The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on April 18, 2000, at 5:30 p.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Nancy Higgs, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Randy O'Brien, Sue Carlson, and Helen Voltz, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

The Invocation was given by Pastor Brent Drake, New Life Church of Central Brevard, Viera, Florida.

Commissioner Nancy Higgs led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the Minutes of February 8, 2000 Regular Meeting. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING ADMINISTRATIVE PROFESSIONALS WEEK

Commissioner Voltz read aloud a resolution proclaiming April 23 through 29, 2000, as Administrative Professionals Week in Brevard County, and requesting special attention be given to Administrative Professionals Day on April 26, 2000.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution proclaiming April 23 through 29, 2000 as Administrative Professionals Week in Brevard County, and urging all businesses and industries to join in giving due recognition to this group and special attention to Administrative Professionals Day on April 26, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 2000-132.)

Commissioner Voltz presented the Resolution to Monica Waddell and Ginny Mitchell who thanked the Board for the Resolution on behalf of the Central Brevard Chapter of the IAAP. Ms. Mitchell noted they are not just secretaries but office professionals with skills. Chairman Higgs thanked those in the profession for making it easier for the County to accomplish its duties.

RESOLUTION, RE: COMMENDING EAGLE SCOUT SEAN REYNOLDS

Commissioner O'Brien read aloud a resolution commending Sean Reynolds for attaining the rank of Eagle Scout.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution commending Sean Reynolds for attaining the rank of Eagle Scout and selecting a project that would benefit the environment and community. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner O'Brien presented the Resolution to Sean Reynolds and his dad. Sean Reynolds thanked the Board for giving him the opportunity to do the project as he likes the environment; and thanked Mike Knight for leading him through the project to improve recreational use opportunities for canoeing, bird watching, and waterfowl hunting on Pine Island Conservation area.

PERMISSION TO UTILIZE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT DELIVERY METHOD AND EXECUTE CONTRACT, RE: CONSTRUCTION OF SPESSARD HOLLAND GOLF COURSE 17TH TEE RESTROOM

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize utilizing the Construction Management Delivery Method for construction of Spessard Holland Golf Course 17th Tee Restroom; and authorize the Chairman to execute the Contract with the selected contractor. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS AND NEGOTIATE CONTRACT, RE: COMPANY TO REPRESENT AND SELL THE SPACE COAST IN THE EUROPEAN MARKET

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant permission to advertise request for proposals for a company to represent and sell the Space Coast in the European Market; appoint the TDC Marketing Committee as the selection committee if more than three proposals are submitted; and authorize the Tourism Development Executive Director to negotiate the Contract with the Tourist Development Council's final approval. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Contract.)

AUTHORIZATION FOR COUNTY MANAGER TO SIGN MODIFICATION TO AGREEMENT WITH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, RE: SHELTER SHUTTER FUNDS

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the County Manager to sign Modification to Agreement with Department of Community Affairs to accept an additional $223,269 for shuttering specific buildings at Rockledge High School, a primary backup hurricane shelter, and the Special Education Wing at Astronaut High School, a backup special needs shelter. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, AND AUTHORIZATION FOR COUNTY MANAGER TO SIGN DOCUMENTS, RE: HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT FOR WILDFIRE EDUCATION PROJECT

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the County Manager or his designated representative to execute Agreement with Florida Department of Community Affairs for Brevard County Wildfire Education Project, FEMA Project 1223-005, and any additional modifications, reports and correspondence concerning the Agreement; and approve a loan of $20,000 to Emergency Management until reimbursement of the grant is provided. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF APPLICATION, RE: HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT FOR SHUTTERS

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the County Manager or his designee to execute application to the State of Florida for Hazard Mitigation Grant funds to install hurricane shutters on seven Brevard County schools and two County buildings used as hurricane shelters and for the installation of electrical wiring and connections for emergency generator power for four schools used as County special needs shelters, and any agreements and correspondence generated by the application. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS, RE: CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARDS

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to appoint and/or reappoint Bobbie McMillan to the Arts in Public Places Advisory Committee, replacing Barbara Arnoult with term expiring December 31, 2000; Yvette Torres to the Community Action Agency Advisory Committee with term expiring December 31, 2000; and Ruth Santomassino to Country Acres Advisory Board with term expiring December 31, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: BILLS AND BUDGET CHANGES

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve bills and budget changes as submitted. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH SURVEYS, APPRAISALS, AND NEGOTIATIONS, RE: ACQUISITION OF PROPERTIES FOR PINEDA CAUSEWAY EXTENSION

Chairman Higgs advised the Board understands the concerns of the people regarding the Pineda Causeway Extension and how important it is to them because for some it is where they work and others where they live, worship, or have children in school. She stated what the Board will hear tonight will help it in making a good decision; the process needs to allow an opportunity for everyone to speak and be heard; and in order to do that, she would ask each speaker to hold to the time limits and the public to hold their applause or other demonstrations of feelings about the presentations by various speakers. She requested staff make a brief presentation on the status of the project.

Public Works Director Henry Minneboo advised he asked Transportation Planning Director Bob Kamm to give an overview on how the project started and what caused it to be where it is today.

Transportation Planning Director Bob Kamm advised he will review the key past events and use slides and graphics for the presentation. He stated the idea of extending the Pineda Causeway west of I-95 has been under discussion for at least 20 years; in 1980, the County's Comprehensive Plan included the Pineda extension as a future improvement; in 1989, Florida Department of Transportation (DOT) conducted a study of the extension and recommended an expressway from U.S. 1 to a new interchange at I-95; local officials concluded it was too expensive, and the project was not pursued; however, DOT did get approval for the interchange and that approval remains valid today. He advised in 1995 The Viera Company offered to donate right-of-way for the future extension of the Pineda Causeway; the Viera traffic analysis showed that North Wickham Road would not accommodate the Viera development along with everything else that is happening in North Melbourne; and additional roadways, like the Pineda, would be needed. He stated The Viera Company offered to reserve land for the eventual construction of the Pineda, which the County accepted in 1996; and The Viera Company still owns the land, but offered to make it available when the Pineda would be needed. Mr. Kamm advised in April, 1999, a rezoning request was approved by the County for the Grand Haven Subdivision located south of Suntree and north of Windover Farms; access to Grand Haven was proposed to be from Wickham Road by way of a new two-lane entry road built in the land reserved by The Viera Company for the Pineda extension; and that rezoning put several things in motion. He stated the developer and the County agreed to locate the road in the southern part of the right-of-way in order to increase the buffer with Windsor Estates; it agreed the Pineda would be a controlled access road with a limited number of access points to serve Grand Haven and Suntree; and it reached a cost-sharing agreement with the developer to build the road to a higher standard so it could eventually become part of the Pineda extension. He stated the County agreed to pay for the incremental increases above what would normally be required for a residential street; and that entrance road is now under construction. He stated the Grand Haven traffic study pointed out that the capacity on Wickham Road north of Post Road is rapidly being used up; in May, 1999, staff began a planning study to identify what could be done over the next 20 years to improve traffic conditions in the North Melbourne area; and the analysis showed the future volume on North Wickham Road will exceed the road's capacity, and concluded that the Pineda extension, with an interchange at I-95, would be needed to prevent Wickham Road, north of Pineda, from reaching unacceptable congestion levels. He advised the extension will redirect sufficient traffic off North Wickham Road so the standard would not be exceeded; the study also recommended the County widen Wickham Road south of Pineda to six lanes and begin more detailed analysis of the Pineda/Wickham intersection options; and the Public Works Department staff began working on that almost immediately. Mr. Kamm advised at the end of November, 1999, the Board adopted a list of road improvement projects to fund with its local option gas tax; $12.5 million was set aside for the Pineda extension; so funding is available for implementation. He stated when designing a road improvement, staff begins with several rough ideas then refine the options as they learn more about them; and explained a slide of the general factors considered when evaluating options. He stated they look at future needs, design standards, cost, permitting requirements, and impact on adjacent properties; and to help them evaluate the different options, they listen to what the public says; so they must maintain an open process based on developing a dialogue with those who would be affected by the project. Mr. Kamm advised since January, 2000, staff held numerous meetings with project stakeholders and a general public meeting in February, 2000; and all of those meetings is to provide staff with a better understanding of the citizens' concerns and to help the citizens understand what the County is proposing to do to meet future roadway needs. He stated last Friday he met with DOT District Secretary Mike Snyder in Deland to discuss the Pineda interchange; he indicated the County is seeking a commitment from DOT for construction funding to build an interchange in the relatively near future; and he was given a very positive response and was told the County is actually doing the hard part. He stated Mr. Snyder recognized there is approval for the interchange and that the County and private interests are putting forward significant funding and donating right-of-way; all that is needed is federal concurrence and DOT funds; and that, in Mr. Snyder's opinion, was doable. He stated Mr. Snyder offered to put together a team from DOT to work with staff to get it done; so an interchange in a five to seven-year time frame appears quite possible.

Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff advised there has been concern about the possibility of a St. Andrews Boulevard connection to the Pineda extension; it is not directly related to the extension project; so he wants to clarify the situation. He stated during the wetlands permitting phase of Grand Haven, the possibility of eliminating the connection to Wickham Road was advanced by the permitting agencies; they required an analysis be performed, making the assumption that only St. Andrews Boulevard would be available as a means of ingress/egress for Grand Haven; utilizing that assumption, the study revealed that there was a very serious negative impact to the existing St. Andrews Boulevard; and as such it also had a negative impact on Grand Haven, and as such no further consideration was given to that possibility. He stated while it is not directly related to the Pineda extension, it is currently thought that connecting St. Andrews Boulevard to the Pineda extension, rather than creating additional traffic within Suntree, would reduce the traffic on Wickham Road north of the Pineda Causeway and have a positive impact there; and it would reduce travel time for the residents of Suntree and all the subdivisions in the area on the south end of Suntree.

Public Works Director Henry Minneboo advised Mr. Kamm's staff went through a study phase and turned the majority of the study over to Public Works; the Engineering Section came up with some concepts that could be suitable for that location; and he will briefly explain the concepts. He stated Layout #1's basic alignment was relatively simplified; the first thing that came to their attention was the proximity of the existing right-of-way in relationship to the alignment of the road; they also maintained 150 feet of right-of-way throughout the entire west section of the Pineda extension; and that alignment blended in with the existing right-of-way on the east side of Wickham Road which is the Pineda Causeway. He stated the Pineda Causeway has about 200 feet of right-of-way and the westernmost portion has about 150 feet. He stated they modified #1 and developed Layout #2 to try and keep everything to the north; and explained a slide depicting North Windsor Estates on the west side, the car wash, Holy Trinity Church, and Venable Shopping Center. He stated they modified #2 and came up with Layout #2A, which addressed the setback requirements. He stated they came from 150 feet of right-of-way and tightened it down to 125 feet which would give some relief to the Church located on the southwest quadrant of the intersection and not be as damaging to that site; and on the east side they stayed within the right-of-way requirements of the Pineda Causeway. He stated they looked at Layout #3, modified some of the radiuses, and tried to deal with a more concerned alignment that would not have as much effect on some of the sites. Mr. Minneboo stated Layout #4 gets away from the plus intersection of 90 degrees and drops it to 80 degrees; they tried to carry that portion through the intersection; but some concerns included elimination of the car wash and taking a significant portion of the parking area for Holy Trinity Church. He stated they revised that and came up with Layout #4A, adjusted the inside radiuses and met all design requirements; and it allowed basically the same alignment, but reduced the amount of land the County would need from Holy Trinity Church to .18 acre. He stated the parcel west of the Holy Trinity Church is the Price property; and this concept would take the majority of his land. He stated they addressed Layout #5 which could not save the car wash, eliminated Holy Trinity School's baseball field, took a good portion of its parking lot, and got closer to its building; so staff did not think #5 was very good. He stated they produced Layout #6 to push away from Holy Trinity School so it would not have an adverse effect on that; but it would be close to the east side of the Venable Shopping Center located on the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Pineda and Wickham Road. Mr. Minneboo advised they have recently looked at Layout #7 which addresses what earlier design constraints were and pushed through not exactly a 90 degree angle at the intersection, but aligned itself and flattened out the curve a little more. He stated #7 would take about one-fourth of the shopping center, but will stay out of the wetlands and maintains 150 feet throughout. He stated they tried to look at numerous concepts to address all the issues, and are at the point where they would like to have direction from the Board. He stated staff is trying to hire ten engineering firms at one time because they have ten projects and are trying to build all ten at one time; and they tried different methods and believe this way would be the most suitable. He stated in the past, staggering projects were related to money issues; the County always had something under construction; and if they had projects under construction for a few years throughout the whole County, it would not have as much adverse impact on the community. He stated they are in the selection process and have to follow the Consultants Competitive Negotiation Act requirements; they have hired six firms and have three more to select for interviews; and upon completion, they will bring those firms to the Board and make their recommendations on a possible engineering firm for the Pineda extension project. He stated the first thing they have to do is a preliminary engineering study required for condemnations; and no matter what is done, they have to do a preliminary engineering study for the location.

Chairman Higgs advised of the revised procedure for addressing the Board on this issue, providing ten minutes for representatives of groups and three minutes for other speakers.

Dale Heaton, Pastor of Pineda Presbyterian Church, advised of past experiences with the County; and stated nobody wants their properties affected, but Commissioners have to rise to statesmanship and make decisions based on public interest alone; and the welfare of the entire community should be decisive in the vote, not political pressure and potential impact it may have on their ability to be re-elected. He stated Layout # 4A or 5 that goes south of the Church will hurt the fewest and benefit the most; Layout #1 or 2 which was dropped would have affected the Church in a marginal way; but Layout #2A goes right through the center of the 15 acres of the Church property and 28 feet from the main building. He stated that means about half of the 15 acres will become useless for their planned church expansion if the road went through their property. He stated they have only the first unit built and will have more buildings constructed as time goes on. Pastor Heaton stated Layout #1 would not have been a problem for the Church; they could have purchased property to the south or done something to make it a usable site; but it was a problem for Windsor Estates; Layout #2A would mean the church would have to relocate some distance from the present site at Wickham Road and Pineda and would have a deleterious effect upon the Church. He noted they have people from all over Melbourne and not just Viera and if they had to move a long ways away it would be hard on the Church. He stated the Episcopal School on the other hand would lose with Layout #4A less than 1/4 acre of their 40 acre site; the school has two other entrance roads potentially available; and although the cry has been raised about safety for student drivers, they could have up to three entrances and exits for that property and would not have to exit on the busy Pineda extension. He stated the car wash owner, who may or may not be affected, depending on which proposal the Board votes on, has ownership of property to the south of the present location; that means she could build another car wash without closing the business; and those businesses located in the Pineda Plaza would still have two access roads. He stated they believe 4A provides the least harm and the greatest good for the majority concerned; and a vote by the Board for 4A or 5 or any of the options to the south would be an act of statesmanship and overall in the best service of the entire public interest for all who are involved.

Jim Fallace, Attorney representing Holy Trinity Academy, expressed appreciation for the Board's careful consideration and staff's assistance to prevent misunderstandings and misinformation about this difficult subject. He stated Holy Trinity Academy is projected to open during the normal school year and have an initial enrollment of 230 students for grades 7 through 10; by 2003 the projection is over 400 students with grades 7 through 12; and presented a handout identifying the property and the Academy's position on the issues. He stated Mr. Menzel can provide answers to questions the Board may have of the site plan and proposed layout, and identify why Layout #4A has a detrimental impact on the proposed layout of Holy Trinity. He stated Mr. Menzel, Catherine Ford and other members of the Academy should be commended on trying to layout in a functional mode the campus for the Academy with the primary concern being safety; and that is why the buildings are set back from Pineda Causeway. He stated the main entrance which the Board approved for the Academy was to front on the Pineda Causeway with less volume and less lanes of traffic than what is being proposed today; and explained a photo of the site identifying the campus under construction and where Layout #4A would take a portion of the property and become an issue with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services. He stated when the project started, they worked closely with the County and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services; since part of the property is scrub habitat, they were required to offsite mitigate, and infused another $180,000 for 60 acres of property which has been deeded to Brevard County; and they committed in their permitting process with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services to restore that scrub habitat right in the path of Layout #4A. Mr. Fallace stated the entrance was planned for safety without a deceleration lane, but with consideration for traffic to slow down; Layout #4A creates a triangle of three intersections, with one that does not have a stop light in front of the Academy; students will be driving and be bussed in from all over the County; and 350 individuals representing families of the Academy members signed a petition objecting to 4A and asking the Board not to proceed with it, but proceed with Layout #2 which has become 2A. He stated the Academy is against Layout #4A; and Layout #2A is not the best but was the proposal contemplated on March 7, 1999 when the plat for Windsor Estates was approved by the Board. He stated Commissioner Higgs questioned Mr. Evans about the entrance for Windsor Estates; during that exchange, Mr. Evans and every Board member made it clear that the entrance onto Wickham Road was temporary; and the staff noted that the logical point for the extension of Pineda Causeway was at its point of terminus at Wickham Road, which has not changed today. Mr. Fallace advised the logic is to reduce the cost; Layout #4A was addressed at the MPO meeting as being the most expensive proposal; funds have not been identified to connect to I-95; discussion at the MPO meeting was to construct a fly-over; and in the last two weeks he has read over 30 news articles concerning the Board's consideration in 1989 and again in 1995. He stated Commissioner Scarborough made interesting points that were quoted in the newspaper, one being the estimate to connect to I-95 at that time in 1995 was $30 million and today it is $11 to $12 million with $6.5 million being for the realignment under Layout #4A. He stated he is mystified where the money is going and how a $30 million estimate in 1995 is now a $6 million estimate. He stated Layout #4A does not meet their safe engineering requirements; Mr. Minneboo does an outstanding job; with the Wickham Road widening project, he wants a 90? intersection; and he made it clear 4A is not a 90? intersection. He requested Mr. Menzel identify why taking a quarter of an acre off the site presents insurmountable problems for the Holy Trinity Academy.

Dave Menzel with MAI Engineers, stated he is familiar with the project and has been with it from the day it started to find sites all the way through to where they are now which is basically complete; and next week they will start putting sod on the ballfield. He stated it is a core habitat area; the mitigation rates were very high; the cost was somewhat double what it is now; and they went back, and with the help of their consultant, discussed using the perimeter areas of the site which surround the ballfield and the rectangular piece at the entrance. He stated the handout and overhead slide show every piece of the property that is available on the site has been used for something; the primary core habitat restoration areas are at the entrance and around the ballfield; and by using those areas and the areas in the back, which is the small triangle on the west side of the football field, they were able to change the mitigation rate from 4 to 2 which cut the cost in half. He stated if the County changes those mitigation areas, their agreement with the State will change the rates and cause more mitigation than anticipated; the three wetlands are preserved 100%; if the road cuts through the site, it is going to impact one wetland and the contouring of the site so that the water would flow in and nourish that wetland; consequently, there will have to be some modifications made to that whole area on the west side of the property to compensate for that.

Doris Ahearn, representing Windsor Estates Homeowners Association, asked residents, officers and directors of the Association to rise; stated Windsor Estates is a residential community on the west side of Wickham Road at the terminus with Pineda Causeway; at buildout it will consist of 211 homes; presently there are 25 lots remaining to be sold; and due to their location, they have an interest in the selection of the Pineda alignment. She stated there is one entrance to Windsor Estates from Wickham Road; every time they leave or return to their homes they will have to navigate their way through whatever intersection is constructed; therefore, safety has been and will remain their primary concern. She stated the intersection constructed must provide a safe route for all who travel through it; they recognize their responsibility to view the options for the intersection from a broad perspective; they questioned staff and considered their responses in a larger context than restricting to their own interests; and at present they have not been provided with a definitive explanation of Windsor's access to Wickham Road under Layout #2A. Ms. Ahearn stated the members of Windsor's Ad Hoc Committee and Advisory Group have shared information provided to them with all residents; until tonight they were not provided Layout #7; and as a community they adopted the position to oppose Layout #2 and any variation, including 2A, based on the 5% elevation requirement which they were advised is at the end of acceptable State standards, the impact on their access to Wickham Road, and the extreme impact on the Pineda Presbyterian Church. She stated they recognize an offset intersection may provide a short-term solution of the alignment; however, they have reservations about it being a viable long-term solution; and if it is approved, it should not be a permanent solution because future Commissioners will face the need to re-engineer the offset intersection with more limits and at more expense than today. Ms. Ahearn stated, based on the design concepts provided to them, the degree of impact on stakeholders, and the possibilities available for the relocation or compensation for those stakeholders most severely affected, the best long-term solution for the alignment is Layout #4A; therefore, it is endorsed by Windsor Estates Homeowners Association. She requested clarification of the proposed engineering studies; and inquired if the result will be a single layout or variation of the layouts, if there will be a single determination made as to Windsor's access under Layout #2A, and if so, what will that determination be based on, and will their input be solicited. She stated they expect the layout ultimately selected to provide a permanent alignment of Wickham Road and Pineda Extension, a clear detailed presentation of how safe access to their homes will be provided with Layout #2A, and an explanation of the easterly traffic flow onto Pineda from Wickham Road together with an explanation of traffic flow from Windsor onto Wickham Road and Pineda relative to Layout #4A. She stated they expect the nature of Windsor Estates as a gated community with private roads and signalized entry to be preserved; they welcome the opportunity to continue working with the County; and they ask the Board to remain aware that the decision will affect every resident, every day, and every time they leave home and return.

Bill Hall advised the students of the Academy will be there part of a day and part of a week; the over 200 homes in Windsor Estates will be there all day every day on a long-term basis; and even if there is no extension, they would still have to deal with Pineda Causeway/Wickham Road because the traffic is going to be there and the potential six-laning of Wickham Road is going to be there. He stated the Academy has alternatives to its entrance; it has Business Center Boulevard that would make a main entrance; so to dump onto Pineda Causeway is a choice by the Academy. He stated the 350 signatures are from individuals who have temporary interest in the situation compared to the permanent homeowners of Windsor Estates; a quarter of an acre in Layout #4A is about the size of an average home lot; there are a number of schools throughout the County that are much closer to the roads, including Sabal Elementary and Palm Bay High School; so that quarter-acre should not be that much of a concern. He thanked the Board for giving them the opportunity to provide input; asked the Board not to delay or postpone the decision or defer to an offset so a future Board would face tougher decisions; and requested support of Layout #4A.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there were comments they did not see Layout #7; the comments seem to be for or against Layouts #2 and #4; and inquired if there are extra copies of Layout #7 to share with the audience. Mr. Minneboo advised a lot of packages were developed and is available to the public in the back of the room.

Wendy Arteaga, owner of Tropical Splash Car Wash, requested everybody who supports the Car Wash to stand; and presented a petition with 1,100 signatures from the general public asking the Board not to take property away from Tropical Splash Car Wash or Holy Trinity Academy in order to construct the Pineda Extension. She stated in 1995, when Windsor Estates was approved, the Board made every attempt to have foresight and make a plan; she understands some homeowners were not informed; she also understands that Pineda Presbyterian Church had initially expressed an interest or considered the feasibility of moving or relocating, but discussions with the Board indicated it was not feasible or palatable, so the County looked east of Wickham Road; and requested they be given the same consideration as given to those west of Wickham Road. She stated she is only one individual but have over 1,000 signatures of concerned citizens; the most obvious solution is to look at an offset intersection; and if appropriately designed, it would be a definite alternative not a temporary solution. Ms. Arteaga stated the most difficult traffic to handle in an offset intersection is any turn lane volume; the North Wickham Road Traffic Study indicates extending the Pineda to I-95 will not address the level of concurrency problems on Wickham Road; and Wickham Road will need to be widened or an additional north/south parallel road needs to be constructed. She stated Layout #4A creates three intersections rather than one; there will be synchronization issues with the current Pineda/Wickham and new Pineda/Wickham intersections; and it will be more difficult to handle because of the east/west traffic going through the new intersection than a simple offset where currently Pineda traffic goes into Wickham Road and heads south with a continuous right green light. She stated it will not affect any property owners and will save the County $6.1 million; and they are owed a good attempt at that, and proof it cannot be done, before looking to take people's properties. Ms. Arteaga advised it was suggested that she can move to the southern portion of the property, but that would require mitigation offsite at 20-to-1 because of wetlands on the property, which the County would have to go through with Layout #4A. She stated another concern is her time and investment; she just started the business with a huge investment in time, personal energy, and finances; a lot of attention is required to get a business of that nature off the ground and keep it that way in its early stages; and now she is being asked to continue doing that while finding another site and building another business which is not a simple task. She stated she cannot anticipate all the needs, demands and problems that may arise; and it will be an incredible hardship, especially since the County has other options to consider.

Jim Venable, representing Pineda Plaza, advised he was not made aware of some of the concepts until this weekend; Layout #6 uses a portion of his property, which he was not aware of; and Layout #7 practically destroys the integrity of the Plaza. He appealed to the Board, that if it needs to use a portion of the Plaza property, it consider purchasing all of it. He stated he has been an advocate of the Pineda Extension for a long time; it is something that needs to be done; and he hopes it will be done quickly. He stated it has always been known that the Causeway would be extended from its present terminus and join with I-95 in a southwesterly direction; Windsor Estates residents should have known that; and inquired if anyone representing Brevard County, the developer, or realtor who sold the property tells buyers there would never be an extension to the west from the present terminus of Pineda Causeway.

Jeffrey Arent, new President of Waterford Place Homeowners Association, advised after two weeks in office, he has to speak on a situation that may come up in the future and not the issue being discussed this evening, and that is the connection of St. Andrews Boulevard to the Pineda Extension. He stated based on a poll taken in the community, 87% oppose the connection; they purchased in that community to be away from major intersections; St. Andrews Boulevard is a two-lane road with 30 mph speed limit and numerous bus stops; and if it is connected to a main artery to I-95, safety will be a major concern of the residents because people will not follow the speed limit to get to I-95 and to work and the road would have to be widened to four lanes and 45 mph. He stated they are investigating the situation and will get opinions from Suntree and other communities in the area, and bring the information to the Board to try and preserve what is there now which is a safe, quiet environment. Mr. Arent stated widening Wickham Road would probably alleviate a lot of concerns people have of the possible connection to St. Andrews Boulevard and using it as a main road because they can use Wickham Road instead; most businesses and items of interest are on Wickham Road; and I-95 is not always the best advantage. He stated they have other concerns and issues, but it is far in the future; and he will speak with Suntree Masters about it and get its opinion and other information about the community; and requested the Board work with the Homeowners Association on this issue.

Greg Eisenmenger advised he uses the Pineda Causeway to Wickham Road on a daily basis; he has a historical perspective on the issue and followed the plans throughout the years; and there is a certain continuity of decision that has existed on the issue and commitments made to different property owners and planners; but unfortunately, the groups that lose are those who have been on notice for over ten years that the plan was the proposed Layout #2A. He stated the homeowners in Windsor Estates were notified at the time they proposed their private entrance that it would be a temporary situation and the Pineda Extension would be going through there; the Church was on notice that its future plans for expansion on the back portion of the property were going to be at risk, so they chose to plan accordingly; and now they are asking the Board to rescue them from the choices they made. He stated Holy Trinity participated in the situation and was consistently placed on notice that its planning would not be impacted in the future; the members made their decisions based on the commitment of ten years on a plan of 2A; and they made wetlands mitigation with those things in mind. He stated the quarter acre is not the issue; safety is the issue; and Layout #4A definitely places every student at risk and every extracurricular activity that extends beyond school hours and on weekends will be at risk because of the traffic that will flow past the Academy. Mr. Eisenmenger stated he saw Layout #7 for the first time tonight; it addresses buffer areas which are necessary; the impact on Pineda Plaza is significant; and he echoes the owner of the Plaza, that if the Board is going to approve #7, it take the whole plaza and straighten out the curve.

Buck Crowley, President of Waterford Point Homeowners Association, advised they are concerned about St. Andrews Boulevard in the small end towards Sawgrass and the traffic impact on their community; there has been a fatality in the Pinehurst area already; and there is a bottleneck at St. Andrews Boulevard and Pinehurst every school morning at 8:30 a.m. He stated the people do not continue down St. Andrews Boulevard because it is a mile and a quarter out of their way; they drive in front of the school; and for the most part there are no buses to take the children and grandchildren to school, so they are walking and bicycling on the streets. He stated they are extremely concerned about the issue; and know the Board will do the right thing and stop the St. Andrews Boulevard connection.

W. R. Thomas advised he can help the Board avoid the most disruption and accomplish its objective with the least expense; there are options that have not been looked at; and he wants to present those to the Board. He stated the major problem is to ease evacuation from the coast and get people out in case of disaster; the best route is to come across the Pineda Causeway to U.S. 1; there is a cloverleaf to get people to U.S. 1; and since it is a federal highway, the federal government may give grants to widen it. He stated traffic would go north on U.S. 1 to Suntree Boulevard; Suntree Boulevard can be widened and a modified cloverleaf constructed at Wickham Road that will ease traffic getting on Wickham Road; and Wickham Road would be widened to I-95, for a complete evacuation route. Mr. Thomas stated in addition, traffic going north on U.S. 1 will come to Viera Boulevard; the right-of-way has already been designated and part of the roadway built; and a modified cloverleaf there will take traffic off U.S. 1 through Viera and onto the proposed intersection cloverleaf with I-95. He stated there would not be condemnation problems, and disruptions with businesses, people, and housing areas. He stated if the Board wants to solve the problem of too many people in the area, he would suggest a moratorium on building; and noted he would be willing to discuss the details of his proposals with anyone.

Wayne Stinnett advised he has followed the process of the Pineda Causeway since its inception; his concern as Manager of Tropical Splash Car Wash is he does not want to lose his job; several things were brought up concerning an offset intersection and its comparison to other offset intersections in Melbourne and Palm Bay; and those intersections are not offset, but two separate roadways intersecting Wickham Road and Minton Road that are too close together. He stated an offset intersection at Pineda and Wickham Road would be the best situation; and it would not take any land away and would not cause hardships for homeowners or people going to and from the school. Mr. Stinnett advised in 1996, the original plan was to go through the existing intersection with an S-curve through the temporary entrance to Windsor Estates; that proposal is still on the books and should be the most logical proposal or the offset intersection; and if an offset intersection is designed right with a sweeping right-hand curve after a left turn onto Wickham Road with a merge lane, it would not cause traffic tie ups. He stated an offset intersection would tie up traffic less than Layout #4A; #4A would have two intersections close together line Palm Bay Road and Emerson Road; and if the offset intersection is designed properly, it could function perfectly for the next 20 to 30 years, and eliminate traffic tie-ups on Wickham Road. He stated in 1996, when the last proposal was in effect of making an S-turn after the intersection, his boss Wendy Arteaga was applying for a permit; at that time no mention was made to the possibility or idea of a realignment going through her property; she went through a lot of effort for a year and a half to two years developing plans on where, when, and how to put the business together; and she came up with the best possible scenario. Mr. Stinnett stated the offset intersection is the most logical choice; second would be Layout #2A; the deeds for Windsor Estates homeowners include 2 or 2A as the proposition the County was going with; and buyers were supposed to be told by the realtors about it. He stated the developer of Windsor Estates should have told the people that it is a subdivision at the end of a highway that crosses the intercoastal waterway.

Catherine Ford, Head Master at Holy Trinity Episcopal Academy, stated she came across the Pineda Causeway, saw the metal roofs, and was affirmed in knowing they were going to open the Academy in the Fall of 2000 as planned. She stated it is a dream and vision of many members of the community; and it is not about a quarter of an acre, but about the quality of life at the Academy and the dream they put together for the children of Brevard County. She stated they carefully developed a site plan for the 40-acre parcel and utilized every inch of the property either as an outdoor lab, ballfield, or classroom; and there is no extra space. She stated they partnered with Brevard County from the beginning, and after almost a year of research, they decided to go forward and mitigate the scrubjays on the property; they participated in the EEL's program, purchased and dedicated 60 acres and paid a $60,000 assessment so the scrubjays could be perpetuated on the site; and that is no small issue to them. Ms. Ford advised the site plan was approved by the County planners; they worked with staff in Land Development to make everything fit on the parcel; Bruce Moia led a wonderful team; and it was finally permitted in July so they could clear the land. She stated she worked with Greg Lugar in economic development on a bond issue so they could proceed and open the campus in 2000; on August 23, 1999, the Board approved the bond issue and First Union Bank backed them along with the backing of the County's industrial development act; and they were awarded $5.5 million on August 6 and went forward with the Building Department to do everything they needed to do to present the community with a marvelous comprehensive junior and senior high school program from grades 7 to 12. She stated prior to proceeding with every step, they asked questions if the Pineda extension would hurt them; and they were told no.

Melissa Hoagland advised she enjoys the environmental attributes of the current St. Andrews Boulevard; and as a parent of four small children who depend on St. Andrews Boulevard as a safe passageway to school, she wants to make her voice heard even though the connection to the proposed Pineda Extension is not the main focus of tonight's business. She stated they heard many concerns from Windsor Estates residents about the impact the road will have on them; St. Andrews Boulevard connection to the Pineda Extension will have a similar impact on Suntree; and it will not be that far in the future from what she heard tonight, so her children will still be in elementary school. Ms. Hoagland stated she is strongly opposed to any portion of a plan for the Pineda Extension that would include a connection of St. Andrews Boulevard at its western end; Chris Sinclair of the Renaissance Planning Group indicated the projected increase in traffic related to development, and projected a connection of St. Andrews Boulevard with the Pineda Extension; he said when Sawgrass was completed, there would be up to 3,000 additional trips a day on St. Andrews Boulevard; and with a connection to the Pineda Extension, it could be as high as 12,000 additional trips. She requested the Board consider the effects it will have on the current pleasant curving roadway, the visible enjoyable wildlife, and the safety of the primary route of travel to and from school. She stated it will transfer a residential street in a long established existing community into a high-traffic thoroughfare. Ms. Hoagland stated staff said one of the two advantages of the St. Andrews Boulevard connection to the Extension is that it will decrease traffic on North Wickham Road; and it will decrease traffic by diverting it through Suntree, a residential community, rather than keeping it on the roadway where it needs to be. She stated variations suggested include one-way traffic only exiting Suntree from the rear with the reasoning that the traffic volume would not greatly increase, but people would still have access to I-95; that would greatly increase traffic volume over what it is now; and it does not speak to the concern of the residents about the speed of cars going down that road using it as an alternate route. She stated communities are comprised of many individuals each of whom has goals and priorities; there are a lot of different goals in their community; some of those goals include minimizing access time to I-95; and that was mentioned tonight as a stated advantage to connect St. Andrews Boulevard to the Pineda Extension. She stated another goal is preserving as much of the wildlife as possible that those who live in Suntree enjoy; and the third goal is safety.

Gordon Nelson advised he sent a letter to each Commissioner and will not repeat it except to say when he attended the public meeting on February 21, 2000, he came away convinced that there were very few beneficiaries of the Pineda Extension. He stated the County's consultant claimed the extension addresses needs for 10 to 20 years, yet the data show that the north/south traffic will be 50% higher than east/west traffic; and their solution is to widen Wickham Road to six lanes. He stated the County continues to approve subdivisions with hundreds of homes and single entrances dropping traffic only on Wickham Road; that is a safety hazard; opportunities for other north/south roads west of Wickham Road are being eliminated; and when the I-95, Lake Washington, Wickham Road triangle is built out with 10,000 homes and hundreds of new businesses, there is going to be gridlock. He stated the Pineda Extension is pitting church against church and businesses against families; the long-term issue is where and how many interchanges will be permitted in the seven and a half miles on I-95 between Eau Gallie and Wickham Road; the prime argument for the extension is hurricane evacuation from the beaches; but in Class I and II hurricanes, beach dwellers come to visit friends landside; and in another Floyd-type hurricane, North Melbourne residents north of Parkway will flood the Wickham/Pineda interchange. Mr. Nelson advised Layout #2A goes through the center of the 14-year old 225 member Pineda Presbyterian Church property, through the children's playground and its parking lot; it will be 28 feet from the main sanctuary and closer to the Christian education building; and while the Church is not bull-nosed, the site will not be usable with no room for growth and no parking. He stated Pineda Presbyterian Church lacks Trinity's resources; if the Church is forced to move, it may not survive; the Board has difficult choices to make; and he hopes it will step back and solve North Melbourne's long-term traffic problems, otherwise it will have two bad choices of which #2A is clearly the worst.

Bill McCord, professional planner, advised there are some benefits to a few of the alignments; and he provided a letter to Commissioner Carlson, which he hopes will be entered into the record identifying some potential solutions from his point of view. He stated the first alignment with a 35 mph design curve extending west, north, and northwest of the Church would be the best alternative; it will afford an opportunity to build a community, a central retail and cultural community center at that intersection; they do not need a 45 mph design speed through that major intersection because it would be too dangerous; and most impacts of Layout #4 would disrupt wetlands, which have been meticulously preserved by the Holy Trinity site. He stated the alignment that extends the Pineda west from the existing intersection and takes a reverse curve to follow the existing right-of-way south of the intersection is the best alternative. Mr. McCord advised he wrote a letter to the newspaper on connecting St. Andrews Boulevard; that is an important aspect for community transportation design; and everybody cannot live on a cul de sac or it will load all the trips on Wickham Road. He stated all the trips in Suntree cannot be loaded onto Wickham Road as well as other trips that are background trips being loaded onto Wickham Road from other locations; there has to be some level of connectivity; and unfortunately, the past decisions by the Board as well as others destroyed that connectivity. He stated what is going to happen is a massive gridlock; and implored the Board to look at alternatives, particularly those with the least impact. He stated the first alignment takes some of the Church's property but no homes or businesses; the Church in most cases could be permitted to build that close to the road; or the County could arrange a land swap to acquire property to the south and incorporate the Church expansion on that property and provide retention basins. He stated the alignments do not identify where retention basins are going to be, so it will require additional property to accommodate those retention systems; and the alignment of the intersection for Windsor Estates can be moved farther south southwest of the Church and connect with the Pineda Extension and not directly impact Wickham Road.

Bill Joy advised he drives on Wickham Road daily and encouraged the Board to make a great choice for Brevard County, which must be a plus intersection option. He inquired why an option to swing the Pineda Extension southeast of the railroad and move the railroad crossing down there was not considered. He stated a plus intersection will greatly improve the traffic flow; and the Pineda east/west traffic will not become additional north/south traffic for Wickham Road as in a dog leg or offset; it will not add to congestion on Wickham Road; and it will benefit the majority of the residents. Mr. Joy stated only a small minority will benefit from an offset intersection; looking at the student body of the school, church members, and shoppers in the Plaza amounts to about 1,000 to 1,500 segments a day; if that is doubled for error purposes, it is 3,000 segments a day; and projections for the year 2020 traffic studies indicate there will be 64,000 trip segments in an area between the Pineda and the Pineda extension if the County offsets it. He stated the majority of people who create the traffic are not represented here tonight; the offset option is not a very good option for the County; the Board has an obligation to make a choice that is in the best interest of all of Brevard County; and any option which creates a plus or almost plus intersection is better for the majority of the residents of Brevard County.

Sans Lassiter, traffic engineer, advised he watched the area grow and studied it a lot; he recommended the Board not do an offset intersection as it has paid a lot of money over the years to correct those; and recommended it consider a plus intersection keeping the design speed as high as possible to maximize the opportunity to interchange with I-95. He stated it is an important improvement in the long-term of the County; the road has been studied since the mid 1980's; and it will be a great thing for the future even though it is not the sole answer. Mr. Lassiter stated a previous speaker talked about connectivity between projects; that is a positive

thing; the Board would want to minimize through traffic through neighborhoods, but at the same time provide alternative access; and it is a tradeoff, but one he would recommend to preserve capacity for the future.

Chairman Higgs thanked all the audience for their comments, professionalism, and patience.

The meeting recessed at 7:10 p.m., and reconvened at 7:23 p.m.

Dorothy Marshall, representing Pineda Presbyterian Church, advised she has talked to Commissioners Higgs and Carlson and hopes the Board does not choose Layout #2A which would erase Pineda Church. She stated 14 years ago when they first built out there, there was no Windsor Estates, just a bunch of trees and a two-lane road; it has been said they were aware that the Causeway would some day go through their property, and that is true; but there was an offer to make the road, which is now Windsor Estates driveway, the Pineda Extension; and the Church gave the County 25 feet of its property so it could be the road for the extension. She stated many things have happened in the past ten years and now it is not viable; the Board cannot go back, but it can look forward and consider what is best for the whole community; there should be an access to I-95 and a causeway; and if the County takes the Church's property, it cannot be part of it and has to be all, but it would dissolve the Church. She stated the name of the Church is Pineda Presbyterian; and they want to remain the Pineda Presbyterian Church on the corner of Pineda Causeway.

Mr. Minneboo advised this has been a long process; unfortunately, on the technical side staff has been thrown a curve ball; and many people are concerned about the area that is significantly west of the extension. He stated they understand the significance of that and will address that later, as they do not want to mix the two projects together, because they need to give those people in Suntree, Waterford, and Sawgrass, etc. an opportunity to deal with their issues specifically. He noted as staff progresses with the project, they will meet with the people and address their concerns and show them the pluses and minuses of that connection.

