Box 18, Folder 25, Document 59

Dublin Core

Text Item Type Metadata



September 12, 1967

The Executive Group of the Housing Resources Committee met at 10:00 aeMe
September 12, 1967, in Committee Room 4'2, City Hall, The following members

were present:

Mr. Cecil A. Alexander, Chairman, Housing Resources Committee

Dr. Benjamin E. Mays, Co-Chairman, Housing Resources Committee

Mr, Archer D. Smith, representing Mr. Charles L. Weltner, Acting Chairman,
Legal Panel

Mr. Henry L. Hills, representing Mr. Lee Burge, Chairman, Finance and
Non-Profit funds Panel

Mr. John Wilson, member, Finance and Non-Profit Funds Panel

Mr. Charles F. Palmer, representing Mr. Clarence 0. Coleman, Chairman,
Public Housing Panel

Mr. F. C. Terrell, representing Mr. Wallace L. Lee, member, Land Acquisition

Dr. Vivian Henderson, Acting Chairman, Land Acquisition Panel

Mr. J. A. Alston, member, Land Acquisition Panel

Mr. Stewart Wight, member, Land Acquisition Panel

Dean 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 lowe
income housing inventory report but had onli 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 apertment units being develoved under conventional financing which cdo not
cost more than $10,000 per unit to construct, $12,000 for each side of a duplex
and $15,000 for a single family house. He explained that the last page of the
summary contains notes, sme 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 have lost ground in this program since the previous report two
months ago.

He then called attention to the extract from the CIP revort pertaining
to low-income housing recuirements (Item 3 on the agenda and in the folder).
He also pointed out that we are not really building lowcost housine in public
housing but low-income housing.

He also explained Item (a) on the agenda 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 under-
staffed to handle the statistical data required by the CIP and proposed that
from here on out when someone goes to the Building Department for a permit
we should try to get the Permit Desk to list what the rent on the units will
be and number of bedrooms per unit; that there is no way we can require this
legally; and that another thing that we need to do 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
for not less than 3 months. He stated that he felt the structures being built ~
are reasonably good and that his feclin:'s are that a great deal more interest
should be put in the lowest rental-purchase ranges; that we can get more in
that price range from the prefabricated housing; that the carrying charges on
these per month is important anc we should find out what it is; that to meet
the really tough part of the program means going to the City for additional
help. He also asked for comments from members of the Committee.

Mr. Clark said he would support askin; for more help; that he also saw
a news report for housing that wovld rent for $50 to $70 per month, under the
Farmers Association program; that it is in DeKalb County, and is called City

Mr. Alexander stated that is a good start to zet lowecost housing in the

Another member stated that the Farmers Association prozram is also a
part of the FHA program.

Mr. Palmer inquired as to the definition of low-cost housing?
Mr. Jones replied that it is essentially a matter of interpretation,
Mr. Alexander stated that is was from $0 to 55 per month,

Mr. Palmer commented "And they want low-income housing built uncer private

Mr. Alexander replied it is thought of now primarily as a Turnkey

Mr. Jones added "And even Rent Supplement",

Mr. Alexander again proposed asking the City for a Clerk and developing
a form for the Building Department to get filled out at the time permits are
obtained anc stated that we will have to talk to Mr. Wofford about that.

A motion was made that the matter be left in Mr, Jones' hands, Nr. Yates
seconded it. The matter was drop»ed 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 recommendations to
the Board of Aldermen; that we have been taking this on as a extracurricular
roll to assist the develovers in this program; that this has been done in ©
several instances, but no members of this Committee have been asked to fo
around looking at these sites to recommend those which we consider reasonable,

Mr. Jones explained that this is what he and Mr. Gates have been attemmting
to do; that they have been out with the s»xonsors and actually looked at most
of the sites and have only listed anc encouraged those which they felt were
practical and desirable; that in a several instances they have discouraged
sponsors from submittins sites which they felt were impracticable or unsuitable.

