In attendance
| Name | Organisation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Andria Birch (AB) - Chair | Bassetlaw Community and Voluntary Service (BCVS) | CEO |
| Julie Beresford (JB) | Bassetlaw District Council (BDC) | Head of Growth & Economic Prosperity |
| Sally Gillborn (SG) – Deputy Chair |
NNBID | CEO |
| Rebecca Bibby (RB) | Bassetlaw District Council (BDC) |
Admin Support Assistant |
| Michelle Cleaver (MC) | Bassetlaw District Council (BDC) |
Programme Officer |
| Peter Gaw (PG) | Inspire | CEO |
| Philip Jackson (PJ) | Worksop Business Forum | Chair |
| Michael Hirst (MH) | BPL | CEO |
| Stephen Marwood (SM) | Environmental Agency | Sustainable Growth Manager |
| Dee Sissons (DS) | Aurora | CEO |
| Becky Law (BL) | Member of Public | - |
| Tina Masters (TM) | Bassetlaw District Council (BDC) |
Media Officer |
| Robert Harrison (RH) | Nottinghamshire Police | Bassetlaw Neighbourhood Policing Inspector Wildlife Crime and Heritage Crime Officer |
| Chris Grocock (CG) | Futures Group | Head of Business Development |
| James Harrison (JH) | MHCLG | Grant Manager |
| Richard ward (RW) | NCC | Deputy Cabinet Member for Economical Development and Asset Management. |
| Craig Taylor (CT) | Bassetlaw District Council (BDC) | Asst. Chief Executive & Director of Regeneration & Neighbourhood |
| Ted Rizzo (TR) | Worksop Together | Marketing Degree Apprentice |
| Jo White (JW) | MP | - |
| Paul Stuart (PS) | East Midlands Chamber of Commerce | Head of Business Support |
| Tony Ward (TW) | S80 | CEO |
Apologies
| Name | Organisation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Karen Whitlam (KW) | Citizens Advice North Nottinghamshire |
CEO |
| Dave Skepper (DS) | Stagecoach |
Action Table
| Previous Actions | Undertaken by | Timeline |
|---|---|---|
| 6.1 Circulate the LGF slides/briefing note and share the single assurance framework guidance with the minutes. | JB | RB to share with minutes |
| 7.1 Arrange meeting with Jaysika Dennis to confirm the Board’s decision and clarify the scope of works. |
MC | Weds 29th July |
| 7.2 Apprenticeship recruitment urgently. | MC/AB | Complete |
| 7.3 Share the link for the website when live. | MC/RB | Weds 29th July |
| 8.1 Distribute CoI forms and Code of Conduct forms | RB | Completed by RB |
| 8.2 Circulate the sub-group terms of reference. | MC/RB | Complete |
| 8.3 Map out clearer process for bringing pipeline projects/business cases to the Board. | - | TBC |
| 9.1 Share the survey report and any updates on The Ship. | MC | Ongoing |
| 10.1 Look into existing safety audits and feedback to Board. | MC | Ongoing |
| 10.2 Contact RS to ask for more specific, and tangible recommendations, including priority locations and design options. | MC | Complete but ongoing |
| 12.1 Circulate update of deep clean | RB/MC | With minutes |
| 15.1 Arrange meeting for discussion on capital investment. |
MC | 11 Aug 2026 |
| New Actions | Undertaken by | Timeline |
|---|---|---|
| Chase again for outstanding COI forms | RB | Done |
| AB to circulate notes from PIP event on 11th September |
AB | - |
| Coordinate sub-groups and send out meeting invites | RB/MC | - |
| Prepare public realm costings | RB/MC | - |
| Contact NTU and query PARM model. | MC | - |
| Send chaser to members for Board profiles. | RB | Done |
| Share website mock up once it has been created. | MC | Done |
| Add Ted to Basecamp | MC | Done |
Minutes of the last meeting and matters arising
Agreed minutes from meeting on 23rd July 2026.
Board welcomes Ted Rizzo as Marketing Degree Apprentice.
Conflicts of Interest
Action: RB to chase COI forms.
Funding Update - Reporting and Capacity Funding
Balance for 2026 £469,520. Mc confirmed the current costings total £256,653.90. Costs comprise £49,918.00 for Community & Bus Engagement, £34,918.00 for CYP Engagement, £40,000.00 for BDC Management Costs, £2,780.00 for the website and £26,613.28 for the engagement unit. Additional expenditure includes £15.59 for domain renewal, £59.84 for Facebook advertising, £300.00 for the website photographer, £149.16 for room hire, £1,000.00 for comms/website updates, £100,760.10 for marketing apprentice degree and £140.00 for the events flag.
