Apparently, "big moves on the construction front are to be announced by the end of the season which are going to be very well received by Chelsea fans."
"Agreements in principle with Network Rail and the local authority over the expansion have already been reached according to some. An extra tier on the Mathew Harding stand, with the condition that a bridge is built over the railway line, by the club will get the ok from the council."

Views of the MH Stand (and East Stand) where the exapansion will be affected
"They know we're effectively landlocked and with the current climate on high end domestic property, the Stamford Bridge land value wouldn´t yield as much as first envisaged – not the time to move on - It's the right time to allow it to happen as construction is on its backside and contract costs make it viable."
The safety issues which the local council has used to keep us in check (even going back to the days of Bates) have been overcome.
"A means of escape is resolved now via Brompton which the fire officers had never previously taken too."
Although we know just how some of these rumours work (…a mate of mine whose girlfriend knows the daughter of Ethel, the players tea lady, overheard this the day “blah blah blah…”) this particular one was in circulation some time ago and has resurfaced very recently – most importantly, it aligns with Kenyon’s declaration in an interview with BBC´s Mihir Bose that we are looking to stay at the Bridge and a further separate rumour a few months ago that the club had finally thawed out a stubborn local council.
Apparently the draft plans "look incredible and would put capacity at c.65k" - although I would seriously doubt this figure. Kenyon has already said that the most we could expand by is around 10,000 more giving us a capacity of around 52,000 – but not having seen the plans and with the possibility that the extra tier would include the MH wrap-arounds we shall see.
Clutching at too many rumours? Possibly (No, definitely! – Ed) but there seems to be just too much smoke on this one for there not to be any fire at all.
Kenyon from some months ago (around 8 mins 40 secs into the interview he comments on the Bridge)
http://uk.truveo.com/Indepth-interview-Chelseas-Peter-Kenyon/id/3006081829
![]()
Earlier renovation work at Stamford Bridge
At a fans forum some time ago the club were asked about a move or staying:
“We are continuing to look at the options, but are limited on all fronts. There are major issues regarding the first choice of increasing capacity at Stamford Bridge because the ground is hemmed in on all sides.
“A 60,000 seater stadium takes 20 acres and Stamford Bridge has a maximum of 13. The Club is currently at the maximum capacity for a site of this size. However, finding a 20 acre site nearby is extremely difficult. Negotiations would have to be conducted with the CPO as well.
“The Club has not exhausted the possibilities of Stamford Bridge. Moving to a new stadium from start to finish takes a minimum of 5 years anyway.” (In a straw poll of the Forum, fans were overwhelmingly against the idea of moving location, even within an arbitrary 5 mile radius).
Earls Court Exhibition Centre with their huge Seagrave Road car park has been mentioned in the press as a site for a move along with Stratford's Olympic Stadium, Battersea power station and White City in west London.
Of course, the reasons for a move or an extended Bridge are two-fold; an increase in match day revenue that will boost annual turnover figures and a current list of 65,000 members (besides 24,000 ST holders - the club restricts the amount to this figure) that could see more Chelsea matches at the Bridge.With the club confident of sustained success the members figure would increase further.
.
(continue to part 2)
Bookmark or share this story with:
Related Articles:
