Topic: Saving a site

[Ixion]

Havering Council intend to take two acres of the Melville road site for building.It is statutory allotment land.They have blocked entry to this land and are to get Eric Pickles to take it off the list of statutory land so they can build on it.There are 50 on the waiting list for the site yet they maintain no one wants to use it.
Advice please on what can be done.

[goodlife]

Take it on local papers perharps? You are going to need lot of publicity to deter council from their plans.
Perharps try to get as many people as possible to write to Eric Pickles some letters.

I'm sure others with lot of more advise/ideas will reply later on...

[Jeanbean]

Something similar was threatened here in Southend only last year, to do with the expansion of Southend Airport. We found out that the Allotments had 'statutory status' which I think means if the Council took the allotments then they were duty bound to replace with same amount of land for Allotment use within 3/4 mile. As there is no other available land within this radius we were told our site was safe. For how long who knows. Is this what you mean by statutory allotment land? We spoke with the Allotment Officer at the Council who helped intervene on our behalf.

On another subject there was an orchard that was threatened by the aiport expansion that was saved by Eric Pickles so don't automatically think he will give the Council the green light.

Unwashed is the best one here for this type of information. Hopefully he will read this thread and post a reply.

Wish you well to keep your site

[Ixion]

It has been in the papers we have three  councillors on our side. The local allotment society no longer fulfils its proper role it is in charge of 15 sites yet advertises no vacant plots.Does not keep proper records and does not know how many have only half or quarter plots or on sites with a list how many have more than one plot.
It does not effectively enforce abandoned or neglected plots.
I have a plot on another site on which there are at least five spare plots and as many neglected plots yet no advertising gets done for new plot holders.I made some ads and put them in local shops and on local forums and websites.
In one week 8 people had applied but the Steward says we must not change things too quickly its not right to advertise we don't want new plot holders.
It might be that Stewards get a free plot for their services as well as their own.

[BAK]

There is no list of statutory allotments because there is no registration process.

If the contract - when the land was purchased by the Council - states that it can only be used for the purpose of allotments then that automatically confers statutory status.

If the council wishes to change the status it must apply to the relevant Secretary of State and give just reason why it should be changed.

[Unwashed]

There is no list of statutory allotments because there is no registration process.

If the contract - when the land was purchased by the Council - states that it can only be used for the purpose of allotments then that automatically confers statutory status.

If the council wishes to change the status it must apply to the relevant Secretary of State and give just reason why it should be changed.

The protection of "statutory" allotments comes from Section 8 of the Allotments Act 1925 which protects the land from sale or alternative use if the land was aquired by the council for allotments.  There's no need for the conveyance to include a clause limiting the use to allotments, Section 8. does that, but if such a clause existed it would be useful evidence if the council wanted to deny "statutory" status.

Where a local authority has purchased [or appropriated] land for use as allotments the local authority shall not sell, appropriate, use, or dispose of the land for any purpose other than use for allotments without the consent of the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries . . . and such consent [may be given unconditionally or subject to such conditions as the Minister thinks fit, but] shall not be given unless the Minister is satisfied that adequate provision will be made for allotment holders displaced by the action of the local authority or that such provision is unnecessary or not reasonably practicable,

The Secretary of State will automatically ask the The National Society of Allotment and Leisure Gardeners for their objections if the council makes an application for disposal so it's probably a good idea that you talk to them.

[daveyboi]

It seems that they have taken into consideration the waiting list and propose to use 0.6 of an acre of the land for additional plots to meet the waiting list requirements at present but they have decided to get further information before approaching the NSALG for their views etc.

Please see http://democracy.havering.gov.uk/iedecisiondetails.aspx?id=580 and read the accompanying pdf documents at the bottom of the page.

[Unwashed]

Thanks for that daveyboi.

The accompanying report says that the number on the waiting list has been taken into account and implied that the .6 acre extension will provide everyone on the list with a plot, but it doesn't actually say how many people are on the waiting list, and I'm always suspicious when factual reports contain several pages of guff but omit the single objective piece of factual evidence on which the decision turns.

In support of the decision to appropriate the site the report cites the fact that the site it unoccupied as evidence of its redundancy, but it's not.  The fact that there are people on the waiting list is objective evidence that additional allotment provision is needed, and the fact that the site has been left to lie derelict is evidence of the decline in allotment use in the eighties, and the complacancy of the council and allotment society in expanding when interest in the allotment movement picked up.

It's possibe that the waiting list is very small and that a .6 acre extension (what's that, like 15 extra five pole plots) will satisfy all possible current demand, but the report doesn't actually appear to present the evidence to support that.

[Unwashed]

There are 50 on the waiting list for the site yet they maintain no one wants to use it.

Sorry Ixion, just re-read your post.  If there are indeed 50 on the waiting list then the council's decision is wrong.  The .6 acre extension will provide at most just 15 five pole plots (120 poles of lettable allotments per acre is a pretty standard plot density).  The site is not redundant if there remain 35 people on the waiting list.  A council is under a legal duty to provide sufficient allotments (S.23 Small Holdings and Allotments Act 1908), and sufficient means a plot for everyone who wants one, and that means no one on the waiting.

If there are indeed 50 people on the waiting list than it is very shabby indeed for the council to have suppressed this objective fact from the report to council.

I think you should write to the National Society of Allotment and Leisure Gardeners and ask them to put your objection to the council.  You also need to write to the council formally objecting on the grounds that the site is not redundant, evidenced by the number on the waiting list, and suggets instead that the whole of the site be given back to allotments.

[daveyboi]

There are 50 on the waiting list for the site yet they maintain no one wants to use it.

If there are indeed 50 people on the waiting list than it is very shabby indeed for the council to have suppressed this objective fact from the report to council.

I think that this is why two councillors have called in the decision and demanded full reports on the waiting lists before approval so there is hope still there.
Would it be practical to make sure all those on the waiting list still want plots and make sure they respond to any confirmation request that they still want a plot from the council?