.Nzg4Ng.Nzg4Ng

MINUTES HOUSING RESOTJR C"GS COI1ViITTI:E :SXECUTIVE GRJU? MEf.TL 'i1 September 12, 1967 The Executive Group of the Housing Resources Committee met at 10: 00 a.m., September 12, 1967, in Conn'littee Room t12, City Hall. The following members were present: Mr. Cecil A. Alexander, Chairman, Housing Resources Committee Dr. Benjamin E. Mays, Co-Chairman, Housin~ Resow-ccs Committee Mr. Archer D. Smith, representing Mr. Charles L. Weltner, Acting Chairman, Legal Panel Mr. Henry L. P.ills, representing Mr. Lee Burge, Chairman, Finance and Non-Profit Funds Panel Hr . John Wilson, member, Finance and Non-Profit Funds Panel Mr. Charles F, Palmer, representing Mr. Clarence D; Cole.man, Chairman, Public Housing Panel Mr. F. c. Terrell, representing Mr. Wallace L. Lee, member, Land Acquisition Panel Dr. Vivian Henderson, Actin6 Chairman, Land Acquisition Panel Mr. J. A. Alston, member, Land Acquisition Panel Mr. Stewart Wight, member, Land Acquisition Panel .fkan William s. Jackson, Chairman, Social Problems Panel Mr. Edward S. Simon, Vice-Chairman, Business Participation Panel Mr. Dale Clark, Chairman, Public Information Panel Mr. Malcolm D. Jones, Director Also present at the meeting were: Mr. William S. Holland, Executive Director, CACUR · Mr.· Lester A. Persells, Associate Executive Director, Housing Authority Mr. Alexander opened the meeting with comments pertaining to the program and then called on Mr . Jones to present the current status report of the program. Mr. Jones stated that his office was in the process of retyping the low• income housing inventory report but had only the summary ready for this meeting (Item 2 on the agenda and document 2 in the folder which had been presented to Executive Group members). He explained that included in the inventory are apartment units bei~ developed under conventional financing which tlo not cost more than $10,000 per unit to construct, $12,000 for each side of a du)lex and $1S,OOO for a single family house. He eA-plainecl that the last page of the summary contains notes, s:, me of which are especially significant. He explained that Item A of the notes gives a comparison of the status of the program on August 31, as compared with the previous report of June 28 and stated that on the whole we hnve lost ground in this program since the previous report two months ago. �2 He then called attention to the extract from the CIP report pertaining to low-income housing requirements (Item 3 on the agenda and in the folder). He also pointed out t hat we are not really building low-cost housing in public housing but low-income housing . He also explained Item 4(a) on the a genda and the correspondin:; document in the folder passed out to Committee members, pertaining to available land suitably zoned for the low-income housing program. At this point Mr. Alexander explained that Mr. Jones' office was understaff ed to handle the statistical data required by the CIP and proposed that f rom here on out when someone GOes to the Building Department for a permit we should try to r,et the Per1ut Desk to list what the rent on the units will be and number of bedrooms per unit; th2.t ther e is no way we can require this legally; and that another thing that we need to clo is to also go back to the developers now in_ the program and get more specific information on their plans. He proposed for this purpose that the City provide a Clerk to the Committee f or not less than 3 months. He stated that he felt the structures beins built are reasonably r;ood and that his fe elin::s ar e that a gr eat deal more int eres t should be put in the lowest r ental-purchase ran~es ; that we can get more in that price r ange f rom the prefabricat ed housing; th2.t the carrying charges on these per month i s important and we should find out what it is; that to meet the r eally tough part of the program m6ans going to the City for additional hel p . He als o asked for comments f rom members of the Coilll'ilittee. Mr . Clnrk s ai d he would sup~'.)ort a s k in,~ f or more help; that he als o s aw a news repor t f or housing t hat woul d r ent f or $50 t o ~>70 per month, under the Farmers Associa tion program; t hat i t i s in DeKalb County , and is called City Line . Mr . Alexander stated that is a good start to ~et low.cost housing in the counties . Another member stat ed that the Farmers Association pro,::ram is als o a part of the FHA program. ~.lr . PaJ.mcr inquired as to the def init ion of low-cost hous ing, . Mr. Jone s replied that it i s essentially a matter of interpr et a t i on , Mr. Alexander st ated tha t is was from $0 to ~55 per mont h . Mr. Palmer cormnent ed "And t hey want l ow- i ncome housi ne built under privat e enterprise?" Mr. Alexander replied it is thought of now primarily as a Turnkey development. Mr. Jones added 11 And even Rent Supplement". �3 Mr. Alexander again pro_p osed askin(~ the City f or a Clerk and developing a form for the- Building Department to get fille d out at the time permits are obtained and. ctated that we will have to talk to Mr. Wofford about that. A motion was made that the matter be lef t in Mr. Jones' hands , Y.tr. Yates seconded it.