Mr. Alexander continued that his feeling is that we should try to aid and
assist the builders in this program but that we have no power to chanze what
is going on and that we are having our pro»osals turned down one by one for
various reasons. He stated that the approach which he felt we should take is
to issue a general statement about the housing program, its needs, and the
shortage of land that is now suitably zoned and to work toward getting a
rezoning of the entire City, with due consideration for low-income housing
needs; that as for working with the developers we should be governed by what
we see is acceptable to the Board of Aldermen and the Building Department in
granting permits; and further to come to some conclusion about the problems.
He stated that we should also help the developers arrange meetings with the
Aldermen, Departments involved and anyone who wants to talk to them about
deficiencies in Community Facilities related to the housing program, which in
some instances have been legimate, such as parks, transportation, traffic,
schools etc. He further stated that at the same time the urgency of this
program has seemed to escape some »eople; that one thing which we also need is
to emphasize the requirement for additional low-income housing in the neighboring
cities and countics and make it clear that we are not trying to create a haven
here in Atlanta for the whole country to come to and move in on this programs;
that this may happen, but we should try to avoi' it. He stated that the CIP
requirement is for replacement of houses and avartmenits that are unfit for
human habitation. He then called upon Mr. Jones for comments.

Mr. Jones stated he feels that it we do not take a position to actively
support the cevelopers who have proposed good projects and which appear reasonable,
he cid not know who would; that he was personally inclined to feel that we can do
a service if we as a Committee take a »osition on such projects; that he does not
think however that many areas will be built in the City which already have
a surplus of community facilities; that he has hopec that we can supply
facilities such as parks, schools, playgrounds etc. simultaneous with the development
of the housing projects, by relying on other Agencies and other Departments;

that those details should be checked into carefully and coor<ination made to
provide these services as adequately as we can. He saic that he felt personally
that a statement from the Housing Resources Committee on each of the projects
proposed for low-income housing would be helpful to the Planning Board and the
Zoning Committee when they make their decisions. He pointed out difficulties
which we have had in getting sites approved up to that point and explained

that he and Mr. Gates (the Committee Consultant) have attempted to look at

each proposed site but have been unable to follow through on all. details such
as checking on the adequacy of community facilities etc.; that in several
instances he and Mr, Gates have discourayec sponsors for this reason or that;
such as ground too rough, facilities not available etc. and that as a result,
several of the sites originally proposed have never come up for rezoning. He
further stated that he was inclined to feel that on those provosals for Turnkey
Gevelopment that it would even be well for the Planning Board and the Zoning
Committee to know whether or not the Housing Authority considered the sites

as favorable and suitable.

One member commented that perhaps the whole City needs to be rezoned.

Mr. Alexander replied it scemed to him that we must create additional
land through purchases for the city-wide approachs that when the individual
developer coancs along, there should be a body looking to the interest of the
whole city and it appeared to him that these things have thus far been
considocred only by the Board of Aldermens that he wonders whether this is
doing the program the best service? Hc stated that consulting with the
Planning Board is also very much in order, presumably.

In referring to Item (a) on the agenda and the corresponding marked
document in the folder, vr. Henderson inquired if this material is what his
Committee had asked for?

Mr. Jones stated that this is what the Planning Department provided in
response to his panel's request; that when we got it, it came in two forms:
a zoning man of the City with vacant land areas superimposed on it in orange;
and a redort of total land in the various zoning catagories and vacant land
by Land Lot and Uistrict.

Mr. Jones further explained that the Planning Department is now making
a comprehensive Land-Use study to go before the Board of Aldermen with some
proposed changes in the overall land-use of the City; that he felt the best
thing this Committee could do now is to set its recommendations presented to
the Planning and Development Committee; that we have a Joint Mecting scheduled
for the 29th of September.

Mr. Alexander then told Dr. Henderson that he should 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 those two should come
up with a proposal, say in September, as to the number of acres needed and its

Dr. Henderson asked approximately how many acres does that involve?

Mr. Jones replied that the maximum censity authorized for garden type
cpartments is 16 units per acre, but that the Housing Authority has been trying
to hold that Jown to about 12 units per acre.

Mr. Persells stated that was correct; that 3, |, and 5 bedroom units, which
the Housing Authority particularly needs, results in reduction of the density
below 16 units per acre.

Mr. Jones explained we had one project which has been approved by FHA at
16 units per acre, but it is in an Urban Renewal project; that we had a developer
recently drop a project because he had bought the land expecting to develope it
at the maximum authorized density of 16 units per acre and that in preliminary
discussions, FHA suggested 10 units per acre.

Mr. Alexander stated that it is open to debate about how many total acres
would be required; that our experience to date indicates that no more than
1/3 of the land appropriately zoned actually gets into the low-income housing
program, due to turndowns by HUD, FHA, neighborhoods etc.; that to date only
about 1/3 of the land zoned has found its way into this program.

