.MTcxMA.MTcxMA

MINUTES OF THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR URBAN RENEW AL Directors Room Trust Company of Georgia Building Thursday, October 30, 1969 _The Reorganization meeting of the CACUR was called to order at 2:00 P. M. by Vice Chairman A. B. Padg e tt, by prior arrangement of the Chairman who was delayed a few minutes due to a conflicting engagement. Those attending the meeting from the Executive Committee were: Messrs. Carlton Rochell; Rob e rt W. Bivens; Henri Java Art Burks (representing Mr. William J. VanLandingham); W. L. Calloway; Richa rd Rich; Edgar Schukraft; and Joe C. Whitley. Committee members in attendance were: Messrs . Richard K. B a rksdale; 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. M attie Murcy; Mrs . Mary Ann Blackwood; Mrs. Mary F. Gilm er; 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 Opensh aw; and Mrs . Margaret Ross; for the Atl anta Planning Department: Mrs. Sally Pickett; Mr. John Mat11'.hew~; Mrs. Hel e n Meyers; 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 a ll new and old members. He then introduced Col. Malcolm Jones, E xec utive 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 E xec utive Committee Members were provided each member w ho 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 Citi zens Advisory Committee for Urban Renewal, (copies 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 Langda le personally addressed the group and welcomed the new members. He explained the changed role of Urban Renewal and NDP and stated that this called for changes in structure of the Commit tee and operational procedure . The importance of CACUR advis ing on Urban Renewal and NDP policy matters was �Page Two stressed. Padg_e tt. The Chairman 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 Environment; (b) Transportation; (c) Housing. Each component consisted of inte1nization 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 ti1ning or priorities. Mr. Wright then offered to respond to questions. There were none. Mr. Rich suggested that since the presentation was on physical development that an annotated map showing proposed projects and their specific location would be helpful. Mr. Wright responded that he had such a map which any interested person could look at after the meeting. Since State Representative John Hood, Chairman of the Model Cities Housing Committee, did not attend the meeting, Mr . Padgett asked Mr. Johnnie Johnson, Director of Model Cities, to comment on the Model Cities Housing Committee views. Mr. Johnson stated substantially that the Housing Committee of the Model Citi es area had expressed desires that the Atlanta Housing Authority take the following action immediately, so that th e Model Cities program can proceed in a manner acceptable to the residents of Model Cities: 1. That no relocation housing be brought into the Model Cities Area until it has been specifically approved (as to lo cation, type of structures and size ) by the Housing Committee. 2. That all activity of the Atlanta Housing Authority in the Model Cities Area - including acquisition of property, displacement of residents, and demolition of structuresexcept those activities in which the Atlanta Housing Authority has a l egal obligation to proceed and from which a release cannot be obtained, be immediately stopped until the problem of relocation housing is resolved. 3 . That the October 1, 1969 , offering of the Atlanta Housing Authority for the sale and development of the C-4 Peoplestown site be immediately withdrawn. 4 . That a Committee immediately be formed composed of representatives from the Atlanta Housing Authority, the Model Cities Agency and the Mass Convention, Inc . This Committee or its sub-committee to have the responsibility �7 I 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 acti vi ties 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 Comrnittee 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 Mode l Cities Housing Committee. Mr. Openshaw stated that on October 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 1n a jor concerns include: (1) Rehabilitation, (2) Disposition of project l a nd, and (3) Relocation. Inas much as the Neighborhood Development Pro g ram (NDP), w hich is urban renew a l on an annual basis, was designed to respond to the needs of area resid ents, to assist them in the physic a l improvement of their neighborhoods, th e Atlanta Housing A uthority readily agr e ed to stop all NDP activities in the Model Cities Area in orde r to explore new alternatives in the direction the progr a m should take. The Model Cities Housing Committee expressed serious concerns of property owners unable to bring their properties up to the required Project Rehabilitation Standa rds, a requirement to be eligible for Federal Financial assistance. The 1968 Housing Act imposed income limita tions on families eligible for 3% direct rehabilitation loans. The Atl ant a Housing Authority has agree d 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 Peoplestow n, 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 land 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 liveability within the cost limitations and Federal guidelines, contained three