Dublin Core
Text Item Type Metadata
Text
SUBJECT: ADDENDJM i
DEVELOPMENT COMPETITION ON FEDERAL SURPLUS
LAND TO MEET CRITICAL NEEDS
GA. R-22 - THOMASVILLE UREAN -REDEVELOPMENT AREA
Dear Sir:
This letter constitutes an Addendum to an Invitation to Buy
and Develop land in the Thomasville Urban Redevelopment Area,
Project Georgia R-22, dated June 10, 1968. The Offering is
an invitation to bid on a development competition encompass-
ing approximately 96 acres of Federal Surplus Land lying in
two parcels designated BB-l and CC-l. 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 Build-
ing, Atlanta, Georgia, 30303. |
The Housing Act of 1968 contains provisions which propospective
Redevelopers may wish to use in this competition. It is anti-
cipated that most of the pertinent details concerning this Act,
and particularly Sections 235 and 236, will be known within the
next few weeks. It is anticipated also that the supplemental
Appropriations Act, funding tha new Sections, will be passed on
or before October 1. We are announcing the new bid opening date
of October 24, 1968, to provide an opportunity for Redevelopers
to submit proposals based on the possibilities provided in the
new Housing Act.
During the past several weeks a number of prospective Redevel-
opers have asked questions, the answers to which we believe
should have general circulation. These answers are to be con-
_S§idered Addenda to the Offering, and are as follows: age
wie
(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 his approach to land use. Some
commercial land will ic necessary to. serve the con-
venience needs of the immediate neighborhood. We
have limited this to six acres. Part of this six
, acres may be utilized for service stations located
; near the on and off ramps of the Lakewood Extension
“ 4° Freeway, which use would increase the value of the
commercial land greatly. The commercial usage should fe
be subordinate to the shopping center to be built at
the corner of Moreland Avenue and McDonough Boulevard,
4, WN It is our belief, shared by FHA, that the land for
\ flowest income housing should be included in housing
. development costs at the lowest possible value in
order to achieve the lowest possible rents or sales
‘prices. For that reason, we have stipulated that
this land would be accepted by FSA at a maximum value
of $4,590 per acre foi Section 221 d(3}, Section 235
and Section 236 developments. The remaining residen-
tial land might be acceptable for mortgages under
other programs, including conventional financing, at
a somewhat higher value.
When the forecoing considerations are lumped together,
we arrived at an averace price per acre of $7,650. We
believe that the Redevsloper and his advisers should
be able to allocate valiies to individual portions for
each portion. We realize that. this (average price of
$7,650) approach to the sale of land will mean that
the Redeveloper will reed more than usual capital since
he will buy residential]. land prior to the purchase and
development of the commercial land. It is our hope
that this disadvantace will be outweighed by the many
advantages gained by having complete freedom to develop
land uses foi the total area.
The Offering requires development of 300 dwelling units
available to the lewest income families. The wording
"lowest income families" is Celibexate, and is in con-
trast to the words “lJow-rent public housing". It is
our belief that the use of Section 221 da(3) in its var-
ious applications, Section 225 ané/or Section 236,
together with use of tne Rent Supplement Program, can
provide for many of these fayilies. It may be that ~
(3)
(4)
.
3.
Some quantity of low-rent public housing may be
found necessary. Each prospective Redeveloper
should analyze this phase of the development in
order properly to arrive at a solution. It is
our hope that no low-rent public housing will be
necessary to meet this goal or the development.
However, if public housing, either Turn-key or
preferably Leased, is considered necessary, it
should not exceed 50% of the 300 dwellings.
Our analysis of the low-rent public housing situ-
ation in Atlanta, as it comcerns high-rise for
elderly, leads us to the conclusion that this
type of public housing would not be acceptable in
this development. We do not, however, rule out
high-rise for one and two person families financed
through other programs.
After the bid opening, all proposals will ke deliv-
ered to a Jury composed of nationally recognized
authorities in the field of housing. The Jury is
being supplied with the same information as that
supplied to prospective Redevelopers. This Jury
will review all proposals and will select the
successful proposal to recommend to the Housing
Authority Board of Commissioners for the award.
It should be apparent from the foregoing that the
criteria for judging the proposals will be based
solely on the written information which has been
supplied both to the prospective Redevelopers and
to the Jury. The types of questions, therefore,
that our staff is prepared to answer relate to
the methods of submitting proposals rather than
to the contents of the'proposals.
