The PIA Social Planning Chapter and the Women’s Planning network jointly presented a seminar on “Community Engagement in Planning” in early June. Four speakers provided different perspectives on their engagement experiences:
• Jacqueline Robinson, the Director of Community Development at Village Well, spoke from the consultant’s perspective about the challenges of getting local communities and authorities involved in long-term community development projects, especially in getting long-term commitment and resources to intensive planning processes.
• Dr Clare Mouat, of the University of Melbourne, spoke from the academic perspective, and discussed the impact that new technologies are having on engagement practices.
• Brenda Gabe, a Community Advocate, has participated in many community engagement processes. She spoke about the time and effort it took to be involved in being consulted, and the need for the consulters to be transparent and honest about the influence that the community will have over the planning process.
• Kerry O’Neill, Project Director Long Term Planning at the Victorian Bushfire Reconstruction Authority, spoke about engaging with communities that have been impacted by disaster. Kerry noted that in in these circumstances the agencies have to go above and beyond to help traumatised people participate in the process, and that the recovery of the community must be the over-riding concern for the agencies involved.
The aim of this seminar was to talk about examples of good practice and to get the planning profession thinking about what we need to do to improve our record in engaging with communities. All four speakers were eloquent in the need to improve our commitment to public participation in planning and were generous in sharing their stories and experiences.
The PIA Social Planning Chapter aims to improve the understanding and practice of consultation and engagement in planning. They have developed a Draft Public Participation national position statement, which is open for comment until the 30th July. The policy introduction makes this comment:
Opportunities to be consulted and to participate in planning processes are important parts of the broader democratic process. They are also components of due diligence in planning practice and are important safeguards for the planning authority and decision makers. Engagement through participation processes is a governance responsibility.
There are too many examples of planning applications creating a public outcry where local community members claim that they weren’t consulted about a proposal which they feel will negatively affect them; while the developers and planners stand around (hurt expressions on their faces) saying, “But it’s in the plan!”. There seems to be a general lack of understanding, on both sides, of the role that public participation should play in planning, and at what point in those processes that communities have the power to influence planning outcomes.
Community engagement is not just a feel-good thing, nor is a forced tack-on, or a burden on developers. It should be an integral part of the planning process. When done well, it can add considerably to the outcomes, producing plans and developments that align with community aspirations and values. The draft position statement notes that its over-arching principle is:
Public participation is based on the belief that those who are affected by a decision have a right to be involved in the decision-making process.
In other words, anyone who is affected by a planning proposal should have a right to be involved in deciding the outcome. The key question that many planners struggle to answer is when their involvement should occur – at the plan-making stage, the policy development stage, the development application stage, or throughout? The principles of public participation indicate that community participation should occur throughout the planning process.
