HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/06/2013AP PROCLAMATION
DESIGNATING THE MONTH OF APRIL, 2013
AS CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION MONTH
WHEREAS, for more than a century, Children's Home Society of Florida has upheld our legacy of
protecting the lives of abused children and families; and
WHEREAS, every 42 seconds a child suffers from abuse and neglect and Children's Home
Society of Florida is here to change the story for a child in our community; and
WHEREAS, Children's Home Society of Florida, Treasure Coast Division, works diligently with
United For Families and the Department of Children and Families to ensure that every child suffering from
abuse has a brighter future and hope for a safe life; and
WHEREAS, children who have suffered abuse or neglect are at least 25 percent more likely to
experience problems such as delinquency, teen pregnancy, low academic achievement, drug use and mental
health problems; and
WHEREAS, Children's Home Society of Florida, along with its community partners, embraces
opportunities that can potentially change the way society cares for children and youth. Act now to protect
children in Indian River County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS that the month of April, 2013, be designated as
Nl� NATIONAL CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION MONTH
in Indian River County. In honor of this event, we encourage community agencies, religious organizations,
businesses and others to remember children and families suffering from abuse and neglect, further an
awareness of the changes and issues facing these children, and focus attention on those children who live in
the shadow of an uncertain future while they await protection and assistance.
Adopted this 16th day of April, 2013.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
s ph E. Flescher, Chairman
VV"{ k
y S. Davis, Vice Chairman
�"!7;_ -
u
Peter D. O'Bryan
AM
xsF ' lari
Ti neor
PROCLAMATION
DESIGNATING APRIL 21 THROUGH APRIL 27, 2013 AS
CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS WEEK IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
WHEREAS, victims of crime across America need and deserve support and
assistance to help them cope with the consequences of crime; and
WHEREAS, national Crime Victims' Rights Week offers us all the opportunity to
promote Strength In Unity in helping victims and survivors of crime through a wide range of
supportive services offered by over 10,000 community and justice system-based programs, and
the more than 32,000 federal and state statutes that define and protect their rights; and
WHEREAS, by being united against crime and for victim's rights and services we gain
strength as individuals, as communities, and as a nation as a whole, and offer strength to
victims who seek to recover in the aftermath of crime; and
WHEREAS, America has joined together annually, each April since 1981 to recognize
the needs and rights of crime victims and survivors during National Crime Victims' Rights Week.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that April 21 through April 27, 2013
be designated as CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS WEEK in Indian River County, and the Board
honors crime victims and those who serve them during this week and throughout the year.
Adopted this 16th day of April, 2013.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
�a
Jseph E. Flescher, Chairman
Wesley Davi ,, Vic airman
y l/Q
4 ftf rot
Peter D. O' Bryan
Bob Solari
Ti o
PROCLAMATION
RECOGNIZING APRIL 14-20, 2013 AS
NATIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY TELECOMMUNICATIONS WEEK
WHEREAS, emergencies can occur at any time that require police, fire or emergency medical
services; and
WHEREAS, when an emergency occurs, the prompt response of police officers, firefighters and
paramedics is critical to the protection of life and preservation of property; and
WHEREAS, the safety of our police officers and firefighters is dependent upon the quality and
accuracy of information obtained from citizens who telephone the Indian River County Sheriff's Office
Dispatch Center; and
WHEREAS, Public Safety Dispatchers are the first and most critical contact our citizens have
with emergency services; and
WHEREAS, Public Safety Dispatchers are a vital link for our police officers and firefighters by
monitoring their activities, providing them with information, and ensuring their safety; and
WHEREAS, Public Safety Dispatchers of the Indian River County Sheriff's Office have
contributed substantially to the apprehension of criminals, suppression of crime and treatment of
patients. They are knowledgeable and highly trained individuals who work closely with police, fire
and medical personnel; and
WHEREAS, each dispatcher has exhibited compassion, understanding and professionalism
during the performance of their duties in the past year.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Board recognizes April 14
through April 20, 2013 as National Public Safety Telecommunications Week, in honor of the
men and women whose diligence and professionalism keep our county and citizens safe.
Duly adopted this 16th day of April 2013 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
se rf E. Flescher, Chairman
Vresj�v�SDavis, ce Chairman
{ s
S'itil.
Peter D. O' Bryan
`Bob Solari
i
Ti r
� � f
Sunny Award
Is presented to
. .
rencVTop TraWebrite in 2013
Indian River County, Florida
In recognition of being one of the most transparent government
websites in America by scoring in the top one percent among 7,000
state and local websites analyzed by Sunshine Review's
Transparency Checklist.
.p,
Dear Joseph,
congratulations, the Indian River County website has won
a Sunny Award! The Sunny Award is presented by the
Editors of Sunshine Review to honor the most transparent
government websites in the nation. These outstanding Top Transparency
Wabsite in 2013
websites have scored an "A+" transparency grade on
Sunshine Review's Transparency Checklist. This year,
only 247 of the more than 7,000 government websites ranked by Sunshine
Review earned a Sunny Award.
Sunshine Review will be publicly announcing the winners in a national media
release today during Sunshine Week, March 10-16.
Sunshine Review promotes transparency and affirmative disclosure at the
state and local levels. Sunshine Review used a "10 Point Transparency
Checklist" to analyze 50 state websites and more than 7,000 local government
-ebsites.
Again, congratulations on winning a Sunny Award.
Mike Barnhart
Michael K. Barnhart
President, Sunshine Review
P: 773-234-9812 1 www.sunshinereview.org Facebook: Sunshine Review
5
Indian River County Wins National Transparency Award
Indian River County , FL. — March 13, 2012 — Today, Sunshine Review, a national
nonprofit organization dedicated to government transparency, released the winners of
the fourth annual Sunny Awards and among the winners was Indian River County. The
award, which honors the most transparent government websites in the nation, went to
250 government entities with Florida receiving the most Sunny Awards.
"Indian River County knows the importance of promoting transparency in everything we
do. We are honored to receive a Sunny Award and will continue to empower citizens by
providing the necessary information to keep them informed on the actions their
government is taking on their behalf," said Joseph Baird, County Administrator.
For the 2013 awards, Editors at Sunshine Review analyzed more than 1,000 qualifying
government websites and graded each on a 10-point transparency checklist. Editors
looked at content available on government websites against what should be provided.
They sought information on items such as budgets, meetings, lobbying, financial audits,
contracts, academic performance, public records and taxes. The winners of the Sunny
Award all received an "A" grade during the extensive grading process.
"The Sunny Awards recognize governments that make transparency a priority. The
winners of the Sunny Awards are cities, counties and school districts that proactively
*4%... share the public information that empowers citizens and keeps government accountable
to the people," said Michael Barnhart, President of Sunshine Review. "We would like to
congratulate Indian River County for being a champion for transparency and serving as
a leader to every state and local government around the nation."
Eight states earned nearly half of the 247 Sunny Awards given. The leading states were
Florida (25), Virginia (19), Illinois (19), California (12), Georgia (12), Kansas (11),
Oklahoma (10) and Colorado (9). In addition, 35 counties, 22 cities and 42 school
districts from all over the country earned the coveted "A+" grade.
The Sunny Awards announcement falls during the annual of"Sunshine Week," March
10-16, a period nationally recognized by hundreds of media and civic organizations, that
celebrates the efforts of activists and the strides taken towards open government.
Sunshine Review is a nonprofit organization dedicated to state and local government
transparency. Sunshine Review collaborates with individuals and organizations
throughout America in the cause of an informed citizenry and a transparent government.
Since its inception in 2008, Sunshine Review has analyzed the websites of all 50 states
and more than 7,000 state and local entities.
For information on Sunshine Review please contact Meghan Tisinger at
Meghan(o)-TKOCommunicationsLLC.com or (703)965-1145.
6
3A
4�
�G
.JEFFREY R. SMITH �
Clerk of Circuit Court and Comptroller
w.. 1 801 27TH Street �ZpRIpA
Vero Beach, Florida 32961 -1028 Telephone (772) 226-1945
TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DATE: April 4, 2013
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WARRANTS
March 29, 2013 to April 4, 2013
FROM: DIANE BERNARDO - FINANCE DIRECTOR
In compliance with Chapter 136.06, Florida Statutes, all warrants (checks and electronic
payments) issued by the Board of County Commissioners are to be recorded in the Board
minutes.
Approval is requested for the attached list of warrants, issued by the Comptroller's office, for the
time period of March 29, 2013 to April 4, 2013.
Attachment:
DB: MS
7
CHECKS WRITTEN
CHECK NBR CK DATE VENDOR AMOUNT
296677 4/1/2013 ORANGE COUNTY HOUSING AND 1,830.34
296678 4/1/2013 SANDY PINES LTD 553.00
296679 4/1/2013 ALL FLORIDA REALTY SERVICES INC 5,194.00
296680 4/1/2013 GERALD T CAPAK 265.00
296681 4/l/2013 CHERYL DOYLE 354.00
296682 4/1/2013 VERO BEACH EDGEWOOD PLACE(305-113) 659.00
296683 4/1/2013 GRACES LANDING LTD 6,346.00
296684 4/l/2013 MICHAEL JACKOWSKI 429.00
296685 4/1/2013 TERRY A LAWRENCE 77.00
296686 4/1/2013 LINDSEY GARDENS APARTMENTS 10,119.00
296687 4/1/2013 BRYAN D BLAIS 782.00
296688 4/1/2013 RIVER PARK ASSOCIATES 12,725.00
296689 4/1/2013 RICHARD C THERIEN 825.00
296690 4/1/2013 CREATIVE CHOICE HOMES XVI LTD 3,807.00
296691 4/1/2013 DAVID YORK 528.00
296692 4/1/2013 ST FRANCIS MANOR OF VERO BEACH 976.00
296693 4/1/2013 CITY OF VERO BEACH 185.00
296694 4/1/2013 TREASURE COAST HOMELESS SERVICES 1,545.00
296695 4/1/2013 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT 167.00
296696 4/1/2013 FULCHINI ENTERPRISES INC 287.00
296697 4/1/2013 VENETIAN APARTMENTS OF VERO BEACH 881.00
296698 4/1/2013 HERMOSA PROPERTIES LLC 308.00
296699 4/1/2013 PINNACLE GROVE LTD 7,305.00
296700 4/1/2013 VERO CLUB PARTNERS LTD 14,958.00
296701 4/1/2013 DAVID SPARKS 600.00
296702 4/1/2013 FORT PIERCE HOUSING AUTHORITY 932.56
296703 4/1/2013 CRAIG MERRILL 1,586.00
296704 4/1/2013 CHRISTINE SALTER 514.00
296705 4/1/2013 HAGGERTY FAMILY LTD 307.00
296706 4/1/2013 THE PALMS AT VERO BEACH 13,753.00
296707 4/1/2013 FELLSMERE COMM ENRICHMENT PROGRAM INC 91.00
296708 4/1/2013 ED SCHLITT LC 359.00
296709 4/1/2013 HENRY O SPEIGHT 740.00
296710 4/1/2013 DAVID CONDON 594.00
296711 4/1/2013 HILARY MCIVOR 505.00
296712 4/1/2013 PAULALANE 376.00
296713 4/1/2013 FRANK BLAKE 442.00
296714 4/1/2013 JOHN A CAPPELLO 332.00
296715 4/1/2013 TCG SONRISE II LLC 1,096.00
296716 4/1/2013 KARL LACHNITT 750.00
296717 4/1/2013 PELICAN ISLES LP 6,147.00
296718 4/1/2013 JOHN F BAER 2,534.00
296719 4/l/2013 CAMERON HORD 259.00
296720 4/1/2013 SUNCOAST REALTY& RENTAL MANAGEMENT LLC 2,423.00
296721 4/1/2013 OAK RIVER PROPERTIES INC 1,068.00
296722 4/1/2013 KENNEN COHEN 437.00
296723 4/l/2013 MARILYN LEWIS 302.00
296724 4/1/2013 STEPHEN J SHORT SR 648.00
296725 4/l/2013 MICHAEL KANNER 566.00
296726 4/1/2013 ANDRE DORAWA 364.00
296727 4/1/2013 RICHARD JOHN KELLER 782.00
296728 4/1/2013 ADINA GOLDMAN 459.00
296729 4/1/2013 INDIAN RIVER RDA LP 628.00
296730 4/1/2013 DANIEL GOWER 699.00
296731 4/1/2013 GEORGE THUYNS 685.00
296732 4/1/2013 STEVEN ROBERT HARTMAN 541.00
�- 296733 4/1/2013 LAZY J LLC 402.00
296734 4/1/2013 STEPHANIE FOUNTAIN 252.00
1 8
CHECK NBR CK DATE VENDOR AMOUNT
296735 4/1/2013 WINFRIED ARENDT 361.00
296736 4/1/2013 SYLVIA MCNEILL 238.00
296737 4/1/2013 SKOKIE HOLDINGS INC 577.00
296738 4/1/2013 LILIAN N BEUTTELL 441.00
`"W 296739 4/1/2013 ROGER WINSLOW 503.00
296740 4/1/2013 TAMMY MEEKS 719.00
296741 4/1/2013 VINCENT PILEGGI 451.00
296742 4/1/2013 OSLO VALLEY PROPERTIES INC 989.00
296743 4/1/2013 VICKY L STANLEY 808.00
296744 4/1/2013 CORY J HOWELL 302.00
296745 4/1/2013 CHOICE RENTALS INC 231.00
296746 4/1/2013 WILLIAM JAMES STANGANELLI 399.00
296747 4/1/2013 TRADITIONAL PROPERTIES GROUP INC 673.00
296748 4/1/2013 THE CHARLES F FOWLER 1996 CHARITABLE UNITRUS 848.00
296749 4/1/2013 OSCEOLA COUNTY SECTION 8 687.78
296750 4/1/2013 WYNN OWLE 572.00
296751 4/1/2013 DONALD G COMBS 476.00
296752 4/1/2013 WILLIAM NEUWIRTH 558.00
296753 4/1/2013 ANTHONYARROYO 308.00
296754 4/1/2013 BRIGITTE BALL 535.00
296755 4/1/2013 AHS HOLDINGS GROUP LLC 2,731.00
296756 4/1/2013 COUNTY OF VOLUSIA HVC PROGRAM 643.78
296757 4/l/2013 AJL MANAGEMENT CORP 424.00
296758 4/1/2013 VERO HOUSING LLC 1,730.00
296759 4/1/2013 YVONNE KOUTSOFIOS 280.00
296760 4/1/2013 HOUSING AUTHORITY CITY OF ALLENTOWN 642.78
296761 4/1/2013 DYNAMIC ENDEAVORS LLC 139.00
296762 4/1/2013 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF FULTON COUNTY 657.78
296763 4/1/2013 ALAN R TOKAR 649.00
296764 4/1/2013 2184 1ST PL SW LLC 584.00
296765 4/1/2013 VILLAS OF VERO BEACH 491.00
�.. 296766 4/1/2013 BRIAN E GALLAGHER 503.00
296767 4/1/2013 MANUEL V CAMACHO SR LLC 542.00
296768 4/1/2013 HOUSING AUTHORITY 724.78
296769 4/1/2013 ALCURT VERO BEACH LLC 1,739.00
296770 4/1/2013 CITY OF TUCSON 45.78
296771 4/1/2013 CITY OF TUCSON 413.00
296772 4/3/2013 COMPBENEFITS COMPANY 236.54
296773 4/3/2013 COLONIAL LIFE&ACCIDENT INS CO 158.94
296774 4/3/2013 AMERICAN FAMILY LIFE ASSURANCE CO 22,334.43
296775 4/3/2013 ALLSTATE 668.84
296776 4/3/2013 FLORIDA COMBINED 7,655.16
296777 4/3/2013 FLORIDA COMBINED 13,866.47
296778 4/4/2013 PORT CONSOLIDATED INC 1,140.57
296779 4/4/2013 JORDAN MOWER INC 540.11
296780 4/4/2013 TEN-8 FIRE EQUIPMENT INC 4,491.94
296781 4/4/2013 VERO CHEMICAL DISTRIBUTORS INC 631.40
296782 4/4/2013 COPYCO INC DBA 92.28
296783 4/4/2013 RICOH USA INC 232.62
296784 4/4/2013 VELDE FORD INC 1,159.21
296785 4/4/2013 RUSSELL CONCRETE INC 611.50
296786 4/4/2013 AT&T WIRELESS 19.00
296787 4/4/2013 DATA FLOW SYSTEMS INC 1,038.00
296788 4/4/2013 PARALEE COMPANY INC 1,113.88
296789 4/4/2013 COLD AIR DISTRIBUTORS WAREHOUSE 1,190.63
296790 4/4/2013 KELLY TRACTOR CO 5,075.90
296791 4/4/2013 VERO LAWNMOWER CENTER INC 39.99
296792 4/4/2013 AMERIGAS EAGLE PROPANE LP 3,424.90
296793 4/4/2013 DAILY COURIER SERVICE 78.00
296794 4/4/2013 GAYLORD BROTHERS INC 151.80
2 g
CHECK NBR CK DATE VENDOR AMOUNT
296795 4/4/2013 MARK W HILL DBA 462.88
296796 4/4/2013 DUVAL FORD 21,874.00
296797 4/4/2013 SCHULKE BITTLE&STODDARD LLC 9,750.46
296798 4/4/2013 EGP INC 141.02
296799 4/4/2013 VERO INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC 55.75
296800 4/4/2013 BRODART COMPANY 115.00
296801 4/4/2013 SPORTSMANS SPECIALTY GROUP 393.71
296802 4/4/2013 CARTER ASSOCIATES INC 6,071.37
296803 4/4/2013 HOMELAND IRRIGATION 66.36
296804 4/4/2013 DELL MARKETING LP 35,460.11
296805 4/4/2013 GENERAL PART INC 1,259.79
296806 4/4/2013 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER 92.87
296807 4/4/2013 BLAKESLEE SERVICES INC 710.00
296808 4/4/2013 BAKER&TAYLOR INC 1,196.03
296809 4/4/2013 GROVE WELDERS INC 600.00
296810 4/4/2013 MIDWEST TAPE LLC 500.11
296811 4/4/2013 DWYER INSTRUMENTS INC 479.45
296812 4/4/2013 LOWES CO INC 463.94
296813 4/4/2013 PRECISION CONTRACTING SERVICES INC 12,767.00
296814 4/4/2013 FIRST HOSPITAL LABORATORIES INC 136.50
296815 4/4/2013 RELIABLE POLY JOHN 242.64
296816 4/4/2013 DLT SOLUTIONS LLC 945.29
296817 4/4/2013 PARKS AND SON INC 10,015.74
296818 4/4/2013 CITY OF VERO BEACH 67,865.08
296819 4/4/2013 PETTY CASH 65.66
296820 4/4/2013 PETTY CASH 52.50
296821 4/4/2013 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SHERIFF 10,635.32
296822 4/4/2013 JANITORIAL DEPOT OF AMERICA INC 2,633.20
296823 4/4/2013 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS INC 944.42
296824 4/4/2013 IRC CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 72,308.69
296825 4/4/2013 RIVER-FRONT HOTEL LLC 300.00
o.. 296826 4/4/2013 CITY OF SEBASTIAN 19,550.37
296827 4/4/2013 CALLAWAY GOLF SALES COMPANY 2,320.00
296828 4/4/2013 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT 5,521.55
296829 4/4/2013 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 540.00
296830 4/4/2013 CITY OF FELLSMERE 18.65
296831 4/4/2013 KENNETH CAMPBELL SENIOR 140.00
296832 4/4/2013 COMMUNITY ASPHALT CORP 46,081.21
296833 4/4/2013 JOSEPH A BAIRD 760.14
296834 4/4/2013 CHRISTOPHER R MORA 114.81
296835 4/4/2013 GERALD A YOUNG SR 120.00
296836 4/4/2013 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HISTORICAL 1,004.75
296837 4/4/2013 G K ENVIRONMENTAL INC 9,285.00
296838 4/4/2013 MUSCO SPORTS LIGHTING LLC 87,093.00
296839 4/4/2013 WESTSIDE REPROGRAPHICS OF VERO BEACH INC 204.08
296840 4/4/2013 FLORIDA DEPT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES 16,837.61
296841 4/4/2013 KEEP INDIAN RIVER BEAUTIFUL INC 3,810.45
296842 4/4/2013 BANK OF NEW YORK 350.00
296843 4/4/2013 ADVANCED XEROGRAPHICS IMAGING 814.33
296844 4/4/2013 LINDSEY MATHENY 40.00
296845 4/4/2013 TIM GEIB 60.00
296846 4/4/2013 SIMPLEXGRINNELL LP 6,228.00
296847 4/4/2013 SOUTHERN PLUMBING INC 225.00
296848 4/4/2013 ST LUCIE COUNTY BOCC 74,073.00
296849 4/4/2013 RUSSELL PAYNE INC 180.39
296850 4/4/2013 TRANE US INC 2,794.73
296851 4/4/2013 CELICO PARTNERSHIP 120.03
296852 4/4/2013 CINTAS CORPORATION NO 2 42925
296853 4/4/2013 FLORIDA DEPT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE 45,842.31
296854 4/4/2013 MUTUAL OF OMAHA 6,512.00
3 10
CHECK NBR CK DATE VENDOR AMOUNT
296855 4/4/2013 BIG BROTHERS AND BIG SISTERS 1,250.00
296856 4/4/2013 FLORIDA RURAL LEGAL SERVICES INC 2,354.11
296857 4/4/2013 RANDOM HOUSE INC 165.75
296858 4/4/2013 UNITED RENTALS NORTH AMERICA INC 186.76
`... 296859 4/4/2013 JOHNS EASTERN COMPANY INC 5,267.19
296860 4/4/2013 JACKS COMPLETE TREE SERVICE 1,600.00
296861 4/4/2013 CENTRAL PUMP&SUPPLY INC 274.33
296862 4/4/2013 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS 4,129.76
296863 4/4/2013 GLOVER OIL COMPANY INC 54,673.19
296864 4/4/2013 GARY L EMBREY 60.00
296865 4/4/2013 LARRY STEPHEN FAISON 40.00
296866 4/4/2013 JOSE RIVERA 100.00
296867 4/4/2013 CAROLE J MADIGAN 2,036.00
296868 4/4/2013 METRO FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES INC 1,396.50
296869 4/4/2013 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS INC 922.58
296870 4/4/2013 KENNY CAMPBELL JR 120.00
296871 4/4/2013 BRIAN WYKOFF 100.00
296872 4/4/2013 COMPLETE ALARM INC. 1,164.00
296873 4/4/2013 MUNICIPAL WATER WORKS INC 1,532.21
296874 4/4/2013 SRIGLEY, SEAN&NICOLE 70.00
296875 4/4/2013 CHARLES A WALKER 160.00
296876 4/4/2013 FISHER&PHILLIPS LLP 1,151.35
296877 4/4/2013 CEMEX 3,570.93
296878 4/4/2013 GUARDIAN COMMUNITY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 3,500.00
296879 4/4/2013 DANIEL IOFFREDO 60.00
296880 4/4/2013 BENNETT AUTO SUPPLY INC 526.35
296881 4/4/2013 TREASURE COAST FOOD BANK INC 621.93
296882 4/4/2013 TREASURE COAST SPRINKLERS INC 2,062.00
296883 4/4/2013 MICHELLE VAN KEULEN 200.00
296884 4/4/2013 YOUTH GUIDANCE DONATION FUND 3,700.00
296885 4/4/2013 SANDY ARACENA 100.00
Nmow 296886 4/4/2013 KNAPHEIDE TRUCK EQUIPMENT SOUTHEAST 89.03
296887 4/4/2013 TREASURE COAST MOTOR CYCLE CENTER INC 150.62
296888 4/4/2013 GUETTLER BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION LLC 376,838.89
296889 4/4/2013 BOULEVARD TIRE CENTER 3,422.18
296890 4/4/2013 PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC 3,810.40
296891 4/4/2013 DELRAY MOTORS 10.47
296892 4/4/2013 AG SCAPE SERVICES INC 5,236.16
296893 4/4/2013 DEPT OF HWY SAFETY&MOTOR VEHICLES 10.00
296894 4/4/2013 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS 28.00
296895 4/4/2013 KEITH GROCHOLL 60.00
296896 4/4/2013 COMANCO ENVIRONMENTAL CORPORATION 240,648.74
296897 4/4/2013 B &E PROPERTY MAINTENANCE 775.00
296898 4/4/2013 WILD TURKEY ESTATES OF VERO LLC 11,435.55
296899 4/4/2013 CLOSE CONSTRUCTION LLC 147,957.29
296900 4/4/2013 SHAWN GINN 60.00
296901 4/4/2013 CHRISTOPHER LEE MERRITT 40.00
296902 4/4/2013 VERO 53 HARBOR LLC 20,000.00
296903 4/4/2013 REPROGRAPHIC SOLUTIONS INC 18.00
296904 4/4/2013 FEMA LAW ASSOCIATES PLLC 2,228.00
296905 4/4/2013 LINDA CICHEWICZ 95.00
296906 4/4/2013 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT 1,850.64
296907 4/4/2013 MUTUAL OF OMAHA 129.68
Grand Total: 1,700,511.83
4 11
ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS - WIRE & ACH
TRANS NBR DATE VENDOR AMOUNT
2370 3/29/201: IRS-PAYROLL TAXES 362,904.12
2371 4/1/2013 FL RETIREMENT SYSTEM 432,654.04
`%w- 2372 4/1/2013 CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT 74,969.41
2373 4/1/2013 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS 70,142.59
2374 4/1/2013 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SHERIFF 2,964,036.48
2375 4/2/2013 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMIN 13,173.89
2376 4/3/2013 SHUMAKER LOOP&KENDRICK LLP 143,110.41
Grand Total: 4,060,990.94
1 12
ELECTRONIC PAYMENT - VISA CARD
TRANS. NBR DATE VENDOR AMOUNT
1001252 3/28/2013 REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA 94,637.67
1001253 3/28/2013 REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA 94,637.69
1001254 3/28/2013 REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA 119,527.45
1001255 3/28/2013 REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA 119,527.47
1001256 4/2/2013 EVERGLADES FARM EQUIPMENT CO INC 200.68
1001257 4/2/2013 HENRY SCHEIN INC 8,867.84
1001258 4/2/2013 INDIAN RIVER BATTERY 310.75
1001259 4/2/2013 REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA 2,306.57
1001260 4/2/2013 APPLE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO 201.26
1001261 4/2/2013 ST LUCIE BATTERY&TIRE CO 55.40
1001262 4/2/2013 ALLIED UNIVERSAL CORP 2,799.50
1001263 4/2/2013 HILL MANUFACTURING CO INC 666.39
1001264 4/2/2013 ARAMARK UNIFORM&CAREER APPAREL LLC 423.08
1001265 4/2/2013 SOUTHERN COMPUTER WAREHOUSE 4,309.34
1001266 4/2/2013 SVI SYSTEMS INC 675.00
1001267 4/2/2013 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 51,650.27
1001268 4/2/2013 BARKER ELECTRIC, AIR CONDITIONING 260.00
1001269 4/2/2013 ESRIINC 2,500.00
1001270 4/2/2013 FLAGLER CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT LLC 36.18
1001271 4/2/2013 GREAT SOUTHERN CONSTRUCTION 105.94
1001272 4/2/2013 CAPITAL OFFICE PRODUCTS 79.46
1001273 4/2/2013 WINGFOOT PLASTIC PRINTING SVS INC 2,339.07
1001274 4/2/2013 AUTO PARTNERS LLC 153.59
1001275 4/2/2013 L&L DISTRIBUTORS 1,097.10
1001276 4/2/2013 S &S AUTO PARTS 339.74
1001277 4/2/2013 HYDRA SERVICE(S) INC 1,930.00
1001278 4/3/2013 LIGHTSOURCE IMAGING SOLUTIONS LLC 435.50
1001279 4/3/2013 REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA 29.60
1001280 4/3/2013 JOHNSON CONTROLS INC 1,911.86
�^ 1001281 4/3/2013 4IMPRINT INC 1,374.15
1001282 4/3/2013 COMMUNITY ASPHALT CORP 341.36
1001283 4/3/2013 EAST COAST ANIMAL MEDICAL CENTER 88.00
1001284 4/4/2013 PARKS RENTAL& SALES INC 283.75
1001285 4/4/2013 INDIAN RIVER BATTERY 2,485.15
1001286 4/4/2013 REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA 29.60
1001287 4/4/2013 RECORDED BOOKS LLC 379.20
1001288 4/4/2013 ARAMARK UNIFORM&CAREER APPAREL LLC 88.04
1001289 4/4/2013 SEBASTIAN OFFICE SUPPLY CO 16.12
1001290 4/4/2013 COMO OIL COMPANY OF FLORIDA 2,821.27
1001291 4/4/2013 FLAGLER CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT LLC 2,158.82
1001292 4/4/2013 CAPITAL OFFICE PRODUCTS 17.89
1001293 4/4/2013 AT&T 6,151.54
1001294 4/1/2013 OFFICE DEPOT BSD CUSTOMER SVC 571.10
1001295 4/4/2013 WASTE MANAGEMENT INC 973.10
Grand Total: 529,793.49
1 13
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY svER�
140- PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
STORMWATER DIVISION _
180127" STREET ,•
VERO BEACH,FLORIDA 32960
Phone: (772)226-1562
ORiy
TO: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
THROUGH: Christopher R. Mora, P.E., Public Works Director
FROM: W. Keith McCully, P.E., Stormwater Engineer 140
SUBJECT: CONSENT AGENDA -APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO WORK
ORDER NO. 5-RR FOR THE ROCKRIDGE SUBDIVISION SURGE
PROTECTION PROJECT
DATE: April 4, 2013
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The purpose of this agenda item is to request approval of Amendment No. 3 to Work
Order No. 5-RR with the consulting engineering firm Malcolm Pirnie, Inc./Arcadis, for
additional environmental mitigation permitting services for the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USAGE). The Rockridge Surge Protection Project includes mitigation of
impacted wetlands. The proposed mitigation site is on County owned Earman Island
and the additional permitting services are required because an abutting piece of the
island is being used for proposed mitigation for another County project (Oslo Boat
Ramp). Sometime after Malcolm Pirnie submitted the latest Rockridge mitigation site
plan to the USACE, the adjacent Oslo Boat Ramp mitigation site plan was revised at the
request of the USACE. Malcolm Pirnie must now revise its proposed Rockridge
mitigation site plan to show the latest Oslo Boat Ramp mitigation site plan modifications,
and resubmit it to the USACE. Thus, Amendment No. 3 is necessary to harmonize the
activities of the two proposed mitigation sites for the USACE's review.
