if the proposed stadium on this site is carried out then it would make all the sense in the world to build a pedestrian elevated bridge-park
right over i-40 and into the boat house district. i have seen some examples of them in europe or asia, i don't remember.
i don't know if such a connection has already been proposed but if not then it should; just imagine being able to bike or walk confortably
all the way from midtown to the boathouse district.

You can already walk comfortably from Midtown to the Boathouse District via Bricktown Landing. If you're going to spend money on a highway cap I'd rather see the proposed one over 235 happen. That said, I wouldn't mind seeing a pedestrian bridge over the tracks and drainage ditch so that you could walk from the COOP site to Bricktown Landing and then into the BHD.

See my crappy illustration. Lines equal proposed bridge, circle equal existing pedestrian access to BHD.

13631

You can already walk comfortably from Midtown to the Boathouse District via Bricktown Landing. If you're going to spend money on a highway cap I'd rather see the proposed one over 235 happen. That said, I wouldn't mind seeing a pedestrian bridge over the tracks and drainage ditch so that you could walk from the COOP site to Bricktown Landing and then into the BHD.

See my crappy illustration. Lines equal proposed bridge, circle equal existing pedestrian access to BHD.

13631
When this development happens the canal will almost for certain be extended to run throughout. And those tracks will no longer exist

That was my understanding, the only tracks remaining will be the elevated portions.

the canal will almost for certain be extended to run throughout

Apologies, I don't remember this detail, can you please cite source so I can research further?

When this development happens the canal will almost for certain be extended to run throughout. And those tracks will no longer exist

Steve recently said in his chat that he thought the canal extension would be a good possibility.

Good to know, didn't catch that.

major league soccer expansion in front-runner cities is facing substantial hurdles and there is
also rumor that MLS will continue to grow beyond 28 teams like the rest of the major professional american sports leagues.
that opens the door for okc to have a distant shot at receiving an MLS franchise in the future.

it's a bonus that the okc energy is run by true sports teams operators who know and understand how to put a team
in place and develop it. with the site for stadium and commercial development already secured it is just a matter of getting
the right people (major investors) on board to make the push toward a professional team. think how quickly the city managed to get an NBA
team when the big businesses decided to make it happen. i think even the thunder can become a stake holder
in a new professional team for okc like the spurs are doing in their bid for an MLS franchise in san antonio.

i have a feeling this may happen after all. when the maps 3 projects are nearing completion it will be more than evident that
the producer's coop site is the logical next wave of development for the city's downtown.


http://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2017/04/05/mls-releases-statement-after-st-louis-votes-down-soccer-stadium-funding


http://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/other/2017/03/21/detroit-mls-bid-goes-gratiot-jail-site/99434064/

The Funks have an opportunity to wait on the next wave of MLS expansion bids to open or look at an existing MLS team's relocation option--thru the upcoming process (2017-2020).

As poster OKC2017 mentioned above, OKC is in a good position to put in a bid. Funks have constructed a comparable MLS practice facility @2810 NE 63rd; land secured for future stadium & mix-use development with the 37 acres of the Producers' COOP Mill site.

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2011/06/08/sports/soccer/skc/skc-blog480.jpg
City has promised to help with the stadium development if they know a team is coming. This means infrastructure for the site along with possible TIF (Tax Increment Financing) qualification & could be positioned to secure some bond funds & MAPS help.

An OKC MLS bid does seem to be gaining traction. The City continues to get on the MLS radar--MLS Expansion Update: San Diego, St Louis, Cincinnati, Nashville, Oklahoma City and More:


OKC Energy FC fans are still probably riding high from their USL Cup Playoff victory from over the weekend, but before that they got subtle news on potential MLS expansion. The owner of the team, Bob Funk Jr., along with other investors, have agreed to buy 37-acres of land in downtown OKC. MLS really loves downtown stadiums, so this seems like a step in the right direction. Not to mention, the source for that information was the league's official site.

SB Nation - http://www.thebluetestament.com/2016/10/4/13153202/mls-expansion-update-nashville-st-louis-san-diego-cincinnati-oklahoma-city-lafc-minnesota-atlanta

The Funks have an opportunity to wait on the next wave of MLS expansion bids to open or look at an existing MLS team's relocation option--thru the upcoming process (2017-2020).

As poster OKC2017 mentioned above, OKC is in a good position to put in a bid. Funks have constructed a comparable MLS practice facility @2810 NE 63rd; land secured for future stadium & mix-use development with the 37 acres of the Producers' COOP Mill site.

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2011/06/08/sports/soccer/skc/skc-blog480.jpg
City has promised to help with the stadium development if they know a team is coming. This means infrastructure for the site along with possible TIF (Tax Increment Financing) qualification & could be positioned to secure some bond funds & MAPS help.

An OKC MLS bid does seem to be gaining traction. The City continues to get on the MLS radar--MLS Expansion Update: San Diego, St Louis, Cincinnati, Nashville, Oklahoma City and More:



SB Nation - http://www.thebluetestament.com/2016/10/4/13153202/mls-expansion-update-nashville-st-louis-san-diego-cincinnati-oklahoma-city-lafc-minnesota-atlanta
That article is from October of 2016, nothing new.

That article is from October of 2016, nothing new.

Thank you, did notice the date, 6 months prior to April 2017.

:ot:

True gopokes88 it's nothing new.

OKC Energy FC ownership is making progress; they have some components on which to build.

The Thunder wouldn't be in OKC without our fans & city's support (296 consecutive sellouts of 18,203 since 2010 season); many posters thought we couldn't support the NBA at time.

Our original plans with the Chesapeake Energy Arena were to pursue NHL hockey--Columbus (Bluejackets) secured that final 4th franchise edging out Oklahoma City & Houston's bids in the 1997 NHL expansion derby.


Information to support post #608 by OKC2017; poster appears curious about the possibility of an MLS franchise for OKC.

Here's another article for the OKC2017 poster:


Oklahoma City

The players involved: Bob Funk Jr., owner of the USL's OKC Energy FC

Point of convergence: Funk Jr. leads a group of investors who have purchased 37 acres of prime downtown real estate in Oklahoma City with eyes on a soccer-specific stadium, which a good starting point.

Prospects: Funk Jr. admitted that MLS is a long play for Oklahoma City. He recently said that the group is "several years away" from actively pursuing an MLS franchise, so this one is still in the distance.

FourFourTwo: Ranking the expansion markets lining up to get into Major League Soccer:

Page 3: https://www.fourfourtwo.com/us/features/ranking-expansion-markets-lining-get-major-league-soccer?page=0%2C2 USL OKC Energy FC

A long shot for MLS; however so were the Thunder. OKC is in the MLS conversation.

IF we don't obtain MLS, we have a great USL (granted D2 status for 2017) minor league soccer organization in the OKC Energy FC--they need the community's support..

:backtotop

Thank you, did notice the date, 6 months prior to April 2017.

:ot:

True gopokes88 it's nothing new.

OKC Energy FC ownership is making progress; they have some components on which to build.

The Thunder wouldn't be in OKC without our fans & city's support (296 consecutive sellouts of 18,203 since 2010 season); many posters thought we couldn't support the NBA at time.

Our original plans with the Chesapeake Energy Arena were to pursue NHL hockey--Columbus (Bluejackets) secured that final 4th franchise edging out Oklahoma City & Houston's bids in the 1997 NHL expansion derby.


Information to support post #608 by OKC2017; poster appears curious about the possibility of an MLS franchise for OKC.

Here's another article for the OKC2017 poster:



FourFourTwo: Ranking the expansion markets lining up to get into Major League Soccer:

Page 3: https://www.fourfourtwo.com/us/features/ranking-expansion-markets-lining-get-major-league-soccer?page=0%2C2 USL OKC Energy FC

A long shot for MLS; however so were the Thunder. OKC is in the MLS conversation.

IF we don't obtain MLS, we have a great USL (granted D2 status for 2017) minor league soccer organization in the OKC Energy FC--they need the community's support..

