By Professor Robert J Romano, JD, LLM, St. John’s University, Senior Writer
Metropolitan Park is a comprehensive redevelopment proposal that would replace the roughly 50-acre surface parking lot around Citi Field, land technically owned by New York City but leased in part to USTA and in part to the New York Mets, with a multi-use entertainment complex, anchored by a full-scale gambling casino. The proposal includes not only the casino, but a hotel, restaurants, and public green space as well.
In early 2025, despite the site’s technical designation as parkland, the proposal cleared a major hurdle when the state Senate passed a “parkland alienation” bill, authorizing conversion of the parking lot for private commercial use if the project wins a gaming license.[1] Subsequently, the city’s zoning text was amended, and the city council approved the zoning modifications by a landslide, signaling strong institutional support.[2] At the same time, New York State Gaming Commission awarded three downstate casino licenses, with Metropolitan Park being among one of the final candidates.[3] For many observers therefore, the Metropolitan Park proposal was looking like the frontrunner because it had political backing, regulatory clearance, and an ambitious vision for transforming underused parking lots into a major entertainment hub.
The project hit a roadblock, however, when the United States Tennis Association (USTA) filed a lawsuit against the City of New York in the Manhattan Supreme Court in November 2025.[4] The core of the dispute is a lease provision under which USTA, which operates the adjacent tennis facilities at the USTA Billie Jean King National Tennis Center, is guaranteed first access to the Citi Field parking lot during the US Open.[5]
Per its complaint, the USTA stressed that its rights are essential to ensuring the smooth conduct of the US Open, a global sporting event that draws large crowds and relies on access to parking and associated infrastructure. The lawsuit claims that any “deed, lease or license” granting third-party rights to the land “are subject and subordinate in all respects to the rights of the USTA National Tennis Center.”[6]
On November 14, 2025, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Nancy Bannon granted a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) prohibiting the City from executing any lease or agreement with Metropolitan Park that did not explicitly comply with the superiority clause and the USTA’s rights under its existing lease.[7] The TRO was significant because it temporarily halted the city’s plan to finalize the lease agreement with Metropolitan Park, potentially jeopardizing the project’s timeline in the midst of the state’s casino licensing process.
Despite the seriousness of the USTA’s contractual claims, its lawsuit has not derailed the Metropolitan Park proposal because, first of all, it focused on specific lease rights, such as parking control and operational impacts during the U.S. Open, rather than seeking a declaration that any casino or entertainment complex was categorically barred on the Citi Field‑area lands. As a result, following Judge Bannon’s order, the city and Metropolitan Park reportedly revised their lease agreement to include the superiority clause demanded by the USTA.[8] Additionally, public statements from both city and Metropolitan Park officials claimed the updated agreement now “complies with the court order” and “reflects the USTA’s rights.”[9]
Secondly, despite the litigation, state casino licensing and local land‑use processes have continued to advance, balancing the USTA’s claims against the potential economic benefits of the proposal that included jobs, tax revenue, and infrastructure improvements. It appears as though as long as team demonstrated willingness to address the USTA’s operational needs, through revised agreements, design changes, or assurances about U.S. Open priority, the project remained viable within the competitive downstate licensing field.[10] Finally, disputes involving anchor tenants and major developments often resolve through settlement rather than full trial judgment, especially when both sides can secure meaningful protections. For the USTA, preserving reliable parking, security, and access during the Open is paramount; for the developer, clarifying the rules and constraints surrounding those weeks can be an acceptable cost of doing business in exchange for a transformative, multi‑billion‑dollar project.
Most importantly, however, what USTA’s case against the City of New York illustrates is the importance of timing and litigation strategy in complex public‑private projects. A well‑timed lawsuit can slow a project enough to gain leverage without necessarily ending it, while a developer’s ability to keep parallel processes moving can prevent a temporary stall from becoming a de facto denial. As of now, the USTA’s lawsuit had briefly stalled but not derailed Steve Cohen’s ambitious Queens casino vision, leaving the ultimate fate of Metropolitan Park to be decided in the intertwined arenas of courtrooms, regulatory hearings, and high‑stakes settlement talks.
[1] https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2025/05/28/citi-field-casino-proposal-flushing-land-use-bill?utm_source=chatgpt.com
[2] https://abc7ny.com/post/citi-field-casino-new-sports-entertainment-park-queens-gets-approval-york-city-council/16028433/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
[3] https://news.worldcasinodirectory.com/ny-casino-board-advances-toward-final-picks-with-site-visits-and-disputes-120602?utm_source=chatgpt.com
[4] USTA National Tennis Center Incorporated v The City of New York, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Index No. 659682/2025
[5] https://queenseagle.com/all/2025/11/14/judge-freezes-citys-deal-with-citi-field-casino-bidders-amid-usta-suit
[6] USTA National Tennis Center Incorporated v The City of New York, Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Index No. 659682/2025
[7] https://queenseagle.com/all/2025/11/14/judge-freezes-citys-deal-with-citi-field-casino-bidders-amid-usta-suit
[8] https://queenseagle.com/all/2025/11/17/city-agrees-to-citi-field-casino-lease-after-legal-challenge-threatened-proposal?utm_source=chatgpt.com
[9] Id.
[10] Articles/2023/11/07/steve-cohen-new-york-mets-metropolitan-park-hard-rock-casino/
