CarefreeMuratcan

Stamford Bridge Upgrades

Recommended Posts

Ham   
53 minutes ago, Flinkers said:

1:1.6 is usually a good ratio for safe standing areas but current Green Guide regulations permit up to 1:1.8

So, for example: Shed End = ca. 6800 x 1.6 = ca.  10880 spectators.

I 100% agree but someone will be along soon to tell you this is wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Flinkers said:

1:1.6 is usually a good ratio for safe standing areas but current Green Guide regulations permit up to 1:1.8

So, for example: Shed End = ca. 6800 x 1.6 = ca.  10880 spectators.

And current installations offer 1:1.  At Chelsea Egress is the limit anyway, so no increase can be gained

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flinkers   
9 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

And current installations offer 1:1.  At Chelsea Egress is the limit anyway, so no increase can be gained

We're already operating at under capacity, aren't we? Especially for European nights.

If we rip out the seats and replace them with rails and snap seats (which is what most clubs seem to be doing) then you're right. There'd be little to no increase, which is probably why the club has stated they've lost another 500 seats because of the installation.

If remedial works could be done to add an intermediate step between the rows, then that ratio should be theoretically achievable.

image.thumb.png.fbd3a8e9758bbb63c719f63a9f48013a.png

But then again our rows may not be deep enough to do that...

Edited by Flinkers
typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the capacity can't be increased, the psychological effect of having standing areas, dissuading non-singers from buying tickets there and encouraging singers to buy tickets there, as well as peer pressuring people who might be on the fence to sing, will at least have the result I have wanted for 10+ years since the atmosphere started becoming generally spotty except for the most important games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paulw66   
34 minutes ago, CarefreeMuratcan said:

Even if the capacity can't be increased, the psychological effect of having standing areas, dissuading non-singers from buying tickets there and encouraging singers to buy tickets there, as well as peer pressuring people who might be on the fence to sing, will at least have the result I have wanted for 10+ years since the atmosphere started becoming generally spotty except for the most important games. 

Agreed. Even if capacity doesn't increase, the atmosphere should improve. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   
8 hours ago, Flinkers said:

We're already operating at under capacity, aren't we? Especially for European nights.

If we rip out the seats and replace them with rails and snap seats (which is what most clubs seem to be doing) then you're right. There'd be little to no increase, which is probably why the club has stated they've lost another 500 seats because of the installation.

If remedial works could be done to add an intermediate step between the rows, then that ratio should be theoretically achievable.

image.thumb.png.fbd3a8e9758bbb63c719f63a9f48013a.png

But then again our rows may not be deep enough to do that...

Yes we are under egress capacity and the subject only came up when discussing the possibility of redeveloping the current stadium to 50,000 plus.  

Even with the potential of 1:1.8 for the affected areas we'd be fine.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   

Looks like the entire Shed Lower tier and possibly both tiers of the east corner are rail seating.

Screenshot_20210719-225135_Gallery.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone seen a permission to use rail seating being granted yet?  As in approval by the SGSA and SAG?
And will that be just for sitting on rail seats?

On 5/9/2021 at 9:47 PM, CarefreeMuratcan said:

https://www.chelseafc.com/en/news/2021/04/23/general-admission-season-ticket-and-matchday-pricing-frozen?cardIndex=0-2

"Rail seating installed

A further upgrade to Stamford Bridge that we are pleased to announce is the installation of rail seating in the Matthew Harding Lower and Shed End Upper and Lower tiers.

This change, which will be ready for the 2021/22 season subject to approval by the Sports Ground Safety Authority (SGSA) and its Safety Advisory Group (SAG), will enhance supporter safety by replacing the current seats in those sections of the stadium.

The decision is the result of many months of consultation with the SGSA and Hammersmith and Fulham Council, as well as work with independent architects to find the optimum solution for Stamford Bridge.

While the change will result in a loss of just over 500 seats in the areas concerned, we have decided to act now in order to be ready and prepared for any future government decision to introduce safe standing in Premier League stadia.

 

On 5/27/2021 at 9:24 PM, Flinkers said:

1:1.6 is usually a good ratio for safe standing areas but current Green Guide regulations permit up to 1:1.8

So, for example: Shed End = ca. 6800 x 1.6 = ca.  10880 spectators.

But if the change has lead to a loss of 500 seats that means 6300 / 6800 = 0.93 (7% loss)   so a 1 : 0.93 ratio

I know most installations to date are being done at 1:1  but I don't understand why we have lost seats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flinkers   
9 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

Has anyone seen a permission to use rail seating being granted yet?  As in approval by the SGSA and SAG?
And will that be just for sitting on rail seats?

 

But if the change has lead to a loss of 500 seats that means 6300 / 6800 = 0.93 (7% loss)   so a 1 : 0.93 ratio

I know most installations to date are being done at 1:1  but I don't understand why we have lost seats.

That’s just the sum of lost seats applied to one stand. The rail seating is being in the MHL too, so the losses are spread over ca. 10000 seats and not 7000. Still just a ratio of about 1:1 though.

The seats being wider, or the mounts for the flip seats taking up more space could be two reasons why we‘ve got a net loss in capacity.

The planning permission for the installation must be on the LBHF website somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Flinkers said:

That’s just the sum of lost seats applied to one stand. The rail seating is being in the MHL too, so the losses are spread over ca. 10000 seats and not 7000. Still just a ratio of about 1:1 though.

The seats being wider, or the mounts for the flip seats taking up more space could be two reasons why we‘ve got a net loss in capacity.

The planning permission for the installation must be on the LBHF website somewhere.

Interesting.  I'm not bothered about LBHF planning permission - they wouldn't be installed without that.  It is the Sports Ground Safety Authority (SGSA) and its Safety Advisory Group (SAG) that was mentioned in the original press release that I'm looking for.

And what is the point - unless someone allows fans to stand?  Unless this is actually a method to use the ground for other events such as a rock concert where convenient standing room / dancing room is a much bigger advantage.
 

Edited by Droy was my hero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now