Petersham Trust Newsletters

July 2005

Message from Graham Ball, Chair

The purpose of this letter is to let you know the current state of play in respect of the achievement of the original aims of the Petersham Trust (PT) to which you have all so kindly and generously contributed, and to outline the most likely way forward.

As you are aware the primary objectives of the PT were as follows:-

	1)	To ensure that cows continued to graze on the meadows for the greater part of the year.
	2)	To make good the years of neglect due to lack of investment in the 'infrastructure' of the meadows. Specifically the perimeter fencing, the gates, improving the farm buildings on River Lane and enhancing the quality of the meadows themselves and the meadow sward - which at times threatened to be overcome (overrun) by thistle.
	3)	To embark upon a tree strategy which involves the removal of dead or dying trees, pruning and reshaping and the planting of new trees where appropriate.
	4)	To guarantee the future of the meadows in perpetuity by handing over the management of the meadows to the National Trust to continue to fulfil the PT's original objectives.

In order for the NT to take on the stewardship of the meadows they require a lump sum from the PT, the income from which they consider to be sufficient to meet the outgoings. Throughout the lifetime of the PT, cognisant of the ultimate handover objective, we have worked hand in hand with the NT and they have attended all the Trustees meetings.

So where do we stand in the attainment of the original objectives?

	1)	Cows continue to graze on the meadows - arriving usually, as they did this year, in April and leaving in November.
	2)	The vast majority of the fencing has been replaced by wooden post and rail that is much more in keeping with the rural feel that we have endeavoured to perpetuate. The gates at either end of the path have been replaced with (wheelchair friendly) kissing gates. More later on the farm buildings but for now the dangerous buildings have been removed leaving the shell of the milking parlour. We have removed over three tons of rubble and detritus from the meadows, concrete blocks embedded feet into the earth have been removed and the quality of the grass itself is better this summer than it has been for years.
	3)	We are two years into a five year tree strategy that has already seen the quality and condition of our tree stock much improved. Over the winter we planted nearly thirty semi mature trees including, cedar of Lebanon, red oak, horse chestnut and fruit trees.
	4)	In the last quarter of last year we agreed in principle a sum of money that the NT will accept as an endowment _ subject to certain conditions.

One of the conditions that the NT require brings me neatly back to the issue of the farm buildings on River Lane. Although tidier, these are still an eyesore and the Trustees had initially wanted to restore the milking parlour to its original Victorian splendour.

However as we continued our fund raising it became clear that actually the NT were not in favour of restoring these buildings as the maintenance costs would be considerable and thus the required endowment sum would need to rise.

Simultaneously the costs involved in restoring these buildings which initially had been estimated at £60k had leapt to £250k - the latter figure was based on a feasibility study from a leading firm of specialist architects. At this stage however Trustees had nevertheless agreed to proceed with Phase 1 of this refurbishment (approximate cost £90k) and we sent out estimates to builders so that works could commence. However when we received the results we were forced to reconsider yet again as the actual total costs came in closer to £450k - and could easily have risen further!!

Trustees were then faced with a dilemma. The main driver for wanting to refurbish the milking parlour was to fulfil the objectives that we set out to do. However faced with a bill for £450k was that sensible?

The buildings themselves have little or no architectural merit (an earlier application for Grade 2 listing was turned down). The cows themselves would be blissfully unaware of the money spent in their name and would not have their lives affected in any way at all as they are not a dairy herd. (The milk quota was lost for the meadows in the 1970s). So we would be spending £450k on a quasi museum - a 'museum' that would have to be maintained and manned (albeit on an ad hoc basis) and moreover by restoring the building this would add significantly to the required sum necessary to raise as an endowment.

In addition, were we to knock down the existing buildings, we (or the NT) could then build a barn for a significantly smaller amount (say £90k) and this building would be of more practical use. It would retain the rural feel of the area and moreover the cost of upkeep would be minimal.

This, therefore, is the decision that Trustees have decided upon and the reasons for it. I hope you agree that under the circumstances it is both reasonable and the correct decision. It is for these reasons that we have applied to LB of R as landlord to vary the terms of our lease to let us demolish the existing buildings and also for the necessary permission to demolish because the buildings are in a conservation area.

So, turning next to the future, assuming the necessary permissions are forthcoming, in very broad terms the PT at the moment has enough net cash (after paying any likely creditors and meeting existing commitments) to pay the NT the agreed endowment. We do not have enough yet to pay the all the costs of demolition and to complete the building of a suitably rustic looking barn - although we are not far off - so any further contributions would be gratefully received! If we receive the permissions on a timely basis, the existing milking parlour will be knocked down probably during the winter when the cows are on the winter break and the rustic barn built in its stead, thereafter the area will be landscaped. Assuming that NT give us the necessary assurances to fulfil the aims outlined in this letter, we will handover the stewardship to them and our job will be essentially complete.

Should you require any elaboration or explanation of anything that is unclear, please feel free to call me on any of the contact numbers below and I would be pleased to go into further detail.

I apologise for the length of this letter and if you have reached this point thank you for your perseverance!

Thank you all for your generosity and I hope you agree that we are very close to our stated objectives.

Data Protection

As a matter of policy, the Trust does not share its address list with anyone nor would it divulge any data without first asking permission. Should you like to be removed from the mailing list, please advise us at:-

The Petersham Trust, 18 Breamwater Gardens, Ham, TW10 7SQ
Telephone/Fax: 0208 255 6628
E-mail address:- info@petershammeadows.org