Box 20, Folder 20, Document 11

Dublin Core

Text Item Type Metadata


April 21, 1967

A regular meeting of the Urban Renewal Policy Committee was held on
Friday, April 21, 1967 at 10:00 A. M. in Committee Room #2, Second

Floor, City Hall.
The following members were present:

Rodney Cook, Chairman
Edwin Sterne

Gregory Griggs

George Cotsakis

Frank Etheridge


Hugh Pierce
John Flanigen

Also present were:

George Aldridge ‘
Jim Kluttz

George Berry

John Izard

Hugh Peterson

Robert Sommerville

Howard Openshaw

Collier Gladin

Les Persells

Bob Bivens

The Chairman called the meeting to order and the following business
was considered:

Mr. Gladin introduced to the Committee and others present, Mr. Jimmy
Kluttz, a new addition to the City's planning staff. He stated that
Mr. Kluttz comes to the City highly recommended with impressive
qualifications; that he has several years experience in the housing
field and will serve as the City's coordinator of urban renewal.

In behalf of the Committee, Chairman Cook recognized and welcomed
Mr. Kluttz, stating they look forward to working with him,


Submission of Revised Application to Combine the Buttermilk Bottoms
and Bedford Pine Project Area,

Mr. Persells exhibited a combined map of the two existing project
areas and stated that at the time this was initially discussed with
the renewal assistance administration, the Housing Authority was
advised that the necessary right-of-way for the widening of Bedford
Place could be dedicated to the City and that the City could proceed

Ta neat

Urban Renewal Policy Committee
April 21, 1967 Page 2

with the widening project, however, when Part I of the Buttermilk
Bottoms Application was presented for their review and approval, a
change of policy at the Federal level was made, necessitating that

the City purchase the right-of-way for the street widening, which

will require a cash outlay of a quarter of a million dollars. Mr.
Persells stated further that inasmuch as the City is not in a posi-=
tion to make this cash outlay, the only solution to the problem

seems to be to combine the two projects. He then cited the advan-
tages to such a combination: First, the proximity of the projects

to each other dictate a tying together of the street alignments;

since there is a change in street grades as much as 20 feet at some
points, considerable regrading of the street system will be required.
Secondly, there is a Federal restriction on relocating people outside
of a project proper, and combination of the two projects would per-
mit the temporary on-site relocation of people from one project to

the other. Thirdly, if the projects aren't combined, the City stands
to lose approximately $125,000 in credits for the widening of Bedford.
Mr. Openshaw explained the existing project boundary line is on the
east side of Bedford; the City is immediately widening on the west
side of Bedford to 3 lanes (all within the Buttermilk Bottoms project)
and this being the boundary line, only 50 percent credit will be ,
eligible, both in the cost of the right-of-way and street improve-
ments, unless the projects are combined so as to include the east

side of Bedford, making it an interior street; this would then

permit a 100 percent credit for the widening that the City had

hoped to receive. Mr. Persells stated also the coordination, ac-
quisition, demolition and relocation will be much simpler as a sine.
gle project, rather than two. During ensuing discussion, Mr. Cook
expressed concern about the additional delay in acquisition of proper-=
ties in the Buttermilk Bottoms project since the people in this area
have been told it would begin within the next six weeks. The Committee
was also doubtful that it would involve just a six months delay,

and Mr. Cook further expressed particular concern about known hardship
cases along Forrest Avenue. Mr. Persells explained that he did not
believe there would be that much delay in the projects actually; that
as soon as the Survey and Planning Application is submitted to com-
bine the projects, the Housing Authority can immediately proceed with
preparation of Part I of the application and would expect to have it
ready by the time the Survey and Planning Application is approved;
that since about 60% of the Buttermilk Bottoms project has been acquired
under the Letter of Consent method the Authority has agreed that it
would not make any such additional request after the Federal people
had called to their attention that you cannot execute a project under
the guise of Letters of Consent. However, in order to facilitate
acquisition of hardship cases, Mr. Persells stated Mr. Davis (City
Comptroller) has agreed to make available up to $250,000 to purchase
bona fide hardship cases in the 40% balance of the project; that based
on a preliminary survey of the types of hardship cases existing and

