Page 53 - ALG Issue 4 2020

South East
Surrey, Kent, West Sussex and East Sussex
REPRESENTATIVE
Vacant
Contact natsoc@nsalg.org.uk if interested in the position
MENTOR
Paul Neary
South East
0845 313 8422 pneary.nas@gmail.com
MENTOR
Andrew Bird
Kent
0845 313 8462 abird.nas@gmail.com
Welcome to our new members...
Marina Allotments Association
13 Individuals
Hartley Parish Council Stone Parish Council
Want to see more from your Region?
Send your articles to natsoc@nsalg.org.uk
Save Bellfields Allotments
Calls to 0845 numbers cost 3p (ex VAT) per minute plus your telephone company’s access charge
quit were sent at GBC insistence to all Bellfields tenants by GAS.
At the end of August, the Secretary of State delivered his verdict. The request by GBC to dispose of Bellfields for building was rejected.
GBC Councillors immediately went to “press”. Their key message was that some “gardeners” had destroyed 14 years of planning. But for us there was an opportunity to join in the narrative previously totally controlled by GBC. Our response is below:
“I must own up to a slight feeling of schadenfreude reading the hysterical comments made following the decision by the Secretary of State (Rob Jenrick) to his refusal to accept the request made by GBC for the disposal of the Bellfields Allotments. I would like to make some observations. The total area of the Weyside Urban Village (WUV)
is 41 hectares (around 100 acres in old money). The Bellfields site is a bit over 3 hectares (8 acres). 1500 homes imply a density of 15 homes per acre but the claim is the loss of 200 homes, implying 25 per acre on the Bellfields site. However, the claim is also that the site is for essential infrastructure. Under the guidelines, “housing” is not infrastructure.
The SoS followed policy and criteria relevant to the disposal of statutory allotment land as governed by UK law. His decision was that 1) the submission by GBC (Section 8 of the Allotment Act 1925 revision) failed to meet policy and 2) criteria. It is spurious to put forward an argument that this decision was
the result of any actions by tenants of Bellfields although our objections were clearly considered in his judgement.
The Local Plan, of which WUV is a part, was developed over either 14 years or 18 years and involved
For a number of years, Guildford Borough Council (GBC) have
been engaged in the Slyfield Area Regeneration Project (SARP). This is to transform a brownfield industrial area in order to build housing and associated infrastructure. Included in the land covered by the plan are three joined allotment sites known collectively as Bellfields Allotments. As Chairman
of the Guildford Allotments Society (GAS) I, with two other Management Committee colleagues, attended regular meetings with the GBC officer responsible for Parks & Countryside which included the 13 allotments sites managed by GAS on behalf of GBC.
The SARP issue was regularly discussed and an understanding was built that should SARP go ahead then only a part of the Bellfields site would be developed with the remainder continuing as allotments. It was also explained that development was unlikely in the near future because of the huge cost of cleaning up the brownfield area which included relocating the main sewage works.
A grant of £70 million was obtained from Central Government and, in mid- 2019, the new Chairman and Treasurer of GAS were summoned to a meeting by a consultant employed to spearhead the project. Now called the Weyside Urban Village, the plan was to build 1500 homes. The project would include the entire Bellfields Allotment site. New land had been secured adjacent to the existing Slyfield Industrial site and that would replace the Bellfields site with all tenants relocating from October 2020. Freedom of Information request revealed that the budget for this was £1million.
The takeover of the whole site was non-negotiable, all discussions were strictly confidential (and as it transpired no minutes were taken or
issued). GDPR regulations meant that any communications from the GBC development team would have to be circulated by GAS. This placed the GAS management in an impossible position where they had to maintain good relations with GBC for the benefit of other sites and the Society as a whole, could say nothing without approval of GBC and had no room for negotiation apart from securing the best deal on the new site. They did an amazing job under the circumstances. They were volunteers suddenly required to work, without payment 20-hour weeks under great pressure.
The constraints under which GAS management were forced to operate meant that the tenants of Bellfields
had no “voice”. I offered to help them with the agreement of GAS because
I could act without the straightjacket that GBC had effectively applied to GAS. Not only did they accept this offer but, in a mass meeting in February 2020, the tenants elected me to act as their spokesman. Much work had been done by the Bellfields “folk”. Objections, letters, emails, a Facebook page, a detailed ecological survey, filming of the walk from Bellfields to the new site, but most importantly building a spirit of resistance that the approach adopted by GBC had all but eroded.
In February GBC submitted their Section 8 request required in respect
of “disposal” of statutory allotment land. NAS forwarded their report,
GAS provided their objections to the Secretary of State through the National Planning Casework Unit (NPCU). The Bellfields tenants submitted a 10-page dossier plus a separate folder of supporting documents. Whilst all this was going on, GBC had determined (cancelled) the head lease which covers all the allotments and provides the basis for devolved management of allotments from GBC to GAS. Notices to
Their key message was that some “gardeners” had destroyed 14 years of planning
Allotment and Leisure Gardener 53