I don't think you guys are realistic about having any part of the Zoo at Wheeler Park but if you wanted to see how much you could accomplish on a parcel that size checkout the Chattanooga zoo. It isn't a bad little zoo but it would be tough to have 2 zoos in OKC. They would only steal attendance from each other. However, if this idea ever was attempted I think Central/Promenade Park would be a better location. If OKC is going to succeed in reinventing itself we can't follow up urban sprawl with park sprawl, attraction sprawl, and amenities sprawl. We need to keep things compact and close together so we can extend the usable hours past 9AM-5PM Monday thru Friday.

http://www.chattzoo.org/

I disagree with that assessment... in my experience (and i have a lot of experience) in visiting both Zoos and Aquariums. I find that they seem to attract two completely separate groups of people. Sure there is a lot of overlap between the two, and those people would probably still continue to go to both. But i think there would be quite a bit of people who currently do not go to the zoo, who would go to an Aquarium that was by itself. Just go to Tulsa to see this occur. And if they were to build their Zoosuem away from the zoo as well and put it more downtown, i think the exhibits that they get would draw an even bigger appeal. I know several people who did not go see the Dinosaur exhibit when it was at the Zoo because they didn't want to deal with having to navigate the whole zoo just to go see the exhibit, and people who frequently go to the zoo would probably still travel down to Wheeler to go see the exhibit if they really wanted to. I think they would lose little, if any, in attendance numbers at the zoo by moving the Aquarium and/or Zoosuem to wheeler, and i think the Aquarium would have a draw all it's own that was not previously there.

now is that new draw enough to justify a move, or could this new draw even pay the bills to keep it open. that is the real question. But i think it is very realistic to think that a Metropolitan area of this size could support both a Zoo and an Aquarium.

I know that if it were operated by the zoo, and even if it was a completely different Zoo friends type membership. i would have both. so that on very nice days i would still probably go spend a few hours at the zoo, but when i was downtown or wanted to get out on those extremely hot, or extremely cold days, i would go frequent an Aquarium.

It would also have a draw all to its own simply due to the location of it. I'm about 100x more likely to take my kids to events or activities in the downtown area because that is where we live. The more people move to downtown, the more and more that will be true. That is why I think it could be a real asset to the Zoo. It will capture revenue it might actually miss out on otherwise. If we connected the two with an express train, it could be even better.

You and i are on the same page

Sid, you live downtown currently... how long of a walk do you think it is from where you live to Wheeler Park as it currently is? Just curious

The OKC Zoo is far from maxed out; it owns well over 400 acres, only 119 of which are developed.

Do you happen to have something that says and/or shows the 400 acres? all i am finding when looking online are articles defining the zoo as being 120 acres which is what you are saying is the developed land. I'm not questioning you, as i have come to rely on you for many other things that have been said on this board. I just personally can't find it, and would like to have that info at my disposal

Currently we are in Deep Deuce, so sort of on the opposite side of Downtown. I haven't really clocked it. We meander quite a bit and with three kids, their short legs just only go so fast. I think it takes us right around 30 minutes to get down to the river. Maybe we will walk down to Wheeler this weekend and I'll clock how long it takes.

However, a N/S Robinson streetcar would dramatically improve that trip time. We'd only then have to walk west to Robinson and then east a couple blocks after we got off at SW 10th. Just saying. :)

I agree... i can't wait for Phase 1 of the streetcar so that we can start looking at expansion of it.

Are you talking just an aquarium at Wheeler Park or other types of zoo animals? I still think there are a lot better places for an aquarium than being so far removed from tourist areas around downtown.

Are you talking just an aquarium at Wheeler Park or other types of zoo animals? I still think there are a lot better places for an aquarium than being so far removed from tourist areas around downtown.

I think all that has been mentioned has been an Aquarium... and would it be so far removed by the time it was built? And there might be better places, but do those places bring along the history that comes from having it at Wheeler Park?

For the record... i would be opposed to another full blown zoo at wheeler park. yes, that would pull visitors from both places.

