City Council

.( igico,w Ltn $-a.^-t t ti.;.. (D Jur 30 3 4i Ptl 19$7 Oklahoma C1!y, Oklahoma ,, o'- * i(r. ll I o! lL'rfttt, July 13r 1962 -r 1,1:';i;:i I)i ci"l''i Ii'':l:f' !lr. Jarnes Norlck, Mayor /) 111r. Robert T. Luttrell, Clty Managqr c tq 5/ Members of the Oklahoma Clty CouncLll 'e/- Munlclpal Bulldlng Oklahoma C1ty, Oklahoma w,l,' Gentlemen: This letter ls to officially advlse you that the Urban Renewal Authorlty of the Clty of Oklahoma Clty has completed the prellmlnary studies of its Job and functlons and has cond{cted a llmlted serles of wlndshleld surveys of some areas affected by bllght ln the Clty of Oklahoma Clty. The respolslblllty of deslgnatlng a project area for study and plapnlng by the Oklahoma Clty Renewal Authorlty is vested ln the Clty Councll of the Clty of Oklahoma Clty. It is gur understanding that thls situation pretty much prevalls ln many cltled throughout the Unlted States 1n connectlon wlth the carrylng out of the Urban Renewal functlons. It 1s our further understandlng that premature public exposure of a prospectlve bllghted area sourght to be brought under conslderatlon for urban renewal work frequently has harmful effects, occaslonally as encouragement to speculators, but rtost often in terms of the development of unnecessary'fear and uncertalnty 1n the mlnds of oocupants of dwelllngs or buslnesses wlthin the contempla{ed area. It ls our understandlng that ln order to avold these consequencds, 1t 1s the common practlce ln otner c1t1es for the Urban Renewal Authorlty ln such instances to d,lscuss lnformally with the Clty Counoll pgtentlal proJect areas befone making speclflc recommendatlons for approprlate actlon to the Clty Council. I would l1ke to hear your reactlon to such a mode of procedure. We are, of course, aware that techrtlcally under our exlstlng statutes that recommendatlons of proJect argas for renewal actlon ls by no means a functlon confined to the Urban R(newa1 Authority, and you are advlsed that your Urban Renewal Authorlty jLs qulte deslrous of undertaklng to ca:P:ry out inltlal study and plannlng on any proJects that may be properly referred to it by the Clty Councllr In thls connectlon, lt may be deslrable that prellmlnary and lnfdrmal dlscusslons, therefore, also be had along the 1lnes prevlously lndlcated, wlth referenee to proJect areas sought to be recommended to the Co{ncll by other sourees, &s., for exarnple, the Clty P1annlng Commlsslon. In any event, be advlsed of the readlness of thls Authorlty to under- take proJect study and plannlngr whenever thls City can afford 1t the necessarTr pnellmlnary funds or technlca] asslstance lt w111 requlre. Respectfully subrnl tted, o a t Vlce-Chalrman Unban Renewal Authorlty , fli-i-, r 30 3 qi pil ir$? I c I1' v r.'i- :; tl t t '; i t' .'-'-1 ' ",-, 1", TO: Mayor ilames Norick The City Council of the City of Oklahoma City REPORT OF ACTIVITIES OF TIIE OKLAIIOIVIA CITY URBATiI RENEWAL AUTHORITY FOR PRECEDING qISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30 2 Gentlemen: Pursuant to fitle 11 o.S.A. dection 1609 (f), more generally known as the URBAIiI REDE\ZELOPMENT LAT{ of the State of Oklahoma, the same being subparagraph (f) of Section 9 appQaring at page 65 of the laws of L959, the Urban Renewal Authority of thg City of Oklahoma City herewith makes the following report of its activitties since its creatiotl on November 2, 1961, through the end of the fiscal year ending June 30, L962, as follows: FINAIICIAI STATEMEI{IIT I At the time of its creation and during the period under report, your Authority has received no rurias appropriated for its use bY the City of Oklatroma CitY. 2. During the period under geport no project has been referred to your Authority for carrying out of project planning and studies for recommendation of renewal action, and your Authority has, accordinglYt not been in a position to make application for Federal funds, and has, of course, received none. 3. Accordingly, no expenses chargeable to the Authority, or ulti- mately to be claimed against the thority, have been incurred during the period under report. Insofar as this Authority has required secre- tarial and stenographic services, long distance caIIs, travelling expenses for its members, and the purchase of a corporate seaI, these expenses have entirely been borne out of the pockets of the individual members of the Authority, and havp been donated by the members of the Authority without expectation of ultimate repayment. The only out-of- pocket expenses not so paid by thq j-ndividual members of this Authori-ty were incurred June 28th and 29th, when the members of this Authority were flown to the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, spent the day of ilune 29Lh in consultation with experts and other individuals active in the field of Urban Renewal in that City, and were then flown back to the City of Oklahoma City. AJ-l expenses of this trip were borne by the Downtown Action Committee of the City of Oklahoma City, and donated to the members of this Authority. 