|
Post by admin on Oct 6, 2023 20:47:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by rodders on Oct 6, 2023 21:46:14 GMT
Bloody wonderful !!! Will the council have the balls to resist the greed and avarice of the money boys, when the objections would seem to me now overwhelming.
|
|
bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 116
|
Post by bratters on Oct 6, 2023 22:12:41 GMT
Bloody wonderful !!! Will the council have the balls to resist the greed and avarice of the money boys, when the objections would seem to me now overwhelming. You would like to think so! And also keeping in mind that the council will only benefit when council tax and business rates start to roll in in possibly 8-10 years time. Plus any manner of stuff the council can get out of the development with section 106.
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 6, 2023 22:25:57 GMT
Bloody wonderful !!! Will the council have the balls to resist the greed and avarice of the money boys, when the objections would seem to me now overwhelming. The key bit to note here is that according to Sport England, AEPG have not addressed the loss of the existing sports facility in their supporting information and there is therefore insufficient information provided to assess the loss of the existing sports facility in according with the relevant policies. However, I'm reliably informed that AEPG have allegedly submitted to Council exactly that information that Sport England say isn't provided. I couldn't find it either and PCC have ignored my e-mail request for it's location or a copy! Work that one out in the spirit of openness and transparency? If anyone can find it then I'll be happy to take that back.
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 7, 2023 10:27:31 GMT
From the BSF (OldNutter) 7/10/23 Assuming the application goes to the planning committee, there are some really serious rules that the councillors will have to follow. Actual members of the committee will be voting on it after all the discussions at the meeting and the rules governing what they can and cannot do are very strict, so even if they have been convinced the application should be rejected, they must not say or do anything to display those feelings or they will be barred fro voting when it comes to that in the meeting. For instance they cannot really speak other than strict information only. This can be a bit depressing for people have objected because it seems as though the deck is stacked against them in the meeting - that is because it is. Facebook and Twitter(X) can be quite deadly in these circumstances. Councillors who are not on the committee can speak for or against the application, so it is worth identifying those councillors and making sure they get the majority of the lobbying . There is a document spelling all this out at democracy.peterborough.gov.uk - Planning Code of ConductSections 7.5 to 7.8 are worth a couple of minutes reading if you are going thinking of going to the meeting. Based on my experience, the chairman of the meeting will be ruthless about who can officially speak and how long they can speak for. Both members of the public and non-committee councillors will probably only get 3 minutes for their session. Where it can get interesting is if there is a decent number of members of the public there. Those in the public gallery cannot officially speak, but they can get a bit rowdy up to a point before getting told off (shades of "order, order"). For example, one of the official speakers will be the applicant (presumably Butterfield) and it would not be surprising for the public gallery to get a bit noisy when he comes out with the sort of BS we have become used to. At that point, the chairman will probably have to intervene to quieten things down (hopefully) but the level of discontent having to be put down can have the desired effect without having to use any words. For instance, nodding heads, frowns and eye rolls, muttering etc of the sort you see and hear in the House of Commons, can work wonders for communicating discontent or disapproval without words or permission to speak and that can influence the members of the committee if they think things are not quite a as right as they might have thought. With the numbers of objectors to this awful plan, despite many of them not strictly in line with planning challenges, there can be no doubt about how badly the public consultation phase has actually turned out during the pre-planning stage and this is very important in the scheme of how the planning system should work. Huge numbers of objections are not supposed to happen in the way the system operates properly because the pre-planning moves are supposed to iron out all that stuff with proper believable realistic plans being produced in line with the Local Plan and local wishes - no surprises is the order of the day. And one final gem I picked up is that the plan as it has been tabled cannot be changed once it is presented, so for instance the planning committee cannot say it might work if you changed it a bit Mr B - he would be told he will have to go back, change the plan and re-submit it again once updated and go round again or appeal the decision using the law. It is a strict yes/no gate at that meeting and Mick has shown how important that looks like being to the future of the showground.
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 7, 2023 10:43:14 GMT
BSF response from arnieg (Councillor of 18 years) There are a lot of wise words in the above. Re the final para I think it is quite possible that AEPG will revise the application now before it goes to committee in attempt to head off some of the arguments, which could delay the process by several months. Oh and those councillors you are seeking to influence may well read Panthers social media as a result of being lobbied, so try and remove all those references to councillors taking 'brown envelopes'. Nothing is guaranteed to lose the sympathy more quickly of someone whose voice could be an important one in our favour. No mention of brown envelopes here so well done those who have contributed
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 8, 2023 7:54:38 GMT
And the prepared statement has appeared. AEPG must have been working on this for a while and are trying to counter 1000's of objections and criticism of their operation and actions. Will need to unpick this when I get time:
AEPG Statement regarding Peterborough Panthers use of East of England Showground
We understand the disappointment at the imminent closure of the East of England Showground in its current form, which incorporates the grandstand used by the Peterborough Panthers.
The charity, East of England Agricultural Society (EEAS), is the current landowner of the East of England Showground, who are in the process of selling the land. As part of the sale, the land needs to be clear of commercial operations or agreements.
This includes the area of land the grandstand occupies and as the ownership of the land is predicted to change sometime in 2024, there is no ability to commit to a 2024 Speedway Season.
The arrangement to run speedway at the Showground has only ever been on a season-by-season basis and there has never been long term commitment on either side to continue.
We have been in consultation with Keith Chapman at Peterborough Panthers and his team since 2021, when the East of England Agricultural Society (EEAS), appointed AEPG as promoter and operator.
AEPG has already agreed, at its considerable cost and resource, to extend the speedway tenure to include the 2023 season, as previously it had been agreed it would expire at the end of 2022.
To quote the most recent statement from the Peterborough Panthers: “AEPG have been more than fair and reasonable in accommodating this”.
Discussions over the development of the Showground have been around for a number of years with the site originally put forward for development four years ago in line with the local plan site allocation.
As demonstrated above, the discontinuation of Speedway at the Showground is not new news or a surprise to the Peterborough Panthers, and we are sorry to hear the club has not found a new home in this time.
The question has been asked regarding running the speedway until the land sale, however the costs involved in running the site and maintaining the grandstand for the sole purpose of Speedway is non-viable for AEPG and EEAS as it would result in continued losses.
Significant costs have been borne by AEPG for the last 2 years and previously by EEAS, the charity, and these far outweigh any viable rent increases. This is estimated to be twelve times the current rent per meet to cover the overhead costs involved.
As such the decision not to renew the arrangement for running speedway meets would remain irrespective of any planning applications on the land.
As a charitable organisation the Society’s activity must either bring income which contributes to fulfilling its charitable aims or fulfil them directly.
This activity does not meet this requirement and these principles underpin both this decision and the decision to sell the land for development.
For clarity the land currently occupied on a temporary basis by DHL Supply Chain will be under separate ownership, will run to a different process and will have no impact on the sale of land for housing development.
Other tenants on the Showground are on short term contracts and not committed until past early 2024. AEPG are aware of other interested parties looking to negotiate the future of the Speedway on the site and have clarified with the current owner that those conversations can take place.
However, this does not change the current position that for the reasons already stated, a continuation of Speedway at the Showground for 2024 is not possible and beyond this becomes not commercially viable for the landowner and site operator.
Additional Information
Who owns the land?
• The East of England Agricultural Society (EEAS), a registered charity and the current private landowner Why can’t there be a 2024 Speedway Season?
• The land needs to be clear of commercial operations or agreements. This includes the area of land the grandstand occupies and as the ownership of the land is predicted to change sometime in 2024 there is no ability to commit to a 2024 Speedway Season.
How often does Speedway run?
• Speedway is seasonal and only runs fortnightly for circa 6 months of the year i.e. only 14-17 days per year, with meets being heavily weather dependent.
Who is EEAS and what do they do?
• EEAS are a registered charity who must optimise its incomes to meet its charitable objectives, which are the education and promotion of farming as an industry within the local community.
What about the Local Plan?
LP30 supports the development of new cultural, leisure, tourism and community facilities. This looks to promote improving the range and quality of facilities. It also highlights a need for a wide range of activities meeting the needs of different communities. The proposed new development promises to deliver a wider range of facilities suitable for a wider cross section of the community than is available at present on the site.
The loss via redevelopment of an existing leisure facility is permitted by the policy if the site is not viable to be developed for a new facility or the service is met by an existing provision in a reasonable proximity.
LP36 mirrors policy LP30 in respect of how the loss of existing leisure and sports facilities will be considered. Neither LP30 nor LP36 mentions Speedway specifically.
What about viability?
• The costs involved in running the site and maintaining the grandstand for the sole purpose of Speedway are non-viable for the landowner and the site operator. There are a range of associated costs including insurances, maintenance and utilities which would be cost prohibitive.
What will happen to the track at the end of the 2023 season?
• AEPG and the current owners of the Panthers are in conversation about the removal of any elements owned by Peterborough Speedway and Keith Chapman. There is a good relationship and a timeline which suits both parties will be agreed. At no time have AEPG given a deadline for this activity to take place.
Timeline
2019 – Based on the local plan allocation, EEAS decide to promote the land for sale and development, public consultations are carried out, and it is widely known and publicised that the intention for the site is to close in its current form.
2021 – AEPG are engaged by EEAS and meet with Panthers owners to discuss future of the site and impact for Speedway and on 2022 season End of 2022 season – AEPG and Panthers agree to extend for the 2023 season
2023 – Planning for the site submitted and land sale negotiations begin
2024 – Anticipated planning determination and land sale
AEPG facebook 8/10/23
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 8, 2023 8:05:13 GMT
"We understand the disappointment at the imminent closure of the East of England Showground in its current form, which incorporates the grandstand used by the Peterborough Panthers."
No they don't because otherwise they wouldn't need to be explaining their unpopular development to quell massive dissatisfaction/objection, as well as not needing to go on a sponsorship charm offensive to appear to be the business equivalent of Mr Motivator, instead of alleged destructive profit orientated developer.
|
|
bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 116
|
Post by bratters on Oct 8, 2023 8:59:44 GMT
Saying LP30 and LP36 doesn’t specifically mention Speedway LOL why would it? What other sports take place at the Showground? Clowns.
|
|
|
Post by rodders on Oct 8, 2023 10:51:12 GMT
It would not surprise me in the slightest that in the absence of any restraining order a rapid attempt was made to demolish the Grandstand.
AEPG are right when they claim the the future of Peterborough Speedway at EOES has been far from certain for many years. Successive promoters have chose not to plan for this situation, in fairness probably only Frost would have been in a financial position to do so
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 8, 2023 13:59:47 GMT
Saying LP30 and LP36 doesn’t specifically mention Speedway LOL why would it? What other sports take place at the Showground? Clowns. Going to go through it in a minute but that was the one that jumped out at me. I suspect whoever wrote that will be having a meeting with the boss. Sport England managed to join the dots: I'm also reliably informed that AEPG submitted to Council information with their reasoning concerning the loss of the speedway site as it relates to local plan policy.That is the very information that Sport England say is missing to help their decision making. That then begs the question that if AEPG don't think that Peterborough Speedway was the reason for "The loss of any existing leisure and sports facilities will not be supported unless replacement facilities are provided in accordance with policy LP30." then why did they mention speedway in their submission to Council and why are they trying to distance themselves from those elements and evidence now?
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 8, 2023 14:05:26 GMT
It would not surprise me in the slightest that in the absence of any restraining order a rapid attempt was made to demolish the Grandstand.AEPG are right when they claim the the future of Peterborough Speedway at EOES has been far from certain for many years. Successive promoters have chose not to plan for this situation, in fairness probably only Frost would have been in a financial position to do so That is a concern if there are no restrictions in place but if they want to nail down their coffin then such vandalism would help no end. Whoever to the drone pictures of the EoES and Greyhound track needs to get to work.
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 8, 2023 15:22:04 GMT
. Discussions over the development of the Showground have been around for a number of years with the site originally put forward for development four years ago in line with the local plan site allocation. AEPG facebook 8/10/23 As OldNutter says on the BSF: "With the numbers of objectors to this awful plan, despite many of them not strictly in line with planning challenges, there can be no doubt about how badly the public consultation phase has actually turned out during the pre-planning stage and this is very important in the scheme of how the planning system should work. Huge numbers of objections are not supposed to happen in the way the system operates properly because the pre-planning moves are supposed to iron out all that stuff with proper believable realistic plans being produced in line with the Local Plan and local wishes" Application Ref: 23/00400/OUT currently 845 public comments/representations which will virtually all be objections (that does not include 123 supporting documents/plans) Application Ref: 23/00412/OUT currently 558 public comments/representations (one extension request) which will virtually all be objections (that does not include 118 supporting documents/plans) Therefore with AEPG believing that community involvement in the process is important, then with near 1400 public comments/representations objecting thus far then it hasn't gone too well.
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 8, 2023 18:28:59 GMT
Can't believe that they used this as evidence: To quote the most recent statement from the Peterborough Panthers: “AEPG have been more than fair and reasonable in accommodating this”.For 20 years since Mercer arrived Peterborough Speedway has publicly always said that "We have a very good working relationship with the Showground" when allegedly it was not quite like that? It's no surprise that a man who knows said: It is good to see objections are being made by supporters. However very little fight from the current management of the club. Very curious 😠😠😠😠😠. l will say no more. If I was in charge of the club I would not be making any comment either. We have four meetings left and things can be made very difficult for the club by AEPG in running those meetings. I know first hand how difficult it can be as tenants of the Showground. Don’t get me started on Andrew Mercer . . . . .
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 8, 2023 18:55:48 GMT
AEPG are aware of other interested parties looking to negotiate the future of the Speedway on the site and have clarified with the current owner that those conversations can take place.
However, this does not change the current position that for the reasons already stated, a continuation of Speedway at the Showground for 2024 is not possible and beyond this becomes not commercially viable for the landowner and site operator.That's a new and confusing one: "looking to negotiate the future of the Speedway on the site" - what the hell does that mean? There is no future on the site according to AEPG? When Peterborough City Council do their job reject the applications then that certainly does change the position for 2024 (if they ever get round to it) because: Peterborough Panthers speedway team was informed in 2022 that the 2023 season would sadly have to be their last in the Showground grandstand (is that when Chapman said (1.02), I do believe that there are a few more years here yet), as that area is expected to be under different ownership by the time the 2024 Speedway season begins. Sale of the land is expected to be approved by Spring 2024, again subject to planning approval.
|
|
bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 116
|
Post by bratters on Oct 8, 2023 23:08:04 GMT
AEPG are aware of other interested parties looking to negotiate the future of the Speedway on the site and have clarified with the current owner that those conversations can take place.
However, this does not change the current position that for the reasons already stated, a continuation of Speedway at the Showground for 2024 is not possible and beyond this becomes not commercially viable for the landowner and site operator.That's a new and confusing one: "looking to negotiate the future of the Speedway on the site" - what the hell does that mean? There is no future on the site according to AEPG? When Peterborough City Council do their job reject the applications then that certainly does change the position for 2024 (if they ever get round to it) because: Peterborough Panthers speedway team was informed in 2022 that the 2023 season would sadly have to be their last in the Showground grandstand (is that when Chapman said (1.02), I do believe that there are a few more years here yet), as that area is expected to be under different ownership by the time the 2024 Speedway season begins. Sale of the land is expected to be approved by Spring 2024, again subject to planning approval. It has never taken a genius to work out that sale of any land on the Showground is a pipe dream to happen in the spring of 2024. We are only at the outline stage, then there is the full approval stage, then there is the sale stage to builders (I can’t believe they are queuing up to buy land in the current climate and if they are they certainly won’t be paying what AEPG thought builders would pay three years ago) who then submit outline plans, then full approval stage. A guy from Anglian Water recently told me it’ll be at least three years before they can even get proper water supply fully to the site. If the outline plans are refused - and there has to be a good chance of that happening given the amount of objections - then it’s back to the drawing board for AEPG and re-submission. The process could and most likely will take years before a brick is sunk in the ground. The way AEPG are going about their business screams of amateurs in this game, they have no track record of a development of this magnitude, I honestly think they’ll walk at some point, especially when we get into a costly round of appeals and stuff. Trouble is they’ll likely be replaced by a more professional outfit, unless of course the council dip down the back of the sofa (like they did for the Posh ground) and find the money to buy the place off the EoEAS and genuinely make it a leisure led development, with housing as per the local plan.
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 9, 2023 13:25:21 GMT
What about viability? • The costs involved in running the site and maintaining the grandstand for the sole purpose of Speedway are non-viable for the landowner and the site operator. There are a range of associated costs including insurances, maintenance and utilities which would be cost prohibitive. From the BSF (OldNutter), an opinion: They seem to think we are all as stupid as they appear. The majority of the added costs were probably due to the need to keep the whole site open without anything else operating there rather than changing it round so that the speedway was fenced with an enclosure in it's own area for operations, parking and security. The pre and post-match security alone to check that entire site would have swallowed a fair lump of cash that would not have been necessary had they not been so pig-headed as to keep trying to clear a part of the site that will now just rot away just so they could carry on pretending the speedway was no more viable than all the events that used to use the site that were evicted s well so they could make more money getting houses and roads built on it. The grandstand, track and pits were actually closer to the entrance gate than almost the whole of the rest of the site and could have easily been separated off for years. And I would have thought that the EEAS members could have provided loads of goats or cows to keep the grass short on the rest of the site so it was at least doing more good for the charity than just leaving it to waste while they get their act together for what is likely to be a 10-year plan at the very least.
|
|
bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 116
|
Post by bratters on Oct 9, 2023 14:31:31 GMT
What about viability? • The costs involved in running the site and maintaining the grandstand for the sole purpose of Speedway are non-viable for the landowner and the site operator. There are a range of associated costs including insurances, maintenance and utilities which would be cost prohibitive. From the BSF (OldNutter), an opinion: They seem to think we are all as stupid as they appear. The majority of the added costs were probably due to the need to keep the whole site open without anything else operating there rather than changing it round so that the speedway was fenced with an enclosure in it's own area for operations, parking and security. The pre and post-match security alone to check that entire site would have swallowed a fair lump of cash that would not have been necessary had they not been so pig-headed as to keep trying to clear a part of the site that will now just rot away just so they could carry on pretending the speedway was no more viable than all the events that used to use the site that were evicted s well so they could make more money getting houses and roads built on it. The grandstand, track and pits were actually closer to the entrance gate than almost the whole of the rest of the site and could have easily been separated off for years. And I would have thought that the EEAS members could have provided loads of goats or cows to keep the grass short on the rest of the site so it was at least doing more good for the charity than just leaving it to waste while they get their act together for what is likely to be a 10-year plan at the very least. Oldnutter is 100% correct, this is what AEPG should have done, they are naive if they think they’ll sell any parcels of land in 2024. However developers will still buy land but cheaply, and they won’t develop on it in the current climate and couldn’t anyone who wants to run Speedway discuss it with any developers? Even the Bellway site in Alwalton is being scaled back in the short term because people aren’t buying. All this does is show AEPGs inexperience in developing, I am no expert on the subject, but I’ve learned enough in the last three months to understand that AEPG and Mr Buttercup are pretty bloody useless at it.
