Parks and Open Spaces Strategy 2003 - 2008

Prepared By:

Parks & Countryside Service

And

Groundwork West London

Dec 2002

Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 1 – Summary

1 SUMMARY...... 6

1.1 BACKGROUND ...... 6 2 STRATEGY AIMS & OBJECTIVES ...... 8

2.1 OBJECTIVES...... 8 3 STRATEGY PROCESS...... 9

3.1 RESEARCH AND INFORMATION GATHERING...... 9 3.1.1 Desk Study ...... 9 3.1.2 Site Audit ...... 9 3.1.3 Public Consultation ...... 9 3.2 ANALYSIS...... 11 3.2.1 Generic ...... 11 3.2.2 Site Specific ...... 11 3.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 11 4 PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS...... 12

4.1 RESULTS OF GROUNDWORK CONSULTATION ...... 12 4.1.1 Background...... 12 4.1.2 Results ...... 12 4.1.3 Where respondents live...... 13 4.1.4 How often do people go to a London Borough of Ealing Park...... 13 4.1.5 How do people get to Ealing Parks? ...... 13 4.1.6 Why do people visit Ealing Parks?...... 13 4.1.7 What are people’s favourite things in Ealing Parks?...... 13 4.2 SPORTS USER SURVEY – UNDERTAKEN BY ACTIVE EALING...... 14 4.2.1 Bowling clubs / Players ...... 15 4.2.2 Football Players ...... 15 4.2.3 Cricket Players ...... 15 4.3 SUMMARY OF TALKBACK 2000 RESIDENTS PANEL SURVEY JULY 2001...... 16 4.4 SUMMARY OF TALKBACK 2000 RESIDENTS PANEL SURVEY SEPTEMBER 2001...... 17 4.4.1 Consideration of TalkBack 2000 Summary ...... 18 4.5 ESTIMATED NUMBER OF VISITORS TO PARKS...... 19 5 EALING’S PARKS TODAY: THE FINDINGS...... 21

5.1 OVERVIEW ...... 21 5.2 THE ‘HIERARCHY OF EALING’ PARKS ...... 21 5.3 THE RANGE OF PARKS & AREAS OF DEFICIENCIES ...... 23 5.3.1 Metropolitan Parks...... 23 5.3.2 District Parks...... 23 5.3.3 Local Parks...... 24 5.3.4 Town Centres...... 25 5.4 PARKS AND OPEN SPACES AUDIT...... 25 5.4.1 Results ...... 26 Average scores across all parks ...... 26 Average scores by contract area...... 30 Average scores by park type ...... 33 5.4.2 Recommendations...... 36 5.4.3 Parks with potential for a Green Flag Park Award ...... 37 5.5 PLAY AREA AUDIT AND ANALYSIS ...... 38 5.5.1 The importance of playgrounds...... 38 5.5.2 Background to audit ...... 39 5.5.3 National Playing Fields Association (NPFA) Standards...... 40 5.5.4 Safety Standards ...... 40 5.5.5 Playground audits ...... 42 Playground performance by contract area...... 42 Playground performance by park type ...... 42 Playground trends ...... 43

- 2 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 1 – Summary

Recommendations...... 43 5.6 SPORTS FACILITY AUDIT AND ANALYSIS...... 44 5.6.1 Background to audit and user survey ...... 45 5.6.2 User Survey ...... 45 5.6.3 Analysis of site audits ...... 46 Athletics...... 47 Bowls...... 47 Cricket ...... 48 Football...... 48 Multi-sport ...... 48 Rugby ...... 49 Tennis ...... 49 Roller-skating/blading ...... 49 Golf...... 49 5.6.4 Conclusion...... 50 5.6.5 Centres of Excellence ...... 50 5.7 CONSIDERATION OF OTHER GREEN SPACE - CEMETERIES, GOLF COURSES AND ALLOTMENTS ...... 51 5.7.1 Cemeteries ...... 51 5.7.2 Golf courses...... 51 5.7.3 Allotments...... 52 6 WILDLIFE AND NATURE CONSERVATION IN EALING...... 53

6.1 INTRODUCTION...... 53 6.2 BACKGROUND ...... 53 6.3 DESIGNATIONS ...... 54 6.3.1 Site of Metropolitan Importance for nature conservation...... 54 6.3.2 Sites of Borough importance for nature conservation...... 54 6.3.3 Sites of Local Importance for nature conservation...... 54 Sites in Parks and Open Spaces ...... 54 6.4 DEFICIENCY ...... 55 6.5 OVERALL OBJECTIVES ...... 56 6.5.1 LA21 recommendations for nature conservation...... 56 6.6 A SUMMARY OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF EALING’S BIO-DIVERSITY ACTION PLANS...... 56 6.6.1 Ten Habitat Action Plans ...... 56 Acid Grassland...... 56 Allotments ...... 56 Amenity Grassland ...... 57 ‘Education’ Land ...... 57 Hedgerows ...... 57 Neutral and Marshy Grassland...... 58 Ponds ...... 58 Reed Beds...... 58 Rivers, Streams and Canals...... 58 Woodland (including Scrub)...... 59 6.6.2 Four Habitat Statements: ...... 59 Arable Land ...... 59 Health land...... 59 Private Gardens...... 60 Railway Land...... 60 6.6.3 Eleven Species Action Plans...... 60 Bats...... 60 Birds of Prey (Red Kite, Sparrowhawk, Buzzard, Kestrel, Hobby, Peregrine)...... 61 Black Poplar...... 61 Butterflies ...... 61 Finches, Buntings and Sparrows (House sparrow, tree sparrow, linnet, bullfinch, yellowhammer) ...... 62 Mistletoe ...... 62 Mute Swan...... 62 Slow worms ...... 63 Song Thrush...... 63 Swallows...... 63 Water Vole...... 64 6.6.4 Two Species Statements...... 64 Dyers Greenweed...... 64

- 3 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 1 – Summary

Wild Service Tree ...... 64 6.6.5 Recommendations...... 64 Further investigation and Monitoring...... 64 Target Areas...... 65 Development...... 65 Management ...... 66 Education...... 66 Quality and Diversity...... 66 6.6.6 Identifying opportunities for site development for nature conservation...... 67 7 SPECIALIST AREAS...... 68

7.1 TREES IN PARKS AND OPEN SPACES ...... 68 7.1.1 Policy...... 68 7.1.2 Policies for maintenance of existing trees ...... 69 7.1.3 Policies for planting new trees ...... 70 7.2 HERITAGE FEATURES IN PARKS ...... 71 7.2.1 Policies for heritage sites ...... 72 7.3 DOG FOULING OF LAND ACT...... 72 7.4 CYCLING IN PARKS...... 72 7.4.1 Recommendation for cycling ...... 73 8 VALUE FOR MONEY ...... 74

8.1 OVERVIEW ...... 74 8.2 PROCESS...... 74 8.3 RESULTS...... 75 9 PRIORITISING IMPROVEMENTS AND INVESTMENT...... 77

9.1 THE NEED TO INVEST IN PARKS ...... 77 9.2 STRATEGIC JUSTIFICATION FOR PRIORITY INVESTMENT...... 77 9.2.1 Deficiency in Play provision...... 77 9.2.2 Park deficiency as defined in UDP...... 77 9.2.3 Nature Conservation deficiency ...... 77 9.2.4 Parks Audit Score...... 77 9.2.5 Playground Audit Score...... 78 9.2.6 Deprived area in line with MDI...... 78 9.2.7 Funding available to undertake improvements...... 78 9.2.8 Is it a key Park...... 78 9.2.9 Community involvement / usage/ Town Centre ...... 79 9.2.10 Potential Sports Centre of excellence...... 79 9.2.11 Scoring...... 79 9.3 TAKING FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES...... 80 10 FUNDING THE CHANGES AND IMPROVEMENTS ...... 81

10.1 FUNDING SOURCES...... 81 10.1.1 Single Regeneration Budget Areas (SRB)...... 81 Action Acton...... 81 10.1.2 Section 106 ...... 82 10.1.3 Sponsorship ...... 82 10.1.4 Private Partnership ...... 82 10.1.5 The Lottery Fund ...... 83 10.1.6 Charitable Trusts...... 83 10.1.7 Other Government Agencies...... 84 11 POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES ...... 85

11.1 INTRODUCTION...... 85 11.2 PARKS AND COUNTRYSIDE SERVICE OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES ...... 86 11.2.1 Improving and managing parks and open green spaces...... 86 11.2.2 Improving and managing nature conservation areas...... 90 11.2.3 Improving the management of trees in Parks and Open Spaces...... 92 11.2.4 Improving and managing Animal Centres...... 95

- 4 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 1 – Summary

11.2.5 Improving the Ealing Bereavement Service...... 96 11.2.6 Improving Ealing’s Allotments...... 98 11.2.7 Improving Playgrounds within Parks...... 99 11.2.8 Buildings within parks...... 100 11.2.9 Golf courses...... 101 11.2.10 Outdoor Sports Areas ...... 102 11.2.11 Providing safe and welcoming parks...... 104 11.2.12 Promoting Ealing’s Parks as an educational resource ...... 106 11.2.13 Marketing and promoting Ealing’s Parks ...... 107 11.2.14 Parks & Countryside Service Best Value Improvement Plan ...... 110 11.2.15 Internal and external consultation/communication ...... 112 11.2.16 Health and Safety...... 114 12 APPENICES ...... 115 Appendix 1 – Parks Audit Scores ...... 116 Appendix 2 – Table of Outdoor Sports Provision...... 117 Appendix 3 – Matrix to define the Priority for Investment in Parks ...... 118 Appendix 4 – Matrix to Define the Priority (By Priority Ranking)...... 119 13 MAPS...... 120 Map 1 – Parks and Open Spaces in Ealing...... 121 Map 2 – District Parks Area of Deficiency ...... 122 Map 3 – Local Parks Area of Deficiency...... 123 Map 4 – Grounds Maintenance Contract Areas ...... 124 Map 5 – SRB Areas ...... 125 Map 6 – Playgrounds in Parks ...... 126 Map 7 – Playgrounds in Parks Open Spaces and Housing Estates...... 127 Map 8 – Sports Facilities ...... 128 Map 9 – Nature Conservation Sites ...... 129 Map 10- Town Centres in the Borough...... 130 Map 11 – Distribution of Consultation Groups...... 131 Map 12 – Park Royal SRB Area ...... 132 Map 13 – Southall SRB Area...... 133 Map 14 – Action Acton SRB Area ...... 134

- 5 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 1 – Summary

1 SUMMARY

Parks and Countryside Service - Mission Statement:

To provide a range of excellent parks and open spaces with good facilities for a wide range of age groups, and a first class, responsive service which meets the needs and expectations of our customers

1.1 Background

In Our Towns and Cities: The Future, central government set out its views on the important contribution of green spaces to the urban environment:

“Well-managed public open spaces such as greens, squares, parks, children’s play areas, allotments, woodlands and recreational and sporting areas ...are ...vital to enhancing the quality of urban environments and the quality of our lives.” DETR (2000) p74

In recent years, the national political profile of urban parks has been raised considerably. Work in the 1990s by the Institute of Leisure and Amenity Management (1991a, b), the Landscape Institute (1992), the Garden History Society (1993) and Comedia / Demos (1995, 1996) set out convincing arguments for the need for change in park policy at local and national levels. Nationally, the government responded through the production of the Town and Country Parks Report (DETR 1999a,b), the Urban White Paper (DETR 2000), the establishment of an Urban Green Spaces Task Force and a review of PPG17 in 2001. Central government funding has been provided for the Green Flag Park Award scheme, the Local Authority-Owned Parks Needs Assessment (ILAM 2000) and the Urban Parks Forum. National Lottery funding has also provided millions of pounds to restore parks through the Urban Parks Programme.

Some of the key recommendations for local authorities from the above documents involve issues such as community consultation and involvement, seeking new sources of external funding to regenerate parks, developing front line staff in parks and the production of urban parks strategies.

The often stated benefits of producing a parks strategy are that such a document should provide a long term framework and rationale for budgeting and management decisions. It should also allow an assessment of the current resources of the parks service and how these can be re-allocated or enhanced to meet the changing demands of modern society. There is also a role for park strategies in relating the management and regeneration of urban green space to much wider regeneration issues.

Parks can have a role to play in national crosscutting issues such as sustainable development, life long learning, social exclusion and employment. Strategies need to

- 6 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 1 – Summary reflect these issues (DETR 1999b), set out how they will be addressed through green space provision and have the support of the community, elected members and interested organisations on the way forward.

“the key element of the strategy is that, rather than generally maintain all of the parks and open spaces at a minimal level of improvement, it may be more beneficial to prioritise key parks (chosen in consultation with the public), to produce visible and evident improvements” Comedia (1995) p56

Ealing Council are amongst a small number who have decided to invest time and resources into the production of a parks strategy to assess what national and local issues face the service and how it should respond. This document, produced by a partnership of the London Borough of Ealing Parks and Countryside Service and Groundwork West London, goes further by incorporating the findings of a detailed assessment of the current quality of parks and open spaces across the borough, as well as a community consultation exercise to determine the views and needs of local people. These have been combined with in depth interviews with council staff and a detailed analysis of current grounds maintenance data.

Thus this document brings together what could be considered as ‘top down’ national and policy issues with a ‘bottom up’ assessment of the resources available and the views of local people in Ealing. In doing so it sets out a strategic vision for the future of the parks service with key recommendations for the various parts of the service. The detailed qualitative assessments of each parks and open space will also inform the production of site specific action plans in the future.

This document will also make a significant contribution to the authority’s Best Value review for the parks and countryside service. Again the government has made a clear statement about the role of strategies or master plans for parks services in Best Value.

“In implementing best value, we expect all local authorities to have a master plan for parks and green space and to ensure that local people, as well as members of the council, have easy access to a regularly updated version of it.”

DETR (1999b)

- 7 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 2 – Strategy Aims and Objectives

2 STRATEGY AIMS & OBJECTIVES

The strategy is a document that will guide the service to improved performance and better parks. The strategy has been developed based on the study of best practice and public need.

The strategy addresses issues of sustainability by looking at current maintenance and management practices, types of facilities and open space. It also assesses the ecological and conservation value of the Borough’s open spaces. The strategy provides guidance on best practice of sustainable maintenance regimes, horticultural practice and energy efficiency.

The current level of funding available is considered together with opportunities for realising additional funding. The strategy provides a broad framework for developing the marketing potential of the Borough’s open spaces while maintaining and improving upon the current levels of provision.

2.1 Objectives The Service set the following objectives to be met by the Parks and Open Spaces Strategy: ¾ To improve the quality and variety of Ealing’s parks and open spaces ¾ To set a framework by which the P&CS can work to provide parks to serve the needs of the community ¾ To determine investment priorities ¾ To inform / guide improvements and development of parks ¾ To secure internal and external funding ¾ To provide quantifiable data via consultation on the needs and wants of the community for their parks ¾ To provide benchmarks of good practice ¾ To provide guidance for future site specific consultation ¾ To produce generic recommendations on: ¾ access / infrastructure ¾ playgrounds ¾ marketing ¾ bio-diversity ¾ sustainability ¾ outdoor sport provision ¾ buildings ¾ amenity horticultural management ¾ allotments ¾ health & safety ¾ To produce site specific recommendations ¾ To inform the Service’s Best Value Review

- 8 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 3 – Strategy Process

3 STRATEGY PROCESS

The strategy aims to provide a blueprint for how the Borough’s parks and open spaces will be managed for the next five years and beyond. The diagram, shown in Figure 1 illustrates the process that took place to develop the strategy.

The strategy process therefore comprised three main stages:

3.1 Research and information gathering

3.1.1 Desk Study This included research and compilation of background information that guided the strategy from both local and national policy, as well as examples of good practice in particular issues of parks management. This stage also included mapping facilities, parks and open spaces and their catchment areas. Linked to the mapping exercise was research of funding opportunities to help improve parks and open spaces, both for the Borough as a whole, and for particular geographical areas.

3.1.2 Site Audit Providing the majority of the raw data on parks, this element took a ‘snapshot’ of the condition of the Borough’s parks and open spaces, and the performance of the parks and countryside service as a whole. Using the recognised standards of the Green Flag Parks Award (GFPA) and the NPFA’s Six Acre Standard for play and sports provision, an audit was carried out on all the Borough’s parks and open spaces over 1 hectare, and a selection under 1 hectare.

The parks were scored out of 10 on 21 different measures of quality, derived from the GFPA scoring system, with a few amendments to make them more relevant to the London Borough of Ealing. A full list of the 21 measures is shown in Appendix 1. This provided an overall score for each park, and for individual aspects of each park. The methodology also allowed for consideration of the parks’ suitability for a GFPA.

Separate audits were also carried out on play and sports facilities using a specially designed audit form and the resulting scores were fed back into the main parks audit. A review of ecological sites, cemeteries, public golf courses and allotments was also completed.

In order to assess value for money and to consider the correlation between quality and investment, information on the cost of maintenance for each site was obtained and analysed.

3.1.3 Public Consultation A Borough wide public consultation exercise aimed to establish the views of the people who use the Borough’s parks and open spaces. A questionnaire was sent to 94 groups and organisations chosen on a geographic and demographic basis to ensure as representative a sample of the Borough’s population as possible was consulted. These groups included cultural and religious groups, mothers and toddlers groups, sheltered housing units, health centres and libraries. Six schools were also consulted to establish the views and needs of young people. The survey asked respondents which parks they

- 9 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 3 – Strategy Process use and why, what they thought the main problems are in parks and what they thought the priorities for improvements should be.

As well as consulting the public, the Council’s P&CS officers, including members of the Ranger Service and the contract managers, who are involved in the day to day management of the Borough’s parks, were consulted using interviews and a questionnaire. These officers intimately know the day to day issues and problems surrounding the management of the borough’s parks and open spaces, will implement the strategy proposals and are therefore instrumental in its success.

- 10 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 3 – Strategy Process

3.2 Analysis

The desk research, audit and consultation exercise provided a wealth of information on the Borough’s parks and open spaces and their management, which was then analysed to help guide priorities and recommendations. The data was considered at two levels:

3.2.1 Generic All the elements of the research and information gathering stage produced Borough wide information that was then processed to develop a picture of the how the Borough as a whole was performing in its parks and open spaces. For example, the desk study highlighted national or local policy that needed to be taken note of in developing the strategy proposals. The funding research identified sources of funding available to improve parks and open spaces across the Borough. The site audit data was analysed to provide an assessment of the quality of the Borough’s parks and open spaces on a borough wide, contract area and park type basis. The consultation study identified the key issues where the borough was performing well, or poorly in the eyes of park users.

3.2.2 Site Specific Whilst much of the data produced was generic, the process also produced valuable site specific data that can be used to prioritise improvements on a site by site basis. For example, the mapping exercise identified areas of deficiency in certain types of provision which meant that certain parks can be targeted to address these areas of deficiency. The park audits provided quality scores on different aspects of each park which can be used to prioritise improvements on individual sites. The consultation exercise provided information about the use of specific parks and resulted in a list of people who wanted to get more involved in their local park.

3.3 Recommendations

The strategy Objectives and Policies, based on the existing key Service areas of the P&CS, were developed out of the findings of the strategy and by using examples of good practice from elsewhere in the country.

22 site specific action plans were consulted on locally through focus groups and local displays, and then finalised to form part of the final strategy document.

To undertake some of the improvements in the action plans will require increased investment and so the strategy recommendations also include an assessment of investment priorities and funding possibilities.

- 11 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 4 – Public Perceptions

4 PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS

Public opinion has been an essential element in informing the Parks Strategy. Consultation has been undertaken in a variety of ways to ensure a wide cross section of the community has had the opportunity to contribute their views. This has taken the form of: Community consultation undertaken by Groundwork West London Telephone survey undertaken by RBA through a residents panel Sports users survey undertaken by Active Ealing

4.1 Results of Groundwork Consultation

4.1.1 Background Nearly 3500 questionnaires were distributed to 94 community groups across the London Borough of Ealing. These organisations included a range of religious, horticultural and children’s services groups. Of the surveys that were sent out, 458 were returned representing a 13% return rate.

To address the issue of consulting young people, a consultation exercise was undertaken in six schools across the borough. Work shops were facilitated with class teachers and an amended version of the consultation form was used to gauge the young people’s opinions. A total of 630 responses were obtained.

Including the schools consultation, the majority of those who responded were under 16 (50%). 22% of respondents were aged between 15 and 44, and 17% aged 45 and above. Fifty four percent of respondents were female and 45% male. Of those responding 66% were White European, 19% Asian, 9% Black African/Caribbean (and 6%other.

4.1.2 Results In summary, of those surveyed:

• Most people visit an Ealing park on a weekly basis, especially in the summer

• Walking is the most popular method of travelling to Ealing parks

• The most common reason for visiting Ealing parks is to take children to use park playgrounds. Other popular responses include to relax and enjoy open spaces

• The most common complaints about Ealing parks were problems of vandalism, poor maintenance and dog fouling

• Respondents felt that the most important priorities for spending money in Ealing parks should be improved play facilities, increased numbers of park rangers and improved security

- 12 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 4 – Public Perceptions

4.1.3 Where respondents live The majority of people who responded live in W5 (19%). There is also a good representation of respondents from other post code districts including UB1 (12%), W7 (15%) and W13 (15%). There is a slightly poorer representation from other districts including UB2 (5%), UB5 (4%), UB6 (8%), and W3 (7%).

4.1.4 How often do people go to a London Borough of Ealing Park Nearly half of those responding visit a park in the London Borough of Ealing on a weekly basis and an additional 20% of respondents visit a London Borough of Ealing park every day.

Respondents from Asian ethnic backgrounds were less likely to use the parks on such a regular basis. Over half those responding from these communities used parks either once a month or less. Over one quarter of respondents from Black/African Caribbean backgrounds rarely use the parks in Ealing.

Those under 16 years of age were the most likely to use parks every day. The schools analysis showed that during the summer months, parks were used on at least a weekly basis by children, but this usage fell dramatically during the winter months.

Less than 5% of people surveyed never visit parks in Ealing.

4.1.5 How do people get to Ealing Parks? Nearly 85% of those surveyed walk to the parks in Ealing. The majority of those who walk to Ealing parks are in the under 16 and 55-64 age brackets. The second most popular method of transport is the motor car. Only 8% of those responding travel to Ealing parks by bicycle, but this percentage was much higher in the schools consultation where 26.5% cycled to their local parks.

4.1.6 Why do people visit Ealing Parks? The most common reason for visiting Ealing Parks is to take children to or to use park playgrounds. Other popular responses included to exercise and to people watch/relax/enjoy the open space. Exercising in the parks was most popular with respondent’s aged over 55. Attending events/exhibitions in the parks was another popular response, particularly with those aged 35 and above. Only 11.9% of those responding use Ealing Parks to walk their dogs.

Compared with the overall responses to this question, respondents from Black and African Caribbean communities were more likely to take their children to or use the playground, to people watch and relax and to have family outings in Ealing parks.

Those surveyed were also able to add open - ended responses to this question. This provided some interesting insights, with one person surveyed stating that “seeing young trees become established” was a reason for visiting Ealing parks. Another person surveyed visited Ealing parks for “the peace and quiet”.

4.1.7 What are people’s favourite things in Ealing Parks? The open green space experience and sense of ‘fresh’ air and play facilities were the most popular responses to this question. Compared with the overall results, respondents from

- 13 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 4 – Public Perceptions

Asian ethnic groups were more likely to nominate the fresh air and open green spaces as their favourite aspects of Ealing’s parks ‘I love the parks for the flowers, trees and space’. In addition, over 83% of 55-64 year olds stated that open green space was their favourite thing about Ealing parks. Respondent’s in all the age groups over 16 years consistently rated the fresh air of Ealing’s parks as a favourite aspect of their experiences when visiting them.

By comparison, facilities, activities and playgrounds were the most popular feature of the parks with those under 16 years of age. These responses were also found to be very popular amongst members of the Black and African Caribbean communities.

Only 9.2% of those responding said that features, including art and buildings were their favourite things in parks in Ealing.

What are peoples least favourite things in Ealing Parks? Respondents were asked to rank their four least favourite things in Ealing parks. Nearly 70% of those surveyed ranked dog mess as their least favourite thing about the parks. This was summed up by one person who stated that “parks are for people - they are not toilets for animals”.

Vandalism and poor maintenance also rated very highly in the respondent’s list of least favourite things in Ealing parks. In particular, respondent’s complained about unclean toilets.

A lack of facilities also ranked highly. This response was particularly common from those under 16 years of age. Some respondents provided further details about the lack of facilities including the playgrounds ‘there are lots of parks in Ealing which is great but few with enough playground equipment for children of all ages’ and ‘the lack of facilities for children under 16’ and ‘there is a need for large climbing frames or something for older children. There were also specific complaints about the lack of toilets in Lammas Park.

What do people think should be the most important features in Ealing parks? Respondents were asked what their four highest priorities were for spending money on improving special features in Ealing parks. New/improved play facilities, additional rangers/park patrols and improved security were the most popular responses.

Many comments referred to the need for increased security. Those surveyed wished “to have a park keeper who could monitor activities, violence, vandalism and who can control the situation”. Others requested “more lights across parks, and better maintenance of the conservation area in parks, and improved drainage and fencing”.

4.2 Sports User Survey – undertaken by Active Ealing

Active Ealing undertook a questionnaire survey of all clubs using the outdoor sports facilities provided in the borough’s parks. In general terms the results showed a reasonable satisfaction with the pitches but highlighted the poor standards of pavilions.

- 14 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 4 – Public Perceptions

4.2.1 Bowling clubs / Players

¾ 63% rate the greens as good ¾ 53% consider the pavilion to be poor ¾ 59% consider the maintenance of pavilions to be poor ¾ 55% rate the helpfulness of staff as good ¾ 60% rate the overall service, compared to greens played elsewhere, as the same or better. ¾ The most complaints made to the council relate to the pavilion (44%) ¾ 83% were dissatisfied with the way in which the complaint was dealt with of which 64% gave the reason as being that action was promised but nothing has been done.

Options for improvement: ¾ Pilot leasing scheme for two bowling pavilions and potentially greens. ¾ Review charges against those set by other boroughs and change accordingly. ¾ Seek external funding grants for improvements

4.2.2 Football Players

¾ 52% rate the pitches as average or better ¾ 69% rate the changing and shower facilities as poor ¾ 56% consider the maintenance of the changing facilities to be poor ¾ 47% consider the cleanliness of changing facilities to be poor. ¾ 53% rate the helpfulness of staff to be good. ¾ 81% rate the overall service, compared to pitches played elsewhere, as the same or worse. ¾ The most complaints made to the council relate to the pavilion (43%) ¾ 88% were dissatisfied with the way in which the complaint was dealt with of which 50% gave the reason as being that action was promised but nothing has been done.

Options for improvement: ¾ Roll out leasing programme ¾ Secure additional grant funding for renovating pitches (drainage) and pavilions.

4.2.3 Cricket Players

¾ 61% rate the pitches as average or better ¾ 61% rate the changing and shower facilities as poor ¾ 70% consider the maintenance of the changing facilities to be poor ¾ 63% consider the cleanliness of changing facilities to be poor. ¾ 52% rate the helpfulness of staff to be good. ¾ 56% rate the overall service, compared to pitches played elsewhere, as the same or better.. ¾ The most complaints made to the council relate to the pavilion (50%) ¾ 70% were dissatisfied with the way in which the complaint was dealt with of which 28% gave the reason as being that action was promised but nothing has been done and staff being unable to resolve the problem.

- 15 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 4 – Public Perceptions

4.3 Summary of TalkBack 2000 Residents Panel Survey July 2001

Following the Groundwork and User Surveys certain issues needed further clarification so the P&CS utilised the Council’s Residents Panel Survey undertaken by RBA in July and September 2001 to ask a range of questions. The Residents Panel has been selected to accurately reflect the demographic, ethnic, and cultural diversity of the Borough. The results are tabulated as follows: ¾ 36% of residents use parks at least once per week and over half could be classified as regular users ¾ Walpole Park is the most visited followed by Acton, Ravenor, Gunnersbury, Lammas and Pitshanger parks. ¾ Of those who say that they do visit parks less than once a fortnight, 37% say it is because they do not have time. However 9% overall say they do not feel safe and 15% of women. ¾ 49% believe that the standard of parks has stayed the same in the last 2 years, 33% improved and 18% got worse. ¾ 71% agree that parks are well looked after

Issues: ¾ Further analysis shown that those more likely to agree are those residents who have recently moved to the borough (84%) and those in council or housing association accommodation) (88% agree, 29% strongly). ¾ The perception of safety needs to be addressed as part of this review.

¾ 64% agree that the fences and gates are well maintained ¾ 70% feel that footpaths are well maintained

Issue: ¾ Although the sample is small (28), those with a disability appear to be more likely to disagree that the footpaths are well maintained – 27% disagree compared with 17% overall.

¾ Less than half (49%) agree and 22% disagree that the buildings are well maintained.

Issue: ¾ This is the poorest response overall and would match the perception of sports pitch users and the concern of staff that the buildings maintenance contract is a major concern due to lack of funding, perceived poor performance of contractors and lack of delegated responsibilities.

¾ 58% agree that the standard of playgrounds is good:

Issue: ¾ There are differences in opinion between those in and other AB socio-economic groups. 47% of ‘ABs’ agree that the standard of playgrounds is good and over 60% for all other groups. 67% of those of Asian origin agree that playgrounds are of a good standard. However, this does not appear to match performance when compared to others or indeed the opinion of officers.

- 16 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 4 – Public Perceptions

¾ 33% agree that there are not enough litter bins and 50% disagree.

¾ 34% agree the sports facilities are good and 27% disagree with the statement

Issue: ¾ There are further differences between socio-economic groups 49% of those in council rented or housing association accommodation agree but 30% of owner occupiers agree. This may be as a result of alternative sport facilities available by means of private clubs. Overall, this result indicates the poor perception of buildings and their maintenance as a serious issue that needs to be addressed.

¾ 42% agree that there are not enough wildlife areas in parks but 39% feel there are enough: Issue: ¾ Those of Asian origin are most likely to feel there re insufficient wildlife area (62%)

¾ 40% disagree that signs and notices are out of date.

4.4 Summary of TalkBack 2000 Residents Panel Survey September 2001

The level of support and opposition to possible changes in service delivery were tested with the residents panel. In each case, residents were given the options of ‘support’, ‘neither’, ‘oppose’, ‘don’t know’ or ‘depends’.

Table 1: Service Provision Challenge Policy Issue / Idea Support Oppose Introduce an entrance fee of under £1 for certain 37% 49% playgrounds and use the money to pay for an attendant to supervise the children. Set aside areas in large parks to be used for wildlife and 86% 8% conservation. Have more colourful permanent plants in parks but fewer 69% 15% bedding plants Allow people to cycle in parks but only long special cycle 69% 15% routes. Give gardeners recognisable uniforms to make people 88% 4% aware that there are staff working in the parks. Work in partnership with private companies to increase the 40% 38% amount of money spent on golf courses. Turn larger sports facilities into ‘centres of excellence’. 22% 60% This will mean less money available to spend on smaller sports facilities. Ask local people to become volunteer park rangers who 75% 17% would patrol the parks, report on problem and carry out tasks under the guidance of full-time Rangers. Sample size 555: interviews conducted between 3rd and 21st September 2001

- 17 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 4 – Public Perceptions

4.4.1 Consideration of TalkBack 2000 Summary ¾ There is almost unequivocal support for ‘Giving gardeners recognisable uniforms to make people aware that there are staff working in the parks’. Almost nine out of ten (88%) support this idea (net+84), and no sub-groups stand out as opposing this idea more.

¾ Almost nine out of ten (89%) overall support the idea of “Allowing people to cycle in parks, but only along special cycle routes” (net +81). However, 18% of those aged over 65 oppose the idea.

¾ Similarly, almost nine out of ten (86%) support the idea of “Setting aside areas in large parks for wildlife and conservation” (net +78). Those who are more negative about Ealing council in general are more likely to oppose this idea (15%).

¾ Views are more mixed about the idea of “Asking local people to become volunteer Park Rangers, who would patrol parks, report on problems and carry out tasks under the guidance of full-time Rangers”. Three-quarters (75%) support the idea, but 17% oppose it (net +58). Just under a fifth (17%) say they would be likely to agree to become a volunteer Park Ranger if they were asked – 3% say they would be certain to. The propensity to agree to volunteer is greater where support for the idea is stronger: 30% of those living in the area for 5-10 years say they would be likely to agree, and 25% of those in Council or Housing Association rented accommodation.

¾ A similar level of support is evident for the idea of “Having more colourful permanent plants, but fewer bedding plants” Almost seven out of ten (69%) support the idea, but 15% oppose it (net +54). A further one in ten (10%) neither oppose nor support this idea. The level of support is higher amongst panel members in Acton (82%), and lower amongst older panel members (55% of those aged 65+).

¾ There is an almost balanced view on two statements:

¾ “Working in partnership with private companies to increase the amount of money spent on golf courses and facilities” (40% support / 38% oppose – net +2); and

¾ “Introducing an entrance fee of under £1 for playgrounds and play areas, and use the money to pay for an attendant to supervise the children” (37% support / 49% oppose – net –8).

¾ There is greater support for this latter idea amongst panel members in Southall (49%), those in rented Council or Housing Association accommodation (55%), those with children aged 6-10 (49%) or 11-15 (51%), and those in socio-economic groups DE (49%).

¾ There is overall a net opposition to the idea of “Turning larger sport facilities into ‘centres of excellence’, which will mean less money available to spend on smaller sport facilities”. Six out of ten panel members (60%) oppose this idea, while 22% support it (net –38). The opposition is greater amongst panel members in Ealing and Hanwell (67% opposed), and in Northolt, Greenford and Perivale (65%). Lone parents are also more likely to oppose the idea (80%), as are those of white origin (63%).

- 18 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 4 – Public Perceptions

4.5 Estimated number of visitors to Parks

A conservative estimate for the number of visits to parks in the borough is 12,148,000 per year, based upon the RBA Residents Panel Survey – July 2001.

This is based upon the percentage of respondents’ answers to the frequency of visits to parks: Table 2: Visitor Numbers Number of Visits per year Response (%) Estimate of visits Total visits per per year year* At least 1 visit per week 36% 104 9,345,024

<1 visit per weak but at least 18% 52 2,336,256 1 visit every 2 weeks < 1 visit every 2 weeks but at 11% 12 329,472 least 1 visit per month < 1 visit per month but at 10% 4 99,840 least 1 visit every 3 months < 1 visit every 3 months but 5% 2 24,960 at least 1 visit every 6 months < 1 visit every 6 months but 5% 1 12,480 at least 1 visit per year < 1 visit per year N/A 0 0

Never N/A 0 0

TOTAL VISITS PER YEAR 12,148,032 Margin of error + 4.2% *Using population of Ealing (ages 16+) = 249,600 (2000)

For all estimated visits the lowest possible number have been used i.e. where the response was “At least 1 visit per week”, this has been taken as 2 visits. This figure does not necessarily include golf courses or outdoor sports facilities and does not include children under 16.

- 19 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 4 – Public Perceptions

Using the percentage of parks visited most often, it appears that the total number of visits to parks are as follows:

Table 3: Most frequently visited parks Park % of Estimated Classification respondents Number Park (Area Committee) within the UDP who said they of visits (Proposed) visit the park per year most often Walpole Park* (Ealing) District 12% 1,458,000 Acton Park (Acton) District 7% 850,400 Ravenor Park (Greenford) Local 6% 728,900 Brent Lodge Park / Churchfields District 6% 728,900 Recreation ground / Brent River Park (Hanwell) Lammas Park* (Ealing) District 5% 607,400 Pitshanger Park (Ealing) District 5% 607,400 Southall Park (Southall) Local 4% 485,900 Horsenden Hill (Greenford/Perivale) Metropolitan 4% 485,900 Perivale Park (Perivale) District 4% 485,900 Ealing Common (Ealing) Local 2% 242,960 Elthorne Park (Hanwell) Local 2% 242,960

*Walpole Park and Lammas Park are proposed as a single District Park. Margin of error + 4.2%

- 20 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

5 EALING’S PARKS TODAY: THE FINDINGS

5.1 Overview

Ealing has an extensive network of parks and open spaces, providing a green backdrop to the built infrastructure of the Borough. Much of the larger tracts of open space lie in the flood plain of the river Brent which bisects the Borough from Hangar Lane to Hanwell, providing a fairly continuous green break between the built up north-west and south-east areas of the Borough. Other large areas of open land exist at Horsenden Hill, around Osterley Park to the south of the Borough and along the western boundary with Hillingdon, where extensive pasture still survives around the Yeading Brook and at Islip Manor. Numerous other smaller parks and open spaces are also dotted throughout the Borough.

Despite it’s green character, certain areas of the Borough are found to be deficient in open space. In particular, there is a deficiency of District Parks in Southall and Acton. It is proposed that this should be addressed by the nomination of Key Local Parks, whose size restricts an upgrade in planning designation, but whose characteristics and heavy use by the local community warrant greater investment.

An audit of parks was undertaken as part of this strategy, based on the standards set by the ILAM led and Government endorsed, Green Flag Park Awards scheme. Parks were audited on 21 measures or criteria of quality resulting in scores out of 10. The audit found that although Ealing’s parks have suffered from many years of under investment, as is the case across the country, they have a number of strengths which can be built on with some focused re-investment, to provide the first class parks of the future.

5.2 The ‘Hierarchy of Ealing’ Parks

Parks and open spaces within the London Borough of Ealing are designated in the borough’s Unitary Development Plan (UDP) and the following table outlines the current ‘hierarchy’:

- 21 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

Table 4: Hierarchy of Public Open Space

Hierarchy of Public Open Space Facilities Type Main Approx. Distance Characteristics Function Size from Home a) Weekend and 400 ha Large areas and corridors of commons, Regional Park occasional visits (990 acres woodlands and parkland including and open spaces by car, cycle, or and above) areas not publicly accessible but which (linked MOL & public transport contribute to the overall amenity GB corridors) e.g. providing for informal recreation with Brent River Park some non-intensive active recreational use. b) Metropolitan Weekend and 60.7 ha 2 miles Either i) natural heathland commons, Park: occasional visits (150 acres (3.2 km) or woodland, etc; or ii) formal parks e.g. Horsenden by cycle, car or and above) more where providing both active and passive Hill and Northolt public transport park is recreation, eg. boating, entertainment, and Greenford appreciably leisure facilities for the family, etc., Countryside Park larger may contain playing fields, but at least 100 acres for other pursuits including nature and landscape conservation. Adequate car parking, disables access and cycle provision essential. c) District Park Weekend and 50 acres 0.75 miles Containing playing fields, but at least e.g. Brent Lodge, occasional visits (20.2 ha and (1 .2 km) 30 acres for other pursuits (as in local Perivale, Walpole, on foot, cycle, car above) parks) and some car parking. Pitshanger Parks or public transport d) Local Park For pedestrian 5 acres 0.25 miles Providing for court games, children's e.g. Ravenor, Islip visitors including (2 ha and (400m) or less play for different age groups including Manor, Elthorne, nearby workers above) play centres and adventure Jubilee Parks play-grounds, sitting out areas, including nature and landscape conservation, landscaped environment and disabled access; and playing fields if the parks are large enough. e) Pedestrian visits Under 5 0.25 miles Gardens, sitting-out areas, children's Small Local Park especially by old acres (2 ha (400m) or less play-grounds and disabled access. e.g. Manor House people, children and above) Local pockets managed for nature and Grounds, Dean and workers at landscape conservation which could Gardens, South mid-day; include seating or play areas. Acton Recreation particularly Ground valuable in high density areas

The categories described in Table 4 provide guidelines with which to assess the spread and availability of facilities within parks across the Borough. From this information deficiencies in park provision can be analysed.

Metropolitan Parks (MP’s) should contain a wide range of facilities of sufficient quality and quantity and interest to attract visitors from further afield who would be prepared to travel by car or public transport for an occasional afternoon out.

District Parks (DP’s) should have a good playground, some sports facilities and be of a size and quality to attract regular visits. Typically, youngsters would make their own way to such parks by foot or bicycle, or perhaps a short bus ride.

- 22 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

Local Parks (LP’s) and Small Local Parks (SLP’s) cater for local residents or workers who would reach them on foot and would generally spend shorter periods of time there. They are invaluable as nearby spaces for play, relaxation or social activities although they are likely to have fewer facilities than larger parks.

Clearly, MP’s and DP’s also serve the function of LPs for those who are fortunate to live or work close to them.

However, in some parts of the Borough most notably in Acton and Southall sections of the community do not have MPs and DP’s within the recommended 0.75 miles of their homes. The UDP seeks opportunities to address these deficiencies but this is not easy to achieve. It is therefore recommended that some strategically located local parks are promoted in those areas as Key Local Parks (KLP’s). They should become a focus for investment to redress their short fall in size by increased quality and quantity of facilities. Both DP’s and KLP’s should be priority sites for funding and obtaining GFPA status. (Objective 3 policy PSG14)

5.3 The range of parks & areas of deficiencies

Map 1 shows the location of all the parks and open spaces audited and their planning designations.

5.3.1 Metropolitan Parks Currently there is only one fully developed Metropolitan Parks in the Borough, Horsenden Hill, a large area of open land mainly managed for nature conservation. To address this shortage the Northolt and Greenford Countryside Park is currently under development. Much of it is already open for use, but elements of the Park are ambitious, such as the £2 million Northala Fields project, and the whole park will not be complete until 2006. Gunnersbury Park owned in partnership with the LB Hounslow, but actually outside of the Borough provides metropolitan facilities to the South. In addition to these sites it is felt that the range of facilities and access to sports and contiguous open space provided by Brent Lodge Park, Churchfields, Brent Meadow, and the Brent River and West Middlesex Golf Courses also represents a Metropolitan Park and it is a recommendation of this strategy that it should be adopted as such within the UDP.

5.3.2 District Parks There are five designated District Parks which are predominantly located in the centre and south of the Borough.

Map 2 shows the areas of Metropolitan and District Park deficiency represented by a hashed line shaded area. The UDP designates the catchment area of Metropolitan Parks to be 2 miles from each park, and for District Parks the distance is 0.75 miles. Deficiency is assessed to be the areas beyond these distances, taking into account the effect of physical barriers to pedestrian movement such as major roads, railways and watercourses.

- 23 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

There is an area of District and Metropolitan Park deficiency to the east of the Borough in Acton. Residents in this part of the Borough have to travel a considerable distance to get the same level of facilities as other Borough residents. The Council is attempting to address this by negotiating public access through the private open space that links Acton Park with Trinity Way Open Space. This would mean that Acton Park could be given District Park status. At the time of writing, this negotiation was in its early stages, but should it be successful, the deficiency in this part of the borough would be addressed. Until that is achieved Acton Park should be designated as a Key Local Park.

Another area of deficiency lies to the south west of the Borough in Southall, in the Glebe, Northcote and Dormers Wells wards. Whilst there are several Local and Small Local Parks within the area (although none in Northcote ward) they do not provide the range of facilities that are needed for the local population. One measure to alleviate the open space deficiency here would be to ensure some open space provision as part of the development of the former gasworks site within Northcote ward. This is to be adopted into the UDP and supported by the P&CS In addition, Southall Park, Southall Recreation Ground and Spikes Bridge Park should be defined as Key Local Parks and receive a focus of investment.

The final reasonably large area of deficiency lies to the north of the borough, following the borough boundary in Mandeville and Wood End wards. Again, without the space to develop new district parks Islip Manor Park should be a Key Local Park and a target for improvements.

5.3.3 Local Parks Generally, Local and Small Local Parks fill the gaps between the larger Metropolitan and District Parks quite well. Included in the Local and Small Local Park category are cemeteries and golf courses as they provide public open space useable as passive recreational spaces as well as for their primary functions.

Map 3 shows the deficiency of Local Park provision. According to the UDP, people should not have to travel more than 400 metres to reach a Local Park. On Map 3, it has been assumed that for the purposes of evaluating Local Park provision, a 400 metre radius around any park or open space including and above Local Park status is used. This takes account of the fact that someone living within 400 metres of Horsenden Hill, for example, still regards it as their Local Park. As with Map 2, the effect of physical barriers to pedestrian movement is also taken into account.

Although there are many areas of Local Park deficiency, the largest are in Southall, in Northcote and Glebe wards, in Ealing, in the Hobbayne, Argyle, Pitshanger and Hanger Lane wards and in Acton, in Victoria ward. Whilst there is provision in the forms of District Parks in some of these areas, being further away, these involve longer travelling times and do not provide the nearby nature and escape of local parks. The UDP seeks opportunities within planning developments to create new local parks. Over the last 3 years Glade Lane Park in Southall, and Cerobus Park in Park Royal have been created. It is anticipated that a new park will emerge from the Southall Gasworks site when it is eventually reclaimed and developed. Such opportunities will be actively pursued in the future.

- 24 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

5.3.4 Town Centres Parks that lie within or adjacent to town centres often function differently to more suburban parks. Town centre parks are often used as places where people have their lunch or some fresh air during their working day. They get more daytime use than other parks and require slightly different facilities such as picnic tables and cafes. They are also often used as shortcuts to get between surrounding residential areas and the town centre, whether it be a route to work, or to go shopping. As such, parks need to be able to allow safe through passage for both pedestrians and cyclists, and there is always pressure to extend opening hours either legally, or illegally by breaking holes through gates and fences. Some like Haven Green and Ealing Green attract very evening use especially in the summer and this needs to be actively managed and accommodated.

These parks in particular can encourage healthy lifestyles and a reduction in car use. 58% of car trips are under 5 miles (source: National Travel Survey), seven out of ten journeys to work are by car (source: Labour Force Survey), and cycling or walking briskly for half an hour can half the risk of heart disease (source: Health Education Authority). By providing safe and attractive routes through parks and open spaces, particularly those around town centres, cycling and walking can be encouraged.

Map 10 shows the borough’s parks and open spaces in relation to its Town, District and Local centres. Key parks in these locations are: Acton Park and Woodlands (Acton); Ealing Common, Ealing Green, Walpole Park Dean Gardens and Haven Green (Ealing including West Ealing); Churchfields (Hanwell); Manor House Grounds, Southall Park, Havelock Cemetery (Southall); and Ravenor Park (Greenford).

5.4 Parks and Open Spaces Audit

76 parks and open spaces were audited. These sites are currently designated in the London Borough of Ealing’s UDP as:

Metropolitan Parks 2 District Parks 5 Local Parks 35 Small Local Parks 31

The audit also included 3 public ‘pay and play’ golf courses, which provide publicly accessible open space, in addition to their primary function of golf.

The audit is based on the scoring system for the Green Flag Park Award (GFPA) scheme. For a park to qualify for a GFPA, it must score over 65% (analogous to a score of 6.5 in the parks strategy audit). While any space might be considered for a GFPA, in reality, only the better, larger parks in an area will be likely to have sufficient quality and variety of provision to be successful.

Since the audit was based on a purely qualitative assessment, the key to it’s success was consistency, both in how the parks were assessed and what criteria were used. It was necessary to use the same set of criteria to consider a large, district park with a variety of provision and a small local park which, in terms of its provision might be considered as little more than a patch of amenity grass. However, this has led to some apparent

- 25 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings anomalies in the scoring where some sites, such as Ealing Green, without many facilities score higher than larger formal parks, such as Brent Lodge Park, providing a wide range of facilities. This is because each site is scored mainly on the quality of what exists, rather than if it exists at all, although there is one measure which is specifically about the extent of provision for the whole community.

Perhaps the most important function of these audits is to have provided a snap shot of the condition of our parks in accordance with an objective set of criteria against which the future improvement of Ealing’s open spaces can be judged. The Service has committed itself to undertake regular external audits.

5.4.1 Results

Park scores were analysed to draw out some broad issues and conclusions. The analysis of the parks audit scores is considered in 3 ways:

¾ Average scores across all parks ¾ Average scores by contract area ¾ Average scores by park type

Average scores across all parks See Appendix 1 for a comprehensive table of scores for all parks. A summary ‘league table’ of parks, in order of score, is included below (Table 5).

Table 5: League Table of park audit scores

Name of Park Score Type Area Glade Lane Canalside Park 6.8 LP Southall Ravenor Park 6.6 LP Southall Fourteen Acres/Horsenden Rec. 6.5 SLP N&G Wolf Fields Park 6.3 SLP Southall Acton Park 6.0 LP Acton Ealing Green 5.9 SLP Ealing Islip Manor Park 5.9 LP N&G Walpole/Lammas Park and enclosure 5.8 DP Ealing Connolly Dell 5.7 SLP Ealing Elthorne Park 5.7 LP Ealing Mill Hill Gardens 5.6 SLP Acton Acton Green Common 5.4 LP Acton North Acton Playing Fields 5.3 LP Acton Montpelier Park 5.2 LP Acton Haven Green 5.2 SLP Ealing Lime Tree Park 5.2 LP N&G Brent Lodge Park/ Meadow/Churchfields 5.2 DP Ealing Rec. Berkeley Fields 5.2 SLP N&G Perivale Golf Course 5.0 GC Golf Cranleigh Open Space 5.0 SLP Southall

- 26 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

Wood End Rec. West 4.9 SLP N&G King George's Fields 4.9 LP Southall Trumpers Field 4.9 SLP Southall Elthorne Park Extension 4.9 LP Ealing Blondin Park 4.9 LP Ealing Horsenden Hill 4.8 MP N&G Spikes Bridge Park 4.8 LP Southall Southfields Rec. 4.8 LP Acton Heathfield Gardens 4.8 SLP Acton Manor House Grounds 4.8 SLP Southall Warren Farm 4.8 LP Southall Dean Gardens 4.7 SLP Ealing South Park 4.7 SLP Acton Western Road Open Space 4.7 SLP Southall Cayton Park 4.6 LP N&G Ealing Common 4.6 LP Ealing Oldfield Rec. 4.6 SLP N&G Hanger Hill Park / Hanger Lane (Chatsworth 4.6 DP Acton Wood) Coronation Gardens 4.5 SLP Acton Norwood Green 4.5 LP Southall Wesley Playing Fields 4.5 SLP Acton Southall Park 4.5 LP Southall Springfield Gardens 4.5 LP Acton Drayton Green 4.4 LP Ealing Pitshanger Park/ Cleveland Park 4.4 DP Acton South Acton Rec. 4.4 SLP Acton Brentham Open Space 4.4 LP Acton Ealing Central Sports Ground 4.2 LP N&G Southall Rec. 4.1 LP Southall Perivale Park 4.1 DP Southall Marnhams Field 4.1 LP Southall Mount Pleasant 4.0 SLP Southall Northolt Park 3.9 LP N&G Twyford Crescent Gardens 3.9 SLP Acton Brent Valley Golf Course 3.9 GC Golf Greenford Rec. 3.9 LP Southall Norwood Green Playing Fields 3.8 LP Southall Cuckoo Park 3.8 LP Ealing Jubilee Park 3.8 LP Southall Fairview Playground 3.7 SLP N&G Ridding Lane 3.6 SLP N&G Trinity Way Open Space 3.6 LP Acton King George's Playing Field, W7 3.6 SLP Ealing NGCP Kensington Field/Belvue/Rectory 3.5 MP N&G Bitterns Field (Bridge Ave CA) 3.5 LP Ealing The Green, W3 3.5 SLP Acton

- 27 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

Paradise Fields 3.4 SLP N&G Bromyards Garden 3.3 SLP Acton Lord Halsbury's Memorial Ground 3.3 LP N&G Mandeville Parkway 3.3 LP N&G Horsenden Hill Golf Course 3.2 GC Golf Tentelow Lane Open Space 2.9 SLP Southall Bixley Fields 2.5 SLP Southall Woodlands 2.4 SLP Acton Tentelow Lane Playing Fields 2.1 SLP Southall Northolt Recreation Ground 2.1 LP N&G Total Score 340.2 Total Cells 76 Average 4.5

The overall Borough average score for parks is 4.5. As the GFPA requires parks to score 6.5 or above, it can be concluded that on average, the Borough performs poorly in park provision. However, individual parks within the audit naturally score differently, and this analysis will highlight particular parks that are performing close to GFPA standards, or are performing particularly badly.

The highest scoring park in the Borough is Glade Lane Canalside Park which scored 6.8. As a new park with a range of newly installed facilities, it is unsurprising that this park would achieve a high quality score. However, if this park is to remain sustainable in the future, issues of management and on-going community involvement need to be tackled. The high score however indicates that this park is a possible contender for the Green Flag Award.

There are only two other parks which, based on their audit scores, have performed well, namely Ravenor Park and Fourteen Acres/Horsenden Rec. scoring 6.6 and 6.5 respectively. Ravenor Park in particular is a Local Park which is well used and would benefit from the investment needed to obtain a GFPA. Fourteen Acres/Horsenden Rec. is unlikely to have a sufficient range of facilities to qualify.

