Wimbledon's tennis expansion explained: Why the All England Club wants 39 extra courts

Controversial proposals to triple Wimbledon, the third Grand Slam of the tennis calendar, are set to return to court.

The Greater London Authority (GLA) granted the All England Lawn Tennis Club (AELTC) planning permission in September 2024 to build 39 new grass tennis courts, including a stadium court.

In December 2024, campaign group Save Wimbledon Park (SWP) instructed lawyers to challenge the decision, which could ultimately lead to a judicial review in the UK Supreme Court and the withdrawal of planning permission. The AELTC simultaneously announced its intention to take its own plans to court in an effort to meet any challenge.

How did Wimbledon get here? What are the expansion plans? And how could they be stopped?

GO DEEPER

Wimbledon tennis expansion set for the Supreme Court battle on both sides

What does the Wimbledon expansion look like?

The AELTC plans to build 39 new grass courts on the old Wimbledon Park golf course, which would almost triple the size of the ground during the Wimbledon Championships. One of these courts will be an 8,000-seat show court, which would be Wimbledon's third.

When would this project actually be completed?

AELTC chief executive Sally Bolton and chairman Debbie Jevans said the courts will not be ready until the early 2030s after planning permission is granted in September 2024. They were also coy about when development work could actually start, pointing to the fact that there is still space was. for filing an appeal. With the AELTC and SWP having initiated separate legal proceedings in December 2024, that timeline could be extended.

How did we get to this point?

SWP believes that the planning permission contradicts a statutory trust, which requires certain areas of land to be kept free for public recreation. The AELTC is of the opinion that this does not apply to the land in question. That's at the heart of their two latest legal lawsuits, both filed in December 2024.

The AELTC wants its own plans to be endorsed by the British legal system. SWP wants the AELTC to recognize the statutory trust and calls on the GLA to quash the grant of planning permission on this basis.

Wimbledon is currently operating with the minimum number of courts required for a Grand Slam tournament (The All England Club)

This dispute goes all the way back to 1993, when the AELTC bought the Wimbledon Park golf course site from Merton Council for 5.2 million ($6.6 million). At the time, the AELTC signed a covenant agreeing that it would not use the land other than for leisure or recreational purposes or as open space. Residents groups, including the Wimbledon Society, believe the AELTC's proposals breach that covenant.

The next big step came in 2018, when the AELTC bought the Wimbledon Park golf club, whose lease expired in 2041, for 65 million. This led to each member receiving 85,000. Since then, the AELTC has worked hard to expand to bring Wimbledon in line with the other Grand Slams.

Merton Council approved the AELTC's plans in October 2023, but a month later they were rejected by Wandsworth Council (the club borders both areas). The matter was subsequently referred to the General London Assembly (GLA), which, in a 221-page report published in September 2024, found no material considerations deemed to justify refusal of consent and recommended that Deputy Mayor Jules Pipe grant planning permission . for the schedule. London Mayor Sadiq Khan apologized for the trial three years ago after previously expressing support for the proposals.

Why is Wimbledon so keen to continue this?

The AELTC believes this expansion is the only way to keep pace with the other three Grand Slams, all of which host qualifying on site.

Wimbledon, which has always been the pinnacle of tennis, is lagging behind in that regard. The AELTIC wants fans through the gate during qualifying week, which is currently being held in Roehampton, a few miles away.

Moving qualifying to the Wimbledon venue would see up to 10,000 fans enter the grounds per day, compared to the 2,000 capacity at the Bank of England Club in Roehampton. The AELTC hopes the new space will allow an average of 50,000 visitors per day during the actual championships; The average daily attendance in 2024 was 37,603.

Having more courts, both for training and competition, will also reduce wear and tear during the tournament. Wimbledon currently operates with the minimum number of match courts for a Grand Slam, while the third largest court (court 2) is the smallest of the four majors.

It is important that Wimbledon maintains its place at the pinnacle of the sport, Jevans told reporters after the hearing.

The other slams are three-week events. It was a two-week event.

Why are campaigners against Wimbledon plans frustrated?

If we go all the way back to 1993 and the covenant that the AELTC would not use the land other than for leisure or recreational purposes or as open space, there is a sense that promises have been broken.

Call me old-fashioned, but I believe promises should be kept, Paul Kohler, the Liberal Democrat MP for Wimbledon, said at the public hearing. In 1993, the then chairman of the AELTC, John Curry, said: We fully understand and support everyone's determination to keep the country open and we bought the land on that basis.

Protesters also have environmental and social concerns, with net tree loss and major impacts on biodiversity cited as damage development would cause. Experts in the field invited to the planning hearing by the AELTC rejected this characterization, pointing to plans to plant five times as many trees as were planned to be removed. The experts also said the area would perform better ecologically thanks to projects such as planting wet forests.

A recurring theme from those opposed was a perceived lack of compromise and a feeling that local residents had not been consulted, more so than the outright rejection of the idea of ​​expansion.

There is a deep sense of feeling among opponents, many of whom lined up outside City Hall on the day of the hearing, holding banners outside the building with slogans like “green, no greed!” About 80 of the 140 in the public gallery were said to be people opposed to the plans. When Pipe read the verdict, there were boos and shouts of shame about you from some of the campaigners present.

Protesters outside the public hearing expressed some of their concerns when interviewed by The Athletics. Mary-Jane Jeanes, a member of the environmental group Friends of the Earth and a former Liberal Democrat councilor in Merton, pointed out some of the ecological damage the expansion would cause and the long period over which local residents would be affected by the development. There will be a decade of disruption while this stuff is built, she said.

Jeanes and other residents also reject the idea that Wimbledon needs to improve to keep pace with the other slams. They argue that Wimbledon's heritage and prestige mean it will always remain a special, iconic event.

Labor MP for Putney, Roehampton and Southfields told Fleur Anderson The Athletics that: The balance here is about saying: is opening up a piece of land that was previously a golf club and therefore a good thing? Or is it saying that the entire area should be a public park and only 22 percent of it will be public, and that's a bad thing?

Protesters outside the planning hearing in September 2024 (Charlie Eccleshare/The Athletic)

Is everyone who lives locally against this?

No. During the hearing, Shan Warnock-Smith KC, a local resident who supported the development, praised the AELTC for its extensive consultation with the community. David Mooney, CEO of the London Wildlife Trust, spoke about the ecological improvements to the plans and said the golf club is quite dead ecologically. It was later pointed out that the Trust was relying on AELTC data which had not been independently confirmed.

Local resident and lifelong member of the Wimbledon Society Thomas Moulton said the significant benefits will be appreciated all year round and outweigh the disadvantages. A 23-acre public park will benefit future generations, he said. There will also be a four-hectare public park at the northern entrance to the site, adjacent to the entrance to the existing Wimbledon Park. This is open all year round, outside of qualifiers and championships.

This is one of the big counter-arguments against the naysayers: the fact that Save Wimbledon Park is a bit of a misnomer. The AELTC plans to build on what has been a private golf club for 100 years, rather than on the public grounds of Wimbledon Park. The new development will obviously be off-limits to the public for part of the year (and in some parts all of the year), but it does not replace any land that is currently public or has ever been public in modern times.

Why did the GLA rule in favor of the AELTC?

In granting planning permission, Pipe said: The proposed development would deliver very significant benefits, including those for public open space and recreation, the community, cultural heritage, ecology and biodiversity, the economy, employment and transport.

These would clearly outweigh the damage caused by the proposal and would represent very special circumstances. For these reasons I agree with the recommendation of the GLA planning officers and grant planning permission.

He added that: As is widely accepted, Wimbledon is the most prestigious tournament in the world of tennis, attracting a global audience and visitors and contributing to London's brand in terms of culture, sporting heritage and as a visitor destination.

What happens next?

The first part of SWP's challenge to the planning permission is to send a letter to the GLA. The Pre-Action Protocol for Judicial Review requires this letter, which SWP sent to the GLA on December 6, 2024. A response was requested by December 16. Many steps would still need to be taken for a formal judicial review.

The AELTC's desire to refer the issue of legal trust to the legal system does not yet have a timeline.

(Top photo: Historic England Archive / Heritage Images via Getty Images)