:backtotop

This is just a retread of old information. Nothing you have posted is new.

Prior to any of this going forward should be a fact finding report authored by some well respected economists on the ROI. It has been done in the past in other markets and it appears that tax payer funded sporting venues are a poor investment of tax monies. Failure to do this is an acknowledgement that this would be a poor ROI.

Prior to any of this going forward should be a fact finding report authored by some well respected economists on the ROI. It has been done in the past in other markets and it appears that tax payer funded sporting venues are a poor investment of tax monies. Failure to do this is an acknowledgement that this would be a poor ROI.

The 43 acre Producers' COOP Mill (PCM) site's owners suggest that this area may be developed for hotels, mixed-use office-retail-residential & a potential stadium. Have the Funks asked anything of the city that retail giants (like Walmart & Target) request of cities other than infrastructure when they put in a store, the assistance needed by the city has yet-to-be determined. Does OKC need an ROI (return on investment) study on a private development?

Many of us would agree that the PCM site is an eyesore for the core.

There have been a ton of discussions about convention centers, arenas & stadiums throughout the country. It comes down to a familiar term used called 'economic impact study.' Many of us are not quite sure as to what that means.

The City-owned Chesapeake Arena & the Bricktown Ballpark are used for events other than sports. Some of these events wouldn't make a stop in OKC if we didn't possess these facilities. Call it a 'quality of life' facility if you want; however many attractions bring 'new money' into our community's economy spent by out-of-state tourist.

soccer (football) is a huge money making industry world wide. i think everyone is clear on that.
player signings are usually within the dozens of millions of dollars as a fee to a club to release a
player from legally binding contract; what the player earns as salary is another different amount.

big money from around the world has been flocking to take ownership of historical soccer clubs
in the major european leagues, many of them are american and own some of the most profittable
teams like manchester united or arsenal.

the thing with MLS and OKC in particular is that it offers so much potential to become an economic
engine that would generate hundreds of millions of dollars to the city in the long term. however,
there is also risk that MLS does not become a top flight league flooded by investment from home and
abroad in the form of advertising, sponsorships, tv rights, etc etc. but what if it does?

personally, i think the u.s is destined to dominate the world in just about every sport, including soccer.
soccer will take time and patience because it is not deeply rooted in our culture like it is in other countries
or the way other sports are rooted here, like football, baseball or basketball. but once this current generation
hops onto the commercial world of soccer as a business MLS and the u.s national team will take the world by
storm and it is within our own time range that we may see the u.s winning a world cup and MLS becoming the
prime, elite league that everyone the world over will be talking about much the same way people from every
corner of the earth talks about real madrid, barcelona and manchester united.

so that's what it is at stake if little, rural okc lands an MLS franchise while it still has a chance to contend for one.
but money is the lubricant that oils economic engines and without the support the okc thunder has, for example,
it would not make sense for the city to even bother to push for a stadium plan.

Major League Soccer appears to be growing. No idea how big it will eventually become, if it will surpass MLB or the NBA. It's possible, but it's going to take 30+ years to do it. At a minimum.

If OKC can get in sometime in the near future, that's probably a good thing. Right now, the support requirements for the sport are fairly small (compared to other professional leagues). If we are going to support a second professional league, it will probably have to be MLS. As the sport grows, OKC will also be growing, so I don't think it will stretch us too far.

There should probably be some amount of public funding for it (there usually is for this sort of thing), but it should primarily be a private investment. If a group of investors think they can make money off of it, then wonderful. But there are better things for the city to pay for than building a stadium to chase after a second big league team. If we get it, great. If not, oh well.

Does anyone know the status of the planned purchase of the Producers Coop property by Bob Funk Jr.'s group that was planned to close this spring? Last article I could find was from February stating that the group was in process of due diligence and hoped to learn a lot more over the following 30 days.

Does anyone know the status of the planned purchase of the Producers Coop property by Bob Funk Jr.'s group that was planned to close this spring? Last article I could find was from February stating that the group was in process of due diligence and hoped to learn a lot more over the following 30 days.

