Consult or be damned

Planning, 10 October 2008

Some would call it an accident waiting to happen. But for accidents to occur they have to be unpreventable - and they were certainly avoidable in this situation. Both the developer and the planning consultant had so far handled the question-and-answer session reasonably well.

They had explained the high demand for new housing in the area and underlined the sizeable proportion of affordable homes in their proposed scheme. They had made the effort to reassure residents about increased traffic and even pointed to a design that would be sympathetic to the neighbourhood. They might not have totally extinguished nimby tendencies, but they had taken some of the heat out of the debate.

Then one of them described the homes as "units". In the blink of an eye, the mood in the hall changed. Suspicion turned into distrust. The questions became more hostile with bellicose statements from the floor. Now there was more than a groundswell of opposition to the scheme.

If only these were imaginary scenarios. Yet they happen time and time again. Former planning solicitor Lord Hart of Chilton has a damning verdict on public consultation in the planning system. "Ninety-eight per cent of people are blissfully unaware of planning. The other two per cent wake up one day to find that someone has stuck an announcement through their letterbox that their immediate environment is going to change. Even if the language seems benign, the official nature of the document, replete with technical terms, gives the impression that the whole thing is stitched up already. No wonder people go ballistic."

Hart's sentiments might be deeply uncomfortable but they are a fair reflection of the situation. His comments feature in a hard-hitting report by Liberal Democrat peer Baroness Barker. The research, published by public affairs consultancy Meeting Place Communications, highlights fundamental problems with the way that consultation is carried out by developers and planners. Crucially, it notes that professionals mistakenly think that sharing information with the public on what is planned is the same thing as consultation.

Barker's reminder could not be more timely. Despite widespread concern that progress towards the government's target of three million homes by 2020 is foundering amid the credit crunch and the housing slump, there is still pent-up demand for development. Energy, transport and waste all need public consultation.

Pressure growing for public engagement

Then there is the eco-town programme, which in some places has run into serious local opposition. Controversy still rages over the role of public scrutiny of any decision by the proposed independent planning commission. Meanwhile, a resurgent Conservative Party nailed its colours to the mast last week by pledging to support US-style charrettes or employ the Neighbourhood Initiatives Foundation's Planning for Real model for engaging residents. Consultation will be a key area for developers and planners, whichever party wins the next general election.

As far back as 1994, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation developed a "ladder" of community engagement. This starts with information sharing, moves up to consultation by offering options and listening to feedback and then focuses on "deciding together", which encourages ideas and options and leads to joint decision-making. In the later stages "acting together", whereby different interests form a partnership to develop the best option, precedes support for independent community interests, in which local groups develop their own initiatives within guidelines.

In many quarters, this ladder has been forgotten. Barker says the guiding principles for community engagement (see panel) used by English Partnerships and developer Barratt at Hanham Hall in Bristol are a good place to start. Meeting Place director Ian Thorn says consultation is a recent skill that professionals have had to learn, pointing out that most planning courses only take a cursory look at the techniques.

"There is huge confusion over what consultation means. Good consultation takes time and money and most planners in local government and the private sector have little of that. Best practice is very much about engaging the lay community. Planners are trained to engage with other professionals, so there is a danger that the language they use confuses the public," says Thorn.

"The challenge is how we take naturally complex ideas mixed up in technical, engineering or ecological issues, add in some politician-speak and then present that to the public. For people trained to deal with technical issues coming up against a real life community who won't believe them, even if they are wearing a white coat and look like a scientist, that is a real challenge."

Central to this is who should be consulted and when this should happen. How can planners and developers reach beyond the usual suspects? Barker slams many consultation exercises for planning "around the object rather than the people who need to be involved". Before starting, she advises, professionals should research an area's demographics, community facilities and groups before deciding how best to manage face-to-face sessions and give feedback to participants.

"Consultation sessions should be built around the daily or weekly rhythm of the community, not the working hours and culture of the organisations making the application," she adds. The Bengali community, for example, prefers to attend meetings at 1am after restaurants close.

Explaining system process demands skills

"There is no such thing as a hard-to-reach group," says Kingston Racial Equality Council chairman John Azah in the report. "When the local authority wants you to pay your council tax you are not hard to find. There are poor consultations that exclude people."

Barker concedes that building trust takes time, while other issues totally unrelated to planning proposals might surface during consultation. Ensuring that people understand the process and the legal parameters without feeling patronised is one essential skill. Professionals should ask themselves how they would feel if the situation were reversed, she reasons.

There are any number of sure-fire ways to provoke the public. In Barker's view, this raises fundamental questions as to who should carry out the consultation. Do the professionals have the knowledge to answer technical questions in language people understand? Do they know the area and the people living there? Will they have an open debate with objectors?

The report takes a subtle crack at developers who use PR professionals to consult communities. It is crucial to select people who know about planning but can tailor their message to different audiences and avoid giving communities the impression that they are "up against a gang of professionals in an unfair fight". Thorn adds: "A lot of PR companies see consultation as an opportunity to make money. They forget that they are not selling baked beans or chocolate bars. It should be about influencing how schemes develop and the people who will be affected by them."

Paradoxically, Thorn detects a huge amount of enthusiasm to genuinely engage communities but warns that this is undermined by a serious lack of co-ordination and opportunities to share good practice. Meeting Place intends to publish a series of reports delving into the challenges of consultation in the future.

"Developers and local authorities are working to tight timescales that do not allow for consultation to be robust. Developers fear that anything offered up to the public will be changed. Councils have to determine major applications within 13 weeks, while developers are often under financial pressure. So the very nature of development militates against quality consultation," he admits. "Yet if consultation is made a priority in projects there will be less confusion and less chance of mass complaints. The key is get in early, the earlier the better. The more you talk to people, the more you can build trust and dialogue."

If You Ask Me - A Guide to Good Planning Consultation is available at www.meetingplacecommunications.com

TEN COMMANDMENTS

English Partnerships' key principles for engaging communities:

1. Get started early.

2. Be clear about aims and objectives while bearing in mind whether the community has been consulted before and people's ability to get involved.

3. Find out about the community and involve the right people.

4. Develop and involve partners to help broaden the scheme's results.

5. Set ground rules with the community and partners.

6. Have a robust delivery plan with realistic timescales, adequate funding and effective risk management.

7. Consider different models of community engagement.

8. Develop a clear communications strategy.

9. Be flexible about the exit strategy.

10. Measure success and learn for future projects.