In what? just a couple of months? I have become a fan of the "like" option -- which doesn't exist in the OKCpedia section!
"Like" from me for all of the recent comments.
JTF: I respect your opinion a LOT, but think that it would be cool to take a smallish section of Wheeler Park and build an Aquarium that interacts with the river. I think it should be done by the Zoo people, but be an aquarium only, with the exception of the Zooseum exhibit. If the zoo does it, they should move all their aquatic exhibits there, and focus on non-aquatic stuff in the Adventure District (which may have to rename itself once the boathouses are completed and the zipline is installed over the river). The river interaction should especially highlight Oklahoma native stuff. If we're allowed to dream big on this project, I think it should include some underwater walkways and some water cleaning methods employed upstream a bit (but not too clean -- this IS Oklahoma, land of the red dirt).

How is it removed from 'tourist areas'? It is really close to Bricktown, the Stockyards, Boathouse District, and the most visited site in all of OKC, the Oklahoma City National Museum & Memorial.

So why not build it closer? The Crystal Bridge is closer to PHF than it is to Wheeler Park and how many people are making that walk? If you put it at Wheeler Park you ensure that 95% of the people get there by car.

The National Memorial is only 500' further to the State Capitol than it is to Wheeler Park.

This is only an issue because downtown doesn't have a very urban transit system. A fact that I expect will change with the introduction of the streetcar as well as just based on conversations I've had with Mr. Cain. There is definitely more focus on transit downtown coming.

Extremely good point Sid!

Look, I don't know about everyone who is talking about this, but I'm looking at this as a long term development. I don't know if it could happen in a year, or five or ten. I just think the idea is very cool. And if it were to happen 5-10 years from now the dynamic of the downtown area will no doubt have changed dramaticaly. Wheeler is in a great place to bring together alot of future developments. It's location creates a natural connection to the Farmer's Market, the River, the park, and Hubcap Alley, all areas that are either currently being redeveloped, or will see redevelopment in the future. That redevelopment could naturally be accompanied by improvements in transit. And we really don't know what is going to happen in the south section of Riverside. It is believed that it will be residential, but who's to say that it will only be residential. If Riverside develops a more vibrant mix, an aquarium could fit nicely.

AND let's not forget... This tread is NOT about an aquarium, it IS about Wheeler Park and it's eventual redevelopment. Personally I love the aquarium idea and realize that it is just one componet to that redevelopment. But for those of you not interested in the idea, let's try to stay away from getting too deep into criticizing it. Rather than trying to point out why it wouldn't work, tell us what WOULD work there. What would be something to bring people to the area and improve the overall quality of life not just in Wheeler Park itself, but also in the surrounding area.

What type of "aquarium" is being discussed? A publicly owned aquarium/museum like the Texas State Aquarium (http://www.texasstateaquarium.org/) or one like the private Aquarium Restaurants (http://www.aquariumrestaurants.com/) attraction by the Landry's restaurant group like they have in Denver, Houston, Nashville and Kemah.

You could build an aquarium with a Rainforest Cafe' attached. Now that would be cool!!! lol

What type of "aquarium" is being discussed? A publicly owned aquarium/museum like the Texas State Aquarium (http://www.texasstateaquarium.org/) or one like the private Aquarium Restaurants (http://www.aquariumrestaurants.com/) attraction by the Landry's restaurant group like they have in Denver, Houston, Nashville and Kemah.

I think they are talking about moving Aquaticus out of the zoo so that the zoo can expand into that space with other animals. They could then move Aquaticus downtown and make it bigger. I like the idea, I am just not crazy about the location. Nearly every walking study I have seen limits most people's walking distance to under a 1/2 mile. I know from my own family that if we went downtown to the Memorial or OKCMA there is no way my wife is walking to Wheeler Park to go to Aquaticus. To me, moving Aquaticus to Wheeler Park is no different than trying to use Stage Center as a children's museum. You don't start with the location and try to find 'something' to go on it - you start with the 'something' and then find a location for it.

If you give people a place to walk to and keep them entertained, they will walk great distances.

Last month I was in Chicago for the day. I walked 20 miles. Yes, 20 miles. From Gold Coast down through Navy Pier, down to Soldier Field, the Planetarium, the Aquarium, then back up into downtown and all the way over to Sears Tower and the Loop. Literally walked 20 miles over a 11 hour stay. I mapped it out when I got home.

