Difference between revisions of ".MjEzNw.MjEzNw"

Latest revision as of 03:57, 12 May 2018

DAN SWEAT 2:30 April 30 Decisions Necessary to Develop New-Town-In-Town Projects 1. Who will administer the project? a. Direct sale by HUD to Developer. b. HUD to City of Atlanta to Developer. c. HUD to Atlanta Housing Authority to Developer. 2. Will disposition be for 221 (D) (3), 202 only? 3. Who builds primary streets and utilities? a. Developer. b. City. c. Atlanta Housing Authority. 4. When are street locations to be pinned down?

Persons to be involved in these decisions? a. Members of the Planning and Development Committee and Board of Aldermen. b. Mayor Ivan Allen c. Mr. John Edmunds d. Mr. M. B. Satterfield e. Mr. Edwin Stern f. Mr. Frank Ethridge g. Mr . Collier Gladdin h. Mr. Richard Case i. Atlanta Housing Authority Board of Commissioners j. Mr. Cecil Alexander k. Col . Malcolm Jones l. Mr. Dan Sweat m. Mr. Ed Baxter

1.a. Direct Sale By HUD To Developers 1. HUD states that they would expect the City to provide the l and use plan, assurances as to public facilities, review the developers proposals. 2. HUD would need Bureau of Budget approval of the method of sale and would present the proposal to sell to the Bureau prior to making the award. Each of these steps would consume a minimum of approximately 30 days or a total of 60 days on this stage. 3. Under this method the Developer would put in the streets and utilities and this cost would be reflected in rents or sales prices. 4. No non-cash credits involved. 5. Fed. Pen. to GSA to HUD is based on certain improvements (fences , etc.) which only HUD can finance. 6. Can HUD acquire the 4 non-gov't owned parcels? Leave them out? 1.a. Schedule Direct Sale HUD to Developer Decisions May 1, 1968 Land Use Map May 3, 1968 Disposition Plan May 21, 1968 Relocation Plan May 21, 1968 Acquisition Plan May 21, 1968 Project Improvements Plan May 21, 1968 Financing Plan May 21, 1968 Submit to the Bureau of the Budget for prior approval May 21, 1968

Approval June 21, 1968 Select developer (advertise if necessary) July 21, 1968 Submit to the Bureau of the Budget for concurrence July 21, 1968 Concurrence Aug 21, 1968 Execute Contract September 1, 1968 Approval of FHA or Mortgagor of redevelopment January 1, 1969 Start Engineering January 1, 1969 Start Construction of Site improvements February 1, 1969 Complete Site Improvements sufficient to begin construction of Housing June 15, 1969

During the interim from July 21 to January 1, it will be necessary to acquire the 4 privately owned parcels , relocate the one family and demolish the structure.

1.b. Sale from Government to City to Developer

1. HUD clear with Bureau of Budget for sale direct to City - approximately 30 days. 2. City proceeds with land use plan, decisions as to provision for streets and util., determine method of sale. 3. Method of sale as outlined by Asst. City Atty - Tom Choyce : 1. A resolution must be passed by the Mayor and Board of Aldermen stating that the real estate is no longer useful and necessary to the City and ordering the real estate to be sold. Formality but must be done at a regular Ald. meeting after a meeting of P & D Com. 2. The Land Agent must cause a plat of the property to be made by a registered land surveyor. This must be done by any agent. AHA would need about 20 days prior to closing). 3. The Land Agent must cause an appraisal of the property to be made by the Atlanta Real Estate Board or a real estate appraiser who is a member of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers. The appraisal must be placed in a sealed envelope and turned over to the the Land Agent. 4. The plat of the property along with the legal description must be submitted to the Purchasing Agent, who must advertise for bids to be submitted for the purchase of the property. 5. All bids must be opened and read at the designated time by the Purchasing Committee. The Purchasing Committee must tabulate the bids and refer them to an Aldermanic Committee. 6. The Committee must open the sealed appraisal and take the appraisal into consideration in determining whether or not any of the bids shall be recommended for acceptance. This Committee must submit its final recommendation to the Mayor and Board of Aldermen for final determination. 4. City must find a way to purchase the 4 non-gov' t owned parcels or leave them out.

1.b. Schedule HUD to City of Atlanta to Developer Decisions May 1, 1968 Land Use Map May 3, 1968 Disposition Plan May 21, 1968 Acquisition Plan (4 privately owned parcels as well as Federal Land) May 21, 1968 Relocation Plan May 21, 1968 Project Improvements Plan May 21, 1968 Financing Plan May 21, 1968 Planning and Development Committee to make recommendations to the Board of Aldermen in joint session with the Finance Committee May 27, 1968 Aldermanic Approval June 3, 1968 Order Survey and Description June 3, 1968 Appraisals Ordered June 24, 1968 Advertise June 24, 1968 Receive Bids August 24, 1968 Board of Aldermen Approve September 16, 1968 Contract September 26, 1968 Begin Construction of housing* January 26, 1969

ENGINEERING AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS

Engineering June 3, 1968*** September 16, 1968** Let Site Improvements Contract July 21, 1968 November 1, 1968 Complete S.I. sufficient to begin Construction of housing December 6, 1968 March 15, 1969

• This date would delay the start of construction from January 26, 1969, to March 15, 1969.

