Suffolk Punch Section 106 Agreement
Dear Milton Keynes Council,
In 2017, Milton Keynes Council approved a development at the former Suffolk Punch site in Langcliffe Drive in Heelands (16/01475/FUL).
The Section 106 agreement for this development agreed on 4 April 2008 included a requirement for the developer to either build a Community Hall or to make a Community Facilities Fall Back Contribution of £208,000 which Milton Keynes Council would use to construct a Community Hall.
Please can I request the following under the Freedom of Information Act 2000:
1. Any documents, emails or external correspondence held by Milton Keynes Council relating to the release of the Community Facilities Fall Back Contribution, the Section 106 agreement for the development or the construction of a community hall at this site that have been created since 1 June 2022.
2. Any documents, emails or external correspondence held by Milton Keynes Council relating to Bradwell Parish Council that have been created since 1 June 2022.
Yours faithfully,
Peter Brant
Reference: FOI-480011184
Date of request: 20/01/2023
Title of request: Suffolk Punch Section 106 Agreement
Dear Peter Brant,
Thank you for your request for information. Your request is being
considered and you will receive the information requested within the
statutory timescale of 20 working days.
In the event that the information cannot be released you will be advised
within 20 working days, including your rights of appeal.
Best Regards
Freedom of Information Team
Any personal data will be processed in line with the Data Protection legislation, further details at https://www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/privacy
This email and any attachments hereto are strictly confidential and intended solely for the addressee. It may contain information which is privileged. If you are not the intended addressee, you must not disclose, forward, copy or take any action in reliance of this email or attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it and notify us as soon as possible.
The anti-virus software used by Milton Keynes City Council is updated regularly in an effort to minimise the possibility of viruses infecting our systems. However, you should be aware that there is no absolute guarantee that any files attached to this email are virus free.
Dear Freedom of Information Team,
The statutory timescale for responding to both this request and the request relating to the cost estimate for a community hall that formed part of the Suffolk Punch S106 Viability Assessment and S106 Agreement, which you advised you have merged with this request, expired last week.
Please could you advise when I am likely to receive a response.
Many thanks,
Peter
Reference: FOI-480011184
Date of request: 19/01/2023
Title of request: Suffolk Punch Section 106 Agreement
Information request:
Dear Peter Brant,
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Your request for information has now been considered and the information
requested has been sent to your email directly as the its 8MB and too
large to attach.
If you have a complaint about the handling of your request then you may
request an internal review within the next 40 working days which will be
considered as part of Stage 2 of the Council’s complaints procedure.
You also have a right of appeal to the Information Commissioner at:
Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Tel: 0303 123 1113
[1]www.ico.org.uk
Best Regards
Freedom of Information Team
Any personal data will be processed in line with the Data Protection legislation, further details at https://www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/privacy
This email and any attachments hereto are strictly confidential and intended solely for the addressee. It may contain information which is privileged. If you are not the intended addressee, you must not disclose, forward, copy or take any action in reliance of this email or attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it and notify us as soon as possible.
The anti-virus software used by Milton Keynes City Council is updated regularly in an effort to minimise the possibility of viruses infecting our systems. However, you should be aware that there is no absolute guarantee that any files attached to this email are virus free.
References
Visible links
1. http://www.ico.org.uk/
Good morning,
Your request for information has now been considered and the information requested is attached
If you have a complaint about the handling of your request then you may request an internal review within the next 40 working days which will be considered as part of Stage 2 of the Council’s complaints procedure.
You also have a right of appeal to the Information Commissioner at:
Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Tel: 0303 123 1113
Dear Freedom of Information Act,
Many thanks for the response to part of the information request.
I have two further questions.
Firstly, when do you intend to respond to the request for documents, emails and external correspondence relating to the release of the Community Facilities Fall Back Contribution, the Section 106 agreement, the construction of a community hall and Bradwell Parish Council created since 1 June 2022?
Secondly, is this the full extent of the information which Milton Keynes Council holds regarding the estimated cost of the community hall used in the S106 Agreement? I was hoping there might be further detail about how the cost estimate was developed by Kirkby Diamond and scrutinised by Milton Keynes Council given it is apparent that the cost of the community hall to the specification in the S106 agreement is well over three and a half times higher than the estimated £208,000 cost.
Many thanks for your help,
Peter
Reference: FOI-488991414
Date of request: 20/02/2023
Title of request: Suffolk Punch Section 106 Agreement
Dear Peter Brant,
Thank you for your request for information. Your request is being
considered and you will receive the information requested within the
statutory timescale of 20 working days.
In the event that the information cannot be released you will be advised
within 20 working days, including your rights of appeal.
Best Regards
Freedom of Information Team
Any personal data will be processed in line with the Data Protection legislation, further details at https://www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/privacy
This email and any attachments hereto are strictly confidential and intended solely for the addressee. It may contain information which is privileged. If you are not the intended addressee, you must not disclose, forward, copy or take any action in reliance of this email or attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it and notify us as soon as possible.
The anti-virus software used by Milton Keynes City Council is updated regularly in an effort to minimise the possibility of viruses infecting our systems. However, you should be aware that there is no absolute guarantee that any files attached to this email are virus free.
Dear Freedom of Information Team,
On 19 January I made the following request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000:
In 2017, Milton Keynes Council approved a development at the former Suffolk Punch site in Langcliffe Drive in Heelands (16/01475/FUL). The Section 106 agreement for this development agreed on 4 April 2008 included a requirement for the developer to either build a Community Hall or to make a Community Facilities Fall Back Contribution of £208,000 which Milton Keynes Council would use to construct a Community Hall. Please can I request the following under the Freedom of Information Act 2000:
1. Any documents, emails or external correspondence held by Milton Keynes Council relating to the release of the Community Facilities Fall Back Contribution, the Section 106 agreement for the development or the construction of a community hall at this site that have been created since 1 June 2022.
2. Any documents, emails or external correspondence held by Milton Keynes Council relating to Bradwell Parish Council that have been created since 1 June 2022.
The legal deadline for responding to this request was on 16 February, which is now two weeks ago. However, you are yet to respond to it. Instead, you have responded to a completely different request which for you decided to combine with this one under the same reference number.
I would be grateful if you were able to respond to the request at the earliest opportunity.
Thanks,
Peter
Reference: FOI-494867581
Date of request: 08/03/2023
Title of request: Suffolk Punch Section 106 Agreement
Dear Peter Brant,
Thank you for your request for information. Your request is being
considered and you will receive the information requested within the
statutory timescale of 20 working days.
In the event that the information cannot be released you will be advised
within 20 working days, including your rights of appeal.
Best Regards
Freedom of Information Team
Any personal data will be processed in line with the Data Protection legislation, further details at https://www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/privacy
This email and any attachments hereto are strictly confidential and intended solely for the addressee. It may contain information which is privileged. If you are not the intended addressee, you must not disclose, forward, copy or take any action in reliance of this email or attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it and notify us as soon as possible.
The anti-virus software used by Milton Keynes City Council is updated regularly in an effort to minimise the possibility of viruses infecting our systems. However, you should be aware that there is no absolute guarantee that any files attached to this email are virus free.
Reference: FOI-494867581
Date of request: 02/03/2023
Title of request: Suffolk Punch Section 106 Agreement
Dear Peter Brant,
Best Regards
Freedom of Information Team
Any personal data will be processed in line with the Data Protection legislation, further details at https://www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/privacy
This email and any attachments hereto are strictly confidential and intended solely for the addressee. It may contain information which is privileged. If you are not the intended addressee, you must not disclose, forward, copy or take any action in reliance of this email or attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it and notify us as soon as possible.
The anti-virus software used by Milton Keynes City Council is updated regularly in an effort to minimise the possibility of viruses infecting our systems. However, you should be aware that there is no absolute guarantee that any files attached to this email are virus free.
Dear Freedom of Information Team,
I just received an email from you which had no body or attachment.
Did you mean to attach something?
Thanks,
Peter Brant
Good Morning,
This request was closed as it was a duplicate of the FOI previously requested that the Planning Service is dealing with.
Kind regards
FOI Team
Information Governance
Milton Keynes City Council l Civic, 1 Saxon Gate East l Milton Keynes l MK9 3EJ
www.milton-keynes.gov.uk
Dear Freedom of Information Act,
Thanks for your email.
Is there an estimated time you think you will be able to respond to the request by?
I submitted the request on 19 January and it was due for response on 16 February meaning it is now well overdue. I completely understand if it is taking longer than the statutory timescale to respond but would appreciate this being communicated to me explaining the reasons for the delay.
Yours sincerely,
Peter Brant
Good morning,
We've chased up with the relevant team and was informed that the request was received on 20 February 2023 which was a follow up/additional enquiry to the original request that was made back in January which has already been dealt with.
