Page 5

General comments – A consistent format for presenting the priorities needs to be used. The Infrastructure Specialist Group has a good template that could be circulated. This work also needs to show why a topic is a high priority. Five basic questions should always be asked in the process of prioritising work – who, what, when, why and how. Because resources are finite and there will be a different waiting on different things, a gateway process needs to be identified. This work can be included in the Delivery Board’s project planning workshop arranged for April. (Specialist group work plans received at time of writing minutes of Delivery Board meeting are attached as appendix 2.)

6.

Arrangements for recruiting the permanent chairman for the Delivery Board The Project Director explained that the interim chairman, John Walker’s contract will expire this summer. When his contract was first written, it was expected a decision from MoD would have been confirmed by now. Without the confirmation from MoD, it was felt that the Board cannot recruit a permanent chairman. In light of this, the present chairman is willing to extend his contract into next year. There is still urgency. Even if the chairman’s contract is extended, the Delivery Board needs to agree the Job Description and Person Specification. (At this point, the interim Chairman left the room.) The Delivery Board recognises that it will be difficult to recruit a permanent chairman while there is no MoD decision, and agreed that the interim chairman’s contract should be extended. The MoD’s decision is expected by the summer recess. Therefore, the contract should be extended by at least three to six months beyond this taking the contract into next year, with a recommendation that the contract is actually renewed for one year. The impact of the MoD’s decision on the development of a Delivery Vehicle can be reviewed in December 2011, and will allow the Delivery Board to take advantage of John Walker’s wealth of experience. Renewal of the contract will need to follow EHDC’s procurement procedures and funding of the post is available through the Eco-town funding. The job description and person specification have already previously been circulated with many of the comments now added. Any further comments should be sent to the Project Director as soon as possible.

7.

Transport model and rail feasibility study Tim Wall introduced the transport model. The transport model is now starting to test different scenarios. The Delivery Board noted the findings and these findings will be taken to the Specialist Group. The HRA work could affect the number of houses proposed; therefore a suggestion was made that the transport study should use a 3,000 or 3,500 figure as well as the 1,700, 4,000 and 5,300 options already being tested. However, this additional testing would be difficult to complete before the core strategy’s May 2011 deadline, and would incur

-5-

TW

Delivery Board notes March 2011  

Notes from the meeting of the Whitehill Bordon Delivery Board

Advertisement