Re: VP it is then! : Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:14 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

For some huge gold-plated cantilever wonder maybe, but not for basic if cheap cover with vertical supports.

Wasn't VP rumoured to be for sale at only £2.5m? We could buy 4 of them at that price!

It is ironic that a Bradford Council engineer named Wardley drew up a plan in 1951 for a 92,000 capacity ‘European’ style stadium, which would then have cost £250,000. If only . . .

Bugger, I didn't allow for the gold plating In this day and age tho' would a stand be built with vertical pillar support?
The problem is in fact Odsal's biggest benefit, that is it's shape. Ideal for fair weather veiwing, but an engineers nightmare when constructing a roof to allow good viewing from the back of said stand.
One possible way is to build the covered part 3/4 or 1/2 of the way down from the concourse, good for the guys at the back tough if you like to stand at the front.

Re: VP it is then! : Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:38 am  

I haven't read the last 6 pages, because I expect it'll be an echo of what I'm about to say.

It's pretty predictable what was going to come out sooner or later, it's just nice to have it confirmed what everyone knew, that going for the £75m redevelopment option whilst in the midst of a recession was nothing short of farcical.

If we do have to move to VP, it'll be appalling. Even as a BCFC fan, I can proudly say it's in a horrible location, there's nothing around it, and to be honest, it just isn't Odsal. But it's still Bradford, and we'll still be the Bradford Bulls. Moving out of Bradford is NOT an option, it's just unfeasible to think of going to watch the Bulls somewhere else!

I caught a post at the top of this page mentioning the fact we wouldn't be chopped in the next round of licensing, which is right. Only clubs that recieved a grade C will be considered for the drop in 2011. So an option I suppose if we're clutching at Odsal shaped straws would be to stay at Odsal, and see if we can push for a cheaper redevelopment? I always wanted BCFC to come up here, I don't know the ins and outs of the VP leasehold with Gordon Gibb, but I expect City could walk away from VP if they so chose to. But you'd have umpteen thousand BCFC fans saying the same as us, they don't want to move away from their home, even if it is a godforsaken hellhole.

I think the T&A said there's 5 cheaper options, two of which don't involve touching Odsal at all, which is fair enough, as we're a PLC and the Council are looking to redevelop the area. However, we should push for all we've got to be included. In my mind, leaving Odsal would be unthinkable.

Re: VP it is then! : Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:47 am  

Mission wrote:

I thought it was costing too much to maintain, and surely this wouldn't solve the problem?

Is there any really hard evidence that Odsal is that much more expensive to maintain, other than the £35k drain repair (which didnt seem to me to be necessarily unique to Odsal)?

I only ask because I remember sitting through a fans forum circa 2000 during which Caisley read out a list of major items of repair that needed to be carried out immediately, as a matter of urgency, if the ground were to retain its safety certificate. The main item was a new roof on the main stand which was extremely urgent. The main impression given was that Odsal was on the verge of being condemned.

Over the years since then I dont remember any of these urgent repairs being carried out (although I accept that some of them may have been behind the scenes) and talk of losing the safety certificate seems to have gone away.

Odsal is undoubtedly a big open space, but what exactly do the club spend extra money on, compared to other clubs?

Re: VP it is then! : Wed Mar 24, 2010 12:02 pm  

Great post from Highlander above - realistic and well reasoned IMO.

We have a long leasehold on Odsal, not the freehold, so I suspect the lease will require us to continue to use the site as a RL stadium and will not allow us to use it for any other replacement purpose. Or to assign the lease. Without approval.

Re VP, I formed the same view as Highlander. As I see it, the most likely option:

1 - Council forms Stadium Operating Company.
2 - SOC gets temporary loan from council.
3 - SOC buys VP off Gibb Pension Fund
4 - Council pays Bulls £x to surrender the Odsal peppercorn rent lease, on condition proceeds used to buy a 1/3 (?) share in the SOC.
5 - Council cuts deal with BCFC to enable them to buy a 1/3 share in SOC (soft loan? Payment, allied to Bulls leaving Odsal, to compensate BCFC for having to share stadium?)
6 - Council buys the remaining 1/3 (?) share in SOC
7 - SOC repays temp loan to Council.
8 - Council funds payments to Bulls (and maybe BCFC) from sale/development of the now-vacant Odsal site. Probably makes a big profit on the deal. Keighley crew go apolplectic because they can find nothing to go apoplectic about in the deal.
9 - SOC charges Bulls and bantams rent, and operates all the concessions, bars etc etc.