Commissioner Scarborough requested Mr. Minneboo advise the Board of the advantages and disadvantages of Layout #7. Mr. Minneboo advised Layout #7 starts at the western portion about 800 feet west of Wickham Road and goes in an easterly direction across and intersects with Wickham Road; it then aligns out of a wetland issue that may be of concern later in the design; then it flattens out, but takes about a quarter of an acre of the shopping center. He stated as Mr. Venable pointed out, the County may end up with the entire shopping center, but it would also give the County a triangular swath of land; and if a portion of Pineda Causeway is vacated, it will have a fairly valuable piece of property it will not need and would have an opportunity to sell. Mr. Minneboo advised as with all the concepts, there are a lot of advantages and disadvantages; what makes #7 attractive is the County could ultimately end up with a tremendous piece of property; and although property on Wickham Road is not as valuable as property on SR 520 on Merritt Island which sells for $1.5 million an acre, it is progressing in an upward direction. He stated it would also have park potential and retention possibilities. Mr. Minneboo advised on the negative side, as in all cases, it will put a person out of business, but the Holy Trinity Academy, car wash, Presbyterian Church, and Windsor Estates will not be affected. Commissioner Scarborough stated Layout #4A shows configuration but not how the roads will connect; and inquired what would the vacating do to the shopping center; with Mr. Minneboo responding they did not deal with geometrics of any intersections because they are all conceptual. Commissioner Scarborough inquired about a T-intersection; with Mr. Minneboo responding it would be a T-type intersection so it would not lose that leg of the intersection, and keep the transition open at all times, and maybe continue a single-lane road that would go up and make a right turn on red, so motorists would not have to go all the way down then make a transition. Commissioner Scarborough stated that would be with Layout #4A but not with 7.

Mr. Kamm advised with Layout #4A, they would not want traffic coming south on Wickham Road wanting to go east; there would be a tendency, if it is not designed properly, for people to make use of the old Pineda as a cut through; and that would make the operations of the intersections very difficult and put a lot of traffic by the railroad track. He stated staff is interested in designing the intersection of old Pineda and Wickham Road in a way that would allow some movements and disallow others; and it would require some very high-level engineering.

Commissioner Carlson stated the question came up if the County is creating an offset with the utilization of Layout #4A and how would it blend two lighted intersections together so they would work without creating a major problem; and inquired how would that be accomplished; with Mr. Minneboo responding with one signal controller they could operate the two legs of the intersection extremely efficiently. Commissioner Carlson inquired if that would be using #4A; with Mr. Minneboo responding no matter what layout is used, one controller to operate two intersections can accomplish a lot and develop the proper progression. Commissioner Carlson stated a technical study on that is warranted.

Mr. Kamm stated not all movements may be possible at all times; there could be restrictions on the movements with a design that will operate safely and effectively; that level of detail is not shown at this time; but it will be part of the preliminary engineering study. He stated just because it is not shown does not mean staff is not aware of the difficulties; and some engineering decisions will need to be made to get it to operate properly.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Layout #7 will be considered for technical review; with Mr. Kamm responding Layout #7 talks about vacating old Pineda completely so it would not be on the east side; they would still have to deal with the Windsor Estates access under #7; but in terms of the east side of Wickham, they would not have an issue. Mr. Minneboo stated staff could make it part of the technical engineering review if the Board desires. Commissioner Carlson stated Mr. Fallace brought up the issue of the cost of the I-95 interchange being $30 million in the 1980's, and $6.5 million now; and requested clarification. Mr. Kamm advised his assumption is that the $30 million cost estimate refers to what FDOT proposed in 1988 and 1989 which included a bridge over the railroad, an interchange at Wickham Road, limited access expressway the whole way to I-95, and the interchange at I-95; given what the prices were ten years ago, it sounds about right for that type of expressway facility; but that is not what staff is proposing; and it has never been a serious proposal on the part of the County to implement that type of facility. Commissioner Carlson stated so it was not just the I-95 interchange; with Mr. Kamm responding no, it was the whole freeway and that is why the elected officials at that time deemed the project to be more than what was needed and too expensive. Commissioner Carlson stated Doris Ahearn had questions regarding Windsor Estates access road; and requested staff describe what occurred when the platting occurred and what portion of the access road had conditions on it. Mr. Kamm advised it is his understanding, in looking at the record, and as included in the package that Holy Trinity submitted, it shows that the Board clearly indicated at the time of subdivision plat approval that the entrance to Windsor Estates should be regarded as a temporary location. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the information was disclosed on a deed to the residents; with Mr. Kamm responding he does not know what happened after that point. Mr. Minneboo stated that is not a deed restriction and is generally not shown on a deed. Commissioner Carlson inquired how is that normally disclosed; with Mr. Minneboo responding through the sales process. Commissioner Carlson inquired if staff could clarify what criteria will be used as a basis for any decision after the engineering study is done; with Mr. Minneboo responding staff would like to get some direction from the Board so they can move forward with the preliminary engineering study that needs to be done in the condemnation phase of the project. Commissioner Carlson requested Mr. Minneboo elaborate on the condemnation process and what requirements are needed in order to condemn property; with Mr. Minneboo responding on the engineering side, they review plans at 30, 60, 90 and 100% completion; they found out in court that after 60% has been approved, they can move forward with condemnation proceedings. Commissioner Carlson inquired if mitigation requirements applied due to environmental regulatory issues is a road block in terms of condemnation; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding if a project is going through environmentally sensitive property, be it condemned or otherwise, it will have to obtain a permit; the permitting agency will have control whether the project can be built or not; so the answer is maybe the County has to do its own mitigation if it ends up condemning that type of property. Commissioner Carlson stated she was referring to property that had already been mitigated such as at the Holy Trinity site; with Mr. Knox responding he is not sure that would make any difference. Commissioner Carlson stated Holy Trinity mitigated and spent $60,000 for the process and 60 acres; and inquired if they would be compensated by the County if their property goes through condemnation proceedings; with Mr. Knox responding if the County condemns Holy Trinity's property, it will pay for the value of that property and any damages it may cause to the remaining property. He stated if Holy Trinity did mitigation as part of its permitting process, the County would not have to pay for that; but that is not going to exclude the County from having to do the same thing. Commissioner Carlson stated there was a question about the Viera interchange; and inquired if it was denied.

Mr. Kamm advised he understands that the Viera interchange is on hold; the Federal Highway Administration substantially changed its requirements for granting interchanges in about 1990; a new set of stringent criteria came into effect; the Viera interchange is under that new set of criteria; and the Pineda interchange was granted under the old criteria. He stated the Federal Highway Administration will no longer grant approval for an interchange based on projected demand primarily by developers on what the demand may be 20 years from now; and it wants actual proof on the ground now that there is a congestion problem that the interchange would improve. He noted there may have been too many cases where private entities said there will be terrible congestion and they needed an interchange but the development never pans out as anticipated and the interchange was not necessary; so the bar was raised higher in 1990 and The Viera Company is under that bar because it has not reached the development threshold yet where Fiske or Wickham interchanges are at unacceptable levels. He stated until Fiske and Wickham interchanges reach those thresholds, the Viera interchange will be on hold.

Commissioner Carlson stated she received numerous letters, emails, petitions, etc.; most of them have been put into the record; two things that may not have been put into the record are one letter signed by Bill McCord, Assistant Director of Planning and Zoning for the City of Melbourne that included his perspective which he shared with the audience today, and a letter from the South Beach Coalition which represents Satellite Beach, Indian Harbour Beach, Indialantic, and Melbourne Beach, basically supporting the extension of the Pineda Causeway west with an I-95 interchange and an aligned intersection at Wickham Road.

