Peterborough Panthers 2023

[Noodles]

1 hour ago, Sully said:

Would it be worth making a new thread with this pinned to get more eyes on it? I would but have no idea who to……

Agreed.  Simple instructions with an example of what to write would encourage more to do it.

[OldNutter]

4 hours ago, Crump99 said:

Policy LP36: East of England Showground specifically points to the fact that the loss of any existing leisure and sports facilities will not be supported unless replacement facilities are provided in accordance with policy LP30

Seems pretty clear to me that that was specifically included for Peterborough Speedway!

Policy LP30: Culture, Leisure, Tourism and Community Facilities
The council will support the development of new cultural, leisure, tourism and community facilities,
especially if:
it will help to improve the range, quality, and distinctiveness of facilities that the city and
surrounding areas have to offer;
it improves access by sustainable transport modes to such facilities; and
it will help to promote the image of Peterborough and attract more visitors.

The above is not what many focus on or take note of (and it's just for information) but it is part of the stick that they will use to beat us with in conjunction with our weapon and their main failing of not meeting the criteria below, and, allegedly, using weak reasoning to justify ignoring LP 30:

Existing Culture, Leisure, Tourism and Community Facilities - the important bit

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.

But as I say, don't get in to specific detail at this point (unless you are good and know what you're doing), just a general objection of that not being met should mean that they have to wake up and think about it at the very least.

 

 

Spot on - should form the basis of the action to force the issue

I am a newby posting here so I will keep a bit down for a while about the issues on this thread.  I went to my first speedway event when I was four at Perry Barr, Birmingham 76 years ago.  Since then, I have spent time following the Brummies (love that big red B ) and then when we moved to Coventry it was the Bees.Then I left the RAF I ended up here in darkest Bedfordshire, so Peterborough became my nearest team.  I've chimed in here because I ended up getting mixed up in a planning fight with a bunch of very determined developers who have come back with more and more complicated B-S to try and bamboozle the locals into giving up and I have learnt a few tips and tricks on the way.  The Crimp99 post is real solid advice.

Objections do not have to be super complicated, but they do have to very pointed at the words in the planning system.  We must accept that the planning system is a huge operation that is biassed massively in favour of big money.  Every stage in any fight with them has been pre-planned so that the peasants can't win.  Having said that we managed to get a big development stopped here for now last week with a great deal of help from our new wave "post-Boris" councillors down here.  Because the system is so biassed, do not expect much help from the council planning officers - they are part of the system (not the case with the councillors - they have to face the peasants for their jobs every few years)).

Probably the best advice I can give for now having scanned the Local Plan and the planning application documents on the council web site is to shout loud everywhere you can.  The developers weakest card is when they have to pop their heads up into view .  This will mainly be first when they have to publish their detailed plans because if you spend time reading through getting to know the key documents you will know what the battlefield looks like from their perspective - try to find the planning officer's comments in amongst all the files.  Put official objections in at every turn at every date possible, such as the short 30-day one that is currently open.  Heed the advice from that post from Crump99 and keep it direct and pointed at official policies.  The emotional stuff might help a bit with the councillors, but the planners and developers will just sit back and laugh at those comments. In fact they will probably trade on them a bit to show how poor the opposition is.

The next stage when the opposition surface will be a key meeting of the "Development Planning Meeting" (or something with a similar name).  The planners have to explain why they have ignored all of the public comments and the councillors on that committee have a chance to vote to reject the application.  Rejecting it would be a huge step for people-power so it has to be on the basis of proving the Planning Officials wrong.  The developers will stack the application with loads of bogus stuff provided by the people they pay from the planning industry that have pseudo-mathematical models that always prove that the development will do nothing to make things any worse and the world will be all roses if they get their way - they will also miss out inconvenient things that do not help.  The main thing we did round here was to get as many people to email the councillors on that planning committee directly with a quick summary of why it should be rejected and turn up at the public gallery to make it clear there is lots of support to keep Panthers racing in Peterborough.  See if you can get Look East off their Norwich chairs to go to the meeting for example

Finally, the application is pretending to be pushing leisure facilities at the site.  We must accept that speedway will not pay all the money needed for the sport, so any re-built stadium must have facilities that can be used on most of the time when there is no speedway going on there.  Things like sports and meeting facilities need to be built into the stadium infrastructure.  The Nation Speedway Stadium was built primarily to replace that great stadium across the road at Hyde and I gather there are gymnasium facilities in it to pay some of the bills.  Maybe we can get some help from other tracks as well as Belle Vue that have gone through this system, such as Coventry (looks like eventually succeeding against a dodgy developer and helpful council).  I am sure Bomber has some contacts there.

That should be enough for a first post, and I will keep a somewhat distant eye on how things progress as one of you local posters get their teeth into the fight and if I notice anything useful, I may chime back in.

Edited August 29, 2023 by OldNutter
minor spelling

[Mick Bratley]

There are two parts to the planning application.

The documents to the two parts are here: https://planpa.peterborough.gov.uk/online-applications//search.do?action=simple&searchType=Application

Search keyword ‘Showground’ You will see the recently published two applications.

You can submit your objections or comments for the first part here: https://planpa.peterborough.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=makeComment&keyVal=RSOMJ0MLIWV00

You can submit your objections or comments for the second part here:
https://planpa.peterborough.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=makeComment&keyVal=RSXWVDML04U00

The planning portal is not the easiest to navigate, but it is important that Speedway supporters overcome this, read the documents and note that there is no provision for Peterborough Speedway in the planning application, in contravention of the City Councils Local Plan and specifically policy LP30. You can find the adopted Peterborough Local Plan here https://www.peterborough.gov.uk/council/planning-and-development/planning-policies/local-development-plan

The section on the Showground and specifically local policies LP30 and LP36 are very relevant. This is a legal document, if this is not adhered to, what is the point of going to the trouble and expense of producing such a document?

Objections and or comments are welcomed from supporters of all clubs from the U.K. and around the world. The Peterborough City Council need to know and understand the 53 year heritage of Peterborough Panthers.

 

Edited August 29, 2023 by Mick Bratley

[Crump99]

15 minutes ago, Mick Bratley said:

There are two parts to the planning application.

The documents to the two parts are here: https://planpa.peterborough.gov.uk/online-applications//search.do?action=simple&searchType=Application

Search keyword ‘Showground’ You will see the recently published two applications.

You can submit your objections or comments for the first part here: https://planpa.peterborough.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=makeComment&keyVal=RSOMJ0MLIWV00

You can submit your objections or comments for the second part here:
https://planpa.peterborough.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=makeComment&keyVal=RSXWVDML04U00

The planning portal is not the easiest to navigate, but it is important that Speedway supporters overcome this, read the documents and note that there is no provision for Peterborough Speedway in the planning application, in contravention of the City Councils Local Plan and specifically policy LP30. You can find the adopted Peterborough Local Plan here https://www.peterborough.gov.uk/council/planning-and-development/planning-policies/local-development-plan

The section on the Showground and specifically local policies LP30 and LP36 are very relevant. This is a legal document, if this is not adhered to, what is the point of going to the trouble and expense of producing such a document?

I seem to recall some planning applications being turned down on the basis of the local plan not being adhered to. It might be worth an e-mail to planning services to ask how many planning applications were rejected because of the local plan and the specific reason, copying it plenty of appropriate contacts so that the e-mail isn't ignored - could even do it as a FOI request - it's a simple enough ask and shouldn't be too onerous for them but does wake them up to our situation.

[Mick Bratley]

6 minutes ago, Crump99 said:

I seem to recall some planning applications being turned down on the basis of the local plan not being adhered to. It might be worth an e-mail to planning services to ask how many planning applications were rejected because of the local plan and the specific reason, copying it plenty of appropriate contacts so that the e-mail isn't ignored - could even do it as a FOI request - it's a simple enough ask and shouldn't be too onerous for them but does wake them up to our situation.

Off you go then!

[Crump99]

7 minutes ago, Mick Bratley said:

Off you go then!

You're heartless, you know I'm suffering

Should be a laugh, I'll give it a go as soon as I can!

[Mick Bratley]

1 minute ago, Crump99 said:

You're heartless, you know I'm suffering

Should be a laugh, I'll give it a go as soon as I can!

It’s therapy mate, I want to keep you busy.

[Noodles]

8 hours ago, Mick Bratley said:

There are two parts to the planning application.

The documents to the two parts are here: https://planpa.peterborough.gov.uk/online-applications//search.do?action=simple&searchType=Application

Search keyword ‘Showground’ You will see the recently published two applications.

You can submit your objections or comments for the first part here: https://planpa.peterborough.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=makeComment&keyVal=RSOMJ0MLIWV00

You can submit your objections or comments for the second part here:
https://planpa.peterborough.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=makeComment&keyVal=RSXWVDML04U00

The planning portal is not the easiest to navigate, but it is important that Speedway supporters overcome this, read the documents and note that there is no provision for Peterborough Speedway in the planning application, in contravention of the City Councils Local Plan and specifically policy LP30. You can find the adopted Peterborough Local Plan here https://www.peterborough.gov.uk/council/planning-and-development/planning-policies/local-development-plan

The section on the Showground and specifically local policies LP30 and LP36 are very relevant. This is a legal document, if this is not adhered to, what is the point of going to the trouble and expense of producing such a document?

Objections and or comments are welcomed from supporters of all clubs from the U.K. and around the world. The Peterborough City Council need to know and understand the 53 year heritage of Peterborough Panthers.

 

Cheers Mick.  This needs to be shared far and wide, not just on this forum.

[Mick Bratley]

I have been invited on to BBC Radio Cambridgeshire at 8:00am on Thursday 31st August (tomorrow) to discuss the Showground development.

[Noodles]

57 minutes ago, Mick Bratley said:

I have been invited on to BBC Radio Cambridgeshire at 8:00am on Thursday 31st August (tomorrow) to discuss the Showground development.

I appreciate everything you are doing Mick

[tellboy]

39 minutes ago, Noodles said:

I appreciate everything you are doing Mick

Along with all speedway fans from around the UK and more hopefully.

[JoeW436]

1 hour ago, Mick Bratley said:

I have been invited on to BBC Radio Cambridgeshire at 8:00am on Thursday 31st August (tomorrow) to discuss the Showground development.

Go well Mick.

[Sir Sidney]

A section on the Showground just about to start on the same station. 

A Councillor due to speak now (4.15 if you listen on catch up) and AEPG at 5ish

Broadly, the rep from AEPG said about speedway

- Not viable
- speedway has been subsidised for many years ( presume he means lower than commercial rent)
- been working with the speedway owner for some time who had lots of notice.

If they can prove its not viable they would potentially overcome the local plan issue, so that is a key area to address. 

Coventry faced the same claim and refuted it I believe, so maybe some clear area for exchange of information,  joint working etc

 

Edited August 30, 2023 by Sir Sidney

[Crump99]

6 hours ago, Sir Sidney said:

A section on the Showground just about to start on the same station. 

A Councillor due to speak now (4.15 if you listen on catch up) and AEPG at 5ish

Broadly, the rep from AEPG said about speedway

- Not viable
- speedway has been subsidised for many years ( presume he means lower than commercial rent)
- been working with the speedway owner for some time who had lots of notice.

If they can prove its not viable they would potentially overcome the local plan issue, so that is a key area to address. 

Coventry faced the same claim and refuted it I believe, so maybe some clear area for exchange of information,  joint working etc

 

AEPG have prepared a document about the  loss of the speedway site as it relates to the Local Plan and that has been given to the Council apparently. Mick and I have seem their summary which isn't that good or impossible to argue against. I can't say more than that. I guess that their full document will appear publically at some point? The local paper today conveniently fails to mention AEPG & PCC's responsibility under LP30 so perhaps best to keep banging that drum and then deal with how AEPG think they've dodged it.

[yaxley panther]

They do have a very slight valid point , in that we've had a fare warning about this development, but a question to this is , where is this land that was earmarked for a new track ? It's never mentioned and I'm thinking was there ever land for a new development or were they under the impression that the showground development was never going to happen?... I really don't know 

[Crump99]

8 hours ago, yaxley panther said:

They do have a very slight valid point , in that we've had a fare warning about this development, but a question to this is , where is this land that was earmarked for a new track ? It's never mentioned and I'm thinking was there ever land for a new development or were they under the impression that the showground development was never going to happen?... I really don't know 

Actually they don't if they haven't negotiated in good faith and are trying to try to get out of their responsibilities within the local plan and LP30. That interestingly came up on Bratters interview on BBC Radio Cambs after the PCC spokesman said that added infrastructure costs were the responsibility of the developer as stated in the local plan. Surprisingly the presenter was interested by that and said that they need to look at whether the same applies to LP30?

Fengate is the talking horse for that new track, as it has been for 20 years. Whether that was ever reality, or how far it got depends on who you speak to.

At the end of the day though, LP30 specifies a like for like replacement either at the EoES or elsewhere. If AEPG wish to kick us out then that cost is down to them and their opposition to LP30 when it ever appears needs to be challenged.

I agree that we have come to the party late but initially the club said that it would need a change of circumstances and one assumes that they tried their best and only finally conceded defeat for the reason in the first sentence.

As Bratters said, we couldn't do much until AEPG played their hand, which they now have, and the response has been good but it needs to be kept going and ramped up. A 10 year vision of developers and the usual artists' impression of a development that the Peterborough public don't want and destroys an existing culture, leisure, tourism & community facility is good ammunition for the fight we potentially face unless common sense prevails.

Edited August 31, 2023 by Crump99

[Hackney]

Where is the speedway track going on this new 25 acre site?

Edited August 31, 2023 by Hackney

[Crump99]

1 hour ago, Hackney said:

Where is the speedway track going on this new 25 acre site?

You've lost me! What am I missing?

[Sir Sidney]

38 minutes ago, Crump99 said:

You've lost me! What am I missing?

I would think the implication is that Mr Tomalin could build a new track on his 25 acre site

[Deano]

Best course is to fight the showground being built on full stop.
 

 

so what’s this at Fengate?

https://maps.app.goo.gl/cELwrUmMtwFZFJn28?g_st=ic

To me it just looks like another development opportunity waiting to happen if this is the place.