April 17, 2001

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on April 17, 2001, at 5:34 p.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Susan Carlson, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Randy O'Brien, Nancy Higgs, and Jackie Colon, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

The Invocation was given by Dr. Richard Chandler, First United Methodist Church of Port St. John.

Commissioner Jackie Colon led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve the Minutes of March 6, 2001 Regular Meeting. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REQUEST FOR REDUCTION OF FINE AND RELEASE OF LIEN, RE: GARY COPPOLA,
SEBASTIAN BEACH INN

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the Attorney representing Gary Coppola requested the item be continued to another meeting has his client has other violations.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to table the request for reduction of fine and release of lien for Gary Coppola, Sebastian Beach Inn, until May 8, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: RELOCATION OF TDC, BCA, ZOO, AND SIGN WORKSHOP

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised he sent a note to all Commissioners about moving the workshop on April 19, 2001 to the Commission Room because of the crowd that is anticipated. He stated the presenters requested 20 to 25 minutes to make their presentations; and he suggested they limit their organization speakers to three, which they are willing to do.

Commissioner O'Brien stated they should be given 30 minutes each, and three speakers are sufficient.

Chairman Carlson stated she was trying to sculpt the meeting so it does not go into the sign issue at 1:00 p.m., and 20 to 25 minutes should be sufficient. She agreed with limiting the speakers so the Board does not have to hear the same thing over and over again. Mr. Jenkins stated if there are no objections from the Board, he will proceed with that plan.

REPORT, RE: LEGAL ACTION AGAINST ANSELMO VALDES AND RANGER
CONSTRUCTION FOR ILLEGAL STORAGE OPERATION

Commissioner Scarborough advised there is a storage operation of milling, concrete, etc.; they cleared an area and did not get an agreement; and staff has tried to get them into compliance, but they have not signed the temporary use agreement. He stated he heard they have the area list with flood lights at 2:00 a.m. and have been working at those hours. Commissioner Scarborough requested the County Attorney take appropriate and immediate action to stop the illegal storage of materials.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize the County Attorney to take appropriate and immediate action against Anselmo Valdes and Ranger Construction Industries, Inc. to stop the illegal storage operation.

Commissioner Higgs inquired what action is considered appropriate; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding he could file a complaint for temporary injunction or temporary restraining order, and needs authority to post a bond if it has to be done to get an injunction.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to amend the motion to include authorization for the County Attorney to post a bond if necessary.

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

REPORT, RE: PUBLIC HEARING BY FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION

Commissioner O'Brien advised the Fish and Wildlife Commission will hold its public hearing on proposed changes to the manatee speed zones on May 3, 2001, at 4:00 p.m. in the ballroom of the Melbourne Airport Hilton, 200 Rialto Place, Melbourne, Florida. He invited anyone with an interest in the subject to attend the hearing and provide their input.

REPORT, RE: POW/MIA PARK

Commissioner O'Brien stated the POW/MIA Park is the first park in the Nation named after the prisoners of war; and Commissioner Carlson deserves accolades for going forward with development of the Park.

RESOLUTION, RE: SUPPORTING FUNDING FOR SHORE PROTECTION PROJECT

Commissioner O'Brien advised he has a resolution discussed at a workshop, which requests Congress and the Florida Congressional Delegation to support continued federal funding of the Brevard County Shore Protection Project at the present level or above current levels. He stated not one local dollar is being used to restore the beaches; it is being paid for by the tourists who come to Brevard County; the State matches it; and federal funding pays more than half for mitigation. He stated there is a 45-foot deep ditch dug by the federal government in Port Canaveral, which causes the sand never to get to the beaches south of Port Canaveral; so the loss of beaches is not caused so much by Mother Nature as by the federal government. Commissioner O'Brien advised now the President of the United States wants to pay less than what the federal government agreed to; Brevard County signed a 50-year lease with the federal government; and now it wants to change its funding. He stated if the federal government wants to fill in the ditch, it can do that; but until it does, the restoration of the beaches caused by its actions is imperative; so the resolution should be approved.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt Resolution requesting Congressman Dave Weldon and the Florida Congressional Delegation to use their offices to ensure the federal cost share for the Brevard County Shore Protection Project is maintained at the level stipulated in the Project Cooperative Agreement, and that Congress appropriates the necessary funds in FY 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Carlson inquired if the Board requested a letter be sent to President Bush; with Commissioner O'Brien responding the Board directed a letter be sent to Governor Bush to intercede. Chairman Carlson inquired she has a letter; and could attach the Resolution to it.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize the Chairman to send the Resolution supporting funding for the Brevard County Shore Protection Project with a letter to Governor Bush. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: TRASH BASH DAY

Commissioner Colon reminded everyone that Saturday is Trash Bash Day; stated they will be going from one end of the County to the other cleaning up; for those folks interested in helping out, all the Commissioners will be out; District 5 will be on Minton, Malabar Road and Jupiter; and requested those who want to help to be there at 8:00 a.m. and bring gloves so they do not have to pick up trash with their hands and it would be wonderful to do something for the community.

Commissioner O'Brien advised District 2 has won the award for the past two years because of the volunteers who help to clean up the river.

DISCUSSION, RE: BREVARD COUNTY MARINE ADVISORY COUNCIL REPORT

Chairman Carlson advised she was requested to move the Marine Advisory Council item before the public hearings because of the length of time they will take; she does not know if all the Commissioners had the opportunity to meet with the trio who came to her office from the Advisory Council; and if there are questions and the Board wants to wait and talk about it, they could bring back additional information based on the outline attached to the Agenda item.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the next step would be to modify the original Resolution, so it will become the Council's empowering resolution, and bring that back to the Board.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to acknowledge receipt of the Mission Statement and Scope of Work prepared by the Brevard County Marine Advisory Council, and instruct staff to prepare a resolution amending the original Resolution to empower the Council, and return the resolution to the Board for consideration and adoption. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: REZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTY OFF BARNES BOULEVARD

Chairman Carlson advised at the last zoning meeting, the Board had an issue off Barnes Boulevard, which it postponed and asked staff to make some comments; but she is not sure the Board requested a letter be sent on the 96-acre Pine Acres parcel that abutted the BU-2 property. She inquired if comments were put together about the environmental concerns that some residents brought up regarding the impact to the Cruickshank property; and if Natural Resources put some comments together and sent it to the City to let them know what the County is doing.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised Natural Resources provided some information to the City of Rockledge several weeks ago; if the Board wants information about the current rezoning application that the County is considering, staff has provided that information to Rockledge as a matter of public information; but it has not written a specific letter about that. She inquired if that is the Board's direction.

Chairman Carlson stated if it was done in the County, it would probably be fine because they would have to go through the environmental permitting process, etc.; the concern was, and part of the hold up for the zoning was the impact to the Cruickshank property based on some of the environmental issues that were brought up; and if staff feels it has sent an informational letter, that is fine, as she was just trying to get clarification. Ms. Busacca stated they have provided a letter. Chairman Carlson requested a copy of the letter and what was sent to the City.

REPORT, RE: PROPOSED LEGISLATION ON BILLBOARDS

Chairman Carlson advised another issue that has come up in Tallahassee is the billboard issue; and inquired if the Board has taken any other actions regarding House Bill 1053 and Senate Bill 2056 which would eliminate amortizing of billboards and local home rule control of counties.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised staff has communicated with the Brevard Legislative Delegation, lobbyist, and other interested parties the Board's position on that issue; it has done that several times; but the legislation appears to be moving forward. Chairman Carlson inquired if there is anything else the Board needs to do; with Mr. Jenkins responding he is not sure there is much more that it can do at this point.

REPORT, RE: CONDOLENCES TO DAN SHRADER'S FAMILY

Chairman Carlson advised she wants to send the Board's condolences to Dan Shrader's family; he was the County's Agriculture and Extension Services Director who passed away early Easter morning, and will be sorely missed.

REPORT, RE: ADDITIONAL SPACE FOR BOARD MEETING

Chairman Carlson advised there is an area on the second floor where there is a camera and television so people who are standing in the back of the room can be more comfortable and watch the proceedings if they want to do that.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised it is in the Space Coast room, and when their item comes up, they will have sufficient time to come down stairs.

Commissioner Scarborough advised the Resolution commending the Airmen will come up shortly, and if they do not remain, there will be two rows of seats available for those standing in the back of the room, so they can wait and see if there are seats in the Board Room before going upstairs.

RESOLUTION, RE: COMMENDING FLORIDA AIR ACADEMY BASKETBALL TEAM

Commissioner Colon read aloud a resolution recognizing the achievements of Florida Air Academy basketball team; and named each player.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution recognizing the achievements and outstanding season of the Florida Air Academy Basketball Team, and congratulating the Team on its Class 3A State Championship title. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Colon presented the Resolution to Head Coach Aubin Goporo.

AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT WITH IVEY, HARRIS & WALLS, INC., RE:
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR POW/MIA PARK

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Amendment No. 1 to Agreement with Ivey, Harris & Walls, Inc. to provide additional engineering services for the POW/MIA Park development at $4,740. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDMENT TO OPTION FOR SALE AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH BOARD OF
TRUSTEES OF THE IITF, AND PERMISSION TO FILL SUIT, RE: BALKANY PROPERTY

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Amendment to Option Agreement for Sale and Purchase with the Board of Trustees of The Internal Improvement Trust Fund (IITF), allowing for closing on Parcels C and D of the Balkany property prior to clearing title defect on Parcels A and B, for reimbursement of $467,364; and authorize the County Attorney to file suit against National Advertising Company, Outdoor Systems Advertising, Infinity Outdoor, or whichever companies have a beneficial interest in two leases for billboards on the property owned by Brevard County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REVISED EXHIBIT "B" TO OPTION AGREEMENT WITH THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE IITF, RE: VALKARIA PROPERTIES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve revised Exhibit "B" to the Option Agreement with the Board of Trustees of The Internal Improvement Trust Fund (IITF), correcting acreage and appraised values for the Fedd Investment, Collins, and McKinnon parcels of the Valkaria properties. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS, RE: CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARDS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to reappoint George Reynolds and Doug Jaren to the Marine Advisory Council, with terms expiring December 31, 2001; reappoint Huge Normile to the Housing Finance Authority with term expiring April 17, 2005; reappoint Bob Ambuster to the Public Golf Advisory Board, with term expiring December 31, 2001; appoint Mary Tees to the Citizen Budget Review Committee, with term expiring December 31, 2001; and appoint Robert Preikschat to the Metropolitan Planning Organization Citizens Advisory Committee, replacing Ben Graham, with term expiring December 31, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT, RE: ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT'S
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to acknowledge receipt of the St. Johns River Water Management District's financial statements for the period ending September 30, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: BILLS AND BUDGET CHANGES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve bills and submitted. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: REZONING REQUEST OF ROGER AND MARY GARRETT

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Board, made at its public hearing on March 5, 2001, as follows:

Item 5. (Z0103402) Roger and Mary Cynthia Garrett's request for change from GU and BU-1 to BU-2 on one acre located on the south side of Virginia Avenue, east of Fiske Boulevard, which was recommended for approval by the P&Z Board, and tabled by the Board of County Commissioners on April 5, 2001. She advised the request was postponed to try and find a fit for the BU-2 zoning requested by the applicant.

Roger Garrett advised they are still waiting on paperwork from the bank; so they have not submitted the original documents.

Chairman Carlson advised, after discussions with staff and looking at the binding development plan where Mr. Garrett suggested a buffer next to the homes to the south, she still has problems with the request; even though Mr. Garrett is situated to do business where he only has a truck or two coming into the property, BU-2 is a very strong zoning for the area; and there are no other BU-2 zoning in that area. She stated if there is a way that Mr. Garrett can work with staff and formulate a use in BU-1 only, it would not be an impact in the future on surrounding properties; her fear is not with the Garretts; even though the uses are stripped to only BU-1 uses, it still does not protect the residents in the area; so she has a little too much heartburn with accepting BU-2 and would have to move to deny it. She noted perhaps they can regroup with staff and see if there is some other way they can work the issue to use the property.

Mr. Garrett inquired if there is a way to have BU-1 with exclusions; with Zoning Official Rick Enos responding a pure retail landscape nursery business can be accommodated in BU-1, but not bulk storage of mulch, or storage of heavy equipment for the landscaping business.

Commissioner Higgs stated those things could be sold and could be bulk storage inside a building. Chairman Carlson stated there are other issues with delivering sod and things on semis and stuff like that. Mr. Garrett stated they do not deal in sod. Chairman Carlson stated she understands that, but Mr. Garrett mentioned he would have two semis a week making deliveries; with Mr. Garrett responding there would be two semis a week. Chairman Carlson stated those are some of her concerns; and suggested Mr. Garrett work with staff to see if they can do some sort of covering or whatever, be a little more creative, and be aware of the rights of those who live around there, because the property is amidst residential properties, and to go that far is too much of an intrusion. She stated she appreciates Mr. Garrett working with it and trying to figure out a way to make BU-2 work; but it is not working; and recommended he meet with staff to see if they can work something else out.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to deny Item 5. (Z0103402) Roger and Mary Cynthia Garrett's request for change from GU and BU-1 to BU-2 on one acre located on the south side of Virginia Avenue, east of Fiske Boulevard. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Enos inquired if the Board wishes to waive the time and fee for the Garretts; with Chairman Carlson responding if they can find something that will fit, she would be willing to do that.

SPEED HUMP REQUEST, RE: PHYLLIS DRIVE

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to approve installation of speed humps on Phyllis Drive located in Merritt Island. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PRESENTATION BY POST, BUCKLEY, SCHUH & JERNIGAN, INC., AND APPROVAL OF
ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE, RE: PINEDA CAUSEWAY EXTENSION PROJECT

Chairman Carlson advised Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. will give a technical review and details on the Pineda Causeway Extension project; and instructed staff to bring advise of what has transpired and what the time line has been, so people can reflect back on how much work it has taken to get to this point.

Public Works Coordinator Henry Minneboo advised seats have been set aside for Commissioners in the audience so the consultant would not have her back to the Board. He stated the project started some time ago; initial meetings had significant crowds; the last meeting was held within the last two weeks; and there were about 135 people in attendance. He stated Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. has done an outstanding job in trying to answer everyone's questions; and the majority of the questions have been answered, but if there are any lingering questions tonight, they will be glad to answer those as well. He stated the presentation will take approximately ten minutes; Sue Gratch is a registered professional engineer who worked very hard on the project and has done an outstanding job; and he will turn the presentation over to her.

Susan Gratch with Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. advised the purpose of this meeting is to follow up on the public meeting held on April 2, 2001; since that time and over the past several weeks, they have briefed each Commissioner on the project; and tonight they will present the alignment alternatives and issues relative to the Pineda Causeway Extension, summary matrix evaluation, cost estimates for the project, make a recommendation, and request the Board's approval of the recommendation. She stated the project is the Pineda Causeway Extension, from I-95 to east of Wickham Road; there is a rural typical section for a portion of the project and an urban typical section; the rural typical section is a four-lane divided median divided section with shoulders and sidewalks outside the swale ditch; and the urban section is a similar section with four lanes, raised median, and curb and gutter on the outside with sidewalks on both sides of the road. She stated the process brought them to identify the refinement and analysis of the alternatives, which they have divided into two segments; Segment 1 is the west segment, which runs from I-95 to about a half a mile west of Wickham Road; and only one alternative alignment exist for this Segment. She stated Segment 2 runs from half a mile west of Wickham Road to U.S. 1; and they have four alternatives for that Segment. Ms. Gratch advised the original study did not take the alignment all the way to U.S. 1; they felt it was important, from a continuity standpoint, to carry four lanes to U.S. 1 to its current four-lane section today; and described the overall segment map and various alternatives to Wickham Road section in Segment 2. She stated Segment 1 has a single alternative primarily because the right-of-way has been donated for the majority of it by the adjacent developer; and it is also consistent with the adjacent development plans. She stated the typical section from the west side of I-95 to Peninsula Circle is the rural section; from Peninsula Circle to the half-mile west point of Wickham Road is the urban section; and they have coordinated the section with Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). She stated the FDOT District 5 has an ongoing study for improvements to I-95, which includes six laning and an ultimate interchange; and those are some of the coordination elements that have occurred with the project. She stated they coordinated with Brevard County staff on the extension of the Zoo's linear park on the west side of the project; they also coordinated with the adjacent development that is ongoing and continuing to progress in the corridor; the project requires right-of-way for this segment only in the parcel immediately east of I-95; and the parcel is not only to facilitate the Extension, but also to accommodate the County's contribution for the ultimate interchange with I-95.

Ms. Gratch advised Alternative #2 primarily holds the alignment of the existing Pineda Causeway on the east side of Wickham Road, and requires curvature across the west side of Wickham Road, tying back to the existing right-of-way section, the currently under-construction portion of Pineda Causeway to the west and south of Windsor Estates. She stated the project requires additional turn lanes along Wickham Road and a divided median from the new intersection at Wickham Road and Pineda Causeway south to approximately the existing right-of-way. She stated the key impacts of Alternative #2 are a curve across Wickham Road which requires some reconstruction of Wickham Road to accommodate the super-elevated section of road; key right-of-way needs are mostly a total take for the Pineda Presbyterian Church because it is about 20 feet from the building and takes most of the land associated with the Church; and it requires a strip take along the east side of Wickham Road, with one of the strip takes being across the Pineda Plaza. She stated it also impacts some of the vacant lands to the west and southwest of the Church. She stated as a result of continuing the project to U.S. 1, they need a pond in the general vicinity of the railroad tracks to the east end of the project; and that is very similar to all four Alternatives. Ms. Gratch stated the existing intersection with Windsor Estates is affected by Alternative #2; the cures for that access are identified as Options A and B; Option B would take the Windsor Estates access to a point approximately 700 feet west of Wickham Road along Pineda Causeway and have an intersection there with full turning movements; and Option A would take the Windsor Estates access driveway to the north approximately 600 feet across from Sellers Lane. She stated it would impact the 7-11 Store as a result of the Windsor Estates access being revised; and the 7-11 would also have a revised access. She stated Alternative #2's environmental impacts involve a couple of wetland crossings on the west side of the project; some scrub jay habitat between Windsor Estates and the Pineda Presbyterian Church would be potentially impacted; and they have observed a red cockaded woodpecker in the area of the alignment. She stated from a traffic operations standpoint, it is acceptable and meets the initial and ultimate demands of the area.

Ms. Gatch advised Alternative #4 primarily holds the existing right-of-way alignment on the west side of Wickham Road and transitions back to the existing Pineda Causeway east of Wickham Road through a reverse curve; the Alternative requires the addition of turn lanes along Wickham Road as did Alternative #2 to accommodate the new intersection; and it also requires a median between the proposed section at the south and existing intersection across from Windsor Estates and existing Pineda Causeway. She stated in that area the existing Pineda Causeway section would be accessed westbound on the new section via a one-way off ramp to facilitate movements to the Wickham Road and existing Pineda Causeway intersection; and the existing several hundred feet of road to the north of the Pineda Plaza remains a two-way road, so that access remains. She stated right-of-way requirements for Alternative #4 impacts the Tropical Splash Car Wash; it is primarily a total take where the developed portion of the parcel currently is; it will impact approximately a quarter-acre of the School property, which is currently serving as a retention area; and it will also impact some of the vacant lands between the School and the Car Wash. She stated there are some opportunities to enhance the access to the School; they have shown a couple of different alternatives; and they will be continuing to refine those if that is the selected Alternative. She noted Windsor Estates access will remain unaffected; the 7-11 Store will remain unaffected; and the access to the Church along Wickham Road will become a right in and right out. Ms. Gatch advised the environmental impacts include wetlands and scrub jay habitat on the east side of the road; and traffic operations are acceptable and meet initial and ultimate demands and needs.

Ms. Gatch advised Alternative #7 is an alignment which basically splits the difference between Alternatives #2 and #4; it has a more gradual curve across the intersection of Wickham Road; and it requires a little bit more reconstruction between the project on the west side of Wickham Road and tying back to the east side on the existing Causeway. She stated significant impacts on Wickham Road are turn lanes to facilitate the intersection movements and the addition of a divided median from south of the Car Wash to approximately Sellers Lane. She stated from a right-of-way standpoint, key issues are it basically impacts the Pineda Plaza completely and the businesses associated with it; and it also impacts some vacant land to the east and the majority of vacant land to the west of the alignment. She stated similar to Alternative #2, Windsor Estates access is affected and would be identified with a couple of different alternatives to mitigate for that; similar to Alternative #2, it has Options A and B, with A being the access to the south, and B being the access to the north; and a third option has been identified, which would keep Windsor Estates access where it is, but it would be a right in/right out only because of the divided median. Ms. Gatch advised the 7-11 access is impacted similar to the Windsor Estates access and would basically have a right in/right out at Wickham Road; and Tropical Splash Car Wash and the Church will be impacted to a right in/right out only as a result of the median along Wickham Road. She stated from an environmental standpoint, it would impact wetlands and scrub jay habitat primarily on the west side of Wickham Road. She stated traffic operations meet initial and future needs and is acceptable.

Ms. Gatch advised Alternative #10 is the offset intersection alternative, and primarily holds the alignment both east and west of Wickham Road, minimizes right-of-way impacts, but requires the addition of turn lanes and through lanes both north and south on Wickham Road to facilitate the necessary movements. She stated right-of-way needs include strip takes along Wickham Road, which would potentially affect the 7-11, Church, and Plaza; and from an access standpoint, they would look at closing the median from north of the Car Wash to the new intersection, as well as north of the existing intersection up to Sellers Lane. She stated environmental impacts are minimized by Alternative #10, with just a few wetland impacts on the west side of the project; however, the Alternative falls short from a traffic operations standpoint because it does not satisfy future needs; and in the future they would likely be presenting to the Board alternatives to mitigate what capacity they would lose as a result of maintaining this alignment. Ms. Gatch stated the affects on Wickham Road are significant; today traffic headed westbound uses the Causeway and heads north on Wickham Road and reaches I-95 via Wickham Road; it would very likely expedite the need to widen Wickham Road; and in all likelihood, traffic would continue that pattern via southbound Wickham Road then continue westbound with the Causeway. She stated it does not provide road continuity and requires signals at two major intersections.

Ms. Gatch advised they have put together an evaluation of all types of impacts; primarily Alternatives #7 and #4 displace businesses; Alternatives #2 and #7 have primary business impacts along the corridor; Alternative #2 requires the Church to be relocated; Alternative #4 is the only alternative that has a minor impact to the School; and neighborhood impacts are more significant with Alternatives #2 and #7. She stated wetland impacts are not much different between the Alternatives; Alternative #4 has a slight amount higher than the rest of the Alternatives; all the Alternatives impact scrub jays; and the potential for impact to the red cockaded woodpecker exits with Alternative #2. She stated in terms of traffic operations, all the Alternatives offer acceptable operations with the exception of #10, which is unacceptable; and they all have impacts on utility with #4 having the least amount and #10 having the highest amount of impacts. Ms. Gatch advised from a cost standpoint, for four lanes of the project all the way to I-95 and two lanes to Grand Haven would be just under $15 million for the segment to U.S. 1; and the initial project cost would be slightly higher than $2 million. She stated the least expensive alternative for Segment 2, which is the intersection area at Wickham Road, the least expensive Alternative is 10, which does not provide the traffic operations needed for the corridor. She stated Alternative #7 is high in price, from $19 to $22 million range; Alternative #2A and B are in the $11 to $13 million range; and Alternative #4 is just over $10 million, which includes construction, right-of-way, mitigation, and the total project cost.

Ms. Gatch advised Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. recommends Alternative #4; it has the least community impacts to businesses, churches, and residents; it provides acceptable traffic operations for the initial and ultimate needs; it has the least right-of-way impacts; and it minimizes overall project cost while still providing for the required needs. She stated Segment 1 recap on the project is the transition to two lanes to Grand Haven Subdivision; it includes the right-of-way purchase adjacent to I-95; and Segment 2 makes up the recommendation for the complete project at a total cost of just over $12.3 million. She requested the Board approve Alternative #4 as presented today, which includes four lanes across Wickham Road to the existing four lane section near U.S. 1, transitioning back to a two-lane section to the west of Grand Haven, and the right-of-way acquisition on the east side of I-95 to facilitate the future interchange construction by FDOT.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if there were estimates made on the value the County may be able to recoup from rebuilding a plaza or selling the land or whatever might be left from the take of Pineda Plaza property; with Mr. Minneboo responding no. Commissioner Higgs noted the high cost does not show any estimate that may be recovered; and Mr. Minneboo responded it does not.

James Bingle, member of the Pineda Presbyterian Church, advised the alignment recommended does not impact the Church directly, but the median in the center of Wickham Road precludes people coming from the south to access the property. He stated there are three ways they can have access, even with the center curb; one would be if the access road into Windsor Estates Subdivision was a public road that would give them ingress and egress onto that road; and a second way would be if there was a road that went south through their property to the new extension of the Pineda Causeway. He stated the third alternative would be if the median barrier were to terminate at their driveway so that cars coming from the south could turn left into the Church property on the existing driveway. Mr. Bingle stated since Alternative #4 would not impact the present Pineda/Wickham intersection, and the County would be creating a new intersection, the curb may not be needed that far; and it would be needed to the new intersection, but he is not sure it would be needed all the way to impact the old intersection.

Foster Clark advised the Car Wash provides a lot of jobs for the young people who are in college and use their money to fund their education and provide for books and tuition. He stated if the Car Wash is taken, they would have to find new jobs; but in the meantime, they would still have to meet their educational requirements and financial obligations. He stated the area was selected after a lot of study that showed a great demand for the car wash; it is the only full-service car wash of its type in the area; it has proven itself even though it has only been there two or three years; and requested the Board take those things into consideration. He stated the Car Wash does a lot of good in the community and provides a lot of jobs for young people currently in college.

Reverend Calvin Gittner, Pineda Presbyterian Church, advised the access to Pineda Presbyterian Church is a concern; currently the Church has full access from northbound and southbound Wickham Road; and Alternative #4 would reduce their access to right in/right out only. He stated it would require northbound traffic on Wickham Road to make a U-turn in order to enter the Church property, and those exiting the Church, who wish to go north on Wickham Road, to also make a U-turn to go home. He stated having the members or those who use the Church facilities making U-turns is a serious safety issue and an unacceptable solution. He advised in addition to their worship services and programs, the Worldwide Church of God uses their facility on Saturday afternoons; they provide meeting space for neighborhood and community groups; a number of 12-step programs utilize their facility; and they serve as one of the largest voting precincts in the County, with over 4,000 voters for the last election. Reverend Gittner stated over the past 18 years, the Church has continued its commitment to serve the community; as they continue to grow, they expect to increase their outreach and service programs; an average of 450 people attend some sort of meeting at the Church on a weekly basis; and over the next three to five years they expect that number to double. He stated just as the Board is looking to having the Pineda Causeway extension meet the long-term traffic needs, they are seeking to have their access to the Church property meet their long-term needs. He advised, after discussions with some of the Commissioners, Mr. Minneboo, and neighbors at Windsor Estates, they have come up with some workable solutions; they request an exit only access to Windsor Drive to allow northbound traffic to exit the Church property safely and turn left at the traffic light, and a full in and out access to the Pineda Causeway Extension, the same as offered to Windsor Estates in Alternatives #2 and #7. He stated it would allow optimum use of their roadways; and because the Extension is designed as a limited access road, it can be a shared access with the vacant land at the northwest corner of Wickham Road and Pineda Causeway Extension. He noted it would allow for optimum traffic flow and for the use of their property; and it would be a workable solution. Reverend Gittner advised the combination access would be the best solution and would allow the Church to continue its 18-year history of serving the community; so they hope the Board will look favorably on their request.

Gordon Nelson advised he lives off Washington Road and has friends and family in Suntree; he patronizes Suntree businesses and is a member of the Pineda Presbyterian Church; and he attended a number of meetings on the Pineda Causeway Extension in the last 18 months. He stated he spoke to the Board in April, 2000; at that time he expressed a concern that as the I-95/Lake Washington Road/Wickham Road triangle is built out, there will be upwards of 10,000 new homes and businesses with single entrances dropping onto Wickham Road; and if the north/south road west of Wickham Road is eliminated, there will be a real potential for gridlock in the area. He stated the Pineda Causeway extension will not enhance north/south traffic flow; so he hopes the Board will continue to look at the broader issues. He stated he concurs with Alternative #4, and compliments staff for working with Holy Trinity Academy to resolve its issues expressed last year; but Alternative #4 needs a closer look. He stated he would be coming from the south to the Presbyterian Church and would have to make a U-turn; and with all the groups that use the Church in any given week, that would be 400 to 1,000 U-turns a week, which is hardly safe engineering. Mr. Nelson advised the Pineda Causeway Extension was brought to a head by Grand Haven a year ago; it was said they have a right to use their land, and they do; and likewise, Pineda Church's plans for development over the next one to five years need to be considered. He stated the sanctuary is too small; the kitchen is inadequate; Christian education facilities, meeting rooms, and sports facilities are needed; and the lack of decision on the Pineda Extension has blocked their meeting those needs over the last two years. He stated today the Church has 223 members, but had 324 people in attendance last Sunday; each week there are a variety of groups, from homeowners associations to seniors who use the Church facilities; it is a community facility; and last November voters called the Sheriff because of the traffic difficulties in and around the Church. He stated five years from now the Church should have a congregation of 500 to 600 people; there will be a new Christian education facility followed by a new sanctuary, which would likely face the Pineda Extension; there will be new meeting and sports facilities, and perhaps senior housing; and many people in Grand Haven and other developments may be using the Church's facilities and programs. Mr. Nelson stated; safe egress/ingress requires multiple accesses; an aerial photograph of a few years ago showed the decision the Board has to make would be easy because only Pineda Church and Pineda Plaza were there; and requested the Board make a decision considering the needs of all who are daily users of the Wickham/Pineda roadways.

Wendy Arteaga, owner of Tropical Splash Car Wash, inquired exactly when is the interchange planned, what sort of commitment has the County made, and what is the time frame. She stated it would be embarrassing if ten years from now, after the acquisition of rights-of-way and destruction of her business, there is still no interchange at I-95, and all the work was done simply to go into Grand Haven. She stated the engineers mentioned the highest public support is in favor of Alternative #4; and she wants to make sure they have seen and reviewed the nearly 1,500 petitions that were presented to the Board a year ago by Holy Trinity and her. She stated she heard concerns tonight about people's long-term plans and how they are affected; her long-term plans are greatly affected; the Car Wash was a huge long-term commitment by her family; and if Alternative #4 is taken, it will be personally and financially devastating for her family. Ms. Arteaga stated she needs the Board's assurance that it is going to work with her in good faith; she has had none of those assurances; in fact the first time she heard a whisper of a dollar amount was in the newspaper; and if that dollar amount is accurate, it is grossly under-estimated. She stated she will appreciate the Board's consideration tonight.

Attorney Jim Fallace, representing Holy Trinity Academy, advised Catherine Ford, the headmaster, will give the Board some information on the future growth and anticipated additional enrollment for Holy Trinity Academy. He stated Holy Trinity is concerned about the impact Alternative #4 will have on Wendy Arteaga and the Car Wash; in the past he has stood before the Board and objected to Alternative #4, which constitutes a taking of some of Holy Trinity's property; and today, as a result of the hard work and cooperation they received from County staff, especially Mr. Minneboo, they understand the difficult decision the Board has to make in connection with the Alternatives before it. He stated with the County's help, they believe the Academy can continue to expand and serve as an example of how the community can, through private donations and some public financing, improve the potential of education for children. He stated Alternative #4 is proposed to the Board as the alternative with the best recommendation; it is the alternative that most impacts Holy Trinity; he is not here to argue or tell the Board why it should choose another alternative or go back to the pre-planning that was discussed in the original Comprehensive Plan, because they understand there is a public need; and they understand everyone is going to be affected, and that sacrifices need to be made, and Holy Trinity stands ready to make some sacrifices. Mr. Fallace advised he talked to Mr. Minneboo about alternatives to impacting the Academy and its children; their primary concern is safety of the 300 plus families and a growing expansion of students; and they have several items they want the Board to consider to amend or condition Alternative #4, if that is the alternative chosen by the Board. He stated first and foremost is a traffic signal at the entrance of the Academy; and they would prefer a full traffic signal for the safety of the children, because as the Academy grows in grade levels, they will have student drivers. He stated they discussed it with Mr. Minneboo, and understand the Board may not be in a position to give that assurance to them today; but at a minimum, they request a blinking yellow school zone light during the time period when danger is most possible. Mr. Fallace advised he discussed with Mr. Minneboo, an alternative entrance to the Academy; that involves contractual commitments with Ira Price who owns the contiguous land; Mr. Minneboo has gone out of his way to work with him on that; and he talked with Ira Price, who could not be here today as he is in Miami on personal business. He stated he thinks they can move towards a positive realignment of the entrance with greater safety for the Academy; they are not opposed to Alternative #4, but changes need to be made for safety reasons; and Ms. Ford will address the buffer wall, which is also a concern. Mr. Fallace stated it may not be something the Board is able to address today as part of a condition or amendment to the proposed alternative, but the alignment comes close to the ballfield and activities field; and they would like to avoid an unintentional intrusion into those fields. He stated they also want reimbursement for improvements the County required them to make on Pineda when they received site plan approval and built the Academy; and they want the concerns of their neighbors to be addressed. He noted County staff is trying to do that; and they want the Board to continue to consider those concerns.

Catherine Ford, Headmaster of Holy Trinity Academy, advised in 1999 and 2000, with the support from the community, they developed a top-notch independent school for the community; they were supported by the Board through many number of efforts in terms of site planning and ultimately through the bond initiative that allowed them to build the Academy; and they did due diligence in researching all the appropriate spots, and finally decided that the best location was on Pineda Causeway. She stated they purposefully selected that portion of the property so it could be sequestered from the community, not only from traffic, but also from passersby. She noted with today's issues revolving around school violence, it was appropriate to set the school as far back from the right-of-way as possible; all those things were done properly; and they opened in grand style last fall with 222 students. She stated their manifest destiny should be realized in just a couple of years; and the Board will see well over 450 students all engaged in the activities one would expect to find at a comprehensive independent high school. Ms. Ford stated they hosted district tennis for 1A schools all over Central Florida; they held grandparents day, and saw their track team leave for district competition and their baseball and softball teams take out of the school parking lot happily on their way to St. Edwards School for another competition; and this Spring they have hosted a number of baseball games just a few feet away from the proposed right-of-way. She stated the Academy is faced with serious student safety issues that must be addressed if the Board chooses Alternative #4; she would like to see a full traffic signal in front of Holy Trinity Academy, and thinks it is the least the County can do to see that their students can safely ingress and egress in a place that was not designed for the kind of traffic that will take place; and she would like to see a visual barrier that obstructs the Academy's frontage from the public, especially at the baseball field, while at the same time providing protection from an errant vehicle. She stated that is absolutely imperative. Ms. Ford stated their site plan, which was approved by the County, shows the Academy set back as far as possible from any kind of right-of-way; now they find that the right-of-way is virtually upon them; and requested the Board consider a significant redesign of the entrance that promotes safe ingress and egress into Holy Trinity's property. She stated she recognizes that it is a difficult decision; she supports Jim Venable and Wendy Arteaga, both of whom came to the Board with the same issues and concerns that Holy Trinity has; and requested the Board give all consideration to those parties in its decision making.

William Hall, resident of Windsor Estates, requested the residents to stand; and stated there will be 211 homes in Windsor Estates when it is completed. He thanked Mr. Minneboo, John Denninghoff, Bob Kamm and Commissioners for their time, communications with them throughout the project, and for their receptiveness in hearing their concerns. He stated they have a unique interest in the Pineda/Wickham intersection alignment; safety of all the residents and people who travel through that intersection is their primary concern; and to that end they have agreed to grant the Pineda Presbyterian Church an easement to Windsor Estates Drive so they may safely exit their Church grounds and benefit from the signalized entry at Wickham Road. Mr. Hall advised they agree with the traffic assessment and decision to identify a final alignment alternative this evening; and after hearing the engineering report, they believe their analysis of Alternative #4 is in agreement with the findings, and that it has the best engineering features, best price outside of Alternative #10, and provides the safest alternative for all involved. He stated the residents' concerns have not changed since they started working with staff over a year ago; a safe entrance and exit through a signalized intersection is assured with Alternative #4; and on behalf of all the residents of Windsor Estates, he thanks the Board for supporting Alternative #4.

Commissioner Higgs advised Mr. Hall indicated support from Windsor Estates for an exit onto Windsor Drive; and inquired if they are not interested in an entrance and exit for the Presbyterian Church; with Mr. Hall responding it was not until last week that they were aware of the cement median between the lanes on Wickham Road, so that was not a discussion when they voted; and they have not had a meeting on an entrance. Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Hall is saying they are not closed to the idea but cannot make a commitment now; with Mr. Hall responding that is correct, but they made a concerted effort to have a vote on the exit.

Jim Venable, representing Pineda Plaza and 20 plus tenants and numerous people who use the facilities, advised he thought there was a plan that would satisfy the County, Presbyterian Church, Windsor Estates, Tropical Splash Car Wash, and Holy Trinity Academy some time ago; he made a proposal to sell the Plaza to the County and manage it for a couple of years until all but two of the leases were terminated; and that proposal was valid until September 30, 2000, but the County did not accept it by the deadline or request an extension. He stated in September, 2000, there were seven vacancies in the Plaza, but they were fortunate to find several tenants, some of which wanted three-year leases; and they consummated those leases in good faith, and told the tenants they would not sell the Plaza to the County. He stated in November or December, 2000, he was called regarding the Contract with the County; but he could not offer it to the County at that point after they assured their tenants they would not sell it for destruction. Mr. Venable advised he believes, in any plan the County has, that they are entitled to have safe and easy access to the Plaza; Alternative #4 goes behind the Plaza; they have continually asked that the present road, Pineda Causeway, remain open in order that their customers and patients can continue east without circling the building to the south; and above all, they need easy access from Viera and Suntree, which they presently have on the Pineda Causeway. He requested the present traffic light remain for Windsor Estates and others; and stated it would allow southbound traffic on Wickham Road to turn east onto the Causeway and provide the Plaza with the use of its preferable front entrance; and if that can be done with Alternative #4, it would be acceptable to them.

Allan Weiner, resident of Windsor Estates, advised the primary attraction to Windsor Estates was the traffic light at the entrance; it sounds like the light will remain with Alternative #4, but it was not specifically stated; and requested it be put on the record whether Alternative #4 plans to keep the traffic light.

Chairman Carlson inquired if that commitment can be made tonight; with Mr. Minneboo responding until the whole design is done and the warrant analysis is completed, he would not want to commit and say the light will stay there forever. He stated if the Presbyterian Church is going to use it, there should be enough vehicles to warrant the traffic light; however, nobody is ready to commit to it at this time.

Mike Miles advised he lives in the Lake Washington area and is a 37 year resident; for 25 years he was directly involved in the construction industry in Brevard County and remains excited watching the County grow and prosper; but what has always disappointed him the most about the growth is the elected officials and staff's inability to keep pace with transportation needs before they became a problem. He stated some examples are the length of time it took to connect Eau Gallie Causeway to I-95, the years it took to address Minton Road alignment problem, the decade it took to bring U.S. 192 to its present gridlock state, and the failure to address other north/south corridors such as Wickham Road, Turtle Mound Road, Croton Road, Harlock, and John Rodes Boulevard, to name a few. He stated the present Commission, as well as past Commissions and their staffs, have failed miserably to act in the best interest of the County residents, which they took a sworn oath to do; and the Commission and County staff have chosen to sit back and allow Pineda Extension to become a political football and apparently a monetary windfall for some property owners along the pre-designed route of the extension at the expense of the taxpayers. Mr. Miles stated the connection to I-95 and the Pineda Causeway could have and should have been completed years ago at a fraction of the cost and well before the current right-of-way situation came about; it does not take a rocket scientist to realize the importance of the highway alignment and connection to Wickham Road, U.S. 1, and SR A1A, which would have benefited thousands of residents in the North Melbourne/Suntree area as well as the beachside; and now the time has come to make the important decision as to where it would connect and how many millions of dollars it will cost the taxpayers of Brevard County. He stated estimates range from $10 million to an astronomical $37 million, as announced in the newspaper, to span two miles of roadway; and inquired why have the Board, Public Works Department, MPO, Planning and Zoning Department, Economic Development Council, as well as other County agencies failed in their responsibilities to address this vital connection from I-95 east to an existing causeway to SR A1A and all points in between, while it was planning, discussing, permitting, and clearing the way for thousands of acres of development, which all dumped onto Wickham Road. Mr. Miles stated if I-95 is going to be the biggest north/south corridor under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation, the County residents deserve adequate access to and from I-95; the County chose to allow development to come and dump thousands of cars and trucks onto the smaller roads which run north and south and cause gridlock, which the taxpayers now have to spend millions of dollars to correct; so apparently the Board's concentration was more on increasing its tax base than on moving motorists around this section of Brevard County by providing adequate transportation routes north, south, east and west. He inquired if it was more important to get to I-95 or to get to Grand Haven, which started this whole issue. Mr. Miles advised the Commissioners have exhausted themselves on manatee protection, scrub jay protection, Indian River Lagoon protection, endangered lands protection, wetlands protection, and gopher tortoise protection, as well as many other issues; but it failed to protect the taxpaying motorists in the County by providing the ability to get around. He stated as a taxpayer and voter, he urges the Board to make a decision that would utilize the existing intersection at Wickham Road and Pineda Causeway; install a chicane behind the Church to connect to the new road heading west, leaving the Academy, Pineda Plaza, and Tropical Splash Car Wash unaffected while utilizing the pre-arranged right-of-way to the west connecting to I-95 interchange. He requested the Board support Alternative #2.

Katie Beauregard with Re/Max Alternative Realty, representing the owners of three acres on the northeast corner of Wickham Road and Pineda Causeway, advised the buyer is a national tenant who is in the process of going through the contract; the contract is for $1.5 million; the owners' family has lived in Brevard County for over a hundred years; and they have requested clarification of the Pineda lanes going east and west from A1A to Wickham Road. She stated they want the Board to talk to them about that and the turn lane on Wickham Road to the Pineda so they can understand what is going on. She stated the buyer informed the owner if there is less access to the property than there is now, he will back out of the contract; so they would like to know about the Pineda lanes east and west and Wickham Road heading south at the turn lane going to the Pineda. Ms. Beauregard advised the owners want the access worked out so the tenant will not back out of the contract; they have talked with an attorney; and they will ask the County to reimburse them for the full amount of the contract price if the buyer backs out for this reason.