4. Accordinglyn,!our Authority, in accordance with the section of the statute above mentioned, makeg the following sunmarized financial statement, to-wit: CLASSIFICATION C}ARACTER OF ITEM ASSETS s8.67 Corporate Seal LIABIL]TIES N INCOME during Fiscal Year None OPERATING E)CPENSES AS Of End of Fiscal Year None REPORT OL GENERAL ACTIVIT]ES OF TIIE .AUTHORITY 1. The Urban Renewal Authority of the City of Oklatroma City acquired corporate existence on November 2, 1961, when on that date the Vice-Mayor of the city of oklahoma City, with the approval of the majority of the City Council of Oklahoma City, appointed the following members of sa-id Authority with thd foltowing originally designated terms, to-wit: -2- C. Kenneth Woodard, 2324 N. wL 49Eh Street 3-year term Granville Tomerlin. 2001 N. W: 35th Street 3-year term (ittember-at-Large) Reuben Martin, 2L36 S. W. 40th Street 2-year term iloe C. Scott, 114 North Broadpay 2-year term F. D. Moon, 1314 N. E. 8th Street l-year term On the same date, William C. Kesslgr, as Vice-Mayor of the City of Oklahoma City, appointed Granville Tomerlin as Chairman of the Urban Renewal Authority and F. D. Ivloon aF Vice-Chairman. 2. On the24$ day of Januar v Lg62 , the second official meeting was held by the Urban Renewal Authority of Oklahoma City for the purpose of final organization thereof. The By-Laws of sa:Ld Authority were duly enacted, and C. Kenneth lrloodard, member of that Authority, was elected Secretary-freasurer of said Authority to serve until his successor be elected or appointed. 3. The individual membe:is of the Authority, both individually and by collective effort, during the ppriod under report, devoted in excess of 11000 man-hours to the business of selectively studying, reading, analyzing and discussing wtrat appeared to be the most promising material available to practical men desirous of creating an effective working Urban Renewal Authority. ThL s material has included not only the funda- mental organic statute creating this Authority enacted by the State of Oklahoma, but a nr:rnber of Federal ptatutes and some of the pertinent regulations bearing thereon, coveringly not only the field of direct but of development planning assistance, urban renewal assistance, "[a, the various aids to housing and cifty development, both within and with- out the framework of the Urbart aI activities. This study has inclu- ded a number of available texts :I treatises, but primarily has been an attempted selective study from an almost overwtrelming mass of documentary material, primarily in the form of pamphlets. -3- 4. In its studies in this regard, your Urban Renewal Authority has had the benefit of frequent ,,1"" and take discussions with a nurnber of individuals extremely wQ11-informed and in some instances eminent in the field of city planrling and urban renewal work. It has also had benefit of similar discuSsions with civic, charitable and business leaders, and key city officials of the City of Oklatroma City. 5. On February 9, L962, all but one of the members of this Auth- ority visited the City of Tulsa from approximately 10:00 E.rrr. to 5:00 p.rn., and had the benefit of a continuous briefing session with the Director of Metropolitan Planning of that City, the Urban Renewal Director of that City, the Iay members of the Metropolitan Planning Commission of that City, and the lay members of the Urban Renewal Authority of that City, a session which is still prqving of great benefit. 6. On,fune 28th, 1962, all of the members of this Authority flew to the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, and from B:00 B.rn. until 3:30 p.rl., on ilune 29th, had the benefit of a similar briefing session, primarily with the Director of the Urban Renewal Authority of that City and with the Metropolitan Planning Director of that City, as well as members of their individual staffs and leading business leaders, active in civic support of planning and urban renqwal activities of that City, and also with the Mayor of that City. The technical, and above all, the practical information, suggestions and ideas acquired in this briefing session are proving to be of great benefit. 7. In addition to its general studies as to functions and problems, the members of the Urban Renewal Authority, indivj-dualIy and colIectively, undertook consideralcle study of the problems of, and specific r€conun€n- dations as to the Mj-nimum Housing Code, under consideration by the City Council of the City of Oklatroma City during the early portion of the period herein reported. 