Deal is now completely dead and we're back to square 1:

http://newsok.com/producers-cooperative-development-near-oklahoma-citys-bricktown-canceled/article/5551138

Maybe it is just me, but I am amazed that every project requires substantial public funding, even when the private side are billionaires. In a time where OK can't even pay teachers a living wage, these developers are frequently seeking public funding. I understand it, but only to a point.

Well that's disappointing. Such an eyesore...

From that article:


The timeline and cost to secure the additional property we needed to proceed with confidence became a hurdle too high to clear

Sounds like they were trying to acquire the Lumberyard property along the boulevard from Mazaheri and they couldn't come to terms.

Maybe it is just me, but I am amazed that every project requires substantial public funding, even when the private side are billionaires. In a time where OK can't even pay teachers a living wage, these developers are frequently seeking public funding. I understand it, but only to a point.

The City created this monster and keeps feeding it, mainly through TIF which is absolutely appropriated from public schools.

They started giving handouts and even after billions of investment since, we are still writing checks to developers, as almost every single one swears they can't make things work without tax dollars.

When you are using tax dollars taken from schools and given to developers for very high-end condo projects (like 701 Hudson and Broadway Condos) you can come completely off the rails.

^^^^^^^^
That criticism is fair in many instances, however this site is quite complicated. Environmental remediation alone will be massive. It also requires new public infrastructure in a way that is very rare for a centrally located site, in the form of drainage, sewer, ingress/egress, streets and on and on. Much of the public funding request here would have been simply to pay for infrastructure that mostly already exists on other sites.

Add to all of this that the asking price was still very high in relation to what it's truly worth, and the spreadsheet quickly tips in the direction of zero or negative ROI. Expecting that developers should be eager to take little/zero profit or even a loss just because a development looks great in renderings and because they are wealthy is nonsensical. If they can't see the same type of ROI that they would see by putting their money into another investment, they will walk. You would too.

That is the point at which the community has to decide if the benefit of having an area developed and returned to the tax rolls is worth the public investment. It's the "but for" argument here, which is where TIF and public monies make the most sense from a taxpayer standpoint.

But really, I doubt in this case it was reticence on the City's part that was the deciding factor but instead a still-inflated land price and perhaps an uncooperative neighbor. For this development to have worked, there had to be a high level of coordination with the lumberyard, which entirely fronts the boulevard.

There are programs for environmental cleanup and the city could provide the needed infrastructure as it does for other developments around town.

The simple fact is that every single downtown developer comes with their hand out, and you can't blame them because everyone who has come before them has already been gifted.

Not disagreeing that it has become all too common for every development to sidle up to the trough; just saying that sites like this one, First National and a few others are clearly in a class of their own when it comes to justification for public participation.

Not disagreeing that it has become all too common for every development to sidle up to the trough; just saying that sites like this one, First National and a few others are clearly in a class of their own when it comes to justification for public participation.

Agree, and would put the Wheeler District in that category as well.

But in both those cases, they are self-funded, using newly generated taxes from the new development that gets put back in.


BTW, it occurs to me that a condition of receiving public assistance should be a full independent accounting once the project is finished and leased.

As things stand now, every single developer swears up and down a project won't be profitable without these public gifts, and we can actually figure out if that is true by looking at the real numbers afterwards.

I have the feeling the large majority of them are doing very well.

I hope this may just be a move to put pressure on the holdout to force a sale by showing that they are willing to walk away. This may be wishful thinking though.

I hope this may just be a move to put pressure on the holdout to force a sale by showing that they are willing to walk away. This may be wishful thinking though.

Mazaheri is mega-wealthy and seems prepared to sit on that Lumberyard property indefinitely.

He is also a serious developer and probably not very interested in selling.

Hope they can clean up this EYESORE of clinking, clanking, clattering collection of collagenous junk; then some real development can begin.

The Funks haven't changed; BIG TALK of the NHL coming to the city in the late '90s with the pursuit of the Calgary Flames moving to our city, also TALK of obtaining an MLS franchise when the expansion fee was $10 million; now it's $100 million. They probably can't get enough investors who trust their judgement to do a privately funded stadium project--let alone have the funds to purchase an MLS franchise (expansion or relocation).

As for the future of the Producer's COOP mill site, OKC needs to get ready for the future; THINK BIG, this site has enormous potential--let's demand clean up of this cosmetic canker sore that distracts from the skyline from I-40.

clinking, clanking, clattering collection of collagenous junk

Danger! Danger, Will Robinson!

Could it just be posturing? No one else is gonna buy that site on a whim. So the Funk's "walk away" and let others stew for a bit until they come back and say "hold on now, don't go away just yet"...

Maybe it is just me, but I am amazed that every project requires substantial public funding, even when the private side are billionaires. In a time where OK can't even pay teachers a living wage, these developers are frequently seeking public funding. I understand it, but only to a point.


You don't become a billionaire losing money on projects. In fact you don't become a billionaire only making a little money on projects.

You don't become a billionaire losing money on projects. In fact you don't become a billionaire only making a little money on projects.

That's exactly right, you become a billionaire by taking advantage of the public :evilsmile

That's exactly right, you become a billionaire by taking advantage of the public :evilsmile

Please let this turn into an economics argument. I'm begging.

Please let this turn into an economics argument. I'm begging.


Supply-side economics, Billionaire?

Are you a poor man's billionaire (Ref: George Shinn) or a rich billionaire--liquid with cash & assets. Billionaires will take advantage of corporate welfare but scream to the highest heavens when a family of five is awarded FOOD STAMPS--an economic engine for retail grocery stores.

Forgive me for the use of the FS words.

It's okay. Wait a few years when the park is completed and interest in downtown again becomes the rage.

It'll happen. Patience.

There are programs for environmental cleanup and the city could provide the needed infrastructure as it does for other developments around town

For private developers, there are no "free" or "government assisted" programs for environmental cleanup. In fact, the only thing that is available for a "private" developer is the possibility of a loan from ODEQ through the Brownfields Program...that is if money is available. And I can tell you with certainty that there is currently no money for loans through the Brownfield Program. And even if it were...it is just a loan (low interest yes...about 2-3%, but none is currently available) As to this site...any private developer that purchases this property will be responsible for the environmental cleanup. And as to this property...it is sizeable.

^

Even so, if there is a mess that should be factored into the sales price by the current owners. That's the way the free market is supposed to work. It's how it works for me or you if we are trying to sell a house with big problems that would have to be dealt with by a buyer.

So bizarre to me that in a state that is supposed to be ultra small government and anti-taxation, we happily fork over billions to rich people and companies. All without any proof whatsoever that it benefits anyone but the recipients.

Honestly, it's because people don't really understand how all this works and the money used is appropriated and dispersed without much public vetting or a vote of the people.

^

Even so, if there is a mess that should be factored into the sales price by the current owners. That's the way the free market is supposed to work. It's how it works for me or you if we are trying to sell a house.

Very true...and that is part of the problem here...the owners clearly weren't willing to make sufficient concessions in light of the large expense of cleanup of the property that will be required for redevelopment. Especially considering the planned uses were residential and commercial.

Very true...and that is part of the problem here...the owners clearly weren't willing to make sufficient concessions in light of the large expense of cleanup of the property that will be required for redevelopment. Especially considering the planned uses were residential and commercial.

Then they need to get realistic instead of the tax payers artificially inflating the purchase price through gifts.

The property is worth what someone is willing to pay, and that includes any contamination.

This has to stop somewhere... The giving away of millions that are badly needed elsewhere in this city and state is completely out of control and contrary to even the most basic common sense.


As I mentioned, if we are going to keep doing this we should at least insist on a final accounting which will show definitively if these funds were even needed in the first place. Until then, we are just giving money away with absolutely no accountability or even the slightest ability to measure the impact.

Supply-side economics, Billionaire?

Are you a poor man's billionaire (Ref: George Shinn) or a rich billionaire--liquid with cash & assets. Billionaires will take advantage of corporate welfare but scream to the highest heavens when a family of five is awarded FOOD STAMPS--an economic engine for retail grocery stores.

Forgive me for the use of the FS words.

Most billionaires are very liberal so the food stamps argument isn't true

most billionaires are very liberal so the food stamps argument isn't true

lol

Whoever obtains this property should be able to get some assistance on clean-up. Did this site once use to be apart of the early 30s oil field development?

what a shame; this is got to be, by far, the hottest piece of real estate in oklahoma right now.
if the full scale urban life style proposal with the state of the art major league soccer stadium anchoring it
along the boulevard were carried out it would definitely take the city to a new level.
if the deal actually pended upon the acquisition of the lumberyard then maybe they should have invited
the owners to join the investor team and become prime stake holders as a joint business venture, right?
i don't think the cleaning up of the site and basic infrastructure would have been too big of a deal because
of proximity to the most urban core in the city; everything is pretty much accessible withing feet. perhaps
it was more of a revenue expectation based on market analysis fall back. an investment of this size and style
could easily go deep into the hundreds of millions of dollars and well, who knows how long it would take the
investors to see any profit from it after the expenses.

Whoever obtains this property should be able to get some assistance on clean-up. Did this site once use to be apart of the early 30s oil field development?

No assistance is available for private developers other than possibly some low interest loans through ODEQ and EPA. But they have to be paid back. If you purchase known contaminated property...its on you to clean it up. Now sometimes...if the contaminator still exists...you can sue for contribution...but as to old historic oil fields...most of those companies have been gone for decades or more. Yes it was an oil field...and possibly a portion was a refinery at one point. Back in the early 1900s up to about 1915-1920. All of the southern part of downtown OKC was oil field and refinery property back in the day.

But bottom line...apart from a low interest loan...whoever purchases this property is on the hook for clean-up.

As has been mentioned before, on the surface this looks like the ideal project for TIF. I would like to hear about how much the city will pay for environmental remediation, etc. because if that is included into the TIF request than it may over exaggerate how much they are actually requesting. At the end of the day, if they were expecting to include Mazaheri's property in this development and that was a deal breaker, that should have been known up front. Fred is a wealthy, competent developer that bought early and is highly unlikely to give up this property, even if it is for ownership in the group. I wouldn't be surprised if bank financing was difficult also.

I would like to hear about how much the city will pay for environmental remediation, etc. because if that is included into the TIF request than it may over exaggerate how much they are actually requesting.

The city will not pay for environmental clean up on privately owned property. Nor will the state or the federal government. That is solely on the property owners.

The city will not pay for environmental clean up on privately owned property. Nor will the state or the federal government. That is solely on the property owners.

Partially true...

https://www.okc.gov/departments/planning/programs/brownfields

The City may pay for assessments and will assist in providing low interest loans...

"Financial Resources

- No cost environmental assessments for qualifying redevelopment projects in Oklahoma City
- Low interest environmental clean-up loan funds to aid redevelopment
- Grants to nonprofits for environmental clean-up to aid redevelopment"

Just get rid of those ugly metal buildings seen from the expressway & aerial views. Funk probably walked away from the deal because of the clean-up concerns.

They know there are better areas in the core to put a development that might include an MLS stadium starter.

Funk's main concern was the clean up. It will be interesting to see how things develop with this property considering the costs to clean up this location will be high.

Partially true...

https://www.okc.gov/departments/planning/programs/brownfields

The City may pay for assessments and will assist in providing low interest loans...

"Financial Resources

- No cost environmental assessments for qualifying redevelopment projects in Oklahoma City
- Low interest environmental clean-up loan funds to aid redevelopment
- Grants to nonprofits for environmental clean-up to aid redevelopment"

My statement was "completely true." As I said...the city (like the state) will not pay for environmental clean-up. Period.

