|
|
Post by admin on Sept 27, 2023 17:37:51 GMT
Naturally we live in hope!! I have been involved in a few things locally and whilst those in charge give lip service and therefore false hope, in the event speak generally with forked tongues. I am sure I have mentioned this before but remember one local councilor phoning me over a particular issue and said "we do not really care unless an issue effects our own patch". I have not seen it mentioned but what has local MP had to say about all this? Fair points. My local councillor, who also happens to be on the planning committee (although I didn't know at the time) said that it'll go through on the nod. They don't usually get massive objection or adverse publicity though. If they fall for this then the members of the planning committee will never be forgotten - not great for the CV to be responsible for the loss of Peterborough Speedway and the EoES under such circumstances. The MPs are aware but yet to really break cover. Whether they will or not when it hots up further remains to be seen: The MP for the ward in which the showground is situate is Shailesh Vara so he's the one who really needs to come to the party. Paul Bristow is the Peterborough MP, likes a photo op and cause so we can live in hope with him:  - ET 20/1/23 |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 28, 2023 15:42:57 GMT
As posted by bratters on the BSF: The ability to submit comments/objections to the development plans for the Showground and the end of Peterborough Speedway remain open for the foreseeable future.Provided by Cllr Julie Stevenson to clarify the position regarding deadlines - clarification received from the council today: "The ability to make comments online will not 'close' after the deadline. Local residents still will be able to submit online comments right up to the point that the application is determined. We have to provide a deadline in order to meet statutory regulations and to help manage the application process. There are a number of different dates because for a major application we publicise the application in different ways ie letter, site notice and press notice which go out at different times. All the comments made by other residents and consultees will be viewable up to the determination date too." We are now over 1300 comments/objections, (including one from SCB and BSPL) that’s an amazing achievement and it’s being noticed, your voices are being heard in important places, the number of comments/objections is unprecedented for planning applications in Peterborough. Let’s keep going. Let’s turn the screw. Let’s keep doing this. Let people hear your voice. Anyone from anywhere can submit a comment. Here’s two links that will take you straight to the two planning applications that have been submitted for developing the Peterborough Showground and to make comments and/or objections. You can comment on both applications.planpa.peterborough.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=makeComment&keyVal=RSOMJ0MLIWV00planpa.peterborough.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=makeComment&keyVal=RSXWVDML04U00 |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 28, 2023 16:38:44 GMT
Objection - 23/00400/OUT Public Comment from the Speedway Control Bureau 26/09/2023:The Speedway Control Bureau of whom are the governing body of British Speedway along
with the British Speedway Promoters Ltd, the commercial body of British Speedway, would
like to object to the above planning applications at the East of England Showground in
Peterborough for the following reasons -SCB.pdf (111.71 KB)
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 29, 2023 10:06:11 GMT
Looks like another stonking objection, and possibly the best yet for us: 23/00400/OUT Representation from Consultee (Web) Open Space Management 22/09/2023  PCC - OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT - PLANNING COMMENTS Recommendation: Objection
Further to significant PreApp dialogue with the Applicant PCC Open Space Management are disappointed with the current submission of the 2 somewhat underwhelming Applications  Neighbourhood Parks: Main Park is needing to be enlarged (again no quantity can be located), further within the overall design more thought is to be given to understanding the history of the Showground, our suggestion for the main POS Area
(Neighbourhood Park) would be the current main Showground outdoor speedway/events area (please see image below highlighted):Not sure what the first graphic means but I think that it's helpful  Further to all of the above further dialogue is therefore requested with the Developer to enable the design &
resubmission of an improved scheme that enables the provision of the required POS/NGS/Play & Allotment
