Etihad Campus, Stadium and Collar Site Development Thread

supercity88 said:
No I think there will be screens in each corner and the openness for air flow. Looking at the images for a fully expanded stadium it looks as though the side stands extend and curve into the corners more but whether that actually will happen who knows!View attachment 59244
Click to expand...
I think the outside wall of the Stadium has louvres in the corners that open up to improve airflow too.
 
kippax81 said:
I shared the Kickair information. I did, however, also say don't shoot the messenger :-)

The info I received was from somebody I know very well who is involved in High Tech business in and around Manchester. As far as I'm aware he would have no reason to pull my plonker, so to speak. He seemed very sure of his facts so I thought I would share with the forum. I am due to meet with him on Friday so I will try and dig out a bit more information.

Possibly the club could buy the land and then lease it out? Maybe this is a start of the collar site development we have all been waiting for?

I suppose this is like a transfer saga...nobody really knows 100% apart from the people who sign their names on the contracts etc.
Click to expand...
Your contact probably knows better than mine (at City).

The information I posted was based on a conversation about the expansion plans. There was a passing comment of 'and the club are gonna buy the Mercedes garage too'. That was it.

The person I was speaking too wouldn't have any role in procuring the land. They work in a different department. They would have been informed about expansion plans though.
 
supercity88 said:
Didn't mean to snap (read it back and sounds arsey!).

Quite right, their brief will be quite simple. Maximise capacity whilst ensuring quickest return on investment and minimising disruption. Ideally enabling works and prep prior to beginning works over one summer and finishing the next summer ready for the new season.

Timing-wise I can't see how it starts in summer 23 unless they're sticking to the current proposals. They'll need planning permission otherwise so I would imagine we would be looking at a start in 24 to use that summer initially and complete it in summer 25 for the 25/26 season. A long way off basically!

Thinking about the design, I wonder if the Council would accept the V supports being enclosed by an expanded stand but shown through the curtain glazing. Spurs have something similar. Obviously not sure how much of the desigb rationale was from the Council originally, but there's lots of talk about retaining its current architectural merit in the planning application. That's usually just nonsense design chat to justify something though.
Click to expand...
The V supports are partially enclosed in the South Stand, so I see no reason why they wouldn't be in the North Stand.
Let's see what happens with planning permission. The original permission for the three tiers has expired, so regardless of what the club do, they are going to have to submit new plans.
 
Manchester33 said:
Your contact probably knows better than mine (at City).

The information I posted was based on a conversation about the expansion plans. There was a passing comment of 'and the club are gonna buy the Mercedes garage too'. That was it.

The person I was speaking too wouldn't have any role in procuring the land. They work in a different department. They would have been informed about expansion plans though.
Click to expand...

Will be interesting to see what does eventually happen either way.

One thing for sure, of which I'm definitely certain, is that prime land on the doorstep of one of Europe's top football clubs and an arena that is going to be holding events nearly all year round, will not be sat vacant for long!

Am busy with a work project at the minute but I'm going to send you a PM later this afternoon, if you would look out for it, mate. Have something that might be of interest to you and your contact at City.

Cheers for know.
 
Manchester33 said:
The V supports are partially enclosed in the South Stand, so I see no reason why they wouldn't be in the North Stand.
Let's see what happens with planning permission. The original permission for the three tiers has expired, so regardless of what the club do, they are going to have to submit new plans.
Click to expand...

The original permission hasn't expired mate. It was one application to cover the expansion of both stands either together or in phases. It's been implemented so it is extant. City can construct a third tier on the NS providing an additional 6,250 seats without needing to get planning. Any changes to that will require an amended application though. I mean fully enclosed rather than partially - to enable the stand to build out further to enclose a club store and/or any hotel further bars/restaurant facilities. You'd have a few cables within the stand then potentially - it's whether the lack of symmetry is seen as an issue if the Council are precious about that original design.