The current remaining balance for 2026 is £212,866.
Summary of the finance update
Town Centre and Neighbourhoods Public Realm £63,461 remains in the relevant capital budget. Events Programme - £42,000 allocated through grants and £22,000 remaining from revenue.
Town Centre and Neighbourhood Community Safety - Remaining balances are approximately £26,000 revenue and £90,000 capital in that budget area.
Bringing Back Empty Buildings Back into Use & Business Support – 10 grants have been awarded for business and business support programme. £13,446 remains available within the business grants budget for fit-outs and frontage improvements. The scheme has been well received, with a waiting list of businesses interested in accessing the funding. A final moderation meeting is scheduled for Monday 21st September. In addition, £25,000 of revenue funding remains unspent.
There is a remaining £50,000 revenue in the skills and workforce budget which has not yet been allocated, and £60,000 in capital schemes also remains unallocated.
Community Engagement Update
AB and BL provided the Board an update on community engagement and involvement. Engagement was described as organic rather than linear, building on last year’s programme to inform the investment plan and the first round of this year’s engagement around events. The current phase is focused on identifying which buildings the Worksop community would most like to see brought back into use. The survey remained open at the time of the meeting, with approximately 185 responses received. The emerging picture remained consistent with the previous update, but with a larger sample size. Full analysis will be undertaken once the survey closes. AB provided a brief breakdown of the survey so far:
- Awareness of PIP is increasing, with around 35% of respondents stating they had heard of the programme.
- 44% of respondents said they would like to be more involved in deciding how funding is spent.
- The first resident and community engagement meeting had taken place the previous evening. BL to feedback further.
- The age range of respondents was considered diverse, and 32% of respondents identified as disabled, indicating inclusive participation.
- Male respondents were underrepresented, so further engagement with men’s groups was
identified as necessary. - Participation showed a good ethnic mix for the district, with 9% of respondents from non-white and diverse populations.
The most frequently mentioned building was The Ship, which accounted for around 36% of responses. Other buildings or categories in the top five included the Regal/old cinema, empty shops in the town centre, the French Horn, and banks, particularly Barclays. AB noted that the findings were consistent with previous feedback, particularly around The Ship.
It was noted that bringing heritage buildings and assets back into use aligns with the PIP objectives and could support additional heritage funding. However, feasibility, community priorities, planning considerations, ownership and availability would all need further discussion.
BL reported that the first community meeting had been positive. Around 10 people attended, the majority of whom were residents, with others connected to Worksop through work or other involvement. Attendees discussed The Ship, the old Regal cinema, and empty shops.
The next engagement thread will focus on crime and fear of crime and Board will be informed on responses.
DS asked for clarification whether the current engagement was focused on identifying priority buildings rather than deciding what should happen within them. AB confirmed that the current stage is about identifying which buildings are important to the community; determining future uses will be the next stage.
It was noted that Worksop has many existing community groups where engagement is already happening. These groups need to be involved in the WT PIP community engagement.
Cultural and Heritage Partnership Proposal
PG introduced the paper on developing a coordinated culture and heritage partnership for Worksop. He explained that there are opportunities to use PIP funding as match funding to help lever in additional external investment for culture, heritage and related activity.
Cultural investment in Bassetlaw has been identified as historically low by DCMS and Arts Council. DCMS recently identified Bassetlaw as one of 81 ‘Culture Priority Places’. This designation will direct funding from DCMS and influence a range of bodies (ACE, HLF, Lottery Community Fund) in their funding decisions which may positively influence funding decisions by organisations.
Examples were given of other Nottinghamshire partnership models, including Mansfield, Ashfield Creates and Newark Creates. The Newark model was considered particularly relevant because it involved a smaller group of organisations delivering coordinated projects linked to regeneration and a towns board.
Approximately 25 to 30 organisations had been contacted, with around 10 expressing interest in coming together to discuss a Worksop-focused culture and heritage partnership. PG discussed the partnership should be connected to the Worksop Town Board because of the strong community feedback around events, activity, heritage and pride in place.
Declarations of conflicts of interest
PJ declared that he is a director and trustee of the Priory Gate Council Trust.
DS declared a conflict of interest as Aurora would be supportive of the proposal and would wish to be involved.
DS also asked how the proposed subgroup would relate to existing networks, including the Heritage Network. It was agreed the Board would need to clarify the relationship with existing groups and avoid any duplication of work.
