bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 165
|
Post by bratters on Aug 22, 2024 8:17:20 GMT
AEPG Ltd doesn’t exist. Amateurs. Can’t even get their company name right. Just one of a number of anomalies. does exist though, with Butterfield as the only active person who therefore has significant control: notified on 20 August 2020 which I guess is a new company he set up for the EoES? I guess that makes the REVISED Health Impact Assessment accurate in respect of AEPR  ASSET EARNING POWER RESIDENTIAL (AEPR) LTD exists of 2021 under the same structure as (AEPG 2020) Don't know anything about the specifics of setting up companies but it does seem strange to claim a long track record of success when you seem to have been in existence for less time than the 2019 Peterborough Local Plan? The submitted document doesn’t say that though. It is an error on their part, of course, but highlights their lack of attention to detail. The response by me does however highlight to the planning department this lack of attention to detail and casts doubt over how much attention to detail they have given to all of their submissions. |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Aug 23, 2024 15:53:08 GMT
The submitted document doesn’t say that though. It is an error on their part, of course, but highlights their lack of attention to detail. The response by me does however highlight to the planning department this lack of attention to detail and casts doubt over how much attention to detail they have given to all of their submissions. Timely reminder then as they've done a dump on 23/00412/OUT - pity the case officer!  |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Aug 27, 2024 15:53:40 GMT
 It’s worth noting that agricultural shows and events at Showgrounds throughout England are currently booming. (hopefully we've collected evidence to back up that statement?)
You mean, you don’t watch Countryfile? Looks like I'm not the only one? Cllr Christian Hogg: Our great city still has a lot to offer if you know where to look. peterboroughtoday 27/8/24 (full text)With council business at a minimum over the holiday period the town hall has been quieter of late. Thankfully there have been many distractions across out city to keep me busy. (not speedway in 2024 of course for no good reason!)The ever-popular HAF programme for the school holidays is as popular as ever with all sessions being fully booked. It’s been great to see the plethora of local community fetes and fundays across the city. The embankment has been well used also; including the Peterborough Beerfest, which seems to go from strength to strength with a strong entertainment offering. (of course a new Posh ground there will stop all of that!)This just shows that despite financial difficulties, which we all face, Peterborough does still know how to go out and have a good time, without spending a king’s ransom. So before planning days out elsewhere please look to see what is available in our great city, these events will only continue if we continue to turn up otherwise, they will go the way of the East of England Show and Truckfest.We need to reinvest in our local community assets as they have been ignored by previous administrations and left to deteriorate for far too long. There has been too much emphasis on growing the city and looking at enhancing what already exists in our city has been pushed aside.If we are to attract new businesses to Peterborough we need to show that it is a great place to live, work and bring up our families. I am hopeful that with a new administration and a new government we will see a willingness to change course and start to fix the problems that exist in our city. It is still too early to tell but rest assured that we will be keeping a close eye on the decisions being made and will hold both government and the city’s cabinet to account where it is needed. |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Aug 28, 2024 20:15:42 GMT
Opinion (full text at peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/opinion Published 23rd Aug 2024) - Labour’s plans for mass housebuilding will be challenging - By Peter Hiller
Moving forward we now have a minority Labour group cabinet, which we will work with whilst it works to benefit the residents of this City and elected members of the council. It’s our job as the new shadow cabinet, and others in the opposition groups, to challenge the new administration, hold them to account and, as we’ve done already, call out decisions we feel have not represented the best interests of the City’s taxpayers.
As the council’s Shadow Cabinet member for Regeneration and Growth I naturally have particular interest in the new Labour government’s announced changes to our planning system, the National Planning Policy Framework (the overarching planning policy) and newly pledged commitment to building one-and-a-half million new homes nationally within their first five years. There’s no silver bullet to solve the national housing crisis and return the country to long-term sustainable economic growth. The government will need to deploy a range of tools to do this.
The announced changes to national policy are an important first step to put us back on the path to growth, combining targeted approach to Green Belt release (of which Peterborough has none), while reaffirming the presumption in favour of brownfield development, enabling viable development across a mix of tenures, and giving greater weight to critical infrastructure delivery in strategically important sectors, such as science and technology and renewables.
That said, like many I’ve spoken with, I’m concerned how this might possibly affect not just Peterborough’s existing well-populated urban areas and infrastructure but also the villages and rural services I and other Peterborough First councillors are elected to protect against inappropriate development schemes which potentially impact on existing communities, traffic levels, schools and health provision. We rural wards’ councillors aren’t against new development per-se but any proposals should be Local and Neighbourhood Plan compliant, sympathetic to our rural environment, acceptable to our Parish Councils and, most importantly, supported by our communities’ residents.
The government’s house building ambition is undoubtedly challenging, with industry experts already suggesting the improbability of the task, citing the lurch back to top-down housing targets imposed on local communities as riding roughshod over the wishes of local communities. That said, my insider friend in Westminster tells me that, as Peterborough currently over performs in the numbers of annually completed houses, the imposed targets here will most likely be manageable within our existing framework. In addition, we are well underway in the involving process of creating a replacement Local Plan for Peterborough and its surrounding villages, which is very much a positive for our City in planning terms.
I sit on our Local Plan members’ Working Group, helping to advise our strategic planners in the development of it. I think it’s fair to say the Labour national and local new administrations are well past their respective honeymoon periods and for the sake of our country and certainly our great City I hope sensible minds prevail.
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 3, 2024 10:06:25 GMT
Peterborough residents express concerns about the East of England Showground redevelopment through new steering groupOver 1500 homes are planned on the site. Land agents AEPG have said that spades could go in the ground by April 2025. Two outline planning applications have been submitted. Only one of which (650 homes) is allocated for part of the site by the council in its Local Plan. Both applications are still awaiting a decision from the city council. At a well-attended public meeting in Orton Wistow last month, organised by Councillor Nicola Day, residents had the opportunity to discuss concerns about the proposed redevelopment. At the meeting, a group was appointed to take residents’ concerns forward and to ensure that they are understood by the Local Planning Authority. The group, now calling itself SPURR (Showground Plans Under Resident Review) has had several meetings including an exploratory one with the Peterborough City Council Planning Officer. It is also in contact with the new local MP, Sam Carling. It aims to report back its work and findings shortly to the wider public.How did they get a meeting when we were first in the queue? I don't think that we got this? Peterborough City Council Leader Mohammed Farooq is set to meet with the current owners of the Peterborough Panthers speedway team to discuss the club’s future. Also it was my understanding that the outgoing Tory MP wanted a meeting so have we made Carling aware (born 2002 so certainly needs educating on Peterborough Speedway) of our plight, situation and the intransigence of AEPG.Cllr Nicola Day said: “This proposal is a large scale housing and leisure development in Orton Waterville ward, second in size only to the township in Haddon. "This is a development which will have an impact on the local community. As a local Councillor I felt the most democratic thing to do was to listen to the views of local residents, which was achieved by door-knocking and speaking to local residents on the doorstep. "Then based on what I heard on the doorstep, to hold a wider public meeting and form a steering group. There will be further steps we need to take, assimilating views, concerns and ideas as a group and reporting back to the local community. "My position is to listen and engage with local residents so that we can get the best outcomes for our community and any future communities. "Green Party policy is clear, larger scale developments do need to ensure they provide the appropriate infrastructure to support the development of such communities.” For further information, questions or queries contact: nicola.day@peterborough.gov.uk Full text at peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/environment 2/9/24
|
|
|
|
Post by rodders on Sept 3, 2024 14:01:43 GMT
My position is that that most likely I will not post again on this subject. Any views which in anyway are seen to not agree with the consortium are rebuffed so what is the point
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 3, 2024 17:19:27 GMT
My position is that that most likely I will not post again on this subject. Any views which in anyway are seen to not agree with the consortium are rebuffed so what is the point You're lucky that you think that you know the consortiums strategy, I'm buggered if I do? It's very disappointing (although who expected any different) that 2025 is off the table and a return to the EoES at all as we knew it would take some trick! Therefore it's trench warfare and I'm sure that you can work out what the objective and end game is for Peterborough Speedway's future? Views that assist with that outcome are what's needed despite the fact that we know that we're in dire straits. You know the game Rodders, you've been round long enough. You can post what you like Rodders but have to take the flak, that's how social media works. It can be a lonely and unpleasant place at times. As for the Orton group, I'm pleased that someone else has taken on the fight because we're not in a strong position fighting alone. I'm not sure how much it helps us (hopefully we have representation on the group) but it is another headache for PCC/AEPG which can only be a good thing? |
|
|
|
Post by rodders on Sept 3, 2024 17:50:30 GMT
My position is that that most likely I will not post again on this subject. Any views which in anyway are seen to not agree with the consortium are rebuffed so what is the point You're lucky that you think that you know the consortiums strategy, I'm buggered if I do? It's very disappointing (although who expected any different) that 2025 is off the table and a return to the EoES at all as we knew it would take some trick! Therefore it's trench warfare and I'm sure that you can work out what the objective and end game is for Peterborough Speedway's future? Views that assist with that outcome are what's needed despite the fact that we know that we're in dire straits. You know the game Rodders, you've been round long enough. You can post what you like Rodders but have to take the flak, that's how social media works. It can be a lonely and unpleasant place at times. As for the Orton group, I'm pleased that someone else has taken on the fight because we're not in a strong position fighting alone. I'm not sure how much it helps us (hopefully we have representation on the group) but it is another headache for PCC/AEPG which can only be a good thing? That is the point we do not know their strategy. Other than we all believe that the objective is to keep Panthers going. The message we get however is put up and shut up . We know best . |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 3, 2024 20:35:40 GMT
You're lucky that you think that you know the consortiums strategy, I'm buggered if I do? It's very disappointing (although who expected any different) that 2025 is off the table and a return to the EoES at all as we knew it would take some trick! Therefore it's trench warfare and I'm sure that you can work out what the objective and end game is for Peterborough Speedway's future? Views that assist with that outcome are what's needed despite the fact that we know that we're in dire straits. You know the game Rodders, you've been round long enough. You can post what you like Rodders but have to take the flak, that's how social media works. It can be a lonely and unpleasant place at times. As for the Orton group, I'm pleased that someone else has taken on the fight because we're not in a strong position fighting alone. I'm not sure how much it helps us (hopefully we have representation on the group) but it is another headache for PCC/AEPG which can only be a good thing? That is the point we do not know their strategy. Other than we all believe that the objective is to keep Panthers going. The message we get however is put up and shut up . We know best . No it isn't. You've pointed out the objective and you can work out the mechanisms to achieve that. That's the strategy. As you know, speedway administrators have always been poor communicators & they work on a need to know basis, which isn't always ideal but there has to be an inner and outer circle and someone has to be in that outer circle. I am but I get by. We can't know everything Rodders. Some things have to be kept in that inner circle and if you keep poking to get in then are going to react. You know that, it's not personal. |
|
|
|
Post by rodders on Sept 3, 2024 21:58:32 GMT
That is the point we do not know their strategy. Other than we all believe that the objective is to keep Panthers going. The message we get however is put up and shut up . We know best . No it isn't. You've pointed out the objective and you can work out the mechanisms to achieve that. That's the strategy. As you know, speedway administrators have always been poor communicators & they work on a need to know basis, which isn't always ideal but there has to be an inner and outer circle and someone has to be in that outer circle. I am but I get by. We can't know everything Rodders. Some things have to be kept in that inner circle and if you keep poking to get in then are going to react. You know that, it's not personal. A strange expression !!! Who decides what there is to know and who needs to know? |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 3, 2024 22:21:13 GMT
No it isn't. You've pointed out the objective and you can work out the mechanisms to achieve that. That's the strategy. As you know, speedway administrators have always been poor communicators & they work on a need to know basis, which isn't always ideal but there has to be an inner and outer circle and someone has to be in that outer circle. I am but I get by. We can't know everything Rodders. Some things have to be kept in that inner circle and if you keep poking to get in then are going to react. You know that, it's not personal. A strange expression!!! Who decides what there is to know and who needs to know? Pretty self explanatory if we're talking about the consortium. If there is something to say that doesn't undermine their strategy then they'll release it when appropriate, hopefully. It isn't their fault that there is nothing going on, or if there is it's behind closed doors. We've just got to live with it which tbh isn't much different to 2010 in terms of lack of information. |
|
bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 165
|
Post by bratters on Sept 3, 2024 22:25:52 GMT
My position is that that most likely I will not post again on this subject. Any views which in anyway are seen to not agree with the consortium are rebuffed so what is the point That’s absolute nonsense. I can’t tell you what you want to hear, what everyone else would like to hear. It’s a long game, I’ve never shied away from saying that. Like I said earlier you (that’s the collective’you’ not you personally) will only see a divide if ‘you’ want to. Anyway what/where are the views that are seen to not agree with the consortium and where were they rebuffed. Give me an example. And the point is, we all want the same end result! |
|
bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 165
|
Post by bratters on Sept 3, 2024 22:30:45 GMT