Sincerely yours,
—- i
M. B. Satterfield/
Executive Directdr
“Sy
MBS :hen
SHEETZ AND BRADFIELD
ARCHITECTS J INC. [AIAy
AUG 2 9 1968
a
"ATLANTA; GEORGIA
DEVELOPMENT COMPETITION ON FEDERAL SURPLUS
LAND TO MEET CRITICAL NEEDS
GA. R-22 - THOMASVILLE UREAN -REDEVELOPMENT AREA
Dear Sir:
This letter constitutes an Addendum to an Invitation to Buy
and Develop land in the Thomasville Urban Redevelopment Area,
Project Georgia R-22, dated June 10, 1968. The Offering is
an invitation to bid on a development competition encompass-
ing approximately 96 acres of Federal Surplus Land lying in
two parcels designated BB-l and CC-l. 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 Build-
ing, Atlanta, Georgia, 30303. |
The Housing Act of 1968 contains provisions which propospective
Redevelopers may wish to use in this competition. It is anti-
cipated that most of the pertinent details concerning this Act,
and particularly Sections 235 and 236, will be known within the
next few weeks. It is anticipated also that the supplemental
Appropriations Act, funding tha new Sections, will be passed on
or before October 1. We are announcing the new bid opening date
of October 24, 1968, to provide an opportunity for Redevelopers
to submit proposals based on the possibilities provided in the
new Housing Act.
During the past several weeks a number of prospective Redevel-
opers have asked questions, the answers to which we believe
should have general circulation. These answers are to be con-
_S§idered Addenda to the Offering, and are as follows: age
wie
(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 his approach to land use. Some
commercial land will ic necessary to. serve the con-
venience needs of the immediate neighborhood. We
have limited this to six acres. Part of this six
, acres may be utilized for service stations located
; near the on and off ramps of the Lakewood Extension
“ 4° Freeway, which use would increase the value of the
commercial land greatly. The commercial usage should fe
be subordinate to the shopping center to be built at
the corner of Moreland Avenue and McDonough Boulevard,
4, WN It is our belief, shared by FHA, that the land for
\ flowest income housing should be included in housing
. development costs at the lowest possible value in
order to achieve the lowest possible rents or sales
‘prices. For that reason, we have stipulated that
this land would be accepted by FSA at a maximum value
of $4,590 per acre foi Section 221 d(3}, Section 235
and Section 236 developments. The remaining residen-
tial land might be acceptable for mortgages under
other programs, including conventional financing, at
a somewhat higher value.
When the forecoing considerations are lumped together,
we arrived at an averace price per acre of $7,650. We
believe that the Redevsloper and his advisers should
be able to allocate valiies to individual portions for
each portion. We realize that. this (average price of
$7,650) approach to the sale of land will mean that
the Redeveloper will reed more than usual capital since
he will buy residential]. land prior to the purchase and
development of the commercial land. It is our hope
that this disadvantace will be outweighed by the many
advantages gained by having complete freedom to develop
land uses foi the total area.
The Offering requires development of 300 dwelling units
available to the lewest income families. The wording
"lowest income families" is Celibexate, and is in con-
trast to the words “lJow-rent public housing". It is
our belief that the use of Section 221 da(3) in its var-
ious applications, Section 225 ané/or Section 236,
together with use of tne Rent Supplement Program, can
provide for many of these fayilies. It may be that ~
(3)
(4)
.
3.
Some quantity of low-rent public housing may be
found necessary. Each prospective Redeveloper
should analyze this phase of the development in
order properly to arrive at a solution. It is
our hope that no low-rent public housing will be
necessary to meet this goal or the development.
However, if public housing, either Turn-key or
preferably Leased, is considered necessary, it
should not exceed 50% of the 300 dwellings.
Our analysis of the low-rent public housing situ-
ation in Atlanta, as it comcerns high-rise for
elderly, leads us to the conclusion that this
type of public housing would not be acceptable in
this development. We do not, however, rule out
high-rise for one and two person families financed
through other programs.
After the bid opening, all proposals will ke deliv-
ered to a Jury composed of nationally recognized
authorities in the field of housing. The Jury is
being supplied with the same information as that
supplied to prospective Redevelopers. This Jury
will review all proposals and will select the
successful proposal to recommend to the Housing
Authority Board of Commissioners for the award.
It should be apparent from the foregoing that the
criteria for judging the proposals will be based
solely on the written information which has been
supplied both to the prospective Redevelopers and
to the Jury. The types of questions, therefore,
that our staff is prepared to answer relate to
the methods of submitting proposals rather than
to the contents of the'proposals.
Sincerely yours,
—- i
M. B. Satterfield/
Executive Directdr
“Sy
MBS :hen
SHEETZ AND BRADFIELD
ARCHITECTS J INC. [AIAy
AUG 2 9 1968
a
"ATLANTA; GEORGIA