The teams said they were initially considering changes to the current San Siro, but quickly concluded that logistical issues and delays would be overcome. Instead, they offered a 60,000-seat arena to be built in the neighborhood. As soon as it is built, the current San Siro will arrive and pave the way for a public space that could contain elements of its cult towers and ramps, according to the design of the American architectural firm Populous, whose proposal was selected.
“I think these buildings are containers, and therefore the old buildings have such emotions attached to them that the idea that some of them might stay, if they could be there as a marker of previous history, is a pretty good idea. Said Chris Lee, Managing Director of Populous. “One had to be careful not to try to move too many, in fact, new buildings, where it would easily turn into a paste of trying to re-create the building.”
Opposition is expected, Lim said. In Milan it has emerged in various forms.
Milan Mayor Beppe Salam, while generally supporting the project, has warned both clubs that the city-owned San Siro will remain in place until at least 2026, when it is expected to host the opening ceremony of the Winter Olympics.
Another group, the Si Meazza Committee, took a tough approach, challenging only the idea of demolishing the San Siro, which its most prominent voices – lawyers, concert promoters and former politicians – described as a symbol of Milan. Around the world, a scene starring Diego Maradona, Bob Dylan and Beyoncé. Other critics pointed to the environmental impact of the stadium demolition and highlighted the renderings, which they believed could be done at half price, while saving the original arena.
However, some fear the deadly work could be given: the future without San Siro received the tacit approval of the Italian heritage body in 2020, when it had no objection to the demolition of the stadium. In November, the project was announced in the public interest (under certain conditions) by city leaders.