THE growing number of communities forming action groups and taking their anger over coastal development to the streets may cause some to question the value of community consultation.
THE growing number of communities forming action groups and taking their anger over coastal development to the streets may cause some to question the value of community consultation.
Others, however, recognise its value, adding that there are areas in which the process could be improved.
Several development proposals in Western Australia that have been the subject of well-organised community anger, the most recent being opposition from high-rise development at Scarborough.
Others controversial projects to have attracted significant public protest include proposed developments at Leighton Beach, South Beach, Ningaloo Reef, and Port Coogee.
While the checkered history of community involvement in some of these projects has contributed to community dissent, sometimes even a high level of community consultation can result in unwanted, and often angry, community attitudes.
Planning Institute of Australia WA president David Caddy said community consultation was vital to raising issues at the outset of the planning and development process.
Further, Mr Caddy said the high level of community activity surrounding coastal developments was indicative of a sense of ownership of these areas among the wider community.
“It doesn’t matter how much you consult with the community, there are still going to be some people who feel disenfranchised at the end,” he said.
“What you need to do is put in place a program of consultation that is understood by the community.
“The question for all parties is how the community consultation program is gong to work.
“It’s a matter of having a well thought-out process that is understood by everyone at the outset.”
Coastal Planning Coalition spokesperson Andrew Sullivan, who is also an architect and urban planner, said while he was strongly in favour of community consultation, improvement of the coastal planning was needed to avoid ‘extreme reactions’.
“There is consultation, but it is questionable whether any of it is very meaningful,” Mr Sullivan said.
“A lot of the consultation is about design and defend, rather than consulting with the community.
“They [developers] argue that someone had to start somewhere, and what we are saying is that they need to start with the community rather than getting the architect to draw up the plans first.
“This needs to be done on a regional basis, rather than a site-by-site basis. Ningaloo is an example. The Government had to go back and do a regional strategy.
“Until we have this process in place, we are going to continue to have Leighton, Coogee, Ningaloo.”
LandCorp CEO Ross Holt said the community consultation process had evolved to a point where communities expected to be consulted at the very early stages of project planning.
LandCorp is the State government body responsible for the redevelopment at Leighton Marshalling Yards, in conjunction with the City of Fremantle and the Department of Planning and Infrastrucure.
Extensive negotiation with community stakeholders has resulted in a modified plan and the establishment of the Leighton Community Liaison Group (CLG), which will be involved in ongoing consultation.
“I think we’ve seen some situations in the past where we haven’t had a good community consultation process,” Mr Holt said.
“Community consultation tends to be more vital for infill development projects, industrial projects, and every project where there is a high enough level of community interest.”
Linton Pike, director of independent facilitation firm Estill, said the community at Leighton was highly cynical and suspicious until his firm was brought in to consult with all stakeholders.
But through consultation and negotiation with the community, a situation was reached that was acceptable to all parties amidst ongoing consultation, Mr Pike said.
