daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > Manchester Metro Area

Manchester Metro Area For Manchester, Salford and the surrounding area.



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old December 9th, 2008, 07:27 PM   #161
Savage Henry
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 434
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveC View Post
Errm, the canal channel is currently well under construction!
Really? I've totally missed that one then!

I knew they'd got the planning permission a couple of years ago, but didn't think it'd actually be viable. It's not exactly a scenic journey for the most part!
Savage Henry no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old December 9th, 2008, 08:18 PM   #162
jrb
10th February 2008
 
jrb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 31,924
Likes (Received): 3478

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveC View Post
Errm, the canal channel is currently well under construction!
I think it's more to do with Mediacity, rather than the planned village.

It wouldn't surprise me if the water taxis initially only went to to Mediacity and back to the Trafford Centre.

Why divert the London BBC staff and their money to Manchester city centre?
jrb no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 9th, 2008, 09:27 PM   #163
guenuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 886
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrb View Post
Welcome to the world of Peel. Fortunately Grosvenor got in first with Liverpool One, otherwise you would have ended up with another iconic Trafford Centre on your Waterfront.

Sickening thought! I'm not Peels biggest fan either, they only ever seem to be interested in delivering projects in Manchester or should I say Salford? we just get pie in the sky schemes of skyscrapers. Mind you I'm not particularly jealous of the trafford centre, I haven't been since Liverpool One opened up, more jealous of the media city actually.
guenuk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2008, 12:00 AM   #164
jrb
10th February 2008
 
jrb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 31,924
Likes (Received): 3478

As promised. From Crains.




jrb no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2008, 12:22 AM   #165
Chorley Boi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Chorley
Posts: 714
Likes (Received): 0

like it another gr8 business idea by mr peel
Chorley Boi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2008, 12:27 AM   #166
jrb
10th February 2008
 
jrb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 31,924
Likes (Received): 3478

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chorley Boi View Post
like it another gr8 business idea by mr peel
3400 new homes = 3000 extra cars(roughly) added to an already congested area. You won't see the Metrolink extension and the water taxi's will be of little use unless your traveling to Mediacity. Come to think of it, why would you use a water taxi to get to Mediacity, it's faster to drive by car. 10 minutes.

Last edited by jrb; December 10th, 2008 at 01:09 AM.
jrb no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2008, 12:35 AM   #167
dgnr8
Mmm, Danone
 
dgnr8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,792
Likes (Received): 10

You're clearly not taking into account Jonathon Ross and Terry Wogan banging up the canal in their multimillion pound speedboats and jetskis.
dgnr8 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2008, 01:09 AM   #168
jrb
10th February 2008
 
jrb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 31,924
Likes (Received): 3478

Boots loses battle over Christmas lights
Tuesday, 09 December 2008
Boots has lost its legal battle with the Trafford Centre over who pays for Christmas lights.
The retailer took The Trafford Centre to London’s High Court claiming the centre should foot some of the bill for Christmas decorations and Santa’s Grotto. The retailer was claiming a total of £203,000.

Boots argued that festive touches, other year-round entertainment and large electronic information displays should be treated as “promotions” and therefore it was entitled to a discount from its landlord on the bill for meeting the costs.

However, Mr Justice Morgan ruled at a preliminary hearing yesterday that the decorations were not “promotions” but fell into the general category of “service charge” and therefore the retailer was not entitled to get any help paying the bill.

Under the lease, the Trafford Centre must pay 50 per cent of the cost of items which fall under “promotions.”
jrb no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2008, 01:45 AM   #169
CDX
Keep Changing.
 
CDX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,598
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrb View Post
3400 new homes = 3000 extra cars(roughly) added to an already congested area.
A bit of congestion cause denial by Peel...



From one of Peels responses to the Trafford planning strat docs.
CDX no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2008, 01:49 AM   #170
jrb
10th February 2008
 
jrb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 31,924
Likes (Received): 3478

Quote:
Originally Posted by CDX View Post
A bit of congestion cause denial by Peel...



From one of Peels responses to the Trafford planning strat docs.
That's funny.
jrb no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2008, 01:56 AM   #171
CDX
Keep Changing.
 
CDX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,598
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrb View Post
That's funny.
Just as funny as this:



And pleasure cruises...sorry water taxis...would not be for leisure activity....
CDX no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2008, 11:58 AM   #172
Savage Henry
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 434
Likes (Received): 5

I'm sorry, am I reading that Crains article correctly? Peel have the 'proposed Metrolink extension' as part of their plans for this? The same Metrolink extension they're currently rallying against?
Savage Henry no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2008, 12:06 PM   #173
CDX
Keep Changing.
 
CDX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,598
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savage Henry View Post
I'm sorry, am I reading that Crains article correctly? Peel have the 'proposed Metrolink extension' as part of their plans for this? The same Metrolink extension they're currently rallying against?
Included to appease planners no doubt, look at the wording on the rough transport map, 'Potential Metrolink' extension, not planned or even proposed....
CDX no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2008, 12:40 AM   #174
East-Mcr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 108
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savage Henry View Post
The same Metrolink extension they're currently rallying against?
Have they said this? Can you post hard evidence from them?

They are suporting a "no" vote, yes - but against the congestion charge element of it...
East-Mcr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2008, 12:47 AM   #175
SleepyOne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,091
Likes (Received): 1

As the 'no' lobby has consistently been unable to provide a feasible and realistic alternative method of funding the improvements proposed through TIF, it is entirely reasonable to assert that in opposing TIF and being unwilling to put their hands in their own pockets, Peel are essentially opposing a metrolink extension to their front door.
__________________
Manchester Original Modern
SleepyOne no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2008, 01:14 AM   #176
andysimo123
wind-up merchant
 
andysimo123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 15,975
Likes (Received): 53

Quote:
Originally Posted by East-Mcr View Post
Have they said this? Can you post hard evidence from them?

They are suporting a "no" vote, yes - but against the congestion charge element of it...
"Explore cheaper public transport options - The proposed Metrolink expansion adds just 18 miles of track (the extensions to the airport and Trafford Park) but accounts for around half of the councils' total transport spend under TIF - a massive £1.2 billion. Virtually all of the Rochdale, Oldham and Tameside extensions have already been funded and will be built regardless of the TIF package. Is 18 miles of extra track really the best way to spend £1.2 billion?"

Straight from yours truly Peel.

http://www.stopthecharge.co.uk/alternatives.php
andysimo123 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2008, 01:29 AM   #177
East-Mcr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 108
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by andysimo123 View Post
"Explore cheaper public transport options - The proposed Metrolink expansion adds just 18 miles of track (the extensions to the airport and Trafford Park) but accounts for around half of the councils' total transport spend under TIF - a massive £1.2 billion. Virtually all of the Rochdale, Oldham and Tameside extensions have already been funded and will be built regardless of the TIF package. Is 18 miles of extra track really the best way to spend £1.2 billion?"

Straight from yours truly Peel.

http://www.stopthecharge.co.uk/alternatives.php
The extract you kindly pointed out shows they are in favour of enhancing public transport including the Metrolink, but £1.2BN is too much to spend on the metrolink extentions (and I agree). The metrolink expansion proposas under TIF - remember 3b only - 3a is already covered without tif (although strangely, they keep refering to the 3a extentions in TIF booklets to make TIF more appealing...

So, once again, where does it say Peel are against the Metrolink extensions?
East-Mcr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2008, 01:39 AM   #178
andysimo123
wind-up merchant
 
andysimo123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 15,975
Likes (Received): 53

Quote:
Originally Posted by East-Mcr View Post
The extract you kindly pointed out shows they are in favour of enhancing public transport including the Metrolink, but £1.2BN is too much to spend on the metrolink extentions (and I agree). The metrolink expansion proposas under TIF - remember 3b only - 3a is already covered without tif (although strangely, they keep refering to the 3a extentions in TIF booklets to make TIF more appealing...

So, once again, where does it say Peel are against the Metrolink extensions?
One they run that website(if they don't who the hell does?) and two they fail to understand costs. 62 new trams are needed. That's £124 Million. Two lines to the Airport and Trafford park are totally missed. The 2nd city centre line is missed. It fails to say that some of that is private funding. Some of the money put into Phase 3b will improve 3a such as the 62 extra trams and the fact that there is more of it. Phase 3a is a half finished project just like the Manchester Airport road to no where.
andysimo123 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2008, 01:58 AM   #179
East-Mcr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 108
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by andysimo123 View Post
One they run that website(if they don't who the hell does?)
No they dont....

~# whois stopthecharge.co.uk

Domain name:
stopthecharge.co.uk

Registrant:
Andy Dunbar

Registrant type:
UK Individual

His address is availabe on the public WHOIS, but I thught it not fair to post it here...

Quote:
Originally Posted by andysimo123 View Post
and two
No, we are back to "one" again

Sorry- I thought you were going to answer my question ... so once again, where does it say Peel are against the Metrolink extensions??

Quote:
Originally Posted by andysimo123 View Post
Phase 3a is a half finished project just like the Manchester Airport road to no where.
Interesting you should mention that - look who the "yes" camp have supporting them now

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co....ccharge_debate

Yes, it's no other than John "two jags, i'll drive my wife 20 yards so she does not mess her hair up, living in Hull" Prestcott! Erm, Wasn't it his fault the A555 is like it is today (unfinished) and the "big bang" never happened?
East-Mcr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2008, 02:24 AM   #180
CDX
Keep Changing.
 
CDX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,598
Likes (Received): 0

These guys have a hell of a lot to answer for:

http://www.burstproofbubble.com/vide...he_charge.html

Quote:



http://www.communiquepr.co.uk/

Originally commissioned to develop a simple logo for the upcoming campaign to oppose the Manchester Congestion Charge, our proposed design steered all future creative across the web and outdoor advertising.

We took the shark theme a step futher in the form of a big blue predator who starred in four short viral videos produced entirely here within the bubble.
http://www.how-do.co.uk/north-west-m...-200806102775/

Last edited by CDX; December 11th, 2008 at 02:33 AM.
CDX no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu