Reflections on Council Consultation in Darlington - Geoff Turnbull

The upgrade for Charles Kernan Reserve arose because Council needed to replace the play equipment in the park to make it comply with Australian Standards. They drew up two possible plans for exhibition on display boards at a community consultation day held in the park on 15 November 2008. The consultation day was well attended and REDWatch made available details of where people could view the designs online and make comments in the following weeks. Sixty three written responses and a petition for a community garden were received during the consultation period. Ideally notices for future consultations should provide details of where people who can not attend the exhibition can view the plans and also make their comments.

Based on the submissions council then reworked its proposal to incorporate community ideas but these were not made public until a few hours before the final recommendation went to the CoS Environment and Heritage Committee when an email was sent advising people that they could address the committee. Only major projects tend to get taken back to the community for a second consultation and on smaller projects people who have expressed an interest are usually notified on the Friday before the recommendations go to Committee on Monday.

In the case of the Charles Kernan Reserve we requested more time for comments and that the proposal also be presented at the coming Inner West Community Forum. As a result those who had made submissions were given Tuesday and Wednesday to make comments. These comments were incorporated into a special council officers report which was circulated to councillors (but not made available to the public on the CoS website) prior to the full Council meeting that approved the plan. The approved plan was presented in the rushed CoS presentation to the Inner West Community Forum (held in Camperdown) prior to the discussion of the Pedestrian, Cycling and Traffic Calming plan. Council also decided to hold a meeting with those who have indicated an interest in the proposed community garden incorporated in the new design to work out how this is to be managed (for details see item above).

As the reserve is the major park for Darlington I think the proposals should have been bought back to the community as is the case with other major parks. At the very least community projects should be available for review by interested parties for at least a week prior to their consideration by Council Committee so people have time to discuss what is proposed and to make a considered response and so council officers can propose changes if required.

One of the problems with this consultation is that in focussing on a single park. Council has responded by trying to squeeze everything that people wanted into a very small area. Now it may be that a BBQ area next to a basketball ring next to small community garden, as well as a children’s playground and space for dogs to run may work, but we would have at least liked to have had the discussion with our neighbours and council about this and to see if any other options were viable.

If the discussion about Charles Kernan Reserve had been part of a wider Darlington open space and facilities plan then the discussion would have taken place in a wider context. This could have included other yet to be redeveloped CoS pocket parks in Vine St and Little Eveleigh St. As well it could have considered what might be able to be located in the North Eveleigh re-development. It could have also looked at what may have been negotiated with Sydney University as part of its desire to integrate better with its neighbouring community. All this could have provided a better mix of open space and facilities (including a larger community garden) within a couple of blocks.

If the process had started with Council talking to the community about what they wanted, the cost and time of Council putting together its own initial plan, which was largely rejected by the community, would have been saved. After listening to the community Council could have then gone away and drawn up some options based on what the community said they wanted. The savings could then have been spent consulting the community about whether the essential elements had been captured or if there needed to be some fine turning.

Ideally such a plan could be part of a Local Action Plan put together with the local community and which reflected their priorities. The current Local Action Plan covering Darlington village is for the Inner West region and the Darlington elements were not worked through with the Darlington community. The LAP is a Council construct developed from questionnaires sent to residents a few years ago asking them what changes they wanted to see in their area. It was then assembled by Council with some opportunity for comment on the exhibition. In Darlington the implementation of the LAP recommendations keeps getting deferred and we have been told there are no funds allocated for 2008-9. Perhaps it is time to set up a process to update the LAPs, maybe another questionnaire to capture current concerns and then meetings within each of the villages to put together a truly local LAP.

The underlying problem to my mind currently is that Council has no process to talk with a small community / village like Darlington about such local planning. The village is just too small and council deals in larger areas! Darlington’s issues get dealt with at Inner West Community Forums which covers Camperdown (South of Parramatta Road), Chippendale, Darlington, Newtown - North of King Street & East of Church Street and Erskineville including Sydney Uni, Golden Grove and Macdonaldtown! Much more is reported at these community forums about what council is doing at Sydney Park than is ever said about Darlington. Council needs a process where it meets with people in their “villages” at least occasionally to hear what people want from Council for their community. It doesn’t need to be a full  turnout of councillors and officers but it does need to be people who will listen and help facilitate a plan for that community.

In Seattle, from which many current CoS local planning ideas were derived, there is a Department of Neighbourhoods that facilitate the process. There community groups plan and build their own parks and even are funded to employ their own planners. While I would like to see this one day in Sydney, right now I would be happy if Council could made some adjustments in their consultation and planning processes so that there were greater opportunities for the villages to have a greater say about what Council is delivering for their villages.

Geoff Turnbull 15 April 2009