Box 20, Folder 20, Document 12

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_020_020_012.pdf

Dublin Core

Title

Box 20, Folder 20, Document 12

Text Item Type Metadata

Text

ro
February 17, 1967
A regular meeting of the Urban Renewal Policy Committee was held on Friday,
February 17, 1967 at 10:00 A. M. in Committee Room #2, Second Floor, City Hall.
The following Members were present:
Rodney Cook, Chairman
Edwin L. Sterne
George Cotsakis
Hugh Pierce
Gregory Griggs
,~
l
~}
t
<t
~
.,
Absent:
John Flanigen
· Frank Etheridge
Also present were:
I!:~
LJJ
ti)
~
w
0
Q_
~
~



>




M. B. Satterfield, Executive Director, Atlanta Housing Authority.
Les Persel Is, Director of Redevelopment, Atlanta Housing Authority.
Howard Openshaw, Chief, Planning-Engineering Department,
Atlanta Housing Authority.
.
Collier Gladin, Planning Director, City of Atlanta.
George Berry, Comptroller's Office.
Robert L. Sommerville, Atlanta Transit Company.
~
0
0
ro
Representatives of various City departments were present; also, several representatives
of Georgia State College were present, i.e., Dean William Suttles; Andrew Steiner;
V. V. Lavroff and Jesse Draper, Member of the Board of Regents.
The Chairman cal led the meeting to order and the fol lowing business was considered:
Public Hearing on one block amendment to Georgia State Urban Redevelopment Plan,
said block being immediately north of the Atlanta Police Station and bounded on the
north by Gilmer Street, on the east by Butler Street, on the south by Decatur Street
and the west by Piedmont Avenue .
@
Mr. Howard Openshaw gave the fol low ing pertinent information relative to th is
amendment: The original Urban Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the Board of
Alde rmen on March 19, 1962 . Notice of today's public hearing was adve rt ised in
Th e Atlanta Constitution on February 3 and February 10 in accordance w ith Federal
regu lati ons . The plan c ons ists of a ten pa ge narrat ive and two ma ps , indicating the
project boundary , prope rties to be a cq u ired a nd proposed land use. Al I urban
redevelopmen t ac t ivi ties have been completed in the ori gina l proje ct area - acquisition,
relocation, demo lition, and disposal of land to the Board of Regents. The proposed
addition involves a total of 6.6 acres, comprising 13 properties which are proposed
�Minutes
Urban Renewal Policy Committee
February 17, 1967
Page 2
for acquisition. The properties will be appraised by two competent appraisers and every
effort made to acquire the property through negotiation but if necessary, the property
will be acqui red through the power of eminent domain. All fifteen existing structures will
be demolished. There are no families to be relocated. Relocation assistance will be
made available to the existing thirteen businesses in the area. An information statement
describing the financial assistance available was distributed to the business concerns on
February 10 . The actual moving expense for any one business concern to be paid by the
Federal Government cannot exceed $25·, 000; under certain conditions a smal I business
displacement payment may also be available. The area to be added is presently zoned
M-1 and no change in zoning is proposed, however, certain controls will be placed on the
land restricting its use to college and college-related uses; 4.5 net acres will be sold
to the Board of Regents for redevelopment in accordance with the Comprehensive Master
Campus Plan. The amendment will increase the net project cost $1,147,072. The local
share, one-third of the net project cost, will be provided by the Board of Regents. The
City of Atlanta will provide an estimated $77,647 for street, sidewalk, sewer and traffic
improvements.
Dr. Suttles briefly explained how this additional block would fit into Georgia State's
Comprehensive Campus Master Plan .
And rew Steiner, Georgia State Consultant, briefly explained the composition of
the proposed buildings and using perspective maps, gave a visual concept of this proposal
as related to the entire Plan.
In response to an expression of concern by Mr. Cotsakis that the overal I Plan shou Id be
approved prior to the piece- meal addition of a sing.le block, and that some members of
the Board of Aldermen were not familiar with the Georgia State Campus Plan, Mr . Cook
explain e d that th is was the reason the Pol icy Committee reques ted the Master Campus
Plan . He commented further that he fe It Georgia State had progressed far enough to
indicate that any additions would follow the guidelines as set forth in the ir Maste r Plan .
Cha irman Coo k was requested to alert the Board of Aldermen about the Plan as a ma tter
· of communication (at their next meeting of February 20, 1967) and ask them to re vi ew
the copy wh ich had been forwarded to them .
Mr. G ladin note d tha t there was cons iderable private development a ct iv it ies w ithin the
Ce ntra l Bus iness District and that he felt it is in order tha t th is Comm ittee a nd other
Alderma nic Committe e s re cogni z e and support the need fo r the de ve lopme nt o f a Central
Downtown Plan, designed to coordina te and re late a l I these vari ous activiti es. He cited
several examples of both public and private p lanning be ing done on a spot basi s, such
as the Nasher property, Portman's Peachtree Center, Georgia Plaza and rapid transit .
Mr . Cook then read into the record two communiques. One from Alderman Cecil Turner
endorsing the Georgia State Campus Plan, stating he hoped it would be approved and
�Minutes
Urban Renewal Policy Committee
February 17, 1967
Page 3
sent to the Board of Aldermen on February 20, 1967; a second from the Atlanta Civic
Design Commission, stating 11 it is the consensus of opinion of members present at the
February 9 meeting that the Atlanta Civic Design Commission strongly endorses, on
the Georgia State College Master Plan, the concept of the Plaza system, which
includes the separation of vehicles from pedestrian traffic by different levels 11 •
No one from the public appeared to be heard, and upon motion by Mr. Griggs,
seconded by Mr. Cotsakis and unanimous vote, the one block amendment to the
Georgia State Redevelopment Plan was approved.















































