Etihad Campus, Stadium and Collar Site Development Thread

[jrb]

This?

The other one.

But thanks.

Forgot about that one.

 

[Shaelumstash]

This?

@jrb sorry, this is the one I was talking about mate.

 

[jrb]

@jrb sorry, this is the one I was talking about mate.

No probs.

Completely forgot about that proposal.

Didn’t like it then. Still don’t.

Thanks.

 

[Gordyola]

Swales plan was to have executive boxes hanging from the main stand roof but it was scuppered by fire regs, probably never had the money anyhow

I’ve got the plans for the development of the ground that Franny planned this before they entered into negotiations to move to Eastlands
Will dig then out and get them scanned

 

[Keeper!]

I was lucky enough to get to see a artistic impression and plans shown to me by an ex Chief Ex' of a new stadium to be built at our present site, that was stunning, but sadly don't think we will ever get to build it, partly because of issues with Sport England.

 

[Bobbyespania]

Could you post a picture?

 

[spiny]

I was lucky enough to get to see a artistic impression and plans shown to me by an ex Chief Ex' of a new stadium to be built at our present site, that was stunning, but sadly don't think we will ever get to build it, partly because of issues with Sport England.

Sport England have their own agenda re the Etihad. Compare how different is their approach to the London Stadium, not only given away but funding and running costs?

In contrast, City spent a bundle on converting and improving the stadium plus paying the running costs and rent with Sport England holding a veto for any plans over GMC and City who constitute the majority interest.

 

[JGL07]

Sport England have their own agenda re the Etihad. Compare how different is their approach to the London Stadium, not only given away but funding and running costs?

In contrast, City spent a bundle on converting and improving the stadium plus paying the running costs and rent with Sport England holding a veto for any plans over GMC and City who constitute the majority interest.

The difference was that the City of Manchester stadium was built with an agreement that City would take over as tenants whereas the Olympic Stadium was built in the hope that some one would come in to use it after 2012.

Without the deal with City, the City of Manchester Stadium would never have been built, at least in the form that it was.

The Olympic Stadium was there with the terms of being available for Athletics meetings. Spurs would have bid for it but wanted to bulldoze the whole thing and start again. This was vetoed leaving West Ham as the only feasible bidder (Orient aside!) Hence West Ham could name their terms.

 

[chesterbells]

The difference was that the City of Manchester stadium was built with an agreement that City would take over as tenants whereas the Olympic Stadium was built in the hope that some one would come in to use it after 2012.

Without the deal with City, the City of Manchester Stadium would never have been built, at least in the form that it was.

The Olympic Stadium was there with the terms of being available for Athletics meetings. Spurs would have bid for it but wanted to bulldoze the whole thing and start again. This was vetoed leaving West Ham as the only feasible bidder (Orient aside!) Hence West Ham could name their terms.

Boris economics

 

[spiny]

The difference was that the City of Manchester stadium was built with an agreement that City would take over as tenants whereas the Olympic Stadium was built in the hope that some one would come in to use it after 2012.

Without the deal with City, the City of Manchester Stadium would never have been built, at least in the form that it was.

The Olympic Stadium was there with the terms of being available for Athletics meetings. Spurs would have bid for it but wanted to bulldoze the whole thing and start again. This was vetoed leaving West Ham as the only feasible bidder (Orient aside!) Hence West Ham could name their terms.

Absolutely correct ...
.. and is why Sport England should butt out. They have nothing to offer and have shown their incompetence.
The subsequent investment by ADUG is beyond anything that was envisaged, without Sport England having to pay a penny. IMHO they should be reimbursed and Manchester City with their partnership with Manchester Council, allowed to develop the ground and collar site as they deem fit even if it includes a new stadium.