Held at the Winchester hall, Turk's Head on 14th April 2014
Present
* Stephen Alexander ("SA") Chair
* Mandie Adams McGuire Vice Chair
* Barney King
* Moir Leslie
* Lloyd Wilson
* Councillor Geoff Acton
* Colin Cooper ( South West London Environment Network)
* and X9 Friends of Moormead
Apologies
* Nikki Gouldstone
* Harry Jacobs
* Maddie Menzies
* London Borough of Richmond upon Thames
Minutes
*1.* SA welcomed those present.
*2.* Annual report - SA had already emailed a report to the Friends. He made the additional points
*2.1* There are 120 Friends
*2.2* The Friends of Moormead ("FOM") was set up at the instigation of LBRuT at the time that the Parks contracts were being let; groups which wanted to be involved in the direct maintenance of local parks could bid for a contract. Those groups solely interested in the maintenance standards and use of their parks were encouraged to set up Friends groups whom LBRuT could consult. SA reported that there had been very little consultation. The most important matter of interest is the state of the pavilion. David Allister told SA in June 2013 that he would commission a condition survey. This had not taken place. On the morning of the AGM, SA received some comments on his Annual Report from Ishbel Murray (Assistant Director Environment LBRuT). Given the lack of time to distribute these comments, SA read them to the meeting. Ms Murray's comments on the pavilion were:
A programme of condition surveys of all Council properties is underway. Regrettably, the prioritisation of the Moormead Pavilion was not made clear when the programme was agreed. In response to your contact, a separate instruction has been issued and the survey was due to take place today (Monday 14^th^ April). We anticipate receipt of the results of the survey within the next 14 days and we will endeavour to advise the FOM of the outcome w/c 28^th^ April.
SA said that it is appreciated that there is little money available but LBRuT had originally said that monies might be available to Friends groups that were not available to Councils. As the main concern is the pavilion, monies from such bodies as London in Bloom and Civic Pride would be negligible. SA reminded the meeting that LBRuT had always said that the use of the pavilion for community use or as a caf� could only be justified on financial grounds. Colin Cooper said that he had experience of Councils' attitude to cafes in that they can rarely be commercial.
SA said that he had recently been shown around Kneller Gardens which has changing rooms in its pavilion which have never been used.
*2.3* SA said that there might be funds available for some naturalisation of Moormead, around the edges and possibly by the restoration of a section of the river bank. Various studies are being carried out on the restoration in general of the Crane and a workshop is being organised in June/July 2014 to look at the possibilities and funding.
*2.4* SA thanked Peter Mahnke for his help in preparing and maintaining the FOM website.
*3.* SA asked if there were any changes required to the list of Committee Members shown in the agenda. The members present indicated that the current committee should be re-elected. i.e.
* Stephen Alexander - Chair
* Mandie Adams McGuire - vice Chair
* James Bishop
* Peter Bloom
* Nikki Gouldstone
* Harry Jacobs
* Barney King
* Moir Leslie
* Maddie Menzies
* Robin Narayan
* Lloyd Wilson
* Peter Wilson
*4.* Various points were discussed.
*4.1* Concerning the current condition of the pavilion it was suggested that a Freedom of Information request should be made to LBRuT if it is felt that they are not being open.
*4.2* It has been noticed by Friends that contractors vans drive over the grass during maintenance visits and bin emptying. SA said that he would ask Annie Tollafield of Continental landscapes if the FOM could be advised when site visits were being made by managers. The works undertaken to alleviate the standing water on the path behind the pavilion have been unsuccessful, although the winter was exceptionally wet. Ms Murray made the following comment :-
bq.. Following a meeting with the Friends in December, we carried out works to try to alleviate the issue of water settling on the path behind the pavilion. This involved the digging of a trench each side of the footpath and membrane sheets were put into it and filled with gravel. This was to take the water away before it got on to the path but with the all the rain we had the ground was too wet to soak up any more water. There was also a lot of foot and vehicle traffic making the surface hard and compacted so water could not penetrate it.
Unfortunately we did experience exceptionally high volumes of rain this winter and as such the drainage was not adequate to solve the issue.
The ground above these drains needs to be able to soak up the water, so grass or plants is the best option not compacted soil but we do have a heavy tree cover making growing difficult.
The Friends Group were kept up to date on these works via email and ward cllrs were replied to via email on 10^th^ Jan to Cllr Khosa and to Cllr Acton via ME on 14^th^ Jan. Yvonne (Kelleher) will invite members of the Friends along to another site visit next week to discuss what further action could be carried out to resolve the issue such as raising the entire length of footpath.
p. *4.3* The trees on the park side of Moor Mead Road ( near the tennis court) have not been looked at or pruned for many years. Roads say it is the responsibility of Parks and vice versa.
*4.4* The provision of fitness equipment for teenagers and adults was discussed. Cllr Geoff Acton said that he would approach Yvonne Kelleher (LBRuT Parks) . Cllr Acton pointed out that LBRuT has a parks designer who could perhaps be asked to have a look at Moormead as a whole.
*4.5* The fenced off area around the playground equipment was felt to be "uninviting". Comparison was made to the children's' area in Marble Hill park which was felt to be more useful as a dog free picnic, quiet zone. A Friend requested consideration of a similar, separate enclosure for parents and young children, which is not part of the children's play area and would also be prohibited to dogs.
*4.6* The lighting of some areas was said to be inadequate. Colin Cooper said that it was now Police and Council policy not to encourage access after dark by actually reducing lighting.
*4.7* It was suggested that as St Stephen's School have to pay rent for using Moormead as a playground, LBRuT should offer more facilities.
*4.8* The cricket pitch was removed as it was dangerous. The area is really too small for adult cricket. Ms Murray of LBRuT made the following comment:-
bq. At the request of the Friends Group Parks arranged the removal of the cricket mat and reinstated the area with new turf. If the Friends have any suggestions for new sport facilities we would be happy to consider and assist where possible.
*4.9* SA said that he had been concerned about the apparent use of Moormead as part of a London wide cycle way ("Mini Holland") This not the case and Ms Murray made the following comment :-
Unfortunately the Council was not selected as one of the three winning Mini Holland bids but has been promised substantial funding for elements of the bid that it submitted. At present the Council is waiting to find out from TfL what level of funding it will get and for what. TfL will be working with the Council on parts of the bid that it particularly liked and wants to see implemented. At the moment TfL have not indicated what these will be except measures to support Twickenham town centre and possibly developing the A316 cycle routes in one form or another.
As regards Moorhead itself, if anything is proposed for this area the Council will certainly consult and take on board any comments that we receive and we will make sure that we respect the wishes of the residents of the area
*5.* There being no further business SA declared the meeting closed at 1955 hrs.