stadium expansion

[tom cavendish 0]

As you say, the UEA wants to expand. This is actually why it is such a good idea to have a stadium at the UEA.Using the Bristol example1. The uni was going to build a new car park, but by giving permission for a stadium to be built on their land, it means the Uni does not have the cost of building a new car park. Instead they will lease it from the football club. Of course the football club will benefit too as they will get a massive income from leasing the car park to the Uni on non-match days.2. Teaching space - the Bristol stadium plans have a massive amount of teaching space as part of the stadium, Again, this means no build cost for the Uni and they will pay to lease it from the football club. The football club will make a massive income from leasing the teaching space at the stadium.So, as to where the stadium could be built, it could be built where the Uni are looking to develop. This is what they are doing at UWE.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]

Tangible, thank you for the extra info about Colney, that it isn''t big enough just for a stadium. When you talk about a costly relocation, how costly is the "all that is needed" that you outline? At least £20m (club figures) for the Watling Stand and presumably at least another £10m for a second tier on the Jarrold. To take the capacity up by only 12,000-13,000 seats. That strikes me as pretty costly compared to your figure (which may or may not be right) of £70m for a whole new stadium.

[/quote]

£70m+ plus the cost of the land and the cost of transport related upgrades in one go (- say £8m net for Carrow Rd.)   v an initial £20m .....

(Well if it costs £20m for 10,000 then its not unreasonable to think £40m for 20,000.........so £70m allows for a bit of a disount for 40,000). 

Do you think NCFC could service a debt of £70m+?

[BroadstairsR 2,168]

A new stadium is an absurd idea and makes no financial sense whatsoever, in my humble opinion. The total costs could cripple the Club forever more and leasing the ground would be a massive step backwards ala Ip---- Town. It is not just building it either, as the entire transfer of the whole Club''s infrastructure would be such a costly thing that it would inhibit the progress that we now all aspire to.

 

 Everything is right about the Carra, it''s history, it''s position, it''s facilities, everything in fact is perfect except that it needs to facilitate bigger crowds. The planned expansions are the only option and necessary asap.

 

The fortunes of the beautiful game have fluctuated over the years from the hiatus after ''66 to the downturn a decade or so later. The current status of it being a Nationwide and Worldwide phenomena,  fuelled by TV coverage seems to be eternal.

 

In this respect NCFC have benefitted. Often seen as a disadvantage, our remoteness from other league clubs is now a positive. The large catchment area of a public enticed to attend football matches explains in part why we attracted gates of 25, 000 in League 1 and now sell out consistently in the Prem. Other clubs have more competition. Ground expansion is vital.  

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="tom cavendish"]As you say, the UEA wants to expand. This is actually why it is such a good idea to have a stadium at the UEA.

Using the Bristol example

1. The uni was going to build a new car park, but by giving permission for a stadium to be built on their land, it means the Uni does not have the cost of building a new car park. Instead they will lease it from the football club. Of course the football club will benefit too as they will get a massive income from leasing the car park to the Uni on non-match days.

2. Teaching space - the Bristol stadium plans have a massive amount of teaching space as part of the stadium, Again, this means no build cost for the Uni and they will pay to lease it from the football club. The football club will make a massive income from leasing the teaching space at the stadium.

So, as to where the stadium could be built, it could be built where the Uni are looking to develop. This is what they are doing at UWE.


[/quote]

Re 1) You have failed to grasp the facts re the UEA car parking: a) car parking at UEA is limited by the planners  b) UEA already has a main car park thats already big enough. So why would they need another car park that will not be allowed to use.....assuming that somehow they can find space to build it!!!

Re 2) Earlham Hall already exists!

         The ex Blackdale School site is no where near big enough for a football stadium.

         The Meadows is not going to be built on by anyone!!

 

So I repeat where on the UEA campus would you locate a new stadium for NCFC.?

 

 

[shefcanary 2,408]

I''ve read some crap on here and there is a lot being talked about in this thread about grants being available for a new ground.  B@ll@cks will NCFC get any - they''re a Premier League team now in a relatively well off part of the UK.  If NCFC Plc joined the queue for grants I think they will be way down the list, if they do get any it will be for relatively minor parts of the build (like an education suite / office block) not for the main buidling.  Rotherham got plenty but they are in League 2, the site is on a BROWNfield site and is in the middle of an unemployment blackspot within one of the poorest boroughs in the country.  Go compare!  We are in the middle of public sector melt down FFS - the money would have to be self-generated and unless we get some Russian billionaire or decide to stage the 2040 Olympics it ain''t going to happen.

So we have to make the most of the present ground.  There has also been talk about demolition of the GW stand the potential loss of income that would take, with the main problem seemingly being that the old Carrow Road causes problems and the current stand could not be used as a base for a new one.  I think actually it all boils down to a cost benefit analysis; is it cheaper to knock the GW down, build afresh and take the hit from loss of tickets for a while, versus the increased costs and complications of taking the roof off the GW and building a cantilever second tier over the road and the old stand. 

The former will give more bang for the buck and it sounds the preferred route of the board, probably because it gives more commercial opportunities in the future.  Yes relocating fans will be a problem but as with Wolves if it is planned well it might only be for half a season.

Sheff Wed did the latter at Hillsbrough for thier South Stand, it really is quite wierd walking from the new bit into the old Archibald Leitch 1930''s bit (they have retained all the old features including woodchip!) as well as building it over a road, so it can all be done.  What''s bizarre was when they did it they could easily have relocated their fans to other parts of the stadium anyway.   

So if we are safe by this time next season I could see the roof coming off the old GW by the middle of April 2013 whichever route was taken!

[tom cavendish 0]

"UEA already has a main car park thats already big enough"

That isn''t true according to the UEA "Demand for car parking at the University often outweighs supply".The UEA has 1,600 parking spaces, but has 4,570 people registered for permits. In addition, they need spaces for visitors. They say they need 3,000 parking spaces.

[grantroederdisaster 0]

Any talk of moving is complete ballocks and stinks of people thinking that the grass is greener!!

 

Moving the stadium to Colney is a total no goer cause the training ground is hard to get to now and if a stadium was built there then the club would also have to spend millions on a direct sliproad onto the A47. Not going to happen!

 

Thats because the ground is in the ideal location, round the corner from the train station, walking distance from the City centre and not far from the A47 Southern bypass.

 

It would create more problems to move to a souless bowl outside of the City Boundaries because the many fans that go by train from places like London, Colchester, Ipswich, Stowmarket, Diss, and all stops along the Yarmouth/Lowestoft/Sheringham/Cambridge line would then have to be bused out to the ground. Many fans would get sick of this and would then elect to drive which would create more problems with the roads struggling to cope. All this and then we''d have the horror scanario of a soulless retail park bowlaway from the clubs heartland in the City!

 

The matchday experience would be much poorer because it would be more difficult to go in to the City or any of the pubs and bars around Thorpe, Riverside, City etc. Don''t ever underestimate how wonderful the Carrow Road matchday experience is!

 

Thankfully the Board have already investigated this possibility and came to the same conclusion as I did above!

 

Anyway Carrow Road can be made as big as we''ll ever need it to be - anything 45,000 or under is possible according to my calculations!

 

Another factor overlooked is that when the old Boulton and Paul factories were replaced by the Riverside development with new roads, the whole area was transformed and the increased roads and walk/cycle ways are more condusive to bigger crowds. I find it marvellous how easy it is to get about the near vicinity of the ground even when theres been nearly 27,000 leaving a game!

 

Its certainly not set in stone that if the club do eventually undertake a major capacity increase of Carrow Road, it will be the City stand. I''ve heard people say with connections to the Board that they have mooted putting an upper tier on the Jarold stand because the current capacity wouldn''t drop when doing so. They''ve also worked out that if the City stand gets an increase in capacity it will be better through a completely new stand rather than building an upper tier over the existing stand because this way the ground capacity would be increased and the facilities would be improved at the same time. the current City stand while still being a decent stand, is now 26 years old and the facilities could be better and less cramped so its best to move forward and build a new version!

 

I do find it funny how many people thinking along the "little ole Norwich" lines, think we don''t need a capacity increase. Look at our crowds over the last 10 years, in particular since the Jarold stand was completed and our League 1 average League ATT in 2009/10. Every ground capacity increase since the completion of the Jarold stand in 2004 has seen the ATT averages go up as well. All the stats prove we need and could justify a bigger capacity. The doubters make it sound like we struggle to get 20,000 for home games!

