Etihad Campus, Stadium and Collar Site Development Thread

BeerIsTheBest said:
Fblueboy
Ha. I read through the replies and some are predictably pathetic with jibes on empty seats. It’s all many have left alongside the jibe on being Chumps Lge failures. Thousands of hateful 8 fans will read about this and mourn. What a statement from the owners, what a time to be a blue. Hope I survive long enough to see it all in its final glory.
Click to expand...

It’s amazing the derogatory fake comments are allowed & all my corrections didn’t get added.
 
HelloCity said:
Will this be over the closed season do you think or begin before this season finishes?
Click to expand...
1) Before end of season
2) At end of season
3)When signings are made.

Personally I'd like to see a major multiple reveal of Jude, Alexia McAlistar & Josko Guadival on the same day early in the close season....piss boiling all round!!
 
FootballSense said:
Transport for Greater Manchester is the responsible authority. Its remit includes stategic planning, funding and delivery. Sources of funding must be co-ordinated by and channel through TfGM for major schemes.

If any real progress is to be made, this will be secured with TfGM, The Mayor, City as a club and other principal parties at The Etihad Campus working together to find solutions and ameliorate the impact of increased numbers coming to East Manchester. This is all within the context of centralised funding controls and priorities still focussed on London and the south.

Steps towards some form of devolution to Greater Manchester have been achieved; buses are being brought back into public control; and limited release of funding has been allowed by Whitehall.

The environment is now right for serious discussions with TfGM. However the challenges, funding and timescales should not be under estimated.
Click to expand...

This is a very important point and is exactly why I said we're best placed concentrating on the strategy publicly declared by TfGM. Aspirations that fit with that are more likely to be met with a degree of receptiveness from the transport and political authorities than those that don't. For more detailed discussion, see below.

Citizen of Legoland said:
TfGM and MCC have plans going through to 2040 and are quite detailed. They have given themselves 5/10 years to just come up with ideas, then another 5 years to discuss/develop/discard these ideas, then 5/10 to implement them. Some things, like Elton Reservoir metrolink stop and car park are relatively simple and might be complete by 2030, others are more complex.

Lots of things are connected. The biggest issue is probably the Castlefield corridor for trains travelling Deansgate/Oxford Rd/Piccadilly. It’s just two tracks and is the most lucrative because it feeds passengers to the airport from far and wide. They built a loop from Victoria to Piccadilly (Ordsall curve) to allow trains from Newcastle to go direct to the airport but it’s made it worse. This was in addition to the Windsor curve that joined Salford Crescent to the Castlefield corridor built in the nineties that allows Glasgow trains a direct route to the airport. Not only airport traffic but commuters use this corridor. Ideally, we’d either widen the corridor (many billions of pounds) or route Glasgow or Newcastle traffic another way. The line down the side of the stadium WAS considered before building Ordsall Curve but rejected (on cost presumably) and it would not have offered direct airport trains to Newcastle or Leeds passengers. Also HS2 complicates things there as does Northern Powerhouse Rail (if it’s still going). In my view, I think they should re-build the viaduct into Piccadilly and re-route Newcastle and Leeds trains to terminate there, with px changing to an airport train, but this can’t be done unless HS2 gets ditched or re-designed.

So how does this affect trams and buses and cars? Well, reducing commuter traffic on the corridor means passengers have to use something else. The trams also have capacity limitations and are subject to major disruption. Extending the tram network is very expensive too and I don’t think building more road running lines is a popular idea any more, so we’re left with two options, buses or tram-train (TT). For the TT option that line by our stadium has potential. It could feed passengers from Marple, Hadfield over to Wigan, Bolton allowing commuters a Victoria city centre destination instead of Piccadilly. It’s just whether it can be as flexible and as regular as a tram to be useful but not affect the train routes from Leeds, Newcastle etc. Plus we’re not hearing much about it since trials in Sheffield ended in 2020 (?), so perhaps that idea has cooled too.

It feels to me that we are much nearer to better buses than anything else. They can serve everywhere in GM but to be effective it does mean there needs to be fewer cars (or at least more help getting them through congested areas).

The new Sandhills metrolink stop might be useful if it goes ahead. It will be as close to the stadium as Piccadilly but will cover Bury and Oldham lines.

TL:DR There are plans already in place for improved public transport. If the buses can be successful like they seem to be in London, maybe we don’t need the billion pound fantasy ideas. And the other thing to consider is that the new arena, the North Stand expansion; they might not know exactly what is needed yet, how people will choose to arrive.
Click to expand...

This is a really interesting post. As indicated above, I think we have to try to ensure that any transport solutions fit with TfGM's declared strategy, and to that end I've been scan-reading the Five Year Transport Delivery Plan (TDP), issued in 2021, which outlines the current steps working towards TfGM's long-term ambitions as set out in the 2040 Transport Strategy and Our Network document.

In particular, I've focused on the tram-train aspect, given the discussions going back over 20 years of services from the Glossop/Hadfield and/or Marple lines serving Sportcity/Etihad Campus in one way or another and tram-train being the current idea of how this might be done. In previous transport strategy documents, there was a suggestion that converting the Marple line for tram-train use was a priority for as soon as the Sheffield to Rotherham tram-train trial was completed.

That happened a couple of years ago, but the degree of urgency no longer seems to be there given that the latest TDP merely suggests that it will "develop options" by 2026 for converting both the Marple and Glossop lines to tram-train use. The projects placed in this category are generally those that "are longer term projects that would be delivered in later years", which would be disappointing IMO given the prominence previously expressed for this project.

There's some hope, however. The TDP does state that the above "work may identify interventions that could be delivered by 2026" and states an "aim to achieve that wherever possible". If Marple and Glossop tram-train conversion hasn't been placed in this latter category, then I hope City are lobbying hard for that to change.

Of course, I suppose we should note that, unlike Aston Villa with their relevant authorities, City aren't conducting discussions with TfGM and the Greater Manchester Mayor's Office about transport links in public. Therefore, all kinds of ideas might have been mooted about which we remain currently aware. I hope so, because what's currently been stated officially regarding transport seems rather underwhelming. It would be nice if the club were being proactive in this area.

I'd like to think that they'd at least explore the use of the line by our stadium, which, as I keep repeating, was planned back when City were about to move to the stadium. If it was considered viable then, why not now? I appreciate there might be reasons, but it seems an opportunity worth examining seriously given that the arena will open soon, with foyer and hospitality space that can attract conferences and events even on non-concert days.

I agree with you that improved bus services could play an important role, too. The TDP is 353 pages long, and I've not had time to digest most of it yet, but I'll try to have a look when I can and see whether anything that's said in there about buses could have an impact on this development.

Mainly, though, I just hope that people at City grasp how vital the transport issue is in terms of maximising the success of the current developments and will, accordingly, push Andy Burnham and TfGM hard to come up with solutions. After all, our owners should have plenty of leverage. If there's the right attitude within City to this matter, I'm sure that satisfactory progress can be made - even if it's frustrating that all discussions are in private.
 
petrusha said:
This is a very important point and is exactly why I said we're best placed concentrating on the strategy publicly declared by TfGM. Aspirations that fit with that are more likely to be met with a degree of receptiveness from the transport and political authorities than those that don't. For more detailed discussion, see below.



This is a really interesting post. As indicated above, I think we have to try to ensure that any transport solutions fit with TfGM's declared strategy, and to that end I've been scan-reading the Five Year Transport Delivery Plan (TDP), issued in 2021, which outlines the current steps working towards TfGM's long-term ambitions as set out in the 2040 Transport Strategy and Our Network document.

In particular, I've focused on the tram-train aspect, given the discussions going back over 20 years of services from the Glossop/Hadfield and/or Marple lines serving Sportcity/Etihad Campus in one way or another and tram-train being the current idea of how this might be done. In previous transport strategy documents, there was a suggestion that converting the Marple line for tram-train use was a priority for as soon as the Sheffield to Rotherham tram-train trial was completed.

That happened a couple of years ago, but the degree of urgency no longer seems to be there given that the latest TDP merely suggests that it will "develop options" by 2026 for converting both the Marple and Glossop lines to tram-train use. The projects placed in this category are generally those that "are longer term projects that would be delivered in later years", which would be disappointing IMO given the prominence previously expressed for this project.

There's some hope, however. The TDP does state that the above "work may identify interventions that could be delivered by 2026" and states an "aim to achieve that wherever possible". If Marple and Glossop tram-train conversion hasn't been placed in this latter category, then I hope City are lobbying hard for that to change.

Of course, I suppose we should note that, unlike Aston Villa with their relevant authorities, City aren't conducting discussions with TfGM and the Greater Manchester Mayor's Office about transport links in public. Therefore, all kinds of ideas might have been mooted about which we remain currently aware. I hope so, because what's currently been stated officially regarding transport seems rather underwhelming. It would be nice if the club were being proactive in this area.

I'd like to think that they'd at least explore the use of the line by our stadium, which, as I keep repeating, was planned back when City were about to move to the stadium. If it was considered viable then, why not now? I appreciate there might be reasons, but it seems an opportunity worth examining seriously given that the arena will open soon, with foyer and hospitality space that can attract conferences and events even on non-concert days.

I agree with you that improved bus services could play an important role, too. The TDP is 353 pages long, and I've not had time to digest most of it yet, but I'll try to have a look when I can and see whether anything that's said in there about buses could have an impact on this development.

Mainly, though, I just hope that people at City grasp how vital the transport issue is in terms of maximising the success of the current developments and will, accordingly, push Andy Burnham and TfGM hard to come up with solutions. After all, our owners should have plenty of leverage. If there's the right attitude within City to this matter, I'm sure that satisfactory progress can be made - even if it's frustrating that all discussions are in private.
Click to expand...
CITYs policy is not to reveal information until irrevocable agreements are contracted.

This will not change..
 
What’s happening with the squash club? Used to be a handy little place to pop in for a last pint if you were a bit early. Seems to have been shut whenever I’ve glanced over this season.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I enjoy walking from town as well (weather permitting) but train strikes have made my onward journey to Lancashire impossible in recent seasons, forcing me to drive. Meanwhile a proper shuttle bus service back to town would be great. It works well on most German grounds.
Click to expand...
There are loads of buses after the game on Ashton Road. £2 into Piccadilly. You may have to queue but no more than 10 minutes ever. If it is lashing down I have jumped on a few times this season.
 
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