4- This Authority endeavored to render such technical assistance in this connection as j.t was able to afford to the members of the City Council, and more particularly to the Diregtor of the Planning Commission of the City of Oklahoma City upon whom the responsibility for this study and the development of this Code primarily rested. As previously indicated by resolution of this A,uthority ttransmitted to the governing body of the City Oklahoma City, the enactnfent and consequent enforcement of a reasonable trCinimum Housing Code, at this time, constitutes one of the seven essential requisites to a satisfactory workable prograln, consti- tuting a condition to the securing of Federal funds for actual impl,emen- tation for land acquisitions, etc., of an approved Urban Renewal project. 8. Under the provisions of itle 11, o.S.A. Section 1608, the 1 Urban Renewal Authority is required to prepare an Urban Renewal plan for a defined Urban Renewal project so as to conform with the general city plan for the area of operation and of the incorporated city, and with a view to submitting a plan which "conforms to and assists in the execution of the general plan of the incorporated city as a whole." your Urban Renewal Authority has been advised that this general plan for the City of Oklahoma City is known as "The Comprehensive City PIan for Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Lg|gr "prepared by the Oklatroma City Planning Commission and sr:bmitted to the City Council in May of L949t which plan is generally known and referred to as the Bartholomew PIan, since the professional consultants for thisl plan were Harland Bartholomew and Associates, City Planners of Saint Louis, Missouri. Your Authority has found no other data constituting any modern revisions adopted by the City Council that appear to constitute a part of the general plan of the City of Oklatroma City. It has, accordingly; made a considerable study of the general aspects of the so-batled "Bartholomew PIan" on the assump- tion that until modern revisions thereof are adopted by the City Council that this constitutes the general plan of the City of Oklahoma City, which of necessity wilt constitute the guide to which it will have to conform in the development of specific renewal project plans and studies. Lr- - J 9. Our studies have tended to establish that most of the cities, where effective Urban Renewal work has been accomplished, have been cities which have had available a Eacility generally referred to as public housing. Ttrese are sometimes caIled "Iow-rent facilities." These are facilities where residential structures are built by cities or special authorities under Federal subsidies whereby low-income groups are afforded rental housing at rents commensurate with their income. Where rentals determined on such a basis are insufficient to maintain the structures and amort-ize the costs, these losses are made up by Federal subsidies. It is the understanding of this Urban Renewal Authority that virtually no such pfrblic housing exists in the City of Oklahoma City. IO. Aside from that, under thb provisions of Title 11, O.S.A. Section 1606, it is provided that hothing (in the Urban Renewal Act) shalI be construed to authorize any City or Urban Renewal Authority to construct or operate public housing facilities. Your Authority is, therefore, faced with the problem that in carrying out Urban Renewal Projects, it will hav e to plan and effectively carry out the reloca- tion of families, in many instanceb in extremely low income brackets, without being able to rely on or resort to public housing facilities. This appears to be one of the major challenges that your Authority will have to face. It welcomes this challenge. 11. It recognizes that it must, by sole resort to pri-vate enterprize, find a practical way to secure 1ow cost housing so that low-income families may be relocated in decent, safe and sanitary structures with- out serious economic dislocation. To do this, it has sought the assis- tance of the local home building ifrdustry, the local architects, and the locaI real estate org:anizationp, and has secured the establishment of a permanent committee. fhis committeers preliminary studies of this problem and reports to your Authorf-ty have been to some extent quite -6- encouraging. The key to the problpmras so far developed appears to be the securing of what are now only [-imitedly available Feddral funds for non-commercial type loans to non-profit or co-operative corporations at extremely low interest rates, with long periods of amortizatilon. L2. Your Authority has been and remains deeply interested in the work being done by the staff of the Planning Commission of the City of Oklatroma City in the development of a Community Renewal Program, whose primary purpose, as we understand it, will be to identify and delineate blighted areas within the City of Oklahoma City and areas falling under blighting influences, and to analyze and correlate the numerous technioal factors which would have bearing upon the designation of renewal project area priori-ties with supporting and accumulated data applicable to each such area or potential project. fihe Authority is not familiar with the details of this study but has every reason to believe that the tectrnical proficiency and skilt wj-th which this study and report has been accom- plished is of very high order. 