On 18th December 2008 Elmbridge Council approved the development of the site opposite Hampton Court Palace known as the 'Jolly Boatman'. This was despite overwhelming local opposition to the scheme caused by the density of the development. We are now committed to ensure that the approval is overturned if possible, that the development follows the planning approval precisely and that the whole process is undertaken transparently and within the letter of the law.

The Surrey Advertiser published an article on the 15 May pointing out that "a vital legal agreement between the developers of the Jolly Boatman site and the council remains unsigned just weeks before the six-month deadline". We have learned that the project is not being conducted openly and transparently as Elmbridge officials have refused Councillor's requests to access the details of the final contract. We have therefore issued the following press release.

Press release 25th May 2009: Hampton Court Rescue Campaign

Transparency in Local Government?

Councillors helpless

The Gladedale/Network Rail development at Hampton Court Station, the final act plays out behind closed doors.

Attached to the provisional 18th Dec 08 approval given for the controversial redevelopment of the Jolly Boatman site at Hampton Court, Elmbridge Borough Council (EBC) imposed a 6 month time-limitation for the signing-off of the contract binding the developer’s financial obligations. With 3 weeks remaining HCRC is told that the negotiations surrounding the S106, as it is known, are at a final stage, beyond which full planning permission for the multi-million pound scheme will be granted.

HCRC has learned however that the EBC Officers, with delegated powers to sign off the S106, have repeatedly refused Councillors’ requests to access the details of the final contract. According to EBC’s legal dept., the Freedom of Information Act does not apply to this material and its contents will not be revealed to Members until after the contract is signed.

“This is the most dangerous case of the tail wagging the dog.” said HCRC Co-chair, Brian Rusbridge “This is possibly the largest, most complicated and historically sensitive development that Elmbridge will be involved with and Councillors must insist that power and responsibility ultimately rests with elected members and not their paid officials”

The Officer’s significant and irreversible decision is final. Concerns from Councillors, HCRC and the wider public remain unresolved.

• The arbitrary sum of £300,000 proposed in the original application falls woefully short of the estimated real costs of such a radical scheme and that ultimately the Elmbridge rate-payer would bear the burden of the shortfall. Moreover, without an opportunity for adequate scrutiny of the developer’s financial Viability Statement, the Councillors have, once again, had to rely on the Officer’s report. In the subsequent knowledge that the heads of Gladedale Group Limited, Remo Dipri and son John have stepped down from the Company, fears remain.
• The S106 cannot be ratified until the full permission for disposal/sale of railway land has been granted by the Government’s licensing authority, the Office of Rail Regulation, at present outstanding.

Councillors told HCRC that EBC procedure dictates that in the event that the S106 is not signed by 18 June, a new time limit would need approval by full Council. For this reason, EBC Planning officers might, for expediency, bow to pressure from the commercially interested parties and head -off comments or constructive input from Councillors that might impair the ability to sign off the S106 within the present deadline.

“The final decision must be in the hands of the elected members whose job it is to serve the community.” Says Brian Rusbridge.

The following letter was sent to the Surrey Advertiser in response to the letter from the Esher and Walton MP Ian Taylor. On 15 June the Surrey Advertiser reported that Mr. Taylor is to stand down at the next election.

LETTER TO THE EDITOR SURREY ADVERTISER

On 5 June the Surrey Advertiser published a letter from Ian Taylor MP claiming that a letter in the previous issue, had misrepresented his role in the long running battle over the future of the Hampton Court Station/Jolly Boatman site, alleging that its facts were wrong. We can find no fault with it. It was a masterly exposition of the critical position that Elmbridge Council now finds itself.

For over twenty years Hampton Court Station has been allowed to fall into disrepair and the land in front, bordering the Thames, has remained a rubbish tip – a national disgrace. Those seeking commercially to exploit this site only seek to hoodwink the community into believing that “Anything is better than this”. In fact the owners of the railway site have a duty to maintain the station in first-class order and should have been compelled to do so. (Now after all this time they have acted) but GladeDale, the Developers, should have been forced to keep their land facing Hampton Court Palace in good order. Did we ever hear Ian Taylor criticizing the authorities for their failure to act?

Ian Taylor did not form the Portcullis Group. In 2000, Community representatives, on both sides of the Thames met Vince Cable MP., and Ian Taylor with other local and national Authorities and with Hampton Court Palace to find a solution. We, the signatories to this letter were the instigators. We were persuaded by Ian Taylor not to go to the Press, but to allow him to liaise with Elmbridge Planning Officers, who would conduct private meetings with potential developers. From that time onwards it has all been behind closed doors, with the final result of the Planning Approval in December 2008 being given for a monstrous development to cover the whole site.

Elmbridge Planning Officers are now in the final stages of signing agreements to allow the whole disastrous scheme to go ahead. They will not disclose the contents of the agreements, even to Elmbridge Councillors and certainly not to the community – a major manipulation of the democratic process. The Hampton Court Rescue Campaign has consistently pressed for the whole of the complex procedure to be in the public domain. When will Elmbridge Council wake up? It is now rapidly moving towards the biggest disaster in its history with implications for generations to come. We must find a way to stop it in its tracks then all of us can sit together to identify what is right for the future of the Hampton Court/Jolly Boatman site – not what is in the commercial interests of developers.

So, where do you stand on this Mr. Taylor? We acknowledge your skill in sitting astride the fence but this is not an option. You cannot claim to be “Against the development in principle” whilst at the same time supporting the commercial aspirations of the developers to the extent of writing to Hazel Blears, the Sec. of State for Communities and Local Government, as you did, advising her not to call it in for a Public Inquiry. This is a highly critical site with both national and local implications. It should not be left to the hole-in-the–wall activities of Elmbridge Planning Officers.

Please Mr. Taylor, don’t refer disparagingly to the views of “some local residents”. We estimate that over 5,000 people, both locally and throughout the UK have signed petitions and have written a great many letters, many from highly qualified people, opposing this disastrous development. So, Mr. Taylor, don’t fob the residents off with half truths; get your facts right and tell all of us where you now stand.

Brian J. Rusbridge CBE. Joint Chairman, Hampton Court Rescue Campaign
Prof. Bryan Woodriff Joint Chairman, Hampton Court Rescue Campaign