Commissioner Voltz advised when she was Chairman of the Southwest Brevard Transportation Study Committee, they had an offset intersection they were desperately trying to mitigate; there was nothing but major problems; she understands Palm Bay Road, Emerson Road and Minton Road is an offset intersection, as well as Nasa, Ellis and Wickham Road; and inquired if there is a difference. Mr. Minneboo advised those are offset intersections, but there are new buzz words for those particular designs; Palm Bay, Emerson and Minton is basically an offset, but it is wider than the one at Nasa, Ellis and Wickham Road; and those geometrics have to be taken into consideration. He stated with the subject intersection, the spread differential is 800 feet between the center of the Pineda Causeway and the center of the now Grand Haven Road; so there is some differences. Commissioner Voltz inquired how many feet are between Palm Bay and Emerson; with Mr. Minneboo responding more than 800 feet. Mr. Minneboo stated one of the problems in Palm Bay is that traffic is very distinct; what transpires in the morning for two hours comes back in the afternoon; but they are going to add another lane there. Commissioner Voltz inquired when; with Mr. Kamm responding it is in design right now. Commissioner Voltz stated she supports going directly across the current Pineda such as in Layout #2A, but not an offset intersection. She stated Mr. Minneboo mentioned the land south of the Church and incorporating that or offsetting the Windsor Estates Drive to come on the north side of the 7-11 Store. Mr. Minneboo stated there is some potential to acquire the parcels available south of the Church that are contiguous to Wickham Road; and there is a five-acre parcel for sale there; and the Board can consider vacating the present portion of the Pineda, so if that is the alignment selected, that could be a possibility. He stated he talked to the owner of the parcel north of the 7-11 Store; the land is presently under contract, but they would be willing to discuss it with the County for a road for Windsor Estates. Commissioner Voltz stated even if the road is moved to the south, it would still involve two intersections and more traffic tie ups which a T-intersection would alleviate. Mr. Minneboo noted it would eliminate what is called Grand Haven Road. Commissioner Voltz stated Layout #4A wipes out the car wash, but the owner has an opportunity to go to the south and a possibility of working with the County to remain open and do that at the same time. Mr. Minneboo stated there are different scenarios that can be done on a relatively new business such as the car wash; there are leasing arrangements while allowing the County to do the design work; and they could be there two or three years before the road is ready for implementation. Commissioner Voltz stated Layouts #2A and #4A have possibilities with a lot of reworking of land issues; she has a problem with what Mr. Knox said about the mitigation because Holy Trinity spent money to mitigate when it would not have had to mitigate if it knew the County would end up buying their land and mitigating it; and inquired why would the County not have to pay Holy Trinity back the cost of its mitigation; with Mr. Knox responding that is a permitting issue. Mr. Knox advised if the County went to the permitting agency and said it wants to take advantage of the fact that Holy Trinity mitigated and paid $60,000, and the permitting agency accepts that, then Holy Trinity would probably have a claim to be paid back for the portion that is attributable to the project; however, if the permitting agency said it does not care what Holy Trinity did, it is the County's project and it wants the County to mitigate its property, there is no benefit. Commissioner Voltz stated Holy Trinity would not have had to pay a portion of the mitigation costs if it had known the County was going to come through and have to mitigate. Mr. Knox stated if the County ends up condemning that property, it may be something Holy Trinity claims, but whether or not it gets paid, nobody knows. Commissioner Voltz stated whether it is legal or not, the County has a moral responsibility to cover some of those costs. She stated she hopes the Board does not end up doing what was done in the south end of the County where it was fine to affect the other neighborhood but not theirs and the County ended up doing nothing; it spent $300,000 on a study that did absolutely nothing because the elected officials were not willing to say it is going to affect them but for the traffic and betterment of the community it is what has to be done. Chairman Higgs stated there were some elected officials who were ready to go forward. Commissioner Voltz stated she hopes the Board does something; and she can support 2A, 4A and 7 to be reviewed in a study. Mr. Minneboo stated preliminary engineering study has to be done no matter what the Board does tonight; what people will ask is how much will that be; it will be between $75,000 and $100,000; and it will be extremely thorough and deal with all the socio-economic parts, wetlands, costs, etc. Commissioner Voltz stated the Church purchased property behind it, and Mr. Minneboo mentioned something about it keeping that and the County giving it access to that as well as the land on the south end of the property to work something out; with Mr. Minneboo responding when they go through negotiations, they try to work with everybody to make it as easy a transition as possible; and whatever is the most suitable alignment, they will do everything possible to make it a smooth transition for all the people involved. Commissioner Voltz stated she does not want to see a church close, a school affected, and a community affected, so staff should do whatever is necessary to mitigate that with the alignments.

Chairman Higgs stated there seems to be a lack of clarity what the Pineda Extension will do; and suggested staff reiterate the main purposes. Mr. Kamm advised the Pineda will become a regional roadway and affect traffic throughout the region; people who are using Wickham Road now do not just live in the immediate vicinity of Wickham Road; they live in Melbourne, Palm Bay and on the beachside; so Wickham Road is also a regional facility. He stated all their analyses show Wickham will not be able to accommodate the level of traffic they expect to have on it in the future; the volumes on Wickham Road is about 38,000 trips now; they are looking at a 50% increase in that volume; and individuals who spoke about the lack of connectivity in North Melbourne are correct. He stated in their study, they looked at other connections which were very unusual; they looked at extending Murrell Road south to connect to Post Road; they looked at different options that would help Wickham Road; but unfortunately, a lot of those options were closed because of development that has occurred. Mr. Kamm stated Viera is a major development, and its future impact on the traffic level in Central Brevard is going to be significant; there is general growth in the immediate area of Wickham Road and general growth in traffic all over the County, plus the Viera DRI which is focusing traffic at the Wickham/Pineda intersection; so what the Pineda does is provide another travel corridor to allow a different way to go. He stated the connection to St. Andrews is very important; the immediate benefit of the Pineda is that it will divert sufficient traffic off Wickham Road so the County would not have to widen Wickham Road between the Pineda and I-95; however, if they do not build the Pineda Extension, the County will be faced with the prospect of widening Wickham Road north of Pineda; and he does not know of any elected body that would want to take that on. He stated widening North Wickham Road would be extraordinarily expensive and disruptive; so the Pineda provides an alternative way to alleviate that potential problem as well as provide a benefit to the overall traffic circulation in the County. He stated there are some evacuation benefits but they have not talked about that much because they have not quantified those; it does provide another way to get to the Interstate from the beaches; it is not now that there is a problem; but staff is looking 20 years out where it will provide a benefit.

Commissioner Carlson advised someone mentioned not doing the project; and requested staff address the issue of moratoriums and what the County will be faced with if a moratorium is in place due to concurrency problems; with Ms. Busacca responding if a proposed development trips the threshold on a road so that there is not sufficient capacity to handle the development, the development could be phased until improvements are there or a moratorium could be put on. She stated in the case of a moratorium, the government body that puts the moratorium on cannot put it on indefinitely; that body would be required to come up with a solution to solve the problem so the property could be developed; and that solution could come in many forms. She noted moratoriums are not intended to be permanent solutions to infrastructure situations. Mr. Kamm advised the problem staff faces with North Wickham Road is it would be above concurrency thresholds and the County would be faced with potential moratoriums in the Suntree area and extreme difficulty in widening Wickham Road; and to avoid that future dilemma, the Pineda extension makes good sense. Commissioner Carlson stated when Grand Haven Subdivision came up, there was a threshold factor the County was worried about meeting and going into a potential moratorium; so staff tried to use a more proactive mentality in approaching the problem.

Chairman Higgs advised she met with a number of representatives and looked at the problems each group seemed to have with the various options; she asked the question that led to Layout #7; and it was a "what if" concept, i.e. what if the County did not do this or that, could it work. She indicated there will continue to be questions from individuals and the Board as they go through this process and look at all the issues to answer the questions in the best way. She stated the gentleman who talked about 50,000 people who will be driving on that road mentioned a major issue; and those people are not here tonight, but the Board has to look at the mobility as a critical issue and weigh all the other concerns as well. Chairman Higgs advised staff needs some direction; moving forward with the design by the consultant and looking at cost issues and other things then bringing that back to the Board is probably the next step; and staff will continue talking to the various interest groups as those go forward to see what kind of arrangements may be made.

Mr. Minneboo stated discussions with the interest groups are not going to cease; it will be easier and better with an engineering firm that can deal with heavy duty details; and they will continue to meet with those groups as one of their requirements as they go through the extensive preliminary study. He stated they also host an information meeting where all the people can provide more input, but it is pretty evident what direction staff will be going at that time.

Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board goes forward, determines a design, and is not able to work out something with the property owners and have to go into condemnation, does it need to have explored all the options from an engineering standpoint so it can determine in court the condemnation is a public necessity; with Mr. Knox responding not necessarily, although it would help to do that. He stated the Board looked at several options tonight and narrowed them down to a few; that process takes care of the necessity; and once it decides it needs it, the discretion as to why the Board needs it is left to the Board; and the fact that it considered alternative routes is sufficient. Chairman Higgs inquired if that means the Board does not have to have preliminary engineering work done on all the options; with Mr. Knox responding no.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to proceed with preliminary engineering analysis of Conceptual Layouts 2A, 4A and 7, utilizing engineering consultant services, and include cost estimates.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Layout #7 just came up; if someone comes up with #8 and #9, he would not want to stop having an open mind of something that is cheaper, better, and impacts less people; so if staff is given other options, Mr. Minneboo can bring those back to the Board. Mr. Kamm inquired if the motion is interpreted to mean rather than just look at 2A, 4A and 7, it means not look at the others that were presented today, but there may be other variations that come up. Commissioner Voltz stated that would be a safe assumption. Chairman Higgs advised staff will look at those first and get back to the Board with costs and everything else to see if they can find a suitable option among those.

Mr. Minneboo stated staff wants to expedite the project; and requested authorization to obtain appraisals on parcels that may be needed. Chairman Higgs inquired if appraisals can be included in the motion; with Commissioners Carlson and Voltz accepting the amendment.

Mr. Minneboo stated the time line is to select all the engineers for all the projects throughout the County by May 30, 2000; hopefully by July 30, 2000 they will have negotiated offers from all the firms; and between May and July, staff will come back to the Board to get the firms selected approved by the Board. He stated the study will take three to four months; a lot of work goes into those things and it is not done haphazardly; and hopefully it will be ready by December 1, 2000 if nothing goes wrong. Chairman Higgs inquired if someone came forward with a proposal to take that person's property, would it be brought back to the Board; with Mr. Minneboo responding yes, and it could have a significant bearing on the alignment.

Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion as amended. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 8:11 p.m., and reconvened at 8:18 p.m.

REPORT, RE: CLARIFICATION OF DIRECTION ON FENCE AT FIRE STATION 80

County Manager Tom Jenkins requested clarification of prior Board action on an issue Public Safety Director Jack Parker will elaborate.

Public Safety Director Jack Parker advised on February 15, 2000, the Board made a motion to direct him to not allow anyone to park on the open area of Fire Station 80 pending further action, but there has not been additional action, so he has been operating under that premise.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised there was discussion but no motion; and staff is concerned about the potential issues that may occur in the future and felt it was appropriate that, since there was a motion on February 15, 2000, whatever the Board's intent was recently, should be made in the form of a motion.

Commissioner Carlson asked the County Attorney to advise the Board on the legal aspects of doing nothing and leaving the fence line the way it is.

County Attorney Scott Knox advised the issue is whether or not the Board wants to allow people to walk on the property as it exists; and if it does not want the public using it, it could trespass people or put the fence up. He stated if the Board puts the fence up, it will not have an issue; if it trespasses people it will not have an issue; and if it allows people to use the property, it will create an issue. Commissioner Carlson inquired what is the recommended course of action; with Mr. Knox responding to minimize any legal liability, it could put up a fence. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Knox means to straighten the fence so nobody can use the property; with Mr. Knox responding yes.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, to direct staff to straighten the fence at Fire Station 80, and put it all the way across the property so people cannot use the property due to potential liability.

Commissioner Voltz stated the Board decided not to do that the last time it discussed the issue. Commissioner Carlson stated it was brought to her attention that by leaving it open, it would put the County in a potential liability stance if an issue occurred there; so by straightening out the fence, the Board would not have to worry about it. Commissioner Voltz stated the person who brought the issue to the Board is not here to discuss it.

Commissioner O'Brien seconded the motion.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the Board has discussed this issue extensively; it is time to put it to rest; and putting the fence across the entire property will ensure putting the issue to rest.

Chairman Higgs advised she looked at the problem this afternoon; if it is left in its existing condition, it may inadvertently have people use the property to go into the shopping center; and although she respects the rights of people to be on County property, the fence will be a protection to people so they may not get into a situation with the shopping center that they do not want to be in. She inquired how did those parking places get on County property; with Mr. Jenkins responding patrons of the restaurant primarily used it. Chairman Higgs stated it is paved; with Commissioner Voltz responding it is not paved. Chairman Higgs stated it is an improved parking area; and inquired who improved it; with Mr. Jenkins responding the shopping center owners may have done it at some time. Chairman Higgs inquired if they have a lease with the County; with Mr. Jenkins responding no. Chairman Higgs stated she hopes in the future if shopping centers use County property they pay the citizens for the use. Mr. Parker stated the property is maintained by Public Safety so he will take responsibility for it and will ensure it is not repeated.

Commissioner Voltz stated if it was done in the beginning, the issue would not be before the Board; and now that it is done, she does not want to reverse it, so she will not vote for the motion.

Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Voltz voted nay.

REPORT, RE: REGIONALIZATION

Commissioner Scarborough advised Jacob Stewart will be making a presentation at the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council meeting tomorrow; there may be interesting comments on regionalization and how the crossroads play; and he will bring a report to the Board at the next meeting.

REPORT, RE: SHRINERS AND ELKS SCREENING

Commissioner O'Brien advised the Shriners and the Elks will provide free medical screening on April 22, 2000, from 9:00 a.m. to noon, for children with various diseases, such as club foot, bowed legs, dislocated hips, burns, hand and back problems, scoliosis, etc. He stated they want people to bring their children there where doctors will screen them and perhaps they can be helped by the Shriners or the Elks at no cost. He noted the phone number is 259-5302.

Chairman Higgs commented it is not just for minor health problems; and Commissioner Carlson stated they will screen children for potential treatment at the Shriners Hospital in Tampa.

REPORT, RE: BREVARD ZOO WETLANDS HABITAT

Commissioner Carlson read a letter from Margo McKnight, Brevard Zoo Director, advising of the rave reviews and attention the zoo is getting because of its wetlands outpost habitat with a kayaking course through it, and their mission to become an outdoor experience to instill appreciation for nature and conservation of wildlife and wild places. She distributed copies of the Wildlife Conservation magazine, which had an article, entitled, "Welcome to the Swamp". Commissioner Carlson stated there is another magazine, Volume 1, Issue 1, Summer of '99, called, Endangered Species that had a more in-depth article on the zoo called, "The Handmade Zoo," with neat pictures. She stated the zoo, under the leadership of Ms. McKnight, will grow to be a major destination and important to the future of the County; and expressed appreciation to Ms. McKnight and all who are part of that effort for their hard work.

REPORT, RE: LEGISLATION REDUCING LOCAL CONTROL OF BILLBOARDS

Commissioner Voltz advised on April 6, 2000, the Board asked her to contact the Florida Association of Counties regarding its position on legislation that would reduce the authority of local governments to regulate billboards; she called the Association, and they are looking into it. She stated right now it has been taken out of the bills; however, the Association is concerned someone may slip it in, so they are watching every piece of legislation, but would not be surprised if they miss it.

REPORT, RE: LEGISLATION ON AMBULANCES

Commissioner Voltz advised of a letter from Laurie Hundley who is helping Guy Spearman in Tallahassee regarding the issue with the ambulance in Volusia County, stating that the sponsor of the language has asked that the surrounding counties urge Volusia County to resolve its differences within the city and not bring it up legislatively because it will affect every county. She stated they want the Board to write a letter to Volusia County and ask it to resolve its differences locally; and inquired if the Board wants to do that.

Chairman Higgs recommended the County Manager send a letter to Volusia County.

REPORT, RE: CDBG AND HOME FUNDS

Commissioner Voltz advised of a letter from the National Association of Counties regarding CDBG and HOME funds, noting it requested $2 billion in FY 2000 for HOME and $5 billion for CDBG throughout the United States; and requesting the Board send a letter in support of that legislation to get them to try and get them to go through with it.

Commissioner Carlson stated she gave that item to Don Lusk to determine how it would impact the County, and if it would be of any interest to support it. Commissioner Voltz stated Brevard County would probably get more money this year than it did last year; and the letter would just be supporting the CDBG and HOME Programs. She stated before she sends a letter, she wanted to get approval from the Board to do it, or the Chairman could send a letter. Chairman Higgs consented to Commissioner Voltz sending a letter supporting those Programs.

PUBLIC COMMENTS - WALTER PINE, RE: AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES

Walter Pine advised he met with some staff members on the Americans with Disabilities issue and found them responsive and receptive; and he has things to talk about on April 25, 2000, and wanted to clarify conditions of his appearance.

Chairman Higgs advised the groups interested in dogs on the beaches and South Shores previously requested time certains.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize a time certain for Walter Pine on April 25, 2000, to be arranged by the Chairman; and staff be prepared to be involved in the 20-minute presentation. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: AUTHORITY OF THE BOARD CHAIRMAN

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board's policy needs to have capacity for the Chairman to give someone additional time; the Chairman is under tremendous constraints to follow the rules on time certains and what works and what does not work; and the Chairman should have the capacity to review situations and go beyond the rules. He stated it is a practical matter; and suggested the County Manager and staff have some thoughts about the policy after Mr. Pine's presentation, so if a disabled person needs a time certain or additional time, the policy does not deny that person an opportunity to be heard.

WARRANT LISTS

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 8:44 p.m.

ATTEST:

NANCY HIGGS, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

SANDY CRAWFORD, CLERK
(S E A L)