Etihad Campus, Stadium and Collar Site Development Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can't seen the extension being completed until the Metrolink 2nd crossing gets completed. Manchester City Centre is a no-go zone.

I wish they'd have put it all underground. Overground the Metrolink is so disruptive during construction and takes priority over other road users. Perhaps the worst of the construction is over now though. St Peters Square is nearing completion (5 or 6 months I think). Once the Metrolink is fully operational and roads re-opened then I think the extension can go ahead. If it's warranted. 54k average last season suggests it is already needed.
Worked on a couple of schemes for an underground system in Mcr in the eighties....basically its a non starter. Far too much under there to go through, and the city centre doesn't have the area to go deep and back up again...if that makes sense. I would offer a Chicago style metrolink above ground as a possibility..
 
Worked on a couple of schemes for an underground system in Mcr in the eighties....basically its a non starter. Far too much under there to go through, and the city centre doesn't have the area to go deep and back up again...if that makes sense. I would offer a Chicago style metrolink above ground as a possibility..

Would certainly put us on par with Brockway, Ogdenville and North Haverbrook.
 
Whilst being extremely grateful and priviledged to have the owner we have, I'll reserve the right to think for myself if that's ok with you?
"I am firmly in the camp that our owners can do no wrong" - everyone can get the odd thing wrong - doesn't mean discussing it is an insult. Some people get so precious about this.


I suggest you read back my post and then read back yours.

In your post you infer that I am instructing people on how they should think - really? I simply stated clearly the camp that I am in and surely that is my right?? - yet you seem to challenge that - so are you not by inference commenting on how I should think?
 
Well
I suggest you read back my post and then read back yours.

In your post you infer that I am instructing people on how they should think - really? I simply stated clearly the camp that I am in and surely that is my right?? - yet you seem to challenge that - so are you not by inference commenting on how I should think?
I really couldn't care less. I must have interpreted your need to prostrate your eulogy upon us in the wrong context.
 
I can't seen the extension being completed until the Metrolink 2nd crossing gets completed. Manchester City Centre is a no-go zone.

I wish they'd have put it all underground. Overground the Metrolink is so disruptive during construction and takes priority over other road users. Perhaps the worst of the construction is over now though. St Peters Square is nearing completion (5 or 6 months I think). Once the Metrolink is fully operational and roads re-opened then I think the extension can go ahead. If it's warranted. 54k average last season suggests it is already needed.
A Manchester underground would be great and would solve a lot of problems for the City in general, the trouble is Manchester is in the north of England nowhere near the precious capital and "power house of the north" or not they hate "wasting money" on us northerners.
 
A Manchester underground would be great and would solve a lot of problems for the City in general, the trouble is Manchester is in the north of England nowhere near the precious capital and "power house of the north" or not they hate "wasting money" on us northerners.



Datablog
London gets 24 times as much spent on infrastructure per resident than north-east England


In the week when George Osborne claimed he was championing investment in the north, analysis of spending shows that London’s population receive far more than anybody else



George Osborne (pictured left) backed higher infrastructure spending in the north of England. Photograph: Lynne Cameron/PA
George Arnett

Thursday 7 August 2014 00.01 BSTLast modified on Thursday 7 August 201413.13 BST

This article is 1 year old
Shares
8,185
Comments
125

The size of the investment gap between London and the rest of England was made stark by new analysis showing Crossrail alone is earmarked to receive nine times more funding than all the rail projects from the North’s three regions combined.

Figures derived from a research report by IPPR, show Londoners receive £5,203 more per head on capital investment than people in the north-east – a discrepancy sure to reignite a long-running row on whether London’s growth is coming at the detriment of the rest of the UK.

Earlier this week the UK chancellor George Osborne endorsed a £15bn plan to improve infrastructure in five northern cities this week. Although he did not commit to any funding, Osborne said the overall aim was:

To end the imbalance in the UK economy so our success is not wholly dependent on the global city of London, so we have across the north of England individual cities that are better connected, have a better quality of life, and are able to create

New analysis of public infrastructure spending by IPPR North lays bare the gap between how much capital expenditure there is in the capital than the rest of England.

Our additional analysis of the 2013 government infrastructure plan, the IPPR’s data source, showed that the £14.5bn total capital expenditure planned for Crossrail outmatches the £1.6bn earmarked for rail projects in Yorkshire and the Humber, the north-east and the north-west by nine to one.

Other projects in the capital including tube improvements mean that £5,426 will have been spent on each resident of London compared to £223 on those in the north-east region. That’s over 24 times as much.

On the surface of it, residents of the north west seem the most fortunate region outside London, with project spending at £1,248 per head. However, Guardian analysis found that more than half of that total was down to the decommissioning of the Sellafield nuclear plant in Cumbria – necessary, doubtless, but hardly an infrastructure ‘improvement’ as most people would understand it.

111c6c4d-8381-476b-9b2e-2fc765b95c85-bestSizeAvailable.png

Taking away the costs of that decommissioning in the north-west would reduce the spend per head there to £599 - just over one tenth of what is spent on each person in the capital.

Ed Cox, Director of IPPR North said:

Effective infrastructure is the bedrock of an effective and efficient economy. Transport connections, flood defences and high-speed broadband networks all allow people and goods to move quickly from place to place and for business to flourish. It is widely recognised that the North of England loses out as government spending on infrastructure is continuously skewed towards London.

These figures apply to all projects which receive some level of public funding, whose benefits have been bracketed to apply to one specific region. Projects designed to benefit the entire country, such as the High Speed 2 rail line have not been included.

The government infrastructure plan is not set in stone, but the Treasury describes it as “a strategic and more credible overview of the level of public and private infrastructure investment planned over the rest of this decade and beyond.” The document, published late last year, suggests that transport improvements for the north specifically are a relatively new concern.

One third of planned infrastructure spending in London is the £14.5bn earmarked for Crossrail with line upgrades on the Tube receiving the second most at £8.2bn.

a6d2db49-872e-4b86-abbc-655da22e3a11-bestSizeAvailable.png

The biggest rail project currently set to specifically address the needs of those in the north of England is the delivery of a range of products including improvements to the journey time on the Manchester Airport through the Ordsall Chord, which will cost £498.1m (3.4% of the cost of Crossrail).

How much of public infrastructure spending in the north is on rail? It’s 12.6%, while the Sellafield nuclear decommissioning we mentioned earlier makes up over a third of the £12.5bn planned to be spent specifically in the north of England.

Update: in response to demand, we’ve redone the calculations to include thenumber of commuters in each region. The chart showing this is below

388a1d63-fbe3-42a6-b6e3-a6f43dd21f1d-460x403.png
 
Worked on a couple of schemes for an underground system in Mcr in the eighties....basically its a non starter. Far too much under there to go through, and the city centre doesn't have the area to go deep and back up again...if that makes sense. I would offer a Chicago style metrolink above ground as a possibility..
I think I know what you mean. Been studying directional drilling of shale gas seams, where instead of drilling vertical wells down to the seam they can drill a well down and then horizontally through the seam, then fracture it extracting the gas. I know it's not the same thing, but what might have been very difficult in the 80s might technologically be possible now. However given the infrastructure that's been put in place now, it's difficult to just abandon it as a bad job. It's a bit frustrating to see how long these developments take. St peters Sq has been shut for years and I don't think it's due to fully re-open until August or September.
 
TfGM will just add more bus lanes and we will end up with more almost empty buses using them They need to look at traffic flow get rid of bus lanes and educate drivers to get through green lights instead of leaving gaps and stopping to let cars out of side roads when the lights in front of them are on green I could go on
Really so your idea of a better transport system is less buses and more cars ? The city and surrounding towns already get gridlock at certain time, and it's not bus lane or bad drivers that course it, it's to many cars, I drove to Widnes Wednesday, and crawling out of Greater Manchester at 10/20 mph on the M60/M56 shows it's not bus lanes or traffic lights that course the problems, as they is none on the motorways.
 
I worked the Bruce Springsteen concert on Wednesday and was approached by a Liverpool fan who had never been to the etihad and he was blown away by the stadium, how it just looked and felt on a different scale to Anfield and he said "even with Anfield expansion you guys are miles ahead"
 
I worked the Bruce Springsteen concert on Wednesday and was approached by a Liverpool fan who had never been to the etihad and he was blown away by the stadium, how it just looked and felt on a different scale to Anfield and he said "even with Anfield expansion you guys are miles ahead"
When you see some of the grounds that were going to be built for them ,never has a fan base been so ripped off with that tk maxx extension they have ended up witjh
 
I had a plan for the metro and using both lines to go and from the etihad to Piccadilly and the same time
so 2 would go on both lines up to the Etihad and 1 would carry on to ashton and the other would wait for the other 2 then the waiting 1 would go to ashton

you could have double trams so that's 4 trams all going to the Etihad on match days the service for ashton would start at the velo park
 
Really so your idea of a better transport system is less buses and more cars ? The city and surrounding towns already get gridlock at certain time, and it's not bus lane or bad drivers that course it, it's to many cars, I drove to Widnes Wednesday, and crawling out of Greater Manchester at 10/20 mph on the M60/M56 shows it's not bus lanes or traffic lights that course the problems, as they is none on the motorways.

A two lane road will have twice the capacity of a one lane road, this is obvious. Reducing it to one to accommodate buses has knock on to other roads, so yes just like Liverpool let's see the light and get rid of them. Bad driver habits contribute to traffic jams, leaving gaps in crawling traffic means the queue of traffic is longer than it should be, less cars get through on green than should do, junctions up to that road are also affected. I drove into Manchester last Wednesday and the Springsteen gig was on at the Etihad due to selfless drivers blocking junctions, a lane on Blackfriars was empty so yes bad drivers and bus lanes cause traffic jams. I can't comment on your illustration, but is this the same every day at that time? Or was it the consequence of an accident?
I was also pointing out that most buses are not full, yet there are following each other down the road
 
Slightly off topic but staggering to see the farcicke situation that is the contracting performance on the mancunian way. An utter disgrace that this is still ongoing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top