Peterborough Panthers 2023

[Crump99 4,476]

On 9/11/2023 at 12:15 AM, OldNutter said:

Butterfield seems to be essentially a  one-man-band who has managed some of those "health" clubs we are looking to get if he wins. with a convincing manner and not a lot else, other than a bunch of mates who want to follow him scrumping  in the property magic money tree orchard.  AEPG is a front that holds the operating company taken over from the Agricultural Society.  AEPG has only got one director and assets of £1 according to Companies House.  The operating company now only has two directors, Butterfield and a mate who is apparently the new CEO.  The rest of the people who appear on the web page of AEPG are the groups, consultants and finance people who have put this dreadful application together.

Just been reading another article in Peterborough Today and I must say that I thought that I've read something like that before https://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/politics/council/council-backed-house-building-company-medesham-homes-that-owns-pleasure-fair-meadow-car-park-is-not-really-fit-for-purpose-and-could-close-4288262

Edited September 12, 2023 by Crump99

[Sully 274]

Councillor Julia Stevenson in reply to Paul Stainton (BBC reporter) on Twitter lamenting the panthers closing. 
 

“If this goes anything like the way of the hydrotherapy pool, the fans can expect to see photos of the beloved facilities smashed to bits in the near future.”

[Shhalewhhale 26]

I won't be suprised if the track and grandstand are demolished by the end of October. Or mysteriously catch fire. Funny how these things accidentally happen. Like that pub in the West Midlands...

[Chris 441]

AEPG will pull it apart pretty quickly after the farewell meeting. Is there anything that can be done to prevent it from happening though?

[Sir Sidney 292]

1 hour ago, Chris said:

AEPG will pull it apart pretty quickly after the farewell meeting. Is there anything that can be done to prevent it from happening though?

AEPG would be very rash to do that before the planning application is decided. 

 

[Deano 1,318]

1 hour ago, Chris said:

AEPG will pull it apart pretty quickly after the farewell meeting. Is there anything that can be done to prevent it from happening though?

Exactly, everyone shouldn't be surprised when this happens.

It happens to a lot where a "forced" change of use is being investigated by the owners.

Fans need to use the Crooked House as an example, to stop it.

Edited September 13, 2023 by Deano

[Deano 1,318]

26 minutes ago, Sir Sidney said:

AEPG would be very rash to do that before the planning application is decided. 

 

Maybe, but Coventry Stadium doesn’t have permission and look at that place. There are many more examples.

[Crump99 4,476]

1 hour ago, Chris said:

AEPG will pull it apart pretty quickly after the farewell meeting. Is there anything that can be done to prevent it from happening though?

Basically you would imagine that Peterborough City Council would be the first port of call but the fact at a councillor, and someone on our side, is saying that really does beg the question of where indeed do you go? These people are profit orientated professional wreckers of things and with a weak council who've fallen for the vision and brochure, it probably needs equivalent professionals now to answer your question but who knows any or can afford such advice? Anyone sending in an objection could link to LP30 and being "fit for purpose" when the planning application went in but I'm clutching at straws. Urgency is the key though because if AEPG are thinking that then they need to know that there will be consequences, and not the ones that they want.

[Hamish McRaker 601]

Judging by the comments on here concerning Mr Chapman's broadcast during this Monday's match, would it be a surprise if he were to be actually operating the bulldozer destroying the stadium, grinning from ear to ear and happily singing "It's Over"? 

And will anyone attend any Farewell meeting (paying or for free) that is promoted and organised by him?

[Sir Sidney 292]

52 minutes ago, Deano said:

Maybe, but Coventry Stadium doesn’t have permission and look at that place. There are many more examples.

Maybe so, but Brandon Stadium has not been demolished. 

AEPG presumably want the Council onside, and have included demolition within its planning application. Why would it risk demolishing the grandstand and stadium buildings in advance of the application being determined? It makes no business sense. The Council is already going to get significant flack, quite justifiably, if it allows the demolition without replacement in accordance with its own Local Plan. If AEPG were to demolish it without permission it might well jeopardise the whole application. 

Of course, it wouldn't be unknown for a significant fire to occur - but I suspect the Police would want to get involved if it were suspicious, and that would slow down AEPG even more - and delays cost money.

[False dawn 2,298]

1 minute ago, Sir Sidney said:

Maybe so, but Brandon Stadium has not been demolished. 

AEPG presumably want the Council onside, and have included demolition within its planning application. Why would it risk demolishing the grandstand and stadium buildings in advance of the application being determined? It makes no business sense. The Council is already going to get significant flack, quite justifiably, if it allows the demolition without replacement in accordance with its own Local Plan. If AEPG were to demolish it without permission it might well jeopardise the whole application. 

Of course, it wouldn't be unknown for a significant fire to occur - but I suspect the Police would want to get involved if it were suspicious, and that would slow down AEPG even more - and delays cost money.

Could the stand (and other buildings) be dismantled and used on a future, alternative site?

[Sir Sidney 292]

Just now, False dawn said:

Could the stand (and other buildings) be dismantled and used on a future, alternative site?

No idea I'm afraid. I'm sure there are people close to the club who could answer that, but I would have thought the cost were prohibitive even if it were technically feasible.

[Sir Sidney 292]

3 hours ago, Sully said:

Councillor Julia Stevenson in reply to Paul Stainton (BBC reporter) on Twitter lamenting the panthers closing. 
 

“If this goes anything like the way of the hydrotherapy pool, the fans can expect to see photos of the beloved facilities smashed to bits in the near future.”

Was she suggesting that this happened before or after planning permission was granted (if indeed it was)? I can quite imaging AEPG wanting to demolish the stadium as soon as they have got permission, if permission is granted

[Crump99 4,476]

1 hour ago, Sir Sidney said:

AEPG would be very rash to do that before the planning application is decided. 

 

Thought I'd google and see what comes up? Whether this applies in 2023 I don't know but it's interesting:

What happens if planning permission is ignored?

If you do require planning permission but you proceed without it, you will have committed a planning breach. In the event of a planning breach, you will need to submit a retrospective application to the local council. If this is successful, you will not need to take any further action.

My concern is that my local council has all but nodded this through (didn't expect any opposition though) and the planning committee is just a front and tick box exercise for approval. Consider that the planning application was verified on the August Bank Holiday, as well as being told this week that the case officer dealing with this application is on annual leave at the moment and he will reply to you on his return doesn't exactly fill one with confidence!

[Sir Sidney 292]

2 minutes ago, Crump99 said:

Thought I'd google and see what comes up? Whether this applies in 2023 I don't know but it's interesting:

What happens if planning permission is ignored?

If you do require planning permission but you proceed without it, you will have committed a planning breach. In the event of a planning breach, you will need to submit a retrospective application to the local council. If this is successful, you will not need to take any further action.

My concern is that my local council has all but nodded this through (didn't expect any opposition though) and the planning committee is just a front and tick box exercise for approval. Consider that the planning application was verified on the August Bank Holiday, as well as being told this week that the case officer dealing with this application is on annual leave at the moment and he will reply to you on his return doesn't exactly fill one with confidence!

How have you concluded that the Council 'has all but nodded this through ' ?