While I do defend certain silly decisions, I do agree about the cult of nostalgia, it first became apparent to me, when Tyrone was going to have the cladding taken off Jack and Vera's house, but they couldnt do it, stuff like that is annoying.
I don't see why they don't just have Tyrone paint over the cladding. Fiz would've insisted on redecorating the interior completely by now if this was real life - and if they ever do revamp the No. 9 set, there's nothing stopping the production team giving a little nod to Jack and Vera by having their picture up on the wall or something. No. 9 still looks like Vera could be wandering around upstairs and it's just weird!
I really agree with the comments that Corrie is becoming increasingly wrapped up in its own little bubble - the idea that certain sets or buildings just CAN'T be touched because it's been the same for a few years. The only thing I like on the new exterior is the fact that the terrace looks more lifelike - the Rovers in particular looks amazing. But I don't like that recreated Stage One 'wall' or the cop-out of extending the Victoria Court-style buildings across Victoria Street.
Now they've got the opportunity to expand slightly further into Rosamund/Crimea Street in the next few years, let's hope they knock that stupid arch down and build a believable row of facades. It's not unimaginable that Weatherfield Council would start a 'regeneration' project in and around the town. Although this is Corrie we're on about so the arch is probably here to stay until the show ends. >:(
I don't see why they don't just have Tyrone paint over the cladding. Fiz would've insisted on redecorating the interior completely by now if this was real life - and if they ever do revamp the No. 9 set, there's nothing stopping the production team giving a little nod to Jack and Vera by having their picture up on the wall or something. No. 9 still looks like Vera could be wandering around upstairs and it's just weird!
I really agree with the comments that Corrie is becoming increasingly wrapped up in its own little bubble - the idea that certain sets or buildings just CAN'T be touched because it's been the same for a few years. The only thing I like on the new exterior is the fact that the terrace looks more lifelike - the Rovers in particular looks amazing. But I don't like that recreated Stage One 'wall' or the cop-out of extending the Victoria Court-style buildings across Victoria Street.
Now they've got the opportunity to expand slightly further into Rosamund/Crimea Street in the next few years, let's hope they knock that stupid arch down and build a believable row of facades. It's not unimaginable that Weatherfield Council would start a 'regeneration' project in and around the town. Although this is Corrie we're on about so the arch is probably here to stay until the show ends. >:(
I agree with you here. As much as I like the fact that parts of residents who lived in the streets lives still come through on screen, surely an average street would kick up a fuss about that stone cladding on number 9? I think that the set designers at corrie just wouldn't dare to take it down as it is part of corries past and jack and Vera were two of the streets most memorable characters- I'm surprised it has lasted 25 years! As for that arch, I think that it would be to much of a palava to knock down as it has featured in the show for 15 years and it helps hide where the rovers side wall actually ends ( it could go on for ever!) and where the ginnel entrance starts. They could always say that it was built to help support the rovers and the chippy or it could be to stop huge lorries from entering the residential area? Or mabey that it was an old viaduct 100s of years ago and most of it was knocked down in 1901 when they started building the street but they just left that arch because they couldn't afford to knock it down? I think with the street moving, it could he a great chance to see some new areas of weatherfield like the rest of Mawdsley street and some more shops appearing in rosamund street as well since that was the former weatherfield town centre. I think that the reason we haven't seen all this already is because of the lack of space at the quay st sets. Yes this new set could of been an opportunity to get rid of the old set problems like the studios walls and the rosamund st arch but for the time being, they just kept them as they are because we would notice the difference on screen - not that noticing them is a bad thing!
You might be interested in this post that I wrote yesterday.
I think that the lack of ambition is a complex part of this cult of nostalgia that has built up over the past 10 years or so. Absolutely agree with you that they really have missed a huge opportunity for change and expansion. Any chances of extending the set into Rosamund Street/Mawdlsey Street/Crimea Street have been blocked off by that viaduct. Similarly, Victoria Street has been more or less closed off by the extension of the flats/new gym.
