I'm not aware of any sites in the centre of the district that are suitable.

Perhaps Odsal is the only site where the council owns land that of sufficient size? It's easy to reach from the city centre by road. It's not on green belt and is in no danger of flooding.

A new stadium next to the motorway network is a potential money spinner for the council too in case it wishes to bid for events, so maybe there is something in it for the non Bulls supporting taxpayer after all? The stadium development will give the council a bigger asset than it currently holds. The KC stadium in Hull is the base for a lot of positive work in the community where various projects and businesses have offices. This could be repeated in Bradford.

If the OSV ends up attracting people from Calderdale or Leeds or anywhere else then surely that's a good thing? They'll be swelling the coffers of Bradford council! That's another benefit to you!

Edge?

Odsal?

Are you drunk?

Won't a lot of it be privately financed?

I've been teetotal for a day now.

Here's a map, and I reckon Odsal is more or less where the 6036 converges with the 641?

[urlhttp://mediafiles.thedms.co.uk/Publication/YS-Brad/cms/pdf/Bradford-district-map.pdf[/url

Edge of district by anyones standards.

Well, that's the thing..it's all a bit vague.

Do you have some figures?

It won't last. I give it till 7pm




See that orangey circle with "BRADFORD" above it? Well, that's the centre. See the blue line with M606 which almost touches the orange line? Well, that's where Odsal is. It is almost directly central to the district. Unless you're suggesting that the middle of your map, which is Bingley Five Rise Locks, is the true "centre"?




Only about as much as Bradford City Centre itself is "edge of district". Which would make your point, er, well, to be polite, balderdash?

Sorry I foolishly thought that when we said "edge of district" we meant "edge of district", whereas it would seem we should be referring to "relative to just the city of Bradford and sod the rest".

And while we're on it, that's wrong. My 6036 converging with 641 beats your position hands down.



By at least 200 yards.

This has been driven by the council from the start. The Bulls are one interested party of many.

The Richard Dunn loses money because the facilities are so restricted.
The new facilities will serve thousands of people from across the district. It will form part of the sports facilities offered by Bradford College and local (by that I mean district wide) facilities for sports groups.

The vast majority of people who will use the site will not be connected to the bulls in any way at all.
If one of the district football clubs moves in too and at least one local amateur RL team then the usage of the stadium itsself will widen.

If other towns and cites far smaller than Bradford can have sports villages then why should we be denied just because some residents on the other side of the city don't think it's close enough.

The sports village could not be developed at VP or it probably would have already happened. At Odsal we have the space, the motorway access and the interest. The sports centre could be replaced and the valuable land used to help pay for it. Could Keighley offer all that?

Of course not!

AJ seems to be saying that the money going towards the OSV from the Council should be shared equally across all facilities across the entire district rather than a big chunk spent in one place because it's too hard to travel from Keighley to Odsal.

This seems to be regardless of need, and regardless of the fact that better facilities could be provided if resources were pooled.

I get the feeling that some folk wouldn't be making any noise at all if there was no stadium as part of the OSV. AJ has already said the scheme is a Trojan Horse for the Bulls. It seems a bit odd that if that were the case why so many organisations would be signing up.

The benefits of a new stadium and the OSV being built would filter down to council tax payers whether they use it or not. It's a good project and I hope it goes ahead.

For the record, I don't have any problems with the Richard Dunn being replaced, it's a tip, and it's outdated. That area needs new public recreational facilities, no doubt at all.

For the record, the same could be applied to Keighley Leisure Centre and Pool, and Shipley pool ( I can't say anything about the other facilities in the area, as I'm not familiar with them).

The issue I have is of funding. Bradford Bulls were paid £4.6 (?) million to take care of the stadium for the foreseeable future. What happens to that money now? I'm not stirring it here, but surely that's a reasonable question?

Because Andrea, and I hate to drag this up again, we'll end up paying for it!!



Andrea, talk of motorway access isn't relevant at all. How much of the metropolitan district of Bradford does the M606/M62 serve?



Nobody said it could.

This discussion is getting silly, it sounds like to me it's a case of if i can't have direct access to something i don't see why others should, when i pay the same tax...whilst we're at it why don't we look at the spend per head by the government and have a go at the southerners.

Please use your common sense, the access links, the land, the proximity to the university... all already discussed, at least 1 team who could go some way to filling it and the replacement of Richard Dunnes, which as loss making, your paying for now!

If you object to using the money for this what else would you use the money for?

The lump sum had several components. IIRC it went something broadly like this (don't hold me to the details):

Part of it was to pay for urgent capital/maintenance expenditure for which the council was responsible, and that was sunk into the ground up front. Remember the Council still owns the ground. That money never came to the club.

Part of the money was the net present value of the EXISTING council commitment up to 2019 - costs of running the ground. Thats where the contingent liability to repay - see my post - likely comes from. This was not new money at all, and the Council gets it back pro rata if we move out.

Part of the money was compensation for ending the EXISTING annual payment to the club (I think which arose following the 1986 Speedway WC where the club gave the rights to food and drink sales etc to the Council in exchange for an annual sum).

Not of this was new money. None. It was all existing council obligations dating back to 1986. All the settlement was was two single discounted payments and completion of necessary stadium work. Again: not new money as it was all expenditure the council was contractually committed to.

But I guess this just risks raking up the 2002 argument all over again, where each of the different camps simply refused to budge from their entrenched positions regardless of fact or logic

That funding was necessary because of the chronic mismanagement of Odsal by Bradford Council since the year dot. Odsal and the Bulls are potentially two of Bradford's greatest icons, yet the short-sightedness and incompetence of the Council has allowed the former and consequently the latter to reach a parlous state. If there is a solution that also provides community facilities, ones far more likely to be used with a professional sports club on site and drawing publicity, surely this is just the sort of thing rates are for?

Oh God, I've got the full gang on to me now

BTW, I'd fully support a 'Keighley Sporting Village' around Lawkholme Lane. But AFAIK it hasn't be proposed. Get Keighley RU to sell up at Utley, get the bowls and the cricket involved... also, it could help with community relations which I understand are and have been a bit of an issue for some time. The way Hood sold OSV was pensioners playing bowls next to teenagers doing kickiboxing, people coming in for one sport then trying another.

Well with the plods right next door it shouldn't cost much for the policing of the thousands who would be attending...

Isn`t that a bit near the edge of the district? Jeez, it would take me an age to get there.............no, I`m not paying my rates for that

Both which have relatively recently had large wads of cash spent on them IIRC.

Shipley pool definately had a refit not too long back.

I've used both Keighley & Shipley heavily while my daughter was growing up, both excellent facilites. I have no problem with my tax being spent on them, neither do I on OSV even though it's unlikely I will ever use it, obviously providing it is done efficiently etc.

You'd have to demolish a lot of housing to do that.

Do you mean the land between Royd Ings and Hard Ings?

I don't know, it's all so far away...

I mean [url=http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=royd+ings+keighley&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=12.374478,39.550781&ie=UTF8&ll=53.874038,-1.901729&spn=0.006022,0.019312&t=h&z=16&iwloc=addrthis bit[/url. Maybe it would have to be in two pods, one on each side of the road...