Comments on: Residents On Damaged Cromwell Ask City Council For Action

By: Rufor

Rufor — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 16:26:26 +0000

fairfieldvoice.com – da best. Keep it going!

By: ledgerkalen

ledgerkalen — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 15:43:47 +0000

I agree with you that some contractors are more conscious of their actions than others. I don't agree in passing the buck Everyone should own up to their part of the problem. That was my point really. I admire when someone can be fair, honest, and objective instead of pointing fingers and placing blame before they have all of the facts and all sides of the story.

I absolutely have empathy for your situation and the condition of Cromwell and would be frustrated too. You have every right to be bummed about it.

By: Heather Miller

Heather Miller — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 23:52:06 +0000

Hi ledgerkalen,

#1 No, I don't really have a solution for where they should have otherwise parked their trucks and equipment while repairing the intersection part. I'm sure it was necessary, and yes it was in bad shape before they came, which is why it got so torn up. I'm just commenting on what happened and what it's like now for people who don't live or drive on this street and may not realize just how bad it is so they can be informed. Even if I completely understand the situation and know it couldn't have happened any other way I still have a right to be bummed about it and wish it was otherwise, every time I turn down the street to go home. I'm sure the city will get to it when they have the funds.

#2 I think we're in agreement – grass is going to get torn up when sidewalk repairs are done. Some contractors are rougher than others. Some of the people on this block had some pretty rough ones. I can say that for certain because some of the OTHER people on the block had really considerate ones and their lawn looks just fine now, where others are still recovering. Of course it's between the home owner and the contractor to work out compensation in either direction.

My point really was that there have been a variety of circumstances piling up in the past few years that make our block look pretty sad. Who is responsible for fixing which part of each component varies, and I don't think anyone should be passing the buck on their part. But some of it is frustrating, for example, the end our driveway that isn't and won't be finished till the city fixes the road, and who knows when that will be? Again, even if I understand the situation and sympathize with the city's tough position of not having funds for repairs at the moment, I can still be bummed about the current state of affairs, and share that frustration. In fact, that seems to be about all I CAN do at this point. We'll live, it'll get fixed eventually, there are plenty of worse things to have to deal with in this world!

By: ledgerkalen

ledgerkalen — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 18:04:46 +0000

#1 I am not saying there is no solution, but who do you expect to pay for the repairs? Your tax dollars were spent to fix the intersection on Cromwell. If the street was to be repaired with that same project your tax dollars would also be spent to do that. I think that only the intersection was repaired because it had to be done before the asphalt was laid on Burlington Avenue. I don’t think funds were or have been allocated to repair Cromwell. Let me give a scenario to better explain my point. If the construction crew were to damage the street by being irresponsible with equipment (i.e. using steel tracks when unwarranted on the pavement for that project) and therefore causing damage to the street, then yes, I agree with you they are responsible to repair the damage they caused. However, that isn’t what we are discussing here. The street was already in dis-repair prior to the construction crew arriving to replace the intersection. IF the street was in good repair prior to their arrival we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The trucks and equipment of the construction crew that repaired the intersection would not have caused the street to be turned to gravel IF it was in good repair. Also, keep in mind that there is an inspector paid by the city on site when the contractor is working to ensure that they are not being negligent. I think this is simply a case of long overdue replacement of Cromwell of which the city is responsible to make a priority when funds are available.

#3 I agree that I don’t have all the facts and timelines to come to a “concrete” (pardon the pun) judgment. I realize that I have a negative view point on the issue and this is due in part to watching opportunists over the years try to nickel and dime entities that they view as having the money or resources to fix a problem that is their responsibility without looking at the issue fairly and honestly. I am all about fairness, honesty and taking responsibilities for one’s own issues and problems be it contractor, homeowner or the city.

By: Will Merydith

Will Merydith — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:27:16 +0000

LedgerKalen – thanks for the detailed comments.

#1 – If someone builds a brand new home next to mine and in the process damages my older house, no matter whether there intentions are good or not is irrelevant to the fact that THEY are responsible for damaging my house. I don't follow your logic here. It's a fallacy to act like there is no solution. The solution is that the DoT (or whatever crew parked and damaged the street), repairs the street back to the state is was in (or better) prior to the damage they caused.

#2 – We agree here.

#3 – I don't think anyone is trying to be an opportunist here. I think we can agree that between the sidewalk contractor (I am assuming that is who laid the steps) and the road crews – the step is now damaged. And this is where I sympathize with Makeig – the frustration of trying to get someone to claim responsibility and fix the step. There should be no *additional* tax dollars spent – the contractor responsible will eat that cost to repair the damage or do the job over – that was my understanding from the Mayor's response at the City Council meeting.

Some points of confusion in this conversation are:

1 – Who poured the steps? Was this a sidewalk crew hired by the City or by Makeig?
2 – Who and when where the steps damaged?
3 – What is the sequence of events – it would be nice to know a construction timeline, with descriptions of work done and crews responsible.

By: ledgerkalen

ledgerkalen — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:09:55 +0000

I would like to address some of the issues brought up in the post and in the comments above.
#1 I will not argue that Cromwell is in extreme dis-repair. Anyone that lives or drives on Cromwell can attest to the fact that Cromwell was in dis-repair BEFORE any construction crews showed up. Heather Miller states that the construction crews tore up the street more with equipment and trucks during the intersection repair project. I also am not debating that. Consideration needs to be given to the state of the street before the contractors showed up. Did they make it worse having to park there? Yes. Was the street in good condition before the contractors showed up to perform the work? No. Would the contractors have torn up a street that was in good repair? No. That project had to be completed so that the asphalt could be laid on Burlington Ave. Although not ideal and more than likely somewhat of an inconvenience to residents, I don’t see another option other than parking on the street for the duration of the project. Does Heather have a solution on where that crew should have put their equipment and trucks in order to complete that project?
#2 The sidewalk crew that tore up the grass. This inevitably is going to happen with sidewalk repair because of the nature of the work. I understand that there were several upset residents in the City of Fairfield regarding the seeding and lawn repair that was performed at a sub standard level by the contractor. Unfortunately this is often what happens when contractors from out of town are hired that do not care about the city they are doing work for or the quality of their work. I absolutely don’t agree with that standard of work and feel that the contractor should either be penalized or correct the problem.
#3 Ms. Makeig’s steps: Will, before you take a sympathetic view point on her damaged step, take a minute to realize what might have actually caused this problem. Look closely at the picture that you provided. How would a construction crew have damaged this step? What kind of action would they have taken to put it in the condition that it is currently in? To me it looks like the original contractor that installed the step did not provide proper sub-base or support for the step. Or placed the step on the curb and used it for support which is obviously deteriorating. I would consider this unacceptable work from a contractor. But how is any of this the cities responsibility or any city or DOT hired contractor’s responsibility? Based on the information I have, I would venture to say that this is a case of an opportunist that is trying to take advantage of the City of Fairfield by claiming that city hired contractors have damaged her step. In turn the city has the choice to do nothing, hold a contractor responsible or pay for the damage with tax payer funds. Is that the kind of situation you want to be sympathetic towards and hold an entity accountable that did not create the situation to begin with?