Summary

The Hampton Court Rescue Campaign remain committed to preventing an international scandal.

• Please sign the online Downing Street petition against the Jolly Boatman development.
• Receive our e-bulletin automatically.
• Architect Keith Garner has initiated a private legal action to review Elmbridge Council's controversial decision.
• Surrey Advertiser points out important legal documents not signed.
• Private Eye takes up the cause.

News Bulletin January 2010

Jolly Boatman Moves to Downing Street

Keith Garner has created an on-line petition on the 10 Downing Street website which appeals directly to the Prime Minister. With every CLICK the Jolly Boatman issue will be brought closer to an intervention by central Government.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/hampton-court/

Saving the Jolly Boatman site is of national and international interest, so please sign up and network this petition by passing it on. Every CLICK counts.

The Legal Battle Continues

The legal wrangling continues for Battersea architect, Keith Garner. He is bravely pursuing a private legal action to seek a judicial review of Elmbridge Council’s controversial decision to give the go ahead to the Jolly Boatman and Hampton Court Station redevelopment.

The case has now been reviewed by Deputy High Court Judge, George Bartlett QC and his initial considerations are now published. The Judge has identified that Elmbridge Council  ‘were required to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the setting of Hampton Court Palace’ but has ‘failed to weigh properly the relevant policies and other material considerations’, and that the Officer’s report was in error by having ‘failed to address this important issue’.

The Case is Delayed by a Technicality

However, the Judge regrettably questioned Mr  Garner’s eligibility to fight his case, observing that, although he submitted an objection to the first set of plans, stating his clear opposition to the general principle of development on the site, he had not objected to the later, redesigned scheme, thus compromising his ‘standing’.  The absence of his second, written objection has meant a delay in proceedings while this precise point is argued.

Garner adds:  “I have asked my solicitors to renew the application for judicial review so that the question of my 'standing' can be considered further.  However, I don’t think Elmbridge should be hiding behind the technicality that I haven’t been given 'standing' so far.  They shouldn’t be wasting council tax payers’ money in this way.”  

HCRC can confirm that Mr Garner has had a continuous involvement with the Jolly Boatman affair since 1995, working alongside MPs Vince Cable and Ian Taylor in his steadfast resolve to resist any development of this sensitive site. It is difficult to accept that his ‘standing’ could be called into doubt.

Please Support Keith Garner's Courageous Stand

It is clear from his efforts with the 10 Downing Street petition that he is strongly committed to proceeding with his case. Garner believes it to be not only an important community issue, which embraces the views of Historic Royal Palaces, the Hampton Court Rescue Campaign and countless other professional bodies and individuals, but also one of National interest.  HCRC is keen to assist him in his courageous endeavour and is pleased to provide a link to his website below.  Here his case can be followed in greater detail and crucially, donations or pledges made to his fighting fund to get his action off the ground.

http://www.kgarch.co.uk/jblegal/

It is customary for legal matters to take time, but HCRC will report his and other Campaign news as the Elmbridge challenge progresses.

Has Development Work Started Already?

The recent kerbside repairs at the Station alarmed some residents into believing that work had already started. But in answer to the fears locally that the bull-dozers would soon be moving in, Elmbridge Planning Dept. still has approvals to grant before a go-ahead.

This is because the final part to the Application, the Decision Notice, granted on the 16^th June 2009 is very demanding. Nearly every condition therein insists on approvals being obtained in writing from the Local Planning Authority before any work commences on the site. e.g. Drainage, Water Supply, Surface Water, Contamination, Traffic and works impacting the safety of a listed building (the Bridge) to list but a few. It is understood that these approvals will not be given without extensive consultation and HCRC will be keeping a keen eye on Elmbridge Borough Council throughout.

Architect Keith Garner Initiates a Judicial Review

In addition, a 3 month period passes after the issue of a Decision Notice in which a legal challenge, a Judicial Review can be mounted. The excellent news is that with only days to spare, a Judicial Review has been lodged. This has been initiated by an architect from Battersea, Mr Keith Garner whose significant professional record, working in Building Conservation and the historic environment, includes acting as consultant to Hampton Court Palace and Kew Gardens.

Very concerning is the reality that a Judicial Review is an expensive business. To help with his urgent need to raise monies to fight the case, HCRC is happy to publicise the details of his fighting fund. If you would like to send him a donation or make a pledge, please see below.

Garner says “The legal challenge is potentially very expensive for me, even if the Protective Costs Order is granted. I cannot afford to keep the legal challenge going without support from members of the public.

Details of the bank account I have set up to fund the legal challenge are as follows:

This account is solely for the purpose of paying my solicitors Richard Buxton Environmental and Public Law, and the barrister David Smith of Landmark Chambers. I have nothing personal to gain from bringing this legal challenge, which I believe is in the public interest”.

See www.kgarch.co.uk/jblegal/

HCRC eagerly awaits the imminent response from Elmbridge to the premise that the Gladedale development breeches Government guidelines on Flooding and Heritage. It will be interesting to see how Elmbridge replies since, through the long history of this Planning decision, HCRC has been repeatedly fobbed off on these and other equally critical issues.

Surrey Advertiser Points Out Vital Legal Documents Not Signed

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

Click to read
PRIVATE EYE's expose of this "international scandal".

“Hampton Court is one of the three most important palace complexes to have survived in Europe. It is surrounded by a unique and magical landscape. Anything that gratuitously damages it isn’t a national scandal but an international scandal.”

David Starkey
Britain’s leading Tudor historian