47°
NORWALK, Conn. – Work on a Norwalk intersection began Monday morning to the consternation of some of the residents in the area.
Do you think City Hall should do a better job informing and responding to the citizens of Norwalk?
View ResultsDo you think City Hall should do a better job informing and responding to the citizens of Norwalk?
-
Yes
94% -
No
6%
"I defy him to pull this stunt in Rowayton or Cranbury or Silvermine," Diane Cece said of Public Works Director Hal Alvord to two city engineers at Olmstead Place and East Avenue on Monday afternoon. "I defy him to come and mangle someone's road with no notice, change their entry and egress and have us wake up one morning to this."
Cece said she and her neighbors have been waiting for at least 10 years for the city to improve the intersection just south of the Interstate 95 northbound entrance, preferably with a traffic light.
The intersection dates to the 1950s, before I-95 was built, and is wider than needed. Turning left is difficult there. A sign that work was imminent arrived in August with the placement of red markers in the road, she said. No letters were sent to homeowners, no public meeting was held, she said.
After three weeks of emails to the city, Cece went to City Hall on Sept. 7 with a neighbor. Engineer Dick Linnartz provided the city's plans – which did not match the markings the neighbors had been studying – and discussed it with her, she said.
"I said, 'We're not sure if we're happy with this plan,'" Cece said. "'It could be the greatest thing, but it could make life worse for us. We've got to try to understand it.' So I said to Dick, 'You've got to tell us when it's going to start, that's what I need to know.'"
He promised to tell her, Cece said. But she found out Sunday when she bumped into a neighbor who had seen a surveyor Friday.
"It's almost not about the project anymore," she said. "Our issue is the city gave no notice to the residents and has been completely unresponsive to our requests for information, to meet with them, to get a through opportunity to review the plans."
Linnartz was not available for comment, and DPW employees referred all requests for information to Alvord.
"She's got them fired up," Alvord said about Cece and the residents. "I'm sorry — she creates unreal expectations."
Alvord said the two property owners at Olmstead and East Avenue were notified because that is where the work is being done. The entire road is not being paved, so residents down the way were not consulted or informed.
"She wants more time — 'Let's table everything,'" he said. "I'm sorry, but residents don't get to decide what the engineering plans for a project are."
The intersection will be narrowed, he said, with the additional benefit of more room on East Avenue for cars to line up, so they won't be blocking the intersection.
"This project has been in the mill for years, at least three years that I know," he said. "She asked for the plans, we gave them to her." A traffic light is still in the works, Alvord said, although he does not know when it might be installed.
Attached: The city of Norwalk's plan for Olmstead Place and East Avenue. (olmstead.pdf)
Comments (30)
It is unclear how this is supposed to be improving traffic or safety at that intersection. If advance communication were the rule, and not the exception, we might expect that the city would find a way to describe it.
Arrogant, rude and discourteous treatment of citizens is not acceptable, if the citizen treated the city employee with respect. This breakdown of "Customer Service" (which is painted on the far too many city cars we pay for) should be addressed by whoever is in charge. It does not seem clear any more who is in charge.
Aside from those important issues - my question is how is Norwalk benefiting from this project?
I've been to the work site & I've risked accidents using the East Ave / Olmstead Place intersection for many years. I don't see how the work is going to improve traffic flow, ease the exiting hazard or make any positive impact.
So, with no apparent benefit and several $10,000 being paid by the taxpayers -- why is this project even being done? Who (other than the contractor) is benefiting from this expenditure of tax revenue?
@ East Norwalker: I can't ever pass up the opportunity to comment on Customer Service.....
Perhaps Norwalk City Hall should follow Greenwich's lead in instituting a government-wide Customer Service training initiative. Having been certified in service training for the manufacturing sector, I can tell you first-hand that the processes in place now at City Hall lacks compliance with even the most basic of service principles and practices. Can't blame the employees, really. It's the administrations and stagnant leadership & management that either can't see the forest for the trees, or are in denial that improvements to the process would yield better results (improve efficiences, increase resident, visitor and business experience and satisfaction).
Customer Service training costs almost always pay for themselves by helping to identify bottlenecks and redundancies - or just by having happier customers! In my 30+ years of customer service, I can tell you that corporations, non-profits and municipalities should seriously consider the cost of NOT having properly trained employees and customer-friendly technology, and not so much on the cost of implementing it.