- The matter was dropqed there. Mr, Alexander then explained that the roll of this Committee in zoning matters is not an open and shut case as to how to make reconnnendations to the Boo.rd of Aldermen; that we have been taking this on as n extracurricular roll to a 1,sist the developers in this progrrun; t hat this has been done i n several instances, but no members of this Committee have been asked to co around looking at these s ites to r e commend. thos e which we cons ider reasonable. Mr. Jones explained. that this is what he and Mr. Gates have been atteml)ting to do; that they have been out with the s-,:)Onsors and actually looked at most of tho sites anc.t have only listed and. encouraged thos e which they felt were pr actical and desirable, t hat in a several ins tances they have di scourai cd sponsors f rom submittin0 s ites which they f elt were impr~cticable or unsuitable . Hr. Alexander continued t hat hie feel :LnG i s that we s hould t ry t o ai d and assist the builder s i n this progr am but that we hnve no p or"'7er t o cha116 e what is going on and that we a.r e hnvin:~ our pr o )Osal s turned down one by one f or various reasons. He stated that the approach which he felt we s hould t ake i s to issue a general s t at ement about t he housing progr am, i t s needs, and the shor t a~e of land. that is now suitabl y zoneG and t o work towar d gettin;-~ a rezoning of the ent ire City, with due consideration f or l ow-i n come housing needs; that as for working with t he developers we should be governed by what wo sec is a cceptabl e t o the Board of Aldermen and t ho Building De~art ment i n granting permits; and fur ther t o come to some conclusion about the problems. He stated that we should also hel p the developers arrange meetings with the Aldermen, Departments involved and anyone who want s to talk to them about deficiencies in Community Facil ities relat ed t o t he housing program, which in some instances have been lcgimat c , such as parks , transportation, traffic, schools etc. He further stated that at t he same time the ur 6ency of this program has seemed to es cape some ;)eople; that one thing which we also need is to emphasize the requirement for additional low-income housing in the neighboring cities and counties and make it clear that we are not trying to creat e a haven here in Atlanta for the whol e country to come to and move in on t his program; tha t this may happen, but we should try t o avoi,1. it. He stated that the CIP requirement is for repl acement of houses and apartments that are unfit for human habitation. He then called upon Mr. Jones for comments. Mr. Jones stated he feels t hat it we do not take a position to actively sup::iort the c:'.evelopers who have proposedgood projects and which apIJear~ reasonable, he di d not know who would; that he was personally inclined to fe el that we can do a service if we 'as'"a Committee take a ')Osition on such proj ects; that he docs not think however t hat mnny are;is will be built in the City which already have a surplus of community facilities; that he has hopec. that we can sup;)ly facilities such as parks, schools, playgrounds etc. simultaneous with the development of the housing pr oj ects, by r elying on other Agencies and other Department s ; �4 that those deta.ils should be checked into carefully and coordination made to provide these services as adequately as we ca1i . · He said th2.t he felt personally that a statement from the Housing itesources Cammi ttee on each of the proj ects proposed f or low-income housing would be helpful to the Planning Boa:.· d and. the Zoning Committee when they make their decisions. He pointed out difficulties which we have had in gettine sites approved up to that point and ffi~)lainecl that he and Hr. Gates (the Committee Consultant) have attempted to look at each proposed site but have been unable to follow through on all details such a s checking on the adequacy of community facilities etc.; that in several instances he and Mr. Gates have discourni~ed s ponsors for this reason or that; such as ground too rough, facilities not availabl e etc. and that as a result, sever al of the sites originally propos ed have nev8r come up for rezoning. · He further stated that he was inclined to feel that on those prooosals for Turnkey development that it would ev2n be W:?11 for the Planning Board and the Zoning Committee to know whether or not the Housing Authority considered the sites as favor able and suitabl e . One member commented that perhaps the whole City needs to be rezoned. Mr. Alexander replied it seemed to him that we must create additional land through purchases for the city - wide avproa ch; that when the indivi dual developer canes along, there s hould be a body looking to the interest of the whole city and it ap;)eared to him that these things have thus far been consider ed only by the Board of Aldermen; that he wonders whether t his is doing the program the best service? He stat ed that consulting with the Planning Board is als o v cr.J much in order, presumably . In r eferring to Item 4(a) on the agenda and the corresponding marked doc1.ll7lent in the fol der, Dr . Hender s on inquired i f this material i s wha t his Committee had asked for ?