The Board discussed whether the partnership should be a formal subgroup. There was broad support for linking it directly to the Worksop Town Board, as this would provide clarity for funders, avoid confusion between multiple groups and give the partnership appropriate status when seeking investment.
CT pointed out that Board should consider potential funding opportunities and the best way to leverage these opportunities.
The Board agreed to establish a new culture and heritage subgroup as part of the Worksop Town Board. This will be the ninth subgroup within the developing programme structure, with a Board representative, community representation and reporting arrangements into the main Board. Future proposals from the subgroup to follow the agreed business case format once finalised.
AB provided a brief update following her attendance at the Pride in Place event in London on 18th September. She noted that the event had been useful, particularly the resources shared on funding programmes and policy areas aligned to Pride in Place and emphasised the need to monitor the changing funding landscape to avoid duplication and attract additional investment. The key message from the event was that community involvement must remain central to all activity.
Action: AB to write up and share her notes, circulate the presentations received from the event, and forward an electronic copy of the funding paper once available.
Sub-group discussion
MC shared spreadsheet with 9 different sub-groups and asked for members to email confirming their participation and which members would like to chair the sub-groups.
JB asked for confirmation that external partners can join the sub-groups.
AB asked that sub-groups meet regularly and create a business case and feedback recommendations back to the full Board.
Action: RB/MC to coordinate sub-groups.
Worksop Masterplan
Karen Johnson (KJ) – Planning Policy & Infrastructure Manager (BDC) presented to the Board Worksop Town Centre Master Plan Vision, which was developed as a partnership project and adopted by the Council in 2021. The presentation highlighted the key principles and opportunities identified through the Master Plan and how these could inform the Board's future priorities.
Masterplan goes to 2040. Covers wider town centre from train station up to Town Hall and east to west across the centre. Masterplan recognises the increasing importance of town centres as places for experiences, leisure and social activity, rather than solely for retail.
Key concepts: smart & sustainable economic growth, life on the waterfront, active travel choices and sustainable transport, reviving a sense of community, and reconnecting people and history. KJ discussed the geographical zones and explained how each area focuses on different key concepts.
Town Centre Living
Increasing the number of homes within and close to the town centre remained an important objective. This would help support activity during evenings and weekends, as well as daytime footfall.
There was also significant potential to bring redundant and underused buildings, particularly upper floors, back into productive use and provide good-quality residential accommodation.
Innovation District
The Innovation District was identified as an opportunity to support business, research, training and education. The Bridge was highlighted as an example of this type of provision.
Waterfront, Leisure and Green Connections
The development of the Priory Centre was highlighted as an important opportunity to address gaps in leisure and hospitality sector.
Improved connections between the town centre, canal and Sandhill Lake were discussed, including opportunities for: play and recreation, social and community spaces, walking and cycling and nature.
Bridge Street and Heritage
Bringing upper floors back into use could increase activity and natural surveillance, particularly during evenings and weekends.
Improved east-west pedestrian connectivity through Worksop's historic yards was also highlighted. Good-quality routes through the yards could improve connections between Bridge Street, the bus station and cultural facilities while encouraging people to explore the town centre on foot.
Board notes CCTV and lightening under public realm needs to be considered for the public to use these routes.
Healthy Places and Spaces
The area around the Savoy, was identified as having potential to develop further as a multipurpose, family-friendly area for events and hospitality.
Opportunities to make streets and public spaces more engaging were discussed, including public art, lighting, informal play and planting. Small-scale community food growing, could also provide opportunities for residents and visitors to interact positively with town-centre spaces. Board would need to consider maintenance of planters etc.
Station Gateway
Masterplan looks at improving frontage on stations, potential for new housing near the train station to increase commuter usage. Also consider ways to travel around town without cars and encourage walking and cycling.
KJ talked through planning applications and advised that proposals were considered against local and national planning policies alongside planning considerations. The Board were encouraged to use the Council's pre-application planning service when developing proposals. Early engagement would enable planning officers to identify potential issues and advise on the information required to support an application.
KJ discussed work had commenced on a new Local Plan looking ahead to 2045. This aligned well with the Master Plan's 2040 timeframe. It was explained that changes to the national planning framework presented greater opportunities to consider localised issues in more detail.
PJ expressed support for strengthening shopfront guidance. KJ confirmed the Local Plan contained a shopfront policy.
BL highlighted that community engagement has been asking how the types of shops coming into the town centre, including vape shops, are determined. The board asked if planning has bearing over the type of business occupying the town-centre units. JW confirmed National Government was considering changes relating to certain town-centre uses, including vape shops and amusement arcades, which could provide greater local control in future. It was suggested that clear written information for the community on this issue would be helpful and that local communities should be involved in any future consultation.
