The US Open, moving out of New York?
This week, the Wall Street Journal had dire news to report from the tennis circuit in the USA, while every other Grand Slam venue makes further progress, the US Open is once again on the back foot.
The Australian Open is held only a few months apart from the US Open, and it throws the mediocre state of the American Grand Slam into sharp relief. While Melbourne Park proves itself an exemplary location for a Grand Slam, Flushing Meadows might have to
resort to financial assistance from the city itself in order to improve the facilities available.
The problems faced by the National Tennis Centre might have been remediable, were it not for the fact that they are root issues. The Stadium itself is built on a volatile ash landfill. Therefore, adding more stadiums or renovating the current one might be
more trouble than it is worth.
For one, the entire procedure would be highly expensive due to the retractable roof of the stadium. Meanwhile, the largest arena in the venue is roofless due to the soft ground, which is incapable of supporting a structure so immense.
The most obvious solution to this seems to be building a roof over a smaller stadium, which the United States Tennis Association is understandably reluctant to do so.
For one, the stadium would be unable to seat the required number of fans in the event of inclement weather. This defeats the purpose of a stadium with a roof.
However, the USTA is well aware that it has a problem of vast proportions on its hands. Over the last few years, three of the singles finals have been interrupted due to rain. These three finals also mark the tournament’s lowest television ratings since
1992.
Grand Slam venues in Paris, Melbourne and London have already unveiled highly extensive remodelling plans, while the New York stadium has yet to secure itself against rain.
These two events have the USTA considering the possibility of turning to New York City for financial aid.
If push comes to shove and the situation worsens, the tournament might have to be moved out of New York.
When asked about this decision, USTA chairman, Jon Vegosen, said, “New York provides a one-of-a-kind locale for the US Open, and our preference is to remain in New York. However, we are in a hyper-competitive marketplace, and to remain the No. 1 tennis event
in the world, we will need significant investments in the tournament’s infrastructure. The National Tennis Center is an aging facility, significant upgrades are needed, and we’ll have to consider all options to maintain our position”.
While the stadium has the capacity to seat almost twenty-three thousand people, most fans have never had much affinity for it. The most affordable seats are also the ones, which offer the worst views, and the infrastructure of the stadium is such that it
would fall apart if altered. Covering the stadium from the walls itself is impossible. It would require a canopy rising from the ground to fully protect it against weather conditions.
Matthew Rossetti, USTA’s chief architect, says, “That site is the equivalent of Jell-O. We’ve analyzed it dozens of times. Because of the soil’s condition, (a roof) requires its own structure – it wouldn’t touch the stadium at all. Once you get into that,
you’re talking huge dollars”. This is backed up by an estimate which puts the cost of a canopy from 175 to 225 million dollars.
However, the City may be willing to step in to pick up the tab for such a procedure. Andrew Brent, a spokesperson for the Mayor’s office, said, “The Billie Jean King National Tennis Center and the US Open are great New York City traditions. The City’s budget
issues are well-known, but we’ll work with the USTA to help it continue to thrive in New York”. It remains to be seen whether or not New York City can live up to these promises.
Tags: