Crump99

ok ta, didn't read that and I doubt that most locals did either. It will have more impact in Peterborough via the ET though and still needs challenging. As you say, it is a rehash of what they've said before so I'm sure it can be pulled apart as per usual.

I wouldn't believe a word of it and negotiations along with suitable financial arrangements can fix most things. Under pressure AEPG couldn't get their prepared statement out quick enough on Sunday and that said: 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. And after yesterday's glimmer of hope they've similarly rushed out their counter story which I'm sure raises more questions than it answers.

I don't believe that he wants us gone but he's clearly not got the affinity to the club compared to those who came before him. He had to keep AEPG sweet all year, and probably still does? Some of the messaging and detail (or not) within it throughout 2023 has, even so, been rather disappointing though! Buster is done now though. The important thing now is to keep the pressure up on the EEAS/AEPR/PCC which will be vital support for those behind the scenes fighting for our future.

AEPG think that they say all of the right things but the more that they say and do, the more incompetent and selfish they look. If the East of England Agricultural Society and Peterborough City Council had held an open and well publicised initial consultation process then we'd never have got here in the first place. We wouldn't have been blighted by the self proclaimed Mr Motivator of the development industry trying to convince everyone of the AEPG alleged active wellness, lifestyle and health credentials that would easily have been delivered without their unwanted assistance.

Good advice

I hope that the Peterborough City Council ePetition is happening, gets approved and up and running. I suspect that the contributors would be quite eye opening and the numbers significant.

So given that the Planning and Environmental Protection Committee have scheduled a meeting for Tuesday 14th November, 2023,1.30 pm, can we expect them to look at this then? Given that AEPG's alleged sale of the land is expected to be approved by Spring 2024, again subject to planning approval, it's all getting a bit tight unless they all think that it's an unchallenged done deal and can be nodded through? Most of the council will be on leave for much of Dec and early Jan so I can't see much happening planning meeting wise after Nov until middle of Jan. Thankfully though, even 5 weeks is good time for tomorrow's developers PR exercise to have been forgotten, along with Aaron Murrell's confused view of AEPG.

The EEAS/AEPG have all but closed down the site so that's the waste. PCC could approve a multi use health, fitness and well being complex including Peterborough Speedway and the more sensible associated elements of the proposed development but they've made a dash for cash and bought the AEPG fantasy that'll be an out of date dogs' dinner in a decade. I agree that the farewell meeting is a shocking idea. The only bonus would be if Chapman gets on the mic and tells us (well those who can't find something else to do and are going) what has really gone on and what he thinks.

Are you talking about the Design and Access Statement?

Both so true. You like to think it's all above board then you get an AEPG charm offensive for an Oct 15 event and within 24 hours PCC bang out that 2 days later, when everyone (except speedway supporters) will think that they are not what they are, they will make a decision on a refused application. The whiff is already there. It's just a question of how pungent it gets! Makes me laugh when Aaron Murrell, Director for organisers Good Running Events said: “We are incredibly excited to have AEPG on board as headline sponsors of the AEPG Great Eastern Run. “AEPG are a forward-thinking team who share our philosophy of getting people to be fit and active in their community - which makes them the perfect sponsors for this event.” AEPG is a visionary facilitator *Their Facebook intro, not my words) who unlocks future potential in regenerating land - ie Page · Property developer, nothing more and nothing less. 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.” So Butterfield doesn't see the contradiction there and the negatives of destroying a popular underused and badly managed existing Culture, Leisure, Tourism and Community Facility Greenspace, along with wanting to rid the city of one of its most high profile and successful sporting teams? Who buys his guff? I'm looking forward to Consultee (Web) Open Space Management 22/09/2023 PCC - OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT - PLANNING COMMENTS reappearing on the planning portal next week. It strangely went AWOL after the Peterborough Today article - thinking about it, the 9th or later to reappear is another funny day given the weekends event!

Hope they are not that negative. If they are then I wish they'd say. I could then just give up and concentrate on an alternative interest.

Exactly! Anyone who thinks that in a decade's time the city of Peterborough will have a concrete development that is better than the Existing Culture, Leisure, Tourism and Community Facility that the EEAS, AEPG & PCC hope to destroy really do need to have a look at themselves. It's no surprise that we keep reading things like: An AEPG spokesperson said: “These are artist impressions, albeit they are based on the AEPG vision of the overall development’s look and feel. Artist impressions, vision, look and feel - usual meaningless dross!

He probably picked up the word from my post and I was just repeating what the EEAS CEO said: "AEPG currently occupy and operate the site under a lease"

I suspect that you're right. I wonder how watertight it is because I doubt that PCC expected so much flak? This was in the local press fact file explaining the project and timeline: Peterborough Panthers speedway team was informed in 2022 (not what Chapman said on the mic?) that the 2023 season would sadly have to be their last in the Showground grandstand, 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. "Operators so-far have not been named" - they're going to be popular when/if known

Would this muddy the waters? "A planning Article 4 restriction was submitted to the council on Thursday 28/09 by the Parish Council" I assume that that is related to the below objection? Orton Waterville Parish Council OBJECTS to this planning application 23/00400/OUT and 23/00412/OUT, in its current format for the following material observations: 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).

Don't play the last ever game that AEPG, Chapman & some supporters are pushing is my suggestion. With planning up in the air, nothing is going to happen at the EoES for years sufficient to stop Peterborough Speedway running for several seasons at the very least. Also, with a local plan review under way and Peterborough City Council under increasing pressure, the only thing to say farewell to is 2023 and Chapman's tenure as he's made it clear that he does not want to take Panthers forward.

Bratters is the expert regarding the world of shark infested custard. If there's a way then he would know. If AEPG don't want to negotiate though then what do you do? Go direct to the East of England Agricultural Society, keeping PCC updated as well could be a useful strategy. I'm sure that they don't want to be brought in to this and dragged down with their current promoter, AEPG who currently occupy and operate the site under a lease. The EEAS certainly didn't swallow AEPG's alleged exciting plans and fantasy planning applications to get negative press and a 1000+, thus far, objections.

Amen to that. The first part is spot on in my book. I'm certainly not playing that game. I was done for 2023 when Chapman read the AEPG script over the PA. The local paper and AEPG will love the farewell to speedway at the EoES edition and those not involved in the fight will just buy it as the opposition ebbs away If we carry on kicking and screaming a bit without anyone significant happening, being that an MP, PCC decision maker or these alleged people who want to take the club forward breaking ranks then I'll not be holding my breath for the future. I keep seeing that people are working hard behind the scenes, well I know one, so let's hope that they keep the pressure up for those next few pivotal weeks.

I'm sure that they have tried to get out of those elements by submitting to PCC a prepared document which looks at the loss of Peterborough Speedway in the context of Local Plan Policy. I don't believe that document is in the public domain and I've hit a blank trying to get a copy of it. I know the basics and their arguments are pretty weak and have generally been negated by many many excellent objections. AEPG do hold the cards though and unless someone from the club (who will that be because Chapman is demob-happy and allegedly there is nobody else?) calls AEPG's bluff and goes public then they will stick with the non-viable excuse at an unused EoES and it may just stick. PCC will look for a get out and no 2024 would do it IMO.

Positive note and farewell meeting in the same sentence. Well done. You're not Paul Grinnell or on the AEPG payroll are you

Problem is that the long game for Panthers is only 5 or 6 weeks. If that step back to go forward is to take a year out, come back with something unlikely to be as good as part of whatever is left of British Speedway at that time then good luck with that.

More reality than theory: allegedly AEPG had discussions with Panthers owners and the outcome of such meetings was that the club could not afford a break even rent. Now if, for instance, Rick Frost and his fortunes was in charge and called their bluff, would AEPG say OK, crack on in 2024? I doubt it? They'd just think up another barrier.

Neither am I but I know enough and there is nothing (usual rumours aside) around to justify that post.

Could still confirm until November I believe so the opportunity is still there. Bigger problem is that it requires a new Panthers owner/s and AEPG to come to the table which they allegedly have no desire/intention to do.

Why? Evidence for that?