There was a real opportunity to open up Victoria Street as well as Rosamund Street and Crimea Street. Many people have hoped for more of Mawdsley Street, but the dynamic from having larger houses on either Crimea Street or Victoria Street could have been much more interesting from a character perspective. Mawdsley Street is supposed to be identical to Coronation Street, and we already have a terrace full of residents there. Having characters living in large, potentially posher (or even rougher) houses could have been interesting. References to larger Victorian town houses and villas on both Crimea Street and Victoria Stree have peppered stories over the years and would have been a really interesting addition to the set. The removal of the viaduct and the inclusion of a gable end of houses on the corner of Crimea Street (more or less the same as what we used to see in the early 2000s credits) would have been fantastic, allowing diagonal shots from the Rovers/Salon area of the set and vice versa. Victoria Street could have been extended just behind Victoria Court with the inclusion of a couple of larger, red-brick town houses in the 'true' Salford style.
I agree with you here. As much as I like the fact that parts of residents who lived in the streets lives still come through on screen, surely an average street would kick up a fuss about that stone cladding on number 9? I think that the set designers at corrie just wouldn't dare to take it down as it is part of corries past and jack and Vera were two of the streets most memorable characters- I'm surprised it has lasted 25 years! As for that arch, I think that it would be to much of a palava to knock down as it has featured in the show for 15 years and it helps hide where the rovers side wall actually ends ( it could go on for ever!) and where the ginnel entrance starts. They could always say that it was built to help support the rovers and the chippy or it could be to stop huge lorries from entering the residential area? Or mabey that it was an old viaduct 100s of years ago and most of it was knocked down in 1901 when they started building the street but they just left that arch because they couldn't afford to knock it down? I think with the street moving, it could he a great chance to see some new areas of weatherfield like the rest of Mawdsley street and some more shops appearing in rosamund street as well since that was the former weatherfield town centre. I think that the reason we haven't seen all this already is because of the lack of space at the quay st sets. Yes this new set could of been an opportunity to get rid of the old set problems like the studios walls and the rosamund st arch but for the time being, they just kept them as they are because we would notice the difference on screen - not that noticing them is a bad thing!
I do agree about the much critisised arch, it'd seem weird to just suddenly magic it away, it was unbelievable enough that it appeared from nowhere, but to just make it dissappear again would be jarring, the arch does indeed serve a good purpose too, it helps disguise where the set ends, perhaps in 10 years when they have permission to extend the set, it can finally be taken down. There is a number of 'viaducts to nowhere' around the country, so its not too weird.
People complain about the wall on the viaduct too, but it blocks the view of the Imperial War Museum's fin, something that would be harder to explain than there simply being a tall wall on the viaduct that has had history appearing above the viaduct for decades. Imagine how out of place the fin would look in this picture, without the wall http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/images/ic/944x531_b/p01mjl5k.jpg
Now that the new set has room for two cars to pass, does that mean that we will occassionally see the bin men? I don't think I've seen any since Eddie Yates, and Curly Watts left. We never hear anyone asking someone to put the bins out. I think that Salford have 4 bins at least per house.
Come to think about it, Emmerdale doesn't have a bin day either, Tate Haulage used to have a bin collection... :eek:
Now that the new set has room for two cars to pass, does that mean that we will occassionally see the bin men? I don't think I've seen any since Eddie Yates, and Curly Watts left. We never hear anyone asking someone to put the bins out. I think that Salford have 4 bins at least per house.
Come to think about it, Emmerdale doesn't have a bin day either, Tate Haulage used to have a bin collection... :eek:
I remember on that spin off series "ken and deirdre's bedtime stories" the main plot was putting the bins out, Deirdre asking ken if he put the bins out every week and one week he gets angry with her and asks her to stop asking him! Then he remembers he forgot to put them out! I'll watch them again to see if there is any clues to when the day is
They were broadcasted on a Monday but it was set the night before bin day- so I think that weatherfields bin day in on a Tuesday!
I do agree about the much critisised arch, it'd seem weird to just suddenly magic it away, it was unbelievable enough that it appeared from nowhere, but to just make it dissappear again would be jarring, the arch does indeed serve a good purpose too, it helps disguise where the set ends, perhaps in 10 years when they have permission to extend the set, it can finally be taken down. There is a number of 'viaducts to nowhere' around the country, so its not too weird.
People complain about the wall on the viaduct too, but it blocks the view of the Imperial War Museum's fin, something that would be harder to explain than there simply being a tall wall on the viaduct that has had history appearing above the viaduct for decades. Imagine how out of place the fin would look in this picture, without the wall http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/images/ic/944x531_b/p01mjl5k.jpg
Like I explained before the simple solution was to make the viaduct higher, as it used to be on the older, 1970's set. It would block out the museum and solve the problem of having a wall in view that isn't meant to be there. It would also save them from having to edit it out for special shots. It's not meant to exist so it should not be there. Also with the false viaduct if you want to make excuses to try and make sense of it thats absolutely fine. If it were good design however you would have absolutely no need to do that. The fact that you do explains why it is bad design.
