hoo d, Cha irma n o f the Mode l C i ti es Hou s ing Committe e, did not att e nd th e meeting , Mr. P a d ge tt a ske d Mr . Johnnie Johnson, Director of Model Cities, to comment on the Model Cities Housing Committee views. Mr. °John s on sta ted s ub s t a ntially tha t t he H ousing Com mittee of t he Mode l Citie s a r e a h a d expr esse d d esi r es tha t th e Atl ant a H ou s i ng A uthority take the following a ction immedia t e ly, s o tha t th e M o d e l Cities prog r a m c a n procee d in a manner accepta ble to th e r e side nts of Mode l Cities: 1. That no relo c ation housing be brought into the Mode l Cities Area until it h as b een spe cific a lly a pprove d (a s to loc a tion, typ e of structur es a nd s i z e) by the H ou s ing Committee . 2. That all activity of the Atla nta Housing Authority in the Model Cities Area - including acquisiti on of property, displaceme nt of reside nts, a nd demolition of structurese x c e pt thos e ac ti v iti es in w hich the Atla nta Hou s ing Authority h as a l egal obligation t o pr ocee d a nd from whic h a re l ease cann o t b e obtaine d, b e im mediatel y stopped until the problem of relocation housing is resolved . 3. That th e O cto b e r 1, 19 69 , offe ring of t h e Atla nta Hous ing Autho r ity for the s a l e and d eve l o pm ent o f the C -4 P e o p l es t own site b e i mmedi a t e l y wit h d rawn. 4 . T h a t a C omm ittee imm e dia t e l y be for me d c ompose d of repre s entatives fr om the A tlant a H ousing A uthority, the M o del C i ties Age n cy and the M ass Conventi on, Inc. Thi s Committee or i t s sub-committ ee to have the responsibility �7 Page Three for working out a satisfactory relocation housing plan and an offer for the sale and development of the C-4 site and other land in the Model Cities area. The problem of relocation housing to be given the highest priority so that other activities of the Atlanta Housing Authority in the Model Cities area can be resumed as quickly as possible. Mr. Johnson stated that the Model Cities Housing Committee was prepared to file an injunction against the Housing "Authority to stop activity until the Committee views had been met. Mr. Padgett then called on Mr. Howard Openshaw, Director of Redevelopment for the Atlanta Housing Authority to comment on and explain the consequences resulting from the position taken by the Model Cities Housing Committee. Mr. Opensh aw stated that on Octob er 16, the newly reactivated Model Cities Housing Committee advised the Atlanta Housing Authority of three major concerns of area residents, and requested that all NDP activities be stopped until satisfactory solutions could be worked out . The three major concerns include: (1) Rehabilitation, (2) Di sposition of project land, and (3) Relocation . Inasmuch as the Neighborhood Development Program (NDP), which is urban renewal on an annual basis, was designed to respond to the needs of area residents, to assist them in the physical improvement of th e ir neighborhoods, th e Atlanta Housing Authority readily agreed to stop all NDP acti v ities in the Model Cities Area in order to explore new alternatives in the direction the program should take. The Model Cities Housing Committee expressed serious concerns of property owners unable to bring their properties up to the required Project Rehabilitation Standards, a requirement to be eligible for Federal Financial assistance. The 1968 Housing Act imposed income limitations on families eligible for 3% direct rehabilitation loans. The Atlanta Housing Authority has agreed to review the Project Rehabilitation Standards and the Federal regulations governing rehabilitation procedures with a resident committee in order to arrive at a solution. The Model Cities Housing Committee requested that the Atlanta Housing Authority withdraw its invitation for the sale and development of Parcel C-4 in Peoplestown, and to prepare documents requiring the redeveloper to come from the Model Cities area. Attorneys representing the Atlanta Housing Authority and the Model Cities Mass Convention are in the process of preparing bid documents restricting the sale of urban renewal l and in the Model Cities area to area residents or organizations. The third concern expressed by the Model Cities Housing Committee was the complete rejection of the type of relocation housing units proposed by the Authority. These units, designed by an architect to provide maximum li veabi lity within the cost limitations and Federal guidelines, contained three bedrooms (two bedrooms �Page Four 8 feet by 8 fe_et, one bedroom 10 feet by 12 feet). The Housing Committee indic ate d that residents would rej ec t mobile ho1nes, and w ould insist on pre-fabricated modular units. Mr. Openshaw indicated th at the Housing Act of 1949 as amended prohibits the use of urban renew a l funds for the construction of structures, that HUD guidelines specifically limit relocation housing units to mobile homes built on a chassis, without permanent foundation, easily