Should the BBC relocate or redevelop in the city centre and where? [Archive] - Page 3

jrb

June 16th, 2006, 11:00 PM

From todays MEN. Various pieces/articles.

How Salford won BBC battle

Salford's Media City plansGRIT, determination and a dedicated team effort landed Salford the prize - announced yesterday - of being host to the BBC's new media headquarters.

Six months ago the city was winning admiring glances for a bid which would probably come an honourable second to Manchester in the battle to be the location for the BBC's £400m move north. Five departments and 1,500 media staff posts are now due to switch to Salford's Media City from London in 2010. BBC staff at the Oxford Road site will also move there.

As D-Day loomed, momentum for the Salford bid grew and it drew level with Manchester whose site was between the Mancunian Way and Whitworth Street.

The key element for Salford was having Peel Holdings as the landowners. The site on the Quays is already cleared and Peel has an enviable portfolio for delivering colossal developments. As owners of the Trafford Centre, John Lennon Airport in Liverpool, and the force behind plans for a new racecourse in Worsley they have clout and know-how.

Felicity Goodey, a former BBC journalist, supplied the polish in terms of presentation. As chairman of the Central Salford Urban Regeneration Company, she led the bid together with Peel and the council.

Aces

With the addition of one of the world's leading urban planners, Michael Joroff, they had a star player. His report to the BBC suggested Salford held all the ace cards: the space; long-term commitment of Peel; the effectiveness of Salford coming from zero in the BBC race to level in six months; and the team's commitment to the Media City concept.

BBC bosses were "wowed" by a presentation cleverly staged in the Compass Room on top of the Lowry arts centre, which overlooks 35 acres already cleared for the BBC's potential arrival.

Some issues remain and the government has the final decision but Salford's bid won over the governors. The city had been through this sort of challange before - twice - and been successful.

In the late 80s they took a gamble and forged partnerships with developers to transform barren docklands into a new waterside location for homes and firms.

In the 90s they never gave up on the dream of a performing arts centre at The Quays, which started life as a sketch of the Albert Hall on Salford Docks. In February 1996 they landed National Lottery cash to build it and The Lowry has been a hit. Now they have a hat trick of successes.

------

'Come and join us' plea to Granada

BBC bosses are keen to persuade Granada to join them at Salford Quays.

They want the ITV company and other media and technology firms to team up with them in the new media city.

That raises the prospect of Granada quitting its 21-acre Quay Street site in Manchester, along with a possible historic move for Coronation Street.

BBC director general Mark Thompson said: "I believe this presents a unique opportunity for other broadcasters and the independent sector to join us in a project that could bring very significant benefits for audiences and the economy of the North of England."

But potential BBC partners are waiting to see if the 2010 move to Salford clears one last major hurdle - a satisfactory licence fee settlement from the government. A decision on that is not expected until October at the earliest.

In a statement, ITV Granada said: "We are encouraged that the BBC has reaffirmed their decision to move production to the north west. However, we are disappointed that it is linked to the licence fee settlement and that the decision isn't going to be taken until later in the year. Meanwhile, ITV is continuing to talk to both cities about our future plans."

Options

ITV chief executive Charles Allen has not ruled out a shared centre with the BBC away from Quay Street. Speaking last year, he said: "We have also said that we would be happy to go to other sites - we are looking at other options."

Granada has also spoken in the past of "a constructive dialogue" with the BBC over how the two could work together in the future.

With the proposed BBC move still four years away, work is about to begin on an £18m scheme to turn the Bonded Warehouse on the Quay Street site into a new city headquarters for ITV Granada.

More than 800 staff are due to move in next year in a project which spells the end for the current 1960s administration building, which still has the original red rooftop Granada sign.

A site share with Granada at Quay Street was one of the earlier options rejected by the BBC.

But having lost to Salford in the race to host the BBC's media zone, Manchester council may be equally as determined to persuade Granada to stay at Quay Street, just inside the Manchester border with Salford.

------

Businesses welcome Salford move

BUSINESSES have today welcomed the BBC's decision to move to Salford Quays.

Richard Parkinson of commercial law firm Turner Parkinson, said: "The move is excellent news for the region, and also good for the commercial property market because of all the associated and related businesses moving into the area to be near the BBC.

"It is great news for law firms such as ours. We are already seeing an increase in demand for our media services and commercial property expertise.

Advertisement your story continues below
"Decentralisation is fantastic for the region too, as Manchester city centre has picked up more than its fair share of businesses coming to the north. It is also a reflection on our strong infrastructure and professional services network."

David Fish, of Manchester-based Mango Experiential Marketing said: "I can understand why the BBC chose Salford Quays. It gives them the opportunity to develop the media village, which will bring a lot of new talent to the north.

"Building a village such as this in Manchester city centre would be difficult, but locating it in Salford Quays allows the BBC to create a community."

Victory could trigger house price boom

THE BBC decision could trigger a property boom in Salford and across the region.

Experts say house prices could rise by as much as 5 per cent as a result of the move.

Salford would be at the heart of rocketing prices, but there would also be big benefits for areas like Hale, Bowdon, Altrincham, Wilmslow and the trendy media villages of Didsbury and Heaton Moor as TV executives from London look to relocate to the leafy suburbs within commuting distance of Salford Quays.

Some of the region's bigger estate agents are already planning to travel to London to hold presentations for the 1,500 staff who are likely to be included in the massive relocation.

They will show them the best areas the region has to offer and explain which villages' are best suited for communication, grammar schools and transport as well as good standard period homes.

Jeremy Briggs, director of Bridgford's, is based in Wilmslow and predicts big benefits for Manchester's most desirable locations.

He said: "Huge numbers of media buyers will be coming to the region on the back of this move. Most will be looking for upmarket homes in the best areas of south Manchester.

"Places like Hale, Bowdon, Altrincham, Wilmslow, Didsbury and the Heatons all stand to do very well as a result of the demand for property in the area.

"Most of those areas have excellent transport links and good schools and an excellent range of exactly the kind of period properties these London-based TV executives will be hoping to buy.

Education

"It will be simple supply and demand economics which will prevail here. House prices are inevitably going to rise because of the sudden extra interest in those areas."

The influx of TV executives will also see a bunfight for places at the region's best grammar schools with Trafford - which has a long history of public school education - probably becoming more attractive than ever.

But the Heatons, with easy access to the prestigious Stockport Grammar School, will also benefit. And there is likely to be an increase in the applications to join Manchester Grammar School too.

But it is the boom in property prices which could see already established residents in the leafy Manchester suburbs cashing in on the back of the BBC's relocation.

Mr Briggs said: "If I was going to give a guesstimate of how much the property market could benefit from this move - and there are many factors to take into account, not least the fact that 2010 is still some way off - I would have to say we would probably see an increase of about five per cent.

"There will be a huge influx of people into these areas and those already there, and looking to sell, will certainly make a healthy profit."

------

WeasteDevil

June 17th, 2006, 01:23 AM

When you think of it, although I am biased, the Salford scheme, IF they can pull it off is the best move for the city as a whole. People talk about the buzz of the city centre, but those docks used to buzz far louder than the city centre ever did, and it's about time they buzzed again. Those docks for many a year kept Manchester afloat, and they deserve the oportunity to try it again. The Quays up until now might not have been the greatest success storey in terms of architecture or quality developments, but what the hell do you expect for an inland port 35 miles from the sea linked by a canal that cannont take large container ships?

It's redevelopment takes time, of course errors have been made, and they are still making them, but at least Salford CC tried to do something there, long before the bomb. There is a lot of focus on Manchester CC and what they have done, but I doubt that without the bomb they would have done anything at all, or they would have done very little. In a way, the two councils had a simlar scenario. One (MCC) had a centre destroyed by a bomb, the other (SCC) had an area detroyed by economics and technology. People complain about the Quays as being lifeless and full of bad architecture, but what could SCC do at the time on a blank canvas?

They had a huge site to try and do something with, and thankfully they did have Peel. Otherwise, the whole lot would have been filled in and it would be a locked River Irwell. This is great news. This is what will expand the City Centre towards the Quays, Salford deserves this, as not only will it bring the buzz back to the place that probably had the biggest buzz in Manchester at one time, but it will lead to more developements to connect the two (city centre & Salford Quays) far better than Central Spine ever would have done.

Anyone that wanted central spine to win this IMO was biased and selfish in the extream. In terms of regeneration, this will do far more, yet will not give you a 200m city centre skyscraper.

Accura4Matalan

June 17th, 2006, 01:35 AM

fucking shit dtuff

Martin G

June 17th, 2006, 01:41 AM

Why the hell should everything relocate to Salford Quays anyway? It seems that is the all too easy and convenient option these days. One thing that stops me from going to the Salford Quays area / Lowry / IWMN is how hard it is to get there by bus or tram. It's completely inaccessible by rail for a start, by road it involves lots of potential snarl ups at key junctions and intersections as the road network there is hardly free-flowing is it? (All these twists and turns and roundabouts and tightly graded main routes and "boulevards"). The tram for instance takes forever and it literally crawls at speeds more like 5mph in some of the most tightly-curved sections as it weaves in and out of the whole area..... in short it's just a no man's land really all said and done.

Manchester City Centre is at least perfectly accessible by most modes of transport. I really do feel that the whole Salford Quays development is overrated in the extreme.

It's like when I was still job-searching a few years back and most of the design jobs and interviews that I had were in the Salford Quays area, it took an age to pick my way around the place and reach the actual offices by tram and then walking..... unlike when one has a car which they can just drive straight there and park outside. I'm glad that I don't have to work there now anyway.... :no:

The Longford

June 17th, 2006, 01:55 AM

http://www.brindleysharbor.com/images/water-sking.jpg

kids

June 17th, 2006, 02:22 AM

Anyone that wanted central spine to win this IMO was biased and selfish in the extream. In terms of regeneration, this will do far more, yet will not give you a 200m city centre skyscraper.

I think you're assuming that if you opted for central spine, you are denying dock nine development. Which i am most cerianly not. I just think this particular development should've gone to the city centre.

skymann

June 17th, 2006, 02:01 PM

I think you're assuming that if you opted for central spine, you are denying dock nine development. Which i am most cerianly not. I just think this particular development should've gone to the city centre.

As far as the BBC and rest of the world are concerned Manchester's docklands were chosen over the city centre - exactly the same as happened in Glasgow. The BBC are just looking for a cheap option rather than the best for media (which is really best located in metropolitan centres and not docklands IMHO). Only a complete arsehole (are shit newspaper e.g. the crap rag MEN) would describe the relocation in terms of Salford over Manchester, it's like saying White City over Central London. That is just puerile nonsense. It will still be BBC Manchester wherever it is and you can guarantee that it will be referred to as the Manchester relocation. People coming up from London will be, I think, disappointed to be stuck on let's face it the really dull Manchester docklands rather than the city centre, but money talks obviously.

