Bridge of sighs

Chelsea stadium plans on hold

Chelsea insist Roman Abramovich has not yet scrapped his plans to build a new stadium, despite the club admitting that planning permission for the project will be allowed to expire, and with the coronavirus crisis casting further doubt on whether it will ever get off the ground again.

Planning permission for the 60,000-capacity stadium that some had likened to a “football cathedral” was granted three years ago on the premise that work would start before March 31, 2020.

Abramovich hit the pause button on the project almost two years ago, following the refusal of the UK government to grant Chelsea’s Russian owner his tier-one visa, and the club have now effectively returned to stage one of the project with the imminent expiry of planning permission.

Given Abramovich has made no attempt to reapply for his visa and has not been seen at Stamford Bridge for two years, there was already no prospect of the necessary work starting by the end of this month.

As part of the planning permission, Chelsea had agreed to have started the demolition of all the buildings on the site around the stadium, including the two hotels, by Tuesday.

The fact that one of the hotels is being used by NHS staff – at Abramovich’s expense – during the coronavirus crisis only highlights the new reality in which everybody is living and working.

Chelsea had pointed to the “unfavourable investment climate” in their 2018 statement confirming that the stadium had been shelved, with uncertainty over a post-Brexit landscape.

But there is even more doubt over what the post-coronavirus landscape might look like and it was noticeable Chelsea made no effort to reassure fans that a new planning application would be submitted or that the project would be looked at again by a certain date.

Confirming the planning permission would be allowed to lapse, a Chelsea statement said: “Chelsea Football Club acknowledges that the planning permission we obtained for a new stadium expires on March 31, 2020.

“We are grateful to all our fans and stakeholders, especially Hammersmith and Fulham Council, for their patience and understanding in the matter. We will continue to consider our options for a new stadium, should economic conditions improve.”

There is a 180-year lease on the ground with Chelsea Pitch Owners, the shareholders of which are mainly fans who own the freehold as guardians of the club’s longevity at Stamford Bridge. CPO gave its approval to moving out of Stamford Bridge temporarily while a new stadium was built, but it has no idea if and when that will happen.

Charles Rose, the outgoing CPO chairman who co-signed the planning application with Chelsea chairman Bruce Buck, said: “The confirmation [of the lapsing of permission] represents the biggest missed opportunity in the lifetime of most Chelsea fans.

“Many of us who have supported the club’s efforts in this regard over the last 10 years will feel let down that we are back to where we started. In order to remain as a top English and European force, Stamford Bridge must either be rebuilt or at least redeveloped, and it appears the club are now not listening to any alternatives, which is disappointing.”

CPO spokesperson Ginette Gower said: “We are of course aware that the planning permission for the new stadium expires at the end of this month. We respect the decision not to go ahead at the current time.”

It was originally estimated that the new stadium would cost around £1billion and require the club to move to a temporary home for three years. But industry experts believe both predictions were hugely optimistic and that it would more likely cost closer to £2billion and take at least seven years.

Hammersmith and Fulham council had agreed plans to build a platform across the District Line to the west of the stadium, and the Southern mainline to the east, to accommodate the asymmetrical design.

It had also approved the plan to dig down to create the depth of the stadium bowl necessary to increase the capacity on a site previously thought too small for a ground of that size.

But a source with knowledge of big building projects told The Sunday Tele

graph: “The plan makes no business sense whatsoever. Given how much it would cost and how long it would take, the stadium would be nothing but a vanity project. You could develop Stamford Bridge for half the cost and half the time.”

With a capacity of 41,631 at Stamford Bridge and without the promise of a new stadium and the associated revenue streams, Chelsea’s need to qualify for the Champions League regularly would appear greater than that of their rivals.

The doubts over Abramovich’s longterm commitment will also remain while the future of the stadium remains in limbo. Whether or not the investment environment ever improves, there is no point in Abramovich building a cathedral in which he cannot worship or be worshipped.