relocateable. Nonetheless the Housing Authority has agreed to explore with a residents' committee a lternative solutions related to temporary relocateable housing in the Model Cities Area. Mr. Openshaw stated that a P o licy Committee, a Relocation Committee and a Rehabilitation Committee, composed of repr es entatives of the Model Cities Agency, the Atlanta Housing Authority and th e Mass Convention, Inc., have been appointe d to seek solutions to the problems concerning rehabilitation, sale of l a nd, and relocation in the Model Cities area, and to permit the Atla nta Housing Authority to resume the 1969 NDP acti vi ties voluntarily halte d on Octob e r 17. Mr. Openshaw indicated that the two major problems confronting the Atla nta Housing Authority, the implementing agency for carrying out the 1969 NDP plans for the Model Cities area, . plans prepared by the Model Cities staff with complete resident involvement, are: 1. Conflict between the expressed desires of the residents and limitations of Federal regulations. 2. The NDP plan for 1969 and also 1970 we re approved by neighborhood residents as well as the Model Cities E xec utive Board without benefit of the recently activated Model Citi es Housing Committee's stated objectives. For example, the 1969 NDP plan for the Model Cities area designated four sites for permanent housing requiring the r e location . of 278 famili es , 77 individu a ls, and 10 business concerns, all to be relocated before rede ve lopment could take place on the specific sites invol ve d. To require mid- wa y through the cal endar year that acquisition of land and relocation of families b e discontinu e d until suitable relocatable housing is provide within the area is to introduce a valid c oncept, but one that will prevent the Authority from completing the NDP plan within the calendar year 1969. The 1970 NDP plans, prepared by four planning consultants with involvement of residents of the six Model Cities neighborhoods, require the relocation of 609 families during the calendar year 1970, with no vacant land includ ed in the acquisition program, nor funds for relocation housing. While the Housing Authority will make available for occupancy during 1970 over 2, 650 d we lling units for families of low and moderate income, these units are not loc ated w ithin the Model Cities area, hence the Housing Authority is once again placed in an impossible position of trying to carry out plans approved by the neighborhoods in conformance with objectives recently expressed of the Model Cities Housing Committee. �Page Five Mr. Openshaw indicated that the City's NDP application for 1970 is already 30 days overdue and that the application cannot be submitted to HUD until the situation in Model Cities is resolved. Mr. Openshaw stated that the stopping of all NDP activities in the Model Cities area becomes all the more acute when we consider the f a ct that unencumbered funds for cal~ndar year 19 6 9 must be return e d to W a shington for redistributed in the national program, and that Atlanta has been advis e d that Fed e ral funds for the 1970 NDP have been reduced to appro x imately 45. 9% of . the amount allocated for 1969. Mr. Jones asked if any substantial delay in the relocation and acquisition of sites in the Model Cities area wouldn't seriously jeopardize the City's "Bre a kthrough" application for which sites in the Mod e l C i ties area h a d be e n offered as priority prototype housing sites, to be cleared by January 1970? Mr. Open.shaw's r e ply was that this is true. Mr. Openshaw closed his comments with an optomistic note that h e hoped the difficulty with the Model Cities Housing Committee would be resolved over the we e kend and that activity in the Model Cities area could resume. Mr. Johnni e Johnson wa s then give n a n opportunity to comment a gain for Representative John Hood in rebutt a l of any of Mr . Openshaw' s remarks. Mr. Johnson explained th a t h e thou g ht th e sit u a tion h a d arisen throu g h l a c k of timely communication between a ll e lem e nts involved and e x pressed hopes of a compris e solution soon . Because of the time element involved, a more lengthy discussion w a s precluded. Mr. Padgett then ask e d both Mr . Johnson and Mr. Openshaw what the CACUR could do now to assist in resol v ing the matter? Both seemed to think tha t for the time being it would be be st to await further d e velopments. Col. Jones then presented Vice Cha irman Padg e tt with the Financial Statement for the period September 30 to October 30, 1969, which was read to the Committee. Col. Jones then read a Resolution e x pressing sympathy and condolences to the family and business associates (Atlanta Life Insurance Company) of the late CACUR member, E . M . Martin . The Resolution w as una minously adopted and will be sent to the family and busines s associa t es of the l a te E. M . Martin. The meeting wad adjourned at 3 :15 P . M. Respectfull y submitted , ~u2--~~r.t~ //;J Malc olm D . Jo.fles Exe c uti v e Di rector �