Councillors are expected to turn the clock back five years at their meeting tomorrow to discuss the latest twist in the Odsal Superdome saga.
The corporate executive sub-committee is likely to authorise a limited marketing exercise to identify developers interested in developing the stadium, which is the home of former Super League champions Bradford Bulls.
It will be almost a carbon copy of a decision in 1993 to find the best developer.
On that occasion Superdome was chosen, but building has still not started.
But Director of Regeneration, David Kennedy, will tell members major British developers Chelverton Properties are in the process of agreeing a deal to take over the long -delayed scheme,
The company wants to take over all the work already done by Superdome chief executive John Garside and his team who hoped to make their £200 million dream a reality.
Chelverton says it will keep within the broad parameters of the Superdome scheme which has planning permission until the year 2000 for a sports stadium, featuring shopping and leisure facilities.
Chelverton intends to create a new company to carry the new scheme forward and would continue to call it Superdome - although Mr Garside and his colleagues will have no shares in the new set up.
But the meeting is expected to be stormy, with strong criticism of the Labour Group for prolonging the delay over Mr Garside's ambitious project.
Liberal Democrat and Tory councillors are expected to demand safeguards in any new contract and stringent scrutiny.
And leader of the Council's Tory Group, Councillor Margaret Eaton , says she wants to know the full cost to the Council of the saga and never wants to see a repeat of the Odsal "fiasco".
She said: "I want a full inquiry and explanations."
And representatives for the residents living around the stadium were likely to attend the meeting demanding urgent action on a landfill tip which should have got anti-pollution treatment as part of the original Superdome scheme.
Council leader Councillor Ian Greenwood says he will do everything to speed up the process and the marketing would be expedited if the committee gave the go ahead.
But there could be a number of rivals because the site has a massive carrot.
It is one of few undeveloped land sites left in the country with current planning consent for out-of-town shopping.
Transport and Environment Secretary John Prescott has clamped down on such applications because he wants to protect the traditional towns and cities.
The existing planning permission for the stadium allows 200,000 square feet each for shopping and leisure, as well as a new stadium.
Five years of waiting
The hugely ambitious Superdome scheme was born five years ago when Bradford Council picked it from a shortlist of six to redevelop Odsal Stadium.
The announcement was made in a blaze of publicity and Gerry Sutcliffe, then Council leader said he was "genuinely thrilled'' about the prospect of the £100 million development.
John Garside, named as co-director of an international company Gleyson Stewart, said he expected work to start in July, 1994.
He said funding was the least of the company's problems and the cash would be in place before work started.
By November 28 that year the Telegraph & Argus reported that a new company would be formed. Superdome appeared to take a big step forward when the Council's planning committee submitted the plan to the Department of the Environment.
A 1,600-name petition against the development was ignored by Environment Secretary John Gummer. And the future looked rosy again in 1995 - though building had not started - when Yorkshire Foods chairman Mike Firth said he was putting a large amount of money into the project.
Superdome's failure to get shortlisted as a new national stadium with Sports Council funding did not appear to trouble Mr Garside, who said he was well able to carry on. But as the months went on with no tangible signs of progress Bulls boss Chris Caisley complained increasingly that his club was suffering and predicted Superdome would never happen.
In December 1996, fury erupted after the Council's corporate executive sub-committee agreed to give Superdome bosses a two-year extension. An angry Caisley described it as pathetic.
Mr Garside announced in November last year that deals were being signed with two major American internationals to take space on the stadium.
But frustrated Bulls boss Caisley made his own deal in April this year with millionaire developer Eddie Healey for an alternative £120 million.
In May Mr Garside announced he had appointed a major bank, Arbuthnot Latham, to deal with the finance and funders. Three days before the final quarterly review it was announced that another major British company was taking over the project.
Chelverton Properties says it will set up a new company. Managing director Matthew Cattiser says they will be looking at a scaled version of the original scheme, but feasibility studies will be carried out first.
The main players
John Garside: Superdome chief executive, has promised to deliver his grandiose scheme at Odsal Stadium for the past five years
Chris Caisley: Bradford Bulls chairman, who said the massive £200 million pound scheme would never materialise
Eddie Healey: Millionaire who wants to develop the stadium for a £120m shopping, leisure and stadium scheme
Ian Greenwood: Council leader, who has welcomed Chelverton onto the Superdome stage
Councillor Margaret Eaton: Leader of the Council's Tory group who wants firm assurances if a new developer is chosen
Councillor Jeanette Sunderland: Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, who says there should be urgent work on the landfill tip
David Kennedy: Director of Regeneration who is expected to launch another marketing exercise of the stadium
John Steel: Outside Superdome consultants, who was planning chief when Superdome got planning consent
Councillor Dave Green: who was committee chairman when Superdome got a two year extension to its deadline in the face of a major protest
Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
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