Maybe. Maybe not. The story will be in The Oklahoman and at NewsOK.com | Powered by The Oklahoman and NEWS 9 (http://www.newsok.com) Friday.

Geesh Steve. You're worse than American Idol....making us wait.

Hey, wouldn't $200 million be more than what Hogan has spent on Lower Bricktown? I think it would be close anyways.

I remember Bricktown 2000's plan was for over $400 million to be invested in Lower Bricktown. Now, where they were planning to get that money was always a question.

Here's a teaser.... Bob Funk. That's all. Buy the paper, visit newsok. Keep me employed. Good night.
-Steve

Btw: it will be Friday in six minutes. I wonder how long it takes NewsOk to get a story posted?

Here's a teaser.... Bob Funk. That's all. Buy the paper, visit newsok. Keep me employed. Good night.
-Steve


Ahhh, you'd be referring to the new development planned for the property east of the ballpark. I've been waiting for something to be announced about that. And we get the paper, so it will be coming on my door step tomorrow morning.

Btw: it will be Friday in six minutes. I wonder how long it takes NewsOk to get a story posted?

I'm thinking they get the stories up around 5 or 6 AM.

There WILL be a $200M development in Bricktown. This will only be confirmed by the report tomorrow.

Is it there yet?

Found it...

NewsOK: Discussion over land stalls<br/><span class='hl2'>City, developers differ on ideas</span> (http://newsok.com/article/3058235/)

What"s Wrong With You Mick!!!!

Can someone please post the entire 2 page article? I haven't been able to log into the new Newsok.com for days now. Screwy new website.@#$#$&#37;$#

I can post the rendering though:

http://static.newsok.biz/article/3058235/BRICK_VIEW_1_05-25-2007_OU3EOS8.jpg

NewsOK: Discussion over land stalls<br/><span class='hl2'>City, developers differ on ideas</span> (http://newsok.com/article/3058235)

Discussion over land stalls

By Steve Lackmeyer
Business Writer

Oklahoma RedHawks (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Oklahoma+RedHawks&CATEGORY=ORGANIZATION) owners Bob Funk (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Bob+Funk&CATEGORY=PERSON) and Scott Pruitt (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Scott+Pruitt&CATEGORY=PERSON) are clashing with Oklahoma City officials over plans to build a $200 million mixed-use development east of the AT&T Bricktown Ballpark (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=AT&#37;26T+Bricktown+Ballpark&CATEGORY=ATTRACTION).

Funk and Pruitt are concerned they've hit an impasse in negotiations with Mayor Mick Cornett (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Mick+Cornett&CATEGORY=PERSON) and City Manager Jim Couch. Funk and Pruitt say they are prepared to invest approximately $200 million on a project that would include a hotel and condominiums on the west side of Joe Carter (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Joe+Carter&CATEGORY=PERSON) Avenue, immediately east of the ballpark, and up to 100,000 square feet of retail, more housing and a 1,900-space garage on a parking lot east of the same avenue.
The land in question is leased to Funk and Pruitt for another 17 years as part of their team's lease of the AT&T Bricktown Ballpark (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=AT%26T+Bricktown+Ballpark&CATEGORY=ATTRACTION). Planning for the project began four years ago, Pruitt said, and negotiations with the city continued through last year until a bid to buy parking lots for the project was met with silence in December.
"We extended an offer to the city,” Pruitt said. "And the response back was no response. No counter offer, no response to negotiate. And that was December. And we're wondering — what do we need to do to get things started?”
Even informal conversations over the last several months have not given Funk and Pruitt a clear idea whether the city supports developing the property.
"It's unusual for us, and we're having a hard time understanding it,” Funk said. "We just want to understand what the city wants to do.”
Meeting scheduled
Couch and Cornett (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Mick+Cornett&CATEGORY=PERSON) deny talks have hit an impasse, and said a meeting with Pruitt (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Scott+Pruitt&CATEGORY=PERSON) and Funk (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Bob+Funk&CATEGORY=PERSON) is scheduled for next week. "There is not an impasse,” Couch said.

