WATCH: Ace New Two St Peter's Square Video

For once it's an issue with their site, Steve, not ours

A man who is to good architecture what Accrington stanley are to the Champions leauge.

Even if true your put-down would be atrocious. And you spelt league wrong.

Is this the same Anonymous mouthing off each time?

I enjoyed the video, flythroughs are often pretty pointless. I see the trams don't appear to be running though ...

I was there this morning and, sadly, part of the back has already gone.

Why haven't you chained yourself to the building?

Quite right, and I hope you are right about the result being as substantial as the visualisations look. I would suggest that, after a period where Mr Simpson seemed to have lost his creative mojo and was turning out some pretty formulaic stuff, this may represent a return to form. Hope so anyway, the man has shown genius in the past.

Also, are the trees that have been planted in the square so far actually Lilac trees?

I thought cyclists consider footpaths to be "dedicated cycle access". That's certainly how they behave as they rudely barge past pedestrians on a daily basis. On your substantive point, I given that St Peter's Square runs NE to SW I don't think it will have that much impact on light in what is a pretty large plaza. We're getting a beautiful new square, that even Ian Simpson doesn't appear to be ruining. Why complain all the blooming time!

Smitty, given the choice of road or paths I'm not surprised if some chose the path. If cyclists had dedicated lanes then they would use them. And I don't mean a green strip of tarmac, I mean the vastly superior type you get in other European cities that embrace cycling.

Smitty, It is NE-SW than I would have imagined, but still, you can see where the shadows are falling from the much shorter buildings on the satellite view ( goo.gl/…/iKA5I… ), beside which, it's about the feel and the aspect of the place, dominated by these huge characterless corporate looking towers. Re: cycling, it's nice to hear you think it's understandable and fair for people on bikes to use footways in the absence of anything better - I'm sure you'll be sticking up for them when they do - but actually it's less than ideal for everyone concerned so it just leads to more congestion and parking problems.

All I ask is that cyclists obey the rules of the road as pedestrians are the ones who come off worst! Perhaps cyclists could learn from the rather more polite class of rider you see in other European cities and pedestrians would be more sympathetic to their "plight". I don't understand how you think that St Peter's Square is characterless. No 1 looks great, the side bit on No 2 has the potential to look lovely and complement the town hall extension (although let's reserve judgement till we see it), and on the other side we have the best buildings in the city! Apart from the Blob it will be one of the best spaces in Manchester when finished. But, hey, keep complaining.

Anyone above the age of ten who is cycling on the pavement is breaking the law and it's about time the police started fining cyclists who cycle on pavements.When some idiot cycles at high speed behind you on a pavement you never hear his approach like with a car or motorbike and if you move for some reason in your direction,they are going to crash into you.Also there are the ones who cycle full pace down pavement toward where there is a bend and again expect you to get out the way.Then there are the ones who think the rules about stopping at traffic lights and pedestrian crossing don't apply to them.The excuse from cyclists is always about how motorists treat them badly but that's no excuse for their behaviour and attitude to pedestrians,who by the way also have to deal with drivers who don't stop at lights and other things.If cyclists won't keep off pavements then pedestrians should use all their new cycle paths in return.