DOCSLIB.ORG

2013-2014 Citizen Survey

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2013-2014 Citizen Survey Jupiter, FL Key Findings March 2014 About The NCS • Community Livability • Community Residents Characteristics • Governance Private • Participation sector Communities are partnerships among… Community- based organizations Government 2 Facets of Community Livability Safety Mobility Community Engagement Natural Quality of Environment Community Overall Education and Built Enrichment Environment Recreation and Wellness Economy 3 The NCS & Jupiter • Participant in The NCS since 2009 • 2009, 2011, 2013 • Random sample of 3,000 households in 2013 • Mail with web option • 745 returned surveys; 27% response rate • ±4% margin of error 4 National and Florida Benchmark Comparisons 5 Geographic Areas of Jupiter Four subareas 1. CRA and coastal communities 2. Northern Loxahatchee River/Riverside Drive communities/Central Jupiter & charter neighborhoods 3. Western communities & The Shores/Heights, Hamptons, Indian Creek and Loxahatchee Club 4. Abacoa/Admirals' Cove & Bears Club 6 Key Finding #1 Jupiter residents continue to enjoy a high quality of life 7 Jupiter Overall 94% Excellent or Good Place to live 97% Quality of Life Overall image 91% Excellent 51% Overall Poor 90% 1% appearance Neighborhood 89% Fair Place to raise 5% 89% children Place to retire 88% Good 43% Percent excellent or good = National benchmark comparison = Florida benchmark comparison 8 Strong Economy Place to visit 90% Ratings for all characteristics above the national benchmark Overall economic 80% health Place to work 73% Percent excellent or good 9 Current and Future Downtown Areas Future Current 20% None of the above 40% 21% Abacoa Town Center 31% 4% Center Street 10% 16% Inlet Village 8% 35% Harbourside Place 7% 3% Tony Penna Drive 4% 10 Ratings of Contact with Jupiter Employees Courtesy 87% Knowledge 85% Responsiveness 83% Percent excellent or good 11 Support of Senior Programs Please indicate how important, if at all, it is for the Town of Jupiter to offer each of the following types of programs for residents 55 and over: Senior support services 80% Health information programs, fairs 68% and seminars Dances, concerts, and entertainment 54% events Day trips to area attractions such as 50% malls, casinos, parks and activities Games and leagues 46% Sports leagues 44% Coach trips to other areas of Florida 33% and the Southeast Longer-term trips and cruises 24% Percent essential or very important 12 Jupiter’s Public Information Efforts Thinking about Jupiter’s public information efforts, please rate the quality of each of the following: Town Times quarterly 80% newsletter Usability/design of the Town 75% website (www.jupiter.fl.us) The Town's website content 73% The Town's Facebook page 71% The Town's Twitter feed 66% Percent excellent or good 13 Key Finding #2 Safety is a feature that makes Jupiter a livable community 14 Safe and Livable Community Safe in neighborhood 97% Similar to the National and Florida benchmarks Safe downtown or 88% commercial area Percent very or somewhat safe Overall Feeling of Safety Excellent 36% Poor 2% Fair 7% Good 56% = National benchmark comparison 15 = Florida benchmark comparison Safe and Livable Community Fire 97% Ambulance/EMS 94% Police 88% Crime prevention 81% Emergency 78% preparedness Percent excellent or good = National benchmark comparison = Florida benchmark comparison 16 Key Finding #3 The Natural Environment is a top focus area for Jupiter residents 17 Natural Environment Air quality 91% Cleanliness 88% Overall Ratings above natural 86% the national environment benchmark Yard waste 85% pick-up 95% of all Jupiter residents recycled more Drinking 80% than once a month water Percent excellent or good 18 Key Focus Areas Legend Higher than national benchmark Similar to national benchmark Lower than national benchmark Key Focus Area Education Built Safety and Environment Enrichment Natural Recreation Environment and