[Bill 1,788]

Yep, a soulless plastic ground on the edge of the City is just what we need, much like at Reading which is a nightmare to get to. Carrow Road will always be ''home'' to us, however much it is developed, because those developments are only in stages so fans will have their memories of their stand.Many of the old Barclay crowd will have fond memories of the first promotion, the awesome night games against Palace (to stay up) and the league cup games against Chelsea - not forgetting the many rather ''boisterous'' battles with away fans. Watching the main stand throw cushions and feeling the hairs on the back of your neck stand up as on very memorable occsasions ''On the ball, City'' would roll round the whole ground, almost always starting from the South Stand it seemed (sung, not barked)Each generation will have it''s own special times - right up to the last couple of seasons and the numerous final hurrahs and last minute goals. With the 6th (?) minute of injury time goal, in the blazing sun against Derby, being well up there with all the rest over the various decades.The financial, practical and logistic problems* that would arise by any move have been well, and intelligently, covered by numerous posts above. So as far as I am concerned Carrow Road is our home and if the canary family has got a bit bigger of late then it''ll have to mean a loft conversion or something similar - but not a move, definitely not a move.

* problems ?  surely you mean ishooooooooooooooooos

[grantroederdisaster 0]

Well said City1st!

 

Many people get sucked into this thought of what we''ve got isn''t good enough and theres a better alternative but all the factors of Carrow Road like close to train station, City centre, Southern bypass, many wonderful pubs, bars, restaurants and the ability to vastly increase capacity make it clearly obvious that the present ground would be a million times better than any lonely bowl in the middle of a oversized car park, out of the City stuck along the A47!

 

Thankfully the very competant current Board think along the same way!

[tom cavendish 0]

Look at the finances:Build costs:- no need to purchase land if leased on a peppercorn rent from the UEA or council- proceeds of sale of CR- would have cost £20m for an extra 8,000 seats at CR- would have lost millions in income whilst the old stand is demolished and new one built- millions more available in football grants for new stadiums rather than to redevelop existing stadiums.Also consider the additional income streams and savings:- could lease the car park to the UEA on non match-days (UEA want more parking spaces)- could lease a huge amount of teaching space to the UEA (UEA want more teaching space)- could lease a stadium convenience store to a supermarket that would be used by students- could have some student flats as part of the stadium- stadium bars could be open to students on non-match days- maintenance and running costs would be far lower at a new stadium- far greater income from fans parking at the stadium- less competition from local pubs, so far more money for the club from food & drink- students could be used as occasional staff and work as part of their courses.

[grantroederdisaster 0]

Where on the UEA site would there be enough room for a 40,000 capacity stadium?

 

Nowhere and the park next door will not be built on. The current car parking isn''t enough for the university let alone 30,000+ crowds. The public transport to the uni is buses and can you imagine all the buses required from the train station to the Uni needed to accomodate all the football fans and then trying to negotiate through the City on a Saturday?

 

The Watton Road out towards Colney and the A47 is chockablock as it is without a massive stadium being built at the Uni!

 

All and all the uni idea is a complete no goer!

 

Have the Council got enough room for a 40,000 stadium somewhere?

 

Probably not!

 

I recall the s*um having a peppercorn rent fee of the Council for Portaloo Road until a few years ago but now the Council are making them pay a 6 figure sum for it. In this day and age of public sector cutbacks, the chances of the Council giving us land to build a big ground at peppercorn rent and the football club making huge sums from 30,000+ crowds is miniscule!

 

These two suggestions are complete pie in the SKY and only serves to make the present stadium location lok even better!

 

No reason to leave our home of 77 years as its the best place the ground could be in end of story!

[tom cavendish 0]

"The current car parking isn''t enough for the university let alone 30,000+ crowds"Exactly! If you look at the Bristol example, the uni will be leasing the 1,270 capacity stadium car park from the football club on non

matchdays. That is one of the reasons why the uni wants a stadium on the land

that they had bought. NCFC could do the same sort of deal with the UEA, as the

UEA want more parking and it would provide a good income stream for NCFC.

For a 1,270 car park x £5 x 300 days = £1.9m per year.