13. On a basis of its studies, your Urban Renewal Authority would submit an abbreviated outline of the following tentative suggestions to the governing body of this City as to an approach to the Urban Renewal work ultimately to be done herein that may in some instances be of specific use and benefit. The suggestions are as follows: a. The so-calIed Bartholomew plan, or "Comprehensive City PIan of the City of Oklahoma City of L949", is at this time badly out-dated. The fantastic arcr\arth of the City of Oklahoma City. not only population-wise, but primarily area-wise, tras been well beyond most of the apparent.projections relied on in this plan; nor did this plan include, oq seriously contemplate. the tremen- dous development of Federal assistance that has taken place since its preparation, not only in the field of Strict Urban Renewal, -7- but in the field of general City Planning and in other fields involving direct E'ederal assistance in the orderly development of cities. We think it imperative that this City seek, by appropriate means, Federal Assistance available to Metropolitan and regional plannj-ng commispions, and on this basis, undertake to secure the necessary staf f and consultative services to carry out henceforward development and revision in the continuous planning for the development of the City of Oklahoma City and its environs, and the redevelopment and renewal of blighted or delap- idated areas in the older portion of oklahoma City, within the environs of such continuous everall planniyrg.,. b. It is essential that theCity of Oklahoma City prepare an overall street and traffic plans for the entire area, and maintain the same by continuous technical study and revision. c. If it is not already contemplated, it is essential that staff facilities be pro'jzided to the Planning Commission of this City for the constant maintenance and up-dating of the Community Renewal Program when same is completed with particu- 1ar emphasis on ma-intenance and information accumulation requisite to that program. d. If the same is not included in the Community Renewal Program, it j-s particularly important that a definite plan projected 10, 15 or 20 years into the future be established with requisite priorities for all future capital fund expendi- tures contemplated in the fufure development of this City, most of which presumably wilX- be financed out of future bond issues. Similar planning and coordination for similar construc- tion to be built by the Counrty, School Board and the State of Oklatroma, should be obtained as far as possible. Whenever -B- capital fund investments of fhis character can be properly made in areas susceptible to urban renewal treatment, the City, in many instances, bec omes entitled to credits against its requisite contribution to renewal costs in conjunction with Federal advances, and tlrere thus results in enormous benefits and assistance to the City in bearing its essential portion of Urban Renewal finpncing. We are irbrmed that one of the important arts, in g"fd Urban Renewal administration, lies in capitalizing on the credits available from properly planned capital fund expenditures of the type mentioned in conjunction with Urban Renewpl project developments. L4. Your Urban Renewal Authfrity feels that its individual menbers have now acquired the sufficient J-nformation and background whereby this Authority can now approach with sfme confidence its first Urban Renewal project. As previously reported to the governing body of this City, this Authority has made certain surveys and studies on the basis of which it is prepared to make sugggstions as to prospective project areas, or to discuss such other areas asl the governing body of this City might care to designate. your Urban Renewal Authoritlr regrets that it is unable to incor- porate in this report its specific thanks to, and to specifically name, the large number of individuals expert in the field of Urban Renewal and City planning, the City officfals, the civic leaders, the charitable leaders, etc., but alrove all the business leaders, who have given time, skilll U information to be of assistance unstintingly of their "t to your Urban Renewal Authority, bnd its work during the portion of the fiscal year herein rePorted. Respectfully submitted, ATTEST: F. D. Moon, Vice-Chairman <=l ( Urban Renewal AuthoritY c vur.<- ( /'*- t'' c. nneth Woodard, SecretarY -9- :. P,- t,