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 9, 2023 15:31:20 GMT
From the BSF (OldNutter), an opinion: They seem to think we are all as stupid as they appear. The majority of the added costs were probably due to the need to keep the whole site open without anything else operating there rather than changing it round so that the speedway was fenced with an enclosure in it's own area for operations, parking and security. The pre and post-match security alone to check that entire site would have swallowed a fair lump of cash that would not have been necessary had they not been so pig-headed as to keep trying to clear a part of the site that will now just rot away just so they could carry on pretending the speedway was no more viable than all the events that used to use the site that were evicted s well so they could make more money getting houses and roads built on it. The grandstand, track and pits were actually closer to the entrance gate than almost the whole of the rest of the site and could have easily been separated off for years. And I would have thought that the EEAS members could have provided loads of goats or cows to keep the grass short on the rest of the site so it was at least doing more good for the charity than just leaving it to waste while they get their act together for what is likely to be a 10-year plan at the very least. Oldnutter is 100% correct, this is what AEPG should have done, they are naive if they think they’ll sell any parcels of land in 2024. However developers will still buy land but cheaply, and they won’t develop on it in the current climate and couldn’t anyone who wants to run Speedway discuss it with any developers? Even the Bellway site in Alwalton is being scaled back in the short term because people aren’t buying. All this does is show AEPGs inexperience in developing, I am no expert on the subject, but I’ve learned enough in the last three months to understand that AEPG and Mr Buttercup are pretty bloody useless at it. It's been a quick learning curve hasn't it. They certainly didn't dot the i's and cross the t's or bring the community with them. The only people they seem to have blagged at the moment are the EEAS CEO, some of PCC and someone from the Great Eastern Run, although a sponsorship cheque allegedly helps to ignore detail in that specific situation. AEPG allegedly think that they went over and above with their community involvement and communications on their unwanted development. I think that 1000's of objections suggests that their consultation exercise was inadequate and that your view is reasonably accurate?
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 9, 2023 16:33:24 GMT
Well that's put the cat amongst the pigeons! Excellent read, just missing that there are nearly 1400 objections thus far to AEPG's two planning applications. Would imagine that that's pretty unusual and indicates a right dogs' dinner? Hope for speedway in Peterborough as powerful Sport England body raise objections to Showground plans and a consortium is negotiating to buy PanthersSport England have lodged an official objection to plans that would bring an end to 53 years of speedway in Peterborough.It’s a major boost to a local consortium, who we can now reveal, are in deep negotiations with current owner Keith Chapman to buy the club. Chapman oversaw his final meetings of his five years in charge of the city club when he staged Saturday night’s blockbuster ‘Farewell to the Showground’ meeting in front of a packed-out East of England Arena. Sport England’s intervention has breathed fresh impetus into the consortium who are desperate to buy the speedway rights from Chapman and revive hopes – as slim as they might be – that the bikes could still be seen in action at the Alwalton circuit next year. Sport England is an independent body whose board members are appointed by the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.They are consulted on all planning matters involving sport and have already lodged their opposition to the current plans submitted by Asset Earning Power Group (UK) Limited (AEPG) for the re-development of the 165-acre Showground site. They want to demolish the main 2,000 seat grandstand as part of their £50 million project to build a total of 1,500 homes on the East of England Agricultural Society owned Showground which was first opened in 1966 and has been a venue for speedway since 1970. Speedway is now the sole remaining entertainment at the Showground after the traditional three-day East of England Show was canned after a weather-ravaged 2012 event. Other major shows like Peterborough Truckfest, which regularly pulled in around 90,000 visitors over two days, were given notice to quit also and has now moved to the Lincolnshire Showground. The Festival of Motorcycling, a mecca for two-wheel enthusiasts, began life as the BMF Show and the final event in 2022 attracted more nearly 21,000 paying customers in May last year, Peterborough City Council invited comments on the two planning applications from AEPG, the first to demolish all buildings on the Showground and to erect up to 650 dwellings. The second application is to build a further 850 homes, a 250-bed hotel, a primary school, and a leisure village. In a lengthy, detailed submission, Sport England’s Stuart Morgans (Principal Planning Manager, North Team) writes about the Panthers: “We are concerned about the loss of the speedway track and associated facilities (car parking etc) which is the home of Peterborough Panthers speedway team. We do not support this element of the application.” “Sport England notes that the Council’s adopted development plan policy LP36 states that the loss of any existing leisure and sports facilities will not be supported unless replacement facilities are provided in according with policy LP30. “The applicant has not addressed the loss of the existing sports facility in their supporting information. As such, there would seem to be insufficient information provided to assess the loss of the existing sports facility in accordance with the relevant policies. “Although Sport England is not in a position to provide a detailed response on the loss of the speedway venue on this occasion, you may wish to consider advice provided by the recognised sport National Governing Bodies (NGBs). “The relevant NGBs may be able to provide advice on specific matters such the impact of the development proposal on the current facility. In the case of speedway, the recognised National Governing Body is the Speedway Control Bureau. We would recommend the Local Planning Authority consult the Speedway Control Bureau. “We also understand that they have already made representation on this application objecting to the loss of the speedway facility.” In their summing up, Sport England say: “In respect of the loss of the area used for speedway, the loss of this facility does not seem to have been addressed in accordance with relevant planning policies.” And in their conclusion, Mr Morgans confirms: “Sport England wishes to object to this application.” There has also been a formal objection from the British Horse Society who note ‘at no point in the documents submitted is there anywhere provision for inclusion of horse riding or equestrian users by way of inclusion of bridleway or restricted byway giving access to and connectivity with the existing public right of way network. “This is ironic considering the heritage and previous uses of this particular agricultural site. “The equestrian industry (excluding the racing industry) in Cambridgeshire, which includes Peterborough, contributes over £100 million to the rural economy pa. “Nationally, the equestrian industry is the second largest rural employer. Peterborough has a vibrant equestrian community. This industry relies on a suitably surfaced, safe rights of way network.” peterboroughtoday 9/10/23
|
|
bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 116
|
Post by bratters on Oct 9, 2023 18:52:11 GMT
Oldnutter is 100% correct, this is what AEPG should have done, they are naive if they think they’ll sell any parcels of land in 2024. However developers will still buy land but cheaply, and they won’t develop on it in the current climate and couldn’t anyone who wants to run Speedway discuss it with any developers? Even the Bellway site in Alwalton is being scaled back in the short term because people aren’t buying. All this does is show AEPGs inexperience in developing, I am no expert on the subject, but I’ve learned enough in the last three months to understand that AEPG and Mr Buttercup are pretty bloody useless at it. It's been a quick learning curve hasn't it. They certainly didn't dot the i's and cross the t's or bring the community with them. The only people they seem to have blagged at the moment are the EEAS CEO, some of PCC and someone from the Great Eastern Run, although a sponsorship cheque allegedly helps to ignore detail in that specific situation. AEPG allegedly think that they went over and above with their community involvement and communications on their unwanted development. I think that 1000's of objections suggests that their consultation exercise was inadequate and that your view is reasonably accurate? There was absolutely no consultation with residents. As I said on Radio Cambridgeshire today, they held an open day with lots of photo shopped drawings, lots of vague sentiments such as “competitive socialising” told everyone how good they were, and shouldn’t we be excited about what they are giving us. No one was excited.
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 9, 2023 20:10:28 GMT
It's been a quick learning curve hasn't it. They certainly didn't dot the i's and cross the t's or bring the community with them. The only people they seem to have blagged at the moment are the EEAS CEO, some of PCC and someone from the Great Eastern Run, although a sponsorship cheque allegedly helps to ignore detail in that specific situation. AEPG allegedly think that they went over and above with their community involvement and communications on their unwanted development. I think that 1000's of objections suggests that their consultation exercise was inadequate and that your view is reasonably accurate? There was absolutely no consultation with residents. As I said on Radio Cambridgeshire today, they held an open day with lots of photo shopped drawings, lots of vague sentiments such as “competitive socialising” told everyone how good they were, and shouldn’t we be excited about what they are giving us. No one was excited. You only have to read through the numerous objections from the big players especially to see that on many of them the lack of information/detail and appreciation of culture, history, community and project impacts is a common theme. AEPG have done a poor job, thought it'd be a shoe in but an incompetent consultation process has come back to bite them big time, and they can't be surprised, although the charm offensive and rhetoric suggests that they are.