I once proposed hanging a signs in every office and meeting room at city hall reading "How Are We Servicing Our Customers Today?" and 'How Can We Make This Better for The Public" as a friendly reminders.....
I even drafted a joint resolution for the Council to consider that acknowledged the importance of public participation...folks on both sides thought it had merit, but none willing to work together to advance for discussion - very discouraging.....
Perhaps I will once again offer to develop a service training plan for the city and do the training myself!
The Colonel said "This project has been in the mill for years, at least three years that I know"
The plan drawing shows an incomplete DATE box, but what is there is very clear and it is AUGUST 2012.
Who are we to believe ? The plan drawings or the Colonel ?
He is not only rude, but,when it suits his purposes, doesn't tell the truth.
Remember when he said the City owned FOUR garbage trucks and needed to replace them, at a cost of almost a million dollars, when he was advocating a contract with City Carting for garbage collection ? There are TEN garbage trucks parked at the DPW. Maybe he can't count, either, when it suits his purpose. I have a picture showing these trucks. It is hard to believe he forgot the other SIX trucks. He couldn't sell me a used car under any circumstances.
Old Timer - likely the drawings get a date that corresponds with the latest revision? But to your point, of course the plan was in the works for more than 4 weeks, and when I complained to Hal that the first markings looked too wide and didn't take into account a utility pole that juts out into the road, the engineers took a look and re-did the plan.....in August....hopefully using an engineering design and not ye old WAG (wild-assed-guess) system....
Funny. I was at the last DPW meeting, with a member of the Zoning Commission in attendance and I asked about this project. Mr. Alvord referred me to Public Works engineering, with a joke about not being able to remember all the projects off the top of his head. You would think that a project that was only days away from starting would have been top of mind.
Yup....you'd think....
The lack of reasonable communication plans and disrespectful treatment of citizens by the DPW Department Director has been allowed by the current administration for years. Our Mayor likes to let all know that he is in charge of his Department Heads, so I guess we can conclude that he approved of this kind of sarcasm and unprofessional remark. This is the latest statement from its Director that not only seems arrogant but points out a missed opportunity to have a positive public relation experience. Ms. Cece was trying to help the department communicate....we citizens should NOT have to do the job of the well-paid staff. In an age of computers, etc., I do not feel that notifying at least the street leaders and printing out a slip of paper for the street's mailboxes would have been too cumbersome.
Please consider citizens, to file written complaints about this kind of treatment to the Personnel Division so that it is in the staff personnel files. There will be a paper trail that may give our leaders the "courage" to realize which staff are performing well....make sure you keep a copy and also consider making a complaint to the Common Council Personnel Committee, where Doug Hempstead is Chair...I can't understand why he keeps cancelling the meetings all summer...this kind of incident points out that there are many staff communication problems and voters have the right to expect that the common council should help us......
The lack of reasonable communication plans and disrespectful treatment of citizens by the DPW Department Director has been allowed by the current administration for years. Our Mayor likes to let all know that he is in charge of his Department Heads, so I guess we can conclude that he approved of this kind of sarcasm and unprofessional remark.
Not just by the current administration, but prior, as well. As to Mayor, once again, no reply to my emails.
Many folks are hesitant to voice complaints against employees - however uncomfortable as it may be, you are probably right that little will ever change unless people voice their concerns through the proper channels.
City Hall should take a lesson from other communities who pay more than lip service to Customer Service (customer service is an oxymoron here?)
This city does not care about or respect the rights of the property owner. This can be seen an ALL of the actions and "improvements" performed.
Sounds like somebody dropped the ball here. It's entirely reasonable for residents to want to meet with the DPW to understand plans to make major changes to the intersection of East Avenue and their dead-end street. The changes are probably a very good thing, but the failure to fully inform all the residents on that street seems to have inadvertently created a PR fiasco.
I looked at the plans linked in this article and they appear to require a traffic engineer's knowledge to truly understand what's being done, so I disagree with Alvord's implication that providing Diane with the plans fulfilled the City's responsibility. This doesn't appear to be a question of City residents wanting to make engineering decision, as Alvord implies with his comments. Diane has a very simple question - what changes are you making to my dead end street? As a taxpayer she has a right to know.
I think reasonable people can agree that neither the City nor Diane are acting with bad intentions, so how about setting aside the overheated rhetoric by Diane and the Colonel, and have that meeting with residents to fully explain the changes. Better late than never. It appears that Diane already spoke with the City's Engineer to understand the construction - what was it about his explanation that was insufficient?
@Wither: your comments are well-considered - thanks for that.
To answer your question, the plan that was explained to me and ONE neighbor did not even align with the street markings, so even having plans in hand when we returned from City Hall, and standing in the intersection, it was difficult to discern the changes.
Nevertheless, good sports that we are, I waited for the pdf from Dick and sent a copy to the neighbors who first contacted me, and to the others for whom I had emails. I figured, as discussed with Dick, that we'd give them a chance to take a look, and then book a meeting for any questions or concerns. From the time we got the plan, to the time the markings were done and the work apparently scheduled was less than 4 business days! Had we known we'd have days or hours rather than weeks or a month, I would called an emergency meeting of the neighbors and the neighborhood association and the city to expedite the process. Three times I asked for an estimated start date - three times I got no answer.
Here are the questions at least one neighbor had Sunday night upon learning the work would start in the morning:
Why is this project scheduled? What purpose does it serve? How it will improve or further aggravate the residents of Olmstead Place?
They go on to suggest a Q&A with neighbors.
Others had more questions than I had ever even considered while meeting with Dick.
@Diane
Thanks for your reply. I hope that Mayor Moccia will publicly address the concerns that you raised. I assume that's the elected official to whom you are referring when you say "Dick" in your comment above.
"I hope that Mayor Moccia will publicly address the concerns that you raised"..
Now thats funny..He is such an arrogant ass that he seems to believe that we work for him and not the other way around..Moccia is a waste as mayor and should do the right thing and step down.
Wither - apologies, my reference was to Mr. Linnartz (also a .....oops, never mind!).
Having said that, I DO think the Mayor should at least be courteous and professional enough to respond to my emails to him....
Residents get to decide alot of things and TAXPAYERS should never be treated as disrespectfully as it sounds like Alvord was. What NEEDS to happen in this city is for its administration & employees to remember who exactly owns the city & pays them. The TAXPAYERS & NOBODY else. We cater to special interest groups & create "sharrows" for a small group of loudmouths which does NOTHING to better the city for those who fund it, spend millions improving parks to attract people who DONT LIVE HERE, host all sorts of events etc yet the taxpayers are treated as second rate citizens. There is no reason, other than intentional rudeness or obvious incompetence, that people cant be informed of it when a project like this is going to start or that the effected taxpayers cant have a chance to voice concerns.
It would be tough to drive around our city right now & not think that the DPW was being run by a third grader.
@Ken P: and that's an insult to third graders everywhere (ba doom doom, or whatever the comic drum roll is :)
Just shut you're pie hole and deal with the improvements.
@Wcracka: Improvements?? From your lips to God's ears. At this point we can only hope that what they're doing to our road won't actually make it worse!
It is a dead end street so notice to the folks on the rest of the block would have been nice....just sayin."
Thanks Bkind - perhaps in the future we can prevent this from happening to other residents and neighborhoods by requiring at least 48 hours notice to everyone on the afffected street.
I recently asked the Mayor's Neighborhood Preservation Committee to consider hosting a discussion on how the city can better keep residents informed of major projects that impact them (new development projects, zoning regulation changes, master plans, construction, traffic initiatives, road closures, etc). Hard to believe, but the Mayor was adamantly opposed and wouldn't even consider a discussion on the matter, much less any action steps! Customer service claims no manpower, Zoning points to legal notices, etc).
It's a little unclear here Diane. Did they give you access to the plans to look at? The city should at least be willing to let you look at the plans at you know what to expect. It also sounds like you have been aware I the project since August. Were you lookin for advanced notice on the specific start date? I believe the City should give 24-48 hours notice if thy are going to do construction that would impact parking so those people wit cars have an opportunity to move them before they need to be towed at the last minute because they are in the way.
At least 48 hours notice of the start would have been decent, but I hope you agree that for a project of this size, at least 2 months notice of the project it itself should be required! The entire intersection won't even resemble what it looks and drives like today.
The project was already approved, engineered, bid out, surveyed, and marked before Olmsteaders "learned" of it by seeing call-before-you-dig marks and survey stakes! Fait accompli.
Repeated requests to get information on who, what, when, where, why went unanswered. A simple request to Mr. Alvord for a 30 minute meeting with the project engineered was answered as (we're too busy this week and have no plans to meet with the public). Attempts the following week failed. and so forth. Finally, we DID get a copy of the plan by going to city hall during walk-in hours at DPW, waited 40 minutes, and got one copy of the plan, and not even the one that was representative of the road markings! Can you believe the final markings were done on Friday (I didn't see them until my Sunday walk) and the road crews were there Monday morning.
