GovWire

Introduction

This is a response to the consultation that the government ran seeking information and evidence on the residential-led mixed use development that Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd and Alexpo (IOM) Ltd propose to build on the site of the former Jolly Boatman pub and on land adjoining Hampton Court Station at Hampton Court Way, East Molesey KT8 9AE. The development proposed is demolition and redevelopment to provide 97 homes, a hotel (84 beds) and retail units for uses within Use Class E, together with access, station interchange, car parking, servicing, new public realm, landscaping and other associated works. The site is currently derelict and has been for many years.

The consent of the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (the Secretary of State) to this development has been sought by Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd and Alexpo (IOM) Ltd under section 49 of the South Western Railway Act 1913. A planning process has been held in relation to the proposed development, concluding on 8 July 2022.

This consultation provided an opportunity for all interested parties to present any information or evidence relating to the proposed development that had not already been submitted, and which has emerged since full planning permission was granted for the proposed scheme on 8 July 2022 following a Planning Inquiry (ref APP/K3605/W/22/3291416).

Executive summary

The public consultation ran for 9 weeks from 10 April 2024 to 12 June 2024. There were 61 responses containing information which could be assessed. This summary covers the main themes from the consultation responses. It is not possible to describe all the responses in detail.

In addition, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport had previously received correspondence on the proposed development since July 2022. As the consultation stated, information or evidence previously submitted via correspondence since the conclusion of the planning inquiry on 8 July 2022 was considered as part of the decision-making process.

The consultation responses and correspondence were assessed to determine if they presented new evidence for the government to consider since the planning inquiry decision in July 2022 and, where such new information was presented, it was considered in decision-making.

Summary of consultation responses and government response

A range of issues were raised during the consultation that had already been raised during the planning inquiry. These included:

• the impact of the development on Hampton Court Palace
• impacts on the local area and services
• local area benefits
• comments regarding the developers
• the viability of the scheme
• local opposition
• concerns about climate change
• concerns about the tree screening
• comments on the planning process
• concerns about the impact on heritage assets and planning considerations such as alternative uses of the land.

These are important points, however the government considers that the evidence relating to these themes was not new. These important issues were addressed in the planning inquiry, which approved the development.

Comments were raised on the planning process itself. Judicial review of the Planning Inspectors decision could be sought within 3 months. Elmbridge Borough Council sought permission for a statutory planning review but their application was turned down. No other parties took the matter further. The previous granting of planning permission was a significant factor in the governments decision-making.

The government considered that new information was received relating to:

• the revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
• the locally listed assets Cigarette Island Park and The Coal Office; and
• a 1938 Covenant relating to Cigarette Island Park;

Assessment of new evidence

The revised NPPF and local plans

• Consultation respondents drew attention to 2 linked areas of consideration: (1) changes to national planning policy via the NPPF since the decision of the Planning Inspector and (2) changes to Elmbridge Borough Councils local plans, and its assessment of future housing supply.

• The NPPF sets out the governments planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. Changes incorporated into the NPPF in December 2023 (i.e after the Planning Inquiry) state that significant uplifts in the average density of residential development may be inappropriate if the resulting built form would be wholly out of character with the existing area. At the Planning Inquiry the Inspector concluded that the development would enhance the character and appearance of the area. The government has therefore determined that this new provision in the current NPPF does not undermine the grant of planning permission and does not stand in the way of consent in this matter.

• Evidence received noted that since the Planning Inquiry, Elmbridge Borough Councils supply of deliverable housing had declined below levels required by the current NPPF. If the development did not proceed, the local housing supply would be negatively impacted further.

Locally listed assets of Cigarette Island Park and The Coal Office

• In July 2023 Elmbridge Borough Council adopted new Local Heritage Asset Listings for Cigarette Island Park and The Coal Office. Locally listed assets are not in scope of the statutory protections given to nationally listed assets, although they are important to the local area.
• The Coal Office was identified for demolition as part of the planning application (under the name Hampton Court Motors). Its proposed demolition was considered in the Inquiry.
• During the Inquiry, the Inspector treated Cigarette Island Park as a non-designated local heritage asset, and so gave consideration to its importance as such. Under the proposal, Cigarette Island Park will be used as temporary car parking rather than being permanently removed and, as a condition of the planning permission, it will be restored to its current condition after 2 years from the start of development.
• The Coal Office has been locally listed by Elmbridge Borough Council since the grant of planning permission. However, Local Heritage Asset Listing does not give statutory protections to these assets. The government considers that Elmbridge Borough Councils Local Heritage Asset Listing of these assets is not a sufficient reason to not approve the development and plans.

The 1938 Covenant relating to the adjacent Cigarette Island Park

• This covenant is contained in the 1938 conveyance of most of Cigarette Island from the Commissioners of Works (the successor to whom is the DCMS Secretary of State) to the predecessor of Elmbridge Borough Council.

• A covenant appears briefly to have been referred to in the Planning Inquiry (though not specifically identified as this one) but its significance was not considered by the Inspector to be a matter for him to decide upon. A copy of the conveyance containing the covenant was then provided as part of correspondence to the department and is therefore being treated as new evidence.

• The covenant was examined as new evidence as it was not clear that this was the covenant referred to in the Planning Inquiry decision.

• For the purposes of the current development, the covenant requires Elmbridge Borough Council to obtain the DCMS Secretary of States permission to build the proposed temporary car park on Cigarette Island Park, adjacent to the site of the proposed development. The Council has not yet sought this consent. The government does not consider that this requirement is relevant to her consent under the South Western Railway Act 1913 for the development to proceed.

Decision

Following an assessment of this evidence, under Section 49 of the South Western Railway Act 1913 the Secretary of State for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport has given her consent to build the residential-led mixed use scheme on land around Hampton Court Station, specifically the former Jolly Boatman and land adjoining Hampton Court Station, Hampton Court Way, the Western part of Cigarette Island, east of Jolly Boatman and Hampton Court Station site.