Derelict land in Glasgow used as community allotments for the last three years have been destroyed by owners without warning, so that allotmenteers were unable to retrieve plants and materials.

Govanhill's guerrilla gardeners find their waste ground allotments bulldozed | UK news | theguardian.com

"kay" wrote


Derelict land in Glasgow used as community allotments for the last three
years have been destroyed by owners without warning, so that
allotmenteers were unable to retrieve plants and materials.

'Govanhill's guerrilla gardeners find their waste ground allotments
bulldozed | UK news | theguardian.com' (http://tinyurl.com/kb4erwo)


The gardeners knew it couldn't last but for the developers to destroy
everything without notice is ignorance beyond belief. What message are they
sending the locals? If they want local help or cooperation from the locals
in the future they have destroyed any chance now and by alienating everyone
possibly made their own job more difficult. Stupidity and short sightedness
doesn't come close.
--
Regards. Bob Hobden.
Posted to this Newsgroup from the W of London, UK

On 15/11/2013 12:18, Bob Hobden wrote:
"kay" wrote


Derelict land in Glasgow used as community allotments for the last three
years have been destroyed by owners without warning, so that
allotmenteers were unable to retrieve plants and materials.

'Govanhill's guerrilla gardeners find their waste ground allotments
bulldozed | UK news | theguardian.com' (http://tinyurl.com/kb4erwo)


The gardeners knew it couldn't last but for the developers to destroy
everything without notice is ignorance beyond belief. What message are
they sending the locals? If they want local help or cooperation from the
locals in the future they have destroyed any chance now and by
alienating everyone possibly made their own job more difficult.
Stupidity and short sightedness doesn't come close.



Indeed. The landowners may have followed the letter of the law, but
hardly the spirit of the law. To all intents and purposes they have
(allegedly) vandalised or stolen crops et al belong to the gardeners.
It would not have been hard to post a warning at the site to indicate
that development was due to proceed. The gardeners using the site could
then have removed their crops and equipment.

By law (assuming that Scottish law is not vastly different to ours in
this regard), there must have been at least one planning notice posted
in the vicinity when permission to build was being sought. It would not
(as a local) be hard to learn when this permission would run out.
Assuming this was the case, it might be argued that the gardeners should
have known when the land would be required by the owner/developer. All
this notwithstanding, it was a despicable thing to do without any form
of warning.

I hope the gardeners get their new allotment site in time for next season.

--
Spider.
On high ground in SE London
gardening on heavy clay

On 15/11/2013 13:47, Spider wrote:
On 15/11/2013 12:18, Bob Hobden wrote:
"kay" wrote


Derelict land in Glasgow used as community allotments for the last three
years have been destroyed by owners without warning, so that
allotmenteers were unable to retrieve plants and materials.

'Govanhill's guerrilla gardeners find their waste ground allotments
bulldozed | UK news | theguardian.com' (http://tinyurl.com/kb4erwo)


The gardeners knew it couldn't last but for the developers to destroy
everything without notice is ignorance beyond belief. What message are
they sending the locals? If they want local help or cooperation from the
locals in the future they have destroyed any chance now and by
alienating everyone possibly made their own job more difficult.
Stupidity and short sightedness doesn't come close.



Indeed. The landowners may have followed the letter of the law, but
hardly the spirit of the law. To all intents and purposes they have
(allegedly) vandalised or stolen crops et al belong to the gardeners. It
would not have been hard to post a warning at the site to indicate that
development was due to proceed. The gardeners using the site could then
have removed their crops and equipment.

By law (assuming that Scottish law is not vastly different to ours in
this regard), there must have been at least one planning notice posted
in the vicinity when permission to build was being sought. It would not
(as a local) be hard to learn when this permission would run out.
Assuming this was the case, it might be argued that the gardeners should
have known when the land would be required by the owner/developer. All
this notwithstanding, it was a despicable thing to do without any form
of warning.

I hope the gardeners get their new allotment site in time for next season.


Give notice and all the protesters and green weirdos would have been out
in force.
Jock probably went in with his machine and the attitude "it's more than
my Jobs Worth to leave anything".
Now the ground is clear they can apply for planing with no chance of
anyone saying that the ground is being used for anything.

On 15/11/2013 14:03, David Hill wrote:
On 15/11/2013 13:47, Spider wrote:
On 15/11/2013 12:18, Bob Hobden wrote:
"kay" wrote


Derelict land in Glasgow used as community allotments for the last
three
years have been destroyed by owners without warning, so that
allotmenteers were unable to retrieve plants and materials.

'Govanhill's guerrilla gardeners find their waste ground allotments
bulldozed | UK news | theguardian.com' (http://tinyurl.com/kb4erwo)


The gardeners knew it couldn't last but for the developers to destroy
everything without notice is ignorance beyond belief. What message are
they sending the locals? If they want local help or cooperation from the
locals in the future they have destroyed any chance now and by
alienating everyone possibly made their own job more difficult.
Stupidity and short sightedness doesn't come close.



Indeed. The landowners may have followed the letter of the law, but
hardly the spirit of the law. To all intents and purposes they have
(allegedly) vandalised or stolen crops et al belong to the gardeners. It
would not have been hard to post a warning at the site to indicate that
development was due to proceed. The gardeners using the site could then
have removed their crops and equipment.

By law (assuming that Scottish law is not vastly different to ours in
this regard), there must have been at least one planning notice posted
in the vicinity when permission to build was being sought. It would not
(as a local) be hard to learn when this permission would run out.
Assuming this was the case, it might be argued that the gardeners should
have known when the land would be required by the owner/developer. All
this notwithstanding, it was a despicable thing to do without any form
of warning.

I hope the gardeners get their new allotment site in time for next
season.


Give notice and all the protesters and green weirdos would have been out
in force.
Jock probably went in with his machine and the attitude "it's more than
my Jobs Worth to leave anything".
Now the ground is clear they can apply for planing with no chance of
anyone saying that the ground is being used for anything.



Yes, David, you may very well be right. Such a waste, though, of the
crops and any good feeling that may have prevailed had it been done
differently.

--
Spider.
On high ground in SE London
gardening on heavy clay

On Friday, November 15, 2013 2:03:23 PM UTC, Dave Hill wrote:
On 15/11/2013 13:47, Spider wrote:

On 15/11/2013 12:18, Bob Hobden wrote:

"kay" wrote





Derelict land in Glasgow used as community allotments for the last three

years have been destroyed by owners without warning, so that

allotmenteers were unable to retrieve plants and materials.



'Govanhill's guerrilla gardeners find their waste ground allotments

bulldozed | UK news | theguardian.com' (http://tinyurl.com/kb4erwo)





The gardeners knew it couldn't last but for the developers to destroy

everything without notice is ignorance beyond belief. What message are

they sending the locals? If they want local help or cooperation from the

locals in the future they have destroyed any chance now and by

alienating everyone possibly made their own job more difficult.

Stupidity and short sightedness doesn't come close.







Indeed. The landowners may have followed the letter of the law, but

hardly the spirit of the law. To all intents and purposes they have

(allegedly) vandalised or stolen crops et al belong to the gardeners. It

would not have been hard to post a warning at the site to indicate that

development was due to proceed. The gardeners using the site could then

have removed their crops and equipment.



By law (assuming that Scottish law is not vastly different to ours in

this regard), there must have been at least one planning notice posted

in the vicinity when permission to build was being sought. It would not

(as a local) be hard to learn when this permission would run out.

Assuming this was the case, it might be argued that the gardeners should

have known when the land would be required by the owner/developer. All

this notwithstanding, it was a despicable thing to do without any form

of warning.



I hope the gardeners get their new allotment site in time for next season.





Give notice and all the protesters and green weirdos would have been out

in force.

Jock probably went in with his machine and the attitude "it's more than

my Jobs Worth to leave anything".

Now the ground is clear they can apply for planing with no chance of

anyone saying that the ground is being used for anything.


Yep, you beat me to it. If the owner had done the right thing and said I want it back, you can have it another season, to give you time to grow anything planted, harvest and replant somewhere else, I don't think he would have been repaid with the same kindness.

Yep, protestors and legal challenges (someone would probably fund them), dragging it on and costing money.

In article ,
says...

Indeed. The landowners may have followed the letter of the law, but
hardly the spirit of the law.

If you had more clue about Scottish law you might be in a better
position to pass comment.

To all intents and purposes they have
(allegedly) vandalised or stolen crops et al belong to the gardeners.

You are *completely wrong" (and taking a foolish risk) to assert the
landowners are guilty of theft and vandalism.

It would not have been hard to post a warning at the site to indicate
that development was due to proceed. The gardeners using the site could
then have removed their crops and equipment.

By law (assuming that Scottish law is not vastly different to ours in
this regard),

Wrong assumption. Scotland has its own, separate legislation; the law
here is NOT the same as English law.

there must have been at least one planning notice posted
in the vicinity when permission to build was being sought.

It would not
(as a local) be hard to learn when this permission would run out.

Planning applications in Scotland (at all stages) are public
information, viewable online, or paper copies of the full application at
local libraries.

Assuming this was the case, it might be argued that the gardeners should
have known when the land would be required by the owner/developer.

The garden organisers website states

"From the very beginning, we were aware that the site was owned by a
developer and that planning permission was in place .... We made a
concerted effort to make clear to people who came along to volunteer
that our activities on the site could be terminated at any time."

Janet (Scotland).

On 2013-11-15 17:28:59 +0000, Janet said:

In article ,
says...

Indeed. The landowners may have followed the letter of the law, but
hardly the spirit of the law.

If you had more clue about Scottish law you might be in a better
position to pass comment.
snip

Instead of reverting to your default position of 'downright bloody
rude', perhaps you could consider explaining things politely. For a
change.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.com
South Devon

On 15/11/2013 17:28, Janet wrote:
In article ,
says...

Indeed. The landowners may have followed the letter of the law, but
hardly the spirit of the law.

If you had more clue about Scottish law you might be in a better
position to pass comment.

To all intents and purposes they have
(allegedly) vandalised or stolen crops et al belong to the gardeners.

You are *completely wrong" (and taking a foolish risk) to assert the
landowners are guilty of theft and vandalism.

It would not have been hard to post a warning at the site to indicate
that development was due to proceed. The gardeners using the site could
then have removed their crops and equipment.

By law (assuming that Scottish law is not vastly different to ours in
this regard),

Wrong assumption. Scotland has its own, separate legislation; the law
here is NOT the same as English law.

there must have been at least one planning notice posted
in the vicinity when permission to build was being sought.

It would not
(as a local) be hard to learn when this permission would run out.

Planning applications in Scotland (at all stages) are public
information, viewable online, or paper copies of the full application at
local libraries.

Assuming this was the case, it might be argued that the gardeners should
have known when the land would be required by the owner/developer.

The garden organisers website states

"From the very beginning, we were aware that the site was owned by a
developer and that planning permission was in place .... We made a
concerted effort to make clear to people who came along to volunteer
that our activities on the site could be terminated at any time."

Janet (Scotland).





If you cannot pretend to have good manners, then I shall not pretend I
have the patience to answer you.
I have better things to do.

--
Spider.
On high ground in SE London
gardening on heavy clay

On 15/11/2013 18:34, sacha wrote:
On 2013-11-15 17:28:59 +0000, Janet said:

In article ,
says...

Indeed. The landowners may have followed the letter of the law, but
hardly the spirit of the law.

If you had more clue about Scottish law you might be in a better
position to pass comment.
snip

Instead of reverting to your default position of 'downright bloody
rude', perhaps you could consider explaining things politely. For a change.




Thank you, Sacha. It was very rude but, to be honest, I'm not
interested in an explanation from that quarter.
If a well-mannered Scot wishes to explain the implications of Scottish
Law where it pertains to the question here, I shall be pleased to take
time to read it and learn from it. Rudeness is not something I wish to
learn more about.

--
Spider.
On high ground in SE London
gardening on heavy clay

In article , david@abacus-
nurseries.co.uk says...

Jock probably went in with his machine and the attitude "it's more than
my Jobs Worth to leave anything".

The exact opposite is the case; the clearance contractors were
sympathetic, and helped the guerrilla gardeners move trees and raised
beds to safety.


Now the ground is clear they can apply for planing with no chance of
anyone saying that the ground is being used for anything.

The planning permission was granted BEFORE the gardens were started.

Here's a telling picture of the "gardens".

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/lo...ll-south-seed-
community-garden-2787679

" we must reluctantly accept that the landowners were within their
rights to reclaim the space.....
?We managed to speak to the contractors while they were in the process
of dismantling the site.
?They were sympathetic to our situation and have assisted us in
salvaging what remained of the raised beds and timber, and even some
fruit trees."

The bottom line is:

South Seeds started a short-term temporary project without permission
of the property-developer landowner, knew, and told the gardeners from
the outset the site had planning permission on it and would be cleared
for building 8 new houses. It's in a run down area of decrepit tenements
where new housing is desperately needed.

If you were a taxpayer in Scotland how would you feel about the
quarter of a million funding South Seeds got from the Scottish govt in
2012?

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/En...e/howyoucanhel
p/communities/ClimateChallengeFund/projects/CCF10


"South Seeds - the South Seeds Energy Catalyst project aims to deliver
practical advice and support to improve energy efficiency in properties
in the South Glasgow area by working with local energy partners to
maximise uptake of efficiency measures cut fuel bills and improve
people's lives. Tenements will be encouraged to tackle energy efficiency
by setting up Close Troops in which people will work together to improve
close efficiency and work alongside the local community to work together
to refurbish and manage green spaces for local food growing. £227,570"
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/


Janet.(Scotland)

I don't think they were looking for that. 24 hours would have done.

In article ,
says...

'Road_Hog[_2_ Wrote:
;995263']
Yep, you beat me to it. If the owner had done the right thing and said I
want it back, you can have it another season, to give you time to grow
anything planted, harvest and replant somewhere else, I don't think he
would have been repaid with the same kindness.


I don't think they were looking for that. 24 hours would have done.

Squatting has been a crime in Scotland for over a century. In Scotland
squatters can be evicted without notice and without a court order.

NO landowner is going to give up that valuable legal protection by
telling squatters " OK you can just stay till tomorrow / whichever day
suits you", IOW giving them permission to occupy.

Janet.

"kay" wrote in message
...

Derelict land in Glasgow used as community allotments for the last three
years have been destroyed by owners without warning, so that
allotmenteers were unable to retrieve plants and materials.

'Govanhill's guerrilla gardeners find their waste ground allotments
bulldozed | UK news | theguardian.com' (http://tinyurl.com/kb4erwo)

It's sad to hear but I'm not surprised. If you grow somewhere you haven't
permission to, this kind of thing will always happen. All land belongs to
someone (or a council) and if you kind of squat on it, you have to be
prepared to be evicted.
Having said that, it's still a pity but they must have known it was risky.

Tina

On Friday, 15 November 2013 19:20:08 UTC, kay wrote:


I don't think they were looking for that. 24 hours would have done.


More than enough time to serve legal papers and ensure a lengthy legal process. It's amazing how quickly activists can mobilise and take over an allotment, putting obstacles in the way and chaining themselves to stuff.

Do you not think, that the developer thought that people would just come and take their plants etc. without causing problems are challenging them, they would not have been happy to give 24 hour's notice? Let's face it, they'd waited over 3 years, what difference would another day make?

Don't get me wrong, I think it's very sad, I have two allotments myself, so I know how they must feel. But you do have to ask yourself, why did they give no notice, when they'd already waited so long? They must have had some concerns that there would be trouble and you can't blame them.