ALLOTMENTS IN ENGLAND report 06

2-Chapter 2 : Introduction and context Chapter 3 : Research Methods Chapter 8: Management practice Chapters 9-10 City Farms and Community Gardens Chapter 9: supply Chapter 10: site chara

by Professor David Crouch

The University of Derby

IMPORTANT NOTE:

We estimate that questionnaires were received on less than half of

allotment sites in England which casts doubt on whether the findings presented in the report relating to sites are valid The low response means that it is not possible to use this survey to estimate with

confidence the numbers of allotment sites in England; and that the other findings relating to sites should be viewed with caution as they may not be representative of all allotment sites.

Department for Communities and Local Government

2-Chapter 2 : Introduction and context

Chapter 3 : Research Methods

Chapter 8: Management practice

Chapters 9-10 City Farms and Community Gardens

Chapter 9: supply

Chapter 10: site characteristics: policy: management practice

Chapter 11: Discussion

Chapter 12: Conclusions and recommendations

Tables and figuresusedinthetext.

1.Comparison and trends, allotments, 1996-2005

2.Distribution of questionnaire return rate Allotments supply: regional distribution

3.Allotmnet ownership and status distribution

4.Legal status of allotments

5.Allotment status by plots by regions

6.Summary of key components, allotments.

7.Key trends analysis, allotments

8.Local councils that have disposed of allotment sites

9.allotment rent by council type

10.Average allotment rents across different status categories and by region

11.Council audit of open spaces.

12.Number of allotment sites in relation to allotment policy document

13.Overall and rent management responsibility

14.Management of allotment sites by region

15.Authorities` responsibility for handling rents

16.Maintenance and organisation of waiting list

17.authorities responsible for site perimeter

18.Authorities responsible for water supply

19.ciuncils offering incentives for disability by type

20.incentives to plotholders

21.types of antisocial behaviour

22.provision of facilities to encourage environmental friendliness

23.Ownership of land for city farms and community gardens

24.City farms and community gardens: number of garden plots, total areas

25.General facilities available on city farms and community garden sites and by region

26.Facilities for individuals with disabilities, city farms and community gardens

27.Activiites and events taking place on city farm and community garden sites

28.Anti-social behaviour on community garden sites

29.Activities and events taking place on city farms and community gardens by region

Commentary on trends comparison

Commentary on response levels

2 SurveyQuestionnaires

3.Summary glossary, allotments, city farms and community gardens

Appendices tables and figures.

1 Convergence factors used in the estimate of allotment areas and rental values.

2 Method of distribution of Allotment Policy and Site Questionnaires

3.Key, components of allotments by unitary authorities, London Boroughs and Metropolitan Districts

Chapter 1 Executive Summary

This Report present the results of the2005survey of allotments, city farms and

community gardens in England This Survey and its analysis were undertaken by the University of Derby between 2004and 2005 The Survey included attention to the

Regarding city farms and community gardens, their:

 Supply This is the first time such data has been collected and analysed

 Site characteristics; Policy; Management practice

This Report presents an analysis of these categories of data, discussion and conclusions From these, recommendations are made for consequent handling of allotment matters, including their future monitoring It presents a discussion on emerging issues concerning city farms and community gardens

This Report accompanies two significant data sets, on Allotments, and on City Farms andCommunity Gardens These datasets, provided by this Survey, accompany a GIS

database whose locational data were provided through the Survey

Brief context on Allotments, and on City Farms and Community Gardens

Allotments

An allotment is a rented plot of ground let and used for the purpose of domestic

cultivation, principally but not exclusively for growing food During several hundred

years allotments have become a significant feature of culture and landscape For over onehundred years local councils have held the responsibility to provide allotments to the public in response to demand for them Some adjustments to legislation have followed during the last one hundred years, but their purpose and the local authorities` duty to provide has remained the same [Crouch and Ward 2003] Allotments have for this time span been a feature distributed unevenly across cities, towns and villages Allotments have a history of wide ownership type, and there remain allotments in private ownership

Of course, these sites do not fall within government policy and regulations, and evidence

of their existence and character tends not to be recorded in the public domain; their ownership and location is very diverse Allotments in the ownership and management of local councils were, until the nineteen nineties, in the remit of the Ministry of

Agriculture They then became part of the responsibility of the Department of the

Environment, now the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister This change in responsibilityreflects their acknowledgement of significance in terms of several policy arenas, as noted below

The popularity of allotments has varied over the last on hundred years, peaking

significantly during the two world wars, and especially following the second world war, experienced a decline as a result of the association with rationing, and as new

development spread often into areas of land including allotments Their popularity was reversed during the nineteen seventies as a result of increasing attention to diet, organic food and wider environmental issues, including interest in self-produced food growing

The subsequent three decades have been characterised by shifts in pressure of land development and negotiations for these popular concerns that have frequently prioritised allotments as a key source for their delivery [Crouch and Ward Ibid]

Following the 1997 Report on Allotments in England [DETR/Anglia 1997], the

Department of the Environment Inquiry into the Future of Allotments identified a number

of areas for policy attention where allotments were to be engaged [House of Commons 1998] These included environmental sustainability, open space quality, health, an

accessible resource for older people and those with disability and community building Asubsequent investigation into the opportunities for best practice for allotments, including policy connectedness and delivery, was made [LGA 2001].

Allotment sites, facilities, security, land prices and development pressures, accessible populations, management delivery and local council policy are all very varied Therefore,generally aggregated evidence on allotments does not significantly reveal the dynamics

of their operation in significant detail This is evident in the data sest considered in this report, and the commentary possible

This Survey provides the first updating of data concerning a wide range of allotments policy and management since the Survey of 1997

City Farms and Community Gardens www.farmgarden.org.uk

City farms and community gardens are normally members of a framework registered charity, The Federation of City farms and Community Gardens Each `garden` and `farm`

is independent, and normally relates in its business to a local council or private agency The Federation represents 65 city farms, more than 1000 community gardens, 75 school farms and 20 community-led allotment groups in the UK The Federation exists to

support, promote and represent groups which are engaged in community-led development

of open space through locally managed farming and gardening It serves as the national sub sectoral umbrella body or infrastructure organisation, providing services to member voluntary organisations within a thematic sub sector

City Farms

City Farms are sites normally located within cities, where a range of activities can take place, related to livestock keeping and cultivation, characterised by a strong public participation through organised visits and public access The public accessibility requires areas of the farms to be set aside for circulation and public events City farms are

significantly community-run and generated through community activities, increasingly managed on a very professional basis through the umbrella auspices of the Federation of

City Farms and Community Gardens City farms originated during the nineteen seventies and the growing popularity of making non-urban environments and in particular animals accessible to city populations, with a purpose too of engaging those, especially children, living in more crowded areas of cities with little or no experience of farming.

Community Gardens

Community Gardens developed from the city farms `movement` and drew upon models

in such as the USA for regenerating areas of effectively vacant land in cities for the purpose of community-oriented and responsive cultivation, including food growing, on individual and on shared plots of various sizes Thus, Community Gardens resemble allotments in that they are available for cultivation They are firmly in a tradition of community involvement, and tend to be used by plotholders from their immediate

neighbourhoods, sometimes directly linked with particular adjacent housing schemes They are not held within particular government policies for provision, but are recognised

by government as a legitimate supplier of appropriate land for community cultivation

During the nineteen eighties community gardens became part of the City Farms

federation, and now the appropriate body is called The Federation for Community

Gardens and City Farms It is not the requirement of all city farm, or community gardens,

to be associated within the Federation, and many remain independent

CFCG website

The present Survey included all three categories, Allotments, City Farms and CommunityGardens, in an effort to deliver comprehensive evidence concerning these three, distinct but related forms of land availability and their contribution to environment and landscapecharacter and quality, utilisation by the general public, service for opportunities of

cultivation and their related benefits for health, community building and individual and community responsibility for the environment of urban and rural areas

Data on city farms and community gardens had not previously been collected

www.farmgarden.org.uk

Asummary glossaryoftermsisgiveninAppendix3.:

1.2.Main findings: Allotments,

1.2.1.Allotments:

 Evidence was received for only one half of the estimated allotments in England

 There are 7,000 Sites and 245,000 Plots

 The Total Sites area is 4,785hectares[16,987acres]

 5.2 plots are available for every 1,000 population

 13.4 plots are available for every 1,000 households

 The waiting list for allotments is 14,000

 There are 25,131 vacant plots

 The average allotment site has 39 plots, range c.10-400

 Most allotments sites are owned by local authorities, a small proportion are privately owned

 The average rent for theusual10rodplotis£31,varyingbetween £24 in the East of England to £46 in London

Comparisons and trends 1996-2005 demonstrate a reduction of plots and sites;

reduction of vacant plots, and an increase in waiting list numbers

Table 1 Comparisons and trends 1996-2005

Feature 1996 2006

Total plots 295,630 245,000

1.2.2.Three hundred Statutory Sites have of various sizes and parts there of are recorded

as disposed of since 1996 [ODPM records];500 Temporary Sites [not protected by speciallegislation] are estimated as disposed of since 1996.This evidence suggests a continued disposal of sites, accompanied by an increase in vacant plots; more efficient use of remaining plots, and reduction in overall availability to the population.Vacant plots may

be associated with a lack of local public awareness of their availability, that depends on modes and efficiency of site and plot promotion These aggregate observations may belie local correlations between these factors.

1.2.3.A significant minority of local councils are engaging allotment in their open space, environmental quality, community opportunity and other related policy areas However, this is very uneven Promotion of sites is also very uneven, and there is a significant surviving use of merely on-site notices that may lack popular visibility

1.2.4.Four in ten of the one half of councils responding have Open Space Strategies It is not known how allotments are engaged in these An Open Space Audit is required by PPG17

1.2.5.Approximately one third of the councils that responded in the survey have some form of facility or instruction to encourage environmentally friendly use of some of their sites

1.2.6.Most allotment sites from responding councils are fenced, and supplied with water The quality of this provision is not recorded

1.2.7.Significant minorities of councils have special facilities for those with disabilities, and encourage those who may be socially excluded A significant minority of councils have events, educational use and other public use of some of their sites

1.2.8.Most allotment sites are managed by local councils, including especially rent handling A significant minority of sites are managed by Allotment Associations

1.2.9.Where they are maintained, waiting lists remain the responsibility of local councils

in the main

1.2.10.Most allotment authorities identify some form of vandalism

1.3 Main findings: City Farms and Community Gardens.

1.3.1.City Farms

 Evidence was received for 36 City Farms, with 113 plots for individual or shared [`community`] cultivation Individual plots are extremely varied in size and number on City Farm sites

 These sites total an area of 109 hectares [300 acres]

 Sites are managed locally, and significantly offer community involvement, public visits, educational use, and have a range of livestock

1.3.2.Community Gardens

 These sites include 864 plots for individual or shared cultivation

 These sites occupy in total 227 hectares [561 acres];

 The average site size 0.9hectares [2.3acres]

 Sites are managed locally, with significant member involvement A significant number of sites offer some level of community involvement, and public visits,

1.3.City Farms and Community Gardens

1.3.1.City farms and Community garden sites are generally well supplied with facilities, including those for people with disability

1.3.2.Almost all sites have perimeter fencing and water supply; Over half of sites have a community building; Nearly two thirds are furnished with toilets; One in six have waste skip provision;

1.3.3.Nearly two-thirds have facility for those with disability, Three quarters have

wheelchair access, Almost one half disability access toilets, One half have an

accessibility slope, One half have raised beds for cultivation, One third have a sensory garden One in twenty have a braille facility.

1.3.4.City Farms and Community Gardens exist to facilitate local-community relevance and participation and not only for individual plot cultivation Thus, their management andfacilities, including access and events are related to the wider public and educational groups

1.4.Recommendations

 Local councils be further engaged in building their promotion of allotments

 Local council maintain consistent records on all site disposals

 A selective assessment be made of the efficiency and effectiveness of types of promotion in different localities; in relation to the procedures for site disposal

 An analysis of rents and site services and their efficiency be made

 The role of allotments in relation to local council open space policy and practice

be intensified, in order to obtain best value from this landholding

Chapter.2 : Introduction and context

2.1.In 2004 the ODPM commissioned this Survey to produce a Report and

comprehensive dataset concerning Allotments, City Farms and Community Gardens in England in the following way:

 carry out a survey of allotments, and of community gardens and city farms in

England;

 produce a report and summary detailing findings;

 develop a database of information on allotments, community gardens and city farms, including location details;

 Inform the locational GIS dataset on allotments and city and community gardens in England

2.2.It was also intended that this Survey may produce time and trend comparisons with the Survey of Allotments in England 1997 However, for reasons identified in the

Research Methods Appendix 1 this is possible with some caveats that a complete dataset was not achievable

2.3.Data from this survey commentary on the developments of allotments policy in relation to particular areas of wider local council policy [LGA 2001]

3 : Research Methods

3.1.The Survey was undertaken in three parts:

 An initial questionnaire was sent to all local authorities [exclusive of Parish and Town Councils] From this questionnaire, town and parish councils known to have allotment sites were identified

 All councils responding positively to the first stage were sent a questionnaire on Policy

 All councils identified with responsibility for sites were sent a Questionnaire on their sites

 The Federation of City Farms and Community Gardeners contacted known sites

in order to arrange completion of a separate questionnaire distinctly targeted to CFCG matters [CFCG do not have individual policy as such]

3.2.Very thorough and persistent follow up methods were used to secure the highest achievable rate of return for allotments, and via the Federation [FCFCG] A persistent follow through with its members

All data sets from these components were analysed using SPSS

A fully detailed Appendix provides the full details of the Method used

3.3.Council response varied by category across the different Questionnaires [local

authorities only].District, Unitary, Metropolitan Districts and London Boroughs are the main policy units for allotments, and most allotments are owned by local councils

Similarly, they are responsible directly, or through Town or Parish Councils, for the management of allotment sites in their ownership, possibly also with the responsibility being shared with associations of representative plotholders, Allotment Associations Over three-quarters of Met councils supplied data on policy; all supplied data on sites

Two thirds of Unitary, London Borough and District councils [approximately] supplied data on policy and on sites All Met counties supplied site data.

3.4.No consistent source of Private Sites exists Some local councils were able to identifysites

Table 2 Distribution of questionnaire return rate:

*A number of Town and Parish Councils are responsible for allotments [ownership, management and maintenance] These were sourced through those responding positive in

1996, and through current information from District Councils However, there are over 7,000 Town and Parish Councils in England The 1996 response from a thorough check

on especially Parish Councils over a long time only realized partial response Therefore the total for which the survey has data may under-represent

3.4Comment: Diversity within the data set

3.4.1.This Survey sought complete response as a full audit of sites, all categories After exhaustive technical effort to yield a full audit, the Survey was competed with the

response rate given above[Table ] The data is not derived from a selected,

category-stratified sample The performance of allotments, by site owners/managers and by

individual tenants, is very diverse It is therefore important to attend to the distribution of response between different categories of local councils, as this is one structured guide to the diversity of their policy, management and use Key aspects of data are considered in terms of the stratification of council response In, for example, the evidence on policy development by local councils, there is a significant difference in policy development between district and metropolitan councils Moreover, the response rate in particular sections of the questionnaires, on policy and on sites, whilst uneven in all categories, is significantly different between these categories of councils These matters are returned to

in the chapter on discussion of the evidence, and in the recommendations therefrom

3.4.2.Furthermore, it is not possible at the scale of this data, for England, to ascertain the degree of completeness for evidence concerning smaller local councils, ie parish

councils Many of the sites relating to parish councils are owned and fully managed by those councils Others are owned and managed by their respective district councils It may be that considerable numbers, perhaps thousands of sites, are in the former category.The 1996 survey was supported by a regional network of informants, at great length and time This was not undertaken for the present survey

3.4.3.An attempt was made to provide data that would enable correlation between

elements of policy and management, and delivery of efficiency in site and plot use In theevent, the dataset is unable to yield this, as the evidence needed would require much closer attention, for example, to cause and effect, thus identifying timing of policy

elements and effect

3.4.4.The present survey collected locational data to inform a Geographical Information System database The complexity of the two questionnaires, and the requirement to include locational data, may be reasons for the incompleteness of this response This matter is also pursued in the recommendations

3.4.5.In conclusion, this variation in received data robustness requires caution on

interpreting regional and other distributional tables that are presented; there is significant diversity, too, in the response to individual questions on site and policy categories

3.4.6.There response rate to the City Farms and Community Gardens questionnaires is summarized as follows The Federation of City Farms and Community gardens represents

65 city farms, more than 1000 community gardens Data in this survey was received from

36 city farms and 301community gardens, representing approximately one half and one third respectively

Chapters 4-8 Allotments

4.Supply

4.1.There are an estimated 7,000 Sites and 245,000 Plots Of these, the total sites area is

estimated to be approximately 4,785 hectares [16,987acres].The waiting list for

allotments currently totals 1400, with 25,131 vacant plots Details of waiting lists are presented in the chapter on Demand The estimated area of allotment is unreliable, as this

is at odds with available evidence on disposals, as discussed below

4.1.1.The average allotment site has 39 plots, with a range of between 10 and 400

[Data received from the Survey indicates: 3,418 allotment Sites; 139,939 plots]

Note: An informed estimation suggests that the received data under-estimates the actual total [see response rates, Research Method above] In order to secure a more accurate estimation of the actual total, including areas of non-response, evidence derived from the previous survey [1996] was used, subtracting from this the number of sites disposed of recorded at ODPM [for Statutory Sites] and an estimate there from for Temporary Sites [that need no central government approval].[fully explained in Appendix 1]

4.2.There are 14,000 allotment plots that are currently vacant; approximately one in six ofall plots available Plots may be vacant through lack of local demand, the unattractiveness

of site [eg poor ground] Plots may also be vacant on account of a lack of awareness of their availability, if they are not being promoted .It is evident that there a need for some vacant plots at any time for availability for those on waiting lists Temporary illness and death mean periodic vacant plots Moreover, some local councils may vacate plots in preparation for work on sites, and for vacating [parts of] sites Vacant plots are

considered in relation to later evidence on demand [waiting list numbers] and in relation

to the trend data, below

4.3.Approximately 5 plots are available for every 1,000 population, 13 plots are available

for every 1,000 households Availability of allotments by households better reflects the use of allotments than by individuals Frequently more than one member of a household participates in working one plot listed for the individual household

4.4.The major holding of allotments is owned by local councils, on council land A small proportion is on land in private ownership Whilst the certainty of status is unclear in nearly one quarter of council sites, there is a three-to-one ratio between Statutory and Temporary sites

Table 3: Ownership and status distribution

Local Council Owned [all levels] 94%

so relevant, and adjustments to availability may be needed Similarly, the availability of plots by population and households varies significantly

The south east has the highest number of vacant plots and also waiting lists, suggesting that plots may not be in the right location for current populations and their demand The west midlands has the smaller waiting list

Table 4: Legal status of allotments.(statutory, private, temporary, unknown) by

No.

of sites

% within Region

No.

of sites

% within Region

No.

of sites

% within Region

No.

of sites

% within Region

No.

of sites

% within Region East of

4.5.1.There is a tendency to smaller plots [30 plots per site] in the north-west

The largest numbers of plots per site are in the east midlands [42 plots per site] The larger the site, it has normally the greater the number of plots Most sites are mainly comprised of regular, ten rod plots

4.5.2.The availability of allotments per thousand population and households varies significantly Per thousand households this varies between 3.5 per household in the north-west to 6.9 in the north-east; in terms of population between 8.5 north-west to 19.1 in the north-east]

Table5: Allotment sites and plots by regions [averages]

Region No of

LAs

Plots per site

Plots per 1000 households*

Plots per 1000 population*

% Vacant plots out of total plots East of England 35 40.5 11.4 4.7 15.5

* Population statistics were taken from the 2001 Census for Local Authorities that responded to the allotment survey The population for England is not the total population but was derived from the sum of the populations for each of the respondent Local Authorities

Table6.:Summary of key components of allotment (England, regions)

Thistablerelatesthetotalsreceivedtotheestimatedtotals.

from survey

Estimated true total no.

of sites†

true total no.

of plots†

Total Vacant plots

Estimated true total no.

of vacant plots†

Total on waiting list

* Population statistics were taken from the 2001 Census for Local Authorities that responded to the allotment survey

The population for England was obtained by taking the sum of the populations for each of the respondent Local Authorities This figure should not be confused with the true total population of England.

4.6.Allotment trends1996-2005

4.6.1.A comparison of supply and trends

1996-2005demonstratesthefollowingkeycomponents

The evidence from the disposals data and the received database from the present survey

demonstrate a continuing reduction of plot numbers, by approximately 15%, one in six

4.6.2.Approximately 300 Statutory Sites or parts thereof have been disposed of since

1996 [ODPM data local council returns] [local councils are legally required to obtain Statutory Sites disposal approval] An estimate** of a further 500 disposed sites since

1996 is made The sites [or parts thereof] disposed of were mainly ones with a

significantly higher rate of vacancy than sites overall This trend is less steep a decline than that identified up to 1996 However the evience collected does not provide a reliable figure from which to estimate total allotment area, or local council land holding The profound drop in area suggested by the composite trend table, below, does not correlate with evidence, for example, regarding disposed sites