The fact that there are only 3 parks out of 76 that have scored 6.5 and above is a reflection of the recent history of under investment in parks, and recommendations to address this will be made later in the strategy. The poorest quality parks in the borough, both scoring 2.1 are Northolt Recreation Ground and Tentelow Lane Playing Fields. Typifying the worst aspects of playing field sites, these parks have little or no ecological, aesthetic or amenity value, other than the minimal use by a minority of users for formal sports. In the case of Tentelow Lane Playing Fields, these are currently leased out, although still maintained by the P&CS. Since the site is not available for general public use, it would make better sense to hand the responsibility for maintenance over to the lessee. The use of sites such as Northolt Recreation Ground could be reconsidered through public consultation. If sports use is still a priority, then the site needs to be maintained to a higher standard to accommodate this. If there is a decline in demand for sports pitches, alternative provision could be designed into the space.

- 28 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

An analysis of the average scores for each of the 21 quality criteria reveals how parks perform on different aspects. A summary ‘league table’ of scores for each quality criteria is shown below in Table 6.

Table 6: League table of quality criteria in parks

Quality criteria Average score (all parks) Building and infrastructure 6.8 Sports facilities 6.7 Universal access 6.5 Horticultural and arboricultural 6.4 Is the Park Welcoming? 6.3 Health and personal safety in the Park 6.1 Is the park well maintained overall? 6.0 Is the access good and safe? 5.8 Pollution control and conservation of 5.5 natural resources Litter and waste management 5.4 Design and landscape quality 4.7 Play facilities 4.5 Conservation of Buildings and structures 3.8 Dog fouling 3.4 Provision of facilities for a cross-section 3.4 of the community Signage 3.2 Conservation of wild flora and fauna 2.7 Community involvement in management 1.2 and development Marketing and promotion 1.0 Waste and recycling 0.5 Conservation of landscape features NA

The Borough performs very well in certain aspects of parks management, with 3 of the top five criteria performing above the 6.5 minimum standard for GFPA status, and with the remaining two only 0.2 below the standard.

The top five criteria indicate that the Borough’s parks are on the whole welcoming and accessible with good horticultural maintenance. They also have a reasonable quality of infrastructure, such as paths, park furniture and fencing, and sports facilities.

However, parks are generally not well sign posted and appear to be providing limited opportunities for conservation of flora and fauna. The audit also implies a lack of community involvement in parks and a need to improve the marketing of events and activities within them. However, this is misleading because there are a number of Friends of Groups, a great deal of on going public consultation, and the Enjoy the Great Outdoors programme is very successful. What is clear is that these things are poorly advertised within the Parks themselves and this needs to be addressed. Where waste recycling may

- 29 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings be taking place, there is very little evidence of it on site. These last three criteria are notable for their absence in most of the Borough’s parks, and should become the focus for new initiatives. Dog fouling and the provision of facilities for a cross section of the community are also key issues for improvement. In all other criteria, the scores are fairly average.

Average scores by contract area The site audit results were also considered on a contract area basis, to find out if there are substantial differences on quality according to differences in the maintenance contract.

The average scores for each contract area are as follows:

Table 7: Average GFPA scores by contract area

District Score Ealing 4.8 Southall 4.5 Northolt 4.3 Acton 4.3

The Ealing contract area therefore has on average, the highest scoring parks, with a score above the Borough average, which is 4.5. Southall area’s score equals the Borough average and the other two contract areas are both lower than the Borough average.

Ealing Area There are 14 parks and open spaces in the Ealing Area, comprising 2 District Parks (DPs), 7 Local Parks (LPs) and 5 Small Local Parks (SLPs). The highest scoring park is Ealing Green which scores 5.9, and the lowest is King George’s Playing Field, which only scores 3.4. The Brent Lodge and Walpole Park/Lammas Park district parks score reasonably well at 5.3 and 5.6 respectively. They are important and well used open spaces with a range of facilities but there is clearly room for improvement to raise standards up to GFPA quality.

Table 8: Top and bottom five quality criteria for the Ealing Area

Top 5 Bottom 5 1 Building and Infrastructure 7.3 1 Waste Recycling 0.3 2 Universal Access 7.2 2 Marketing and Promotion 1.2 3 Horticulture and Arboriculture 7.1 3 Community Involvement 2.0 4 Welcoming Park 7.1 4 Dog Fouling 2.9 5 Good and Safe Access 6.3 5 Signage 3.4

The top four criteria score very highly, being significantly above the GFPA standard of 6.5. Even the fifth place criteria is only 0.2 off the GFPA standard. The Ealing Area parks and open spaces are generally very welcoming, with good access for all, and good horticultural maintenance and infrastructure. However, as in the Borough wide analysis of criteria, the area suffers from a lack of evidence of waste recycling, marketing and promotion of events and activities, and community involvement. Dog fouling is also a problem which needs to be resolved, together with improvements to signage.

- 30 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

There are only a few criteria within the area’s parks that pull down the overall average, so addressing these would significantly improve them and bring many in line with the GFPA standard.

Northolt and Greenford Area There are 17 parks and open spaces in the contract area comprising 2 Metropolitan Parks (MPs), no District Parks, (DPs), 8 Local Parks (LPs), and 7 Small Local Parks (SLPs). The highest scoring park is Fourteen Acres / Horsenden Rec., which scores 6.5 and the lowest is Northolt Recreation Ground which only scores 2.1.

Table 9: Top & bottom five quality criteria for Northolt & Greenford Contract Area

Top 5 Bottom 5 1 Sports Facilities 7.2 1 Waste Recycling 0.3 2 Building & Infrastructure 6.1 2 Marketing and Promotion 1.3 3 Pollution control, conservation 6.0 3 Community Involvement 1.3 of natural resources 4 Horticulture and Arboriculture 5.9 4 Conservation of Buildings 2.5 5 Welcoming Park 5.8 5 Signage 2.5

Only one of the criteria, sports facilities, scores over the GFPA standard of 6.5. Whilst other criteria score above the Borough average, none are exceptional, and there are several criteria that score very badly. The contract area’s parks and open spaces therefore have good sports facilities, and whilst they are fairly welcoming, attractive and have a good level of maintenance, there are areas for improvement. As in the Borough as a whole, the parks score poorly on waste recycling, marketing and community involvement, but there is also a need to improve the signage in the parks and maintenance of buildings.

Acton Area There are 19 parks and open spaces in this contract area, comprising one DP, eight LPs and 10 SLPs. The highest scoring park is Acton Park which scores 6.0, and the lowest is Woodlands Park which only scores 2.0. Acton Park is the only park in the area scoring 6 or over, with the second placed park scoring 5.4. With 8 of the 19 parks scoring below the Borough average there is considerable room for improvement in the Acton area.

SLPs perform particularly poorly in the Acton area, with the bottom three parks being SLPs. The exception is Mill Hill Gardens which is the second highest scoring park in the area with a score of 5.6. Unusually, it also scores quite highly on community involvement as well as signage, reflecting the fact that it has an active friends group.

Table 10: Top and bottom five criteria for the Acton Contract Area Top 5 Bottom 5 1 Sports Facilities 7.2 1 Waste Recycling 0.3 2 Building and Infrastructure 6.6 2 Marketing and Promotion 1.2 3 Welcoming Park 6.5 3 Community Involvement 2.0 4 Universal Access 6.4 4 Conservation of Flora/Fauna 2.9 5 Health and Personal Safety 6.3 5 Conservation of Buildings 3.4

- 31 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

Three criteria score on or above the GFPA standard, and as in Northolt and Greenford, sports facilities score the most with 7.2. Other top scoring criteria include Buildings and Infrastructure, Welcoming and Access, and Health and Personal Safety. This is the first time this criteria has been scored in the top five criteria, and shows that Acton’s parks and open spaces provide a safe environment for people to enjoy.

As with other contract areas, and the Borough as a whole, the area performs poorly in terms of waste recycling, marketing and promotion and community involvement. Other areas that it performs poorly on are the conservation of flora and fauna and of buildings. Conservation of flora and fauna falls within the bottom five criteria, indicating that more can be done to improve the ecological value of Acton’s parks and open spaces.

Southall Area There are 22 parks and open spaces in the Southall contract area, consisting of one DP, twelve LPs and nine SLPs. It appears to be an area of contrasts in park quality with the highest scoring park in the Borough, Glade Lane Canalside Park, with a score of 6.8 and the lowest scoring park in the Borough, Tentelow Lane Playing Fields with a score of 2.1.

Only two parks in the contract area perform well enough to meet the GFPA standard of 6.5, Glade Lane and Ravenor Park, although Wolf Fields, in third place is only 0.2 below the standard. Three of the four top scoring parks in the Borough are in the Southall contract area although whilst there are some very good parks in the contract area, there are also quite a few poor ones, with 9 of the 22 parks performing below the Borough average.

The contract area only has one DP, Perivale Park, and this performs quite poorly with a score of 4.1. Southall is deficient in DP provision, and Perivale Park, although in the Southall contract area, is not easily accessible from Southall town centre. Key Local Parks, such as Spikes Bridge Park and Southall Park need to be targeted for improvements to address this deficiency in provision.

Table 11: Top and bottom five criteria for the Southall contract area

Top 5 Bottom 5 1 Universal Access 7.4 1 Waste Recycling 0.5 2 Sports Facilities 7.3 2 Marketing and Promotion 0.5 3 Building and Infrastructure 7.0 3 Community Involvement 0.8 4 Horticulture & Arboriculture 6.8 4 Conservation of Flora/Fauna 2.3 5 Health and Personal Safety 6.2 5 Conservation of Buildings 3.0

The top and bottom scoring criteria show that the area performs exceptionally in some aspects, with 4 out of the 5 top criteria scoring considerably higher than the GFPA 6.5 standard, but exceptionally poorly on other aspects, with the usual criteria of waste recycling, marketing and promotion and community involvement all scoring below 1.

Southall area’s parks are therefore accessible, safe and averagely well maintained. The area is particularly poor for nature conservation. The disparity between criteria scores

- 32 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings means that by making improvements to the lowest scoring criteria, there would be a great impact on the overall quality of Southall’s parks.

Average scores by park type

Metropolitan Parks There are two MPs in the Borough, Horsenden Hill with a score of 4.8, and Northolt and Greenford Countryside Park (NGCP) with a score of 3.5. Both are located in the Northolt and Greenford contract area, but serve the residents of the whole Borough.

NGCP scores poorly but is still in the process of being created from a number of separate sites, and will receive considerable investment over the next few years. In particular, the major improvements at Rectory Park and Northala Fields will impact on the availability and quality of play and sports provision in this area.

Table 12: Top and Bottom 5 quality criteria scores for Horsenden Hill:

Top 5 Bottom 5 1 Pollution control, 10 1 Waste Recycling 0.0 conservation of natural resources 2 Welcoming Site 8.2 2 Dog Fouling 1.3 3 Sports Facilities 7.3 3 Community Involvement 1.5 4 Safe Access 6.7 4 Universal Access 2.0 5 Building and Infrastructure 6.3 5 Play Facilities 3.0

Much of Horsenden Hill is managed for nature conservation, and it therefore scores well on pollution control and conservation of natural resources. The site also scores very well on access, it’s welcoming nature, and it’s building and infrastructure. It also scores well on sports facilities, although these are limited to a bowling club. Four of the five top criteria score over the 6.5 GFPA standard, suggesting a high quality MP. It scores poorly on the usual aspects of waste recycling and community involvement, (although this is now addressed by the Friends of Horsendon Hill) but does better on marketing and promotion than many other parks. The park also scores poorly on dog fouling and play facilities. These score below the borough averages for each criteria in both cases, and with the consultation survey indicating these as key concerns for park users, this should be a priority for improvement on this MP.

Table 13: Top and Bottom 5 quality criteria scores for NGCP: Top 5 Bottom 5 1 Sports Facilities 7.3 1 Waste Recycling 0.0 2 Pollution control, 6.3 2 Marketing and Promotion 0.3 conservation of natural resources 3 Well Maintained 4.7 3 Community Involvement 0.3 4 Health and personal safety 4.6 4 Signage 2.8 5 Design and landscape quality 4.5 5 Provision of facilities for 3.1 cross section of local community

- 33 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

Although NGCP is currently under development as a new Metropolitan Park, and the audit scores will soon be outdated, they highlight key issues which can be tackled through the on-going improvements, such as the need for adequate signage and the potential for waste recycling. Promoting the new park and involving the local community is also an on-going process, but the audit shows there is little evidence of this on site at present.

District Parks There are only five District Parks (DPs) in the Borough, with the highest scoring being Walpole Park / Lammas Park and Enclosure with a score of 5.8. The lowest scoring DP is Perivale Park with a score of 4.1. The Borough average for DPs is 4.8, slightly better than the Borough average for all parks of 4.5. However, none of the parks are close to reaching the GFPA standard of 6.5 which should be a target for this type of park.

Table 14: Top and bottom five criteria for District Parks:

Top 5 Bottom 5 1 Sports Facilities 7.3 1 Waste Recycling 0.0 2 Building and Infrastructure 7.3 2 Marketing and Promotion 1.1 3 Universal Access 7.0 3 Community Involvement 1.1 4 Conservation of Buildings 6.8 4 Dog Fouling 2.9 5 Horticulture & Arboriculture 6.7 5 Signage 3.4

DPs score very highly in all five top criteria, and in fact the top seven criteria are all over the 6.5 GFPA standard. The fact that so many criteria are scoring highly (13 of the 21 criteria score are over the 4.5 borough average) suggest that DPs in the Borough are generally of a high quality. However, there are some criteria where DPs perform particularly badly, which brings down the average score for DPs to 4.8. The usual three criteria appear, with a zero score for waste recycling, and only just over one for marketing and promotion and community involvement. The fourth worst criteria is dog fouling which scores only 2.9, 0.5 below the Borough average for that measure, making this a priority for improvement, together with better signage.

It is a recommendation of this strategy that all DPs should be improved with a view to achieving GFPA status.

Local Parks There are 35 LPs in the Borough, with the highest scoring being Glade Lane Canalside Park with a score of 6.8 (also the borough’s top scoring park) and the lowest scoring is Northolt Recreation Ground with a score of 2.1 (also the Borough’s lowest scoring park). The average score for a LP in the Borough is 4.6, which means that LPs only marginally perform better than the Borough average for all parks. Although, it is questionable whether a LP would reach official GFPA status due to it’s limited range of facilities, but as an accepted standard for measuring a parks quality, only two LPs score over 6.5, Glade Lane Canalside Park and Ravenor Park.

The top two sites lie within the Southall contract area despite Ealing being the best performing contract area overall. This indicates that Ealing scores highly in other designations of park provision, rather than that of LPs. The three poorest performing LPs

- 34 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings are in the Northolt and Greenford contract area, and with only 2 LPs in the top 15 LPs, this contract area performs poorly in LP provision.

Table 15: Top and bottom five criteria for Local Parks:

Top 5 Bottom 5 1 Sports Facilities 7.1 1 Waste Recycling 0.7 2 Building and Infrastructure 6.7 2 Marketing and Promotion 0.9 3 Universal Access 6.6 3 Community Involvement 1.5 4 Horticulture and Arboriculture 6.4 4 Conservation of 2.7 Flora/Fauna 5 Welcoming Site 6.4 5 Signage 3.1

The criteria that LPs perform particularly poorly and well on are generally the same as the Borough as a whole. Community Involvement is marginally better in LPs than in the Borough as a whole, as is the provision of sports facilities. The other criteria on the whole perform similarly to the Borough average.

Small Local Parks There are 31 SLPs in the borough with the highest scoring being Fourteen Acres/Horsenden Rec. which scores 6.5, and the lowest being Tentelow Lane Playing Fields which scores 2.1. The average score for a SLP in the Borough is 4.4, which is below the Borough wide average for all park designations indicating that on the whole SLPs are marginally poorer than other designations of parks. It is very unlikely that a SLP would be able to secure GFPA status, given their limited range of facilities and in Ealing, only Fourteen Acres/Horsenden Rec. scores the 6.5 score required by the GFPA scheme.

Whilst the top scoring SLP lies in the Northolt and Greenford contract area, and the second placed SLP in the Southall area, three of the next four sites lie within the Ealing contract area, and there is only one Ealing site in the bottom 15 SLPs. This indicates that good SLPs are one of the reasons why Ealing contract area performs the best of the four contract areas.

Table 16: Top and bottom five criteria for Small Local Parks:

Top 5 Bottom 5 1 Universal Access 7.0 1 Waste Recycling 0.3 2 Building and Infrastructure 7.0 2 Marketing and Promotion 1.0 3 Welcoming Site 6.4 3 Community Involvement 1.1 4 Horticulture and Arboriculture 6.3 4 Conservation of Flora/Fauna 2.2 5 Health and Personal Safety 6.1 5 Dog Fouling 3.0

As you would expect from these small parks, access is generally good, and they are generally welcoming, safe and attractive. Apart from the usual three criteria that score badly throughout the Borough’s parks, nature conservation is poor compared to the Borough average for that criterion.

- 35 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

Dog fouling scores 3.0 for SLPs, compared to a Borough average of 3.4. Whilst this difference is marginal, the fact that in all other park types, other criterion score worse indicate that SLPs tend to have a particular problem with dog fouling. This may be explained by the fact that in small spaces dog fouling is more obvious, and as these spaces are close to residential housing, they are often used for exercising dogs. However, dog fouling was one of the key issues of concern raised through the consultation exercise and since dog fouling only comes in the bottom five categories for SLPs indicates that this is where the problem is greatest, and where measures to resolve the problem need to be implemented.

5.4.2 Recommendations The Audit has indicated that Parks are failing to meet standards mainly on sustainability issues such as waste and recycling, nature conservation and community involvement. However, this is misleading. What it does indicate is that there is poor signage and information provision within parks so the work which is being done is not apparent to the public: Fifteen new sites for nature conservation management have been proposed to the amended Unitary Development Plan, most of them in parks. Much of the green waste is currently recycled but outside of the Borough via Greenford Depot and this does generate needlessly wasted transport ‘costs’. To address this a new green waste recycling centre is to be created in Acton Park during 2002. A number of ‘Friends of Parks Groups’ are set up, facilitated or serviced across the Borough, notable at Blondin Park, Mill Hill Gardens, NGCP Society, Horsendon Farm, Acton, Lammas & Walpole Parks, Greenford Town Centre/Ravenor park and consultation is a constant theme of the Service but this is not apparent on site and needs to be addressed through improved signage.

The GFPA manual advises that local authorities should examine their performance in respect of sustainability and consider the development of their own indicators and targets. Sustainability covers a broad range of park related issues, from encouraging the broadest cross section of the community to use parks to making best use of the resources used in parks management. The best way to ensure sustainability in parks, although not necessary for a GFPA, is to adopt an environmental management system, such as EMAS or ISO 14001. Failing this, the main principles of an EMAS should be followed, such as:

¾ Adopting an environmental policy ¾ Nominating persons with overall responsibility for environmental management ¾ Training staff in environmental management ¾ Setting objectives and targets for environmental improvement ¾ Measuring, recording and evaluating environmental performance ¾ Reviewing and seeking to improve environmental performance

Any environmental objectives set should include a waste management plan based on reduce-reuse-recycle, a strategy for the reduction in use of pesticides, and an environmental specifying policy for materials and goods. Ways of reducing pollution, water wastage and increasing energy efficiency should also be considered.

The potential for creation of a wider range of nature conservation habitats exists in many parks. Currently, nature areas are focused on specific key sites whereas the majority of

- 36 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings parks have little or no wildlife value. The possibility of incorporating nature conservation management into these often smaller or more urban sites, will be considered.

Another area where parks appear to be under performing is in marketing & promotion. Marketing is about making people aware of where parks are and what facilities and events are available, and encouraging greater use by the whole community. Most parks have some historical, ecological or functional value that can be promoted to users through site signs and interpretation, newsletters, press releases and events. The annual Great Outdoors events leaflet does promote and market our parks very successfully and highlights some 60 events the service runs through the year, but there is no reference to its existence or availability on site, and this has distorted the audit performance in this area.

The siting of signs in parks needs to be planned carefully, and once installed they should be well maintained and kept free of graffiti. A standard design of ‘Welcome Signs’ for parks entrances has been adopted across the Borough, which reflects the stewardship of the Parks and Countryside Service, and will include up to date information about the Borough’s parks. However, funding for this is limited and sponsorship is the most likely way forward, but this has proved unpredictable. Upgrading of signage will remain a priority for all parks. (See objective 2 PGS11.)

Dog fouling is a problem everywhere in parks, to the extent that some smaller parks have become little more than dog toilets. However, dog owners are a significant element amongst frequent users of parks and provide an important human presence which may encourage other users. Changing the dog fouling situation requires a change in attitudes and habits, which is only likely to be achieved through educational campaigns and awareness raising. This must therefore become an increased priority for Ealing.

The final key issue for improvement is the provision of facilities for a cross section of the community. People are attracted to parks such as Brent Lodge Park with its diversity of features, particularly families looking to entertain young children. Parks are an excellent recreational venue which are currently under-used as such, due to their limited range of facilities. Interests change according to fashion and demography and parks need to adapt to the needs and desires of local people. A successful park needs to provide the range of facilities that people in that area want or need. Existing facilities which are derelict or under used can be converted to new uses, and management of areas can be changed to accommodate different uses. New suggestions and ideas will be sought from park users and potential facilities providers.

5.4.3 Parks with potential for a Green Flag Park Award

Achieving Green Flag Award status will not be easy. The standards are deliberately set high to ensure that those parks meeting the standard are exceptional and not of average quality. For this reason the Service will not set itself unrealistic targets. Nor will the Service drain resources from one park or part of the Borough to raise standards in another.

- 37 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

However, the Service does commit itself to achieving GFA status for Acton Park during 2002.

All District Parks and Key Local Parks will be prioritised for improvements with the intention of submitting them for an award. The order of priority within this short list will depend partly on the available resources for improvements in each area.

Southall contract area: Glade Lane Canalside Park Ravenor Park Perivale Park Spikes Bridge Park Southall Park Southall Recreation Ground

Ealing contract area: Walpole/Lammas park Brent Lodge Park

Acton contract area: Hangar Hill Park Pitshangar Park Acton Park

N&G contract area: Islip Manor Park

5.5 Play Area Audit and Analysis

5.5.1 The importance of playgrounds Providing opportunities for creative, mentally stimulating, and physically active play for children is a very important element in public parks. Research indicates that the current generation of children are less physically active than their predecessors. Television, computer games, and the motor car combined with a fat rich diet has caused a reduction in time spent outdoors involved in active play, and a marked increase in child obesity. Research goes on to predict an increase in coronary heart disease in adulthood as a consequence if this is not addressed. Active children’s play can help address these issues.

Modern playgrounds also need to compete with a great variety of other play opportunities to successfully attract children to use them. Good playgrounds need to meet very high safety standards, be visually stimulating and offer a range of activities which allow children to use their muscles actively through climbing, swinging, balancing and jumping while having lots of fun outside in the fresh air at the same time. Such facilities do not come cheap and need a great deal of maintenance.

The audit found that Ealing needs to invest heavily in its playgrounds to meet the needs of the Borough’s children, and the expectations of their parents.

- 38 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

5.5.2 Background to audit 52 play sites were audited, as shown on Map 6. 41 were in the parks and open spaces which were in the main audit and the remainder were either stand alone play sites or were in open spaces which were considered too small to be audited.

The audit does not include play areas on housing estates as these are not managed by P&CS. However, there is extensive provision on housing estates and these sites are considered in relation to the deficiency analysis.

Only unsupervised play areas were audited and only those with fixed play equipment. Therefore this audit is not concerned with supervised facilities, kick about areas, or play sites with no equipment. Although these also provide valuable play opportunities, this is not intended as a comprehensive play strategy but rather focuses on play sites which form part of Ealing’s parks and open spaces.

Borough wide spread of facilities – deficiencies and clusters Map 7 shows the location of all the audited play facilities plus those on housing estates. It also identifies a 400 metre catchment area around each play facility and the resulting ‘areas of deficiency’, which are not within 400 metres of a play area.

The mapping exercise shows a deficiency in play provision in many parts of the Borough. The largest areas of deficiency are Ealing Common and Hangar Lane (both of which have no play facilities), the majority of Northcote, Victoria and Pitshangar wards, and large parts of Springfield, Wood End and Perivale wards.

There is particularly good provision, with a cluster of facilities, in central Acton (Heathfield, Southfield and Vale wards), Walpole ward, and parts of Hobbayne, Costons and West End wards.

The 1999 LBE review of play areas also found that there are imbalances in play provision across the Borough. Consideration of child density by ward in relation to number of play facilities revealed that wards such as Northcote, Springfield, Elthorne and Southfield have a very low playground provision in relation to the child density. Other wards, such as Dormers Wells, Victoria, West End, Hobbayne, Mandeville and Costons have a high playground ratio to children.

Key areas of deficiency which are a priority for the establishment of new facilities are therefore those which are both further than 400 metres from an existing facility and in an area of high child density. Northcote and Springfield wards therefore should be considered a priority. Both Hangar lane and Ealing Common have relatively low child densities with 6 and 10 under 16 year olds per hectare respectively, (as opposed to 26 per hectare in Northcote). However, the increasing physical and psychological restrictions on children’s ability to travel to play caused by increase in traffic and the widespread fear of ‘stranger danger’, places greater importance on local and easily accessible play facilities. The complete lack of play facilities within walking distance in both these wards must therefore be considered a priority for improvement.

- 39 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

5.5.3 National Playing Fields Association (NPFA) Standards Play areas were considered in relation to the NPFA’s ‘Six Acre Standard. Minimum Standards for Outdoor Playing Space’. This document, which was adopted by the Government’s Audit Commission as a key indicator of local authority service quality, defines 3 categories of unsupervised play provision to adequately meet the needs of different age groups. The first category (Local Area for Play, or LAP), is not considered here as it does not contain fixed equipment and is more typically found on housing estates. This is provision for 4-6 year olds. The two other categories, which are relevant are defined as follows:

Table 17: Definition of Local Equipped Area for Play (LEAP)

Target age group: 4 –8 year olds Location: 5 minutes walk from home Content: Minimum 5 types of play equipment Seating for adults Activity zone: Minimum 400m2 Buffer zone: Minimum 20 metres between edge of play area and boundary of nearest property

Table 18: Definition of Neighbourhood Equipped Area for Play (NEAP)

Target age group: 8 –14 year olds Location: 15 minutes walk from home Content: Minimum 8 types of play equipment Kick about area and area for wheeled play and seating for adults Activity zone: Minimum 1000m2 Buffer zone: Minimum 30 metres between edge of play area and boundary of nearest property

For the purposes of measuring play provision against these standards, 4 of the play sites were considered as split into 2 play areas catering for different age groups. Table 19, checks each play area against each of the LEAP/NEAP standard criteria, therefore lists 56 play sites. Of these, only 13 appear to meet the standards as defined by the NPFA at present. Another 6 or so would be easily and relatively cheaply upgraded by the provision of seating for informal adult supervision and many more if adequate fencing was provided.

