Building a Consultation Strategy

BE STRATEGIC AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY

Build your consultation strategy and, while always heeding any issues that arise, stick to it. Incomplete or haphazard efforts can do more harm than not consulting at all. Following through, paying attention, remaining available for conversations and keeping the lines of communication open are all crucial for effective consultation.

Think about consultation not as something that holds up the project, but as crucial to project success. Defining consultation processes early will ensure that important input arrives on time to be effective and to prevent later delays. Good consultation is part of strategic project development.

  • Earnestly consult to truly get the feel for the whole neighbourhood. Halfhearted consultation runs the risk of belittling and offending people.

Think about consultation not as too much work, but as your role and responsibility within your community. Taking initiative early is exactly the strategic involvement needed to build a good community.

  • Be open to changing your ideas.
  • Educate yourself and do not assume you know everything about the development (e.g., understand zoning in your area, know your planner).
  • Work through your emotions about the project and the developer, so you can fairly evaluate the information on the table.
  • Earnestly and truly represent the whole neighbourhood. Half-hearted consultation runs the risk of belittling and offending people.

KEYS TO SUCCESSFUL CONSULTATION

Begin now

  • Consultation must happen early enough in a project cycle to ensure it actually influences the outcome. See p. 41.
  • Define your aims—what you want to accomplish.
  • Define who should be involved and pull them in immediately.

Maximize participation

  • Turn to organizations such as the Edmonton Federation of Community Leagues and community leagues when in doubt about best ways to reach community members.
  • Ask key constituents to help shape the consultation methods. (See page 25 for methods.) Community leaders often have great insights about involving the community.
  • Provide all parties ready access to the information they need to draw knowledgeable conclusions, using existing vehicles such as community league newsletters and Internet networks where available.
  • Ensure all documents are easy to read and understand.
  • Ensure that all views are considered before a final decision is made.
  • Follow privacy and confidentiality guidelines.3
  • Encourage ongoing dialogue, and be willing to listen, truly trying to understand the other’s perspective.
  • Incorporate a feedback process to inform participants and others about outcomes, decisions and implementation timeframes.
  • When in doubt, ask. Poorly planned and managed consultation not only fails to achieve intended outcomes, but reduces community and developer confidence in future attempts.

Accommodate schedules

  • Plan ahead to appear on a community meeting agenda. Most meet monthly and set their agendas in advance.
  • Expect to reach developers during the day, while community members, being volunteers, are often restricted to after-work hours.
  • Conduct consultation sessions at varying times, for example after work hours or on weekends, to enable participation by a cross-section of residents.4
  • Avoid times when people’s ability to respond is limited, including supper hour, Christmas season, school holidays and major cultural events.

“Agreeing to be a representative of a community or an organization is admirable and carries much responsibility. A representative is a liaison amongst all parties and must communicate to everyone on total 360 degree basis.”

–Al Parsons, community member

Build in extra time

  • Active consultation will take more time than you think.
  • Invest the time to properly design and test survey tools.
  • Allow at least four weeks for individuals, community leagues and other groups to consider and respond to issue papers, reports or surveys.
  • Allow enough lead time to be flexible when unexpected events delay stakeholders’ ability to respond.
  • Expect to travel a 360 degree circle (inform-receive feedback-revise) at least twice before moving ahead.

Use inviting venues

  • Bring the consultation to the community rather than expecting citizens to come to the City or the developer. Consult in a comfortable central location, such as a community or health centre.
  • Ensure the location is accessible for people with disabilities and public transit users.
  • Make it as non-threatening as possible. For example, a consultation with public housing tenants used a letter drop outlining the key issues, followed by an informal drop-in meeting. Residents were free to come by and chat over soft drinks, snacks and information.
  • Ensure the equipment is suitable, including microphones if needed.
  • Make sure there are enough chairs.
  • Provide parking, childcare and any other items identified as important.

Guard against hidden bias

  • Ensure that those who conduct the consultation activities have no vested interest in the outcome.
  • Ensure facilitators and scribes are clear about their roles and have been briefed and/or trained.
  • Include opportunities for participants to identify any conflict of interest.

Show respect

  • Honour the views of all parties.
  • Value participants’ knowledge and skills.
  • Plan carefully to ensure people’s time is not wasted.

Be creative and adaptable

  • Use strategies such as focus groups and site visits to explore areas of disagreement.
  • Set a casual stage to break the ice. For example, hold a sausage sizzle, gather over lunch.5
  • If plans prove unworkable, be willing to shift in midstream.
  • Demonstrate cooperation and commitment to reaching agreement.6

FINANCIAL COSTS

As you develop the consultation plan, consider the resources you will need. Which aspects can be handled internally? Which elements require external expertise, such as a consultant, facilitator or researcher? Assess the most cost-effective way to tackle each task and then tailor your strategy to the project budget.

It may be cheaper to buy some expertise rather than trying to be all things to all people. Public forums could be conducted internally, for example, while a consultant conducts a survey or focus group. Money spent on a good survey or effectively facilitated focus groups can save time and achieve good results for a relatively low cost. It is not necessary to spend a fortune on consultation, but pinching pennies up front may cost you later on. 7

Possible expenses:

  • Venue rental
  • Refreshments for meeting(s)
  • Printed materials
  • Advertising
  • Participant costs
  • Facilitator and/or consultant
  • Other

NIMBY: NOT IN MY BACK YARD

Many of us believe that urban sprawl is undesirable. We also defend people’s rights to operate legal businesses and do not want to see homeless people sleeping on heating grates. We might even support policies that increase the density of mature neighbourhoods, or roll up our sleeves and raise funds for a homeless shelter. All that support, however, may weaken or evaporate when our values rub up against a real life proposal to build “one of those” near us. We have a tendency to want the greater good while protecting our own turf. That tension is at the heart of the Not In My Back Yard (NIMBY) reaction.

NIMBY is a buzz word to describe the negative phenomena that occurs when neighbours do not want a development or facility near them, even though they may see its value. Transit routes, affordable housing, adult stores and pawnshops are among frequent NIMBY targets.

The solutions to NIMBY are varied and contextual. In other words, like other consultation efforts, the solutions may depend on the parties involved, the type of proposed development and the effectiveness of the participation process.

NIMBY - Take Two!
BANANA:
Build Absolutely Nothing, Anywhere, Near Anything
CAVE:
 Citizens Against Virtually Everything
LULU:
 Locally Unwanted Land Uses
NOPE:
 Not On Planet Earth
NIMTOO:
 Not In My Term Of Office

“The NIMBY phenomenon has a curious status: we all practice it, but we almost universally condemn its use by others ... It is a human response that is not going to go away ...

NIMBY is the negative expression of a very positive force ... The existence of NIMBY reactions shows that people care ...

The challenge is in finding ways to tap into NIMBY energy and channel it into positive initiatives. To do so, the people who are originating development ideas need to engage those citizens much earlier in the process.”

–Lorne Daniel, Changes inthe Neighbourhood, 2003, pp. 7-8.

To resolve problems associated with NIMBY, consider the following methods.

  • Take a “proactive and conciliatory” rather than a “defensive and aggressive” approach.
  • Conduct consultative sessions to give citizens an outlet for their views.
  • Talk to nearby residents about the proposal.
  • Supply information all interested parties can use.
  • Share information on how the proposed development will or will not affectadjacent and local property values.
  • Prepare a list of reasons why the project will benefit the community as a whole.
  • Conduct a public opinion poll to glean the views of the majority, which may not be reflected in door-to-door petitions.
  • Update elected officials and community leaders on developments in housing and the impact of previous developments.
  • Inform the public about leading-edge ideas through the media and workshops.
  • Involve the building industry as a source of information on innovative building techniques through “home show” style information sessions.
  • Document NIMBY challenges and appeals so others may benefit from past experiences.
  • Be aware of existing housing needs studies and prepare a longer-term strategy for residential needs.

With proactive consultation, "Not In My Backyard!" (NIMBY) can become "Now I Must Be Involved!" (NIMBI)

RESOURCES

Changes in the Neighbourhood by Lorne Daniel, 2003 See this resource for specific ways to combat NIMBY. www.mycommunityinformation.com/housing/ChangesInNeigh.htm

NIMBY Guidelines
The Rural and Small Town Research and Studies Programme
Department of Geography, Mount Allison University, Sackville, N.B. E0A 3C0 Tel: (506) 364-2393, Fax: (506) 364-2601, www.mta.ca/rstp/rstpmain.html

“Understanding and Overcoming the NIMBY Syndrome” Michael Dear in Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 58, No. 3, Summer 2992, pp. 288-297

Facility Siting Credo: Guidelines for an Effective Facility Siting Process Howard Kunreuther and Lawrence E. Susskind in Environmental Impact Assessment Review. Publication Services, University of Pennsylvania, 1991. www.mit.edu/afs/athena/org/p/publicdisputes/practices/credo.html

“I’ve learned to live with myself, so I can learn to live with you,” notes a disabled person to opponents of a group home.

--Lorne Daniel, Changes in the Neighbourhood, 2003.

CASE STUDY: SUCCESSFUL COMMUNITY CONSULTATION IN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBOURHOOD8

The following study outlines a situation where a league went well beyond the level of commitment and resources usually expected of a community. This example illustrates a community league that took charge of the process early and was rewarded with good results. It is not realistic to expect that most participants can commit these kinds of resources. Nevertheless, it is a good example of the significant benefits of either party getting 'out in front' of the consultation process. Being proactive reaps rewards.

Community League

When community league executive members heard that the owner was considering a move, they immediately requested a meeting. The community league felt it was best to start working with the decision-making powers early in the process, to ward off surprises and position themselves most strategically for the negotiations to come.

The community league wanted to influence the sale process itself, particularly regarding such key issues as traffic volumes, access and the use and enjoyment of community amenities. To that end, the league maintained contact with the owner and was kept informed about its actions. At the same time, the community league found citizens willing to work on influencing the decision. In addition to researching zoning issues and development rules, the group spoke with City staff.

The owner did not specifically grant community requests to be part of the tendering decision, but did explicitly mention community concerns in the tender documents as issues and expectations for any prospective buyer.

The community league put a package together for community members and called a meeting, attended by 100 to 150 people. There, facilitators outlined opportunities to influence the process: during the sale, after purchase, in response to a rezoning application, via legal challenge. Opinions expressed that day helped solidify community values, assess options and set the stage for action.

The community league began speaking publicly. Besides alerting the media, they spoke with Councillors, feeling it was important to inform them from the get-go.

At a second community meeting, a steering committee of 12 people was formed. The committee retained a development consultant and an urban planner to bring the project to the next stage while continuing to research traffic counts and other aspects. In concert with these professionals, the committee worked with 150 community members, Council members and City staff to develop its own plan for the site. The resulting statement of community values and corresponding planning guidelines was provided to inquiring developers. The group also developed a concept plan in case the community developed the land.

In sum, the community was proactive, prepared and certain of its views. While views were not always the same, they were openly debated until consensus was reached. Council members and City planners were consulted and well informed of the process.

Redevelopment of large public lands in an established Edmonton neighbourhood included a long and extensive community consultation process. So long, in fact, that some community members estimate that they spent more than 500 volunteer hours during the two-year process.

The quiet neighbourhood was primarily developed prior to 1960. The consultation process started early— before the former owner sold the property, originally zoned Urban Services.

Developer

The developer who finally purchased the property met with community representatives numerous times. Recognizing the time and effort the league contributed, the developer endeavoured to keep the meetings as short and functional as possible.

Because the community was now quite clear about what it thought, the committee could express its concerns and negotiate in good faith on behalf of the whole community. Various proposals were considered and agreement finally reached, without proceeding to appeal.

The developer noted that this project worked well for the community because the community league possessed both strength and organization.

  • The community league had strong and realistic leadership.
  • Those who spoke had done their homework to ensure they were representing the league.
  • Representatives were qualified or experienced in advocating a position. Understanding that change would occur, they were committed to a fair resolution that would best serve the community.

Planning and Development Department

Once the developer made the application, a public meeting was held and very well attended. At this meeting a City representative provided information about RPL (Planned Lot Residential).

A City representative then met with the community to discuss the relative advantages and disadvantages of RPL zoning versus the Mature Neighbourhood Overlay, which applies to residential development in the neighbourhood.

RPL zoning is not subject to the MNO, and allows higher buildings than the overlay. In addition, it allows narrower site width and more site coverage than the RF1 zoning surrounding the property. Yet the proposed RPL zoning conforms to the Community Plan for the neighbourhood, which recommends that residential development respond to varying demographics and preferences in housing tenure while maintaining a low-density residential character. RPL allows flexibility while providing single detached housing.

Ensuing discussions between the developer and the community saw the site developed under RPL zoning.

CONCLUSION

As this case reveals, consultation is not a passive, occasional activity. It takes a lot of commitment. The responsibility shouldered by all parties with interest in this site, particularly the community league, was enormous. Most projects do not require this kind of effort, but some do.

Two years later, the site contains 60 attractive and varied single-family dwellings. Design controls and a restrictive covenant requiring rear detached garages and lanes resolved community concerns about RPL zoning. Most community members are content with the development density, and traffic solutions seem to be working. Some mature trees and some new trees spot the boulevard.

Best of all, community, developer, City and Council members have successfully partnered together, completing the work necessary to bring about a new development that complements the values of the community. Both new and existing residents enjoy the new development.