Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1939-11-12
traus Refuses
100000 for
Test Project
Alley Authority's
Housing Comparison
Believed illegal

housing comparison
Believed illegal
BY NELSON SHEPARD.
The United States Housing Au-
thority yesterday flatly refused to
become party with the Alley
Dwelling Authority in building q
dual project here as a sort of labora-
tory test to determine which Of the
two agencies has the better ideas
and standards for low-rent housing
In Washington.
Questioning the legality of the A.
D. A. plan as one of several basic
objections, Administrator Nathan
Straus returned the application for
q $2,079 900 loan after its rejection
by an official reviewing board. In
a tersely worded public statement
he set forth two main objections.
The proposed plan," Mr.. Straus
said, obviously is based upon a
fundamental misconception of the
low-rent housing program Initial
ed by the United States Housing
Act of 1887, which provides that
every project must be local under
taking-designed, submitted, built,
owned and operated by local au-
thority."
The second main objection was
based on the A. D. AS interpreta-
ton of the so-called U. S. H. A.
minimum standards for housing.
TT is clear from the application
= that the A. D. A. looks with
disfavor on half of the project
which it proposes building" the
statement explained. 'On this
point we thoroughly agree-we also
think 1t undesirable.
Other Projects Welcome.
Executive Officer John Ihlder of
the A. D. A. proposed to build two
projects on 38-acre tract to dem
onstrate the relative merits of con-
struction costs, minimum standards
and Inability of dwellings in accord
ance with the ideas of each agency.
The Star was told yesterday that the
project Mr.. Ihlder planned as the
A. D. A. demonstration unit was re-
garded by the Federal officials as
very satisfactory" and one which
no doubt would have been approved
had it been offered singly.
In his statement, Mr.. Straus coun-
tered with the earnest hope" that
the A. D. A. would push forward
with the large program already un-
der way here and submit to us plans
for further projects which 1t believes
to be desirable and which at the
same time conform to the. terms of
the United States Housing Act"
|. Altogether there are seven projects
under loan contracts with the Fed
eral agency, it was pointed out, and
two others are in process of init
alton. These projects will provide
decent homes at low rentals for more
than 1000 low-income families now
living in the city's Sums" the state
ment said.
The essence of the rejected A. d.
A. plan, it was pointed out, is that
on one side of the site the local
authority would construct dwellings
which it regards as desirable, but
which 1t is believed the U. S. H. A.
would not approve under its normal
standards. On the other side it
would construct dwellings which it
regards as undesirable for Washing
ton, but which it feels are in con-
formity with normal U. S. H. A.
standards.
THE avowed purpose of this DEM
onstration project is to offer con-
trast between a so-called A. D. A.
plan and a so-called u S. H. A.
plan," the statement said.
Sympathetic to Local Projects.
Mr.. Strauss asserted that mo
project can be started anywhere
until the local agency is whole
heartedly behind it."
THAT is the core of the whole
housing program. which is not i'm
posed from above by the Federal
Government" he added. The U.
s. H. A. has no right under the law
to make loans to finance any project
which local housing authority
deems undesirable merely to prove
that the U. S. H. A. may be right
about certain technical matters"
For local authority to undertake
. project about which it disagrees,
he said, would be 'inimical" to the
whole housing program.
The U. S. H. A. has not and will
not turn down any plan offered by a
local housing authority provided
funds are available and basic stand
ards of the United States Housing
Act are met" he added. Generally
speaking, the U. S. H. A. does not
seek to impose standards, but should
the cost of any proposed project run
so high as not to satisfy the clear
purpose of the act to design very
economical housing for families of
very low income, the U. S. H. A.
could not and would not approve it.
Therefore, If all or part of the
proposed demonstration project did
not meet the standards of the act
and the administrative regulations
derived therefrom, the U. S. H. A.
could not approve it just to provide
an experiment not authorized by
law"
The reviewing board, which usually
takes two to three weeks to pass on
a project, rendered its decision tn a
few days in this case. Omcials
seemed pleased with the blueprint
drawings for the A. D. A. demonstra-
ton unit. They explained however
that the U. S. H.A. plan as conceived
by Mr.. 1hlder contained many sug-
gestions outmoded and discarded.
Informed last night that his plan
had been rejected. Mr.. Ihlder said
that's the first I've heard of it.
He declined to comment until he
has studied all phases of the Hous-
Ing Authoritys objections to the
comparative projects.