Melissa Hoagland advised the main focus has been on Segment 2 and the alignment of the proposed extension in the area of Wickham Road; and she has two questions that are points of information for the County engineering staff about planning on Segment 1, which will be similar no matter what alternative is chosen. She stated if an extension plan is approved tonight, the next phase will involve the specifics of the connection of the roadway to existing roads; and inquired what is the time table for consideration of the plans to connect the existing roadways, when will the County consider how it will connect them, which roads will be connected, and will it involve the proposed southern Suntree access to the Pineda Extension. She inquired what will the mechanism be for notifying area residents of the County's deliberations and for obtaining input from the residents on any future actions in this regard.

Chairman Carlson instructed Mr. Minneboo to go through some of the questions; noted there is a big issue on the time frame; and recommended that issue be considered first. Mr. Minneboo advised one major concern is the access to the Presbyterian Church, specifically on the south side; that may be difficult because of the arrangements with the original landowner and minimizing the access to Grand Haven; and staff is not sure at this point whether they can give another access points. He stated the County is restricted to three access points through there and most have been utilized; so they will have to do further research on the Church's access. Chairman Carlson inquired if the County is restricted to three access points because of the I-95 interchange; with Mr. Minneboo responding, it is an Agreement with Duda to maintain three access points throughout that entire corridor.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Alternative #2 shows a connection approximately where the Presbyterian Church wants an entrance; and inquired why is it shown on Alternative #2 and not on Alternative #4; with Mr. Minneboo responding that is a different right-of-way. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if it would not extend all the way down because it moved further to the north; with Mr. Minneboo responding that is correct. Commissioner Scarborough inquired what would happen if it is moved that distance to the south; with Mr. Minneboo responding it will cross another parcel. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the County can do condemnation like it has done with other roads, such as Option B under Alternative #2; with Mr. Minneboo responding the County can condemn property for public roads, but he is not sure it can do that for private use. Commissioner Scarborough stated he sees a private road for Windsor Estates on Option B of Alternative #2; with Mr. Minneboo responding it would have been a public road as well; and staff will be looking into it to see if they can address that specific point.

Commissioner Higgs inquired, if the County can condemn property for public use, which comprises entrances and exits such as Windsor Estates' entry road, and the Church and other businesses use it, would that make it a public use; with Mr. Minneboo responding staff needs to give the Board more information on that item.

Mr. Minneboo advised it will probably be a couple of years by the time Segment 1, which is from Wickham Road to the east, is completed. Chairman Carlson inquired if Mr. Minneboo is referring to the actual design and that this process is the preliminary design; with Mr. Minneboo responding this is the preliminary engineering. Chairman Carlson asked Mr. Minneboo to go through the steps before the asphalt is laid so people have an idea of the timing; with Mr. Minneboo responding a normal project would begin with a preliminary engineering report; upon completion of the report, they would go into the design phase of the report, which outlines exactly what needs to be done on a specific project; and the design could take a considerable period of time depending on the magnitude of the project. He stated upon completion of the design, they would develop the bid specifications and advertise for bids; they would then go through the right-of-way acquisition process while into the bidding phase; and then they would move into implementation. Chairman Carlson inquired if it would take two years to do all those activities and have the complete design prior to laying asphalt; with Mr. Minneboo responding they could have it ready to build in a year if they had to. Chairman Carlson noted she is not sure if she believes that; and requested some time frames, as Ms. Arteaga is looking for some assurances about displacement of her business if Alternative #4 is chosen, and everyone is interested in how long the project would take. She inquired, given that the County does not have the dollars to do the project, not even right-of-way dollars, what kind of time frame is staff looking at for connection to Wickham Road; with Mr. Minneboo responding looking at the big picture, the preliminary design and engineering study for I-95 six-laning and interchange will be completed in July, 2003; then DOT will need to hire consultants to design the bid specifications which would be completed in July, 2007; and construction of the interchange could take place in 2009. He stated that is the DOT's sequence of events; and depending on the segment between Wickham Road to the west, which is two-laned and now completed, the only segment that needs to be completed under Alternative #4 is from east to Wickham Road and transition into the present Pineda Causeway. He stated they could get the design, do the mitigation, and have all those tasks done in a couple of years and be ready to start construction.

Chairman Carlson advised Ms. Hoaglund had an issue with Segment 1; and inquired if that aligns with the interchange issue; with Mr. Minneboo responding it is a totally separate issue; it is referred to as the St. Andrews extension; and that issue is not included in the Pineda Causeway Extension package. Chairman Carlson stated Ms. Hoaglund was looking for a time frame. Mr. Minneboo advised staff will try and meet with the homeowners groups and outline the pros and cons, and hopefully by this summer they will have some answers on the location. Chairman Carlson stated, depending on what alternative the Board chooses, there will be conversations on the Windsor Estates intersection and the potential of a St. Andrews intersection with Pineda; and those conversations are going to develop over time as the process evolves.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the segment to the east of Wickham Road operates independently of I-95 interchange construction; with Mr. Minneboo responding yes.

Commissioner Colon advised she has come into the project a year and a half to two years after what has been going on; and it does not make any sense to her for the Board to discuss something that it does not know where the funding is going to come from. She stated she is a little bit upset after hearing some of the things Ms. Arteaga had to say; and she sympathizes with her and thinks everyone in the room would definitely sympathize with her--Holy Trinity, Pineda Plaza, Pineda Presbyterian Church, and Windsor Estates. She stated everyone is wondering where does arrogance come into the discussions; and today she hopes that all the Board is doing is discussing it and getting feedback from its constituents, but is not going to make a major decision. Commissioner Colon advised when she talked to staff about two weeks ago, one of the things they discussed with her was they were going to go through Tropical Splash Car Wash; she asked them if they had spoken to the folks from the Car Wash; it seemed like they felt good that everything was okay; but coming here tonight, Ms. Arteaga is not exactly clear about what will happen. She stated if anyone saw her leave the room, it was because she took about ten minutes to speak to Ms. Arteaga because she had not had an opportunity to speak to her. Commissioner Colon stated with all due respect to the Board, they have used the word "condemn" so easily tonight; it upsets her because she thinks the Board needs to be sensitive to where it puts major roads; and just because it is an access for the public, does not allow the Board to be so quick about what it wants to go ahead and condemn. She stated she wanted to be able to share that with the Board as the new kid on the block; and it is something she is very uncomfortable with because it is going to affect a lot of lives. She stated just because it is Tropical Splash Car Wash and one owner does not allow anyone in the room to go ahead and take it lightly; and she hopes everyone realizes where she is coming from because this is something that is very uncomfortable.

Chairman Carlson advised over the last two years, none of the Commissioners have taken this issue lightly; and it is unfortunate to step into it from the perspective Commissioner Colon has. She stated because it is in her District, she dealt with everybody who could potentially be affected by this issue; but as history has shown, prior Commissions and other folks are at fault for not going forward and doing this when they should have done, because it would have cost a lot less money. She stated unfortunately, they did not have 20/20 hindsight. She stated she would like to see a decision made; why there are problems tonight is because they do not have a decision; they need to know which alternative they are going to take and work on the issues; so the Board should look at Alternative #4 as recommended by the consultant and staff, focus on that, and comment on any problems they may have. She stated if there are no problems with Alternative #4, she would take a motion to approve Alternative #4 then talk about some of the issues that will occur at a later point. Chairman Carlson advised Mr. Minneboo has given some details in terms of time lines, but there is no crystal ball; they do not know where the money is coming from; they have a lot of other road issues that may end up taking precedent over the Pineda Extension; and there are a lot of things happening in the Legislature that the Board does not know what those will impact. She stated the Board should at least attempt to make a decision so it can find some money somewhere to purchase right-of-way, as all the Commissioners would prefer not to go through this process for another two years or however long it may be. She stated the project may not be able to be done in a couple of years, but they need to make the decision now and be decisive about that sort of thing and get on with the issue of taking care of all the interests and trying to make sure everyone, including the folks like the Car Wash owners, Holy Trinity Academy, the Presbyterian Church, and everyone are taken care of with community interests in mind. She stated the Board is interested in the best interest of all concerned; and she is sure its decision will show that.

Commissioner Colon advised one of the things that confuses her is staff saying they could start in a year and all of a sudden they are talking about 2009; and inquired which is it, next year or nine years from now. She stated another thing that concerns her is arrogance; arrogance to her is when someone who owns a business is told that possibly the County is thinking of condemning it two days before a major meeting where all the people came, and she was only told two days before and was not able to ask certain questions. She stated Ms. Arteaga has been aware of the process for the last two years; throughout the whole process, according to the information she has, she asked County staff if they had any inkling of going through the Car Wash and going behind Holy Trinity Academy; some of the feedback that was given was the same feedback that the Board has gotten with all different kinds of answers; but what she is saying is that the Board needs to be fair. Commissioner Colon advised the possibility of going through the Car Wash was there; Ms. Arteaga knew there was a potential there; but she did not know that the recommendation from staff was definitely going to be at that meeting. She stated no one knew before that meeting took place that Alternative #4 was the one staff was going to recommend; and she knows that for a fact because some of them told her themselves at that meeting they felt better because Alternative #4 seemed to be the one that really made sense and was not going to affect their quality of life. She stated what concerns her is, if the project is going to be something that is going to be ten years from now, or nine years from now, is the Board going to be fair to this business owner and pay her exactly what the business is worth, or is it going to try and buy it now when it is not worth as much as it would be in nine or ten years. Commissioner Colon stated the Board was sensitive to Holy Trinity Academy; everyone needs to be sensitive and be able to realize that the County does some things that are fair for all, not just the majority; and that is where she is coming from. She stated she wants to have that information available to all the people and if she finds out that the County staff was a bit arrogant in how this was handled, then everyone who was part of that will come out in the open; and she did not appreciate some of the things that have happened behind the scenes.

Mr. Minneboo advised for at least five meetings of major importance, they met with all the people; he personally took time on the weekends to meet with each and everyone who he thought would be directly affected; and until they knew where all the numbers were going to fall, they did not know Alternative #4 was going to be the most desirable. He stated he went to Wendy Arteaga personally; the word "condemn" has never been utilized in any conversations he ever had with any person throughout any part of the corridors in the entire vicinity; and he met with everybody personally and discussed every issue to its fullest. He stated Mr. Fallace can attest to that and anybody here who would like to talk about it.

Chairman Carlson stated in all the discussions she had through District 4, she does not recall the use of condemnation coming up unless it was of absolute last resort; the County wanted to avoid those possibilities; it can go in and condemn everything without talking to the community; it has happened in the past and will probably happen in the future; but that is not the way she wanted to do business, and did not feel that was the way staff wanted to do business. She stated staff has done an excellent job in trying to work with all groups and trying to make something work; there are many entities with so many interests that are diverse and very difficult; and she does not have a problem with all the things staff has done. Chairman Carlson stated she tried hard to work with the community; the community once divided is now coming together and trying to understand that this is an issue the entire community has to look at, has to agree upon, and has to have their interests and needs met; so the Board is not trying to avoid anything or distract from that at this meeting. She stated the Board is trying to make a decision; it is not trying to make it so it is not personal because it is personal for everybody sitting here; everybody is here because they have a personal interest at stake; and none of the Commissioners are going to understate that. She stated she would like to move forward and not put this off as previous Commissions have done many years ago; she would like to have something happen tonight; so she would like to get some comments from the Commissioners to see where they would like to go, then move this project forward.

Commissioner Higgs advised the Board has been presented with a number of alternatives; all of them do something to somebody that they do not want to happen; and while there are things that have to be worked out with Alternative #4, it minimizes the impacts to the smallest number of people. She stated she used the term "condemnation" when she asked staff about doing any road projects; that is a term that cannot be hidden in terms of a conversation regarding this project; there are people who are going to be unhappy with the County because of the road no matter what it does; and it is a reality of the County's business in regard to roads. She stated if her asking the question was something that offended anyone, it certainly was not meant to offend; it is a realistic term about how roads are built; unfortunately, it is a very expensive way to go; so they hope to work those out. She stated realistically Alternative #4 is the best one.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to move forward with Alternative #4 for the Pineda Causeway Extension, as recommended by the consultants and staff.

Commissioner Scarborough recommended continued discussions on Holy Trinity Academy lights, access to Windsor Estates, and access to Pineda Presbyterian Church. He stated in reference to Commissioner Colon's comments, the County can condemn property, but it is trying to walk beyond the condemnation to being sensitive; and recommended the motion include continued discussions with all the groups, because sometimes answers can be found if people are determined to find answers. Commissioner Higgs stated all the groups at this point are trying to find answers; that is her expectation and the practice of Brevard County staff in doing road projects; and they will continue to work with all the parties involved to come up with solutions that minimize the negative impacts to everyone while at the same time maximizing the road's ability to serve the people of the community.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Board needs to go forward with the understanding that they will continue to work with all the parties involved to make it the least objectionable. Commissioner Scarborough stated he will second that amendment.

Commissioner O'Brien advised he agrees that Pineda Presbyterian Church has an ingress/egress problem on Wickham Road; it is not only a church but a community center and voting precinct; and people from Windsor Estates will probably be going to that Church to vote. He stated the Church expects future growth, which will be wonderful for the community; and the right in/right out will put an undue burden on everyone who has to go there unless an agreement can be made. He stated gas prices are now at $1.69 a gallon; if it gets to be an energy crisis, the Board has to ask itself how it can conserve fuel by helping to facilitate the needs of the Church and everyone who has to go there; and with 100 cars a day and 400 cars on Sundays, that is a lot of fuel that could be conserved instead of wasted by having to make U-turns, come back to the traffic light, and wait again. Commissioner O'Brien advised Windsor Estates has offered an exit for the Church members; and hopefully they will consider ingress and egress there. He stated County staff will be happy to work with all the people to try and solve those kinds of problems, especially on future needs; and Pineda Presbyterian and Holy Trinity both expect substantial expansion, which actually makes the need for the Pineda Extension more necessary. He stated placing a school zone light along the Pineda is important; and he hopes that is included in the motion. Commissioner Higgs stated the motion includes working with all the groups involved. Chairman Carlson stated there are a lot of details that need to be ironed out. Commissioner O'Brien stated he wants to be reassured the County will look at those situations, especially as the Academy grows, some of the students will be old enough to drive.

