After years of delay, Crystal Palace has made significant progress in the redevelopment of Selhurst Park.

However, they will be required to submit a new planning application, which could slow things down further, Athleticism understand.

Work has yet to start on the stadium, despite planning permission having been granted in principle and an agreement under Section 106 of the Planning Act 1990 – required for all major developments – to fund community works approved by the Mayor of London in 2020.

Still Athleticism may reveal that despite having to submit a new bid, a breakthrough seems closer after the club and Croydon Council held positive and constructive discussions.

These conversations included the possibility of using a compulsory purchase order (CPO) to buy a plot of land on the site which is currently owned by supermarket giant Sainsbury’s.

The board are believed to be ready to facilitate the CPO if Palace are willing to fund it. All parties are expected to be eager to see the redevelopment progress as quickly as possible.

Athleticism reported in April 2020 that a letter to Palace from the board had led to further discussions and that the Section 106 (S106) agreement had finally been reached. Other conversations are said to have taken place at the end of last year and have continued in this one, although it is only in these recent meetings that real progress has been made.

The proposed redevelopment would increase the capacity of the stadium, surrounded by south London residential streets, from 25,486 to 34,259.

A new main stand would accommodate 13,500 spectators – up from 5,627 currently – with a significant expansion of its corporate sections included. A restaurant and a commercial unit are also offered. The gap in the corner between the Holmesdale Road stand at the southern end of the stadium and the Arthur Wait stand on its eastern side would also be filled with an additional 683 seats.

However, an increase in pitch length from 101.5m to 105m (to make Selhurst Park compliant with UEFA regulations and eligible to host a football tournament) would result in a loss of 1,170 seats in the Whitehorse Lane Stand behind the north goal.

This is all progress, but a new planning application will now have to be submitted, as the conditions set out in the 2018 planning application are not in line with the London plan adopted in 2021 (which covers the development of the capital over the next 20 to 20 years). 25 years, and informs planning decisions).

If S106 had been signed before the adoption of the new London plan, this would not have been a problem and no new application would have been necessary.

It is understood that the process could take between several months and a year. Once it is approved by the council, which considers it a priority, it will also have to be approved again by the mayor of London.

This land owned by Sainsbury’s has always been a potential stumbling block.

Palace chairman Steve Parish has referred to what the club considers a “strip of land” which can only be used for its current purpose – as parking. It is this area that can be the subject of a CPO – where land can be acquired by a public body (in this case Croydon Council), without the consent of its owner.

Above, in red, the outline of the footprint of the redeveloped stadium.

A Sainsbury’s spokesperson said: “We are actively engaged in discussions with the owners of Crystal Palace FC. Our latest proposals represent what we believe to be a fair and commercial offer, and we remain committed to arriving at a solution that works for everyone.

In 2018, the club’s dedicated stadium website, which appears to be no longer active, said it believed the works would take “up to three years” at a cost of between £75m and £100m. S106 will also see the club contribute between £750,000 and £1million towards improving the area.

It is in the interests of all parties that this redevelopment be completed. Croydon Council are in serious financial trouble and declared bankruptcy in November 2020, while Palace would generate significant revenue by having much more hospitality space in a new main stand.

Another stumbling block was the acquisition of five council-owned houses and a private house in Wooderson Close, which backs onto what will become the stadium’s footprint at its south-west corner.

An agreement, known as the “Wooderson Close Agreement”, is in place with the council to complete S106.

This requires the club to provide 12 months’ notice of its intention to purchase the land, to ensure there is sufficient time to relocate existing residents while meeting the council’s ‘reasonable costs’ . The club would also pay a lump sum to the board for lost rental income.

Crystal Palace fans outside Selhurst Park (Photo: Justin Setterfield/Getty Images)

To meet the conditions of the draft plan for London set by the Greater London Authority, there must be “no net loss of affordable housing” and a “no net loss of housing scheme” (NNLD) in the borough.

Palace must therefore cover the cost of buying these homes and relocating displaced tenants, including removal costs and compensation of at least £6,000 each, as well as funding the construction of six four-equivalent homes rooms elsewhere. These should be located as close to the current site as possible.

Until the NNLD program has received planning permission, work on the stadium cannot begin. Affected residents say their lives are “on hold”.

Ashia Choudhury, who lives with her husband and two children, aged 21 and 10, in Wooderson Close, says Athleticism: ” I’m sick of waiting. They told us to move four years ago, they packed up my stuff, and then they couldn’t find us accommodation. We were sitting here in boxes.

“The replacement properties are supposed to be the same but the one they showed us was smaller than this so I turned it down. We were stuck here. Council says they will show us houses and then they don’t show us. It’s frustrating. It’s a disappointment because your life is on hold. I had to move my youngest child to another school.

Another group of residents of Wooderson Close, who have lived there for more than 20 years, say Athleticism : “At first we weren’t happy, but when we thought they had decided what to do, we just wanted a house the same size. This is all very confusing. We are getting old and there is nothing we can do. They added that they had had no contact from the club or the board since last year and could not plan for the future due to the uncertainty.

Among other terms of S106, the club is required to spend:

• £46,270 on pedestrian improvements to routes at three area stations – Selhurst, Thornton Heath and Norwood Junction – and bus shelters for Whitehorse Lane
• £15,000 towards the development of management plans for these stations
• £100,000 for improved cycle routes to the stadium
• £10,000 to develop the case and establish the scope of the ‘master plan’ for the regeneration of the wider area
• £100,000 on measures to encourage the use of sustainable modes of transport and reduce reliance on cars to get to and from the stadium.

Although it is understood that there is a firm commitment to the redevelopment of Selhurst Park, things could get complicated in the event that David Blitzer and Josh Harris, two of the four general partners who together own Palace, win the offer from their consortium to buy another Premier League club Chelsea.

The stadium redevelopment has already cost Palace more than £1million in preparatory work, but the project is seen as crucial to securing a more sustainable long-term future for the club by increasing revenue.

Palace has been approached for comment.

(Top photo: Sebastian Frej/MB Media/Getty Images)