That is the point we do not know their strategy. Other than we all believe that the objective is to keep Panthers going. The message we get however is put up and shut up . We know best . No it isn't. You've pointed out the objective and you can work out the mechanisms to achieve that. That's the strategy. As you know, speedway administrators have always been poor communicators & they work on a need to know basis, which isn't always ideal but there has to be an inner and outer circle and someone has to be in that outer circle. I am but I get by. We can't know everything Rodders. Some things have to be kept in that inner circle and if you keep poking to get in then are going to react. You know that, it's not personal. When I was a promoter you probably got better communication than ever before at the club, I should know, I got the fines! Of course there are things happening that I can’t disclose, but as Churchill once said, you cannot reason with a tiger when your head is in its mouth! Our clubs head is in AEPGs mouth right now and the real battle won’t take place until the plans are heard and we get to speak in front of the council. That day still seems a long way away. |
|
|
|
Post by Bigcatdiary on Sept 4, 2024 8:31:05 GMT
No it isn't. You've pointed out the objective and you can work out the mechanisms to achieve that. That's the strategy. As you know, speedway administrators have always been poor communicators & they work on a need to know basis, which isn't always ideal but there has to be an inner and outer circle and someone has to be in that outer circle. I am but I get by. We can't know everything Rodders. Some things have to be kept in that inner circle and if you keep poking to get in then are going to react. You know that, it's not personal. When I was a promoter you probably got better communication than ever before at the club, I should know, I got the fines! Of course there are things happening that I can’t disclose, but as Churchill once said, you cannot reason with a tiger when your head is in its mouth! Our clubs head is in AEPGs mouth right now and the real battle won’t take place until the plans are heard and we get to speak in front of the council. That day still seems a long way away. The way I see it their are just four options 1. AEPG run out of money and the application fails, (A few people think this so it might perhaps have some merit) 2. AEPG relent/see the light and agree to meet the consortium and allow speedway to resume whilst awaiting planning permission, (This appears unlikely at present) 3. PCC hear the application and refuse it, it does appear unlikely but you never know for sure until it happens, With perhaps option 2 coming to the table), of course AEPG could appeal but it will be expensive and do they have the funds. 4. PCC hear the application and somehow approve it, (This leaves an option for appeal which I think is very likely)' Note : The result whatever way it goes is unlikely to happen this year and in all likelihood early to middle of 2025 if rumours are true. |
|
bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 165
|
Post by bratters on Sept 4, 2024 14:40:34 GMT
When I was a promoter you probably got better communication than ever before at the club, I should know, I got the fines! Of course there are things happening that I can’t disclose, but as Churchill once said, you cannot reason with a tiger when your head is in its mouth! Our clubs head is in AEPGs mouth right now and the real battle won’t take place until the plans are heard and we get to speak in front of the council. That day still seems a long way away. The way I see it their are just four options 1. AEPG run out of money and the application fails, (A few people think this so it might perhaps have some merit) 2. AEPG relent/see the light and agree to meet the consortium and allow speedway to resume whilst awaiting planning permission, (This appears unlikely at present) 3. PCC hear the application and refuse it, it does appear unlikely but you never know for sure until it happens, With perhaps option 2 coming to the table), of course AEPG could appeal but it will be expensive and do they have the funds. 4. PCC hear the application and somehow approve it, (This leaves an option for appeal which I think is very likely)' Note : The result whatever way it goes is unlikely to happen this year and in all likelihood early to middle of 2025 if rumours are true. Option 1, 3 and 4, I agree with. Option 2 will not happen. Option 5, PCC will approve planning on submission of revised plans which include the provision of a Speedway track in them or an alternative facility provided elsewhere. This option satisfies the specific policies in the Peterborough local plan. |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 4, 2024 15:42:24 GMT
The way I see it their are just four options 1. AEPG run out of money and the application fails, (A few people think this so it might perhaps have some merit) 2. AEPG relent/see the light and agree to meet the consortium and allow speedway to resume whilst awaiting planning permission, (This appears unlikely at present) 3. PCC hear the application and refuse it, it does appear unlikely but you never know for sure until it happens, With perhaps option 2 coming to the table), of course AEPG could appeal but it will be expensive and do they have the funds. 4. PCC hear the application and somehow approve it, (This leaves an option for appeal which I think is very likely)' Note : The result whatever way it goes is unlikely to happen this year and in all likelihood early to middle of 2025 if rumours are true. Option 1, 3 and 4, I agree with. Option 2 will not happen. Option 5, PCC will approve planning on submission of revised plans which include the provision of a Speedway track in them or an alternative facility provided elsewhere. This option satisfies the specific policies in the Peterborough local plan. Yes I was thinking that there is an option missing, as was pointed out by the BSP/SCB: "One way in which AEPG could ensure their scheme was compliant with National Planning Policy Framework would be to provide an alternative venue, in the Peterborough area, for the sport which they have evicted, or indeed to modify their own plans to support its retention at the Showground.
However, as things stand, we believe there is no way this proposal should be accepted – or, realistically, even taken to planning committee – whilst the reports are so deficient and so full of falsehoods about our sport." |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 5, 2024 8:40:13 GMT
Massive 40 Application Supporting Document dump from AEPG (on both applications) Planning – Planning Application Documents for 23/00412/OUT | Outline permission for demolition of all buildings and construction of up to 650 dwellings with associated open space and infrastructure, with access secured and all other matters (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) reserved. This application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement. | East Of England Showground Oundle Road Alwalton Peterborough PE2 6XE plandocs.peterborough.gov.uk/PublicAccess.WebSearch/(S(em3k0vfpdy50zgzadsv45omb))/Results.aspxFirst question as I thought I'd look at the REVISED ES Appendix 1.1 Screening opinion? Brief description of the project/development: Residential development of up to 1600 dwellings (it's two developments, only one of which is in the local plan). Policy LP36: East of England Showground1) Residential development of around 650 dwellings.Proposals for development should not have an unacceptable adverse impact on the surrounding uses (especially on occupiers of nearby residential properties), and all development should ensure that the character of the area is maintained. A comprehensive master plan in advance of, or alongside, any significant proposals will be required and, if approved by the council in advance, this would become a material consideration in the determination of future planning applications. Such a master plan must demonstrate how the functioning Showground will be retained. The loss of any existing leisure and sports facilities will not be supported unless replacement facilities are provided in accordance with policy LP30
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 5, 2024 21:40:29 GMT
Massive 40 Application Supporting Document dump from AEPG (on both applications) Planning – Planning Application Documents for 23/00412/OUT | Outline permission for demolition of all buildings and construction of up to 650 dwellings with associated open space and infrastructure, with access secured and all other matters (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) reserved. This application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement. | East Of England Showground Oundle Road Alwalton Peterborough PE2 6XE plandocs.peterborough.gov.uk/PublicAccess.WebSearch/(S(em3k0vfpdy50zgzadsv45omb))/Results.aspxFirst question as I thought I'd look at the REVISED ES Appendix 1.1 Screening opinion? Brief description of the project/development: Residential development of up to 1600 dwellings (it's two developments, only one of which is in the local plan). Policy LP36: East of England Showground1) Residential development of around 650 dwellings.Proposals for development should not have an unacceptable adverse impact on the surrounding uses (especially on occupiers of nearby residential properties), and all development should ensure that the character of the area is maintained. A comprehensive master plan in advance of, or alongside, any significant proposals will be required and, if approved by the council in advance, this would become a material consideration in the determination of future planning applications. Such a master plan must demonstrate how the functioning Showground will be retained. The loss of any existing leisure and sports facilities will not be supported unless replacement facilities are provided in accordance with policy LP30 Is it a coincidence that this dump happened the same week as the ET reported: "The group, now calling itself SPURR (Showground Plans Under Resident Review) has had several meetings including an exploratory one with the Peterborough City Council Planning Officer."and we got a: "Please see attached correspondence from Planning & Building Services at Peterborough City Council which relates to the following proposal:
Description: Outline permission for demolition of all buildings and construction of up to 650 dwellings with associated open space and infrastructure, with access secured and all other matters (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) reserved. This application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement.
Address: East Of England Showground Oundle Road Alwalton
Reference: 23/00412/OUT
Planning Services
Peterborough City Council
Sand Martin House, Bittern Way, Fletton Quays, Peterborough PE2 8TY
E: Planningcontrol@peterborough.gov.uk
T: 01733 453410"e-mail |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 6, 2024 15:43:09 GMT
Plans to be considered by councillors on October 15Protesters opposed to multi-million pound plans for a homes and leisure village development on the East of England Showground have been given another 30 days to voice their objections.
 
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 6, 2024 16:00:02 GMT
30 days more consultation as decision day looms for East of England Showground development plansAn AEPG spokesperson said: “To clarify, we have made minor amendments to the visual presentation of the parameter plans following discussion with the case officer. "There is no change to the content or original purpose of the parameter plans.Ward Councillor Julie Stevenson said: “It's a very short deadline, 30 days of public consultation and then just two weeks for the council officers to prepare a report to go to planning committee on October 15. "Whether these deadlines can be met when the two applications are so complex remains to be seen. What has prompted objections so far?Many of the scores of objections to the development of the Showground have come from supporters of the speedway champion team Peterborough Panthers. The club has raced on a track at the Showground for 50 plus years. But the plans to develop the site have seen the removal of the track. However, Ashby Butterfield  (ET about as accurate as the AEPG documents!) said: " speedway's home was never here – the club was only on a monthly renewable tenancy.” Full text at peterboroughtoday/30-days-more-consultation-as-decision-day-looms-for-east-of-england-showground-development-plans 6/9/24
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 6, 2024 21:44:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 8, 2024 15:24:27 GMT
Favourite new objection thus far:Despite multiple applications by the developer they have on each occasion failed to address how the only two access points to the planned development will be improved. (haven't checked yet to see if they have?)The existing access points at Dunblane Drive and Joseph Odham Way will not cope with an addition 2000+ cars plus associated commercial traffic. Also this will lead to further issues that already exist at peak times on Oundle Road. ( that's a safe bet  ) The developer has failed to address to the need for additional healthcare facilities which are already overstretched in the Ortons. Finally the developer has failed to take note of Local Plan LP30 and has not satisfactorily addressed a suitable alternative site for speedway that has been a part of Peterborough culture for over 50 years. The application or planned development does not meet with the local residents approval and should be refused. ( I prefer existing site and scrapped or redesigned plans.)
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 8, 2024 15:59:59 GMT
another:
Not needed. With Hampton, Cardea (one of many such (possibly smaller) developments in and around Peterborough), and the new Haddon Estate plus the new Hilton Garden at Fletton Quays which is still not finished. The showground should be used for the sole purpose it's there for. Not housing, hotels etc
Peterborough would appear to have easily already met any national housing stock quota without this development? I'd question Butterfield's assertion that Peterborough is deficient of the niche leisure elements this vision will allegedly deliver? Have PCC done an audit to prove the point?
Butterfield let the cat out of the bag when he said: "who wants to buy a house near a speedway track" despite trying to say as evidence that it is underused for only a few hours for part of the year. It's all about money with him, as his 50 letters from his business colleagues will no doubt point out. He wants Peterborough Speedway to go away and certainly doesn't want to meet his responsibilities within LP30.
|
|
bratters
Championship poster.
Posts: 165
|
Post by bratters on Sept 8, 2024 21:47:16 GMT
another:Not needed. With Hampton, Cardea (one of many such (possibly smaller) developments in and around Peterborough), and the new Haddon Estate plus the new Hilton Garden at Fletton Quays which is still not finished. The showground should be used for the sole purpose it's there for. Not housing, hotels etcPeterborough would appear to have easily already met any national housing stock quota without this development? I'd question Butterfield's assertion that Peterborough is deficient of the niche leisure elements this vision will allegedly deliver? Have PCC done an audit to prove the point? Butterfield let the cat out of the bag when he said: "who wants to buy a house near a speedway track" despite trying to say as evidence that it is underused for only a few hours for part of the year. It's all about money with him, as his 50 letters from his business colleagues will no doubt point out. He wants Peterborough Speedway to go away and certainly doesn't want to meet his responsibilities within LP30. The Speedway club has lived harmoniously with its neighbours for almost a quarter of a century, without any real issues. AEPG obviously will always remain blind to this fact. |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Sept 11, 2024 13:54:47 GMT
It's also amazing what you find when bored: Posted AEPG website 01 September, 2022 - Mr Butterfield also vowed there would be a future for the existing Arena and Events Centre in the development. He said: “The Arena and Events Centre is a huge asset for the showground and our intention is to keep the buildings and facilities and to enhance them. “The leisure development will take place around the arena and we are confident the development will create in excess of 400 jobs. Which helps to explain the PCC - OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT - PLANNING COMMENTS of Sept 2023 that went AWOL from the planning portal before being returned in a considerably watered down, changed version without these graphics: 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):  - around the Arena   |
|
It’s worth noting that agricultural shows and events at Showgrounds throughout England are currently booming. (hopefully we've collected evidence to back up that statement?)
(ET about as accurate as the AEPG documents!) said: "speedway's home was never here – the club was only on a monthly renewable tenancy.”
)