Adran yr Economi, Gwyddoniaeth a Thrafnidiaeth Department for Economy, Science and Transport

Eich cyf/Your ref Ein cyf/Our ref ATISN 9531

James M J Hewitt [email protected]

9 July, 2015 Dear Mr Hewitt Request for Information – ATISN 9531

I wrote to you on 22 June 2015 regarding your request for information. In your request you asked for all correspondence including letters and e-mails sent to the Forest of Dean District Council and circulated internally by the made in respect of Highway issues relating to the Forest of Dean District Council Outline Planning Application P1530/14/OUT.

I can confirm that we hold information relating to your request which I have enclosed at Annex 1 of this document. Some names have been redacted under Section 40(2), (third party personal data) of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2000. The reason for applying this exemption is set out at Annex 2 of this document. Please note that the Welsh Ministers hold no authority to comment or direct Planning Applications outside of Wales.

If you are dissatisfied with the Welsh Government’s handling of your request, you can ask for an internal review within 40 working days of the date of this response. Requests for an internal review should be addressed to the Welsh Government’s Freedom of Information Officer at: Information Rights Unit, Welsh Government, Cathays Park, , CF10 3NQ, [email protected]. Please remember to quote the ATISN reference number above.

You also have the right to complain to the Information Commissioner. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.

However, please note that the Commissioner will not normally investigate a complaint until it has been through our own internal review process.

Yours sincerely Claudia Currie Route Engineer

Cathays Park - 2 Cardiff [email protected] CF10 3NQ www.gov.wales

Annex 1

From: Welsh Government Sent: 13th October 2014 11:43 To: South Wales Truck Road Agent Re: RE: Planning Application Consultation: P1530/14/OUT

I was not aware of this development, but we were consulted on one nearer to the Welsh Border which would have a small impact on the bridge. I have cut and pasted the comments below as there is nothing much we can suggest other than improvements for pedestrians as the Welsh Ministers have no authority over the Planning Authorities in England.

OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR UP TO 110 HOMES, PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, LANDSCAPING, HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS AND ASSOCIATED ENGINEERING WORKS ON LAND AT BEACHLEY ROAD, SEDBURY, NP16 7AA The proposal for 110 new homes in Sedbury will generate a proportion of walking trips over the A48 bridge as a result of its relative position to and its services. The Welsh Government (Transport) as highway authority for the motorway and trunk roads in Wales therefore advises that any consent your Authority may grant should be subject to a Section 106 agreement that secures an appropriate contribution from the developer towards any option for the A48 bridge that may come forward. An options report is currently being worked up which will consider Trief kerbing, pedestrian guard railing and speed limit reduction. The outcome of the report may recommend the options in isolation or as a package of combined measures.

Regards

------

From: South Wales Agent Sent: 7th October 2014 17:33 To: Welsh Government Subject: FW: Planning Application Consultation: P1530/14/OUT

Hi

Are you aware of the development in Tutshill attached?

It is quite a distance away from our boundary with Gloucestershire CC but wondered if you have any concerns on this development and whether it may impact on any future proposals along the Wye Bridge.

------

From: Forest of Dean Government Sent: 30 September 2014 12:10 To: South Wales Subject: Planning Application Consultation: P1530/14/OUT

Please see attached document

Forest of Dean District Council Planning Division Council Offices High Street Coleford Glos GL16 8HG

For the attention of:

Our Ref: qA1152707 Your Ref: P1792/13/OUT

21st March 2014

Dear Sir,

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE) (WALES) ORDER 2012: OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR UP TO 110 HOMES, PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, LANDSCAPING, HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS AND ASSOCIATED ENGINEERING WORKS ON LAND AT BEACHLEY ROAD, SEDBURY, NP16 7AA

I refer to your consultation letter dated 28th March 2014 with regard to the above planning application.

The proposal for 110 new homes in Sedbury will generate a proportion of walking trips over the A48 bridge as a result of its relative position to Chepstow and its services. The Welsh Government (Transport) as highway authority for the motorway and trunk roads in Wales therefore advises that any consent your Authority may grant should be subject to a Section 106 agreement that secures an appropriate contribution from the developer towards any option for the A48 bridge that may come forward. An options report is currently being worked up which will consider Trief kerbing, pedestrian guardrailing and speed limit reduction. The outcome of the report may recommend the options in isolation or as a package of combined measures.

Yours faithfully,

Welsh Government

Ministerial Correspondence from the Minister of Economy, Science & Transport Ref: EH/06222/14

From: Welsh Government Sent: 01 December 2014 16:24 To: Welsh Government Subject: FW: Forest of Dean District Council (mail reference 917786)

For a jacket please.

Regards

------From: South Wales Transport Trunk Road Agent Sent: 01 December 2014 16:20 To: Welsh Government Subject: FW: Forest of Dean District Council (mail reference 917786) Importance: High

Please see e-mail below as requested by XXXXXXX below that I forward to you.

A background note will be completed in relation to this and sent to you when completed.

Thanks

------From: South Wales Transport Trunk Road Agent Sent: 01 December 2014 14:31 To: Welsh Government Subject: FW: Forest of Dean District Council (mail reference 917786) Importance: High

Good afternoon

Please see below an e-mail from XXXXXXX in relation to a planning application.

We have drafted a response below, could you please let me know if this is ok to send out?

Regards

------From: South Wales Trunk Road Agent Engineer Sent: 27 November 2014 16:17 To: South Wales Trunk Road Agent Subject: RE: Forest of Dean District Council (mail reference 917786)

Please process following response

Dear Mr

With reference to your email enquiry dated the 13th November 2014, I would confirm that the South Wales Trunk Road Agent (SWTRA) received an email from Forest of Dean Council on the 24th February 2014 in relation to the planning application for 110 homes in Sedbury.