Obtaining the USACE permit is necessary for this project in order to satisfy
requirements of a FEMA Hazardous Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) contract (Phase
1 subcontract). This contract was issued shortly after Hurricanes Jean and Francis
devastated the County in 2004. The Rockridge subdivision experienced significant
flooding during Hurricane Francis and the HMGP contract was issued in order to
mitigate future flooding within the subdivision. This work effort is referred to as the
f:Apublic workslkeithmistormwater projectsVockridge suboivision\agenda items\agenda item-mpi amendment no.3 to work order
no.5-rr.doc
14
Page 2
Amendment No. 3 to Work Order No. 5-RR
BCC Meeting —April 16, 2013— CONSENT
April 4, 2013
Rockridge Surge Protection Project. The County is under Phase 1 of the HMGP
contract, which covers design, permitting, and geotechnical surveying services for the
Rockridge Surge Protection Project. Per the HMGP contract, FEMA will reimburse the
County $267,000 for expenses incurred by the County in Phase 1. Existing agreements
with Malcolm Pirnie for Phase 1 activities total $618,175.80. The USACE permit is the
only known remaining item to be completed and its procurement is required by the
HMGP contract in order to secure the FEMA Phase 1 reimbursement.
Amendment No. 3 to Work Order No. 5-RR will include the permitting services believed
necessary to finally complete the project's environmental permitting requirements. The
not-to-exceed amount of Amendment No. 3 is $1,500.
ANALYSIS
Alternative No. 1 - Approve Amendment No. 3 to Work Order No. 5-RR.
Alternative No. 2 - Reject Amendment No. 3 to Work Order No. 5-RR.
FUNDING
The funds for additional permitting services for the Rockridge Surge Protection Project
will come from Account #31524338-033130-06046, Optional Sales Tax / Engineering
Services / Rockridge Surge Protection.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve Amendment No. 3 to
Work Order No. 5-RR.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Amendment No. 3 to Work Order No. 5-RR (one copy).
DISTRIBUTION
1. Christopher R. Mora, P.E., Public Works Director
2. Budget
3. Legal
c•\�..tirn\A/nrLc\ICo 4hA \C+n mu.n+or�rn:e F�\�nnLr:dne c..tia:,.:r:n \eno v ire r\enenrtn I+-- KADI e.,,e...4---t KI— 'x to\n/nrL 15
Page 3
Amendment No. 3 to Work Order No. 5-RR
BCC Meeting —April 16, 2013—CONSENT
April 4, 2013
APPROVED AGENDA ITEM Indian River County AppQftd Date
Administration J
FOR April 16, 2013
Budget
BY Legal L' -
Public Works
Stormwater Engineering
F•kPnhlic Wnrkc\KaithM\Ctnrmwatar Prniartc\RnrkriHru-Ciihriivicinn\Ananria Itamc\Ananrin Itam-UPI Amanrimant Nn 3 to Wnd< 16
WORK ORDER NUMBER 5-RR, AMENDMENT NO. 3
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES for ADDITIONAL
�... PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS for the
ROCKRIDGE SUBDIVISION SURGE PROTECTION PROJECT
This Work Order Number 5-RR, Amendment No. 3 is entered into as of this
day of , 2013, pursuant to that certain Agreement for Professional
Services entered into as of February 21, 2006 ("Agreement"), by and between Indian
River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida ("COUNTY") and Malcolm
Pirnie, Inc. ("CONSULTANT").
The COUNTY has selected the CONSULTANT to perform the professional
services set forth on Attachment 1, attached to this Work Order and made part hereof
by this reference. The professional services will be performed by the CONSULTANT for
the fee schedule set forth in Attachment 2, attached to this Work Order and made a part
hereof by this reference. The CONSULTANT will perform the professional services
within the timeframe more particularly set forth in Attachment 3, attached to this Work
Order and made a part hereof by this reference, all in accordance with the terms and
provisions set forth in the Agreement. Pursuant to paragraph 1.4 of the Agreement,
nothing contained in any Work Order shall conflict with the terms of the Agreement and
the terms of the Agreement shall be deemed to be incorporated in each individual Work
Order as if fully set forth herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Work Order as
•. of the date first written above.
CONSULTANT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC. 11 OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By:J/ U • `�, P�� By
Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman
Title: l'ri�e �nyi�onnaew� C�iheev
Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court &
Comptroller
By
Deputy Clerk
A roved:
seph . Baird, County Administrator
Approved ed as to form anp legal;sufficiency:
,..,
Lilfi/arn K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
1
C:\Users\rawlingspWppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\LTFDOVU8\Amendment 3 to WO
5-RR-4-2-2013.doc
17
ATTACHMENT 1 to WORK ORDER NO. 5-RR, AMENDMENT No. 3
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES for ADDITIONAL
PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS for the
ROCKRIDGE SUBDIVISION SURGE PROTECTION PROJECT
INTRODUCTION/OVERVIEW
Indian River County (the "County") has requested that Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. (the
"CONSULTANT") perform additional environmental permitting services in order to
secure a permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The additional
USACE environmental permitting services — above the services approved by
Amendments No. 1 and 2 of Work Order Number 5-RR - are required because the
environmental mitigation permitting issues associated with using County owned
property (Earman Island) for this project, at the request of the USACE, are compounded
because an abutting piece of property on the island is also being permitted for another
County mitigation project (Oslo Boat Ramp). Since the CONSULTANT submitted the
proposed Rockridge mitigation plan to the USACE, the adjacent Oslo Boat Ramp
mitigation plan was revised at the request of the USACE. The CONSULTANT must
now revise the proposed Rockridge mitigation plan to accommodate the latest Oslo
Boat Ramp mitigation plan and resubmit it to the USACE. This requires Work Order No.
5-RR, Amendment No. 3, to be issued for the associated additional engineering
services related specifically to harmonize the activities of the two proposed mitigation
sites.
1.0 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING SERVICES
Provide additional environmental permitting services as necessary to permit the
Rockridge Surge Protection Project with the US Army Corps of Engineers, including but
not limited to modifying the existing Rockridge mitigation plan so it reflects the latest
Oslo Boat Ramp mitigation plan revisions. The activities to address the requirements of
the USACE will require additional manhours by the CONSULTANT to acquire the
USACE permit necessary for this project
**END OF ATTACHMENT 1**
2
C:\Users\rawlingsp\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\LTFDOVU8\Amendment 3 to WO
5-RR-4-2-2013.doc
18
ATTACHMENT 2 to WORK ORDER NO.5-RR, AMENDMENT NO. 3
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES for ADDITIONAL
�.- PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS for the
ROCKRIDGE SUBDIVISION SURGE PROTECTION PROJECT
1. COMPENSATION
The COUNTY agrees to pay and the CONSULTANT agrees to accept, a not-to-
exceed fee of $1,500.00 for services rendered according to Attachment 1 of this Work
Order. The additional work will be billed at the hourly rates set forth in the Agreement.
These engineering fees will be in addition to those indicated in Work Order No. 5-RR,
and Amendments No. 1 and 2 of the same work order.
2. PARTIAL PAYMENTS
The COUNTY shall make monthly partial payments to the CONSULTANT for all
authorized work pertaining directly to this project performed during the previous
calendar month. Using the form contained herein as Attachment 5, the CONSULTANT
shall submit invoices monthly for services performed and expenses incurred pursuant to
this Work Order during the prior month.
The CONSULTANT shall submit duly certified invoices in duplicate to the
Director of the Public Works Department. For lump sum line items, the amount
submitted shall be the prorated amount due for all work performed to date under this
phase, determined by applying the percentage of the work completed as certified by the
CONSULTANT, to the total due for this phase of the work. For time and material line
items, the amount submitted shall be based on the actual hours worked and expenses
incurred for the billing period.
The amount of the partial payment due the CONSULTANT for the work
performed to date under these phases shall be an amount calculated in accordance
with the previous paragraph, less ten percent (10%) of the invoice amount thus
determined, which shall be withheld by the COUNTY as retainage, and less previous
payments. Per F.S. 218.74(2), the COUNTY will pay approved invoices on or before
the forty-fifth day after the COUNTY receives the CONSULTANT's invoice.
Per F.S. 218.74(2), the ten percent (10%) retainage withheld shall be paid in full
to the CONSULTANT by the COUNTY, on or before the forty-fifth day after the date of
final acceptance of the Work by the Public Works Director.
**END OF ATTACHMENT 2**
3
C:\Users\rawlingspWppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\LTFDOVU8Wmendment 3 to WO
5-RR-4-2-2013.doc 9
ATTACHMENT 3 to WORK ORDER NO. 5-RR, AMENDMENT NO. 3
.,. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES for ADDITIONAL
PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS for the
ROCKRIDGE SUBDIVISION SURGE PROTECTION PROJECT
1. TIME FOR COMPLETION
Time is of the essence for this project. The CONSULTANT shall complete the
final design of this project within 30 calendar days from the COUNTY's Authorization to
Proceed.
**END OF ATTACHMENT 3**
4
C:\Users\rawlingsp\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\LTFDOVU8\Amendment 3 to WO
5-RR-4-2-2013.doc
20
CONSENT AGENDA
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AGENDA ITEM
Michael C. Zito, Assistant County Administrator/
Department of General Services
Date: April 10, 2013
To: The Honorable Board of County Commissioners
Thru: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
From: Michael Zito, Assistant County Administrator
Subject: HUD Grant Renewals for Supportive Housing Program Grants and Shelter Plus
Care Grant
BACKGROUND:
Applications were submitted for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Continuum of Care (CoC) Program. The following
applications were selected for funding in the total amount of$673,164.00
The grants are divided into two categories: Supportive Housing Program Grants and Shelter Plus Care Grant.
• The Supportive HousingLPropram Grants are:
FL0115L4H091205 2012 Transitional Housing Renewal, $70,063.00
FLOI16L4H091205 2012 HMIS Expansion Renewal, $36,177.00
FL0308L411091204 2012 CoCWideHMIS Renewal, $25,856.00
• The Shelter Plus Care Grants are:
FLOI 14L4H091205 2012 Alcohope Renewal $ 71,328.00
FL0119L4H091205 2012 New Chronics $109,200.00
FLO120L4H091205,2012 New Horizons 1 $159,600.00
FL036OL4HO91203,2012 Indian River Chronics Renewal $ 92,400.00
FL0440L 4HO91201 2012 New Horizons 2 $108,540.00
FUNDING:
There is no cash match required from Indian River County for any of these agreements.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Board: 1) acknowledge the renewal of awards by HUD in the aggregate amount of
$673,164; 2) upon receipt of the original HUD agreements and with approval by County Attorney, authorize
the Board Chairman to execute; 3) allow the Treasure Coast Homeless Services Council to submit the grant
agreements on behalf of the County.
ATTACHMENTS:
U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development letter of 03-13-2013
Treasure Coast Homeless Services Council Inc. letter of 04-09-2013
Sample of previous year Program Renewal Grant Agreement
Approved Agenda Item Indian River Co. Approved Date
For: April 16, 2013 Administration �/ 11
County Attorney
'1y. Budget 1d
/Tosep A.Baird Department o i
County Administrator Risk Management
FAAssistant County Administrator\AGENDA ITEMS\2013\BCC 04-APR 2013\BCC Memo-HUD Renewals 4-16-2013.doc f� 1
�:
!�k ill;l U.S.DGt?4R'fAfil NT OF tIQUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
* x" WASHINGTON,DC 20410-7000
''711�� '�aaf.•n`n`
OFFICE OF ASSISTANT SECRETARY
FO.RCOMMUNr'Y PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
March 13, 2013
Mr. Bradley Bernauer
Director, County Human Services
Indian River County Board of Commissioners
1801 27th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Dear Mr. Bernauer:
Congratulations! 1 am delighted to inform you that the Fiscal Year(FY)2012 Continuum
of Care(CoQ Program application(s) your organization submitted was(were)selected for funding
in the total amount of$673,164. The enclosure lists the name(s)of the individual project(s),the
project number(s),and the award amount(s) for each conditionally selected application(s).
The CDC Program is an important part of HUD's mission. CoCs all over the country
continue to improve the lives of homeless men,women,and children through their local planning
efforts and through the direct housing and service programs funded under the FY 2012
competition.The programs and CoCs funded through the CoC Program continue to demonstrate
their value by improving accountability and performance every year. HUD commends your
organization for its work and encourages it to continue to strive for excellence in the fight against
homelessness.
Congratulations again on your conditional award. Your local HUD field office will be
sending a letter to provide your organization with more information about finalizing its award(s).
HUD is counting on your organization to use these important resources in a timely and effective
manner.
Sincerely,
Mark Johnon
Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Special Needs
Enclosure
A'}5'SV.(kUd.gOV espunol.hud.gov
22
Enclosure
FL044OL4HO91201
FL-509- REN -2012 New Horizons 2
$108.540
FLO120L4HO91205
FL-509-REN-2012 New Horizons 1
$159,600
FLOl14L4HO91205
FL-509-REN -2012 Alcohope Renewal
$71.328
FLO I 16L4HO91205
FL-509-REN-2012 HMIS Expansion Renewal
$36,177
FL036OL4HO91203
FL-509- REN-2012 I R Chronics Renewal
$92,400
FLO 119L4HO9I205
FL-509-REN-2012 New Chronics
$109,200
FL0308L4HO91204
FL-509- REN-2012 CoCwide HMIS Renewal
$25,856
FLO I 15L4HO91205
FL-509- REN -2012 Transitional Housing Renewal
$70.063
Total Awarded: $673,164
23
Chairman, Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
1801 27th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Dear Commissioner: 4/9/2013
Attached is the HUD Congratulations letter indicating the renewal of our 2012 Continuum of Care awards.
The letter lists all new awards,including their new grant numbers and amounts. Contracts with new
grant numbers will be forthcoming at the end of this month.These renewals were previously approved
for submission to HUD and will be finalized when the contracts are executed by the Chair of the BOCC.
None of these renewals require any contribution or match from Indian River County.
Following is a table which provides you with the old grant numbers for your reference. Please note that any
obliation for match will be met by the agencywhen match is required.
Name JOLD Number I Match ITYPE INew Amount
Obliation for match will be met by the Treasure Coast Homeles Services Council for two awards.
2012 CoCWideHMIS FL0308B4H091103 25% HMIS $25,856
2012 HMIS Expansion Renewal FL0116B4H091104 25% HMIS $ 36,177.00
Obligation for match will be met by Homeless Family Center for one award:
2012 Transitional Housing Renewal 1
11-0115841-1091104 I 25%ISupportive Services $ 70,063.00
These awards do not require a cash match. Supportive services will be provided by New Horizons:
2012 New Horizons 1 FL0120C41-1091104 0 Permanent Housing $ 159,600.00
2012 New Horizons 2 FL29C709001 0 Permanent Housing $ 108,540.00
2012 Indian River Chronics FL0360C4F091102 0 Permanent Housing $ 92,400.00
2012 New Chronics FL0119C4H091104 0 Permanent Housing $ 109,200.00
2012 Alcohope Renewal FL0114C4H091104 0 Permanent Housing $ 71,328.00
TOTAL RENEWALS $673,164
N
.p
Please feel free to contact me if you have questions.
Louise Hubbard, Executive Director
Tr e Coast Hom S ces C ncil, Inc.
N
C.TI
SAMPLE COPY
PgtAENr0
oeV_ Jil � y0 U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Community Planning and Development
400 West Bay Street
Suite 1015
9e� ati�ti4e� Jacksonville,FI,32202
Grant Number:FLO1 I5B4HO91104
Project Name:FL-509 -REN-2011 Transitional Housing Renewal
Total Award Amount: $70,063
Component: SSO
Recipient: Indian River County Board of County Commissioners
Contact Person and Title:Bradley Bernauer,Director, County Human Services
Telephone Number: (772) 567-8000
Fax Number: (772) 567-599I
E-mail Address: bbernauer@doh.state.fl.us
EIN/Tax ID Number: 59-6000674
DUNS Number: 079208989
Effective Date: June 1, 2012
Project Location(s):
2011 SUPPORTIVE HOUSING PROGRAM
RENEWAL GRANT AGREEMENT
This Grant Agreement is made by and between the United States Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) and the Recipient,which is described in section I of
Attachment A, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
The assistance which is the subject of this Grant Agreement is authorized by the
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act 42 U.S.C. 11381 (hereafter"the Act"). The term
"grant"or"grant funds" means the assistance provided under this Agreement. This grant
agreement will be governed by the Act;the Supportive Housing rule codified at 24 CFR 583,
which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Attachment B, and the Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA),that was published in two parts.The first part was the Policy Requirements
and General Section of the NOFA,and the second part was the Continuum of Care Homeless
Assistance Programs section of the NOFA, which are located at hM2://archives.hud.jzov/fundinv/
2011/fundsavail.cfm The term "Application"means the original and renewal application
submissions, including the certifications and assurances,the Technical Submission,and any
information or documentation required to meet any grant award conditions, on the basis of which
HUD approved a grant. The Application is incorporated herein as part of this Agreement,
however, in the event of a conflict between any part of the Application and any part of the Grant
Agreement, the Iatter shall control. The Secretary agrees, subject to the terms of the Grant
Agreement, to provide the grant funds in the amount specified at section 2 of Attachment A for the
approved project described in the application. The Recipient agrees, subject to the terms of the
Grant Agreement,to use the grant funds for eligible activities during the term specified at section
3 of Attachment A.
www.hnd.gov esp=o1.hud.gov Page 1
26
SAMPLE COPY
�- The Recipient must provide a 25 percent cash match for supportive services.
The Recipient agrees to comply with all requirements of this Grant Agreement and to
accept responsibility for such compliance by any entities to which it makes grant funds available.
The Recipient agrees to participate in a local Homeless Management Information System
(HMIS)when implemented.
The Recipient and project sponsor, if any,will not knowingly allow illegal activities in
any unit assisted with grant funds.
The Recipient agrees to draw grant funds at least quarterly.
For any project funded by this grant, which is also financed through the use of the Low
Income Housing Tax Credit,the following applies:
HUD recognizes that the Recipient or the project sponsor will or has financed this project
through the use of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit. The Recipient or project
sponsor shall be the general partner of a limited partnership formed for that purpose. If
grant funds were used for acquisition,rehabilitation or construction,then,throughout a
period of twenty years from the date of initial occupancy or the initial service provision,
the Recipient or project sponsor shall continue as general partner and shall ensure that the
project is operated in accordance with the requirements of this Grant Agreement, the
applicable regulations and statutes. Further,the said limited partnership shall own the
project site throughout that twenty-year period.If grant funds were not used for
acquisition, rehabilitation or new construction,then the period shall not be twenty years,
but shall be for the term of the grant agreement and any renewal thereof. Failure to
comply with the terms of this paragraph shall constitute a default under the Grant
Agreement.
A default shall consist of any use of grant funds for a purpose other than as authorized by
this Grant Agreement, failure in the Recipient's duty to provide the supportive housing for the
minimum term in accordance with the requirements of the Attachment A provisions,
noncompliance with the Act or Attachment B provisions,any other material breach of the Grant
Agreement, or misrepresentations in the application submissions which, if known by HUD,would
have resulted in this grant not being provided. Upon due notice to the Recipient of the occurrence
of any such default and the provision of a reasonable opportunity to respond,HUD may take one
or more of the following actions:
(a) direct the Recipient to submit progress schedules for completing approved
activities; or
(b) issue a letter of warning advising the Recipient of the default,establishing a date by
which corrective actions must be completed and putting the Recipient on notice that
more serious actions will be taken if the default is not corrected or is repeated;or
(c) direct the Recipient to establish and maintain a management plan that assigns
responsibilities for carrying out remedial actions; or
(d) direct the Recipient to suspend,discontinue or not incur costs for the affected
activity; or
www.hud.gov espanol.hud_gov Page 2
27
SAMPLE COPY
(e) reduce or recapture the grant; or
(f) direct the Recipient to reimburse the program accounts for costs inappropriately
charged to the program;or
(g) continue the grant with a substitute Recipient of HUD's choosing; or
(h) other appropriate action including, but not limited to, any remedial action legally
available, such as affirmative litigation seeking declaratory judgment, specific
performance, damages,temporary or permanent injunctions and any other available
remedies.
No delay or omission by HUD in exercising any right or remedy available to it under this
Grant Agreement shall impair any such right or remedy or constitute a waiver or acquiescence in
any Recipient default.
The Grantee shall comply with requirements established by the Office of Management and
Budget(OMB)concerning the Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System(DUNS),
the Central Contractor Registration(CCR) database, and the Federal Funding Accountability and
Transparency Act, including Appendix A to Part 25 of the Financial Assistance Use of Universal
Identifter and Central Contractor Registration, 75 Fed.Reg.55671 (Sept. 14,2010)(to be
codified at 2 CFR part 25)and Appendix A to Part 170 of the Requirements for Federal Funding
Accountability and Transparency Act Implementation, 75 Fed.Reg. 55663 (Sept. 14, 2010)
(to be codified at 2 CFR part 170).
This Grant Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties hereto,and
may be amended only in writing executed by HUD and the Recipient. More specifically,the
Recipient shall not change recipients, location, services, or population to be served nor shift more
than 10 percent of funds from one approved type of eligible activity to another without the prior
written approval of HUD. The effective date of this Grant Agreement shall be the date of
execution by HUD, except with prior written approval by HUD.
www.hud.gov espanol.hud.gov Page 3
28
SAMPLE COPY
SIGNATURES
This Grant Agreement is hereby executed as follows:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
By:
Signature and Date
�r
Print name of signatory
Director
Title
RECIPIENT
Name of Organization
By:
Authorized Signature and Date
Print name of signatory
Title
www.hud.gov espmol.hud.gov Page 4
29
SAMPLE COPY
`�— ATTACHMENT A
1. The Recipient is Indian River County Board of County Commissioners.
2. HUD's total fund obligation for this project is$70,063,which shall be allocated as follows:
a. Leasing $0
b. Supportive services $70,063
c. Operating costs $0
d. HMIS $0
e. Administration $0
3. Although this agreement will become effective only upon the execution hereof by both parties,
upon execution,the term of this agreement shall run from the end of the Recipient's final operating
year under the original Grant Agreement or, if the original Grant Agreement was amended to
extend its term, the term of this agreement shall run from the end of the extension of the original
Grant Agreement term for a period of twelve(12)months. Eligible costs, as defined by the Act
and Attachment B, incurred between the end of Recipient's final operating year under the original
Grant Agreement, or extension thereof, and the execution of this Renewal Grant Agreement may
be paid with funds from the first operating year of this Renewal Grant.
www.hud.gov espanol.hud.gov Page 5
30
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BOARD MEMORANDUM
Date: April 4, 2013
To: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
From: Vincent Burke, P.E., Director of Utility Services/
Prepared By: Terry Southard, Operations Manager C`N`D'
Subject: Final Pay for IRC Bid No.2011032 to Data Flow Systems,Inc.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:
On Tuesday May 10, 2011, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) awarded Bid No. 2011032 in the amount of
$109,972.00 to Data Flow Systems, Inc. The bid's purpose was to: 1) upgrade and automate the data flow system at
existing reuse sites,and 2)to program the system to maximize the delivery of reuse water to our customers.
On August 16, 2011 the BCC approved Change Order No. 1 in the amount of$16,839.65 for additional equipment and
parts. This brought the total amount of the project to$126,811.65.
Data Flow Systems, Inc. has completed the project and has requested fmal payment. Previous invoices in the amount of
$118,023.55 have been paid to Data Flow. Final payment in the amount of$8,788.10 will complete the County's obligation
to the company.
.... FUNDING:
Funds for this project are in the Reuse Distribution Automation accounts in the Operating Budget. Operating revenues
are generated from water and sewer sales.
Description Account Number Amount
Reuse Distribution Automation 471-169000-11502 $2,576.33
Reuse Distribution Automation-Retainage 471-206000-11502 $6,211.77
RECOMMENDATION:
It is Staff's recommendation that the BCC approve release of retainage and final payment to Data Flow Systems, Inc. in
the amount of$8,788.10.
Attachment:
Attachment A: Data Flow Systems Invoice
Indian River Co. Approved Date
APPROVED FOR AGENDA: Administration °�///3
Utilities Q 3
Utilities .t
By: Legal / tf
oseph A. Baird, County Administrator
Budget
For
".. Date
31
ATTACHMENT
Data Flow systems, Inc. INVOICE
605 N.John Rodes Blvd.
Melbourne,FL 32934 Invoice Number: 461250
Date: 04105f2013
-- Aa�aflaw ��trxls Page Number. 1
Order Number: 28874-SE
F-O.B: SHIPPING POINT
Mi 7.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITIES INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITIES
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
1800 27TH STREET 1800 27TH STREET
VERO BEACH, FL 32960 VERO BEACH,FL 32960
USA USA
14A
-W T-A
TO
INDRIV-SW COUNTY PROJECT Net 30 Freight:Billed
10NMMETHM
HOW
UPS GROUND 0410512013 05/05/2013
1"A' _0
-X,
ip
130
0 COMPLETION OF PUNCH LIST ITEMS $2,576.33 $2,576.33
1 0 RELEASE RETAINAGE $6,211.77 $6,211.77
SUB TOTAL' $8,788.10
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE' $8,788.10
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ON HOW THIS INVOICE WAS CALCULATED,OR QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OF OUR OTHER PRODUCTS,
PLEASE CONTACT OUR SALES OFFICE.
PLEASE REFERENCE THIS INVOICE NUMBER ON YOUR CHECK AND REMIT TO: Data Flow Systems,Inc.
605 N.John Rodes Blvd.
Melbourne,FL 32934
32-
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Facilities Management Division
Department of Public Works
Date: April 10, 2013 CONSENT AGENDA
To: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
Through: Christopher R. Mora, P.E., Public Works Director C-V111-
From:
Lynn Williams, Manager, Facilities Management Division
Subject: Approval of First Extension of Custodial Services Agreement with JMC Services, Inc.
BACKGROUND:
On January 24, 2012 the Board of County Commissioners approved the agreement with JMC
Services of Winter Park, Florida for custodial services in County facilities. Amendment #1 was
approved on April 3, 2012 and added two locations to the agreement.
The current contract was for one year with two one year renewals and expired on February 28,
2013. Amendment #2 extends the contract through February 2014 at which time an additional
renewal will be available with satisfactory service from the Contractor. No changes to the terms
conditions or pricing is affected by the renewal. Annual cost of the current contract is
$502,246.20.
FUNDING:
Funding for the Custodial services is included in the operating budget Account #00122019-
033490 for Facilities Management. This department is included in the General Fund, which is
supported primarily by Ad Valorem Taxes. The agreement also includes service for the Main
and North County Libraries, funding for these facilities is included in: 00110971-033490 and
00111271-033490 respectively. These departments are included in the General Fund, which is
primarily supported by Ad Valorem taxes in addition to other revenue sources (Half-Cent Sales
Tax, State Board revenues, etc.)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board approve the First Extension of Custodial Services Agreement
and authorize the Chairman to execute the Agreement.
APPROVED AGENDA ITEM:
Indian River Co. ApptQved Q.1te
Administration W 01115
B:?se"ph
Count Attorney - t
Baird, County Administrator Bud etra r3De artment FApril 16 2013 disk-AAanagant
F:\Public Works\Luanne M\Facilities Management\custodial services\Amendment#2 JMC Agreement BCC 04-10-
13.doc 33
FIRST EXTENSION OF CUSTODIAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
This First Extension of Custodial Services Agreement ("First Extension") is entered into
effective April , 2013, by and between Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State
of Florida, 1801 27th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960 ("County") and JMC Services, Inc., a Florida
corporation, having a principal place of business at 37 West Smith Street, Winter Garden, FL
34777 ("Contractor").
BACKGROUND RECITALS
WHEREAS, the County and the Contractor entered into a Custodial Services Agreement
("Agreement") dated January 24, 2012 and effective March 1, 2012; and
WHEREAS, the since that time, the Parties have amended the Agreement on April 3, 2012
to include two buildings not included in the initial Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the County and the Contractor desire to extend the Agreement for an
additional year as contemplated by Indian River County Request for Proposal #2012021, Custodial
Services of County Buildings.
NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, covenant and
agree to extend the Agreement as follows:
1. The background recitals are true and correct and form a material part of this First
Extension of Custodial Services Agreement.
2. The Custodial Services Agreement ("Agreement") dated January 24, 2012, as amended
on April 3, 2012, is hereby extended until February 28, 2014.
3. All terms and conditions of the Agreement not amended herein remain in full force and
effect.
34
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the County and the Contractor have caused this First Extension
of Custodial Services Agreement to be signed by their respective duly authorized officers as of the
day and year first stated above.
Contractor: JMC SERVICES, INC. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By By
Debra Cito, President Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman
Date approved by BCC:
nunc pro tunc March 1, 2013
Attest:
Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court
And Comptroller
By:
Deputy Clerk
Approved as to form and legal ufficie
4
O =2
.- By:
William K. DeBraal
Deputy County Attorney
35
Leslie R. Swan
Supervisor of Elections
Indian River County
Your Vote Is Your Voice...Speak Up!
April 8, 2013
Honorable Joseph Flescher
Indian River County Commission
180127 th Street, Building A
Vero Beach FL 32960
Dear Chairman Joseph Flescher:
The Supervisor of Elections office conducted an election on March 12, 2013 for the municipalities of
Indian River Shores and Vero Beach. The municipalities have reimbursed the Supervisor of Elections
office for the cost of conducting these elections. The city revenues received from both municipalities
total $ 28,134.
In addition to the municipal election held in March, the Supervisor of Elections office assisted in
conducting a special election to fill the vacancy of Hospital District Seat 3. The hospital district
conducted their election with the assistance from our office. The elections office was reimbursed for
expenses incurred for setting up the election. The amount the Election office was reimbursed for
election expenses was$ 1,885.92.
1 am asking to have both the city revenues we received from the March election and the reimbursement
we received from the Hospital District to be rolled back into our 2012/2013 budget. These elections
were not accounted for in our initial 2012/2013 budget.
Should you have any questions regarding the appropriation of these funds please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Most sincerely,
Leslie R. Swan
Supervisor of Elections
437543 rd Avenue, Vero Beach, FL 32967 • (772) 226-3440 a FAX (772) 770-5367 36
www.voteindianriver.com
Departmental
Community Development-
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDUM EMERGENCY AGENDA ITEM
April 16, 2013
AGENDA ITEM: 12A1
TO: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
DEPAfiffWNT HEAD CONCURRENCE
Robert M. Keating, AICP; Co munity De elopment Director
FROM: Phillip J. Matson, AICP
MPO Staff Director
DATE: April 12, 2013
SUBJECT: Consideration of Lease Agreement with the City of Vero Beach for new
Transit Hub at 17th Street
It is requested that the information presented herein be given formal consideration by the
Indian River County Board of County Commissioners at its meeting of April 16, 2013.
SUMMARY
Since 2010, Indian River County's fixed route public transportation system, the
GoLine, has utilized a site at the County Administration building as its Central
County transit hub. Although the site has worked well operationally, the City of
Vero Beach has requested that the GoLine find an alternative location for the
hub because of concerns from local residents. In the spring of 2012, an
alternative location was suggested by City of Vero Beach staff. That location is
a city-owned parcel on 17th Street west of the FEC railroad tracks. In September
of 2012, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) awarded a Bus Livability
Grant of$1,150,000 to Indian River County for constructing hub improvements.