Mr. Alexander stated that there apvears to be a need to rezone the City
at large; that there were 51 zoning petitions on the agenda recently for one
meeting of the Planning Board.

Mr. Jones explained that the current zoning was especially planned for
industry; that many areas were originally planned but never used as industrial,
which development will not occur in the forseeable future, and that the same
applies to much of the land now zoned residential (single family development)
whereas the immediate need of the City now is for low-income multi-family

Mr. Persells explained that the Housing Authority has gone back over the
land to consider additional parcels which could be used for the low-income housing
category where changes seem to be reasonable.

% * *

Mr. Alexander stated the builders have claimed that FHA procedures were
holding them up; that Atlanta is one of the City's in which FHA now claims that
it can process an application in less than 2 weeks; that this is a change in
attitude, but the 221 d (3) program does not come within the direct line of
FHA's principal insuring policy.

Mr. Alexander asked Mr. Clark if the report prepared by Mr. Gates on the
accelerated procedure for multi-family processing by FHA could be carried to
the press (Item 6 on the agenda, with covies 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 from this Gommittee.

Mr. Alexander then referred to Item 7 on the agenda pertaining to the
proposal in the Rent 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 theory that if nonprofit sponsors are financially inw lved
in the success of their project that they will have more permanent interest
in it; that Urban America'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 that this approach of reauiring the 5%
equity will defeat the purpose of the program; that what he would like to do
is to get an authorization from the Committee to sign a telegram in support of
this position and to urge consideration of this matter in the final preparation
of the bill.

A motion was made by Mr. Palmer, seconded ane unanimously adopted asking
Mr, Alexander to send such telegrams to appropriate Senators.

Mr. Clark asked if the 5% donation is a known step or a new development.

Mr. Alexander stated that it is new; that the thinking is that the
nonprofit sponsor is not supsosed to be getting any profit back from the project
and it is asking too much of him to put up 5% equity donation to the project.
Mr. Alexander also said that to give the other side of it is, that in 221 a (3)

nonprofit projects one can borrow up to a 102% of the project cost and this
is what you are competing with, in a sense.

Mr. Persells asked Mr. Alexander to explain the 102%.
Mr. Alexander explained what the extra 2% takes care of.
3 % %

Mr. Alexander again asked for and received unanimous consent to request
the City for a Glerk for at least 3 months.

Mr. Alexander then called for brief reports from the Pancl Chairmen.

Legal Panel ~ Mr. Archer Smith made a very interesting presentation of
his case study and the significance of the Shaffer vs. City of Atlanta Housing
Code Case, which he announced was coming up for hearing the next day.

Construction and Design Panel ~ As no one was present to represent this
panel, Mr. Alexander explained a project which that panel was working on
involving Building Codes and a System study,

Finance and Nonprofit Funds Panel - Mr. Alexander explained that this
panel is working on creation of a Nonprofit Housing Development Corporation.
He also mentioned the favorable comments made at the Urban America Seminar
by a local banker pertaining to loans made through his bank to sponsors of
nonprofit projects.

Business Participation Panel - Mr. 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

Public Information Panel - Mr. Clark commented on the ill-fated Brownto:m
Road rezoning attempt and to a nonprofit sponsor project which is being promoted
locally by the Interfaith Group of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation.

Social Problems Panel - Dean Jackson explained that the averaze annual
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 for an 18 acre site on the West side of Atlanta, North of Bakers
Ferry Road, S. W. (LL 2h, lth Dist. FF) to present his proposal (one of three
in Item 5 on the agenda). Mr. Edwards made a good and convincing presentation,
From questions asked and comments made by some members of the Committee, the
Committee a»bpeared receptive to Mr. Edwards! proposal. Formal action by the
Committee however was not called for by the Chairman to endorse this project
to the Zoning Committee, as had previously been requested by Mr. Edwards,
as well as similar reauests from sponsors of two other projects which the Committee
had previously endorsed to the Planning Board. This was for reasons explained
earlier in the mecting. Subsequently however, the Chairman of the Planning
Board was requested to pass on to the Zoning Committce, with the Planning
Boards! recommendations, a letter which had previously been written by the
Committee to the Planning Board endorsing those two projects.

The meeting was adjorned at 12 noon,

7} peotheceyts prada adh not
Malcolm D, Jon
Supervisor of Inspection Services

Encls: Agenda
Documents contained in folder provided every member present (with
file copy only).

public items show