Ebenezer Church - Proposed Expansion.
0
Mr. Openshaw pointed out, on an accompanying map, the existing property of the
Church on Auburn Avenue and stated that the property in question Iies adjace nt
th e reto to the east; that he understands from the Church members the City Building
Inspector has required them to remove a back portion of their building to allow for a
fire escape and this eliminates a great deal of their parking; that this request is to
purchase an additional 150 feet along Auburn Avenue, extending through to Jackson
Place, to be used for church parking. He exhibited a second map illustrating the
property on a larger scale.
The Committee noted that this property and the adjoining properties extending to
the intersection of Auburn Avenue and Boulevard were designated for commercial use
and the ensuing discussion centered around the existence of a liquor store situated
on the southwest corner of the intersection and whether or not th is owner's rights
would be abridged by extending the Church property 150 feet, thereby placing his
bu siness in such a proximity to the Church so as to prohibit him from ever selling his
business unde r the State statute relative to required distances from Churches for
such uses .
Alderman Pierce felt the liquor store owner's rights should prevail should he decide
to se ll his business since it existed prior to this request.
Mr. Cook was of the opinion, and the other committee members generally agreed,
that the question of the store owner 's rights is immaterial in considering the merits
of a llowing the Church to expand and that the remedy to his problem, if and when it
arose, would lie elsewhere, perhaps within the courts.
0
h,,.._____
Mr. Sterne raised a question as to how the commercial development of the remaining
properties might be affected by the use of this 150 feet for church purposes.
�Minutes
Urban Renewal Policy Committee
February 17, 1967
Page 4
Mr. Satterfield stated it was his opinion the remaining 1.63 acres would be just as
saleable, if not more so, than if it were a part of the whole parcel.
In response to questioning by Chairman Cook, Mr. Openshaw stated the Butler
Street Project originated in 1959. A brief discussion then ensued about the type of
problems prohibiting consumation of the project. Mr. Openshaw explained there
have been no expressions of interest in the remaining properties to date and it has not
been previously advertised, but preparations are being made to offer the property for sale.
Mr. Persells explained that because there had always been a demand for property
in the Butler Street Project, the general policy pursued by the Housing Authority had
been to advertise the property after there had been a specific expression of interest
in a particular piece of property so there would be competition; that the project had
now reached the stage of a few remaining 11 tag ends 11 and the Authority is working on
a general proposal to place these on the market.
0
Chairman Cook concurred, stating he would Iike to see a concentrated effort to
complete th is project.
The Committee then unanimously approved the Church expansion as requested.















































Rockdale Urban Renewal Project - Fulton County Property.
Mr. Openshaw pointed out, on an accompanying map, the property owned by Fu Iton
County, lying generally to the east of Grove Park Place, and he stated that he would
like some direction from this Committee as to how to acquire the County's interest
a.nd a clear title to this property. He explained that another individual is claiming
an interest in the lots, therefore clouding the title and prohibiting clear acquisition
of it; that Mr. Sheats is wi II ing to give a quit- claim deed for the County's interest at
the approved price of $7,300. However , Mr . Persel Is explained the County is not
wi 11 ing to take the necessary steps to clear the title because of the cost involved and
that the Federal Government will not participate as it would be an ineligible cost.
After other discussion, the Committee unanimously agreed that the Housing Authority
should take this matter up with the County Commissioners with a minimum of delay
and that Chairman Cook would furnish the Housing Authority with a supporting letter
in behalf of the Policy Committee, urging the Commissioners to undertake to resolve
this problem as soon as possible.















































