Crump99

I think that we just need to focus on what Mick has highlighted, holding PCC & AEPG to account now with the planning application and process.. Without that it's irrelevant whether or not MT or anyone else is interested and I'm pretty sure that he hasn't got the time or inclination to take up that protracted fight. Apart from getting Flappy excited, what has MT really said & done that has got people excited and come to fruition? The club statement suggest that they are not up with things either: "We have spoken to several people regarding the potential for a new site, but the club would need significant help with that as it would essentially involve building a new stadium." - Why? If the developers want to throw the club out then according to the local plan then that's down to them, not the club. Didn't they offer us the stand? Good, take it down, buy some land and rebuild it for us. Job done then you can build a track equal to the EoES

That is a reasonable request but timing is everything and communication skills are paramount. Is it really the time to be showing your hand (if he has one?) or just preaching to the converted with something that they want to hear without delivery? Isn't that partly why we are where we are.

We only need to hear when something is agreed and in black & white. Drip feeding rumours, speculation, decisions not agreed and a wish list helps nobody and just seems to rile people like Buster. When will people learn?

It's an age thing. We need more thinking time as we lose brain cells: speaking personally of course and not for Bratters! Mick's the man in such times of crisis and you want to be on his side. Only orion and a few from the former fun palace of WWoS thought differently AEPG clearly thought/think that this will go through with a nod so it's great that people like Mick are now waking people up to the fact that only AEPG seem to feel that they've got an easy run through. They don't want a fuss. Just look at a quote from Monday's meeting with the locals: "At one point AEPG asked residents not to discuss matters on social media" - which shows a lack of understanding of the world we now live in, that was the response from Cllr Stevenson as mentioned in Bratters interview.

Listen here https://audioboom.com/posts/8284634-bbc-radio-cambs-20-april-2023-concerns-about-the-closure-of-peterborough-panthers-mick-bratley-in

Thankfully some people are waking up and realising that AEPG throwing their weight around and everyone off site, and turning it into a car park, does in no way mean that they are anywhere near the prize of getting their plans approved. We are now in the trenches stage with hand to hand fighting next up. Mick Bratley just gave an excellent interview on BBC Radio Cambridgeshire, talking about what the club means to him (as a 50 year fan which included his promotional tenure with the unforgettable 2006 (although not mentioned)), what the situation currently is as we all know it, and what could/should be the final outcome? Basically that means incorporating Peterborough Speedway in any new development or relocation at the expense of AEPG or their masters as detailed in LP 30 (amusingly PCC were reported not to be aware of the protection order in their own plan )

Agreeing twice with Bratters in one day, that's a collectors item!

Which is why the PCC Local Plan has to be highlighted now along with the provisions within it. If AEPG don't wish to accommodate Peterborough Speedway then LP30 "Existing Culture, Leisure, Tourism and Community Facilities" means that such an act of vandalism will result in a relocation cost to them with both land purchase and construction: "m - The proposal includes the provision of a new facility of a similar nature and of a similar or greater size in a suitable on or off-site location" It certainly isn't a done deal as you say: The depot is a temporary use because AEPG has also submitted an outline planning application for a £50 million leisure village and 1,500 homes on the Showground - I assume that that's not been agreed so they have nothing yet? The resistance is growing and as far as we know they have nothing but the artists impression and glossy brochure? Much like the POSH ground on the embankment Someone needs to keep an eye on them though because if this is how local residents feel after Monday's meeting with AEPG then we've got a bit of a problem: "But their overall attitude suggests they will just push on with this regardless and they are not interested in residents’ feelings"

True and diplomatic Bratters, will save that one

I think that it's gone too far now (started with Mercer all those years ago as you know more than most) and further significant development of some sort is the only outcome with the Showground. Only question is whether Peterborough Speedway can be incorporated within it or whether the local plan still says that they must be provided for elsewhere if not? The place (mainly the surroundings outside of the main arena to be fair) looks more of a dump on each visit, which is probably intentional? Can't see it ever being returned to a resemblance of it's former glory with new owners but we live in hope. Posh Premiership Not until your owner stops selling every decent player as soon as the club makes progress. Buy low and sell everyone as soon as there's a profit to be seen (without the losses of increased wage demands) is a noble sustainable policy but lower league thinking so it's no surprise that you've been waiting so long and will sadly never see your dream Bit off script there, but back on track. What do you think of the purple rebrand? I liked the way that Saul & the new girl were trying to sell it as a positive whilst having a discussion at pit gate on Monday. I think that it's awful, unnecessary nothingness? I may be in the minority but I usually am.

I thought exactly the same when I read that. I know my local councillor well so will bend his ear. It's out of his patch but the citywide plan isn't so I'll ask some questions and he can liaise with the local lot. The local plan is reviewed after 5 years (& every 5 years thereafter) so it may change then. I don't think that hope is lost for 2024 unless Buster agreed to something when he took the club over. He only gave us a couple of years at that time.