Like I explained before the simple solution was to make the viaduct higher, as it used to be on the older, 1970's set. It would block out the museum and solve the problem of having a wall in view that isn't meant to be there. It would also save them from having to edit it out for special shots. It's not meant to exist so it should not be there. Also with the false viaduct if you want to make excuses to try and make sense of it thats absolutely fine. If it were good design however you would have absolutely no need to do that. The fact that you do explains why it is bad design.
The arch doesn't need too much explanation though, trains used to run across the Viaduct Street viaduct, its not unrealistic that the bridge used to run over the back of Coronation/Mawdsley Street and connect at some point, possibly before the show began (or even before the street was built), and then at some point they decided to discontinue the line, but to leave the arch across Rosamund Street. I mean, look at what exactly is behind the Medical Centre, a bonded warehouse, a trainline could have run from the Viaduct Street viaduct right to the warehouse.
Don't get me wrong, you have to connect the dots for the arch to make sense, but all the clues are there, warehouses on Victoria Street, old railway viaducts. Fair enough point with the wall though, but I really don't see why everyone has such an issue with that one.
The arch doesn't need too much explanation though, trains used to run across the Viaduct Street viaduct, its not unrealistic that the bridge used to run over the back of Coronation/Mawdsley Street and connect at some point, possibly before the show began (or even before the street was built), and then at some point they decided to discontinue the line, but to leave the arch across Rosamund Street. I mean, look at what exactly is behind the Medical Centre, a bonded warehouse, a trainline could have run from the Viaduct Street viaduct right to the warehouse.
Don't get me wrong, you have to connect the dots for the arch to make sense, but all the clues are there, warehouses on Victoria Street, old railway viaducts. Fair enough point with the wall though, but I really don't see why everyone has such an issue with that one.
Do you remember the old opening titles? In this titles the archway was visible in one shot down Rosamund Street but in the next shot, across the back yards the viaduct magically disappeared again. Even the production team themselves were unable to explain or deal with the existence of this arch. You are clutching at straws trying to find a way to explain why it's there. You wouldn't have to if the design made sense. When someone is forced to make up the existence of a railway viaduct that was demolished, except for one small arch, in order to justify a set piece that doesn't make any sense within it's setting there is a problem.
Do you remember the old opening titles? In this titles the archway was visible in one shot down Rosamund Street but in the next shot, across the back yards the viaduct magically disappeared again. Even the production team themselves were unable to explain or deal with the existence of this arch. You are clutching at straws trying to find a way to explain why it's there. You wouldn't have to if the design made sense. When someone is forced to make up the existence of a railway viaduct that was demolished, except for one small arch, in order to justify a set piece that doesn't make any sense within it's setting there is a problem.
Yeah, I have to admit, I'd rather the arch didn't exist, but it being there can make sense when you think about it. I did kinda come up with the idea of it not being fully demolished due to to buisnesses being built into it. At the end of the day, I understand why it was built into the new set, but I hope it gets demolished when they gain permission to extend into the Crimea Street area in 10 or so years.
Yeah, I have to admit, I'd rather the arch didn't exist, but it being there can make sense when you think about it. I did kinda come up with the idea of it not being fully demolished due to to buisnesses being built into it. At the end of the day, I understand why it was built into the new set, but I hope it gets demolished when they gain permission to extend into the Crimea Street area in 10 or so years.
I really wouldn't hold your breath on them doing that. They are completely indifferent to the inconsistencies in the set design. I would imagine the arch is there to stay. It's a shame because I feel that they let the show down by not being as ambitious and creative as their competitors are. If you watch a show like River City, which is a Glasgow based soap opera, the set created for that show genuinely looks like it could be in Glasgow. It reflects the city, our history and our people. It's all living and breathing in that set. Even the design of the local cafe reflects the old art deco cafes we have in Glasgow opened by Italian immigrants who came to Scotland. There is a ship yard that reflects our shipbuilding heritage while there is even a tube stop that ties the show into the our underground network. Everything is considered and makes sense. It's good design that doesn't require viewers to explain away poor design decisions.
While I do defend certain silly decisions, I do agree about the cult of nostalgia, it first became apparent to me, when Tyrone was going to have the cladding taken off Jack and Vera's house, but they couldnt do it, stuff like that is annoying.
I think that in reality, removing cladding is pretty difficult, since I think it often damages the bricks. But I agree it should be painted over, and the interior was bad enough before but now it's even crazier with the random Cath Kidson knock off stuff they've added to the head-ache inducing mix!
I suppose it might have been a good idea to add some bigger Victorian housing to the set,but I doubt they'd ever use them. They don't use Victoria Court at all and would rather characters like Maria and Peter/Carla inexplicably living in tiny flats above shops.
I really wouldn't hold your breath on them doing that. They are completely indifferent to the inconsistencies in the set design. I would imagine the arch is there to stay. It's a shame because I feel that they let the show down by not being as ambitious and creative as their competitors are. If you watch a show like River City, which is a Glasgow based soap opera, the set created for that show genuinely looks like it could be in Glasgow. It reflects the city, our history and our people. It's all living and breathing in that set. Even the design of the local cafe reflects the old art deco cafes we have in Glasgow opened by Italian immigrants who came to Scotland. There is a ship yard that reflects our shipbuilding heritage while there is even a tube stop that ties the show into the our underground network. Everything is considered and makes sense. It's good design that doesn't require viewers to explain away poor design decisions.
Yeah, you're probably right. I do think the new set has really improved in some areas like Victoria Street and Viaduct Street though. I hope they do something with the new part of Victoria Court they introduced, SB did mention that the gym was going to be opened in "a complex of shops and restaraunts"
I think that in reality, removing cladding is pretty difficult, since I think it often damages the bricks. But I agree it should be painted over, and the interior was bad enough before but now it's even crazier with the random Cath Kidson knock off stuff they've added to the head-ache inducing mix!
I suppose it might have been a good idea to add some bigger Victorian housing to the set,but I doubt they'd ever use them. They don't use Victoria Court at all and would rather characters like Maria and Peter/Carla inexplicably living in tiny flats above shops.
In a way though, I can kinda see why the interior of Tyrone's house is as it is, everything looks all over the place, which kinda relates to Fiz and Tyrone. Not to mention Tyrone did redecorate the house, with wallpaper that looked very similar to the old wallpaper, which was kind of funny.
In a way though, I can kinda see why the interior of Tyrone's house is as it is, everything looks all over the place, which kinda relates to Fiz and Tyrone. Not to mention Tyrone did redecorate the house, with wallpaper that looked very similar to the old wallpaper, which was kind of funny.
Which mirrors the redesign of the Rovers. It's not believable but because of the misplaced nostalgia believability suffers.
What annoys me about the arch, was its easy to solve the problem. Get rid of it, extend the rovers over to the chippy, maybe leave a ginnel in between for secret meetings and they could bring back the snug in the extension.
The arch doesn't need too much explanation though, trains used to run across the Viaduct Street viaduct, its not unrealistic that the bridge used to run over the back of Coronation/Mawdsley Street and connect at some point, possibly before the show began (or even before the street was built), and then at some point they decided to discontinue the line, but to leave the arch across Rosamund Street. I mean, look at what exactly is behind the Medical Centre, a bonded warehouse, a trainline could have run from the Viaduct Street viaduct right to the warehouse.
Don't get me wrong, you have to connect the dots for the arch to make sense, but all the clues are there, warehouses on Victoria Street, old railway viaducts. Fair enough point with the wall though, but I really don't see why everyone has such an issue with that one.
Instead of the fake Stage One wall, perhaps the designers could have constructed a wall that matches the brickwork of the Viaduct Street arches? It would have been a bit more believable. The reason why I have an issue with the Stage One wall being there on the new set is because - like anndra_w says - it's a studio building which isn't meant to exist in Weatherfield. We clearly saw Jubilee Terrace and the other streets on the other side of the viaduct during the time of the tram crash in 2010.
There's another poor design feature I just realised. Look at how the viaduct and fake wall meets the MoSI facade and tell me there's space for a tram to get through!
Looking at some of the pictures, I'm quite taken aback at just how imposing some of the surrounding buildings are on the new set, which really makes me question just how versatile it'll really be.
At Quay Street they only had the Granada Building and Beetham Tower to contend with, at Salford it looks as though they've got skyscrapers on all sides. I really am shocked. Long shots down the street will be more or less impossible now.
Comments
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3269/13056887553_bd7007916a_c.jpg
Compare that to the old one
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3612/13057089264_b6992fa642_c.jpg
The new one is a lot bigger
I don't see why they don't just have Tyrone paint over the cladding. Fiz would've insisted on redecorating the interior completely by now if this was real life - and if they ever do revamp the No. 9 set, there's nothing stopping the production team giving a little nod to Jack and Vera by having their picture up on the wall or something. No. 9 still looks like Vera could be wandering around upstairs and it's just weird!
I really agree with the comments that Corrie is becoming increasingly wrapped up in its own little bubble - the idea that certain sets or buildings just CAN'T be touched because it's been the same for a few years. The only thing I like on the new exterior is the fact that the terrace looks more lifelike - the Rovers in particular looks amazing. But I don't like that recreated Stage One 'wall' or the cop-out of extending the Victoria Court-style buildings across Victoria Street.
Now they've got the opportunity to expand slightly further into Rosamund/Crimea Street in the next few years, let's hope they knock that stupid arch down and build a believable row of facades. It's not unimaginable that Weatherfield Council would start a 'regeneration' project in and around the town. Although this is Corrie we're on about so the arch is probably here to stay until the show ends. >:(
I agree with you here. As much as I like the fact that parts of residents who lived in the streets lives still come through on screen, surely an average street would kick up a fuss about that stone cladding on number 9? I think that the set designers at corrie just wouldn't dare to take it down as it is part of corries past and jack and Vera were two of the streets most memorable characters- I'm surprised it has lasted 25 years! As for that arch, I think that it would be to much of a palava to knock down as it has featured in the show for 15 years and it helps hide where the rovers side wall actually ends ( it could go on for ever!) and where the ginnel entrance starts. They could always say that it was built to help support the rovers and the chippy or it could be to stop huge lorries from entering the residential area? Or mabey that it was an old viaduct 100s of years ago and most of it was knocked down in 1901 when they started building the street but they just left that arch because they couldn't afford to knock it down? I think with the street moving, it could he a great chance to see some new areas of weatherfield like the rest of Mawdsley street and some more shops appearing in rosamund street as well since that was the former weatherfield town centre. I think that the reason we haven't seen all this already is because of the lack of space at the quay st sets. Yes this new set could of been an opportunity to get rid of the old set problems like the studios walls and the rosamund st arch but for the time being, they just kept them as they are because we would notice the difference on screen - not that noticing them is a bad thing!
Belting post and I absolutely agree with you.
I do agree about the much critisised arch, it'd seem weird to just suddenly magic it away, it was unbelievable enough that it appeared from nowhere, but to just make it dissappear again would be jarring, the arch does indeed serve a good purpose too, it helps disguise where the set ends, perhaps in 10 years when they have permission to extend the set, it can finally be taken down. There is a number of 'viaducts to nowhere' around the country, so its not too weird.
People complain about the wall on the viaduct too, but it blocks the view of the Imperial War Museum's fin, something that would be harder to explain than there simply being a tall wall on the viaduct that has had history appearing above the viaduct for decades. Imagine how out of place the fin would look in this picture, without the wall
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/images/ic/944x531_b/p01mjl5k.jpg
Come to think about it, Emmerdale doesn't have a bin day either, Tate Haulage used to have a bin collection... :eek:
I remember on that spin off series "ken and deirdre's bedtime stories" the main plot was putting the bins out, Deirdre asking ken if he put the bins out every week and one week he gets angry with her and asks her to stop asking him! Then he remembers he forgot to put them out! I'll watch them again to see if there is any clues to when the day is
They were broadcasted on a Monday but it was set the night before bin day- so I think that weatherfields bin day in on a Tuesday!
http://www.corrieblog.tv/28_01_CORO_JANICE_TREVOR1.jpg
Trevor! How could I forget Trevor! He legged it with Janice Battersby!:D
I can't believe they paired him up with Carla at one point
Like I explained before the simple solution was to make the viaduct higher, as it used to be on the older, 1970's set. It would block out the museum and solve the problem of having a wall in view that isn't meant to be there. It would also save them from having to edit it out for special shots. It's not meant to exist so it should not be there. Also with the false viaduct if you want to make excuses to try and make sense of it thats absolutely fine. If it were good design however you would have absolutely no need to do that. The fact that you do explains why it is bad design.
The arch doesn't need too much explanation though, trains used to run across the Viaduct Street viaduct, its not unrealistic that the bridge used to run over the back of Coronation/Mawdsley Street and connect at some point, possibly before the show began (or even before the street was built), and then at some point they decided to discontinue the line, but to leave the arch across Rosamund Street. I mean, look at what exactly is behind the Medical Centre, a bonded warehouse, a trainline could have run from the Viaduct Street viaduct right to the warehouse.
Don't get me wrong, you have to connect the dots for the arch to make sense, but all the clues are there, warehouses on Victoria Street, old railway viaducts. Fair enough point with the wall though, but I really don't see why everyone has such an issue with that one.
Do you remember the old opening titles? In this titles the archway was visible in one shot down Rosamund Street but in the next shot, across the back yards the viaduct magically disappeared again. Even the production team themselves were unable to explain or deal with the existence of this arch. You are clutching at straws trying to find a way to explain why it's there. You wouldn't have to if the design made sense. When someone is forced to make up the existence of a railway viaduct that was demolished, except for one small arch, in order to justify a set piece that doesn't make any sense within it's setting there is a problem.
Yeah, I have to admit, I'd rather the arch didn't exist, but it being there can make sense when you think about it. I did kinda come up with the idea of it not being fully demolished due to to buisnesses being built into it. At the end of the day, I understand why it was built into the new set, but I hope it gets demolished when they gain permission to extend into the Crimea Street area in 10 or so years.
I really wouldn't hold your breath on them doing that. They are completely indifferent to the inconsistencies in the set design. I would imagine the arch is there to stay. It's a shame because I feel that they let the show down by not being as ambitious and creative as their competitors are. If you watch a show like River City, which is a Glasgow based soap opera, the set created for that show genuinely looks like it could be in Glasgow. It reflects the city, our history and our people. It's all living and breathing in that set. Even the design of the local cafe reflects the old art deco cafes we have in Glasgow opened by Italian immigrants who came to Scotland. There is a ship yard that reflects our shipbuilding heritage while there is even a tube stop that ties the show into the our underground network. Everything is considered and makes sense. It's good design that doesn't require viewers to explain away poor design decisions.
I think that in reality, removing cladding is pretty difficult, since I think it often damages the bricks. But I agree it should be painted over, and the interior was bad enough before but now it's even crazier with the random Cath Kidson knock off stuff they've added to the head-ache inducing mix!
I suppose it might have been a good idea to add some bigger Victorian housing to the set,but I doubt they'd ever use them. They don't use Victoria Court at all and would rather characters like Maria and Peter/Carla inexplicably living in tiny flats above shops.
Yeah, you're probably right. I do think the new set has really improved in some areas like Victoria Street and Viaduct Street though. I hope they do something with the new part of Victoria Court they introduced, SB did mention that the gym was going to be opened in "a complex of shops and restaraunts"
In a way though, I can kinda see why the interior of Tyrone's house is as it is, everything looks all over the place, which kinda relates to Fiz and Tyrone. Not to mention Tyrone did redecorate the house, with wallpaper that looked very similar to the old wallpaper, which was kind of funny.
Which mirrors the redesign of the Rovers. It's not believable but because of the misplaced nostalgia believability suffers.
True, but at least with Tyrone's house, the similarity was intentional within the context of the show.
Look forward not back I say, good that ITV are investing the cash.
Instead of the fake Stage One wall, perhaps the designers could have constructed a wall that matches the brickwork of the Viaduct Street arches? It would have been a bit more believable. The reason why I have an issue with the Stage One wall being there on the new set is because - like anndra_w says - it's a studio building which isn't meant to exist in Weatherfield. We clearly saw Jubilee Terrace and the other streets on the other side of the viaduct during the time of the tram crash in 2010.
There's another poor design feature I just realised. Look at how the viaduct and fake wall meets the MoSI facade and tell me there's space for a tram to get through!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30922768@N07/11119815684/in/set-72157638182852516
Looking at some of the pictures, I'm quite taken aback at just how imposing some of the surrounding buildings are on the new set, which really makes me question just how versatile it'll really be.
At Quay Street they only had the Granada Building and Beetham Tower to contend with, at Salford it looks as though they've got skyscrapers on all sides. I really am shocked. Long shots down the street will be more or less impossible now.
You'll make me blush.
I'm really enjoying being back in this thread, so I'll do my best to keep posting!
Hope you're well