4.6.3.One half of the allotments recorded in the national census in 1970 have now been used for other purposes Commensurate with this is the high reduction in the number of vacant plots This may indicate resultant higher efficiency of use owing to local site disposals, as well as improvement in plot and site management, and/or increased demand

over diminishing supply Increases in the waiting list have continued in the recorded

years 1970, 1996, 2005, [explained further in Chapter five: Demand] There is a

proportionate reduction in availability of plots by households In 1996 there were 15 plots

per thousand households; in 2005 there are 13.4 plots per thousand households

4.6.4.Furthermore, as the subsequent chapters demonstrate, there is evidence of

significant improvement in the sites that do remain, in terms of services and linkage with

policy The distribution of status and ownership of allotments between 1996 and 2005 is difficult to clarify owing to the large proportion of `status not known` given by

respondents Curiously, the figure remains the same [as given] as in 1978 Once again, this figure may be unreliable, as the datasets are very uneven and variable

Table7.: Key trend analysis

Date sites plots acreage vacant waiting Statutory List [see `Demand`] [percentage]

Data 1970-1996, DETR/APU Report of Survey of Allotments in England, 1997]

*1977 figure used as proxy, 1978 n/a]

**Thisestimatedfigureistobetreatedwithcaution,derivedfromtheaveragecollectedsitesizeandadjustedforestimatedsitetotals

***Actual Data Received accounts for responses from only 3418 sites Range indicates estimate from the listed `unknown site status` category

4.6.4.Evidence of site disposals suggests that 300 Statutory Sites have of various sizes have been disposed of since 1996 [ODPM records].An estimate has been made that 500 Temporary Sites [not protected by special legislation] have been disposed of since 1996

4.6.5 Evidence obtained from local councils who responded regarding the disposal of their sites [all categories] suggests that the result may be a more efficient use of

remaining plots, and/or a reduction in overall availability to the population.Councils that have disposed of sites are more likely to have a greater proportion of vacant plots This suggests that sites are being disposed of where demand for allotments is lower This evidence appears in Table 8

Table 8:Local Authorities that have disposed of sites since 1996 and their respective percentages of Vacant Plots

% Vacant plots Have sites been disposed since 1996? Total Las

No of LAs % of LAs No of LAs % of LAs

5: Demand

5.1.Allotment demand is characterised by names on waiting lists The present total number of individuals and households seeking plots as represented on waiting lists is 14,000 There are 25,631 vacant plots Plots vacant as percentage of total plots: 13.4.[this figure of waiting list lengths is an estimate bearing in mind the response on this question The actual response figure was 10,450 names on Waiting Lists]

5.1.2.Length of time waiting lists varies greatly at a regional and local level

Approximately two thirds of councils responding in this survey maintain awaiting list [only 228 councils responded]

5.1.3.Relationships between the size of waiting lists and the provision of allotments is varied and gives no regular picture There is some evidence that where waiting lists are organised by site there is a lower waiting list This could reflect that there is a faster allocation route, or that there is lower demand in such sites However, it is likely to be theformer In England overall, in most local councils people wait 7-12 months to be

allocated a plot In some areas, waiting time may be significantly reduced to only a few months This may relate to the efficiency of managing placement from the list, and to the local availability of sites In general terms, waiting lists lengths vary considerably by region Over one half wait over one year in the southwest; in the west Midlands only ten percent wait that period, whilst over one quarter are allocated within one month

This data is presented, for completeness of comparison, in TABLE 7 [above]

Chapter 6: Site and plot characteristics

6.1.Plot sizes of allotments in England are normally approximately 10m x 30m square [10 rods] The majority of plots are of this size Increasingly they are made smaller, [eg 10m by 15m, 5 rods] to enable higher plot availability and to attract smaller plot users Rents are usually charged per 10 rod measure

6.2 The average rent for theusual10rodplotis£31,varying between £24 in the East of England to £46 in London Rents vary enormously not only in terms of location and plot size, but in terms of facilities, mode of management and management character

6.2.1.There is great variation between rents for plots between Statutory and Temporary Sites and between different regions This reasonably reflects the tendency for Statutory Sites, given their likelihood of longer term existence, being more fully serviced with facilities than Temporary Sites In general terms, rents vary in relation to security of site, and between rural and urban sites Sites in urban areas, where sites are concentrated, where the local council manages a number of sites within the urban area, generally tend

to have higher provision of facilities

These variations are shown in the two following tables 9, 10

Table 9 Rents by council type [per ten rod, regular sized plot]

