Stamford Bridge Thread

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

But didn't the previous studies show that it's not safely possibly to increase the capacity?

Engineering is always moving forward. But beyond that I think the end game is to try and buy out some of the local businesses (it won't be cheap) and redesign the infrastructure so there its easily accessible for the supporters. The big problem I see is the Railroad.

[Symbol123 175]

They've already started building on it, there are cranes, foundations etc. all over the site

There have been continuing doubts about Tan's ability to raise the funds he promised for the development of the area. (The costs involved with making the Power station fit for habitation are set to spiral)

And without those funds/promises being met, his planning permission can be withdrawn.

So while its probably out of our grasp, theres a small chance that it could still be available.

[We Hate Scouse 10,326]

But didn't the previous studies show that it's not safely possibly to increase the capacity?

I thought it was more the fact it wouldn't be financelly viable to build. We wouldn't start seeing the benefits of it for 20-25 years.

[The only place to be 11,313]

Always nice to hear official stuff from the club about stadium expansion/relocation but I don't see what's changed beyond the recent elections putting a Labour council in charge. If I were to be cynical then I would say this is the club making it very clear that they're exhausting all possibilities with regards expanding on the current plot so as to appease the CPO before submitting a new plan to move. Earls Court could face some issues with the new Labour council but even then there's absolutely no guarantee a stadium would fit with the redesigned plans whilst the Battersea redevelopment would really need to face some catastrophic funding issues for that to be a possibility again....although it's Battersea Power Station so that's not exactly beyond the realms of possibility based on it's history.

With a new council being elected there's always a sense of a fresh start so maybe there's some hope to be had there but my gut feeling is that this might just lead to some minor tinkering with regards egress areas. Looking at the land we actually have, a 60,000 seat stadium would probably require something radical happening and some time at another stadium (always thought Twickenham was a possibility).

Just got to hope for the best and some friendly, open, engaged minds on the council.

[We Hate Scouse 10,326]

Just got to hope for the best and some friendly, open, engaged minds on the council.

Hahahahaha wishful thinking. Friendly, open and engaged councillors?

[The only place to be 11,313]

Hahahahaha wishful thinking. Friendly, open and engaged councillors?

Reading the statement and it's very heavy on the 'improving publicly-owned' areas bit which might appeal to a Labour council and the fact that they're looking to get locals on-board with anything right from the very start suggests this is probably a long-term thing.

Looking at it cynically though and it could just be a token gesture that they know will lead nowhere and once again reinforce the notion that we need to move elsewhere, but whatever happens a 60,000 seater stadium is some way off.

[quickpassnmove 924]

I've no idea about the local politics, so I'm curious if anyone thinks Labour representatives could help CFC get permission to build another tier on the NE side of the stadium, over the train tracks and into the adjacent park (which wouldn't be too intrusive, it would seem).

[xPetrCechx 13,570]

Always nice to hear official stuff from the club about stadium expansion/relocation but I don't see what's changed beyond the recent elections putting a Labour council in charge. If I were to be cynical then I would say this is the club making it very clear that they're exhausting all possibilities with regards expanding on the current plot so as to appease the CPO before submitting a new plan to move. Earls Court could face some issues with the new Labour council but even then there's absolutely no guarantee a stadium would fit with the redesigned plans whilst the Battersea redevelopment would really need to face some catastrophic funding issues for that to be a possibility again....although it's Battersea Power Station so that's not exactly beyond the realms of possibility based on it's history.

With a new council being elected there's always a sense of a fresh start so maybe there's some hope to be had there but my gut feeling is that this might just lead to some minor tinkering with regards egress areas. Looking at the land we actually have, a 60,000 seat stadium would probably require something radical happening and some time at another stadium (always thought Twickenham was a possibility).

Just got to hope for the best and some friendly, open, engaged minds on the council.

So what our best option?

[The only place to be 11,313]

So what our best option?

Honestly, I don't know. Maybe suck it up, spend £600 million knocking the stadium down hoping the council help us acquire the extra land we would need and spend three years playing somewhere like Twickers. Battersea was probably the ideal place with Earls Court a close second. Whatever happens the club needs to be open and honest with the CPO.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Question: How does the cost of building a new stadium or even rebuilding an existing one factor in with FFP? Surely there must be something in there about it or no team in Europe would be able to build a new stadium and keep a positive balance.

[The Skipper 20,609]

Question: How does the cost of building a new stadium or even rebuilding an existing one factor in with FFP? Surely there must be something in there about it or no team in Europe would be able to build a new stadium and keep a positive balance.

To my knowledge, I think I was reading it up the other day... Building a new stadium won't come up as an expense under FFP. It comes under one of the exceptions.

[zyzz 711]

Question: How does the cost of building a new stadium or even rebuilding an existing one factor in with FFP? Surely there must be something in there about it or no team in Europe would be able to build a new stadium and keep a positive balance.

Investments in the stadium or other facilities are excluded from the FFP