Belle Vues National Speedway Stadium

[Humphrey Appleby 13,983]

HAVE posted elsewhere that the builders have been appointed by the council and they are pursuing planning permission which should be no more than a formality although it still has to go through the right channels and takes time.

 

I'm not sure why the builders would be seeking planning permission if they're just working as contractors? Surely this is the responsibility of the owners?

[John Leslie 3,213]

I believe ISG is International Stadia Group who are, or at least were involved with Coventry's Ricoh Arena amongst others. It also used to be 50% owned by a certain IMG(UK), but they withdrew after burning 7.5 million quid on the venture..

ISG plc (formerly Interior Services Group plc) who won the tender to build Belle Vue, is totally unrelated to International Stadia Group Ltd.

[PHILIPRISING 7,298]

I'm not sure why the builders would be seeking planning permission if they're just working as contractors? Surely this is the responsibility of the owners?

 

THE planning application is in but (I'm told) once the contractors have been agreed they can help speed up the process inasmuch as having been given the job to do they want to get on with it.

[Guest]

With Philip and Speedway Star's column the other week, if the future is so bleak for British Speedway what on earth is the point of spending shed loads of money on facility where the Sport is struggling for its very future ?

 

It's not when considered against what other sports pay for new or improving stadiums.

[pandorum 1,259]

THE planning application is in but (I'm told) once the contractors have been agreed they can help speed up the process inasmuch as having been given the job to do they want to get on with it.

 

I worked for contractors for 40 years and never heard of any job where a contractor sought planning permission.

That's not what contractors do.

I think this is a matter of crossed semantics.

 

I think Phil means ISG has been approved as the developer and they are in charge of overseeing a construction process in which case they may well have a hand in planning permission.

Which means an actual contractor ie those responsible for actually building the thing has yet to be found or appointed.

That contractor may well be ISG itself and as daft as that sounds it is not uncommon in the construction industry to work on a job where the firm you work for as a contractor is actually working for itself as a developer of a project or development partner therin.

 

I have personal experience of exactly that and believe me working as a contractor for the same company you are working for as developer is not as much of a cake walk as you might think.

Insane as it sounds a firm working as a developer does not always accept a tender from itself and may well give the work to a rival with a cheaper bid. Also a firm employing itself working in-house as a contractor sometimes is a lot harder on itself when it comes to construction specifications.

 

What that means to me is the project is under development but has not got to the stage where the nuts and bolts of actual construction can be put into practice such as prepare a site and make the steel etc.

 

In which case it's just another project waiting to be given the go ahead and as such could vanish with the morning mist as so many like it do.

 

It's not when considered against what other sports pay for new or improving stadiums.

True but speedway does have a history of being run by people with the business acumen of a used car salesman whereas most other sports have a bit more of a clue.

Edited July 24, 2013 by pandorum

[pandorum 1,259]

If the council is building the facility, then there presumably there should have been a tendering process as this is mandatory for public works with a value of more than 4.3 million.

There are easily ways around that. Simply by breaking the whole up into packages one can avoid such a thing.

A lot of construction jobs do this.

I once worked on a huge several hundred million pound sewage treatment project which had half a dozen different major contractors involved in packages and twice as many minor contractors working alongside the major ones.

Even small projects like the speedway stadium can be broken up into packages with more than one contractor involved and no tendering.

Edited July 24, 2013 by pandorum

[Mad Potter 2 109]

Could be of interest Minutes of Manchester City Council April 2013 Meeting http://www.manchester.gov.uk/download/meetings/id/14932/11_belle_vue_sports_village

 

Also http://www.manchester.gov.uk/download/meetings/id/15087/download_the_minutes

 

See pg 9

[MattK 3,447]

THE money used of the whole project has not come from council tax but is in effect from Manchester City Football Club which is why it was deemed acceptable to spend it on a Sports Village

 

In the report to the Executive it states:

 

"Recommend to the Council that the Capital Programme is increased by a total of £10.38 million; financed from £0.714 million external grant, £4.5m MCC (Manchester City Council) resources for the National Speedway Stadium which will be repaid from stadium rental income..."

 

"The National Speedway Stadium £4.5 million build costs will be funded from Prudential Borrowing."

 

The other parts of the Sports Village, such as the Basketball Centre will be funded by "MCFC stadium rental income", but this suggests not the speedway.

 

http://www.manchester.gov.uk/download/meetings/id/14932/11_belle_vue_sports_village

[Grand Central 2,654]

THE planning application is in but (I'm told) once the contractors have been agreed they can help speed up the process inasmuch as having been given the job to do they want to get on with it.

