MAPS 4 Stadium

[Laramie]

it shouldn't cost 3.5 to build that same stadium maybe double but not 3.5

BoulderSooner, this I'm in total agreement with you on. You may a see a bigger stadium with more amenities depending on the option 2 funds, be it $60 million or $72 million with a developer who wants this project. You might be surprised to see something more in line with this:

20,000 seat venue, if the land price is right

You would think MAPS designers learned one thing from the original MAPS, provide yourself a good cushion for estimates to prepare for cost overruns.

[Plutonic Panda]

I would support it if they put it south of the river and had a streetcar line to Capitol Hill. I think that proposal would be a winner.

As much as I like the development going on in downtown, I believe the city has to show a commitment to real investment outside of that area with this MAPS. Putting a big centerpiece project like this on the south side (even if it's barely on the south side) would be a statement. Historically the city basically ignores anything south of the river.

This would generate a lot of investment in that area, I think it would be very good for the city.

Same here.

[Pete]

The big issue with this proposal is that we don't know where it would go.

And no matter the location, there will be tons of additional costs which are simply unknown.


We shouldn't get ourselves into a similar situation as the convention center, where after it was approved, all the sudden we learned that a heavily subsidized convention hotel was a necessity, as was a parking garage and other things. The total bill for that project is about double what was pitched.

If this makes the final cut for vote, I hope we an honest account of those costs in advance.

[jedicurt]

If this makes the final cut for vote, I hope we an honest account of those costs in advance.

hahaha. you have big hopes sir... but sadly, i don't think there is a chance of them being granted

[onthestrip]

The big issue with this proposal is that we don't know where it would go.

And no matter the location, there will be tons of additional costs which are simply unknown.


We shouldn't get ourselves into a similar situation as the convention center, where after it was approved, all the sudden we learned that a heavily subsidized convention hotel was a necessity, as was a parking garage and other things. The total bill for that project is about double what was pitched.

If this makes the final cut for vote, I hope we an honest account of those costs in advance.

Why couldnt MAPs say we give you $** million and you have to promise a soccer stadium with ****** amount of seats. Any costs above that has to come out of Energy's pocket.

[Pete]

Why couldnt MAPs say we give you $** million and you have to promise a soccer stadium with ****** amount of seats. Any costs above that has to come out of Energy's pocket.

Because the city would own the stadium and we'd be stuck for the money if the Energy or other investors couldn't cover.

See the Whitewater facility, convention center and the American Indian Cultural Center as examples.

[Richard at Remax]

Anyone else concerned that the Mayor appears to be all in on the stadium? His social media seems to reflect that.

[Ross MacLochness]

no because it would only be a small percentage of the overall budget.

[jonny d]

Anyone else concerned that the Mayor appears to be all in on the stadium? His social media seems to reflect that.

He probably knows OKC is the largest city in America without a modern, mixed-use stadium of this variety. That is not a good thing. But like Ross said, it is maybe 10-15% of the total MAPS budget.

[Richard at Remax]

Let me rephrase. It rubs me the wrong way how intertwined him and the Energy seem to be on social media, rather than sitting back and letting the public decide. It's almost like they have read the negative feedback and are trying to spin it to how positive it will be. The fact that they are saying this stadium would get used 80 nights a year and each event would bring in ~$1 million seems like a big stretch to me. Plus, like Pete said, there will be tons of other costs associated with this as well.

Full disclosure, I am against it either way. I don't think we should finance something like this for a crappy D3 team that's part of a crappy MLS.

[Pete]

Mayor Holt was taking trips to visit other soccer facilities long before the MAPS process started.

This project is clearly the darling of the Chamber.

[jonny d]

Let me rephrase. It rubs me the wrong way how intertwined him and the Energy seem to be on social media, rather than sitting back and letting the public decide. It's almost like they have read the negative feedback and are trying to spin it to how positive it will be. The fact that they are saying this stadium would get used 80 nights a year and each event would bring in ~$1 million seems like a big stretch to me. Plus, like Pete said, there will be tons of other costs associated with this as well.

Full disclosure, I am against it either way. I don't think we should finance something like this for a crappy D3 team that's part of a crappy MLS.

But again, it won't just be for that (as I have been told a ton of times).

[Richard at Remax]

I understand that. Let's focus on high school football games. With districts and schools building all new facilities for themselves, why would they want to play here and lose out on revenue? So the only thing would be state championships most likely, which get rotated between here, tulsa, and stillwater.

[Pete]

I understand that. Let's focus on high school football games. With districts and schools building all new facilities for themselves, why would they want to play here and lose out on revenue? So the only thing would be state championships most likely, which get rotated between here, tulsa, and stillwater.

Right now, even when they take things to neutral sites (like playoff semi finals) they just use high school facilities like Putnam City, which has more than enough capacity for anything other than the 6A final. And there is always Taft and Speegle and now PCW and PCN have very nice stadiums as do Edmond SF and North, with Memorial's stadium being done next year.

There is absolutely no need for another stadium for high school football; if anything we are way, way overbuilt considering all these schools play a total of 5 home games per year.

Now, they could move a ton of playoff games to this new stadium, but as mentioned you are just taking away a revenue source for these school districts and leaving empty dozens of pefectly good facilities.

[Pete]

So, take away high school football (and we should), what does that leave?

A soccer team that is lucky to draw a couple of thousand?

A live music venue? How many do we freaking need? We are just getting ready to open Scisssortail Park and we’ve got scores of others which generally go way underutilized, especially those that are outdoors.

[Ross MacLochness]

Can't bring guns into a soccer stadium

[Pete]

This stadium will be for the Energy and any future incarnations.

Let them pay for it and stop trying to tell people it’s needed for these other uses, because we already have plenty of under-utilized facilities for those things.

[gopokes88]

Let me rephrase. It rubs me the wrong way how intertwined him and the Energy seem to be on social media, rather than sitting back and letting the public decide. It's almost like they have read the negative feedback and are trying to spin it to how positive it will be. The fact that they are saying this stadium would get used 80 nights a year and each event would bring in ~$1 million seems like a big stretch to me. Plus, like Pete said, there will be tons of other costs associated with this as well.

Full disclosure, I am against it either way. I don't think we should finance something like this for a crappy D3 team that's part of a crappy MLS.

On another note. Was not a fan of the threats Funk was making about moving the team. Be more like the thunder, put forth your proposal, explain why you need it and why it’s necessary, and let the public debate it. Not ONCE has anyone from the thunder made any threat of moving implied or otherwise.

BFD is our tier 2 soccer team relocates to....where exactly? There’s already 40 teams, they’re running out of cities.

[OKCRT]

BoulderSooner, this I'm in total agreement with you on. You may a see a bigger stadium with more amenities depending on the option 2 funds, be it $60 million or $72 million with a developer who wants this project. You might be surprised to see something more in line with this:

20,000 seat venue, if the land price is right

You would think MAPS designers learned one thing from the original MAPS, provide yourself a good cushion for estimates to prepare for cost overruns.

If Funk would seriously pursue an MLS franchise I think a first class 20-25k seat stadium downtown would pass with OKC putting up 50-70% financing and Funk (or whoever the owner would be)putting in the balance. The USL is what it is and most folks look at that as minor league and will be turned off. They should get serious about MLS if they are touting expanding to 40 teams then OKC should have a legit shot.

[dcsooner]

If Funk would seriously pursue an MLS franchise I think a first class 20-25k seat stadium downtown would pass with OKC putting up 50-70% financing and Funk (or whoever the owner would be)putting in the balance. The USL is what it is and most folks look at that as minor league and will be turned off. They should get serious about MLS if they are touting expanding to 40 teams then OKC should have a legit shot.

+1

[Pete]

BTW, everything other than the 6A football title game (and semis) was played at high school stadiums last year. And those two exceptions were at U of Tulsa which has way more capacity than 10,000. So those games probably wouldn't move anyway because what is being proposed wouldn't be big enough. Plus, this would be primarily a soccer field, which is much wider than a football field and tends to make a bad fan experience because you are so far removed.

Even the 6A-II title game was played at Owasso High.

The high schools that host playoff games (even the neutral field variety) get the revenue. So now we are going to take that away by moving games to wherever this facility lands?


This is not like the state basketball tourney were half the teams play more than one game and some play 3. And some schools have both boys and girls teams represented. Football games are one-and-done. Even if you advance, it's a week later. So people would drive in for the game and likely drive right back home, as most these games are finished by 9PM. The teams definitely don't stay overnight. At best you get some people staying for one night.

[Jersey Boss]

One alternative that would require OSSA approval would be to stack several championship games on the same day. Texas does this now. That way you get a massive influx of fans coming to town. Of course their would be a need to alternate with Tulsa on a yearly basis with half the teams here and half in Tulsa. However with two division 6 groupings each venue would have either a 6A or 6B game every year.

[Pete]

One alternative that would require OSSA approval would be to stack several championship games on the same day. Texas does this now. That way you get a massive influx of fans coming to town. Of course their would be a need to alternate with Tulsa on a yearly basis with half the teams here and half in Tulsa. However with two division 6 groupings each venue would have either a 6A or 6B game every year.

Beyond the 6A title game, no Oklahoma HS football games draw many fans. It's nothing like Texas.

And the low attendance is a big driver behind the recent wave of OKC area stadiums; in the old days schools like PC West could have never accommodated the crowds on campus. Now, they can easily do so because they (and PC North) draw under 1,000 instead of the 5-6K of the 60's, 70's and 80's.

Similarly, there was absolutely no reason for the Edmond schools to keep playing at UCO. Way, way too big for their needs (and BTW, that's a great facility if for high school title games, arguably better than TU, which is way too big).

The stadiums at Mustang and Yukon are new, big and beautiful.

Attendance is very low everywhere apart from a few of the Tulsa-area mega-schools that have chosen not to split their high schools.

[Anonymous.]

Banking on football games for future use seems like a bad idea, isn't there some study done recently that shows parents are becoming less likely to encourage their kids to start football due to long-term head injury concerns? Plus, who actually cares about highschool football other than maybe Texas? I feel like football, especially highschool level is a dying product.

If we can get major music festivals landed at a venue like this, then it would be very cool. But that sort of thing comes with a lot of stuff that OK/OKC may not be too fond of.

[SoonerDave]

High school football isn't dying... Or else phantoms voted for all those levies paying for some fairly impressive stadiums around OKC. And I can't fathom any HS team forsaking a home playoff date to use a bastardized soccer stadium for a venue. So we're left with the rationale of spending $$$ ok on a 10,000-seat arena that'll be lucky to be 20% occupied at best once in a while for soccer?? No, thanks. Sorry, Mayor Holt, but I can't jump on board for this.