FOI003505 EIR Planning

Environmental Information Regulations 2004 request
Planning application 23/01985/AGDET and enforcement reference 25/50262/ENF
I request copies of the recorded environmental information held by RBWM which was considered or relied upon when concluding that the development at Pound Field/Ross Field satisfied the requirements of Schedule 2, Part 6, Class A of the GPDO 2015.
For avoidance of doubt, I am not asking RBWM to create a new assessment, undertake a new survey or measurement, perform new calculations, or provide an explanation which is not already held in recorded form.
Please provide the following recorded information held at the date of this request:
1.    Agricultural unit
Any map, plan, schedule, application material, Land Registry information, GIS record, measurement, calculation, note, email or other document identifying:
•    the land RBWM treated as comprising the relevant agricultural unit;
•    the area of that unit;
•    the area of Ross Field/Pound Field;
•    and every parcel included in the calculation.
2.    Occupation of the unit
Any recorded evidence considered or relied upon concerning:
•    the person or business occupying each parcel;
•    the basis upon which Ross Field, Marsh Meadow or any part of Cookham Commons was treated as occupied as one agricultural unit;
•    any tenancy, licence, grazing right, hay-cutting right, common right, holding record or other occupational arrangement.
Private personal and financial information may be appropriately redacted. I request disclosure of the reasonably severable information establishing the nature, extent and duration of the relevant occupation or rights.
3.    Agricultural use
Any recorded evidence considered or relied upon to establish that the relevant land was in agricultural use for the purposes of a trade or business, including any information concerning cattle numbers, overwintering, hay production or other agricultural operations.
4.    Reasonable necessity
Any recorded assessment, calculation, note, email or supporting evidence concerning whether the proposed barn was reasonably necessary for agriculture within the identified unit, including:
•    the proposed storage capacity;
•    annual hay and straw requirements;
•    the number of cattle served;
•    existing storage facilities;
•    the suitability or capacity of the existing barn;
•    and the scale of the proposed building relative to the agricultural operation.
5.    Class A limitations
Any checklist, assessment, calculation, plan, measurement, note or correspondence recording RBWM’s consideration of the limitations in paragraph A.1, including floor area, height, distance from roads and protected buildings, intended use and any relevant earlier development.
6.    Enforcement assessment and closure
Any non-privileged officer report, assessment, checklist, memorandum, email, file entry, site-visit record, photograph or decision record supporting the statements in the closure note that:
•    “the development meets all the criteria under Part 6”;
•    “the information submitted is valid”;
•    and “the development is lawful.”
Please include any record showing who made or authorised those findings and when they were made.
7.    Completed development
Any record comparing the barn as constructed with the dimensions, siting, design, materials and intended use shown in the documents submitted under 23/01985/AGDET.
Legal professional privilege
I am not requesting the privileged substance of legal advice through this request.
However, factual records, pre-existing documents and independent officer assessments should not be treated as privileged merely because they may also have been supplied to or considered by a lawyer. If any responsive record contains privileged passages, please redact those passages and disclose the reasonably severable balance.
Information not held
For each numbered item, if RBWM holds no responsive recorded information, please state that expressly.
Where regulation 12(4)(a) is relied upon, please identify:
•    the teams, officers, electronic systems and physical files searched;
•    the search terms or application/enforcement references used;
•    whether the planning, enforcement, GIS, property, legal and document-management systems were searched;
•    whether relevant information is held on RBWM’s behalf by an external planning or legal provider;
•    and whether responsive information was previously held but deleted or destroyed, including the applicable retention policy.