Don't get me started on Pier B. Practically every airline consultation asked for its removal, but, good ol' penny pinching won the debate.
One of the proposed ideas was to run T2 to approximately where the old control tower is, join it up to T3 there and have 2 more finger piers in the space where the main area of T1 and the B pier is now.
Sounds like penny wise pound foolish. my guess renovating Pier B will turn out to be quite expensive when all is said and done, relative to replacing it. This would be especially true if it were done at the end of the project using the same building techniques that the new piers are using, the marginal cost will be quite low at that point. I would not be surprised to see that part of the plan evolve over the next 10 years.
Of course the challenge is how will they run the connection between what is now T2 and T3. That routing will determine future airside and stand development flexibility. If it is run in the wrong place landslide development will fill in the remaining space and basically limit future stand growth.
Incidentally, the distance from the current T2 security to the end of Pier B is over 1km. That's a pretty long way, longer than check-in to furthest gate at AMS or LGW, even LHR has shorter walks. The airport with longer distances often have transit systems. It is quite possible that MAN will have flight connection walking distances over 2km when all is complete, more than double what the longest walk is now (airside).