5 minutes ago, Celery1989 said:

Fair point mate. I actually go to a handful of aways and in fairness do always appreciate being in the corner of an end, be it upper or lower. It just rankles me that the away fans get up to half the Shed when this is the stand that has been synonymous with our fans or decades. In the new ground they will definitely be in an end, just remains to be seen which one and why. I would have thought the Shed as this is easier to get in and out of. 

It's been confirmed by the club that away fans will be spread over three tiers in the south west corner of the new ground (so between the new Shed and West Stands) and they will have a dedicated entrance through the Bovril Gate.

13 hours ago, Celery1989 said:

Is anyone else concerned about what 3 years at a half-full Wembley will do to us? It's been shown that the big pitch doesn't do any favours for teams that play there and for the fans the area is rubbish as well. 

On the plus side, theres a lot more pubs suited for pre-match boozing around Wembley

3 hours ago, Celery1989 said:

Fair point mate. I actually go to a handful of aways and in fairness do always appreciate being in the corner of an end, be it upper or lower. It just rankles me that the away fans get up to half the Shed when this is the stand that has been synonymous with our fans or decades. In the new ground they will definitely be in an end, just remains to be seen which one and why. I would have thought the Shed as this is easier to get in and out of. 

Yes.  Reckon the police and safety people will have had their say and had a preference that visiting fans are at the Fulham Road end of the stadium.  Can remember when they experimented with giving West Ham the MHL for a cup game.  Wow,  that didn't go well and seemed a mad decision even before the match.    As Essex blue above says, the away fans will be over three tiers in a narrower strip so even with a full 3,000 allocation they will only have about a quarter of the stand instead of half the present Shed.   I guess for clubs who have smaller followings, they'll only get a corner of the lower tier.  Hopefully the club will work with the fans to get like minded singing supporters grouped together at both Wembley (if that's where we decamp to) and a new Stamford Bridge.  They have mentioned atmosphere in the planning documents with regard to the stadium design so are well aware of its importance.

23 hours ago, Xfaxtor said:

On the plus side, theres a lot more pubs suited for pre-match boozing around Wembley

That's a fair point. It's getting harder and harder to get a decent pre-match pint before home games, all the pubs/bars on or near to the Broadway have all had rubbish makeovers and even some of those by West Brompton have shut now.

Unfortunately the whole area around Wembley stadium is a dump and whilst the ground offers very good facilities it's not conducive to a good atmosphere either.

On 06/01/2017 at 15:32, Mr Parker's Dogbite said:

There are properties on Brompton Park Crescent behind the MH Stand and a larger stand there would presumably have to be taller and stretch much further back. I do see your point about the proximity of the West Stand and Oswald Stoll but maybe it's a matter of where the sun is in relation to the stadium over the course of the year.

Cheers for that MPD, as sad as this may sound i've actually had to google an image to see how far from the MH stand those properties are, i really didnt think there was any close enough to be affected, but your point about having a taller stand does make sense.

Regards away fans being up in the gods, ive seen so many Chelsea fans on social media saying "lets shove the away fans up in the west/east upper"(as SB is now) yeah because that'd really help our singing sections like the MHL wont it.

For atmosphere i think away fans should be next to any singing area the club introduces in the new stadium.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/jan/10/chelsea-stamford-bridge-stadium-plan

Would we be able to use the full capacity at Twickenham?

25 minutes ago, PythonLu said:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/jan/10/chelsea-stamford-bridge-stadium-plan

Would we be able to use the full capacity at Twickenham?

Thought Twickenham was done and dusted due to the locals.

https://twitter.com/danlevene

 

5 hours ago, Richard P said:

Thought Twickenham was done and dusted due to the locals.

Would be the ideal place to play while SB is under construction tho

11 hours ago, Richard P said:

Thought Twickenham was done and dusted due to the locals.

Same here, but that article in the Guardian gave me some hope :) 

I would prefer Twickenham, to be honest. The area seems to be nicer, and we could hopefully use the whole stadium. The fact that we'd have to leave half of Wembley empty is a major disadvantage, but that's just my opinion.

Twickenham is more difficult to get to, the only realistic way of getting there is by train, and it is quite out of central London. Wembley on the other hand has more options to get there, several tube lines, overground and rail, and it is thus closer to central London. Also, Wembley is 8000 seats bigger than Twickenham, so if we don't sell out Wembley, chances are that we don't either sell out Twickenham.

5 minutes ago, RMH said:

Twickenham is more difficult to get to, the only realistic way of getting there is by train, and it is quite out of central London. Wembley on the other hand has more options to get there, several tube lines, overground and rail, and it is thus closer to central London. Also, Wembley is 8000 seats bigger than Twickenham, so if we don't sell out Wembley, chances are that we don't either sell out Twickenham.

We won't be giving the full allocation  for Wembley. 

13 hours ago, Carshalton Blue said:

Regards away fans being up in the gods, ive seen so many Chelsea fans on social media saying "lets shove the away fans up in the west/east upper"(as SB is now) yeah because that'd really help our singing sections like the MHL wont it.

For atmosphere i think away fans should be next to any singing area the club introduces in the new stadium.

 

When the the away fans used to sit in the east stand lower next to the mhl the banter was good fun.  We can thank Jose for the change.

2 hours ago, PythonLu said:

Same here, but that article in the Guardian gave me some hope :) 

I would prefer Twickenham, to be honest. The area seems to be nicer, and we could hopefully use the whole stadium. The fact that we'd have to leave half of Wembley empty is a major disadvantage, but that's just my opinion.

It shouldn't give you hope. The writer obviously isn't that up to date with the goings on. Twickenham has been fully ruled out, the locals will not have a football club playing there. 

We will be at Wembley, the FA want the money and its the easiest solution. Even if I would personally prefer Twickenham.  

Also we can use the whole of Wembley for big games. Its not all games that are capped at 50k.

2 hours ago, benjsross said:

It shouldn't give you hope. The writer obviously isn't that up to date with the goings on. Twickenham has been fully ruled out, the locals will not have a football club playing there. 

We will be at Wembley, the FA want the money and its the easiest solution. Even if I would personally prefer Twickenham.  

Also we can use the whole of Wembley for big games. Its not all games that are capped at 50k.

Coincidently, there is another significant meeting being held tonight.   Councillors representing the London Borough of Brent wards surrounding Wembley Stadium are discussing a proposal by the Football Association to increase full capacity events at the stadium to 57 per year.    This is surely with both Spurs and likely Chelsea playing there in mind.

Really hope we get this approved, love the look of the plans.

Not so keen on Wembley though. Area surrounding it isn't nice, no nice boozers and very hard to get to from a lot of places.

If the council have recommended the plans be approved, what sort of percentages do we have of it being approved?

Surely the chances have to be pretty good. 

Edited January 11, 20179 yr by JM7

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-38572335

Would be great and I am not sure about other people but I would rather us stay at Stamford Bridge until the new stadium is ready. I don't like the idea of moving into a temp ground. You lose that connection and fortress feeling and while it says staying at the Bridge would be most expensive option, I would be happy with this than potentially groundsharing or using a stadium that is not ours.

Edited January 11, 20179 yr by STATS

2 hours ago, STATS said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-38572335

Would be great and I am not sure about other people but I would rather us stay at Stamford Bridge until the new stadium is ready. I don't like the idea of moving into a temp ground. You lose that connection and fortress feeling and while it says staying at the Bridge would be most expensive option, I would be happy with this than potentially groundsharing or using a stadium that is not ours.

I miss it already...

Sounds like a good meeting so far, everything gone well and then they adjourned to come back in a few minutes to talk nothing but Stamford Bridge

Meeting started about 7.30 pm descion expected about 10.00pm

planning officer: 1 year development while Chelsea still play there.  3 years playing elsewhere while it's completed 

6 minutes ago, mad_mac said:

planning officer: 1 year development while Chelsea still play there.  3 years playing elsewhere while it's completed 

Thanks for the updates!

"we believe development of Chelsea FC is integral to the prosperity of the borough.  The stadium will be seen across the world"

 

That's a pretty cool statement