LTC 141-2022 AD HOC NEIGHBORHOOD RESILIENCE PROJEVTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MOTIOND o cuS ign E nvelope ID : 897 07 2C 6 -E 9 97-4F 4 4 -A C 3C -FB 1C 8E 1ED 5E C
MIAMI BEACH
O F FIC E O F T H E C ITY M A N A G E R
N O . LTC # 141-2022 LETTER TO C O M M IS S IO N
TO: Honorable Mayor Dan Gelber and Members of the City Commission
FROM, Rafael E. Granado, City Clerk /~
D A TE : 4/12/2022
S U B JE C T : AD HOC NEIGHBORHOOD RESILIENCE PROJECTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MOTION
The purpose of this Letter to Commission is to provide you the motion made at the Ad Hoc
Neighborhood Resilience Projects Advisory Committee held on April 4, 2022.
For any comments please contact Amy Knowles, Chief Resilience Officer and Committee
liaison.
Att~meot: Ad Hoc Neighborhood Resilience Projects Advisory Committee Motion ••• RG/L /
DocuSign Envelope ID: 897072C6-E997-4F44-AC3C-FB 1C8E1ED 5EC
M IA M I BEA C H
RISING
ABOVE
AD HOC NEIGHBORHOOD RESILIENCE PROJECTS
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
City of Miam i Beach
Elizabeth Wheaton, Chair
Amy Knowles, Liaison
Members:
Elizabeth Wheaton (Chair-present), Clare McCord (Vice-Chair), Spencer Hennings (present), Barbara
Herskowitz(present), Calvin Kohli (absent), Galen Treuer (present)
TO:
FROM:
DATE
SUBJECT:
Mayor Dan Gelber and Members of the City Commission
Elizabeth Wheaton, Ad Hoc Neighborhood Resilience Projects Advisory
Committee Chair
April 4, 2022
Committee Motion-Response to Referral C4 A from March 9, 2022
Commission Meeting
Dear Honorable Mayor and Commission,
The Ad Hoc Neighborhood Resilience Projects Advisory Committee met on April 4, 2022 and unanimously
passed the following motion in response to Referral C4 A about harmonization agreements, from the
March 9, 2022 City Commission meeting.
The Committee recommends the transmittal of the staff presentation (Attachment 1) to the City
Commission, which does include information requested by C4 A, and provides the following additional
input in response to each of the three questions posed by Referral C4 A:
1) What have been the major barriers to securing these agreements?
Barriers identified by staff through lessons learned from former projects located in
Attachment 1;
Difficulty in communicating and understanding the timeline for each harmonization
agreement in the context of the overall project timeline;
Fear of the unknown as natural human response to want to maintain status quo combined
with complexity of the project;
Complexity of the regulatory agency environment; and
Legal complexity of the agreements and property owners' decisions to hire counsel
"NIMBY-ism" meaning property owners having to deal with a construction project on their
street, directly impacting their properties.
2) What additional information would help this process?
Build trust and credibility by providing more consistent, frequent and clear updates to
property owners on issues related to the harmonization agreement and the overall project.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 897072C 6-E997-4F4 4-AC3C-F B1C 8E1 ED5EC
M IA M I BEA C H
RISING
ABOVE
AD HOC NEIGHBORHOOD RESILIENCE PROJECTS
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
City of Miam i Beach
Elizabeth Wheaton, Chair
Amy Knowles, Liaison
Communication should align expectations by providing clear details for project and
communication processes.
o For example, when answers to the property owners' questions are still being
researched/designed and an extended period is required to provide a full response,
communications should continue so the property owner understands where the City
is in the process. This ensures that even if there is no new information available, the
community members know that the City is still working to address their property's
questions;
Communications to the individual property owner should outline expectations of the
process and provide a date of finality. Properties should understand the time period in
which they need to decide and a set date to provide signatures for required agreements. If
a decision is not made before that date, the project will move forward with completing
harmonization on public property;
Have more visual, simplified and personal information. Suggestions include: adding before
and after photos of prior projects; providing fact sheets that include profiles of main staff
team involved; providing photos and video testimonials of property owners who have
previously undergone the harmonization process as part ofthe City's neighborhood
improvement projects; creating an ambassador program in which community members
who have experienced the process volunteer to be available to meet with property owners
as a resource ;
Provide property owners information about lessons the City has learned and how
harmonization has improved, specifically from responding to community concerns and
sharing improvements in the agreements from the City Attorney's Office.
3) What other opportunities exist to improve the process and reduce project delays?
Build trust with the PIO throughout the duration of the project through building into the
PIO contract guidelines for regular, clear and consistent communications and establishing
metrics that include process and timelines for addressing and resolving issues;
Be clear about the harmonization process steps, milestones and timelines to help
property owners make decisions to keep the overall project on-time, including a set date as
the harmonization agreement needs to be formally confirmed or declined in order to reduce
project delays; and
Simplify the communication process wherever possible by prioritizing and focusing on the
three-top decision-points to improve clarity and help prevent information overload.
Sincerely,
1/0ocuSigned by:
Ll .,~CF6BCE004BB .. ~
Elizabeth Wheaton, Chair, Ad Hoc Neighborhood Resilience Projects Advisory Committee
4/11/2022 I 4:05 PM EDT