I'm sad that the great designs for Dock 9 will now not be realised. I know they were conceptual but the new designs are shit - which unfortunately decribes most of the docklands buildings (Manchester's docks as well as London's). I still think we'll get great buildings at Central Spine and will do well as a media/IT centre despite the BBC not relocating there.

I will be pleased to see the dumbarse cunts at Salford Council have the smile wiped off their faces, when everything is described "Salford Quays, Manchester" this and "BBC Manchester" that, and "let's go over to the BBC Sport studios in Manchester" etc. The only positive of this is that Salford Quays will just be consolidated even more in public consciousness as Manchester and maybe the divs Councillors will start proper talks on incorporating the whole of Manchester (including Salford, Eccles, Swinton, Worsley etc.) with all the other Manchester suburbs. I am still saddened that the old elegant dock 9 scheme will be lost to Manchester forever. Oh well, such is crap that a bit of spending can achieve.

vertigosufferer

June 17th, 2006, 03:19 PM

Nice views from Salford Quays though, the backdrop for the regional news programs should be nice. At least it's only a mile away from the City Centre.

WeasteDevil

June 17th, 2006, 04:39 PM

One thing that stops me from going to the Salford Quays area / Lowry / IWMN is how hard it is to get there by bus or tram. It's completely inaccessible by rail for a start

A railway station could easily be built that would be no further from the quays than Piccadilly is from the Town Hall for example.

in short it's just a no man's land really all said and done.

Manchester City Centre is at least perfectly accessible by most modes of transport. I really do feel that the whole Salford Quays development is overrated in the extreme.

Which is why it needs a development like this. It's an anchor tenant if you like, a big player bringing lots of people in, which in turn WILL bring other people in.

unlike when one has a car which they can just drive straight there and park outside.

It's not hard to get to the Quays by car (it has the end of a motorway on its doorstep), it's definately no harder to get to than the city centre for 1/2 of the population of the metropolitan area, and there are plenty of parking spaces when it's not a matchday.

WeasteDevil

June 17th, 2006, 04:44 PM

A lot of you IMO are reacting to this in a way that Londoners react towards the rest of the country (same people in most cases that complain about London and everything being centred there). Yet most of you insist that Salford is Manchester. On the one hand Salford is Manchester when it fits your agendas, yet it isn't when it doesn't fit your agendas.

In the main it stinks of hypocrisy!

WeasteDevil

June 17th, 2006, 04:45 PM

fucking shit dtuff

If it was going to Preston you'd have your cock out right now!

The Longford

June 17th, 2006, 04:59 PM

A railway station could easily be built that would be no further from the quays than Piccadilly is from the Town Hall for example.

Was looking at some old maps of manchester docks yesterday and did you know that the railway used to come right in to Merchants Quay through a tunnel under Ordsall and reappears at Liverpool Road? That tunnel must still be there musnt it? Where is the entrance? Well gone isnt it?
There is the Eccles spur aswell that comes right up to where the meedja city is meant to be going.

jrb

June 17th, 2006, 10:12 PM

As far as the BBC and rest of the world are concerned Manchester's docklands were chosen over the city centre - exactly the same as happened in Glasgow. The BBC are just looking for a cheap option rather than the best for media (which is really best located in metropolitan centres and not docklands IMHO). Only a complete arsehole (are shit newspaper e.g. the crap rag MEN) would describe the relocation in terms of Salford over Manchester, it's like saying White City over Central London. That is just puerile nonsense. It will still be BBC Manchester wherever it is and you can guarantee that it will be referred to as the Manchester relocation. People coming up from London will be, I think, disappointed to be stuck on let's face it the really dull Manchester docklands rather than the city centre, but money talks obviously.

I'm sad that the great designs for Dock 9 will now not be realised. I know they were conceptual but the new designs are shit - which unfortunately decribes most of the docklands buildings (Manchester's docks as well as London's). I still think we'll get great buildings at Central Spine and will do well as a media/IT centre despite the BBC not relocating there.

I will be pleased to see the dumbarse cunts at Salford Council have the smile wiped off their faces, when everything is described "Salford Quays, Manchester" this and "BBC Manchester" that, and "let's go over to the BBC Sport studios in Manchester" etc. The only positive of this is that Salford Quays will just be consolidated even more in public consciousness as Manchester and maybe the divs Councillors will start proper talks on incorporating the whole of Manchester (including Salford, Eccles, Swinton, Worsley etc.) with all the other Manchester suburbs. I am still saddened that the old elegant dock 9 scheme will be lost to Manchester forever. Oh well, such is crap that a bit of spending can achieve.

Skymann. Your absolutely right about the BBC's motives. It's to save the corporation money(end of) and to offer the TV licence fee payer a better deal. Peel and Salford city council will have to do all the hard work.

The renders/models are only conceptual and will definitely change over the next 5 years. So don't worry about the current designs.

The Quays are 5 minute's from Castlefield, just like Ancoats is 10 minute's from Castlefield.(exactly) Salford Quays is Manchester. It's the same city for f***'s sake.

The dock 9 towers. As for not getting built? Don't think so matey! They stand much more of a chance now then they ever did before. Do you honestly think Peel would have built those 4 towers without a prelet? And which company or companies would have relocated from the city centre to fill those 4 towers built in such an isolated location?

As for the dumbarse cunts at Salford council having the smiles wiped off their faces? They can't be that dumb, they've just convinced the BBC to move to Salford Quays.

Pietari

June 22nd, 2006, 02:01 PM

I know that this is a contentious issue but TV coverage etc (newspapers) of the North West (and in the North West) is appaling, terrible and absolute trash IMHO.

It`s about time that it was possible to unlock the box.

Multimedia from a variety of sources - and yes including LIVERPPOL and elsewhere might just stop the downward spiral to a London centric control.

From Liverpools point of view especially I don`t think Manchester has been any better to be honest. In reality.

Now Manchester finds itself in the same `Bulls Horns` oops how did that happen? (Job losses and additional centralisation.)

Will additional production / communication jobs be moved up from London - who knows.

Is more than one communication (NEWS) point the way forward or production facilities availablity necessary?

I would say it was.

Architecty

June 22nd, 2006, 02:44 PM

It is pretty disgraceful how the Manchester based supposedly North West media is so dismissive of news from the rest of the region, especially Liverpool. The trivial nonsense about Gtr Manc that you see every night, with little or no mention of anywhere else unless it’s a murder! I’m very happy about the BBC move, I’m very happy that Granada is such a large company and is to its core Mancunian, but there is such a pattern that the rest of the country will go from hating the media’s London bias to hating the media’s London AND Manchester bias and nothing really changing. Surely Liverpool deserves its own ITV region in the same way that Yorkshire is split up so everything doesn’t just end up being about Leeds!

While I’m on the subject I was very much in the Central Spine camp, but now the dust has settled I think Salford Quays will be good in that it makes the move more plausible, because it all comes down to money and the quays site will be cheaper to develop. If ASK can find something to anchor central spine and they stick with the public spaces and colonnades shown in their bid, it will be a fantastic and quite plausibly developed area much in the Spinningfields mould.

I don’t think anyone should kid themselves though that the Media City scheme is any more than a vision, it was Peel showing off about how much land they have and giving the BBC a handy “we cant miss the opportunity” line when they mean “horary cheap brownfield”. What doesn’t seem to have been mentioned by people comparing with other media city schemes around the world is that they are government sponsored tax incentive driven schemes that basically blackmail people into moving to them out of straight economics, and not a desire for a media group hug. Ours quite frankly wouldn’t have that kind of incentive, the government for one wouldn’t destabilise the media in London, not when Canary Wharf had such a tumultuous effect on Fleet Street when it was a tax haven.

Anyway wasn’t it supposed to be today that they decided yay or nay for the move at all, political shenanigans about the licence fee if it is held up. Any bets if this or Metrolink will get decided first!

Sir Miles Platting

June 22nd, 2006, 07:01 PM

^^ You are always going to get what's perceived as 'trivial nonsense' in reporting districts in a large region, architecty.
It works both ways, eg the average person in Accrington has as much interest what goes on in Neston and vice-versa.
It's difficult for the broadcaster wherever they are based to give comprehensive coverage that will please every area. There will invariably be an occassional imbalance, but some days it depends on what is the most newsworthy story. I don't know why these arguments on local news coverage seem so precious to certain people, we have the local fishwrappers filling that role quite handily.
Trust me, there's no conspiracy, it just ain't worth the hassle!

jrb

June 24th, 2006, 10:58 PM

RICHARD BUTT: Tussle for BBC is self-defeating

SO, Salford has (probably) won the battle for the BBC's new, bigger, northern base.

The fact that the BBC wants to move children's television, sport, Radio Five Live and some other bits and bobs - plus hundreds of jobs - from London to Greater Manchester can only be good news for us.

But that news was known a long time ago.

Whether it was going to be in Manchester or Salford was a bit of a side issue, really. But it's the sort of issue that gets politicians - and some journalists - excited.

I was guilty myself. When I was Metro News's editor, I wanted to whip up an anti-Salford political story to try to support the Manchester bid for the Beeb.

After all, Metro News isn't delivered in Salford (so we can be as rude as we like about it) and the site - between Whitworth Street and the Mancunian Way - was close to our south Manchester heartland.

I tried to get readers' views. So I put one of those "What do you think?" questions in the story.

I wanted to provoke "Outraged of Burnage" to write to our letters page to say Salford was wrong, wrong, wrong.

But not one of you cared enough to respond.

You do care that the national broadcaster is moving north. You wrote on that. But you didn't really mind where.

Politicians care. They stick to their ridiculous, outdated borders. Salford's politicians are crowing now. Manchester's are downhearted. Journalists know politicians professionally and socially, so some wrongly think their feelings on such things matter so much they should be reported.

But real human beings see the bigger picture. It's good for the whole area - no matter what you call it.

It's an accident of politics that Manchester and Salford are not the same city anyway. The Irwell divides them. That's hardly the English Channel or the Himalaya.

Socially, culturally and economically, they're the same city - and so is most of the rest of Greater Manchester.

Time, money and energy are wasted in the area's different town halls competing.

Since the abolition of the Greater Manchester Council, there's no body fighting for the conurbation as a whole.

Instead, there's infighting and Greater Manchester - or whatever you want to call it - cannot punch at its true weight.

But old habits die hard. And I cannot help one last jibe.

There's no way BBC Manchester is going to change its name to BBC Salford, is there?

rolybling

June 24th, 2006, 11:02 PM

no..is the short answer to that!

b4mmy

June 24th, 2006, 11:15 PM

There's no way BBC Manchester is going to change its name to BBC Salford, is there?

No, because most people think Salford IS Manchester... they are inextricably linked and a single homogenous mass, divided only by local politics. The man in the street doesn't know one from the other. And probably doesn't care. ....neither should we, and we shouldn't allow local politicians to have us believe that its an issue. BBC 'anywhere in the region' is good for all of us.

BeardedGenius

June 25th, 2006, 12:29 PM

In the Sunday Times today. BBC staff falling over themselves to move up North, and suggestions it would be seen as a Manchester move rather than a Salford move misleading...

Salford switches on

The BBC’s plan to move more than 2,000 staff to the northwest will help speed the regeneration of this former industrial town, reports Rosie Millard

So, the sweet smell of regeneration is blowing around the waterfront of the Manchester Ship Canal at Salford, after this industrial city was chosen as the likely site for the BBC’s much-discussed relocation of key departments from London.
The plan, announced this month, is for the corporation to shunt about 1,800 staff from the capital to a new 200-acre media village in Salford Quays on the banks of the canal. Five Live, sport, new media and children’s channels are set to make the 200-mile journey from London in 2010, joining 800 staff who will be moved there from central Manchester.

A final decision is not expected until the end of this year and is tied up with the BBC’s tangled licence-fee negotiations with the government. But Salford is cock-a-hoop and the city’s estate agents, restaurateurs and bar owners are salivating at the prospect of an influx of well-heeled, Bluetoothing, sushi-eating media types.

Indeed, the city, immortalised in its industrial heyday by LS Lowry’s matchstick-men paintings, is being cheerfully reborn as a sort of Soho of the North. A sexy video package narrated by Paul “Shameless” Abbott presents “Salford Media City” as somewhere in which “industrial heritage meets 21st-century ambition” and “tomorrow’s talent has the place to dream”, whatever that means. To illustrate the point, balmy shots of children wielding television cameras alongside the canal are presented with arty impressions of what the Media City will look like come 2010.

This is not to say the BBC will plonk CBeebies, Gary Lineker, Ian Wright, Beverley Turner and the rest into a complete wasteland. Salford has already been the recipient of some serious sexing-up. The Queen went there to open the eponymous gallery for the national collection of Lowry’s work in 2000; Daniel Libeskind, the renowned architect, followed with his Imperial War Museum North; and, more prosaically, HM Revenue & Customs is relocating staff to Salford.

“It’s had a lot of regeneration and it’s becoming very fashionable,” says Keith Hollinrake from Hunters estate agency in Manchester. “The NV Buildings on Salford Quays (which boast funky interiors by Ben de Lisi) are fantastic, and apartments there are on the market for about £180,000. It wouldn’t surprise me if prices on the Quays surge by an additional 5% when the BBC moves in, and prices are already going up 6% per annum.”

With offices in York and Leeds, Hollinrake is no stranger to the magical regenerative wand that comes when large groups of workers move outside London. “We had the Ministry of Agriculture relocating staff to York in 1996, and that meant an immediate spike in prices, which went on for about a year,” he recalls.

“Families come up and disperse over a wider area, but prior to the move most people rent very close to the work space. And so for those rental properties, you have a lot of investors buying into the area because they can see an immediate potential in buy-to-let.”

Average rents around Salford Quays are about £700 a month for a two-bedder but, according to Hollinrake, are expected to rise quite sharply. Capital values are already shifting; Land Registry figures show the average cost of a house in Salford is £123,248 — 7.5% higher than last year and 1.2% up on last quarter.

Harry Johnson, a Manchester landlord, has 20 properties in Salford. “A friend has a couple of flats on Salford Quays that have been empty for ages. He was going to sell them. Now the BBC isg coming, he might well change his mind,” he says. “It will help Salford. And Manchester. Because Salford is really a suburb of Manchester. Frankly, the IRA did us a favour by blowing up the centre of Manchester (in 1996): the rebuilding of Manchester and a massive inward investment hasn’t stopped since.”

But will BBC staff willingly swap Television Centre for somewhere much, much further away from the Groucho Club? “I’ll believe it when I see it,” says one Five Live staffer, who is understandably reluctant to be named. “Without exception, every single Five Live programme editor has said in private conversation that they will never leave London. Why would you want to go and live in Salford? I suspect most of us will use it as a chance to go and work for Radio Four.”

Even the notion that Salford might be made more bearable by the arrival of hundreds of personnel is given short shrift. “There is a direct equivalent with TVC (Televison Centre),” continues my source. “Thousands of people work here, but that doesn’t change things much. Shepherd’s Bush is still a dump, isn’t it?” The BBC has said the go-ahead for the £400m move is dependent on the government agreeing to a new financial package, which includes a licence-fee settlement of 2.3% above inflation, for several years. Unfair, shout its commercial rivals, but sources within the BBC acknowledge that by tying the licence demands so tightly to the Salford relocation plan, the broadcaster may have the government over a barrel. “The government is desperate for the BBC to appear less London-centric, and to help with the regeneration of Salford,” says one source.

If its stars don’t want to play ball, Auntie could turn nasty. “If it becomes Salford or the sack, then I suspect people might become very interested in the regeneration of Greater Manchester,” says someone from the children’s department, grimly.

Not everyone is reluctant to move. Victoria Derbyshire, a Five Live presenter born in Bury, Greater Manchester, would be happy to move closer to her roots. “If it happens, I will not be protesting all the way up the M6 because I know that part of the world and my family lives there,” she says. “I would regard it very positively. However, try telling colleagues that parts of Salford are stunning, and their jaws literally hit the ground.”

Latic

June 25th, 2006, 12:40 PM

Maybe if some of them would actually bother to come up here and have a look.......
:|

The Longford

June 25th, 2006, 01:13 PM

BeardedGenius

June 25th, 2006, 01:27 PM

WeasteDevil

June 25th, 2006, 01:34 PM

After all, Metro News isn't delivered in Salford

Yes it is!

rolybling

June 25th, 2006, 02:02 PM

'former industrial town' - its a fucking city for a start and how long does something have to be 'former' before it just starts being!
:uh:
'Lowry’s matchstick-men paintings' - aaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh!
:gaah:
"Because Salford is really a suburb of Manchester." - aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
:rant: :gaah: :rant: :gaah:
"Without exception, every single Five Live programme editor has said in private conversation that they will never leave London." - GOOD! Fucking stay there you cocksucking motherfuckers!
:mad2: :mad2: :mad2: :mad2: :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash: :no: :no: :no: :no: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :moods: :moods: :moods: :moods: :gaah: :gaah: :gaah: :gaah: :nuts: :nuts: :nuts:

It does whiff a bit doesn't it..how much more patronising could it have been? I suspect not much..I'm with you Longfella, if it disturbs them that much then stay the fuck away, we don't want Hooray Henry's looking down their parochial London noses at us. FUCK THE FUCKING FUCK FUCK FUCK OFF!!

They make it sound like we're all gonna be stood at Piccadilly station waiting for the "well heeled" media types to step off the train so we can see what rich people from London look like. "Eee thats what them London types look like lass"

They fuckin infuriate me!!

The Longford

June 25th, 2006, 02:59 PM

Heard a funny story many years ago and dont know whether a) its true or b) its relevant.
The Krays (as in 'loved their mum' 'only hurt their own' 'pillars of the community' East End 'legitimate business men') were looking to expand their 'empire' and at the time Manchester had a really thriving club scene. Anyway urban legend has it that the toughest firm in London piled on a train to Manchester to check out what was up for grabs. On arriving at Piccadilly they were met by a 'welcoming commitee' of 'associates' of the Quality Street firm (notorious north Manchester gangsters, to those innocent souls amongst you) and after a couple of 'suggestions' and 'recommendations' the Krays got on the next train back to London and never bothered us again.
Take what you want from that little story and perhaps some 'senior Radio 5 producers' should take note.

rolybling

June 25th, 2006, 03:15 PM

Sounds true to me

Chogmook

June 25th, 2006, 03:29 PM

It is true indeed!

Northbeach

June 25th, 2006, 08:54 PM

^^ Heard the same story but the scene was set in Liverpool - part myth perhaps (it was recalled by a director who had just made a gangster film in liverpool - one of (if not 'the') last films made by Richard Harris.
Good story all the same.

andysimo123

June 25th, 2006, 09:46 PM

That story, I googled it and found this on wikipedia. Says its a myth but here we go.

The Quality Street gang were a gang, the principal perpetrators of organised crime in Manchester, England during the 1960s and 1970s.

In 1986, Deputy Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police John Stalker was suspended over accusations that, amongst other things, he had attended social events at which members of the gang were present. Stalker was later cleared.

A widely repeated urban myth relates that in the 1960s, notorious London gangsters the Kray twins set out for Manchester to establish a hold on the city. The story goes that following a meeting between the Quality Street gang and Greater Manchester Police, the Krays were greeted at Manchester Piccadilly station, by massed ranks of police and local gangsters who turned them round and put them back on the train to London.

jrb

June 25th, 2006, 10:03 PM

One thing some of you have over looked.

Once the first way of southern Luvvies have retired or returned to London, their places will be filled by Northern BBC staff or Northern media graduates. Think long term and push that Northern McCain oven chip off your shoulder. :)

kebabmonster

June 25th, 2006, 10:13 PM

1) Londoner's won't know the difference between Salford and Manchester. People from Oldham and Bolton think that Salford is in Manchester, so I can't see the metropoli being better informed.

2) The metro is widely distributed in Salford, mainly at train stations and the receptions of offices.

3) JRB is right. Once the original southern based staff have gone to pastures new (London/Manchester/elsewhere) then the posts will be up for grabs.

4) Mark Garner's take on the QSG/Kray twins tete a tete: http://www.manchesterconfidential.co.uk/index.asp?Sessionx=IpqiNwY6JWIoNwB6JpqiNwA

The Longford

June 25th, 2006, 10:16 PM

Sorry to be a pedant but the word myth is often mis used. A myth doesnt necessarily mean something isnt true.
For something to become a myth it just means that it is a story that has been perhaps exaggerated or changed. Many myths (even urban ones) have an element of truth in them and in fact as many myths derive from a direct truth as they do from untruths.
This story maybe a myth but that doesnt mean it didnt happen!

The Longford

June 25th, 2006, 10:21 PM

2) The metro is widely distributed in Salford, mainly at train stations and the receptions of offices.

I think you are getting the crappy little blue top Metro,that litters the buses, and The Metro News which is like the 'Best of" the MEN which comes out on a Thursday and which doesnt get delivered in Salford (for some strange reason!) mixed up.

kebabmonster

June 25th, 2006, 11:28 PM

I am getting mixed up.

The letters page of the blue-top Metro can be a right hoot though. And it keeps the Scallies occupied on the bus, they can now rip up and throw about the newspaper, instead of slashing seats.

Pietari

June 26th, 2006, 10:14 AM

On the plus side `TV Centre` Sheperds Bush IS A DUMP.................

Perhaps once some of the hapless `get it on up north` they will discover a different country and have a better and more meaningful life and programmes will change for the better.

ie: Get a life.

