Etihad Campus, Stadium and Collar Site Development Thread

They're the interface between Government and the electorate. Very little appears in their pages that's worth the paper it's written on. Except the ads. And this is somewhere between a report and an ad.
 
jrb said:
F***ing MUEN at it again.

I can’t express how much I loath it.

It’s nothing but a Rag, filled with murder stories, negative stories, pops up adds, and United stories.

I’m so glad City f***ed it off years ago.

It won’t happen sadly, but I’d love it to go bust.
Click to expand...
The paper certainly takes a negative view of Manchester and makes a lot of bad judgement calls. It has been one of the worst performing newspapers in the UK for decades in a market which is in terminal decline. Its website is just trivial clickbait. It does not cover City or United well at all. Just the usual re-hashed garbage.
FFS the current Arena looks 25 years out of date. It is not a good venue and needs competition. If it stays it has to be upgraded.
 
I genuinely hope the arena on the Campus is a top notch concert venue - not an oversized concrete sports hall with seats - which is what effectively the MEN is. Somewhere with top notch acoustics could really attract a lot of good acts and make the extortionate prices being changed for gigs these days slightly better value.
 
Sheikh Rattle n Roll said:
Who actually owns the Arena?......was some dodgy deal done to sell it like The Millennium Dome?...... the only decent sounding gigs I have been to there were Billy Joel and Stevie Wonder, and that was because I was 2nd and 3rd rows directly next to speakers mounted on the stage. People go on about the Manchester Arena having a 20,000 capacity, for what events?.....maybe only Boxing? unless the seats are used behind the stage, think the capacity is 16k to 17k......for the majority the Arena has shite acoustics, so why not build a new and better Arena that Manchester can be proud of and say is a World Class venue.
Click to expand...

I work there for Showsec and its 20k for likes of U2 when they were in the round, we had 17,500 for Mumford and Sons recently.
 
Any development is a dead duck, unless the issue of transport is fully addressed: The MEN arena sits atop a railway and tram station in the centre of town with good walking links to the centre.

The Etihad is 30 minutes walk from town and boasts an underserved tram stop with crappy road connections.
 
anyoldblu said:
Any development is a dead duck, unless the issue of transport is fully addressed: The MEN arena sits atop a railway and tram station in the centre of town with good walking links to the centre.

The Etihad is 30 minutes walk from town and boasts an underserved tram stop with crappy road connections.
Click to expand...

Last time I needed a tram from there, I bought a ticket then noted the message it was cancelled.
 
nmc said:
I genuinely hope the arena on the Campus is a top notch concert venue - not an oversized concrete sports hall with seats - which is what effectively the MEN is. Somewhere with top notch acoustics could really attract a lot of good acts and make the extortionate prices being changed for gigs these days slightly better value.
Click to expand...
Check out the Glasgow SE Hydro. Thats a very good venue. Something like that would be excellent.
 
remember arthur mann said:
https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...er-congested-manic-mayor-reckons-16613290.amp
Click to expand...
They should have thought about that when they built the Metrolink - direct competition for cars / buses. It's like the bus-lanes that impact negatively on the car drivers who lose a lane. The Metrolink takes spce from other uses and gets priority at the junctions.

As regards an Underground connecting Victoria to Piccadilly, who has used the mainline connection? I haven't once, and I use the train a lot. They spent £100 million and as far as I can see it's a complete white elephant. I might be wrong but I am just going off my own personal experience. I haven't seen any routes through Picadilly into Victoria so if that does not work, why would an Underground work. The City centre is just too small to make it worthwhile. If I was at Deansgate, and wanted to get to Piccadilly, I'd still walk. It takes me ten minutes to do that walking, and there's no way a Manchester tube system would have trains running every 5 minutes. It works in London because you can't get from London to Wembley on foot in ten minutes. Impractical for Manchester. The one possibility from Piccadilly to Victoria which made sense but they've done that overground now.

The idea that the Etihad needs a transport upgrade is nonsense. There are 60,000 people who go to the Etihad for concerts. No one ever mentions that as an issue, so the idea that a potential arena holding 20k at most needs a transport upgrade does not make any sense.

I think this arena talk is a bit over-done. For it to become a reality, someone is going to have to agree to operate it. I think we'd know about that now if it was close to happening.
 
remember arthur mann said:
https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...er-congested-manic-mayor-reckons-16613290.amp
Click to expand...

Burnham should make his mind up, a few months back he was fan faring his outline to get trans running to Wigan and Stockport and a newer, better integrated transport system in regards to the metro link. Now he’s saying underground is the way forward, he is right so why is he potentially pissing away public money on overground transport when he doesn’t see it as a solution?
 
anyoldblu said:
Any development is a dead duck, unless the issue of transport is fully addressed: The MEN arena sits atop a railway and tram station in the centre of town with good walking links to the centre.

The Etihad is 30 minutes walk from town and boasts an underserved tram stop with crappy road connections.
Click to expand...

Not really, since the arena will hold around 20k which is no where near the 54k capacity of the Etihad.

Crowds of that size will be able to get away quite quickly.
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
Burnham should make his mind up, a few months back he was fan faring his outline to get trans running to Wigan and Stockport and a newer, better integrated transport system in regards to the metro link. Now he’s saying underground is the way forward, he is right so why is he potentially pissing away public money on overground transport when he doesn’t see it as a solution?
Click to expand...

I think he means having both tbh.
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
Burnham should make his mind up, a few months back he was fan faring his outline to get trans running to Wigan and Stockport and a newer, better integrated transport system in regards to the metro link. Now he’s saying underground is the way forward, he is right so why is he potentially pissing away public money on overground transport when he doesn’t see it as a solution?
Click to expand...
For a conurbation of 2.7m and the terrible congestion we have in the city, it’s both we should be aiming for.

And more cycle only routes.
 
Psychedelic Casual said:
For a conurbation of 2.7m and the terrible congestion we have in the city, it’s both we should be aiming for.

And more cycle only routes.
Click to expand...
All the current concepts, e.g The Circle (ex BBC, Oxford Rd), are about people working and living in Manchester. It's not like London at all where the whole of the South East commutes into London every day. A good 50% of the development in Manchester is centred on the Oxford Rd corridor because this is where the commercial operators smell money. It's what makes Manchester almost unique in the world. Transport is not a big deal for these people, because people live in the City and work in it. Unforunately for out of town blues, the focus of MCC, and private builders like Brunswick, will be on enabling this environment, that is where they see the future. It is anti-car, pro bus, pro pedestrian, pro cycle. I think the car-driving element of City's fanbase suffers as a result because they are not part of this world.

You think about all the developments in Manchester, road narrowing, cycle lanes, bus lanes. Cameras. All anti-car.

Where there will be a problem is that the High Street will suffer. Footfall is massively down, but that's probably inevitable. Traditional retail is moving out of Manchester. St Annes Sq, King St are empty. House of Fraser scarecely survives. MAnchester is changing.
 
The problem is most people who currently use cars will not be tempted onto either bikes or buses. They might be tempted onto quality public transport, but that is more expensive in terms of capital. You are looking at tubes (very expensive) better trains (quite expensive) and better trams (expensive but probably covering revenue costs, unlike local trains.)

A fundamental problem in this country is to want to improve stuff without spending large amounts of dosh. (Except in London, natch.) It can't be done on the cheap. The alternative of doing nowt leads to a slow but sure decline in the economy. We are already seeing this in terms of the decline in city centre retail.
 
Marvin said:
They should have thought about that when they built the Metrolink - direct competition for cars / buses. It's like the bus-lanes that impact negatively on the car drivers who lose a lane. The Metrolink takes spce from other uses and gets priority at the junctions.

As regards an Underground connecting Victoria to Piccadilly, who has used the mainline connection? I haven't once, and I use the train a lot. They spent £100 million and as far as I can see it's a complete white elephant. I might be wrong but I am just going off my own personal experience. I haven't seen any routes through Picadilly into Victoria so if that does not work, why would an Underground work. The City centre is just too small to make it worthwhile. If I was at Deansgate, and wanted to get to Piccadilly, I'd still walk. It takes me ten minutes to do that walking, and there's no way a Manchester tube system would have trains running every 5 minutes. It works in London because you can't get from London to Wembley on foot in ten minutes. Impractical for Manchester. The one possibility from Piccadilly to Victoria which made sense but they've done that overground now.

The idea that the Etihad needs a transport upgrade is nonsense. There are 60,000 people who go to the Etihad for concerts. No one ever mentions that as an issue, so the idea that a potential arena holding 20k at most needs a transport upgrade does not make any sense.

I think this arena talk is a bit over-done. For it to become a reality, someone is going to have to agree to operate it. I think we'd know about that now if it was close to happening.
Click to expand...

You make it sound like Manchester’s transport problems and huge under investment are all of its own doing. Manchester commissioned and paid for a study to build an underground at Central Governments request - when Thatcher was PM. They never received a formal response. Metrolink was the only option in town - and even that was delivered on a shoestring. There are few European Cities of the size of Manchester that don’t have some sort of underground. It’s a British thing - Birmingham, Bristol etc... could say the same we don’t typically invest in big projects outside the capital and with Johnson as PM that won’t change - HS2 will be scaled back and pretty much scrapped north of Birmingham - I’m told by friends working on the project. Northern Powerhouse my arse.
 
Marvin said:
As regards an Underground connecting Victoria to Piccadilly, who has used the mainline connection? I haven't once, and I use the train a lot. They spent £100 million and as far as I can see it's a complete white elephant. I might be wrong but I am just going off my own personal experience. I haven't seen any routes through Picadilly into Victoria so if that does not work, why would an Underground work.
Click to expand...

The issue inhibiting the Piccadilly - Victoria rail-link is summed up in one word: GRAYLING. The single most incompetent minister the UK has endured in over a century ... despite some serious competition. The now-completed Ordsall Chord can only work as intended if delivered in conjunction with through-platforms 15 / 16 at Manchester Piccadilly and the associated Oxford Road corridor capacity enhancements. The dimwitted one has personally blocked these developments, claiming that "digital railway solutions" will resolve the problem instead. This is so unutterably stupid that one suspects even Grayling doesn't believe it: he is part of the cabal which feuded with George Osborne and is determined to destroy any 'Northern Powerhouse' legacy which may accrue to him.

The reality is that trains using the two existing through-platforms 13 / 14 at Piccadilly occupy them for too long ("dwell time"). There's nothing digital about that. Huge crowds disembark trains (with luggage), huge crowds board trains (with luggage), wheelchair ramps must be safely deployed and stowed away again. This cannot be rushed ... we're talking a busy city centre mainline station - it simply takes time. 15 / 16 would allow trains to alternate through the corridor with those from 13 / 14. Even small village stations in the SE have four through platforms. But not Manchester Piccadilly. London Bridge Station alone has recently seen a GBP1Bn upgrade. The Piccadilly / Oxford Road work is priced at less than a third of that. But - of course - Manchester Piccadilly isn't in London.

Next week - like it or not - we get a new Prime Minister. And a new cabinet. Any chance of a transport minister with a brain, please? And no personal grudge against Osborne.

One key objective of the combined improvements marketed to us as "the one billion pound Northern Hub investment" (announced repeatedly, never fully-delivered) was to increase the number of trains able to transit Central Manchester on through services. Seemless service from Manchester Airport, Stockport and beyond through to Yorkshire and the NE / Scotland. Grayling's ineptitude (or malevolent intent) means that we're stuck with a situation where we can only run the same number of trains through Manchester as pre-Ordsall Chord. So YES - the OC is basically a white elephant until the rest of the long-promised 'Northern Hub' improvements are delivered (if that ever happens at all). Airport to Yorkshire / NE services do now route via the OC which is helpful in itself, but extra capacity ("paths") was the real intended prize. That is absent. Plans to run frequent Bradford - Rochdale - Manchester - Manchester Airport services are amongst the casualties unable to be accommodated as promised. And don't even mention northern electrification.

Rail delays generated by the Platform 13 /14 bottleneck radiate out across the North of England rail network daily with a cascading effect. It desperately needs resolution, though issues such as the NHS, education and social care will always take priority in the media. So public outrage over wild under-investment in regional transport infrastructure is muted. Until disastrous rail timetable changes kick in without the infrastructure in place to support them. Grayling points at Northern Rail and Transpennine Express then. But he needs to look in the mirror. THE PROBLEM IS HIM. For God's sake, don't promote this **** to the Lords.

Sorry for wandering off topic somewhat. And for the long post. But we need to understand WHY the current Piccadilly - Victoria link is of such limited use. It isn't lack of need.
 
Marvin said:
All the current concepts, e.g The Circle (ex BBC, Oxford Rd), are about people working and living in Manchester. It's not like London at all where the whole of the South East commutes into London every day. A good 50% of the development in Manchester is centred on the Oxford Rd corridor because this is where the commercial operators smell money. It's what makes Manchester almost unique in the world. Transport is not a big deal for these people, because people live in the City and work in it. Unforunately for out of town blues, the focus of MCC, and private builders like Brunswick, will be on enabling this environment, that is where they see the future. It is anti-car, pro bus, pro pedestrian, pro cycle. I think the car-driving element of City's fanbase suffers as a result because they are not part of this world.

You think about all the developments in Manchester, road narrowing, cycle lanes, bus lanes. Cameras. All anti-car.

Where there will be a problem is that the High Street will suffer. Footfall is massively down, but that's probably inevitable. Traditional retail is moving out of Manchester. St Annes Sq, King St are empty. House of Fraser scarecely survives. MAnchester is changing.
Click to expand...
As someone who lived in the city centre for 15 years, I disagree that people who live there don’t care about transport.

If you want to get from one side of the city centre to the other between 3pm-7pm, it’s absolutely unbearable with traffic. Getting out of the city centre and heading south is equally horrendous.

Unless you live right next to Piccadilly, heading out by public transport during these times is an absolute nightmare. Forget the busses, it’s gridlocked. The train services around the city centre are pathetic, the promise of the Ordsall curve has just not been fulfilled.

There should be a “circle line” type service from Piccadilly through Oxford Rd, Deansgate, Salford Central (right next to Spinningfields) and Victoria. The infrastructure is there now, but the service is just non-existent.

The tram only really serves people from the suburbs to get in to town. But for getting around the city centre, it’s an absolute joke. It’s quicker to walk. The stops are too close together and they missed a trick not putting a line down Deansgate to actually make the service serve the whole city centre.

The city centre is a fantastic place to live, loads of Londoners come up and can’t believe the lifestyle they can have for the price. But it has so much potential to be better.

An underground system would be great, but it would cost billions and it’s never going to happen. The better, and far cheaper option would be to run services on the “circle line” I mentioned above, and connect Piccadilly to Salford Central / Spinningfields and integrate the infrastructure we already have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top