Buildings worthy of registration not yet registered

Authority	Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture
Date received	2020-02-14
Outcome	Not upheld
Outcome date	2020-12-31
Case ID	1181449

Summary

The requester asked for a list of buildings identified as potentially worthy of protection but not yet registered, which was refused under exemptions for publicly available information and ongoing research. The subsequent internal review upheld the refusal, noting that arguments regarding the age of research reports would be addressed in a separate outstanding request.

Key Facts

The Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture refused to release the list of potentially protected buildings.
The refusal was based on Section 20 (information accessible by other means) and Section 37 (research and natural resources).
The internal review decision was 'Not upheld' on 31 December 2020.
The requester cited that 31 out of 47 buildings in Ramsey had consultancy reports dating back to 1999 with none since 2014.
The authority noted an outstanding request (ref. 1584697) that would address the arguments regarding the age of the reports.

Data Disclosed

1181449
2020-02-14
2020-12-31
2020-03-18
2020-10-09
47
31
1999
2014
1584697
6
2

Exemptions Cited

Section 20: Information accessible to applicant by other means
Section 37: Research and natural resources

Original Request

The full list of buildings on the Island which have been identified as potentially being worthy of inclusion on the register of protected buildings, but which are not presently included on the register of protected buildings, for each local authority area.

Data Tables (4)


“The	full	list of	buildings on t		he Island w	hich have be	en identifie	d as potential
being	worthy o		f inclusion on		the register	of protecte	d buildings,	but whic		h are
not p	resently i		ncluded	on the	register of	protected b	uildings, for	each	loc
authority		area.

“I		reque	st that	the De	partment re	consider the		withholding		of this d
under	the	S37	exemption it h		as applied.	The exempt		ion relates t		o researc	h being
carrie	d out. A		subsequent Fo		I request 14	55946 has		elicited	information o		n the
exten	t of	the r	esearch	and it	is shown th	at of	the 47	buildings in		Ramsey	31 h	ave
been	subject t		o a consultanc		y report, the	se reports d		ate back as		far as 1	999,
some	do	not h	ave dates avai		lable at all,	and none ha		ve been und		ertaken	sinc
2014.	Officer r		eports	have n	ot been prog	ressed in th		e majority o		f cases,	wher
they	have	bee	n undertaken t		hey similarly	are	all ove	r 5 years ag

“Give		n th	e con	siderable leng			th of time th	ese propert	ies have bee		n on	list	and
the ti		me	which	has	passed si		nce the con	sultants rep	orts have be		en undertake		n, I
feel t		he a	pplica	tion	of	the S3	7 exemption	is unjustifi	ed as	the pe	riod for r	esearch
is	excessive an			d falls		therefo	re outside th	e intention	of this

								falls					outside					the		intention							of		the	section				37		qualified					exemption.					This		request
asked		for		a	“list		of		buildings”,								which					was				withheld.				The		request						did		not	ask		for		any	further
information					relating						to		the		buildings							on		that			list.

Full Response Text

Freedom of Information Co-ordinator Corporate Services Directorate Thie Slieau Whallian, Foxdale Road, St John’s, Isle of Man, IM4 3AS Tel no (01624) 685854 Fax no (01624 685851 Email: defa@gov.im www.gov.im

31 December 2020 Our ref: 1181449 Dear ###,

Information requested by: ###

Summary of Process 1. Request received: 14th February 2020 Request: • “The full list of buildings on the Island which have been identified as potentially being worthy of inclusion on the register of protected buildings, but which are not presently included on the register of protected buildings, for each local authority area.” 2. Response sent: 18th March 2020 Response: • Some information already publically available so exempt from release under section 20, Information accessible to applicant by other means. • Other information exempt under section 37, Research and natural resources. 3. Review requested: 9th October 2020 • “I would request that the Department reconsider the withholding of this data under the S37 exemption it has applied. The exemption relates to research being carried out. A subsequent FoI request 1455946 has elicited information on the extent of the research and it is shown that of the 47 buildings in Ramsey 31 have been subject to a consultancy report, these reports date back as far as 1999, some do not have dates available at all, and none have been undertaken since 2014. Officer reports have not been progressed in the majority of cases, where they have been undertaken they similarly are all over 5 years ago, • “Given the considerable length of time these properties have been on the list and the time which has passed since the consultants reports have been undertaken, I feel the application of the S37 exemption is unjustified as the period for research is excessive and falls therefore outside the intention of this exemption.”

Statutory Considerations 1. Did the public authority respond to your request within the required timescales? No, the Department responded on the 23rd day after receipt of the request. 2. Did the public authority provide the information requested? No, the Department considered it was exempt from release as some of it was already available and the absolute exemption under section 20 (Information accessible to applicant by other means) was applied. The rest was considered exempt by virtue of section 37 (Research and natural resources). 3. Did the public authority conduct a reasonable search for the information? Yes. 4. If the public authority did not provide the information because of the application of a practical refusal reason, was the refusal clear? A practical refusal reason was not applied. 5. If the public authority applied an exemption was it correct and was it explained? Two exemptions were applied correctly and explanations were given. 6. Did the public authority offer appropriate advice and assistance? The request was clear and no assistance was considered necessary. 7. Did the public authority advise you of the internal review process and your right of appeal to the Information Commissioner? Yes, the response letter gave the necessary details. Specific Issues you raised You raise the issue that the information relating to properties in Ramsey is of an age that you consider means it falls outside the intention of the section 37 qualified exemption. This request asked for a “list of buildings”, which was withheld. The request did not ask for any further information relating to the buildings on that list. This review notes however that, although it is not specifically the “list of buildings” the information relating to those buildings is very closely linked to that list. It is also noted that you have an outstanding Freedom of Information request (ref. 1584697) that seeks the full list of all buildings identified as having potential for inclusion on the register of protected buildings, but not presently included on that register. That request suggests some arguments why the information should be released. The argument you mention above relating to the age of the reports will be considered and addressed in the response to that request.

Decision

The final decision of this review is that your complaint is not upheld. Making a Complaint
If you are not satisfied with the result of the review, you then have the right to appeal to the Information Commissioner for a decision on; 1. Whether we have responded to your request for information in accordance with Part 2 of the Freedom of Information Act 2015; or 2. Whether we are justified in refusing to give you the information requested.
In response to an application for review, the Information Commissioner may, at any time, attempt to resolve a matter by negotiation, conciliation, mediation or another form of alternative dispute resolution and will have regard to any outcome of this in making any subsequent decision. More detailed information on your right to a review can be found on the Information Commissioner’s website at www.inforights.im. Should you have any queries concerning this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Further information about freedom of information requests can be found at www.gov.im/foi.

Yours sincerely

18th March 2020 Our ref: 1181449

Dear ###,

We write further to your request which was received on 14th February 2020 and which states:

"The full list of buildings on the Island which have been identified as potentially being worthy of inclusion on the register of protected buildings, but which are not presently included on the register of protected buildings, for each local authority area." Published information Information in relation to buildings that have been identified as being potentially worthy of inclusion on the register of protected buildings is shown in a number of Area and Local Plans which are public documents that can be found here https://www.gov.im/categories/planning-and-building-control/planning- policy/development-plan/local-plans/. The Onchan, Laxey & Lonan and Braddan plans are examples of such. As this information is already publically available it is absolutely exempt from release here under section 20. Other information While the Department does hold a wider list of buildings, these buildings are either those that are included in the Area and Local Plans, or are ones to which no due consideration in respect of whether they are potentially worthy has been undertaken by the Department. While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance the information is exempt under section 37 of the Act (Research and Natural Resources), as disclosure would be likely to prejudice the cultural heritage of the Island and the integrity of the buildings on the list. The information relates to research being, or to be carried out by a public authority and disclosure before the completion of the research would be likely to prejudice the subject matter of the research on the basis the buildings could be demolished, damaged or elements of them could be removed. Such acts would undermine the Department’s ability to protect the cultural heritage of the Island. A process is in place for the correct consideration of buildings to be registered. Once a building is proposed to be registered, the Department gives public notice of this, posts a site notice, informs the local authority and invites representations to be made.

As section 37 is a qualified exemption, it is subject to a public interest test. The public interest must be something that is of serious concern and benefit to the public at large.

Factors in favour of disclosure • To help increase public confidence in the transparency of the building registration process. • To enable the public to examine the list and contribute to its compilation and content, i.e. to aid the consultation process.

Factors in favour of withholding • The release of the list of buildings may lead to the properties being the subject of work which may undermine the condition, architectural merit/value or even the demolition of an unregistered building; before initial protection can be implemented while a thorough and complete assessment of the building may be made. In taking these factors into account the Department has determined that the factors in favour of maintaining the exemption outweigh the factors in favour of disclosing the information.

Please quote the reference number 1181449 in any future communications.

Your right to request a review

If you are unhappy with this response to your freedom of information request, you may ask us to carry out an internal review of the response, by completing a complaint form and submitting it electronically or by delivery/post.

An electronic version of our complaint form can be found by going to our website at https://services.gov.im/freedom-of-information/Review . If you would like a paper version of our complaint form to be sent to you by post, please contact me and I will be happy to arrange for this. Your review request should explain why you are dissatisfied with this response, and should be made as soon as practicable. We will respond as soon as the review has been concluded.

If you are not satisfied with the result of the review, you then have the right to appeal to the Information Commissioner for a decision on; 1. Whether we have responded to your request for information in accordance with Part 2 of the Freedom of Information Act 2015; or 2. Whether we are justified in refusing to give you the information requested.
In response to an application for review, the Information Commissioner may, at any time, attempt to resolve a matter by negotiation, conciliation, mediation or another form of alternative dispute resolution and will have regard to any outcome of this in making any subsequent decision. More detailed information on your right to a review can be found on the Information Commissioner’s website at www.inforights.im. Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Further information about freedom of information requests can be found at www.gov.im/foi.

I will now close your request as of this date.