Belle Vue National Stadium

[foamfence 2,917]

You'd have thought that instead of airlifting Team GB and all that goes with it, to Croatia, this kind of Team GB Boot Camp would be the ideal thing to happen at the "NSS"... http://www.speedwaygb.co/news.php?extend.31717

 

Are the BSPA / SCB giving the game away about their doubts over the future of the NSS by sticking with Gorican again?

I thought they actually drove there. There may be out of season noise restrictions or all sorts of reasons not to use NSS.

[OveFundinFan 4,150]

You'd have thought that instead of airlifting Team GB and all that goes with it, to Croatia, this kind of Team GB Boot Camp would be the ideal thing to happen at the "NSS"... http://www.speedwaygb.co/news.php?extend.31717

 

Are the BSPA / SCB giving the game away about their doubts over the future of the NSS by sticking with Gorican again?

 

Maybe in the first week of March the weather is more predictable in Gorican then in Manchester.

[uk_martin 1,607]

I thought they actually drove there.

I'll ignore that.

 

 

I thought they actually drove there. There may be out of season noise restrictions or all sorts of reasons not to use NSS.

It's a National Speedway Stadium, or SUPPOSED to be. Why would Manchester City Council build a facility and then impose restrictions on when it can be used? try scraping a bit deeper into the barrel, you're nearly at the bottom of it but not yet quite there.

 

 

Maybe in the first week of March the weather is more predictable in Gorican then in Manchester.

Is the weather any better in the 3rd or 4th week in March, in Manchester, than it is in the first week?

 

Gorican gets an average of 3.17cm of rain, with an average minimum temperature of 6 degrees and an average maximum temperature of 12 degrees in March, which is hardly tropical. To within a centimetre of rainfall and a 2 celciuses of temperature, that's not far off what you can expect in Manchester. If it rains on one day in Manchester, you can go home and come back the next day. If Gorican is rained off, it's a long journey and a complete waste of time.

[foamfence 2,917]

I'll ignore that.

 

 

It's a National Speedway Stadium, or SUPPOSED to be. Why would Manchester City Council build a facility and then impose restrictions on when it can be used? try scraping a bit deeper into the barrel, you're nearly at the bottom of it but not yet quite there.

 

 

Is the weather any better in the 3rd or 4th week in March, in Manchester, than it is in the first week?

 

Gorican gets an average of 3.17cm of rain, with an average minimum temperature of 6 degrees and an average maximum temperature of 12 degrees in March, which is hardly tropical. To within a centimetre of rainfall and a 2 celciuses of temperature, that's not far off what you can expect in Manchester. If it rains on one day in Manchester, you can go home and come back the next day. If Gorican is rained off, it's a long journey and a complete waste of time.

I don't understand the "scraping the barrel" remark or the ignoring of my point about driving there. Why ask a question and then attempt to belittle the answers? Why not ask Rosco, he's answered things for me on Twitter?

http://www.speedwaygp.com/news/article/4740/rosco-2017-camp-compulsory They drove there last year.

[The White Knight 9,039]

I don't understand the "scraping the barrel" remark or the ignoring of my point about driving there. Why ask a question and then attempt to belittle the answers? Why not ask Rosco, he's answered things for me on Twitter?

http://www.speedwaygp.com/news/article/4740/rosco-2017-camp-compulsory They drove there last year.

Nice one ff - I'm out of 'Likes' for the day.

[MattK 3,447]

It's a National Speedway Stadium, or SUPPOSED to be. Why would Manchester City Council build a facility and then impose restrictions on when it can be used? try scraping a bit deeper into the barrel, you're nearly at the bottom of it but not yet quite there.

There are a number of restrictions in place from the planning permission:

 

For example, meetings can be held on Wednesday, Friday and Saturdays only - 18:00 to 22:30

 

There shall be no more than 43 meetings during the main season of which no more than 25 meetings will be held on Fridays and no more than 18 meetings on Wednesdays or Saturday

 

There shall be 7 hours of practice sessions 3 of which will be Sundays (main season) or Saturdays (out of season). The practice sessions shall start no later

than 12:00 (midday) and finish no later than 18:00.