tvlr. Jones s t ated that this is Phat the Planning Department pr ovided i n

response to hi s panel' s request; th.it when i.e got it, it came in t wo f orms: a zoni ng map of the Cit~, wi th vacant lancl ar eas super impos ed on it i n orange; and a re,ort of total l and in tho various zoni ng cat aeories and vacant l and by Land Lot and Dis t ri ct. Mr . Jones f urther expl ained t hat t he Planning fupart ment i s now maki ng a comprehensive Land-Use s tudy to go before the Board of Aldermen with come propos ed changes in t he overall land-use of the Cit y; t hat he fel t the best thin:; t his Cammi ttee coul d do now is to 1.:;ct its r 0, commendat i ons presented t o the Planning and Development Commit tee; that we have a Joi nt Meeting scheduled for the 29th of September. Mr. Alexander then told Dr . Henderson that hes hould meet with Mr. Jones to go over the material provided by the Planning Department, but that in trying to resolve this thing we are still short on land and t hose two should cane up with a proposal, say in September, as to the number of acres needed and its distribution. Dr. Henderson asked approximately how many acres does that involve? �5 Mr. Jones replied that the maximwn ci.ensity authorized for garden type ,:·.partments is 16 units per acre, but that the Housing Authority has been tr,fing to hold that down to about 12 units per acre. Mr. Pcrsells stated that was corre ct; that 3, h, and 5 bedroom units, which the Hous ing Author ity particularly needs, r esults in r eduction of the density tclow 16 units per a cre. Mr. Jones explained we had one proj ect which has been approved by FHA at 16 units per acre , but it is in nn Urban Renewal project; that we had a developer recently drop a project bec~use he had bought the land expecting to develope it at the maxinum authorized dens ity of 16 units per a cre and that i n preliminary discussions, FHA suggested 10 units per acre. Mr. Alexander s t ated that it is open to debat e about how many total acres would be required.; -that our experience to dat e indi cates that no more than 1/3 of t he l and appropriately zoned actually gets into the low-income housing program, due to turnd.mms by HUD, FHA, nei ghborhoods etc. ; that to date only about 1/3 of the land zoned has found its way into this program.

Mr. Alexander stated that there ap) ears to be a need to rezone the City

at large ; that there wer e 51 zoning petitions on the agenda recently for one

';.ec':-i ng of the Planning Board.

V.tr . Jones expl ained that the current z anin5 wa s especially planned for indus try; that many areas wer e orieinall y pl anned but never us ed as industrial, 1-,:-D.ch development will not occur in the f orsceable futur e , and that the same applies to much of t he land now zoned r esidential ( s ingl e fam ily development) whereas t ho immediat e need of the City now i s f or low-income multi-family housing. Mr. Persell s expl ained that the Housing Author i ty has gone ba ck over the lan<l to cons ~.der additi onal parcel s which could be used f or the low-income housing c~tegoriJ where ch,u1gcs seem to be reasonabl e .

Mr. Alexander stated the builders have claimed that FHA procedures were holdinG them up; that Atlanta i s one of the City ' s in which FHA now claims that it can process an applicat ion in l ess t han 2 weeks; that this is a change in attitude, but the 221 d ( 3) pr ogram does not come within the direct line of FHA 1 s principal insuring policy . Mr. Alexander asked Mr. Clark if the report prepared by Mr. Gates on the accelernted procedure for multi-family processing by FHA could be carried to the press (Item 6 on the agenda., ·w ith co-: >i es in the folders) Mr. Clark indicated that it would probably be better for this type of announcement to be made by the local FHA office rather than f rom this Committee. �6 Mr. Alexander then referred to Item 7 on the agenda pertaining to the proposal in the fl.ent Supplement program to require nonprofit sponsors to put up 5%equity (in effect a donation); that the reason the attempt to put this thing in, is the theOI'iJ that if nonprofit sponsors 2re financially inm lved in the success of their project that they will hD.ve more permanent interest in it; that Urban AmGrica's feeling is, if this is done the Rent Supplement program will die before it gets an opportunity to grow; and Urban America has suGgested that those interested send telegrams to their Senators and to Senator Warren Magnuson sugGesting tlkct this approach of re~uiring the 5% equity will defeat the purpose of the program; that what he would like to do is to eet an authorization from the Committee to sign a t 8l egram in support of this position and to urge cons idercJ.tion of this matter in the final preparation of the bill. A motion was made by Mr .. Palmer, s econded and unanimously c1.dopt ed asking Mr. Alexander to sen<.J. such telogrruns to appropriate Sen<'..tors. · Mr. Clark asked if the .5%o.onation i s a known step or a new development. Mr. Alexander s t at ed that it i s nonprofit, spons or i s not sup-: iosed to and it is asking too much of him to Mr. Alexancler also s aid that to gi ve nonprof it proj e cts one can borrow up is what you are compe ting with, in a new; that t he thinking i s tha t t he be gct t in~ any prof it back f rom t he proj e c.t put up 5%equity ~onation to the proj e ct. · the other si d.P. of it is, that in 221 d (3) to a 102% of the proj ect coat and this sense . Mr . Per s ells asked Mr •. Alexander to expl ain t he 102~Z•. Mr . Alexander explained what the extra 2'1, t akes care of •. ~-

Mr . Alexander again asked for and recei ved unanimous consent to r eques t the City for a Cl.er k f or a t l eas t 3 months . Mr . Alexander then called f or br i ef repor t s from the Panel Chairmen. Legal Panel - Mr. Archer Smith made a ver y int er es t ine pr e sent ation of his case s tudy and t he s i gnificance of the Shaffer vs . City of Atlant a Housing Code Case , whi ch he announced was corning up f or hearing the next day. Constr ucti on and Design Panel - As no one was pr esent to r epr esent t his pnnel, Mr. Alexa..11der ex.pl ained a proj e ct which tha t panel was working on i nvolving Bui l ding Codes and a Syst em s tudy. , Finance and Nonprofi t Funds Panel - Mr. Alexander expl ai ned t h8.t t his panel is working on creat ion of a Nonprofit Housing Development Corporation • . He als o menti oned the f avorable comments made at the Urban America Seminar by n local banker pertaining to loans made t hrough his bank to sponsors of nonprof it proj ects. �7 Business Participation Panel - r1r. Alexander commented briefly on his recent conference in Washington with Secretary Weaver and FHA Administrator, Brownstein, pertaining to bringing "Big Business" into the low-income housing field. Public Information Panel - Mr. Clark commented on the ill-fated Browntmm Road rezoning at tempt and to a nonprof it sponsor project which is being promoted locally by the Interfaith Group of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation. Social Problems Panel - fuan Jacksor.. explained that the avera2;e annunl income for Negroes in Atlanta is $3600 and that the number one question is the adequacy of the number of bedrooms in rental units. Mr. Alexander then called on Mr. David T. Edwards, sponsor of a rezoning petition f or an 18 acre site on the West side of Atlanta , i'Jorth of Bakers Ferry Road, s. W. (-IJ, 2h, 14th Dist. FF) to present his proposal ( one of three in Item 5 on the agenda). ¥1r. Edwards made a good and convincing presentation. From questions a sked md comments made by some member s of the Committee , the Committee appeared receptive to Mr. Edwards' proposal. Formal action by the Committee however was not called for by the Chairman to endorse this proj ect to the Zoning Committe e , as had previously been re quc oted by Mr. Edwards, as well as similar requests from sponsors of two other projects which the Committe e had previously endorsed to the Planning Board. This was for r easons explained earlier in the me eting. Subsequently however, the Chairman of the Planning Boclrd was reque s t ed to pass on to the Zoning Connnittee , with the Plnnning Boards' recommendations, a letter which had previously been written by the Commi ttee to the Planning Board endorsing those t wo proj ects. The mee ting was adjorned at 12 noon. - --~ ·~ /) u,.(/..cdb .,,,,._;J--1 ' u...-:~ Malcolm :o.. Jon Supervis or of I nspe ct ion Servi ce s Encls : Agenda Document s conta ined i n fol der provided every member pr es ent (with file copy only ).• �