• • Engineering start after selection of Developer.

• • • Engineering start before selection of Developer.

1.c . HUD to AHA to Developer 1. Atlanta Housing Authority would use the normal urban renewal procedure through on and "expedited" basis. The schedule is estimated on optimum time intervals as are the other schedules. 2. If the project puts in the basic streets and utilities, they would be constructed at project cost which could be more than offset by Non-cash Grant-in-Aid Credits. 3. The two major credits are for two schools: one at $1,000,000 - 100% eligible and one at $2,000,000 - 10 to 50% eligible. 4. Some comparatively small credits would be eligible from park, bridge, ramp and other items probably in the range of $50-100,000.

1.c. Schedule Thomasville Amendment R-22 HUD To AHA To Developer This schedule is prepared based on the following assumptions: 1. All decisions necessary for the submission of the application (particularly the ones applied to the method of disposition and sequence installation of site improvements) are made prior to May l, 1968. 2. That the submission is to be made to the June 3, 1968 Aldermanic Committee. 3. That HUD holds good on their commitment to review and approve the application in 30 days.

I. Part I - Part II Application 1* 2* 3* Decisions May 1, 1968 Land Use Map May 3, Project Area Data Report May 20, Disposition Plan May 20, Relocation Report May 21, Acquisition Plan May 21, Urban Renewal Plan May 21, Project Improvements Plan May 21, All other sections of the application May 21, Financing Plan May 24, Submit to Aldermanic Finance Committee May 27, Public Hearing May 31, Aldermanic Approval June 3, Complete Submission June 7,

II. Execution Activities Approval July 8, 1968* Executed Loan and Grant Contract July 15, * a. Disposition Activities Advertise July 29, 1968 May 27, 1968 Receive Bids Sept. 23, July 27 Identify Developer Oct. 21, Aug. 27 Sign Contract Oct. 31, Sept. 27, Begin Construction of housing** January 27, 1969 April 26, 1969 Feb. 27, 1969 b. Acquisition-Relocation-Demolition Begin Acquisition July 29, 1968 Begin Relocation Aug. 26, Complete Acquisition Sept. 30, Complete Relocation Sept. 30, Complete Demolition Oct. 14,

• Time contingent on HUD action.
  • Time contingent on Development FHA action and completion of access streets.

Col. 1 contingent on pre-advertising.

c. Engineering and Site Improvements Engineering May 27, 1968 Oct. 21, 1968 Aug. 27, 1968 Let Site Improvements Contract July 12, 1968 Dec. 11, 1968 Oct. 15, 1968 Complete Site Improvements Sufficient for Construction Nov. 27, Apr. 26, 1969 Feb.. 27, 1969 Complete Site Improvements Apr. 27, 1969 Aug. 19, 1969 June 27, 1969

1* Site Improvements Designated in Planning 2* Advertise after Loan and Grant - Site Improvements on basis of bid 3* Pre-Advertise -- Site Improvements on basis of bid

2. Will Disposition be 221 (d) (3), 202, only? a. 221 (d) ( 3) development would prevent any private development being financed by other FHA or conventional finance. This would prevent an extensive economic mix in this new area. However, high income families now occupy the Single Family Portion of the Thomasville Project. b. To split the area between two programs will require definite boundaries for each, so that each can be appraised separately. c. 221 (d) (3) would insure low and moderate income occupants. d. 221 (d) (3) would require special appraisal techniques (writedown of land price). e. Commercial areas must be designated regardless of other consideration for appraisal purposes. f. If public housing is involved (this is at the present ruled out), this boundary would have to be delineated. (Turn key or conventional). g. Can the developer be non-profit, limited dividend , Co-op, or other, or will it be limited to one.

3. Who builds primary streets and utilities? a. For the developer to build streets and utilities would increase the cost per dwelling unit. b. 221 (d) (3) might affect the decisions. c. Approximately 6½ months would be required for the City or Authority to build the primary street system sufficiently to provide access. However, construction can begin prior to advertising sale of land. d. A developer could build the streets at his rate of need but probably no more rapidly than the City or the Authority. It would however, force scheduling of construction to be tied to street construction schedule (access). This may not be pertinent. e. Authority construction of the streets would cost the City approximately 1/3. f. Bridge credits would be affected. g. Cost of streets and utilities estimated at $______________________________.

4. When should street locations be pinned down (involves savings of approximately 1-3½ months)? a. If street is pinned down before advertising property: (1) Would restrict the design of the development plan. (2) Would define school and park sites so that costs and credits could be firm. (3) Would save approximately 1-3½ months. b. After streets are pinned down after advertising and decision on developer: (1) Would give freedom to the development plan. (2) Cost and credits would not be quite as firm. (3) Would delay from 1-3½ months before construction could be started (would this be actual or would the architects use up the time anyway)?