Wellness Community Mobility Economy Engagement 19 2013 Ratings Compared to 2011 3 received higher 60 ratings received similar 23 ratings received lower ratings 20 Opportunities Areas with Opportunity for Improvement • Mobility • Recreation & • Travel by car Wellness • Travel by bicycle • Town parks • Traffic enforcement • Recreation programs • Built Environment • Community • New development in Engagement & Jupiter Governance • Storm drainage • Sense of community • Land use, planning • Openness and and zoning acceptance • Code enforcement • Overall direction 21 Conclusions • Jupiter residents continue to enjoy a high quality of life. • Safety is a feature that makes Jupiter a livable community. • The Natural Environment is a top focus area for Jupiter residents. 22 Questions? Thank you! National Research Center, Inc. 2955 Valmont Road Suite 300 Boulder, CO 80301 303-444-7863 • [email protected] www.n-r-c.com The National Citizen Survey™ Jupiter, FL Community Livability Report 2014 National Research Center, Inc. | Boulder, CO International City/County Management Association | Washington, DC Contents About .............................................................................................. 1 Quality of Life in Jupiter ................................................................... 2 Community Characteristics ............................................................... 3 Governance ..................................................................................... 5 Participation .................................................................................... 7 Special Topics .................................................................................. 9 Conclusions ................................................................................... 13 The National Citizen Survey™ © 2001-2014 National Research Center, Inc. National Research Center, Inc. International City/County Management Association 2955 Valmont Road, Suite 300 777 North Capitol Street NE, Suite 500 Boulder, CO 80301 Washington, DC 20002 www.n-r-c.com • 303-444-7863 www.icma.org • 202-289-ICMA About The National Citizen Survey™ (The NCS) report is about the “livability” of Jupiter. The phrase “livable community” is used here to evoke a place that is not simply habitable, but that is desirable. It is not only where people do live, but where they want to live. Great communities are partnerships of the government, private sector, community-based organizations and residents, all Residents geographically connected. The NCS captures residents’ opinions within the three pillars of a community (Community Characteristics, Governance and Participation) across eight central facets of community (Safety, Mobility, Natural Environment, Built Private Environment, Economy, Recreation and Wellness, Education and sector Enrichment and Community Engagement). Communities are partnerships among… Community- The Community Livability Report provides the opinions of a based representative sample of 745 residents of the Town of Jupiter. The organizations margin of error around any reported percentage is 4% for the entire sample. The full description of methods used to garner these opinions can be found in the Technical Appendices provided under separate cover. Government 1 Quality of Life in Jupiter Almost all residents rated the quality of life in Jupiter as excellent or good. Ratings for overall quality of life were higher in Jupiter when Overall Quality of Life Excellent compared to the national benchmark. 