A Public Meeting Is Needed
As discussed on the History page, during the 2012 meetings, the Neel-Schaffer engineer, speaking on behalf of the city, promised another presentation for the public once the design was finalized. There was indeed a second public meeting in August 2012; however, there are a number of reasons to say that it does not meet the city's requirement to inform the public about the final design.
​
The most obvious reason is that the current project design is different in important ways from the design concept that was presented ten years ago. For example, in 2012 the residents were led to believe there would be a traffic light at Henry/Doherty, which is not included in the current plan. Also, the flyer given to the residents at the final 2012 public meeting depicted an idyllic, beautifully landscaped roadway, with a curved sidewalk winding gracefully around a large number of fully-mature trees, many park benches where neighbors sit and chat, picturesque gardens, attractive street lighting, etc. It all looked like a neighborhood park in an upscale area. By contrast, the actual engineering drawings show asphalt and concrete - no benches, no gardens, no street lighting, no trees. (When developers misrepresent their proposed subdivisions like this, our council members rightly take them to task for false advertising!) At one of the meetings in 2012, the residents were also told the lane width on Doherty Drive Ext would be 12 feet, as required by the city ordinance (a requirement that was reaffirmed recently by the council). However, the design width is 11 feet. Residents and council members were also told that the road path would be curved to save trees if an arborist found that to be possible, but there is no evidence that was ever done.
​
Also, all but two of the homes on the east side of the north-south segment of the road were unoccupied at that time, so many members of the public with the most direct interest in the project were not included in the briefing.
​
Also, the recent changes in weather patterns, along with the city's experience with flooding after hurricanes, has dramatically raised our awareness of the increase in flood risk associated with the new road. See the flood risk page.
​
Also, the history of the blunders associated with the drainage design leaves residents with little confidence in the city's design for a stormwater management system. See the stormwater design page.
​
Also, the experience with cut-through traffic on Trend Road has raised more concerns about cut-through traffic, which is notorious for speeding, reckless driving, and accidents. See cut-through traffic page.
​
Also, the results of the tree surveys were not available in 2012. Since then, two tree surveys have been completed. The loss of trees is a significant concern for citizens, and they deserve accurate information about it. Has any attempt been made to minimize tree loss? The city should hold itself accountable for tree preservation in the same way it holds developers accountable.
​
Also, the overall prognosis for future traffic ills has changed because residents now know that the situation is not going to be relieved by widening of Minton Road, since that possibility has been foreclosed. See Minton Road - Current Conditions page.
​
And finally, residents have never been given information about safety issues such as how the demolition of huge oaks trees can be safely be carried out, given that the right-of-way is narrow and is immediately surrounded by homes, backyards, play areas, swimming pools, etc. And what safety measures will be taken if there is a major storm during the construction process?
​
The upshot of all this is that to keep its promise, the city needs to hold a meeting at which the current residents are briefed on the current design of the project and resident feedback is solicited.
​
Briefings at city council meetings do not satisfy the requirement, because there is no give and take between the public and the presenter.
​
​One can't help but notice the good example set by the FL Department of Transportation. When they plan a road construction, they explain it in detail in an easily accessible YouTube video; they actively solicit comments from residents via mail, email, phone call, or in-person; and they include the comments in the formal record. West Melbourne would do well to emulate their example of transparency and accountability.
​