PS: a no parking zone there in the morning, but I have to tell you I feel sorry for anyone who left for work with their windows open down there! Yuck.
I'm sorry, but residents don't get to decide what the engineering plans for a project are."
Of course we do Hal, because we LIVE here, and PAY TAXES here, and you live in Danbury, and your poorly thought out & implemented plans ruin our city and then you go home, and spend the salary that OUR TAXES paid.
We have dangerous, confusing slalom courses on arterial roads - traffic lights that promote gridlock - public "improvements" in areas that won't be developed for years - milions in unnecessary pipes installed because you couldn't perform even the most routine maintenance - installing "no parking" signs to drive out local, neighborhood businesses - road widening projects to create passenger and truck motor speedways - a solid waste collection monopoly - customer service software and systems so poorly designed that residents can't even track our requests for service - roads that get paved one week, and dug up by utilities the next.
I could go on and on and on, Hal, but then you might think I was getting folks riled up.
Will the arrogance of this administration never stop
Apparently not - but it only goes on because we allow it to, Tim.
You cannot be serious! Does Mr. Alvord truly believe that it is an "unreal expectation" for taxpaying residents to seek information and input into a major reconfiguration of their road? This is not a "paving" project, though that is how he classified it for funding. This project changes almost EVERYTHING about our intersection, including stop sign placement, road markings, traffic signs, road width, and entry/egress maneuvers. We don't recall seeing this on any public works agenda, nor are we aware of any discussion before the traffic commission.
The two properties he did notify (which he was required to do) are both commercial properties, one is entirely vacant!
Mr. Alvord refused to meet with us, give us any information, or provide advance notification, though he knows I live on this street and that I represent a neighborhood association. They didn't even provide the plans until my neighbor and I went to DPW during engineering walk-in hour! And then they kept us waiting more than 30 minutes, probably hoping we would leave.
By the way Mr. Alvord - the neighbors CONTACTED ME, not the other way around. They were alarmed to see street markings and not knowing what was about to happen, thought I might know or could find out.
And don't tell me and the press that the project doesn't impact every neighbor. We 50+ private homes have one way off and one way on to our dead end street, so we should have been consultated and informed, just like the two commercial properties. An empty building actually got more consideration and provided more input than the residents, most of whom have lived here for DECADES.
The damage is apparently already done on Olmstead, but residents in other areas should know that since Hal Alvord has done this to us, than he can do it to you, in your neighborhood, on your street.
Already done. Woke up one morning and the street that is perpendicular to mine became a 1-way. Now all the traffic from Connecticut Ave. has to drive by my house. I understand the idea of having to run EVERYTHING by the residents would slow down progress, but there must be a happy medium in all this. To all the city decision-makers: “It's nice to be important, but it’s more important to be nice.”
NwlkCityZen- very sorry to hear that it's already happened to others, especially where a new traffic pattern clearly impacts your quality of life and "quiet enjoyment", legal and literally.
I absolutely think yours was a case where the city should have notified you well in advance of the approval of the plan - all this stuff starts as ideas and plans, but none should be approved or finalized without resident's input.
Here's what's not nice about the city: I bet you that if you complained about not being notified of the one-way change and change in traffic flow that they would have told you "well, we posted it on the agenda for the traffic commission". Yeah, right. The letter of the law, but never the spirit of the law. And then they tell you to "get a life" if you actually read the agendas and attend the meetings! And even if it was posted for discussion and approval at Traffic Commission, guess what? They meet on a Monday at 4pm, during work day, at police headquarters, and until last month, did not allow public comment!
That is SO not playing nice......
Can't help wondering if Moccia controls Alvord or if Alvord has the real upper hand and makes decisions for Moccia and the council to rubber stamp. We know he lies to us and, sometimes, to the council. Is it possible he gets away with lying to Moccia, too ? Or, is it more likely he and Moccia collaborate (co-conspirators ?) on some of the stories we are told ?
After all, it doesn't take much to read a recent date on a project he claims has been in the works for three years, or to drive by the DPW yard and see ten garbage trucks when he says there are four. It is hard to see how the change in the intersection at East Ave and Olmstead will be an improvement. Will a favored property owner there get more parking ?