51% Shown below are the eight facets of community. The color of each Poor community facet summarizes how residents rated it across the three 1% Fair sections of the survey that represent the pillars of a community – 5% Community Characteristics, Governance and Participation. When most ratings across the three pillars were higher than the benchmark, the color for that facet is the darkest shade; when most ratings were lower Good than the benchmark, the color is the lightest shade. A mix of ratings 43% (higher and lower than the benchmark) results in a color between the extremes. In addition to a summary of ratings, the image below includes one or more stars to indicate which community facets were the most important focus areas for the community. Residents identified Safety, Natural Environment and Economy as priorities for the Jupiter community in the coming two years. It is noteworthy that Jupiter residents gave favorable ratings to these of these facets of community. Ratings for Natural Environment tended to be higher than in comparison communities. Ratings for Safety, Mobility, Built Environment, Economy, Recreation and Wellness, Education and Enrichment and Community Engagement were positive and similar to other communities. This overview of the key aspects of community quality provides a quick summary of where residents see exceptionally strong performance and where performance offers the greatest opportunity for improvement. Linking quality to importance offers community members and leaders a view into the characteristics of the community that matter most and that seem to be working best. Details that support these findings are contained in the remainder of this Livability Report, starting with the ratings for Community Characteristics, Governance and Participation and ending with results for Jupiter’s unique questions. Legend x Higher than national benchmark Similar to national benchmark Lower than national benchmark Most important Education Built Safety and Environment Enrichment Natural Recreation Environment and Wellness Community Mobility Economy Engagement 2 The National Citizen Survey™ Community Characteristics What makes a community
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Handling of Apple Transport Techniques and Efficiency Vibration, Damage and Bruising Texture, Firmness and Quality
    Centre of Excellence AGROPHYSICS for Applied Physics in Sustainable Agriculture Handling of Apple transport techniques and efficiency vibration, damage and bruising texture, firmness and quality Bohdan Dobrzañski, jr. Jacek Rabcewicz Rafa³ Rybczyñski B. Dobrzañski Institute of Agrophysics Polish Academy of Sciences Centre of Excellence AGROPHYSICS for Applied Physics in Sustainable Agriculture Handling of Apple transport techniques and efficiency vibration, damage and bruising texture, firmness and quality Bohdan Dobrzañski, jr. Jacek Rabcewicz Rafa³ Rybczyñski B. Dobrzañski Institute of Agrophysics Polish Academy of Sciences PUBLISHED BY: B. DOBRZAŃSKI INSTITUTE OF AGROPHYSICS OF POLISH ACADEMY OF SCIENCES ACTIVITIES OF WP9 IN THE CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE AGROPHYSICS CONTRACT NO: QLAM-2001-00428 CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE FOR APPLIED PHYSICS IN SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE WITH THE th ACRONYM AGROPHYSICS IS FOUNDED UNDER 5 EU FRAMEWORK FOR RESEARCH, TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION ACTIVITIES GENERAL SUPERVISOR OF THE CENTRE: PROF. DR. RYSZARD T. WALCZAK, MEMBER OF POLISH ACADEMY OF SCIENCES PROJECT COORDINATOR: DR. ENG. ANDRZEJ STĘPNIEWSKI WP9: PHYSICAL METHODS OF EVALUATION OF FRUIT AND VEGETABLE QUALITY LEADER OF WP9: PROF. DR. ENG. BOHDAN DOBRZAŃSKI, JR. REVIEWED BY PROF. DR. ENG. JÓZEF KOWALCZUK TRANSLATED (EXCEPT CHAPTERS: 1, 2, 6-9) BY M.SC. TOMASZ BYLICA THE RESULTS OF STUDY PRESENTED IN THE MONOGRAPH ARE SUPPORTED BY: THE STATE COMMITTEE FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH UNDER GRANT NO. 5 P06F 012 19 AND ORDERED PROJECT NO. PBZ-51-02 RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF POMOLOGY AND FLORICULTURE B. DOBRZAŃSKI INSTITUTE OF AGROPHYSICS OF POLISH ACADEMY OF SCIENCES ©Copyright by BOHDAN DOBRZAŃSKI INSTITUTE OF AGROPHYSICS OF POLISH ACADEMY OF SCIENCES LUBLIN 2006 ISBN 83-89969-55-6 ST 1 EDITION - ISBN 83-89969-55-6 (IN ENGLISH) 180 COPIES, PRINTED SHEETS (16.8) PRINTED ON ACID-FREE PAPER IN POLAND BY: ALF-GRAF, UL.
    [Show full text]
  • INF03 Reduce Lists of Apple Varieites
    ECE/TRADE/C/WP.7/GE.1/2009/INF.3 Specialized Section on Standardization of Fresh Fruit and Vegetables Fifty-fifth session Geneva, 4 - 8 May 2009 Items 4(a) of the provisional agenda REVISION OF UNECE STANDARDS Proposals on the list of apple varieties This note has been put together by the secretariat following the decision taken by the Specialized Section at its fifty-fourth session to collect information from countries on varieties that are important in international trade. Replies have been received from the following countries: Canada, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Slovakia, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland and the USA. This note also includes the documents compiled for the same purpose and submitted to the fifty-second session of the Specialized Section. I. Documents submitted to the 52nd session of the Specialized Section A. UNECE Standard for Apples – List of Varieties At the last meeting the 51 st session of the Specialized Section GE.1 the delegation of the United Kingdom offered to coordinate efforts to simplify the list of apple varieties. The aim was to see what the result would be if we only include the most important varieties that are produced and traded. The list is designed to help distinguish apple varieties by colour groups, size and russeting it is not exhaustive, non-listed varieties can still be marketed. The idea should not be to list every variety grown in every country. The UK asked for views on what were considered to be the most important top thirty varieties. Eight countries sent their views, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, USA, Slovakia, Germany Finland and the Czech Republic.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Analysis of a Major International Collection of Cultivated Apple Varieties Reveals Previously Unknown Historic Heteroploid and Inbred Relationships
    Genetic analysis of a major international collection of cultivated apple varieties reveals previously unknown historic heteroploid and inbred relationships Article Published Version Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY) Open Access Ordidge, M., Kirdwichai, P., Baksh, M. F., Venison, E. P., Gibbings, J. G. and Dunwell, J. M. (2018) Genetic analysis of a major international collection of cultivated apple varieties reveals previously unknown historic heteroploid and inbred relationships. PLoS ONE, 13 (9). e0202405. ISSN 1932-6203 doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202405 Available at http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/78594/ It is advisable to refer to the publisher’s version if you intend to cite from the work. See Guidance on citing . To link to this article DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202405 Publisher: Public Library of Science All outputs in CentAUR are protected by Intellectual Property Rights law, including copyright law. Copyright and IPR is retained by the creators or other copyright holders. Terms and conditions for use of this material are defined in the End User Agreement . www.reading.ac.uk/centaur CentAUR Central Archive at the University of Reading Reading’s research outputs online Genetic analysis of a major international collection of cultivated apple varieties reveals previously unknown historic heteroploid and inbred relationships Article Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY) Ordidge, M., Kirdwichai, P., Baksh, M. F., Venison, E. P., Gibbings, J. G. and Dunwell, J. M. (2018) Genetic analysis of a major international collection of cultivated apple varieties reveals previously unknown historic heteroploid and inbred relationships. PLOS ONE, 13 (9).
    [Show full text]
  • Delinquent Current Year Real Property
    Delinquent Current Year Real Property Tax as of February 1, 2021 PRIMARY OWNER SECONDARY OWNER PARCEL ID TOTAL DUE SITUS ADDRESS 11 WESTVIEW LLC 964972494700000 1,550.02 11 WESTVIEW RD ASHEVILLE NC 1115 INVESTMENTS LLC 962826247600000 1,784.57 424 DEAVERVIEW RD ASHEVILLE NC 120 BROADWAY STREET LLC 061935493200000 630.62 99999 BROADWAY ST BLACK MOUNTAIN NC 13:22 LEGACIES LLC 967741958700000 2,609.06 48 WESTSIDE VILLAGE RD UNINCORPORATED 131 BROADWAY LLC 061935599200000 2,856.73 131 BROADWAY ST BLACK MOUNTAIN NC 1430 MERRIMON AVENUE LLC 973095178600000 2,759.07 1430 MERRIMON AVE ASHEVILLE NC 146 ROBERTS LLC 964807218300000 19,180.16 146 ROBERTS ST ASHEVILLE NC 146 ROBERTS LLC 964806195600000 17.24 179 ROBERTS ST ASHEVILLE NC 161 LOGAN LLC 964784681600000 1,447.39 617 BROOKSHIRE ST ASHEVILLE NC 18 BRENNAN BROKE ME LLC 962964621500000 2,410.41 18 BRENNAN BROOK DR UNINCORPORATED 180 HOLDINGS LLC 963816782800000 12.94 99999 MAURICET LN ASHEVILLE NC 233 RIVERSIDE LLC 963889237500000 17,355.27 350 RIVERSIDE DR ASHEVILLE NC 27 DEER RUN DRIVE LLC 965505559900000 2,393.79 27 DEER RUN DR ASHEVILLE NC 28 HUNTER DRIVE REVOCABLE TRUST 962421184100000 478.17 28 HUNTER DR UNINCORPORATED 29 PAGE AVE LLC 964930087300000 12,618.97 29 PAGE AVE ASHEVILLE NC 299 OLD HIGHWAY 20 LLC 971182306200000 2,670.65 17 STONE OWL TRL UNINCORPORATED 2M HOME INVESTMENTS LLC 970141443400000 881.74 71 GRAY FOX DR UNINCORPORATED 311 ASHEVILLE CONDO LLC 9648623059C0311 2,608.52 311 BOWLING PARK RD ASHEVILLE NC 325 HAYWOOD CHECK THE DEED! LLC 963864649400000 2,288.38 325 HAYWOOD
    [Show full text]
  • Standardized Parent Company Names for TRI Reporting
    Standardized Parent Company Names for TRI Reporting This alphabetized list of TRI Reporting Year (RY) 2011 Parent Company names is provided here as a reference for facilities filing their RY 2012 reports using paper forms. For RY 2012, the Agency is emphasizing the importance of accurate names for Parent Companies. Your facility may or may not have a Parent Company. Also, if you do have a Parent Company, please note that it is not necessarily listed here. Instructions Search for your standardized company name by pressing the CTRL+F keys. If your Parent Company is on this list, please write the name exactly as spelled and abbreviated here in Section 5.1 of the appropriate TRI Reporting Form. If your Parent Company is not on this list, please clearly write out the name of your parent company. In either case, please use ALL CAPITAL letters and DO NOT use periods. Please consult the most recent TRI Reporting Forms and Instructions (http://www.epa.gov/tri/report/index.htm) if you need additional information on reporting for reporting Parent Company names. Find your standardized company name on the alphabetical list below, or search for a name by pressing the CTRL+F keys Standardized Parent Company Names 3A COMPOSITES USA INC 3F CHIMICA AMERICAS INC 3G MERMET CORP 3M CO 5N PLUS INC A & A MANUFACTURING CO INC A & A READY MIX INC A & E CUSTOM TRUCK A & E INC A FINKL & SONS CO A G SIMPSON AUTOMOTIVE INC A KEY 3 CASTING CO A MATRIX METALS CO LLC A O SMITH CORP A RAYMOND TINNERMAN MANUFACTURING INC A SCHULMAN INC A TEICHERT & SON INC A TO Z DRYING
    [Show full text]
  • Founding Clones, Inbreeding, Coancestry, and Status Number of Modern Apple Cultivars
    J. AMER. SOC. HORT. SCI. 121(5):773–782. 1996. Founding Clones, Inbreeding, Coancestry, and Status Number of Modern Apple Cultivars Dominique A.M. Noiton The Horticulture and Food Research Institute of New Zealand Ltd, Havelock North Research Center, Havelock North, New Zealand Peter A. Alspach The Horticulture and Food Research Institute of New Zealand Ltd, Riwaka Research Center, Motueka, New Zealand Additional index words. breeding, genetic diversity, Malus ×domestica Abstract. Pedigrees of apple (Malus ×domestica Borkh.) cultivars were used to study worldwide genetic diversity among clones used in modern apple breeding. The most frequent founding clones were ‘Cox’s Orange Pippin’, ‘Golden Delicious’, ‘Red Delicious’, ‘Jonathan’, and ‘McIntosh’. Coefficients of coancestry between 50 mainstream cultivars and these clones averaged 0.03, 0.12, 0.07, 0.06, and 0.02, respectively, but they were frequently as high as 0.25 with certain pairings. Among a group of 27 cultivars carrying the Vf gene for scab resistance, coefficients of coancestry with the five founding clones were of the same order. Although few of the cultivars sampled were substantially inbred, inbreeding could reach serious levels in their future offspring if current breeding practices are continued. The status effective number was 8 for the mainstream group and 7 for the Vf-carrier clones. This indicates clearly that apple breeders are operating with a population of greatly reduced genetic diversity. Careful consideration of pedigrees and increased size of the genetic base are needed in future apple breeding strategies. The domestic apple (Malus ×domestica), one of the world’s floribunda 821 x ‘Rome Beauty’.
    [Show full text]
  • Apple Pollination Groups
    Flowering times of apples RHS Pollination Groups To ensure good pollination and therefore a good crop, it is essential to grow two or more different cultivars from the same Flowering Group or adjacent Flowering Groups. Some cultivars are triploid – they have sterile pollen and need two other cultivars for good pollination; therefore, always grow at least two other non- triploid cultivars with each one. Key AGM = RHS Award of Garden Merit * Incompatible with each other ** Incompatible with each other *** ‘Golden Delicious’ may be ineffective on ‘Crispin’ (syn. ‘Mutsu’) Flowering Group 1 Very early; pollinated by groups 1 & 2 ‘Gravenstein’ (triploid) ‘Lord Suffield’ ‘Manks Codlin’ ‘Red Astrachan’ ‘Stark Earliest’ (syn. ‘Scarlet Pimpernel’) ‘Vista Bella’ Flowering Group 2 Pollinated by groups 1,2 & 3 ‘Adams's Pearmain’ ‘Alkmene’ AGM (syn. ‘Early Windsor’) ‘Baker's Delicious’ ‘Beauty of Bath’ (partial tip bearer) ‘Beauty of Blackmoor’ ‘Ben's Red’ ‘Bismarck’ ‘Bolero’ (syn. ‘Tuscan’) ‘Cheddar Cross’ ‘Christmas Pearmain’ ‘Devonshire Quarrenden’ ‘Egremont Russet’ AGM ‘George Cave’ (tip bearer) ‘George Neal’ AGM ‘Golden Spire’ ‘Idared’ AGM ‘Irish Peach’ (tip bearer) ‘Kerry Pippin’ ‘Keswick Codling’ ‘Laxton's Early Crimson’ ‘Lord Lambourne’ AGM (partial tip bearer) ‘Maidstone Favourite’ ‘Margil’ ‘Mclntosh’ ‘Red Melba’ ‘Merton Charm’ ‘Michaelmas Red’ ‘Norfolk Beauty’ ‘Owen Thomas’ ‘Reverend W. Wilks’ ‘Ribston Pippin’ AGM (triploid, partial tip bearer) ‘Ross Nonpareil’ ‘Saint Edmund's Pippin’ AGM (partial tip bearer) ‘Striped Beefing’ ‘Warner's King’ AGM (triploid) ‘Washington’ (triploid) ‘White Transparent’ Flowering Group 3 Pollinated by groups 2, 3 & 4 ‘Acme’ ‘Alexander’ (syn. ‘Emperor Alexander’) ‘Allington Pippin’ ‘Arthur Turner’ AGM ‘Barnack Orange’ ‘Baumann's Reinette’ ‘Belle de Boskoop’ AGM (triploid) ‘Belle de Pontoise’ ‘Blenheim Orange’ AGM (triploid, partial tip bearer) ‘Bountiful’ ‘Bowden's Seedling’ ‘Bramley's Seedling’ AGM (triploid, partial tip bearer) ‘Brownlees Russett’ ‘Charles Ross’ AGM ‘Cox's Orange Pippin’ */** ‘Crispin’ (syn.
    [Show full text]
  • Applied to the Buying-In Prices for Fruit and Vegetables 1 . in Annex VIII, The
    24 . 6 . 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No L 177/37 COMMISSION REGULATION ( EEC) No 1822/89 of 23 June 1989 amending Regulation ( EEC) No 3587/86 fixing the conversion factors to be applied to the buying-in prices for fruit and vegetables THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES , grapes produced with a view to the obligatory distillation of wine made from table grapes ; Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Whereas the Management Committee for Fruit and Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 Vegetables has not delivered an opinion within the time of 18 May 1972 on the common organization of the limit set by its chairman, market in fruit and vegetables ('), as last amended by Regulation ( EEC) No 1 1 19/89 (2), and in particular Article HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION : 16 (4) thereof, Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3587/86 (J), Article 1 as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2040/88 (4), fixes the conversion factors permitting the calculation of the Regulation (EEC) No 3587/86 is hereby amended as prices at which products with characteristics different follows : from those of products used for the fixing of the basic 1 . In Annex VIII, the list of varieties of large pears is and buying-in prices are bought in ; replaced by the list set out in Annex I hereto . Whereas Commission Regulation ( EEC) No 920/89 (5) lays down quality standards for citrus fruit, apples and 2. The first indent of point (b) in Annexe IX is replaced pears ; whereas the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No by the following : 3587/86 should accordingly by adapted to those II .
