Lynn Haven residents press city over damaged yards, blocked driveways and delayed restoration on West 10th utilities project

City staff and residents met at a Saturday workshop called to address mounting complaints about the West 10th Street Utilities Improvement Project, a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)‑funded undertaking to line sewer mains, replace aging water pipes and install a stormwater collection system along the 9th–17th block corridor.

City Manager Chris Lightfoot opened with a technical overview, saying the project includes trenchless lining of roughly 9,300 feet of clay sewer pipe, replacement of multiple water mains and about 2.4 miles of roadway work. He told the meeting the contract followed RFQ223‑06, Deubberry Engineers led design, and ECSC (the low bidder) won the construction contract. A March 30 change order of $826,172.93 pushed the contractor’s completion schedule into September–October 2026, he said.

The hour-long public-comment portion focused on residents’ accounts of extended restoration times, property damage and poor communication. “This project became much more than a temporary inconvenience,” resident Haley King told commissioners and staff, presenting a packet of photos and a timeline she said shows promised 30‑day restorations routinely stretched to six months or longer. King said excavation, stockpiled soil, heavy equipment parked on private property and intermittent water outages limited access and caused safety and health worries for neighbors.

Other residents said crews parked trucks on private yards, blocked driveways with equipment and porta‑potties, left rebar and debris, and poured asphalt over driveways that had previously been concrete. Several speakers said they had not received consistent advance notice of work that blocked access to their homes. One resident, citing a medical appointment missed because of blocked access, asked the city to guarantee clearer advance notification when driveways will be obstructed.

Staff described technical and subsurface reasons for some delays: Linhaven’s soils and unexpected utility locations noted in old as‑builts produced additional excavation and tie‑in work. On the question of responsibility for damage and final restoration, staff said the city holds contractor retainage and will require repairs before final project acceptance. “We will require ECSC or any contractor that’s working on it to ensure that it’s repaired before the project is complete,” a staff speaker said, noting retainage is available to secure repairs.

Residents also raised non-restoration complaints: new streetlights near the school that shine onto private pools; confusion over where the public right‑of‑way ends and private property begins; concerns about grading and long‑term drainage and ponding; and a report of airborne dust aggravating a resident’s ocular condition.

Commissioners and experienced local contractors and residents pressed for operational changes: better contract language to make contractors liable for property damage, more frequent on‑site inspections or a dedicated project manager, pre‑ and post‑construction photographs, clearly marked rights‑of‑way, and improved public notification such as door‑hang notices, yard signs or a project page on the city website.

As a short‑term measure, commissioners invited two active residents who have been documenting problems — Haley King and another volunteer, Miss Nelson — to serve as interim liaisons to help field and escalate complaints during the final months of the project. Staff also promised one‑on‑one follow‑up meetings with residents who submitted specific restoration requests and to provide clear timelines for fixes.

What happens next: the commission committed to pursue the restoration requests raised at the workshop and to consider structural changes — including adding project management capacity on large, federally funded work — to reduce the likelihood of repeat problems on future projects. The commission and staff instructed residents to continue to document issues and to use the two volunteer liaisons as points of contact while staff arrange individual site reviews.

The workshop contained no formal vote; staff said some disputed costs on change orders are submitted for reimbursement to the Department of Commerce under the CDBG grant and that the city expects to pursue full reimbursement where appropriate.

Commissioners said they will compile a list of specific fixes from the meeting and follow up with residents who provided packets and photos. They urged residents to keep documenting issues and to provide photo evidence for restoration claims.