5.5.4 Safety Standards The assessment of whether a play facility meets LEAP standards or not, did not include a Health & Safety assessment, which is a key element to the play areas meeting the NPFA standard. However, all playgrounds have a mechanical safety assessment once a week. An external playground specialists also undertakes an annual audit and produces a schedule of maintenance and repairs required to maintain the play areas in a safe condition. All the playgrounds currently meet the British Standard 5696. A schedule of work is also in hand to raise standards to meet recommended European Community Safety Standards but this will take considerable resources to complete. All new equipment installed meets the latest European Standard.

- 40 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

TABLE 19: EALING PARK STRATEGY - ANALYSIS OF PLAY AREAS IN RELATION TO NPFA STANDARDS

Name Score Area No. of Seating Fencing 400 20m 1000 30m NEAP potential equipment sqm+ buffer sqm+ buffer LEAP Acton Common 4 650 6 N Y Y Y N Y LEAP Acton Park 6.1 2174 5 Y Y Y Y Y Y LEAP Ben Acorn Centre/Carr Road 6.2 375 5 N Y Y N N N Blondin Park 2.7 425 5 Y Y Y Y N Y LEAP Brent Lodge Park 3.5 215 6 Y Y N Y N Y Churchfields Rec 5 484 5 Y Y Y Y N N LEAP Coronation Gardens Rec 4.8 1848 7 Y Y Y N N N LEAP Cranleigh Play Park 4.3 850 3 Y N Y N N N Cuckoo Park A 3.4 750 8 N N Y Y N N Cuckoo Park B " 450 5 N N Y N N N Dean Gardens A 2.9 141 3 N N N Y N N Dean Gardens B " 437 3 Y Y Y Y N Y Dormers Wells Play Centre 4.9 1653 7 N N Y Y Y Y Down Way Playground 1.3 5568 6 Y N Y N Y N Drayton Green 2.4 844 5 N N Y N N N Ealing Central Sports Ground 3.4 330 7 Y N N Y N Y Elthorne Park 3.7 330 9 N Y N Y N Y Fairview Playground 3 270 4 Y N N Y N Y Fourteen Acres 7.7 840 6 Y Y Y N N N LEAP* Glade Lane Canalside Park 5.8 915 7 N Y Y Y N Y LEAP Greenford Rec 6.1 684 7 N N Y Y N Y Gurnell Play Area 3.4 1694 6 Y N Y N Y N Hanger Hill Park 4.2 769 6 N Y Y Y N Y LEAP Havelock Play Area 2.4 546 6 Y N Y N N N High Lane Play Area 2.2 300 3 N N N Y N Y Horsenden Hill 3 1700 9 Y Y Y Y Y Y NEAP Islip Manor Park 3.6 559 7 N Y Y Y N N LEAP Islip Manor Play Centre 6.5 656 5 Y Y Y Y N Y LEAP Jubilee Gardens 3.5 906 4 Y Y Y N N N King George's Fields, W7 4.3 975 5 Y Y Y N N N LEAP* Lammas Park 6.1 950 8 N Y Y Y N N LEAP Lammas Park Play Centre " 951 5 Y Y Y N N N Lime Trees Park 5.6 4500 7 Y Y Y N Y N LEAP* Mill Hill Park 1.5 250 4 Y I N Y Y N North Acton Playing Fields 5.3 1545 9 Y Y Y Y Y N LEAP NEAP* Northolt Park Play Centre 6.7 1249 6 N Y Y Y Y N LEAP Norwood Green 4.3 750 6 Y Y Y Y Y N LEAP Oldfield Rec 3.8 450 5 Y N Y Y N Y Perivale park 6.1 3300 9 N N Y N Y N Pitshanger Park 3.7 1387 10 Y Y Y Y Y Y NEAP Ravenor Park 5.8 1002 5 Y Y Y Y Y Y LEAP Rectory Park 3.5 640 6 N N Y Y N Y Rectory Park Extension 3.7 598 4 N N Y Y N Y South Acton Rec 3.5 1900 8 Y N Y N Y N South Park 3.4 4067 1 Y Y Y N Y N Spikes Bridge Park 3.5 1204 8 Y Y Y Y Y N LEAP Southall Park 4.6 411 5 Y N Y Y N Y Southall Park Play Centre " 408 6 Y Y Y N N N Southall Rec Ground 5.4 1143 8 N Y Y N Y N Southfield Road Rec 4.5 1204 6 Y Y Y N Y N Spencer Street Play Area 3.4 2475 3 N Y Y N Y N Springfield Gardens 4 968 7 Y Y Y N N N Walpole Park 3.4 570 5 Y Y Y Y Y Wesley Playing Fields 3.8 1280 5 Y Y Y Y Y Y LEAP Wood End Rec (East) 2.1 225 6 Y Y N N N N Wood End Rec(West) 5.1 1147 5 Y Y Y N Y N

Notes:

N = No Y = Yes

Areas are in square metres

Fencing is a 'no' even if some elements of the play area are fenced since the whole area must be fenced to meet LEAP standards

400sqm+/1000sqm+ = Is the play area over 400/1000 square metres?

LEAP/NEAP* = meets standard but buffer zone is inadequate

Potential = would meet standard if seating were provided

- 41 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

5.5.5 Playground audits

The Green Flag Award Standard was again used as a demanding and independent bench mark against which to judge our playgrounds. Scores are out of a potential 10 with the pass mark for a Green Flag Award being 6.5. Ealing’s play areas score an average of 4.2 across the Borough which compares unfavourably with an average score of 4.5 on all measures across the Borough. Play would appear to be an aspect of Ealing’s parks which is below average quality, when compared with other elements within parks and open spaces.

According to the audit, playgrounds ranks 9th lowest out of 21 measures. Since the consultation results show that the most common reason for visiting Ealing’s parks is to take children to use park playgrounds, this is emerging as a clear priority for improvement.

Playground performance by contract area When play facility scores are considered by maintenance contract area, the average scores show that the best play areas are in the Southall contract area and the worst in Ealing. This is in direct contrast to the overall park audit scores, where Ealing parks have the highest average score and Southall the lowest. This may well be a reflection of the local population’s needs, with more resources being allocated to play areas in Southall where child densities are higher. Scores are as follows:

Table 20: Average Scores for play areas by contract area:

Southall (13 play areas in total) 4.8 Acton (13 play areas in total) 4.4 N&G (15 play areas in total) 4.1 Ealing (11 play areas in total) 3.5

Playground performance by park type Consideration of the context of the play area shows that at present, the best are in district parks and local parks, and the worst in small local parks and the Borough’s two metropolitan parks, as follows:

Table 21: Average scores for play areas by park type:

Small local park 4.4 Local park 4.7 District park 4.6 Metropolitan park 3.3

It is, perhaps, unsurprising that small local parks tend to have poorer quality play areas due to their limited size. They are also less likely to have Council resources directed towards them for improvements than larger parks which serve a wider population.

- 42 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

The poor scores on metropolitan parks is set to change once the major new play area in the Northolt and Greenford Countryside Park is completed. However, Horsenden Hill play area remains a priority for improvement.

A number of the play areas which meet LEAP or NEAP standard do not have a correspondingly high audit score, namely, Blondin Park (2.7), Horsenden Hill, (3.0), Pitshangar Park (3.7), and Wesley Playing Fields (3.8). Although these play areas have adequate fencing, play equipment, seating and are of sufficient size, they are lacking in design quality, may have a limited variety of equipment, and elements such as litter bins, child seats, shade and cycle parking are often lacking.

Playground trends In general, the play areas seem to have focused on being vandal proof rather than particularly child friendly or imaginative, and play value is therefore often limited. Many appear to be very old and have probably been stripped of features as they have become unsafe or too difficult to maintain to a safe standard, and then not replaced. The design of the play areas, such as the style and positioning of play equipment and how they fit their context is often poorly considered. Play areas are mostly fenced, but too often, there are problems with the gates which undermines the protection of the fence. Frequently, they also do not have signs prohibiting dogs and dogs have been seen within play areas during the audits.

The standard, quality and play value of new play equipment and play areas has substantially improved since many of Ealing’s older play areas were installed – what was acceptable 20 years ago is not so acceptable today. There is therefore, scope to improve the majority of the play areas if funds were available.

Although the audit did not include supervised play facilities, some unsupervised play areas form part of supervised play centres, and these have been one of the highlights of the survey. They have been well used and bring life and a focus to many parks and open spaces. The success of the play centres within some parks demonstrates the value of staffed and well maintained play facilities. They have become a focus for families and act as a social meeting place as well as a play area.

Recommendations Overall, there is an urgent need to improve play areas within the borough. Many do not conform to European standards, and are therefore a priority for improvements. In improving these sites, there is a need to consider how to maximise play value, through the choice and siting of equipment and through good landscape design.

Playground refurbishment will be the number one priority for investment by the Service over the next 5 years. This will require substantial capital investment and the Service commits itself to pursuing all funding opportunities to secure funding both within the Council and from external grant sources. (see objective 12)

It is recommended that all play areas are upgraded to meet LEAP or NEAP standards, where possible. this may be carried out simply and economically by providing seats or

- 43 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings adequate fencing and gates. One criteria of LEAP’s & NEAP’s is distance from residential housing, to reduce noise nuisance. It is uneconomical to move an established playground just to meet this requirement but this criteria will be adopted for new playgrounds.

Some playgrounds which have performed poorly in the audit were already in the programme for improvements, such as Pitshanger, Wesley, and Spikesbridge and are already greatly improved. In order to prioritise future investment, it is recommended that initially play areas within parks which have been targeted for first phase of Site Specific Action Plans are improved. Funding strategies for these parks should therefore include funding for play area improvements.

All new play facilities will be designed to meet the latest NPFA standards, and areas of deficiency will be prioritised for improvements. Suitable sites need to be identified, and where these are not available in parks, alternative sites on Housing or Education sites should be considered.

5.6 Sports facility audit and analysis

The provision of affordable open air sports facilities has traditionally been a large element of the service provided by the Parks & Countryside Service over the years. However, peoples expectations of the quality and range of facilities wanted has risen while the quality of the heavily subsidised public services provided has not always kept pace. Sports Leisure has become a large commercial industry in the late 20th Century and there are a wide range of private providers of sports facilities now available in the market place. The Council now needs to reconsider what demand there are for sports provision, what level of service it can reasonably provide and at what cost.

Increased awareness of physical exercise as an important element in health and long life has led to an increase in “sport” in the widest sense, often undertaken by older generations than previously was the case. As a result there is a trend in participation away from formal, competitive, team sports and towards activities which are less formal, often solo activities and those in which an individual can participate at any chosen time. Hence the popularity of (outdoor) activities such as cycling/mountain biking, roller-blading, and walking.

In addition to the obvious health benefits of promoting sporting activities in parks, provision of sports facilities can also help meet many wider social objectives. Evidence, supported by the Police Crime Prevention Unit, indicates that good local sports facilities provides a positive diversion from crime for adolescents. This coupled with improving quality of life and promoting social inclusion can encouraging inward investment and economic growth.

Parks have traditionally provided grass playing fields, sometimes with associated changing facilities, to cater for competitive sports such as football, rugby and cricket, and hard courts designed specifically for tennis. These facilities often take up a disproportionate amount of space in parks, and their large rectangular shapes have defined the form and appearance of the park landscape. Whilst Sunday morning usage can be high, the following six and half days of the week the facilities can be largely

- 44 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings unused and the “municipal” appearance of the park be a discouragement to other would be users. This coupled with the often competing objective of increasing nature conservation value and biodiversity and peoples desire to enjoy a more natural environment in their parks, leads to a need to reassess the extent of sports provision within the Borough’s parks.

The audit found Ealing’s outdoor sports facilities to be numerous and of a reasonable quality although let down substantially by the poor quality of pavilions and changing rooms. This assessment is at odds with the concurrent user survey where the majority felt that the football and cricket pitches were average to poor. Although there was agreement that the pavilions were in a poor to very poor condition.

5.6.1 Background to audit and user survey

27 out of the 76 parks and open spaces audited include formal sports facilities. Audited sports facilities included only the following:

¾ facilities within parks and open spaces ¾ public access (ie not privately owned) ¾ outdoor sports provision ¾ sports pavilions associated with outdoor sports facilities

The audits scored sports facilities on their quality and the resulting overall score was included as one of the 21 measures of the main park audit. This does not take into account the scope or choice of facilities present on each site. Scores were based on the following:

¾ Quality of outdoor facilities ¾ Quality of any fixed equipment ¾ Condition and quality of any pavilions ¾ Accessibility ¾ Health & Safety issues

The available facilities at each location were then mapped and a table of provision produced, (see Appendix 2) in order to show the scope of facilities on offer.

5.6.2 User Survey Active Ealing and the P&C Service have also undertaken a user survey. This has been addressed to those using our outdoor sports facilities and pavilions, including football, cricket and bowls. Clearly, when asking such a specialist group their views, one expects a single minded response. The analysis shows clearly that users are broadly dissatisfied with the quality of existing provision. This includes the pitch quality, maintenance and cleanliness, but is most marked with regard to pavilion facilities. (See Section 4 Consultation, for results of survey)

Scope and location of sports facilities The Audit Commissions figures indicate that the London Borough of Ealing has a significantly larger number of outdoor sports facilities than most other London Boroughs. Map 8 shows the location of all the audited sports facilities. The facilities are spread

- 45 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings around a total of 27 sites, the largest being Rectory Park, (now part of the Northolt & Greenford Countryside Park), Warren Farm and Ealing Central Sports Ground, with an equal spread of 7 sites in each maintenance contract area.

Most of the borough has a reasonable provision of sports facilities, and given that users by definition are in the age group which allows them to be both active and mobile sites do not have to be immediately local. They are therefore concentrated in the Boroughs Metropolitan, District and Key Local Parks. Parts of Southall are currently considered to be deficient in sports provision. This is in the process of being addressed by new dual use facilities at Featherstone High School and there are plans to renew the worn out full size Astroturf pitch at Dairy Meadow Open Space. Despite this it is clear that Southall Recreation Ground and especially Spikesbridge Park remain priority areas for sports investment.

Unlike the user survey, the broad public consultation carried out as part of this strategy, was not specifically focused on sports activists, and indicates the relative level of interest in sports facilities within parks amongst a wide spectrum of the community.

22% of respondents said they went to parks to play sports. This figure is quite low in comparison to the 61% who said ‘take children to play’, the 43% who said, ‘to people watch and relax’ and the 36% who said, ‘to look at wildlife’,. However, in line with the national trend for more informal activities, 45% said they visited parks in the Borough for exercise.

When asked what they thought were the priorities for improvements, only 23% stated sports as a number 1 or 2 priority. Play, improved security, additional staffing and more dog exercise areas all came out considerably higher with between 42% and 58% nominating these as priorities.

5.6.3 Analysis of site audits Sports facilities score well with an average of 6.7 out of 10 across the Borough, comparing favourably with an average score of 4.5 on all measures across the Borough. This reflects the quality of existing facilities, rather than any measure of the variety or choice of sporting opportunities on offer. The top and bottom 5 parks in terms of quality of sports provision are as follows:

Table 22: Top 5 sports facilities

Southfields Playing Fields. (football and tennis) 9.7 Acton Park (bowls and tennis) 8.7 Pitshangar Park (bowls, football, tennis) 8.4 Islip Manor Park (bowls, cricket, football) 8.0 Ealing Central Sports Ground (football) 8.0

- 46 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

Table 23: Bottom 5 sports facilities

Blondin Park (football) 2.4 Wesley Playing Fields (multi sport) 4.0 Spikes Bridge Park (cricket, football, tennis) 4.6 Southall Rec. (cricket, football, tennis) 5.5 Northolt Park (multi sport) 5.6

Clearly, parks such as Spikes Bridge and Southall Recreation Ground have the infrastructure and are of sufficient size to provide first class sporting facilities with some investment. Other high scoring parks, such as Acton Park have more limited facilities due the nature or size of the park, but what does exist is of high quality.

In general, sports facilities scored particularly well on the generic qualities of access, equipment and parking, (over 7.0 in all cases), although not so well on health and safety. Health and safety considered aspects such as access for emergency vehicles, evidence of site supervision and information about who to contact in an emergency.

At present the P&CS provides around 78 football pitches, 21 cricket pitches, 10 bowling greens, and 84 tennis courts, across 27 sites. In addition, rugby, gaelic football, 5-a-side and 7-a-side football are regularly provided, as well as croquet, softball, rounders, volleyball, netball, basketball, and other sports which can be played on multi-play surfaces and playing fields.

An analysis by sport facility type follows:

Athletics The athletics track at Perivale Park is the only athletics facility in the Borough and one of the few 8 lane floodlit tartan tracks in London. It is used by clubs, schools, and members of the public alike. It is a high quality sports facility, but changing/administration facilities are poor. Future management needs to ensure it’s continued quality as a key facility in the Borough.

Bowls Bowling greens are available in 10 of the Borough’s parks and are generally of very good quality, scoring on average, 7.3 in the audit. Bowls remain a popular activity, particularly amongst the older age group. However, maintenance cost for bowling greens are very high so those which have not been heavily used have tended to be removed in recent years. Those which remain suffer from poor pavilions and facilities and are often a focus for vandalism. This is clearly reflected in the user survey, which confirms the average to good quality of the playing surface but rates the ancillary facilities and security as poor to very poor. Investment in appropriate security and improved pavilions is required, but resources are very limited and the facilities are not sustainable as they are. Consideration needs to be given to passing “ownership” to the individual bowls club via a rent free lease, along with an annual grant for pitch maintenance. Experience in other Boroughs has revealed this to be a successful and sustainable way of improving facilities.

- 47 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

Cricket The user survey records that 60% cricketers consider the wickets to be average to good, and 40% poor or very poor. However, over 60% felt that pavilions were poor or very poor. Cricket is a very social, family orientated sport and the condition of the pavilions is more important to the enjoyment of the event than say for football. Cricket wickets also appear to be a magnet for vandalism.

Football The high level of grass pitch provision for football dominates many of the Borough’s parks. However, football’s popularity has significantly increased and demand has remained high. Although traditionally a white male pursuit, football is gaining popularity amongst women and young Asian males. 5-a-side pitches, particularly all-weather facilities are in very high demand, as they can be used informally by small groups.

Whilst there is ample provision of grass pitches, changing facilities are generally poor, locked due to the high cost of managing them or non-existent. With an average score of 5.7, football also does not score particularly well in the audit, indicating that improvements could be made to the quality of existing facilities.

This is again reflected in the user survey with 55% considering the pitches to be average to good, 68% considering the pavilions to be poor or very poor.

The relatively poor quality of football pitches is a consequence of two factors. Firstly, the very high cost of providing good drainage to the heavy clay soils which predominant within the Borough. In wet years, such as that in which the surveys were undertaken, a number of games have to be postponed due to unplayable conditions. Secondly, public pitches have an element of alternative use with informal football and play by children, and occasional summer use for fairs, circuses and other events. This generally leads to litter, wear, and poorer standards, and leads to a steady pressure upon the Service to allow fenced football pitches to exclude other uses (especially dogs). It is acknowledged that this would improve pitch performance but to the detriment of wider park usage and enjoyment and is not generally supported by this strategy, although there may be a few specific sites where it could be considered.

Pavilions represent both a large capital investment and an ongoing drain on revenue. For most of the week they are empty and unused and a target for relentless vandalism and graffiti. With the resources currently available to the P&C Service it is hard to anticipate any improvement in the existing provision, unless more sustainable uses for pavilions can be found.

Multi-sport Only 7 multi-sport games areas were identified in the audit. Multi-sport areas provide opportunities for a wide range of formal and informal sports throughout the year, take relatively little space and if floodlit, can extend park usage into the evenings. They are also popular with children, particularly the often neglected 12-16 year olds, providing opportunities to develop ball skills and a place to meet and socialise.

- 48 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

Multi-sport areas could also help meet the demand for more football provision whilst minimising the need to monopolise limited green space. Such facilities are encouraged by the Police and Crime Prevention Units as a method of distracting youths from petty crime.

Clearly, there is a need to provide such facilities in appropriate locations and as external grants can be found for them this is an area for positive development.

Rugby Few of the Borough’s playing fields are marked out for rugby and demand is reported to be of below the national average. However, Ealing Rugby Club have a number of junior and senior teams and opportunities for the use of existing playing fields need to be considered.

Tennis Tennis courts are available in 16 parks out of the 73 audited and they vary greatly in quality. The better quality facilities such as those in Pitshangar Park and North Acton Playing Fields have either been leased or are used regularly for coaching. Many others, which although are free of charge, are in a poor state of repair and are only suitable for casual use.

Tennis has been identified by the Council as a top priority sport. It is equally popular with men and women of all ages, provides good social and health benefits and can be played outdoors throughout the year. The high number of existing tennis courts means that improved provision for tennis may be achieved through an improvement programme, rather than development of many new courts.

The external lease option has proven successful where it has been entered into and there are more sites where this should be adopted such as at Southall Park.

The Lawn Tennis Association are also keen to improve the availability and quality of local park provision and there appears to be opportunities to upgrade facilities via grants from them which need to be actively pursued.

Roller-skating/blading Roller blading/skating sites have been built at several sites around the borough in Northolt, Southall and Acton and have proven very popular. The equipment and fine grade tarmac finish are very expensive to provide and it is hard to anticipate how long such fads are going to last. However, there is no evidence of the enthusiasm ebbing and it is proposed that more such facilities are provided, there appears to be a particular demand for one in the central Ealing area

Golf There are 3 public ‘pay and play’ golf courses in the Borough – Brent Valley, Perivale Park and Horsenden Hill. Lying adjacent to major parks and open spaces, they not only provide affordable access to golfing facilities, but they also extend the potential for passive recreation, where footpaths cross them. They also provide valuable wildlife habitat and contribute to the informal green setting of the local area.

- 49 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

There is considerable market competition within the golf course industry and providing good quality facilities which attract players is increasingly difficult. Golf income is down and alternative methods of providing publicly accessible pay and play golf facilities within the Borough need to actively considered.

5.6.4 Conclusion There is a good range of sports provision within Ealing’s parks although it is of variable quality. The demand for sports bookings remains strong especially where facilities are of a good quality. Clearly, poor quality or derelict pavilions has led to reduced availability and usage in some sites like Rectory and Spikesbridge Parks.

Key areas for improvement are:

¾ Finding sustainable uses for sports pavilions and changing rooms, which will allow for their maintenance, upgrading and improvement. ¾ Health & Safety measures ¾ Provision for youth sports such as roller blading ¾ Increase in multi use sports areas ¾ Improvement/adaptation of existing tennis courts

Any consideration of sporting opportunities within parks cannot ignore the importance of passive and more informal recreation. Parks are used extensively for walking, cycling, jogging, and other fitness related activities. These activities can be carried out on paths and in spaces which have other functions, take little space and they contribute greatly to community health and well being. They should be encouraged by making parks safe and accessible, providing footpaths to allow winter access where these do not currently exist. A balance needs to be maintained between these more informal activities and formal sports.

There is also a balance to be struck between the need for playing fields and the need to create attractive, well landscaped, diverse parks which attract a wider section of the community throughout the week, to enjoy both passive and active recreation. Playing fields are of limited value to wildlife and cover a high proportion of the Borough’s parks and open spaces whilst contributing often only a single use to the function of the park. The provision of smaller, all-weather multi use sport areas may be considered as an alternative to maintaining large areas of playing field as amenity grassland in some cases.

A number of Council Departments are responsible for the management of different sports facilities and with limited resources, it will be essential to have an integrated approach to the improvement of this aspect of Ealing’s parks and open spaces.

5.6.5 Centres of Excellence Improving the standard of sports facilities is a priority for the P&CS. However, this will need a flexible and opportunistic approach to be successful. External funding agencies exist but often require a demonstrable commitment to improved coaching before grants are awarded. Given the need to provide improved facilities consideration will be given to focusing of existing resources into fewer sites where centres of excellence can be established with high quality pitch and pavilion facilities. Opportunities exist to raise

- 50 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings external funding through public/private partnerships and encouraging voluntary sector management of smaller facilities. Consultation on this approach has revealed little support for this idea. However, consultation has not yet targeted the users groups who would be the primary beneficiaries. Active Ealing strongly support this concept as do Sports England and the Football Association both prospective funding agencies. For these reasons Centres of Excellence remain a priority (see objective 17)

5.7 Consideration of other green space - Cemeteries, Golf Courses and Allotments

5.7.1 Cemeteries The P&CS manage 5 cemeteries across the Borough and these were audited using the same audit form as for parks. Whilst cemeteries clearly have a completely separate primary function to parks, they also share some important attributes. If maintained to a sufficiently high standard, they can provide valuable green space for people and wildlife, they often are also of historical interest and provide a place of peace and quiet in which to escape the stresses of urban living.

The Council’s Biodiversity Action Plan highlights the importance of cemeteries for wildlife.

The audit of cemeteries found them to be of generally higher quality than many parks, with an average score of 6.5 out of 10. The areas in which the cemeteries excelled were horticultural maintenance, ease of access within the sites, conservation of natural resources and landscape quality, with scores of over 8.0 on these measures. They performed less well on aspects such as waste and recycling (in line with all open spaces), dog fouling and conservation of wild fauna and flora.

Greenford Park, South Ealing and Hortus Cemeteries all scored 6.5 or above, exceeding the adopted GFPA standard. North Acton also scored highly, with a score of 6.4 but Havelock fared less well, at only 4.7. Havelock Cemetery is in poor condition due to high levels of vandalism. However, it’s proximity to the adjacent Manor House Grounds, an important town centre park for Southall, makes this site a priority for improvement.

It is recommended that greater use of cemeteries for passive recreation and as through routes is encouraged, especially in areas of open space deficiency. This can be done by promoting the particular wildlife and heritage interest of the sites through the use of leaflets and on site signage.

Routes through cemeteries should be well maintained and sign-posted to encourage walkers.

5.7.2 Golf courses There are 3 public ‘pay and play’ golf courses in the Borough – Brent Valley, Perivale Park and Horsenden Hill. Lying adjacent to major parks and open spaces, they not only provide affordable access to golfing facilities, but they also extend the potential for passive recreation, where footpaths cross them, increase potential for nature conservation and contribute to the informal green setting of the local area.

- 51 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 5 – Ealing’s Parks today: The Findings

The three golf courses were audited as for parks and open spaces and scored on average slightly lower than parks as a whole, with an average score of 4.0. Perivale Golf Course was the highest scoring with a score of 5.0 and Brent Valley and Horsenden Hill did less well with scores of 3.9 and 3.2 respectively. Generally, golf courses scored highly on building and infrastructure, horticultural and general maintenance, their welcoming nature and health and personal safety. They scored poorly on the usual 3 measures of community involvement, waste and recycling and marketing, but also on universal access.

