Search (34 results)

Applied Filters (Reset)

  • Tags = Box 5 Folder 7

Filters

Result Types

Item Types

Tags

Featured

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 7

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_007.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 7
  • Text: CITY OF ATLANTA CITY HALL ATLANTA, GA. 30303 May 9, 1968 "Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404 IVAN ALLEN, JR., MAYOR R. EARL LANDERS, Administrative Assistant | MRS. ANN M. MOSES, Executive Secretary | DAN E. SWEAT, JR., Director of Governmental Liaison } Mr. M. B. Satterfield Executive Director Atlanta Housing Authority 824 Hurt Building Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Satt: I note that the Resolution adopted by the Board of Aldermen on May 6 pertaining to the Honor Farm No, 1 site authorizes & that it be taken into the Thomasville Urban Renewal Project "to be developed primarily for housing for families of low and moderate income," Under this criteria, it could conceivably be developed under the various aspects of the 221 d (3) program and housing for the elderly only. Enclosed is a copy of a Resolution adopted by the Housing Resources Committee on May 2, calling for development of © a substantial portion of the additional land to be taken into the project for "lowest income housing, "' I personally support this view and request that in calling for proposals from developers for the area that the Housing Authority specify a substantial portion of the land to be developed for housing for lowest income-families. Sincerely, Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor IAJr:fy Enclosure.
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 8

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_008.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 8
  • Text: HOUSING FOR LOW-INCOME FAMILIES U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WASHINGTON, D.C. 20410 EXTRACT Housing Assistance Administration Page 16 Exeept for a so program, the locality must have a Workable Program for Community fmprovement approved by the Secretary of HUD and currently in effect. A Workable Program includes seven elements of accepted principles of good community development. These interact to deal with the problem of slums and blight and help to establish neighborhoods suitable for an adequate family life. (HUD publications deseribing Workable Program requirements are available.) In the leasing program, the local governing body must approve use of the program in the locality. In other programs, each project must be approved by the governing body, which must also enter into a cooperation agreement with the LHA, The agreement covers such matters as tax exemption, payments in lieu of taxes, and provision of the usual municipal services, * ok
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 28

