Prior to building Dunn's, most of the land was a Council Highways yard/depot, so presumably council owned for donkeys years.

Same old story.

Big investment companies can get stuff built on a grand scale, despite recesion and all, as their accounts and finance work in a different way. Hene how our own OSv almost came off, although there was a mix of funding going into that.

But Councils used to be able to go in for that sort of thing, and depending on the project maybe the odd one still can. But Bradford is skint and ain't one of them.

My concern is after May 2019 when the rugby covenant ends, the Council and RFL profit from the site. I don't care if they do, mind, but don't feel confident that we would be top of their list to look after. We re likely to be in the lower divisons still and could be shunted off to a Horsfall or other abomination.

Not sure where the idea there is some kind of 'covenant' comes from. 2019 referred only to the Odsal settlement money and not something the council were bound by. The only 'brake' on the council is the lease held by the RFL. Provided the head lease is kept up to date I'd expect the council would be legally bound to honour it, unless there is some legal get out clause, of course.

Under the lease, now held by the RFL, they must play rugby at Odsal until May 2019, or ensure that someone else does.

it's not a case of the Council "being bound by" this - other way round, really - they imposed that requirement.

After that, subject only to planning permission, they can do anything with the site.

The Council as freeholder could of course scrap that requirement if they wanted. But they couldn't extend it, so rugby at Odsal after 2019 is in the hands of RFL.

That's my understanding too, FA and pretty much what I said earlier.
The 'covenant', as it really isn't, is a factor in the 'settlement' agreement and nothing else.