I'm pretty sure that the Council would have no problem funding a replacement Sports Centre by itself either through existing capital budgets or the realisation of some of Dunn's existing land.

If Dunn's is losing as much money as they say then it's a "no brainer" with no other "schemes" and "political problems" attached.


Well South Bradford will be losing the swimming pool under current OSV proposals so what would that leave ?

Anyone would think that the athletics track, a non-league footy stadium, 4 x 11 a side pitches and a cricket pitch that are proposed to be built over by houses didn't already exist in South Bradford

BM, I think you make some good points. However, I believe the situation boils down to this:

[list[*If Bulls were to move to VP permanently, they would not be viable as a top flight rugby league club.[/*:m
[*If Bulls stay at Odsal as it is, they will sooner or later not be viable as a top flight rugby league club.[/*:m
[*Bulls have no realistic means of developing the stadium without Council backing.[/*:m
[*It is in Bradford Council's interests to have the Bulls continue as a top flight rugby league club.[/*:m[/list:u
Do you disagree or take issue with any of the above statements? Should Bradford Council allow another of the city's sporting institutions go to the wall when we know that with the right facilities they can more than pay for themselves in the long run?

fundamental problem we have is we are only leaseholders of odsal so we cant borrow against value of land. This also makes it difficult to attract outside investment other than grants.
council would probably sign ground over to us but then we would become liable for cost of enviromental cleanup which is needed, which is probably a significant percentage of costs of OSV.

Yes we can. It's a 150 year lease which was described at the time by Mr Caisley as "virtual ownership".
Getting into debt is probably not a great idea though - that way clubs have gone to the wall.

why?

I don't think you can. I can't see how you can borrow against something you don't own. Where's the collateral?

Same reason it would clean graffiti off the town hall. The benefits might not be immediately apparent in the ledger, but the alternative is to do nothing, sending out the signal that the council have given up on the city, so everyone else might as well too.

Well my family has borrowed money against a lease on lan d which is a 99 yr lease, for farming reasons.

That's the post I was hoping for. I firm sense of City's proud history and respect for the sense of grief and yet a pragmatic forward thinking approach.

There are lot's of problems associated with building on Odsal which means it's not an attractive proposition to developers, to be honest if there had been interest in it the council would have been happy to sell it off long ago and get rid of it. If it ends up being used for anything other than a stadium it will be landfill, and not the big money raiser for the council that some seem to think.

No we don't and don't you forget it.

Weren't there some new rules set down a couple of years back about minimum facilities at super league grounds?
I've been looking for the document but I can't find it anywhere.
Some of it was about carparking. VP doesn't have any supporter carparking at all. If we were to move stadium would we have to comply with new rules?
Perhaps grounds like Belle Vue and Headingley get away with it because the clubs are stuck with the location and the nearby housing.