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_028.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 28
  • Text: NATIONAL COMMISSION ON URBAN PROBLEMS ROOM 640, 806 15TH ST. N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005 CU-8-68 FOR RELEASE Contact: Walter Rybeck Sunday Phone: 202/382-2068 September 1, 1968 SEVEN-CITY STUDY PINPOINTS HOUSING PLIGHT OF LARGE POOR FAMILIES Public and private housing have failed by a large margin to meet the needs of large poor families, according to a study prepared for the National Commission on Urban Problems and released today. "The finding of a shortage of some 71,000 dwelling units affecting almost 70 percent of the large poor families in seven major cities is not just another statistic," said Commission Chairman Paul H. Douglas. "The number of children affected by this gap in these cities alone is computed to be approximately one- third of a million." (See p. 19.) The seven cities studied were Washington, Philadelphia, New Orleans, St. Louis, Richmond, Denver and San Francisco. They were selected because, in these places, detailed income data by family size could be correlated with available housing supply information. Walter Smart, Walter Rybeck and Howard E. Shuman of the Commission staff prepared the report, ''THE LARGE POOR FAMILY--A HOUSING GAP." The shortage of 71,000 units was figured after including as available for occupancy 12,000 units which the seven cities indicated were merely planned. When only the current available inventory is counted, the shortage is more than 83,000 units and affects 80 percent of the large poor families. Poor families are defined in the study as those who with 25 percent of family income cannot afford decent private housing. The inventory available to them is necessarily the housing supplied under various subsidy programs. What is the gap? The study (1) finds the minimum income required to afford standard or decent housing in each city as determined by the local redevelopment agency, (2) calculates the number of large families below that income level, and (3) totals the number of existing and planned standard housing units suitable for large families under all housing programs, In essence, the gap is the difference between (2) and (3), between need and supply. In the seven cities (see Table 3, p. 15) there were 103,464 large families with insufficient income to afford standard housing. Available and planned housing left a gap of 71,162--a shortage affecting 68.8 percent of these families. The five- and six-member families numbered 63,728. The gap in their case was 40,026 units--a shortage affecting 62.8 percent of these families. The seven- and eight-member families numbered 26,225. The gap in their case was 19,237 units--a shortage affecting 73.4 percent of these families. The nine- and ten-member families numbered 9,558. The gap in their case was 8,148 units--a shortage affecting 85.2 percent of these families. The very large families of 11 or more members numbered 3,953. The gap in their case was 3,751 units--a shortage affecting 94.9 percent of them. As family size increases, the number of families goes down sharply, the size of the gap rises significantly, and the number of children affected by each unit of housing shortage increases. The report further shows the high percentage of non- whites affected by the large poor family housing gap (pp. 17-18). The authors cite a number of legislative and administrative factors that have tended to discourage the building of subsidized housing suitable for large families. (See pp. 21-28.) Mr. Douglas said, "I was very pleased to find provisions in the new Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 which, in part, move in the direction of easing some of the housing problems faced by large poor families." Note to Correspondents: The authors will hold a press conference on the report (for Sunday release) at 10 a.m. Friday, August 30, in Room 10211, tenth floor, of the New Executive Office Building, 17th & H Streets, N.W. Advance copies available on request. PUBLICATIONS - NATIONAL COMMISSION ON URBAN PROBLEMS - AUGUST 1968 1, The Commission hearings cover all topics assigned to the Commission and many related current issues. The complete set of five volumes has been at the printers for many months but only those listed are available at this time. 2. Background studies undertaken by the Commission staff and consultants, in preparation for the Commission's report to the President and to Congress, resulted in several dozen research papers, many of which it was felt would be of public interest. Research reports that are published do not necessarily carry the endorsement of the Commission, 3. The Commission's own report, carrying out the Congressional and White House mandates, will be the final category of publication. Order Form and Summary of Publications to Date Requests are being handled without charge. Single copies only, please. Bulk orders cannot be filled because of limited supplies. (Exception: reprints of Research Report No. 1 have been made available by the Joint Economic Committee of Congress.) The Hearings are also available for purchase from "Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402," To avoid errors and hasten mailing, check publication you wish to receive and PRINT CLEARLY in the address blank, HEARINGS BEFORE THE NATIONAL COMMISSION ON URBAN PROBLEMS, Vol. 1. Baltimore, New Haven, Boston, Pittsburgh. Major topics-- urban renewal, rehabilitation, housing codes, financing and insuring in blighted areas, property taxation, land values. Indexed, 361 pp. (Our supply almost exhausted.) HEARINGS, Vol. 2. Los Angeles, San Francisco. Major topics--land-use regulation, building codes and technology, urban design, governing metropolitan areas, housing low-income families. Indexed, 493 pp. HEARINGS, Vol 3. Denver, Atlanta, Houston, Fort Worth-Arlington-Dallas, Miami. Major topics--metropolitan housing patterns, public housing, new housing subsidies, zoning, building and housing codes, urban finance, government consolidation. Indexed, 386 pp. Research Report No. 1, IMPACT OF THE PROPERTY TAX, by Dick Netzer. Measures the tax burden on housing, examines intrametropolitan tax differentials that stimulate exclusionary practices and unsound development; scores faulty assessment practices; proposes reforms and alternatives; 62 pp. Research Report No. 2, PROBLEMS OF ZONING AND LAND-USE REGULATION, by the American Society of Planning Officials. Finds land-use controls often exclude low-income minority families from certain urban areas; claims zoning may exert less influence on development patterns than utility extensions, land speculation, highway locations; includes views of 28 experts; 80 pp. Research Report No. 3, THE CHALLENGE OF AMERICA'S METROPOLITAN POPULATION OUTLOOK--1960 TO 1985, by Patricia Leavey Hodge and Philip M. Hauser. Projects urban expansion with biggest growth in suburban rings; further racial concentra- tion of whites in suburbs and nonwhites in central cities; marked increase in growth of young labor force (ages 15-44); 90 pp. (Commission supply exhausted. Praeger, 111 4th Ave., N.Y., N.Y., reprinting for sale. Government may reprint.) Research Report No. 4, THE LARGE POOR FAMILY--A HOUSING GAP, by Walter Smart, Walter Rybeck, Howard E. Shuman. Study of seven cities (Washington, Philadelphia, New Orleans, St. Louis, Richmond, Denver, San Francisco) finds poor families of five or more persons neglected in public programs; measures shortage; cites restrictions inhibiting supply of larger dwelling units; 28 pp. NAME ORGANI ZATION STREET CITY, STATE, ZIP 2310084
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 24

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_024.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 24
  • Text: Pon Svre ad HOUSING RESOURCES COMMITTEE April 19, 1968 SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM: Re Honor Farm No. 1 (Federal Pen Site) In meoting yesterday with Housing Authority representatives, the following salient points were brought out: 1. Price of the portions to be developed for housing and related commercial will require prior determination as to nature of development, i.e., through the Housing Authority as Urben Renewal or by developers direct without the Urban Renewal procedure. 2. Mr. Persells stated he would prefer it not be under Urban Renewal. 3. Mr. Paswiiie felt that after an Urban Renewal project reaches the Execution stage, development thereafter could be as quick through the Housing Authority es direct through private enterprise, but he would not predict how long it would take to reach the Execution stage. 4. Mr. Perselis stated that Mr. Ed Baxter apparently feels that none of the land should be developed as Public Housing and that in last meeting the Mayor appeared to concur. (I essume that this does not preclude Turnkey development of at least a portion of the area). I feel that prospective developers should be encouraged to build e substantial number of units so thet they could initially or subsequently be sold to the occupants and thet develope ment under both Turnkey and 221 d (3) should be advocated. 5S. It wes brought out by Mr. Oppenshaw that if development is not under Uxben Renewal, credite for the Elementary and Junior High Schools would not be availeble and thet credite for these two facilities would be eufficient to balance off the entire local shere of the cost of an Urban Renewel project. a SE It elso developed, however, that the Junior High School-Community Center would be e general community facility serving that whole general area of the city and not limited to the proposed development area. 6. Since the Junior High-Community Center represents 24 acres out of the entire Federal Pen Site to be dedicated, that in view of the difficulty- the City is having getting low-income housing sites, particularly for Public Housing, and the fact that the School Department can get sites enywhere they are needed, that the overall needs of the City would be better served if this entire 24 acre portion, which includes some of the best land, would be developed for low-income housing, RECOMMENDATION: (a) That the housing and related commercial portions of the area be developed by private enterprise direct, without going through the Urban Renewal process. | (b) That the currently designated Junior High School and Community Neighborhood Center site be also developed for loweincome housing. (c) That a multiple type housing development be encouraged using both Turnkey and 221 d processes, with a substantial portion of the units designed so that they could eventually be sold to the occupants. Respectfully submitted, Malcolm op Housing Coordinator
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 26