Recently, the City of Vero Beach and Indian River County have finalized a
lease agreement between the City and the County for use of the 17th Street site
as a transit hub (Attachment 1). Staff recommends that the Board of County
Commissioners consider the attached lease agreement, provide staff with any
comments, and approve the attached lease agreement.
DESCRIPTION, CONDITIONS AND ANALYSIS
Since 2010, Indian River County's Public Transportation System, the GoLine, has utilized a
site at the south side of the County Administration Building as its main passenger hub. Though
it lacks amenities such as permanent restrooms and shelters, the current hub is paved and has
worked well from an operational standpoint. Nonetheless, the City of Vero Beach has
requested that the GoLine find an alternative location for the hub because of concerns from
FAC.--y De 1.pm \Users\MPO\Meetings\5Cn1013\T1a .t Hub a1 171h 511—.d. 1
local residents. In an effort to identify an alternative location for the hub, MPO and Senior
Resource Association (SRA) staff identified and analyzed a number of publicly owned sites in
east-central Indian River County. Most of the sites identified, including the Vero Beach
Airport, Downtown Vero Beach, and the School District's old maintenance complex, lacked
sufficient public support and/or had technical issues that prevented those sites from being
considered as the permanent location of the future transit hub.
In the spring of 2012, City of Vero Beach staff offered an alternative location for the hub. That
location is a city-owned parcel on the south side of 17th Street west of the FEC railroad tracks.
In September of 2012, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) awarded a Bus Livability
Grant in the amount of$1,150,000 to Indian River County for constructing hub improvements.
In December of 2012, county staff presented a lease to the Board of County Commissioners for
use of the 17th Street site as the new hub location. At that time, county staff recommended
against the then-proposed lease because of unresolved maintenance responsibilities between
Indian River County and the City of Vero Beach. The primary issue was whether the City or
the County would be responsible for the maintenance of landscaping at the 17th Street location.
Since that time, staff from the county, city, MPO and SRA examined a number of alternative
hub locations,but were unable to identify another viable site for the hub.
Recently, MPO and SRA staff reconsidered the proposed 17th Street location and determined
that the location is acceptable as the site of the County's transit facility. As part of that
reconsideration, Indian River County and the City of Vero Beach resolved a number of
outstanding issues pertaining to the long term maintenance and operation of the facility.
Specifically, the County agreed to maintain shelters, bathrooms, and other transit amenities at
the site and also agreed to maintain site landscaping. Those responsibilities are identified in the
agreement between Indian River County and the City of Vero Beach for the use of the 17th
Street site (Attachment 1). Because the proposed site can function as the transit system's hub
and because there are no outstanding maintenance issues, the project is now ready to proceed at
the 17th Street site.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners consider the attached lease
agreement, provide staff with any comments, and approve the attached lease agreement.
ATTACHMENT
1. Lease Agreement with the City of Vero Beach for 17th Street Transit Hub Site
Indian River A roved Date APPROVED AGENDA ITEM:
Co. / �}
Admin. �`�s % FOR: l ✓lC��
Legal
Budget 1545 BY: ( Y
Dept. a 4
Risk Mgr.
FACom -W Development\Users\MPD\Meetings\BCC\2033\iansit Nub at 111h 51—t.dx 2
LEASE AGREEMENT
By and between
The City of Vero Beach, Florida
And
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida
This Lease Agreement, hereafter "Agreement," entered into on this day of
, 2013 by the CITY OF VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, a Florida
municipal corporation, whose mailing address is P.O. Box 1389, Vero Beach, FL32961-
1389, hereinafter "Landlord", and the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of Florida,
whose mailing address is 180127 th Street,Vero Beach, FL 32960, hereinafter"Tenant."
WHEREAS, Tenant contracts with the Senior Resource Association, Inc. (SRA),
as the County's Transit Provider and the County's Community Transportation
Coordinator, for the operation of the GoLine Indian River Transit which is a fixed route
bus system that runs throughout the County and to Indian River State College's main
campus in Ft. Pierce and operation of the Community Coach, paratransit service which is
a door to door transportation; and
WHEREAS, the ridership on the GoLine buses has increased necessitating a
permanent bus and public transportation hub, hereinafter "Transit Hub," with restrooms,
shelters and other related needs; and
WHEREAS, the GoLine transportation system is an asset to all the municipalities
in the County, including the Cities of Vero Beach, Fellsmere and Sebastian and the
Parties agree and confirm that the Transit Hub constitutes a public purpose and therefore
Tenant shall pay no ad valorem taxes on the leased Premises; and
WHEREAS, in order to continue and improve the GoLine system for the benefit
of city and county residents, the parties are willing to enter into a long term lease for a
parcel of property owned by Landlord located on 16th Street for construction of a Transit
Hub; and
WHEREAS, the Tenant has applied and has been approved to receive a federal
grant for construction of a Transit Hub to better serve ridership; and
WHEREAS, Tenant proposes to plan, design, permit and build a permanent
Transit Hub together with other site improvements on the leased property to improve the
GoLine system; and
WHEREAS, upon completion of the Transit Hub, Tenant will enter into an
assignment, sublease or transfer with or to SRA for the use of the Transit Hub and the
property subject to this lease; and
WHEREAS, Tenant and Landlord find that the leasing and use of the public lands
by Tenant for the purposes stated herein constitute a public use and benefit.
Attachment 1
CADocuments and Settings\Bfreeman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK69\Transit Hub lease 4 11 2013.doc 1
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein,
and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are
hereby acknowledged,Landlord and Tenant agree as follows:
WITNESSETH :
1. RECITATIONS. The foregoing "WHEREAS" clauses are hereby adopted and
incorporated herein.
2. LEASED PROPERTY.
Landlord hereby leases to Tenant that certain real property located in the 1200 block on
the south side of 16th Street, Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida, consisting of
69,870 square feet of land, as more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto
and incorporated herein, hereinafter"Premises."
3. RESERVATION OF ACCESS EASEMENT.
Landlord reserves a non-exclusive right of access, "Access Easement," over the westerly
40 feet +/- of the Premises to access Landlord's adjacent facilities as depicted in Exhibit
B attached hereto and incorporated herein.
4. TERM; OPTION TO RENEW.
(a) The initial term of this Agreement shall be forty (40) years, commencing
on , 2013, and terminating on , 2053.
(b) This Agreement may be renewed for three additional ten(10)year terms at the
conclusion of the initial term and each of the two successive terms; provided, however,
that Tenant is not in default hereunder, and provided that both parties agree to such
renewal in writing at least sixty days prior to the termination of the initial term and the
termination of each successive term.
5. RENT.
During the term(s) of this Agreement, Tenant shall pay Landlord rent in the amount of
twenty-five ($25.00) dollars per year upon execution of this Agreement and thereafter
annually on or before the anniversary of the execution date of this Agreement. In addition
to the above rental payments, Tenant shall pay all applicable taxes, fees, and assessments,
if any. Such rental payments shall be subject to adjustment for any renewal terms by
agreement of the parties.
6. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT BY TENANT.
Tenant may terminate this Agreement at any time by providing sixty days written notice.
CADocuments and Settings\Bfreeman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK69\Transit Hub lease 4 11 2013.doc2
7. USE OF PREMISES.
During the term of this Agreement, Tenant shall use the Premises for a Transit Hub and
other like and associated uses, but for no other purposes. Tenant shall not use the
Premises, or any part thereof, for any illegal, immoral, or improper purposes. Aside from
the disturbance, noise or annoyance associated with the day to day operation of a Transit
Hub, Tenant shall not make or allow any disturbance, noise, or annoyance unreasonably
detrimental to the Premises or the comfort and peace of the inhabitants of the vicinity of
the premises. Action of the Transit Hub patrons after leaving the Premises shall not be
deemed to be the actions of the Tenant and shall not constitute the basis of a default under
this section by Tenant.
8. PROPERTY LEASED "AS IS"• PERMITTING AND LICENSING
REQUIREMENTS.
Tenant agrees that the Premises are being leased "as is" and Landlord makes no
warranties in relation thereto. Landlord agrees that the Premises have the appropriate
zoning classification for Tenant's intended use as a Transit Hub. Tenant, at Tenant's sole
expense, shall be solely responsible for obtaining all required zoning and site plan
approvals, permits, and licenses necessary for Tenant's use of the Premises. Tenant
agrees to make all necessary applications for approvals for the intended use of the
Premises and attend any meetings or hearings associated with such applications.
However, if any application should be denied or if conditions are added to any approval
such that in the sole opinion of Tenant are unacceptable, Tenant may terminate this
Agreement in accordance with paragraph 6. Other than stated herein, Landlord makes no
other warranty or guarantee of the condition of the Premises or any improvements.
Tenant has examined the Premises and has determined that the Premises are suitable for
Tenant's purposes.
8.1 Permittinf, and Construction Cooperation. Landlord shall cooperate with
Tenant in connection with any permits, applications, and other requests, as necessary or
required in connection with the design, planning, permitting and construction of the
Transit Hub and associated improvements on the Premises.
9. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW.
Tenant shall comply with all of the laws, rules, ordinances, and regulations of the City,
County, State and Federal Governments, and agencies regarding the use of the Premises.
Violation of any law, rule, ordinance or regulation by Tenant may result in immediate
termination of this Agreement.
10. INSTALLATION AND REMOVAL OF EQUIPMENT AND FIXTURES.
Tenant shall have the right to install on the Premises such site improvements, buildings,
structures, equipment, fixtures and other items necessary or convenient for its use of the
Premises in compliance with City codes. All equipment and personal property purchased
CADocuments and Settings\Bfreeman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK69\Transit Hub lease 4 11 2013.doc 3
by Tenant and placed in, on, or about the Premises, including equipment not affixed to
the realty, shall remain the property of Tenant. Tenant may remove same on or before the
termination of this Agreement. In addition, any and all personal property not attached or
installed in any building or structure shall remain Tenant's property and shall be removed
on or prior to termination of this Agreement.
11. PUBLIC UTILITIES.
Tenant will pay within time allowed for payment without penalties, all charges for water,
sewer and electricity and all other public utilities which may arise from Tenant's use of
the Premises. Tenant agrees to hold Landlord harmless from any interruption in the use
and services of such commodities and for payment of charges for any such utility
services.
12. RELEASE HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION.
To the extent allowed by law, Tenant hereby releases and shall indemnify and hold
Landlord harmless from and against any and all liabilities, claims, demands, damages,
actions, lawsuits, judgments, penalties, losses, costs, or expenses, of any kind or nature,
including, but not limited to, costs of investigation and attorneys' fees and costs through
trial and appeal, arising out of, incidental to, or in any way connected with the condition
of the Premises, to the extent that such condition arises out of or is caused by Tenant's
use or occupation of the Premises and is not caused by the negligence or is the fault of the
Landlord.
13. INSURANCE.
(a) Property Insurance. During the term(s) of this Agreement, at Tenant's sole
cost and expense. Tenant shall place the Premises, all buildings and their contents on its
lists of lands and property covered under its policies of self reinsurance and eV'ff excess
insurance and shall furnish Landlord a certificate of said coverage.
(b) Commercial General Liability Insurance. During the term(s) of this
Agreement, Tenant shall procure, maintain and pay for commercial general liability
insurance and automobile liability insurance providing coverage which protects Tenant
and Landlord, from any and all claims and liabilities for bodily injury and property
damage arising from operations, premises, fire, and other related issues. Such insurance
coverage shall have a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.00. The
insurance policy shall name Landlord as an insured and shall be endorsed to include
provisions for at least thirty (30) days advance notice to Landlord by the insurer prior to
any policy change, amendment, termination, or expiration of coverage. Tenant shall
direct its insurance agent to provide Landlord with a policy, a copy of the additional
insured endorsement containing language no less restrictive than ISO Form CG 20 10 07
04 or ISO CG 20 33 07 04, and a certificate of insurance stating that the coverages as
provided herein are in force prior to the commencement date of this Agreement. Tenant's
insurance shall be primary and any other insurance that may be maintained by the City
shall be in excess of and shall not contribute with Tenant's insurance.
CADocuments and Settings\Bfreeman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK69\Transit Hub lease 4 11 2013.doc4
13.1 Dama;e by Fire or Other Causes. In the event that any improvements
on the Premises are destroyed or so damaged by fire or other casualty as to be unfit for
occupancy or use, Tenant shall have the option to rebuild or repair the damaged
improvements at Tenant's expense or Tenant may choose to terminate this Agreement
and the tenancy shall thereby be ended. Landlord shall not be liable to rebuild, replace or
repair said premises for the benefit of Tenant.
14. MAINTENANCE OF PREMISES:
(a) Tenant's Duties.
1. Tenant agrees to make any and all repairs and improvements to the
buildings and other improvements constructed on the Premises, including, but not limited
to, the roof(s), air conditioning, machinery, plumbing, wiring, pipes, electrical fixtures,
and all other equipment associated with the buildings and other improvements located on
the Premises;
2. Tenant agrees to mow grass and maintain landscaping and shrubbery;
3. Tenant agrees to perform day to day cleaning of the interior of the
improvements, such as mopping floors, cleaning restrooms, cleaning windows and
emptying the garbage to maintain the improvements in a clean and attractive condition;
and
4. Tenant agrees to install, at Tenant's sole expense, a security fence/gate
at the south end of the Premises per Landlord's specifications as required by the site plan.
5. Tenant agrees to maintain the Access Easement as depicted in Exhibit
B.
(b) Landlord's Duties.
1. Landlord agrees to maintain the security fence/gate installed by Tenant
pursuant to (a) 4, above.
2. Landlord agrees to repair any damage done to the Access Easement as a
direct result of Landlord's use of the Access Easement as depicted in Exhibit B.
15. RIGHT TO INSPECT.
The Landlord may enter and inspect the Premises at all reasonable hours to insure the
Premises are being properly maintained and kept in good condition.
16. ASSIGNMENT OR SUBLEASE.
Tenant shall be permitted to assign, sublease or transfer any part of this Agreement with
prior written consent of Landlord to the SRA or Tenant's then current Transit Provider or
CADocuments and Settings\Bfreeman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK69\Transit Hub lease 4 11 2013.doc 5
Community Transportation Coordinator upon notice to Landlord. Tenant shall not
assign, sublease or transfer this Agreement to any other parties without the written
consent of Landlord. Tenant shall not mortgage or otherwise encumber the Premises or
any improvement thereon.
17. ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS.
In the event there arises any dispute or litigation over the terms and conditions of this
Agreement or Tenant's occupancy or use of the Premises each party shall be responsible
for its own attorney's fees, costs and suit money expended to resolve that dispute.
18. NOTICE.
Any notices which are required, or which either party may desire to serve upon the other,
shall be in writing and shall be deemed served when hand delivered, or when actually
received via U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to
Tenant at: To Landlord at:
Indian River County City of Vero Beach
Attn: Public Works Director Attn: City Manager
1801 27th Street 1053 20th Place
Vero Beach, Florida 32960 P.O. Box 1389
Vero Beach, Florida 32961-1389
These addresses may be changed by either party by providing written notification to the
other.
19. RADON GAS.
Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas that, when it has accumulated in a building
in sufficient quantities may present health risks to persons who are exposed to it over
time. Levels of radon that exceed federal and state guidelines have been found in
buildings in Florida. Additional information regarding radon testing may be obtained
from you county public health unit. This paragraph is included pursuant to the
requirement of Florida Statutes Chapter 404.056 for the purpose of public information
and notification.
20. DEFAULT; REMEDIES FOR DEFAULT.
(a) The following shall be deemed to constitute a default of the terms of this
Agreement:
1. The failure by Landlord or Tenant to pay any amount of money due
under this Agreement;
2. The failure by Landlord or Tenant to comply with any other provision
or condition of this Agreement; or
CADocuments and Settings\Bfreeman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK69\Transit Hub lease 4 11 2013.doc6
3. The abandonment by Tenant of the Premises or any part of the
Premises.
(b) Landlord and Tenant shall have all remedies for any default by the other party
as provided for at law or in equity. This paragraph 20 shall be governed in accordance
with Landlord and Tenant law, Chapter 83, Florida Statutes.
21. SURRENDER AT END OF TERM.
Upon the expiration or termination of the Agreement, Tenant shall surrender the Premises
quietly and peaceably in substantially the same condition as it was at the outset of this
Agreement, reasonable wear and tear excepted. Tenant may be required, at Landlord's
discretion and at Tenant's sole expense, to remove any improvements or demolish any
structures upon termination of this Agreement.
22. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
(a) This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the
laws of the State of Florida.
(b) This Agreement and all attachments set forth all the promises, agreements,
conditions, and understandings, either oral or written, between them. No subsequent
alteration, amendment, change, or addition to this Agreement or its attachments will be
binding on Landlord or Tenant unless in writing and signed by them and made a part of
this Agreement by direct reference.
(c) The terms of this Agreement shall be binding on the respective successors,
contractors, representatives, agents, and assigns of the parties.
(d) This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which
shall be deemed an original and all which together will constitute one and the same
instrument.
CADocuments and Settings\Bfreeman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK69\Transit Hub lease 4 11 2013.doc7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Landlord and Tenant, hereunto affixed our hands and
seals at Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida, the day and year first above written.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: By-,Jeffrey R. Smith Joseph E. Flescher, Chairman
Clerk of the Court
Approved as to form and legal sufficiency:
Alan S. Po ackwich Sr.
County Attorney
Approved:
Joseph A. Baird
County Administrator
CADocuments and Settings\Bfreeman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK69\Transit Hub lease 4 11 2013.doc 8
ATTEST: CITY OF VERO BEACH, FLORIDA
w..
By: BY:
Tammy K. Vock A. Craig Fletcher
City Clerk Mayor
Approved as to form and legal Approved as conforming to
sufficiency: municipal policy:
Wayne R. Coment James R. O'Connor
City Attorney City Manager
CADocuments and Settings\Bfreeman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK69\Transit Hub lease 4 11 2013.doc 9
l� �7
Indian River County, Florida
Memorandum
NOW-
TO: Joseph A. Baird, County Admin tr
THRU: Jason Brown, Director, OMB
FROM: Beth Martin, Risk Managers,
J7'
DATE: April 8, 2013
SUBJECT: Request for Agenda; Property/Casualty Insurance 2013-14
Please consider the following for inclusion on the April 16, 2013 Board of County
Commissioners' agenda.
Background
On April 4, 2011, the Board of County Commissioners approved the current excess
property/casualty insurance program following a Request for Qualifications for insurance
services and review of the submittals by Siver Insurance Consultants. Arthur J. Gallagher Risk
Management Services, Inc. (AJG) implemented the current program and with staff, recommends
the renewal program as detailed below and found in detail in the full proposal available for
review in the Commission office.
Analysis
Renewal discussions began in December. Our goals were two-fold: maintain coverage
necessary to protect the County's assets and control costs for doing so. Two forces combined to
make the renewal difficult. First, Meadowbrook (Star), underwriter of the package or primary
layer of coverage, announced that it was withdrawing completely from the market. Second,
workers' compensation insurers significantly reined in their willingness to underwrite public
sector clients because of presumption claims, arising from what is commonly referred to as the
Heart/Lung Bill, for police and firefighters.
Savings of approximately four (4) percent, or $52,470, were achieved for the property coverage.
Other lines fluctuated moderately with some increases and some decreases. The overall effect is
that the total premiums for all other lines (excluding worker's compensation) remained nearly
static. Workers' compensation presented the most challenge. Many carriers were unwilling to
�-- write coverage because of presumption claims' high costs. One carrier would quote only with a
$1 million self-insured retention.
37
Please see the table below for a comparison between the renewal premium and the current
premium for each line of coverage:
2012-2013 2013-2014
Insurance Costs Premium Premium (Decrease)
Workers'Comp.Liability/ $270,471 $402,770 $132,299 48.9%
London Package --7
EMT Liability $35,718 $36,225 $507 1.4%
Protective&Indemnity $8,910 $8,910 $0 0.0%
Property $1,346,292 $1,293,822 ($52,470) -3.9%
Boiler&Machinery $11,434 $11,542 $108 0.9%
Inland Marine $42,142 $49,267 $7,125 16.9%
Crime $8,419 $6,721 ($1,698) -20.2%
Terrorism-Property $18,000 $16,461 ($1,539) -8.6%
Terrorism-Liability $30,518 $28,992 ($1,526) -5.0%
Totals $1,771,904 $1,854,710 $82,806 4.7%
As shown above, the total premiums for all lines of coverage is an increase of$82,806, or 4.7%
from the current year. The increase is primarily a result of the 49% increase in premiums for
worker's compensation coverage, which was offset by the moderate decrease in property
premiums.
The program recommended by AJG and County staff includes:
• Property: In addition to the $52,470 premium savings, coverage will be written on a
blanket basis rather than scheduled basis, allowing for greater flexibility in the total
amount of insurance available for a claim. There will also be a 3% Swing Clause
meaning, among other things, that the County can add up to $10,009,712 in insured
values without a premium increase during the policy term.
• Workers' Compensation: The self-insured retention increases from $350,000.00 per
claim to $500,000.00 per claim for all employees with the exception of police and
firefighters who will now be at $750,000.00 per claim due primarily to the increasing risk
of presumption claims. AJG and staff extensively reviewed all claims over the past
thirteen(13) policy years and determined that this is the best available financial option.
The table below illustrates the historical cost for the County's insurance program.
38
Indian River Historical Cost Analysis
Insurance Costs 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014
Workers' Comp. $1,045,187 $305,000 $305,000 $267,000 $270,471 $402,770
Liability/Package
EMT Liability N/A $40,000 $40,000 $29,580 $35,718 $36,225
Protective& N/A $10,000 $8,147 $8,335 $8,910 $8,910
Indemnity
Property $1,950,000 $1,412,500 $1,350,000 $1,049,302 $1,346,292 $1,293,822
Boiler&Machinery $14,651 $10,339 $12,987 $10,858 $11,434 $11,542
Inland Marine N/A N/A $80,000 $60,800 $42,142 $49,267
Crime $10,339 $15,190 $9,754 $8,311 $8,419 $6,721
Terrorism-Property $37,500 $47,900 $30,000 $17,769 $18,000 $16,461
Terrorism-Liability $10,400 Incl. $9,950 $7,461 $30,518 $28,992
Totals $3,068,077 $1,840,929 $1,845,838 $1,459,416 $1,771,904 $1,854,710
Funding
Funding for the insurance coverage discussed herein is provided by the Self Insurance Fund,
Other Insurance account (acct. number 50224613-034530). The Self Insurance Fund is an
internal service fund that allocates charges to the County's user funds. The current year budget
includes funding in the amount of$2.0 million for excess insurance premiums.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Board approve the renewal and authorize staff to bind coverage for
May 1, 2013 through April 30, 2014 with a current annual premium of $1,854,710 based upon
the current schedule of values and coverage selections.
Attachments:
Indian River App ed Date
County
Property Markets Approached & Responses Admin.
Legal r(6 3
Budget )d
Approved for Agenda Dept.
Risk Mgr. ov 1O-/3
Jiseph . Baird, County Administrator
�-- April 16, 2013
39
Arthur J. Gallagher Risk Management Services
VI: Property Markets Approached & Responses
Market Review
We approached the following carriers in an effort to provide the most comprehensive and cost effective insurance program.
CARRIER LINE OF • POSITION
Package Program:
Quoted
Florida Municipal Insurance Trust Package
Lloyds of London(Brit) Package Quoted
. . ......................................... . ...............................................................................
............... ................
.�. ..._... _.._. ...... ......_.
.Package e Quoted
Safety National
Munich Re Package Quote1.d
_..
... ....._.. .... .........._ .. .
'Package Markel ;Declined only writing pools
. ................................._..9._.
Ace Packa a Declined as they reinsure FMIT and
unable to quote.
��
Travelers ;Package Declined as TPA not approved
...... ................................. ........ _.. _ ....
AI
Package Declined as unable to write WC
.................................._............_....................................._..................._._._...._................
W R Berkley Package I Declined as they reinsure FMIT and
unable to quote.
Excess Workers Compensation:
Florida Municipal Insurance Trust Excess WC Quoted
..................................-.......................... ................
_. v
Arch ;Excess WC Quoted
Safety National Excess WC Quoted$249,974 for$750K SIR&$1M
police&Fire—not competitive. Also
quoted$1 M SIR for$84,588.
......................................................................................................................................................,_........................_....._..
...............................
..................................................................._.....................
Midman (NY Marine) Excess WC Quoted$301,905 with SIR of$750K
and$1.5M Police&Fire—not
i competitive
Midwest Employers Excess WC Indication only: Premium between
$350K-$375K with SIR of$1.25M-
i$1.5M. Not competitive.
:
.........................................................._........................ ........_........................................,........................_..............................
_................._............................................................__.
........................................................._................................................._........................_................,. d buffer Lloyds
of London(Brit) Excess WC +Provided a u er layer if needed.
Liberty Excess WC Declined. No longer a WC market
................... ._.. .... ....... .. .....
Excess WC Declined TPA not approved.
Travelers . .. . . ..__._ . ._ ._......_._....
Excess WC g p
Declined—only writing pools.
Markel
Ace _ Excess WC Quoted$259,975 for$1.5M SIR. Not
competitive.
.............. _........
__._..._. ........ ......... ............ _ ...............
Property Program:
Lexington Insurance Company& Property-PRIMARY$10,000,000 Quoted
Liberty Surplus &Lloyds of London
.....
_... ....
21
Proposal for Indian River County BOCC 0
Arthur J. Gallagher Risk management S�rviees • ,.
Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Property-1 st Excess$5M XS$10M f Quoted
Company(ACE INA Group) ___._ ..___"___
Alterra Excess & Surplus Ins Co &,Property-2nd Excess$10M XS $15M l''Quote
Liberty Surplus ..................................i........................_..._.............._...................._.........._..._.....................__.._...............-......
................
...........................................:. ............................................................................................................._....... .
Landmark American Insurance Property Pro ert —3rd Excess$175M Excess uo e
Company(Alleghany Insurance E$25M
Holdings) .. L....-.____...__._...__._......_....._.__..._.__._....__._.
------.----....-......_..__._....___.._._......_.__. Quoted
Alterra Inland Marine --
_
Property Indicated they could provide capacity in
;
Axis I �primary layer, but unable to support
I"Hurricane"deductible
----._.._.._._._......_......_.___................................_. Declined.
Maxum ;Property
----------- -- .........-- i Indicated$920K layer premium for
Property
Hiscox primary$10M, $2.5M capacity
Inland Marine I Prior carrier for inland marine, but
XLunable to offer full limits last year.
I
Modeled but could not compete with
XL Property
pricing already secured.
................. i_.. ... .
Property
Navigators
Declined—no longer writing this type o
coverage
.... .... ............
. ..............................................................................-......... .
...................................._............................_..........................._......................._........... .._............_._ Indicated could only
support$10M XS
Torus !:Property
$15M layer only.
......_...__._....._............................_..........._......!. ._._............._.............................._....._.........._._......__
I
_................_............................_............_. _. Line ca capacity filled carrier never
(Property P y
Zurich Specialty responded after several follow ups.
-.- -- ---"-- ----- ill� Line capacity filled; earner never
Property
Colony i responded after several follow ups --
--- Declined all layers attachment point too
Arch ;Property j low. _,__
--------•---••••---" -- '
Property operty � R Line capacity filled; carrier never
CNA responded after several follow ups.
l.._._._..._..............................................._.._......_................_..................._._.
.................................._.
.................................................................................................................................................................................................
......................................... n
i Quoted$1,495,000+$20K inspection
Amrisc: Lloyds of London,Indian Property j fee+assessments for$200M AOP
Harbor Insurance Limits&$40M Named Storm with a
Co,QBE Specialty,
'deductible cap of$10M. Excludes lift
Steadfast Insurance stations.Named Storm deductible was
Co. quoted at 5%with a minimum of$5M vs
the quoted program of minimum of
$250K. Quote not competitive
_.. ............ . .
i.Declined_pricing too -in
Property Direct market -
......................
Swiss Re - - - Capacity filled- No response todate
Property
Aspen from this carrier.
_...
_......
_.__..._..
-- Declined. No longer writing on a
AProperty
Allianz
windstorm business
__-----_ ___ - Still waiting on model Nothing receive
Starr Specialty/CV Star Property to date.
22
Proposal for Indian River County BOCC 41
"' Arthur J. Gallagher Risk Managerr��nt Services _
___._____._..._._._..______._.___..______..______..__.._. Appetite is to entertain all risk excluding
Great American 'Property
wind due to location.
---------------------
Proper
Capacity filled.
James River - --
other Coverages:
.....-. .
1....
... .. ... . 'Quoted
Travelers `Boiler and Machinery _
. _-....... ;.Qu
Travelers Casualty and Surety Crime
Quoted
Company of America(Travelers
Group) I
Lloyds of London I Terrorism-Property,Terrorism- j Quoted
Liability
..........
................................................................................................ . .
1.............................._.............._....................................._......................._................_......-............._.....;..................................
...........
Great American Insurance Company Marine-Hull, Protection&Indemnity Quote
of New York(Great American
Property and Casualty Insurance
Group) _....._......._........_........._..................................._......_.................-._................;....__........_..............................
...............
...._................._.......-.._.............._.....
.....................
Quoted
Lloyd's London — ;Medical Professional Liability
23
Proposal for Indian River County BOCC 42
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,FLORIDA
AGENDA ITEM
`*low
DATE: APRIL 9, 2013
TO: JOSEPH A. BAIRD, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM:
VINCENT BURKE,P.E.,DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
PREPARED BY: TERRY SOUTHARD,OPERATIONS MANAGER C v
SUBJECT: REPAIR SEWER VAC TRUCK#347
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Indian River County Utilities operates three vacuum sewer trucks (Vac-Con truck). The trucks
are used to maintain the Utility systems gravity sewer lines, manholes and lift stations. Truck#
347 is a 2007 Ford Vac-Con truck. The trucks are designed to work in harsh environments.
Presently,this truck is in need of some major repairs including overall replacement of the
vacuum compressor assembly and debris tank.
Southern Sewer Equipment Sales located in Fort Pierce, Florida is listed on the Florida Sherrif
State Bid Contract and is the authorized representative for the Vac-Con truck sales and repairs.
A new Vac-Con truck costs approximately $306,000.00.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Utilities Department recommends that the Board of County Commissioners
(BCC) authorize the Purchasing Department to waive the bidding process and issue a purchase
order to Southern Sewer Equipment Sales, as the sole source representative for Vac-Con trucks,
to repair Vac-Con truck#347 for the price of$56,145.16. In addition, due to the complexity of
the Vac-Con trucks, allow for a contingency of$5,000.00 in case the need for other repairs are
discovered as the truck is disassembled and inspected further. Completion of these repairs
should extend the life of the truck another 5 years.
43
Funding for these repairs is in the Heavy Equipment Maintenance account in the operating fund.
Operating fund revenues are generated by water and sewer sales.
x �. ' Descphou ,jam._ Account=Number ..,k Amount
Heavy Equipment Maintenance 47126836-034650 $61,145.16
Attachment A: Sole Source Letter
Attachment B: Quote for Repairs
Indian River Co. Appmved Date
Administration !/ /✓
APPROVED FOR AGENDA: Utilities
Utilities
Legal AIJ!59 ,1W-?
a Budget Ak y
-61
BY:
Jos h A. Baird,
Cou y Administrator
FOR:
Date
44
ATTACHMENT A
VjOC<*N
969 Hall Park Drive
Green Cove Springs,FL 32043
904-284-4200 Tel
904-529-8659 Fax
www.vac-con.com
April 4, 2013
To Vlom It May Concern:
This letter will confirm that Southern Sewer Equipment Sales located at 3409 Industrial Avenue, Ft.
Pierce, FL 34946 — Telephone: 772-595-6940, is the sole authorized Vac-Con dealer for sales, parts
and service in the State of Florida (excluding the Florida Panhandle).
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Todd M. Masley
Sales Manager
45
ATTACHMENT
Southern Sewer Equipment r5mes Quom
3409 Industrial 27th Street
Fort Pierce, FL 34946
A CERTIFIED MBE WOMAN OWNED BUSINESS"
Phone# Fax# E-mail Web Site DATE NUMBER
800-782-4134 772-595-9171 info@southemsewer.com www.southernsewer.com 4/4/2013 9519A
SALESMAN P.O.#/REQ.# NAME/ADDRESS
JRW INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
ATTENTION PHONE# COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
1840-25TH STREET
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960-3365
PLEASE REFER TO QUOTE NUMBER WHEN PLACING ORDER
QTY ITEM DESCRIPTION EACH Total
0 MILEAGE DATE/TIME:02/18/13 1.57 0.00
MAKE:SERIAL#09074706
MODEL# 11 YARD
1 711-14516 VACUUM COMPRESSOR ASSEMBLY-3 STAGE EXCHANGED,WITH 17,919.66 17,919.66
FLEX COUPLING&DRIVE MOTOR
1 711-12744 DEBRIS TANK STRUCTURE ASSEMBLY 11 YARD,NEW STYLE 13,761.16 13,761.16
1 711-8790 INLET TUBE ASSY ************ 562.90 562.90
1 711-3356 HYD DOOR LOC ASSY.(ADDITIONAL PARTS NEEDED TO COMPLETE 1,302.78 1,302.78
UPGRADE)
1 711-12764 DOOR STRUCTURE ASSEMBLY*** NEEDS AN EXTRA FLANGE FOR 4,164.42 4,164.42
THE PUMP OFF ASSEMBLY**SEE NEXT ITEM**
1 810-0395 FLANGE ** THIS IS TO BE WELDED TO THE DOOR ASSEMBLY 159.97 159.97
1 711-0063 DOOR LOCK TEE HANDLE ASSY. 48.71 48.71
1 711-12826 DOOR SEAL AY 72"DIA REAR DOOR 264.37 264.37
1 711-12876 DOOR SAFETY PROP ASSY-5-16 YD-SPHER DOOR 137.54 137.54
1 711-12776 WEAR PLATE ASSY-72"DIA REAR DOOR 178.41 178.41
1 711-12984 DEBRIS TANK SCREEN ASSEMBLY 812.78 812.78
1 711-12955 REAR DOOR HINGE/BOLT ON STYLE-USE WITH 800-9496 REAR DOOR 260.53 260.53
WELDMENT
1 711-14482 VACUUM BREAKER STRUCTURE ASSY 2,427.27 2,427.27
S ARM/PLASTIC BALL 246.05 246.05
1 711-21703C... FLOAT ARM ASSEMBLY 3-14 STAINLES
1 711-25404 INLET/OUT LET ADAPTER ASSY 1,658.90 1,658.90
1 711-26209 INLET/OUTLET ADAPTER MOUNT ASSY 35.70 35.70
225.50 225.50
1 800-8884 INLET TUBE WELDMENT 8 INCH ************
1 711-14438 DEBRIS TANK FLUSH OUT ASSEMBLY 1,364.46 1,364.46
1 1 711-12901-DS 5"BUTTERFLY ASSEMBLY 384.00 384.00
25 692-1601 REAR DOOR STRIPES WHITE NEED 25' 5.06 126.50
III DECALS FOR THE DEBRIS TANK 65.001 65.00
UPON REVIEWING THIS QUOTE,IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING SERVICE,
PLEASE CONTACT OUR SERVICE DEPARTMENT AT 1-800-782-4134.
Total
QUOTES ARE VALID FOR 30 DAYS FREIGHT NOT INCLUDED IN PRICING
PAYMENT BY CREDIT CARD IS LIMITED TO$5,000 MAXIMUM.
Page 1 46
Southern Sewer Equipment Sales QUOTE
3409 Industrial 27th Street
Fort Pierce, FL 34946
.. -'A CERTIFIED MBE WOMAN OWNED BUSINESS"
Phone# Fax# E-mail Web Site DATE NUMBER
800-782-4134 772-595-9171 info@southemsewer.com www.southernsewer.com 4/4/2013 9519A
SALESMAN P.O.#/REQ.# NAME/ADDRESS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
JRW FINANCE DEPARTMENT
ATTENTION PHONE# COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
1840-25TH STREET
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960-3365
PLEASE REFER TO QUOTE NUMBER WHEN PLACING ORDER
QTY ITEM DESCRIPTION EACH Total
2 692-3001 VAC-CON LOGO,RED&GRAY ON CLEAR VINYL-10.40"X 48 4.86
" 27.3,764.43 43 3,7 554.71
PAINT 45.37 272.22
6 680-0001 KANAFLEX-8"X 1 FOOT
1
1 711-13002-DEBRIS TANK SUPPORT REST ASSEMBLY 106.66 106.66 1 1 711-15140RS9 -DEBRIS TANK WIRING HARNESS 790.10 790.10
LABOR LABOR BY SOUTHERN SEWER:
2,550.00 2,550.00
FREIGHT SHIPPING NOT TO EXCEED$2500.00
2,500.00 2,500.00
UPON REVIEWING THIS QUOTE,IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING SERVICE,
PLEASE CONTACT OUR SERVICE DEPARTMENT AT 1-800-782-4134.
Total $56,145.16
QUOTES ARE VALID FOR 30 DAYS FREIGHT NOT INCLUDED IN PRICING
PAYMENT BY CREDIT CARD IS LIMITED TO$5,000 MAXIMUM.
Page 2 47
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AGENDA ITEM
DATE: APRIL 9,2013
TO: JOSEPH A.BAIRD
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: VINCENT BURKE,P.E. 6)
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
THROUGH: MIKE HOTCHKISS,P.E. 99
CAPITAL PROJECTS MANAGER
r
PREPARED JESSE ROLAND
AND STAFFED PLANS REVIE
�., BY: DEPARTMENT UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME SUBDIVISION
PETITION FOR WATER SERVICE
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UCP—4100
BACKGROUND
A petition has been received (See ATTACHMENT 1 - Petition) from the property owners of Indian
River Aerodrome Subdivision, requesting that the County supply potable water and fire protection.
Staff is now requesting the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approval to begin surveying
and engineering design of the above-mentioned project. (See ATTACHMENT 2 - Map that
displays the area to benefit from the assessment project.)
ANALYSIS
There are 55 lots in this subdivision with which 53 lots may benefit from the installation of the
county water system. Parcel number 33-38-23-00003-0000-00000.1 is owned by Indian River
Aerodrome Property Owners and would not benefit from this water assessment. Parcel number
33-38-23-00004-0000-00055.0, a.k.a. 8235 5th Street SW, is already connected to County water
and would not benefit from this water assessment. The owners of 35 lots, or 66.0% of the
benefitting properties, have signed the petition. Lot sizes vary from 0.98 an acre to 2.55 an acre
F:\Utilities\UTILITY-Engineering\Projects-Assessment Projects\OOOAssessments-2013 Proposed\AerodromeSubdivision-UCP#
4100\W ordDocuments\AgendaltemApprovalForEngineering_Design_DRAFT_3.docx
48
in size. (See ATTACHMENT 3 —Schedule of benefitting properties).
This project is to be paid through the assessment of property owners along the proposed water line
route. Funding will be from the assessment fund No. 473. The funds for this project will be derived
from the property owners of Aerodrome Subdivision.
DESCRIPTIONi ACCOUNT NUMBER AMOUNT
Indian River Aerodrome
473-169000-13511 $ TBD
Water Assessment
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends approval of the above-listed project,
and requests authorization for the Department to proceed with the engineering design work and
negotiate a contract for survey services, with one of the approved survey consultants, in preparation
for the special assessment project. Engineering design services will be provided by the Department
of Utility Services.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
1 -Petition
2 -Map showing area to benefit from water assessment
3 - Schedule of Properties
Indian River Co. Approved Date
Administration
Utilities
APPROVED FOR AGENDA: Utilities V _s
Legal
Budget �?)
BY:
seph A Baird,
unty Administrator
FOR: Of3
Dat
F:\Uti1ities\UT1L1TY-Engineering\Projects-Assessment Projects\OOOAssessments-2013 Proposed\AerodromeSubdivision-UCP#
4100\W ordDocuments\AgendaItemApproval ForEngineering_Design_DKAFT_3.docx
49
C)
INDIAN RIVER AERODROME SPECIAL WATER ASSESSMENT PETITION 8/17/2012-JESSE ROLAND, INDIAN
66%(YES)SIGNATURES REQUIRED FOR BCC APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY RIVER COUNTY DEPT OF UTILITY
DESIGN AND COST ESTIMATE.SIGNING THIS PETION DOEES_NOT OBLIGATE SERVICES
OWNERS INTO AN ASSESSMENT!
OWNER NAME SITE ADDRESS YES _ NO SIGNATURE
CHUMLEYTHEMI * 525 GULL WING DR X.
TRAX MICHAEL A(TR)(TOK)* CAROL A(TR) 300 NIEUPORT DR �r
KASER WILLIAM H JOAN H 125 NIEUPORT DR
CARLSON EDWIN J JOYCE M 485 NIEUPORT DR X,
GAGLIARDI GENE R ROSEMARY B 8525 WACO WAY f�Cc'a� 'uSL•� Girt/ `$
DE JOUNCE CARS-A* ' 245 NIEUPORT DR =�
HIPE PHILIP J FANNIE 345 NIEUPORT DR 11M /
-RINNER ROY ROCHELLE 385 NIEUPORT DR
WOOD MARY E 220 SOPWITH DR gets (S L
SELIG M'ICHAEL'A BOBBIE J 505 WRIGHT CIR
CHERRNAY'CLIFFORD MARIE,, 515 WRIGHT CIR
CADORETTE DAVID M * MERANA M 520 WRIGHT CIR.
BREINING AUSTIN MARTIN'CAROL SIDE 585 GULL WING DR
�— MARIANbJOHN E LOUISA IVl•+ y 240 SPADSPUR DR
E'MANUEL C W JR*TAMSO'N'M. 230 SPADSPUR DR
DEE LEE ALAN LOLA BETH 255 NIEUPORT DR
—SCOTT-ALFRED•W-DONNA D 365 NIEUPORT DR
FORSELL-PETER MAT5 475 NIEUPORT DR
YOU-NG-JAMES--E DEBORAH-D 400 SOPWITH DR
A E&G R GARNER GROUP INC 8520 WACO WAY
VON LINSOWE DAVID J *TRUDY J 160 SOPWITH DR
ANDERSON NILS BO ULLA BIRGITTA 140 SOPWITH DR .`S-----
KETNER LANDISG BETTY 120 SOPWITH DR j( C%uSLrl?
�-
�
DN LIZ.LPRopeWry APP
V—
Lo
.
No
r AL6�1 Ql.LG
CObK Ll'N�DAJ.'(TR)(TOK)"& * 510 WRIGHT CIR W.
DYSOFJvR,AYMONDrE°KIM,A 535 GULL WING DR
IVI(lLEi�GARI A&"` 515 GULL WING DR
NEWCOMBE GEOFFREY LJANET E 565 GULL WING DR �r
BARNHbUSE H W NANCY 580 GULL WING DR ?C '
BOULEY JOSEPH LJR * 290 NIEUPORT DR
COfiCTT.KI�VIBERLY�S&
* 290 NIEUPORT DR
DAVISNJAM,ES.K 270 NIEUPORT DR
SP.ANIOLL``ALBERT*� 260 NIEUPORT DR
t LlNTO.N-SMJTH ; REVOR KENNETHIRENE 250 NIEUPORT DR
HEISS�WINNIEC100 NIEUPORT DRDOIN C(COTR)(TOK)WINIFRED P 265 NIEUPORT DR
B`QWt.EIS,,KA,R0N`'JTASH'A M 275 NIEUPORT DR
MCCLURE BENTON J * 395 NIEUPORT DR .r
Git STROlVI=1,ENGT" 465 NIEUPORT DR
POWER`VINCENTT;JRKCAROL 495 NIEUPORT DR
LYNCH.rDAN CARDL A 440 SOPWITH DR
BURDSALL GARY LEE JEAN M 420 SOPWITH DR
D'�FFENDALL,REkE 8545 DE HAVILLAND CT
WOLFENDEN IAN HEL,ENE 8525 DE HAVILLAND CT _--
E(SF�ER Sl'EpHEN`B*ANTO'NIA 8515 DE HAVILLAND CT
,, ... -�
'C,ATA 8,520 DE HAVILLAND CT _ '.--•
FISCHER JOHN B'(TRS)(TOK) SHIRLEY R 8540 DE HAVILLAND CT Xf�
MARKS WALTER E 8560 DE HAVILLAND CT
FORD1 `LLIAIV145 CNALCiTI'E`T* 8515 WACO WAY
FERGUSON GEORGE W * CATHERINE SUE 240 SOPWITH DR _P`'`S'CD
<D'ENTON ROBERT(TRS)w& 525 WRIGHT CIR } ! �� � �`C�7
ZoRC WILLIAM-J:,CONSTAN,E'G 505 GULL WING DR
KNRU51'S'f ICHOLAS J GfLOf"A'' 540 GULL WING DR
KSER'WILLIANIA l IVDA SUE;*.'
560 GULL WING DR
INFORMATION: z04
,Q
co
1ST ST SW
(55) PARCELS IN SUBDIVISION
(53) PARCELS TO BE INCLUDED
125 100 23o IN THE WATER ASSESSMENT
ffi
F
0 LAND ACRES VARY FROM
245 ._.____SP
ADSpUR DR 0.98 TO 2.55 IN SIZE
250
140 240
255
160 260
m
265
220 270
275
240
8520 280
345
olf_ 8515 290
WACO WAY
8525 365 Z
� G
O
8520 385
�a 300
o.
8560 8540
395 vj
DE HAVILLAND CT Q
``NW 8545 8515 0
465 cli
00
8525
400 "
475
420
485
440
AIRSTRIP PARCEL495 8235 5TH STREET SW
ALREADY CONNECTED TO
NIC COUNTY WATER.ALL FEES HAVE
BEEN PAID. NO TEMPORARY
SERVICE AGREEMENT.
510
505
Oyu 505 540 560 580
GUt,i.
WING DR
515 520 535
` 525
525
i 545 565 585
" i- INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
PROPOSED WATER MAIN ASSESSMENT UCP # 4100 5
°`� AERODROME SUBDIVISION
Schedule of Properties - Aerodrome Subdivision
Water Main Assessment Project ti* �
aw
P4w--EL ID 33-38-23-00002-0000-00001.0 PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00002-0000-00003.0
SITE_ADDR Soo NIEUPORT DR SITE_ADDR 28o NIEUPORT DR
OWN_LNAME TRAX OW'N_LNANIE CONTI
OWN_FNAMEI MICHAEL A(TR)(TOK)* OWN_FNAMEI KIMBERLY S&*
OWN_FNAME2 CAROL A(TR)(TOK) OWN_FNAME2
OWN_ADDR1 Soo NIEUPORT DR OWN_ADDR1 28o NIEUPORT DR
OWN ADDR2 OWN_ADDR2
OWN_ADDR3 OWN_ADDR3
OWN-CITY VERO BEACH OWN-CITY VERO BEACH
OWN STATE FL OWN STATE FL
OWN_ZIP 32968 OWN_ZIP 32968
SQFT 43,996 SOFT 49;658
LAND-ACRES: 1.01 LAND-ACRES: 1.14
SUBDN_NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME SUBDN_NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED_PETITION 0 SIGNED_PETITION ❑�
PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00002.-0000-00002.0 PARCEL ID 33-38`23-00002-0000-00004.0
-- :- ------------- _ ....
SITE ADDR 290 NIEUPORT DR SITE ADDR 27o NIEUPORT DR
OWN_LNAME ' BOULEY OWN_LNAME DAVIS
OWN FNAMEI JOSEPH L JR* OWN_FNAMEI JAMES K
OWN_FNAME2 OWN FNAME2
OWN ADDR1 290 NIEUPORT DR OWN ADDRI 27o NIEUPORT DR
OWN ADDR2 OWNADDR2
OWNADDR3 OWN ADDR3
OWN_CTTY VERO BEACH OWN-CITY VERO BEACH
OWN-STATE FL OWN-STATE FL
OWN-ZIP 32968 OWN-ZIP 32968
SQFT 47,045 SQFT 52,272
LAND ACRES: 1.o8 LAND ACRES: 1.2
SUBDIV NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME SUBDIVNME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED PETITION ❑ SIGNED PETITION D
53
-------------------
PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00002-0000-00005.0 PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00002-0000-00007.0
-------------
SITE—ADDR 26o NIEUPORT DR SITE_ADDR 240 SPAD.SP.UR D,R
........-_----
OWN_LNAME SPANIOLI OWN—LNAME ALA RIANI ------------
------------ ...........
Gl,,--FNAMEi ALBERT* --OlAlN_FNAMEi JOHN E
OWN FNAME2 ------------
OlATN_FNAME2 LOUISA M
--------_-------
OWN—ADDR1 26o NIEUPORT DR OWN ADDRi
PADSPUR DR
OWN—ADDR2 OWN ADDR2
OWN—ADD R3 OWN—ADDR3
..............
OWN CITY VERO BEACH
OWN CITY VERO BEACH
OWN STATE FL -------
OWNSTATE FL
OWN—ZIP 32968 OWN—ZIP 32968-9136
SQFF 54,886 SQFF 50,965
LAND—ACRES: 1.26 LAND—ACRES: 1.17
SUBDIVNME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME SUBDIVNME: INDIAN RIV ERAE RO D ROM E
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED—PETITION Fvl SIGNEDPETITIONW-1
..........
-00002-0000-0
PARCEL ID 33-3;3-23 0006.o PARCEL 33-38-23-00002-0000-00008.o
srrE_ADDR ,250,N EUPORT DR SITE ADDR
.23oSPADSPURDR
OWN' LNAME EMANUEL,
G LNAME,
;TREVOR KENNETH. OWN FNAME1 JR.*
OWN FNAMEi
-----------
OWN,FNAME2 ;IRENE OWN�_FNAME2 TAMSON M
..............,
--------------
OWILADDRi 25p NIEUPORT DR OWN ADDkl 'PO BOX 1179
........... .......
OWN,ADDR2 OWN ADDk2
............. ................
----------
OWN ADDR3 OWN ADDR3
..................
OWNCITY ;VERO BEACH OWN CITY VERO BEACH
- -----------------------
OWN STATE YL OWN STATE FL
-----------
OWN—ZIP 32968-9214 OVV N ZIP 32061-1179
SQA 53,579 SQFF 43,096
LAND ACRES:
1.23 LAND ACRES: 1.01
SU,BDlV_NME: -INDIAN RIVERAERODROME SUBDIV_NME: INDIAN ItIVERAERODROME
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNEDPETITIONRv SIGNEDPETITION
54
...............
PARCEL ID33-38-23-00002-0000-00009.0 PARCEL ID 11 33. -38-23-00002-0000-00011.0 1 -- . . - .- - " -
SITE-ADDR loo NIEUPORT DR SITE-ADDR 24-5,NIEUPORT-D,R----
----------
OWN-LNAME THEISS OIAIN-LNAME DE-JOUN,GE
FNAMEi WINNIE C OV\TN-FNAME1 L I ARS-A . ...... -------- .........
OWN-FNAME2 OIAIN-FNAME2
OWN-ADDRi ioo NIEUPORT DR OlA'N-ADDR1 --245 NIEUPORT D-R
OWN-ADDR2 OWN-ADDR2
OWN-ADDR3 O-IA'N-ADDR3 ------- ........
------------------ ----------
OWN-CITY VERO BEACH OWN-CITY -VERO BEACH
--------------- .. ........
OWN-STATE FL OWN STATE F I L
OWN-ZIP32968-9212 OWN ZIP ...... ---------.......----
32968-9215
SQFF 47,045 SQFT 64,904
----------
LAND-ACRES: 1.08 LAND-ACRES: 1-1.49--- --- ---------I..........----------------------
SUBDIV-NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME SUBDIV NME:
INDIAN RIVER AERODROME
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED-PETITION SIGNEDPETITION
PARCEL ID33-38-23700002-0000-00010.0 PARCEL ID
33-38-23-00002-0000-00012.0
-------------
SITE-ADDR 426 NIEUPORT DR SITE AbDR 2-55-NIEUPORT I-D-R
............
LNAME KASER
OWN-LNAME DEE
..........
OWN FNAME1 WILLIAM H OWN FNAMEi LEE ALAN
OWN-FNAME2 JOAN H OVv-N-FNAME2 L-OLA-B ETH-
OWN-ADDRi 125 NIEUPORT DR OWN ADDRi
255 NIEUPORT DR
-----
OWN ---------
ADDR2
OWN-ADDR2
OWN ADDR3
OWN-ADDR3
OWN CrIY VERO BEACH
OWN CITY VERO BEACH
OWN-STATE •.FL OWN STATE
-------- FL
OWN ZIP :3� 32968
------------
SQFr 173,181 SQFF64,904
LANDACRES: 1.68 LAND-ACRES: 1.49
SUBDIV NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODROME SUBDIV NME: -INDLAN
RIVERAERODROME
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED-PETITION F./I SIGNEDPETITION
55
PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00002-0000-00013.0 PARCEL Ill 33-38-23-00002-0000-00015.0
SITE_ADDR 265 NIEUPORT DR SITE_ADDR 345 NIEUPORT DR
... -
OW"T LNAME DOLAN OWN_LNAME HIPE
...._.......
---- ---- ------ -- -.
ON.,, FNAMEI MARTIN C(COTR)(TOK) OWN_FNAMEI PHILIP J
--- - .--- ..... -
OWN_FNAME2 WINIFRED P(COTR)(TOK) OWN_FNAME2 FANNIE
OWN_ADDR1 265 NIEUPORT DR OWN_ADDR1 345 NIEUPORT DR
OWN ADDR2 0WA'N_ADDR2
.... ........--
-
OWN_ADDR3 OWN_ADDR3
OWN CITY VERO BEACH OWN CITY VERO BEACH
---
OWN STATE FL OWN STATE FL
_._ ........ - ---- ---- _- _.
OWN_ZIP 32968 OWN_ZIP 32968-9216
SQFT 64,904 SQFT 64,904
----- .......-_. -------
LAND-ACRES:
LANDACRES: 1.49 LAND ACRES: 1.49
- ..__ ------ ..... .......___ - ---- - - -
SUBDIV_NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME SUBDIV_NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME
ASST.AMOUNT - ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED PETITION ❑ SIGNED_PETITION ❑
._. _ __- _ _ _..
PARCEL ID 33738-23700002-0000-00014.0 PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00002-000o-000l6.o
SITE ADDR 275 NIEUPORT DR SITE ADDR 365 NIEUPORT DR
_
O'er„ LNAME BOWLES OWN LNAME SCOTT
OWN FNAMEI AARON J OWN_FNAMEI ALFRED W - --
OWNFNAME2 TTASHA M, OWN FNAME2 DONNA D
OWN ADDR1 275 NIEUPORT DR OWN ADDR1 365 NIEUPORT DR
-------
----
OWN_ADDR2 OWN ADDR2
OWN_ADDR3
OWN ADDR3
OWN CITY ,VERO BEACH OWN-CITY VERO BEACH
OWN_STATE ;FL OWN STATE FL
32968 OWN ZIP 32968-9216
SQFT 64,904 SQA 64,904
LAND ACRES: 1.49 LAND ACRES; 1.49
SUBDN_NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODROME SUBDIV NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED PETITION - SIGNED_PETITION
56
------PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00002-0000-00017.0 PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00002-0000-00019.0
SITE ADDR 385 NIEUPORT DR SITE -ADDR
465 NIEUPORT DR
OIATN-LNAME PINNER OWN-LNAME GRAFSTROM
..........
0,,.._-FNAMEi ROY OWN-FNAME1 BENGT
OV*TN-FNAME2 ROCHELLE OlArN-FNAME2
OWN-ADDR1 385 NIEUPORT DR 0-*ATN-ADDR1 465 NIEUPORT DR
............I-----... "..'-------
OWN-ADDR2 OWN-ADDR2
------------
OWN-ADDR3 OWN-ADDR3
OWN-CITY VERO BEACH OWN-CITY VERO BEACH
OWN-STATE FL OWN-STATE FL
OWN-ZIP 32968-9216 041'N-ZIP 32968-9218
SQFT 64,904 SQFF 48,352
-----------
LAND ACRES: 1.49 LAND ACRES: 1.11
----------
SUBDIV-NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME SUBDIV-NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNEDPETITION SIGNEDPETITION
PARCEL ID '33-38728ro6002-9000-100018.0 PARCEL ID 33-38-28-00002-0000-00020.0
........... ..........
SITF-ADDR :355,NIEUPORT DR, SITE ADDR 475 NIEUPORT DR
, LNAME ''MCCLTM, '"'
OWILLNAME YORSELL
.............
-----------------
OWN FNAMEi BENTON J OWN FNAMEi PETER MATS
------------- ----------
OWN FNAME2 OWN FNAME2,
............
OWN ADDRi 396 NIEUPORT-DR OWN ADDRi iAEGERISTRASSE 66 CH-6300
OWN. ADDR2 OWILADDR2
OWPLADDR3 OWN ADDR3
OWN CITY :VERO BEACH OWN_CITY :ZUG SWITZERLAND
OWNSTATEYL OWNSTATE
OWILZIPXaR OWN ZIP
,
SQFT 64,904 .
SQFT 49,223
LAND ACRES: 1.49 LAND ACRES: 1.13
............
SUBDIV-NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODROME SUBDIV-NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODROME
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNEDPETITIONSIGNED-PETITION
57
�
|
yADCDLID -00002-0000-00021.0 PARCELDU /
'--- — |
8ITE_AJ)DD 485NlEUy0DIDR 8[1E_Aouu 440 80PWl7BDD /
---��---� |
OlmN_LN8ME CADLSON OWN_IN&\ME LYNCH `
�------------�------ - --- --- -� -� -' ------ -----1
0,..~~_FNAMDz EDWIN 0WJ_}N0ME1 DAN |
-----------�--------------- --------------------------�--|
UWN_ BAMDo JOYCE OWR_INAMEu CAf8]LA |
-------�-----------------�--- -'-------------'---�--�-----1
0WN_/ADDK1 485NIEUy0DIDll 0YA'N_ADDDz 440S0fWITBDR |
---�-------------'�------ - ------------�- -------------1
OWN ADD82 0l%TN_ADDK2 |
0WN_ADD83 OWN ADDD3 |
--------------------- ------- '-----------�--------------1
OWN CITY VED0D8ACB OlA'N_CITY VER}BEACf |
-�----��-------�--.....-------
OWN-STATE FL OWN-STATE FL |
_-____-_�______
---------
0\wN_Zly 32968-9127 OWN-ZIP 32968-9115 |
. ...
SgFF 40,658 O0FT 44,807 |
-'------------------- - |
LAND-ACRES: 1.14 LAND-ACRES: 1.03 .
3lJDDIV_NMD: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME — SUBD 8: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO2 !
��--------------...............------- --- ------------'--------------1
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT /
SIGNED-PETITION SIGNED-PETITION
OWN FNAMEi NT, OWN—FNAMEi-
OW 'JEAN
OWN ADDR2, OWN ADDR2
OWN ADDR,3
OWN ADDR3
OWN STATE
OWN� STATE FL �FL
SQFT 61,,42'0 SQFr '45,302,
LAND ACRES': 1.41 LAND ACRES:
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
El
SIGNED—PETITION FV SIGNED—PETITION
~-
58
--------- ----------
PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00003-0000-00026.o PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00003-0000-00028.o
SITE_ADDR 400 SOPWITH DR SITE_ADDR 8525 DE HAVILLAND CT
- ---- .................. -----. -- _.. - ------ -
OWN LNAME YOUNG OWN LNAME WOLFENDEN
O FNAMEI JAMES E* OWN_FNAMEI IAN
OWN FNAME2 DEBORAH D OWN-FNAME2 HELENE
-- ---- ...... .... ...... -
OWN ADDR1 400 SOPWTTH DR OWN ADDR1 8525 DE HAVILLAND CT
OWN_ADDR2 OWN_ADDR2
OWN=ADDR3 OWN=ADDR3
OWN CITY VERO BEACH OWN-CITY VERO BEACH
OWN STATE FL OWN STATE FL
--- - ----- __... --- _. .._. ---- --
OWN_ZIP 32968-9115 OWN_ZIP 32968-9519
SQFT 46,6o9 SQFF 49,223
LAND ACRES: 1.07 LAND-ACRES: 1.13
._.----- _-------------- ___.._....... .... - - ._ - __._.---
SUBDIV NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 2 SUBDN_NME: INDIAN RTVERAERODROME NO 2
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED-PETITION SIGNED_PETITION ❑
_
PARCEL ID 33-38-23-000-03-0000-0002Z.o PARCEL ID 33-38-23 0000 0000 00029 0
SITE ADDR 8545 DE HAVILLAND Cr, SITE ADDR 8515 DE HAVILLAND Cr
---------------
O� LNAME DEFFENDALL OWN LNA 4E FISHER
OWN FNAME1 'REX E OWN_FNAMEI STEPHEN B,*
OWN FNAME2 - - - - OWN FNAME2 'ANTONIA -
OWN ADDR1 '8548 DE HAVILLA.ND Cr _ OWN ADDR1 851.5 DE HAVILLAND Cr -- -
OWN ADDR2 OWN ADDR2 -
OWN_ADDR3 OWN ADDR3
- ------ .. --. -- -- -OWN CITY VERO BEACH OWN CITY VERO BEACH
OWN_STATE FL OWN STATE FL
OWN ZIP- 32968-9i9; OWN ZIP 32968
SQFT 246,1 4 SQF r 43,560
LAND ACRES: 1.o6 LAND ACRES: 1
SUBDTiNME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 2 SUBDIV NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODROME NO 2
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED_PETTTION SIGNED_PETTTION ❑�
59
---------------- . -------- ---- -- ---- ---- ---
PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00003-0000-00030.0 PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00003-0000-00032.0
SITE_ADDR 852o DE HAVILLAND CT SII'E_ADDR 856o DE HAVILLAND CT
OWN-LNAME CATALANO FAMILY LMTD PRTN OIAIN_LNAME MARKS
O-�,,FNAMEi OWN_FNAMEI WALTER E
_ _.. ------ _ ...._ ..