Awesome Sid... 40 minutes roughly, not to bad, especially if you had the young ones in tow...

And as for distances people will walk, i agree with the posters just above... i averaged 7 miles a day walking when i was in San Fran for a few weeks, and there was public transportation to take, but it didn't always go where i wanted it to. If people are willing to walk a 1/2 mile for anything, then if you build something that they really want to go to, what is another 1/2 mile? now add to that the future streetcar system and where it can run, and we might decrease that distance even more.

2816

It's only 1.1 miles from the skydance bridge if we use the current trails and put something on the furthest point of Wheeler park

I walked this yesterday from Bass Pro Shop. And i made the whole trip in 30 minutes without any kids in tow. granted, i do kinda walk fast and regularly. but i still spent time looking around and didn't try to make it there as fast as i could. Walking the shortest distance i could from the Skydance bridge, it was around like 7 minutes to the far side of Wheeler Park.

For those claiming this park doesn't see much use (and thus removing it in favor of a privately-owned soccer stadium) I was by there Thursday evening and it was extremely active wtih soccer practices and lots of families.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/wheelerpark061218.jpg

For those claiming this park doesn't see much use (and thus removing it in favor of a privately-owned soccer stadium) I was by there Thursday evening and it was extremely active wtih soccer practices and lots of families.

I've been to 7 Energy home games so far this year and there's no way they're drawing more than 2,000 per game. Given that, I find it hard to believe that there would be serious momentum to demolish this park and build a soccer stadium instead.

Side Note: I honestly have no idea what the Energy's 5-10 year plan is at this point. I know they want to be out of Taft sooner rather than later, but it seems like the team's popularity peaked in 2015, slowly declined in 2016-17, and fell off a cliff this season with the poor quality of play thus far.

I wonder what the average attendance was for OKC Cavalry games...

I've been to 7 Energy home games so far this year and there's no way they're drawing more than 2,000 per game. Given that, I find it hard to believe that there would be serious momentum to demolish this park and build a soccer stadium instead.

Side Note: I honestly have no idea what the Energy's 5-10 year plan is at this point. I know they want to be out of Taft sooner rather than later, but it seems like the team's popularity peaked in 2015, slowly declined in 2016-17, and fell off a cliff this season with the poor quality of play thus far.


i agree with you. there's no point altering this park much less hand it over to private hands just to fit a small sports team stadium in it. the funks can really pull a development project at much lesser financial & social cost. i, for example, would propose the following site for a multi use development district anchored by a soccer stadium. perhaps the only thing i would add to it is a river boat house to load and unload passengers coming over on boats from the boat house district and brick town via the river.



14688

The stadium would need to be multi-use to get any sort of value out of it. I think USL has a stipulation that every team will need to have a soccer-specific stadium here in a few years, so that will cause a need, but I agree that the attendence doesn't exactly demand a stadium.

The Energy being literally one of the worst teams in the entire league this year doesn't exactly help attendance either.

The stadium would need to be multi-use to get any sort of value out of it. I think USL has a stipulation that every team will need to have a soccer-specific stadium here in a few years, so that will cause a need, but I agree that the attendence doesn't exactly demand a stadium.

The Energy being literally one of the worst teams in the entire league this year doesn't exactly help attendance either.

Yeah, the Energy's terrible form this year has definitely been a drag on attendance. I'm sure it will go back up somewhat if they can get back to putting a competitive team on the field, but they weren't exactly filling up Taft last season when they were in the top half of the league, either.

The USL does want all of their teams playing in soccer-specific stadiums by the start of the 2020 season, but I'd be surprised if that deadline actually sticks, because there are currently 10 teams playing in baseball stadiums, with three more expansion teams playing in baseball stadiums set to join next season. From what I've read, the main issue with Taft is that it's slightly too narrow to be a USSF-approved field. It frustrates me that when the Energy and OKCPS renovated Taft back in 2014, they didn't just tear out the track and build a new track across the street, to the north of the NW Classen baseball field. Not sure how much additional money that would have cost, but it would have allowed the Energy to build the field to USSF standards. I know the Energy want their own stadium though, so I doubt they've ever thought of Taft as a long-term home, anyways.

I like OKC2017's proposed development district, but I do wonder how much it would cost to buy out those remaining homes and businesses between Walker, I-40, Harvey, and the river. I know Louisville's USL team is in the process of building a development district anchored by a 10,000 seat soccer-specific stadium (which I think is about the maximum size the Energy should be looking to build) with a mix of public and private financing. They are spending about $50 million on the stadium and about $200 million total on the entire district. I won't pretend to know whether Funk and McLaughlin can finance that on their own, or whether they'll ask for subsidies and/or the creation of a TIF district.

Another (short-term) possibility is that the Energy could look to build their own pop-up stadium (http://www.us.jll.com/united-states/en-us/news/4697/jll-builds-phoenix-rising-fc-soccer-stadium) after this season or next season, while they continue to explore long-term options. I'm not 100% sure where they would put such a stadium, but somewhere on the State Fairgrounds seems like a potential option. Phoenix's USL team did this prior to last season as part of a larger rebrand, and their club has had a lot of positive momentum over the past two years as a result. The Energy recently brought in a senior advisor who was instrumental in getting Sacramento's USL team a soccer-specific stadium, so I would expect some stadium news in the next several months.

What about attendance if such a stadium were built near the stockyards or elsewhere south of the river? Demographics might work a bit better.

BTW, I saw a list of sports stadiums being built around the country and I think 8 or so soccer facilities of 20 to 40K in size are being built for MLS.

The facility could certainly also be used for concerts

I've been to 7 Energy home games so far this year and there's no way they're drawing more than 2,000 per game. Given that, I find it hard to believe that there would be serious momentum to demolish this park and build a soccer stadium instead.

Side Note: I honestly have no idea what the Energy's 5-10 year plan is at this point. I know they want to be out of Taft sooner rather than later, but it seems like the team's popularity peaked in 2015, slowly declined in 2016-17, and fell off a cliff this season with the poor quality of play thus far.

USL's goal by 2020:

USL: League announces intention to house all 24 teams in soccer-specific stadiums by 2020 - https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2015/05/13/usl-league-announces-intention-house-all-24-teams-soccer-specific-stadiums-2020

Really thought that once Rayo OKC exited the scene that the Energy FC would have capitalized on the whole market to themselves.

Let's see, the OKC IGA Tennis Classic (Williams' sisters early participation), Oklahoma City RedHawks, Oklahoma City Barons AHL all went down hill once under the Funk's umbrella and now the Oklahoma City Energy FC. Had great expectations in the Funks to market soccer, bring OKC its second major league sport with MLS expansion.

Thank God, they didn't secure the NHL Calgary Flames (post Thunder), as Bob Funk Sr., once raised eyebrows about the possibility of the NHL in OKC--we would be in the same position as the City of Hartford--too close to Boston. OKC is just far enough from Dallas that we don't have to live in their shadow or that of Mavericks' owner, Mark Cuban.

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/warehouse/getpubliccontent?contentId=d1abd26c-2425-4f35-a5f2-44ce483cc893

USL is one tier below Major League Soccer. Our city could use a venue; hopefully bring the OSSAA's 5-A & 4A high school championships to a new stadium in the Wheeler area or on the riverfront. Much like we did with the Peake, build a basic stadium, something in the 25,000-seat range without all the bells & whistles; if Funk wants to occupy the stadium as a USL tenant or future anchor MLS tenant; let him partnership with the city to provide all the bells and whistles--chairback seats, suites etc.

Feel the city could be ready to move forward on a soccer specific stadium with a Funk partnership.

For those claiming this park doesn't see much use (and thus removing it in favor of a privately-owned soccer stadium) I was by there Thursday evening and it was extremely active wtih soccer practices and lots of families.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/wheelerpark061218.jpg

Just wait until next week when adult softball starts back up. We use those fields Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, Friday and sometimes Sunday.
We should’ve started summer league last week but I won’t get into that. :rolleyes:

I honestly see very little utilization and lots of empty surface parking in that pic, but agree that softball brings a TON of people to Wheeler Park.

What park has parking lots that size?

The only reason Wheeler does is because of the softball crowds.

If Wheeler is redeveloped as a soccer stadium there is ample room to replace the softball use and in fact the current park usage by upgrading the entire series of connected park and other space along the river, which actually even connects to Scissortail, Wiley Post, et. al. All of that is to say that if a soccer stadium makes sense for that location I believe we should do it when the time comes, but also should pay attention to not losing existing amenities and perhaps even leveraging it to have INCREASED park access and amenities for current users who would be displaced by the stadium. It's not a zero sum situation.

If Wheeler is redeveloped as a soccer stadium there is ample room to replace the softball use and in fact the current park usage by upgrading the entire series of connected park and other space along the river, which actually even connects to Scissortail, Wiley Post, et. al. All of that is to say that if a soccer stadium makes sense for that location I believe we should do it when the time comes, but also should pay attention to not losing existing amenities and perhaps even leveraging it to have INCREASED park access and amenities for current users who would be displaced by the stadium. It's not a zero sum situation.

Do you know something about this or are you just speculating?

Just speculation. What I do know is that the connected parkland exists and is very underutilized. I also know there has been discussion in the past of utilizing this space for amateur sports and other recreational uses. It seems quite natural that if the existing site is ultimately redeveloped as a soccer stadium that there would be consideration given to relocating and replacing the amenities currently within Wheeler to adjacent and nearby - and currently underutilized - park land.

I will never understand this site.

Google Maps puts Wheeler Park at ~55 acres. We are literally building a 70-acre park almost directly adjacent to this one. So either we are 70 acres short on park space as it stands, or some of that land could easily be redeveloped without a drop in quality of life for the surrounding residents.

If the only real concern is that softball games need somewhere to be played, there is tons of underutilized parkland in that area where new fields could sit.

^

So every time a new park is built we should sell off all or part of the nearest existing park to a private concern?

When Scissortail Park was proposed and voted on it was never part of the deal that Wheeler would somehow be expendable. The plan was always to keep them both and all the other OKC parks.

The city is growing and more and more people are living and recreating near the core. Look how incredibly busy the Myriad Gardens has become in a very short time.

We are also getting ready to add a new Manuel Perez Park on the south shore of the river, just to the east of Robinson. Should we then get rid of the existing parks that are adjacent? On not build the lower portion of Scissortail Park which be closer than Wheeler is to it?


It seems people are being very cavalier about a park because they don't personally use it, although lots of other people do.

I go to a bunch of OKC parks all over town, including this one. I walk my dogs, fly my drone and usually pick up trash along the way. I love seeing and experiencing our parks and frankly it puts me in contact with people I wouldn't otherwise interact with; and I happen to think isolation is one of the biggest problems in our culture today; especially not interacting with those different than you and your direct neighbors.

Almost all our parks are busy, mainly used by people who don't have big yards or any yard at all.

I bet almost no one here has even been to Wheeler Park and those who have go to play or watch softball. I go by, to or through that park once every week or two (it's one of my favorite places to launch my drone plus I just like it).

And in general OKC could use tons more recreation space, well beyond what is currently planned. If there are so many great places for the amenities of this park to be relocated, then there should be tons of places for a privately owned soccer stadium that doesn't involving taking all or most of an existing area park.

If you're going to take a park, prefer that you take Wiley Post Park west of the Mat Hoffman Action Sports Park for a Soccer Specific Stadium; then tie both Wheeler & Wiley Post parks together as Urbanized suggested in Post #92. The two parks are separated by Walker Avenue: https://www.google.com/maps/search/+11th+%26+south+western+avenue,+oklahoma+city/@35.4506879,-97.5288912,15z

We should never, ever be doing away with existing parks.

We need a lot more recreation, not less.

^

So every time a new park is built we should sell off all or part of the nearest existing park to a private concern?

When Scissortail Park was proposed and voted on it was never part of the deal that Wheeler would somehow be expendable. The plan was always to keep them both and all the other OKC parks.

The city is growing and more and more people are living and recreating near the core. Look how incredibly busy the Myriad Gardens has become in a very short time.

We are also getting ready to add a new Manuel Perez Park on the south shore of the river, just to the east of Robinson. Should we then get rid of the existing parks that are adjacent? On not build the lower portion of Scissortail Park which be closer than Wheeler is to it?


It seems people are being very cavalier about a park because they don't personally use it, although lots of other people do.

I go to a bunch of OKC parks all over town, including this one. I walk my dogs, fly my drone and usually pick up trash along the way. I love seeing and experiencing our parks and frankly it puts me in contact with people I wouldn't otherwise interact with; and I happen to think isolation is one of the biggest problems in our culture today; especially not interacting with those different than you and your direct neighbors.

Almost all our parks are busy, mainly used by people who don't have big yards or any yard at all.

I bet almost no one here has even been to Wheeler Park and those who have go to play or watch softball. I go by, to or through that park once every week or two (it's one of my favorite places to launch my drone plus I just like it).

And in general OKC could use tons more recreation space, well beyond what is currently planned. If there are so many great places for the amenities of this park to be relocated, then there should be tons of places for a privately owned soccer stadium that doesn't involving taking all or most of an existing area park.

If a soccer stadium is build in wheeler park (I have no knowledge of this). Keep in mind that it is almost 100% that the stadium will be owned by the city of OKC.

Pete I used to go to Wheeler all the time, 3-4 times a week to run on the river trail. I can't ever remember going there when there wasn't a youth soccer team, or adult rugby team using the open fields for practice/games. Wheeler is a heavily used space.

Just from the photo it looks like at least 75% of the space is softball fields, so of course if softball games aren't going on its gonna look empty from an aerial shot.

The south lot at Wheeler is where I park if I go running on the river trails. Off hours, so I don't see as many people using the park directly, but the trails get a lot of use.


^

So every time a new park is built we should sell off all or part of the nearest existing park to a private concern?

When Scissortail Park was proposed and voted on it was never part of the deal that Wheeler would somehow be expendable. The plan was always to keep them both and all the other OKC parks.

The city is growing and more and more people are living and recreating near the core. Look how incredibly busy the Myriad Gardens has become in a very short time.

We are also getting ready to add a new Manuel Perez Park on the south shore of the river, just to the east of Robinson. Should we then get rid of the existing parks that are adjacent? On not build the lower portion of Scissortail Park which be closer than Wheeler is to it?


It seems people are being very cavalier about a park because they don't personally use it, although lots of other people do.

I go to a bunch of OKC parks all over town, including this one. I walk my dogs, fly my drone and usually pick up trash along the way. I love seeing and experiencing our parks and frankly it puts me in contact with people I wouldn't otherwise interact with; and I happen to think isolation is one of the biggest problems in our culture today; especially not interacting with those different than you and your direct neighbors.

Almost all our parks are busy, mainly used by people who don't have big yards or any yard at all.

I bet almost no one here has even been to Wheeler Park and those who have go to play or watch softball. I go by, to or through that park once every week or two (it's one of my favorite places to launch my drone plus I just like it).

And in general OKC could use tons more recreation space, well beyond what is currently planned. If there are so many great places for the amenities of this park to be relocated, then there should be tons of places for a privately owned soccer stadium that doesn't involving taking all or most of an existing area park.

Amen.

If a soccer stadium is build in wheeler park (I have no knowledge of this). Keep in mind that it is almost 100% that the stadium will be owned by the city of OKC.

Yeah that would be true. The fact of the matter is that the city owns the Chesapeake arena but the Thunder for all practical purposes are the tail that wags the dog. There seems to be a precedent with these city built and owned facilities for the primary tenant to have outsized influence in what gets allowed to be booked.

Yeah that would be true. The fact of the matter is that the city owns the Chesapeake arena but the Thunder for all practical purposes are the tail that wags the dog. There seems to be a precedent with these city built and owned facilities for the primary tenant to have outsized influence in what gets allowed to be booked.

yep.. and this is exactly why OKC will not get another hockey team anytime soon. we were very very close to getting the ECHL affiliate (Double A) for the Dallas Stars... but they wanted to use Chesapeake Arena, and it was very quickly nixed by the Thunder. because having a building used an additional 36 days for events is a terrible idea I guess.

^

I always like to point out that the LA Kings share the Staples Center with both the Lakers and Clippers PLUS have tons of concerts and other events. That's one NHL team and 2 NBA teams. And yet they still use that venue all the time for other things as well.

It can be done, it's just that the powers that be in OKC seem content to let all the big shows go to a smaller Tulsa market, thus depriving people in OKC of experiencing many concerts and robbing the local economy of millions every year.

Steering :ot:

The Peake could accommodate an ECHL franchise with the added incentive to renew former rivals Tulsa & Wichita. Thunder are the Peake's anchor tenant.

A new proposed arena (replace SFA) is under consideration to accommodate our valued horse show industry; the multi-purpose venue could be equipped for basketball & ice hockey as well. There aren't any decent restaurants/amenities in the area; good chance ice hockey would fail much like a better quality product (AHL Barons) failed in a subpar facility w/o former established rivals across from the Peake. Not going to ignore the Barons' failure was attributed to other factors as well.

Also :ot:

Speaking of softball, back in the 60's/70's there was an annual Native American softball tournament at Wheeler Park in the late summer that attracted huge crowds of people in the park. Whatever happened to it, anyone know?

IIRC they eventually moved the tournament; City didn't renew the lease.

Although it was good for local area convenience type stores in the area; the tournament was preyed upon by a rowdy drinking group many with no ties to softball. Many were there from Friday thru Sunday. Some attendees camped along the river; the last year it operated at Wheeler one reported drunk fell off the Western Avenue Bridge; also the park never shut down during that time; police were frequently called to the area to deal with occasional clashes between a small group of area gang members who crashed the huge 49 side party which spanned two & 1/2 days.

Wheeler Park was completely trashed during that time; cans, bottles (warning signs didn't deter glass), illegal drugs and you name it. Wheeler Park couldn't supply enough portable toilets to keep up with the disgusting activities that took place--few drunk characters didn't use the portable toilets.

Witnessed some of this myself because a friend of mind (from Watonga) came here to participate in the tournament with his family; use to accompany the family on those events. It wasn't so much the tournament but the outsiders who congregated in the park to turn the non softball activities into a complete fiasco.


Wheeler Park was covered by overnight campers, though the city now forbids that. Narcomey got serapes (Indian blankets) from Mexico and gave them away as prizes for home runs.

Blood, Sweat and Cheers Annual Softball Tourney Brings Indians Together: https://newsok.com/article/2507803/blood-sweat-and-cheers-annual-softball-tourney-brings-indians-together

Thanks Laramie, that article is dated 1995 it continued on longer than I thought

looks like it came back to wheeler park for 2014 and after that (possibly 2015?) was at the asa stadium


https://nfca.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6584:asa-hall-of-fame-complex-to-host-63rd-annual-all-indian-fastpitch-tournament&catid=114&Itemid=149

Staples Center is an unusual facility in that it has multiple anchor tenants and therefore there is not any one of them to place monopoly on the dates or its use. Chicago's United Center is another one.

However, it is not unusual for facilities with no competition to allow the anchor to de-facto control the use. Here in Seattle, the Mariners are anchor tenant at Safeco Field. Guess who else uses the facility? Even though it is owned by King County and built/financed in part by the state. CenturyLink Field used to be anchored solely by the Seattle Seahawks. Facility built and owned by King County. Prior to the expansion of MLS, the Seahawks were sole tenant and controlled events (and got a cut from those allowed). With the MLS Sounders sharing the facility, there is no longer a monopoly and there are other events coming there.

Now here's an interesting one, KeyArena, the former home of the NBA Seattle Supersonics and current home of the WNBA Seattle Storm. Previously, there was competition there and LOTS of concerts, events, and shows. Today, basically JUST the WNBA and Seattle University teams play there with other arenas in the area (mainly Tacoma) that gets the shows. Same facility but run totally different today vs. 2008.

Point being, Oklahoma City needs to eventually decide that it owns Chesapeake arena and desires more events/control over dates. Until then, the NBA will dictate to SMG who, what and when and likely the Thunder is getting a cut of anything happening there. Not a bad deal for a new NBA city getting a team but I expect this to be revised on the next contract renewal given the smashing success of OKC as a true NBA market and the demand this city has for events.

Also :ot:

Speaking of softball, back in the 60's/70's there was an annual Native American softball tournament at Wheeler Park in the late summer that attracted huge crowds of people in the park. Whatever happened to it, anyone know?

It was fastpitch softball, I believe. In the 70s when I used to play a lot, we ran into the tournament in Anadarko. It may have moved there.

^

I always like to point out that the LA Kings share the Staples Center with both the Lakers and Clippers PLUS have tons of concerts and other events. That's one NHL team and 2 NBA teams. And yet they still use that venue all the time for other things as well.

It can be done, it's just that the powers that be in OKC seem content to let all the big shows go to a smaller Tulsa market, thus depriving people in OKC of experiencing many concerts and robbing the local economy of millions every year.

It can be but I saw a documentary several years ago about the operation of that arena and it is a work of art to get all those events in. There was a day they had 2 major sporting events there the same day and a concert the next. The crews that tear down and set up were on the job the second each event ended, no wasted time or motion. Not just them, but the crews that clean, stock and cook food, etc. It was amazing. The Thunder have a good deal but there is a lot to having an arena housing both hockey and basketball.

The Staples Center is a special case.

^

There were/are dozens of arenas and stadiums that have simultaneously hosted multiple pro, semi-pro and college sports teams and still staged all kinds of events.

The question is: Why can't OKC?

Simple answer: We choose not to.

I wish there was a way we could let the necessary powers that be know we want more concerts in our city-owned arena.

I'll let the conversation get back on topic.

I think a significant part of the issue with Chesapeake goes beyond the Thunder and rests with SMG and the fact that they also manage BOK. The arena in Tulsa has no anchor tenant, so needs lots of events to be profitable. The arena in OKC is profitable with zero effort thanks to the built-in Thunder business. It is a well-known fact that OKC folks (myself included) willingly drive to Tulsa for quality shows while Tulsa residents usually can’t be bothered to drive to OKC. The whole thing is a pretty obvious business decision if you think of it from this perspective.

I’m not sure how the City changes this. Minimum performance guarantees on the next negotiation? Not even sure how that would work. But I can guarantee you this: SMG isn’t going anywhere. They were just contracted to manage the new MAPS 3 convention center. Nor would we necessarily want them to. They are one of if not THE top dog in the industry, and concerts are not our only priority as a city.

OK, sorry to extend the off-topic discussion.

^

If the city wanted to change this they would just hire someone other than SMG.

As I suggested, there are also plenty of reasons to retain SMG.

As I suggested, there are also plenty of reasons to retain SMG.

And plenty of reasons not to.

I don't see how SMG's simultaneous management of the BOK Center and Chesapeake isn't a big conflict of interest.

How often do they book an act or event at only one but not the other?

In other words, if they book an act in Tulsa it's probably easier for them and means that act will not be booked in OKC. And to SMG it doesn't make any difference if they go to Tulsa... They get paid just the same.

How is this good for OKC??

I don't see how SMG's simultaneous management of the BOK Center and Chesapeake isn't a big conflict of interest.

How often do they book an act or event at only one but not the other?

In other words, if they book an act in Tulsa it's probably easier for them and means that act will not be booked in OKC. And to SMG it doesn't make any difference if they go to Tulsa... They get paid just the same.

How is this good for OKC??

The number of qualified arena management groups is very, VERY small. I can't think of any other than SMG. Could the city do it? I wouldn't trust them to run a drive-thru, let alone an arena.

The number of qualified arena management groups is very, VERY small. I can't think of any other than SMG. Could the city do it? I wouldn't trust them to run a drive-thru, let alone an arena.

You only need one.

AEG is a big-time player and Live Nation has good market share as well.

There are good options other than SMG.

I don't see how SMG's simultaneous management of the BOK Center and Chesapeake isn't a big conflict of interest.

How often do they book an act or event at only one but not the other?

In other words, if they book an act in Tulsa it's probably easier for them and means that act will not be booked in OKC. And to SMG it doesn't make any difference if they go to Tulsa... They get paid just the same.

How is this good for OKC??
I never claimed that it is good for the concert scene in particular; in fact if you scroll up a few posts you will see that I am the very poster who introduced the theory that it was detrimental, as I have done before. I personally agree that it doesn't seem to be. That said, booking concerts is not the only reason they were hired to manage this facility, and there are surely other reasons that they have been retained and in fact the relationship has been expanded to include the CC.