'
"'----------
.
�Minutes
Urban Renewal Policy Committee
February 17, 1967
Page 5
With further reference to the Rockdale Project, there was a brief discussion as
to FHA policy relative to allocation of units within the Area. The Housing Authority
maintained their previous position on the matter - that the initial allocation
of 150 units for the first project was impractical (see minutes of November 18, 1966,
Page 4) but Mr. Satterfield, in response to questioning by the Committee, stated that
he had not received any indication on the part of an proposer that they were withdrawing
from the competition because of the restrictions being imposed by FHA, but they
have voiced some objections.
Mr. Persells stated he understood the Mayor's Housing Resources Committee is go ing
to urge FHA to increase the allocation of units and he felt it would not be amiss for
this Committee to direct a letter to FHA suggesting that every consideration be given
to a larger allocation of units.
It was the unanimous decision of the Committee that Chairman Cook would direct
such letter to FHA •
0
















.






























Rawson-Washington Urban Renewal Project - Industrial land adjacent to public housing.
Mr . Ope nshaw pointed out on a map of th e project area Parcel N - 3, owned by
Swift and Company and the adjoining small parcel (B-4) being offered for sale by the
Housing Authority.
Parce l N-3 is presently occupied by a small office building for Swift and a hydrogen
gas ta nk; parce I B- 4 is vacant . Both tracts are z oned M- 2 and I ie adjacent to
proposed public housing .
Mr. Openshaw explained that a bid ($6,300) has be en submitted on Parcel B- 4
and the proposal is for a motorcycle repair shop by Atlanta Motorcycle Sal es; that
he would li ke a n expression of th e Committee' s fee lings about th is proposa l . He commented
further he a lso discussed with Sw ift the ir plans for the ir property but was advised that
he woul d have to write the company in Ch icago .
Mr. Sterne commented tha t the Haus ing Authori ty's Board of Commissi oners was
strongly opposed to it, fee ling it would not be desirable to place such a use in the
midst of public housing where it is presumed there wi ll be a concentration of children.
0
Messrs. Satterfield and Persells stated that it may well be the Housing Authority would
want to acquire both tracts and include them in the project in the future, but in the
�Minutes
Urban Renewal Pol icy Committee
February 17, 1967
Page 6
interim, they did not feel the use of the property for a motorcycle repair shop
would be conducive to the surrounding neighborhood.
The Committee unanimously denied the bid and requested that the Housing Authority
determine from Swift (by writing the Chicago headquarters) their future proposal
for Parcel N-3.















































The Committee then considered the following unfinished business:
Citizens Trust Property, Parcel A-5, Butler Street Project.
Mr. Openshaw was requested to report at the next meeting whether or not a
building permit had been obtained by Citizens Trust.
Status of request for up-to-date appraisal from Walt Sullivan on cost of moving
public housing building from Hilliard Street.
0
The latest appraisal from Mr. Sul I ivan, obtained by George Berry of the Comptroller• s
Office, was in the amount of $62,000. The Policy Committee felt this was entirely
out of the question and agreed that the Housing Authority would pursue the idea of
placing pub Iic housing on the property.
Motel proposal, Parcel D-9, Rawson-Washington Project.
Mr. Persells stated the proponents are continuing to pursue this matter; that they
requested and was granted an extension of time by paying an additional earnest fee
in excess of $50,000, which will not be refunded should the project not materialize.
Block 27, West End Boys• Club, Inc.
Requests plan change to designate parcels I thru 8 11 To Be Acquired", and re - classify
Block 27 for institutional use. (A- I zoning district). Deferred from January 13, 1967
me eting .
The Committee unan imously approved this plan change , subject to verification
by Keri Byers, Chai rman of the C itiz ens Advisory Committee for West End .
Status of study of traffic probl ems around a u ditorium c omplex~
0
'------
Mr. Gladin stated the City has acquired land on Forrest Avenue and
is ready to begin the street widening.
�\
Minutes
Urban Renewal Policy Committee
February 17, 1967
Page 7
The remaining unfinished business of the Committee was postponed until
the next regular meeting with a request that the Housing Authority be
prepared to submit status reports on all items.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Approved:
<2W(irman
0
jp
0
_________
,.,.,._
Respectfully submitted,
f
~oanne Parks, Secretary

Transcribe This Item

  1. http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_020_020_012.pdf

Document Viewer