Salford Merseyside is definately making progress. :scouserd: :)

frozenmusic

June 26th, 2006, 10:50 AM

The Longford

June 26th, 2006, 11:42 AM

Either way it’s surely a glorification of gangster culture of the same order that you berate when applied to the Kray's?
Surely!
As i said - take what you will from the story but my point was that southerners have a pre conceived idea of the north and the BBC is some how lowering itself by coming here. The analogy was that the arrogant southerers may get a shock when they arrive - not in the form of 'lovable' gangsters but in the fact that Manchester is a culturaly rich place and that their quality of life (and perhaps the BBC's output) improves.

jrb

June 29th, 2006, 12:27 PM

From todays MEN.

Would Howard be saying the same thing if Central Spine had won? I think not!
Not the time to rock the boat Howard.

Anyway, was it really down to rent? If so, and if the prize was so big, why couldn't Argent match the rentals being offered by Peel? They own most of the Central Spine site don't they?

BBC's move north 'may never happen'
David Ottewell

SALFORD: How bid might look.THE Manchester team defeated by Salford in the race to host the BBC's "big move north" has warned the switch may never happen.

Sir Howard Bernstein, chief executive of Manchester council, said the fact that the government had postponed a new licence fee deal "increased the risk" that the corporation would cancel the relocation. And he said it had "never been a done deal".

The Manchester Evening News revealed earlier this month how the BBC had chosen a site in Salford Quays ahead of a rival site in Manchester centre as the leading bidder for a new headquarters, intended to host five departments and 1,500 staff.

Advertisement your story continues below

But the corporation stressed at the time that the move still depended on a satisfactory deal with the government on a new licence fee.
A decision on that issue, originally due next month, has now been put back until October.

Sir Howard said: "I think that we can take from this that the discussion about the licence fee is not going very well.

'Affordability'

"The move was always going to be subject to affordability - and therefore the postponement must increase the risk that the BBC will not formally commit to relocation. This has never been a done deal."

Sir Howard revealed that he had received a letter from BBC director-general Mark Thompson, making it clear that a final decision had not been made and that the intention was only to have a period of exclusive talks with Salford.

But he admitted he considered it "unlikely" Mr Thompson's team would wish to restart negotiations with Manchester at a later date.

Council leader Sir Richard Leese said he had "no intention of falling out" with Salford over the BBC decision.

"All the evidence we have is that from an operational point of view, in terms of recruiting and retaining staff and linking the northern operation to London and other places, the city centre site was far, far superior to any other," he said. "What we always knew was that in pure rental terms, we were never likely to be able to compete on cost with an out-of-city-centre site.

"That leads me to the conclusion that price had a very definite effect on the BBC's decision - but this is conjecture."

rolybling

June 29th, 2006, 01:01 PM

The sad fact is jerb, the BBC has had their excuse in place(licence fee) since the very begining. I've always had a sneaking feeling they would be using that excuse one day. My fear is they won't move here at all or if they do it will be considerably scaled down from any "Media City" we're all expecting. History speaks for itself and history tells us the BBC have always been reluctant to put their money where their mouth is when it comes to the regions. It would be dispicable of them to use the licence fee as a way to back out at any time, the Govt has told them to make themselves less London centric so in turn the BBC ask for an inflation busting hike in the licence fee knowing damn well its unlikely they will get it. And while they ponce around with this decision Council Tax payers money in Manchester and Salford has been poured into their proposals to lure the BBC here, when in the back of the Beebs mind, they probably had no intention of coming here in the first place. Oh dear.

WeasteDevil

June 29th, 2006, 09:25 PM

What type of revenue does the licence fee bring in each year, I don't have a clue? 2 billion quid is it at a guess? How much is this move costing 400 million? 20% of a year's income? It's not exactly a lot of money in the great scheme of things is it - 5% of the licence fee income over the four year period it is supposed to take.

majormystery

June 30th, 2006, 10:39 AM

In 2004 the BBC license fee income was £2.94bn. In addition BBC worldwide (its commercial arm) recently reported profits for the last year of £89m on a turnover of £784m.

URBANISER

June 30th, 2006, 11:29 AM

Talk about sour grapes from Berny and Leese! Michael Grade less than a month ago stated that the BBC was determined that the Manchester move would happen. He said (rough quote from alcohol stained memory!) "even if we don't get all we want as far as the licence fee is concerned we will if necessary 're prioritise' to ensure the manchester move happens. This move is very important for the BBC"

jrb

July 27th, 2006, 08:05 PM

Security fears 'critical' in battle for the Beeb

SECURITY concerns were "critical" in the decision that meant Manchester missed out on hosting the BBC in its move north, it emerged today.

BBC bosses wanted to stop public vehicles parking near the proposed northern headquarters - now to be based in Salford.

And they tried to negotiate a get-out clause with Manchester that would have allowed them to ditch a 15-year rental agreement after just five years - leaving taxpayers having to cover potential losses of £50m.

Advertisement your story continues below
The revelations were contained in a report by Sir Howard Bernstein, chief executive of Manchester council.

The document also raises "concerns" that the North West Development Agency - the quango that controls cash for major projects - may have "failed to exercise an active role" by saying which site would have been better for the region's economy.

The M.E.N. reported earlier this month how the BBC decided on Salford Quays as the preferred bidder for a new northern base hosting five departments and 1,500 staff.

Sir Howard's new report, based on a debrief by corporation officials, says that cost "was not the absolute driver".

It listed a number of reasons Salford was chosen, including higher-specification studio design and cheaper land rent.

Relative

The report claims "the relative position of the Salford and Manchester bids changed during stage two" of the bidding process and that the Manchester site would have generated £3.3bn gross value added and closed the north-south gap by three per cent in 10 years.

Sir Richard Leese, leader of the council, said: "Manchester's bid still remains, in my view, the best for the economy of the north west by a significant amount.

"The BBC governors went for an island site rather than an integrated city centre site. They have done something similar in White City and it has not worked at all well. Why they would want to repeat that I don't know."

It is the second time Manchester council has fallen out with the agency, which was involved in a report recommending Blackpool, not Manchester, should get Britain's only super-casino.

Steven Broomhead, chief executive of the NWDA, said: "Our primary concern is to make sure that the BBC's planned relocation happens and brings with it maximum economic benefit."

jrb

July 31st, 2006, 11:12 AM

It's getting messy?

Stop squabbling on BBC jobs, says bishop

THE BISHOP of Manchester has warned that squabbling between Manchester and Salford councils could scupper the BBC's move to the north.

The Right Rev Nigel McCulloch - who sits on a House of Lords committee on the BBC - said it was vital the two authorities now unite behind proposals to move 1,500 jobs to Greater Manchester.

He spoke out after Manchester council leader Sir Richard Leese continued to criticise the choice of a site in Salford Quays as the preferred location for the BBC's northern HQ.

Sir Richard said a rival Manchester site would have been better for the local economy "by a significant amount".

The council boss also said BBC governors were making the same mistake with Salford Quays as they had when they chose the isolated out-of-town White City site for one of its main London bases.

Mr McCulloch said the BBC's move north was still not a "done deal" and Manchester should now accept and support the decision of the BBC governors.

Excellent

"The autumn outcome of tense negotiations over the new licence fee will be the determining factor," he said. "That is why the cities of Manchester and Salford must be united in promoting the plan.

"As a member of the House of Lords select committee on the BBC charter review, I listened to their two bids. Manchester put an excellent case, and Salford's submission was excellent, too.

"When their representatives sat before us, they were emphatic about each supporting the BBC's decision - whichever way it went. That promise really must be kept. Lack of unity at this crucial stage could provide a ready excuse for the BBC to pull out."

The BBC decided earlier this month on Salford Quays as the preferred site for a new northern HQ, with 1,500 staff and five departments. A rival bid by Manchester, based in the city centre, was rejected. A final decision on the move will only be made after the BBC and the government agree on a future licence fee.

Yesterday Sir Richard and his Salford counterpart, John Merry, both stressed they were committed to bringing the BBC north for the good of the region.

Sir Richard said: "We are not falling out with Salford. We are committed to working with Salford on things of joint economic benefit."

Coun Merry said: "Salford is committed to delivering the benefits of the project for the whole of the Greater Manchester area and the north west."

Farsight

July 31st, 2006, 05:30 PM

Good stuff, thanks for posting that jrb.

WeasteDevil

August 2nd, 2006, 02:49 PM

GShutty

August 2nd, 2006, 05:30 PM

It's sour grapes is what it is. Manchester constantly claiming the Greater Manchester area as its own when it benefits them directly, yet treating it as something different when it doesn't get what it wants. The fact of the matter is that MCC wants to have all of the pie and fuck off the rest. It's not too disimilar to their harping on about the Trafford Centre, and their outragous objections to Salford RLFCs new stadium project.

No wonder the likes of Liverpool are suspicious of them, they'll even shit on their own front doorstep.

I've got to agree with you Weaste and it disappoints me immensely. Many people in the North and the rest of the UK complain and with some justification that everything in the UK goes to London- take the Motorshow that used to be at the excellent NEC. It would be a shame if the same situation was created in the NW, where everything went to Manchester.

It was rather heart-warming to see the majority of people on the Manchester Forum, voicing the merits of the Blackpool Casino bid. Whilst I actually disagreed with this (that's another story altogether), it was good to see that people wanted to spread the wealth.

The Longford

August 2nd, 2006, 05:48 PM

Isaac Newell

August 2nd, 2006, 05:56 PM

Amen.

Sir Miles Platting

August 2nd, 2006, 06:07 PM

^^ 'kinell....enuff of the hair-shirts and self-flagellation already!

Most Mancs are not self-centric. It's just not our style.

Sir Howard is merely stating a well-informed opinion.

Unfortunately it comes across as sour grapes.... ;)

GShutty

August 3rd, 2006, 09:48 AM

Yes i agree.
multi million pound flats in Manchester are all very well but you could buy streets of houses in Burnley for the same money. Lets spread the love a bit more.
I actually prefer being a northerner than a Manc (or salfordian if you are being pedantic or even a MaccLad if you are being really really pedantic) and dont want Manchester to be a cultural ghetto at the detriment to everywhere else.
Two Pints of lager is bobbins but i like the fact its set in Runcorn. Likewise i really enjoyed All Quiet in the Preston Front because you never see that part of the world on the telly.
I'm a bit tired of endless programmes set in Manchester to be honest.
I wouldnt even mind of they were set in Salford FFS.
Manchester is becoming a bit of cliche and if was a Prestonian, Wiganer, or Blackburner i would start to resent Manchester a bit.

I think an 'epicentre/engine room' for a region is important and probably necessary, but the Northwest is lucky enough to have several large towns and 2 great cities, (Liverpool and Manchester) and if all of these can create a positive impact on the region, then I believe the region will function much more effectively and more fair than for example, dictating that Manchester has all of the responsibility and rewards that the NW can offer.

As I said in an earlier post the last thing we should be looking to do is replicating the UK/London situation on a regional scale.

