11.15.23 UPDATE: Eureka Road North

“Past experience, if not forgotten, is a guide for the future.”

– Buddha

UPDATE 11.15.23: The next neighborhood meeting is scheduled for 11.30.23  at 5:30.  City Hall

10.11.23:  The Council discussed the 9.21 meeting, the feedback received from the Eureka Road website, and a more format for the next community meeting with the residents.  See the full discussion here.

The words chosen in the cloud above are not random. They were voiced, often repeated, by frustrated neighbors, wanting to be heard at the City Hall open house on September 21. The subject discussed was the planned 2025 revision of Eureka Road North.

Emotions ran high. The format of the meeting took a quick turn from the planned casual open house to Q&A directed at staff and two Council members, who held their own answering the barrage of questions directed at them.

This is not the first time the City has been caught flat-footed by neighbors who are steps ahead in gathering information–accurate or not. The SCA editors see this as a learning opportunity for City leadership. We choose to call the 9.21 session a “focus group” and suggest it as a teachable moment to avoid this consistent failure by the staff and City Council. Listen to your constituents.

The process of road construction is emotional, fragile and loaded with land mines and trip wires. Construction is expensive. It disrupts the neighborhood, creates physical chaos, massive inconvenience, and unites neighbors or turns them against each other. Loud voices silence many others.

In spite of this, the City must complete a taxpayer funded project that serves the general public and protects the affected neighborhood. Concurrently, the neighbors deserve transparency that includes accurate facts and complete information.

Let’s review the projects* in the last few years that have hit substantial neighbor resistance. The resistance gains traction while the City continually plays catch up to squelching rumors, dealing with anger, all while keeping a low profile with inconsistent or nonexistent messaging.

Some of those projects:

• Wedgewood Forest, which wasn’t even a plan, but became a controversial issue that gained a lot of public attention.
• Glen Road, first scheduled for 2002, was delayed for almost two decades (with significant inflationary cost), due to neighborhood opposition.
• Smithtown Ponds the Council planning for this project spanned several years, but did not seek public input into the design or cost, leading to resident distrust.
• Strawberry Lane, with weeks of delay, resulted in an unnecessary eminent domain (additional legal costs) among other obstacles, to make it happen.
• Birch Bluff, perhaps the least vocal of the listed projects, has become the poster child for why not to do Eureka Road North.

It comes to this: How can the City break this damaging cycle of poor messaging, opaque planning, and inexcusable budget overruns? What can we learn about best practices to build a better and mutually beneficial working relationship between the City and its residents?

• Communicate(!): Communicate, communicate. Website enhancements to the user experience and better search engine optimization algorithms could go a long way to finding information that is already available on the site. That said, much of the relevant important information is not even available, leaving many residents confused and finding it difficult to navigate the site to find information they need. For example, with respect to Eureka Road, a simple site search does not immediately reveal whether or not the planned construction is for North or South Eureka Road. As of this writing, the Eureka Road survey is “buried” on the website. (Here it is for a quick look).
• Traffic: At any first meeting, provide traffic data, including number of vehicles and speed. The City can easily, proactively gather this info to be ready when discussing traffic concerns. (Note: There are always traffic concerns.)
• Trees: The Right of Way ordinance summarized in lay terms, as it relates to the project at hand, directly addressing trees and other obstacles within ROW boundaries.
  • For tactical purposes, have a thorough written explanation of the purpose of city-owned ROW, such as, roadway construction and maintenance, staging, snow storage, utilities, safe zone for pedestrians, bikes and people exiting their vehicles.
  • Street and aerial photos of the affected ROW property for immediate factual discussion. Be prepared to talk about a tree or narrow front yard, at the outset.
  • Acknowledge city errors for being lax in enforcing the ordinance–which resulted in trees and other objects being allowed where they should not have been in the first place–and explaining the City will not replace them because of the ordinance.
• Get the dirt: Have physical “core” samples of the roadway so residents can visualize and understand more than the road surface. Compare the construction of the old roadway to the current standards. Exhibits are effective.
• Assessments for road improvements: There are none. This fact should be communicated up front. It is a benefit we have all been paying for.
• Listen: Provide a more open forum at council meetings and work sessions. Increase residents’ abilities to speak and be heard. This was a constant theme at the 9.21 open house, and has been generally, for several years.

In summary, the key takeaways are:

• Address potentially emotive or divisive issues by communicating early and sharing relevant facts and data–residents cannot make good decisions without it.
• Productive two-way dialogue can prevent misunderstandings and make residents feel heard.
• This dialogue creates space for productive exchanges which benefit both the City and the residents, and makes meaningful progress toward quality long-term investments that improve our city and create goodwill among its residents.

  –SCA Editors

Background

_______________________

*Woodside Road and Riviera Lane projects also occurred recently, and seem to have little neighborhood resistance.