[The White Knight 9,039]

There are a number of restrictions in place from the planning permission:

 

For example, meetings can be held on Wednesday, Friday and Saturdays only - 18:00 to 22:30

 

There shall be no more than 43 meetings during the main season of which no more than 25 meetings will be held on Fridays and no more than 18 meetings on Wednesdays or Saturday

 

There shall be 7 hours of practice sessions 3 of which will be Sundays (main season) or Saturdays (out of season). The practice sessions shall start no later

than 12:00 (midday) and finish no later than 18:00.

Thank you MattK - I couldn't remember the details.

[Little Thumper 528]

There are a number of restrictions in place from the planning permission:

 

For example, meetings can be held on Wednesday, Friday and Saturdays only - 18:00 to 22:30

 

There shall be no more than 43 meetings during the main season of which no more than 25 meetings will be held on Fridays and no more than 18 meetings on Wednesdays or Saturday

 

There shall be 7 hours of practice sessions 3 of which will be Sundays (main season) or Saturdays (out of season). The practice sessions shall start no later

than 12:00 (midday) and finish no later than 18:00.

 

MattK, I don't quite understand the last bit about practice sessions.

Is it saying that there is a limit of 7 hours of practice sessions each week?

 

If that's the case, I wouldn't have thought there would be much chance of running a speedway training academy.

 

And is there any limit/restrictions on other events being held at the venue?

 

Thanks

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

All kinds of excuses can be made, but there was still a failure in the project management process - in particular inspection of the work.

 

The track is a specialist and critical component in speedway, and there's not a chance that I'd rely on a contractor or sub-contractor to do that sort of work without checking it at every stage. This is not hindsight but sensible precautions when dealing with any sort of building work.

 

The contract was with the council, not Belle Vue Speedway. If anyone should have made sure that the contractor was doing his job properly, its them and I can just imagine what would have happened if David Gordon or Chris Morton had wanted to make inspections to ensure that the work was of sufficient standard (or worse had said that it wasn't good enough).

 

The very fact that the report has been suppressed confirms the fact that the council do not want the truth of the matter to be known, as does their action in coming to a very quick settlement with David Gordon about the outstanding rent.

 

I'd still maintain that going ahead with the meeting was down to Belle Vue - problems were clear the night before - but to blame them (and I think you might be) for the shoddy workmanship (used nappies as hard core for heavens sake) is most unfair.

Edited January 5, 2017 by Halifaxtiger

[Daniel Smith 5,694]

 

MattK, I don't quite understand the last bit about practice sessions.

Is it saying that there is a limit of 7 hours of practice sessions each week?

 

If that's the case, I wouldn't have thought there would be much chance of running a speedway training academy.

 

And is there any limit/restrictions on other events being held at the venue?

 

Thanks

 

7 hours a week is more than plenty to have an academy running.

 

Today's Speedway is about more than just track time.

Like the Poultec training there's engineering & maintenance, rules & regulations, health & safety, nutrition & fitness.

 

2 hours track time 3x per week

Plus the Aces & Colts meetings will take up 1 day every week, occasionally 2

[Vincent Blachshadow 2,938]

 

The contract was with the council, not Belle Vue Speedway. If anyone should have made sure that the contractor was doing his job properly, its them and I can just imagine what would have happened if David Gordon or Chris Morton had wanted to make inspections to ensure that the work was of sufficient standard (or worse had said that it wasn't good enough).

 

The very fact that the report has been suppressed confirms the fact that the council do not want the truth of the matter to be known, as does their action in coming to a very quick settlement with David Gordon about the outstanding rent.

 

I'd still maintain that going ahead with the meeting was down to Belle Vue - problems were clear the night before - but to blame them (and I think you might be) for the shoddy workmanship (used nappies as hard core for heavens sake) is most unfair.

 

The laying of a speedway track is a specialist procedure that needs some level of supervision by somebody who knows what should be happening. I would have expected this to be raised during initial parleys between Gordon, Morton, the Council and any prospective contractors and the presence of interested third parties during the procedure should have been sorted at the outset.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Vincent Blackshadow

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

 

The laying of a speedway track is a specialist procedure that needs some level of supervision by somebody who knows what should be happening. I would have expected this to be raised during initial parleys between Gordon, Morton, the Council and any prospective contractors and the presence of interested third parties during the procedure should have been sorted at the outset.

 

 

I absolutely agree regarding the specialist nature of the laying of the track and the necessity of involving someone qualified in that area but the contract was with the council, not Belle Vue and therefore that is entirely the former's responsibility. No reason at all why they could not have employed someone like Colin Meredith to oversee - or at least audit - that area of the work.

 

My suspicion is that Morton & Gordon had absolutely no powers of inspection or rights to ensure that work was to par at all. After all, is it totally unreasonable for them to expect with the involvement of the local authority and their preferred contractors that the stadium would be anything less than expected ?

 

The simple fact is that based on what has been posted the council allowed an appalling bodge job by a set of cowboys who it seems wanted to avoid financial penalties for the stadium not being ready on time and who almost certainly knew that their work wasn't up to standard. The council's responsibility is shown by the fact that they came to a very quick settlement over tens of thousands of pounds owed in back rent and the suppression of the auditors report. Make no mistake, if they were not at fault at all the court case would have been pursued and the report loudly trumpeted in the local press.

 

As I have said, the blame for running that opening meeting lies entirely with Gordon & Morton in my view as they knew how things were before hand, yet chose to run anyway. However, to blame them for the dreadful construction work is entirely unreasonable and, indeed, you cannot help not having some sympathy for them given that they paid extremely dearly for the failure of the council and ISG to ensure that the stadium was as it should have been.

[Tsunami 10,219]

 

 

I absolutely agree regarding the specialist nature of the laying of the track and the necessity of involving someone qualified in that area but the contract was with the council, not Belle Vue and therefore that is entirely the former's responsibility. No reason at all why they could not have employed someone like Colin Meredith to oversee - or at least audit - that area of the work.

 

My suspicion is that Morton & Gordon had absolutely no powers of inspection or rights to ensure that work was to par at all. After all, is it totally unreasonable for them to expect with the involvement of the local authority and their preferred contractors that the stadium would be anything less than expected ?

 

The simple fact is that based on what has been posted the council allowed an appalling bodge job by a set of cowboys who it seems wanted to avoid financial penalties for the stadium not being ready on time and who almost certainly knew that their work wasn't up to standard. The council's responsibility is shown by the fact that they came to a very quick settlement over tens of thousands of pounds owed in back rent and the suppression of the auditors report. Make no mistake, if they were not at fault at all the court case would have been pursued and the report loudly trumpeted in the local press.

 

As I have said, the blame for running that opening meeting lies entirely with Gordon & Morton in my view as they knew how things were before hand, yet chose to run anyway. However, to blame them for the dreadful construction work is entirely unreasonable and, indeed, you cannot help not having some sympathy for them given that they paid extremely dearly for the failure of the council and ISG to ensure that the stadium was as it should have been.

Agree, Don't forget that Morton and Gordon would have seen the rest of the track laid properly earlier, and thought the same standards would have been applied in the closing of the gap for access. They were still responsible for giving the meeting the go ahead.

[Humphrey Appleby 13,983]

My suspicion is that Morton & Gordon had absolutely no powers of inspection or rights to ensure that work was to par at all. After all, is it totally unreasonable for them to expect with the involvement of the local authority and their preferred contractors that the stadium would be anything less than expected ?

If the success of my business depended on a critical component such as a track, then it would be absolutely a condition of my involvement to be have the right to inspect the construction - whether myself or by a track specialist.

 

Yes, it's clear there were failures on the part of the council, but slippages are not unusual in construction projects and it's how they're dealt with.

[Skidder1 7,662]

There are a number of restrictions in place from the planning permission:

 

For example, meetings can be held on Wednesday, Friday and Saturdays only - 18:00 to 22:30

 

There shall be no more than 43 meetings during the main season of which no more than 25 meetings will be held on Fridays and no more than 18 meetings on Wednesdays or Saturday

 

There shall be 7 hours of practice sessions 3 of which will be Sundays (main season) or Saturdays (out of season). The practice sessions shall start no later

than 12:00 (midday) and finish no later than 18:00.

What about meetings on Mondays - Sky meetings or otherwise - and those that start at middayish??

Edited January 6, 2017 by Skidder1