Chelsea’s plans for a £1bn new stadium is being held up by a family over right to light – and the lack of it shining into their home when the new Stamford Bridge is built.
The Crosthwaites have lived in their west London cottage for 50 years and the dispute has already put the brakes on the project’s investment, with a possibility that Europe’s most expensive stadium may not even get built.
The family of four; parents Lucinda and Nicolas, and children Louis and Rose, took out an injunction in May with a conviction that the towering new 60,000-capacity stadium will cast a permanent shadow over parts of their home.
The new stadium has been granted planning permission a year ago and signed off by the Mayor of London. Chelsea has called on the local council to intervene and take advantage of planning laws of section 203 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016, to stop the injunction from effectively ending the planned development.
What is the Family’s argument?
The Crosthwaites own a large house in an expensive part of West London where a three-bedroom property on the same street sold for £1.18m last year.
Chelsea’s offer, of legal advice worth £50,000 and further compensation understood to be a six-figure sum, could not persuade them to waive their ‘right to light’ in their home.
Daughter, Rose, says their home is the nearest property to the new stadium, and even though it’s on the other side of a railway from Stamford Bridge and in a different borough, she says “sunlight and daylight will be seriously affected”.
The Crosthwaites have said through lawyers that they are not opposed to the redevelopment of the stadium, and are suggesting the east stand in question could be “cut-back or re-designed so as not to cause interference”.
They have also highlighted a “disproportionate amount of hospitality seating” which takes up more space than normal seating.
They say there will be almost 17,000 hospitality seats, 28% of the total, and compare that to Arsenal’s Emirates Stadium, where hospitality comprises 16% of the capacity.
Chelsea’s response
Premier League champions, Chelsea, have said that the planning and development of their new stadium have been above board in every aspect.
A public consultation of 13,000 local residents earned 97.5% support, and they have paid compensation to other homeowners who have been affected, by losing their ‘right to light’.
Chelsea also claims the new stadium will “further enhance the economic, cultural and social services they provide”, including £6m worth of educational programmes, a £7m improvement to local infrastructure with an additional £16.3m spent in local businesses as 2.4 million people visit the area annually.
Chelsea’s urge for a better home
Chelsea’s owner, Abramovich, desire to increase Chelsea’s stadium capacity for several years has been thwarted in his previous attempts to buy Battersea Power Station, losing out to property developers.
If successful, the Blues would not be able to move into their new home until the 2024-25 seasons, yet it would, at last, put them in line with their main London rivals.
Eleven years ago, Arsenal built the 60,000 seat Emirates Stadium, in 2016 West Ham moved to the 57,000-capacity Olympic Stadium, and Tottenham is redeveloping their White Hart Lane ground at the moment.
The 41,000-capacity Stamford Bridge is the seventh biggest stadium used by a Premier League team, well behind Manchester United’s 75,500 -seat Old Trafford.
Meanwhile, Chelsea is yet to find a temporary home for the four years it might take to build the new stadium, but Wembley Stadium is being considered as a possible option.
