IPR Praha: Step 09 – Addressing Comments

Homepage > Step 09 – Addressing Comments

After the proposal consultation, it is time to sort, evaluate, and address all comments – deciding which can be incorporated into the proposal and which cannot. A high-quality final project proposal should reflect real user needs while remaining feasible. This step is critical for maintaining public trust in the process: people need to see how their input was handled, whether it was included in the proposal, or why it could not be incorporated.

9.1 Description and objective

Together with the author, review feedback from both the public and key stakeholders (Step 8). Assess which inputs are relevant and feasible, and which exceed the defined limits of participation. Comments that cannot be incorporated should be declined with clear justification. If conflicting requirements or significant changes arise, re-engage key stakeholders in the process.

9.2 Responsible persons

Author
Participation Coordinator / Participatory Planning Specialist

9.3 Consultation (as needed)

IPR (relevant office/section) – review of individual proposals
City district Mayor’s office
IPR Participation Office – support in project implementation
Departments of Prague City Hall (relevant offices and individuals)
City of Prague organizations (relevant offices and individuals)
- IMPORTANT: participation of a senior representative from the relevant City of Prague department or organization at the roundtable meeting
Custodians (city district, Prague City Hall)
Property owners
Key local institutions
Other relevant parties (developers, state organizations, etc.)

9.4 Activities for success

A. Sort, categorize, and record individual comments

Review meeting minutes and photo documentation of materials created during consultations. Compile all comments in a clear format – ideally in a table where the author can later add responses on how each was addressed.

B. Roundtable with stakeholders and author (if needed)

If stakeholder comments conflict, organize a half-day roundtable with the author and stakeholders. Review all feedback together, group it into themes, assess its relevance, and propose possible solutions.

C. Incorporate and address comments

The author incorporates agreed changes and provides clear justification for any inputs that cannot be included.

9.5 Outputs

Outputs may vary depending on the project. Recommended:

Output 9A: Final project proposal after comments are incorporated

Output 9B: Table showing how comments and feedback were addressed

9.6 Timeframe

Approximately 4 weeks (depending on the number of comments)

9.7 Keep in mind

Sorting and incorporating comments is time-intensive and must remain the responsibility of the author. Ensure this requirement is included in the contract. Inform the public in advance about the expected duration of the comment-processing phase and the follow-up stages, so they have a clear picture of the process.

9.8 Communication

Communication objective:

Informing about addressing comments.

Communicate:

→ Share the outcomes of activities undertaken in the 2nd phase of participatory planning with the public.

→ If possible (depending on the participatory method used), publish the processing of individual comments from the consultation process and inform those who participated.

→ Provide ongoing updates of the progress of final project design preparation.

Communication tools:

Utilize all communication channels of the city district: website, social media, city district newsletter, Prague media, flyers, posters, etc.

9.9 Parallel steps

While addressing comments, you can also begin preparing the presentation of the final proposal with the author (Step 10). Keep in mind that creating graphic materials and securing permits or rentals may take additional time. Meetings and negotiations under Step 11 may also be running in parallel.