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_026.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 26
  • Text: i Derr aw wy 2 af 1 GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30332 OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT April 17, 1968 Mr. Cecil Alexander Chairman Housing Resources Committee City Hall Atlanta, Georgia Dear Mr. Alexander: I am writing in response to your request for an evaluation of the presentation made to the Construction and Design Subcommittee of the Housing Resources Committee by Mr. McNamara on Tuesday, March 26. You will recall that this was a presentation of a new concept for the fabri- cation of residential units. This concept involved pmring on site, by use of vacuum forms, con- crete elements of a standardized nature which would become elements of multi-family residential buildings. The standardized elements could be varied from job to job and from unit to unit in such a way as to make them adaptable to the needs of various sites and architectural plans. It is my opinion, as Chaimnan of the Construction and Design Subcom- mittee, and that of those with whom I have talked who were present at this slide presentation, that the concept is a good one but that it is at this point in time only a concept and not a proven plan. It is my opinion that Mr. McNamara should find a developer who is willing to develop this idea on an actual building project involving a number of multi-family units. If such a developer can be found, this may well be an excellent concept to utilize in the molel city program as it does represent one innovation in the field of attempting to provide low income housing. The model city program should be considered bacause of a necessity for requiring a reason- able sized tract of land in order to build enough units to analyze the validity of Mr. McNamara's proposed technique. It is, after all, an experi- mental project and one which is yet to be proven in the field. There are many possible applications of pre-fabricated elements within these units which should be explored, but which may be restricted at this time by various codes. If max-..um saving is to be attained in this kind of project, the use of prefabricated fixtures and materials must be allowed subject to carefully drawn requirements. Mr. Cecil Alexander page 2. a _ In summary, it is our belief that this is a good concept but that it is only a concept at this time and that it does require actual’ construction of a number of units in order to properly evaluate the technique on any objective basis. Sincerely yours, Edwin D. Harrison President EDH:hs cc: Colonel Malcolm Jones a Mr. Moreland Smith Mr. Bob Winn
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 30

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_030.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 30
  • Text: WARE, STERNE & GRIFFIN ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE 639 TRUST COMPANY OF GEORGIA BUILDING ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 HENRY H. WARE, JA. EDWIN L. STERNE WILLIAM W. GRIFFIN April 22 3 19 68 ROBERT F. LYLE JOHN P. RABUN, UR. RALPH S. FORCE ALTON H, HOPKINS JOHN W, AR RIOGE, JR. MICHAEL L. SELLERS Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 TELEPHONE 525-5591! Dear Ivan: After our discussion last week at lunch, I met with Mr. Satter- field, Executive Director of the Atlanta Housing Authority, and Les Persells, his assistant, and discussed the whole matter with them at length, While I am sure you recognize that there are some delays which are beyond our control, nevertheless, I would like for the Housing Authority to do everything possible not only to avoid delays on its own account but to keep after the others with whom we have to deal, such as the Federal Government, architects, City Planning Department, etc,, to try to move things along as speedily as possible, With this in mind Mr. Satterfield tells me this morning that he has employed Col. James B, Miller, a retired Army Colonel, as Production Coordinator for the Housing Authority. His duties will be specifically to try to cut red tape, break log jams and move things along both within and without the Housing Authority. T hope, too, that Col. Miller will make periodic reports, copies of which will be sent to you and others interested, so that we may see and keep up with any lags in these matters, With kindest regards, I am incerely, ~O yf ia x weg ELS:ms Edwin L. Sterne ec: Mr. Cecil Alexander ec: Mr. M. B. Satterfield
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 32

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_032.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 32
  • Text: CTTY fw" fe rer f WITT “j 2 % HOUSING RESOURCES COMMITTEE Orry PEA ET; dam AeA A BOSS Tel. 522-4463 Area Code 404 Room 120, City Hall IVAN ALLEN, JR., MAYOR April 29, 1968 CECIL A. ALEXANDER, Chairman Housing Resources Committee MALCOLM D. JONES Housing Coordinator Dear Housing Resources Committee Member: ‘The regular monthly meeting of the Executive Group of the Housing Resources Cormittee for May 1966 will be held as scheduled, Thursday, May 2, at 10:00 a.m., in Committee Room 2, City Hall. This will be another joint meeting with the Coordination Group composed of Heads of Departments and Agencies whose activities relate to Low-income Housing. We are working on a plan for making more land available for low-income housing, which we propose to explain at this meeting and which will need your support. Please consider the functions of your panel and be prepared to offer specific proposals for making concrete contributions to the program. Chairman Alexander proposes scheduling a special re-orientation meeting soon with the complete membership of each Panel of the HRC. We hope that you will be able to attend this meeting. Please reserve the date on your calendar. A return addressed postal card is enclosed for your convenience in advising us whether you will be able to attend the May 2 meeting. Sincerely, Dy eheeliacArft+2— Malcolm D./Jones Housing Coordinator Encl: Postal Card
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 9

