top of page

Annual May Bank Holiday Plot Inspection – May 26 2013

 

1.  Introduction:

Plot inspection was carried out by one committee member (SW) and one non member (RS) on voluntary basis. They were asked to report to the DAGA Committee asap on completion.

 

2.  Procedure:

The existing pro forma (apendix 1) was revisited after previous year’s experience and amended.  The resulting pro forma (app 2) is based on the Rules of DAGA as agreed at the AGM of 2012 and which can be found on the website at http://deptfordallotments.shutterfly.com


 

3. Findings:

 

1 Plot (1-4)

1 access denied to 4/6 plots – gates locked (30, 37, 11&12  and 13 &14)

2 12 plots have 1/3 or more not cultivated

3 with regards extent of cultivation and standard of maintenance there is a clear distinction between established plots (38-20) and those more recently converted

4 non-involvement this current year at 22A, 16B,10A, 8, 7 and 5

5 confusing state of D’s old plot; only 2 plots seem to be active

 

2 Trees (5)

1 signs of historic tampering eg tree ringed at 34 and cherry trees destroyed on 11&12

2 no signs of recent activity

3 ivy affected dead trees between communal footpath and neighbours’ back fence at top end

 

3 Back Railway fence (6-8)

  •  16 plots where land is NOT 6 feet clear from fence

  • 6 plots with structures within 6 feet of fence

4 Safety (9)

15 plots with minor issues:

  • Plot 28 number of protruding uncapped metal poles

  • Plot 36 spiked metal fence adjoining communal footpath

  • Evidence of beer cans

6 Communal Footpath (12-16)

  1.  overall minimum width of 6feet is being maintained

  2.  min width under threat due to lack of maintenance

  3.  16 plotholders NOT maintaining communal path area

  4.  17 plots fail to maintain gap between neighbours’ garden fence and communal footpath - most noticeable at TOP END

  5.  rickety shed leaning over path around 36

 

4. Conclusions

 

4.1 Plots: Overall, high levels of cultivation and maintenance. However:

  • Apart from some newly allocated plots 50% minimum is being maintained  

  • Nb seven plots with ALL CLEAR

  • high % of collective non cultivation

  • signs of inactivity on existing/ established plots – 22A, 16 B,  8, 7, 5

  • signs of inactivity on recently allocated plots 9A & B, 10A, and several Eplots

 

4.3 Back railway fence:

 

  • a number of constructions flout the 6 feet requirement

  • a number of plots have rubbish / items stored in the 6 feet space – reminders to be sent to relevant plotholders

 

4.4 Safety: Overall, safety of high standard but

  • beer cans remains an issue

 

4.6 Communal Footpath:

  • plotholders need reminding of their responsibilities

  • top end (i.e. plot 39 upwards) requires clarification where allotments end


 

5.  Discussion

- members of neglected plots need contacting asap especially in case of possible illness

- new members need chasing to confirm continued participation

- is 50% rule sufficient? Is it not reasonable to expect a higher level of cultivation?

-  pricing per cubic feet might encourage members not to take on more than they can manage?

- should members be asked to take down constructions that infringe the 6 feet rule

- ban alcohol on site?

- members need clear specs re allotment end and communal path policy at  top end of site

 

bottom of page