Ace Plan for Tennis-Friendly McCarren Makeover
McCarren Park has the space and the potential to be an incredible tennis facility but unfortunately the city has let the current courts deteriorate to the point where they’re barely usable. Frustrated by this situation, a group of regulars has decided to try to take matters into their own hands. The band of self-described tennis…
McCarren Park has the space and the potential to be an incredible tennis facility but unfortunately the city has let the current courts deteriorate to the point where they’re barely usable. Frustrated by this situation, a group of regulars has decided to try to take matters into their own hands. The band of self-described tennis nuts has envisioned a multi-step, multi-year plan for turning McCarren into a tennis center to rival the one in Prospect Park. And why not? In the short-term, all the group (called McCarren Tennis) is trying to accomplish is a simple resurfacing and installation of wind screens; they’ve already gotten the support of the Open Space Alliance for that. Stages 2, 3 and 4 involve the addition of more courts and the creation of a pavilion in the middle of them all. Ambitious? Sure. Crazy? Not really. All the developers who still have skin in the game in the neighborhood should be lining up to write a check for this. Not everyone will be pleased with the idea–some of the folks who enjoy a good game of concrete softball on the adjacent lot, for example. They might not realize, however, that the entire area was originally devoted exclusively to tennis once upon a time. To get the ball rolling, the group is holding a fundraiser tournament on the weekend of October 10th with a DJ party on Saturday night when the tennis is wrapped up. More info here.
“The city charges tennis players $7 per hour, or $100 per year, to play. Absolutely none of that money goes directly to tennis courts, but instead subsidizes sports that are free, like handball, softball, etc.”
First off, my recollection of most of the weekend softball games at Bedford and North 12th is league play, which is permitted, which means there is a fee. Furthermore, per law, almost all income of any sort goes into the general fund and when it comes out the other end, who knows what it is spent on. New tires for a fire truck, for all we know. Tennis fees, or fees to swim at Met Pool, don’t subsidize anything.
I suspect the decision about what fields to build on the waterfront is driven in large part by what sports children play. Yes, some kids (both ragamuffins and snobs) play tennis, but not as many as soccer.
Also, I think it’s better to have more courts spread around the city to meet the needs of more communities (as in the new park). Of course, I don’t expect you would disagree with this and I respect your prerogative to try to do what you can.
Velour, thanks for the information. I am not opposed to more tennis courts at all and appreciate that you and others are willing to undertake efforts to create more and better courts. I will confess that I am uncomfortable with taking away a space that has been used for the 19 years I’ve lived here (and before) by the people who have lived here all of their lives to meet the needs predominantly of a new demographic. That is why I think new courts in the new park are preferable- no one is displaced and we have a lot of happy tennis players/fans. That’s all.
Orestes, these are all fair points. As to which park, I’m referring to the new waterfront park along the East River in Williamsburg. This park does include baseball fields, and doesn’t include tennis courts, as you note.
First thing I should say is that the ONLY thing that has been approved at this point is that we resurface the existing seven courts, put up new nets, and get new windscreens. Surely no one is against that. In the long term, we’d like to see that blacktop become tennis courts, but that will involve community and political approval, so it’s very far from guaranteed to happen. I do happen to think that softball is better played on grass, and given those new courts, i hope we can at least make our case that it makes sense to expand tennis. But hey, if softball wins out, I could be content to at least have 7 nice, refurbished courts — that’s goal #1.
As for the specifics:
1. The courts will ABSOLUTELY remain public. That’s why we’re doing this.
2. The OSA is collecting the funds. They are the not-for-profit that was put in charge of McCarren by the NYC Parks Department. They have approved Phase 1 (resurfacing/windscreens) and nothing else.
3. We’re deciding how much money is raised, based on the cost of resurfacing, new nets, and windscreens.
4. Upkeep hopefully will be continued by the city, but this would clearly require getting the city to contribute at least a portion of the permitting fees to the courts. Right now that money hits a general pool and gets spent elsewhere. If we get to phase 3, we probably can make the courts self-sustaining by allowing league play, clinics and lessons, just as Prospect Park does.
In general, is there any reason why ball fields SHOULD take priority over courts? I’m definitely in favor of ball fields, and parks — more parks! — but given that there already are more ball fields being built, I’m a bit unclear as to why you’d be uneasy about more courts!
“c’mon … I watched the finals of USOpen on tv…don’t tell me this is not a sport directed at the elite. Look at the people in audience, who the advertisers, sponsors were,etc. ”
That’s like concluding that football is a sport directed at the elite because of who’s in attendence at the Super Bowl. And even if it were, so what? Opera has a very elitist image, but reality is that tickets to the Met are far less expensive than those to the Mets. And the reality of the National Tennis Center is that except for about six weeks a year around U.S. Open time, that is a public faciltiy where anyone can play or take lessons. I’m pretty sure you can’t do that at Yankee Stadium.
Velour’s post was very spot-on, except those 14 players per hour can be up to twice as high when people play doubles.
The courts in Hudson River Park just north of Canal Street don’t charge a fee or require a permit. And the truth is that you’ll rarely be asked to show your permit at many public parks around Brooklyn. I’ve played many times at Friends Field (Avenue L and E. 4th), Kelly Park (Avenue S & E 14th) and the courts under the Verrazano Bridge approach, and never been asked for my permit.
Velour- to be fair, the city is not planning on moving softball to a new park, it plans to include baseball fields in a new waterfront park (which proposed park is this?) and because there will be new fields, we will convert the present one to tennis courts. I would also bet that demand for the tennis courts is met during the week (the same time the softball field is vacant). Of course, all recreational facilities are more heavily used on the weekends and evenings. Finally, I think your use estimate is very aggressive.
I think it’s a great idea to have more tennis courts in the neighborhood and applaud your willingness to raise private funds to make it happen. But why don’t you lobby the city to include tennis courts in the new waterfront park? That would also alleviate the unmet demand for courts and allow greater access to residents (ie, people closer to the new park will go there to play tennis).
I’m also curious about the specifics. Will the courts remain public? Is the city permitting private citizens to contract and build on a public park or will the funds be handed to the city to make the necessary renovations? Who decides how much money must be raised? Who will be responsible for upkeep? With all of these issues to resolve, I truly don’t understand why building new courts in the new park is not the best solution. Have you lobbied to have tennis courts added to the new park? What kind of response did you receive?
I am a big tennis fan (although I don’t get to play that often) and would welcome additional courts in the neighborhood, but I have to admit I get a slightly uneasy feeling about this proposal. I fear the end result will be new tennis courts and no new ball fields (notwithstanding the city’s stated intention).
I only said that tennis is certainly geared, marketed and targeted to affluent, elite, whatever. But that open to debate whether uses the space as tennis courts worth it, efficient most beneficial. Certainly left open that was possibility.
I’m part of the McCarren Tennis group. No one is taking the existing softball field away from anyone. Yes, there were 21 courts there in the early 80s, but I agree that isn’t the point. What’s happening is this: the city is kindly building a bunch of new softball fields (these are not made out of asphalt) down by the water, so the city plan is to move softball from the current site to those new courts. At that point — and only if that happens, and provided McCarren Tennis can raise the money — they will begin construction of new courts. Certainly the city won’t pay for it.
Also, there are no less than 2 grass softball fields within one block of the asphalt softball field in question. I play on those tennis courts a lot and the only time the softball field gets used is on weekends, which we all notice because occasionally we have to dodge softballs hit over the fence. The tennis courts are packed on weekends (and some weekday mornings) to a point of waiting several hours to get on. Finally, it’s worth considering that tennis courts turn over every hour, so 14 people per hour play on those 7 courts. Multiplied by 8 or 10 hours of use, those courts can support 140 people per day (more if people play doubles). It’s 1/2 the area of the softball field, which means that on a per person basis, the softball field would need to serve about 280 people per day to have the same public benefit. I can’t say whether it does or doesn’t — but I certainly don’t think that anyone should suggest that tennis courts are not an efficient public recreation facility.
Anyway, I like softball and am glad we have it in NYC. But I love tennis and I believe that the City of New York is actually anti-tennis, as some crying “elitism” here also seem to be. The city charges tennis players $7 per hour, or $100 per year, to play. Absolutely none of that money goes directly to tennis courts, but instead subsidizes sports that are free, like handball, softball, etc. Second, those courts in Williamsburg are packed, but they haven’t been repaired in 15 years or more. Compare this to the brand-spanking-new restoration of the rest of McCarren Park and you have to wonder. Finally, it’s worth noting that the city is building new parks all over Williamsburg. None of those parks contain tennis courts — but they do contain softball fields and soccer pitches.
You be the judge. Tennis may not be for everyone, but this is the home of the US Open and there are a lot of underserved players here. McCarren Tennis is trying to help.
Try again DH.
Don’t live in Park slope, don’t own a tennis racket.
Those are also facts, BTW.