End result: BCFC get to stay at VP on secure long-term footing; Council grinning from ear to ear for the kudos of "having saved professional sport in the city" AND turning in a big profit for the council tax payers AND getting rid of the allegations of favouring the Bulls; and Bulls get to lose their home and have to make do with a solution considered unsatisfactory and disadvantageous by most Bulls fans.

But hang on: this is not 2002 - I must be stuck in a time warp somewhere? I could have sworn I could hear the scratching of groundhogs...

Re: VP it is then! : Wed Mar 24, 2010 12:24 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

For some huge gold-plated cantilever wonder maybe, but not for basic if cheap cover with vertical supports.

Wasn't VP rumoured to be for sale at only £2.5m? We could buy 4 of them at that price!

It is ironic that a Bradford Council engineer named Wardley drew up a plan in 1951 for a 92,000 capacity ‘European’ style stadium, which would then have cost £250,000. If only . . .

Leigh's new stadium cost £17.5m, that's everything not just a roof, as part of the c£80m sporting village.
Regarding the 'value' of VP - the value of property has nothing to do with the cost of construction, it is essentially how valuable the land is for it's next best use. There is likely to be very little demand for that piece of land in Mannigham. In fact the demolition & land clearance would probably cancel out the value of the land if it was available as a clear site. If it is zoned for residential all that would end up being built is low cost social housing.

Re: VP it is then! : Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:03 pm  

The new stand at Blackpool FC's Bloomfield Road cost £8.5m - including four floors, with a Supporters Bar, hotel and other community uses.

Only thing I could think to do with the pop side at Odsal is to build a seated tier above the terracing and then above that have boxes / offices etc at the top of the stand - level with the upper concourse. Don't know how that would be engineered!

Re: VP it is then! : Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:30 pm  

At Odsal the engineering of it all is key. filling the bowl would be a huge expense, as is finding a practical way to put a roof on the terracing. The Kop at Valley parade was built in less than 6 months. but it had the benefit of being easier to do.

talking about Leigh and Warrington's stadia is quite irrelevant as neither is Odsal, and both were flat, vacant sites when the stadia were planned.

The council have put £15mill aside to develop Odsal and the sporting facilities.

£5mill would buy Valley Parade. and get the goodwill of City and Bulls fans across the city and the surrounding district.

the money now used to maintain odsal could be used to buy new red amber and black seats for half of the ground, so we feel at home!!!

that leaves £10 to renovate Dicky Dunns and change Odsal so it can be used as a community sports venue, and make the pitch longer at VP so we have a full size playing surface. Simples!

Re: VP it is then! : Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:31 pm  

A roof above the pop terrace would probably have to be a cantilever jobbie, therefore with a largish building behind it to anchor the roof. Otherwise, you end up with big supporting pillars, which are not considered appropriate these days. So you end up paying not just for a roof but for a large stand. the problem then is that you'd have to do a lot of excavation for the building, and daylight would be an issue. This was indeed what was in one of the earlier plans, where the bowl was to be left as is.

Re: VP it is then! : Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:36 pm  

isaac1 wrote:

£5mill would buy Valley Parade. and get the goodwill of City and Bulls fans across the city and the surrounding district.

Unless there is a specific figure in the lease agreement (no-one seems to know), I guess if there isn't to be a stadium at Odsal the price of buying VP might well go up.

Re: Odsal Sporting Village : Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:01 pm  

http://www.bradfordbulls.co.uk/news/464 ... %20VILLAGE Still hope?

http://www.bradfordbulls.co.uk/news/464 ... %20VILLAGE Still hope?