Etihad Campus, Stadium and Collar Site Development Thread

I just don’t see a total rebuild happening sorry. I can see the club looking very closely at what Spurs have achieved and developing what we have now accordingly. It’s s great stadium with endless potential for redevelopment
 
gkmcfc said:
I just don’t see a total rebuild happening sorry. I can see the club looking very closely at what Spurs have achieved and developing what we have now accordingly. It’s s great stadium with endless potential for redevelopment
Click to expand...
But Spurs demolished the whole thing and rebuilt on the same site.
 
Bournemouth Blue said:
So, fulfil the Sport England contract by subsidising conversion of existing Etihad into a multi-sport venue, including athletics track, NFL pitch and concert arena, and build something that will make Barca, Real Madrid, Juve and Spurs crap themselves
Click to expand...
Fuck the NFL
 
I doubt there will be a new Stadium any time soon. The majority of the building cost of the Etihad was covered by Sport England and if the Stadium was sold to City by the council they would have to repay Sport England the cost of the initial build which would have a significant impact on Manchester City Council. It is easier and cheaper to work with the council and expand the current Stadium
 
JGL07 said:
But Spurs demolished the whole thing and rebuilt on the same site.
Click to expand...

Yes but WHL lacked capacity and for years they couldn’t do anything with it - similar to us the new stadium was the catalyst for much needed regeneration. I just don’t see that happening with the Etihad
 
gkmcfc said:
I just don’t see a total rebuild happening sorry. I can see the club looking very closely at what Spurs have achieved and developing what we have now accordingly. It’s s great stadium with endless potential for redevelopment
Click to expand...

It's not a great stadium. Due to the initial brief and the state City were in it at the time it was built to cost with no expansion envisaged. As an icon shape it is a fantastic design but that limits the expansion and the reason that the southside expansion cost nearly as much as the initial stadium cost. The SS expansion is awkward, look at he the shape of the roof and the corners where it joins the existing roof. The catering facilities are limited which is crucial for monetizing the hospitality. Need a new state of the art stadium to replace the CoMS buildt it on the north car park With respect to the contribution £4M to the council this can't go on forever as the cost of the stadium will surely be close to having been paid off, so any purchase costs, which would go to Sport England, will be minimum anyhow?
 
Gordyola said:
It's not a great stadium. Due to the initial brief and the state City were in it at the time it was built to cost with no expansion envisaged. As an icon shape it is a fantastic design but that limits the expansion and the reason that the southside expansion cost nearly as much as the initial stadium cost. The SS expansion is awkward, look at he the shape of the roof and the corners where it joins the existing roof. The catering facilities are limited which is crucial for monetizing the hospitality. Need a new state of the art stadium to replace the CoMS buildt it on the north car park With respect to the contribution £4M to the council this can't go on forever as the cost of the stadium will surely be close to having been paid off, so any purchase costs, which would go to Sport England, will be minimum anyhow?
Click to expand...


I think the shape of the South stand roof is designed to fit smoothly into an expanded higher east and west stand. That's why I think it is higher and is not a cost issue.
 
Don't know where all the new stadium talk is coming from, it was apparently looked at before the CFA was done and discounted, plans for the Etihad are in place , just no timescale on it. Been said many time there won't be a new stadium anytime soon, and when you see the what's possible in the images @worsleyweb posted ,no real need for one.
 
Gordyola said:
It's not a great stadium. Due to the initial brief and the state City were in it at the time it was built to cost with no expansion envisaged. As an icon shape it is a fantastic design but that limits the expansion and the reason that the southside expansion cost nearly as much as the initial stadium cost. The SS expansion is awkward, look at he the shape of the roof and the corners where it joins the existing roof. The catering facilities are limited which is crucial for monetizing the hospitality. Need a new state of the art stadium to replace the CoMS buildt it on the north car park With respect to the contribution £4M to the council this can't go on forever as the cost of the stadium will surely be close to having been paid off, so any purchase costs, which would go to Sport England, will be minimum anyhow?
Click to expand...
It looks very similar on the inside to Spurs stadium. I didn't go to Spurs but how did that cost £1 Billion vis a vis the Etihad. They've got a 60,000 stadium that will be no better than the Etihad when it is 'complete'. I was encouraged to see that Architects are working on a live project i.e. the North Stand expansion is still a live plan. I interpreted the silence after the fan consultation as negative but seems it's still ongoing.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
I think the shape of the South stand roof is designed to fit smoothly into an expanded higher east and west stand. That's why I think it is higher and is not a cost issue.
Click to expand...
I keep seeing this expanded east and west side roofs quoted but never an explanation of how it can be done within the constraints of the current roof design and a working football stadium.

The cost was adding a tier to a stadium that was never designed to be extended, working within the design of the roof it was an incredible solution to a very difficult problem
 
Marvin said:
It looks very similar on the inside to Spurs stadium. I didn't go to Spurs but how did that cost £1 Billion vis a vis the Etihad. They've got a 60,000 stadium that will be no better than the Etihad when it is 'complete'. I was encouraged to see that Architects are working on a live project i.e. the North Stand expansion is still a live plan. I interpreted the silence after the fan consultation as negative but seems it's still ongoing.
Click to expand...

Its not the basic structure its the fitting out with high quality materials, tiling the toilets instead of painting breeze block and the sliding pitch being a couple of examples
 
Gordyola said:
I keep seeing this expanded east and west side roofs quoted but never an explanation of how it can be done within the constraints of the current roof design and a working football stadium.

The cost was adding a tier to a stadium that was never designed to be extended, working within the design of the roof it was an incredible solution to a very difficult problem
Click to expand...
As I understand it the roof would have to be taken down and reconstructed similar to the South stand. Not sure how easy it would be to extend the existing third teirs on the east and west stands. As you state this might not be possible. They may have to be rebuilt?
 
Marvin said:
It looks very similar on the inside to Spurs stadium. I didn't go to Spurs but how did that cost £1 Billion vis a vis the Etihad. They've got a 60,000 stadium that will be no better than the Etihad when it is 'complete'. I was encouraged to see that Architects are working on a live project i.e. the North Stand expansion is still a live plan. I interpreted the silence after the fan consultation as negative but seems it's still ongoing.
Click to expand...

The internals of spurs stadium supersedes the Etihad by some way. Although the 1 Bil figure is ludicrous no doubt
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
As I understand it the roof would have to be taken down and reconstructed similar to the South stand. Not sure how easy it would be to extend the existing third teirs on the east and west stands. As you state this might not be possible. They may have to be rebuilt?
Click to expand...

Yes a new roof but how would it be supported? Taking the old one down would be a nightmare, I doubt it could be done in a month and half and then suffer a considerable time roofless It would be easier quicker to build new if, a capacity or much more than circa 65K was required
 
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