Etihad Campus, Stadium Development and Collar Site

[sweeps feet]

Nah thoght everyone knew ,its going to be the scums new magastore

 

[GXCity]

Asda won't be moving. It's just one of fbloke's fantasies.

If its a fantasy its certainly not one of mine.

One of your fantasies was that the ground wouldn't be expanded for at least 10 to 15 years

 

[tonyblue]

How can i put a picture in here

 

[jrb]

How can i put a picture in here

Here.

<a class="postlink" href="http://postimage.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://postimage.org/</a>

 

[tonyblue]

Ive uploaded it now what please

 

[jrb]

Took some pictures of the new college and leisure centre today.

Will upload them tomorrow.

 

[ste.sully]

Asda won't be moving. It's just one of fbloke's fantasies.

Asda are on the site already so I don't see why any other multi national would not be eyeing up that plot of land either. We have some form of agreement with the council for the two diagonal bits of land(training ground and stadium) but I've always thought the retail park is fair game as far as competitors are concerned?

Asda would be crazy to sell the site. Since they opened the new store in the late 90s the value of that land would have skyrocketed. Not to mention the houses around the stadium which are among some of the fastest growing prices in the country = gentrification and nearby residents with more money to spend.

Essentially the huge gamble they took on east Manchester before the Commonwealth Games looks to be paying off. I cannot see them letting the site - and more importantly the store go - on the cheap. Some on here are stupid to think that City or other parties could somehow just take a wrecking ball to the Asda store for further development.

In fact the Velodrome was one of Manchester City Council's best gambles which has benefited Manchester and United Kingdom performance in international cycling. Some of you lot speak about some of the facilities around City's stadium as if they are insignificant. Let me tell you the town planners and those at the council, although supportive of City, would be reluctant to approve retrospective development which means the demolition of solid local amenities which have taken years to gradually assemble in what was a very depressed area of Manchester.

 

[petrusha]

In fact the Velodrome was one of Manchester City Council's best gambles which has benefited Manchester and United Kingdom performance in international cycling. Some of you lot speak about some of the facilities around City's stadium as if they are insignificant. Let me tell you the town planners and those at the council, although supportive of City, would be reluctant to approve retrospective development which means the demolition of solid local amenities which have taken years to gradually assemble in what was a very depressed area of Manchester.

You appear to be ignoring the fact that the Council's Executive has approved a long-term framework plan for the area which quite openly states that sports facilities currently adjacent to the stadium (i.e. the athletics, squash and tennis venues) should be relocated. THIS is why people are talking about the issue. It 's an aspiration of MCC set out in black and white in a document passed by the MCC Executive: read what it says in the Eastlands Regeneration Framework.

And the key word here is 'relocated'. Once the collar site has been developed, attention will turn to the areas currently occupied by those venues. The cost of building new and better facilities on nearby land (which isn't exactly in short supply) will be fairly minimal in the context of the type of development contemplated.

Asda would be crazy to sell the site. Since they opened the new store in the late 90s the value of that land would have skyrocketed. Not to mention the houses around the stadium which are among some of the fastest growing prices in the country = gentrification and nearby residents with more money to spend.

Essentially the huge gamble they took on east Manchester before the Commonwealth Games looks to be paying off. I cannot see them letting the site - and more importantly the store go - on the cheap. Some on here are stupid to think that City or other parties could somehow just take a wrecking ball to the Asda store for further development.

This is an argument for ASDA to retain a presence in the locality, not a reason why they would have to stay on the current site. And nobody is saying that they should be driven out of the locality. If you care to read any discussion on here over the last three years of ASDA leaving the existing plot, you'll see that no one has ever suggested that it would happen without an alternative nearby site being made available to give ASDA a major presence in East Manchester.

As it stands, though, they're going to find themselves paced right next door to a site pulling in thousands of visitors every day, a site that's intended to pull in visitors 24/7. ASDA make sits money from locals doing their weekly shopping, and it won't make much from visitors to the Etihad Campus, for whom there'll be plenty of provision on the site anyway. Most visitors to the attraction won't go near ASDA and ASDA will find its customers going elsewhere because they're put off by the traffic and the amount of footfall they'll have to fight their way through to do the weekly shop.

One of the things I happen to spend quite a lot of time doing in my job is legal work in relation to the formation and operation of real estate joint ventures, including malls and large-scale retail outlets. I can tell you without fear of contradiction that sticking a big store next to a major sports venue results in sharply reduced takings on a match day. But if there are only 25 of those in a year and the site is suitable in all other respects, the retailer will put up with that. When you're talking about the collar site being developed, the 25 busy days rises to 365 busy days so it becomes a much greater problem for the retailer.

A professional contact of mine earns a lot of money planning retail developments - multinationals pay him to work out where their stores or shopping centres should be located. A couple of years ago, on another occasion when this argument was flaring on here, I showed him the Eastlands Regeneration Framework and asked him what he thought about ASDA's site. He said he thought that they'd want a presence in the area, assuming that land can be found, but not on that site.

Why? Shoppers don't like having to fight their way through crowds heading to other events when they go to a supermarket. Instead, they're likely to opt to shop at rival stores where there's no congestion of that type. With all due respect to you, I'll take the word of the guy who makes a very good living indeed advising supermarket chains among other people as to where they should site their stores.

 

[Centurions]

Asda won't be moving. It's just one of fbloke's fantasies.

Asda are on the site already so I don't see why any other multi national would not be eyeing up that plot of land either. We have some form of agreement with the council for the two diagonal bits of land(training ground and stadium) but I've always thought the retail park is fair game as far as competitors are concerned?

Asda would be crazy to sell the site. Since they opened the new store in the late 90s the value of that land would have skyrocketed. Not to mention the houses around the stadium which are among some of the fastest growing prices in the country = gentrification and nearby residents with more money to spend.

Essentially the huge gamble they took on east Manchester before the Commonwealth Games looks to be paying off. I cannot see them letting the site - and more importantly the store go - on the cheap. Some on here are stupid to think that City or other parties could somehow just take a wrecking ball to the Asda store for further development.

In fact the Velodrome was one of Manchester City Council's best gambles which has benefited Manchester and United Kingdom performance in international cycling. Some of you lot speak about some of the facilities around City's stadium as if they are insignificant. Let me tell you the town planners and those at the council, although supportive of City, would be reluctant to approve retrospective development which means the demolition of solid local amenities which have taken years to gradually assemble in what was a very depressed area of Manchester.

petrusha posted an excellent response to your post but you talk about the Asda being crazy to sell? Do they own the land or is it leased from MCC as someone else claimed?
If it is leased it's not going to be a case of "Get em out by friday! You don't get paid till the last ones well on his way". They'll be in discussions regarding a much better plot for them and won't move until a new store is ready to move in. Even if owned the same discussions would take place.

Does anyone know for sure (rather than just speculating) about the ownership?

 

[petrusha]

petrusha posted an excellent response to your post but you talk about the Asda being crazy to sell? Do they own the land or is it leased from MCC as someone else claimed?
If it is leased it's not going to be a case of "Get em out by friday! You don't get paid till the last ones well on his way". They'll be in discussions regarding a much better plot for them and won't move until a new store is ready to move in. Even if owned the same discussions would take place.

Does anyone know for sure (rather than just speculating) about the ownership?

I claimed it was leased. Back when I had a contact involved with the Etihad Campus project and wider development issues, I was told that Walmart had the plot on a long-term lease. I assumed it to be the case when in the Eastlands Regeneration Framework suggested that the ASDA plot is a development site (see plan on page 28 at the start of section 7, 'The design directions for Eastlands'). However, I can't confirm it for sure.

However, even if ASDA owns it outright, the Council owns lots of development land in East Manchester. As long as Walmart thinks that one of those sites is acceptable, there's scope for some kind of land swap with a cash adjustment if necessary or other kind of sweetener. (For example, how about they're granted certain concessions to sell MCFC goods in the new store, or are allowed a small-ish presence on the campus itself aimed at serving visitors rather than the local population).