Agenda item

Minutes and matters arising from the Board meeting held on 16 February 2018

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting held on 16 February 2018.

 

To receive an update on:

·        Train Station Allotments

·        Thetford Railway Station improvements

·        Update note on regarding the growth proposals for schools in Thetford

 

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 16 February 2018 were agreed as a correct record subject to;

 

a)    Comments referred to in the minutes by BK should be RK (Robert King)

b)    Robert Whittaker was inadvertently omitted from being in attendance

c)    Tina Cunnell be referred to as TC and not DC

d)    Under minute number 5/18 RWh asked that his objection to writing in support of the Heritage Fund as he didn’t think it was appropriate was noted.

 

 

Actions from previous meeting.

 

a)    Thetford Transport Network Improvement Strategy – Minute Number 3/18.

 

                      i.        RWh advised the action included in the minutes had been completed.

 

b)    Educational Standards – Minute Number 4/18

 

                      i.        it was confirmed the briefing note had been received by Members of the group.

 

                     ii.        RD gave an update on the action for Officers included in the minutes. A Partnership Officer had been allocated and would be meeting schools. An outline timescale would be agreed in the summer term and brought back to the Board in the Autumn.

 

                    iii.        RD gave an update on the action for JM included in the minutes regarding the withdrawal of the local bus service. JM had spoken with passenger transport colleagues who advised the bus was still in service and no proposal had been made to cancel this service.

RWh suggested this should be followed up as there was some discrepancy in fact, NCC advised the service remained but report from Councillor Hollis stated it had been withdrawn.

 

ACTION: County Councillors to follow up and give verbal update at the next meeting.

 

                   iv.        RW confirmed the Heritage Lottery bid could be viewed by the Sub- group but not publically. RWh advised the Sub-group had some feedback and considering the number of concerns the Sub-group had he did not feel the Board should support the bid in its current state but if amendments were made he would support it.

 

The Chairman confirmed the Town Councillors were in support

 

TJ stated he was concerned the process was being rushed and Councillors and Community groups were not being communicated with. Heritage Lottery would notice this and the communities should be in support of it.

 

ACTION: TJ take the matter back to the Town Council.

 

RW advised the timescale was earlier than first thought and he had noted points of feedback and would pick up community engagement points.

c)    Little Ouse Waterspace Study – Minute number 6/18

 

                      i.        RWh confirmed TC had given a presentation to the Sub-group.

                     ii.        The open letter had been written in support of the Little Ouse and received by the Town Council.

                    iii.        An invitation to attend a Board meeting to Highways England had been sent.

 

 

d)    Improvements to Thetford Railway Station

 

                      i.        The report was on Page 13. As no comments had been received it was taken that all members were happy with it. A letter had been sent to Greater Anglia.

 

e)    Governance

 

                      i.        Officers Group – The Terms of Reference was an agenda item moving forward.

                     ii.        Sub-Group – RWh said the minutes were not clear as to the make up of the Sub-group. It was confirmed the members were the Board’s Chairman and representatives from Thetford Town Council, Brettenham and Kilverstone Parish Council and Croxton Parish Council.

           

 

f)     LEP Representation

 

                      i.        It was confirmed that LEP had been asked for a member to sit on the Officer Group and the Board.

 

g)    Communities Sub Group

 

                      i.        RWH confirmed a letter had been sent to East Midlands Trains. He queried if the actions could be published on the GTDP website to show people the group was engaged and taking action.

RW advised it wasn’t best practice but the theme of the letter could be uploaded. RWh suggested not all letters should be published but felt the initial letter sent should be.

 

ACTION : The Chairman advised he would investigate what could be published.

 

Supporting documents: