Mayor Squeri discusses latest meeting regarding Milan stadium: “Opportunity for the city” | OneFootball

The latest meeting about the AC Milan project in San Donato took place last night, and before the meeting Mayor Squeri spoke about the proceedings.

As the past few years have shown, the Milan stadium situation is not a simple task. In recent years, there has been much talk, but little movement, and this has been the case this year as well. From January to now, the Rossoneri have evaluated several projects and we have barely moved forward in things.

Instead, there is confusion about the actual ongoings. The Diavolo recently sent a notice of interest about purchasing San Siro. In the week prior though, there had been suggestions that they were looking to include a clause related to San Donato.

With the project still in Milan’s mind, the latest meeting took place last night, and there were two items on the agenda.

➤ Motion to request a consultative survey addressed to citizens for the evaluation of the A.C. Milan stadium project on the ‘San Francesco’ area presented by Councillor Forenza;

➤ Urgent motion Governo del Territorio area San Francesco intervention of urban transformation of sporting character (AC Milan Stadium) with supra-municipal relevance – Suspension of Programme Agreement presented by Councillors Ginelli, Falbo, Sinatori, De Simoni, Papetti, Forenza.

As Milan News writes, the first motion was withdrawn before the meeting began, and the second was rejected by the City Council. In a speech before the vote, Francesco Squeri, the Mayor of San Donato, offered his reasonings for rejecting the motion, and his words have been also relayed in the report.

“I believe it is necessary to clarify some passages of the stadium project in the San Francesco area, so as to better clarify the position of the Administration that I represent.

More Stories about San Donato

Mayor Squeri discusses latest meeting regarding Milan stadium: “Opportunity for the city”

15 November 2024, 13:15

MN: Milan to meet with City Council about San Donato project – the agenda

14 November 2024, 16:00

Tuttosport: ‘San Siro or San Donato?’ – the current state of Milan’s stadium plans

8 November 2024, 10:39

“Let’s start with a premise: the previous Administration approved with a resolution of 1 July 2021 the project called ‘Sport Life City’, a project with a strong sporting vocation that envisaged, and did not envisage, a gross floor area of 108,000 square metres and the construction of an arena with about 20,000 seats, in addition to commercial, tertiary and hospitality uses, including a hotel.

“After we took office, the proponent proposed a variant to us, proposing a new variation of the project that envisages a stadium of about 70 thousand seats for Milan, together with tertiary, directional, commercial and receptive destinations.

“So our administration does not have to choose between a green area and a stadium, but between two urban projects. Our evaluation is based on an analysis of costs, benefits, sustainability and potential in terms of public interest. To reject the stadium project out of hand would not have been in the best interest of the city.

“Following a preliminary technical evaluation, we expressed a favourable opinion on the possibility of a Programme Agreement, although we pointed out aspects of the project that raised concerns for both the administration and citizens. The Municipal Council shared and approved this assessment by a majority, and although the promotion of this Programme Agreement is the Mayor’s prerogative, we wanted to share this line of the Municipality.

“On 18 June, as mayor, I promoted the Programme Agreement, involving the Lombardy Region, the Metropolitan City, Ferrovie dello Stato, Rete Ferroviaria Italiana and Sistemi Urbani. All the authorities adhered and on 15 July the Committee for the Agreement was formed, appointing a technical secretariat.

“The technical secretariat has already produced the scoping document, the first framing document of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), whose public procedure has already begun. The Agreement Committee shared the document in terms of acknowledgement at its meeting on 14 October. This SEA process that has now started follows the timeframe set by the regulations.

“The Programme Agreement is continuing. In order to interrupt an administrative act, a new act would be necessary to represent that the prerequisites of the evaluations that have so far determined the start of the Programme Agreement are no longer valid. The representation that Milan is evaluating the possibility of building its new stadium in Milan does not constitute a new element.

“This is therefore not sufficient reason to interrupt the Programme Agreement. Nor can we force a club to give up a possible alternative to its investment without being able to offer in return the guarantee of approval of the project in San Donato.

“We have said that for us the stadium can represent an opportunity for the city and for the whole of south Milan, we are convinced of this. At the same time we have made explicit the knots to be addressed and unravelled to bring this project to the Council’s approval.

“I am referring to the issues of infrastructure and road network, strengthening of the rail link, redevelopment and revitalisation of the station with metropolitan significance. If these constraints are not overcome with concrete and effective answers, the project would be judged unsustainable for the city and therefore could not have the approval of the Administration that I represent.

“We believe that the conditions are in place for these responses to materialise: for example, we have very positive feedback from Ferrovie dello Stato, which we strongly desired in the Programme Agreement.

“The fact that AC Milan is keeping the possibility of Milan open and deepening it is nothing new, but at the same time it is nothing new that the stadium project at San Donato is concrete and that there is significant investment on the part of AC Milan in that direction.

“We therefore intend to continue the process with seriousness. There will be no lack of commitment on my part to grasping variations of scenarios that could change the direction of the stadium solution in Milan.

“I believe that the above clarifies the political and administrative reason why my majority will vote against the motion under discussion.”