Urban Renewal Policy Committee
April 21, 1967 Page 3

potential numbers, it is felt this amount will take care of the
situation during the additional delay involved in submitting the
revised Survey and Planning Application. In addition to this,

Mr. Persells stated the Authority also proposes to request an amend-
ment to the last Letter of Consent to include the acquisition of

three pieces of property at the corner of Piedmont and Forrest which
are among the priority hardship cases; that the advance acquisition of
these three tracts will solidify the area and facilitate development
of the entrance to the auditorium,

In response to questioning by Chairman Cook, Mr. Persells stated

that through two bond issues, three and one quarter million dollars

in urban renewal funds have been allocated, most of which are committed;
that present estimates indicate when all credits in all of the urban
renewal areas the City now has are pooled, the City's total cash requirement
(the actual cash amount the City will have in the projects) will be about
$900,000. It was mentioned that this figure was dependent upon all of

the non-cash credits currently scheduled in the projects being built. Mr.
Sommerville felt any delays which are not absolutely necessary should be
avoided, He stated delays of this sort imperil the entire urban renewal
process and creates an attitude of bitterness toward the City on the part
of people living in these areas.

After other discussion, it was the general consensus of the Committee
that combining of the two projects would be desirable and beneficial
to the City if the matter of acquisition of hardship cases could be

In answer to questioning by Chairman Cook, George Berry of the Comptroller's
Office stated he felt additional funds, beyond the $250,000, could be
provided, within reason, for bona fide hardship cases.

A motion was then made by Mr. Griggs and seconded by Mr. Etheridge

that the Committee approve the combining of the two projects and accept

the loan of $250,000 from the City to permit advance acquisition of
properties determined to be hardship cases. Messrs. Sterne and Sommerville
reluctantly concurred with the motion.


There was then a lengthy discussion relative to the thirteen acres

of property lying within the University Center Project which the Policy
Committee had allocated for 221-D-3 housing, (See Minutes of March 4, 1966,
Pages 2 & 3). This entire area, including the ten acres awarded to the
colleges, was originally scheduled for 221-D-3 housing, with the ten acres
being excluded for college utilization. Mr, Persells stated the thirteen
acres was offered for sale on April 12 and that he would like to discuss a

Urban Renewal Policy Committee
April 21, 1967 Page 4

schedule of dates for presentations by the proposed developers - seven

at the present time. He explained that in an amendment to the offering,
each proposer has been advised he will be given an opportunity to be
heard for thirty minutes, with an additional thirty minutes for questions
and answers; that it might be advisable to divide the proposals and hear
them on two successive days; that he would like to arrange these meetings
so that as many members of the committee as possible could attend.

In addition to the oral presentations, Mr. Persells stated he hoped to
have available, prior to the hearings, written comments on each proposal,
highlighting points of interest.

Chairman Cook then stated he was greatly disturbed about the offering
price of this property ($74,000) stating he felt it was entirely too

low and unreasonable; that while a specific write-down figure was never
mentioned in the discussion of this property for 221-D-3 housing, the
Committee anticipated the property would be sold at a reduced cost for
this type development, but not for $74,000 which amounts to about $5,000
an acre,

Mr. Cook stated he felt this type of question was a real policy decision
matter and the offering at this price should have been brought back to the

Mr. Openshaw stated the Authority appraised the property on the basis
of 221-D-3 housing, which they were instructed to do,

Mr. Cook agreed with this, but reiterated no specific write-down
figure was mentioned and the Committee had no idea it would be so low; that
he did not want to get into this situation again.

Mr. Etheridge stated the Housing Authority's Board of Commissioners
had approved the offering on the assumption that proper steps had been taken;
that he, quite frankly, was surprised at the low appraisal.

It was pointed out that this area has been designated for low-cost housing
from the beginning of the project and it was recognized that this would
result in a below market price. The only action taken by the Committee

was to exclude the ten acres for the Universities, resulting in a substantial
increase to the City.

After other discussion, it was felt by everyone, however, that renewed emphasis
should be placed on communication between the Policy Committee and the Authority
in such matters and that in the future, they would be brought back to the
Committee. Also, Mr. Persells was asked to continue to study the situation at
hand so see what steps could be taken to get a higher appraisal of the land
without jeopardizing the steps already taken.

The Committee then expressed delight at the submission of multiple proposals
and after a discussion of various dates for presentations by the developers, it
was unanimously agreed as follows: The Committee would meet on May 9 at 4:00
P. M. to hear 4 of the 7 proposals; and on May 10 at 9:00 A. M. to hearing the

remaining three,









Urban Renewal Policy Committee
April 21, 1967

Following a brief discussion, the Committee unanimously concurred |

that the Housing Authority would proceed with the selling of proper-
ties (prior to actual acquisition by the Housing Authority) between

Oak and Gordon Streets, east of Sears, designated for shopping center
development in the reuse plans, Mr. Persells explained the Authority
could sell the properties prior to acquisition, although they could not
convey the title.


As a matter of information, Mr. Persells explained that Parcels

C-1, 3 and 4 of the Rawson-Washington Urban Redevelopment Area had

been offered for 221-D-3 development. The area is comprised of 7.6

acres, and will permit a maximum of 152 units. The property lies near the
State office building complex, across from Capitol Homes, right on Interstate
20 at the on and off ramps and has frontage on both Rawson and Logan

Streets. Mr, Persells stated the proposals will be opened at the Housing
Authority on May 1, 1967 at 10:00 A. M, He presented each Committee

member with a copy of the brochure prepared for the offering.


The Committee discussed a request by the Georgia Hospital Association,
Inc. for a change in the preliminary plans submitted by them in
connection with a proposal to purchase Parcel D-10b in the Butler
Street Urban Redevelopment Area. Mr. Persells stated the proposal

of the Hospital Association has been accepted but the agreement for
disposition of the land has not been consummated; that the Association
has now requested permission to reduce the size of the proposed building
to two stories (3 were originally proposed with first floor parking)
with parking space provided outside of the building, rather than under-
neath as indicated originally; also, this would reduce the estimated
cost of construction from $235,000.00 to approximately $140,000.00.

He further stated no other proposal to buy and redevelop this property
had been received.

The Committee unanimously rejected the Hospital Association's substantial
decrease in their improvements, but asked that Mr. Persells write them
and give them the option of submitting plans substantially in conformance
with their original proposal, or provide the Committee with sufficient
site elevations and details as to how the amended proposal would enhance
the surrounding neighborhood,


A brief presentation was made on the four proposals for development
of the Rockdale Urban Redevelopment Area. Mr. Persells commented that
the financial solvency of each developer and their ability to carry out

Urban Renewal Policy Committee
April 21, 1967 Page 6

their proposal had been verified by a special department of the
Trust Company of Georgia.

It was unanimously decided that a special meeting would be held
Tuesday, April.25, at 4:00 P. M. to discuss these four proposals,
and that the Housing Authority's Board of Commissioners would be
invited to attend. (See Minutes of April 25, 1967).


Parcel D-19 = Rawson-Washington Urban Renewal Project.
Mr. Persells gave the status of this property as being the same
as reported at the meeting of February 17, 1967. (See Minutes,

page 6).

Butler Street Project Area - Mr. Persells reported that all remaining
properties within this area will be advertised within the next three

to four weeks.

The Policy Committee again expressed the hope that this project

would be finalized as quickly as possible and requested the Authority
to contact the Board of Education and advise them of this and get
some firm commitment on the Butler Street School.

There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned.

Approved: Respectfully submitted,



ff 2

. CRB L hel ee
Joanne Parks, Secretary

public items show