You should receive a response by 20th March 2023
Kind regards
FOI Team
Information Governance
Milton Keynes City Council l Civic, 1 Saxon Gate East l Milton Keynes l MK9 3EJ
www.milton-keynes.gov.uk
Dear Freedom of Information Act,
The information you have received from your colleagues is incorrect.
What happened is that a completely separate FOI request was merged with this one under the same reference number and only that request was actually answered. This FOI request has never been addressed.
Thanks for confirming that there will be a response next week, five weeks after the statutory deadline.
Yours sincerely,
Peter Brant
Reference: FOI-488991414
Date of request: 20/02/2023
Title of request: Suffolk Punch Section 106 Agreement
Information request:
Dear Freedom of Information Act,
Many thanks for the response to part of the information request.
I have two further questions.
Firstly, when do you intend to respond to the request for documents,
emails and external correspondence relating to the release of the
Community Facilities Fall Back Contribution, the Section 106 agreement,
the construction of a community hall and Bradwell Parish Council created
since 1 June 2022?
Secondly, is this the full extent of the information which Milton Keynes
Council holds regarding the estimated cost of the community hall used in
the S106 Agreement? I was hoping there might be further detail about how
the cost estimate was developed by Kirkby Diamond and scrutinised by
Milton Keynes Council given it is apparent that the cost of the community
hall to the specification in the S106 agreement is well over three and a
half times higher than the estimated £208,000 cost.
Many thanks for your help,
Peter
Dear Peter Brant,
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Your request for information has now been considered and the information
requested is below
[1]FOI-488991414 - Suffolk Punch - Redacted_Redacted
If you have a complaint about the handling of your request then you may
request an internal review within the next 40 working days which will be
considered as part of Stage 2 of the Council’s complaints procedure.
You also have a right of appeal to the Information Commissioner at:
Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Tel: 0303 123 1113
[2]www.ico.org.uk
Best Regards
Freedom of Information Team
Any personal data will be processed in line with the Data Protection legislation, further details at https://www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/privacy
This email and any attachments hereto are strictly confidential and intended solely for the addressee. It may contain information which is privileged. If you are not the intended addressee, you must not disclose, forward, copy or take any action in reliance of this email or attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it and notify us as soon as possible.
The anti-virus software used by Milton Keynes City Council is updated regularly in an effort to minimise the possibility of viruses infecting our systems. However, you should be aware that there is no absolute guarantee that any files attached to this email are virus free.
References
Visible links
1. https://mkcouncil.sharepoint.com/:f:/r/s...
2. http://www.ico.org.uk/
Dear Freedom of Information Team,
I think you have inadvertently provided a link to a share point document which I am unable to access rather than attaching the document you intended to?
Yours sincerely,
Peter Brant
Dear Peter
Apologies, the wrong link provided was wrong. Please try the below.
[1]https://mkcouncil.sharepoint.com/:b:/s/M...
Best Regards,
Freedom of Information Team
Dear Milton Keynes Council,
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of Milton Keynes Council's handling of my FOI request 'Suffolk Punch Section 106 Agreement'.
I believe that the response to the request does not cover all relevant documents that Milton Keynes Council holds on this matter.
To give one example, the documents released make reference to a meeting of Leisure Board in September 2022 where the release of the Section 106 monies was discussed in w/c 10 September 2022. However, there are no documents included in the response about this meeting beyond these later references.
A second example, is that no documents have been released about the meeting of Leisure Board in December 2022 which also discussed the Section 106 funds. I had previously requested the minutes of this meeting under FOI-480009595 and these make reference to a closed action - presumably from the September meeting - that "consideration should be given to investing in other areas".
I suspect what may have happened is that only documents held by the Planning department have been considered and that documents held by the Leisure Team and other parts of MKC have incorrectly not been deemed within scope.
A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/s...
To be clear, my request for an internal review relates only to the specific request for documents created since 1 June 2022 - see https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/s... - rather than the request for the documents concerning the estimated cost of the community hall which was merged with this request.
Yours faithfully,
Peter Brant
Dear Mr Brant
Thank you for your request for an internal review. Your request is being considered and we aim to respond within the statutory timescale of 20 working days.
Thank you for drawing my attention to the Leisure Board. I will make my own internal enquiries as to which teams may hold information in scope but if there are other specific teams you'd like me to check with then please do let me know.
Best Regards,
FOI Reviewing Officer
Dear Freedom of Information Act,
Thanks for your response.