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_009.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 9
  • Text: - ‘MINUTES HOUSING RESOURCES EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND LOW-INCOME HOUSING COORDINATING GROUP MEETING May 2, 1968 ‘The regular montly meeting of the Housing Coordinating Group and Housing Resources Committee Executive Group was held in Committee Room 2, City Hall, May 2, 1968, at 10:00 a.m. Copies of the invitational notices, agenda, record of those attending and reference documents are attached to the file copy of these minutes, Chairman Cecil #4, Alexander presided. Mr. Alexander opened the meeting by asking Mr. Archer Smith to give the Committee a report on school construction, Mr, Smith presented the following two proposals: (1) Approach the State School Building Authority about them leasing school buildings and then sub-leasing them to the City. The State could lease the premises from the developer for 30/40 years and turn them over to the City of Atlanta on a sub-lease basis. It would take a political decision by the State to re-vamp procedures to allow this. One advantage to this proposal would be that it would apply to all school systems if they so desire. (This was considered perhaps the simplest course of action.) (2) Have a local constitutional amendment passed allowing the City School Board to enter into leases on a long term basis, This local amendment would be the more solid way and the local amendment would be easier to pass. Mr. Alexander asked if the School Board had been approached to see which course of action they would prefer? Mr. Smith Stated that they had not, officially, but the School Board would probably go along with either method. Mr. Jones suggested that the Committee authorize the Legal Panel to contact the School Board and see which they would prefer and then pursue that course, f£ motion was made, seconded and adopted that the Legal Panel be so authorized. Mr. John Chapman appeared before the Committee to discuss a proposal for building low-income housing. He said housing for the lowest income families would probably need to be financed by the Federal government; that housing for medium income families could be financed through private corporations. He was suggesting dwelling units with rent range-of $70-$80-$90 for 1, 2 or 3 bedrooms respectively. He proposed forming a limited profit corporation, the members of which would each put up a certain amount of front money, with the intent of building developments which would produce 4-5% profit, instead of the customery 14- 15% profit. He proposed using private conventional financing 2 entirely, with no connection with Federal assisted programs. He advised he would try to contact several private corporations about putting up money at a reasonable rate of interest and that if he got enough response from private corporations that this could be done, he would inform the Committee of the reaction he received from this idea, Mr, Alexander commented on and referred to an article by Vincent T. Burke, in the Los fngeles Times, March 18, 1968, relating how certain Negro families in Washington had been assisted by a tiny non-profit "Home Buyers" group in obtaining home ownership without any assistance from Federal programs Or organizations. (Copy of the article is attached to the file copy of these minutes.) Mir. Persells reported to the Committee on the Honor Farm No. 1 Site proposed concept. He presented a map showing approximately 120 acres between the Federal Penitentiary and the Thomasville Urban Renewal Project that the Federal government proposes to turn Over to the City for urban improvement, including housing. He explained that the portion of the property to be developed for housing and related commercial could be either turned over directly by HUD to developers, turned over to the City to put out for bids, or go to Atlanta Housing futhority for development through process of Urban Renewal. fh meeting of the Aldermanic Planning and Development Committee is to be held to consider what should be done. Mr. Persells also advised that a new park area is to be developed and an Elementary School and a "Middle School" are to be constructed in the area, The question was asked about how housing could be developed in the shortest length of time. Wr. Persells responded we would be unable to start building until a street and sewer system was begun; that is the biggest delay. it was suggested that the land could be sold to a developer and he could put in the street system Simultaneous with the housing development. Two choices were recommended: (1) The City or developers could go in and put in the street and utilities at their expense of about $270,000.00. (2) Have streets put in by the Housing Authority as an Urban Redevelopment expense. Mr. Persells explained that froma financial standpoint and time element, the most favorable sollution would be to have the Housing Authority put in the street and sewer system at Urban Redevelopment expense, because the schools would have to be built any way, and the City would receive credit for the schools which would more than pay for the expense of putting streets and sewers in and that they could be put in while the developers were getting their plans approved by the Federal government. 3 Mr. Persells advised that topographical maps and surveys had already been made. He also reported that there was a small triangle of land the Federal government doesn't own; stated there were some title difficulties and the only sure way and quickest way to get clear title to the property would be condemnation proceedings through the Urban Renewal process. The Land to be developed for housing and related. commercial is to be offered for sale on May 27, 1968, to developers, with proposals called for. Additional land, 17 single-family lots, is to be added to the Thomasville Urban Renewal Site for sale, with ground breaking between May 20-28. Approximately 50 acres of the 129 acre tract or land weuld be available for housing. Mr. Archer Smith, made a motion that a formal resolution be drawn up that the Housing Resources Committee goes on record as urging the support of the New-Town-In-Town project concept conditioned upon a substantial portion of the project to be developed for loviest-income housing. If this condition is not met, then the Housing Resources Committee goes on record as opposed to the project as presently planned. Motion was seconded and unanimously adopted, with instructions that copies go to the Housing Authority, Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., Members of the Board of Aldermen aud to Mr. Baxter, of HUD. Mr. Howland announced that the CACUR non-profit housing development corporation has now selected five units for re- habilitation under 221 (h) and expected to have them under way Within 60 days. Mr. Alexander then asked Mr. Jones to explain a proposal he hag been working on for accelerated low-income housing develop- ment in the Model Cities area. Mr. Jones explained the concept and stated that a development team waS very anxious to get a tract of about 10 acres for an experimental housing development to start this summer. He read a letter just received by the Mayor from Mr. H. Ralph Taylor, Assistant Secretary, HUD, proposing a HUD sponsored experimental housing project in Model Cities area in selected cities to be carried cut by a prime contractor to be selected by HUD; and inquiring if Atlanta desired to cooperate? Mr. Jones explained that this tied indirectly with the proposal he has been working on; that because of multiple ownerships, it is virtually impossible for private developers to acquire land in the Model Cities area for this purpose; that therefore he has studied the area and looked at certain sites, with others, including a representative of Model Cities, and has selected two tentative sites, having badly dilapidated housing which will in all probability be demolished any way, and has marked these on a map for consideration of the Model Cities staff. Mir. Jones proposed "advanced land acquisition" to be requested in the Model Cities area on such a site to be ; Slected so they would get started on construction of approximately a 10 acre site as soon as possible. A_motion was made, seconded and adopted that the Housing Resources Committee recommends that a Suitable site be selected in the Model Cities area for accelerated development of low-income housing (preferably under the experimental housing concept) and that application be made to HUD for authority to acquire the site under the “advance land acquisition" procedures; that copies be provided the Planning and Development Commmittee, Mayor and Board of Aldermen and HUD. Mr. Persells stated that he concurred and that the Housing Authority would go’ in’soon with a request that the entire Model Cities area be placed under a GNRP so that this could be done as part of an Urban Renewal Project within the Model Cities area. He requested support of the HRC to the Planning and Development Committee, the Mayor and Board of Aldermen and to HUD on that proposal so that the "advance land acquisition" could be legally implemented. The Committee agreed to support the GNRP proposal for this purpose. Mr. Alexander informed the Committee of ground-breaking on the first Turnkey Housing project in ftlanta on Hollywood Road, N.W. at 2:00 p.m. on May 9, 1968. All were invited; that Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr., would officially break the ground for the 202-unit development. Copies of the announcement, prepared by the Housing Authority were distributed. It was announced that the report from the 4d Hoc Committee on Low-income Housing Analysis will not be ready and that it would be discussed at a later date. Mr. Alexander announced that a conference will be held May 29th at the Dinkler all day, consisting of debates and discussions on legal aspects, employment, workshops, etc., on equal opportunity in housing. Mr. Alexander explained briefly the progress made on Package Zoning. Question was asked if a formal resolution has been adopted by the HRC Executive Committee on the proposed Package Zoning Plan. The Committee was advised that such resolution had already been adopted supporting this plan. Wr. flexander also stated it is anticipated that the plan would receive the support of numerous civic and business organizations and radio and television. Mr. Alexander read a Press Release from HUD antiiouncing authorization of trailers (mobile homes) for temporary housing in Urban Redevelopment projects. > Mir. Alexander also commented on the necessity for positive action soon for improvement in the NASH-BANS area, through Urban Renewal or otherwise, The meeting adjourned at 12:00 noon. Respectfully submitted, Detar Malcolm D, Jone Housing Coordinator Encls: &s stated (with file copy only)
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 12