The golf courses should be promoted as areas for wider recreational use. In particular, safe and accessible routes through and around golf courses should be provided, particularly where there is a deficiency of open space or where there is potential to create links between town centres and residential areas.

Golf courses should also be promoted and managed as sites for nature conservation, to increase biodiversity, provide wildlife habitats and increase their interest to a wider public.

The standard of golf buildings should be maintained and improved through detailed, tight and enforceable leasing agreements.

5.7.3 Allotments There are currently 65 allotment sites in the Borough, with an uneven distribution leaving a shortage of sites in Acton. There are also waiting lists in South Ealing and Hanwell. Allotments, traditionally appealing to the over 50 age group, are now becoming more popular with a wider age range because of an increasing interest in healthy lifestyles. Allotment gardening provides health benefits through exercise and the production of fresh fruit and vegetables for consumption. The social environment of gardening on an allotment, also contributes to mental well-being and community cohesion.

Allotment sites can also be good for wildlife, and provide opportunities for organic food production, community composting, recycling and water conservation.

The Council’s Sustainable Allotment Strategy (1999), details proposals for improvements to the P&CS allotment service, the availability of allotment sites, the management of sites, and the accessibility of sites to encourage access for all. The strategy also proposes a publicity programme to ensure information and advice about sustainable gardening practices is available.

The contribution that allotment sites can make to increasing biodiversity is also a consideration. This can be addressed through encouragement and incentives to establish hedges, communal orchards and ponds on allotment sites.

Where there is a surplus of traditional plots, such as in Greenford, alternative forms of community green space should be considered. These could take the form of community gardens incorporating a smaller number of plots but also providing for children’s play or sitting out areas for local residents.

- 52 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing

6 WILDLIFE AND NATURE CONSERVATION IN EALING

6.1 Introduction It is generally recognised that people benefit from contact with wildlife, particularly those living in urban areas with little access to the countryside or urban fringe. Nature conservation areas appeal to people with widely varied interests, ages and personalities and also have educational benefits. Making access to nature conservation sites easy for school children and the public is important, as it is an inexpensive way to observe and learn about seasonal changes and have regular contact with nature. There are also economic benefits, as nature areas improve the living environment for urban dwellers and encourage people to remain living in the area and contribute to the area’s economy. Maintaining nature conservation areas can be labour intensive and provides opportunities for training for young or unemployed people. Urban sites can develop a very interesting and diverse range of habitats and wildlife species. Wildlife also benefits from urban nature conservation areas as they are protected from intensive farming practices and the use of pesticides and herbicides.

6.2 Background There are 93 nature conservation sites in the Borough of Ealing. The majority of sites are located in parks and open spaces, others are found along rivers, canals or railway lines. Some parks are predominantly managed for nature conservation, such as Horsenden Hill, which is also a key Metropolitan Park; others have small areas designated as nature conservation areas within what is principally a formal, urban park. The list of sites was compiled from 3 sources:

¾ London Ecology Unit’s Handbook 16 (1991) ¾ Unitary Development Plan (Adopted August 1995) ¾ P&CS Rangers

All 93 nature conservation sites are shown on Map 9 indicating their designation and location. The complete list of sites showing their designations, habitat types and comments are available within the Chapter 10 of 2002 Unitary Development Plan.

Table 24: Identified Nature Conservation Sites

Source Number of sites Sites identified by the London Ecology Unit in Total 60 Additional sites identified by the P&CS Rangers and in 33 the UDP in Total Total number of sites 93 Sites identified by the London Ecology Unit in Parks & 26 Open spaces managed by the P&CS Additional sites in Parks & Open spaces managed by the 27 P&CS identified by the P&CS Rangers and in the UDP Total number of sites found in Parks & Open spaces 53 and managed by the P&CS

- 53 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing

6.3 Designations Nature conservation site designations in the LEU Handbook are used as guidance for the level of planning and development control, management practices and the quality of nature conservation. The Handbook designations are as follows:

6.3.1 Site of Metropolitan Importance for nature conservation. Sites which contain the best examples of London’s habitats, which contain rare species, rare assemblages of species, important populations of species or which are of particular significance within large areas of otherwise heavily built up London. They have the highest priority for protection. (There are 5 sites in Ealing).

6.3.2 Sites of Borough importance for nature conservation. These area the sites which are important in a Borough perspective; damage to these sites would mean a significant loss to the Borough. They are divided into two grades of their quality in terms of their wildlife and value to people. (There are 17 Grade I and 16 Grade II sites in Ealing).

6.3.3 Sites of Local Importance for nature conservation. These sites are areas, which are or may be of particular value to nearby residents or schools. The sites may already be used by schools for nature study or be run by management committees composed mainly of local residents. Local sites are particularly important in areas otherwise deficient of nearby wildlife sites. (There are 23 Sites in Ealing).

Some of the 33 sites, not designated in the LEU Handbook, are individual areas within a ‘designated’ site such as the Brent River Park North Site 6 in the Handbook, which comprises 13 separate sites identified in the UDP and by the Ealing Rangers. These sites are identified with the letters A to M on Map 9. These sites lie close to the River Brent and as a whole have been designated as an area of Borough Wide Interest Grade I.

The Ealing Rangers have also identified other sites, which are either existing sites of nature conservation such as Carr Road (Site 62), designated a Site of Local Nature Conservation in the UDP or which are managed for nature conservation such as Marnham Fields (Site 52A).

Sites in Parks and Open Spaces The London Ecology Unit’s Handbook identified and designated 26 Sites in parks and open spaces as follows:

¾ 2 sites are of Metropolitan Importance ¾ 9 of Grade I Borough Importance ¾ 5 of Grade II Borough Importance ¾ 10 of Local Importance.

The remaining 27 ecological sites in parks and open spaces, were not designated in the Handbook, although an updated survey may well find that these sites are now worthy of designation.

- 54 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing

The importance the council places on sites of nature conservation in the borough and the level of protection and type of management it employs is indicated in the designations and policies of the Unitary Development Plan (Adopted August 1995). The UDP designates nature conservation sites differently to the LEU, although the LEU document was used as the basis for the designations. UDP designations are as follows:

¾ Metropolitan Site of Nature Conservation (SSSI, LNR and SMI) ¾ Sites of Local Nature Conservation (SLNC) ¾ Nature Conservation Management Areas (NCMA).

The UDP has designated the following 29 sites in parks and open spaces:

¾ 1 Local Nature Reserve (LNR) ¾ 1 Site of Metropolitan Interest (SMI) ¾ 19 Sites of Local Nature Conservation (SLNC) ¾ 9 Nature Conservation Management Areas

Perivale Wood is designated as a LNR and SMI site by the UDP and is designated in the LEU Handbook as being of Metropolitan Importance. Horsenden Hill also designated by the Handbook as being of Metropolitan importance is designated as a management area in the UDP. 8 out of 19 SLNC sites are designated in the Handbook, however, surveys would have to be carried out to assess their quality. Of the 8 designated, 4 are of local Importance, 3 are of Grade I Borough Importance and one is of Grade II Borough Importance.

6.4 Deficiency Areas of nature conservation site deficiency identified in the UDP are largely based on the LEU Handbook assessment. The Handbook identifies a deficiency of sites in the south east region of the Borough, (shown in the Handbook (Fig. 96) as areas more than 1 kilometre distance from accessible Metropolitan or Borough sites or site of equivalent quality in neighbouring boroughs). This is still the case, probably due to the lack of large parks or open spaces where areas can be separated and managed specifically for nature conservation.

A considerable area of Southall is not classed as an area of deficiency due to its proximity to the Canal, which provides an invaluable water habitat. However, the Canal provides limited variety in experiencing the natural world and other nature conservation sites in the area are very small and therefore the UDP shows a deficiency in this area. Opportunities will be taken to develop areas along the canal banks, to increase variety and diversity of the wildlife and access to nature. The Southall Park nature conservation area is being developed, however, has to be surveyed to assess the quality of this site and how well it contributes to the nature conservation in this area.

A priority for further survey work is East Acton (Site 2A) which is designated an SLNC in the UDP but could be classed to be of borough importance. The site is also situated in the area where a district park is proposed covering Acton Park, cricket ground, sports fields and Trinity Way Open Space in Acton. If the site were of Borough wide interest, this would change the area of deficiency in this area as shown on Map 9. Sites such as Southall Park Nature Conservation area (Site 66), Acton Cemetery (Site 1), Acton Park

- 55 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing

(Site 2) or Heathfield Nature Gardens (Site 29) will also be considered as a priority for improvement in order to raise their status in these areas of deficiency.

One of the key challenges for the future is to increase the variety and extent of nature conservation areas within the Borough, by introducing new areas into existing formal parks, extending existing sites and changing management practices.

6.5 Overall Objectives The current draft Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), the LA21 Community Document and the Council’s Response (1998) provide guidelines and give recommendations on how nature conservation should be approached throughout the Borough. The recommendations include the overall approach to nature conservation, detailed guidelines for habitat types and site specific recommendations.

6.5.1 LA21 recommendations for nature conservation

¾ The Borough needs a Nature Conservation strategy and Bio-diversity Action Plan with policies and processes, which enhance, protect and preserve nature conservation value and bio-diversity.

¾ Opportunities should be taken to make more sites accessible to the public.

¾ Management plans, which follow the LA21 principles, should be put into practice.

¾ Efforts should be made to involve the community and provide educational opportunities and information.

6.6 A Summary of the London Borough of Ealing’s Bio-diversity Action Plans.

6.6.1 Ten Habitat Action Plans

Acid Grassland Acid grassland occurs on acid rocks such as sandstones and superficial deposits such as sand, gravel and peat. In Ealing all sites are on free-draining gravel substrates, often as patches in larger areas of neutral grassland. The characteristic indicator plants of these patches are sheep's sorrel and fescues. Harebell also occurs on at least one site. Although in Ealing the habitat is fragmented and unlikely to be of national importance, these small fragments provide an important refuge for some calcifugous species of plants that are otherwise not found in the Borough. The area of acid grassland in Ealing is 2 hectares, 0.1% of London’s resource, and is threatened by direct loss (through intensification of usage or development), and inappropriate management (such as damage from pesticide and fertiliser and the spread of invasive plant and animal species). It is vital to ensure that all sites are managed under regimes that maintain grazing or mowing pressure and without any spraying or the addition of fertiliser or other nutrients.

Allotments Covering around 40 hectares of land within the borough, allotments provide sheltered havens for a range of wildlife including hedgehogs, robins and thrushes. There are about

- 56 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing

65 sites currently used for allotments, 46 of which are managed by the Council and 23 by charities or allotment associations. The distribution of allotments in Ealing is uneven, with a shortage in Acton and more in Greenford. Allotments are effected by the threat of development, the spread of invasive plant and animal species, the use of pesticides, lack of resources and possible lack of knowledge about wildlife gardening. The Council, in partnership with a range of organisations has developed a Sustainable Allotment Strategy with a series of short, medium and long term targets. These incorporate the aims of protecting of key species present on allotment land, increasing the amount of land available for allotments in the Acton Area, encouraging wildlife friendly plots (including use green manures and natural insecticides, composting and recycling water), and creating new ponds and native (prickly) hedges.

Amenity Grassland Ealing has many amenity grassland sites (including formal parks, golf courses, sports pitches, recreation areas and commons). The Amenity grassland plan looks at all features on sites that are Public Open Space and have been set aside for community use. Amenity grassland sites are distributed throughout the Borough and occupy nearly 300 hectares. These sites are affected by the threat of development to buildings, littering, vandalism, and erosion due to heavy usage amongst many things. Although many amenity grassland sites are managed intensively at present, the Parks and Countryside Service has begun to de-formalise some sites by planting hedges or allowing strips of grassland to grow long. They plan to continue these schemes thus helping to increase the wildlife value of many formal parks and open spaces. There is also a commitment to ensuring that planning officers are aware that all open space has a nature conservation value, simply because it is green open space, thus leading to a ‘no loss’ policy of all Public Open Spaces.

‘Education’ Land This refers to the parcels of land owned or managed by schools, colleges or universities. Mostly it is managed as mown grassland and used for sports facilities, but there are often ornamental areas close to school entrances, and many schools now have wildlife areas. Land holdings are distributed fairly evenly over the well-populated parts of the Borough. The land is effected by factors such as the pressure from daily use by children, a dual purpose of grounds (ie: sport, recreation and wildlife), being a non- priority financially and through OFSTED and pressure from developments such as off-street car parking. The Action Plan objectives are to promote and educate people about the benefits of increasing biodiversity and to create a healthier atmosphere for children in school grounds through Education Project weeks and INSET sessions run by the Parks and Countryside Service. It also hopes to encourage diversification of wildlife habitats and keep as much school ground as possible free from development.

Hedgerows Ealing retains only a few hedgerows from its original farmland system, mostly around Horsenden Hill and in the north-west of the borough. Not only are they an invaluable corridor for much wildlife, but they provide a visual variety to an otherwise flat landscape and increase the habitat diversity of the grasslands where they are found. The pressures of road widening and neglect (due to dying out or felling with no replacement, or being excessively/badly cut) affect them. Objectives for Ealing’s hedgerows are to ensure the length is retained or increased (included gapping up and new planting at suitable sites),

- 57 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing that appropriate management is carried out on new and old hedges, and important hedges are designated as locally important.

Neutral and Marshy Grassland Neutral grasslands are mostly found within enclosed field systems on moist mineral soils with a pH of between 5 and 6.5 and are rich in biodiversity. Neutral Grassland in Ealing occupies around 300 hectares and Horsenden Hill, Islip Manor and Yeading Brook Fields are among the most important sites in London. Factors affecting these sites include loss through agricultural improvement and a lack of traditional management leading to spread of invasive species and damage of the site. The habitats are also fragmented and vulnerable to development pressures. A number of sites now benefit from being included in the Countryside Stewardship Scheme and targets are to prevent further loss of species through securing traditional management on remaining sites and creating/restoring/extending other appropriate sites.

Ponds Throughout Ealing a network of ponds of varied design, size and nature create important links for many fauna species such as dragonflies. They are found in the borough in most school grounds, many parks and open spaces, and probably hundreds of private back gardens. Sadly some ponds in the borough have been lost (ie: Fox Wood LNR, Norwood Green and Jubilee Meadow) but the trend has tended towards many new pond areas being created (ie: Acton Park Lodge, Blondin Park Wildlife Area, Trumpers Field and many in gardens and school grounds). These vary in age and quality, unfortunately many suffer from pollution due to surface runoff from roads, dumping and littering. Apart from declines in water quality, other problems include the spread of invasive species, loss and fragmentation of pond network due to development, under-management leading to natural succession, and possible reduced water levels due to drought and climate change. The aim of the Action Plan is to minimise these problems by promoting improved management by raising public awareness and initiating a scheme of restoration and creation throughout the borough. A survey of private garden ponds is also planned.

Reed Beds Reed beds are nationally and locally very rare. In Ealing there is about 2-3 ha of mostly recently created sites which lie mainly within Sites for Nature Conservation. Water authorities are beginning to accept them as an approved way of cleaning polluted water and the number of beds in Ealing are increasing. Pressures on existing beds include under management (leading to siltation, scrub and woodland encroachment), drainage, disturbance and pollution. The action is to continue links with the water authorities to promote further use of reed beds for filtration and promote good management of the existing beds (such as removal of sediments, cutting on a cycle, coppicing willows, erecting signage and implementing a bird and dragonfly monitoring programme).

Rivers, Streams and Canals Open water in Ealing occupies an area of approximately 90 hectares. Running water and canals are mainly distributed in the north west of Ealing with the River Brent as the main flowing water. Into this Costons Brook and a few minor streams run and much of the adjacent land forms the Brent River Park that is managed for its nature conservation value. Other streams of note are the Boundary Stream and Yeading Brook, both supporting a host of aquatic and marginal plants. There are also two branches of the

- 58 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing

Grand Union Canal. One of these joins and incorporates part of the River Brent. All of the above provide wild life corridors and valuable flora and fauna assemblages. The quality of running water in the Borough has recently begun to improve, however, the River Brent is still subject to the consequences of pollution such as road run-off and the connection of washing machines etc. into an old plumbing system which link directly with the River Brent. Canalisation and culverting has occurred in sections of the River Brent, but co-operation between Ealing Parks and Countryside Service and the Environment Agency allows continuing improvements to enhance wildlife habitats. Other targets include the control of invasive plant and animal species (such as giant hogweed) and minimise possible threats from development and disturbance of land adjacent to the water bodies (including for recreation). The plan also works with the Black Poplar and Water Vole Species Action Plans.

Woodland (including Scrub). Ealing has a number of woodlands covering the whole spectrum of ancient (at least 400 years old), secondary, recent and wet although they are fragmented through the borough they cover 70ha+. The majority lie in the north of Ealing and lie with in conservation areas. Lack of management has resulted in a loss of understorey (as has visitor pressure) and a growth of invasive species in some sites. Development pressure is again high. Most sites have a current management plan (or one is being compiled) to ensure appropriate management and wildlife monitoring are initiated and continued and no woodlands are lost. The aim is also to increase borough woodland area by planting and regenerating suitable habitats (where other valuable habitat will not be lost and previously wooded areas) with native species. Community involvement will be paramount.

6.6.2 Four Habitat Statements:

Arable Land Arable land is here taken to be land ploughed or otherwise cultivated and seeded either for agricultural crops or for nature conservation. Arable land where cereal crops are grown for wildlife provides a rich winter food source for skylarks and a range of other granivorous birds including finches, buntings and sparrows. All of these groups have shown alarming population declines in recent years. Ploughing creates a temporary feeding habitat for wagtails and migrant birds like wheatears and is attractive to lapwings which also nest on open areas provided disturbance is minimal. There has been a gradual loss of farmland in Ealing this century with no actively farmed arable land now remaining. Small amounts of land recently set aside as arable land have been ploughed, seeded with cereals and cornfield mixes for nature conservation purposes. Ealing now contains a number of parcels of this arable land, usually created to add diversity within Nature Conservation Management Areas, they can be found at Glade Lane Canalside Park, Rockware Field at Horsenden Hill, Fitzherbert Walk by the River Brent in Hanwell. The two main targets are to double the present area managed as arable land for nature conservation (without compromising areas managed as neutral grassland) and to sustain breeding populations of grey partridges, yellowhammers, and tree sparrows in Ealing.

Health land For the purpose of this statement Health land is defined as that surrounding hospitals, hospices, Children’s and residential homes, clinics and surgeries. Very little information is available concerning area or management. Hospices and homes often have gardens that

- 59 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing provide areas of relaxation. Hospitals will often have some green open space. These grounds are likely to be maintained independently of the Council. The three main factors threatening the wildlife value of this land are a loss of open space to development, the use of chemicals to control pests and weeds, and a probable lack of consideration for nature conservation maintenance regimes. To overcome these attempts should be made to encourage wildlife sympathetic grounds maintenance where possible and Social Services, Local Health Authority and Hospital Management should be made aware of the Council’s Bio Diversity plans.

Private Gardens Gardens represent an enormous potential for wildlife exploitation, in London there are estimated to be 30000ha of gardens compared with 17000ha of public open space. However the very fact that this statement is about private gardens means the direct impact we can have on their management is limited. Threats for wildlife include the fact that many front gardens have been given over to hard standing for car parking, also that modern housing tends to be high density with subsequent reduction of garden size. Also TV gardening programmes may have a negative impact towards minimalist gardening and excessive use of chemicals in gardening. The aims from this action plan are to identify extent of private garden habitat in Ealing, raise awareness of the importance of gardens for wildlife (through articles, newsletters, events such as countryside weekend, and a borough-wide private garden survey) and influence residents’ impact on gardens.

Railway Land Railway land provides an excellent corridor for wildlife in Ealing, with much of the vegetation undisturbed. 14 key areas of railway land have been identified as the most important, or potentially important, for wildlife with the most interesting stretches in the east of the borough. The land consists of corridors of vegetation (often broken up by gaps of hard surface) and also old structures such as bridges, tunnels and station walls that make excellent habitats for ferns and mosses as well as bats. The vegetation that develops is a mosaic of trees, bushes and grasses, the proportions depending on the management and the substrate. Track bedding can be of a variety of substrates that can provide opportunities for plants normally associated with other habitat types. For example, several species of normally chalk loving plants grow on former rail land near Hill Rise. The priority for the current management of railway land is to ensure track safety. As a national policy for Railtrack, land is managed with a view to maintaining or enhancing the lands value to nature, but in practice this may need a more proactive approach (ie: removal of sycamore and Japanese Knotweed, leaving dead wood on site as habitat piles, installing bird/bat/hedgehog boxes). Links should be made to encourage these practices and also possibly gain permission for Council management of specific areas.

6.6.3 Eleven Species Action Plans Bats Bats are the only mammals capable of true flight. Of over 1000 species world wide, 16 are resident in the UK, 8 in London and 5 species recorded in Ealing (2 pipistrelle species, noctule, serotine and brown long-eared), although there are likely to be more. All are legally protected. Little is known about the current status of most species nationally and locally, but evidence points towards massive declines in most species. Only 2 roosts have been recorded in Ealing since the 1980s (both pipistrelle species), with only 3 other possible roosts recorded. However, bats have been observed feeding all over the Borough

- 60 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing suggesting more roosts are present. The first aim is to increase knowledge of the distribution, population and species of bat within Ealing by surveying and monitoring. Importantly another aim is to raise awareness of bats specialised requirements and habits with key audiences in the Borough such as land managers, tree contractors and planners. Finally the plan aims to protect and create suitable feeding habitats, roost sites and commuting routes for bats in Ealing.

Birds of Prey (Red Kite, Sparrowhawk, Buzzard, Kestrel, Hobby, Peregrine) Birds of prey are magnificently adapted and impressive predators at the top of the food chain. The status of most species in Ealing is dependent on factors outside the Borough (such as deliberate persecution by gamekeepers and recovery from the persistent chemical residues mainly from organochlorines used in 1950’s agriculture) although real threats in the borough exist such as deliberate persecution from poachers. At present sparrowhawks and kestrels nest reasonably commonly in suitable sites throughout the Borough. Hobbys also nest but are restricted to the west of the Borough and to larger areas of suitable open space. The other species do not yet nest, but buzzards are occasionally seen and are likely to re-colonise naturally as they re-occupy their historic range prior to persecution. Peregrines are also recovering from pesticide induced range contraction and have just re-colonised London. It is likely that nesting could be encouraged in Ealing by the provision of suitable safe nesting sites. (Prey, in the form of feral pigeons, is already abundant!) red kites, spreading from re-introduction centres in the Chilterns, are likely also to occur in Ealing as the population expands, and could well nest in suitable large areas of open space in the west of the Borough. The objectives for Birds of Prey in Ealing are to ensure that birds and their nests are protected (through preventing illegal killing or trapping etc.) and to provide and maintain suitable habitats and nest sites (such as installing nest boxes).

Black Poplar The native black poplar Populus nigra sp. betulifolia is nationally rare and not to be confused with the introduced Italian black poplar and hybrids which easily cross-pollinate and look almost the same. Characterised as they get older by their large, often leaning appearance with massively arching down curved branches and heavily burred trunks means their biggest threat is from felling for safety as most identified trees in the borough are isolated street trees. Usually found in wet areas typically along side streams and rivers, they are effected by land drainage. There are only a handful of trees known in the borough but there may be some that have not been noticed or reported. The aim is to establish the native trees distribution in Ealing and initiate regeneration through nurseries, planting and management of suitable habitats in partnership with the National and London Black Poplar Working Groups.

Butterflies Butterflies are insects belonging to the order Lepidoptera, meaning scale-wing. Most are found living in woodland, grassland, heathland and hedgerow habitats. Adult butterflies feed on nectar from flowering plants or honeydew secreted by aphids. Most eggs are laid on a single plant type. Since 1986, three species have become extinct in the Hertfordshire and Middlesex area, of which Ealing is a part (wood white, pearl bordered fritillary, high brown fritillary). Two have no known colony (dark green fritillary, silver washed fritillary) and two more have only one remaining colony (small blue, Duke of Burgundy). In Ealing, Wall brown, green hairstreak and brown hairstreak are probably now extinct.

- 61 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing

About 22 species of butterfly can be found in different habitats throughout Ealing. Their threats are a loss of suitable habitat, the use of herbicides and insecticides and a fragmentation and isolation of populations. The actions proposed for butterflies in Ealing is to initiate regular monitoring transects (using standardised methods) and ensure appropriate habitat management and enhancements are initiated. (These include: phasing out the use of insecticides/herbicides; creating more grassed/wildflower meadows in all Parks and Open spaces; and where possible linking suitable habitats by planting new hedgerows).

Finches, Buntings and Sparrows (House sparrow, tree sparrow, linnet, bullfinch, yellowhammer) It is easiest to consider the five species of seed-eating birds grouped under this action plan together, even though their population trends and current status in Ealing differ markedly, the possible actions under this plan would appear to be common to all species. House sparrows are still common breeding birds in Ealing, but in noticeably smaller numbers. Tree sparrows were rare breeding birds in Ealing until perhaps the 1980's but are now no longer found at all in the Borough. Linnets are common breeding birds in the major open areas of Ealing and numbers are thought to be relatively stable. Bullfinches are less common breeding birds in Ealing and numbers have declined, but starting rather later than the national trend. Yellowhammers are long lost as breeding birds in Ealing, but are still present on farmland to the west. It is unlikely that actions within the Borough will be effective unless actions on farmland improve the availability of grain or weed seeds more generally. Targets include a feasibility study for change to low-intensity natural grazing using primitive horses and cattle on Council-owned meadow sites currently cropped by machine.

Mistletoe Mistletoe is a woody evergreen parasite that grows on deciduous trees (it also hosts four species of mistletoe-dependant insects). Host trees favoured by mistletoe are lime and members of the Rosaceae family including hawthorn, whitebeam, rowan and especially apple. There are various mystical powers and medicinal properties associated with mistletoe, including the ability to provide fertility. Mistletoe seems to have adapted to man made habitats such as parks, gardens, orchards and linear tree features such as hedgerows, waterside and roadside trees. However the species is scarce in the Greater London area. Currently it would appear that there are only a small number of mistletoe populations within Ealing. There are however numerous trees and habitats which would appear suited to the species. The existence and extent of previous surveys within the borough is currently not known, so an initial target is to collate any existing data on mistletoe within the LBE, then protect populations discovered and restore populations where mistletoe was or is likely to have been present. Introduction of mistletoe at suitable sites is also planned and will be monitored.