|
|
bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 116
|
Post by bratters on Oct 9, 2023 21:27:45 GMT
There was absolutely no consultation with residents. As I said on Radio Cambridgeshire today, they held an open day with lots of photo shopped drawings, lots of vague sentiments such as “competitive socialising” told everyone how good they were, and shouldn’t we be excited about what they are giving us. No one was excited. You only have to read through the numerous objections from the big players especially to see that on many of them the lack of information/detail and appreciation of culture, history, community and project impacts is a common theme. AEPG have done a poor job, thought it'd be a shoe in but an incompetent consultation process has come back to bite them big time, and they can't be surprised, although the charm offensive and rhetoric suggests that they are. Oh they’re more than surprised, they’re shocked. I’d like to have been a fly on the wall when Ashley Buttercup got round a table with the idiots who wrote the applications for him. I would suggest right now he is a worried man. Had confirmation today that the planning meeting where the retrospective DHL planning application that’s been recommended for refusal is going to be streamed live on October 17th @ 13:30
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 10, 2023 7:04:48 GMT
Source - peterboroughtoday/factfile-east-of-england-showground: The spades-in-the-ground date is still unclear until the planning committee decision. Plans are at the outline planning stage now, which will be referred to several more stages of detailed back-and-forth, no doubt, before anything can physically go ahead. I think that they are doing really well with the hole. Can't work out who's playing the game? AEPG or the ET as Grinnell gets the negative press out yet again. East of England Showground operator adamant that speedway racing will not return to historic venueSpeedway racing has only ever been on a ‘season to season basis’ The operators of Peterborough’s Showground look to have blocked any return to the venue for the city’s champion speedway racing team. The top title-winning Peterborough Panthers saw their 53 year spell at the East of England Showground come to an end on Saturday with their ‘Farewell to the Showground’ meeting in front of a packed-out East of England Arena.Now bosses of AEPG, the promoter of the Showground, have issued a statement underlining the need to clear the site as multi-million pound plans proceed for a 1,500 homes and leisure village at the 165 acres venue. AEPG hope that by next year all planning issues will have been resolved and that sale of the land can be completed. However, AEPG also flags up the fact that it has borne ‘significant’ costs to run and maintain the grandstand just for speedway and says this is a situation that could not continue regardless of whether it secures planning approval for its development plans. A spokesperson for AEPG, which is the company chosen by the venue owners, the East of England Agricultural Society, to sell the land, said: “As part of the sale, the land needs to be clear of commercial operations or agreements. "This includes the area of land the grandstand occupies and as the ownership of the land is predicted to change sometime in 2024, there is no ability to commit to a 2024 Speedway Season. “The arrangement to run speedway at the Showground has only ever been on a season-by-season basis and there has never been long term commitment on either side to continue. Costs would spell end of racing anyway: It adds: “However the costs involved in running the site and maintaining the grandstand for the sole purpose of Speedway is non-viable for AEPG and EEAS as it would result in continued losses. “Significant costs have been borne by AEPG for the last two years and previously by EEAS, the charity, and these far outweigh any viable rent increases. "This is estimated to be 12 times the current rent per meet to cover the overhead costs involved. “As such the decision not to renew the arrangement for running speedway meets would remain irrespective of any planning applications on the land.” AEPG also points out that it has been in discussions with Keith Chapman at Peterborough Panthers for two years and that AEPG has ‘already agreed, at its considerable cost and resource, to extend the speedway’ tenure to include the 2023 season’. In addition, AEPG states that the speedway use does not meet the need for the Agricultural Society, as a charitable organisation, to ensure its activities bring an income that contributes to fulfilling its charitable aims. AEPG submitted two outline planning applications to Peterborough City Council in August to develop the Showground. One is to build 650 homes the other is for 850 homes and a £50 million leisure village that could include a hotel, health, retail, eating and drinking establishments, a primary school, car parking and associated open space and infrastructure. The applications have already prompted scores of objections from residents living near the Showground. peterboroughtoday 10/10/23
|
|
|
Post by rodders on Oct 10, 2023 20:20:52 GMT
One wonders where all this is going!!! Developers seem to be clear that they will not have Speedway back even if planning refused.
|
|