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_012.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 12
  • Text: DAw SU6AT— 9g 8 of si 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? ae Developer. b.. City. ec. Atlanta Housing Authority. lt. When are street locations to be pinned down? | Persons to be involved in these deci sions? a. Members of the Plannin Movelotnent Committee a Board of Aldermen. b. Mayor Ivan Allen } a ce. Mr. John Edmunds / d. Mr. M. B. Satterfield e. Mr. Ne Stern f. Mr. Frank Ethridge tg. Mr. Collier Gladdin — h. Mr. Richard Case -—— ji. Atlanta Housing Authority Board of Commissioners “3. Mr. Cecil Alexander Lek. Col. Malcolm Jones | 1. Mr. Dan Sweat -— mM Mr. Ed. Baxter fe he l.a. Direct Sale By HUD To Developers HUD states that they would expect the City to provide the land use plan, assurances as to public facilities, review the developers proposals. 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. Under this method the Developer would put in the streets and utilities and this cost would be reflected in rents or sales prices. No non-cash credits involved. Fed. Pen. to GSA to HUD is based on certain improvements (fences, etc.) which only HUD can finance. Can HUD acquire the ); non-gov't owned parcels? Leave them out? lea. Schedule Direct Sale HUD to Developer Decisions Land Use Map Disposition Plan Relocation Plan Acquisition Plan Project Improvements Plan Financing Plan Submit to the Bureau of the Budest for prior approval Approval Select developer (advertise if necessary) Submit to the Bureau of the Budget for concurrence Concurrence Execute Contract Approval of FHA or Mortgagor of redevelopment Start Engineering Start Construction of Site improvements Complete Site Improvements sufficient to begin . construction of Housing May 1, 1968 May 3, 1968 May 21, 1968 May 21, 1968 May 21, 1968 May 21, 1968 May 21, 1968 May 21, 1968 June 21, 1968 July 21, 1968 July 21, 1968 August 21, 1968 September 1, 1968 January 1, 1969 January 1, 1969 February 1, 1969 June 15, 1969 During the interim from July 21 to January 1, it will be necessary to acquire the ) privately owned parcels, relocate the one family and demolish the structure. 1.b. Sale from Government to City to Developer HUD clear with Bureau of Budget for sale direct to City ~ approximately 30 days. City proceeds with land use plan, decisions as to provision for streets and util., determine method of sale. / of Method 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 ate 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. . 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. S. All bids must be opened and read at the designated time by the Purchasing Committee. The Purchasing Committee must tebulate 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 fit determination. City must find a way to purchase the ); non-gov't owned parcels or leave them out. 1b. 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 (lh 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 2), 1968 Advertise June 2), 1968 Receive Bids August 2h, 1968 Board of Aldermen Approve September 16, 1968 Contract te 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. *x* Engineering start after selection of Developer. “xx Engineering start before selection of Developer. 1.c. HUD to AHA to Developer 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. 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. 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. Some comparatively small credits would be eligible from park, bridge, ramp and other items probably in the range of $50-100,000. rf 1l.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 (particu~ larly the ones applied to the method of disposition and sequence installation of site improvements) are made prior to May 1, 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 cation in 30 days. Ke Py I, Part I - Part ID Application 1 eee ee ee ee Decisions Land Use Map Project Area Data Report Disposition Plan Relocation Report Acquisition Plan Urban Renewal Plan Project Improvements Plan + All other sections of the application Financing Plan Submit to Aldermanic Finance Committee Public Hearing Aldermanic Approval Complete Submission Ii. Execution Activities Approv fected Ioan and Grant Contract a. Disposition Activities Advertise teceive Bids Identify Developer Sign Contract Begin Construction of housing** January 27, 1969 b. Acquisition-Re! location- Demolition Begin Acquisition Begin Reloce ton Complet te Acqui, j Gonplote 3 ma ion Comple molition D OQ ef eee cn *Time contingent on HUD action. May 21, ; and approve the appli- 3 May 1, 1968 May 3, May 20, May 20, May 21, May 21, May 21, ’ May 21, May 2h, May 27, May 31, June 3, dune 7, July 8, 1968+ July 15, * duly 29, 1968 May 27, 1968 Sept. 23, July 27, Oct. 21, Aug. 27, Oct; 31 Sept. 27, April 26, 1969 Feb. 27, 1969 July 29, 1968 Aug. 26, Sept. 30, Sept. 30, Oct. il, x#Time contingent on DevelopmeSt FHA action and completion of access streets. Col. 1 contingent on pre-advertising. - 3* ae w c. Engineering and Site Improvements Engineering May 27, 1968 Oct. 21, 1968 Let Site Improvements Contract July 12,1968 Dec. 11, 1968 Complete Site Improvements Sufficient for Construction Nov. 27, Apre 26, 1969 Complete Site Improvements Apr. 27, 1969 Aug. 19, 1969 Site Improvements Designated in Planning Advertise after Loan and Grant - Site Improvements on basis of bid Pre-Advertise - Site Improvements on basis of bid Aug. 27, 1968 Oct. 15, 1968 Feb. 2%, 1969 June 27, 1969 2e Will Disposition be 221 (d) (3), 202, only? Ge 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. To split the area between two programs will require definite boundaries for each, so that each can be appraised separately. 221 (d) (3) would insure low and moderate income occupants. 221 (d) (3) would require special appraisal techniques (write- down of land price). Commercial areas must be designated regardless of other consideration for appraisal purposes. If public housing is involved (this is at the present ruled out), this boundary would have to be delineated. (Turn key or conven- tional). Can the developer be non-profit, limited dividend, Co-op, or other; or will it be limited to one. : ca Who builds primary streets and utilities? Ce Ze For the developer to build streets and utilities would increase the cost per dwelling unit. 221 (da) (3) might affect the decisions. Approximately 64 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. 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. Authority construction of the streets would cost the City approximately 1/3. Bridge credits would be affected. Cost of streets and utilities estimated at $ . 1. When should street locations be pinned down (involves savings of approximately 1-34 months)? a. If street is pinned down before advertising property: Oe, (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 1-34 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 1-34 months before construction could be started (would this be actual or would the architects use up the time anyway)?
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 23