I think looking at documents held by the Leisure Board and those officials involved in work informing the consideration by the Board of release of the Suffolk Punch S106 monies - including communications with Bradwell ward councillors on the subject - would probably cover all the relevant documents
Yours sincerely,
Peter Brant
Dear Peter Brant
For the avoidance of doubt, I wanted to let you know that I consider the scope of part 2 of your request (as below) to relate only to the Suffolk Punch site and associated Section 106 agreement and funds. I understand there are likely correspondence between MKCC and Bradwell Parish Council on several topics irrelevant to this site, so I therefore consider the scope to be restricted to the Suffolk Punch Section 106 agreement only. Please advise if this interpretation of the scope is incorrect.
"2. Any documents, emails or external correspondence held by Milton Keynes Council relating to Bradwell Parish Council that have been created since 1 June 2022."
Thank you.
Best Regards,
FOI Reviewing Officer
Dear Freedom of Information Act,
That's correct: I am interested in any documents relating to the Section 106 monies for the Suffolk Punch development. I requested all documents relating to Bradwell Parish Council to help ensure that relevant documents weren't inadvertently left out of scope if they did not directly refer to the Section 106.
Extending the search for Bradwell Parish Council, the Suffolk Punch, the S106, the community hall and the Community Facilities Fall Back Contribution to the Leisure Board and relevant officials in the Leisure Team should hopefully cover all of the relevant documents.
I would also like to request the relevant documents from the 14 March 2023 Leisure Board but I can put in a separate request for that if it is out-of-scope for this one given timing (though it may be more efficient from your perspective to include it in the current request?)
Yours sincerely,
Peter Brant
Dear Peter Brant
Thank you for your below clarification, it is very helpful.
In terms of your further request, I will log this as a new request purely for clarity. You will receive an acknowledgement with a new reference number. The date of the request will be backdated to 24 March 2023, the deadline will therefore be 25/04/2023 (allowing for 2 bank holidays over Easter). Before I do log the request can you confirm you are happy with the below wording for the request or any amendments you'd like?
"I would like to request documents relevant to the Suffolk Punch Development and its Section 106 agreement from the 14 March 2023 Leisure Board."
Best Regards,
FOI Reviewing Officer
Dear Freedom of Information Act,
Thanks for your help.
No worries on the additional request for the March 2023 documents - I have started a separate request myself (I broadened it out a bit beyond what I asked you) so no need to worry about starting one on my behalf or consider this correspondence to have started the clock running on 24 March.
Yours sincerely,
Peter Brant
Dear Mr Brant
I’ve now completed my internal review of your information request reference FOI-488991414. I believe the request was handled under the incorrect legislation. The requested information relates to planning/property issue and therefore meets the definition of “environmental information” as defined in Regulation 2(1) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR). I will therefore consider the request under EIR not the Freedom of Information Act 2000. I’m aware that the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 provides a higher threshold where information is sought to be withheld, such that presumption is in favour of disclosure, and I have kept this in mind throughout my review.
I understand that your primary concern was that we had not released all information held within scope, such that you suspected we had only searched information held by our Planning team. I uphold your complaint and agree that only documents held by the Planning department were considered and for this I apologise on behalf of MKCC. I would also like to thank you for your assistance with regards to teams who may hold relevant information. I checked with the teams you suggested and additionally asked those teams to suggest if any other teams may hold additional information. We have sourced additional information from the Leisure team, Leisure Board and Property/Estates team and I attach a further disclosure of information.
Some of the documents discuss several matters and therefore anything not related to the Suffolk Punch site or associated section 106 has been redacted as out of scope. Any other redactions are in relation to Regulations 12(3) and 13 (personal data). This comprises names, job titles (where external to MKCC) and contact details of junior colleagues and individuals external to MKCC. In line with our FOI/EIR policy colleagues below Head of Service are afforded a level of privacy, in that their names are redacted, however their job role remains in their email signature, due to the public nature of the disclosure.
This concludes the Council’s internal procedures. If you remain dissatisfied, you have the right to appeal to the Information Commissioner’s Office to investigate. You can find full contact details at www.ico.org.uk.
Best Regards
FOI Reviewing Officer
Dear FOI Reviewing Officer,
Many thanks for your review which seems to cover all the relevant documents. Your help is much appreciated and no worries about the error with your colleagues' initial response: these things happen!
Yours sincerely,
Peter Brant
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now