What are the most common misconceptions about the Landscape Round table?

The Landscape Round Table (LRT) is a collaborative planning model, yet it is often shrouded in misunderstanding. One prevalent myth is that the LRT is a mere formality, a box-ticking exercise with no real power. In truth, a well-facilitated LRT is a core decision-influencing body where community stakeholders, designers, and officials negotiate tangible outcomes. Another misconception is that it's exclusively for experts. Contrary to this, its strength lies in integrating diverse voices—from residents to business owners—valuing lived experience as much as technical knowledge.

Many believe the LRT process is quick and decisive. The reality is that it is intentionally iterative, requiring multiple sessions to build consensus, refine designs, and address complex trade-offs. Speed is sacrificed for depth and legitimacy. A fourth fallacy is that the LRT's conclusions are always implemented verbatim. While its recommendations are heavyweight, they feed into a broader political and budgetary framework; the process is about shaping and advocating, not unilateral decreeing.

Finally, some view the LRT as a forum for conflict resolution only. While it manages disagreements, its primary function is proactive co-creation—generating shared visions and innovative solutions before conflicts become entrenched. Understanding these nuances is key to appreciating the Landscape Round Table not as a simple meeting, but as a vital, structured engine for democratic placemaking.