New stadium advisor gives update on council requests, capacity and idea of Milan-only project

By Oliver Fisher -

One of the key figures advising AC Milan over the new stadium project has given an update on the current state of play and confirmed the possibility of building a new home just for the Rossoneri.

The work of Inter and Milan continues for the construction of a new stadium but it continues to encounter delay after delay with the various processes that the two sides must go through and the general bureaucracy of building on public land in Italy.

It was three years ago that the Rossoneri and the Nerazzurri jointly launched the plans but there has not been a huge amount of progress to the extent where breaking ground is imminent, leading to speculation about moving somewhere else in the city where there could be less restrictions.

Giuseppe Bonomi is an advisor to the Rossoneri over the construction of the new San Siro or a new stadium project in general and he spoke on Radio Rossonera to take stock of the situation, with his comments relayed by Calciomercato.

“The public debate meetings closed in mid-November, but in reality the indications from the council finally reached us in the second half of January. This is because there was an order in mid-December of the day voted by the Council of Milan which substantially adhered to the spirit of the proposal by setting some additional conditions to those that had been imposed on us in the past,” he began.

“The council declined the conditions that we should incorporate in the context of the update of the PFTE, of the ‘Preliminary Project’, the Technical and Economic Feasibility Project of the work.

“What are mainly these indications? A substantially further economic effort: the Municipality is asking us to allocate 40 million euros to projects of public interest outside the area where the new stadium will be built.

“We were then asked to increase the green areas: the entire surface of the area involved in our proposal is 280,000 square meters, and the council is asking us to allocate half of it to green areas. Not only that, they then ask us to study engineering solutions that allow the new stadium to be as far away as possible from via Tesio.

“They then ask us to increase the capacity of the stadium up to 70,000 seats without changing the size of the proposal. Lastly, we were asked to obtain the so-called ‘carbon neutrality’, therefore not to emit CO2 during construction sites.

“The latter is an impossible feat: normally this is obtained with environmental compensation, or by going to buy environmental credits elsewhere (investing in other parts, even outside the country of origin, in environmental interventions). This too will represent a burden from the economic point of view of the operation.

“We are evaluating these conditions with our technicians also in order to be able to give a precise answer to the council on the technical-economic possibility of implementing the new indications.

“New, because other requirements have been imposed on us over the last 3 years. Last but not least, a drastic reduction in the volumes that can be built on the area: we started from a volumetric index of almost 0.7 square meters per square meter, while the council has imposed a reduction to 0.35. It is easy to understand how this has created difficulties for us in identifying the economic sustainability of the intervention.

“Is there any possibility of modifying it? Definitely yes, but up to what extent I will only be able to respond to after the outcome of the technical insights we are carrying out. A possibility of increasing the capacity compared to the original proposal of 60/65 thousand is certainly possible.

“However, let’s keep in mind that one of the main reasons that drives us to invest in a new structure is to have a modern system, such as to be able to increase stadium revenues and place us in a competitive line compared to the big European clubs, which on average collect 80-90 million euros more each year than Milan.

“How do you increase revenues? Providing various spaces for the so-called ‘hospitality’: places that can be the subject of season tickets with much higher prices than the ordinary prices of a single place.

“During the debate we tried to explain that the introduction of these spaces will allow us to implement a pricing policy on the remaining part of the stadium that allows anyone access to the stadium, while maintaining affordable prices.

“I think it’s the right balance seen and considering that the increase in revenues represents the main lever for regaining competitiveness at an international level, hence the need for a new modern stadium. In our country the stadiums are obsolete, the last stadium built is that of Juventus, we are talking about 15 years ago.”

On a possible restriction on the current San Siro: “We are less alarmed than the council is. From a legal point of view, we believe that any restriction imposed would be illegitimate. There is a restriction that concerns a facility over seventy years of age, but what existed 70 years ago was a building organism totally different from what exists today.”

Is there confidence that it can be closed by the end of this year to begin construction in 2023?

“Yes, by 2024, but not at the beginning of the year: complicated phases of the procedure are still needed, especially in a country like ours which has an enormous mass of procedures that would seem to discourage any investment.

“We want to be determined to the end, I personally have just returned from having followed numerous procedures of this type such as the new Malpensa airport and I found myself faced with rules that almost seem to dissuade investment… It must be said, however, that we are and will be capable once started the project to make up for the time initially lost.”

Why the new San Siro and not moving to Sesto San Giovanni?

“Like Milan, we have examined and are also examining alternative areas to San Siro, with the investment which in this case would start as an exclusive investment by Milan. Among these areas there is certainly the Sesto area, an area that would lend itself as well as others, equally interesting.

“If, unfortunately, the plan we made on the current San Siro area is aborted, we don’t want to be caught unprepared and we won’t. I am convinced that even in the unfortunate event that we were to abandon the project that we have been carrying out for three years, we would be ready to make up for lost time in other areas.

“What is certain is that the current San Siro area has a particular appeal. First of all for its location: it is located in the northwest quadrant of Milan, the area with the greatest turnout of our fans. But it also has an appeal in terms of tradition, given that San Siro has always been our home.

“I am not nostalgic and I am convinced that progressive changes are needed, because otherwise we wouldn’t be able to compete… there is a gap with the big European clubs and if we look at the causes, one of the main causes is that linked to the containment of revenues deriving from the management of sports infrastructures.

“Hence the absolutely appropriate idea that Milan had a few years ago to start thinking about a new system and to formulate proposals. I wouldn’t tear my clothes apart if we were going to build a modern and beautiful stadium in another area as well, as long as it’s obviously an area well served by local public transport.

“We need a beautiful and modern facility to try to return to being among the major clubs in terms of results on an international level.”

Tags AC Milan


    1. i dont mind the 70.000 stadium demand but i also took notice of the 40 mil request which is downright blackmaiil and that should already have made us abandon the idea of us staying,
      It will be a great fun to see how long the mayor can keep his job when the citicens of milano realizes they will have to pay for a stadium no club wants to stay at while funded by tax money to not go further derelict.

  1. Translation = this will never get done at San Siro – typical Italian politics. Time is way overdue to move to Sesto if ownership is serious about building a new stadium.

  2. I have Read and the Advisor is so Clever and infilled Acmilan Ambition of Success.
    I Really Liked Him Very well,Beause he has just touched my Hear and mind.
    But what i add is to Make to Moves Immidiately if Possible.
    A. To Dissociate From New Shared Sansiro With Inter and Build this New Sansiro Exculusive for our Beloved Acmilan.
    B.To Take Chances from the Ristrictions of Council by itself by Saying we can not Afford this and That Addtional Ristrictions by Now.
    And Than Move and Build New Exclussive Acmilan Stadium.
    It is Abosulately not Good Applicuble to Ivest such Hige Coast a Shared Staduim.
    As he said 80/90 M Euroe Yearly income,But not for only milan but with Inter.
    It is Poor Planning and Aslo out of Mind in this Modren World for Iconic Team of Acmilan to have Shared Stadium.
    Why to Demolish this Sansiro Arena if we Acmilan Will only get 45M Euro Seasonally.
    It is better to as we are.
    Thanks Mr Advisor
    I would Like to Introduce ourselves Personally and Make Future Communication.
    Deaply Acmilan Fun from Somalia.

Comments are closed

Serie A Standings

Live football scores . Current table, fixtures & results.