Allotments and displaced plotholders marginalised in ‘low-quality’ Olympic Park
May 8th, 2010 by admin
The approval of the Olympic Parks and Public Realm Post-Games Transformation planning application was a disappointment for the MGS plotholders whose lovely old site will be replaced by something far inferior in the future Olympic Park.
It is also a betrayal of the thousands of people on allotment waiting lists in the local area, who were hoping for a genuine example of sustainability and response to local needs in the Olympic ‘legacy’.
At the ODA planning committee meeting at Stratford’s Old Town Hall on 27th April, approval was given for only 2.1ha of allotment provision after the Olympics. It is split into two parts at opposite ends of the park, nowhere near the original Manor Gardens site. The illustrative layouts show 85 plots – only two more than the original Manor Gardens site, destroyed in 2007 to enable park landscaping.
The earlier promises that the allotments would be ‘moved back’ to a location near the old site and would be of improved quality have been broken. The northern Eton Manor area is particularly bad, squeezed between a giant wind turbine, major roads, a hockey pitch and car park. It will be exposed to wind, noise and disturbance from the large numbers of visitors they hope to attract to the location – while the old site was peaceful, secluded and enjoyed an almost rural wildlife-rich setting.
MGS read a statement to the Planning Committee outlining their objections and disatisfaction with the process.
- There was no consideration of the importance of a legal assurance of permanent status.
- There had been no opportunity for MGS to influence the park design at any stage, though there were public statements that they were being closely consulted.
- The ODA’s Statement of Participation was misleading in its account of the December 2009 meeting and workshop with MGS, omitting the most important issues raised.
- The splitting of the site would reduce its quality, and further damage the community.
- The northern site at Eton Manor is in very close proximity to Ecotricity’s planned 120m wind turbine. There are no similar installations anywhere so close to sensitive receptors and we should not be forced to be guinea pigs. The site should be moved or the turbine cancelled unless independent research can prove that no-one will suffer ill effects or distress from long term, outdoor exposure at such close range.
- Designers had refused to consider creating a more secluded ‘walled garden’ at Eton Manor to make the location more acceptable
Alison Nimmo of the ODA claimed that it had “been really hard work” trying to find 2.1ha for allotments. With a park area totalling 200ha being designed from scratch, of which 103ha was to be public open space, it shows what a low priority they were given. Since the loss of Manor Gardens was one of the most widely criticised and unpopular impacts of the Olympic development, the failure to try and mitigate this by making new allotments a key aspect of the legacy park design is unforgiveable.
There are now over 1800 people on waiting lists for allotments in the boroughs surrounding the Olympic park. Our survey revealed that there are many more who would like a plot were they available. It is extremely difficult to find land for new allotments in London, and converting existing public open space can be contentious. So the scale of the Olympic redevelopment and the amount of public land available has been a tragically missed opportunity for a substantial increase in allotment provision.
The intention is to build 10,000 new residential units in the park, without gardens. The populations of the surrounding boroughs of Hackney, Newham, Tower Hamlets and Waltham Forest are projected to grow by over 100,000 in the next 20 years. These people are being deprived of the incomparable benefits of an allotment garden of their own by the decisions made now. Once the hard landscaping and elaborate plantings have gone in there will be no chance of changing anything.
We were not the only ones who considered the plans unacceptable. The representatives of the boroughs of Tower Hamlets and Newham (in which the majority of the Park lies) wanted the application rejected and revised, Newham stating the Park plans were ‘not high quality’. Of particular concern were the lack of any details regarding facilities such as toilets and play areas, the large expanses where there was no planned usage, no warm-up track and poor connections.
London Cycling Campaign criticised lack of cycle parking and substandard cycle lanes.
Over 6ha between the Main Stadium and the Aquatics Centre is to be left as a huge expanse of hard surface.
The planning decision turned out to be example of the hasty bureaucracy of Olympic rubber-stamping with all objections being swept aside, and the planning committee granting unanimous approval to the application after a token display of criticism. In this case, the excuse was the rumour of the potential loss of £350m of funding if there was delay in approving the application. Though no-one seemed sure what the actual risk was of the money disappearing, or what the facts of the matter were, it was enough to ensure that it got waved through.







Following the recommendations of the consultants’ report, work has been going on this week to attempt to ease the waterlogging problems on 9 of the worst affected plots at the Marsh Lane allotment site.