bedrooms (two bedrooms �Page Four 8 feet by 8 feet, one bedroom 10 feet by 12 feet). The Housing Committee indicated that_r esidents would reject mobile h01n es , and would insist on pre-fabricated modular units. Mr. Openshaw indicated that the Housing Act of 1949 as amended prohibits the use of urban renewal 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 I com.mittee alternative solutions related to temporary relocateable housing in the Model Cities Area. Mr. Openshaw stated that a Polrcy Committee, a Relocation Committee and a Rehabilitation Comm ittee, composed of representatives of the Model Cities Agency, the Atlanta Hou s ing Authority and the Mass Conve ntion, Inc., have been appointed to seek solutions to the proble ms concerning rehabilita tion, sale of l and, and relocation in the Model Cities area, and to permit th e Atlanta Hou sing Authority to resume the 1969 NDP activities voluntarily halted on October 17. Mr. Op enshaw indicated that the two major problems confronting the Atlanta Housing Authority, the implementing age ncy for carrying out the 19 69 NDP plans for the Mode l Cities area, plans pr e p a red by the Model Cities s taff with complete resident inv ol vement, a re: 1. Conflict b etween the expressed desires of the residents and limita tions of Federal r egula tions . 2. The NDP plan for 196 9 a nd als o 1970 we r e ap proved by n e i g hbo rho:::Jd residents as well as the Mode l Citie s Executive Boa rd without b enefit of the rec e ntly activated Model Cities Hou sing Committe e I s stated objectives. For exampl e, the 19 6 9 NDP plan for the Model Citie s area designa ted four sites for p e rmanent hou s ing r e quiring the reloc ation of 278 families, 77 individua l s , a nd 10 bu sine ss concerns , a ll to be relo cat e d b e for e r e d eve lopm e nt c ould t a k e p l ace on th e s p ec ifi c s i t es involve d. To r e quir e mid-way throu g h th e cal e ndar y e ar t h a t a c quisition of land and reloc a tion of famili e s be dis co ntinu e d until suitable r e lo catabl e housing is provide within the area is to introduce a valid concept, but one that will prevent the Author ity from compl etin g the NDP p l a n within the cal enda r y ear 1969. The 1970 NDP plans, prepared by four planning consultants with involve ment of r e sident s of the six Mode l Citi e s neighborhoods, requir e the re l o cation of 6 0 9 families during the cal e nda r y ear 1970, with no vacant l and included in the ac quisiti o n program, nor funds for relocation hou s ing. While the Housing Authority will make avail abl e f or occupa ncy during 197 0 ove r 2, 65 0 dwe lling unit s for f a milies of low and mode rate incom e , th e se units a r e not l ocate d within t h e Mode l Citi es a r ea , h e n ce th e Hou s ing A uthor i ty i s once a g a in place d i n a n impo ss ible p o s ition o f trying t o car ry out pla n s a p pro v e d by th e n e i g hborh oods in conforma nc e with objectives recently e x pressed of the Model Cities Hous i ng Committee . �Page Five Mr. Op enshaw 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 a ll NDP activities in the Model Cities area becomes all the more acute when we consider the fact that unencumbered funds for calendar year 1969 must be returned to Washington for redistributed in the national program, and that Atlanta has been advised that Federal funds for the 1970 NDP have been reduced to approximate ly 45 . 9% .of the amount allocated for 1969. Mr . Jones aske d if any substantial delay in the relocation and acquisition of sites in the Model Cities area wouldn 1 t seriously jeopardize the C ity ' s 11 Breakthrough 11 application for which sites in the Model Cities area had been offered as priority prototype housing sites, to be cleared by January 1970? Mr. Openshaw 1 s reply was that this is true. Mr. Op enshaw closed his comments with an optomistic note that he hoped the difficulty with the Model Cities Housing Committee would be resolved over the weekend and that activity in the Model Cities area could resume. Mr. Johnnie Johnson was then g iven an opportunity to comment again for Representative John Hood in rebuttal of any of Mr. Op enshaw 1 s remarks. Mr. Johnson explained that he thought the situation had arisen through l a ck of timely communication between· all elements involved and expressed hopes of a comprise solution soon. Bec ause of the time element involved, a more lengthy discussion was precluded. Mr . Padgett then asked both Mr. Johnson and Mr. Op enshaw what the CACUR could do now to assist in resolving the matter? Both seemed to think that for the time being it would be be st to await further developments. Col. Jones then presented Vice Chairman Padgett with the Financia l Statement for the period September 30 to Octob er 30, 1969, which was read to the Committee. Col. Jones then read a Resolution expressing sympathy and condolences to the family and business associates (Atlanta Life Insurance Company) of the late CACUR member, E. M. Martin. The Resolution was unaminously adopted and will be sent to the family and business associates of the late E. M. Martin. The meeting wad adjourned at 3:15 P. M. Respectfully submitted, /-?143.215.248.55t~~ Malcolm D. Jo./les E x ecuti ve Dir ec tor �