Some of the CPO members i know are more worried about having to travel a little bit longer than the future of the club. Some of them get a 10 minute bus to the ground. It takes me nearly two hours. I think some of them are more worried about travel time than they are about the actual future of our club.

Thats just my personal opinion and of course it doesnt count for all CPO memebers.

LDS to look at Chelsea capacity

Posted on Jun 24, 2014

Chelsea FC have appointed Lifschutz Davidson Sandilands to study how they could increase capacity at their Stamford Bridge home.

The study will look at different improvement options for Stamford Bridge, which could include decking over the railway line to the east and the north of the stadium. This follows the failure to find an appropriate site within either the Earls Court or Battersea Power Station regeneration schemes.

In a statement Chelsea FC said: “A study of the area from Fulham Broadway town centre to Stamford Bridge and beyond has been commissioned by Chelsea Football Club’s owner Roman Abramovich.

“This study will review the potential for improvements to publicly-owned areas along Fulham Road and the area around the football ground, including the possibility of decking over the railway lines to the east and north of the ground. This could create landscaped public walkways and cycleways, while also reducing pedestrian traffic on Fulham Road and nearby streets on match days.

“The study will also assess the feasibility of an expansion of the stadium within the existing historic site boundaries, potentially to enlarge its capacity, enhance its facilities and improve the movement of people and vehicles on match and non-matchdays.”

Chelsea Pitch Owners, the company separate to the Football Club, who own the actual pitch, said: “We have recently been invited to meet consultants appointed by Mr Abramovich to consider improvements to the area surrounding Stamford Bridge, including, potentially, walkways over the adjacent rail tracks that may allow an increase in stadium capacity. However, this is a consultation exercise and as far as we know the Club has no specific plans at present either to expand Stamford Bridge, or to move to a new ground. We continue to engage constructively with the Club.”

Hammersmith & Fulham Council has said on a number of occasions that they see Chelsea FCs future at Stamford Bridge, and that they believe capacity improvements could be made on that site. However, the recently elected Labour administration has made no statement as yet.

Edited June 24, 201412 yr by fitz

Good I hope we stay. Keep some of the clubs identity. How any true supporter could want to move is beyond me. 

the CPO have long been protecting the interests of Chelsea and Stamford Bridge. i trust those members to do what is right, as loyal, long-standing supporters. if they felt there wasnt a strong enough case for moving, or that the proposal wasnt good enough then i trust them in that decision. Its one of the few occassions where fans get a voice in important matters at our football club, and we should back those fans 100%. God knows enough of us moan when we dont get a say in what goes on, so why criticise those who stand up for us when they are allowed a vote? (Not a dig at you personally enders, just a general point!)

I'm sure Mr Bean would genuinely give being Prime Minister his best shot.

Just to throw it out there, could R A sell all the land around the pitch and leave a 112x 75 yd approx green space and move to a new site?

Just to throw it out there, could R A sell all the land around the pitch and leave a 112x 75 ydip approx green space and move to a new site?

The CPO would still own the name chelsea

The CPO would still own the name chelsea

thought pitch owners only had rights to football being played at stamford bridge and no other use.

thought pitch owners only had rights to football being played at stamford bridgeu and no other use.

As far is I'm aware the cpo have the name chelsea aswell. Could be wrong Richard

As far is I'm aware the cpo have the name chelsea aswell. Could be wrong Richard

They do indeed.

The irony is that the CPO still owe Chelsea the vast bulk of the loan that the club advanced the CPO to buy the freehold and the rights re the name. Very little of the loan has ever been paid back to the club.

As far is I'm aware the cpo have the name chelsea aswell. Could be wrong Richard

No your right G. Pitch, turnstiles and Naming rights. I just hope it gets sorted soon. Looked through the whole thread and some varied opinions. New ground people say lost soul of Club and will new stadium have any atmosphere. Stay where we are and can't increase capacity, will be hard to keep up with FFP. Roman apparently bought the shopping centre at Fulham Broadway a while ago. I think he didn't realise that the Local council couldn't be persuaded like maybe in his own country!! The idea of a walk way from ground to Fulham Bdy and station by East stand would help foot fare on Fulham Rd. Get rid of 1st Hotel, which at best breaks even ( apparently). Redevelop both ends and maybe everyone would be happy. If he walked away and bubble burst, I wonder how many would be in the ground from past 10 years? With people in their 40s and above in say late 1970s Early 1980s we might have lost some True Blues and others being priced out. What would be our core support. Regarding atmosphere no excuses, enjoy away games more than home games. Up in the MHU not as loud as it use to be.

This is where we should have been playing, I cannot understand why people cant accept our present site is way way too small, its not about wanting to leave the Bridge, the Bridge just isnt viable for what we require in a stadium

Well this is a first for me trying to hold down the bile and not punching my laptop. This is so wrong so f**king wrong look at that i honestly can't believe that a Chelsea fan would want us to move to this. To all old Shed boys hand on heart what's Chelsea all about  6,000 at home to Orient or a 55.000 stadium full of Jeremy's and Prunellas

This is where we should have been playing, I cannot understand why people cant accept our present site is way way too small, its not about wanting to leave the Bridge, the Bridge just isnt viable for what we require in a stadium

That was a fantasy...looks great but they were never interested in chelsea moving in

Well this is a first for me trying to hold down the bile and not punching my laptop. This is so wrong so f**king wrong look at that i honestly can't believe that a Chelsea fan would want us to move to this. To all old Shed boys hand on heart what's Chelsea all about  6,000 at home to Orient or a 55.000 stadium full of Jeremy's and Prunellas

 

Take your point mate but times have changed. Football is so radically different now to what it was back in your day. The reality is that, for Chelsea to keep up with the other top clubs in the world, we need a bigger ground.

 

I dislike the fairweather lot who turned up post-Abramovich as much as anyone else but the truth is that we need people like them to fill out the ground and to keep the club competitive. The hardcore ST holders alone just aren't enough any more, given how paramount financial considerations are these days.

Edited June 25, 201412 yr by Celery1989

Take your point mate but times have changed. Football is so radically different now to what it was back in your day. The reality is that, for Chelsea to keep up with the other top clubs in the world, we need a bigger ground.

 

I dislike the fairweather lot who turned up post-Abramovich as much as anyone else but the truth is that we need people like them to fill out the ground and to keep the club competitive. The hardcore ST holders alone just aren't enough any more, given how paramount financial considerations are these days.

Yes your right but it's not for me. I just can't watch Chelsea anywhere but the bridge. I have real doubts that a 55,000 plus stadium will be the massive success a lot of people think it will be.

Yes your right but it's not for me. I just can't watch Chelsea anywhere but the bridge. I have real doubts that a 55,000 plus stadium will be the massive success a lot of people think it will be.

I would love to stay as well but if it's the best thing for the club then I would back it. I remember when it was going all seater and people were saying can't go to the ground when it's all seated. People came round to it. Let's face it the Shed on big games is half occupied by AWAY fans!!! I wouldn't have thought that when I walked up those steps to the side of the white wall in 1978. Maybe there should be plans if we do move to make sure like minded people have an area to be together and get some old fashioned atmosphere back.

When you got the atmosphere generated by the West Stand and Gate 13 of the East Stand especially in the mid 80s Chelsea was a really intimidating place. All our firm used to sit at away games the first i saw them do that was at Orient in 1981. What i'm saying is sitting was never the problem for most Chelsea fans and we were the first fans to do this certainly in London and i can only think off the top of my head Leeds in 1983 where there most vociferous fans where in the seats behind the goal. A new stadium will bring with it eye watering ticket prices which is going to out price swathes of our support. Don't forget our crowds weren't great when cup games and Champions League tickets were full price.

Yes was at Leeds 83/84 in the seats at the side, we had about 8-9000 that day. I must admit from being on benches of gate 13 I would always try and get seats rather than stand away. If the ground was bigger, I can't see the need to charge more as the extra revenue would come from extra seats.

Yes was at Leeds 83/84 in the seats at the side, we had about 8-9000 that day. I must admit from being on benches of gate 13 I would always try and get seats rather than stand away. If the ground was bigger, I can't see the need to charge more as the extra revenue would come from extra seats.

Your right there is no need to charge more but i still think they would. For arguements sake let's say we moved in 10 years how much would the cheapest ticket for a Cat AA game be?. The average fan is priced out as it is and i just can't see who will be able to afford those prices with family commitments etc coming first on the list of peoples priorities.

Arsenal's prices have risen & they have an extra 25,000 tickets to sell, anyone who thinks Chelsea & most clubs wont fleece their fans for more money when they move to a bigger ground is deluded, lets see how much WHU charge home & away fans when they move, bet it'll be £60+.

Your right there is no need to charge more but i still think they would. For arguements sake let's say we moved in 10 years how much would the cheapest ticket for a Cat AA game be?. The average fan is priced out as it is and i just can't see who will be able to afford those prices with family commitments etc coming first on the list of peoples priorities.

We're not far off £100 a ticket now for some games in the west upper, I dread to think how much it'll be in 10 yrs time.

Chelsea will not fill a 60,000 seater stadium

Edited June 25, 201412 yr by bluegraham

Chelsea will not fill a 60,000 seater stadium

 

At current prices, no. But at, say, £25-30 a ticket (which would probably never happen), I reckon we would. The fanbase is there.

At current prices, no. But at, say, £25-30 a ticket (which would probably never happen), I reckon we would. The fanbase is there.

Yeah we would at them prices but the club will never cut ticket prices.

Chelsea will not fill a 60,000 seater stadium

/\ This. A bigger stadium has done lots for Arsenal in the way of success.

60,000 tickets at £35=£2,100000 42,000 TICKETS AT £65(current average price)=£2,730000. Where's the advantage in moving?