And that's why I can't understand why the club is not making more of a fuss, unless it is behind the scenes of course? The council doesn't have to spend anything but it should be ensuring that it's own local plan is adhered to. One last time as I'm fed up of posting this: Policy LP30: Culture, Leisure, Tourism and Community Facilities (Existing Culture, Leisure, Tourism and Community Facilities) The loss, via redevelopment, of an existing culture, leisure, tourism or community facility will only be permitted if it is demonstrated that: k. The facility is demonstrably no longer fit for purpose and the site is not viable to be redeveloped for a new community facility; - which it is l. The service provided by the facility is met by alternative provision that exists within reasonable proximity: what is deemed as reasonable proximity will depend on the nature of the facility and its associated catchment area; - is Kings Lynn or Leicester alternative and reasonable? m. The proposal includes the provision of a new facility of a similar nature and of a similar or greater size in a suitable on or off-site location. - it doesn't unless AEPG have included it in their application? So they should pay for the land and construction? Looking at the report on the public meeting last night regarding the DHL situation, AEPG will need taking to task. Hopefully there are some councillors with bottle: "By the end of the three-hour meeting on (April 17) many residents were left disappointed by the response of the Showground operator AEPG (Asset Earning Power Group) to their concerns." "And both sides understand the strength of the other’s opposing position. But their overall attitude suggests they will just push on with this regardless and they are not interested in residents’ feelings." - which doesn't sound positive for us? Cllr Stevenson said: “I fear that residents will be less interested in giving up their time for future meetings given how poorly this one was managed. "At one point AEPG asked residents not to discuss matters on social media, which shows a lack of understanding of the world we now live in.

I think that that was probably down to CJ more than MT.

Fixed the track lighting (or at least helped I guess?) with 23 bulbs of the 24 on 4 poles now working.

Shame that they are seemingly not putting the same effort in to trying save the Showground circuit: Wolverhampton has a long and proud history in the sport, having first staged racing in 1928, and has always been regarded as a highly professional, well run and viable business. Rob Godfrey, Chairman of British Speedway Promoters’ Ltd, said: “We were all deeply shocked by the news, and I must stress this was as much of a surprise to us as it was to everyone when we heard on Monday morning. “This stands out as a bizarre and ludicrous decision to end the tenancy of a well-supported, successful, viable club which has a great history in speedway dating back nearly 100 years. “We don’t want to see any club close, and we don’t intend to let this one go without a fight, especially when there appears to be no logical reason for the decision. “We will be forming an Action Group over the coming days and we are fully supportive of Chris (Van Straaten) and his colleagues as they look to save the club. STATEMENT: WOLVERHAMPTON SPEEDWAY (17/4/23 BSPA site)

Agreed: 7. Jordan Jenkins 1', 2, 2', 0 = 5+2 - can't complain at that, he's far from the problem.

3000 in attendance & a handful on here talking crap - think that your calculator needs a service

The update covered it as much as you'd expect to get: "Over the winter there was an on/off scenario whereby the club may have changed hands. However, given the uncertainty over the longevity of Peterborough Speedway, it was understandable that a sale did not take place".

I paid cash last week but will pay more attention next time to the explanation on the sign and act accordingly.

Somewhere I go regularly has just instigated a £2 card surcharge because the bank or whoever has done on them? So that rule no longer applies, or is flexible, or someone is pulling a fast one. I'll need to check on that.

I wouldn't trust the majority of PCC to tell me it's Thursday! Irrespective of their enthusiasm, if the local plan was agreed and not changed then they need to explain why a high profile existing Peterborough sporting facility is being lost without provision of an alternative elsewhere? Permission for EoES development would not be agreed otherwise. That's there in black & white (are you allowed to say that these days?). I don't get the dog track too close to houses. It's no closer now than it has ever been and is not an area likely to be swamped with houses in future. Any noise issues wouldn't be unsurmountable IMO. As for POSH, when you see an artists impression and timeline in the local paper you know that it hasn't been thought through or agreed with all parties and other considerations. The nice graphic is usually the only thing produced at the end of it all.

Responded to a fan's concern (on a specific, not organisational question) via e-mail yesterday so no he hasn't gone. My understanding is that he was unfortunately on leave and it all went a bit pear shaped with him being out of the country.

Bigger problem is potential demolition but if the proposal hasn't got to council and they want to agree with their local plan for the EoES then they can refuse the Fengate Land Holdings Limited (FLHL) application and a deal can be agreed to move Peterborough Speedway in with a sensible curfew to appease the few locals: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-64335400

Rumour I heard last meeting (only a rumour but logical if the Adopted Local Plan was confirmed by PCC) was that the EoES developers had helped the club buy some land to agree with Policy LP36: East of England Showground "The loss of any existing leisure and sports facilities will not be supported unless replacement facilities are provided in accordance with policy LP30". LP30 - Existing Culture, Leisure, Tourism and Community Facilities The loss, via redevelopment, of an existing culture, leisure, tourism or community facility will only be permitted if it is demonstrated that: k. The facility is demonstrably no longer fit for purpose and the site is not viable to be redeveloped for a new community facility; or l. The service provided by the facility is met by alternative provision that exists within reasonable proximity: what is deemed as reasonable proximity will depend on the nature of the facility and its associated catchment area; or m. The proposal includes the provision of a new facility of a similar nature and of a similar or greater size in a suitable on or off-site location. k, The EoES is still fit for purpose; l, is a bit tenuous and potentially open to interpretation and argument; m, there is no provision on or off site so without it the Showground can't throw out Peterborough Speedway and agree with the Local Plan?

Agreed but not his fault or rocket science is it? (not having a go at you, just looking at the problem). The pits don't let him out; those who did must have heard the start of the announcement? If it's too late then those on the mic can see, same as everyone else, what's going on so shut up until he's stopped and off track.