Inter Corporate CEO Alessandro Antonello has provided an update on the club’s position regarding the timeline for a new stadium in Milan.
Speaking to Milan-based newspaper Gazzetta dello Sport in an interview published in today’s print edition, Antonello explained that Inter and AC Milan are considering building outside the San Siro area in order to nail down a clearer timeline.
The Nerazzurri and the Rossoneri have been accelerating the work to start construction on the new stadium in Milan, which they see as necessary to modernize their infrastructure and increase revenues.
However, they continue to face bureaucratic hurdles and delays, including a potential for drawn-out public delays, and yesterday it was reported that the clubs are now considering building the new stadium somewhere other than the San Siro area as had been planned.
Asked whether the clubs have lost patience, Antonello replied that “No, but the clubs have done and are doing everything possible to carry on the San Siro project, which was our priority.”
“But on the other hand, we may have perceived a lack of support from the administration,” he continued. “For more than three years we have presented our project and made all the required adjustments, showing willingness to lower the volumetric indexes, but we fear that the bureaucratic process is getting longer.”
“As with all projects, however, there are always alternative plans,” he added.
The executive went on that “In the meantime, we are no longer thinking ‘exclusively’ about the San Siro as a possibility – we cannot stand still, motionless, for three years without having answers, so therefore it’s only right that we’d look around at other possibilities to give the city and the fans a new stadium.”
“Among the various possibilities, on which there is not yet an overall screening, the one of Sesto San Giovanni certainly stands out, which at one he time was being evaluated,” he continued.
Of the relationship with AC Milan in the new stadium project, he stated that “We continue with the same unity of purpose which we have shown in all the design processes up to this point.”
“We both want a modern, cutting-edge facility,” he added, “which will remain for future generations, and which is up to the club’s standard. And we want a precise timeline.”
“We do not want to put pressure on the administration,”Antonello continued, “we want to respect all the administrative phases as much as possible.”
“We know that there are obstacles and delays with the bureaucracy,” he added, “but in these cases it’s uncertainty that is the worst thing.”
“The ‘public debate’ could last one year,” he emphasized. “If all the planned procedures, including the same debate plus any referendums and appeals, lead to an extension of the project timeline, at that point the clubs would have to start evaluating other projects with clearer plans.”
Antonello added that “We’re obviously available to clarify all the design elements to the committees, even if all the documentation is available to the technical offices as well.”
“We’re not averse to giving a voice to the citizens on this issue, quite the contrary,” he said, “but our pursuit of a Plan B demonstrates the determination that both clubs have to equip ourselves with a new stadium.”
“If we were forced to give up the original project, it would certainly be a loss for everyone,” he said.
“But it is more important to have a facility that matches up to those of the top European clubs,” he explained.
“But if it were to be built in the greater metropolitan area, which we consider completely a part of Milan, in any case, Inter and Milan would remain attached to the values of the city and our history,” he concluded.