Example image from Spurs of how it's enclosed at Spurs but the roof cabling for the South Stand is a bloody maze in comparison!South Stand.JPG

Spurs stadium.JPG
 
supercity88 said:
The original permission hasn't expired mate. It was one application to cover the expansion of both stands either together or in phases. It's been implemented so it is extant. City can construct a third tier on the NS providing an additional 6,250 seats without needing to get planning. Any changes to that will require an amended application though. I mean fully enclosed rather than partially - to enable the stand to build out further to enclose a club store and/or any hotel further bars/restaurant facilities. You'd have a few cables within the stand then potentially - it's whether the lack of symmetry is seen as an issue if the Council are precious about that original design.

Example image from Spurs of how it's enclosed at Spurs but the roof cabling for the South Stand is a bloody maze in comparison!View attachment 59252

View attachment 59251
Click to expand...

Those two images show completely different things don’t they? One is the supports for the roof and the other is the beams which hold up the stand. Believe it or not but the beams which hold up our stand are internal as well.

Also, everyone involved will want the look of any expansion to match in with the current stadium. Unless they plan on re-doing the whole stadium externals then it’s a given that the North Stand will match up with the South Stand in terms of its general look regardless of any hotel and the like being included. Nobody will want a stand looking like it’s completely separate from the rest of the build.
 
Last edited:
HelloCity said:
Those two images show completely different things don’t they? One is the supports for the roof and the other is the beams which hold up the stand. Believe it or not but the beams which hold up our stand are internal as well.

Also, everyone involved will want the look of any expansion to match in with the current stadium. Unless they plan on doing the whole stadium externals then it’s a given that the North Stand will match up with the South Stand in terms of its general look regardless of any hotel and the like being included. Nobody will want a stand looking like it’s completely separate from the rest of the build.
Click to expand...

You mean we won’t be getting the Maine Road look? Just think we could dust off the Platt Lane plans and put that to good use! How things have changed….
 
HelloCity said:
Those two images show completely different things don’t they? One is the supports for the roof and the other is the beams which hold up the stand. Believe it or not but the beams which hold up our stand are internal as well.

Also, everyone involved will want the look of any expansion to match in with the current stadium. Unless they plan on re-doing the whole stadium externals then it’s a given that the North Stand will match up with the South Stand in terms of its general look regardless of any hotel and the like being included. Nobody will want a stand looking like it’s completely separate from the rest of the build.
Click to expand...

Yeah they do I'm just floating ideas out there and wondering if they could widen the footprint though to include more internal facilities for hospitality or other reasons to maximise revenue and enclose more of those supports. Externally it would still tie in there'd just be a slight difference. I'd love to see a mock-up of the stadium externally with the east and west stands expanded. The club are probably looking at that stage in more detail now as well. The precedent has been set for the expansion of the NS so they probably wouldn't lump the East and Colin Bell expansion into the same application as that would introduce new elements to assess but there might be a few more mockups of the feasibility of that work as there was in the original planning application.
 
Just been thinking about all the posts I’ve read on this thread and it’s clear that the majority would love a kop like end for the noisemakers. And though I agree I look at what our owners want and I’ve come to the conclusion that they don’t want a second rate stadium and in my opinion want the best stadium in the world. If you think about within the small collection of ultra billionaires there are bragging rights to who has the biggest and best floating gin palaces and has such that also means us.
 
I am a very infrequent poster (must be best part of 10 years since I stuck my oar in) but avid reader of this forum. Thank you all so much for keeping me entertained, informed and up to date. JRB is a top bloke, as are countless other contributors.
Like many I would love to see a single tier North Stand but recognise that constraints caused by the cable net and the need to close the whole end to realise this option create viability issues.
l wonder if the reduced capacity issue could be alleviated by first extending the third tiers on one or both of the East and Colin Bell Stands prior to starting work on the North. Cable net allowing, would this in theory resolve the problem?
 
Tier 1 of the North stand is below ground so pretty much fixed. If the plan is to extend the North stand to incorporate more facilities that include current ones plus add ones complementary to the Arena then there is no compelling case for a symmetric bowl.

In the same way as a ship has a bow and stern, it still can be symmetric. The issue for any expansion is the development of the corners.

Personally, I see this as the issue for future expansion. My preference would be for a second tier North Stand with wrap around corporate and family stand sides. I am sure City have it all in hand.
 
swalessweepover said:
I am a very infrequent poster (must be best part of 10 years since I stuck my oar in) but avid reader of this forum. Thank you all so much for keeping me entertained, informed and up to date. JRB is a top bloke, as are countless other contributors.
Like many I would love to see a single tier North Stand but recognise that constraints caused by the cable net and the need to close the whole end to realise this option create viability issues.
l wonder if the reduced capacity issue could be alleviated by first extending the third tiers on one or both of the East and Colin Bell Stands prior to starting work on the North. Cable net allowing, would this in theory resolve the problem?
Click to expand...
Extending the W or E stands would require replacing the roof and the cablenet would still cause issues perhaps with sightlines. I'd be astounded if the cablenet isn't eventually removed entirely.
 
Centurions said:
Extending the W or E stands would require replacing the roof and the cablenet would still cause issues perhaps with sightlines. I'd be astounded if the cablenet isn't eventually removed entirely.
Click to expand...

Think you are right - like the south stand all stands will eventually have independent structures using cables but not requiring the central ring. That will eventually be removed but only after all four stands have a new (independently supported) roof.
 
Manchester33 said:
Your contact probably knows better than mine (at City).

The information I posted was based on a conversation about the expansion plans. There was a passing comment of 'and the club are gonna buy the Mercedes garage too'. That was it.

The person I was speaking too wouldn't have any role in procuring the land. They work in a different department. They would have been informed about expansion plans though.
Click to expand...
Apparently city also own the old Princes drinks site between Briscoe Lane and Oldham Road. Not sure what plans they have for it though.
 
Norman kneejerk said:
Apparently city also own the old Princes drinks site between Briscoe Lane and Oldham Road. Not sure what plans they have for it though.
Click to expand...

If that information is correct, then the site is next to the railway line, it may be that they are going to use this site to build a railway station that would service the COOP Live and stadium and the future developments at the site. No more issues with people parking their cars. Could that mean that the Collar Site is getting bigger

1666950489709.png
 
LEXSTARproject said:
If that information is correct, then the site is next to the railway line, it may be that they are going to use this site to build a railway station that would service the COOP Live and stadium and the future developments at the site. No more issues with people parking their cars. Could that mean that the Collar Site is getting bigger

View attachment 59356
Click to expand...
There was a station on the line called Park Station until 1995 just above the doughnut shaped building (A Burns, bottom right). It could potentially be re-built but it's unlikely to be any time soon due to the congestion problems with the rail network in and around Manchester. TfGM are looking at the potential of running Tram-Trains in the future and the line that runs behind the athletics stadium is one identified as a potential route and if a tram stop could be built there it would probably be sufficient. It would mean trams running east-west into Piccadilly as currently and trams running north-south Victoria to Glossop/Marple.
 
Citizen of Legoland said:
There was a station on the line called Park Station until 1995 just above the doughnut shaped building (A Burns, bottom right). It could potentially be re-built but it's unlikely to be any time soon due to the congestion problems with the rail network in and around Manchester. TfGM are looking at the potential of running Tram-Trains in the future and the line that runs behind the athletics stadium is one identified as a potential route and if a tram stop could be built there it would probably be sufficient. It would mean trams running east-west into Piccadilly as currently and trams running north-south Victoria to Glossop/Marple.
Click to expand...
Also, rail infrastructure costs are eye watering. Don't see it happening tbh.
 
Stockton Heath Blue said:
Hopefully, some decent car parking!
Click to expand...
Some of it is being used for parking this season but it is the best part of a mile from the stadium, the site is massive though, and looks like it is being split up for different uses.

I expect as there are so many parcels to it there may be more than one owner, and seriously doubt it has anything to do with a train station at the end of Lord Street North where the line is currently raised on a bridge which has just had 6 months of work to repair it.
 
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