Assessments are not "clean-up." And Phase I assessments are not very expensive...and the city may, like the state, have staff that conducts those Phase I assessments. But in this case, assessments were done by the prospective buyers. A phase I was done some time ago. The city didn't pay for that. Also the Funk group was not a "nonprofit." I said the city wouldn't pay for a "private developer." And a "low interest loan" is not the same as the city "paying for it." The loan will have to be paid back. The State DEQ will also provide "low interest loans" if the money is available. The money for these loans comes from EPA grants, not state or city "appropriated" money. Currently, DEQ doesn't have the money to loan as it is all loaned out. I believe the city is in the same boat. So...bottom line...the environmental clean-up will be on the sellers or the prospective buyers. Not the taxpayers.

Coming from a residential real estate mindset, if I have a seller that knows something will be an issue, ie broken fence, windows, bad roof, ect, I try to get them to take care of it on the front end so by the time its one the market a) we won't have to worry about it and b) they will get a better price for the house, maybe even covering for the costs of doing said repairs.

This might be entirely unrealistic, but that being said I think the sellers of the Coop should thing about cleaning the whole site themselves, or at least pitch in to make it a more desirable deal, to make it more "move in ready." In doing that i think they will make it more desirable for a buyer and they might even get more for what they are asking. Just my two cents

in these types of environmental cases...sellers usually make accommodation for these costs in the asking price. However many of them...like this one...entail clean-up and then long term monitoring with re-openers if the monitoring shows more issues or no changes in the conditions. These things can take many years to complete. I'm involved in some that are over 20 years old. That's why sellers don't do the work first.

How many tons of soil will have to be removed? No telling how deep the contaminated soil goes. Some areas could be very deep while other areas could be just surface. I would imagine it's pretty significant since Funk pulled out,if in fact that was the deal breaker. Is it millions in cleanup or 10s of millions?

Then add in demolition costs to remove all those buildings on top of cleanup and that could total a pretty hefty price tag. That prop. may not be worth the asking price with the way it is. Maybe the seller should demo and cleanup and get top dollar for some prime land.

Wouldn't this site qualify for the Brownfield's Program? If so, developers can get funds from the City to help remediate the land:

https://www.okc.gov/departments/planning/programs/brownfields

As well, Brownfield funds are available from EPA (for the time being). However, the grants are competitive. Only $70-80MM to go around. Limit is $200K for assessment and $200K for remediation. If granted, they would help, but would not likely go far on this site.

Wouldn't this site qualify for the Brownfield's Program? If so, developers can get funds from the City to help remediate the land:

https://www.okc.gov/departments/planning/programs/brownfields

Brownfield grants are only available to governmental entities and nonprofits. Private developers are only able to access low interest loans. And then only if those funds are available. Private developers are not eligible to receive grants. Privates must repay the money they receive. Brownfields will assist with Phase 1 assessments for Private developers. But that is negligible compared to the remediation costs.

As well, Brownfield funds are available from EPA (for the time being). However, the grants are competitive. Only $70-80MM to go around. Limit is $200K for assessment and $200K for remediation. If granted, they would help, but would not likely go far on this site.

Grants are not available to private developers. Only governmental entities and nonprofits. Private developers are only eligible to receive low interest loans...if funds are available.

How many tons of soil will have to be removed? No telling how deep the contaminated soil goes. Some areas could be very deep while other areas could be just surface. I would imagine it's pretty significant since Funk pulled out,if in fact that was the deal breaker. Is it millions in cleanup or 10s of millions?

Then add in demolition costs to remove all those buildings on top of cleanup and that could total a pretty hefty price tag. That prop. may not be worth the asking price with the way it is. Maybe the seller should demo and cleanup and get top dollar for some prime land.

The problem with this approach is that the cleanup could take years to complete. As I recall, one of the concerns was groundwater contamination. That can result in long-term treatment and monitoring. Sellers don't want to wait that long. Usually most sellers make concessions in the sale price for anticipated cleanup costs. I believe there are also old underground storage tanks. Those are problematic.

Maybe if the sellers did some demo work, and leave contamination remediation up to the buyers. A cleared, but contaminated site would be a much easier sell than a fully built out, contaminated site that needs a ton of demo work before contamination remediation can take place.