North Stand Construction Discussion

LEXSTARproject said:
View attachment 106083
View attachment 106084
Number 2 on the planning statement is a car park as noted above @Coatigan , have you saw plans that note something different as this was noted in the planning statement
Click to expand...
The numbers in the first above seem to be from a different and stadium only drawing.

The one I have seen of the second image, 2 was 'lifestyle hotel' 3 was 'entertainment assembly' and 4 was 'media city'. Whatever those actually mean.
 
Man-chester copperpot said:
Under no circumstances is a Rag sitting in my seat. Over my dead body.
I HATE everything to do with that football club, it’s fans, players, badge, colour, the fact that they agreed to have a banner taking the piss makes it even worse. They ruined my childhood.
I still have never bought anything from Sharp and try my best never to wear anything red or Adidas.
Imagine being in the away end for the Rags away at the Etihad.
No,no, no, no, no, no, no, no, let these motherfuckers go to their cousins Salford City or the turncoats FC United
We’ve helped them once and they spat in our faces.
These c*nts can sort it out themselves.
I would refuse to go to the Etihad while sharing with these.

Edit : on a side note.
A friend who lives in a council house in Broadheath (Trafford) wanted to move to a council house in Blackley (North Manchester) to live nearer to his daughter

His application was declined and he was unable to go onto the housing list by Manchester Council due to living in Trafford, rules are that you are only eligible to move around Manchester if you already live in Manchester

So if the Rags want to rent anywhere, will have to be around Trafford

What’s good enough for us civillians is good enough for them Rag B@stards
Click to expand...
Totally agree.

Last time was different - the country was just out of a World War, it would have been odd in those circumstances to leave them without a ground, as the bomb could just have result have destroyed Maine Rd.

This time, they've allowed their stadium to deteriorate, have made no attempt to buy the land required to improve it and have used the profits to buy shite players and pay off old managers.

I don't like letting them in OUR stadium for the derby and we won't need their money if we're paying our players League One wages, so it's a no from me.
 
Coatigan said:
The numbers in the first above seem to be from a different and stadium only drawing.

The one I have seen of the second image, 2 was 'lifestyle hotel' 3 was 'entertainment assembly' and 4 was 'media city'. Whatever those actually mean.
Click to expand...
1707058460406.png

@Coatigan Thanks or that info

2- "Lifestyle Hotel" could that mean a Village Hotel that features a swiming pool,steam rooms and a gym etc. The Village Hotel group normally build the type pictured below which fit in along side a COOP live.

1707057376657.png
3- "Entertainment Assembly" going by the shape of the building could be anything, but after looking at the regeneration plans that the council wants a cinema etc but there are already 4 cinemas near by unless it's an Everyman Cinema

4-Media City could be City trying to copy what has happened at Kings Cross in London and what is happening with Media City with happening at Salford

I hope they copy what Wembley Park has done with a Box Park,Hotels,Apartments,Deigner Outlet etc but on a smaller scale unless city have bought up all the land surrounding the staduim as well

Parking is going to be a major issue

1707059179533.png
1707059642595.png

 
HelloCity said:
View attachment 106095

These videos have put jrb into early retirement.
Click to expand...

No, never.

But I have to admit, the drones are a threat to my pictures. Time and technology move on.

Drones will never replace the view from ground level, giving people a real perspective of how the North stand will look at ground level. Just like the Coop Live Arena.

Took some pictures around the perimeter of the site today. Not overly exciting to be honest. So much heavy machinery onsite.
 
jrb said:
No, never.

But I have to admit, the drones are a threat to my pictures. Time and technology move on.

Drones will never replace the view from ground level, giving people a real perspective of how the North stand will look at ground level. Just like the Coop Live Arena.

Took some pictures around the perimeter of the site today. Not overly exciting to be honest. So much heavy machinery onsite.
Click to expand...
Drone is a threat to everyone.
 
jrb said:
Slightly off topic.

There’s a thread on SSC-MCR titled Manchester United (Old Trafford) | Framework.

Most if not all of the posters posting on the thread are United fans. (some of them are getting a bit giddy about the idea of a new stadium)

It’s mainly about Old Trafford, the stadium, and whether is should be redeveloped or whether it should be demolished and a new stadium built close by. (now Ratcliffe has bought 1/4 of United from the Glazers)

Recently the conversation has gone on to City allowing United to use/share the Etihad whilst a new stadium is built on the current Old Trafford site or close to the Old Trafford site/footprint.

A redeveloped 62,000 capacity Etihad, including a hotel, 3000 capacity fanzone, etc, and what it will have to offer United and their fans is a very tempting proposition for United and something they would be interested in, if they could ‘agree a deal with City’, MCC, and Sports England to use the Etihad stadium for 2-3 seasons whilst a new stadium is built.

Would City be interested in letting United share and use the Etihad knowing the additional rental and match day revenue it would generate for City could run into £100’s millions over 2-3 seasons.

There is a valid argument a new stadium will never be built because the Glazers and Ratcliffe will not fund it, instead they would rather redevelop Old Trafford piecemeal.

Trying to put my blue allegiances aside, and the fact that I used to post on SSC-MCR, I would be totally against the idea for various reasons.

What are your views on the matter?( try and keep it civil ;-) )

The last 2 posts on the thread atm.

It’s A Muffin (post)

City lent them their stadium before and United repaid them by allowing a banner mocking City's lack of success. I doubt the Etihad is an option unless it's extremely lucrative and Everton is probably too far.

Issac Newell (reply)

I think City will be leaned on by the Premier League, the Police and the council. Authorities may look less favourably with regards to concerts etc. if City refuse, which they won't as they will be compensated. In the days when City last lent Utd Maine Rd, fans generally followed both teams.
Click to expand...

I would be fucking outraged. Like virtually all other old-guard City fans, I imagine.
Tell you what, they can always ask for Anfield, see how that goes down. It's not very far.
 
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
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.