Board members discussed the relationship between the Master Plan and new Local Plan. It was confirmed that the documents were separate but complementary. The Master Plan could provide evidence and locally determined priorities to inform Local Plan policies.
There was Board discussion around whether the Council owned the Creative Village site and that a scheme relating to the redundant building was progressing, with further information expected to be communicated shortly. The proposed development was expected to support improved connectivity and focus on the site's heritage. Pedestrian access through the town-centre yards was also discussed. It was further confirmed that planning permission was in place to demolish the old dojo building.
AB queried if a planning officer could be involved in Board meetings. It was discussed it may be more beneficial to have planning officers at sub -group meeting where officers could provide advice.
The Board agreed that a business case framework was required and needs to be discussed further in a different meeting. The framework would ensure proposals were considered by the Board through a clear and transparent process, before progressing. AB discussed need for two business case frameworks (smaller one and larger one for capital projects). JB confirms have some internal frameworks which can be shared with the Bord.
Projection Augmented Relief Model (PARM)
Following the Capital Projects Workshop on 11th August, the Board considered a proposal to develop a portable 3D model of Worksop with Nottingham Trent University (NTU). The model would be approximately 100cm x 90cm and could be used as an engagement tool, allowing projects and different data layers to be projected onto the physical model. MC ran through the costings of the project the estimated cost was up to £15,000 including the required IT equipment, with delivery potentially between October and December.
The board discussed the range of potential uses, including supporting community consultation and engagement; making information more accessible and visual, particularly for young people and helping to tell the story of Worksop's development over time.
SM supported the proposal and offered to provide further information through his data analyst.
DS also supported the proposal, highlighting the value of a visual engagement tool for young people and communities.
Board discussed the importance of ensuring the model remains relevant and up to date.
Action: MC to contact NTU and query further.
Decision: The Board supported proceeding and agreed that arrangements should be progressed promptly due to the level of interest and demand.
Website and Communications Update
MC provided an update on the Worksop Together website. The website subgroup has been involved in the initial mock-up and provided feedback, with the first build expected within two weeks.
Professional photography will replace the temporary images, and Board profiles are being added.
- Action: RB to send chaser to members for Board profiles.
- Action: RB/MC to share website mock up once it has been created.
- Action: Add Ted to Basecamp
Skills and Workforce
The Board discussed the Local Growth Fund (LGF) and wider skills and employment landscape. It was agreed that a more detailed update should be presented at the next meeting. Further clarification is also awaited regarding LGF opportunities for PIP areas, including whether PIP areas will be eligible to bid for funding.
The DWP Youth Hub application remains under internal review, with no confirmation yet regarding the successful provider. An announcement is expected imminently.
Public Realm
The Board discussed opportunities for quick-win public realm improvements across Worksop Town Centre, informed by recent walkarounds and the community safety report. MC, RB, PJ and AB have done public realm audits and findings have been sent out ahead of this meeting. To recap the potential improvements identified included:
- Wayfinding and signage, particularly addressing outdated signage and gaps between key arrival points, car parks and the town centre.
- Developing heritage interpretation, trails and blue plaques. MC spoke with John Stocks about potential to celebrate Worksop’s brewery and football.
- Addressing identified gaps in lighting and CCTV coverage.
- Providing additional seating, while ensuring locations and designs complement longer-term regeneration plans. Opportunities for distinctive, PIP seating were suggested.
- Exploring the idea of a mural as relatively quick and visible improvements.
- Improving the canal corridor, including trails, public realm, access.
Significant potential was noted along the canal. The demolition of the derelict building on Dock Road, alongside the planned pedestrian bridge, also presents an opportunity to create an improved gateway into the town centre. Further discussions with the landowner and Canal & River Trust will help inform future proposals.
The Board agreed that the programme should be divided into quick wins that can be purchased and delivered promptly and larger schemes requiring further development.
Action: RB/MC to put together proposals and costs should be prepared through written procedures.
It was emphasised that all proposals, including quick wins, must take account of community safety, accessibility, sustainability and relevant legislative requirements. Consideration must also be given to the ongoing management and maintenance of new public realm infrastructure, particularly waste bins along the canal.
Any Other Business
Next year’s meetings have been drafted, and invites will be circulated shortly.
Meeting Dates for 2026
- 19th November 2026.
- 10am to 12noon.
- Hybrid at The Bridge Skills Hub.
Last Updated on Tuesday, October 6, 2026