The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About5/19/1976 (2)M WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1976 THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, MET IN SPECIAL SESSION AT THE COURTHOUSE, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1976, AT 5:01 O'CLOCK P.M. PRESENT WERE WILLARD W. SIEBERT, JR., CHAIRMAN; WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., VICE-CHAIRMAN; ALMA LEE Loy, EDWARD J. MASSEY, AND EDWIN S. SCHMUCKER. ALSO PRESENT WERE JACK G. JENNINGS, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR; GEORGE G. COLLINS, JR., ATTORNEY 4 TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; AND VIRGINIA HARGREAVES, DEPUTY CLERK, THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER AND STATED THAT THIS IS THE FINAL PUBLIC HEARING WITH REGARD TO THE APPLICATION FOR THE.COM- MUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM. THE HOUR OF 5:01 -0CLOCK P.M -.HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO -WIT: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL. Published Weekly Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: _ STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath j says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published _ at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being In the matter of irP /rJitrc/ in the Court was pub- ' pshed In sold newspaper in the issues of �¢ 41!f .4 14, /r i A Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. , , Sworn to and subscribed before me this /3t+Z day of.�Z A.D. 8usiz- anagen) u i h ( ark of KCIrcult Court, Indian River County, Florida) 1'� fSEALJ MYy •a zl 19 W6 NOTICEOF-SECOND yos:6 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN* that the County Commission of Indian River County, Florida, will hold a public hearing In the Commission Room, Indian River County Courthouse; 214514th Avenue, on May 19, 1976, at 5:01 P.M. to consider: Revisions, changes or amendments to the ' Application For Community Development Block Grant Program. Interested persons may appear at this hearing and be heard with respect to Property Community Block Grant Development Program. Board of County. Commissloners of Indian River County. Florida By: Willard W. Siebert Jr. t Chairman .May 2,.6, 9, 13, 1976. 2 77 777 i. i 0 VAL BRENNAN, COUNTY PLANNING DIRECTOR, APPEARED AND PRESENTED ' A COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR THE COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, WHICH HE STATED HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL AND THE STATE FOR REVIEW. THEY WILL FORWARD r THEIR REVIEWS ON TO HOUSING URBAN DEVELOPMENT. HE THEN SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD COPIES OF THE HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN WHICH WILL BE FORWARDED ALONG WIT" THE APPLICATION TO H.U.D. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF THIS PLAN HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. MR. BRENNAN STATED THAT IT HAD NOT, COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED IF THE HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN IS A STATISTICAL DOCUMENT CONTAINING INFORMATION ASSIMILATED FROM STUDIES WE HAVE ON FILE. MR. BRENNAN SAID THAT IT WAS AND NOTED THAT WE WILL ALSO HAVE TO DO -AN ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW WHICH HAS TO BE RECEIVED BY H.U.D. PRIOR ' TO THE RELEASING OF ANY FUNDS. HE CONTINUED THAT THE HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN IS A NEW REQUIREMENT THIS YEAR. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF ALL THESE FORMS ARE NECESSARY, AND MR. BRENNAN REPLIED THAT THEY ARE REQUIRED, BUT DON'T HAVE TO GO FOR RE- VIEW. " CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT EVEN THOUGH THE CITIZENS ADVISORY - COMMITTEE HAS NEVER SEEN THIS PLAN, IT MUST ACCOMPANY THE APPLICATION, AND QUESTIONED IF THIS IS LEGAL PROCEDURE. 0 " COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER NOTED THAT IT IS MERELY A SURVEY OF HOUSING CONDITIONS, AND MR. BRENNAN POINTED OUT THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING IS ONLY IN REGARD TO THE APPLICATION ITSELF, COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF THE THREE YEAR GOALS AND CURRENT • YEAR GOALS'SET OUT IN THE HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN ARE THE GOALS THAT HAVE BEEN SET AND ESTABLISHED BY THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. MR. BRENNAN STATED THAT THEY ARES THAT THESE OBJECTIVES ARE NOT NEW TO THE COMMITTEE. COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER SAID HE WISHED TO STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT HE IS VERY WELL PLEASED WITH THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND 2 77 777 i. i 0 FEELS WE ARE ACCOMPLISHING THOSE THINGS THAT ARE MOST NEEDED THAT HAVE BEEN DESIGNATED UNDER THIS PROGRAM. HE CONTINUED THAT WE SHOULD REACH OUR GOALS THIS YEAR ON SPENDING OUR MONEY AND ARE SETTING UP THE PROGRAM FOR NEXT YEAR. COMMISSIONER MASSEY NOTED THAT IN THE HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN ON PAGE 2 OF 2, TABLE II — HOUSING ASSISTANCE NEEDS OF LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS, ONLY MINORITY GROUPS ARE LISTED, AND HE WONDERED IF THIS MIGHT NOT LIMIT THOSE WHO CAN QUALIFY UNDER THIS PROGRAM TO MEMBERS OF MINORITY GROUPS ONLY. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, AND CHAIRMAN SI.EBERT SAID HE FELT THIS IS DONE TO SHOW WHAT MINORITY GROUPS ARE BEING HELPED, BUT WOULD NOT PREVENT a OTHERS FROM QUALIFYING, COMMISSIONER WODTKE POINTED OUT THAT ON THE PRECEDING PAGE THE a CATEGORIES ARE BROKEN DOWN INTO "ALL HOUSEHOLDS," 'ALL FEMALE—HEADED P HOUSEHOLDS," AND "ALL MINORITY HOUSEHOLDS.t° THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WISHED TO SPEAK. HORTENSE BEECHAM OF 14755 34TH AVENUE, GIFFORD, TOOK THE FLOOR AND MADE AN APPEAL FOR A HOUSING PROJECT FOR THE ELDERLY PEOPLE IN THE LOW INCOME GROUP. SHE NOTED THAT MANY OF THESE PEOPLE HAVE AS LITTLE AS $100.00 A MONTH TO LIVE ON AND ARE BADLY IN NEED OF ASSISTANCE. 'CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF SHE WERE REFERRING TO THE NEED FOR - REHABILITATION AND REPAIR, AND MISS BEECHAM SAID SHE WAS. COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER.EXPLAINED THAT WE ARE NOW IN THE PROCESS OF WORKING ON -A REPAIR PROGRAM, AND IT IS THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY FOR NEXT YEAR °S PROGRAM. t COMMISSIONER WODTKE TOLD MISS BEECHAM THAT THE BOARD WOULD VERY MUCH APPRECIATE HER COOPERATION IN EXPLAINING TO THESE PEOPLE JUST WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO AS HE FEARED SOME OF THEM DID NOT REALLY UNDER— STAND AND WERE RELUCTANT TO GIVE THEIR PERMISSION. VAL BRENNAN INFORMED MISS BEECHAM THAT IN THIS APPLICATION WE ARE CARRYING OVER $30,000 FROM THIS YEAR'S FUNDS FOR REHABILITATION, PLUS -ANOTHER $24,000 IS BEING REQUIRED THIS YEAR FOR REHABILITATION AND DEMO— LITION, i AFTER FURTHER DISCUSSION, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. 3 MAY 19 A76 T E OFFICIAL APPLICATION FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM, COMPLETE WITH ALL SUPPLEMENTS, AND IN- STRUCTED THE COUNTY -PLANNER TO FORWARD THE APPLICATION IMMEDIATELY TO THE PROPER OFFICIALS. THE APPLICATION AND SUPPLEMENTARY HOUSING ASSISTANCE ..PLAN. ARE HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES.._ • Form Approved OMB No. 61—R1471 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND I. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE IDENTIFIER URBAN DEVELOPMENT Florida State Division of Planning APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL ASSISTANCE 2- APPLICANTS APPLICATION NO. S. FEDERAL GRANTOR AGENCY 4. APPLICANT NAME Department of Housing and Urban Development i AREA OR REGIONAL OFFICE STREET ADDRESS - P.O. BOX Jacksonville Area Office Courthouse - 14th Avenue STREET ADDRESS - P.O. BOX ' 1 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED H Vero Beach T E OFFICIAL APPLICATION FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM, COMPLETE WITH ALL SUPPLEMENTS, AND IN- STRUCTED THE COUNTY -PLANNER TO FORWARD THE APPLICATION IMMEDIATELY TO THE PROPER OFFICIALS. THE APPLICATION AND SUPPLEMENTARY HOUSING ASSISTANCE ..PLAN. ARE HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES.._ • Form Approved OMB No. 61—R1471 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND I. 4 t1 'i �l Y r, EDITION OF 10.74 IS OBSOLETE I, HUD401ti i11-76) LI r F 'e�paJ�ms 1 - I Ir ,9'Y.P. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE IDENTIFIER URBAN DEVELOPMENT Florida State Division of Planning APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL ASSISTANCE 2- APPLICANTS APPLICATION NO. S. FEDERAL GRANTOR AGENCY 4. APPLICANT NAME Department of Housing and Urban Development Indian River Count AREA OR REGIONAL OFFICE STREET ADDRESS - P.O. BOX Jacksonville Area Office Courthouse - 14th Avenue STREET ADDRESS - P.O. BOX CITY COUNTY Peninsular Plaza 661•Riverside Avenue Vero Beach Indian River CiTY STATE ZIP CODE STATE ZIP CODE Jacksonville Florida 32204 Florida 32960 S. DESCRIPTIVE NAME OF THE PROJECT Community Development Block Grant Program Discretionary 6. FEDERAL CATALOG No. 7. FEDERAL FUNDING REQUESTED 14.219 Non SMSA County - Discretionary $ 150,000. 8. GRANTEE TYPE 13 STATE, KXCOUWY. ® CITY, ® OTHER (Spedfy) Y. TYPE OF APPLICATION REQUEST (3 NEW GRANT, XXCONTINUATION. 13 SUPPLEMENT, ❑ OTHER CHANGES (Spero) 10. TYPE OF ASSISTANCE GRANT, ❑ LOAN, 17 OTHER fSpedfy) 11. POPULATION DIRECTLY BENEFITING FROM THE PROJECT 13. LENGTH OF PROJECT 6,600 12 months 12, CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 14. BEGINNING DATE a. Tenth District Florida July 1 1976 b- 15. DATE OF APPLICATION Tenth District, Florida May , 1976 16. THE APPLICANT CERTIFIES THAT TO THE BEST OF HIS KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF THE DATA IN THIS APPLICATION ARE TRUE AND CORRECT, AND THAT HE WILL COMPLY WITH THE ATTACHED ASSURANCES IF HE RECEIVES THE GRANT. The County Commission of Indian River County does hereby express its interest in the Community Development Program and authorizes the preparation and filing of, and in- curring the costs associated with, a final application for federal assistance for Discretionary funds under the Community Development Program of 1974. TYPED NAME TITLE Chairman, Indian River TELEPHONE NUMBER OF AUTHQRIZ 'REPZSENATIVEn A�Qe Number Ext. ISIGNATUR 4/,.t/76 305 562-4186 9 FEDERAL USE ONLY ------------- 4 t1 'i �l Y r, EDITION OF 10.74 IS OBSOLETE I, HUD401ti i11-76) LI r F 'e�paJ�ms 1 - I Ir ,9'Y.P. 1. NAME OF APPLICANT IAPPLICATION NO.3JUORIGINAL 0 AMENDMENT DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT INDIAN RIVER .COUNTY, _ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 7 4. PROGRAM YEAR: FROM:7/1/76 To: 6/30/77 RELATED SHORT- CENSUS TRACT/ ENVIRONMENTAL RELATED BUDGET ESTIMATED COST (S000) BLOCK GRANT FUNDS OTHER FUNDS • ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION TERM ENUMER- ATION REVIEW STATUS LINE ITEM PROGRAM SUBSEQUENT TOTAL AMOUNT SOURCE OBJECTIVE DISTRICT YEAR YEAR /1J (21 (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (101 C./^ - EDS 1. NAME OF APPLICANT IAPPLICATION NO.3JUORIGINAL 0 AMENDMENT DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT INDIAN RIVER .COUNTY, ENTITLEMENT APPLICANTS ONLY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FLORIDA 4. PROGRAM YEAR: FROM:7/1/76 To: 6/30/77 RELATED SHORT- CENSUS TRACT/ ENVIRONMENTAL RELATED BUDGET ESTIMATED COST (S000) BLOCK GRANT FUNDS OTHER FUNDS • ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION TERM ENUMER- ATION REVIEW STATUS LINE ITEM PROGRAM SUBSEQUENT TOTAL AMOUNT SOURCE OBJECTIVE DISTRICT YEAR YEAR /1J (21 (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (101 EDS 1. Housing Code Enforcement 811 62 4,5,6, Assessment 3 3.0 11, 49 2. 'Site clearance of 6 vacant, B3, B4 4,5,6, Assessment 4 4.0 M dilapidated structures 11, 49 3. Rehabilitation of deterioratin C , C3 2 4,5,6, Assessment 4° 20.0 structures ` 11, 49 4.. Public Works - Street paving B1, B2 4,5,6, Assessment 2 80.0 and improve dirt roads to 11, 49 marl roads (roads of small rights-of-way) 5. Drainage Improvements B3, 84 4,5,6, Assessment 2 20.0 11, 49 6. Recreation Facilities C2 4,5,6, Assessment (1) 2 15.0 49 7. Planning, Development and All All Exempt 13 4.0 Administration All All Exempt 14 4.0 �`'•Y GRAND TOTAL S .150.0 S S $ .Y'. HUD -7015 101-75% Q ..,'A i ` COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUMMARY (STATEMENT OF NEEDS) + f 9. NAME OF APPLICANT 2NUMBER . APPLICATIONf 3. ORIGINAL k AMENDMENT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY a. PROGRAM YEAR !Entitlement Applicants Only) FROM: 7/1 76 TO: 6/30177 r` k A-1. NEED FOR MAINTENANCE AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE QUALITY OF THE HOUSING STOCK. a. At the present time, it is estimated that 12% or some 1300, of the housing units in the unincorporated portions of Indian River County are substandard. -b. Of these 1300, the majority (65%) were determined to be dilapidated and subject to demolition, while 351 (400) are deteriorating but economically feasible of rehabilitation. C. The 1972 Structural Conditions Survey revealed that the greatest concentration o structurally substandard dwellings .existed in Enumeration Districts 4 and 5, in ' Which were located 43% of all such designated units in the Application Area. Enumeration Districts which had greater than 50% of their housing inventory in substandard condition included ED's 3, 4, 5, 6, 11 and 49. 1970 Census, Special Tabulations, DHUD 1970 Census of Housing, General and Detailed Housing Characteristics r Analysis of Neighborhood Study Areas, 1972 Vero Beach/IRC Planning Commission Data Scarce: A•2. 1.NEED TO INCREASE THE AVAILABILITY OF STANDARD UNITS AT COSTS WHICH LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS CAN AFFORD AND WHICH MEET THEIR HOUSEHOLD REQUIREMENTS. a. At this time, it is estimated that there are as many as 1224 households in the unincorporated County which cannot afford standard, non -luxury housing which meets their household needs and are presently either living in_substandard hous- ing which they may or may not be able to afford, or they are residing in sound housing which costs are far beyond their ability to pay for shelter. b. A substantial portion of these households belong to identifiable minority seg- ments, including 590 Black households; 681 elderly or handicapped, 246 large families, and 451 households with female heads. It should be noted that the preceding estimates are not mutually exclusive. Vero Beach/Indian River County Planning Department 1970 Census, General Housing Characteristics 1�970 Census, Special Tabulation by DHUD and General Housing Characteristics _i Date �u A-3. NEED FOR ELIMINATION OF BLIGHTING INFLUENCES WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO THE DECLINE OR. DETERIORATION OF THE COMMUNITY'S NEIGHBORHOODS AND WHICH INHIBIT THE CONSERVA- ' TION OR IMPROVEMENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO LONG-TERM SOUND CONDITION. 0 a. The 1972 Neighborhood Analysis cited severe physical and social blighting in- 5 6, and moderate levels in Enumeration 'i fluence in Enumeration Districts 4, and District 3. These conditions are still prevalent 'and include: Incompatible and mixed land use. R1) ) Prevalence of junk and trash. 3) Deteriorating housing conditions. 4J Overcrowding of housing units. r 5 Unpaved or otherwise deficient streets. i 6 High levels of disease and crime. Analysis of Neighborhood Study Areas, 1972, Vero Beach/IRC Planning Commission "r. ° Data Sourco: HUD -7015.2 (11-75) Po®®—Lof —LPog9a i r i ¢5QC7 • 4R P t , � � `I p]r i r T + 1 •.Y.. 4:�iL3 u 1'' t. NAME OF APPLICANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUMMARY (OTHER NEEDS HAVING A PARTICULAR URGENCY) 2. APPLICATION NUMBER 3. W ORIGINAL r•'1 a aMnRAFIJT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 1 4. PROGRAM YEAR (Ent'riemenr IWPI-11- v.,,r, FROM: 7/1/76 To: 6/30/77 k•4. NEED FOR THE PROVISION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT A14D FACILITIES NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE TO THE CONSERVATION OR IMPROVEMENT OF SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOODS. ae Many neighborhoods in the unincorporated County, and especially those areas of deteriorated or deteriorating housing quality, require such improvements as street paving, curbs and gutters, street lighting, sidewalks and street drainage in order to maintain or return these areas to long-term sound condition. b. Particularly detrimental in areas of lower income households and substandard housing is the lack. of paved streets and proper drainage, which health hazards and related blighting influences tend to inhibit normal maintenance efforts as well as private incentive to up -grade the housing and the neighborhood environments. _ c. The Neighborhood Analysis of 1972 cited Enumeration Districts 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 45, 46, 49, 51 and 52 as being inadequate in all of the following public im- provements/facilities: (1) Sidewalks. 2) Street lights. (3 Paved streets. 4 Storm drainage. (5 Recreation facilities. Data Source: Analysis of Neighborhood Study Areas, 1972 Vero Beach/IRC Planning Commission A-5. PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT This program has developed a closer working relationship between community leaders of Gifford/Wabasso areas, representatives of the Citizen Committee and the County administration and County Commission. It has, in addition, created responsibilities between the members of the Citizens Committee and the people they represent because the latter groups are asking why improvements are being made in some areas and not others. The Citizens Committee is expl graining the year-to-year program and how decisions are being made by the Committee and Administration. It is interesting that other individuals (and groups) not usually interested in area improvements in the past are now taking more interest now that they have seen actual improvements taking place on the ground. The need for the coming year is to expand this involvement and intercommunica- tions. I af. some: Admi HUD -7015.2A.(11-75) • z -, . t. NAME OF APPLICANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUMMARY (OTHER NEEDS HAVING A PARTICULAR URGENCY) 2. APPLICATION NUMBER 3. W ORIGINAL r•'1 a aMnRAFIJT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 1 4. PROGRAM YEAR (Ent'riemenr IWPI-11- v.,,r, FROM: 7/1/76 To: 6/30/77 k•4. NEED FOR THE PROVISION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT A14D FACILITIES NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE TO THE CONSERVATION OR IMPROVEMENT OF SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOODS. ae Many neighborhoods in the unincorporated County, and especially those areas of deteriorated or deteriorating housing quality, require such improvements as street paving, curbs and gutters, street lighting, sidewalks and street drainage in order to maintain or return these areas to long-term sound condition. b. Particularly detrimental in areas of lower income households and substandard housing is the lack. of paved streets and proper drainage, which health hazards and related blighting influences tend to inhibit normal maintenance efforts as well as private incentive to up -grade the housing and the neighborhood environments. _ c. The Neighborhood Analysis of 1972 cited Enumeration Districts 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 45, 46, 49, 51 and 52 as being inadequate in all of the following public im- provements/facilities: (1) Sidewalks. 2) Street lights. (3 Paved streets. 4 Storm drainage. (5 Recreation facilities. Data Source: Analysis of Neighborhood Study Areas, 1972 Vero Beach/IRC Planning Commission A-5. PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT This program has developed a closer working relationship between community leaders of Gifford/Wabasso areas, representatives of the Citizen Committee and the County administration and County Commission. It has, in addition, created responsibilities between the members of the Citizens Committee and the people they represent because the latter groups are asking why improvements are being made in some areas and not others. The Citizens Committee is expl graining the year-to-year program and how decisions are being made by the Committee and Administration. It is interesting that other individuals (and groups) not usually interested in area improvements in the past are now taking more interest now that they have seen actual improvements taking place on the ground. The need for the coming year is to expand this involvement and intercommunica- tions. I af. some: Admi HUD -7015.2A.(11-75) Planninq Director, -and �l issioner 2 of Pepes 4 1 Book s j . i 1 Vit• d ' o; i 91976.` i Y � l l Planninq Director, -and �l issioner 2 of Pepes 4 1 Book s j COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUMMARY /LONG-TERM OBJECTIVES) 1. NAME OF APPLICANT 2. APPLICATION NUMBER 3. [ ORINGINAL ❑ AMENDMENT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY a. PROGRAM YEAR (Entitlement APPUCM s OnIV) FROM: 7/1/76 TO: 6/30/77 B'1. CONSERVATION OF SOUND NEIGHBORHOODS through. . . a. Code enforcement and vigilance, b. The prevention or elimination of blighting influences, and c. The provision or improvement of public facilities in or serving the neighborhoods, such as, but not limited to, streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, utilities, parks and recreation facilities. � Stummm Need(%) No: A-1 A-3 A-4. 6-2. REVITALIZATION OF DETERIORATING NEIGHBORHOODS and the elimination of conditions detrimental to health, safety and the public welfare through. . . a. Clearance of dilapidated and dangerous structures, b. Code enforcement and rehabilitation of deteriorated structures, c. The prevention or elimination of blighting influences, and d. The provision or improvement of public facilities in or serving the neighborhoods, such as, but not limited to, streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, utilities, parks and recreation facilities. SuWWorts Need(s) No: A-1 A-3 A-4. 8'5. INCREASE IN•THE SUPPLY OF STANDARD HOUSING through code enforcement, rehabilitation, and/or the encouragement of new construction, with emphasis on actions benefiting low and moderate income families and individuals, elderly, handicapped, racial minorities and households with female heads. 0 A . KAY 19 197 6. 0 1 of 2 pages '.'t�T .. 1 i3 t• •- T" 4 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUMMARY (LONG-TERM OBJECTIVES) Popo 2 1. NAME OF APPLICANT -?. APPLICATION NUMBER 3. li$ ORINGINAL ��1 ❑ AMENDMENT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 4. PROGRAM YEAR (Entitlement Applicants Only( jjj � FROM: 7/1/76 To: 6/30/77 4. •UECONCENTRATION OF HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOW AND MODERATE INCOME FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS by avoiding undue concentrations of persons receiving public assistance for housing in areas already containing high proportions of low-income ?ersons. Supports Need(s) no: A-3. d , Supports Weed(s) No: a O o b Supports Noodts) No: Y 1 §1970 NUC -7015.301-75) Popo 2 of 2 Popo* �•1 ��1 tF; �f I.Y. 1. tyl/1��; `4 jjj � l�1}�. 1� M Y 1 §1970 COMMUNITY DEVELOMIENT PLAN SUMMARY (SHORT-TERM OBJECTIVES) 9. NAME OF APPLICANT 2. APPLICATION NUMBER 3• ® ORIGINAL AMENDMENT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY a. PROGRAM YEAR (Entitlement Applrcents OafyJ FROM: 7!1/76 TO: 6/30/77 G 1. PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES ae Complete a detailed inventory of the public improvement needs in the Target Area. b. Prepare an up -dated, detailed residential structural conditions survey in the -Target Area to determine specific housing needs and pinpoint potential health hazards and provide a basis for formulating a strategy for subsequent Community Development activities. c. Upgrade and refine current systems to efficiently carry out the goals of the Community Development Program; and to monitor and evaluate progress of the Program, including citizen involvement and information flow procedures. Supports Ne"(s) No: "•2. PROVISION AND UP -GRADING OF PUBLIC FACILITIES IN THE TARGET AREA IN PREPARATION FOR FUTURE HOUSING IMPROVEMENT FACILITIES. Recognizing the limited funds available for this one year program, as well as the magnitude of housing substandardness in the County, a start will be made on rehabilitation of substandard structures with Community Development Block Grant funds. It is the County's intention to concentrate on improvement of living environments of lower-income households, etc. The program will be con- centrated in areas where spot rehabilitation could halt the deterioration process or help upgrade the neighborhood to a stable condition. Rehabilitation efforts will be expanded in this second year and may be in- creased in future years funding (if funds become available), the proposed public improvements may provide impetus for private capital to improve the housing stock in the activity area. At a minimum, such improvements will eliminate basic sources of physical blight with their health and fire hazards such that subsequent housing rehabilitation efforts (public or private) will have im- *proved chances for long-term success. Street paving is desired to improve the mobility of the poor by reducing travel hazards and enabling easy transportation in all weather conditions. The marl surface will greatly reduce the dust which plagues residents. Street drainage improvements are first concerned where areas with excessive flooding and stagnant waters produce potential health hazards. Recreation will be provided in selected ED's along with site clearance, rehabili- tation, street paving, and drainage. All efforts are coordinated to maintain or upgrade lower income neighborhoods. Supports Now($) Na: Pwoe e( Popo& HUD -7015.4 (11-75) I 1 �f, I 4 f". Poo*-?— s(' _Poses HUG' -7015.4 (I1-75) I OW shy T : ate; t•r � 8 - ; � -m! ,�;"s .�*' —r,a- - Y i 9197' 7 i 1 i p ec-5 ��440 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUMMARY 1 1. NAME OF APPLICANT .i I: I! 2. APPLICATION NUMBER 3. ® ORIGINAL ' ♦ ❑ AMENDMENTS I S• PROGRAM YEAR (Enddowant APPlicona Only) • FROM: 7/1/76 To: 6/30/77 C'3. DEMOLITION & SITE CLEARANCE Abandoned, unoccupied, uninhabitable residential and commercial buildings will be demolished and site cleared of debris with trees and shrubs kept wherever possible. Work will be done by County crews wherever possible in ° °brder to minimize cost. Owners written permission will be obtained whenever possible and where determined that owner isnot financially capable of paying cost. swpw" NOW(s) arae a i, b • 4 f". Poo*-?— s(' _Poses HUG' -7015.4 (I1-75) I OW shy T : ate; t•r � 8 - ; � -m! ,�;"s .�*' —r,a- - Y i 9197' 7 i 1 i p ec-5 ��440 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUMMARY 1 1. NAME OF APPLICANT .i I: I! 2. APPLICATION NUMBER 3. ® ORIGINAL ' 4 f". Poo*-?— s(' _Poses HUG' -7015.4 (I1-75) I OW shy T : ate; t•r � 8 - ; � -m! ,�;"s .�*' —r,a- - Y i 9197' 7 i 1 i p ec-5 ��440 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUMMARY (SHORT-TERM OBJECTIVES% 1. NAME OF APPLICANT 2. APPLICATION NUMBER 3. ® ORIGINAL ' ❑ AMENDMENTS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY S• PROGRAM YEAR (Enddowant APPlicona Only) • FROM: 7/1/76 To: 6/30/77 C'3. DEMOLITION & SITE CLEARANCE Abandoned, unoccupied, uninhabitable residential and commercial buildings will be demolished and site cleared of debris with trees and shrubs kept wherever possible. Work will be done by County crews wherever possible in ° °brder to minimize cost. Owners written permission will be obtained whenever possible and where determined that owner isnot financially capable of paying cost. swpw" NOW(s) arae G o .o snppoet.Ond(s) No* G D Q a A a . suppata Nmadbl no, 4 f". Poo*-?— s(' _Poses HUG' -7015.4 (I1-75) I OW shy T : ate; t•r � 8 - ; � -m! ,�;"s .�*' —r,a- - Y i 9197' 7 i 1 i p ec-5 ��440 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUDGET A. XX ORIGINAL O- AMENDMEN B. APPLICATION NO. _ C. NAME OF APPLICANT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY D. PROGRAM YEAR FROM: 7/1/76 TO: 613 77 NO. E. PROGRAM ACTIVITY AMOUNT FORHN LDY OE 1. ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTYTton-2�—UaLterminec 2. PUBLIC WOSKS, FACILITIES, SITE IMPROVEMENTS • d CODE ENFORCEMENT 3.000. 4. CLEARANCE,DEMOLITION• REHABILITATION 24,000. S. REHABILITATION LOANS AND GRANTS —0- 6. SPECIAL PROJECTS FOR ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED' 7. PAYMENTS FOR LOSS OF RENTAL INCOME S. DISPOSITION OF REAL PROPERTY 8. PROVISION OF PUBLIC SERVICES —0- 10. PAYMENT OF NON-FEDERAL SHARES —0- 11. COMPLETION OF UFBAN.RENEWAL/NQP PROJECTS • RELOCATION PAYMENTS AND ASSISTANCE P i i, • PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT 4,000. 14. ADMINISTRATION 4.000. 15. CONTINUATION OF MODEL CITIES ACTIVITIES .. 1! - .. Az—, if _. ..;�5�:-�.... _�. �u�_ .-I YtY •". _ -�_ ....._1�1.: 1 a•e��,. , ,�i3�:i Ft ,.✓�?,:,zi•Y6�,.<. L Y a ��. I ,,.as-'4�bf_. .._ ,e,[.` 17. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUDGET A. XX ORIGINAL O- AMENDMEN B. APPLICATION NO. _ C. NAME OF APPLICANT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY D. PROGRAM YEAR FROM: 7/1/76 TO: 613 77 NO. E. PROGRAM ACTIVITY AMOUNT FORHN LDY OE 1. ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTYTton-2�—UaLterminec 2. PUBLIC WOSKS, FACILITIES, SITE IMPROVEMENTS $115,000. .3. CODE ENFORCEMENT 3.000. 4. CLEARANCE,DEMOLITION• REHABILITATION 24,000. S. REHABILITATION LOANS AND GRANTS —0- 6. SPECIAL PROJECTS FOR ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED' 7. PAYMENTS FOR LOSS OF RENTAL INCOME S. DISPOSITION OF REAL PROPERTY 8. PROVISION OF PUBLIC SERVICES —0- 10. PAYMENT OF NON-FEDERAL SHARES —0- 11. COMPLETION OF UFBAN.RENEWAL/NQP PROJECTS 12., RELOCATION PAYMENTS AND ASSISTANCE s0— /3. PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT 4,000. 14. ADMINISTRATION 4.000. 15. CONTINUATION OF MODEL CITIES ACTIVITIES —0- 16. SUBTOTAL (Sum of Lines f thru 15) 150,000. 17. CONTINGENCIES AND/OR UNSPECIFIED LOCAL OPTION ACTIVITIES (Not to exceed 10% of line 16) -0- 18. TOTAL PROGRAM ACTIVITY COSTS (Sum of Lines 16and 17) 150,000. LINE NO. F. RESOURCES FOR PROGRAM ACTIVITY COSTS _ 1. ENTITLEMENT OR DISCRETIONARY AMOUNT 150,0002. LESS DEDUCTIONS—D— EN 3 ENTITLEMENT/DISCRETIONARY AMOUNT FOR PROGRAM ACTIVITIES (Line 1 minus 2) 150,000. 4. PROGRAM INCOME S. SURPLUS FROM URBAN RENEWAL/NDP SETTLEMENT —0- 6. LOAN PROCEEDS d0- 7. REPROGRAMMED UNOBLIGATED FUNDS FROM PRIOR PROGRAM YEAR 30,000. S. TOTAL RESOURCES FOR PROGRAM ACTIVITY COSTS (Sum ofUrm3.71 180,000. J (3 Check box ijeosts include lnd,rect costs which require approtal of a tart allocation plan as required by Federal Management Circular 74-4. EDITION OF 10.74 IS OBSOLETE HUD -7015.6 (11.75) .t � C• t ,. .��,•., .-�..�, � �„�# ...1 �. .. .•�.��„ r. �s.. �;.. .,rte � a,-: .. k 'Gn4. l g . gypp ��. � '�.' I 1'1, 1. �...� a g•. � • •, I • ' i 9��1�7�k`a ' ; H � �-' �+�• � � � i4 poor �a} 441 _ �1 i o n�\ .0-12 BREVARD COUNTY .. •• •• { .• 1'$S . ,, . • Yom~:�' ;.• `t., tip,,,, • \ % �. a• , ?_ fir*•?1 �o Cu +,�_ '`+ = s • ` Fsu-IC1 ass �'� j�13cw�wrosc� •t rtrl:..•y :':�' .., .. Z �•°i•: •r:.:•:..:.i Iia mm e j _ - I tog ;g`' ' ► _ s .. . . wor..•ro 4�+1 yW° __ - fie« .. _. .. ..�� er _..re rn ..� ._"•q � - y COMMWNITY 4'.+EVELOPM1EINT P?CGP.AM .�. r LOCATIONS Or MINORITY CONCENTRATIONS SOURCE /////, ED's with > 28% Black Population $ , 1970 Census of Population ED's with.> 75% Black Population N ' -:•: Areas Not in Application Area • G.L. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA VE4 . . V. RREVARD COUNTY.. ` .. .. . •l\ If i Ia t7 2�\C' \\ 0. Lam J4 -1f3 0 C) • � �� .,ij+f.il{ ^111 E i.\ i� 4 ' s1� 2 - < 1 va4rt�oa O E ;waaCO::NTY { 38� 37 �/�P•'r �/ —'4335 36 CUIIII HITY DEVELONAIE 1T PR0GPANA I t: PREFERKD LOCATIONS FOR LOWER IlICGD;E •.%" -'' HOUSING ASSISTMICE SOURCE N Illllill New Construction Rehabilitation �-- - - -- Population Analysis and 'w"'~{' Projections INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA - _ � ems.. .._ • .• _ , . _ .. _ .. ... • f _ 4. r: BREYARD COUNTY !•:; f � � '.':I' �• • K •6�.W� .....L'� L•• • I `-• J Slue Cypress rri•:...�t �.. • Lltfe •f: �f.�•:: i. _ . ... _ . al , �%�%,� off•:, t �� _ - - 7. y. V-1 j - JI. t Q a'•9 kclt 77 R � _. JI. t Q a'•9 kclt 77 I SRFVARD COUNTY A; of Sue Cypress La" C p la - d 1 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA (UNINCORPORATED) COMMUNITY DEVELOP14ENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION APRIL, 1976 HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN • 1 d. F 1 • .i MAY 1919TH s. soar' a'. PIP- rr" OMB N 63R 63e 4711 _ U.S. DEP ARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN ® TABLE 1. SURVEY OF HOUSING CONDITIONS — A. HOUSING STATUS AND CONDITION OF ALL HOUSING UNITS IN THE COMMUNITY NAME OF APPLICANT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA (UNINCORPORATED) 2. APPLICATION/GRANT NUMBER 3. ORIGINAL O AMENDMENT, DATE: B — JN r' .< 4. PROGRAM YEAR FROM*July 1, 1976 TO, June 30, 1977 5, DATE OF HOUSING SURVEY(St USED .'• ; STATUS AND CONDITION OF ALL HOUSING UNITS .1 YEAR OF ESTIMATE April 1, 1976 NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS ALL UNITS OWNER RENTER TOTAL SUBTOTAL SUITABLE FOR REHABILITATION* TOTAL SUBTOTAL SUITABLE FOR REHABILITATION*' TOTAL SUBTOTAL SUITABLE FOR - REHABILITATION* (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) ( ) Y L Occupied Units — Total 1976 9224 6622 2602I 2 I a. Substandard 1976 2203 7903653 5 - 190 s It. Standard and All Other (line I minas line la) 1976 8398 6010 2388 -600 4 2. Vacant Available Units — Total 1976 920 s a. Substandard 1976 643 _ t6 b. Standard and All Other (line 2 minus line 2a) 1976 277 1 3, Housing Stock Available — Toto) (sam of lines I and 2) 1976 10,144 7281 2863 e ! 4• Vacancy Rate (line 2= 3) 1976 1 9.1% *(hits "Suitable for Rehabilitation" must be included as o sut—tal i( the opPlicont is proposing a rehabilitation program on Table 111, Goats for Lower Income Housing Assistance. B. DEFINITIONS, DATA SOURCES, AND METHODS (Attach additional pages) 1. Definition of "Substandard" used. (See Attached Sheet) 2 Definition of "suitable for rehabilitation" used. (See Attached Sheet) 3. Data sources and methods used. Analysis of Neighborhood Study Areas - December, 1972; Neighborhood Analysis - Part II - 1973 Report; Low/Moderate Cost Housing Report - June, 1974; and 701 Planning Program Reports. i . JN r' .< HUD -7015.8 (12-75) m ..g..'.•.n..at'..a.L ��e.:nz-3s>r..w.',..:, •a.Y_...�P.. ar. ,�...:. raa�lnnwmsms`�w.t, .�,..q:mia.,�. w,,�,dT.ra1..`::'b:e"'i'"..:.."40.�CP' T-'. ✓. s:s, __—•ms;99�iwc. s a-...ate.-..- CONTINUATION OF MOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN TABLE I. SURVEY OF HOUSING CONDITIONS 1 B. ° DEFINITIONS, DATA SOURCES, AND METHODS: - 1< Definition of "substandard" used: 3 This class consists of dilapidated houses which are lacking in basic facilities and are in such a state of deterioration that it would not be economically feasible to repair them. Examples of these deficien- cies include holes; open cracks or missing materials over large areas of the floors, walls or roof; leaning walls or structures; damage by fire or weather; structures built of make -shift materials, etc. The ` k only feasible course of action would be demolition. 2. -Definition of "suitable for rehabilitation" used: These houses have sufficient visible deficiencies to indicate that deterioration is present. These houses could economically be repaired to continue to give safe and adequate shelter. Examples of these deficiencies could be loose or missing boards, sagging porches, ob-vious need for re -roofing, -loose screens, broken window panes, etc. Such deficiencies are signs of neglect which could lead to serious structural damage. Based on a complete interior survey, some struc- tures classed as marginal may be later classed as dilapidated, , i f- 4 i O A -Y 19. 1 s 3 4 y J. n Ant b j/ t )j U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN ® TABLE It. HOUSING ASSISTANCE -NEEDS OF LOWER•INCOME HOUSEHOLDS - -- 1. NADAE OF APPLICANT 2. APPLICATION/GRANT NUMBER 3. ORIGINAL Be .,.. m O AMENDMENT, DATES INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA (UNINCORPORATED) 4. PROGRAM YEAR S DATE OF HOUSING SURVEY (S) USED FROM: July 1, 1976 TD" June 30, 1977 NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS ALL HOUSEHOLDS ALL FEMALE -HEADED HOUSEHOLDS ALL MINORITY HOUSEHOLDS STATUS OF HOUSEHOLDS REQUIRING ASSISTANCE ELDERLY OR FAMILY LARGE FAMILY ELDERLY OR FAMILY LARGE FAMILY ELDERLY OR FAMILY LARGE FAMILY TOTAL ANDICAPPED (4 or less (5 more TOTAL HANDICAPPED (4 or less (5 more TOTAL HANDICAPPED (4 ordess 1'S or more (6-1) (i•.. persons! (b•2) persons) P (6-3) ons) persons) (b•4) (1.2 persons) (0) (e-2) ersons P ) (e-3) ona) persons) (e-4) (1 ,2 persons) (d•2) persons) P 1 ersons P ) (a) (d•3) (d-4) A. OWNER HOUSEHOLDS 1 (Excluding displacees) 918 510 224 184 N/A* N/A N/A N A 442 205 328 114 : B. RENTER HOUSEHOLDS !Exclndir.¢ displaceesl 306 171 73 62 451 N/A N/A N A 148 68 110 38 C. HOUSEHOLDS EXPECTED TO BE DISPLACED s IN PROGRAM YEAR (Sum of tines Cl and C2) -0--0- -0- -0- - —0— - —0— —0— —0— -0- -0- • 1. ow-lem -0- -0- - -0- - - -0- -0- -0- a j 2. Renters -0- -0- -0- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -0- -0- 10. ADDITIONAL FA:AILIES EXPECTED TO RESIDE �°'� 1"( '!"J'(ITY (Sum of lines Dl and D2) N G� 21� 16 -•--_: ••• r 1. As a resat cf p!arned em la ment 12 6 6 -0- 2. Alga~, emolcyed In locality 15 - E. TOTAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE NEEDS (Sum of lines A. B, C. and DJ 1305 725 318 262 ' Percent of Total 100%55 25 % 20 % A,r ' F. DATA SOURCE. AND METHODS (Attach additional page.:, *All Female Headed Households - Data not available in 1970 Census for areas under 50,000 population. Also, Polk Directory Data available only for Vero Beach (city) and not unincorporated area of Indian River County, Florida. un b, -..r n. ar.-_...'rogWTrw•.+s+rr.-•--•�.•-y. ��+ �7�RfP'G:9'ivnxSlmat/'Rtt4A'F"^FfmR-:'S�rc �L' -�.._..�._��,.a.e,:._iaa....T.. �'.�,'[T'.7.-�.res�rp._.: Rt .,.. •N'..:',.:,,'..,r:a.': r.aw¢n.Da4hYe�49w�.i•SS6[j' _ • ..._ ,. .., .. T _ . .. pyy,...-w.......... .. .. .. .. ... ., • .. . M,.. ' ':.. ...�... .� -..zc.t.,•�'m..fnk+•�lvr'm .ei/yr•yl r..; ;..,�.�,.. _�._._—... Page 2 of 2 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT -' HOUSING; SSISTANCE PLAN —.TABLE -11. HOUSING ASSISTANCE NEEDS OF LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS - 2. APPLICATION!GRANT NUMBER 3. ORIGINAL - • y NAME OF APPLICANT � Q AMENDMENT. DATE: ! M. - INDIAN RIVER COUNTY B — — 4. PROGRAM YEAR June 30 1977 s. (UNINCORPORATED) F M,1976 d1 PROVIDE DATE FOR EACH CATEGORY OF MINORITY HOUSEHOLD, AS APPROPRIATE 4. Q ORIENTAL - y (Check appropriate box) 4. Q ORIENTAL (Check appropriate box) 1. 0 BLACK/NEGRO 4• Q ORIENTAL (Cheek appropriate box) 1. Q BLACK/NEGRO • 1. BLACK/NEGRO STATUS OF 2. Q SPANISH-AMERICAN S. Q ALL OTHER 2. Q SPANISH-AMERICAN S. ALL OTHER MINORITIES. 2. SPANISH-AMERICAN S. Q ALL OTHER MINORITIES P HOUSEHOLDS REQUIRING 3, AMERICAN INDIAN MINORITIES 3.Q AMERICAN INDIAN 3. Q AMERICAN INDIAN �, e��• ASSISTANCE ELDERLY OR FAMILY LARGE FAMILY ELDERLY OR FAMILY (d ar less LARGE FAMILY TOTAL ELDERLY OR HANDICAPPE FAMILY ( 4oriess LARGE FAMILY (5 more ' TOTAL HANDICAPPED(4 or less ($ or more TOTAL HANDICAPPED 1-2 ersonsl ( P persons) P ($ or more (7-2 persons) persons) rs persons) • (i-_ persons) p persons) P persons) P ersonsl a (a} (e•1) (e-2) (a-4) (e -Si (f•lI (f-2) (1•3) (f-4) (,a•1) (9.2) (4-3) A. 0'61NER HOUSEHOLDS (ezcr_firiz disp!3cees) - TOtal 442 205 123 114 "= B. RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (e:cli dint dis neees -Total 148 68 42 38 C. HOUSEHOLDS EXPECTED TO BE DISPLACED 2) -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- _ _ -0- IN PROGRAM YEAR (Sum of lines 1 and -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- - - - - - - -- 1 Cines Renters__ - - 0 -0- -0- -0- -0- - - - - - - - - - - - - 1. _. - 0. TOTAL (Sum of lines A.B. and Cl 590 273 165 152 - Eo 'Data Sources and Methods: Sources: 1970 Census, General & Detailed Housing Characteristics 1970 Census, Special Tablulation, DHUD Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services _ Methodology: See Attached Sheetscei • _ v ,. • g y 0a0 ® I HUD -7015.9 (12-75) HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN - TABLE II.' HOUSING ASSISTANCE NEEDS OF LOWER-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS Continuation of E. Data Sources and Methods: Methodology, 1. Total number of households, by population sub -group, potentially requiring Housing Assistance in 1970 in Indian River County was calculated based upon DHUD Special Tabulation of household incomes, size and housing characteristics compared with lower income limits for Section 8 Housing Assistance. i 2e Comparison of income, poverty and housing characteristics for the in Indian River County. These were subtracted from Y municipalities Count leavin the number of households requiring the total for the g Y assistance in the unincorporated portions of the County. 3e Households living in assisted housing constructed since 1970 were deleted. .4o The resulting 1970 estimate of households requiring assistance were updated in 1974 based upon population growth and the following assum tion* p � i The major portion of growth in Indian River County since 1970 is the result of in -migration and the rate of growth among lower income households which would require assistance should be slower than over- all pupulation growth - and it is assumed to approxi - tate one-half of the overall growth rate. The increase in households requiring assistance is distributed among the population sub -groups in proportion to their representation in 1970, with adjustment for a lesser rate of growth in the Black .segment' �� were estimated 5. Handicapped households requiring housing assistance 4 on the basis of the number of recipients of Public Assistance for the blind and disabled. e 77 F i •tc .. RIs pcl }�.'•�l - •R:(v' 'lr3 -.l ' - 1. -.- ._. MAY�. 197 641Qka4 a ot v.w yr. ^n.ms..a w, owwainu M.mV wno^n 1ICTCLVrrAtmv HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN t TABLE Ill. GOALS FOR LOWER INCOME HOUSING ASSISTA14CE ` THREE YEAR COAL 1. NAME OF APPLICANT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA (UNINCORPORATED) 3- ORIGINAL �] AMENDMENT,DATEt 2. APPLICATION/GRANT NUMBER 4. PROGRAM YEAR FRO"JUly 1, 1976 TO` June 30, 1977 TYPES AND SOURCES OFISTANCE - ASS NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS TO BE ASSISTED ELDERLY OR FAMILY ALL HANDICAPPEDFAMILY HOUSEHOLDS ('% or less (1–Z persons) personas ) LARGE (S or more persons) (a) A. NEW RENTAL UNIT' t6) (e) (d) (e) 1 1. 2 2. State A enc —Total (Sum of lines a and b) a a. Section 8 4 b. Other Is 3. Other Assisted New Rental Housing (Identify) . Total e a. 7 6 e 4. Total (Sum of lines 1. 2, and 3) 306 170 108 28 B. REHABILITATION OF RENTAL UNITS 9 1. Section 8 -HUD to 2. State Agency—Total (Sumo lines a and b) -_ t t a. Section 8 12 b. Other Oth•r Assisted Rehabilitation of Rental Housing (Identify) — Total 14 a, 1a b, IS 4. Total (Sum of lines 1, 2, and 31 153 85 55 13 C. EXISTING RENTAL UNITS: 17 1. Section 8–HUD to 2. $tote Agency–Total (Sum of lines a and b) 19 a. Section 8 20 b. Other 21 1 Other Assisted Existing Rental Housing (identify). Total z2 a, za b, 24 4. Total (Sum of lines 1, 2, and 3) 40 20 15 5 D. REHABILITATION ASSISTANCE TO HOMEOWNERS OR PROSPECTIVE HOMEOWNERS 25 1. CD Block Grants 26 2. Section 235 27 3. Other Rehabilitation Assistance to Homeowners or Prospective Homeowners (ldentify) . Total ae a 25 b.- 30 4. Total (Sum of lines 1, 2, and 3) 612 340 212 6IT— E. NEW CONSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE TO HOMEOWNERS OR PROSPE V O st 11. Section 235 sz 2. Other (identify) • Total as s4 a„ b, ss 3. Total (Sum of lines 1 and 2) 113 66 33 14 se F. ALL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GOALS (Sumo lines A4, R4, C4,1)4, and 1.3 % 1224 681 423 120 27 1 PERCENT OF ALL HOUSEHOLDS 100% 56 % 34 10 % G. EXPLANATION OF PRIORITIES(Attach additional pages) (See Attached Statement) I I I --l- U.S. DEP R7MENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT e ` a I HOUSING ASSISTAtICE PLAN • ! TABLE 111. GOALS FOR LOWER INCOME HOUSING ASSISTANCE CURRENT YEAR GOAL ° 1. NAME OF APPLICANT I INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA (UNINCORPORATED) 3. AN ORIGINAL AMENDMENT. DATEt 2. APPLICATION/GRANT NUMBER 4. PROGRAM YEAR FROM: July 1,1976 TO: June 30, 1977 NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS TO BE ASSISTED ' ALL ELDERLY OR TYPES AND SOURCES OFASSISTANCE HANDICAPPED FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS (4 or less (1-2 persrins) persons) LARGE FAMILY p or more perauns) (a) (b) (e) (d) (ee A. NEW RENTAL UNIT. t1. Section 8 -HUD - - -0- -2 2 2. State A -T (Sum.?l lines a and b) 3 0. Section 8 4 L Other 6 3. Other Assisted New Rental Housing (identify) - Total 0.6 8 4. Total (Sum of lines 15, and 3) B. REHABILITATION OF RENTAL UNITS s 11. Section 8 -HUD 2 to 2. State A en -Total (Sum of lines a and b) I t a. Section 8 12 b. Other 13 3 Other Assisted Rehabilitation of Rental Housing (Identi/Y) - Total L14),O. is 16 4. Total (Sam of lines 1, 2, and 3) - C. EXISTING RENTAL UNITS 17 1. Section 8 -HUD to 2. State A enc -Total (Sum of lines a and b) 18 1 a. Section 8 20 b. Other 21 3. Other Assisted Existing Rental Housing (identify) - Total 22 a. 23 b, _ 24 4. Total (Sum of lines 1. 2, and 3) D. REHABILITATION ASSISTi1NCE TO HOMEOWNERS OR PROSPECTIVE HOMEOWNERS 25 1. CD Block Grants 26 2. Sect' 235 - - -n- -n- -n- 27 3. Other Rehabilitation Assistance to Homeowners or Prospective Homeowners (Identify) - Total ',2N a 52 17 30 5 2s b, 30 4. Total (.qum of lines 1, 2, and 3) E. NEW CONSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE TO HOMEOWNERS OR PROSPECTIVE HOMEOWNERS 311 1. Section 235 32 12. Other Identif- Total s4 b, 3s 3.' Total (Suns of lines 1 and 2) 3e F. ALL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GOALS (Sum of lines A4.84, C4. D4, and E3) NOTE: See Statement attached to Form HUD 7 of Proposed Lower Income Housing", li 70 23 40 15.11, "Table IV - Gene al Location ving to do vith Section 8 Program. 7 g I 1 el . I` :1 o TABLE III. GOALS OF L0WER INCOME HOUSING ASSISTANCE THREE YEAR GOAL - (HUD FORM 7015.10) STATEMENT: . G. EXPLANATION OF PRIORITIES The priorities for this year and last year programs has to be placed on rehabilitation of home owner structures. This work has been done in-house with the use of County employees, thus realizing more for the dollar spent, During the "Three Year. Goal", more emphasis should be placed .j on new rental structures as well as new construction assistance j to home owners or prospective home owners, in order to create . , t amore balanced system f providing e o p g the need. • There has been no interest on the part of contractors to submit proposals under Section 8 until very recently. This will be studied in detail by the Citizens Advisory Committee and County Commission in establishing future years' programs. r • 3 . e •..fit 0 • I MAY ar 45.7 p ' U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING ANU URnAN DEVELOPMENT HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN t ' TABLE IV — GENERAL LOCATIONS FOR PROPOSED LOWER INCOME HOUSING 1. NAME OF APPLICANT 3 -XX) ORIGINAL , INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA (UNINCORPORATED) 1__1 AMENDMENT. DATE: 2. APPLICATION/GRANT NUMBER 4. PROGRAM YEAR FROM: July 1,1976 TO: June 30, 1977- 977IDENTIFY IDENTIFYGENERAL LOCATIONS ON MAP IN THIS APPLICATION 1. New Constluchn: Census Tract Numbers NONE (See Attached Statement) 2. Rehabilitation: Census Tract Numbers Enumeration Districts — E.D.'s 4, 5, 6, 11, 49. S. EXPLANATION OF SELECTION OF GENERAL LOCATIONS L -New Construction NONE (See Attached Statement) Z Rehabilitation Rehabilitation areas were selected by condition of structures, streets, drainage, utilities and other environmental blighting influences in which low and moderate income minorities reside. Priority areas are the same as last year, except the new E.D. 49 "Oslo Area". I -g STATEMENT: TABLE IV - GENERAL LOCATIONS FOR PROPOSED LOWER INCOME HOUSING (HUD 7015.11) A & B No new housing construction is incorporated in this application. This is caused mainly by two factors. This applicant was not fully cognizant of the fact that distribution of Section 8 Housing Allocations was going to be based on the HAP sub- mitted with the 1975-76 application as a determinant for allocating Section 8 funding for new or rehabilitated housing. At the time of submission in 1975, there were no local or vicinity contractors who expressed any interest in submitting any bids - or applications for bids - to build new housing for low and moderate income under Section 8. This fact is sub- stantiated by the fact that this County and Vero Beach created two housing study committees, have prepared four housing study reports, have held about twenty meetings in the period 1971 - 1975, all dealing with this housing situation. As stated elsewhere, this County is doing and contemplates accomplishing rehabilitation with qualified crews hired on the County payroll. Reason: we can get more accomplished for the dollar spent under this arrangement. Recently, within the past two to three months or so, there have been three concerns who have expressed interest in constructing new housing for low.income. It may be worth considering that part of Section 8 funding should be allocated for construction of new housing this year, and quite seriously in the three year goal program. This is proposed to allot $108,688. funding under Section 8 for Indian River County. Indian River has never been funded under this program, although many other counties in Florida have been funded under this program. Indian River was to be funded, as I understand it, in 1974 and 1975. The previous indication is public notice for interested bidders was supposed to be adver- tised in the local paper in early 1976. As of this writing, .nothing has been advertised. Nothing in this statement is to be interpreted as a criticism of past handling of Section 8 funding in Indian River County. This statement is to suggest that we reappraise the function -and pur- pose and use of Section 8 funds in Indian River County. 1 s y�J r _ { { STATEMENT METHODOLOGY USED IN DETERMINING EXPECTED TO RESIDE DATA - H.A.P. - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA 1. 1970 Total -County Population - 35,992. 12,328 Total Work Force, 1970, in County. 9,792 Indian River County Residents in Work Force. Work Force Not Residing in Indian River County. 2 536 or 9- 61.5% In Total Work Force in County. 79.4% Of•County Work Force are County Residents. 2. 1970 793 'Worked.in County and Resided in St. Lucie County. 290 Worked in County and Resided in Brevard County. 9 Worked in County and Resided in Okeechobee County. III. 0 Worked in County and Resided in Seminole County. 1,092 Worked in County and Resided Outside of County. 20.5% Of County Work Force is from Outside of County. (Note: Department of Commerce claims it is 28.5%). - 3. 1975 (July 1) Total County Population - 46,254 1975 Unincorporated County -Population - 28,176 (U.F-.)- 4. 1972 Census of Selected Service Industries/Retail Trade. 1,529 Employees - Industries - Indian River County Total 1,327 Employees - Industries - Vero Beach r 2,569 Employees - Retail - Indian River County Total 2,047 Employees - Retail - Vero Beach 522 Employees - Retail - Remainder of County 5. Projected Figures: If 1970 population of 35,992 has work force of 12,328, then 1975 population of 46,254 has work force of 15,837. If 1970 work force is 12,328, and work force from outside County ;j is 1,092, then 1975 work force is 15,837 and work force from outside County is 1,402. 6. 16% of workers living outside of County are in the low-income category. 16% of 1,402 = 227 low income workers live outside of County. = welling Unit Occupancy is 2.80 persons per family = 81 low-income families broken down as follows: 44 Elderly Families - 1 - 2 persons per household. 21 Families - 4 or less persons per household. L. 16 Families - 5 or more persons per household. ' 9 MAY 9TH 0 %/.1�irr"ice 32 s 77 y'6 aa� $j + S �j r! I I 1 :I e I f I THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, ON MOTION MADE, SECONDED AND CARRIED, THE BOARD ADJOURNED AT 5:35 O'CLOCK P.M. ATTEST: %/.1�irr"ice 32 s 77 y'6 aa� $j + S �j r! I I 1 :I f %/.1�irr"ice 32 s 77 y'6 aa� $j + S