North Stand Construction Discussion

City Matters

These people from the club should have a collective email address that all have access to, instead of the long-winded way of doing things.

There also should be a fan representative on the board this is a must to try and stop people from making crazy discussions like what they have done with the North Stand and the ticketing issues


 
Last edited:
supercity88 said:
Spot on. The assumption was that the ticketing cock up would cause a negative impact on atmosphere but it didn't. More people stayed until the end than usual and the atmosphere was electric. It wasn't right that loyal fans weren't able to get tickets but it shows that in an expanded stadium where there simply will be lots of new fans and overseas supporters, the atmosphere doesn't suffer.

The amount of overseas fans the rags and dippers have. They're still hardcore and make noise.

Ideally we would have a single tier with traditional loyal fans. But I would imagine 600 fans with access to a bar wouldn't be paying much more than the wider 9,000 in NSL2 and would be there for the atmosphere too and contribute. They just want to pay more to have their own location and bar.

It's possible too that if it doesn't work it can be changed. If the side stands get expanded then move it and revert to standard seats.

Even if it's a bunch of 600 posh seats, whilst far from ideal it doesn't change the fact you have a huge tier under the roof where singers can make noise in one location that travels around the ground.

That simply doesn't happen at the moment. You have SSL1 then an attempt to get SSL3 going. Neither can hear each other. Then the Kippax corner which again is isolated from the other singers.

Collate all of those in one area and it will make a racket.
Click to expand...
It's quite likely that we'll end up with TWO ends.

Lots will relocate to NSL2,but some will choose or need to stay in SS3.

We could have the best of both worlds with two ends that spark orff each other.
 
Gone for a Burton said:
It's quite likely that we'll end up with TWO ends.

Lots will relocate to NSL2,but some will choose or need to stay in SS3.

We could have the best of both worlds with two ends that spark orff each other.
Click to expand...
This. Its not necessarily a bad thing. In my view could actually be good because the songs will travel more effectively if you got both ends going for it.
 
LEXSTARproject said:
@jrb its a big area
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here, could you expand?

But since you brought it up.

Its size is 400sqm. Which can take a capacity of up to about 600 depending on seating layouts. Which coincides with the number of seats described as 'hospitality/GA' (and the /GA is actually important here) above it. It is smaller than the 3 hotel bar areas in the same development.

The layout is that of a bog standard bar, i.e no booths, private areas, dining zones etc.

For a bit more context. The main concourse 'common man' bar areas that surround it are 1,300sqm, excluding general spill out zones. The 'hospitality bar' has 5 access points to the concourse areas. Probably the most interesting thing, it doesn't have its own toilets! It shares the main concourse toilets. Pardon the pun, but does that not just piss on the whole notion it is this exclusive corporate bubble people imagine?

The reality of it is, it is just another bar, as part of a busy concourse of multiple bars. Take the purple colour off it, take the hospitality out of the hospitality/GA lable, and there is literally no difference between that and the rest. The seating within the stand is also no different, in size, spacing etc.

If on matchdays the club decide to sell those tickets without the +surcharge, the whole thing just gets used as one. If as someone suggested, the club choose to use it as storage of inflatable bananas, banners, flags and vuvuzelas, it allows for that too. The whole thing looks like it has actually been thought about, and is quite flexible.

I know some people don't trust the club, and think this is sneaking in corporate, but to me it just looks far more fluid than that. I've mentioned before, the pac report states the team had biweekly meetings with the planners for a period of about 5 or 6 months ahead of the submission. It is entirely possible, that the planners may have had an issue with the amount of bar offerings (which is within their remit). And that defining a portion and designating it as dedicated 'hospitality' for a select group, eased their concerns, it is not uncommon. It is also possible that the club just don't know exactly what they want yet, and are getting approval for something that gives them multiple options in the future.

Either way, that flexibility is there, and once approved or even built as per, will remain there. I think it is great fans continue to engage with the club, and I'm keen to hear the feedback myself. I just don't think there is this 'now or never' fight to be had over it.
 
I'm not really here said:
This. Its not necessarily a bad thing. In my view could actually be good because the songs will travel more effectively if you got both ends going for it.
Click to expand...
I wonder if they'll mix the starting ends up for kick off. I always assumed they play attacking the south stand half so the opposition can hear the crowd and throw a wobble. Might be wrong though.
 
Coatigan said:
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here, could you expand?

But since you brought it up.

Its size is 400sqm. Which can take a capacity of up to about 600 depending on seating layouts. Which coincides with the number of seats described as 'hospitality/GA' (and the /GA is actually important here) above it. It is smaller than the 3 hotel bar areas in the same development.

The layout is that of a bog standard bar, i.e no booths, private areas, dining zones etc.

For a bit more context. The main concourse 'common man' bar areas that surround it are 1,300sqm, excluding general spill out zones. The 'hospitality bar' has 5 access points to the concourse areas. Probably the most interesting thing, it doesn't have its own toilets! It shares the main concourse toilets. Pardon the pun, but does that not just piss on the whole notion it is this exclusive corporate bubble people imagine?

The reality of it is, it is just another bar, as part of a busy concourse of multiple bars. Take the purple colour off it, take the hospitality out of the hospitality/GA lable, and there is literally no difference between that and the rest. The seating within the stand is also no different, in size, spacing etc.

If on matchdays the club decide to sell those tickets without the +surcharge, the whole thing just gets used as one. If as someone suggested, the club choose to use it as storage of inflatable bananas, banners, flags and vuvuzelas, it allows for that too. The whole thing looks like it has actually been thought about, and is quite flexible.

I know some people don't trust the club, and think this is sneaking in corporate, but to me it just looks far more fluid than that. I've mentioned before, the pac report states the team had biweekly meetings with the planners for a period of about 5 or 6 months ahead of the submission. It is entirely possible, that the planners may have had an issue with the amount of bar offerings (which is within their remit). And that defining a portion and designating it as dedicated 'hospitality' for a select group, eased their concerns, it is not uncommon. It is also possible that the club just don't know exactly what they want yet, and are getting approval for something that gives them multiple options in the future.

Either way, that flexibility is there, and once approved or even built as per, will remain there. I think it is great fans continue to engage with the club, and I'm keen to hear the feedback myself. I just don't think there is this 'now or never' fight to be had over it.
Click to expand...
This argument over 600 seats is sadly pathetic in the extreme, if it was the whole of one tier there is an argument, but 600, come on.

Many of our strongest most vocal supporters may be very tempted to take up one of these seats and have access to a private bar before and after a game.

I personally think it's a great idea from the club and it has my full support.
 
Keeper! said:
This argument over 600 seats is sadly pathetic in the extreme, if it was the whole of one tier there is an argument, but 600, come on.

Many of our strongest most vocal supporters may be very tempted to take up one of these seats and have access to a private bar before and after a game.

I personally think it's a great idea from the club and it has my full support.
Click to expand...

To flip my own earlier arguement against me. The way it is laid out, if this application hadn't included the purple colour as a 'hospitality' bar, or the 600 seats as 'hospitality/GA', there would be absolutely nothing stopping the club in the future using it and selling it as such. Or dedicating that area, or any other within the concourse or the stand, as a 'premium' offering, at any point in its lifecycle. So the whole worry over it seems somewhat unnecessary.
 
Coatigan said:
To flip my own earlier arguement against me. The way it is laid out, if this application hadn't included the purple colour as a 'hospitality' bar, or the 600 seats as 'hospitality/GA', there would be absolutely nothing stopping the club in the future using it and selling it as such. Or dedicating that area, or any other within the concourse or the stand, as a 'premium' offering, at any point in its lifecycle. So the whole worry over it seems somewhat unnecessary.
Click to expand...
Not against you far from it, several on here are going so far over the top over these seats.
 
Keeper! said:
Not against you far from it, several on here are going so far over the top over these seats.
Click to expand...

No I meant the point itself. My whole argument is that the whole thing is quite flexible. And as such it works both ways.
 
Anyone else intrigued that this is the last week of the objection window, and not one has yet appeared to date, over a month since it went public. For something as big as this.

There is of course a chance that a whole load of them are just sitting there with the council and will all be added in one go next week once the deadline passes. But that rarely happens, particularly with online ones, they tend to appear as they are submitted.

The proposals are either that welcomed, or too overwhelmingly complex. Or we have bribed a pretty large radius.
 
Coatigan said:
Anyone else intrigued that this is the last week of the objection window, and not one has yet appeared to date, over a month since it went public. For something as big as this.

There is of course a chance that a whole load of them are just sitting there with the council and will all be added in one go next week once the deadline passes. But that rarely happens, particularly with online ones, they tend to appear as they are submitted.

The proposals are either that welcomed, or too overwhelmingly complex. Or we have bribed a pretty large radius.
Click to expand...

or all 3 :-D
 
bluesmith said:
Big change coming on the construction side
Click to expand...


Are you morphing into Tolmie, Bluesmith? ;-)

As long as you don’t morph into Ted Roagers on 3-2-1. I’m could never work those clues out.

Thinking back to the prizes. What was the point in winning a speedboat if you lived in an inner city suburb?
 
Last edited:
jrb said:
Are you morphing into Tolmie, Bluesmith? ;-)

As long as you don’t morph into Ted Roagers on 3-2-1. I’m could never work those clues out.

Thinking back to the prizes. What was the point in winning a speedboat if you lived in an inner city suburb?
Click to expand...
Yeh and winning a dustybin on Bullseye.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jrb
www.building.co.uk

Rivals on alert after talks between Laing O’Rourke and Manchester City over £300m Etihad expansion end

Treble-chasing club sticking to start date of this autumn
www.building.co.uk www.building.co.uk

@bluesmith @HelloCity

Treble-chasing club sticking to start date of this autumn
Manchester City is beginning the search for a new contractor to carry out work on the expansion of its Etihad stadium after Building understands the club and Laing O’Rourke failed to agree a price for the job.
O’Rourke had been lined up as the main contractor on the scheme which will see the ground’s capacity increased by 8,000 to 62,000 by putting an upper tier on the existing structure of the North Stand, complete with a sky bar overlooking the pitch and a stadium roof walk experience.
The original builder of the stadium, which is currently building Everton’s £500m Bramley-Moore Dock ground, was also expected to build a large commercial block attached to the North Stand that will contain 4,000 sq m of office space, a museum and a new club shop.
Etihad new 11

Work on the expansion plan is expected to start this autumn
But Building can reveal talks have now ended with the pair believed to have been unable to agree a price for the work.
Manchester City, which could win a hat trick of trophies this season if it beats Inter Milan in the Champions League final on Saturday night, declined to comment but it is understood club officials have described the discussions with O’Rourke only as “preliminary”.
A planning application submitted by the club to the city council in April includes a detailed construction management plan drawn up by Laing O’Rourke with a start on site scheduled for this October and completion of the expanded North Stand due by August 2025.
The club is still expected to start work as planned and under this timetable a winning contractor will be appointed in September.

Attention will now turn to who will carry out the work with sources suggesting Sisk, which is being lined up to build out parts of the Populous-designed scheme, including a 400-room hotel and a 2,800 sq m covered public realm area, could now be in pole position for the entire job.
Sisk has previously built the €165m (£142m) Croke Park stadium in Dublin as well as the €285m (£245m) Aviva stadium, previously known as Lansdowne Road, in the Irish capital.
“It would make great sense from a timing point of view and Sisk have experience of stadia with Croke Park and the Aviva,” the source said.
Etihad new 4

The scheme will also include a hotel and office block
Building understands that would-be builders Sir Robert McAlpine and Mace are unlikely to throw their hats into the ring unless the job was let as a construction management scheme.
City’s current home was designed by Arup and built by John Laing ahead of the 2002 Commonwealth Games in Manchester. The club moved to the ground in time for the start of the 2003/4 season.
Laing O’Rourke declined to comment.
The wider project team includes structural engineer Buro Happold, QS Turner & Townsend, transportation consultant Arup, planning consultant Deloitte, project manager and employers agent Gardiner & Theobald and fire engineer Ashton Fire.
 
Last edited:
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