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 02:36 PM

I think an 'epicentre/engine room' for a region is important and probably necessary, but the Northwest is lucky enough to have several large towns and 2 great cities, (Liverpool and Manchester) and if all of these can create a positive impact on the region, then I believe the region will function much more effectively and more fair than for example, dictating that Manchester has all of the responsibility and rewards that the NW can offer.

As I said in an earlier post the last thing we should be looking to do is replicating the UK/London situation on a regional scale.

Firstly, power has to taken from London and the South East. These people know sweet FA of anything north of Watford and contemptuous of anyone that doesn't have a south east accent. They have presided over the industrial decline of the UK because the power became in the hands of the largely rural south – the inmates ran the asylum.

Over a period of time the London-Oxford-Cambridge power triangle gained power by siphoning wealth, power and decisions to the south. In the UK the power lay in the south east. The Home counties are the counties are those that but onto London, their arrogance is so. The other countries are Away counties that do not matter too much, except to shoot some grouse and make and grow things for them.

In the 1800s Liverpool for a short time rivalled London in wealth - this alarmed them as this meant the power may move north. Wealth does not always mean power, but wealth can lead to power – alarm bells rang in the southern powerbase. Pre WW2 Liverpool and Manchester in total were wealthier than London, with smaller populations in total - this was alarming to the southern power mongers. The top military, judiciary, education, civil service and monarchy are all run by public school/Oxbridge types, who are predominantly southerners – bumpkins. The British Establishment, “the power that need not speak its name”, as Enoch Powel described it. Elected governments can come and go, but they are always there maintaining the status quo, which currently suits them.

The north of England and Midlands was neglected. Post WW2 Germany and Japan concentrated on industrial education, training and investment. The UK spent little on this in comparison. They boomed while the UK, the first and founder of the industrial revolution, declined as an industrial might. All contrived, no accident.

Felixstowe was little more than a village in the early 1960s. Tory money tried to kill Liverpool and the port of Manchester, by creating a large southern port and character assassinating the city of Liverpool and its people - they hate the place. From the city of the loveable mop tops to a bunch of thieves and lazy bastards if you read the organ of Little Middle England, the Daily Mail. Geoffrey Howe wrote a paper, "Managing the decline of Liverpool as a major Metropolitan area". The decline of Liverpool was contrived. Derek Hatton and others fought back.

Hamburg is Europe's second largest port and Germany's second richest city - yet 68 miles from the sea – which dismisses the notion that Manchester is too far from the sea, at 46 miles, to have a successful port and cannot handle large ships – it can and could. Panamax container ships cannot get to Hamburg, they can dock at Liverpool and the new post-Panamax container ships are to be accommodated in Liverpool too. Hamburg can only handle by modern standards small ships.

The city of Hamburg is a city state, it controls itself and makes many of its own laws within the federal framework – decisions that matter in the UK has to go via London. Berlin, Hamburg and Bremen are federal city states. The city of Hamburg is a federal region in Germany - one of 16. Ironically the British Labour party helped set this up in 1949. If they had done the same for Liverpool, one of the largest ports in the world (the Mersey, all from Liverpool up to Manchester was the biggest in the world by far) Liverpool would today have been one Europe's richest cities and prevented the southern focused Tories from trying to kill it. When Liverpool does well it cascades to the rest of the North West.

The largest ships in the world for 30 years were the Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth, both owned by a Liverpool company and had Liverpool on the stern. Not one of these ships ever sailed up the Mersey, as they were forbidden to do so because of a government contract that said they had to use a southern port.

The point? Power has to be taken from London; most in the North West agree with that. The dead paw of London has to be removed. A large port like Liverpool, a unique city with a very different cosmopolitan mix of people in origin, should be its own city state, as it knows its own business and how to project it, like Hamburg has done. The rest of the North West is more intertwined and culturally similar and can be run via Preston, Manchester or Salford. All fits.

Isaac Newell

August 3rd, 2006, 02:55 PM

But the people in power are mainly from outside London. The Chancellor, the Deputy Prime Minister, The Prime Minister, The Foreign Secretary, The Home Secretary. All from outside the South East.

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 03:25 PM

But the people in power are mainly from outside London. The Chancellor, the Deputy Prime Minister, The Prime Minister, The Foreign Secretary, The Home Secretary. All from outside the South East.

The institutions of power are all south east based. The above are all come today gone tomorrow politicians. As long as they maintain the status quo that is fine. Power resides outside party politicians. This is the power that needs severing from the rest of the country. The dead paw of the predominantly South East based British establishment. The odd outsider is there - they cajole them and make them a part of their sphere if they think they will upset the boat, the British way.

Understand how the UK works. Who are the greatest benefactors? Read Jeremy Paxman’s book Who Runs Britain. He pulls punches at points but all is there. Eton/Harrow old boys are in the positions of influence and power, in the military, judiciary, the Monarchy, civil service. It appears the rest of are so thick we can’t do these jobs. Only two schools matter and two universities matter as well, Oxbridge. The system is slow and can be slowed or even stopped at times by those of influence. The power and influence is firmly in the South East and they have made sure well over 100 years that it remains so, even if it means casting off wealth in other regions to remain grasping onto power.

Nothing of any significance is outside: media, military headquarters, research establishments.

John Major was put up there as a PR exercise. Lived in Brixton they said. He did at one point, but from a firm middle class background which was understated. Did he appoint people of his own type? No, mainly Oxbridge public school types. If he was to he would not be put there. Thatcher said she wanted a meritocracy – and did put the odd grammar school boy in a position of power. Your final education didn’t matter, only what school you went to up when you went to university. You could have a 1st class honours from Keele uni and went to a good Comp, you are rated well below the non-performer from Eton. This Thatcher meritocracy appealed to the middle classes of working class origin. Did we get one? No. It was exactly the same when she left as when she got in. The British establishment were glad to see the back of Thatcher as much as the working class outside the South East, as she may have carried out what she promised and their gravy train de-railed.

Banana republics are run better.

STUBBY

August 3rd, 2006, 03:46 PM

[QUOTE=City on The Water]The institutions of power are all south east based. The above are all come today gone tomorrow politicians. As long as they maintain the status quo that is fine.

If you think that power in Britain is public school and Oxbridge biased then you're absolutely right!! Not forgetting the Scots who seem to have a remarkably large number of cabinet ministers in the government at the moment!! Blair is Scottish but this must be just a coincidence of course!

Isaac Newell

August 3rd, 2006, 03:54 PM

That would be all well and good if we didn't live in a global economy. Power rests in multinational corporations and the media. Oxford and Cambridge are centres of academic excellence of world renown and are themselves "multinational"

Hamburg is a poor example as it is the London of Germany. It is where a similar "establishment" as the one you describe in London resides. It pushed and tried to bully Bismark into creating a German mercantile empire to match the British Empire. Bismark wasn't that interested. The fact that it became a state on it's own suggests it was able to pursue it's own interests within the corridors of power.

Felixstowe is closer to London than Liverpool and more importantly faces Rotterdam, it's in an ideal spot to build a container port. New ports where also outside the National Dock Labour Scheme making them Union free. The London Docks were just as unionised as the Liverpool ones.

Private capital will always try to avoid unions. In Germany they have to sit down with the unions. It's not regionalism that helps the German worker, it's the level playing field provided by the central state.

Container ports don't really need any dockers, they can probably be worked by robots, after all it's just lifting boxes from one ship and stacking them up before unstacking them and placing them on another ship/train/truck.

The size of vessel will and journey times will decide where a port goes, and these will be decided in the offices of Evergreen and China shipping, not in a Pall Mall club.

majormystery

August 3rd, 2006, 03:55 PM

Don't most people in Liverpool think the council is not pulling its weight? If so then why award it with greater powers.
Personally I'm a believer of the saying if its not broken don't fix it. And both Manchester and LIverpool are prospering pretty well at the moment in my eyes.

majormystery

August 3rd, 2006, 03:58 PM

It's not regionalism that helps the German worker, it's the level playing field provided by the central state.

Try telling that to the 4 and a half million workers on the dole over in Germany.

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 04:15 PM

City on The Water:The institutions of power are all south east based. The above are all come today gone tomorrow politicians. As long as they maintain the status quo that is fine.

If you think that power in Britain is public school and Oxbridge biased then you're absolutely right!! Not forgetting the Scots who seem to have a remarkably large number of cabinet ministers in the government at the moment!! Blair is Scottish but this must be just a coincidence of course!

To the southern Psyche a Scotsman is neutral. Notice you never see an ee-by-gum north of England accent in top politics.

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 04:19 PM

Don't most people in Liverpool think the council is not pulling its weight? If so then why award it with greater powers.

This is so. A new city state administration would be a different assembly.

Personally I'm a believer of the saying if its not broken don't fix it. And both Manchester and LIverpool are prospering pretty well at the moment in my eyes.

It is broke. There is boom, so the north get some of the crumbs of this. The regeneration of Liverpool/Manchester is just catch up after 30 or 40 years. No real advancement. When the economy contracts then see. What we see now is fools gold, it will not be there for very long with the system we have.

Isaac Newell

August 3rd, 2006, 04:20 PM

Try telling that to the 4 and a half million workers on the dole over in Germany.

May have something to do with unification and trying to integrate the east. Either way 4 million unemployed illustrates that even in a decentralised political system, some regions do better than others.

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 04:23 PM

May have something to do with unification and trying to integrate the east. Either way 4 million unemployed illustrates that even in a decentralised political system, some regions do better than others.

Re-unification has a lot to do with it. A hell of a burden. 4 million out of 85 million is not as great as it looks. Germany is still short of certain skills. and free borders does not help the dole queue. Poles flood over the border. It will all settle down in time.

majormystery

August 3rd, 2006, 04:24 PM

May have something to do with unification and trying to integrate the east. Either way 4 million unemployed illustrates that even in a decentralised political system, some regions do better than others.

The reason the unemployment is so high is because the unions have too much power. Its too difficult to lay off employees when companies hit hard times or even if someone isnt pulling their weight. So as a result they are reluctant to take them on in the first place.

Awayo

August 3rd, 2006, 04:28 PM

To the southern Psyche a Scotsman is neutral. Notice you never see an ee-by-gum north of England accent in top politics.

http://www.whiskyclassified.com/JohnPrescott.jpg

Isaac Newell

August 3rd, 2006, 04:30 PM

The reason the unemployment is so high is because the unions have too much power. Its too difficult to lay off employees when companies hit hard times or even if someone isnt pulling their weight. So as a result they are reluctant to take them on in the first place.

That is a valid reason. If everyone in Manchester and Liverpool offered to work for nothing and without any regard for health and safety. There would be a boom.

majormystery

August 3rd, 2006, 04:36 PM

This is so. A new city state administration would be a different assembly.
Might be a slightly different setup but it would be much the same faces. You cant assume performance would be any different.

It is broke. There is boom, so the north get some of the crumbs of this. The regeneration of Liverpool/Manchester is just catch up after 30 or 40 years. No real advancement. When the economy contracts then see. What we see now is fools gold, it will not be there for very long with the system we have.

I disagree. Personally i think the north would be better shielded against a slowdown than the south. People have a lower level of personal debt and house prises are not as overblown.
In years gone by its the deterioration of manufacturing that has hit hard. That same reliance isn't here any more.

b4mmy

August 3rd, 2006, 04:46 PM

I think its true that personal debt commitments are lower 'up north' than 'down south' and that we can afford to take a hit slightly more than your average Londoner. Maybe. However in my humble experience if there is a severe downturn in trade and industry the econmomy tends to shrink back to London, rather than have pockets of 'safe' areas. Things that start to go are services, transport, grants, regeneration, etc... all these things are easier swallowed if sucked from smaller areas, and then progressively to larger ones. London will be the last place in the UK to give up its maintenence commitments...

Even if London has a hosepipe ban you can gurantee that they will impose one in the South West, or the Midlands first... and probably even if those areas didn't actually need one. Mark my words. The time is coming.

majormystery

August 3rd, 2006, 04:55 PM

If a recession of that magnitude comes along what evidence is there that having city regions will be better equipped to deal with it than the present setup.

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 05:03 PM

That would be all well and good if we didn't live in a global economy. Power rests in multinational corporations and the media. Oxford and Cambridge are centres of academic excellence of world renown and are themselves "multinational"

The global economy has been around for 300 years. During the US Civil war half a million people in Lancashire were on starvation levels as no cotton was coming in due to the Northern blockade of the south.

Hamburg is a poor example as it is the London of Germany.

It is not the London of Germany. Germany has no counterpart to London, as the federal system spreads power.

It is where a similar "establishment" as the one you describe in London resides. It pushed and tried to bully Bismark into creating a German mercantile empire to match the British Empire. Bismark wasn't that interested. The fact that it became a state on it's own suggests it was able to pursue it's own interests within the corridors of power.

That is now ancient history. The current successful German admin comes from 1949 and the British Labour party were instrumental in setting it up.

Felixstowe is closer to London than Liverpool and more importantly faces Rotterdam, it's in an ideal spot to build a container port. New ports where also outside the National Dock Labour Scheme making them Union free. The London Docks were just as unionised as the Liverpool ones.

Not at one point has UK trade with Europe exceed trade outside since 1973. A large container ship travelling an extra few hundred mile after crossing the Atlantic is nothing. Felixstowe is in the middle of nowhere. No industry around it. And you are right, it was a scab port. It was set up to kill Liverpool – a massive deep water port with a large container base and facilities for every type of cargo handling, and first class road and rail infrastructure. And when you take into account all the Mersey ports up to Manchester…. Why? It wasn’t unions as the Daily Mail spouted.

Unions had nothing to do with it, they ran nothing and never made decisions. Unions only ever responded to the results of poor management, or poor government decisions. Thatcher neutralised unions, and a Tory Utopia of prosperity would emerge – the economy went further downhill with longer dole lines. So, it wasn’t unions.

Private capital will always try to avoid unions.

No it doesn’t. Unions were intertwined in Scandinavia and Germany, they never had problems. British management was poor. Poorly educated and trained with the wrong attitude. You have been reading the Daily mail too much.

In Germany they have to sit down with the unions. It's not regionalism that helps the German worker, it's the level playing field provided by the central state.

The unions do mesh in with the management and it worked. UK management and one political party fiercely resisted this, despite is a proven success. The federal state makes the difference. Local people knowing their own business and which way to point for the future. A massive success.

Container ports don't really need any dockers, they can probably be worked by robots, after all it's just lifting boxes from one ship and stacking them up before unstacking them and placing them on another ship/train/truck.

Someone has to stuff and strip the boxes. Not all ship traffic is containers. There is much other types of cargo, bulks, liquids, and some which still needs the man in the hold to get it in and out.

The size of vessel will and journey times will decide where a port goes, and these will be decided in the offices of Evergreen and China shipping, not in a Pall Mall club.

Very large Post-Panamax vessels will decide the viability of an area. These are so big they currently only operate in the Pacific. They need large terminals and a there will only be a few of them because of cost. What will be the most costly aspect of the transportation of a container will be the road/rail aspect either end – and some sea costs too in smaller off-loaded container ships. North America to Ireland containers will be via post-Panamax to Liverpool and off loaded to smaller container ship to cross the Irish sea – no direct North America-Ireland ships. Some smaller ships will go to the likes of Cardiff, Scotland etc. This means that towns near the terminals will have cheaper freight. In the old days transportation was expensive, so manufacturing towns were in easy reach of ports. Fuel costs are rising making transportation from remote ports inland more expensive. The towns local to a large Post-Pamamax terminals will benefit – like the whole of the North West to Liverpool. When Liverpool succeeds so do all around. The UK will probably only have one post-Panamax terminal and that looks like Liverpool as the plans for the extension have been submitted and work about to start.

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 05:04 PM

If a recession of that magnitude comes along what evidence is there that having city regions will be better equipped to deal with it than the present setup.

Look at Germany.

majormystery

August 3rd, 2006, 05:16 PM

Look at Germany.

Germany is experiencing far slower growth than the rest of Europe. But its not in a recession.

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 05:24 PM

Might be a slightly different setup but it would be much the same faces. You cant assume performance would be any different.

You can. The regime and setup would be very different and more accountability too. A council can be elected out this appears to have eluded you.

I disagree. Personally i think the north would be better shielded against a slowdown than the south. People have a lower level of personal debt and house prises are not as overblown.
In years gone by its the deterioration of manufacturing that has hit hard. That same reliance isn't here any more.

Not so. The south has more expendable income that the north. The north-south divide is still very much a reality.

We are in a boom. People are trying to make the best of it before it goes. It will drop off, it always does. All this construction in Liverpool and Manchester will drop off, it will not happen forever. Manchester is grabbing all money with both hands and at times not thinking too much about what they do. Liverpool has many restrictions with large swathes of the city centre and docks areas World Heritage sites, with buffer zones around them too. Nothing is easy to get done, with English Heritage objecting to just about everything. Manchester has a free hand.

There again, imposed quangos are setup to interfere, like Liverpool Vision. Undemocratic bodies like Liverpool Vision and English Heritage can stand in the way of a democratically elected authority. A democratic city state would do the lot themselves and be accountable in many ways for their actions.

What pisses people off about Liverpool council is that there is no master plan for the docks waterway regeneration - a scope document. An Amsterdam can be easily created at Liverpool. Tin-pot tat developers come along and want histotic 1700s waterways and docks filled in to gain easy ground to build cheap tat on. If the Amsterdam council tried to fill in a canal there would be riots.

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 05:38 PM

Germany is experiencing far slower growth than the rest of Europe. But its not in a recession.

You are missing the point. It is the systems. Theirs is far superior. Quoting supercial figures which may change by the month is meaningless. It is the overall long term performance that matters and how it serves the people, and the Germans since WW2 totally outstripped us. That is in economic performance. The local assemblies determine the quality of life for the locals and are good at that.

The Kings Dock development in Liverpool required the approval of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (the dead paw of London) - this would not happen in Germany.

The UK has the pokiest and oldest housing stock in the western world – swathes of back-to-back terraces are still around. It is the Stalinist planning system that does this. Only 7.5% of the land is settled. We pay far too much for tiny cheap tatty boxes. You don’t see such poor housing Germany. Houses in Germany are far bigger and less expensive and they have the same population density as the UK.

Each region sets its own planning, not directed by central government and quotas. The free market decided in Germany, in the UK it is central dictated quotas. So we end up with the most pokey, expensive to buy and heat homes in the developed world. The poor UK system created this.

majormystery

August 3rd, 2006, 05:40 PM

You can. The regime and setup would be very different and more accountability too. A council can be elected out this appears to have eluded you.

Its the first time an election has been mentioned so why assume it has eluded me?
My point was just because something can change, doesnt mean that it will.

Not so. The south has more expendable income that the north. The north-south divide is still very much a reality.

Much of the South is mortgaged up to its eyeballs. If a recession hits that expendable income will dissapear very quickly and people are left with houses which are worth less than they owe on it.

No comment on English Heritage as its been done to death.

Isaac Newell

August 3rd, 2006, 05:42 PM

Recessions hit poor people hardest, no matter where they live. They cut tax revenues and thus not only does industry suffer but those reliant on public services.
The trouble with the North of England is that it has not fully adjusted from previous recessions and allied to this, has a high proportion of "victims" of these previous recessions who are dependant on state aid. Not only are the workers facing reduced circumstances but the non workers are also seeing their income reduced.
Only when the North gets plugged into the emerging industries will it be able to move forward. These are not engineering or ship building or car manufacturing as these can be done elsewhere for cheap. It needs to be something brand new, not seen yet.
The North needs lower income tax than the south, lower interest rates, and less regulation. But it needs high income to cover it's welfare bill.
It needs independance but it also needs handouts.

Isaac Newell

August 3rd, 2006, 05:47 PM

It is not the London of Germany. Germany has no counterpart to London, as the federal system spreads power.

Power is in the hands of those with money, America is Federal but it still has a rustbelt and it's boardrooms are generally situated in New York.

majormystery

August 3rd, 2006, 05:47 PM

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 08:58 PM

Its the first time an election has been mentioned so why assume it has eluded me?
My point was just because something can change, doesnt mean that it will.

Conversely because something is the way it is doesn't mean it states that way. Democracy ensures change if need be. This is quite fundamental schoolboy stuff.

Much of the South is mortgaged up to its eyeballs. If a recession hits that expendable income will dissapear very quickly and people are left with houses which are worth less than they owe on it.

That is one view which has been echoed over 40 years and it has never happened.

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 09:02 PM

The North needs lower income tax than the south, lower interest rates, and less regulation.

A federal system ensures this. The local regions, or city states, can tax and not tax. As in Germany.

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 09:04 PM

Power is in the hands of those with money, America is Federal but it still has a rustbelt and it's boardrooms are generally situated in New York.

and?

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 09:15 PM

Britain has outgrown the major economies of Europe for the past 15 years. Its GDP is now greater than Italy and France, having previously fallen behind both of these. The gap between the British and German economies is far smaller than in the past too.

The UK is playing catchup. Until we sort out the pathetic system we have we will continue to play catchup. The Germans have a higher standard of living than us, a high quality of life too. Even after absorbing a country of 15 million with antiquated industry.

The averaged sized new home in the UK is a paltry British 76 square metres, while in Germany with a similar population density new homes are 109 square metres, nearly half as much again in size. In the Netherlands 115 square metres and in Denmark 137 square metres. Danish rooms are twice as big as the hutches now on offer in the United Kingdom. In Japan, a country once notorious for small homes, the average sized new home is now 140 square metres.

The averaged size living room in the UK is a miniscule 13 foot by 15 foot; a room which has to function as TV room, children’s play room, entertainment room and relaxation room. If the averaged sized man stands in the middle of a typical British living room and stretched out an arm he will hit either a wall or ceiling. British TV has many programmes dedicated to giving a larger feel to a room by careful choice of furnishing and colour co-ordination. People attempt to create an impression of space in undersized homes.

The housing charity, Shelter, estimate 500,000 households are officially overcrowded.

Yet you still wish to copy what they are doing?

You bet your boots I do. It is best you read the first posts of mine on this and understand the points. Don’t feel as if you have to respond even though you don’t fully understand something.

Liam-Manchester

August 3rd, 2006, 10:10 PM

You are missing the point. It is the systems. Theirs is far superior. Quoting supercial figures which may change by the month is meaningless. It is the overall long term performance that matters and how it serves the people, and the Germans since WW2 totally outstripped us. That is in economic performance. The local assemblies determine the quality of life for the locals and are good at that.

The Kings Dock development in Liverpool required the approval of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (the dead paw of London) - this would not happen in Germany.

The UK has the pokiest and oldest housing stock in the western world – swathes of back-to-back terraces are still around. It is the Stalinist planning system that does this. Only 7.5% of the land is settled. We pay far too much for tiny cheap tatty boxes. You don’t see such poor housing Germany. Houses in Germany are far bigger and less expensive and they have the same population density as the UK.

Each region sets its own planning, not directed by central government and quotas. The free market decided in Germany, in the UK it is central dictated quotas. So we end up with the most pokey, expensive to buy and heat homes in the developed world. The poor UK system created this.

I agree with your point about housing- I was actually thinking about the huge number of people in the UK still living in tiny back-to-back terraces just the other day. It's ridiculous that so many are still living in such cramped victorian terraced houses when they were actually built for the factory workers of the late 19th century. Surely those standards are not good enough in today's day and age. After all, the UK is the 5th largest economy in the World having just been surpassed by China. Such a powerful nation economically should certainly be offering its people higher standards of housing.

City on The Water

August 3rd, 2006, 11:21 PM

I agree with your point about housing- I was actually thinking about the huge number of people in the UK still living in tiny back-to-back terraces just the other day. It's ridiculous that so many are still living in such cramped victorian terraced houses when they were actually built for the factory workers of the late 19th century. Surely those standards are not good enough in today's day and age. After all, the UK is the 5th largest economy in the World having just been surpassed by China. Such a powerful nation economically should certainly be offering its people higher standards of housing.

Liverpool city wants to bulldoze 3,000 of them. CABE came in and said no. These houses missed the post war slum clearances.

About planning and homes. Read this. Unaffordable Housing. Take your time - understand:
http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/libimages/143.pdf

This highlights the German system:
http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/libimages/141.pdf

http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/libimages/137.pdf

Housing in the UK is an embrassment

Isaac Newell

August 3rd, 2006, 11:44 PM

A federal system ensures this. The local regions, or city states, can tax and not tax. As in Germany.

Who do you tax though ? Tax too high and everyone who can, moves out. Tax too low and provide no services to anyone.

and?.

You know.

City on The Water

August 4th, 2006, 01:40 AM

Who do you tax though ? Tax too high and everyone who can, moves out. Tax too low and provide no services to anyone.

The point is they can tax to suit their needs. They have that independence from central government.

You know.

I don't.

August 4th, 2006, 10:23 AM

just out of interest. Where did that information come from about china passing britain to become the worlds 4th economy? I know this was due to happen around 2008 but a little shocked to read that its happened already.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter as Quality of Life is the important thing and it gets my goat when people start saying "our economys bigger than yours etc etc".

In a modern world WE need to countries like Germany, Italy and France to perform well so theirs and our standard of living will improve...after all our future is increasingly tied in with theirs (please don't post about to be EU or not to be EU etc) rather than goad that we're better than you!

And as for terraced housing... it's a design classic that can, in the right place, connect people with their streets and community more than any modern tower block and better quality than some shit 'built in seconds' modern day housing estate.

majormystery

August 4th, 2006, 10:28 AM

Conversely because something is the way it is doesn't mean it states that way. Democracy ensures change if need be. This is quite fundamental schoolboy stuff.

That is one view which has been echoed over 40 years and it has never happened.

Actually, it happened in 1989
http://www.home.co.uk/guides/mortgage_glossary.htm?nege

And I'd appreciate it if we could continue this debate without the petty insults from you COTW.

majormystery

August 4th, 2006, 10:30 AM

The UK is playing catchup. Until we sort out the pathetic system we have we will continue to play catchup. The Germans have a higher standard of living than us, a high quality of life too. Even after absorbing a country of 15 million with antiquated industry.

The averaged sized new home in the UK is a paltry British 76 square metres, while in Germany with a similar population density new homes are 109 square metres, nearly half as much again in size. In the Netherlands 115 square metres and in Denmark 137 square metres. Danish rooms are twice as big as the hutches now on offer in the United Kingdom. In Japan, a country once notorious for small homes, the average sized new home is now 140 square metres.

The averaged size living room in the UK is a miniscule 13 foot by 15 foot; a room which has to function as TV room, children’s play room, entertainment room and relaxation room. If the averaged sized man stands in the middle of a typical British living room and stretched out an arm he will hit either a wall or ceiling. British TV has many programmes dedicated to giving a larger feel to a room by careful choice of furnishing and colour co-ordination. People attempt to create an impression of space in undersized homes.

The housing charity, Shelter, estimate 500,000 households are officially overcrowded.

You bet your boots I do. It is best you read the first posts of mine on this and understand the points. Don’t feel as if you have to respond even though you don’t fully understand something.

Whatever the standard of living in Germany it remains well known that their economy in stalling and the changes needed to stimulate it again cannot be made. This is despite having the 'City States' you feel will solve much of the problems of this country.

Isaac Newell

August 4th, 2006, 10:31 AM

The point is they can tax to suit their needs. They have that independence from central government.

You seem au fait with the German taxation, can you give me an example of say the tax rates in Hamburg. Now I know from a little investigation that the national rate of income tax in Germany varies from approx 15% to 42%. However what I cannot find anywhere are rates of local taxation apart from "Trade Tax" which is a profit tax set by municipalities lower than Lander level.

I would like you to enlighten me as you seem very confident that German regions are able to in your words

A federal system ensures this. The local regions, or city states, can tax and not tax. As in Germany.

City on The Water

August 4th, 2006, 10:39 AM

And as for terraced housing... it's a design classic

You are having a laugh.

that can, in the right place, connect people with their streets and community more than any modern tower block and better quality than some shit 'built in seconds' modern day housing estate.

So cab cells in a prison block.

City on The Water

August 4th, 2006, 10:44 AM

Whatever the standard of living in Germany it remains well known that their economy in stalling and the changes needed to stimulate it again cannot be made. This is despite having the 'City States' you feel will solve much of the problems of this country.

It is clear you have the inability to grasp the big picture. You get a little thing in your head and go off on an insignificant tangent thinking it is important.

sjwmoore

August 4th, 2006, 10:51 AM

John MK on the Manc threads? I dont believe it!

majormystery

August 4th, 2006, 10:55 AM

It is clear you have the inability to grasp the big picture. You get a little thing in your head and go off on an insignificant tangent thinking it is important.

What is clear, is that I no longer have any interest in trying to debate something with you.

City on The Water

August 4th, 2006, 10:56 AM

I would like you to enlighten me as you seem very confident that German regions are able to in your words

Look at the German system in detail. What it achieves for the local people in standard or living and quality of life. Then look at the UK system and massive failures over 60 years. Anyone coming in from outer space looking at the two would choose the German system hands down.

Planning is one point which is ultra important to all people, although most think it is not, focusing on trivial transient economic figures. The environment you live in and the size and quality of the housing boosts the quality of life enourmously. Planning is in the hands of the locals in Germany, while in the UK it is centralised and based on quotas (Stalinist).

I would rather live in spacious house in a well laid out suburb than earn more and live in a ticky-tacky hutch in bland area.

City on The Water

August 4th, 2006, 10:59 AM

Isaac Newell

August 4th, 2006, 10:59 AM

You haven't answered my question. You seem to possess knowledge about the German taxation system and the way in which regions can produce their own fiscal regimes. I have looked into this out of curiosity and cannot find any form of local taxation other than something called "Trade Tax" which is levied at municipal level.

Can you enlighten me ?

majormystery

August 4th, 2006, 11:03 AM

You are incapable of any debate. What you have done is get hold of some insignificant figures and condemn a whole system outright because of it.

How old are you?

What figures?

sjwmoore

August 4th, 2006, 11:04 AM

I lived over there for six years- the states are largely autonomous in in all respects bar defence/ secuity/ immigration

Isaac Newell

August 4th, 2006, 11:14 AM

Do they set their own taxes and spending ?

I cannot find anything to indicate that they do. They certainly don't have their own currencies and they don't set their own rates of interest.

sjwmoore

August 4th, 2006, 11:27 AM

I cannot find anything to indicate that they do. They certainly don't have their own currencies and they don't set their own rates of interest.

Thats true. As for tax and spending, they certainly have their own budgets, cant confidently comment on the tax, as forces folk paid UK tax.

Ive sent an email to NordRheinWestfalen government to clarify.

Isaac Newell

August 4th, 2006, 11:33 AM

Should be interesting

GShutty

August 4th, 2006, 03:27 PM

What is clear, is that I no longer have any interest in trying to debate something with you.

You are incapable of any debate. What you have done is get hold of some insignificant figures and condemn a whole system outright because of it.

How old are you?

Don't be a tit CotW. You've made some decent points, which MM has responded to. If he doesn't agree with you, why don't you try explaining them again, or differently? No need.

Sir Miles Platting

August 4th, 2006, 04:16 PM

John MK on the Manc threads? I dont believe it!
Target located over Milton Keynes......and destroyed....

City on The Water

August 4th, 2006, 08:38 PM

Don't be a tit CotW. You've made some decent points, which MM has responded to. If he doesn't agree with you, why don't you try explaining them again, or differently? No need.

I would have to drop to schoolboy stuff.

jrb

August 29th, 2006, 07:20 PM

Interesting article scanned from todays MEN.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/why.jpg

Farsight

August 30th, 2006, 11:11 AM

Thanks jrb. Mind you, he doesn't really say why.

jrb

April 14th, 2010, 11:37 PM

Finally found it. :lol: (look at the date :| )

From EGi.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/Picturecvcvcv.jpg

kids

April 15th, 2010, 01:04 AM

shame, bbc there is good for the streetlife of the city.

Cherguevara

April 15th, 2010, 01:37 AM

Not really. It's a giant windowless block with poor street interaction at the front and none at the back.

Maybe it can be jerbs student village?

jrb

April 15th, 2010, 09:45 AM

Not really. It's a giant windowless block with poor street interaction at the front and none at the back.

Maybe it can be jerbs student village?

Thankfully that's already taking shape across the road. I have a feeling this could be turned into a major knowledge hub/campus which will compliment the existing plans for the Oxford Road corridor.

heatonparkincakes

April 15th, 2010, 11:53 AM

Its windowless mostly as its a studio centred building, in which the ambience of outside would cause havoc if it inflitrated inwards!!!

I remember many moons ago Craig Cash hosting his KFM radio show late at night with the window open at Heaton House (I think its called that) in Stockport and the sounds of passing cars, bus, trains and drunks echoed in the background.

Now the Beeb would not tolerant that!!!! No no on children!!!

I can see the building being redundant for a couple of years and either it will be demolished for something else or incorporated into one of the Universities.

Or worse another Tescos or student hostel.

Cherguevara

April 15th, 2010, 12:57 PM

Its windowless mostly as its a studio centred building, in which the ambience of outside would cause havoc if it inflitrated inwards!!!

Well yes but it doesn't add much to the streetlife even if it does make for a sensible studio design.

I imagine that 'Corridor Manchester' have been working to develop plans for this site as part of their knowledge corridor bit. It's a prime site for lots of different developments really. Excellent for more student accomodation, for some commercial property to serve the growing population of the southern city centre, for inncubator type offices and lab developments, for more mainstream office developments and for some non-student focussed residential properties. Obviously with the economy like it is it isn't going to happen very quickly, but it's still one of the sites with the best potential for a thriving mixed use new district in the city centre.

macc

April 15th, 2010, 01:33 PM

It's a deceptively large site, which stretches back behind the the building itself.

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Manchester,+Lancashire,+UK&sll=53.067627,-4.042969&sspn=14.361938,28.256836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Manchester,+Lancashire,+United+Kingdom&ll=53.473166,-2.238089&spn=0.001734,0.003449&t=h&z=18

I suspect most (if not all) of the car park and building on Cloak Street comes with the site.

I think the existing building will struggle to find a new use and to retain it would prevent any development on the car parks, continue to offer nothing to Charles Street and nothing but nice looks and history to Oxford Road.

If it was in the retail core you could look for a new build department store but it's not and with the economy as it is you can't imagine anything substantial happening anytime soon. The BBC will just want to palm it off on whoever will pay a reasonable amount for it.

Ideally I'd like to see it cleared and a street plan reinstated, with perhaps a central square. Smaller, more manageable plots would diversify any new additions and I'd want more retail fronting Oxford Road and Charles Street.

There's plenty of opportunity for regenerating Charles Street and the redevelopment of the BBC site could tie into this to make it a valuable extension to the Oxford Road area rather than just a link to the Lass O'Gowrie and Manchester uni North Campus.

spoonsbeatfish

April 17th, 2010, 10:58 PM

spoonsbeatfish

April 25th, 2010, 04:53 PM

I developed a quite sizeable proposal last year about what could go there. Don't know if it would ever be possible but think it would be pretty good if something along those lines did.

Would appreciate any feedback (positive or negative) if anyone reads any of it.

http://rapidshare.com/files/377057266/Alex_Green_-__Manchester_Proposal.pdf

Any comments? There were 30 downloads?

Anyone else have any ideas what could go in place of the bbc? When you look at the site using google maps, its pretty damn big!

tomegranate

April 25th, 2010, 11:46 PM

To be totally honest, it looks very impressive what you've done, but I for one couldn't be arsed to read the whole way through, can you give a bit of a summary of your main ideas?

Cherguevara

April 26th, 2010, 01:40 AM

spoonsbeatfish

April 26th, 2010, 06:27 PM

To be totally honest, it looks very impressive what you've done, but I for one couldn't be arsed to read the whole way through, can you give a bit of a summary of your main ideas?

Will do one at some point, but particularly busy at work at the moment.

spoonsbeatfish

April 26th, 2010, 06:35 PM

I read it, and it did seem well thought out. I just wasn't really enthusiastic about it. It seemed like a list of things we don't have in the city centre that might be nice, rather than a holistic plan that builds on the strengths of what is a crucial site in so many ways.

Fair point and to be honest you're right. I do think it is a site though considering its size and scale that would allow for a lot of these things to be built in the city where as other sites may not necessarily lend that opportunity.

As for a cohesive plan about how it all fits together specifically building on the site's strengths - thats why I was hoping for a few ideas/feedback (not so great on detail) but I understand its a long document.

Cherguevara

April 27th, 2010, 10:33 PM

Fair point and to be honest you're right. I do think it is a site though considering its size and scale that would allow for a lot of these things to be built in the city where as other sites may not necessarily lend that opportunity.

As for a cohesive plan about how it all fits together specifically building on the site's strengths - thats why I was hoping for a few ideas/feedback (not so great on detail) but I understand its a long document.

Now I've had a bit of time to think about it, I'd say what I didn't like about your plan was that you seemed to treat the site as a new regional centre when really it's too peripheral to be one. It's best connected to the southern city centre, the universities, Oxford/Wilmslow Road corridors, Hulme, Moss Side and I think it needs to focus on providing something for all these areas, rather than something for the whole city.

Perhaps the area could become a "high street" for the south of the city? Not a regional shopping centre like the Arndale, but somewhere to buy some food, a book, get a coffee, go to the bank etc. Change the street plan to make the area more permeable to UMIST, Mayfield and Ardwick/Brunswick and build some veried housing so it gifts the area with enough of a mixed community to support a variety of commercial enterprises. Perhaps with some small shops to encourage independent retailers, like the northern quarter but a bit less trendy, maybe with a Chorlton in town sort of vibe. Mix it in with some small offices for knowledge related businesses and it could be a modest yet vibrant addition to the city.

kids

April 28th, 2010, 01:58 AM

I didn't read your plan spoonsbeatfish so this is a general comment - why is it that every site has to be iconic? why can't we be satisfied just with homes. this is what central manchester needs more than anything.

rolybling

April 28th, 2010, 07:35 AM

I read some of it spoonsbeatfish, seems like some pretty good ideas to me. I think whatever gets built there shouldn't rely too much on multiple small businesses taking up lets on 'units'. The retail in the immediate area surrounding the site already struggles to attract enough customers to keep afloat, I know this because I was a manager at a store very close to the site up until very recently. There's massive footfall during parts of the daytime but very little at night compared to other areas in the centre. Most of the footfall in the daytime is students and students do not like to spend money so what any business in the vacinity needs is customers and students are not going to be enough. The Holiday Inn opening this year[is it?] should be a boost for local traders but I do feel the area could easily accommodate another good sized hotel.

I would love to see a Manchester Museum of Modern Art open, and I think this site would be as good as any for one. That and a nice sized hotel with lots of nice landscaping around them could be great in this location. They wouldn't necassarily have to rely on students but students would certainly use the museum and so would tourists staying in the near by hotels. Both would be a boost for local shops and maybe there could be some retail element attached to either the hotel or museum but not too much so it kills off other local shops. Anyway that's what I'd like to see there.

tomegranate

April 28th, 2010, 12:10 PM

I would love to see a Manchester Museum of Modern Art open, and I think this site would be as good as any for one. That and a nice sized hotel with lots of nice landscaping around them could be great in this location. They wouldn't necassarily have to rely on students but students would certainly use the museum and so would tourists staying in the near by hotels. Both would be a boost for local shops and maybe there could be some retail element attached to either the hotel or museum but not too much so it kills off other local shops. Anyway that's what I'd like to see there.

*cough mumble relocatedurbis cough bleh*

future.architect

April 28th, 2010, 12:57 PM

*cough mumble relocatedurbis cough bleh*

i agree totaly. if the council had to move the football museum into urbis, they should have relocated 'urbis' somewhere else. it would be great in a converted building like the great northern warehouse which is an amazing building with a decent public square outside it but has the indignity of being used as a carpark and failed shopping centre.

what says old manchester more than a vaulted brick ceiling and an iron victorian column?

Garibaldi773

April 28th, 2010, 03:07 PM

Well, it could be a good site for a park, but there's no money in that.

Failing that, perhaps the best use for the site is to refurbish the existing accommodation as offices, which could then be offered at modest rental levels and flexible lease terms. Bruntwood have made a success of the Manchester Technology Centre which is full, I think.

I don't think that there is a market for new build offices in this part of town (willing to pay the > £20 per sq ft that would be required), especially not with the proposals for St Peter's Square. However, cheap and cheerful space would suit new and knowledge-based businesses just fine.

flange

September 8th, 2010, 12:05 PM

BBC development bidding opens

8 Sep 2010, 10:07

Developers have until 18 November to submit bids for the BBC site on Oxford Road, due to be vacated by the end of 2011 as staff move to Media City.

The 5.4-acre site is suitable, said LSH, for a number of uses, including offices, hotels, retail, leisure, and residential accommodation, student housing, and car parking.

The site's position in the thriving university corridor and the growth of science parks in the area suggests a similar use could be proposed for the BBC site. However, the relatively low rent from a large science park pre-let would not derive the value to attract development on its own. Nor is the option of a residential tower, so often seen in the boom, as easy to envisage now.

LSH has been advising the BBC for the past two years, on the development options for the site. Peter Skelton, strategic development director at LSH Manchester, said: "The downward shift in the property market in recent years has had a negative impact on development projects, with very few sites - particularly of this magnitude - being released for sale. While the redevelopment of BBC site is still some way off, it is vital for Manchester's future prosperity that we get it right."

"Having already identified the anticipated demand in respect of employment, housing and infrastructure, the sale represents a unique opportunity for an accomplished developer to add value to the overall regeneration of the city by identifying and delivering a blend of uses that the market wants, and that visitors, residents, local businesses and the Council alike can be proud of."

As the site is still operational any future redevelopment would not be completed until 2013/2014. LSH is seeking initial expressions of interest before moving onto best bids by 18 November, with an aim to conclude a sale in 2011.

http://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/news/archive/7096-bbc-development-bidding-opens.html

BBC puts Oxford Road HQ up for sale

8th September 2010

By James Graham - Business Correspondent

PROPERTY agent Lambert Smith Hampton (LSH) has been appointed to market the BBC's studios in Oxford Road in Manchester.

The 5.4-acre New Broadcasting House site is being sold as part of the corporation's move to purpose built northern headquarters at MediaCity in Salford Quays.

The building will be available for redevelopment at the end of 2011.

Peter Skelton, strategic development director at LSH Manchester, said: "This is a significant step forward in the redevelopment of what has been earmarked as one of the most important large-scale, strategic development sites in the city centre.

"The downward shift in the property market in recent years has had a negative impact on development projects, with very few sites - particularly of this magnitude - being released for sale. While the redevelopment of BBC site is still some way off, it is vital for Manchester’s future prosperity that we get it right."

He added: "Having already identified the anticipated demand in respect of employment, housing and infrastructure, the sale represents a unique opportunity for an accomplished developer to add value to the overall regeneration of the city by identifying and delivering a blend of uses that the market wants, and that visitors, residents, local businesses and the council can be proud of."

LSH is seeking initial expressions of interest before moving on to best bids, and hopes to conclude a sale in 2011.

http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/northwest/news/