provision - I can't see AEPG being happy with that and these yet to be known developers will not purchase under those restrictions. That’s probably cemented a rubbish weekend for Ashley Butternuts. Love it. More interesting is that I thought that I'd download that submission but it seems to have disappeared? plandocs.peterborough.gov.uk/PublicAccess.WebSearch/(S(tfxjoyfgzn53ok1qz2sdkrfe))/Results.aspx?grdResultsP=4Consultee (Web) Open Space Management 22/09/2023 PCC - OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT - PLANNING COMMENTS Am I missing something? |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 29, 2023 10:22:21 GMT
The ET suggest that the track be turned into a parkland, but that’s not the way I am reading the objection. It'd be good to have a read to check. Can you see the objection on the planning portal? It may still be there and I just can't clock it but I've looked enough times now to think that it's missing? (could be my browser or something? These technical issues happen at times.) Just a reminder of what you're looking for:   |
|
|
|
Post by rodders on Sept 29, 2023 14:34:26 GMT
Means nothing to me. Not on Facebook, so no idea what it is all about |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 29, 2023 16:30:12 GMT
Means nothing to me . Not on Facebook, so no idea what it is all about Wouldn't matter if you were Rodders. It's a private group. It's a bit like when they post Twitter/X links to articles that are behind a paywall, although you do get the headline on those and a couple of lines of the first paragraph. Please be aware that the council's planning department is to recommend that the part-retrospective planning application submitted by AEPG/DHL (23/00251/FUL) be REFUSED. However, due to the volume of interest, the matter is to be referred to the next meeting of the council's planning committee for a final decision, which will take place on 17th October. (credit [Mick Wass]. It'll be worth watching for the agenda, attendees and output of this one: Planning and Environmental Protection Committee - Tuesday 17th October, 2023 1.30 pm - Proposed venue: Bourges/Viersen Room - Town Hall. I see that they've also added this one? 14 Nov 2023 1.30 pm but it doesn't point to any detail so must be a very recent decision? |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 29, 2023 17:30:49 GMT
23/00412/OUT - Representation from Consultee (Web) - 28/09/2023
Orton Waterville Parish Council OBJECTS to this planning application 23/00400/OUT and
23/00412/OUT, in its current format
From the seemingly AWOL PCC Open Space Management submission: - PCC Open Space Management has objected to both planning applications with the following comments: “Further to significant PreApp dialogue with the Applicant PCC Open Space Management are disappointed with the current submission of the 2 somewhat underwhelming Applications. Firstly we can find no submission of POS + NGS quantities (ha) as per request at preApp. No separate plans (as requested at PreApp) for both proposed Play & Allotments showing accessibility standards for such appear to have been submitted”
Speedway
The proposed loss of the Speedway track and arena is contrary to both the local plan, Paragraphs LP30, LP36 and to Paragraph 99(c) of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021)”.
Ashes of the deceased have been scattered within the Speedway arena by a Chaplain over a number
of years.
It is noted that a similar planning application (Ref R18/0186) was submitted in January 2018 by a
Developer for residential dwellings on the site where Coventry Bees Speedway arena is located. The
application was rejected by Rugby Borough Council in November 2022 on the grounds “The
development would result in the loss of a sporting facility that has both local and national
significance and although an alternative sporting provision is proposed there is not a clearly
identified need for the alternative sporting provision and therefore it is considered that the
proposed benefits of the new facility do not clearly outweigh the loss of the stadium. The proposal
would therefore be contrary to Policy HS4(C) of the Local Plan (2019), Policy LF1 of the Brandon and
Bretford Neighbourhood Development Plan (2019) and Paragraph 99(c) of the National Planning
Policy Framework (2021).
Conclusion
Outline planning approval should be refused for both applications. Although a lot of documentation has been submitted for both applications it does somewhat lack detail and facts that are needed to be able to support the proposals. A far greater study needs to be carried out to assess the impact on existing infrastructure and on people, those currently living in Orton Northgate/Orton Southgate and those moving into new housing etc. This of course should be carried out with the Parish Council and
local residents.
Kind Regards
Clerk to Orton Waterville Parish Council
|
|
bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 165
|
Post by bratters on Sept 29, 2023 18:08:04 GMT
23/00412/OUT - Representation from Consultee (Web) - 28/09/2023Orton Waterville Parish Council OBJECTS to this planning application 23/00400/OUT and
23/00412/OUT, in its current formatFrom the seemingly AWOL PCC Open Space Management submission: - PCC Open Space Management has objected to both planning applications with the following comments: “Further to significant PreApp dialogue with the Applicant PCC Open Space Management are disappointed with the current submission of the 2 somewhat underwhelming Applications. Firstly we can find no submission of POS + NGS quantities (ha) as per request at preApp. No separate plans (as requested at PreApp) for both proposed Play & Allotments showing accessibility standards for such appear to have been submitted” SpeedwayThe proposed loss of the Speedway track and arena is contrary to both the local plan, Paragraphs LP30, LP36 and to Paragraph 99(c) of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021)”. Ashes of the deceased have been scattered within the Speedway arena by a Chaplain over a number of years. It is noted that a similar planning application (Ref R18/0186) was submitted in January 2018 by a Developer for residential dwellings on the site where Coventry Bees Speedway arena is located. The application was rejected by Rugby Borough Council in November 2022 on the grounds “The development would result in the loss of a sporting facility that has both local and national significance and although an alternative sporting provision is proposed there is not a clearly identified need for the alternative sporting provision and therefore it is considered that the proposed benefits of the new facility do not clearly outweigh the loss of the stadium. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policy HS4(C) of the Local Plan (2019), Policy LF1 of the Brandon and Bretford Neighbourhood Development Plan (2019) and Paragraph 99(c) of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021). ConclusionOutline planning approval should be refused for both applications. Although a lot of documentation has been submitted for both applications it does somewhat lack detail and facts that are needed to be able to support the proposals. A far greater study needs to be carried out to assess the impact on existing infrastructure and on people, those currently living in Orton Northgate/Orton Southgate and those moving into new housing etc. This of course should be carried out with the Parish Council and local residents. Kind Regards Clerk to Orton Waterville Parish Council I spoke at the Parish council meeting for 30/40 minutes on Wednesday when this was being discussed. There’s more to come hopefully. BTW the deceased ashes is a smoking gun that I’ve had in my back pocket for a while. Very emotive subject, will cause lots of problems and hopefully bad press. |
|
|
|
Post by rodders on Sept 29, 2023 19:04:39 GMT
Bit on BSF re Rye House !! Seems apparent to me at least that once the track is gone all is lost. That is why they are so keen to get rid of track.
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 29, 2023 20:46:01 GMT
Bit on BSF re Rye House !! Seems apparent to me at least that once the track is gone all is lost. That is why they are so keen to get rid of track. In our case that's why I'm not playing the farewell game. I'm sure that AEPG and PCC love the "FAREWELL TO THE SHOWGROUND" billing, makes their job much easier. I'm not sure what Bratters and co are fighting for if we are just giving the the enemy the ammunition? Rather than an evening of memories it should be an evening of protest. |
|
|
|
Post by rodders on Sept 29, 2023 21:31:29 GMT
Bit on BSF re Rye House !! Seems apparent to me at least that once the track is gone all is lost. That is why they are so keen to get rid of track. In our case that's why I'm not playing the farewell game. I'm sure that AEPG and PCC love the "FAREWELL TO THE SHOWGROUND" billing, makes their job much easier. I'm not sure what Bratters and co are fighting for if we are just giving the the enemy the ammunition? Rather than an evening of memories it should be an evening of protest. I am up for that!!! How do we go about it? I do not know how you go about it or who would be willing to meet the cost but seems to me we should try for court order to prevent track and speedway facilities being destroyed at least till outcome of planning application |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 29, 2023 21:49:19 GMT
In our case that's why I'm not playing the farewell game. I'm sure that AEPG and PCC love the "FAREWELL TO THE SHOWGROUND" billing, makes their job much easier. I'm not sure what Bratters and co are fighting for if we are just giving the the enemy the ammunition? Rather than an evening of memories it should be an evening of protest. I am up for that!!! How do we go about it Everyone is seemingly playing along with the game and resigned to their/our fate so just keep your ear to the ground and see if any resistance builds next week. I'm done with 2023 so can't advise further than that. Probably best to keep your head down Rodders and just go with the flow unless the protest opportunity arises! |
|
bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 165
|
Post by bratters on Sept 30, 2023 7:43:57 GMT
In our case that's why I'm not playing the farewell game. I'm sure that AEPG and PCC love the "FAREWELL TO THE SHOWGROUND" billing, makes their job much easier. I'm not sure what Bratters and co are fighting for if we are just giving the the enemy the ammunition? Rather than an evening of memories it should be an evening of protest. I am up for that!!! How do we go about it? I do not know how you go about it or who would be willing to meet the cost but seems to me we should try for court order to prevent track and speedway facilities being destroyed at least till outcome of planning application A planning Article 4 restriction was submitted to the council on Thursday 28/09 by the Parish Council to do exactly that. |
|
|
|
Post by Bigcatdiary on Sept 30, 2023 11:06:58 GMT
I am up for that!!! How do we go about it? I do not know how you go about it or who would be willing to meet the cost but seems to me we should try for court order to prevent track and speedway facilities being destroyed at least till outcome of planning application A planning Article 4 restriction was submitted to the council on Thursday 28/09 by the Parish Council to do exactly that. Sounds like a plan, is the restriction likely to hit any hurdles or should it be pretty straightforward to obtain. |
|
bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 165
|
Post by bratters on Sept 30, 2023 20:22:16 GMT
A planning Article 4 restriction was submitted to the council on Thursday 28/09 by the Parish Council to do exactly that. Sounds like a plan, is the restriction likely to hit any hurdles or should it be pretty straightforward to obtain. Absolutely no idea. It will certainly test the temperature of the council though. |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 30, 2023 21:26:08 GMT
Sounds like a plan, is the restriction likely to hit any hurdles or should it be pretty straightforward to obtain. Absolutely no idea. It will certainly test the temperature of the council though. Absolutely. Anything to keep the pressure on b0252 All a bit beyond me. I can see the reason and logic but whether it has genuine teeth or an easy get out remains to be seen? Search on Article 4 here www.gov.uk/guidance/when-is-permission-required and it finds 46 matches to explain about Article 4. |
|
|
|
Post by rodders on Sept 30, 2023 21:51:53 GMT
Absolutely no idea. It will certainly test the temperature of the council though. Absolutely. Anything to keep the pressure on b0252 All a bit beyond me. I can see the reason and logic but whether it has genuine teeth or an easy get out remains to be seen? Search on Article 4 here www.gov.uk/guidance/when-is-permission-required and it finds 46 matches to explain about Article 4. What I suggested was to obtain a court order to prevent destruction of track and infrastructure. What Bratters has-described seems somewhat different but designed to achieve same end. But what do I know??? |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 30, 2023 22:21:30 GMT
Absolutely. Anything to keep the pressure on b0252 All a bit beyond me. I can see the reason and logic but whether it has genuine teeth or an easy get out remains to be seen? Search on Article 4 here www.gov.uk/guidance/when-is-permission-required and it finds 46 matches to explain about Article 4. What I suggested was to obtain a court order to prevent destruction of track and infrastructure. What Bratters has-described seems somewhat different but designed to achieve same end. But what do I know??? Is that not suddenly getting in to the realms of expensive legal matters? (or at least on the way?) - The planning process and smoking PCC out is the best strategy (and probably our only strategy) at the moment at least I think? |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 30, 2023 23:09:07 GMT
It is quite clear to me and it should have been to most that in the long term there is no future for Panthers at EOES . Successive Promoters have ignored this probably understandably as nobody other than Frost had the finances available to do otherwise. To reiterate we need to secure 2/3 more years at Showground and concentrate on finding a new home. I am not local so do not know but to me the Dog Track seems the solution. That was Danny Dunton's original plan Interesting story just popped up on that. Not the headline, apart from noting that Peterborough Greyhound stadium is still standing and useable (wouldn't be like for like but better than a field), but some of the text: Former Peterborough Greyhound stadium made available for short-term lease as planning approval remains pending
Plans to create an employment hub in place of the stadium are pending approval.The owners of Peterborough’s former greyhound stadium have made the building available for short term lease. Fengate Land Holdings. which brought the Fengate site in May 2021, has advertised a six-month contract commencing on October 1, with either a separate or combined lease available. If taken up, it would be the first time the stadium building will have been used since the stadium closed its doors, bringing an end to 89 years of racing history, which began in 1931. The building is currently subject to a planning application which could see its demolition in favour of nine commercial units to create an employment hub. The hybrid application was submitted in December and also sought outline approval for up 11 industrial units across 12,000 square metres to the south of the site. Fengate Land Holdings has estimated that the project would provide 65 on-site construction jobs, up to 260 on-site operational jobs and boost to the local economy to the tune of £11.2m per year. Ever since the stadium closed, the large car park at the front has been informally used by several local car sales and repair businesses, which has seen a large number of vehicles covering the site.The plans have triggered a large number of objections from local residents, with many wishing for the stadium to return to its previous use.
When asked about these, Andy Girvan, on behalf of Fengate Land Holdings said: “It is clear from the public comments received, that many people enjoyed the site’s historic use and the opportunities it gave some of them."However, the previous business no longer exists and the site provides very little benefit to the area or the city so needs to be brought back into productive use. “The regeneration of the site will provide modern and well serviced business units and give many more people the opportunity to develop their skills and secure their futures in a range of new and emerging industries. "The proposed redevelopment is expected to create up to 240 full time jobs and an estimated £11.5 million of added value to the local economy.” peterboroughtoday 29/9/23 - all sounds very familiar! |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 2, 2023 20:36:04 GMT
"Work has already begun on a number of developments across the Great Haddon site, which will consist of up to 5350 properties, two neighbourhood centres, as well as retail, community, health, leisure, retail and commercial space."
peterboroughtoday/plans-for-84-new-affordable-homes-on-great-haddon-site-near-peterborough 2/10/23
“Peterborough has a huge lack of active health, lifestyle and entertainment facilities”, Ashley added. “The development provides much-needed provision to have these supporting the council’s health and wellness strategy. We are working with PCC to make sure this development positively impacts the local people’s health and wellbeing.”
Well Ashley, it seems that AEPG and Peterborough City Council are proposing to replace a unique and valuable city resource with something already being done nearby!
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 2, 2023 20:56:37 GMT
I've not read this through, and probably will not understand it anyway, so it may or may not be accurate but it's all alleged, opinion and not the views of this board. OldNutter on the BSF seems to have a bit of experience in this field and is always worth a read - it's a bit long but stick with it.
OldNutter BSF 2/10/23 - I think I may have found the key word to describe the current position. The word is "LEASE"
As I understand it from what little is in the public domain, AEPG has been granted a lease to own the showground for an agreed exchange of gold and until an agreed date when theoretically the ownership reverts to the farmers decendants. That money for the lease has been borrowed from somewhere on surety that AEPG will pay it back when the planning application succeeds. The planning succeeding is absolutely vital to this money-making exercise because on that day, the land price will increase from being farmland fit for farming to development land that has a set of agreed planning approvals. That value change is astronomical. However, that will only actually become "money" rather than "value" when somebody buys the LEASE off AEPG at the new very much higher rate that development land commands rather than farming land (expect someone like Bellway (- known round here as Bojjit and Floggit) to buy AEPG out. AEPG will then melt back to the Home Counties and probably never be seen again once the money has been extracted from the company and this legal money making scheme closes and the building company get building and flogging to recover the money they will have given to AEPG in exchange for the LEASE with planning consent.
Looking at that word again, the speedway equipment/grandstand etc (probably not the air fence because that is a relatively new addition and is not stuck down )will have been sitting there as a result of an agreement with whoever owns the club whereby they have LEASED the site on an agreement and cost basis until the LEASE expires. That LEASE expiry date is the point at which the club no longer has any right to sit on that bit of land and could, in theory allow it all to be owned by AEPG because while they have a valid LEASE they effectively own the land for the duration of their LEASE with the farmers.. That scenario would certainly explain the timing and the language over the past year or so.
Stage 1 of the original plan was when AEPG bought the showground LEASE and tried to shut the speedway down in the early summer to make it non-viable before going for the planning application. An exchange of money probably occurred to AEPG when we began hearing that due to some "friendly talking" (AKA some more dosh), the LEASE was extended to a date in October not long after next Saturday making it possible to get to the end of this season. That could explain why everything was "must end - that was the date at the end of the LEASE Extension. Clearly, LEASES and LEASE Extensions for car storage are much more cost-effective than speedway and the cost of extending the speedway LEASE was set too high for the club to survive. It is not beyond possibility because of this strange behaviour when the LEASES for the grandstand and track etc end that the whole lot could probably be owned by AEPG when the LEASE on the speedway site ends next week!!! And as long as the stuff on the land is not listed or something similar, if you own something you can do more or less anything with it. (as long as you take the relevant steps to stop any asbestos being mishandled) A grim scenario, but completely legal and almost certain. Paperwork probably already completed.
The ending of the speedway club LEASE held by the whoever owns the club with whoever owns the showground is really the end of speedway for the foreseeable future at least and is really goodbye to the showground.
Nobody wanting to do put their money and heart where their mouth is, no money, no LEASE extension, NO SPEEDWAY on the showground. A sad end to be effectively created from two words - GREED and LEASES.
|
|
|
|
Post by rodders on Oct 2, 2023 21:46:59 GMT
I admit I have no idea how to go about it or where the money would come from but it seems to me vital that destruction of the track and speedway infrastructure should be prevented at all costs.
Do Speedway not own pits , changing facilities etc, can these just be demolished and swallowed up without by developers with impunity?
Talk of things going on behind the scenes, but as in all things Speedway all secret. I had hoped to be kept within the loop but surprise surprise "no answer was thew stern reply"
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 2, 2023 22:40:05 GMT
I admit I have no idea how to go about it or where the money would come from but it seems to me vital that destruction of the track and speedway infrastructure should be prevented at all costs. Do Speedway not own pits , changing facilities etc, can these just be demolished and swallowed up without by developers with impunity? Talk of things going on behind the scenes, but as in all things Speedway all secret. I had hoped to be kept within the loop but surprise surprise "no answer was the stern reply" Seems to be two camps: those fighting for the EoES and those that think that they can lose it and pick it up at some future point elsewhere? Well good luck with that! Lose this fight and Peterborough loses speedway IMO? Just been reading the ET about Saturday. No help there as the club have the white flags with the AEPG logo ready for the track walk: "We can also confirm that all supporters will be permitted to walk the Showground track at the end of the meeting, as we say farewell to our home of over 50 years" Thankfully it's the Qatar F1 GP and sprint race on Saturday evening. |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 3, 2023 21:37:31 GMT
Any appeal to planning that is refused is gonna cost a lot of money, I would be very satisfied to empty Ashley Butternuts pockets. He does love a headline doesn't he? www.greateastern.run/news/1-2wte3-yd3s7-dy73x-bpmwb-ztzmx-84dtj-9rgjh-mdm4c-88dwt-2m98b?fbclid=IwAR282WNgcQuzM3E2-vffSYv7OeDvTUH5qkApGYiXormHx-eUZgdJTrj09x0I see that AEPG are continuing with their charm offensive & still trying to convince people that their contribution to Peterborough and generally is a positive and that they are not just money orientated developers? AEPG CEO Ashley Butterfield said: “We are delighted to support one of Peterborough’s most well-known events, as it aligns with our values of improving the wellness through an active lifestyle.” “The AEPG Great Eastern Run is a vibrant run, perfect for all generations and fitness levels, and we can’t wait to see everyone line up on the day.” AEPG has recently submitted planning applications for an innovative new multimillion pound leisure village and housing development at the East of England Showground site, which will bring hundreds of new jobs to the city and incorporates active living throughout. There is still time to enter the race and start training, as well as volunteering to help on the day, and still time to get your objection in to the planning applicationsThe ability to submit comments/objections to the development plans for the Showground remain open for the foreseeable future. See other post. We have today hit 1297 comments/objections, that’s an amazing achievement and it’s being noticed, your voices are being heard in important places. Let’s keep going. Talk to your family, talk to you neighbours, talk to your friends, get them to understand what’s happening here, but above anything else get them to comment. Let’s turn the screw, let’s keep doing this. Let people hear your voice.
Here’s two links that will take you straight to the two planning applications that have been submitted for developing the Peterborough Showground and to make comments and/or objections. You can comment on both applications.
planpa.peterborough.gov.uk/.../applicationDetails... planpa.peterborough.gov.uk/.../applicationDetails... |
|