    [Show full text]
  • Fruit Trees & Soft Fruit
    Our helpful guide to FRUIT TREES & SOFT FRUIT APPLE ‘Egremont Russet’ AGM All your requirements for your orchard or fruit garden. ‘Adam’s Permain’ Dessert. A 19th C. variety. Bright red nutty aromatic Dessert. Small/medium golden russet fruit with a Potted fruit trees for planting all year round and bare-rooted apple. Pick October. Use until March. Hardy and sweet and nutty flavour. Upright grower producing disease resistant. Pollination Group 2. good crops. Pick late Sept. Use October/December. for planting during the dormant season. These include a range 6 Pollination Group 2. of local apple varieties. We also have potted soft fruit bushes ‘Blue Moon’ ‘Fiesta’ AGM including Gooseberries, Blackcurrants, Red and White Currants, Apple (Starline). Purple-Blue fruit, crisp and sweet/ sharp harvest August to September. Self-fertile and Dessert with medium-large fruits with a ‘Cox’ type Blueberries, Raspberries, Blackberry and Tayberry. disease resistant. Columnar habit. flavour that is almost as good. Crop heavy and reliable. Pick early October keeps until February. ‘Bountiful’ Disease resistance fair. Pollination Group 3. Cooking. Large green and red sweet fruit. Compact growth makes this a good choice for small gardens. ‘Greenfinch’ Heavy cropper. Good pollinator. Pick late Sept. Use Apple (Starline). Heavy cropping with large green, FRUIT TREE ROOTSTOCKS, TREE SIZES Sept/Jan. Pollination Group 2. crisp, slightly acidic apples. Harvest September to AND POLLINATION October. Self-fertile and disease resistant. Columnar ‘Bramley’s Seedling’ AGM habit. Great for restricted spaces. To keep fruit tree sizes under control for most Ideally, trees should be from the same or adjoining Cooking.
    [Show full text]
  • Fruit and Vegetable Show Schedule 2021
    The RHS Fruit and Vegetable Show Schedules 2021 Summer Fruit and Vegetable Competition 21-25 July 2021 RHS Flower Show Tatton Park Autumn Fruit and Vegetable Competition 1-3 October 2021 RHS Garden Hyde Hall As part of Taste of Autumn Late Fruit and Vegetable Competition 28-31 October 2021 RHS Garden Harlow Carr Judged under the Rules and Regulations of the RHS Horticultural Show Handbook, 8th Edition, unless otherwise stated in the schedule Please note: This schedule is available as a hard copy by request. All requests should go to Georgina Barter. email: [email protected] tel: 020 7821 3142 You can also print sections of this document by selecting ‘print custom range’ and entering a page selection, e.g. 1-5 CONTENTS Regulations for competitive exhibits Regulations 3 Admission 7 Cups, Trophies and Prizes 8 Classified list of gooseberries 9 List of dessert and cooking cultivars of apples, pears and plums 10 Constitution of dishes - fruit 15 Constitution of dishes - vegetables 16 Summer Fruit and Vegetable Competition Timetable 19 Classes 20 Autumn Fruit and Vegetable Competition Timetable 25 Classes 26 Late Fruit and Vegetable Competition Timetable 36 Classes 37 RHS Fruit Group information 43 Show schedule meeting Chairman: Mr C Spires Vice-Chairman: Mr R M Williams MBE Mr D Allison, Mr J Arbury, Mr R H Bailey, Mr A Baggaley Dr P R Dawson, Mr G M Edwards, Mr I Mace, Mr B Newman, Mr D Thornton, Secretary: Mrs G Barter 2 REGULATIONS FOR COMPETITIVE EXHIBITS Exhibitors 1. Eligibility of competitors - Subject to the conditions laid down elsewhere in the Schedule, the competitive classes are open to all whether Members of the Society or not.
    [Show full text]
  • Most Recent Item 2015-2016 Citizen Survey
    1 Jupiter, FL Key Findings 2016 The NCS is presented by NRC in collaboration with ICMA About The NCS . Community Livability Residents . Community Characteristics . Governance Private Communities Community- based sector are partnerships . Participation among... organizations Government 2 Facets of Community Livability Recreation Safety Mobility Economy Quality of and Wellness Community Overall Education Natural Built Community and Environment Environment Engagement Enrichment 3 The NCS & Jupiter . Participant in The NCS since 2009 . 2009, 2011, 2013, 2015 . Scientific sample of 2,600 households . 547 returned surveys; 24% response rate . ±4% margin of error Expanded Online Geographic sample option comparisons Custom Presentation benchmarks 4 Geographic Areas Four Areas 1. CRA and coastal communities 2. Northern Loxahatchee River/Riverside Drive communities/Central Jupiter & charter neighborhoods 3. Western communities & The Shores/Heights, Hamptons, Indian Creek and Loxahatchee Club 4. Abacoa/Admirals' Cove & Bears Club 5 National and Florida Benchmark Comparisons 6 2015 National Benchmark Comparisons 24 received higher 106 3 received similar ratings received ratings lower ratings 7 2015 Florida Benchmark Comparisons 65 received higher 67 1 received similar ratings received ratings lower ratings 8 2015 Ratings Compared to 2013 11 received higher 115 7 received similar ratings received ratings lower ratings 9 Legend Key Focus Areas Higher than national benchmark Similar to national benchmark Lower than national benchmark Most important
    [Show full text]
  • "Register of New Fruit and Nut Varieties"
    Register of New Fruit and Nut Varieties Brooks and Olmo List 35 Edited by James N. Cummins1 Department of Horticultural Sciences, New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Cornell University, Geneva, NY 14456 ADDENDA AND REVISIONS Redglobe.-Described in List 32. Plant pat. 4787, 10 Nov. 1981. Symphony. -Described in List32. Plantpat. 5013, 29 Mar. 1983. APPLE Freedom. -Described in List 34. Plant pat. 5723, 22 Apr. 1986. NECTARINE Jonalicious (Daniel). -Synonym added; plant pat. 1777, 9 Dec. 1958. Stark GulfPride (Zaipride). -Described in List 34. Plant pat. Nured® Jonathan (Improved Red Jonathan) -Synonym added; 5461, 7 May 1985. plant pat. 2650, 5 July 1966. Stark HoneyGlo (Anderhone). -Described in List 32. Plant pat. Paulared (Summer Mac). -Synonym added; plant pat. 2800, 12 4789, 10 Nov. 1981. Mar. 1968. Stark® Blushing Golden™ (Griffith Gold) -Synonym added; plant pat. 2835, 1 Oct. 1968. PEACH Starkspur Compact Red Delicious (Cascade Compact Red Delicious).-Described in List 32. Plant pat. 4811, 26 Jan. 1982. Eldorado. -Described in List 32. Plant pat. 4780, 20 Oct. 1981. Starkspur Dixired Delicious (Hared). -Described in List 32. Plant Stark® Finale. Described in List34. Plant pat. 5655, 4 Feb. 1986. pat. 5547, 3 Sept. 1985. Stark® Gulf Queen (Zaiqueen). -Described in List34. Plantpat. Starkspur Law Rome (PeaceValley) -Described in List 32. Plant 5463, 7 May 1985. pat. 4793. 24 Nov. 1981. Starkspur UltraStripe Delicious (Jenred) -Described in List 32. Plant pat. 5472, 21 May 1985. RASPBERRY Starkspur Winter Banana (Frecon). -Described in List33. Plant pat. 4901, 26 Oct. 1982. Royalty. Described in List 33. Plant pat. 5405, 12 Feb.
    [Show full text]