[ricardo 7,395]

[quote user="tom cavendish"]Look at the finances:Build costs:- no need to purchase land if leased on a peppercorn rent from the UEA or council- proceeds of sale of CR- would have cost £20m for an extra 8,000 seats at CR- would have lost millions in income whilst the old stand is demolished and new one built- millions more available in football grants for new stadiums rather than to redevelop existing stadiums.Also consider the additional income streams and savings:- could lease the car park to the UEA on non match-days (UEA want more parking spaces)- could lease a huge amount of teaching space to the UEA (UEA want more teaching space)- could lease a stadium convenience store to a supermarket that would be used by students- could have some student flats as part of the stadium- stadium bars could be open to students on non-match days- maintenance and running costs would be far lower at a new stadium- far greater income from fans parking at the stadium- less competition from local pubs, so far more money for the club from food & drink- students could be used as occasional staff and work as part of their courses.[/quote]Stop flogging a dead horse. The decision has already been made. There will be no new stadium or move away from CR.End of.

[tom cavendish 0]

"The current car parking isn''t enough for the university let alone 30,000+ crowds"Exactly! If you look at the Bristol example, the uni will be leasing the 1,270 capacity stadium car park from the football club on non matchdays. That is one of the reasons why the uni wants a stadium on the land that they had bought. NCFC could do the same sort of deal with the UEA, as the UEA want more parking and it would provide a good income stream for NCFC.For a 1,270 car park x £5 x 300 days = £1.9m per year.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="tom cavendish"]

"UEA already has a main car park thats already big enough"

That isn''t true according to the UEA "Demand for car parking at the University often outweighs supply".

The UEA has 1,600 parking spaces, but has 4,570 people registered for permits. In addition, they need spaces for visitors. They say they need 3,000 parking spaces.[/quote]

 

I do not question that demand exceeds supply but on page 4 of this document:

http://www.norwich.gov.uk/CommitteeMeetings/Planning%20applications/Document%20Library/64/Repplanningmaincarparkuniversitydriveuea20070726.pdf

there is a reference to National maximum parking standards (PPG13).

In 2007 the UEA had 2,175 parking spaces and were looking for 2,344 by 2011.

Car parking at UEA is limited by PPG13, which is the amount that planners will allow them to have. So as I said before if you can find the space (which you haven''t identified) for another car park to be built at UEA. then people will not be allowed to use it.

 

Furthermore I look forward to reading your suggestion as to where on the UEA campus you would locate a new stadium for NCFC.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

Its obvious from ages ago that Tom Cavendish is a wind up merchant.

 

[tom cavendish 0]

Look at the latest figures. The UEA now has 3,000 staff and 19,585 students.Under the PPG13 standards, they would be allowed 2,805 permanent parking spaces (1 space per 2 staff, plus 1 space per 15 students).However, they only have 1,600 permanent spaces, so that leaves them able to build another 1,205 permanent parking spaces.Now consider that the Uni is looking to expand... they will need even more car parking spaces.The UWE stadium in Bristol is to have 1,270 spaces that the Uni will lease from the football club. That is almost exactly the same number of new parking spaces that the UEA needs and are allowed to build.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="tom cavendish"]Look at the latest figures. The UEA now has 3,000 staff and 19,585 students.

Under the PPG13 standards, they would be allowed 2,805 permanent parking spaces (1 space per 2 staff, plus 1 space per 15 students).

However, they only have 1,600 permanent spaces, so that leaves them able to build another 1,205 permanent parking spaces.

Now consider that the Uni is looking to expand... they will need even more car parking spaces.

The UWE stadium in Bristol is to have 1,270 spaces that the Uni will lease from the football club. That is almost exactly the same number of new parking spaces that the UEA needs and are allowed to build.

[/quote]

Tom,

You are a wind up merchant.....not mentioning the temporary parking spaces!

 

[tom cavendish 0]

I''m not on a wind up, I''m right!It is an identical situation at the UEA. They need about 1205 new permanent parking spaces and to replace their temporary car park.At the Bristol UWE stadium, the new stadium car park (with 1270 spaces) is to replace the need for the uni owned temporary car park.Using the Bristol example, the university didn''t want to spend educational funds building a new permanent car park. They are very keen that a stadium is built on their land so that they can lease the stadium car park and 19,000 sqft of teaching space inside the stadium.Financially, it makes great sense for the football club and the uni.The FC is getting the land for free on a very long lease on a peppercorn rent from the uni. The FC will make millions from leasing the teaching space and car park to the uni, and the build cost of the new stadium is being covered by the sale of their old stadium.They are getting a new stadium, and millions in regular income, and clearing their debts, and it is costing them nothing.If NCFC did the same thing, but instead of spending that extra £20m on 8,000 extra seats at CR but put it towards a news stadium... NCFC would have a much better stadium and lucrative new income streams that could last the next 100 years.

[grantroederdisaster 0]

We are not Bristol City or a similar size either for that matter!

 

We aren''t going to leave Carrow Road. Our very capable board decided this last year and regardless of the few that think we don''t need to, if the circumstances are right I''m convinced they''ll increase the capacity of the ground to a figure that is more in line with a club of our support and League status - 35-40,000.

 

Another conclusion is Tom, your a wind up merchant talking a load of ballocks!

 

If you like the idea of a club playing at UEA, then you should start one there!

[Bill 1,788]

I''m not too sure what would happen to the hotel, or whether the new owners would want a hotel there or visa versaThe new owners at Bristol are Sainsburys so we have to presume that they wouldn''t object to Morrisons being next to them or visa versaBristols ground has a very large car park beside it - I assume we could increase our car park to the same size so we can sell the site at the same price, it also assuming that our club has not sold any of our carparkIt should also be noted that Bristol Rovers plans for redevelopment of the ground involved buikding new stands which would be 7 storeys high, quite an impact in that area, whereas we would have little objection

"and the build cost of the new stadium is being covered by the sale of their old stadium"Not correct. The land sale will generate approximately £10 - £15m. The clubs current debts are around £5m. "The new 20,000-seater stadium is expected to cost about £40m" So the money is coming from elsewhere. Private capital in fact. That will require repaying, plus interest.The stadium is not to be solely for football and will have a running track around the perimeter. There is no clear explanation as to who will own the stadium. Currently Bristol Rovers ground is owned by a seperate company owned by them. Will this company now own the new stadium and if so will it still be 100% owned by Bristol Rovers ?To have posted up such a flawed and erroneous case on behalf of City moving out of Carrow Road suggests young master Thomas has other motives or is a complete idiot, the two not being mutually exclusive.

[tom cavendish 0]

City1st, to clear up your points"Bristol Rovers plans for redevelopment of the ground involved buikding new stands which would be 7 storeys high"No, you seem to be confused. That was the plan for their existing stadium. They have now decided that it is far better to sell it and build a new one at their local uni. "The stadium is not to be solely for football and will have a running track around the perimeter."It is a narrow jogging track for players to warm-up and for the uni to lease. The rugby club may not be moving to the new stadium as they have been bought by the owner of Bristol City.The new owners at Bristol are Sainsburys so we have

to presume that they wouldn''t object to Morrisons being next to them or

visa versaThe new planning regs mean that plans for out of town shopping won''t be passed so easily, so the site at CR will now be more valuable. As I have said before, Ikea don''t have a store in the East and want a store.

Bristols ground has a very large car park beside it -

I assume we could increase our car park to the same size so we can sell

the site at the same price, it also assuming that our club has not sold

any of our carparkPart of their car park was sold for housing, same as at CR. NCFC also own additional land near to CR.

"the money is coming from elsewhere"

The club claims the deal will make them debt free."will it still be 100% owned by Bristol Rovers"According to them, yes it will be.

[tom cavendish 0]

We are not Bristol City or a similar size either for that matter!It is Rovers that are planning a new stadium at a uni. Bristol City are planning a new 30k capacity stadium that can easily be expanded to 44k.Our very capable board decided this last year and regardless of the few

that think we don''t need to, if the circumstances are right I''m

convinced they''ll increase the capacity of the ground to a figure that

is more in line with a club of our support and League status -

35-40,000.

Bristol Rovers building a new stadium at a university is a

first in the UK

for a professional club. They will get the land for free and pay a peppercorn

lease. They will make money from leasing the car park and a huge amount of

teaching space to the uni, plus a small Sainsbury''s convenience store, bars for

students to use etc.

As it is a first, the NCFC board may not have considered the possibility of doing

the same thing, the considerable costs it would save, and the considerable new

income streams. If they take those into consideration, then you might well find

that they think such a plan would be better for NCFC.

[tom cavendish 0]

We are not Bristol City or a similar size either for that matter!It is Rovers that are planning a new stadium at a uni.Bristol City are planning a new 30k capacity stadium that can easily be expanded to 44k.

Our very capable board decided this last year and regardless of the few that think we don''t need to, if the circumstances are right I''m convinced they''ll increase the capacity of the ground to a figure that is more in line with a club of our support and League status - 35-40,000.Bristol Rovers building a new stadium at a university is a first in the UK for a professional club. They will get the land for free and pay a peppercorn lease. They will make money from leasing the car park and a huge amount of teaching space to the uni, plus a small Sainsbury''s convenience store, bars for students to use etc.As it is a first, the NCFC board may not have considered the possibility of doing the same thing, the considerable costs it would save, and the considerable new income streams. If they take those into consideration, then you might well find that they think such a plan would be better for NCFC. 

[Lord Horn 0]

[quote user="tom cavendish"]Look at the latest figures. The UEA now has 3,000 staff and 19,585 students.Under the PPG13 standards, they would be allowed 2,805 permanent parking spaces (1 space per 2 staff, plus 1 space per 15 students).However, they only have 1,600 permanent spaces, so that leaves them able to build another 1,205 permanent parking spaces.Now consider that the Uni is looking to expand... they will need even more car parking spaces.The UWE stadium in Bristol is to have 1,270 spaces that the Uni will lease from the football club. That is almost exactly the same number of new parking spaces that the UEA needs and are allowed to build.[/quote]Please note - PPG13 was superceded last Tuesday by the new National Planning Policy Framework.

[Bill 1,788]

Oh dear, you don''t seem to be too bright. You have clogged this thread up with your over excited squeaks about how wonderful the Bristol development is, yet you are clueless about the most basic of points underpinning it. The financing of it. It is NOT as you cliam -"the cost of building the new Bristol stadium is being covered by the sale of their existing stadium" There is no confusion (other than in your head) about plans for the Memorial Ground. The proposed development of that ground would have entailed going above 7 storys, which is one of the factors that made redeveloping that ground very difficult given how close it is to present housing.  Any development at Norwich would see the new stand rising to the same height as existing stands. Bristol Rovers were constrained by planning (we are not) hence their need to move.Land is only as valuable as the value that can be extracted from it so any purchaser will only pay accordingly. Not some conjured up figure because of changed planning regulations. Carrow Road is smaller than that of the Memorial Ground so we would have to fund a massive ground (up to 40,000 you claim !) out of far less money. "Part of their car park was sold for housing". Which part ? My understanding is that the whole site was sold to Sainsburys."The club claims the deal will make them debt free." But clearly it will not, in fact in will massively increase their debts. I don''t doubt that after having sold the ground they will be able to pay off the current debt but the remaining money from that sale will barely cover 25% of the cost of building the new stadium. So either they will be debt free by not owning that stadium which invalidates you claim of them 100% owning the stadium - or if they do 100% own it they will have debts of approximately £30m.The massive flaws regarding logistics have been well covered by others on here but the worth of your posts should be measured by the fact you have based most of your argument on a false premise  "the cost of building the new Bristol stadium is being covered by the sale of their existing stadium"To be generous I will state that you appear extremely naive. The idea that the track around the ground is merely a jogging track beggars belief, more so when you add "for players to warm-up and for the uni to lease". Why would players need to warm up on the other side of the pitch or behind the goals ? What would students be warming up for ?

"The FC is getting the land for free on a very long lease on a peppercorn rent from the uni. The FC will make millions from leasing the teaching space and car park to the uni"  So th Uni is giving land for free so the football club can make millions by renting it back to them ? What planet are you on ?At the moment it has not been disclosed who is putting up the extra £30m or so and who will be the real owners of the development. I suspect it will be as much used by the Uni as by the football club. And the ''jogging track'' will be part of an athletics ground.So Tom I would suggest that next time, you have the curtesy to do some basic research before coming on here with what amounts to no more than some regurgitated PR puff - and then maybe you would not have warbled out such idiotic nonsense as "millions in regular income, and clearing their debts ... it is costing them nothing...lucrative new income streams that could last the next 100 years"

[Imported Canary 3]

Does anyone else think it''s getting surreal when a football forum ends up hosting an argument about car parking at the local university?

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

[quote user="Imported Canary"]Does anyone else think it''s getting surreal when a football forum ends up hosting an argument about car parking at the local university?[/quote]

 

Compared to some other recent threads I think this one is a model of relevance and sanity...

[tom cavendish 0]

McNally said at the POS night that the UEA have been asked about the feasibility of stadium expansion.It seems as if he has read my suggestion that NCFC should look into a stadium partnership with the UEA.

[Chelmsford Canary 0]

Just beacuse he has asked UEA to carry out feasibility, that does not mean moving away from Carrow Road.

It could be a Feas report on he purchase of he road behind city stand, and providing detailed costs/design of the stadium expansion