Mute Swan Mute swans are large and conspicuous birds that attract attention and are valued by people who see them swimming along our waterways or flying with the characteristic sound of their wings. Following the introduction of the ban on the use of lead fishing weights in 1987, the mute swan population has recovered dramatically on the River Thames, and the number of territories in Ealing has increased. In Ealing, sites along the Grand Union Canal including ponds and to a lesser extent the River Brent are utilised by

- 62 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing this species, although there are still apparently suitable sites in the Brent Valley which are not occupied, including one fishing lake. Disturbance either to the birds or to the nest site is probably the main factor determining breeding success resolved by involving local people in watching over nest sites, and regular checks by Rangers. Angling is an indirect threat because of the risk of birds swallowing or becoming entangled in fishing tackle. Working with the Environment Agency and British Waterways to conserve and protect existing sites and restore and create appropriate features such as islands may provide new nest sites. Oil pollution in the River Brent regularly affects swans on Fitzherbert Walk and may prevent the establishment of a breeding pair at that location.

Slow worms Slow worms are often mistaken for snakes because there is a superficial resemblance; however slow worms are in fact lizards that have lost their legs during the evolutionary process. They are a legally protected species. A 1990- study showed populations of slow worms on the Guinness estate in the east of the borough, due to urban development these slow worms were relocated to Blondin Nature Area, there are also historical records of two populations of slow worms in the Perivale area. An initial action is to Begin comprehensive population distribution survey for the whole borough and ensure beneficial management of those sites they are found to be present on. Decreased and fragmented populations in the borough are due to habitat loss and degradation as well as directly through pesticide poisoning and predation. Population growth will be encouraged through habitat enhancements on appropriate sites and the encouragement of reduced use of pesticides by gardeners, allotment holders and grounds maintenance contractors.

Song Thrush Song thrushes, although partial migrants, are susceptible to cold winters and are slow to recover numbers after setbacks. Climatic factors are thought to be responsible for the dramatic decline since 1982. Song Thrushes are still found as breeding birds in all suitable major open spaces in Ealing but are often absent from smaller open spaces and gardens where they formerly nested. In winter, song thrushes used to roost in scrub patches at many locations in the Borough. Song Thrushes may be particularly vulnerable to decreases in the abundance of land molluscs (slugs and snails) associated with the use of molluscicides (such as slug pellets) which has become widespread in gardens and allotments. This plan aims to promote the plight of song thrushes and the reduction or stoppage of the use of molluscicides wherever possible in the borough, and to encourage organic methods of gardening.

Swallows Swallows are summer visitors to Europe, relying on a plentiful supply of insects in areas of open countryside usually associated in the breeding season with the presence of grazing animals and water bodies. Suitable buildings or structures are also necessary for nest sites. In Ealing there is a small colony inside the Borough boundary near Osterley and birds breeding just outside the Borough regularly feed at Yeading Valley Park and Islip Manor Fields. Nesting occasionally occurs in both Northolt and Hanwell. Past loss of open space to built development has been the main factor resulting in swallows now nesting only on the western edges of the Borough. The low number of sites in Ealing with grazing animals means that swallows are absent from many open spaces which might otherwise be suitable. To overcome this the Council aims to introduce low-intensity

- 63 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing natural grazing schemes on suitable meadow sites and create or maintain ponds on a wide range of sites, in partnership with landowners and local people.

Water Vole Water voles are small mammals living in colonies close to still and moving waterways, especially those with earth or sandy banks, and are also a legally protected species. Here they form burrows for both nesting and refuge. Water voles feed mainly on grass, but also eat fruit, roots and bark. In Ealing watercourses like the River Brent still contain some populations of water vole but they are isolated and fragmented. This and other sites within Ealing have the potential to sustain increased numbers. The initial aim is again to collate existing any existing data on water voles and their habitats within the LBE. Also planned is habitat enhancements of degraded sites such as the restoration of vegetated bankside corridors, and raising awareness of water voles and their habitats within the local community. If appropriate, research will be commissioned into the impact of mink on water vole populations in Ealing.

6.6.4 Two Species Statements

Dyers Greenweed A small shrub growing from 20 - 50cm related to gorse but lacking the spines typical of the genus. Although named ‘Dyers Greenweed’ the dye produced from the flower stems was in fact yellow. Nationally it is rare, and in the Greater London area considered extremely rare, the only known site in the Ealing area is Horsenden Hill. It prefers rough, lightly grazed grassland with poor soil. This statement aims to increase public awareness by including this species on nature / botany walks within the Enjoy Ealing Programme. It also encourages sympathetic management of suitable sites including prevention of scrub encroachment, control of bramble, and protection from human encroachment (public sites) by fencing.

Wild Service Tree The wild service tree is one of the least known native trees of the mountain ash family. It usually spreads by suckers, and seedlings have rarely been found. Though once a common tree in the U.K. (used for many things including musical instruments) they are much less common today as their natural habitat of ancient woodland has been destroyed or converted to other uses. Their fruits were a staple diet during Neolithic times, and were still sold in markets during the 1850’s. It is uncommon in greater London and is only known to be naturally occurring on two sites in Ealing, Horsenden Hill and Grove Farm. There have however been recent plantings of standards in Acton Park. The statement identifies the need to increase public awareness by including the wild service tree in guided walks on woodland management, and also encourage sympathetic management of suitable woodlands, for example: thin out other competing trees and shrubs so that naturally regenerating saplings have a good chance of survival.

6.6.5 Recommendations

Further investigation and Monitoring. Existing sites in key areas such as Southall Park Nature Conservation Area, East Acton (Site 2A – SLNC), Acton Cemetery, Acton Park and Heathfield Nature Gardens, will be surveyed to assess their nature conservation value or potential. Monitoring of the sites

- 64 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing should be an ongoing task. This will ensure that the sites are managed in such a way that their nature conservation value is increased or remains constant with the intention that these areas will acquire higher status, be of greater benefit to the Borough and afford greater protection.

Where appropriate the sites that are designated in the UDP as nature conservation management sites will be upgraded to a higher nature conservation status. Some management sites where existing uses such as sports take place, can be managed to enhance nature conservation though are unlikely to reach a recognised standard.

The Metropolitan Open Land designation will be extended to cover adjacent areas of nature conservation interest where it is not possible to give them protection under a higher nature conservation designation such as Brent Meadow and Dormer’s Mill Pond.

The Ealing Rangers have made several recommendations for potential Sites of Nature Conservation, Local Nature Reserves and Nature Conservation Management areas, which have been selected on their merits in relation to nature conservation:

SLNC (OL21) Bridge Farm Open Space (Site 52A) Islip Manor Park (Site 33)

SMI (OL20) Litten Nature Reserve (Site 36) (Not in a Park) Paradise Fields (Site 31A)

NCMA (OL22) Greenford Lagoons (Site 52B) Northolt Manor (Site 42) Lime Trees Park (Site 69)

In the BAP Greenford Island is also recommended for Local Nature Reserve status.

Target Areas With limited resources, key areas should be targeted such as Southall and more importantly the Acton area where there is a deficiency. Management regimes for existing parks and open spaces will be reconsidered to see if there is potential to introduce nature conservation areas or practices which will enhance nature conservation value and biodiversity. Parks which could be targeted in this way include Acton Park, Western Road Open Space, Manor House Grounds, Bixley Fields, Southall Park, Southall Recreation Ground, Ealing Common, Heathfield Gardens, Springfield Gardens, Woodlands, Mill Hill Park, Southfields Recreation ground, South Park, North Acton Playing Fields and Trinity Way.

Development When considering the potential development of a site, consideration will be given to the introduction of appropriate habitat types to improve diversity and increase nature conservation value following the recommendations in the BAP. Development, which can include the design of whole new areas of habitat, will be considered along with the

- 65 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing inclusion of elements, such as using hedges on boundaries instead of fences, and ponds with areas which are inaccessible to the public. Ceasing opportunities for developing nature conservation areas will be taken where appropriate, such as replacing redundant facilities with nature conservation areas. This, however, needs to consider the public perception for example replacing old rose beds with meadow grass may not be appropriate in the centre of a park where as replacing a redundant building at the edge of a park may be seen as a positive development. The neatness, information and explanation of any nature conservation development will enable sites to be perceived as assets to a park, not as neglected areas.

Management Management plans which include management practices that promote nature conservation, will be produced for every P&CS managed park. Simple changes such as not using herbicide at the base of hedges or managing grasslands as meadows can greatly increase biodiversity. However, any changes in management must consider visual impact and any potential detrimental effect on the public’s perceptions of safety. The common public perception that nature areas are unkempt and neglected is a serious, if unfounded, threat to the success of parks and management techniques need to be adapted where necessary to ensure areas are kept clean and tidy. This could mean trimming wildlife hedges to keep them below eye level, creating Spring meadow rather than Summer meadow in areas which are heavily used in the Summer months or ensuring edges of long grass and paths are maintained to look neat while allowing wildlife to flourish.

Education The Council’s commitment to nature conservation needs to be communicated effectively to the public. Involving the public and creating public support for the nature conservation ‘cause’ will help protect nature areas, will encourage support for the creation of more nature areas and will in return, increase the spread of benefit to a wider range of people. Education can take the form of information on site to explain the wildlife value of an area, creating nature trails with associated leaflets for visitors or creating volunteering opportunities for practical involvement in nature conservation management.

Quality and Diversity Action Plans will be produced for each park as a first step in considering ways of improving the quality and biodiversity in the open spaces of the Borough. Specific recommendations in the BAP need to be considered – such as the need to increase the amount of woodland over the Borough where other valuable habitat will not be lost. This may be possible in areas of amenity grassland, which could be managed to create new habitats and establish wildlife corridors. However, any improvements in nature conservation value have to be balanced with the requirement for leisure, recreation and education opportunities.

Other opportunities considered in the Action Plans will be the creation of wildlife ponds, reedbeds, wildflower meadows, native species hedgerows and the introduction of bird and bat boxes where appropriate. In very formal parks, which are heavily used and maybe have little space, such as small local parks near town centres, plants will be introduced with wildlife in mind. Ornamental plants selected for these locations will include nectar rich plants to attract butterflies and other insects and plants that produce

- 66 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 6 – Wildlife and Nature Conservation in Ealing fruit such as berries and nuts to provide an important food source for birds and small mammals.

Action plans for individual parks and open spaces will consider:

¾ The potential for introducing new wildlife habitats ¾ The potential for extending existing wildlife habitats ¾ The need to protect existing wildlife habitats

6.6.6 Identifying opportunities for site development for nature conservation

Nature conservation and wildlife should be recognised when changes in management are considered for any park or open space. It is everyone’s right to be able to experience nature conservation, at the same time it must be recognised that many people only see parks as places for sports and may resent areas of land being “taken out of the park” for nature conservation.

To ensure that improvements to the wildlife value of a site are appropriate a number of questions should be asked:

¾ What is the primary role of the site? e.g sports, formal park, etc. This primary function must be safeguarded and the main use of resources should be invested in the primary role. ¾ What do the users value about the park at present? Has any site specific consultation taken place? ¾ Is there an area of the park, which is not used formally or informally at present? ¾ Is there already a wildlife site in the park? ¾ Is this valued by the community? i.e. Is it community lead? Is the site actively managed/tidy/ Is there on site signage or interpretation? ¾ Does the planned change in management have an ongoing management/action plan and funding? ¾ Has the proposed work been risk assessed ? ¾ Management changes to the park to enhance the nature conservation value without developing a defined area for nature conservation. ¾ If a wildlife site is not appropriate are there alternative methods of improving the bio- diversity of a site? ¾ Is there scope to change the present planting scheme to improve the wildlife value of the park? e.g. native trees, plants that provide a good nectar source, differential cutting of grassland areas.. ¾ When features are planted on a site can native species be used? e.g. Hawthorn hedges. ¾ New meadow areas in formal parks should have defined areas and be part of the whole park management. It is important that these areas are a valued and integrated part of the park.

The Action Plans recommendations will be implemented where possible and appropriate, through changes in management or development. Any changes in management or the creation of new nature areas will be carried out with public support and early communication with park users about any proposed changes is essential.

- 67 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 7 – Specialist Areas

7 SPECIALIST AREAS

7.1 Trees in parks and open spaces

A major element of Ealing’s claim to being a green borough are the numerous mature trees which abound in its parks, open spaces and streets. It is easy to take such a valuable resource for granted and it is important that a component of the P&C strategy considers the management of trees in our parks.

7.1.1 Policy The Council has formerly adopted five clear policies for trees within the Borough:

¾ The existing tree resource shall be protected and enhanced for the future.

¾ That all species being planted in areas managed for nature conservation be of native species appropriate to the specific environment e.g. alders and willow adjacent to rivers; oak and lime on heavy clay soils etc

¾ That species planted adjacent to sites managed for nature conservation be of native species unless no appropriate native tree is available, and only then of non-invasive species;

¾ That the ‘backbone’ planting within parks should be of native trees and their cultivars, and that non invasive exotic species should be used in moderation to enhance the visual interest and aesthetic appeal of the park. Exotics should be used in those locations were the public should reasonably expect to see the huge cultural history of British plant collections from around the world reflected, such as formal parks and Hanger Hill Arboretum.

¾ That wherever adequate space provides for successful planting of native trees in streets that the opportunity be taken, so long as it will not adversely affect the safety and enjoyment of adjacent people and their property, or incur unreasonable expense on the council.

In addition to these the Council adopted a Borough Forest Strategy (BFS) in 1993, which outlined the need to protect the whole urban tree ‘landscape’ both in the public and private sector. In a borough like Ealing with large areas of residential gardens dissected by numerous railways with large tree covered embankments, the great mass of the ‘treescape’ is in private ownership. Section 9.9 of the BFS also highlighted the importance of using native British species in most circumstances, allowing local native species to regenerate naturally where appropriate seed trees exist and only selecting non native trees for more ornamental locations within formal parks but with due regard to their wildlife value.

Most recently The Council’s Response to the Borough’s LA21 Community Document, ‘Lets Improve our Quality of Life’ reaffirms much of the above in the section on Natural Environment and Biodiversity.

- 68 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 7 – Specialist Areas

In addition the Adopted Unitary Development Plan outlines the planning case for tree retention and protection within the broader landscape and on development sites especially where they adjoin public open space.

Within these broad policy objectives the Parks and Countryside Service has sought to manage its existing tree stock and seek opportunities to plant new trees for future generations to enjoy. The enthusiasm both for tree preservation and new planting within parks while laudable has not always been in the best interest of landscape value, tree health, and the ability of neighbouring residents to enjoy their property. Clearly there is a need to establish the parameters for the maintenance of existing trees and future tree planting.

Management Objective: To protect and enhance existing trees in parks and open spaces by undertaking planned, specialist inspection and maintenance, actively managing existing woodlands and planting additional trees in formal parks, open spaces and housing sites, especially as integral part of improvement projects.

7.1.2 Policies for maintenance of existing trees

i. Existing trees represent a precious resource for the residents of the Borough and require appropriate protection, care and management ii. There will be a presumption against removal or heavy pruning of any mature trees unless: ¾ there are clear health and safety reasons; ¾ there is proven structural damage to adjoining property which cannot be contained by other cost effective solutions; ¾ there is an overriding nature conservation requirement to remove invasive exotic trees (such as Sycamore) in or immediately adjacent to areas managed for nature conservation. The removal of non invasive exotic trees in these areas will only be undertaken following due consideration of the amenity, landscape and heritage value of the trees, and/or their demonstrable negative effect on the wildlife value of the site. ¾ Where appropriate, local consultation/prior notification will be undertaken before substantial trees or quantity of smaller trees are removed. ¾ Coppicing should be acknowledged as an appropriate method of tree management in appropriate locations, especially as part of woodland management. iii. A rolling programme of tree inspections, undertaken by a qualified arboriculturalist, park by park, will be introduced as of April 2002. iv. Established trees will be recorded onto the Council’s computerised tree data base, this will build into a complete asset management register for trees in parks over the next six years. v. Essential health and safety works will be undertaken following the inspections. vi. As a result reactive maintenance will be reduced and only undertaken for health and safety reason or to abate a public nuisance. vii. The Service will rely on the expert advice of the Council’s arboricultural section to advise them on whether works are necessary or not.

- 69 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 7 – Specialist Areas viii. In areas that pose no threat to public safety, and will not impact negatively onto public amenity, dead and decayed trees will be left standing to provide wildlife habitat. ix. In areas managed for nature conservation fallen timber will either be left or will be stacked into piles to provide habitat for wildlife. x. Ancient ‘veteran’ trees will be given special consideration due to their very high wildlife value, and retained wherever possible; even if that requires the exclusion of the public through fencing on health and safety grounds. xi. Willows planted alongside water courses will be subject to routine pollarding on a rolling programme to prolong their natural life spans and so increase their wildlife value in old age. xii. Mature hedgerows are an important wildlife habitat and will be retained and managed appropriately.

7.1.3 Policies for planting new trees

i. Tree planting is important for many reasons: ¾ Trees are universally popular and all public consultation on the subject shows overwhelming desire for trees in their landscape, especially if they are in parks and away from their houses. ¾ Trees take a long time to establish and need to be planted now to provide for future generations. ¾ Trees are an important wildlife habitat ¾ Natural tree regeneration is very limited in urban parks and open spaces. ¾ Tree planting is a strand in the Boroughs strategy to reduce carbon dioxide, one of the major green house gases. ¾ Trees are effective at capturing particulate pollutants, and produce oxygen and therefore make a valuable contribution to air quality. ii. Opportunities for substantial tree planting in mature landscapes are limited. Over crowding parks with trees can limit the landscape value and the enjoyment of the very open space people have come to enjoy. Many of our parks are dominated by sports pitches which greatly limit tree planting. The limited amount of meadow land in the borough is a valuable wildlife resource in itself. iii. Tree planting can often be achieved through the establishment of native hedgerows and this will be undertaken where opportunities arise but with due regard to maintenance cost implications. iv. The most likely planting sites are on housing land and this should be a focus for the councils tree planting programme, subject to the support of colleagues in Housing and the local community. v. Trees are long lived organisms and will be a major feature in the landscape for years to come. It is therefore necessary to reflect on what impact the tree will have in the future. vi. Trees should be selected with consideration of: ¾ their mature heights and crown spread, and their proximity to each other and adjoining buildings both within the park, and those private properties adjoining; ¾ the overall landscape value of the site and not just the immediate location or amenity value of the tree; ¾ the non obstruction of strategic views and vistas;

- 70 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 7 – Specialist Areas

¾ the non obstruction of site lines which may reduce public safety; ¾ the suitability of the species to the location and natural habitat e.g. willows and alder near to water, oak and beech for parkland landscape etc.; ¾ where appropriate, planting willow sets alongside water courses as a cheap and sustainable method of providing trees and future wildlife habitat, but consideration must be given to future maintenance costs; ¾ the heritage value of the site e.g. Cedar trees at Pitshanger Manor or Norwood Hall, or group planting of large woodland species at Acton Park; ¾ the potential for causing structural damage via either direct damage or foundation subsidence; ¾ the potential for casting dense shade to gardens and properties, causing nuisance and needless costly maintenance; vii. The presumption should be that species will be of native species. viii. Trees to be planted within or adjoining areas managed primarily for nature conservation should seek to be locally native ix. Exotic trees should be used sparingly to provide decorative features at strategic and appropriate locations or where the conditions of the site are not favourable to native species. x. Invasive exotics should be avoided but especially adjoining areas managed for nature conservation. xi. It must be acknowledged that planting of standard trees within amenity grass sward is unlikely to be successful unless serious soil amelioration is undertaken. This is due to compacted soil conditions especially on clay soils and the strong competition of the grass sward. Success will be greatly improved if trees or groups of trees are planted in sites where a large area (5 metres sq.) have been thoroughly dug over, and material added to improve the structure of the soil. The grass sward must be suppressed, and the trees protected from strimmers and grass mowers, preferably by fencing in the first few years. Money spent on soil preparation and care is more cost effective than money spent on bigger trees. xii. the tree sponsorship scheme should continue to be promoted but must be in line with the policies outlined above. xiii. Site specific action plans for parks will be produced as an output of the Parks Strategy and tree planting and management must be a properly considered element of them. xiv. All woodlands managed by the Service should have management prescriptions or management plans detailing proposed developments and maintenance.

7.2 Heritage features in parks The Parks and Countryside Service finds itself the custodians of a range of heritage sites. For instance there are listed ancient monuments at Horsendon Hill and Northolt Manor, and listed manor houses within Walpole Park Ealing and Manor House Grounds, Southall. In addition Walpole Park is a listed heritage garden, and Acton Park is a classic Victorian Park. Other parks like Brent Lodge Park, Connelly Dell, Cuckoo Park, Ealing Common, The Woodlands, Pitshanger Park and Acton Green reflect elements of local history and the Boroughs heritage.

These parks have a primary function of providing contemporary open space experience for the local community. However, their connection to previous land use, former great houses and estates and the borough’s more humble agricultural past, are all important in

- 71 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 7 – Specialist Areas providing a sense of past and continuity to current residents. These sites are important heritage features and need to be conserved for future generations and interpreted through leaflets, on site signage and guided walks, so people can appreciate their value.

7.2.1 Policies for heritage sites

The Service will:- ¾ Be responsible custodians of the Borough’s heritage parks and open spaces. ¾ Seek the advice and guidance of agencies such as the Council’s Planning Conservation Officer, English Heritage and British Waterways on appropriate management and conservation of these sites. ¾ Consult with local communities and interest groups such as the Acton and the Southall History Societies and the Brent River and Canal Society. ¾ Secure funding from all available sources to undertake appropriate conservation and interpretation of Heritage sites.

7.3 Dog Fouling of Land Act

Consultation reveals that dog fouling in parks is a major concern for residents in the Borough.

The Service experimented with dog exercise areas, but these have proven counter productive. People see them as areas where they are not required to clean up after their dogs and this undermines the central theme of the policy being enforced by the service which is to encourage dog owners to be responsible. No further dog exercise areas will be provided and those in existence will be phased out.

Dog free areas will be only be maintained within the fenced areas of children playgrounds and some sports areas.

The P&C Service currently has a number of parks registered under the Dog Fouling of land Act where owners who allow their dogs to foul and do not clear up after them are open to a fixed penalty fine of £25. These are enforced by the Parks and Countryside Ranger Service. In combination with information leaflets and the Rangers engaging residents in discussions has led to a marked reduction in dog fouling in the parks effected. To date resources have been limited to expand this programme more quickly but in response to public demand expressed in the consultation the Service has committed to rolling the programme as a matter of urgency. (See objective 20, PP10)

7.4 Cycling in Parks Cycling in parks is a contentious issue with strong views by a minority of people on both sides of the argument. Cycling did not come out of the consultation as an issue of great concern to people. Cycling is an increasingly popular leisure pursuit and is encouraged by all concerned with healthy living and personal fitness. In an era where the reduction of motor vehicle usage is high on the agenda cycle ways and access to site by bicycle needs to be encouraged.

However, the health and safety risk to the elderly and children from irresponsible cyclists who go too fast through parks is an issue which the Service takes seriously.

- 72 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 7 – Specialist Areas

Clearly there is a need to achieve a balance between the reasonable expectation of the majority to cycle to and through parks and the need to seek to ensure the personal safety of park users.

7.4.1 Recommendation for cycling The Service has amended the Bye Laws to permit cycling in all the boroughs parks and open spaces where there is a sign which specifically allows it. Cycle routes will be designated in parks and appropriate signage put up to permit cycling but require speed restriction to 5mph, a duty of care, and pedestrian priority. The Ranger Service will challenge those cyclists who are irresponsible in they way they cycle.

- 73 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 8 – Value for Money

8 VALUE FOR MONEY

8.1 Overview

The decline in investment in parks across the country has also unfortunately affected the quality of Ealing’s parks over the last 2 decades. However, the recent shift in attitude back towards the need for good urban parks, creates potential for some careful re- investment, although with still limited resources this needs to be targeted on the areas most in need.

The assessment of park quality should first therefore be compared with the existing level of investment in maintenance and management. If some parks are failing, is it largely due to a lack of investment in good maintenance practices? And if the Council’s flagship parks are thriving, is this at the expense of other parks in other areas?

Ealing’s parks are maintained under 4 separate area based contracts which were tendered under the rules of CCT for a 3 year period. The cost of maintenance of parks in the four contract areas, Acton, Ealing, Southall and Northolt & Greenford (N&G), therefore varies according to the individual contract. In addition, the Acton area contract has recently been re-tendered with new prices coming into effect in April 2001. Any analysis of value for money needs therefore to take these variations into account.

8.2 Process

The overall maintenance costs per annum for each park was worked out initially, based on the original 4 contracts. For a fair comparison, a multiplier was devised to adjust these costs in line with the most recently priced contract area in Acton. The multiplier was based on a typical park with a variety of maintenance items – Pitshangar Park. The process was as follows:

The cost of maintaining Pitshangar Park per annum using each of the 4 original contract prices was worked out to provide 4 separate figures.

The actual cost of maintaining Pitshangar Park with the new Acton area contract was then divided by each of these 4 figures in turn to create a multiplier for each area.

The multipliers were then used to adjust each individual park cost per annum to bring them in line with the new Acton area contract prices.

In order to compare parks of different sizes, this overall cost was then reduced to a square metre rate.

- 74 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 8 – Value for Money

8.3 Results

The average cost per square metre by contract area shows major differences in the comparative amount being spent on parks in different areas:

Table 25: Average cost of per square metre by contract area

Acton 0.28/m2 Northolt and Greenford 0.31/m2 Southall 0.67/m2 Ealing 1.11/m2

The high cost of parks maintenance in the Ealing contract area is in part due to the fact that it has fewer parks than the other areas and includes 5 of the ten most expensive parks per m2 in the Borough, as shown in the following table:

Table 26: Ten most expensive parks per m2

Name cost/m2 score Area Connolly Dell 5.63 5.7 Ealing Tentelow Lane Play Fields 3.83 2.1 Southall Walpole/Lammas Park 2.38 5.6 Ealing Manor House Grounds 2.00 4.8 Southall Ridding Lane 1.91 3.6 Northolt Brent Lodge Park 1.89 5.3 Ealing Dean Gardens 1.55 4.7 Ealing King George’s Play Field 1.32 3.6 Ealing Springfield Gardens 1.30 4.5 Acton Wolf Fields 1.14 6.3 Southall

Unsurprisingly, Walpole/Lammas Parks and Brent Lodge Park are relatively expensive to maintain, given the variety and extent of facilities within these spaces. They are also both District Parks which are a priority for investment and they score correspondingly high on quality. Manor House grounds and Dean Gardens are also important Local Parks and are close to town centres, with a variety of facilities.

More unexpected is the high cost of maintaining small local parks such as Connolly Dell and Tentelow Lane Playing Fields. Although these do not benefit from the economies of scale of the larger parks, the costs are still disproportionately high. Connolly Dell’s pond and ornamental planting increase its maintenance costs and the park is maintained to a high standard. Tentelow Lane Playing Fields are leased out but are currently maintained under the Southall contract. The high cost of maintenance is due to the range of sports pitches on this site and it is the intention of the Council to negotiate the transfer of this responsibility to the company who lease the facility when the lease is renewed.