All planning comments made by SWTRA are normally passed to the Welsh Government, who as Highway Authority for Motorway and Trunk Roads in Wales, to provide the official response to the Forest of Dean Council. I would also advise that Welsh Ministers have no authority over planning authorities in England.

I trust this information is of assistance.

------From: South Wales Trunk Road Agent enquiries Sent: 26 November 2014 12:27 To: South Wales Trunk Road Agent Engineer Subject: Forest of Dean District Council (mail reference 917786) Importance: High

I have logged in this enquiry and the mail number is 917786 and I have filed electronically on DC12.

Regards

------From: Enquirer Sent: 13 November 2014 19:33 To: South Wales Trunk Road enquiries Subject: Forest of Dean District Council Importance: High

Good evening I am a lawyer and represent a group on a pro bono basis and which is opposed to the planning application for a further 120 houses in NP16 7PS and whilst a Welsh post code is marginally in England. It is indeed Tutshill.

Recently an Inspector for the Appeals process (in England) dealt with an application on appeal for some 110 houses in Sedbury again NP16 but again in England. His report was silent upon upon comment from the Agency. Thus he could only deal with what was before him and on appeal planning was granted.

Thus you have in future much more traffic coming into Wales. If Tutshill is granted then Allaston and Lydney you have some 600 more cars coming into Wales.

It is a fact that the planning portals for all developments at Coleford are silent and with no comments from the Agency.

Indeed I go further and the FODDC will allege I say that they contacted you as to the impact upon the A48 in Wales but you did not respond?

They were pointed in your direction by CC and you might be interested in this......

Quite obviously this it is alleged is a serious matter and without wishing to take up our respective time I would welcome an open response from you by close of business tomorrow.

I will not waste our respective time on Freedom of Information requests but will enlist the help of Andrew R T Davies to make a personal intervention during proceedings in Cardiff as in urgent business.

Of course and for balance you might respond that the FODDC did not indeed contact you.

You may see the direction from which I am coming and my apologies for the pun.

Yours

Minister for Economy, Science and Transport response: 22 December 2014 Dear

Thank you for your email of 13 November regarding planning applications in the Forest of Dean. I am the Minister responsible for with no remit for transport issues within England.

However, I can confirm that my officials have been consulted by the Forest of Dean Planning Department on the three Planning Applications for housing detailed in your letter: Tutshill, Sedbury and Allaston.

My officials have also been consulted by Monmouthshire County Council in respect of the Mabey Bridge site in Chepstow and they have confirmed that the Applicant has taken account of the developments within the Forest of Dean. A formal response to the Council will be issued in due course, within the required consultation period.

Ministerial Correspondence from the Minister of Economy, Science & Transport Ref: EH/06534/14

From: Enquirer Sent: 22 December 2014 21:00 To: Welsh Government Subject: Re: Please see attached response from the Minister our reference EH/06222/14

Thanks and thus a follow up request under the FOI Act.

Following the consultation from the Forest of Dean District Council in respect of Allaston Sedbury and Tutshill did the Minister or her Officials react to or take notice of such consultation in that there were and are substantial health and transport difficulties to be faced by Wales from such developments.

If so how did her reaction manifest itself given the impact on Health in NP16 7PS and whilst in England is indeed an annexe of GP practices in Chepstow and which have contractual arrangements with the Aneurin Bevan University Health Board and with this matter being subject to a Parliamentary enquiry on Cross Border Health.

Then finally given the impact of the three developments did the Officials of the Minister consult with the Trunk Agency as to the impact of traffic flow in and around Chepstow and more so as the potentially damaging pollution difficulties at Hardwicke Hill

Looking at the Minister’s signature I am presuming that this is not given in her own hand but by automatic means?

Yours

Minister for Economy, Science and Transport response: 4 February 2015

Dear

Thank you for your further email of 22 December regarding planning applications in the Forest of Dean.

My officials responded to these consultations in 2014. The responses were limited to advising that the Forest of Dean Planning Authority could consider securing an appropriate S106 contribution from the developer. This would relate to any option regarding the A48 bridge where increased walking trips over the bridge may occur as a result of its relative position to Chepstow and its services.

We have no jurisdiction over any planning authority decisions made outside Wales.

The Trunk Road Agents carry out the day to day operation, maintenance and improvement of the network on our behalf. They would not be consulted independently of the Welsh Government on Planning Applications.

Annex 2

Section 40(2) – Personal Data

Section 40(2) of FOIA requires third party personal data to be withheld in circumstances where its disclosure would breach any of the data protection principles set out in Schedule 1 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA).

We consider that disclosure of this personal data would breach the first data protection principle. The first data protection principle requires that processing of personal data must be fair and lawful and, in particular, that it should not be processed unless one of the conditions set out in Schedule 2 of the DPA is met.

In determining whether disclosure would contravene the first data protection principle, we have considered whether disclosure would amount to fair and lawful processing of those individuals’ personal data. The individuals concerned do not have public facing roles. We consider that those individuals would be under the reasonable expectation that their information would remain confidential and not disclosed to the public at large. As such, we do not consider that disclosure of the redacted personal data would be fair.

Guidance from the Information Commissioner’s Office (Personal information (section 40 and regulation 13) v1.0) states:

“The public authority must decide…….whether it would be fair to disclose the personal data. If the public authority concludes that it would not be fair, then it must not disclose the information in response to the FOIA request”.

In this instance, because the individuals would have had no expectation that their personal data would be released into the public domain, we believe that release of this information would be unfair and so breach the first data protection principle. For that reason, the information is being withheld under section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act. This is an absolute exemption and not subject to the public interest tests.