TO reach the stage of their current bid, the project team has had to constantly go back to the drawing board to meet Worcester City Council requirements.
It has taken lots of effort and expertise to keep this massive project moving.
At a public inquiry in 1995, the issue of an "enabling commercial development" being a necessity was first reviewed by the team with city councillors.
One scheme considered was a presentation by Taylor Woodrow, which envisaged a development at the site and the use of the adjoining field, which is now the Worcester City Cattle Market.
The Taylor Woodrow scheme was rejected at an informal planning meeting as being too big.
It was emphasised the stadium development should be contained in the southern sector of the Nunnery Way site.
A multi-storey coliseum stadium to include sporting facilities and commercial users was then put forward.
Commercial
The flaw on this occasion was that the concept was deemed incompatible with the requirements of an enabling commercial development.
Councillors said appropriate developments could include features such as a health centre, tennis courts, restaurants, leisure shops and merchandising.
The project team then met representatives from an international hotel group, Whitbread and John Lloyd Tennis Centre, an American fast-food chain and an international sports clothing chain.
On the advice of planning officers they also had discussions with Gulf Oil and Bristol Street Motors on a proposed relocation at the site.
After a substantial investigation, none of the suggested uses were thought to be able to generate the value necessary to sponsor the stadium costs.
Other projects, such as a shopping and ski slope design and a factory retail outlet, have also been dismissed.
The team felt too many shops on the site would have an adverse effect on shops in the city centre.
A multiplex cinema group, office blocks and even a housing developers were other avenues the team was asked to consider.
After meeting with property developers Kendricks in autumn 2000, they concluded there was no prospect of commercial success for a relatively small housing estate by a football stadium.
Electricity
The site was not suitable for residential development as major roads, a cattle market and the close proximity of electricity pylons made it unthinkable.
Now, in 2001, after considerable research the team have concluded a non-food retail superstore such as B&Q can only provide the value necessary to sponsor the stadium costs.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article