.OTMy.OTMy

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 