6.2.2.Rents vary enormously regionally, by status and by category of location [eg city, village] This is likely to be in relation to the location [thus land price], soil quality, facilities and other management practices [eg security] in relation to the sites [LGA 2001,Survey 1996] The density of the present evidence does not permit clarity on this, anotheritem taken up in recommendations .Plot rents vary in England from £31 per 10 rod plot The variation of rents is between £24 in Eastern England to £45 in London [10 rods].Table 10: Average rents across different status categories and by region

No.

of sites

% within Region

No.

of sites

% within Region

No.

of sites

% within Region

No.

of sites

% within Region

No.

of sites

% within Region East of

7: Policy

7.1.1.The 2001 Report [LGA 2001] recommended to local councils the value of engagingallotments across a wide range of policy arena This Survey includes attention to these key policy arenas and in particular to Open Space Strategies

asrequiredoflocalcouncilsaboveparishandtownlevelbythplanningguidancenotePPG17 In addition, the above Report recommended much wider attention to such as Health and Sustainable Environment Policies but these were not realised in the returns

Note: this chapter represents the evidence from over one third of the councils [except town and parish Councils, as these are not normally policy-making councils] but many ofthe questions in this section are answered by a very small number of councils

Response to the questions concerning policy varied especially between district councils and the other categories For example, Metropolitan, Unitary councils and London Boroughs responded more highly to the key questions concerning the, within already higher level of response to the Policy questionnaire overall There is a similar pattern in the response concerning the promotion of allotments Therefore this data is expressed in general terms, precise proportions not considered reliable

7.2.Allotments are acknowledged as components of public open spaces Nearly four in ten of councils that responded have an open space strategy; a similar proportion have one currently in development] The response to the question concerning Open Space Policies is very high The variation between categories of council and their production of audits of open space vary Those with an Open Space Audit [including expectation of its completion in six months] are distributed as follows Amongst London boroughs, nearly three quarters have made strategies Nearly two thirds of Metropolitan Districts and District Councils have done so, and one half of Unitary Authorities

Table 11:Council Audit of open spaces in line with planning policy guidance note 17 (PPG17)

within 6 months

No & no plan to do so within 6 months

LAs

No of LAs

% within Region

No of LAs

% within Region

No of LAs

% within Region

No of LAs

% within Region

Table 12.: Number of Sites in relation to allotment policy document.

Number of Sites within

LA

* ‘Council’ refers to the Local Authority within which town or parish councils is located

7.3.Different categories of local councils have as yet produced a policy document on allotments This comprises One half of London boroughs; one third of Metropolitan Districts: and Unitary authorities: and one quarter of District councils

7.4.The majority of councils that responded have one or more policies on specific themes Over three-quarters of local councils have policies specifying standard ofuse; two thirds on target levels of provision, three quarters have demand assessments A high number of local councils have a strategy to promote allotments, over four in five, and a similar proportion to resource allotment sites Most responding councils identified

allotment-an intention to review allotment-and/or monitor policy priorities for allotments; allotment-and identified Strategy for devolved management Target levels of provision and resourcing are

significant policy areas Furthermore, approximately two thirds of councils responding have policy on target levels of provision; and strategy to resource allotments Four in every five local councils have policies on commitment to social inclusion and/or

commitment to physical inclusion Two thirds identify a timetable to review and/or monitor policy priorities for allotments Over half have a Strategy for devolved

management Most councils identify a priority of a strategy for day to day management

of allotments

7.5 Promoting allotments is recognised as the key means to ensure the efficiency of site use and to meet actual demand [Report of Inquiry into the future of allotments 1998] Whilst most councils [above] have a strategy to promote allotments, the means to do so are very varied, and the different means may have different effectiveness, that may also vary by location, accessibility, visibility and so on The promotion of allotments tends to

be higher in local councils where there are a greater number of sites; over one half of councils with more than 20 sites promote them in some way; few of those with fewer than 10 sites do so Councils with larger numbers of sites can allocate greater resource totheir management, with efficiencies of scale.Local councils with larger numbers of sites tend to have policies concerning aspects of allotment supply and management Thus, overhalf of councils with more than 20 sites have policies: one third with between 10 and 20 sites have, and only 16% of those with fewer than 10 sites have policies Moreover, councils with larger numbers of individuals on their waiting lists tend to have policies forallotments, too This may mean that the waiting list increases in response to policy visibility, or policies may follow evidence of demand The difference is slight, ie up to 25

on List, some what under one half have such policies; over 26 on list, somewhat higher