Commissioner O'Brien advised FDOT should improve the signage on U.S. 1 and the Pineda Causeway, especially the signs denoting U.S. 1 north and south; people traveling east on the Pineda who want to go north on U.S. 1 has a little sign saying U.S. 1 with an arrow; and the dirt is torn up at U.S. 1 because people make the wrong turn and want to go south. He stated he does not want to put in more medians along there, but to fix the signage that would really denote if people go up the ramp heading east on Pineda they will hit U.S. 1 crossover and make a left to head north. He noted it is a simple thing, but the signs do not say that; they need a lot of improving there for safety; and 100 feet of it will also be part of this project. Commissioner O'Brien advised to accommodate the Academy, if everyone has to go right as they come out, a lot of them do not live on the beaches and will want to turn around and go back to Windsor Estates; so the Board may want to consider a U-turn lane with a light similar to the one put in at Sea Ray Boats on SR 3, which only trips when a car comes in there to turn. He stated it works well; and hopefully staff will look at something like that for the future needs, not only for the School, but also for people who want to make a U-turn and go back to Pineda Plaza. He stated Grand Haven triggered the project; however, the Board has discussed it for years; he has been a Commissioner for six years and from his first year they have discussed it; and the Board is finally starting to take positive actions toward moving it forward. Commissioner O'Brien advised unlike the State Commission, the County Commission cannot be coerced by federal lawsuits on properties for sale; he resents the last statement made about that; and it was improper because they cannot sue the County for doing what it has to do for the community. He stated the County can step in and buy the Car Wash at fair market value at this time, then lease it to the owners until it has to be torn down; they will get long advanced notice of that; and with their money in hand, they can choose another location either south of where they are presently located or to the north, in California, Texas, or wherever. He stated they will have enough money from this deal to buy property at today's fair market value and set aside money as an investment to keep up with inflation; so when the day comes when the Car Wash has to be torn down, they can put another one up in close proximity to the one that is there today; and that is the part some people forgot. He stated condemnation is not the situation; there are ways to accommodate owners; and the Board has full intentions of doing that. He stated it is not such a heart breaker as everyone is portraying it to be; it is not easy to take, but there are solutions that will help alleviate some of the problems, not all of them; and he would vote in favor of Alternative #4 as the best plan at this time.

Commissioner Colon advised when she spoke to the Church members and residents of Windsor Estates, she was very excited over Alternative #4; but one thing that is very important to remember is it always comes to the part "if it is not happening to me, then it does not matter"; one of the things they always talk about is love thy neighbor; and she hopes that everybody in the room will keep a close eye on what happens to Ms. Arteaga and make sure that she is compensated the way she should be. She stated that is all she is saying to everyone here, to make sure that it is fair, done right, and with some dignity; that is all she is asking for from the people and that they put themselves in her shoes, which she wore in the past. She stated the Board needs to be sensitive to some of the things that happen; Alternative #4 is the best decision the Board can make; she was very surprised about what had happened earlier; and she hopes Ms. Arteaga realizes that she will be watching it closely and that she is not alone. She stated she hopes everyone here fights just as hard to make sure they are doing the right thing by Ms. Arteaga.

Chairman Carlson thanked staff for working very hard on the project, and the consultants, who have done a very good job showing the alternatives and working within each alternative for possible options. She stated her office will be accessible to all the groups that have been vocal throughout the process; she wants to make sure all interests are taken into account and done with the least amount of impact; and she will vote for Alternative #4 which she feels is the best alternative and the most cost effective. She advised Mr. Minneboo that after the vote, she would like to get an idea of where the County will go from here.

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

Mr. Minneboo inquired if that also takes into account the acquisition of right-of-way at I-95. Commissioner Higgs inquired if staff should go forward with that acquisition before FDOT has indicated its desires; with Mr. Minneboo responding affirmatively. Commissioner Scarborough stated it would be prudent to go forward. Chairman Carlson stated I-95 is only one road that is in the path; but if the County has that whole right-of-way free when DOT comes to actually look at that interchange, it will be in a much better position, which might move it up on the time line.

The meeting recessed at 7:36 p.m., and reconvened at 7:54 p.m.

DISCUSSION, RE: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM FOR VALKARIA AIRPORT

Budget Manager Dennis Rogero advised the request is for approval of the Valkaria Airport Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for FY 2000-01 through FY 2004-05, as recommended by the Valkaria Airport Advisory Board. He stated the Board approves the first year of the CIP as part of the operating and capital budget approval in September, and utilizes the CIP to identify and assess capital improvement needs over a five-year period. He stated Brevard County's long-range CIP is updated annually to plan for major expenditures in the future and to adjust capital projects as needs and circumstances change. Mr. Rogero advised specific revenue sources to fund the projects are also identified in the CIP. He stated the Valkaria CIP provides information on three funded projects that total $110,000 in the current fiscal year and six projects at $877,000 from FY 2001-02 through 2004-05, depending on receipt of funding from federal or State grantors and the Board. He advised two of the projects request approval of $350,000 in commercial paper funding.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the CIP came from the Valkaria Airport Advisory Board and not from County staff.

Mary Tees of Port St. John presented a video, depicting that the number of licensed pilots nationwide has been declining steadily for over twenty years; and unless that long-term trend changes, there will be fewer than 1,000 pilots in all of Brevard County. (The video experienced technical problems.)

Maureen Rupe of Port St. John advised they are interested in airports as one is adjacent to Port St. John; they have gotten on well with it, but it is having serious internal problems; and it may benefit the Board to familiarize itself with the problems at Space Coast Executive Airport. She stated the chart in the CIP shows a huge decline in pilot certification; and inquired why $700,000 is in the plan for more hangars when they do not have the pilots. She inquired what is the total amount of grant monies from FAA and FDOT; is the County picking up the rest of the cost; how much debt does the Airport have; and what percentage of the Advisory Board are pilots and what percentage are residents. She stated she understands by taking the grant money, the County could lose control of the airport; and inquired if that is the case. She noted if it is the case, she urges the Board to study other airports under FAA control before taking any action, as there may be a reduction in supervision, noise control, other restrictions, and a conflict with residents' quality of life issues. She stated if the Board thinks control of the Airport will be given to FAA, it should carefully think about accepting the grant.

Norman Allen advised the taxiway for Runway 14/32 is a safety issue; and if another plane is coming in and a pilot is taxiing on the runway, because there is no taxiway, it becomes a very dangerous situation. He stated the FAA is aware that no touch and go is allowed after 6:00 p.m. and before 8:00 a.m.; if a taxiway is constructed, no touch and go would be done because airplanes would be able to taxi back for a landing; but as it stands now, they cannot taxi back except on the runway. Mr. Allen advised the County at one time requested the Fire Department purchase three acres from the FAA; one of the agreements in the purchase of the land was that the money would go towards construction of a taxiway; and a taxiway would alleviate the safety issues, eliminate touch and go's, and be a win/win situation. He stated it makes no sense to purchase another piece of property for substantially more money for the firehouse; it would be paying $110,000 for five acres for the property, and could get three acres from FAA at $45,000 or five acres at $75,000. Mr. Allen stated buying the property for the proposed firehouse would take it off the tax rolls; purchasing the property from FAA would not take it off the tax rolls; so it seems like a waste of tax money to spend more for the proposed site when it is not necessary. He stated the new firehouse will be on an extremely dangerous blind curve; he cannot imagine the fire chief or anyone on staff recommending that location; and requested the Board ask staff to stop the purchase of the firehouse property until more research can be done and put the issue on the Agenda for discussion at a future Board meeting.

Janis Walters, President of Valkaria Neighborhood Association, and member of the Valkaria Airport Advisory Board (VAAB), advised she has problems with the Airport budget that should be cleared up before the Board can make an informed decision on the proposed CIP. She stated less than two years ago, they argued against including the Super Unicom in the budget because there was no discussion or decision by the Board beforehand; the Board decided to leave it in the budget, but not to proceed with the project until it was presented as part of a new CIP; and last year the Board decided to proceed with a Joint Participation Agreement with Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for the Super Unicom even though it did not have the CIP. Ms. Walters advised the VAAB voted specifically to include the Super Unicom in the CIP sent to the Board; she did not see it on the list of projects in the Agenda Report; and she does not like the idea that a capital project can originate as a budget line item and proceed all the way to completion without ever being presented to the Board in its proper context. She stated at the March 6, 2001 VAAB meeting, she learned that some of the projects on the list, i.e. the taxiway, signage, and fuel tank were already approved by the Board in the budget in September, 2000; apparently the Board also approved a five-year $20,000 per year accrual three years ago to completely reconstruct Runway 9/27 because somebody put a line item in the budget; Mr. Shimkus believes he should have $60,000 accrued towards that project; but he can only identify $40,000 plus, so he is scrambling to build more hangars to generate more revenue to cover the difference on an item that should not even exist. Ms. Walters stated nobody seems to know exactly what the Airport's current debt obligations are; the amounts

owed to Road and Bridge or Parks and Recreation are being contested; the Budget Office confirms $250,000 in commercial paper loans on the Airport accounts as of FY 1995-96, which has a balance of $150,000; and inquired how did a theoretically broke Airport pay off $100,000 in the last four years. She stated the current interest rate on the commercial paper program is about 6%; interest on $150,000 would be $9,000 a year; but Mr. Shimkus has budgeted only $5,500 for interest payments, which cannot be right. She stated Mr. Shimkus inflated his intergovernmental revenues by 5% in the budget so that once the 5% statutory reduction is applied, the entire grant eligible capital improvement amount becomes spendable in the current fiscal year; that is nice for facilitating projects, but it inflates the statutory reduction entry by 5% of the grant eligible capital improvements; and inquired if anybody remembers to reverse the 5% artificial inflation or is it being carried forward. She inquired if the $40,000 plus dollars Mr. Shimkus thinks is in the capital accrual budget for Runway 9/27 is real money or net effect of the 5% maneuver. Ms. Walters stated all the financial items and some others need to be sorted out and corrected; and requested the Board have the Airport accounts audited then look at the Airport's true revenues, expenses, and debts before committing to any new spending or new debt. She stated the Agenda Report indicates the CIP list was recommended by the VAAB; not all of them supported all the projects; but they did the best they could with the information they had and brought the product to the Board. She stated some of the projects are eligible for FAA grants; and no one on the VAAB thought the Board should take FAA money, but that was not noted in the Agenda Report. She stated they all expected the Super Unicom to be on the CIP projects list in the Agenda Report; the VAAB voted to include it; it is already in process; and requested the Board include it as Project #1 for this CIP cycle in whatever version of the CIP it chooses to approve since it has already been undertaken.

Johnnie Wimpee advised he recently moved to West Melbourne, but when he moved to Valkaria in 1992, the aviation community wanted to improve the Airport; the improvements are beyond the needs of the community as a whole; and the principal users of the Airport are from out of the County and provide no financial benefit to the community or the County. He stated the FAA wanted to increase taxes on commercial airline tickets and fuel to improve safety of commercial airports like Melbourne Airport, and reduce delays; and inquired why is the County using money to develop an airport for a small aviation community and declining market. He stated if the Board wants to improve the community, it should look at improving Valkaria Road; there is a bridge on it that is used by a commercial concern with occasional overloaded trucks; and to replace the bridge would be a good project for the community. Mr. Wimpee stated he knows it is different types of money that is used for roads and airports, but if the FAA money comes from the same source as highway funds, Valkaria would not be considered.

Arthur Irvine, President of Valkaria Aviation Association, stated from the perspective of someone looking at this meeting from the outside, the discussion is hard to understand; they do not have enough time to explain everything and put it in perspective; but in five minutes he will attempt to theorize on a few things. He advised he has the proposed five-year CIP and the paper trail for acquisition of the five acres for a fire station; and in order for people to understand one, he has to reference the other. He stated evidence will show that a County Commissioner, in collusion with Mr. Curt Lorenc and Ms. Janis Walters, provided a suggestion to the County Fire Department that the analysis of possible sites of land for an fire station should conclude with their preference not a preference based on operational necessity; and that led to a proposal of reversed engineering to support that conclusion. He stated it was then put on the Consent Agenda with no notice to anyone that any decision had been made to the so-called preferred site; and without anyone able to remove it from the Consent Agenda, it was not brought up for general discussion. He stated it is evident that some people will go to any lengths, to any expenditure of taxpayers money, and to any damage to Valkaria homeowners, real or perceived. He stated the credibility of the Board is in question; and that is what he was trying to bring to the Board's attention, but it is difficult to do anything in five minutes.

Bob Varley advised he thought they heard a better win/win situation December, 2000 or January, 2001; he spoke to Mr. Reynolds with the FAA Office in Orlando and told him there was an issue going on at Valkaria; he has looked at the situations in the past and understands the Airport; and he said the best solution for the taxiway on 14/32 is to paint off one side of the runway as a legal taxiway which would only cost the Airport the price of the paint. He stated Mr. Reynolds said the runway is wide enough to accommodate it; that it would be a perfectly acceptable solution with no concrete, facilities work, or land acquisition; and he would talk to County staff about that; however, he has not heard of it as one of the solutions since then. He requested the Board approve four items that relate to safety, but not use FAA funds for those projects. Mr. Varley stated one of the speakers will provide the Board with a copy of the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Assurances, which require obligations on the part of the Board once it takes the money with respect to federal laws that come into effect and did not exist previously. He stated advisory circulars for airports that the County did not have to follow will raise its level of responsibility and lead to future expansion with the County still owning the liability associated with that; so it is not a good situation for a small airport. He requested the Board conduct a thorough financial analysis of the Airport's debt situation, as there seems to be some disconnect in the money; his concern is a growing debt; they have not been able to pay down the debt over the last few years for previous projects; so it does not make sense to go further into debt with this current situation. He requested the Board establish a funding debt cap for the Airport so it will become a restriction as they look ahead into multi-year plans so it does not go overboard in the debt direction. Mr. Varley requested in the future the Board approve and fund projects that do not increase the County's liability at the Airport and projects that improve safety; and that it not increase obligations and associated restrictions that come with obligations to FAA or FDOT. He requested the Board keep control of the Airport and not have federal and State laws that apply too much robust operations, and not approve projects that will threaten the environment created around the Airport. He stated hangars are good and generate revenue; there is a sign up list of people who are interested in hangars, which becomes the justification of building more to some extend; at the moment it does not cost anything to put your name on the list; there may be 40 to 50 names on the list; and requested the Board establish a policy where when it comes time to make a decision on how many T-hangars to build, the first people on the list put down a two-month rent deposit to secure their positions when the hangars are built; and the incentive would be to get the third month free. He noted it would make it a serious obligation on their part.

Dewey Leidal advised his concern is the quality of life; he is not against pilots and support their ability and right to fly and enjoy themselves; but he wants to see things that will benefit everyone. He stated he rarely has problems with the Airport in the location he lives at; however, now and then the touch and go operations on Runway 9 were a nuisance; that runway was supposedly closed permanently, but somewhere that changed; and in the meantime homes were built there. He suggested signage on both ends of that runway saying no touch and go; it is a recreational facility; there have been a lot of improvements; it has a golf course which he supported; runways were refurbished and hangars were put in; and all that benefit the community and help to pay the bills. He stated the Airport should not run up an outrageous debt; the County should not take money from FAA and fall under its thumb where it will tell the County what it can and cannot do; and local control of the Airport is needed. Mr. Leidal stated the VAAB consists of 11 people, with two members from each Commission District which gives good citizen representation countywide; that is a big step in the right direction; and maybe they would not need that many people in the future, but right now it should remain. He stated it is a voluntary board; and the more people involved as volunteers, the better off the County will be.

Del Yonts, Chairman of the VAAB, speaking for himself, stated one thing that came up at their meeting is the FAA funding and criteria and restrictions that can be placed on things; so he feels anything that uses that funding is not appropriate. He stated they need to keep control of the Airport with the Board and not the national government. He stated the budget changed drastically; things have changed a lot; they went over it in great detail; and they understand it, but there are a lot of questions of why they changed from before to now and is it worth going back to look at those things and spend the money to do that. He noted the changes in the numbers were a surprise to the VAAB.

Barbara Ray stated she likes some of the projects on the list because the residents and pilots are concerned about safety; she likes the sweepers, fuel tank, and signage for safety reasons; but she is concerned about spending over $300,000 in commercial paper. She stated they should not use commercial paper all the time and should save it for other things that are more important; they like the fact that there has been progress at the Airport that has shaped it to being something that fits into the community; but they fear bringing FAA funding and losing what they have. She stated they have come too far to lose it; and urged economic caution.

Dan Faden, member of the VAAB, speaking as a homeowner, stated there are two items in the CIP which may be funded with FAA grant funds; they are the north/south taxiway and the air field segmented circle and windsock signage; the County has never used FAA money at Valkaria Airport; the projects can be funded with FDOT money or other available grants; and it would be a big mistake to accept FAA money because of the extensive requirements and regulations that would accompany the money. He stated the cost to comply with FAA designated regulations would be an escalating financial drain; it would be detrimental to the direction the Board has taken with Valkaria Airport, that it be a small recreational community airport; and FAA regulations and rules could open the door to increased flight training. Mr. Faden stated flight safety is the biggest problem at the Airport; and increased flight training activity is not a benefit to the local pilots, as it crowds the air and puts wear and tear on the runways. He stated it is not a benefit to the community because of the repetitious fly-overs; and it has nothing to do with local pilots. Mr. Faden advised when the package was presented to the VAAB, Mr. Shimkus quickly walked them over the north/south taxiway and airfield signage projects, and stated they were not worthy of long discussions because the Board most likely would not approve them due to the extensive regulations that come with FAA grant money. He stated those projects stayed in the package for the Board's review; and requested the Board do what is best for the present and future of Valkaria Airport as well as the continued growth of the community around it. He stated fulfilling FAA requirements would give the Board less control of the Airport, thereby giving the people less of a voice in their Airport; and requested the Board prohibit any FAA money from being used and serous look at the items presented and select the items that will give safety first to the Airport and pilots because those are of key importance.

Curt Lorenc stated he brought some back up information that was on the video, but sometimes a video is the best way to go. Chairman Carlson inquired if it has not been fixed; with Mr. Lorenc responding he hopes they can give it another try. He stated there has been a steady decline in the number of pilots for a 20-year period; there was a decline in the number of pilots in Brevard County even with the increase in population; so the Board has to question some of the projects, like T-hangars which may not be viable. He stated one of the real concerns is taking FAA money; it has serious strings attached to it; the County would lose control of the zoning around the Airport, the noise abatement, and weight restrictions; and all the advisory circulars will become mandatory, which could cost millions to upgrade the Airport to comply with those. Mr. Lorenc stated the FAA will also dictate future projects; he has backup material to support that; a lot of it can be found on the AOPA web page and FAA sites; and he has serious concerns about using FAA money. He advised Mr. Shimkus presented the CIP; the financial numbers given to them at the time were incorrect; he showed he had lots of money to support the projects; he came in and said he needed a decision that evening; and before the public was able to speak there was a motion and second, and very little input from the public. He stated it is important to get input from the pilots and residents to come up with a good CIP; at the March meeting, Mr. Shimkus came back and said he lost $50,000 and it evaporated from his budget; and he did not have too much in the way of explanation for that. Mr. Lorenc stated he can tell the Board about some very interesting things he sees in the budget and it needs to be audited back to 1993 before more debt is incurred; and the Board needs to see what the income is, what its liabilities are, and what it would be adding. He stated the last set of T-hangars had 14 units; the pilots claimed they had 73 on the waiting list and there would be no problem filling the hangars; however, that was not the case. He stated they went through the 73 names on the list and still had two or three hangars vacant; when Mr. Shimkus came, he had a vacancy and went through the waiting list and had to go to No. 26 before he got someone who was willing to take the hangar; so it is not wise to borrow money with the decline in pilots. He stated Mr. Jenkins got the fuel tank going out there; it is a good source of revenue at about $20,000 a year; and safety projects should be done. He noted he would like to give the videotape another try.

Don Darby advised it does not make economic sense to expand Valkaria Airport; no matter where the money comes from, it will cost the County; the federal money will not contribute to operational expenses; and there is no income from that so the County would have to pay to manage, maintain, and operate an expanded airport from the T-hangar revenues or the County budget. He stated the FAA money comes with strings attached; all of it is to benefit a small number of people; many of those people do not live in Brevard County; and the companies that benefit from the Airport are not from the County and cause the biggest problems with flight safety in Vero. He stated they are the biggest users and abusers of the Airport and Valkaria community. Mr. Darby stated quality of life is another issue; he searched for years for an environment like Valkaria and knew there was an airport there when he bought the land and built his house; but he expected it to be a good neighbor; however, it has been quite the opposite. He stated he did not expect a senseless push to expand the airport; it was such a small community airport that it could not bother anyone; but now there is a push to expand it with no reason behind it. He stated the County owes the residents reasonable consideration in this matter, preferably in limiting the Airport growth; and hopefully it never gets as far as the County having to compensate the residents of Valkaria for the loss in property value and quality of life in that community.

Chairman Carlson allowed the videotape to be tried again; however, there was no sound.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired if Mr. Yonts feels taking a grant from FAA is appropriate, and what was the vote on that by the VAAB; with Mr. Yonts responding it was brought to their attention at the last meeting that there may be conditions attached to it; and the statement was if there were restrictions and conditions, the VAAB would not recommend doing it; but if there were no conditions, they the Board could consider the FAA grant funds. He stated they were not sure of the situation and whether or not there were conditions; and at this point, he does not know if there are. Commissioner O'Brien stated the VAAB does not know what the restrictions may or may not be; looking at FAA funding for the overlay project at $31,000 and the signage at $18,000; $300,000 for the T-hangars would come from FDOT, as well as the chain-link fence and four-wheel drive vehicle; but nobody knows what the rules are and he could not find them in the package. Commissioner Higgs stated the Agenda package contains a memo from staff dated April 10, 2001, which outlines what the grant assurances. Commissioner O'Brien stated the VAAB has not been notified. Chairman Carlson inquired if the County has to abide by FAA requirements to get the grant dollars; with Commissioner Higgs responding there are 20 pages of assurances in the Agenda package the County is required to sign if it accepts FAA money. Commissioner O'Brien stated it does not say what the assurances are; the County may be required to provide handicap parking, bathrooms, etc.; he does not know; and he is concerned that the VAAB said it does not know what the conditions are. He inquired how can an advisory board advise the Board of County Commissioners of anything if it does not know what they are advising on. He stated the VAAB has not been advised of what they are; someone said the County would lose control of all zoning around the Airport and FAA will dictate all future projects; but he does not know if that is true or not. Mr. Yonts stated his statement is if there are conditions that the County cannot live with, the Board should not consider using FAA money, but if those assurances are something the County can live with, then it is not an issue. Commissioner Higgs stated the assurances are part of the Agenda package as is staff's assessment of the additional assurances from FAA versus FDOT.

Commissioner Higgs stated in all her conversations with the Director of Public Safety and Fire Chief, she asked them to recommend a technically sound location for the fire station that would be in the best interest of the public safety in Valkaria and Grant; it was before the Board; and if they want additional information, she will let staff explain their reasons even though they were part of the package. She stated she received calls from people in Valkaria; she has scheduled a meeting with Mr. Parker and Chief Farmer to talk with the residents so they can find out what is happening; there were brochures passed out in the neighborhood over the weekend that raised a high level of concern with some people; and they will have an opportunity to meet with staff. She stated regarding the CIP, over the past eight to nine years the Board has done more to upgrade and provide proper safety at Valkaria Airport than has been done in the past 50 years; it was built for World War II use and training use; the Board authorized two sets of T-hangars, an entry road, parking lot, refurbished runways, acquired clear zones, improved the infield, and cleared the side areas of the runways for more safety; and it secured a professional manager and staff. Commissioner Higgs advised there is some debt, and further debt concerns her regarding the capital plan for the Airport; however, she will recommend moving forward with the Super Unicom, fuel tank, airfield signage without FAA money, the runway safety fencing, airport service vehicle, and runway sweeping machines as funds are available to do those. She noted those fit into the five-year plan without seeking FAA funding.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to acknowledge receipt of the Valkaria Airport Capital Improvements Plan, and authorize moving forward with the Super Unicom, fuel tank, airfield segmented circle and windsock signage, runway safety fencing, airport service vehicle, and runway sweeping machine as funds are available without requesting FAA money.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the motion includes the commercial paper projects; with Commissioner Higgs responding she did not include the commercial paper.

Commissioner O'Brien advised the conditions of the grants are standard; and read several conditions regarding certification of equipment, performance of sponsors agents in awarding contracts, clear and accurate bids, good and sufficient title, conformance with property map, appraisals reviewed by qualified appraiser, certification of construction project, inspection, testing, etc. He stated there are no regulations saying FAA will control all the properties, the zoning, and other things that were said by most of the people; and it is standard requirements which say if their money is used, it will be according to ordinary common procurement rules.

Commissioner Higgs asked staff if there were provisions in the FAA assurances the Board should be aware of that might cause concerns; with Valkaria Airport Manager Jim Shimkus responding Item 6, "requirements to comply with all aspects of the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise as defined by 49 CFR Part 26 as amended," is a federal program that would require staff to certify disadvantaged businesses as being eligible to do projects; they would have to look at disadvantaged businesses as vendors and construction contractors before looking at other companies to do the work at Valkaria; and that would become a big paperwork requirement for the minimal staff at the Airport. Commissioner Higgs inquired what would be the County's requirements in terms of land use or the Davis Bacon Act; with Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca responding the Davis Bacon Act would significantly increase the minimum amount of money paid hourly for certain people employed and subcontractors; and regarding compatible land uses, the Board experienced that requirement when it tried to put residential at the end of the runway and FAA became involved and recommended it was contrary to its recommendation. Commissioner Higgs stated those are examples of some of the concerns; and that is why she recommended not accepting FAA funds. Commissioner O'Brien stated the disadvantaged business list is available from the State at no cost; it is on the computers and is a statewide list of minority businesses, etc.; and the County may have some of its own disadvantaged businesses on its purchasing vendor list. He stated FAA not recommending residential at the end of a runway was a smart thing to do; and it was silly to even think about doing that. Commissioner Higgs stated the owner of the property wanted to do it, and he had people who were interested in living there and who were into aviation.

Chairman Carlson clarified the motion to include the fuel tank, signage, runway safety fencing, service vehicle, and sweeping machine; and called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner O'Brien voted nay.

Commissioner Colon inquired if Commissioner Higgs is interested in putting an ordinance establishing penalties for touch and go situations at the Airport on the next agenda for discussion. She stated the fine they looked into said not to exceed $500; and inquired if it is something the Board should discuss; with Commissioner Higgs responding she would like to get a report from staff on how that is being used and the provisions on not to exceed $500, which she does not remember where it came from. She stated she would be happy to discuss that if staff brings a report back at the next meeting or a subsequent meeting when they have time to prepare the report. Commissioner Colon advised one of her concerns is the flight school safety; there are things on the books, but they have no teeth; and if they are not being applied, then they do no good in regards to protecting the community. Commissioner Higgs stated after the Commissioners get the report from staff, if they have questions, it can be put on the Agenda; but she would like to get the report first.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board is going to do anything about the requests for auditing the Airport; with Chairman Carlson responding once the Audit Committee convenes, it would probably look through various Departments and potential areas for auditing. Commissioner Scarborough stated it would be a good idea, when the Board receives requests for auditing, that staff accumulate a list of those areas. He stated the Committee will make the ultimate decision, but if they have direction at different meetings that people requested, it would be something to work on. Chairman Carlson stated it is a good idea for staff to take note of those potential opportunities. Commissioner Higgs stated the Committee will choose the areas they wish to audit; and any time the Board has recommendations from citizens, those should be sent to the Committee.

APPOINTMENTS, RE: REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE

Clarence Rowe, President of the Central Brevard Branch of the NAACP, advised he has concerns about appointments to the Redistricting Committee and the overall subject matter of redistricting; and his presentation will be on the subject of perception and deception, honesty, dignity, and integrity. He stated on April 3, 2001, he brought the subject up; the Board gave specific instructions to staff to hire a consultant; on April 12, 2001 there was a legal ad in the newspaper for the open space ordinance; but there was nothing else on the Agenda that were published on March 28 and April 12, 2001; and the legal ad in Florida TODAY Newspaper did not mention it as well. He stated the April 12, 2001 Agenda denied the public an opportunity to address the issue; there were only two or three people to speak on that subject; and that is shortsighted for the Commissioners or whoever puts the Agenda together for such a sensitive issue. He stated redistricting only comes every ten years, yet it was not made a public subject so people who have concerns could be present to address the issue; and they were denied that opportunity. He stated he has all the ads and none of them have anything about redistricting, only the open space ordinance; he finds that distasteful and dishonest; and the Board is playing with the integrity of the people and taxpayers of the community. Mr. Rowe stated the census information is quite sensitive; it strikes a lot of nerves and does a lot of things within a ten-year period; and there was no public announcement made to that effect. He stated something else he found disturbing was the information dealing with the consultant for Jacksonville; if the Board wants to kill a program, it can go to a town that is five times bigger than Brevard County and try to get a quote from a consultant; that is wrong; and if the Board is going to do something like that, it should deal with a city or community that is like in population rather than get a quote of $100,000 to $400,000 which is not in the ballfield for this community. Mr. Rowe advised he has a problem with some of the appointments to the Redistricting Committee; he was disappointed in Commissioner Carlson's appointments of one County employee who has expertise in planning, and a City official of Rockledge; that is like stacking the deck because those people have more expertise than others and can do more with the census figures and software than anyone else on the Committee; and they would most likely end up leading the Committee because of their expertise, which is a no no. He stated it is the perception it gives; and it is not above board as far as he is concerned. Mr. Rowe advised the Charter was adopted in November, 1994 and became effective January, 1995; it was amended on March 12, 1996, and amended again on November 3, 1998; the Charter has not been used since it has been previously worked as far as redistricting; and this is the first time the Charter has come into play. He stated the language in the Charter is loose; it needs to be tweaked and needs some structure; and it needs to have open days and closed days. He stated two of the appointments came in yesterday; most of the Commissioners appointments were in between April 1 and 4, 2001; there needs to be some structure and sensitivity about what they are doing; and he would suggest an open and closing date when the Board is going to deal with subject matters such as appointments and that they be timely. He stated the subject matter was supposed to be on the Agenda by noon on Friday; somehow it came in yesterday; so there is no structure. He requested the NAACP be given whatever documentation and software pertaining to the census so it may review the subject matter; they have a strong concern in reference to the census at a local, State, regional, and national level; and it is important that they try to work together and do the things that are in the best interest of the overall community. He requested charges be waived if there are any for the requested documentation and software.

Chairman Carlson instructed the County Manager to clarify how the subject of redistricting came up at the open space ordinance workshop.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the item had been on two prior Commission Agendas; there was a question about the consultant's fee; and staff wanted to bring it to the Board's attention to keep the issue moving. He stated they called the consultant recommended by the Florida Association of Counties to get an estimate; it was in the $100,000 range; Jacksonville, with a population of at least double the size of Brevard County ended up paying $250,000 for its consultant although the same consultant they checked with did submit a bid of $100,000 to Jacksonville; and staff brought that information to the Board at the workshop to keep the process moving because there are time constraints, and they knew the Board was going to make its appointments at this meeting, as previously indicated.

Chairman Carlson advised the Board needs to accept the appointments and define a process for electing the chairman and vice chairman of the Committee.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to instruct the Redistricting Committee to elect its chairman and vice chairman. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Jenkins advised he will assign a staff person to the Committee for the first meeting to help it get started and organized. Chairman Carlson inquired about going out for a consultant; with Mr. Jenkins responding staff is moving ahead and breaking the scope of services down into various parts so the Committee and the Board can look at the various parts and costs associated with them as opposed to the full scope of services.

Chairman Carlson called for a motion to accept the appointments.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to appoint Herman Wattwood, Maureen Rupe, Will Warren, Kathy Jarrell, Mark Hobbs, Sam Stanton, Janet Laimont, Hugh Normile, Karen Andreas, Ed Washburn, Don Griffin, Gordon (Bat) Masterson, David Matte, Anselmo Baldonado, and Tom Redmond to the Redistricting Committee, with terms expiring December 31, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Higgs advised although the Board voted to have the Committee appoint its chair and vice chair, it may be appropriate to have staff chair the initial organizational meeting and let the Committee elect its officers at the second meeting. She stated it is unfair to throw people together at their first meeting without having met or talked to each other and expect them to elect their officers. Mr. Jenkins stated that is why he suggested staff assist with the first meeting, and whey the members are better acquainted, they can make the decision when they want to select the chair and vice chair.

Commissioner Colon advised the City Attorney of Palm Bay talks to advisory boards about the Sunshine Law; and inquired what is the process in the County; with Mr. Jenkins responding an Assistant County Attorney will give a presentation on the Sunshine law and public records law, and a handbook is given to each member.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the meetings of the Redistricting Committee will be televised, as the Board authorized the use of its meeting room for the Committee meetings; with Mr. Jenkins responding yes, it will be televised on Space Coast Government Television (SCGTV).

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Committee will be using public information that is also available to the NAACP and any other group that wish to analyze the data independently; with Mr. Jenkins responding yes.

Chairman Carlson inquired if notices of the meetings will get posted and advertised; with Mr. Jenkins responding yes, on SCGTV. Chairman Carlson inquired if a time line can be put together on a monthly basis so people know in advance about the meetings; with Mr. Jenkins responding the Committee will probably discuss a meeting schedule.

PERSONAL APPEARANCES - MAUREEN RUPE AND MARY TEES, RE: FEASIBILITY
STUDY FOR PORT ST. JOHN

Maureen Rupe, Co-Chair of the Port St. John for Tomorrow, advised Port St. John has taken responsibility for itself on many occasions; it came to the Board and asked to be taxed for recreational facilities; by taking responsibility for itself, it saved the County $5 million on facilities. She stated they led the way with an elected advisory board, the first in the State, which was a great step forward for decision-making process to stay in the community; and they appreciate the Board's support. She stated the community and Sheriff put in place a community police unit for $700 and a lot of donated time and effort; they started the first citizen on patrol in unincorporated Brevard County; they worked with Jess Parrish Hospital for a clinic in Port St. John; they worked on the I-95 interchange, west connector road, pedestrian overpass at Fay Boulevard, a library, fire station, opening of Grissom Parkway, and numerous safety and welfare issues; and they have been responsible and civic minded in their attempts to make the County's job easier with their input. Ms. Rupe stated when they asked for the referendum, the Board indicated its reluctance to commit to funding the study; at that time the projected cost was $70,000 to $100,000; and due to the generosity of the University of Central Florida (UCF), the cost is less than $21,000, a reasonable amount for the citizens to request. She stated the huge majority the referendum on the study passed by mandates the study is the will of the people; they appreciate the Board's support in the past; and they ask its consideration and support to give Port St. John a chance to decide its own future.

Mary Tees, Co-Chair of the Port St. John for Tomorrow, advised Florida Statutes Chapter 165, regarding formation of municipalities, places time constraints on the completion of the necessary steps that must be taken to meet State requirements. She stated the completed study, if it is feasible for Port St. John to incorporate, must be in the hands of the State legislature 30 days before the first legislative session of the new year, or no later than January, 2002; and if that requirement is not met, they have to wait another year before it can be considered by the State, and even longer before a vote can be taken. She stated they have waited 18 months for the referendum; six months have passed since the vote was taken; if they continue to wait for the study, it could be argue that the referendum has no validity owing to the length of time that has transpired. Ms. Tees advised two years have gone by since they first approached the Board on the feasibility study; after the study makes its way through the legislature, the Department of Community Affairs, and back to the legislature, another year will pass; then they have to wait for an election to put the matter on the ballot. She stated realizing that the State has the power to approve the study, set the boundaries and pass their action back to Brevard County, they are looking at 24 to 36 months before they can even vote if they want to incorporate. She stated the Board is tasked with serving the public interests, which include offering the opportunity for free exercise of public choice; the referendum passed by a 73% margin to measure the citizens' attitude towards the study; and the public has spoken by their votes. Ms. Tees stated some Commissioners may be concerned about municipalities negating land uses and conservation incentives desired by the County; and issues important to a Commissioner can be addressed with the charter concerning the form, character, spirit, and intent of the proposed municipality. She stated the city of Port St. John could be a future leader and ally in the process of thoughtful and coordinated development; and it is time for Port St. John to set a new standard with consideration towards ecological and conservation issues with an eye towards the future and eco-tourism. She stated they are not asking for special treatment but are asking for thoughtful consideration and support of their request for the opportunity to exercise their free choice.

Carmine Ferraro advised there has been talk about previous areas that conducted studies, such as Suntree, but there are distinct differences between Suntree and Port St. John; while Suntree had 9,000 residents at the time the study was conducted, Port St. John has almost 23,000; and while the process Suntree considered was ore along the private line, Port St. John has taken a public approach by seeking input from the County and residents and holding town meetings. He stated they published articles in the local news journal in their area, and created an email public forum and website to educate the community and get feedback. He stated the most distinct difference is they decided to have a referendum to let the public speak on whether or not a study should be considered. Mr. Ferraro advised no one can disagree that the study is an economically good looking study in terms of its price compared to the typical cost of $70,000 to $100,000; there were comments and concerns about creating a precedent that anyone with a potential problem on the way the County stood on a position can come before the Board and say they want to incorporate and want the County to pay for the study like it did for Port St. John; however, the Board can establish criteria to handle that. He stated it could consider a referendum, minimum population, cap on what would be spent for a study, a community outlay map establishing the boundaries, etc.; so it is an issue the Board can consider at a later date to address that concern. He stated the money is the bottom line; it is not an issue whether or not they should have a study because that has been decided; it is not an issue whether or not they can be a city because they do not know that, but would like to find out; so the issue is whether or not the Board would fund the study. Mr. Ferraro advised according to County staff, the General Fund revenue collects $1.875 million annually from Port St. John; that would represent .0267% of the General Fund; $21,000 represents one-tenth of one percent of the amount Port St. John generates for the General Fund; and requested the Board consider that and pay for the study that 73% of the residents supported.

Joe Stadnik from Canaveral Groves requested the Board reject the funding for the study. He stated in past years, much of District 1 money has been spent in Port St. John for roads; the Port St. John Parks MSTU was a fiasco with people in Carlson placed in it; he was told there would never be a park in Canaveral Groves; but Canaveral Groves has put in more than $1 million in taxes for parks since that time; and today it still does not have a park. He stated the park on Canaveral Groves Boulevard which Port St. John and the County invested money in is now claimed by the soccer team, therefore people in Canaveral Groves and Port St. John cannot use it; Port St. John is infringing on the land which is allocated to Titusville and Canaveral Groves; and the map showing Port St. John's boundaries was in the newspaper. He inquired if they know something he does not know and the Board does not know, did the Board approve it without anybody knowing, or is it a wish list generated by Port St. John. He inquired if the Board is going to support the police department, fire department, construct roads, etc. in Port St. John when it becomes a city. Mr. Stadnik stated there are over 20,000 people living in Port St. John; if each person gave $1.00 they would have the money for the study; and inquired why should the County pay for it. He stated he talked to people from Titusville, Melbourne, and Satellite Beach, and most of them do not support giving County money for a study to become a city; that is not necessary for the County's welfare; and if the Board wants to give money away, it should give it to the cemetery in Titusville which the Titusville Pilots clean up each year in January and a group from the State Attorney's Office also clean it up because it is not funded. He requested the Board not support the funding for the Port St. John study as they have sufficient funds in the community to do their own study with the people living there and businesses in that area.

Amy Tidd, member of Port St. John Advisory Board, speaking as a private citizen, advised Port St. John has always looked to the future and worked with the County to plan improvements; they have a study on the ballot which 73% of the residents asked for; they are working to make sure they have the support of the community and asked for the community support; and that is where Suntree had a problem. She stated Suntree got the money, but the people are the ones who vote; so they are working on community support. She stated Port St. John has saved the County millions of dollars by taxing itself for facilities that the County had put money aside for; the County had put aside $50,000 a year to pay for the soccer field; and that money is probably still there because they paid for the field and did not ask for that money back. Ms. Tidd stated Port St. John, through many issues have saved the County money; tonight they are asking for help to pay for the study which is a long-term growth planning effort; the cost is minimal; and the County will gain a useful planning tool to use even if the incorporation is not feasible. She stated the County will get its money's worth out of the study.

Randy Rodriguez, homeowner and business owner in Port St. John, and member of the Port St. John Special District Advisory Board, but speaking for himself, requested the Board approve the funding for the feasibility study, as time is their biggest criteria. He stated they could get a dollar a person in Port St. John, but that would take too long and set them back a year; they have a community overlay that they hope will be in place soon; it is tied up with the small area plan; and the study is a natural follow up to that. He stated it did not come up whimsically or from a small group of people who thought it would be a good thing to do; it came up from a public referendum and was on the ballot; the community addressed it with a large majority; and they have shown a willingness and ability to manage their own community. Mr. Rodriguez advised they address their own zoning issues, preservation in Fay Lake Wilderness Park, and Space Coast Community Complex; and they taxed themselves for that. He stated the place stays occupied and busy with soccer, little league and football; it is a place for the children to stay occupied; and they thought ahead on those issues and several others. He stated $21,000 is not a big hit; Port St. John has saved the County that much and more time and again; it is not asking for funds from every District; and they hope the Board will give them some consideration.

Curt Lorenc from Valkaria advised he understands Port St. John's concern with Titusville because they had a similar issue in Valkaria with Palm Bay annexing properties; but in their case they have Malabar next to their community. He stated 73% of the people in favor of the study is a large amount; that needs to be considered; there are benefits by doing the study; and the County will have an excellent document for future planning. He stated they currently have a lawsuit; the County filed against Palm Bay; that money is being wasted in legal fees; it is a better thing to use it in a planning document; and he would support his tax dollars being used to fund the study contract for Port St. John.

Janis Walters of Valkaria advised they have a lot of issues in common with Port St. John; 73% in favor of the study is significant; people want answers from an independent source; and even if incorporation is not recommended, in the study, the results will make an excellent planning source for the area. She stated the residents of Valkaria understand the value of planning; Valkaria is in a similar situation; they are worried about Palm Bay; and if they did not have the Comprehensive Plan and Small Area Study to fall back on, they would be in big trouble. She stated they found out they do not qualify for independent incorporation; so if Palm Bay makes a grab for Valkaria with water and sewer leverage, they have the option of approaching Malabar and asking to be annexed. She stated the people of Port St. John need to know what their options and prospects are; and encouraged the Board to support funding for the study.

Keith Cunningham, Planning Administrator the City of Titusville, advised there is a letter in the Agenda packet from the City Manager supporting the feasibility study being proposed. He stated most people from Port St. John may think he objects to it; however, they support the effort; the only concern the City has is its southern boundary and Port St. John's northern boundary; but that can be clarified and worked out. He stated the City has no objections to what is being proposed.

Commissioner Scarborough read a portion of the letter from the Titusville City Manager, as follows: "It is my understanding that they will be asking the County to fund the study at your April 17th regular County Commission meeting. The City Council in Titusville supports Port St. John's efforts to review this very important issue as their community tries to find the best way to position themselves in the future. We are not opposed to the study and will also make our staff available to meet with the representatives of Port St. John to discuss components of the study so they could proceed." Commissioner Scarborough stated Titusville has not expressed opposition, but expressed a desire to communicate and be part of the process; and the people of Port St. John need to be cognizant of that fact.

Dan Faden of Valkaria advised he wants to lend his support for the feasibility study and offers his support and money to fund it.

Lynn Forst, President of Port St. John Homeowners Association, presented a letter of support from one of the largest sporting organizations in Port St. John to the Board; and stated the Port St. John Homeowners Association supports the feasibility study 100%. She stated it is their future; they are concerned about rampant uncontrolled developers who would turn Port St. John into something the residents do not want; and they are deeply concerned about the quality of life issues in Port St. John. She stated they feel that safe streets, steady property values, and environmental issues are uppermost in their concerns; and they request the Board to fund the feasibility study without delay. She noted they pay taxes for parks and recreation, plus pay their own tax for their parks and recreation MSTU.

Chairman Carlson advised one of the speakers commented that it has been determined Valkaria is not eligible to do an independent incorporation; and inquired on what grounds was that based; with County Manager Tom Jenkins responding probably it is too physically close to the City of Malabar. Chairman Carlson inquired if one of the requirements is a certain distance from an existing city; and what will go into a feasibility study, will there be a study before the study to see if it is feasible and not spend money to do a full scale study if it is not. Mr. Jenkins advised the study will look at the revenues, expenditures, structure, and full ramifications of what it would take to be a city; it would be everything they would need to know in order to incorporate; and he is basing those statements on what Suntree did several years ago. Chairman Carlson stated Suntree did not do a referendum to incorporate; with Mr. Jenkins responding no, but they did a full study on the entire aspects of it. Chairman Carlson stated the Suntree study it took three years and cost $75,000.

Chairman Carlson inquired how much would it cost to do the financial portion so they do not spend their time and money going through the whole study in case it is not financially feasible; with Ms. Rupe responding the entire study will cost $20,770. Carmine Ferraro stated they discussed pre-feasibility study with David Laney, and his comment was they have to assemble to do most or all the work to answer those preliminary questions, and felt it would be counterproductive and better to do the entire study and answer all the questions.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there were references to incorporation of Merritt Island and Suntree, but what has occurred in Port St. John is different; the people are in favor of the study; and in the months preceding the vote, people called him asking how they should vote, and he told them to vote in favor of it. He stated he also told them he hopes the study will be independent and impartial so they will have information to make an informed decision; and 73% of the people voted for the study, but not for incorporation. He stated the Board has to protect the integrity of that study; Suntree had a vested group collecting funds for the study; and in doing so, the study became tainted and the community became divided. He stated by the Board stepping forward and running the study, all those issues will dissipate, and they will get an honest study. He stated it has been well thought out and well structured.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded for discussion by Commissioner Colon, to approve funding the feasibility study for incorporation of Port St. John.

Commissioner Colon advised she met with residents in Port St. John and was impressed by how hard they worked; the feasibility study might say not incorporated; but whatever the case may be, they will never know unless the study is done. She stated she wants to give them that opportunity.

Commissioner Higgs stated if the individual who is going to do the study could come before the Board and give it a full briefing at a meeting at the conclusion of the study, so it can be televised and everybody can understand the relationship, it would be an educational process; and inquired if that can be done. She stated UCF reporting to the Board and citizens of what it means can be tremendously valuable to everyone; and if that can be done, she would support funding the study.

Chairman Carlson inquired if the maker of the motion would include that in the motion; with Commissioner Scarborough amending the motion to include a presentation of the study to the Board.

Commissioner Scarborough included in the motion the need to work with Titusville and adjoining communities such as Canaveral Groves, and to be sensitive to everybody in the surrounding community and larger community.

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

The meeting recessed at 9:51 p.m., and reconvened at 10:02 p.m.

DISCUSSION, RE: OAK GROVE ROAD/PARRISH MEDICAL CENTER/BREVARD
COMMUNITY COLLEGE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised this is an opportunity for the County to construct Oak Grove Road; it will be a revenue producer for the Road and Bridge Construction Crew; and it will provide a service to Brevard Community College and Parrish Medical Center, in conjunction with the Chain-of-Lakes project.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to authorize the Public Works Director to sign a letter to Brevard Community College and North Brevard Hospital District Board, agreeing to construct the common entrance road to the new Parrish Medical Center, known as Oak Grove Road, with conditions set forth in the letter and with the Hospital and College paying the County for the project. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC COMMENTS, RE: VALKARIA FIRE STATION

Donald Salee advised no one had any idea where the location of the new fire station was; he knows only two people who belong to the Homeowners Association and they had no idea it was going there; it is a dangerous location; and requested the Board put a hold on the contract until the people who will be impacted have a chance to discuss it.

Bonnie Salee advised she lives directly across the street from the proposed site for a fire station and would like the contract held until they can meet and discuss the situation. She stated Commissioner Higgs has a meeting organized; none of the residents who will be directly impacted knew that the property was being considered for a fire station; it is on a blind curve; and in five years there were seven major accidents investigated by the Florida Highway Patrol who does not investigate minor accidents or people who run into the ditch along that curve. She stated it would put stress and risk on fire fighters and equipment, other people who respond to assist, and the traffic coming around the blind curve; the cost of the property is excessive considering there are other properties that could be or have been considered; and requested the Board table the contract long enough for those who are impacted to meet with the proper people, get the facts, and understand the situation so they can present their side to the Board.

Carol Foley advised her property line is on the line of the proposed site for the new fire station; her major concern is that her bedroom is 60 feet from the property line; and with all the traffic coming and going there, it is going to disturb their peace. She stated they bought the property and additional parcel for solitude, quiet, wilderness, and the country experience of Valkaria; and they have well over $200,000 invested in their property, and are certain their property value will drop because of the fire station. She stated they have concerns about public safety; there are a lot of accidents that happen at the curve and near accidents; and related a story about a car that was barely missed by a semi when I-95 was closed and traffic was re-routed on Valkaria Road. She stated they cannot see coming around the corner; the purchase price is very high for the area; they are concerned that residents have not been notified of the placement of the fire station; and there are a lot more than just those that are close or next to the property who will be affected. She requested the Board stop this item until other residents of the area are advised of the situation and voice their concerns.

Janis Walters, President of Valkaria Neighborhood Association, advised the Valkaria fire station has been in the works since early 1999, a few months after the people passed the referendum; Chief Farmer came to their February meeting in 1999 to discuss the fire station project; the fire station was mentioned in their VNA newsletters of March, 1999 and May 2000; and subsequent developments were handled through their membership phone tree. She stated they cannot guarantee they will be in contact with people who choose not to join, but they do their best; there was an article on it in Florida TODAY on May 27, 2000; two more in July, 2000 with pictures for the grand opening of the temporary location; the Board dealt with this issue on its Agenda in May and October, 2000, as well as April 3, 2001; and it is too late to claim unfair surprise. She stated over a period of two years, many sites were considered; the County tried for the Buehler Trust property, but the two parties could not come to terms; the community tried for the Broken Glass property, but there is no connecting road to Grant; and the Airport property is not economically feasible because of the FAA deed restrictions and lease obligations. Ms. Walters stated Public Safety's analysis of the area indicated the best place is along the eastern half of Valkaria Road; County staff searched out and identified properties with no buildings and approached the owners; two years of searching identified six candidate properties in the Agenda Report presented to the Board on April 3, 2001; and the best suited one is the one the Board chose. She stated the accidents mentioned are a result of speeding and carelessness; she is sure Public Safety took the curve in the road into consideration before it chose the parcel as the best option; there are ways of making it clear that a fire truck is coming out with flashing lights on the side of the road, etc.; and Public Safety would have anticipated those things. She stated she understands the site layout caused a stir among the people who have been riled up over the last few days, but the site layout was on the April 3, 2001 Agenda and is conceptual only and will not be built overnight, and probably will not be started for two or three years; so those worried people have a lot of time to talk to other people who live around fire stations and find out how bad it is or is not. She stated the potential for noise and other problems from a fire station is far less than what they are forced to put up with from the Airport; those people do not belong to the Association and did not joint them in trying to solve the Airport problems; the Board did its part; they did their part; and they worked hard to find the best solutions, but those people chose not to participate; and that is no reason to start the process all over again. She stated the fire fighters who saved their houses last summer are the same ones who are now in the temporary location on the Airport and who will man the new fire station; and inquired how bad can they be.

Curt Lorenc advised the temporary firehouse on Valkaria Airport has been there for some time and he has not noticed any noise or problems and do not believe the people who spoke tonight said they noticed any problems, yet it is a short distance from the proposed site. He stated there were many public meetings on the issue; they made an extraordinary effort to make sure the public knew what was going on by paying for bulk mailings to everyone in Valkaria; and they all had a chance to participate in the process. He stated he had many meetings with Chief Farmer; he was at the Grant firehouse, and Commissioner Higgs was there; and he has a video tape which he will share with the people. He stated they are complaining about the curve; the curve was looked at by Public Safety; they felt was not a problem, and he agrees; it is a gradual curve and visibility is excellent in both directions; so he supports staff's recommendation on the property as he did the temporary firehouse. He stated they have done an excellent job; and it is not the proper time to reopen it, as a lot of hard work went into it by a lot of people.

Bob Briggs advised he is a recent resident of Valkaria, did not know a Homeowners Association existed and was not informed of it; and he appreciates their efforts, but would like the Board to put the contract on hold. He stated they went through a year's process to purchase land in the area; he knows of many parcels that are available, and would lend the services of his wife to the County because she never pays full price for anything; and she will find a piece of land for the County. He stated the curve is dangerous; he lives 2,000 feet down the road from the propose site for the fire station; and he has to be careful when driving on Valkaria Road. He stated the entrance and exit are right in the middle of the curve; the view is blocked from both ends; and requested the Board put it on hold and let them become involved, as they may be able to offer some alternate recommendations.

Jim Soldini advised he is a pilot who uses Valkaria Airport, and thanked the Board for its approval of some of the capital projects. He stated he understands that money is an issue for the other projects, so he has a solution; the County could purchase five acres on the Airport at $75,000 rather than the proposed property at $110,000; it would not take the property off the tax rolls as it would the private property proposed for the fire station; and the $75,000 could be used for future capital improvements at the Airport. He stated the two leading options were the three acres on the Airport because three acres was what was sought; later they found five acres and felt it was better; and that tipped the balance even though it would cost more money for the location on the curve because it was a bigger piece of property. He stated the good news is FAA does not have a problem with selling the County five acres; the Airport has a lot of property that is high and dry across Valkaria Road from the Airport that is not going to do the Airport any good; and as far as deed restrictions eluded to by Ms. Walters, there are no unusual deed restrictions that would adversely affect the fire station. He recommended, instead of going forward and buying the $110,000 property, that the County buy the $75,000 Airport property, give the money to itself instead of a private citizen, and not take the property off the tax rolls.

Dan Faden thanked the Board for its decision on the CIP; and stated staff has done a lot of hard work on the fire station site; every site was looked at and the current site will be acceptable; but the people's concerns have to be considered. He stated the FAA using the money to study a taxiway would be money going nowhere because it would never be built, as it would have to be built from scratch and would cost millions of dollars. He stated the current situation has been researched, and he supports it.

Commissioner Higgs recommended Public Safety provide a report to the Board reiterating their rationale in selecting the site; and if someone on the Board wishes to take action on it contrary to what it has done, the report will be in hand. She stated she has scheduled a meeting with the residents and will have follow-up meetings if necessary, but would like to have a report from staff as soon as possible. Commissioner O'Brien recommended copies of the report be provided to the people who spoke on this item so they can review the same information; and if they are not satisfied, they can see Commissioner Higgs or come before the Board again. Commissioner Colon inquired when is the meeting; with Commissioner Higgs responding 11:00 or 11:30 a.m. on Friday in her office with Chief Farmer, Mr. Parker, and citizens.

Bonnie Salee inquired if the contract can be held up until all the issues are settled because once the contract is signed by the owner, it is a deal the County will be obligated to. She stated they may not prevail in this situation, but they would like to know that the contract is being held until they have a chance to go through the study.

Commissioner Higgs stated she is not willing to make that motion to ask the Board to change its decision at this time; the Board has been through several public meetings on the issue; she is comfortable that staff has done a lot of work on it; and she is willing to meet with the residents, but at this time is supportive of the decision that was made. Ms. Salee inquired if Commissioner Higgs is the only vote on the issue; with Commissioner Higgs responding no, there are four others, and they can make a motion if they wish to. Ms. Salee inquired if any other Commissioner is willing to make a motion; and heard no response.

Chairman Carlson advised the residents need to get the report, review it, and come back to the Board after they have seen the information and perhaps address the issue again; or a Commissioner may bring it up after reviewing the report; and those are the options at this time.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired what is the status of the contract signing; with Mr. Jenkins responding he has not inquired and does not know. Commissioner Colon stated that information should be available by Friday when the residents meet with Commissioner Higgs so they will know if the Board is discussing something that will happen very soon.

WARRANT LISTS

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m.

ATTEST: ___________________________________
SUSAN CARLSON, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)