20 Nov 2025 10:03:49
The planning application decision on developing the Earls Court site will be announced on 26th November, this is a monumental moment in our history and one that the owners hope will go in our favour. If the decision goes against the current owners of Earls Court then Blue.
Co hope to step in with a bid for part of the land in order to build a new stadium. If planning is granted then Chelsea FC has no other option than to remain at Stamford Bridge. At least we will know what direction this is going in and what are everyone hoping for?
20 Nov 2025 13:09:05
RPD, thanks for information mate. I guess that also explains why any SB development proposal wasn’t mentioned in the mins of recent FAB meeting.
20 Nov 2025 13:18:51
Thank you for the update RPD.
20 Nov 2025 14:06:59
I agree Tom, there has been nothing to report really since the owners took over as this Earls Court site is probably the last chance for the club to relocate and this planning outcome will then determine the next steps. Old Oak Common has been muted but again, until Earls Court is put to bed either way nothing can really be said but I do understand the owners are 100% behind increasing our match day fan base and whilst a move away from the Bridge makes most sense it is looking increasingly likely that a stand by stand redevelopment may well be the only way forward.
20 Nov 2025 16:46:41
Thank you for your update RPD.
20 Nov 2025 16:55:54
Despite my affiliation with SB, a move to a new site is my preference. We would be able to stay at the Bridge during the construction of a new stadium. Also, redevelopment of SB is fraught with difficulties, not least with planning permission; local ( affluent) residents have already joined forces to oppose any application.
That process would delay the project by at least a couple of years .
20 Nov 2025 18:21:27
The affluent should realise that having a major football club in their area is a big draw.
20 Nov 2025 19:33:00
I would love us to stay at Stamford Bridge but I think Jimbo is right that it will be a nightmare getting through all the planning hoops and what for? another 15,000 seats at a cost of hundreds of millions, it will take quite a few years to get the money back. This should of been dealt with many years ago but I think Roman had a little problem over his visa and pulled the plug on that stadium re-build, I think he even bought a brick company to make sure we had enough bricks to build the thing? didn't it start underground? I 'm happy as we are but I think we have about 30,000 on the season ticket waiting list so I suppose another 15,000 or 20,000 seats will allow more fans to watch live football.
20 Nov 2025 22:20:07
Greenaway, you are right. We might eventually get planning permission for redevelopment at SB, but highly unlikely for a 60,000 seater stadium. As you say the owners would have to consider whether the cost of adding X amount to the capacity is worthwhile given that you would want it to be multi-purpose to host other types of events.
I don’t blame Roman or the new owners for this problem; the location and physical environment surrounding SB has always been problematic to expansion of the stadium on the existing site.
21 Nov 2025 09:33:16
I agree Jimbo
Stadia nowadays are far more than football venues and if we stay at the Bridge, we will have the same problem with residents as do the owners of Twickenham.
21 Nov 2025 10:57:50
Bill, that is why the owners would prefer the move to Earls Court and explains the wait. This planning decision is monumental for our club and if the current owners of Earls Court succeed in gaining permission to develop on the 26th November we will almost certainly have to stay at Stamford Bridge and I would imagine overhaul what we have on a stand by stand basis and a few thousand more seats at best.
Jimbo is correct in all he says on this matter.
21 Nov 2025 12:10:38
Circumstances that are mainly out the club’s control will dictate the outcome. I’m not sure there is much blame to be attached to any owner!
21 Nov 2025 13:32:41
Been looking at all the stuff about the Birmingham City stadium, due for completion in 2030 (looks amazing btw), and thinking - come on Blue Co, pull your fingers out.
21 Nov 2025 16:45:33
So what advice would you give to Blue. co then J?
21 Nov 2025 21:46:10
RPD, exactly. We are located in a very expensive part of the capital city. Man U or Birmingham have no problem finding the land and gaining planning permission. i was born and bred in London, if I could have thought of a suitable location I would have informed Todd.
21 Nov 2025 22:37:49
Exactly Jimbo, maybe J has never been to Stamford Bridge or London.
22 Nov 2025 07:26:03
Whilst my comment was (I thought obviously) sarcastic, my advice to Blue Co, in particular the two arguing factions (Team Egbahli vs Team Boehly), would be to put egos aside and try and come to a decision that’s best for the club - I suppose that’s the problem with being owned by a consortium, not one clear voice.
Yeah, never been to either, I know nothing of the stadium or city. Maybe I should pop along sometime, take a ride on that big wheel thing and get a better appreciation of the complicated planing permission process. Whilst up there, I could see if I can spot a suitable chunk of land to point out to Todd. Just from looking at Google maps, ‘Hyde Park’ looks like it’s got some promise, although that lake would have to go. Anyway, got to go, those Yals won’t herd themselves.
22 Nov 2025 09:49:16
This will not go down too well, but what about moving away from the area completely.
We will never get what we want where we are located, and building stand by stand will probably bankrupt us as a club with costs rising by the day.
The residents will never allow any other form of entertainment other than our home games like the residents of Richmond and we will never be big enough for England games.
It makes absolutely no sense to stay at our present location and don't get me started on Fulham Broadway underground station.
22 Nov 2025 10:53:10
Bill, my guess is, if the club moves to far from its present home the CPO will not allow the use of the Chelsea name.
22 Nov 2025 16:44:52
No problem Tom, that should not stop us moving.
Just out of curiosity Tom, I know the CPO own the pitch but who owns the rest of the ground including terrace and outside area?
22 Nov 2025 16:56:59
The club.
22 Nov 2025 19:14:07
Interesting, so if we did move away, no football could be played at the Bridge unless the owners allowed access.
22 Nov 2025 19:53:39
Bill, its never going to happen mate?
If you follow your logic the current owners couldn’t develop anything in the pitch area.
I have given my guess what will happen.
If we can’t build a new stadium close to the current SB site then I believe our existing site will be developed stand by stand. Starting with the East and then The Shed.