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_023.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 23
  • Text: 2 ipeil 18, 1968 DISCUSSION Mr. Case of HUD proposes that O.A deed the Highway, School end Parks portions of the site directly to these respective Departments for planning and development, but that the Housing portion (including smell commercial site to serve the project) be deeded to the Housing Authority, for subsequert processing and development under Urban Renewal. However, he concedés that these sites could be deeded by O5A to the City of Atlanta or direct to a selected developer, as is now contemplated for the other portions of the site. All agree that the eventual award of the housing portion to a developer should be based on some form of competitive process. It also appears that the most feasible competitive procedure would be thru design proposals by prospective developers, for multiple type, housings we all also agree that such proposals could be called for by either the City or the Nousing Authority, witHout waiting for the title to first pees from OOA, It is my opinion, which is also sheared by others, that the quickest development can be accomplished thru private developers direct, with-out the land being deeded first to the Housing Authority and then going thru the Urban Renewal process. At least two of the prospective developers much prefer it this way and in fect have requested it be done this way, if possible, Interfaith has specifically asked thatthe Mayor write directly to HUD in Washington requesting this procedure, Any financial advantage that might be derived in development of streets and installation of utilities by the Housing Authority thru the Urban Renewal process, should be off set by the time saved and anticipated relatively low land cost of the project, if done by the developer, in conjunction with the housing development. If necessary, the Housing Authority might be compensated for its administrative services on this project,by adding the expense involved, which should be only nasinal, to the cost of the land to the developer. —- —— a ~ — Page 3 April 16, 1968 Mr. Oppenshaw proposes to work up criterie to be furnished prospective developers aniformly in a package for their guidance in prepering and subaitting proposals on the housing portions of the site (other than the 15 single~fanily lots). The prospective developers are anxious to know whet the land will cost them. They should know this in order to plan intelligently, Mr, Oladin, Mr, Oppenshaw and I are in agreement thats (a) As soon as Mr. Oppenshaw can package the development criteria so that all interested developers may get the seme material and information as to requirements (which he is etteupting to do by Hay 1) such cen then be pat out to developers for submittal of proposals within 30 days, (ob) Selection of the successful developer could then be determined within a 15 day period thereafter. (c) Additional final development details could be worked out with the successful developer, after the award has been made, (ad) The City should reserve the right to determine traffic circulation within the project site. RECUMMED DATIONS l. Mr. Gppenshaw continue his ticht schedule now in progress for development of the 15 gingle-femily lots, through the Housing Authority. 2. HUD be requested to determine as soon as possible and inform the City what the cost of the lend will be. 3. Mr. Oppenchaw to pull to-gether as soon as possible (with target date of May 1) uniform development criteria (including cost of land and suggeszed approximate namber of units by respective types desired for the remaining housing sites to be furnished interested developers. lh. The Housing Authority to call as soon as possible (target date eve -theten te May 1) for multiple type,housing development proposels, for submittal in 30 days (terget date June 1). Page April 18, 1968 5S. Prospective developers to be informed that the Planning Department reserves the right to work out with the successful developer, traffic circulation plans within the sites, satisfactory to the City. 6. Selection of successful bidder to be determined within 15 days after submittal of proposals, 7- HUD in Washington be requested by letter from save Allen to ask GSA to deliver title to the portion of the tract (other than the 15 single family lots) to be developed for Housing (and related commercial) direct to the suecessful developer to be determined jointly by the City- Housing Authority. Be Successful developer be required to start physical development of these housing sites (break ground within six (6) signths fron date of delivery to him of title to the lend. 9. Successful developer be required to agree to complete development within two (2) years from starting (breaking ground) date. Respectfully submitted, Housing Coordinator
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 22

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_022.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 22
  • Text: Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. - 2 - April 25, 1968 Because of the innovative character of our operation, we are desirous of proving our cage in an urban setting as contrasted with the usual subdivision effort. To accomplish a cost reduction in a rural area is not ae significant as to accomplish the same savings in the heart ofa city like Atlanta. These are days of careful experimentation in every- thing having to do with human relations, and we mean to perform a significant social service in the process of making the revolutionary changes in construction techniques that will mass produce the dwelling units. Iam eure that regulations require a competitive setting for the disposi-. tion of the Federal i’enitentiary land, but, by the same token, the F. d- eral Government, as you know, is almost desperately anxious to 6ee cost savings accomplished that will make it possible for low and middle income people to afford new homes without the onus of massive financial subsidy. This we propose to do and for this reason we earnestly request the privilege of using the Honor Farm land in the massive experiment for which we are now tooling up. We are looking at various factory sites for rent inside the Atlanta city limits and, naturally, are anxious that the land we will use for the actual subdivision will be in close proximity. The nature of the manu- facturing process will not require a great many already trained people. This works another advantage for the urban setting. We will be able to give unskilled workers the modest training necessary to manufacture and fabricate the components. As we see it then, our program for using the Honor Farm iand will provide three immediate benefits. First, it will enlarge the housing inventory at very reazonable cost to the tenant and to whatever agency is charged with subsidizing the tenant rent or purchase. Second, it will provide employment for a significant number of semi-skilled and unskilled people in Atlanta. Third, the experimenta- tion will naturally have geographic significance so that my favorite city can be known as having continued in its course of leadership with regard to national urban problems. We are already into the basic site design, we propose single family and multi-family detached units in addition to a modest highrise for the elderly and whatever shopping center would be feasible. We will utilize our fibreglass materials and techniques in all of the construction in whatever degree the particular structure makes possible. Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. - 3 - April 25, 1968 With such a program, the first question is always "when?". The machinery with which we will manufacture our srototype models is already assembled and will be shipped to Atlanta as soon as we have the factory site ready. The larger machinery will be pur- chased and brought into operation as needed. We are counting our time in weeks and will produce upwards of five hundred housing units during our testing. We will anxiously await the outcome of Tuesday's meeting, and will consider it a privilege to work with your people in the service of the citizens of Atlanta. COAST Mets Richard L. Fullerton RLF*jl ce: Mr. Dan Sweat Director of Government Liaison City of Atlanta Mr. Cecil Alexander, Chairman Housing Resources Committee City of Atlanta Senator Paul Douglas, Chariman President's Committee on Urban Problems Washington, D.C. Mr. William O. Burke, Director Industry Division Georgia Department of Industry and Trade Mr. George T. Scharffenberger, (resident City Investing Company New York City Mr. David E. Kahn New York City
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 5

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_005.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 5
  • Text: RICHARD L. FULLERTON AND ASSOCIATES Consultants for Multi-family Housing Telephone 436 -6 1 34 : TELEPHONE 422-4479 145 NoRTH MAGNOLIA AVENUE Post Office Box 7164 P. ©. BOX 2068 Atlanta, Georgia 30309 May 9, 1968 ORLANDO, FLORIDA’ 32802 The Honorable Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor of Atlanta Georgia Dear Mayor Alten: In behalf of Mr. Kahn and all who are working with us in the establishment of a com- prehensive breakthrough in construction costs, I wich to express our sincerest ap- preciation for the time and energy you gave us this afternoon. I realize your very crowded schedule and the crisis proportions of your daily responsibilities. As you know, the federal people, as well as all concerned citizens, are almost desperately anxious to see a price breakthrough mace, so that the poor people can have the dignity of ownership without it being a total subsidy condition. To bullid public housing for $17,600 per unit is not the answer. The answer can only be found in that which made America great in the first place - a frugal approach to life's many opportunities for stewardship. We have had an earnest desire to prove the potential of our construction techniques in an urban setting. Vy previous letter was comprehensive in that regard. Iam very sure that the federal people (beyond the regional HUD office) would be enthu- siastic in their cooperation, and it is a conviction with me that Atlanta would gain mueh from the fact of being the place where this honest and good American thing transpired. The time crisis is upon us as it ie upon everyone, #0 that we cannot affora to iet this eummer pass while only procedural affairs are cared for. We were aot too late in our originalypresentation. We came in several weeks ago with a very serious proposition aad are still ae sincere as we were then, Again, please accept my gratitude for your gracious hospitality and my pledge of continuing «upport in the days which face ue ail. Riehard L. Fullerton RLF *jl ce; Messere, Kahn, Young, Scnarffenberger, /Sweat, Alexander, Dougias, Burke, Jones, Rapp, and Gammon
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 18

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_018.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 18
  • Text: LITTON SYSTEMS, INC. APPLIED SCIENCE DIVISION 7300 PEARL STREET BETHESDA, MARYLAND 20014 (301) 652.6616 April 19, 1968 Honorable Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor of the City of Atlanta Atlanta, Georgia Subject: Co-operation during performance of HUD Experimental Housing Research and Development Program Dear Mayor Allen: On March 14, 1968 the Department of Housing and Urban Development solicited proposals for Concept Design and Execution of an "In City" Experimental Housing Research and Development Program. It is planned that the effort will be concentrated in a large number of Model Cities. By May 1, 1968 it is expected that a Contractor will be selected who will be expected to accomplish an intensive analysis in depth of the Model Cities by June 15, 1968, prior to the actual development of experimental housing programs, In a prior letter to you dated 12-14-67, Litton advised you of its desire to participate in Model Cities efforts, As further expression of interest, Litton Industries has assembled what it considers to be an outstanding team of planners, architects, builders, etc,, to perform on this complex system job. The purpose of this letter is to solicit your support in establish- ing contacts with key citizens in your city, A letter from you defining principal contacts is deeply appreciated, Very truly yours, Leon. Gi 7 rector Public Systems Laboratory Washington Science Center LIN/cep
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021

Box 5, Folder 7, Document 25

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_005_007_025.pdf
  • Result Type: Item
  • Item Type: Text
  • Title: Box 5, Folder 7, Document 25
  • Text: ) 7 =a Dev Frieas SHEATa AND BRADFIELD /ARCHITS ts / INCORPORATED EX Ke c\e ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30309 + 74 FOURTEENTH STREET, N.—. * TELEPHONE 892-8722 + AREA CODE 404 Please address all correspondence to: P. QO. Box 7988 « Atlanta, Georgia 30309 April 19th, 1968. Mr. Lester Persells, Housing Authority of the City of Atlanta, 824 Hurt Building, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. Dear Mr. Persells: We understand that you will have renewal land for sale in the Thomasville Federal Penitentary area for multi-family housing. Please let us express our interest and intention of submitting a bid for either the 221(d)(3) F.H.A. Program or the Turnkey H.A.A. Program. Will you please provide to us a prospectus and the necessary bid documents for all sites that will be available for multi-family housing. Very truly yours, SHEETZ AND BRADFIELD/ARCHITECTS/INCORPORATED/A.1.A. Francis B. Sheetz, Jr., A.I.A. copy to: Mr. Gilbert Boggs 7 Mr. Malcolm Jones ~~ Mr. Ernest Tharpe Mr. James F. Kirkpatrick fbs/gk FRANCIS B. SHEETZ, JR., A.A. © RICHARD H, BRADFIELD, A.A. © RICHARD B. JENKINS © JEROME J. COSTA WILLIAM S. MAYTON, A.LA. «© DANIEL P. SANTACROCE, A.LA.
  • Tags: Box 5, Box 5 Folder 7, Folder topic: Housing Resources Committee | 1968
  • Record Created: April 18, 2017
  • Record Updated: April 29, 2021