The £50 million redevelopment of the East of England Showground in Peterborough remains in limbo after repeated delays in finalising a legal agreement that is already drafted but still unsigned.
The 164-acre Alwalton site, formerly home to major agricultural events and the Peterborough Panthers speedway team, is earmarked for up to 1,500 homes and a 50-acre leisure village, including a hotel, school, and care facilities. Developers Asset Earning Power Group (AEPG), working with the East of England Agricultural Society, secured outline planning approval in 2024 and 2025 – but only on the condition that a Section 106 agreement was completed.
That agreement, a legally binding mechanism under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, sets out contributions of more than £7 million, including £5.9m for schools, £898,000 for GP services and £289,000 for ambulances. It must be signed by Peterborough City Council, the Agricultural Society and AEPG before work can begin.
Two deadlines for signing – April 2025 and July 2025 – have now been missed. Although all parties say they “accept the terms,” no final signatures have yet been added. Campaigners argue that the unsigned deal has left residents in “planning limbo” while uncertainty grows over whether the permissions remain valid.
The draft itself highlights the hold-up. Under the heading “THIS AGREEMENT is made the day of 2025”, the document names the three parties: “(1) THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PETERBOROUGH… (2) EAST OF ENGLAND AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY… and (3) ASSET EARNING POWER RESIDENTIAL (AEPR) LTD.” It further states: “The Council is satisfied that the Development is such as may be permitted… and is minded to grant the Permissions subject to the further provisions of this Agreement.”
Yet despite the legal wording being finalised and references in place (applications 23/00412/OUT and 23/00400/OUT), the deed remains incomplete. Until all parties add their signatures, the planning obligations are not enforceable, and no construction can start.
As of September 2025, all three parties – AEPG, the Agricultural Society and Peterborough City Council – state that they are in agreement on the terms. The Agricultural Society has confirmed its commitment to a “positive legacy” for the land, while AEPG insists it is “ready to proceed”. But the agreement still requires final unilateral signatures, and without them, no progress can be made.
AEPG chief executive Ashley Butterfield said the project would bring “considerable benefits for housing, leisure and wellbeing” and stressed the company was “in agreement with the terms.” The Agricultural Society has also pledged to secure a “positive legacy” for the land.
But until the signatures are inked, the fate of the city’s largest redevelopment in decades rests on a single missing step in an agreement already drafted but still unsigned.
