Chelsea have been urged to act quickly and make a final decision on a proposed stadium move away from Stamford Bridge.
The club had planned a relocation to Earl's Court and are now under pressure to make their next steps after Kensington Council approved alternative plans for the site, according to The Guardian.
Clock ticking on Earl's Court move
Chelsea remain yet to make a decision on how to expand on the current capacity of approximately 41,000, with both an expansion of their present home and a relocation floated.
Since the arrival of Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital as owners in May 2022, a ground expansion has been a clear priority for the club hierarchy, however progress has been slow thus far with tensions between Boehly and the Investment group highlighted as an obstacle alongside the costs.
A move to Earl's Court was believed to be the best and most realistic solution for the club by those familiar, given the lack of any other available sites.
While possible, a Stamford Bridge redevelopment is also seen as challenging, with a stand-by-stand rebuild deemed unattractive and a complete demolition forcing the Blues to play elsewhere for several years.
Following the progression of other plans for the site, a key figure in London politics stated it was time for Chelsea to “put up or shut up” and make clear whether their plans for an Earl's Court move are serious, with the estimated land value expected to rise from £500m to £750m given the planning permission now in place.
While still considering their options, the Blues had reportedly identified the Lilie Bridge depot area within Earl's Court for their new stadium, with chief excecutive Jason Gannon reportedly meeting real estate developers and Transport for London to discuss plans, with political belief that a multiuse stadium would benefit the local economy.
In order for plans to go ahead, Chelsea would need to take action before construction contracts are in place.
Competing plans for Earl's Court site?
Chelsea reached the biggest stumbling block of their proposed move when the Earls Court Development Company (ECDC) received planning permission for their proposals for the site, namely a £10bn housing and retail development.
The ECDC received unanimous approval from Hammersmith and Fulham Council in November, with room not available for a football stadium should plans go ahead as proposed.
After previous concerns over the ECDC's plans, with the future of the site being a contentious issue in London, the group received no opposition to their plans at the latest council meeting, while garnering more reported support from London politicians.
London Mayor Sadiq Khan will soon be asked to endorse the plans, and it is believed to be unlikely that these will be rejected, with 4,000 new homes, 35% of which being designed to be affordable, proposed.
FGG says: Chelsea should act quick to secure optimal site
Among the Premier League's top clubs, it is clear that Chelsea are at a financial disadvantage given the relatively small size of their Stamford Bridge home, and neighbours Tottenham Hotspur are a clear case study for a new stadium opening up new opportunities and making a costly move worthwhile.
A redevelopment of Stamford Bridge on the same footprint is bound to cause major issues for the Blues for a number of years, forcing them to seek another home for several years regardless, and as such Earl's Court should be viewed as the best option in their area.