7.6.Of those responding to the survey, a significant proportion identified links between allotment policies and other agendas Three quarters [73%] identified links between allotment policies and other agendas and

7.7.Practice on Consultation is varied Consultation with plotholders was identified to be quarterly or more frequently by 86 councils [38% of those replying]; once, twice or thriceyearly by 43 [19%]; sporadically `as and when` by 28 [12%] Of those responding to this question, only 28 [12%] identified no consultation

.

8.MANAGEMENT

8.1.Management modes vary The variation mirrors the evidence on policy

Managementofsitesmaybedonebyallotmnetassociations,asdevolvedmanagement However,allotmnesaremanagedsitebysite,andtherecanbevariationsbetweendifferentsitesmanagedbythesamecouncilinreflectionoftheiparticularcircumstances,inparticularthesuitabilityofthesiteandtheinterestamongstplotholderstomanagetheirsite.Onlysomecouncilsyetofferthisdevolvedfacility Nearly one half of sites are managed directly by local councils A further one fifth are managed by town and parish councils Representatives of allotment holders, by way of allotment associations, are involved in some form of devolved management that may include either rent collection, aspects of site management and maintenance Nearly one half of sites have an element of devolved management Responsibility for rent setting

is held by local councils in similar proportion to overall management responsibility Onceagain, detail is given only where the robustness of the evidence received permits, and caveats are given accordingly This chapter represents the evidence from over one third

of the councils [except parish Councils]; many of the questions in this section are

answered by a very small number of councils Evidence of components of management delivery for allotment associations is sparse, as these are not required to make their records available There is a considerable regional distribution of management modes, with no evident pattern

8.2.Responsibilityforrentcollectionbetweenthesemodeinasimilarway,mainlytheresponsibilityofloacalcouncils,includingtownandparishcouncils,andaquartertheresponsibilityofallotmnetassociations

TABLE 13.Overall, and rent management responsibility

management

Parish or town councils 20% 26%

Note: town and parish councils have relatively small numbers of sites and so this data

over-estimates their presence

8.3.1.Regional variation is given in the following tables, indicative only due to the

response variations Higher proportions in North West, North East, Yorkshire and

Humberside are managed by Local Authorities; higher proportion in region of London

and West Midlands managed by Allotment Associations Very low proportions of sites in

London, North East and the North West are managed by town or parish councils

Higher proportion within the North East have shared responsibility

Table14.:Management of allotment sites by region

known

No of sites within Region

% sites within Region

No of sites within Region

% sites within Region

No of sites within Region

% sites within Region

No of sites within Region

% sites within Region

No of sites within Region

% sites within Region

No of sites within Region

% sites within Region

8.3.2.Rent management responsibility is distributed similarly

Table 15.Authorities responsible for handling rents by regions

Local authority Allotment Shared , e.g LA & Town or parish Other Not applicable

association Assoc council No.

within

Region

% within Region

No.

within Region

% within Region

No.

within Region

% within Region

No.

within Region

% within Region

No.

within Region

% within Region

No.

within Region

within Region East of

8.4.Maintenance responsibility The responsibility for particular facility provision rests in

similar proportion to overall management and rents, with local councils at a slightly

higher

level.Onehalfofsitesaremanagedbylocalcouncils;oneintenbyallotmnetassociaitons,onequar

terbyparishandtowncouncils,andasmallnumberjointlybetweenlocalcouncilandallotmentass

oiation

8.5.Delivering plot use efficiency is related to the handling of problems or complaints

regarding plot maintenance The prevailing means is a warning to the plot holder, with

eviction for non compliance as appropriate, the actual procedure not revealed in the

evidence A small proportion of councils issue warnings to alert the plotholder to the

concern and for action, but do nothing more

8.6.waiting lists tend to remain the responsibility of local councils, as recorded by one

half of responding councils Most of the remaining sites` lists are maintained by allotment

associations or parish and town councils This question received a generally low

response, in total 36% of respondents Those not replying may have no lists

Thefollowingtablegivesanindicationofhowthesemodesdistribute,within the dataset

available