OWN_FNAME2 OWN—FNAME2
.......... -.._. ---- - --- -- ----..
OWN_ADDR1 852o DE HAVILLAND CT OWN_ADDR1 856o DE HAVILLAND CT#36
OWN ADDR2 OWN ADDR2
— ..._.. _... .. -
OWN_ADDR3 OWN_ADDR3
OWN CITY VERO BEACH OWN_CITY VERO BEACH
--------_._ _____ -------_ _----_..____. _----- —---
OWN_STATE FL OWNS TATE FL
---- ---.-_. -- - ----- --------- --—-
OWN_ZIP 32968 OWN_ZIP 32968-9519
SQFT 43,996 SQFT 43,996
LAND ACRES: 1.01 LAND ACRES: 1.01
-- -------- ... ........_..... __.-_.__._ _. .............. .---- - -
SUBDN_NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 2 SUBDIV_NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 2
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED PETITION D SIGNED_PETITION ❑
PARCEL ID 33 38 23'00003-0006-00031.0 PARCEL ID X33 38 z3 00003 0000 00033.0
SITE ADDR 8540 DE HAVILLAND Cr
SITE ADDR 8525 WACO.WAY
01,,,,,LNAME FISCI3ER OWN_LNAME GAGLIARDI
OWN_FNAMA1 JOHN B(TRS)(TOK) OWN_FNAME1 GENE R _
OWN.FNAME2 SHIRLEY R CM- )(TOK)* OWN_FNAME2 ROSEMARY B'
OWN ADDR1 'FBO FISCIXER LIVING TRi7ST Y OWN ADDR1 ,8525 WACO WAY
OWN ADDR2 8540;DE14AVILIAND CT OWN ADDR2
0WN_ADDR3 OWN_ADDR3
_--
OWN_CRTY VERO BEACH OWN_CITY VERO BEACH
OWN STATE- FL OWN_STATE FL
OWN ZIP 32968-9519 OWN ZIP 32968-9114
SQFT 43,5b0 - SQA 43,560
LAND ACRES: 1 LAND—ACRES: 1
- - -- - --.. - - -
SUBDIV_NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 2 SUBDIV_NME INDIAN RIVERAERODROME NO 2
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED PETITION ❑ SIGNED_PETITION ❑
60
PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00003-0000-00034.0 - PARCEL ID ----- -
33-38-23-00003-0000-00036.0
--------- .. -.- -------_
SITE_ADDR 8515 WACO WAY SITE ADDR 240 SOPWITH DR
._..-_.. -- --._. --------._._ _ ----
OWN-LNAME FORD OWN_LNAME FERGUSON
-- --- -- ------...--- ----------
C-,, FNAMEi WILLIAM S OWN_FNAMEI GEORGE W
OWN_FNAME2 CHARLOTTE T* OTNN_FNAME2 CATHERINE SUE
OWN_ADDR1 815 WACO WAY OWN_ADDR1 240 SOPWITH DR - -'
OWN_ADDR2 OWN_ADDR2
OWN_ADDR3 OWN_ADDR3
- -- -- - ---.._ ---- -
OWN CITY VERO BEACH OWN CITY VERO BEACH
.__....__ - -- - --- _ -- ---
OWN STATE FL OWN STATE FL
......._.....
OWN-ZIP 32968 OWN_ZIP 32968
---- _...._..... - _------ ----- .......
SQFT 43,996 SQFT 43,996
LAND ACRES: 1.01 LAND ACRES: 1.01
--- ...... .-_. ---- - ---- ----
SUBDN_NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 2 SUBDIV_NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 2
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED PETITION ❑- SIGNED PETITION ❑
PARCEL ID 33-38-23-o0003-0000-00035.0 PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00003-0000-00037.0
SITE ADDR 8520 WACO'WAY a SITE_ADDR ;220 SOPWITH DR
C _LNAME A E&G R GARNER GROUP INC OWN_LNAME WOOD
OWN_FNAMEI OWN FNAMEI MARY E
OWN FNAME2
_ OWN_FNAME2
OWN ADDR1 852o WACO WAY OWN_ADDR1 220 SOPWITH DR
OWN_ADDR2 OWN ADDR2
OWN,ADDR3 OWN ADDR3
OWN-CITY VERO BEACH OWN-CITY VERO BEACH
OWN-STATE FL OWN STATE FL
OWN_ZIF32968 9114.` OWN_ZIP 32968-9236
-
SQFT 43,996 - _ -- SQFT 61,420
LAND ACRES: 1.01 LAND ACRES: 1.41
- ..
SUBDIV NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODRQME NO 2 SUBDIV_NME INDIAN RIVERAERODROME NO 2
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED PETITION ❑ - - SIGNED-PETITION ❑ - - _
61
PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00003-0000-00038.o PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00003-0000-00040.0
SITE_ADDR t6o SOPWITH DR SITE ADDR 120 SOPWITH DR
OWN_LNAME VON LINSOWE OWN_LNAME KETNER
----- - -- -- ----_ -
C,�_FNAMEi DAVID J* OWN_FNAME1 LANDIS G
OWN_FNAME2 TRUDYJ OWN_FNAME2 BETTYJ
OWN_ADDR1 16o SOPWITH DR OWN_ADDRi 120 SOPWITH DR
- --------------
- -
OWN_ADDR2 OWN ADDR2
- --. ....
OWN_ADDR3 OWN_ADDR3
OWN CITY VERO BEACH OWN CITY VERO BEACH
----- --- - ---------------
OWN STATE
_-.---OWNSTATE FL OWN STATE FL —
........
OWN_ZIP 32968 OWN-ZIP 32968
- -- -- - - _
SQFF 47,480 SQFT 65,776
LAND-ACRES: 1.09 LAND-ACRES: 1.51
......__. -
SUBDIV_NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODROME NO 2 SUBDN_NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 2
... -
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED_PETITION ❑ SIGNED PETITION ❑
PARCEL ID
PARCEL ID
33-38 23 00003-0000-00039.0
33 38,=23-00004-0000 00041.0
SITE,ADDR 14o SOPWITH DR SITE ADDR _.._
505 WRIGHT CIR
C _ 'NAME ANDERSON - OWN_LNAME SEIIG - --
OWN_FNAMEl NILS BO OWN_FNAMEi 1VIICHAEL A
OWN_FNAME2 ULI A BIRGITTA OWN FNAME2 .BOBBIE J
OWN_ADDRi ;140 SOPWTTH'DR OWN_ADDRI
50�WRIGHT CIR -
OWN_ADDR2 " OWN ADDR2
- - ----
OWN',ADDR3 OWN_ADDR3
OWN CITY VERO BEACH OWN CITY VERO BEACH
--- - ---
OWN_STATE FL OWN_STATF FL
OWN-ZIP 8',219- 6879219, OWN_ZIP 3296$-9644
SQFT 47,96-- - -- SQFT 42,689
LAND ACRES: 1.1 LAND ACRES: 0.98
SUBDTJ NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODROME NO 2 SUBDIV NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODROME NO 3
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT -
SIGNED_PETITION ❑ SIGNED_PETTTION 0
62
PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00004-0000-00042.0 PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00004-0000-00044.0
------------
------......
SITE ADDR 515 WRIGHT CIR SITE ADDR
520 WRIGHT CIR
ONAINT -LNAME CHERRNAY OWN-LNAME CADORETTE
.................
Ov%w..:-FNAMEi CLIFFORD OWN-FNAME1 DAVID M
OWN FNAME2 MARIE OWN-FNAME2 MERANA M
OWN-ADDR1 515 WRIGHT CIR OWN-ADDRi 520 WRIGHT CIR
OWN ADDR2 OWN ADDR2
...........
OWN ADDR3 OWN ADDR3
------------
OWN-CITY VERO BEACH OWN-CITY VERO BEACH
----------
OWNSTATEFL OWN-STATE FL
...............................
OWN-ZIP 32968 OWN-ZIP 32968
.................
SQFT 6o,984 SQFT 46,174
LAND-ACRES: 1.4 LAND-ACRES: 1.o6
SUBDIV-NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 3 SUBDIV-NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 3
.............
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNEDPETITIONSIGNED-PETITION El
PARCELID -00004-0000700043.0 PARCEL ID 33 38723100004-0000-00045-0
SITV ADDR SITE ADDR 525 WRIGHT'CIR
-7
01,411110-LNAME ;COOKOWN_LNAME DENTON
---—------
OWN F"MEI NIJ j(TR
OWN FNAMEi ROBERT(TRS)&
..... ----------
........................
OWN_FNAME2 OWN FNAME2
---------------
------------
OWN ADDR I 510WRIGHT CIR
OWNAI)ftl ;POIBOX 6116i
---------------------
OWN,ADDR2
OWN,ADDR2
OWN;ADDR& OWN ADDR3,
-_ --------------
OWN-CITY : BEACH OWNCITYROSElAND
-----------
OWN� ,STATE FL OWN-STATE 'FL
OWN ZIP 326 't OWN-ZIP 32957-o661
..........
SQFT 42,680' SQFT .61,420
LAND AND ACRES: 1.41
-----------------
SUBDIV NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODROME,NO3 SUBDIV NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODROME NO 3
L
ASST AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNEDPETITIONSIGNED-PETITION
63
-- - _ -------
PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00004-0000-00046.o PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00004-0000-00048.0
SITE ADDR
505 GULL WING DR SITE_ADDR
535 GULL WING DR
_.............. ----- - -
OWN_LNAME ZORC OWN_LNAME DYSON
0:,,.,_FNAMEi WILLIAM J OWN_FNAME1 RAYMOND E
-----.-- ------ ...._. --- -- - -
OWN_FNAME2 CONSTANCE G OWN_FNAME2 KIM A
OWN ADDRi 505 GULL WING DR OWN_ADDRi -G --
535 GULL WING DR
OWN_ADDR2 OWN ADDR2
OWN—ADDR3 OWN_ADDR3
_.._...------ - - ---- _ --- —._ --
OWN-CITY VERO BEACH OWN_CPIY VERO BEACH
- ---------------------------- -
OWN-STATE FL OWN-STATE FL
OWN_ZIP 32968 - OWN_ZIP32968 68-
-9643
SQA 58,370 - SQFT 62,726
LAND-ACRES: 1.34 LAND-ACRES: 1.44
. _
SUBDIV_NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 3 SUBDIJ NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 3
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED PETITION SIGNED PETITION ❑�
PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00004-0000-00047.0 PARCEL ID 33-38=23-00004-000O-00049.0
SITE ADDR 525 GULL WING DR SITE_ADDR 545 GULL WING DR
ON LNAME CHUMLEY -- OWN_LNAME MILLER - - - --
- _ -- _------ --------
OWN FNAME1
_OWNFNAMEI OWN_FNAMEI CARL A&. - - -
OWN_FNAME2 OWN_FNAME2
OWN ADDR1 525 GULL WING DR OWN_ADDR1 545 GULL WING DR
OWN ADDR2 OWN ADDR2
OWN_ADDR3 OWN ADDR3
OWN CITY VERO BEACH OWN CITY VERO;BEACH
OWN_STATE .
.FL flWN_STATE FL
OWN_ZIP' ;32968 OWN ZIP 32968-9643
SQA 67,954 SQA' S7,o64
LAND ACRES: 1.5b LAND ACRES: 1.31
SUBDIV_NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO`3 SUBDIV NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODROME NO 3
ASST.AMOUNT -` ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNED PETITION - SIGNED PETITION
64
PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00004-0000-00050.0 PARCEL ID 33-38-23-00004-0000-00052.0
............
SITE-ADDR 565 GULL WING DR SITE-ADDR 54o GULL WING DR
OWN-LNAME NEWCOMBE O-'ATN-LNAME KURUSIS
C FNAMEi GEOFFREY L OWN-FNAME1 NICHOLAS J
OWN FNAME2 JANET E OWN FNAME2 GLORIAA
OWN ADDR1 565 GULL WING DR OWN ADDR1 54o GULL WING DR
OWN-ADDR2 OWN-ADDR2
OWN ADDR3 OWN ADDR3
----------------- .... ........
OWN-CrIY VERO BEACH OWN-CITY VERO BEACH
OWNSTATEFL OlATN-STATE FL
..............
OWN ZIP 32968-9643 OWN ZIP 32968
SQFT 51,401 SQFT 58,8o6
LAND-ACRES: 1.18 LAND ACRES: 1.35
SUBDIV-NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODROME NO 3 SUBDfV-NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 3
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNEDPETITIONF] SIGNEDPETITION
---------------- -----------------------
PARCELID -00004-0000-00051.0 PARCEL ID 33-3&23-00004-0000-00053-0
SITE ADDR DR srrF,- ADDR 56o GULL WING DR
------------
0, LNAM9 BREINING OWN LNAME KASER
OWN�-FNAMEI AUSTIN MARTIN(CO-'fR)(TOK) OWN ,FNAMEi WILLIAM
OWN FNAME2 'LINDASUE-*
OWN FNAME2 _R)
OWNADDRI �58GULL WING DR OWN ADDRI 6366 2oTH ST
.........
---------------- -----------------
OWILADDR2 OWN ADDR2
OWN ADDI;t3 OWN ADDR3
-----------------
OWNLcrly N-ER0,BEACH OWILCITY VERO BEACH
------------
OWNSTATE FL OWN-STATE -FL
OWN
OWN = 32966
SQFT 50965 SQFT 57,935
------------------
LAND-ACRES: 1.17, LAND ACRES: 1-33
SUBDIV,NME: INDIAN RIVERAERODROME NO 3 SUBDIV NME: :INDIAN RIVERAERODROME NO 3
ASST.AMOUNT ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNEDPETITION SIGNEDPETITION
65
Frid,jvAlvilnl-,
PARCEL ID _
33-38-23-00004-0000-00054.0
SITE-ADDR58o GULL WING DR
OWN-I,NAME BARNHOUSE
----------------
FNAME1 H W
OIVN-FNAME2 NANCY
OWN-ADDR17o6 13TH AVE
OWN-ADDR2
OWN-ADDR3
.................
OWN-CITY VERO BEACH
OWN-STATE FL
............
OWN-ZIP3296o-1472
—1-1------------
SQl,T 53,579
LAND-ACRES: 1.23
----------- -----------
SUBDIV-NME: INDIAN RIVER AERODROME NO 3
ASST.AMOUNT
SIGNEDPETITIONF./-1
66
gIVEI� 1,5 A-
Of ce of Attorneys Matters
t:. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
�LORI�Q' ATTORNEY
w.-
Alan S.Polackwich,Sr.,County Attorney
William K.DeBraal,Deputy County Attorney
Brooke W.Odom,Assistant County Attorney
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Alan S. Polackwich, Sr., County Attorney
FROM: William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney
DATE: April 10, 2013
SUBJECT: Escheated Homestead Property located at 3080 10th Court
At the Board of County Commissioners meeting of April 2, 2013, the County Attorney's
Office brought forth the matter of a home formerly owned by Douglas D. Welch and St,
Lucie Consulting. Inc. The property had escheated to the County for failure to pay the
property taxes. At that time, the Board tabled the matter for two weeks in order to give Mr.
Welch time to gather the funds necessary to pay the past due taxes, interest and penalties
so the Board might convey the property back to him.
As of the date of this memo, Mr. Welch is still working on the funding issue. He stated that
he intends to have the necessary money to pay the back taxes by this coming Board
meeting. No contact has been received from the other two gentlemen that addressed the
Commission at the meeting.
Attached is a copy of the Agenda item from April 2, 2013.
Recommendation. Direct the County Attorney's Office on how to further address this
matter.
Copies to: Douglas D. Welch
St. Lucie Investments, Inc.
Daie I
10
. McE EGU�AR AGENDA �B-
.� oy o 67
l�N b Y ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY'S MATTERS: 412113
Of of
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTORNEY
Alan S.Polackwich,St.,County Attorney
WiMarn K.DeBraal,Deputy County Attorney
Brooke W.Odom,Assistant County Attorney
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: William K. DeBraal— Deputy County Attorney
THROUGH: Alan S. Polackwich, Sr. —County Attorney e
DATE: March 27, 2013
SUBJECT: Homesteaded Escheated Property
Indian River County recently became the legal owner of the real property located at
3080 10th Court in Vero Beach. The County became the owner by virtue of an
Escheatment Tax Deed issued by the Clerk of Circuit Court and recorded in the public
records on March 7, 2013. The property was formerly owned by Douglas D. Welch (as
to 112 interest) and by St. Lucie Consulting, Inc., a Florida for profit corporation (as to %
interest). The property consists of a single family, concrete block home built in 1959.
The house is approximately 1,447 square feet in size on a 0.29 acre lot in the Golf View
Estates subdivision.
In August 2002, the property was conveyed to Douglas D. Welch and his sister, Susan
Welch.by way of a Personal Representative's Deed. It appears that Douglas lived in the
house as his homestead property and his sister resided in Georgia. The property
taxes for 2007 were not paid and a tax certificate was issued. Later years' taxes also
went unpaid and the Clerk conducted a tax deed sale. At the sale, no one bid on the
property, presumably because at the time of the tax deed sale, the property was
homesteaded property and, pursuant to Florida Statutes, the opening bid is required to
include one-half of the assessed value of the property at the time of the sale plus the
past due taxes. Hence the opening bid was $73,384.27. Since there was no successful
bidder at the tax deed sale, the property thereafter was entered on the List of
Lands Available for Taxes. In February 2010, Susan Welch conveyed her one half
interest in the property to St, Lucie Consulting, who owned the property equally with Mr.
Welch. The property remained on the List for three years without being purchased and
thereafter escheated to Indian River County in accordance with Florida Statutes.
IM
-ULAR AGENDA j r 's I 3• 7•b3
I 7Y A-,. SNE° s — 68
� r_u.
Homesteaded Escheated Property
March 27,2013
Page 12
This office has learned that the previous owner, Mr. Welch; is still living on the property.
There is an active utilities account with the City of Vero Beach for this property. After
learning of the person living on the property, the County's Risk Manager has placed
$10,00.0 in property coverage (covers debris removal) on the structure. Because the
liability insurance is written on a blanket basis; the County is covered for any liability
claim that may arise from this location.
There is a provision under Florida Statutes, where if the County has not sold the
escheated property, the Board of County Commissioners could convey the property
back to the record fee simple owners of the property as of the date the County obtained
title to it, however, before any conveyance could be made, the former owners must pay
an amount equal to all back, omitted, and current taxes, as well as any municipal liens
that may have attached to the property. As of the date of this memo, the total back,
omitted and current taxes, calculated through April, are $13,985.26.
Funding. There is no expenditure of funds for this matter, unless filing a suit to eject
Mr. Welch is necessary.
Options. This matter is placed before the Board of County Commissioners for direction
on how to proceed. The possible options are as follows:
1. Put the former owners on notice, giving them 60 days to either pay all back
taxes, interest and penalties or vacate the premises. However, if the back taxes
are paid in full, nothing prevents the owners from failing to pay taxes in the
future, thus making repetition of this process a possibility. If the taxes are not
paid and the property is not vacated, authorize the County Attorney's Office to file
suit for removal of the occupant(s).
2. Declare the property surplus and offer the property to nonprofit agencies for in-fill
housing with a disclosure that there is at least one occupant living on the
property.
3. Do not extend the option of paying back taxes to the former owners, rather put
them on notice that the property must be vacated within 60 days and if they fail to
do so, authorize the County Attorney's Office to file suit for removal of the
occupant(s) and at the same time, direct staff to sell the property either by
auction or sealed bid.
Recommendation. Staff recommends Option 3, and place the prior owners on notice
to vacate the property within 60 days or face court ordered removal from the property by
authorizing the County Attorney's Office to file suit for removal of the occupant(s). Staff
should be directed to advertise the property for sale by sealed bid or auction.
lnhm
2
69
Indian River Counter, Florida Property Appraiser Printer FriendlyMap Page 1 of 1
Print Back
Indian River County GIS
y r
•HVW
;Psg�a
ParcetID OwnerName PropertyAddress
323936000020040000170 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 308010TH CT VERO BEACH,FL 32960
Notes
http://www.irepa.or&rintMap.aspx 3/27/2013 70
W.
30t7,rll70th Lours f7 rpt
13.
At
4 iy
• r ,
<
,
r:
M
bks z
y
-
a
,
.a
FL-329601 QS
IP
.. .. ... - .. � fid.. ..
-
'�
i
��•F`eS. t..:[,a -<y- t it �' '4 � ' �w.� �-,. ,.r
April 16, 2013
ITEM 14.13.1
1400.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners
DATE: April 8, 2013
SUBJECT: Gifford Neighborhood Plan Update
FROM: Wesley S. Davis
Commissioner, District 1
1 kindly request your consideration for the Board's approval in directing staff to update
the Gifford Neighborhood Plan.
A copy of the current Plan is available in the Commission Office.
WSD:mlp
AVOW
C:\Users\mpursel\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet
Files\Content.Outlook\T20BG5P4\Gifford Neighborhood Plan.docx 72
Gifford
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF • UNTY COMMISSIONERS
SEPTEMBER 11
Gifford Nei hborhood Plan Table of Contents
Page
4
INTRODUCTION
5
EXISTING CONDITIONS
5
Definition of Area 5
Existing Land Uses 8
Future Land Use Designations and Zoning Districts 12
Demographics 13
Housing 27
Support Services 30
Income and Employment 31
Crime 32
Infrastructure
37
ANALYSIS
37
Land Use/Zoning Pattern 38
Housing 42
Neighborhood Commercial Activity Centers 47
Income and Employment 49
Infrastructure 54
Community Development 55
Community Assessment
NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN (Goals, Strategies, Objectives, and Actions)
60
70
IMPLEMENTATION 73
Evaluation and Monitoring Procedures
74
FUNDING SOURCES
� 1
Community Development Department Indian River County
N
Gifford Nei hborhood Plan Table of Contents
Page
List of Tables
Table 1 Existing Land Uses in the Gifford Area 5
Table 2 Demographics 12
Table 3 Single-Family Dwelling Units 13
Table 4 Major Subsidized Single-Family and Multi-Family Developments 27
Table 5 Support Services In Gifford 27
Table 6 Reported Crime Data for 2000 31
Table 7 Current and Long-Term Road Projects in Gifford 33
Table 8 Implementation Matrix 70
Table 9 Evaluation Matrix 73
List of Figures
Figure 1 Gifford Plan Area 6
Figure 2 Distribution of Existing Land Uses 7
Figure 3 Future Land Use Designation 9
Figure 4 Gifford Area Plan Zoning Districts I I
Figure 5 Single-Family Building Permit Activity 14
Indian River County 2
Community Development Department
C�
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Table of Contents
Figure 6 Photo-Example of a Substandard Housing Unit 15
Figure 7 Photo-Example of a Substandard Housing Unit 15
Figure 8 Sub-Standard Housing Units in East Gifford 16
Figure 8.1 Sub-Standard Housing Units in Central Gifford 17
Figure 9 Dilapidated Housing Units in East Gifford 19
Figure 9.1 Dilapidated Housing Units in Central Gifford 20
Figure 10 Photo-Example of a Dilapidated Housing Unit 21
Figure 11 Photo- Example of a Dilapidated Housing Unit 21
Figure 12 Photo-Example of a Unit With Junk/Debris 22
Figure 13 Photo- Example of a Unit With Junk/Debris 22
Figure 14 East Gifford Properties with Junk/Debris 23
Figure 14.1 Central Gifford Properties with Junk/Debris 24
Figure 15 Multi-Family Developments in East Gifford 26
Figure 16 Support Services 29
Figure 17 Photo- Existing 45`x' Street(Dr. Martin Luther King Boulevard) 45
Figure 18 Photo- Improved 45`" Street(Dr. Martin Luther King Boulevard) 45
Community Development Department Indian River County 3
3
V
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Introduction
INTRODUCTION
The Gifford Neighborhood Plan is the culmination of a grass roots effort by the Progressive Civic League of Gifford, the Workforce
Enhancement Task Force, and Indian River County to improve economic conditions and the quality of life for Gifford residents.
Through considerable interaction with the residents of Gifford, the county has prepared this neighborhood plan which presents a
strategy for utilizing the opportunities and for overcoming the constraints that exist in Gifford.
In July 1999, the Board of County Commissioners created a task force to identify issues that exist in Gifford and to make
recommendations regarding those issues to the County Commission. To ensure that the task force would be effective, the County
Commission instructed the Indian River County Chamber of Commerce to appoint task force members representing agencies that
contribute to economic development in the Gifford community.
For the next year, the task force worked on this project. In July 2000, the Workforce Enhancement Task Force presented its findings
and recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners. Based on those recommendations, the Board of County
Commissioners directed county planning staff to develop a neighborhood plan for the Gifford Community. Staff has worked with the
Progressive Civic League of Gifford, Florida, Inc. and the Gifford community to prepare this Gifford Neighborhood Plan.
The purpose of the Gifford Neighborhood plan is to address problems that are important to the residents of Gifford. While the plan
focuses on one neighborhood within the county, the strategies and actions of this plan are consistent with the policies and objectives of
the county's Comprehensive Plan.
Included in the Gifford Neighborhood Plan is an existing conditions section, an analysis section, a plan section, and an implementation
section. The existing conditions section of the plan presents the most up to date data on land uses, zoning, infrastructure, and
commerce for the Gifford neighborhood. Based on the existing conditions of the neighborhood, the analysis section identifies
opportunities and constraints that exist in Gifford. From the analysis of the data, a plan section was developed that presents specific
objectives and action oriented policies to achieve those objectives. Finally, an implementation section identifies all actions to be
taken,the entity responsible for that action, and that action's completion date.
N Community Development Department Indian River County 4
UA
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Definition of Area
Located in the unincorporated portion of Indian River County, the Gifford Neighborhood area encompasses approximately three and
one half square miles. Specifically, the geographical boundaries of the plan area are 66th Avenue to the west, 41St Street to the south,
US Highway One to the east and 49th Street to the north. The southeastern boundary stretches east of US Highway One to include the
Geoffrey Subdivision.
To better analyze existing conditions within Gifford, the project area was divided into West Gifford, Central Gifford, and East
Gifford. Figure 1 displays the overall project area as well as the sub-project areas. East Gifford includes the area between U.S.
Highway 1 and 43`d Avenue as well as those properties east of U.S Highway 1; Central Gifford includes the area between 43`d Avenue
and 58th Avenue; while West Gifford includes the area between 58th Avenue and 66th Avenue.
Existing Land Uses
Based on data from the Indian River County Property Appraiser's Office, existing land uses in the Gifford area were divided into
seven different categories. Those categories and the number of acres for each land use are displayed in Table 1. Figure 2 illustrates
the distribution of those existing land uses in the Gifford area.
Table 1: Existing Land Uses in the Gifford Area
Land Use Acres
Agricultural 392.58
Commercial 85.84
Government 151.22
Industrial 113.17
Institutional 77.35
Residential 701.97
Vacant Land 674.76
TOTAL 2196.88
Community Development Department Indian River County 5
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Figure 1 : Gifford Plan Area
,x¢
ILI
MEN FN
Ulun-
1 ®®®�
0
Fi 1[1 H� I
Gifford Plan Boundary
West Gifford N
East Gifford
0 Central Gifford
Base.shp
Community Development Department Indian River County 6
N
�s
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Figure 2: Distribution of Existing Land Uses
❑Agricultural ❑Commercial ❑Government ❑Industrial ❑Institutional
❑Residential ❑Vacant Land
In terms of area, residential is the largest existing land use category in Gifford. While some uses are clustered in specific areas of
Gifford, residential uses can be found throughout the plan area. There are, however, differences in single-family residential property
characteristics among the geographic sub-areas in Gifford. For example, the single-family residential properties located east of 43`d
Avenue are much smaller in size, and therefore more densely developed, than the single-family residential properties located west of
43`d Avenue. In fact, development of residential subdivisions in East Gifford has generally been at a density of 4 to 7 units/acre,
higher than most parts of the county. In contrast, most residential subdivisions in West and Central Gifford have been developed at a
density of 2 to 3 units/acre,the same as most other county subdivisions.
Existing commercial uses in Gifford are concentrated in two places. One of those places is along U.S. Highway One. Commercial
establishments located on U.S. Highway One include general retail businesses and service related businesses that draw customers
from the entire county. The other place where commercial uses in Gifford are concentrated is along 45th Street and a portion of 43`d
Street, near U.S. Highway One. Establishments located within the 45th Street/43`d Street district primarily serve the residents of the
Gifford area. Those neighborhood establishments include restaurants, lounges, bars, and convenience stores.
Community Development Department Indian River County 7
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Existing industrial uses are clustered within two major areas in Gifford. One area is west of 43`d Avenue, stretching from the north
side of 45th Street south to 415` Street, while the other area is located north of 45th Street between Old Dixie Highway and U.S.
Highway One. Scrap metal yards and some manufacturing establishments can be found in the area west of 43 d Avenue. Along U.S.
Highway One, there are various businesses such as auto repair and warehousing.
The agricultural use category includes citrus groves, citrus production facilities, packinghouses, and improved pastureland. While
some citrus groves can be found east of 58th Avenue, the majority of the groves in the Gifford area are located west of 58th Avenue,
between 41s' Street and 49th Street. Citrus production facilities are primarily located between Old Dixie Highway and U.S. Highway
One, in the area bordered by 45th Street along the north and by 41St Street along the south.
Future Land Use Designations and Zoning Districts
The future land use map and the zoning map are two of the primary tools by which the county regulates development within the
unincorporated area of Indian River County. As part of the comprehensive plan, the future land use map depicts the broad land use
designations, or categories, that are applied to properties in the unincorporated area of the county. Future land use designations
specify and control zoning districts and zoning intensities that may be permitted on a specific piece of property.
➢ Future Land Use Designations
Figure 3 identifies the future land use designations applicable to the Gifford area. Those designations are:
• C/l, Commercial/Industrial
• C-1, Publicly Owned or Controlled Conservation (zero density)
• L-1, Low Density Residential-1 (up to 3 units/acre)
• L-2,Low Density Residential-2 (up to 6 units/acre)
• M-1, Medium Density Residential-1 (up to 8 units/acre)
• M-2, Medium Density Residential-2 (up to 10 units/acre)
• REC, Recreation
Community Development Department Indian River County 8
Gifford Neighborhood • Conditions
Figure 3 : Future Land Use Designation
f�—■. .Ica•
"Gifford Pian Boundaries
Future Land Use
�, ■III I_���III�■ � � � "� � I � II ����:
1 �:I:�III •:I - L I � �i 4
�■fir■ �C,<�, �`tkkFF``# '�k , ' , 1
{
1
Muni
PUB
REC
Community Development1 1 River County9
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Approximately 75% of the land in the study area is designated for residential development. Most of that land, especially the land in
Central and East Gifford, is designated for up to 10 units/acre, the highest density category allowed by the comprehensive plan.
Besides residentially designated land, the study area also contains approximately 446 acres of C/I designated land, all located in
Central and East Gifford. Most of this C/I designated land is located in the industrial corridor along 45`h Street, west of 43`d Avenue,
and along US 1. The comparatively small 45`' Street and 43`d Street commercial districts contain approximately 13.85 acres
combined.
➢ Zoning Designations
Figure 4 identifies the fourteen zoning districts that apply to properties in the Gifford area. These districts are:
• CL, Limited Commercial District
• CG, General Commercial District
• CH, Heavy Commercial District
• IG, General Industrial District
• 1L, Light Industrial District
• MED, Medical District
• CON-1, Publicly Owned or Controlled Conservation District (zero density)
RMH-8, Mobile Home Residential District(up to 8 units/acre)
RMH-6, Mobile Home Residential District(up to 6 units/acre)
• RM-10, Multiple Family Residential District(up to 10 units/acre)
• RM-8, Multiple Family Residential District(up to 8 units/acre)
• RM-6, Multiple Family Residential District(up to 6 units/acre)
• RS-6, Single Family Residential District(up to 6 units/acre)
• RS-3, Single Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre)
These districts reflect Gifford's broad range of uses, including retail, office, personal service, storage, restaurant, repair, agricultural
businesses, various residential uses, and others.
➢ Non-Conforming Uses
A non-conforming use is a use which was lawful prior to the adoption, revision, or amendment of land development regulations, but
which would be prohibited or further restricted under the terms of current land development regulations. In Gifford, mobile homes
located in single-family or multiple-family zoning districts constitute the majority of residential non-conforming uses.
��,, Community Development Department Indian River County 10
Giff
• • Neiahborhood Plan Existina Conditions
Figure 4: • • Area Plan Zoning Districts
• ■ ■ ��.�
II�I,IIIIIII troat
. _.. •.
41st 5 et
Zoning
�' ,�„�et♦�■. � 111111 T ` � ,�,
r+�,'•���' IIIIIIi� ,
� 11-
Categories
A-1 MED RS-2
Co OCR RS-3
CH TM " �.
- - -
Giffofd Plan Boundary
Community
Development Department Indian River
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Non-residential non-conforming uses exist along 43`d Street as well as sporadically throughout Gifford. As shown in Figure 4, the
area just west of U.S. Highway 1, along 43`d Street, is zoned CL, Limited Commercial District. Although several bottle clubs operate
in that area of Gifford, such establishments are not permitted in the CL zoning district. Another non-conforming use is the Green Leaf
Bar, located in a residential neighborhood (along 38th Avenue).
Demographics
The information in this section is derived from the 1990 Census and from the 2000 Census. Bounded by Old Dixie Highway on the
east, 58th Avenue on the west, 41" Street on the south, and the North Relief Canal on the north, Census Tract 503.02 has a geographic
area similar to the Gifford Neighborhood Plan Area. Consequently, the data for this census tract were used to represent the plan area.
Table 2 below identifies the basic demographic make-up of the Gifford Neighborhood Plan Area and Indian River County as a whole.
As noted in Table 2, Gifford residents are more likely than other residents of Indian River County to be young, to have low incomes,
and to be Black.
Table 2: Demographics
1990 Census 2000 Census
Gifford Indian River County Gifford Indian River Count
Population 4,390 90,208 5,123 112,947
%25 & older High School Graduate and Higher 39.0 76.5 58.5 81.6
Median Household Income $14,347 $28,961 $29,437 $39,635
Per Capita Income $6,782 $17,825 $19,910 $27,227
%Below Poverty Level -All Persons 30.3 8.7 ----- -----
Poverty Status, Families 26.3 5.9 19.6 6.3
Poverty Status, Individuals 23.4 9.3
%Black Population 88.0 8.5 82.3 8.2
% 19 years or younger 37.1 21.5 28.8 1 21.3
%20 to 59 years 49.7 43.9 43.4 43.8
%60 years or older 13.2 34.6 27.8 34.9
Median Age 44.0 39.8 47.0
ti Community Development Department Indian River County 12
W
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Housing
y Single-Family Dwelling Units
According to data from the Indian River County Property Appraiser's Office, there are 1,428 single-family dwelling units in the
Gifford area. Of that total, 908 units or 64% are owner occupied. For owner occupied single-family dwelling units, the average lot
size is 20,038 square feet, and the average assessed value is $55,519. For renter occupied single-family dwelling units, the average lot
size is 14,375 square feet, and the average assessed value is $32,328. Table 3 breaks out the data into the three sub-areas of Gifford.
Table 3: Single-Family Dwell ng Units
Owner Occu ied Renter Occu ied
Sub-Area #of Units Av . Lot Size Av . Assessed Value #of Units Avg. Lot Size Av .Assessed Value
East Gifford 526 11,072 $31,246 447 10,753 $26,244
Central Gifford 196 23,720 $72,808 43 22,327 $56,086
West Gifford 186 56,759 $105,943 30 56,091 $88,929
Figure 5 displays the single-family development activity that has occurred in Gifford between 1996 and 2000. Between 1996 and
2000, 100 single-family homes were built in the Gifford area. This represents 3% of all of the single-family homes built in the entire
unincorporated county area during that period. Within Gifford, the central area gained 45 new single-family homes during the last
five years; the eastern area gained 42 new single-family homes; and the western area gained 13 single-family homes.
Much of this new single-family development in Gifford, particularly in East Gifford, is due to the efforts of Habitat for Humanity of
Indian River County, a local affiliate of the national non-profit organization. Incorporated in 1990, Habitat has built 22 homes in
Indian River County in its first ten years. In 2001, Habitat increased its level of activity by platting the 12 lot Grace Oaks subdivision
in Gifford. During that year, Habitat also constructed a home on each of the lots. Future plans are to increase construction activity to
20 to 30 homes a year (with 75% of those homes to be built in Gifford) by 2006. Habitat is currently in the process of developing the
22 lot Grace Pines subdivision in Gifford.
Community Development Department Indian River County 13
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Figure 5: Single-Family Building Permit Activity
2
1
a
1
N
14-
4-
2r-
0
4420 w .
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
❑East Gifford ®Central Gifford ❑West Gifford
From October 2000 through June 2001, a windshield survey was conducted to collect data on housing conditions in the Gifford area.
During the survey, housing units were evaluated based on the exterior appearance of the structure. The purpose of the survey was to
identify properties that fit into at least one of the following three categories:
1. Sub-Standard Housing Category;
■ Buildings that appeared in need of substantial repair to the roof, foundation, or siding.
■ Buildings with boarded up or damaged windows and doors.
2. Dilapidated Housing Category;
■ Buildings that appeared to be in such disrepair that rehabilitation might be more costly and time-consuming than building
new structure.
��, Community Development Department Indian River County 14
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
3. County Code Violation Category.
■ Properties with debris that was visible from the street.
■ Debris includes items such as old and dilapidated automobiles, household appliances, scrap building material, or any junk
item as defined in the county's land development regulations.
Windshield Survey: Sub-Standard Housing Category
The windshield survey classified 388 single-family structures as being in sub-standard condition. Nearly all (91.5%) of those
structures are located in East Gifford. Figures 6 and 7 show examples of housing units that were considered to be in substandard
condition. Figure 8 shows the location of the 355 substandard structures in East Gifford. Central Gifford contains 32 structures that
are classified as substandard. The location of those structures is depicted in Figure 8.1. West Gifford contains one structure that is
classified as substandard.
- e r
t .
n
1•:,' 5wS.:}� Zks`i?kf�tl+v.:�'t rC��"FI..s^iPs..,y
Community Development Department Indian River County 15
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Figure 8: Sub-Standard Housing Units in East Gifford
48th Mot
®®
fflo ®®
a
41st Straot
REEM N
® Sub -standard Housing units 8
OMB
East Gifford
�.! Indian River County 16
N Community Development Department
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Figure 8.1 : Sub-Standard Housing Units in Central Gifford
FR
A C.
A
R �
3 R
C =
R C
R
N
41 st St root
-Substandard Housing Units
0 Central Gifford
Community Development Department Indian River County 17
Gifford Neighborhood Plan
Existing Conditions
Windshield Survey: Dilapidated Housing Category
The windshield survey identified 146 dilapidated housing units, 131 (89.7%) in East Gifford, 14 in Central Gifford, and 1 in West
Gifford. Figures 9 and 9.1 show the locations of the dilapidated structures in East and Central Gifford, respectively. Figures 10 and 11
are examples of structures that were identified as dilapidated buildings.
Community Development Department Indian River County 18
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Figure 9: Dilapidated Housing Units in East Gifford
r
r
41st Street
®®® N
- Dilapidated Housing Units ®®
East Gifford
Community Development Department Indian River County 19
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Figure 9.1 : Dilapidated Housing Units in Central Gifford
7ULSIreet
w
� C
iA
41 st Street N
Dilapidated Housing Units
Central Gifford
1N
�,, Community Development Department Indian River County 20
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Figure 10 , Figure 11
i
Windshield Survey: Code Violation (Junk/Debris) Category
Code violation (Junk/Debris) properties are those parcels where junk/debris is stored on the property and visible from the street.
Debris includes such items as old and dilapidated automobiles, household appliances, scrap building material, or any junk item as
defined in the county's land development regulations. Figures 12 and 13 are examples of properties in Gifford with junk/debris.
From the windshield survey, 95 properties (92 or 94.7% in East Gifford, 2 in Central Gifford, and 1 in West Gifford) were identified
as properties having junk/debris that was visible from the street. Figures 14 and 14.1 show the location of the code violation properties
in East and Central Gifford, respectively.
Community Development Department Indian River County 21
>'f k w '.�
{j,;;'
�. _� � � �,
�;
_.�
�� 'Y �..���1. b, � �"'1S � _ _
��
._
�„
.. ��4 '
1
t Z `. C 7
�_.
� t .�.. �.
. .
- _ � � � �
, s?(
X57 ,- —
�{� y — �
� c° -� - �_-- � a
..� l{. V�y.� {
-''r s.:1 f .,' aZ- i' h I r` L � lY�' � /.� � �t��i
L ' ..fir,.+
may.,_ ,
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Figure 14 so East Gifford Properties with Junk I Debris
49tp Street
a®
EEO � ®
a
®®
41st Street
®®® N
U®HN
Properties with Junk/Debris WHOM
East Gifford
Community Development Department Indian River County 23
Gifford Neighborhood Plan _ Existing Conditions
Figure 14.1: Central Gifford Properties with Junk / Debris
7 reet
.p
_ _
m �
I L
N
41st Street
® Properties with Junk 1 Debris
0 Central Gifford
ro
Indian River County 24
Community Development Department
N
Gifford Neighborhood Plan _Existing Conditions
➢ Multi-Family Dwelling Units
As shown in Figure 4, approximately 590 acres of Gifford are zoned for multi-family uses. All of those multi-family zoned acres are
located in East Gifford. According to information from the Indian River County's Property Appraiser's Office, approximately 57
acres in the Gifford area have been developed for multi-family residential uses. Figure 15 displays the location of those properties that
have been developed for multi-family residential uses.
➢ Mobile Homes
Approximately 80 acres in Gifford, all in Central Gifford, are zoned for mobile homes. Property Appraiser's information indicates
that 69 lots in Gifford contain mobile homes.
➢ Subsidized Housing Developments
Table 4 lists the six major subsidized housing developments in the Gifford area. The projects range in size from 36 to 100 units.
Altogether, the six projects total 437 units, 377 of which are multi-family. The two largest developments were subsidized by the
Farmers Home Administration, now known as USDA, Rural Development. Because Gifford is in an area that is now classified as
"urban," housing projects in Gifford are no longer eligible for that type of subsidy. The other subsidized housing projects in Gifford
were subsidized through the federal government's Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program. Each of these developments is a safe,
attractive,well-maintained, and well-operated rental community.
Community Development Department Indian River County 25
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Figure IS: Multi-Family Developments in East Gifford
49th Street
�M@�rc
120
2
d
KDW
Ompaimmm
MA
41st Street
® Multi-family Developments®
East Gifford
N
N Community Development Department Indian River County 26
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Table 4: Ma'or Subsidized Single-Family and Multi-Family Developments
Development Name Type of Number of Units Government Subsidy
Housing
Gifford Grove Single-Family 60 Low Income Housing Tax Credit
Lindsey Gardens Multi-Family 96 Low Income Housing Tax Credit
Orangewood Park Multi-Family 100 Farmers Home Administration
Sunset Apartments Multi-Family 36 Low Income Housing Tax Credit
Victory Park Multi-Family 100 Farmers Home Administration
Briar Wood of Vero Beach Multi-Family 45 Low Income Housing Tax Credit
Support Services
Table 5 lists the type and number of support services that exist in the three sub-areas of Gifford. Figure 16 displays the location of the
various support services in the Gifford area.
Table 5: S port Services in Gifford
Type of Support Service East Gifford Central Gifford West Gifford Total
-Activity Centers 0 1 0 1
Adult Care Facilities 1 0 0 1
Child Care Facilities 3 0 0 3
Education Facilities 4 0 0 4
-Emergency Medical Stations 1 0 0 1
Fire Stations 0 0 0 0
Health Care Facilities 1 0 0 1
Place of Worship 25 1 1 27
Police Stations/Satellite Offices 1 0 0 1
Community Development Department Indian River County 27
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
➢ Education Facilities
There are four educational facilities located in Gifford, all in East Gifford. Those four facilities are listed below:
■ Dodgertown Elementary School
■ Gifford Middle School
■ Indian River County Alternative Education Center
■ St. Helen's Headstart Center
➢ Ememency Medical Stations
The County's Emergency Services Department operates one emergency medical service (EMS) station in Gifford. That station is
manned 24 hours a day and is located adjacent to Gifford Middle School on 45`" Street. No other EMS facilities are planned for the
Gifford area.
➢ Fire Stations
Indian River County's Emergency Services Department does not have any fire stations located in Gifford. Two fire stations, however,
serve the Gifford area. Those stations are located just outside the boundaries of the plan area. One is located at 2900 43rd Avenue,
while the other is located at 6568 US 1. No new fire stations are planned for the Gifford area.
➢ Health Care Facilities
The Gifford Health Center is the only health care facility located in the Gifford area. This facility is a primary care clinic serving the
adult and pediatric health care needs of the residents of the county and in particular those residents residing in and about the general
area of the clinic's location. All services are offered on a sliding fee scale based upon family size and income. The facility is operated
by the Indian River County Health Department and is funded primarily by the Indian River County Hospital District and by Medicaid.
From October 1999 to September 2000, the health center recorded 7,919 patient care visits. Of the patients that visited the health
center, 41%were between the ages of 0 and 18, while 59%were 19 years of age or older. Since opening in 1996, the health center has
registered over 4,900 patients and currently has a 2,159 active patient census.
s
N
Community Development Department Indian River County 28
-p
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Figure16 : Support Services
49th S root
s
sweet
A
Ir,
st t t o
M, F�9
Activity Centers IRC Sheriff's
Police Satellite Stations Office
0 Other Services
0 Schools
Adult Care Facillitles N
Child Care Faciltles
0 Places of Worship
0 Property Lines
,Av�-Gifford Boundary Area
Community Development Department Indian River County 29
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
➢ Law Enforcement
The Indian River County Sheriff's Office maintains one satellite office in Gifford. This satellite office, located on the grounds of
Gifford Middle School, houses the Sheriffs Community Oriented Police Enforcement (COPE) program for the Gifford area. From
this office, deputies may prepare reports, receive complaints from the community and interact with the community. Through the
COPE office, deputies aid in the prevention of crime and the promotion of positive interaction between the Sheriffs Office and the
residents of the Gifford community.
Additionally, the Sheriff s Main Office is located in the Gifford area near the southeast corner of 41 St Street and 43`d Avenue.
➢ Recreation Facilities
There are five publicly maintained recreation facilities in the Gifford area. Three are maintained by the Vero Beach/Indian River
County recreation department. These facilities, located on a 40 acre campus at the southwest corner of 43`d Avenue and 491h Street,
are Gifford Park, the Gifford Youth Activities Center, and the Gifford Aquatic Center. The campus includes 2 basketball courts, 2
baseball/softball fields, 2 tennis courts, I volleyball court, 1 physical fitness course, 7 picnic tables, 4 picnic pavilions, 1 playground,
outdoor grills, foot trails, and a community center. The Youth Activities Center contains classrooms, computers, a
gymnasium/auditorium, a library, and other facilities. The Aquatic Center features two pools, one for adults and one for children.
The other two recreation facilities in Gifford are Hosie-Schumann Park, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Park, both maintained by the
Indian River County Parks Department. Located adjacent to the W.E. Geoffrey Subdivision on the north side of 39th Street, Hosie-
Schumann Park is two acres in size and consists mostly of open space. Facilities at this park are limited to one concrete picnic table,
one swing set and one basketball court.
Martin Luther King, Jr. Park is two acres in size and is located at the northwest corner of 45th Street and 28th Avenue. This park
contains the historic Macedonia Baptist Church and Museum.
Income and Employment
Gifford's central county location puts it in close proximity to several major employers such as Indian River Memorial Hospital, Vero
Beach Municipal Airport, Dodgertown, the Indian River Mall, Gateway Industrial Park, the county maintenance facility, a Florida
Department of Transportation maintenance facility, and several packinghouses. For that reason, Gifford appears to offer relatively
J
Community Development Department Indian River County 30
w
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
easy access to several employment centers. In fact, no other area of the county is as close to as many employment opportunities as
Gifford. Despite that fact, Gifford residents have lower median household and per capita incomes than the county as a whole.
According to Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) data, the three TAZs in Gifford contain approximately 1,750 employees. Of these 1,750
employees, 160 are employed in the industrial sector, 742 in the commercial sector, and 848 in the service sector. The 7 TAZs
surrounding Gifford have a combined 1,017 employees. In total, Gifford and the surrounding area contain about 2,767 employees.
Crime
The Indian River County Sheriff's Office maintains crime figures for the unincorporated county for Part 1 crime incidents. Table 6
lists the number of incidents by Part 1 crime categories that were reported in Gifford in 2000, and the percentage that those incidents
represented for the entire unincorporated county.
Table 6: Reported Crime Data for 2000
Type of Crime # of Incidents in Gifford %of Incidents for
Unincorporated Count
Assault 84 37.33%
Attempted Suicide 4 4.16%
Auto Burglary 65 14.48%
Business Burglary 38 16.10%
Elder Abuse 2 28.57%
Grand Theft 27 6.68%
Homicide 1 33.33%
Recovered Stolen Vehicle 11 30.56%
Residential Burglary 107 23.36%
-Robbery 12 37.50%
Sex Offense 15 18.52%
-Simple Battery 131 29.05%
Stolen.Vehicle 35 24.48%
Suicide 1 14.29%
Theft 81 6.60%
TOTAL 614 15.90%
Community Development Department Indian River County 31
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Infrastructure
➢ Transportation
Streets
Within Gifford, as with the entire county, roads are divided into three classifications based on the function of the road. Those
functional classifications are local, collector, and arterial. By definition, local roads accommodate the smallest volume and the
slowest speeds, and connect the road network to specific developments or land uses; arterial roads handle the largest volume and the
highest speeds; and collector roads accommodate intermediate volumes and speeds while connecting local and arterial roads.
All of the streets in Gifford are classified as local roadways except for the following:
■ U.S. Highway One and 58th Avenue are classified as urban principal arterial roadways;
■ Old Dixie Highway, 43rd Avenue, 41St Street, and 45th Street are classified as urban collector roadways;
■ 49th Street is classified as an urban minor arterial roadway; and
■ 66th Avenue is classified as a rural major collector roadway.
Most local and collector roads in Gifford are maintained by the County's Public Works Department. Those roads are paved or graded
and generally are in good condition, although some of the roads, like 45th Street, need resurfacing. There are, however, several
existing streets that are not public rights-of-way. These streets are 32nd Avenue, north of 43`d Street; and 35th Avenue, north or 45th
Street. Since there is no public right-of-way, these streets are not maintained by the county and are in poor condition. This problem is
related to land that was divided prior to enactment of current regulations.
The county monitors traffic volumes and crashes along all arterial and collector roads. Based on that information, the county
determines which roads and intersections may need improvements or maintenance. As indicated in Table 7, the county has several
currently active street improvement projects in Gifford. Those projects include widening 41St Street and improving several
intersections. The information for Table 7 was taken from the Indian River County Engineering Division and Public Works
Department, Quarterly Status Report for the period of January through March 2001. This information highlights the county's current
and long-term capital improvement road projects.
v
N
Community Development Department Indian River County 32
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Table 7: Current and Long-Ter Road Projects in Gifford
Project Description Design Date Construction Date Status
Widen & resurface 41 St St., between 58t Av. & October 2001 To be determined ROW to acquire. Additional survey
US 1 work needed.
Improve intersection @ 41St St. & 43 rd Av. April 2001 2001/2002 Alignment established. Plans sent to
utilities companies to verify locations.
Need ROW in NE corner for lake.
Improve intersection A 41s' St. & Old Dix. Hwy. To be determined To be determined Survey completed.
Improve intersection 4 45 th St. & Old Dix. Hwy. To be determined To be determined Surve completed.
Improve intersection @ 49t St. & US 1. To be determined To be determined Consultant working on design to add 1
lane & improve drainage. Utility
conflicts being checked.
According to the county Traffic Engineering Division's 2000 accident report, the following intersections in Gifford had 4 or more
crashes in 2000.
- 41St Street and 58th Avenue—5 accidents
- 41St Street and Old Dixie Highway—7 accidents
- 41" Street and U.S. #1 — 5 accidents
- 47th Street and U.S. #1 —4 accidents
- 49t" Street and 58th Avenue—4 accidents
- 49th Street and Old Dixie Highway—4 accidents
Community Development Department Indian River County 33
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
Sidewalks
Gifford is similar to much of the county in that sidewalks generally do not exist along local roads. Even along major roads, sidewalks
are not continuous and connected. A sidewalk exists along the east side of 43`d Avenue between Dodgertown Elementary School and
47th Place (Gifford Park). Much of that sidewalk, however, is gravel or has weeds growing through cracks. Along the west side of
43`d Avenue, a sidewalk exists in front of Gifford Park. A sidewalk also exists along the north side of 45th Street, between Old Dixie
Highway and 43`d Court. No other sidewalks exist along major roads in Gifford.
Public Transportation
As the county's transit provider, the Indian River County Council on Aging has two fixed transit routes, Routes 3 and 8, that have
stops in Gifford. Both of those routes provide service from Pocahontas Park, located in the City of Vero Beach, to the Gifford Health
Center and back. At Pocahontas Park, riders can switch buses to ride to any destination on any of the county's six other routes.
Routes 3 and 8 rank third and first, respectively, in terms of number of riders carried.
For the three month period from July to September 2001, ridership on Route 3 was 6,844, an increase of 31% compared to the
previous quarter. Major stops on Route 3 include Indian River Memorial Hospital, Guy Colley's Grocery, and other destinations
along US Highway One.
For the three month period from July to September 2001, ridership on Route 8 was 9,480, an increase of 34% compared to the
previous quarter. Major stops along Route 8, which travels a more westerly course than Route 3, include Gifford Gardens,
Orangewood Park, Victory Park, and Dodgertown.
These routes have a total of 19 stops in Gifford. Currently, the stops have no seating or covered shelter, and there are no plans to add
any.
In conjunction with the fixed route service, the Council on Aging offers two additional services. The first additional service is a Bial-
a-ride service for patrons who live more than one quarter mile from either side of its fixed routes. This service will pick up patrons at
their door and drop them off at the closest designated fixed route stop, which then allows those patrons to utilize the fixed route
service.
v
N
Community Development Department Indian River County 34
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
The other additional service is door-to-door service to medical facilities and doctors' appointments for disabled, elderly, and low
income individuals.
The Indian River County School District also provides public transportation which picks-up and drops-off school children. Those
stops, which are located throughout Gifford, are not marked with signs, and do not include seating or covered shelter.
➢ Potable Water Service
Operated by the Indian River County Utilities Department, the county water system extends into the Gifford area. The North County
and the South County Water Treatment Plants serve the entire system. Installed along major transportation corridors, main water
transmission lines ranging in diameter from 2 inches to 12 inches allow the water to flow from the treatment plants. From those main
lines, smaller lines branch out into residential neighborhoods and commercial/industrial nodes to provide residents and businesses
with potable water.
In the Gifford area, main water lines exist along 58th Avenue, along 491h Street from 58th Avenue to U.S. Highway One, along 41St
Street from 58th Avenue to U.S. Highway One, and along U.S. Highway One from 49th Street to 37th Street. From those mainlines,
smaller lines ranging from 2 inches to 12 inches in diameter serve Gifford residents and businesses.
In Gifford, 1,188 residential units, as well as many non-residential sites, are currently connected to the county's potable water system.
➢ Sanitary Sewer Service
The Indian River County Utilities Department operates five wastewater treatment plants, each serving a defined area of the county.
The Central Region Wastewater Treatment Plant serves the Gifford area. Wastewater generated by residences, businesses and other
uses is conveyed to a wastewater treatment plant by a network of collection pipes. In Gifford, that collection network comprises
gravity lines with an 8-inch diameter, and force mains with diameters ranging from 6 inches to 16 inches. Those lines are connected
to 1,068 residences in Gifford, as well as many non-residential users.
Community Development Department Indian River County 35
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Existing Conditions
➢ Stormwater Management
In the Gifford area, the Indian River Farms Water Control District (IRFWCD) is the primary entity responsible for the control of
surface waters. These surface waters flow through sub-lateral, lateral, and outfall canals. The IRFWCD's facilities in Gifford include:
■ sub-lateral canal A-6 (along 41st Street)
■ sub-lateral canal A-7 (along 45th Street)
■ sub-lateral canal A-8 (along 49th Street)
■ lateral "A" canal (along 66th Avenue)
■ lateral "H" canal (along the edge of the old coastal dune)
Maintenance of these facilities is funded by an IRFWCD assessment of$14.00 per acre, or any portion thereof, from all landowners
within the IRFWCD. Stormwater Management is occasionally a problem in Gifford. This problem is generally attributable to
development that occurred prior to current regulations. Additionally, there are problems with canals, ditches, swales, laterals, and sub-
laterals not adequately maintained.
In September 2000, the Board of County Commissioners established a Municipal Service Benefit Unit (MSBU) that includes an area
of Gifford that is not within the boundaries of a water control district. This area includes approximately 43 acres and is bordered by
43`d Street on the north, 41" Street on the south, the FEC Railroad on the east, and the IRFWCD boundary on the west. Since the area
is not within a water control district, poor drainage has been a constant problem for residents. To eliminate the drainage problem, the
county Public Works Department will use MSBU funds to make drainage system improvements and provide maintenance within the
boundaries of the unit.
➢ Street Liehtiny,
Most of Gifford is art of the Gifford Street Lighting District; therefore, street lights are provided throughout Gifford. However, some
streets, such as 29t Avenue and 30th Avenue, do not have street lights. Also, some other street lights are not producing enough light
for safety and security purposes.
N
N
W
Community Development Department Indian River County 36
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
ANALYSIS
This Analysis section constitutes an assessment of the Gifford neighborhood. Using information from the Existing Conditions section
of the plan,this section identifies issues, problems, needs, opportunities, and constraints within the Gifford area.
Land Use/Zoning Pattern
Even with its relatively broad mix of uses, Gifford is primarily a residential area. Together, the residential zoning districts in Gifford
allow single-family, multiple-family and mobile homes, although no zoning district allows all of those uses. Depending on the zoning
district, densities of up to 6 to 10 units/acre are permitted. Therefore, Gifford residents have a relatively broad mix of housing types
and housing prices available to them. For that reason, Gifford residents generally benefit from having the additional housing choices
associated with Gifford's mix of residential zoning districts.
The residential areas of Gifford are located where urban services (such as roads, water, sewer, stormwater management, recreational
facilities, schools, and others) are available and access to employment is convenient. Totaling more than 1,600 acres, the existing
residentially designated land in Gifford can accommodate the existing and projected population growth of Gifford. In fact, the amount
of vacant land indicates that Gifford could eventually double its current population.
Nearly all commercial and. industrial zoning districts in Gifford are properly located where they are accessible to necessary
infrastructure and do not negatively impact residential areas. In fact, those commercial and industrial areas serve Gifford residents by
providing nearby goods, services and jobs.
In Central Gifford, there are some areas that are zoned general industrial. Within these areas, there are various uses including salvage
yards and other heavy industrial uses. Some of these industrial uses are proximate to residences, and in some cases there are land use
conflicts and incompatibilities. Given the historic development pattern and existing uses, however, it would not be feasible or
practical to rezone those industrial properties.
Generally, Gifford's zoning pattern is appropriate. Although Gifford has some "grand-fathered-in" uses (legally established uses)that
do not conform to current zoning regulations, the county's zoning regulations contain provisions that require the cessation of non-
conforming uses. If for any reason, a non-conforming use of land, a non-conforming structure or an establishment having a site
related non-conformity ceases operation for a continuous period of one year or more, all non-conformities shall be considered
terminated and shall not be re-established.
Community Development Department Indian River County 37
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
Currently, most of east Gifford is zoned RM-10 (Multi-Family Residential up to 10 units/acre). Despite that multi-family zoning,
most of east Gifford is developed with single family residences. Because the RM-10 zoning allows multi-family uses, such as
duplexes and triplexes, the existing zoning pattern would allow multi-family structures to be built on lots within single-family areas.
In many parts of Gifford, the RS-6 (Single-Family Residential up to 6 units/acre) zoning district would be more appropriate than the
current RM-10 zoning. For that reason, the county should initiate action to rezone those areas to RS-6.
➢ Summary
• Although Gifford has a relatively broad mix of uses, Gifford is primarily a residential area.
• There is sufficient vacant land in Gifford, both residential and commercial/industrial,to accommodate projected growth.
• Gifford residents benefit from a zoning pattern that allows a wide range of housing choices with respect to both housing type and
density.
• Commercial and industrial zoning districts in Gifford are located close to needed infrastructure.
• Commercial and industrial zoning districts in Gifford are located such that uses providing goods, services and jobs for Gifford
residents are situated in convenient locations.
• Generally, Gifford's existing land use and zoning pattern allows and encourages compatible development and redevelopment.
• Some land use and zoning incompatibilities exist in parts of East and Central Gifford where non-conforming uses and industrial
uses are located.
• No changes to the existing land use designation pattern in Gifford are needed at this time.
• Over time, the county should rezone parts of Gifford from RM-10 to RS-6.
Housing
While Gifford contains a range of housing conditions, the best conditions are in West Gifford where most houses are newer. In
contrast, some of the worst housing in the county is located in East Gifford where many houses are in extremely poor condition. Not
only are structures in poor condition, but junk and debris in some yards negatively affects community appearance.
Generally, poor housing conditions adversely affect quality of life and levels of investment in surrounding property. As a result,
property values do not appreciate. Based on the information provided by the Property Appraiser's Office, East Gifford is currently in
that situation. The information indicates that the average assessed value of residential property in East Gifford is less than half that of
residences in other parts of Gifford. In summary, many residential properties in Gifford, particularly East Gifford, are not maximizing
their economic potential.
W Community Development Department Indian River County 38
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
➢ Issues and Problems
The major issues associated with poor housing conditions are absentee landlords and low rates of home ownership. In Gifford, most
of the poor housing conditions are associated with rental housing. Even though rental housing makes up only 36% of all single-family
units in Gifford, rental housing accounts for 74% of sub-standard housing, 88% of dilapidated housing, and 53% of housing with
junk/debris in East Gifford.
Another cause of poor housing conditions in Gifford is income. Because of the number of low income households, many residents
live in substandard conditions or pay an excessive portion of their income for housing.
➢ Opportunities
Although significant housing problems exist in Gifford, significant opportunities to resolve these problems also exist. Some programs
that are in place are already snaking a difference. Foremost among those programs is Habitat For Humanity's efforts.
With county funding assistance,,Habitat For Humanity (HFH) is building new housing, mentoring its clients, and improving entire
neighborhoods. These efforts are also having an effect on surrounding properties. In many cases, the HFH homes are serving as a
catalyst for other rehabilitation and clean-up efforts.
Any plan to significantly improve housing conditions in Gifford must include a number of activities. These include:
• Condemning and razing dilapidated structures;
• Rehabilitating salvageable structures;
• Constructing new residences, particularly on vacant platted lots;
• Maintaining new and existing residences;
• Increasing home ownership; and
• Intensifying code enforcement.
There are several initiatives that the county can take to improve housing conditions in Gifford. Some are already in use to varying
degrees. To maximize the effectiveness of each initiative, the county should take a comprehensive approach and coordinate a number
of these initiatives. These efforts must focus on East Gifford,the location of the highest concentration of poor housing conditions.
Community Development Department Indian River County 39
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
■ CondemnintYRazin$! Structures
Those structures within Gifford that have deteriorated beyond the point where they can be economically repaired must be removed.
This is a county responsibility and involves action by code enforcement and the building division. While the condemnation process is
slow and time-consuming, it must be pursued. By removing those structures, a community blight can be removed and buildable lots
created. After structures are removed, the county must take all reasonable efforts to make lots available for new construction.
■ Rehabilitating Salva able Structures
Many housing units in Gifford are deteriorated, but can economically be rehabilitated. Two programs managed by the county can
provide funding for rehabilitation activities. Through the State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) Program, the county can
provide rehabilitation funding for low and very low income residents. Although not yet funded, the Community Development Block
Grant Program will provide another source for rehabilitation funding, if the county's grant is approved. Even with funding available,
there is still the challenge of getting property owners to apply for funding. Through rehabilitation, the housing stock can be improved
and preserved, while the overall community can be enhanced.
In the past, Gifford residents have been relatively slow to take advantage of the SHIP Program. There are several reasons for that.
The principal reason, however, may be a reluctance to encumber a residence with a lien as required by the SHIP Program. This
reluctance stems from a fear of losing the residence as well as a general distrust of government programs.
Regardless of those issues, it is clear that the participation of Gifford residents in the SHIP Program will not increase unless groups
and individuals that are trusted and respected in the community (e.g. churches and pastors) are recruited to help "get the word out." In
addition to increased public education activities, SHIP program staff may conduct special informational workshops for Gifford
residents.
■ ConstructinLi New Housing
During the past decade, there has been little new single-family housing construction in east and central Gifford. Over the past few
years, however, Habitat For Humanity has initiated an aggressive sweat equity housing construction program. With county SHIP
funding assistance, Habitat has built housing and provided other services to its clients. Over the next ten years, Habitat intends to
build 20 to 30 houses a year, at least 75% in Gifford. Generally, about 25%to 40% of the cost of each Habitat built home is paid for
with the SHIP funds.
N
-� Community Development Department Indian River County 40
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
New housing construction not only provides safe, decent housing; it can also stimulate additional housing construction and enhance
community appearance.
■ Maintaining New and Existing Residences
To ensure that a community does not deteriorate, it is necessary that the housing stock be adequately maintained. In Gifford, that
requires that landlords maintain their rental units. One way to ensure that units are maintained is to increase code enforcement
activities. Even more effective, though, are efforts by community groups, such as the Progressive Civic League of Gifford to
encourage property maintenance. Property maintenance must be ongoing. This is the most cost effective way to preserve property
values.
■ Increasing Home Ownership
One effective way to improve housing in a community is to increase homeownership. Generally, owners maintain their property
better and have more pride in their community than renters do. Currently, both the Habitat For Humanity program and the SHIP
program provide homeownership opportunities. Other programs are also available through local lenders. Probably the two issues
limiting homeownership the most are cost and credit. To address these issues, there must be a coordinated effort involving
government, non-profits, and local lenders.
■ Subsidized Affordable Housing Projects
Another way to address affordable housing issues is through subsidized affordable housing projects. Those projects, more than most
projects, require coordination between the public and private sectors. Because Gifford has many low income residents, subsidized
housing projects benefit the community by providing affordable housing. That fact, however, needs to be balanced by the fact that
more than 40% (6 of 14) of all subsidized housing projects in unincorporated Indian River County are already located in East Gifford.
Such a concentration can, itself, cause problems.
■ Neighborhood Associations
Although the Progressive Civic League of Gifford functions as a representative of the Gifford community, there are not many smaller
neighborhood associations in Gifford. These types of associations could facilitate communication within neighborhoods and between
neighborhoods. They could also coordinate "clean-ups", aid COPE and Code Enforcement, and generally look after local needs.
Community Development Department Indian River County 41
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
➢ Summary
Generally, Gifford's poor housing problems are located in East Gifford and are, to a large degree, caused by absentee landlords and a
relatively low proportion of owner occupied homes. To improve the housing situation, the county must coordinate the COPE and
Code Enforcement Programs to encourage better maintenance of residential buildings. Those programs should focus on properties
owned by absentee landlords.
To encourage home ownership, and improve housing conditions in Gifford, several programs must be coordinated and expanded.
Those programs include the SHIP Program, Habitat for Humanity, the CDBG Program, and others. Most of these activities should
focus on East Gifford.
Neighborhood Commercial Activity Centers
In Gifford, successful development and redevelopment must include several components. One of those components, as discussed in
the Housing Analysis, is improvement of the housing stock. Another component is renovating commercial establishments. Both of
these components are necessary to prevent or reverse neighborhood deterioration. For that reason, the residential and commercial
areas of Gifford have a complementary relationship.
In Gifford, one component of successful development and redevelopment will be the creation of vital Neighborhood Commercial
Activity Centers. Neighborhood Activity Centers can be entertainment centers, schools, business districts, and public parks and
plazas. Two areas of Gifford already function as Neighborhood Activity Centers. The primary one is located near the southwest
corner of 49th Street and 43`d Avenue. That area contains the Gifford Youth Activity Center, the Gifford Community Center, Gifford
Park, and the Gifford Aquatic Center.
Other Activity Centers in Gifford are the existing commercial/retail areas along 45th and 43`d Streets near Old Dixie Highway. Those
areas contain a small mix of restaurants, bars, bottle clubs, service establishments, convenience stores, and shops. Despite the fact that
some of those establishments are currently poorly-maintained and run-down, the 43`d Street and 45th Street Corridors have the
potential to be redeveloped as Neighborhood Commercial Activity Centers.
These types of neighborhood centers are often community focal points and gathering spots. Frequently, they are the location of a
community's significant public buildings, parks, or art. As such, Neighborhood Activity Centers often foster a sense of place and
N
Community Development Department Indian River County 42
W
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
community identity. Factors that indicate that the 43`d Street and 45th Street Corridors have the potential to be redesigned as
Neighborhood Commercial Activity Centers include the following:
■ They are easily accessible to both pedestrians and motorists in East Gifford;
■ They have sufficient public road right-of-way to accommodate improvements such as sidewalks and landscaping;
■ They are small and compact enough that minor improvements can have significant positive impacts; and
■ They already have a mix of commercial, institutional, and residential uses.
Such Neighborhood Commercial Activity Center areas often provide increased community identity and pride, needed shops and
services, and affordable housing in the form of apartments above shops, as well as jobs.
Another benefit of redeveloping at least a portion of 45th Street and 43`d Street is related to the look and feel of the street. Although
the 45th Street corridor is a major entranceway into Gifford and a major central-county east-west road, 45th Street, like most county
arterial roads, was constructed primarily for the fast movement of cars, with little attention given to pedestrians, bicyclists,
beautification, or public transportation. For those reasons, 45th Street lacks the features needed to make it a lively attractive street.
Those features include wide sidewalks, street trees and landscaping, decorative lights, benches, and attractive buildings. As a result,
45th Street often appears desolate. Thus, it is currently an economically underused corridor along a major roadway. If redesigned as
an attractive, urban, pedestrian-friendly main street, the 45th Street Corridor could become a major economic and aesthetic asset for the
community, while still facilitating the flow of automobile traffic.
➢ Demand Issues
Typically, neighborhood commercial activity centers locate within and near areas having a population size approximately equal to that
of Gifford's. Neighborhood commercial activity centers sell convenience goods (food, drugs, cards, and sundries) and provide
personal services (dry cleaning, hair and nail care, travel agent, and video rental) that meet the day-to-day living needs of the
immediate area. Those types of shopping centers and the uses they contain, however, are generally absent from the Gifford area. For
that reason, it is likely that Gifford residents currently leave Gifford for most of their retail and service purchases. That indicates that
there is an opportunity for entrepreneurs to fill a neighborhood commercial niche in Gifford, conceivably in the 45th Street or 43`d
Street Corridors.
In fact, experts believe that neighborhood commercial centers should generally be 3 to 15 acres in size and serve 2,500 to 40,000
people within a radius of one half mile to 3 miles. The Gifford area contains a population of a little more than 5,000 people within
approximately 3 square miles. The 43`d Street and 45th Street Corridors each contain between 6.5 and 7.5 acres of
Community Development Department Indian River County 43
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
commercial/industrial designated land; combined, they contain almost 14 acres of commercial/industrial designated land. For these
reasons, existing commercially designated land is sufficient to support a neighborhood commercial activity center.
Based on this information, the 43`d Street and 45`x' Street Corridors meet the size requirements of a neighborhood center, and should be
able to draw from a geographically large enough area to support a neighborhood commercial activity center. The population of the
Gifford area, by itself, is within the ranges considered adequate to support a neighborhood commercial activity center.
• According to established urban planning and design criteria, a neighborhood commercial center should provide the sale of
convenience goods and personal services to the neighborhood. Leading tenants of these centers should be a supermarket and
drugstore, and centers should contain between 5 to 20 stores and shops. To support a neighborhood commercial center, a
minimum population of 4,000 is needed, and the center should serve an area having a '/2 mile radius. The gross land area for a
neighborhood commercial center should be between 4 and 8 acres, and the gross floor area of buildings in the center should be
between 30,000 to 75,000 square feet.
➢ Design
The design of a neighborhood commercial activity center is important. For any neighborhood center to be successful, it must be
attractive, and pedestrians must feel safe and comfortable walking between uses. For that reason, the following design elements are
usually associated with neighborhood centers:
• A dense, compact mix of uses including offices and residences above stores;
• Building facades that feature windows and interesting architecture;
• Buildings built to the sidewalk to allow"window shopping";
• Wide, shady sidewalks;
• Street trees;
• Street furniture;
• Decorative street lights;
• Narrow streets;
• On street parking;
• Parking lots located behind buildings; and
• Electrical wires that are located underground rather than suspended between poles.
N Community Development Department Indian River County 44
a--
Ln
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
Figure 17 below, shows 45th Street as it currently exists. Figure 18 shows the same segment of 45th Street, but redesigned to be more
attractive and pedestrian friendly.
re++
R ^
ya a. v
4uu
4 ^
Generally, neighborhood commercial activity centers contain a public gathering or meeting place, often a small open park or plaza. A
possible location for such a place is the county-owned ten-acre parcel at the northwest corner of 45th Street and 28th Avenue. That
parcel extends along the west side of 28th Avenue, from 45th Street to 47th Street. The south end of the parcel currently contains
historic Macedonia Baptist Church and Museum. Currently, plans are being developed to construct a public medical clinic on the
north end of the site. Gifford Middle School is located on the east side of 28th Avenue, across from the site.
Because the referenced parcel was formerly the site of the DuBose Cemetery, some burials occurred on the site. In the past, all bodies
were relocated to Crestlawn Cemetery in Vero Beach. Further development of the site may require similar measures.
In addition to the existing historic church/museum and the planned medical clinic, this site could be developed as a public park or
gathering place. Although details would need to be determined, the site could possibly include a lawn, a bandshell, a playground,
picnic facilities, basketball and tennis courts, and a daycare center.
Community Development Department Indian River.County 45
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
The elements needed to enhance neighborhood commercial activity centers along 43`d Street and 45th Street involve both public and
private property; thus both the public and private sectors would be involved in the transformation of the area into a better
neighborhood activity center. Public sector actions would include infrastructure and landscaping improvements, along with the
adoption of special land development regulations. Private sector responsibilities would include development, redevelopment and
maintenance of individual properties and buildings.
➢ Investment
There are several benefits associated with redevelopment of the 45th Street and 43`d Street areas. Those benefits include beautification,
job creation, and enhancement of quality of life. Perhaps the most important benefit, however, is increased private sector investment
in Gifford.
Redevelopment of the 45th Street and 43`d Street areas will require significant public sector investment. That public sector investment,
however, is likely to spur much greater levels of private sector investment in Gifford. Usually, redevelopment of commercial areas
spurs private investment not only in nearby commercial areas, but also in nearby residential areas. In this way, the redevelopment of
the 45th Street and 43`d Street Corridors can positively impact the entire Gifford area.
➢ Summary
The 45th Street and 43`d Street corridors can be redeveloped into Neighborhood Commercial Activity Centers. Those centers can
benefit Gifford most significantly by encouraging private sector investment in the area. They can also increase economic activity,
create jobs, beautify the area, provide affordable housing, and increase community identity and pride. Although a detailed study is
warranted, a preliminary analysis indicates that there is a market in Gifford for the kinds of goods and services that Neighborhood
Commercial Activity Centers provide.
Indian River County 46
Community Development Department
S
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analvsis
Income and Employment
One advantage of Gifford's central county location is its close proximity to several major employers such as Indian River Memorial
Hospital, Vero Beach Municipal Airport, Dodgertown, the Indian River Mall, Gateway Industrial Park, the county maintenance
facility, a Florida Department of Transportation maintenance facility, and several packinghouses. For that reason, Gifford appears to
offer relatively easy access to several employment centers. In fact, no other area of the county is as close to as many employment
opportunities as Gifford. Despite that fact, Gifford residents have lower median household and per capita incomes than the county as
a whole.
Employment opportunities are continuing to increase in the Gifford area. With additional building occurring on the west part of the
airport,jobs are being created adjacent to Gifford's south boundary. Located adjacent to the airport and abutting South Gifford Road
is the Hammond Industrial Park. This project can be expected to create higher paying industrial jobs and provide employment
opportunities for Gifford residents.
To take advantage of these employment opportunities, Gifford residents must have the skills necessary for the jobs. Currently,
several job training programs exist in Gifford. Even more so now than in the past, these efforts must be focused on the skills needed
for the jobs that will be created.
➢ Issues and Problems
Several factors appear to be related to Gifford's lower income and employment rates. Some of those factors involve land use, zoning,
housing, and infrastructure, and those are discussed in other sections of this document. These are issues over which the county has
some degree of control. In contrast, the county has little control over most of the factors which relate to Gifford's lower income and
employment rates. Those factors include:
Young Age
One of those factors is the relatively young overall age of Gifford residents. Overall, 37.1% of Gifford residents are 19 years old or
younger. For the county as a whole, that percentage is only 21.5. Younger workers generally tend to earn less than older workers.
This, however, could also be an advantage, since younger workers are generally more flexible and more trainable.
Community Development Department Indian River County 47
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
Low Educational Attainment
Another issue is the relatively low overall educational attainment of Gifford residents. In Gifford, the percentage of residents 25
years old or older who have graduated high school is 39, while that percentage is 76.5 for the county as a whole. Generally, incomes
are higher for high school graduates.
Overall Economy
Another issue related to low incomes involves the economy not only in Gifford, but throughout the county. That issue is over-
reliance on retail and service sector employment. That can be a problem because retail and service sector employment tends to be
lower paying than other sectors.
Small Business Problems
A relative lack of successful small businesses and entrepreneurs in Gifford is also cited as a reason for low employment. Part of that
problem is the difficulty of obtaining"start-up" funding for business projects, especially without adequate business plans and equity.
Transportation
Despite being relatively close to several major employers,a lack of transportation to and from work is often cited as a serious problem
in Gifford. Given the lower overall income levels in Gifford and the high costs associated with automobile ownership, that result is
somewhat expected. Even when work is relatively close, it is usually not within walking distance. The county's public transportation
system, however, provides some transportation relief for jobs located in the eastern portion of the county.
➢ Opportunities
Currently, several private non-profit organizations, as well as governmental educational agencies, are working to bring businesses to
Gifford and/or offer services intended to increase the employability of individuals. These groups include the Chamber of Commerce,
Indian River Community College, the Indian River School District, the Workforce Development Board, the Gifford Economic
Development Council, GROW (Giving Rewarding Opportunities to Work), and others. These groups work to match employers and
potential employees. They also work with employers to identify the types of skills that employers are looking for in employees.
Finally, several of these groups provide a wide range of technical and busineas training to Gifford residents and others. Programs run
by these organizations address many of the larger social issues that cause employment and income problems. Those programs, while
effective, are limited in scope.
To address the transportation problems of workers or potential workers, the county may be able to reroute or expand its public
transportation system. In fact, the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), the county's transportation planning organization, is
N
Indian River County 48
Community Development Department
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
currently updating its Transit Development Plan. That update will examine the need for and feasibility of a neighborhood-to-job
commuter service for the county.
➢ Summary
Despite the fact that Gifford's central county location places it near several employment centers, Gifford residents have lower
incomes and higher poverty rates than the county as a whole. This is likely more attributable to social forces, than to locally
controlled issues such as the provision of public facilities and services, or the land use pattern. Regardless, there is a need for job
training that will enable the Gifford residents to obtain better paying jobs and a need for the county and Chamber of Commerce to
attract more higher paying jobs to the county.
Infrastructure
Infrastructure in Gifford is generally adequate. This is largely due to improvements that have taken place during the last 20 years.
Several of those improvements have taken place as a result of implementing comprehensive plan policies or by utilizing various grant
programs (e.g., expansion of utility service). Nevertheless, several areas are still in need of improvement.
➢ Roads
Most roads in Gifford are paved and generally in good condition. County traffic monitoring indicates that roads in Gifford have
sufficient capacity to serve existing and projected development. Overall, the existing grid system effectively distributes traffic in a
manner that reduces the likelihood of any single road becoming congested.
In the last two years, the following roads in the Gifford area were paved or resurfaced:
• 47th Place, 47th Street, 48th Street, 43`d Court, and 48th Place in the Crystal Sands Subdivision
• 43`d Street between 38th Avenue and 28th Avenue
• 47th Street between 39th Avenue and 36th Avenue
• 42nd Street between 28th Avenue and Cul-de-Sac
• 32 Avenue between 45th Street and 47th Street
• 32 Avenue between 47th Street and dead end; and
• 35th Avenue between 43`d Street and 45th Street.
Community Development Department Indian River County 49
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
By the end of 2002, 40t1i Avenue from 45th Street to 491h Street will also be resurfaced. Also scheduled for resurfacing in 2002-2003 is
41s' Street. On an annual basis, the county's road and bridge division does a visual survey of all county roads, including roads in
Gifford, and ranks roads for future resurfacing projects. Any streets in Gifford that are in inadequate condition will rank high for
future paving projects.
One problem in Gifford is the existence of two roads, 32nd Avenue (north of 43rd Street) and 35th Avenue (north of 45th Street), that are
in poor condition and have no public right-of-way. Because those roads are not located within publicly owned rights-of-way, the
county does not maintain them. That type of situation is difficult to remedy, since a remedy requires the coordination of all affected
persons.
In Gifford as well as elsewhere throughout the county, the county traffic engineering division monitors the traffic volume and the
crash rates of major intersections. When warranted intersections are programmed for improvement and signalization. Current and
long-term road projects in Gifford include intersection improvements to 41St Street and 43`d Avenue, 41" Street and Old Dixie
Highway, 45th Street and Old Dixie Highway, and 49th Street and U.S. 1.
Besides the improvements referenced above, the county has plans to widen 41" Street from U.S. 1 to 58th Avenue. That project will
include turn lanes, sidewalks, and resurfacing. In addition, the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is in the process of doing a
truck traffic routing study to identify appropriate streets for truck traffic and to keep trucks out of residential neighborhoods. This
study will address streets within the Gifford area, as well as streets throughout the county.
➢ Sidewalks
Pedestrian and bicycle facilities in Gifford, as in most of the county, exist primarily along arterial and collector roads, rather than
along local roads. Even along arterial and collector roads, however, the sidewalk system in Gifford is not continuous and connected.
These roads are identified in the MPO's Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan as needing sidewalks.
County policy is to develop sidewalks along major roads in conjunction with development projects. As part of the 41St Street
resurfacing project, the county plans to build sidewalks along 41St Street. Improvements to 45th Street will include continuous
sidewalks. Sidewalks along 49th Street will be installed when development projects are initiated on the north side of 491h Street.
v
N
v, Community Development Department Indian River County 50
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
➢ Utilities
Throughout East and Central Gifford, water and sewer lines are relatively new and are available for development. West Gifford is still
served primarily by wells and septic tanks. For potable water, Gifford is served by the North County Reverse Osmosis Plant, which
has a remaining capacity of 1.5 million gallons/day. For wastewater, Gifford is served by the Central County Wastewater Treatment
Plant, which has a remaining capacity of 1.1 million gallons/day. These water and sewer systems can accommodate existing and
future residential, commercial, and industrial development throughout Gifford.
➢ Stormwater Management
In most of Gifford, the Indian River Farms Water Control District (IRFWCD) is responsible for stormwater management and the
maintenance of the ditches, canals, and retention ponds. Although some ditches are not regularly maintained, the stormwater
management system in Gifford is generally adequate to serve existing and projected development. Overall, the stormwater
management infrastructure of the IRFWCD is designed to prevent flooding in the case of the 25 year/24 hour storm.
A small (43 acre)portion of East Gifford, however, is outside the boundaries of the IRFWCD. In that area, a 3 year storm is sufficient
to cause flooding. For that reason, the county recently established the East Gifford Stormwater Watershed Area Municipal Service
Benefit Unit. Through grants and MSBU assessments, stormwater management facilities in East Gifford will be constructed and
maintained. Those facilities will be designed to prevent flooding in the case of the 25 year/24 hour storm. Currently, the county is in
the process of permitting the construction of those facilities, with the actual construction programmed to begin in 2002. The county
anticipates that the construction of those facilities will take approximately 6 months to complete.
For these reasons, the stormwater management infrastructure in Gifford is generally adequate. However, the stormwater management
system in East Gifford must be built and maintained.
➢ Fire and Emergency Medical Services
Currently, there are no fire stations within Gifford. There is, however, an EMS station in the Gifford area. While no fire stations exist
within Gifford, fire stations are located just south and just north of Gifford. Because of their locations, these stations together
probably provide better service to Gifford than would one centrally located station. This is due to the fact that two stations provide for
redundancy such that if one station is responding to a call then the other one can respond to a new call in the Gifford area.
Community Development Department Indian River County 51
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
Fire service standards are based on criteria established by the Insurance Services Office (ISO). ISO also provides ratings for local
areas based on compliance with its standards. For planning purposes, the standards include a 5 mile distance to a manned Fire/EMS
station and the availability of a fire hydrant within 500 feet of commercial development and 1,000 feet of residential development.
Ratings are on a scale of 1 to 10, with a rating of 1 being the highest.
Being within 5 miles of a Fire/EMS station, most developed areas of the county (including all of Gifford) are rated a 4 by ISO.
Response times for an area with a rating of 4 are usually less than 8 minutes. In contrast, most areas outside the urban service area are
rated 9 or 10 by ISO. Policy 2.8 of the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan states that Fire and EMS stations shall be
located to enable a 4 to 6 minute response time within the urban service area.
County Fire Department and EMS Department records indicate that typical response times for calls in East and Central Gifford fall
within a 4 to 8 minute range. The response time for west Gifford area is between 4-10 minutes. Records also indicate that most
development in Gifford meets the ISO standard regarding distance from fire hydrants.
For these reasons, Fire and EMS service in Gifford is sufficient to serve both the existing population and the projected population of
Gifford. In the near future fire protection within Gifford will be enhanced because the station at 6568 U.S. 1 is programmed for
relocation to Indian River Boulevard, south of 53rd Street. This will bring that station closer to Gifford.
➢ Recreation
The county's comprehensive plan calls for 4 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. At that rate, Gifford (with a population of just over
5,000 residents) should have approximately 20 acres of community parks.
The Gifford Park Campus, at over 40 acres in size, is a countywide resource located in Gifford. While it serves the entire county, its
location within Gifford ensures that the majority of its users are from Gifford. This park and its facilities exceed county standards for
Community Parks. To maintain that high level of service, minor improvements and continued maintenance of specific facilities are
needed.
Neighborhood parks are defined as parks which are 2 to 5 acres in size, containing improvements such as swings, benches, tot lots,
fitness trails, and picnic areas. Like most areas in the unincorporated county, park development in Gifford has focused on Community
Parks, rather than Neighborhood Parks. Gifford has two 2-acre Neighborhood Parks (Hosie-Schumann Park and Martin Luther King,
Jr. Park). Hosie-Schumann park is located next to the W.E. Geoffreys Subdivision, which is separated from the rest of Gifford by US
N
Community Development Department Indian River County 52
w
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
1. Therefore, Hosie-Schumann Park is the only park within walking distance of the W.E. Geoffreys Subdivision. Hosie-Schumann
park has limited facilities and needs improvements to make it a functional neighborhood park.
Overall, the county should maintain and upgrade facilities at Gifford Park, totally renovate Hosie-Schumann Park, and enhance Martin
Luther King, Jr. Park. As needed, the county will resurface the tennis courts, basketball courts and other facilities in these parks.
➢ Street Lh!htini!
Street lighting is important to enhance the safety and security of a community. As such, it is necessary to light those areas of the
community with significant pedestrian activity. Even though most of the streets in Gifford have street lights, there are some streets
such as 29th Avenue and 30t Avenue within Gifford Grove subdivision that do not have street lights. Because Gifford has a street
lighting district, the cost of street lights is paid by residents of the community. To ensure that street lights are installed where needed
and when needed, the Progressive Civic League of Gifford and the county traffic engineering division need to develop a
comprehensive street light plan for Gifford.
➢ Summary
Although the quality of Gifford's infrastructure has improved significantly since 1980, there are still areas where more work is
needed. Gifford's roads, as well as its water and sewer system, work well and have ample capacity to accommodate future growth.
As with all infrastructure facilities, adequate on-going maintenance is necessary to ensure that the roadway and water/sewer systems
continue to function adequately. With respect to other infrastructure, Gifford has adequate facilities and services. In Gifford, public
safety facilities are located such that response times are adequate and minimum service levels are met. So no public safety
improvements are necessary. Compared to other areas in the county, Gifford has exceptional recreation facilities. These need to be
maintained. While stormwater/drainage problems have existed in the past, projects are programmed to resolve those problems. A
final infrastructure item is street lights. While the Gifford street lighting district ensures that street lights are provided throughout the
community, it has taken time to get new street lights installed where needed. To resolve that issue, a long range street lighting plan
needs to be developed.
Community Development Department Indian River County 53
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
Community Development
➢ Community Organizations
Many civic organizations have a strong presence in Gifford. These organizations include the Indian River County Chamber of
Commerce, the Gifford Youth Activities Center, the Progressive Civic League of Gifford, the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People, Habitat for Humanity, Indian River Community College, numerous churches, and others. Existing
organizations offer much in the areas of training and education, economic assistance, and community building. By coordinating and
promoting each other's projects, these organizations can increase their success, both individually and overall.
➢ Community Facilities and Centers
Community facilities in Gifford include Gifford Park, the Gifford Youth Activities Center, the Gifford Aquatic Center, the Gifford
Community Center, the Gifford Health Center and others. These facilities offer numerous educational, medical and recreational
services and resources, including ball fields, playgrounds, outdoor basketball and tennis courts, swimming pools (under construction),
classrooms, meeting rooms, computers, a kitchen, and a gymnasium. Additionally, a small library is planned for the Gifford Youth
Activities Center.
➢ Economic Development Organizations
Several organizations work to bring businesses to Gifford and/or offer services intended to increase the employability of individuals.
These groups include the Chamber of Commerce, Indian River Community College, the Indian River School District, the Workforce
Development Board, the Gifford Economic Development Council, and others. These groups work to match employers and potential
employees. They also work with employers to identify the types of skills they (the employers) are looking for in employees. Finally,
several of these groups provide a wide range of technical and business training to Gifford residents and others.
➢ Unemployment and under employment
The Chamber of Commerce is primarily responsible for the recruitment of new businesses. In so doing, the Chamber must continue to
work closely with those organizations in Gifford that match residents with jobs and job training. Those organizations include Indian
River Community College, the Indian River School District, the Workforce Development Board, and the Gifford Economic
Development Council.
N Community Development Department Indian River County 54
ti,
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT
To obtain community feedback and to determine what Gifford residents consider as the community's major issues,problems, and
possible solutions, a community meeting was held. At that meeting facilitated by county planning staff, the residents who attended
were divided into three groups and addressed the following issues:
• Housing and Code Enforcement
• Public Facilities and Services
• Zoning, Development, and Commercial Activity Center
Each group discussed and identified major issues, and problems. Each group then suggested a set of solutions to address these issues
and problems. Following is a list of issues/problems and solutions identified by the Gifford residents.
HOUSING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT
I. Issues/Problems
1. Lack of Ownership
2. Maintenance—keeping it clean
3. Low income
4. Code enforcement(not enough)
5. Debris
6. Age (elderly)
7. Lack of information
8. Drainage problems
9. Distrust of government
10. Costs of infrastructure
II. Solutions
1. SHIP (information)
2. Weed and Seed
Community Development Department Indian River County 55
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
3. Grant Application—spread the money widely
4. Non-profits (increase HFH activities)
5. Neighboring(neighbors helping neighbors)
6. Formation of neighborhood associations
7. Providing information to residents (contact persons, phone numbers)
III. Top 3 Problems (Priority List)
1. Lack of Ownership/information (do not know what to do and whom to call)
2. Costs of Infrastructure
3. Code Enforcement
IV. Top Three Solutions (Priority List)
1. Apply for Grants (CDBG)
2. Weed and Seed (demolish dilapidated houses and replace them with new houses)
3. Neighboring/education
PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
I. Issues/Problems
1. Drainage
• All new road projects should be accompanied by an active drainage system (32❑d Avenue was recently paved and has flooding
problems)
• Relief canals are blocked with debris (example: 25th Avenue Canal)
• Retention ponds alone will not be sufficient to address flooding(example: 41 st Street/Pineview Park)
• Many major roads experience flooding (example: 38th Avenue between 41" Street and 45th Street)
2. Resurfacing/road paving
• Fix potholes throughout the neighborhood
• Pave dirt roads (example: 28th Avenue, 45th to 43rd Street)
3. Street Lighting
• Street lighting needed for traffic and pedestrian safety—especially early-morning schoolchildren waiting for buses
�.l
Community Development Department Indian River County 56
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
Examples:
•49th Street
•45th Street
•30th Avenue
4. Enforce no parking zones
• Swale parking resulted in trampling of newly-sodded area
5. Enforce Code Violations on Vacant properties
• Overgrown/Substandard buildings are both an aesthetic and safety issue
Examples:
• 45th Street
• 33`d Street
II. Solutions
1. Roads Paving
• 49th Street
• 28th Court
• 30th Avenue
• 28th Avenue, 45th Street to 43`d Avenue
2. Drainage
3. Beautification of 45th Street, Martin Luther King Boulevard
• Martin Luther King Boulevard should be the focal point of community pride—the street should uphold the dignity of the name
• Downtown Ft. Pierce is an example of an effective revitalization effort
4. Turn lanes needed (example: MLK shopping plaza)
5. Traffic Signal needed (example: Gifford Road at Dixie Highway)
6. Sidewalks needed, especially in school zones.
Examples:
• 28th Court
• 491h Street
Community Development Department Indian River County 57
Gifford Nei hborhood Plan Plan
such as Habitat for Humanity, will need to continue building new homes in Gifford and providing pre and post
construction mentoring to their clients. In this effort, community groups, particularly the Progressive Civic League of
Gifford, have a vital role. These groups must inform Gifford residents of the various local and state programs
available for housing ownership and/or rehabilitation, and they must encourage residents to participate in these
programs.
Objective 1. Housing Rehabilitation
By 2005, 60 substandard residential units will have been rehabilitated.
Action 1.1 —In 2002, the county will apply for Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) funds to rehabilitate 30-40
substandard housing units in the Gifford area.
Action 1.2—The county will commit up to $350,000 of FY 2002-03 and FY 2003-04 SHIP funds to match the CDBG money.
Action 1.3 —The county will prepare a SHIP program informational package that provides information regarding county's
rehabilitation assistance program.
Action 1.4—The county will give SHIP rehabilitation program priority to Gifford residents.
Action 1.5 -The Progressive Civic League of Gifford will distribute SHIP rehabilitation program information to Gifford residents at
public meetings, churches, and civic events.
Action 1.6—The county will assist Gifford residents in forming neighborhood associations to promote property maintenance and
neighborhood cooperation.
Obiective 2. Housing Demolition
By 2005, 10 dilapidated residential units will have been demolished.
Action 2.1 —The county shall use CDBG funds to demolish and replace at least 5 dilapidated housing units in the Gifford area.
Action 2.2—The county will identify and raze at least 2 unsafe structures per year.
Community Development Department Indian River County 61
Gifford Nei hborhood Plan Plan
Objective 3. Housing Ownership
By 2005, number of owner occupied housing units in Gifford will have been increased by 150 units.
Action 3.1 —The county will commit up to $400,000 of SHIP funds per fiscal year for fiscal years 2002-03, 2003-04, and 2004-05 to
Habitat for Humanity (HFH) program clients in the Gifford area for downpayment/closing cost, impact fee, and land acquisition loan
assistance.
Action 3.2—The county will prepare SHIP program informational packages that provide information regarding the county's
downpayment/closing cost loan assistance program.
Action 3.3 -The Progressive Civic League of Gifford will distribute SHIP downpayment/closing cost program information to Gifford
residents at public meetings, churches, and civic events.
Action 3.4—Local financial institutions will host housing fairs in Gifford to inform Gifford residents of available housing loans, to
provide housing related information, and to provide contact person information.
Action 3.5 -The county will initiate rezoning action when and where appropriate, to change RM-10 zoning to RS-6 zoning.
TOWN CENTERMIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTER
Commercial Activity Center Strategy: An important component of a successful community is a town center/commercial
activity center. This is a location where residents can obtain retail and convenience goods and personal services. While
Gifford does not have an existing town center/neighborhood commercial activity center, there are several areas along
45th Street and 43rd Street where retail type uses currently exist. Using those facilities as a base, a town
center/commercial activity center will be established in the area along 45th Street from 38th Avenue to Old Dixie
Highway, along 43rd Street from 28th Avenue to Old Dixie Highway and the area along 25th Avenue and the F.E.C.
Railroad between 45th Street and 43rd Street. To create the activity center, the county will make necessary land use
plan and zoning changes as well as necessary changes to the County's Land Development Regulations (LDRs). The
county will also make streetscape improvements along 45th Street and 43rd Street in order to create a pleasant shopping
environment, enhance pedestrian access, and provide on street parking. This effort will require coordinated action
involving the county (land use and zoning changes, LDR changes, capital improvements, design standards), the
v
^' Community Development Department Indian River County 62
tJv
Gifford Nei hborhood Plan Plan
Progressive Civic League of Gifford (community support), and the Chamber of Commerce (entrepreneurship
programs).
Objective 4 Neighborhood Commercial Activity Center
By 2010, Gifford will have a vital town center/commercial activity center where local residents can obtain various goods and services.
Action 4.1 — The county will designate 45th Street between Old Dixie Highway and 38th Avenue, 43rd Street between Old Dixie
Highway and 28t" Avenue, and the area along 25th Avenue and the F.E.C. Railroad between 45th Street and 43rd Street as the Gifford
Neighborhood Commercial Activity Center(GNCAC).
Action 4.2 — Indian River County will initiate a land use amendment and rezoning to change up to 15 acres from residential to
Commercial for appropriate properties within the designated Gifford Neighborhood Commercial Activity Center area.
Action 4.3 — The county will amend its Land Development Regulations (LDRs) to include special regulations for the Gifford
Neighborhood Commercial Activity Center. These regulations will address the appearance of new commercial and office buildings,
and the allowance for mixed use development. The regulations will also address the type of uses allowed, and various design
elements, including siting buildings close to the street, locating parking lots behind buildings, and regulating the size, location, and
type of signs.
Action 4.4—The county will construct sidewalk and street improvements along 45th Street and 43rd Street.
Action 4.5 —The county will resurface 45th Street.
Action 4.6—The county will build on-street parking spaces along 43rd Street and 45th Street.
Action 4.7 —The county will apply for funds to construct the streetscape improvements. Funding sources may include CDBG grants,
enhancement funds, and other programs.
Action 4.8 - The county will work with owners of existing businesses in the area to obtain funds for property renovation and
expansion.
Community Development Department Indian River County 63
Gifford Nei hborhood Plan Plan
ILLEGAL AND NON-CONFORMING USES
Elimination of Non-Conforming Uses Strategy: To maintain the integrity of a community, illegal land uses and non-
conforming land uses must be identified and eliminated. In Gifford, illegal rooming houses and bars disrupt
neighborhoods, reduce property values, and inhibit investment. It is important not only to remove these uses, but also
to prevent their re-establishment. To eliminate illegal uses and non-conformities, the county will use its regulatory
authority. This will involve multi-agency sweeps, code enforcement action, and coordination with local community
groups and organizations.
Objective 5. Elimination of Illegal Uses
By 2008, all illegal and non-conforming uses in Gifford will have been eliminated.
Action 5.1 — The county code enforcement section will work with the Sheriffs Office, the Building Division, the Fire Division, and
the Health Department to conduct regular sweeps of suspected illegal uses in Gifford.
Action 5.2—The county code enforcement section will initiate enforcement action against any identified illegal uses.
Action 5.3 — The county code enforcement section will regularly monitor properties against which code enforcement action has been
taken.
INFRASTRUCTURE
Infrastructure Strategy: Adequate infrastructure is important for every community. In Gifford, most of the streets
were paved, and water and sewer lines were installed in the early 80's. Street lighting and sidewalks exist along major
roads. Drainage problems occur in some areas. Throughout Gifford, the most important need is the maintenance of
existing facilities. There is also a need to construct additional infrastructure in some areas. Most important is road
resurfacing, water and sewer line maintenance, drainage enhancements, sidewalk construction, and street light
installation. In most cases, the county is responsible for these activities. Some activities such as road resurfacing are
undertaken on a regular basis according to a countywide schedule. Other activities such as on-going drainage work are
N
Indian River County 64
Community Development Department
Gifford Nei hborhood Plan Plan
special projects. Besides conducting maintenance activities, the county will provide various infrastructure
enhancements. This will include streetscape improvements and sidewalk enhancements.
Obiective 6 Provision of Sidewalks and Streetscape Improvements
By 2005, there will be continuous sidewalks along 41St Street from 58t" Avenue to U.S. #1; along 45th Street from 43rd Avenue to U.S.
#1; and along 43rd Avenue between 41St Street and 49th Street
Action 6.1 —The county Public Works Department will construct sidewalks along 41St Street as part of 41St Street resurfacing project.
Action 6.2 — The county Public Works Department will repair and connect the sidewalk along 43rd Avenue between 41St Street and
49th Street
Action 6.3 -The county Public Works Department will repair and connect the sidewalk along 45th Street, from 43rd Avenue to U.S. #1.
Objective 7 Street Maintenance
By 2005, all streets in Gifford will be adequately maintained. Adequate maintenance is defined as a ranking of 3 or above on the
Road and Bridge Roadway Maintenance Condition Inventory.
Action 7.1 — The county Road and Bridge Division will, on an annual basis, monitor street conditions in Gifford, rank projects for
resurfacing and/or repair, and undertake high rank projects. A copy of this report will be provided to the Gifford Progressive Civic
League.
Action 7.2 -The Road and Bridge Division will repair or resurface any street with a ranking below 3.
Action 7.3 — The county Public Works Department will widen and resurface 41s' Street, providing sidewalks, turn lanes and other
related improvements.
Action 7.4—The county Public Works Department will resurface 45th Street
Community Development Department Indian River County 65
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Plan
Objective 8. Street Improvements
By 2010, all publicly owned roads in Gifford with adequate right-of-way will be paved.
Action 8.1 —The Progressive Civic League of Gifford will coordinate with property owners along 28"' Court, 28 Avenue, and 30th
Avenue between 45th Street and 491h Street to obtain right-of-way donations for those roads.
Action 8.2 - The county Public Works Department shall pave 28th Court, 28th Avenue, and 30th Avenue from 45th Street to 49th Street
when all needed right-of-ways are donated to the county.
Objective 9 Street and Intersection Safety
By 2010, crash rates within Gifford will not exceed the countywide average.
Action 9.1 - The county Traffic Engineering Division shall on an annual basis monitor traffic volumes and crash rates of all major
intersections, including intersections in Gifford. When warrants are met, intersections will be signalized. The county shall submit a
copy of this report to the Progressive Civic League of Gifford.
Action 9.2 - The county shall make improvements to the 41" Street/43`d Avenue intersection; the 41" Street/581h Avenue intersection;
the 41" Street/Old Dixie Highway intersection; the 45th Street/Old Dixie Highway intersection; and the 49th Street/U.S. #1
intersection.
Action 9.3 - The Metropolitan Planning Organization will, by 2003, complete a truck routing plan that will identify appropriate truck
routes throughout the county, including Gifford.
Objective 10. Drainage Improvements
By 2005, there will not be any flooding problems in Gifford for a 10 year/24 hour storm event.
Action 10.1 — The county Public Works Department will initiate and complete the stormwater management improvements
programmed for the portion of east Gifford which is not part of the Indian River Farms Water Control District(IRFWCD).
Action 10.2—The Indian River Farms Water Control District(IRFWCD) will continue to maintain its canals within Gifford.
Indian River County 66
NJ Community Development Department
o�
Plan
Gifford Nei hborhood Plan
Action 10.3 —The Progressive Civic League of Gifford will encourage Gifford residents to monitor all areas of Gifford and report any
dumping of grass clippings or other debris into stormwater management facilities.
Action 10.4 — The Progressive Civic League of Gifford will encourage residents to notify the county and IRFWMD if they notice
clogged culverts or slow moving water in ditches.
Obiective 11. Street Liehtinp
By 2010, Gifford will have 20 percent more streetlights than presently exist.
Action 11.1 — The county's Public Works Department will meet with the Progressive Civic League of Gifford and with Gifford
residents and develop a plan for street lighting in Gifford,the cost of which will be paid through the Gifford street lighting district.
Action 11.2—The Public Works Department will install street lights on 29th Avenue, 30th Avenue and 49t1i Street in Gifford.
Objective 12 Park Improvements
By 2010, Gifford Park and Hosie Schumann Park will be enhanced.
Action 12.1 - The Public Works Department will construct parking spaces, restrooms, benches, picnic areas, a children's playground,
and basketball courts for the Hosie-Schumann Park.
Action 12.2 -The Public Works Department will construct a stormwater management facility at the southwest corner of Gifford Park.
Action 12.3 -The Public Works Department will construct a security unit at Gifford Park.
CRIME
Crime Strategy: Compared to other areas in the county, Gifford has a high volume of crime and a high crime rate. Reducing
that rate is an important component in achieving the overall plan goal. Like most issue areas, crime reduction requires
coordinated action by various groups and agencies. While many of the physical improvement strategies reflected in this plan,
including code enforcement and housing rehabilitation activities, may affect (reduce) the crime rate, there is still a need for
Community Development Department
Indian River County 67
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Plan
concentrated crime-fighting action. That involves the Sheriffs Office maintaining its current level of resource commitment to
the Gifford area. It also involves the county continuing its code enforcement activities and residents cooperating with law and
code enforcement agencies.
Obiective 13 Crime and Law Enforcement
By 2005, the crime rate in Gifford will be ten percent lower than the 2000 level.
Action 13.1 —The Sheriff's Office will maintain its current level of resource allocation in Gifford.
Action 13.2—The county will focus code enforcement activities on sites which contribute to the crime rate.
Action 13.3 -The Sheriff s office will enforce all posted speed limits.
EMPLOYMENT
Employment Strategy: One of the most significant issues facing Gifford is unemployment and under-employment. Because
unemployment is a major cause of crime, poverty, poor housing conditions, and other problems, unemployment is an issue
whose resolution can significantly improve community conditions. Currently, Gifford and the areas adjacent to Gifford have
one of the highest concentrations of jobs in the county. To solve the unemployment problem in Gifford, more jobs need to be
created, and Gifford residents must be better trained to qualify for those jobs. This will require action by the county and
Chamber of Commerce to create jobs,and action by various groups to provide job training.
Objective 14. Employment
By 2010, Gifford's unemployment rate will be 15 percent lower than 2000 levels.
Action 14.1 -The county will promote industrial park development in the Gifford area.
Action 14.2 - The City of Vero Beach will continue to promote industrial development on Airport property.
Indian River County 68
N Community Development Department
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Plan
Action 14.3 -The Chamber of Commerce will continue to attract industries to Gifford
Action 14.4 - The county and Chamber of Commerce will provide technical assistance to Gifford residents to encourage them to open
businesses in the proposed neighborhood commercial activity center.
Action 14.5 - The School Board will establish a vocational school in Gifford.
Action 14.6 - Giving Rewarding Opportunities to Work(GROW) and other non-profits will continue their job training activities.
Community Development Department Indian River County 69
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Implementation
IMPLEMENTATION
An important part of any plan is its implementation. Implementation involves execution of a plan's identified actions. It involves
taking actions and achieving results.
For the Gifford Neighborhood Plan, implementation involves various activities. While some of these actions will be ongoing, others
are activities that will be taken by certain points in time. For each action in this plan, Table 8 identifies the type of action required,
the responsible entity for taking the action, the timing, and whether or not the policy necessitates a capital expenditure.
Overall plan implementation responsibility will rest with the county planning department. Besides its responsibilities as identified in
Table 8, the county planning department has the additional responsibility of ensuring that other entities discharge their
responsibilities. This will entail notifying other applicable departments of capital expenditures to be included in their budgets,
notifying other departments and groups of actions that must be taken and assisting other departments and agencies in their plan
implementation responsibilities.
TABLE 8
GIFFORD NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
Action Type of Action Responsibility Timing Capital
Expenditure
1.1 Apply for CDBG Grant for Rehabilitating Planning 2002 No
Substandard Housing Units
1.2 Commitment of Funds for Housing Planning FY 2002-2003 Yes
Rehabilitation FY 2003-2004
1.3 Preparing Information Package Planning 2002 No
1.4 Establishing Fund Priority Planning Ongoing No
1.5 Distribution of Information Progressive Civic League of Ongoing No
Gifford (PCLG)
1.6 Forming Neighborhood Association Plannin /Residents/PCLG Ongoing No
N
Community Development Department Indian River County 70
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Implementation
Action Type of Action Responsibility Timing Capital
Expenditure
2.1 Replace Dilapidated Housing Units Planning 2003-2004 Yes
2.2 Demolishing Unsafe Structures Plannin Ongoing Yes
3.1 Commitment of Funds for New Housing Planning Ongoing Yes
Construction
3.2 Pre aration of Informational Package Planning Ongoing No
3.3 Distribution of Information Progressive Civic League of Ongoing No
Gifford
3.4 Conducting Housing Fairs in Gifford Local Financial Ongoing No
Institutions/Others
3.5 Rezonin PlanningB 2006 No
4.1 Designation of Neighborhood Commercial Planning By 2002 No
Activit Center
4.2 Initiate a Land Use Amendment and Planning By 2003 No
Rezoning
4.3 Amendment of the LDRs Planning 2002-2003 No
4.4 Construction of Sidewalks Along 45t Street Public Works 2004-2005 Yes
and 43`d Street
4.5 Resurfacin 45t Street Public Works 2004-2005 Yes
4.6 Building On-Street Parking Public Works 2004-2005 Yes
4.7 Streetsca e Improvements Public Works 2004-2005 Yes
4.8 Coordination with Existing Businesses Planning Ongoing TN(o
o
5.1 Code Enforcement Sweeps Code Enforcement/Sheriff's Ongoing
Office
5.2Code Enforcement Action Code Enforcement Ongoing No
5.3 Code Enforcement MonitoringCode Enforcement Ongoing No
6.1 Construction of Sidewalks along 41St Street Public Works 2003 Yes
6.2 Re air of Sidewalk alon 43` Avenue Public Works 2004-2005 Yes
6.3 Repair Sidewalks along 45' Street Public We rks 2004-2005 Yes
7.1 Monitoriniz Street Conditions Road and Bride Ongoing No
7.2 Repair or Resurface Roads Road and Bride Ongoing Yes
Community Development Department Indian River County 71
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Implementation
Action Type of Action Responsibility Timing Capital
Expenditure
7.3 Resurfacing 41St Street Public Works 2003 Yes
7.4 Resurfacing 45t Street Public Works 2004-2005 Yes
8.1 Donation of R-O-W Progressive Civic League and By 2005 No
Property Owners
8.2 Paving 28t Court, 28t Avenue and 30t Public Works By 2010 Yes
Avenue
9.1 Monitoring Traffic Volumes and Accident Traffic Engineering Ongoing No
Rates
9.2 Intersection Improvements to: Public Works 2003-2005 Yes
41St St/43`d Ave
41St St/Old Dixie Hwy
41" St/58"i Ave
45th St/Old Dixie Hwy
49th St/U.S. #1
9.3 Truck Routing Plan MPO By 2003 No
10.1 Stormwater Improvements Public Works 2002-2003 Yes
10.2 Maintaining Canals IRFWCD Ongoing No
10.3 Monitoring Stormwater Facilities Progressive Civic League of Ongoing No
Gifford/Residents
10.4 Monitoring Stormwater Facilities Residents Ongoing No
11.1 Street Lighting Public Works/PCLG 2002-2003 No
11.2 Installing Street Lihts Along 29t' Avenue, Public Works 2003-2006 Yes
301h Avenue and 49t' Street
12.1 Park Improvements to Hosie-Schumann Park Public Works By 2010 Yes
12.2 Drainage Improvement to Gifford Park Public Works By 2005 Yes
12.3 Construction of a Security Unit Public Works By 2010 Yes
13.1 Resource Allocation Sheriff's Office Ongoing No
13.2 Code Enforcement Actions Code Enforcement Ongoing No
13.3 Enforcement of Posted Speed Limits Sheriff's Office Ongoing No
14.1 Industrial Park Development Private Developers Ongoing Yes (private)
Community Development Department Indian River County 72
w
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Implementation
Action Type of Action Responsibility Timing Capital
Expenditure
14.2 Air ort Industrial Park Ex ansion Vero Beach/Private Develo ers Ongoing Yes (private)
14.3 AttractingBusiness to Gifford Chamber of Commerce On oin No
14.4 Technical Assistance Count /Chamber of Commerce Ongoing No
14.5 Vocational Training School Board Ongoing No
14.6 Vocational TrainingGROW Ongoing No
Evaluation and Monitoring Procedures
To be effective, a plan must not only provide a means for implementation; it must also provide a mechanism for assessing the plan's
effectiveness. Generally a plan's effectiveness can be judged by the degree to which the plan's objectives have been met. Since
objectives are measurable and have specific timeframes, the plan's objectives are the benchmarks used as a basis to evaluate the plan.
Table 9 identifies each of the objectives of the Gifford Neighborhood Plan. It also identifies the measures to be used to evaluate
progress in achieving these objectives. Most of these measures are quantitative. Besides the measures, Table 9 also identifies
timeframes associated with meeting the objectives.
The planning department staff will be responsible for monitoring and evaluating the Gifford Neighborhood Plan.
TABLE 9
GIFFORD NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
EVALUATION MATRIX
Objective # Measure Timeframe
I Number of Substandard Units Rehabilitated 2005
2 Number of Dilapidated Units Demolished 2005
3 Number of Owner Occupied Housing Units 2005
4 Existence of a Town Center 2010
5 Existence of No Non-Conforming Uses 2008
6
Existence of Continuous Sidewalks Along41S` Street, 451Street, and 43r Avenue 2005
Community Development Department Indian River County 73
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Implementation
Objective # Measure Timeframe
7 Existence of No Potholes on the Major Streets 2005
8 Existence of No Publicly Owned Unpaved Road 2010
9 Number of Intersection Crashes 2001
10 Existence of No Flooding Problems 2005
11 20%More Street Lighting 2005
12 Existence of Improvements to the Gifford and Hosie Schumann Park 2010
13 Crime Rate 2005
14 Unemployment Rate 2010
FUNDING SOURCES
To implement strategies and actions that are developed through this neighborhood plan, funding sources must be identified. The
following are possible funding sources that may be utilized for implementing various strategies:
➢ Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
A local government may form a CRA following the completion of a study confirming the presence of necessary conditions and a plan
to address those conditions. CRA's are empowered to buy, assemble and sell property; to conduct studies; and to construct capital
improvement projects. CRA's may raise funds through several means including Tax Increment Financing.
➢ Safe Neighborhood Improvement Districts
A local government may adopt an ordinance that authorizes the formation of a neighborhood improvement district. Once the district
is created, the local government may levy on that district an ad valorem tax on real and personal property of up to 2 mills annually.
Funds from that levy may be used to initiate actions deemed most suitable for implementing safe neighborhood improvement plans.
These actions may include modifications to existing street patterns; removal, razing, renovation, reconstruction, remodeling,
relocation, and improvement of existing structures and facilities; addition of new structures and facilities; and coordination with other
agencies providing relevant informational, educational, and crime prevention services.
Community Development Department Indian River County 74
v
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Implementation
➢ Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)
The housing, the neighborhood revitalization, and the economic development CDBG categories may be possible funding sources for
implementing strategies of this plan. Funds received through the housing CDBG category may be used to rehabilitate substandard
housing occupied by income eligible households. Housing CDBG funds may also be used to demolish dilapidated housing and finance
replacement housing for the displaced occupants. Neighborhood revitalization CDBG funds may be used to provide infrastructure
improvements.
Economic development CDBG funds are available to local governments to provide necessary infrastructure or sites for new businesses
or business expansions. Local governments may also lend CDBG funds directly to the business for capital expenses (land, building,
equipment, site development). CDBG funds from the economic development category must be utilized to create jobs or retain
existing jeopardized jobs,primarily for low/moderate income persons.
➢ Transportation Equity Act for the 21" Century Enhancement Program (TEA-21)
This federal program focuses on improvements that complement the transportation system. TEA-21 funding is partially controlled by
the local MPO.
Several projects in Gifford could qualify for TEA 21 funding. TEA-21 funding can be used for bus stops, bike lanes, sidewalks,
traffic calming, and street beautification (including landscaping).
➢ Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program Grants (FRDAP)
FRDAP Grants can be used to maintain and improve Parks.
The following are existing funding sources that are used for various projects in the Gifford neighborhood:
➢ State Housing Initiative Partnership (SHIP) Program
The SHIP program is a County sponsored program that provides grants or loans to very low and low income persons to assist them in
obtaining a home or rehabilitating their existing home. The SHIP Program is funded by a Documentary Stamp Tax that is collected by
the State and administered by the County. Individuals that meet the income criteria must apply for SHIP assistance. Upon approval of
the applicant's application, funds will be dispersed for activities that meet the requirements of the county's SHIP program.
Community Development Department Indian River County 75
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Implementation
➢ Municipal Service Benefit Unit East Gifford Stormwater Watershed Area
As described in the Existing Conditions Section, the Board of County Commissioners, in September 2000, established a Municipal
Service Benefit District (MSBU) to include an area of Gifford that was not under the authority of a water control district. This
MSBU will enable the county to collect approximately $15 per year per parcel for funding a stormwater improvement project for that
area of Gifford. Stormwater management duties for the rest of Gifford are the responsibility of the Indian River Farms Water Control
District(IRFWCD).
➢ Impact Fees
Traffic impact fees collected in District II can be used for capacity expanding roadway improvements in District 11 which covers the
Gifford area.
➢ Gifford Road Improvement Fund
Funds under this capital projects fund category are transferred from the General Fund and MSTU taxing funds. As indicated in the
county's 2000/01 budget, the Gifford Road Improvement Fund category has been allocated $2,000,000. Road improvement projects
in the Gifford area can be funded through this fund category.
➢ Gifford Street Lighting District
Seventeen street lighting districts exist in the unincorporated county. Since such districts are non-ad valorem projects, funds for
installing, operating, and maintaining the streetlights are generated by billing the property owners that reside in each district.
➢ Funding of Recreation Uses
Maintenance and operation of various recreation facilities in Gifford are funded through the county's general fund revenues. Capital
costs for recreation facilities are funded through the county's one cent sales tax. Also, some facilities such as the Gifford Aquatic
Center charges users' fees.
Community Development De artment Indian River County 76
Y
N P P
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Implementation
y Assessment
The county paves roads, constructs sidewalks, extends water and sewer lines, and provides other facilities through assessment
projects. In the case of assessments, the majority of the property owners in a given area, such as along a street, petition the county for
provision of a needed facility such as a paved road. The property owners benefiting from an improvement would pay their share of
improvement costs. For the roadway assessment projects the county pays for 25% of improvement costs and the rest will be shared
between benefiting property owners.
(MicroWord)CD\U\GiffordPlan\Gifford Neighborhood Plan
Community Development Department Indian River County 77
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analvsis
• 45th Street
• West side of the neighborhood - toward 58th Avenue
III. Top Three Issues (Priority List Issues)
1. Drainage
• Relief canals blocked
• Drainage needed in association with new road projects
• Alternatives to retention ponds
2. Road Paving
• 281h Avenue
• 49th Street
• 28th Court
• 30th Avenue
3. Street Lights
• 491h Street
• 45th Street
• 30th Avenue
IV. Top Solutions (Priority List)
1. Use existing grants monies, revenue sources, and special assessments
2. Follow-up on identified problems
• Better communication between the community and staff
• Improve administration of grant monies and projects
• Provide the community with realistic answers
3. Enforcement efforts
• code issues
• no parking zones
N Community Development Department Indian River County 58
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Analysis
ZONING, DEVELOPMENT, AND COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTER
I. Issues/Problems
1. Home improvement constraints
• Loss of property or perceived property rights through title problems (lien)
2. Stormwater issues for commercial development
• Creating retention ponds on individual parcels vs. using existing canals or community-wide stormwater system
3. Neighborhood supermarket would benefit community
4. Lack of product selection in Gifford
5. Goods are higher priced in Gifford
6. Martin Luther King Boulevard Improvements Needed
• road paving/resurfacing
• sidewalks
• street lights
• landscaping
7. Police sub-station on Martin Luther King Boulevard
8. Martin Luther King Boulevard could duplicate 14th Avenue in downtown Vero and represent main street for Gifford
9. More jobs for Gifford
II. Top Three Issues (Priority Protects)
1. Martin Luther King Boulevard Improvements and Activity Center
2. Development regulations
• stormwater
3. Neighborhood shops
• Grocery
II. Top Three Solutions (Priority List)
1. Supermarket locations
• U.S. 1
2. Martin Luther King Boulevard
• Could provide good impression for visitors
• Road resurfacing
3. Improvements should begin at railroad and move west
Community Development Department Indian River County 59
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Plan
NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN
The neighborhood action plan component of the Gifford Neighborhood Plan identifies the plan goal, strategies to achieve the goal, and
actions to be taken to implement the plan. As structured, the plan is results oriented, with specific actions programmed for
implementation.
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Goal
The goal of the Gifford Neighborhood Plan is to revitalize the Gifford area and create a safe community with good quality
housing, adequate physical infrastructure,well maintained neighborhoods, and vibrant commercial activity areas.
Gifford Neighborhood Plan Strategies
For each major issue identified in the Analysis Section of this plan, an overall strategy has been developed. Each strategy provides a
blueprint for addressing the issue and solving any problems. Associated with each strategy are objectives and actions.
While the strategies establish the general framework for addressing each issue, objectives associated with each strategy set reasonable
accomplishments to be met by specified times. Related to each objective are actions to be undertaken by appropriate parties. Those
actions, when undertaken, should lead to accomplishment of the objectives.
Because the Gifford Neighborhood Plan is a coordinated effort among a number of groups, there are several agencies/organizations
with responsibility for taking actions identified in the plan. Only through the coordinated efforts of these agencies/organizations can
the plan's objectives be met.
HOUSING
Housing Strategy: One of the most significant and most visible problems in Gifford is inadequate housing. To address
this issue, the county, the Progressive Civic League of Gifford, Gifford residents, non-profit groups, and private sector
interests will need to rehabilitate substandard units, remove dilapidated units, and build new housing. In this effort,
the county's role will be to provide state and local funds for housing rehabilitation and new construction, to undertake
housing rehabilitation with federal funds, to remove dilapidated housing with local funds, and to assist in establishing
viable neighborhood associations to promote property maintenance and other objectives. Non-profit organizations,
Community Development Department Indian River County 60