 

Manchester City Council's website, like all Council's nowadays, offers anyone the opportunity to search for Planning applications.

I cannot see one for this project.

 

I have never heard of building contractors putting in planning applications in the way that you suggest Phil.

It would be good to get this more precisely understood.

 

The money, 4.5M GBP is being lent by MCC to Belle Vue Arenas Ltd.

The Council are borrowing from 'Prudential Borrowing' (what is this?) themselves so that it is not coming out of Council Revenues.

I see no mention of Manchester City FC funding being related to the National Speedway Stadium as you suggest.

 

But, whatever the source, this is debt that must be repaid; and at whatever interest rate the Council is having to pay to get it.

We all know that is cheap, now. But over 60 years?

 

Even with zero interest that is £75,000 per annum of capital repayment; and every 1% of interest charged would (at the start) cost an additional £45,000 pa.

Has any Speedway promotion ever operated under such a level of debt repayments?

 

Quite a few people seem better informed than me so I will let them, once again, rip my concerns apart.

Edited July 24, 2013 by Grand Central

[Humphrey Appleby 13,983]

Quite a few people seem better informed than me so I will let them, once again, rip my concerns apart.

 

One doesn't wish to be the harbinger of doom, but I'm afraid the pointers do not appear promising at the moment. As you point out, it's very easy to check things on the Internet these days, yet the speedway community is still wedded to the old-fashioned notion that circulating cockamamie will convince the public.

 

Some more questioning journalism might be in order here too.

[Grand Central 2,654]

One doesn't wish to be the harbinger of doom, but I'm afraid the pointers do not appear promising at the moment. As you point out, it's very easy to check things on the Internet these days, yet the speedway community is still wedded to the old-fashioned notion that circulating cockamamie will convince the public.

 

Some more questioning journalism might be in order here too.

 

How right you are.

Journalism on this and so many issues in Speedway seems to stop at what the Journalist has just been 'told' by others 'who should know'..

Rarely does it seem to involve making investigations of their own via more productive routes.

Edited July 25, 2013 by Grand Central

[Shale Shaker 106]

^{If the project is all going ahead, and coming along swimmingly, it would make a great idea for a feature in the Speedway Star, don't you think?}

IN the fullness of time it will...

 

Looking forward to it, then.

[pandorum 1,259]

 

I have never heard of building contractors putting in planning applications in the way that you suggest Phil.

It would be good to get this more precisely understood.

 

They don't as I explained above I think Phil is mixing it up with a developer which is a different thing.

 

For me the most disturbing thing about all this is that the only purpose of the official website is to sell bricks at £49 a shot.

This to me is a disgrace as the project has gotten nowhere in the years since it was announced.

These brick sellers conned people into a belief that the stadium would be used for the 2012 WTC and we can only guess how many well meaning people bought these high priced bricks.

Nowhere does the site inform about the project and the FB page was last utilised in June 2012.

 

The recent council minutes state that the project is awaiting 'further design developments and negotiation' before 'further details of the capital costs will be submitted'. This does not sound like a project that is anywhere near the construction phase.

 

If this project nosedives, which seems a possibility, what chance will the brick owner have of getting their money back?

The site should stop selling meaningless bricks and concentrate on keeping people informed.

It looks like an internet scam site rather than something to do with speedways last hope of ever dragging itself out of it's self dug grave.

[oldace 1,678]

 

Just as well that not one bean is coming from council tax then!

 

Are you sure about that? I thought MCC were funding the stadium with the club paying it back over 60 years.

 

Whatever the funding though with the perilous state of the sport in this country the council are likely going to be left with a £6,000.000 white elephant long long before the money is repaid.

[mikec 412]

Are you sure about that? I thought MCC were funding the stadium with the club paying it back over 60 years.

 

Whatever the funding though with the perilous state of the sport in this country the council are likely going to be left with a £6,000.000 white elephant long long before the money is repaid.

As the village is a multi purpose site, the chances of it being a "white elephant" as you put it are unlikely. The same was said for some of the sports facilities at Sport City built for the 2002 Commonwealth Games which continue to be utilised by local community & elite athletes alike. The stadium is part of a larger £10m+ scheme, for the use of the community as a whole on a 7 days a week basis, incorporating education, training & sports facilities for kids & adults - in one of the worst areas of Manchester. Have you read the "Belle Vue Sports Village PDF" detailing funding sources? It might fill in a few gaps for you. Or maybe email David Gordon or Chris Morton personally as I have in the past. Maybe then the likes of you & Pandorum will sleep easier in your beds - & occasionally maybe have something positive to say about the Belle Vue club - perish the thought!!