Agenda and draft minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Hodson, Bullen, Sandell and Ring.

To approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on the 8^th January 2025.

RESOLVED: The Minutes from the previous meeting were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Please indicate if there are any interests which should be declared.  A declaration of an interest should indicate the nature of the interest (if not already declared on the Register of Interests) and the agenda item to which it relates.  If a disclosable pecuniary interest is declared, the Member should withdraw from the room whilst the matter is discussed.

Those declarations apply to all Members present, whether the Member is part of the meeting, attending to speak as a local Member on an item or simply observing the meeting from the public seating area.

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider any business which, by reason of special circumstances, the Chair proposed to accept as urgent under Section 100(b)(4)(b) of the Local Government Act, 1972.

There was none.

Members wishing to speak pursuant to Standing Order 34 should inform the Chair of their intention to do so and what items they wish to be heard before a decision on that item is taken.  

Councillor Heneghan was present under Standing Order 34 on Zoom.

If any.

There was none.

Click here to view the recording of this item on YouTube

The Electoral Services Manager summarised the report.

The Chair thanked the Officer for the report and invited questions and comments from the Panel, a summary of which is set out below.

In response to a question from Councillor Kunes, the Electoral Services Manager confirmed a proposal had been received to dissolve Hilgay Parish Council and two separate Parish Council’s established for Hilgay and Ten Mile Bank.

In response to Councillor Colwell’s question, the Electoral Services Manager explained that two Community Governance Reviews (CGR’s) had been submitted. He added one was from Hilgay, as previously mentioned and the other from Burnham Market to reduce the numbers from 11 to 8 Parish Councillors.

Councillor Colwell referred to enquires from residents of West Lynn and sought clarification if a Delegated Decision could be taken for West Lynn to create a Parish Council due to the Local Government Reform. He questioned what residents should do and say for a Parish Council to be created for West Lynn.

The Electoral Services Manager confirmed further detail would be needed and a further conversation with Councillor Colwell could be had at a later time. He added there were different reasons as to why a CGR was done.

Councillor Kemp referred to the comments made by Councillor Colwell and explained residents of West Lynn had the initiative to create a Parish Council to address issues they had concerns about. She questioned how a CGR would be funded to create a Parish Council.

The Electoral Services Manager confirmed the proportion of the funding would not be known and this information was not available at this time.

RESOLVED: The Panel noted the report.

Click here to view the recording of this item on YouTube

The Investment Programmes Officer gave a presentation on the report. 

The Chair thanked the Investment Programmes Officer and invited questions and comments from the Panel, a summary of which is set out below.

Councillor Kunes commented the Boost project was a success with 33 people going back into work.

Councillor Kemp commented the Boost project provided confidence building, improved mental health and overall was good for the Borough. She added she referred residents to the Boost project.

Councillor Colwell sought clarification on when it was expected to find out about the Rural Funding. He commented the light project programme had been well received, and the Borough was known for this project.

The Investment Programmes Officer confirmed it was unknown when a decision would be made.

The Vice- Chair, Councillor Devulapalli referred to the Rural England Prosperity Fund and active travel enhancements. She questioned if there were provisions for rural buses as these were needed and at earlier and later times.

The Regeneration Programmes Manager confirmed this would fall under the Norfolk County Council Bus Service Improvement Plan funding. She explained priorities and allocation of the funding was not yet decided. She explained a survey had been sent to all councillors for their input on the priorities on bus provisions.

The Vice- Chair, Councillor Devulapalli asked if the Panel would recommend further feedback on the survey for rural bus services to be improved.

Councillor Devulapalli was reminded she could attend the Transport Informal Working Group where the feedback from this survey would be presented. Councillor Devulapalli stressed the importance of a bus service from Marham to Downham Market and the boost in the economy.

The Regeneration Programmes Manager commented this was highlighted as an issue in the West Norfolk Economic Strategy

RESOLVED: The Environment and Community Panel supports the following recommendation to Cabinet:

1.    Approve alignment of 2025/26 UKSPF investment with the West Norfolk Economic Strategy

2.    Approve the £600,773 UKSPF investment programme for 2025/26 as set out in Table 2, Section 3 in line with the indicative budget allocations in Appendix 1 (EXEMPT).

3.    Approve proposals in Section 4 for investment of REPF funding for 2025/26 should an additional allocation be awarded.

4.    Delegate authority to the Assistant Director for Regeneration, Housing & Place in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Business to approve budget allocation variations (including removal of any ongoing funding for at risk projects) of UKSPF funding for 25/26 to ensure fulfilment of spend.

Click here to view the recording of this item on YouTube

The Regeneration Programmes Officer introduced the report and invited the representative from Art Reach to present the report further.

The Chair thanked the Regeneration Programmes Officer and the representative from Art Reach and invited questions and comments from the Panel, a summary of which is set out below.

Councillor Kemp highlighted the definition of heritage included in the report and questioned why key assets such as Southgates and Redmount were not included in the strategy.

The Cultural Officer confirmed Southgates was included in the strategy on page 8. He explained the definition used was from the National Lottery fund.

Councillor Kunes referred to the report which included late night buses running from town for cultural and heritage events. He commented buses from the town used to run late.

The Vice-Chair, Councillor Devulapalli sought clarification if there was any focus on the Walks or the Riverfront.

The Cultural Officer explained the strategy was developed following consultation with residents.

Councillor Colwell referred to the Riverside as a historic asset and commented the scheme was previously not ambitious enough and the Riverfront area needed to be enhanced.

The representative from Art Reach confirmed the Riverfront was included in the strategy as an action as a priority four as outlined on page 12 of the Strategy.

Under Standing Order 34 on Zoom, Councillor Heneghan supported the strategy and put herself forward to be involved in strategic and task groups. She added she was keen for the Riverside to be developed.

The representative from Art Reach clarified there was a specific action on page 29 of the strategy to develop a Riverside programme.

In response to a question from the Vice Chair the representative from Art Reach confirmed consultation had been carried out with the College of West Anglia. She advised there was not a specific course offered relating to culture and heritage, however the consultation was carried out with students on creative courses.

The Cultural Officer added further creative courses included media, marketing and performance to inspire students about culture and heritage.

Councillor Bland referred to the exhibitions which were held in historic buildings and highlighted it was always the same local schools which attended as rural schools were unable to travel.

Councillor Colwell suggested the Community Grant Scheme could be used to fund travel expenses for rural schools to attend heritage and cultural events.

The Cultural Officer confirmed this could be investigated and considered. It was agreed that the Panel would be advised of a response.

Councillor Colwell questioned if King’s Lynn Football Club had been considered in the strategy.

The Cultural Officer advised that while King’s Lynn Football Club was a cultural asset, it was being considered within the remit of the leisure strategy.

RESOLVED: The Environment and Community Panel supports the following recommendation to Cabinet:

1.    Endorse the King’s Lynn Culture & Heritage Strategy as set out in appendix 1.

2.    Establish the new governance structure and recruitment of steering group  ...  view the full minutes text for item EC77:

Members of the Panel were reminded that an eform was available on the Intranet which could be completed and submitted if Members had items which they would like to be considered for addition to the Work Programme.

RESOLVED: The Panel’s Work Programme and Forward Decision list was noted.

To note that the next meeting of the Environment and Community Panel is scheduled to take place on 8^th April 2025 at 4:30pm in the Council Chamber, Town Hall.

The next meeting of the Environment and Community Panel would be held on 8^th April 2025 in the Council Chamber, Town Hall.