- 75 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 8 – Value for Money

Table 27: Ten least expensive parks per m2

Name cost/m2 score Contract Area Brentham Open Space 0.01 4.4 Acton Horsenden Hill 0.03 4.8 Ealing Bitterns Field 0.03 3.5 Southall Cranleigh Open Space 0.05 5.0 Northolt Lime Tree Park 0.05 5.2 Ealing Cuckoo Park 0.05 3.8 Southall The Green, W3 0.06 4.9 Acton Trumpers Field 0.06 3.5 Southall King Georges Field 0.07) 4.6 Acton South Park 0.07) 4.7 Northolt Northolt Park 0.07) equal 3.9 Southall Northolt Rec. 0.07) 2.1 Northolt Perivale Park 0.07) 4.1 Southall

The three lowest costing sites, Brentham Open Space, Horsenden Hill, and Bitterns Field, are all managed primarily for nature conservation, demonstrating how cost effective this approach can be. However, they are not particularly high scorers on quality either, and their low level of maintenance may be contributing to their relatively poor quality. Trumpers Field also falls into this category.

With an average quality score of only 3.8, The Green, King Georges Field, Cuckoo Park, Northolt Park and Rec., Perivale Park and South Park, demonstrate the link between a low level of investment in the maintenance of these parks and their apparent quality. Lime Tree Park is a slight anomaly in that it scores a reasonable 5.2 in the audit but is only 0.05p/m2 to maintain. This park would appear to represent good value for money, although is some way off meeting the exacting standards required by the Green Flag Awards.

In terms of value for money for the Borough’s residents who pay Council Tax, parks represent excellent value. For example, for every pound of Council Tax paid, only 1.9p is currently spent on the Parks and Countryside Service. A band A contributor paying £448.38 per annum in Council Tax, therefore pays only £8.52 per annum for the use of all the Borough’s parks.

- 76 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 9 – Prioritising improvement and investment

9 PRIORITISING IMPROVEMENTS AND INVESTMENT

9.1 The need to invest in Parks The need to invest in Ealing’s parks is clear on three accounts: ¾ The audit undertaken reveals relatively poor standards across the Borough with only one park meeting Green Flag Award standard. ¾ Public consultation reveals peoples expectation that the parks need to be improved with better playgrounds, public toilets and improved maintenance. ¾ The Parks and Countryside Service is committed to providing an excellent service.

Parks have suffered from under investment during the 1980’s and 90’s and many of them are much in need of infrastructural investment to improve playgrounds, buildings/sports pavilions, paths and fences. Given that there is pressure from many sides to improve individual parks dear to the heart of those wishing the improvement and that infinite funds are not available, it will be necessary to focus available funding into those areas: ¾ most in need; ¾ which will benefit the greatest number of users ¾ where those resources can be successfully used as matched funding to capture available external grants.

9.2 Strategic justification for priority investment

It became clear that the Service needed to adopt an objective method to prioritise which parks amongst so many needed attention and access to the available resources. While this is not an exact science a number of categories were considered and the following ones adopted.

9.2.1 Deficiency in Play provision This is calculated on the basis of number of playgrounds per electoral ward. Some Wards have none! Map 6 shows the spread of playgrounds and areas of deficiency. Parks with playgrounds in areas of deficiency were seen as having a higher priority.

9.2.2 Park deficiency as defined in UDP The Unitary Development Plan indicates areas of the borough which do not have easy nearby access to local or district parks. These areas are indicted on Maps 2 & 3. Clearly, no park can be in area of deficiency but it defines the area of deficiency. Some parks therefore become strategically very important.

9.2.3 Nature Conservation deficiency The Unitary Development Plan indicates areas of the borough which do not have easy nearby access to areas of nature conservation. These areas are indicted on Map 9.

9.2.4 Parks Audit Score The Audit undertaken by outside consultants scored all the parks against ILAM’s Green Flag Award criteria.. 12 categories were considered and scored separately and the scores then added together to make a final score which is what is considered here. Those parks performing poorly were given a higher priority.

- 77 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 9 – Prioritising improvement and investment

9.2.5 Playground Audit Score Given that playgrounds are considered by the public (via consultation) as their primary reason for visiting parks and the item in parks they wanted to see improved the most this element of the GFA audit is considered separately. Parks with poor playgrounds were given priority.

9.2.6 Deprived area in line with MDI In seeking to address poverty and deprivation Central Government has recently re- defined the parameters of “deprived neighbourhoods” and has decided that the 88 poorest and most deprived neighbourhoods in the Country, utilising the Index of Multiple Deprivation, shall be eligible for additional funding to help redress the causes and effects of deprivation. Sadly LB Ealing has neighbourhoods that meet these criteria and these are the current focus for regeneration, investment and improvement, and subject to the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy and Funding

These neighbourhoods are found in Dormers Wells, Glebe, Northcote and Mount Pleasant Wards in Southall and the South Acton Estate in Heathfield Ward. That these areas also correspond with the existing Single Regeneration Budget areas of Southall Partnership and Action Acton is of course no surprise as these areas have long been areas of deprivation within the Borough and the challenge to improve them is a long-term project.

Public parks may not be a priority focus for over coming deprivation, but as a public facility, free at the point of access and providing opportunities to escape from some of the consequences of poverty, parks have a lot to offer. It is important to focus resources into the parks of deprived areas because they can:

¾ Make a significant impact on the quality of peoples lives in these areas ¾ Boost the self confidence of the local community ¾ Be a catalyst for inward investment ¾ Give local youth a positive experience and distract them from anti-social behaviour

For the purposes of this strategy the wards in the Borough have been listed in order of performance according to MDI, divided in three broad ranks with priority being awarded to the most deprived areas.

9.2.7 Funding available to undertake improvements Clearly if there is no available money improvements will be limited. If the park is within an SRB area or likely to attract Sports England or Heritage Funding then it is more likely to be improved.

9.2.8 Is it a key Park The UDP defines Metropolitan (NGCP and Horsendon) and District parks as sites which should provide a wide range of facilities and are therefore considered key parks for this purpose. Some parts of the borough do not have access to such parks notably Acton and Southall so an additional category has been adopted and called Key Local Parks such as Southall and Acton Parks. These are sites which are too small to be district parks but justify higher levels of investment due to their strategic importance to the community they serve.

- 78 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 9 – Prioritising improvement and investment

9.2.9 Community involvement / usage/ Town Centre Where a park has a high level of community involvement and a local desire to work with the Council to see positive improvements this needs to be encouraged. Some parks are “honey pots” which attract disproportionate numbers of visitors or users notably Brent Lodge Park. Ealing Green and Haven Green receive high usage due to their town centre locations.

9.2.10 Potential Sports Centre of excellence Sites like Warren Farm, Rectory Park, Ealing Central, Spikesbridge have been defined as potential sites for sports excellence. The intention is to reduce the overall number of parks providing poor quality sports facilities and concentrate efforts into good quality facilities in strategically located sites which can be run sustainably.

9.2.11 Scoring Each category is scored 3 important, 2 medium, 1 less important. Each category is also give a weighting so that for instance an area of deficiency in Park provision is highly significant and weighted 5 whereas access to nature conservation has been weighted as 2.

The spread sheet scores and results are shown on Appendix 3 and 4. The twenty two highest priority parks are subject to the first phase of improvement plans, and will receive priority access to available resources, according to their ranking.

Table 28: Parks in Order of Priority for Improvement (some parks of equal priority)

1 Southall Recreation Ground Southall 3 Spikes Bridge Park Southall 3 Southall Park Southall 5 NGCP Kensington Field/Belvue/Rectory Northolt & Greenford 5 North Acton Playing Fields Acton 8 Fairview Playground Northolt 8 Springfield Gardens Acton 8 Northolt Park/Recreation Ground Northolt 9 Wesley Playing Fields Park Royal 11 Horsenden Hill Perivale 11 Cuckoo Park Hanwell 14 Hanger Hill Park / Chatsworth Wood Ealing 14 Acton Park Acton 14 Southfields Recreation Ground Acton 15 Drayton Green Ealing 16 Pitshanger Park/ Cleveland Park Ealing 19 Perivale Park Perivale 19 Manor House Grounds Southall 19 South Acton Recreation Ground Acton 22 Trinity Way Open Space Acton 22 Dean Gardens Ealing 22 Woodlands Acton 23 Blondin Park Northfields

- 79 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 9 – Prioritising improvement and investment

These sites will be the subject of the first phase of site Specific Action Plans, which will be drawn up in the context of the Strategy recommendations and policies and will be consulted upon with local communities during the first half of 2003.

9.3 Taking Funding Opportunities

While accepting that sites in deprived or strategic locations should be the focus of available funding, the Parks and Countryside Service will also take opportunities for improving parks throughout the Borough wherever they may occur.

Section 106 agreements (as discussed on page 83) can become available at any location, and can provide invaluable sources of capital investment, and need to be actively sought and pursued.

For instance research indicates that Walpole/Lammas District Park is the most visited park in the Borough and suffers above average wear and tear and especially soil compaction. Relative to other parks in the Borough this site is not a priority but opportunities for external investment exist with the Town Centre redevelopment proposals, and these need to be taken advantage of. As a park on the English Heritage list of heritage parks and gardens, Lottery funds may also be accessible.

The Urban Village development of the former Taylor Woodrow site in Greenford is another site which is being actively targeted for £50,000 investment in the adjoining King George’s Fields.

- 80 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 10 – Funding the Changes and Improvements

10 FUNDING THE CHANGES AND IMPROVEMENTS

10.1 Funding Sources

As part of the Parks and Open Spaces Strategy, there is the need to identify potential sources of funding in addition to existing and proposed internal budgets. The strategy has evaluated the condition of the borough’s parks and open spaces, and puts forward a blueprint for the management of them for the next five years. In addition to this, the Site Specific Action Plans provide initial suggestions for improvements to individual parks and open spaces. In order for these to be realistic, potential sources of funding need to be identified.

10.1.1 Single Regeneration Budget Areas (SRB) The London Borough of Ealing has secured three central government funded SRB areas within its boundary. These consist of Action Acton, Park Royal and Southall SRB’s. The focus for these central government funded grants are training, job creation, health initiatives and infrastructure improvements such as roads, street lighting etc. Improvements to parks and open spaces is peripheral to the core objectives of the SRB programmes and funds are only available as part of a wider programme of community involvement, healthy living initiatives and capacity building. Both the Southall and Park Royal SRB’s funds are now exhausted and exit strategies have been developed which have led to the formation of the Southall Regeneration Partnership (SRP), and the Park Royal Partnership (PRP) who are continuing the programme of regeneration instigated by the SRB funding.

The P&C Service have successfully accessed funds for Glade Lane Park, Manor House Grounds, Western Road Open Space, and The Crescent in Southall. And Wesley Playing Fields, Coronation Gardens, Cerobus Gardens, Midland Terrace, Acton Cemetery, in Park Royal.

Action Acton Action Acton is a small SRB area covering Vale ward, most of Heathfield ward, half of Springfield ward and a small bit of Southfield ward. The majority of their work is focused on the deprived South Action Estate characterised by high unemployment, poor housing, crime and disaffected youth. Whilst much of the work is focussed on enhancing employment prospects, there is also quite a bit of funding going towards improving the living environment, particularly on the estate. As a result, there is potential for funding for parks and open spaces that lie within the SRB area. Action Acton is only in year two of a five year programme and it is anticipated that project funding will be successfully secured. Map 5 shows the SRB area and the parks that lie within the boundary. The table below shows these potentially eligible parks and open spaces.

Ward Name of Park or Open Space Heathfield Heathfield Gardens, Mill Hill Park, South Acton Rec., South Park, Twyford Crescent Gardens, The Woodlands Springfield Springfield Gardens Vale Acton Park, Bromyards Garden, Trinity Way Open Space Southfield Southfields Rec.

- 81 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 10 – Funding the Changes and Improvements

10.1.2 Section 106 The Governments Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 (PPG3) has recommended that planning authorities relax their UDP requirements for private amenity space in residential developments in urban situations. This is to maximise the opportunity for housing in existing built up areas and take the pressure off green field expansion. This has allowed the conversion of former office blocks and factories into residential sites. This puts direct pressure on a range of existing urban infrastructures but not least parks and open spaces. It is therefore entirely appropriate to seek funding for the improvement to local parks from applicants whose developments are going to increase the use and wear and tear on adjoining park and playground facilities. The Parks and Countryside Service will therefore actively pursue S106 funding in these situations.

10.1.3 Sponsorship Private sector sponsorship of roundabouts and events is an established method of securing valuable funding. However, businesses seldom do this for entirely altruistic reasons, they are usually looking for some positive assistance to their companies commercial success. This can take a variety of forms:

Increasing public awareness of the company is the commonest, and to achieve this the sponsor needs recognition in the form of their logo being prominently displayed etc.; Improving the appearance of the area surrounding their business premises to give a positive impression to their customers; Involvement of company staff in community activities as a form of staff training and team bonding development. This is increasingly popular and events have been discussed with both British Airways and Glaxo Smithklien, although to date without success. As a means for companies to access corporate hospitality. There are limited opportunities for this approach but has been very successfully pursued for the Walpole Park Music Festival, and to a lesser extent for Countryside Weekend.

Clearly this is an area which has not been traditionally pursued by local authorities but the pervading political climate at Westminster, coupled with limited financial resources has made it an increasingly essential means of delivering projects and events within parks.

There remains both some councillor, and resident object to the proliferation of sponsorship signs and what is seen as commercialisation of the Borough’s parks. The local Planning Authority also have very strict regulations on what they perceive to be advertising. For these reasons while sponsorship will be actively sought from the private sector the extent to which it will make resources available is always likely to be limited to such items as roundabouts, key flowerbeds, signs, promotional leaflets and sports and leisure events.

10.1.4 Private Partnership In the past the Council has tried to deliver a wide range of services unaided by the private sector. In some cases this has proven successful especially in the past when resources were more readily available. Increasingly the Council has had to withdraw from projects which have required high staffing levels due to increasing labour costs and restricted

- 82 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 10 – Funding the Changes and Improvements budgets. As a result a number of services previously offered have become unsustainable. Particular casualties within Parks and Open Spaces have been cafés, play centres, sports pavilions, golf courses and tennis facilities. It is becoming increasingly clear that a partnership with the private sector can allow these facilities to be provide more successfully.

A number of initiatives are already operational or being actively pursued. Tennis facilities are run by private lessees at Pitshanger Park and North Acton Recreation Ground, with a marked improvement in standards, and another scheme is about to commence at Lammas Park. A new five a side facility is to be provided at Rectory Park, Northolt which will also provide a completely new pavilion, and its future management, for conventional outdoor sports at the site.

The Service will continue to seek opportunities to involve the private sector and their entrepreneurial skills in the running and investment of park facilities.

10.1.5 The Lottery Fund The lottery is a potential source of larger scale funding for a variety of sports and parks projects. There are two main lottery distributors that can be utilised for parks and open spaces:

Heritage Lottery through the Urban Parks Programme funding is focused on the restoration of heritage parks and facilities such as monuments, band stands, gates and fences. Many of the smaller projects are aimed at local community groups becoming actively involved in projects, while the Service will support such schemes they do require a high level of local enthusiasm and commitment. The Friends of Blondin Park have successfully secured £30,000 for their wildlife area, and the Service have secured £40,000 for The Woodlands in Acton. Another bid has been submitted at the Northolt Manor site and awaits a decision

Larger schemes become very complex and can demand considerable investment of specialist resources to secure. The Service is currently seeking £600,000 funding for the restoration of the early Tudor gardens at Manor House Grounds, Southall. The first bid was refused but negotiations continue.

Sports Lottery Fund has been successfully accessed by the council’s sports development team Active Ealing for sports centres and dual use school sports centres. To date no park sports facility has been targeted but there is potential in the long term.

New Opportunities Fund has been allocated via a range of distributor agencies such as the Countryside Agency, Sustran cycle networks, and Sports England. The funding is very much targeted on local community based schemes, and does not easily lend itself to parks which are open to all.

10.1.6 Charitable Trusts Funding is also available through a number of charitable trusts. Most of them have a particular subject focus such as wildlife, sports, young children etc. Many have a geographical focus. The Service has benefited from several multi use ball courts funded by the Marathon Trust who specialise in youth sports/play provision.

- 83 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 10 – Funding the Changes and Improvements

10.1.7 Other Government Agencies English Partnerships have a wide remit but the Service has successfully secured funding in the past for reclamation of contaminated and derelict land. London’s Waterway Partnership have been a major contributor to canalside improvements at Horsendon Farm Environmental Centre, Northolt and Greenford Countryside Park and Spikesbridge Park. Green Corridors Partnership have funded a number of projects along the A4/M4 transport corridor at Blondin Park and Elthorne Waterside.

It is clear from this plethora of grant funding agencies that money is now available from a variety of sources. The P&C Service will continue to commit officer resources to securing such funds directly and work with local communities and other agencies such as Ground Work West London to support their bids for appropriate projects.

- 84 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11 POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES

11.1 Introduction

In producing a Parks and Open Spaces Strategy for the Borough, there is a need to set a framework by which decisions on the future management of Ealing’s parks and open spaces are made. In producing this framework, there is a need to ensure that it represents the best way forward for improving Ealing’s parks and open spaces, taking account several important issues:

Firstly, the framework needs to be informed by Government Policy as this sets out the legislation by which all local authorities must manage their parks and open spaces. Secondly, it needs to be informed by Local Policy. This is policy that is set out by the London Borough of Ealing concerning parks and open spaces and all activities within them, and will therefore shape any policy set out within this document. This may be further affected by the developing influence within London of the Mayor’s office and the Greater London Authority. Thirdly, the framework needs to be informed by good practice. This involves researching other local authorities’ approach to parks and open spaces management, to see where they got things right or wrong as there is no point in reinventing the wheel. This is a fundamental element of the Best Value review currently being undertaken by the P&C Service. Finally, the framework needs to be informed by people. There is a need to consult the people who know the real issues concerning Ealing’s parks and open spaces. These include local authority officers who manage or run activities in the parks, and essentially also the general public that use, or currently do not use, the parks.

By combining all of these factors, the strategy seeks to produce a focused, relevant and informed policy framework by which to base the decisions made for the future management of Ealing’s Parks and Open Spaces.

Such policies are of little use if they are not acted upon. So the Service commits itself to producing its annual Service Plan in a form which will reflect the Strategy’s Objectives and Policies and create SMART outputs and actions to achieve them. In addition the Site Specific Action Plans which are consequential to the strategy will be similarly focused.

The Objectives and policies are set out below:-

- 85 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2 Parks and Countryside Service Objectives and Policies

11.2.1 Improving and managing parks and open green spaces

Objective 1:

To work in partnership with all external service providers to create a seamless parks maintenance service with an emphasis on continuous improvement, and focus existing resources on achieving a Green Flag Award for each area of the Borough.

Local and national policy and good practice stress the need to conserve and improve open space within urban areas for the well being of those that live and work there. More than 99% of respondents of the consultation questionnaire used their local parks and open spaces in some way The parks audit indicated the need to improve Ealing’s parks and open spaces.

Policies: PGS1: Award all future grounds maintenance contracts with an equal importance given to the quality and price of the submission.

PGS2: Set measurable performance standards for all contracts and work in partnership with contractors to annually improve standards

PGS3: Set annual targets for the level of rectification notices with an annual reduction throughout the length of the contract period.

PGS4: Implement and annual programme of improvements to footpaths, fencing and furniture to improve the appearance of all parks, starting with those short listed for Green Flag Award. PGS4.1 Agree standards for “furniture” e.g. bins, seats, signage etc, in parks and produce a design guide

PGS5: Identify shortfalls in budget and bid for additional funding to invest in improved maintenance standards

PGS6: Consult with residents on an annual basis to determine perceived satisfaction levels of the condition and maintenance of parks.

PGS7: Undertake improvements in parks which meet the needs of the local community which use them, through consultation with residents and visitors and outreach to under represented groups.

PGS8: Undertake at least one Borough wide external parks audit during the life of the strategy. Apply for, achieve and retain at least one Green Flag Award per year. Seek up to 7 Awards across the Borough.

- 86 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

Objective 2:

To research opportunities and actively bid for additional funding to implement a programme of parks improvements, provide a range of additional facilities and attractions in parks to increase use and recognise their value as visitor attractions.

Policies:

PGS9: To secure additional internal and external funding to carry out improvements to the infrastructure of parks and open spaces.

PGS10: Improve existing, and increase the quality and range of visitor facilities within parks to appeal to all ages and thereby increase community use. These may include deigned landscaped features, play facilities, public art, ponds, mazes, wildlife areas etc.

PGS11: Improve the standard of maintenance at park entrances and continue to install “Welcome Signs”.

PGS12: Promote the value of parks and open spaces in the regeneration of the borough’s town centres and as visitor attractions.

PGS13: Use the strategic context to be opportunistic when funding opportunities present themselves.

- 87 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

Objective 3:

To embrace the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) polices including the classification of park hierarchies.

Policies:

PGS13: Maintain a policy of no net loss public open space in the Borough as set out in the UDP Policy OL12.

PSG14: Adopt the classification of metropolitan, district, key local, local and small local parks as a guideline for standards for each category.

PSG15: Focus resources to improve the standard of district and key local parks in each area of the borough and seek Green Flag Status for District and/or Key Local Parks.

PSG16: Identify opportunities to create new areas of public open space in areas highlighted as deficient in key local, local and small local parks

PSG17: Where opportunities are limited to create new open spaces, identify parks where facilities need to be upgraded, beyond the level of UDP classification to offset the deficiency.

PSG18: To adopt Brent Lodge Park and environs as a Metropolitan Park.

PSG19: Work with the planning system to secure new open spaces in Southall as part of the eventual development of the Southall Gas Works site and secure funding to develop and maintain it.

- 88 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

Objective 4:

To enhance the positive environmental impact of the parks and countryside service including the improvement of the nature conservation value of parks in line with the principles of sustainability.

Consultation revealed that for the great majority of users the ‘outdoor experience’ of parks and open spaces was the primary reason for going to the park. Many of the comments received talked of ‘enjoying the fresh air and the space’ and ‘getting away from the bugs and bells of modern life’.

Policies:

PS20: Constantly work with our contractors to improve grounds maintenance standards and provide good quality parks and open spaces for people to enjoy. PSG21: To provide decorative landscaped areas at gateways and focal points within park, to provide attractive, sustainable features using an increased quantity of perennial plants in the floral displays to retain colour. PSG22: Focus resources on fewer higher quality floral bedding areas at major park entrances and key road junctions to maximise their impact.

PSG23: If new bulbs are planted to replace the existing large areas of daffodils in the Borough, opportunities may be taken to select alternative species which while providing a good spring display can be mown soon after flowering and not lead to the unsightly long grass, e.g. crocus, fritillaries

PSG24: Increase the quantity of green waste recycling and composting carried out in the borough.

PSG25: Increase nature conservation value of formal parks through consultation, appropriate design, maintenance, and on site interpretation.

PSG26: Recognise the primary use of each park and open space and ensure that other uses or developments do not have a negative impact on this.

PSG27: Work in partnership with Housing and Groundwork West London to develop the potential of public sector Housing land for public amenity and nature conservation.

- 89 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.2 Improving and managing nature conservation areas

Objective 5:

To implement the short, medium and long term targets of the Ealing Bio-diversity Action Plan by developing site management plans with an emphasis on community involvement and seeking further protection of nature conservation areas by designating further local Nature Reserves (LNRs).

Every Park and open space within the Borough has the potential to be enhanced for nature conservation and this should be explored when any development or review of the management takes place. However, any proposals for nature conservation development must not have an adverse impact on the primary use of the site.

Policies:

NC1: Hold a biannual review of progress with the Bio diversity Action Plan targets and up date accordingly.

NC2: Introduce wildlife in to local parks through habitat creation, sensitive grounds maintenance or both using the guidelines in section.

NC3: All nature conservation areas should have management prescriptions or management plans detailing proposed developments and maintenance.

NC4: Secure funding for wildlife projects within nature conservation areas in all parks and open spaces where appropriate. Through S106 agreements and other funding sources such as the Countryside Stewardship Scheme and English Nature grants.

NC5: Undertake legal and health and safety duty of eradication of invasive weeds, such as giant hogweed and Japanese knotweed, by spot treatment in accordance with Environment Agency and manufacturers guidelines.

- 90 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

Objective 6:

To carry out on site, local resident, Ward Councillor and Area Committee consultation with local residents on all new nature conservation initiatives and projects to increase awareness, understanding and participation.

The failure of many conservation projects has been shown to be due to public concern about change. This is often due to lack of information about the project due to local people not being involved in the planning stage. When people are fully engaged in a project they have ownership for it and value the outcomes. The targets listed should ensure that this happens.

Policies:

NC6 Produce on site signage and interpretation of nature conservation areas including information about planned development work, maintenance regimes and contact details.

NC7: Carry out extensive consultation / dissemination of information to ensure that the local community understands the management of nature conservation areas.

NC8: Promote opportunities for volunteers to get involved in management of conservation areas to encourage ownership and understanding of conservation management. This will be done by developing “Friends of Groups” for sites and running a programme of volunteer tasks.

- 91 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.3 Improving the management of trees in Parks and Open Spaces

Objective: 7

To protect and enhance existing trees in parks and open spaces by undertaking planned, specialist inspection and maintenance, actively managing existing woodlands and planting additional trees, hedgerows and woodlands in formal parks, open spaces and housing sites.

Of all plants trees are the most prominent and the most permanent, the ones that set the scene and dictate the atmosphere. Existing trees represent a precious resource for the residents of the Borough and require appropriate protection, care and management

Policies:

T1: There will be a presumption against removal or heavy pruning of any mature trees unless: ¾ there are clear health and safety reasons; ¾ there is proven structural damage to adjoining property which cannot be contained by other cost effective solutions; ¾ there is an overriding nature conservation requirement to remove invasive exotic trees (such as Sycamore) in or immediately adjacent to areas managed for nature conservation. The removal of non invasive exotic trees in these areas will only be undertaken following due consideration of the amenity, landscape and heritage value of the trees, and/or their demonstrable negative effect on the wildlife value of the site. ¾ Where appropriate, local consultation/prior notification will be undertaken before substantial trees or quantity of smaller trees are removed. ¾ Coppicing is acknowledged as an appropriate method of tree management in appropriate locations, especially as part of woodland management.

T:2 A rolling programme of tree inspections, undertaken by a qualified arboriculturalist, park by park, will be introduced as of April 2002.

T3: Established trees will be recorded onto the Council’s computerised tree data base, this will build into a complete asset management register for trees in parks over the next six years.

T4: Essential health and safety works will be undertaken following the inspections. As a result reactive maintenance will be reduced and only undertaken for health and safety reason or to abate a public nuisance.

T5: In areas that pose no threat to public safety, and will not impact negatively onto public amenity, dead and decayed trees will be left standing to provide

- 92 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

wildlife habitat.

T6: In areas managed for nature conservation fallen timber will either be left or will be stacked into piles to provide habitat for wildlife.

T7: Ancient ‘veteran’ trees will be given special consideration due to their very high wildlife value, and retained wherever possible; even if that requires the exclusion of the public through fencing on health and safety grounds.

T8: Willows planted alongside water courses will be subject to routine pollarding on a rolling programme to prolong their natural life spans and so increase their wildlife value in old age.

T9: Mature hedgerows are an important wildlife habitat and will be retained and managed appropriately.

T10: Tree planting is important for many reasons: ¾ Trees are universally popular and all public consultation on the subject shows overwhelming desire for trees in their landscape, especially if they are in parks and away from their houses. ¾ Trees take a long time to establish and need to be planted now to provide for future generations. ¾ Trees are an important wildlife habitat ¾ Natural tree regeneration is very limited in urban parks and open spaces. ¾ Tree planting is a strand in the Boroughs strategy to reduce carbon dioxide, one of the major green house gases. ¾ Trees are effective at capturing particulate pollutants, and produce oxygen and therefore make a valuable contribution to air quality.

T11: Opportunities will be taken to achieve tree planting through the establishment of native hedgerows and this will be undertaken where opportunities arise but with due regard to maintenance cost implications.

T12: Opportunities for tree planting on the large open spaces associated with housing land will be explored, subject to the support of the local community and colleagues in Housing.

T13: Trees are long lived organisms and will be a major feature in the landscape for years to come. It is therefore necessary to reflect on what impact the tree will have in the future. Trees will be selected with consideration of: ¾ their mature heights and crown spread, and their proximity to each other and adjoining buildings both within the park, and those private properties adjoining; ¾ the overall landscape value of the site and not just the immediate location or amenity value of the tree; ¾ the non obstruction of strategic views and vistas; ¾ the non obstruction of site lines which may reduce public safety; ¾ the suitability of the species to the location and natural habitat e.g.

- 93 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

willows and alder near to water, oak and beech for parkland landscape etc.; ¾ the heritage value of the site e.g. Cedar trees at Pitshanger Manor or Norwood Hall, or group planting of large woodland species at Acton Park; ¾ the potential for causing structural damage via either direct damage or foundation subsidence; ¾ the potential for casting dense shade to gardens and properties, causing nuisance and needless costly maintenance;

T14: The presumption will be that new trees will be of native species. Trees to be planted within or adjoining areas managed primarily for nature conservation should seek to be locally native

T15: Exotic trees should be used sparingly to provide decorative features at strategic and appropriate locations especially in formal parks or where the conditions of the site are not favourable to native species such as some street locations

T16: Invasive exotics should be avoided but especially adjoining areas managed for nature conservation.

T17: Will be protected from damage by strimmers and grass mowers, preferably by fencing in the first few years.

T18: Thorough soil amelioration and grass sward suppression will take place on new sites before tree planting is undertaken to aid establishment.

T19: The tree sponsorship scheme will continue to be promoted but must be in line with the policies outlined above.

T20: Site specific action plans for parks will be produced as an output of the Parks Strategy and tree planting and management will be a properly considered element of them.

T21: Management plans will be developed for all woodlands managed by the Service.

- 94 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.4 Improving and managing Animal Centres

Objective 8:

To carry out a programme of improvements at Brent Lodge Park Animal Centre to the highest possible standards of animal care focussing on Environmental enrichment and education in line with the standards required to retain its zoo license.

The consultation survey shows that the animal centres are a popular reason for visiting borough parks, particularly by those under 16. National good practice indicates the benefits of combining animal centres with education.

Policies:

AC1: To invest all income generated in carrying out further investment in the Animal Centres.

AC2: To secure funding for and build a new primate enclosure.

AC3: To implement the recommendations and conditions of the zoo licence as issued.

AC4: To develop educational opportunities and linkages with local schools.

- 95 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.5 Improving the Ealing Bereavement Service

Objective 9:

To provide a quality burial service and plan for an additional 30 years of burial land for the resident’s of the Borough, whilst improving the landscape value of the existing cemeteries and promoting their importance as green open spaces.

The site audit revealed Ealing Cemeteries to be some of the best, landscaped sites in the Borough. The Biodiversity Action Plan stresses the importance of cemeteries as important habitats for wildlife The consultation study showed that the potential use of cemeteries for informal recreation was not being realised

Ealing Bereavement Service policies:

Policies:

EBS1: To develop and promote a green burial area in line with the Charter for the Bereaved.

EBS2: To Review and promote the grave planting scheme to increase uptake.

EBS3: To expand Greenford Park Cemetery in order to provide burial land for an additional 30 years.

EBS4: To monitor the fixing of memorials for the welfare of our cemetery visitor’s.

EBS5: To establish a programme of memorial health and safety in line with the Institute of Burial and Cremation Administration recommendations.

EBS6: To undertake environmental improvements to cemeteries to maximise opportunities to enjoy them as places for quiet enjoyment of open space.

EBS7: To provide signage and low key promotion of the open space elements of cemeteries to increase public awareness of this resource.

Objective 10:

To work in partnership with all external service providers to deliver a seamless bereavement service in line with the standards set by the Charter for the Bereaved.

- 96 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

Objective 11:

To provide a responsive bereavement service that meets the needs of users by respecting the burial traditions of the entire community, publishing honest and open information about the services available and delivering to the highest possible standard of customer care.

Ealing Bereavement Service Objectives:

Policies:

EBS8: To achieve formal accreditation through the Institute of Burial and Cremation Administration (IBCA) for the service.

EBS9: To revise the current Cemeteries and Burials contract in line with the standards set by the IBCA and Code of Safe Working Practice. (CSWP) to ensure service improvements.

EBS10: To negotiate with the Contractor to encourage accreditation to Investors in People (IIP) to ensure commitment to induction training and development of cemeteries staff.

EBS11: To promote community awareness of burial customs and practices.

EBS12: To establish closer links with Social Services, Local Health Authority and Registrars in order to improve funeral provision, interment facilities for non viable foetus and to provide a seamless service to the newly bereaved.

EBS13: To consult community representatives to identify burial needs of every individual. The service will meet individual needs if they do not impinge upon the majority.

EBS14: To carry out consultation with stakeholders and visitors, to determine preferred interment methods for infants.

EBS15: To promote and produce on site signage and interpretation in line with the Charter for the Bereaved.

- 97 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.6 Improving Ealing’s Allotments

Objective 12:

To implement the short, medium and long term targets of the Sustainable Allotments Strategy by bidding for internal and external funding, implementing self management projects and actively promoting allotments to increase usage.

National research has proven the importance of allotments as an aid to healthy living especially in the elderly as they encourage healthy eating, exercise and reduce heart disease

Policies:

A1: The recommendations of the Sustainable Allotment Strategy have been approved by the Council and will guide the Service over the next five years. In particular the following:

¾ Maintain the Allotment Partnership which has been set up with plot holders, elected Members and officers to examine allotment issues and seek external funding; ¾ Promote self management of sites by a committee of plot holders; ¾ Increase the sustainability of allotments by encouraging composting, the use of mulch to suppress weed growth and retain soil moisture, and encourage organic gardening techniques; ¾ To promote allotments and the availability of vacant plots through publicity campaigns; ¾ To seek innovative ways of securing capital and maintenance funds to undertake infrastructure improvements.

- 98 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.7 Improving Playgrounds within Parks

Objective 13:

To provide safe, play facilities for young people from ages 3-17 by implementing a comprehensive improvement programme ensuring that both EU safety standards and National Association of Playing Fields criteria for playgrounds are met.

National policy specifies the need to ensure play areas conform to NPFA standards but the site audit shows that many play areas do not do this. The consultation study showed that the most popular reason for visiting the borough’s parks was to use play facilities or take children to the playground. When asked what one thing would they like to see improved in their park above all others the largest response was to improve the quality of the playground.

Policies:

PG1: Improve performance relating to the percentage of playgrounds which conform to LEAP and NEAP standards. PG2: To increase the play value in playgrounds in line with Green Flag award standards.

PG3: Adopt NPFA buffer zone requirements for all new LEAP/NEAP play areas.

PG4: Secure additional internal and external funding for playgrounds as the highest priority for additional investment of the Parks and Countryside Service.

PG5: Provide more youth play provision including multi use games areas and “hang out” areas.

PG6: To remove graffiti on a regular and on going basis and paint equipment every two years.

- 99 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.8 Buildings within parks

Objective 14: To enhance the condition of buildings in parks by bidding for internal and external funding for health, safety and welfare improvements.

Objective 14: Work in partnership with organisations to actively lease building stock in order to secure private sector investment and community involvement.

Whilst the consultation study indicated that buildings were not the most important elements of a park, the condition of them was. National research and good practice shows the benefits of well maintained and well used buildings in parks as a way of creating safe, vibrant, healthy parks. The user survey revealed a high level of dissatisfaction with the standard of sports pavilions.

Policies:

B1: Produce buildings action plan to classify options for disposal, lease, refurbishment or demolition.

B2: Secure long term lease arrangements for parks buildings (private sector and community organisations especially where uses can add value to the park)

B3: Seek to demolish buildings that are derelict and have no potential sustainable use.

B4: Reinvest income generated from any successful lease or development back into Parks to improve the service provided.

- 100 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.9 Golf courses

Objective 16:

To implement a golf course strategy to secure long term private sector capital investment in the Council owned facilities and to proactively manage existing private sector leases whilst ensuring that facilities do not socially exclude on the grounds of cost.

Policies:

GC1: Secure the long term future of Brent Valley Golf Club by negotiating a renewal of the current lease.

GC2: Develop a leasing and management ‘package’ for Horsenden Hill, Perivale and Brent Valley Golf Courses to commence from April 2004 which does not exclude community organisations from bidding.

GC3: Promote and improve safe public rights of way through golf courses particularly promoting through routes to link communities to services and facilities.

GC4: Manage golf courses as sites for nature conservation in harmony with their primary function as sports facilities.

- 101 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.10Outdoor Sports Areas

Objective 17:

To provide tennis facilities by developing community centres in partnership with the private sector, whilst bidding for external funding to improve free tennis facilities in other parks.

The consultation survey indicated that the main reason for young people to use parks was for sports recreation. The survey also indicated that this age group prioritised improvements to sports facilities in parks over any other improvement National and local research has shown that use of some sports facilities such as tennis courts and football pitches is seasonal, and that efforts should be made to provide all year round sports facilities. Research shows that encouraging youngsters to play and enjoy sports at a young age leads to improved health and longevity in adults.

Policies:

OS1: Enter into a sustainable lease agreement for the development and maintenance of Lammas Park Enclosure Tennis facility.

OS2: Seek to establish a private sector partnership agreement for Southall Park tennis courts.

OS3: Actively manage the existing leases at Pitshanger Park and North Acton Playing Fields.

OS4: Seek external funding from agencies such as Sports England and the Lawn Tennis Association to improve the standards of tennis courts within Ealing’s Parks.

- 102 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

Objective 18:

To provide outdoor sports centres of excellence by bidding for and investing resources in key sites, and continue a programme of for community and private sector leasing.

Policies:

OS5: Bid to Football Foundation for improvements to pavilions and drainage of soccer pitches.

OS6: Bid to Sports England for improvements to pavilions and sports facilities.

OS7: Seek private sector or community based partnership agreements to find sustainable uses, management and maintenance of pavilions and sports facilities.

OS8: Concentrate available resources into strategic sites across the borough where quality facilities can be provided and managed sustainably.

OS9: Acknowledge the need to increase public access to sports facilities based in parks after dark by providing or supporting the provision of well designed low spillage lighting and flood lighting for use during specified hours.

OS10: Cease to provide sports pitches and facilities in peripheral sites where quality cannot be maintained sustainably.

Objective 19:

To provide bowling facilities for older people whilst recognising the need to secure additional funding for improvements to the existing bowling pavilions.

Policies:

OS11: Negotiate with bowling clubs to develop pavilion leases which will pass management and maintenance of the sites to the clubs along with a grant for pitch maintenance.

OS12: Seek external and internal funds to undertake essential H&S electrical and roof repairs and refurbishment.

- 103 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.11 Providing safe and welcoming parks

Objective 20:

To provide parks which are welcoming and safe for people to enjoy, by patrolling them regularly, dealing with anti-social behaviour promptly, and working with contractors to raise their profile and responsibility within parks.

In the consultation analysis, the most common complaint was that of poor maintenance and dog fouling and they felt that as well as improving play facilities, priorities for improvement were increased staffing and security in parks. There is a public perception that parks are dangerous places despite the lack of statistical evidence to support such a view and this needs to be addressed. The site audit identified the need to improve signage, particularly at entrances to parks and open spaces.

Policies: PP1: To maintain, and work to increase, the profile of staff presence in parks and open spaces to prevent incidence and deal with them as they occur.

PP2: Negotiate with the grounds maintenance contractors to raise the profile and awareness of their staff, through guidance procedures and training to provide a positive service to park users.

PP3: Continue to fund the graffiti clearance teams, and ensure that litter and vandalism are reported and dealt with promptly.

PP4: Seek funding and sponsorship to provide clear signage and information about Ranger emergency contact numbers.

PP5: Raise the perception of parks safety through education and information, and through improved maintenance and care within parks.

PP6: Seek to increase safety of sites through better design including removing areas where people can loiter unseen, the demolition of derelict buildings and improving site lines.

PP7: Utilise the Site Specific Action Plans, developed with the community, to undertake relevant improvements to parks and thereby encourage increased use and the security which comes with that usage.

PP8: To investigate multi-agency approach to managing ‘street’ drinkers and other anti-social behaviour in parks.

PP9: All parks and open spaces which are gated and fully enclosed by fencing or other structures so as to restrict or control entry shall be locked during the hours of darkness and made available for public access and use in accordance with the established opening and closing times.

- 104 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

Objective 21:

To provide a responsive service to enforce the Council’s Bye Laws and any other legislation relevant to public open space such as the Dog Fouling of Land Act and the Environmental Protection Act.

Consultation revealed dog fouling as the single most negative element of public parks.

Policies:

PP10: Accelerate the Council’s policy on dog fouling in parks and open spaces to include all parks in the scheme and implement actions as follows: Designate all open spaces under the Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act. Provide additional dog bins to encourage dog walkers to act responsibly. Promote a Borough wide educational campaign on dog fouling issues working closely with the local communities who use the parks and open spaces. Provide, maintain and regularly empty dog bins in all parks and open spaces in the borough Enforce the Dog Fouling of Land Act when all else fails Identify poorly performing parks and target them for enforcement PP11: Continue to work closely with the Police’s crime prevention unit and seek to further improve communication between the Police and parks staff.

PP12: Respond to litter and fly-tipping problems with measures to prevent further fly-tipping, clearance of existing rubbish and seek prosecution of offenders where possible under the Environmental Protection Act.

- 105 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

Objective 22:

To proactively secure parks and open spaces to prevent unlawful traveller encampments and undertake evictions as soon as the current legal process will allow.

Policies:

PG13: Pursue a no tolerance approach towards unlawful encampment and travellers whilst seeking to recognise their need for human rights.

PG14: Ensure that the local community, ward councillors and MP’s are kept informed about unlawful encampments and actions being taken to evict them.

PP15: Pursue creative solutions to secure parks and open spaces from traveller access, including seeking private partnership with landfill operators to use inert waste to create landscape mounding in appropriate locations as well as modified entrances, ditches, hedging etc.

PP16: Use all available legal power to achieve rapid eviction of unauthorised encampments of travellers from parks and open spaces, in partnership with the Courts and utilising the joint protocol with the Metropolitan Police.

PP17: Continue to work with the West London Partnership Boroughs to ensure best practice is shared, a unified enforcement of the legislation, and that Central Government is made aware of the need for legislative change.

11.2.12 Promoting Ealing’s Parks as an educational resource

Objective 23:

To promote the London Borough of Ealing’s parks and open spaces as outdoor classrooms to promote wildlife, heritage and environmental education to people of all ages.

Government policy promotes the innovative and imaginative delivery of education, particularly through the Healthy Schools Initiative.

Policies:

EE1: Work closely with schools and other Council departments to develop and implement an environmental education programme. EE2: Seek to provide appropriate on site interpretation and signage, and produce information leaflets.

- 106 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.13 Marketing and promoting Ealing’s Parks

Objective 24:

To continue to market and Promote Ealing’s parks and open spaces through the Enjoy the Great Outdoors programme of events, guided walks, talks and leaflets.

The site survey identified the need to improve signage in parks and open spaces, particularly of local events and activities Many of those consulted indicated that the events in the borough’s parks were one of its strong points and that these should be maintained and improved

Policies:

MP1: Continue to build on the successful marketing of major events in parks and open spaces in the borough such as the award winning ‘Enjoy the Great Outdoors’ programme, and the ‘Countryside Weekend’.

MP2: Work to secure additional funding from the private sector through marketing of parks and open spaces and events within them as potentials for advertising, sponsorship and licensing.

MP3: Support the use of parks as venues for events but monitor the effects of events on the condition of the parks and seek to ensure that over-use does not detract from the quality of the natural environment.

MP4: Support the creation of an events venue in the north of the Borough to address the current deficiency.

MP5: Pursue funding to provide consistent, high quality on site information.

- 107 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

Objective 25:

Make the Borough’s parks and open spaces accessible and welcoming to all by providing good signage to the sites, well maintained entrances, new footpath and cycle routes and information leaflets.

The site survey identified the need to improve access to, and paths within parks and open spaces in the borough National policy and good practice has promoted the benefits of self policing as the best way of creating safe, vibrant parks, as highlighted in the acclaimed Comedia/Demos Park Life report. The consultation survey identified that people had major concerns over access and the perception of safety issues in the borough’s parks and open spaces.

Policies:

MP6: Speed up the installation of the branded ‘Welcome’ signs in all the Borough’s parks, by making it a priority for available funding. Pursue sponsorship opportunities and funds to assist with the costs.

MP7: Work to install directional signs to parks and open spaces from surrounding roads, town centres and public transport interchanges as funding becomes available.

MP8: Undertake improvements to entrances to parks and open spaces and enhance the maintenance specification at entrances to ensure that they are safe and welcoming to potential users.

MP9: Seek opportunities to link with Healthy Living initiatives and promote parks as venues for active recreation for health for all age groups.

MP10: Work with relevant Highway Authority to promote and maintain safe ‘through routes’ through parks and open spaces, particularly between residential areas and town centres and schools and to improve and maintain public rights of way in line with government legislation.

MP11: Support the provision of low spillage lighting into parks during specified time periods, to encourage the sustainable after dark usage of pavilions, play centres and sports facilities.

MP12: Work closely with relevant Highway Authority, Sustrans and the London Cycle Network to create, maintain and promote cycle routes through the Borough’s parks and open spaces working carefully to avoid conflict with other park users

MP13: Work to ensure that as far as reasonably possible (as made clear in the legislation) the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act are met on

- 108 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

all the Borough’s parks and open spaces.

MP14: Encourage usage of parks throughout the year by creating a net work of suitable footpaths to include sealed surface paths for primary thoroughfares and, where appropriate, hoggin for secondary paths.

- 109 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.14 Parks & Countryside Service Best Value Improvement Plan

Objective 26:

Provide a Service which improves its performance year on year in line with the adopted Best Value Improvement Plan and provides the highest possible standard of customer care with a positive “can do culture”

Central Government requires that all Local Government Services undertake a Best Value Revue and set year on year improvement targets to be overseen by the Audit Commission. The Parks & Countryside Service will publish their adopted BV Improvement Plan in January 2002. National consensus has accepted the Green Flag Parks Award, and the Open Space Management Award as a true benchmark for quality parks and open spaces. These are independently audited by the Institute of Leisure and Amenity Management (ILAM). The site audit identified that no borough park scored high enough to currently get the Green Flag Park Award The consultation survey highlighted a number of areas in need of improvement but in particular staff presence in parks, dog fouling and general maintenance.

Policies:

SI1: Implement the Best Value Improvement Plan, to be published separately in January 2002, over the following five year period.

SI2: Work to raise the standard of our District and Key Local parks and open spaces and attain and retain national recognised awards such as the ILAM Green Flag Park Award. Attain GFPA status for one park in 2002 and attain seven awards over the next 5 years.

SI3: Seek recognition of the high quality customer care provided by the Services by achieving a Charter Mark award within two years.

- 110 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

Policies:

SI4: Ensure that available resources are appropriately focused, and efficiently allocated and utilised:

¾ Carefully review capital and revenue costs incurred by the Service; ¾ Identify savings and opportunities for reallocation of internal and external resources; ¾ Identify, and promote widely, opportunities for leasing and sponsorship, and reinvest revenue into the service; ¾ Work to secure additional funding from other council departments for specific elements of work relevant to each department; ¾ Work to secure additional external funding, both capital and revenue, through grant funding agencies such as SRB, EU, Lottery, Section 106 etc., as appropriate; ¾ Review the potential to redevelop buildings and facilities in parks and open spaces, where there may be potential to improve the quality of service to the public and secure private sector revenue and capital funding as a result of the development; ¾ Appraise the current level of staffing in parks and open spaces to ensure quality of service; ¾ Seek to increase staff presence in parks and open spaces when resources are made available ¾ Seek to secure additional funding for parks staff from external sources

SI5: Work to reduce the negative environmental impact of the Service by seeking sustainable working procedures for all areas of the Service and adopting an environmental management system, including the following:

¾ Ensure that the Grounds Maintenance Contractors meet their contractual obligations to secure ISO14001 accreditation within two years of contract award; ¾ Build recycling measures into contracts with grounds maintenance contractors and sub-contractors; ¾ Implement a green waste recycling scheme in partnership with our contractors; ¾ Produce a strategy for the reduction of pesticide use; ¾ Create an environmentally sound specification for purchase of goods and materials; ¾ Continue to phase in vehicles which will run on LPG; ¾ Continue to use bicycles as a means of transport for the Service.

- 111 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.15 Internal and external consultation/communication

Objective 27:

To actively involve a wide range of people in the management and development of their local parks and open spaces, through consultation, developing sustainable ‘Friends of Parks’ groups and seeking to engage and train volunteer rangers.

Whilst the borough has several parks ‘Friends Groups’, the consultation identified that more people wanted to get involved in their local parks and open spaces. The site audit identified that even where there was local involvement in a park, it was often not visible or promoted on site. Experience clearly demonstrates that active involvement and ‘ownership’ of parks and open spaces by local community groups improves the parks performance.

Policies:

CI1: Aim to ensure that the service extends to everyone in the community through: Consultation with residents, park users, community groups, societies, individuals, particularly focusing on engaging and involving ethnic minority groups, young people and those often marginalised from decision making; Set up, support and develop Friends Groups for parks in the Borough to represent the views of the local population during development projects, and encourage their sustainable self management with minimal Service support thereafter; Develop and promote opportunities for volunteers to become actively involved in their local parks and open spaces by facilitating volunteer ranger and animal centre posts; Developing and encouraging community initiated and managed events in the Borough’s parks and open spaces; Strive to ensure that all residents of Ealing have the opportunity to have a say in the management of their parks and open spaces; Work to ensure that the population of Ealing are kept informed of changes, activities and events in the Borough’s parks and open spaces Ensure that local residents and park users are consulted and fully involved in all developments to their parks and open spaces.

- 112 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

Objective 28:

To provide effective communication within, to and from the Service, including providing planning advice to Development Control on the environmental impact, landscape design and nature conservation issues relating to new development.

Effective internal communications is an essential element of a quality service. Both public consultation and the internal Best Value challenge sessions have revealed that many people are unaware of the range of services provide or the expertise available within the P&C Service.

Policies:

COM1: Ensure that the Parks & Countryside Service provides a focused and relevant service through good internal procedures for communicating between its own staff.

COM2: Ensure that all projects engage, at the earliest opportunities, those officers and agencies who have local knowledge, experience and responsibility for the park or open space in question.

COM3: Ensure that the Service continues to provide a co-ordinated, high quality professional response to planning development control.

COM4: Raise the profile of the Service with outside agencies and organisations by giving appropriate talks/lectures at professional seminars/fora.

- 113 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 11 – Policies and Objectives

11.2.16 Health and Safety

Objective 29:

To provide and internal and external service which fully takes into account its obligations to the public and staff health, safety and welfare in accordance with British and EU Legislation and guidelines.

Both the site surveys and the user surveys identified that many parks and open spaces scored low on health and safety, especially in relation to sports pavilions and playgrounds.

Policies:

H&S1: The Parks & Countryside Service commits itself to meeting its obligations under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 as amended and any such applicable subsequent EU legislation

H&S2: The Parks & Countryside Service will seek to ensure a safe and healthy environment within its parks and open spaces for its customers to enjoy

H&S3: The Parks & Countryside Service will seek to provide a safe and healthy working environment within which its staff and contractors can undertake their duties

H&S4: Maintain up to date safe working procedures for both the office and site situations

H&S5: Undertake routine daily/weekly inspections of playground equipment by appropriately trained staff and undertake annual external audit of playground equipment by independent specialists.

H&S6: Ensure that the site permit to works are issued to appropriate contractors

H&S7: Ensure that meaningful, comprehensive risk assessment and method statement are produced which identify staff responsibilities, before any works are instigated on site.

H&S8: Ensure that the Construction Design and Management Regulations are enforced in appropriate cases

- 114 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps

12 APPENICES

- 115 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Appendix 1 – Parks Audit Scores

- 116 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Appendix 2 – Table of Outdoor Sports Provision

- 117 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Appendix 3 – Matrix to define the Priority for Investment in Parks

- 118 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Appendix 4 – Matrix to Define the Priority (By Priority Ranking)

- 119 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps 13 MAPS

- 120 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 1 – Parks and Open Spaces in Ealing

- 121 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 2 – District Parks Area of Deficiency

- 122 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 3 – Local Parks Area of Deficiency

- 123 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 4 – Grounds Maintenance Contract Areas

- 124 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 5 – SRB Areas

- 125 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 6 – Playgrounds in Parks

- 126 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 7 – Playgrounds in Parks Open Spaces and Housing Estates

- 127 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 8 – Sports Facilities

- 128 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 9 – Nature Conservation Sites

- 129 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 10- Town Centres in the Borough

- 130 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 11 – Distribution of Consultation Groups

- 131 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 12 – Park Royal SRB Area

- 132 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 13 – Southall SRB Area

- 133 - Parks And Open Spaces Strategy Chapter 12 – Appendices and Maps Map 14 – Action Acton SRB Area

- 134 -