"We have been progressing very, very slowly. We're being very cautious on this, and that's how we've been on all projects like this.”
Significant disagreements remain to be addressed before a deal is done.
Cornett (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Mick+Cornett&CATEGORY=PERSON) is refusing to allow the development to include the employee parking and plaza area west of Joe Carter (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Joe+Carter&CATEGORY=PERSON) Avenue, where the pair want to build a five-star, 125-room hotel and condominiums.
"We are not interested in development west of Joe Carter (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Joe+Carter&CATEGORY=PERSON) Avenue,” Cornett (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Mick+Cornett&CATEGORY=PERSON) said. "That's based on what's being discussed with MAPS 3 and things we might do with that. I don't want us to rush into anything that we might regret later.”
Instead of developing the parking lot and ballpark plaza west of Joe Carter (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Joe+Carter&CATEGORY=PERSON) Avenue, Cornett (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Mick+Cornett&CATEGORY=PERSON) wants to see whether the ballpark can be adapted to accommodate a football or soccer team.
That stance surprised Funk (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Bob+Funk&CATEGORY=PERSON) and Pruitt (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Scott+Pruitt&CATEGORY=PERSON).
"If anyone has been patient in this process, we have been,” Pruitt (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Scott+Pruitt&CATEGORY=PERSON) said.
"No one is rushing into making a decision. We've spent months talking about this. Is the highest and best use for that land surface parking? It's not. If you can replace that parking, add to it, and add condos or retail, how is that not to the benefit of Oklahoma City?”
Funk (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Bob+Funk&CATEGORY=PERSON) and Pruitt (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Scott+Pruitt&CATEGORY=PERSON) also are unclear whether the city is willing to sell the land for development.
Options open
In an interview Wednesday, Couch said the two sides had three options: the city selling its interest to Funk (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Bob+Funk&CATEGORY=PERSON) and Pruitt (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Scott+Pruitt&CATEGORY=PERSON), the pair selling their interest to the city, or the two sides entering into a joint development.

"The city doesn't have the right to negotiate that property without involvement by them,” Couch said. "And they don't have the right to develop that property without dealing with the city. Neither one of us has an absolute right to that property.”
One day later, however, Cornett (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Mick+Cornett&CATEGORY=PERSON) ruled out an outright sale.
"We are not willing to sell to them,” Cornett (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Mick+Cornett&CATEGORY=PERSON) said. "We can buy their share of the lease and then let them respond to an RFP (request for proposals) or we enter into a joint development.”
Was sale indicated?
City officials have never publicly revealed their response to the development proposal until this week.

But Cornett (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Mick+Cornett&CATEGORY=PERSON) said he previously provided a response to Funk (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Bob+Funk&CATEGORY=PERSON)'s and Pruitt (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Scott+Pruitt&CATEGORY=PERSON)'s pitch — a statement that further frustrated the pair.
Pruitt (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Scott+Pruitt&CATEGORY=PERSON) said city officials also led him to believe they were willing to sell the land. He insisted a sale is the best way to proceed with development.

"We're open to seeing whatever their proposals are, but we've not seen anything from them so far,” Funk (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Bob+Funk&CATEGORY=PERSON) said. "I'm not a believer in that the best interest of taxpayers is to be involved in the development business.”

Hopes for development

Pruitt (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Scott+Pruitt&CATEGORY=PERSON) said he hopes the development still can proceed. Pruitt (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Scott+Pruitt&CATEGORY=PERSON) said he and Funk (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Bob+Funk&CATEGORY=PERSON) have an experienced developer and prominent investors ready to advance Bricktown and Oklahoma City to the next tier.
"When are we going to seize this momentum and put a Ritz Carlton (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=The+Ritz-Carlton+Hotel+Co.+LLC&CATEGORY=COMPANY) here to show that we've arrived, or maybe a Whole Foods Market (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Whole+Foods+Market+Inc.&CATEGORY=COMPANY) or Crate and Barrel (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Euromarket+Designs+Inc.&CATEGORY=COMPANY)? What are we going to do to make this happen? Bob Funk (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Bob+Funk&CATEGORY=PERSON) and I want to do just that. We don't think it should be that hard.”

http://olive.newsok.com/Repository/getimage.dll?path=DOK/2007/05/25/21/Img/Pc0211100.jpg

http://olive.newsok.com/Repository/getimage.dll?path=DOK/2007/05/25/21/Img/Pc0211000.jpg

http://olive.newsok.com/Repository/getimage.dll?path=DOK/2007/05/25/26/Img/Pc0260700.jpg

I like the talk about a Ritz and Whole Foods but of course, those two businesses would have to want to sign leases for this development -- I'm sure Funk & Co. haven't even talked to them yet.

Also, I like that Mayor Mick is being cautious about this. It's almost like he's saying "We're not going to make the same mistake as we did in Lower Bricktown." Sure this could be a great development, but why not open it up to other bidders? The fact Funk has a 17-year lease for parking lots does not make him the owner or defacto developer.

Also, the hotel and condos look only to be 4 stories... That would barely see over the right field wall. Why not go at least 10 stories??

I'm okay with opening it up for proposals, but get on with it then. If nobody's got a better idea, then let Pruitt and Funk continue. This already looks ten times better than LBT.

I wonder why the mayor and city manager has so much hesitance?

I agree that it is city-owned land, and that Funk and Pruitt shouldn't just be sold the land outright. There should be a request for proposals, and if Funk and Pruitt win that, then they should receive the property for development. But, I think sitting on the issue, and letting time pass, is ridiculous.

I'm also not sure if developing the land west of Joe Carter Avenue is a good idea. When the ballpark was built, it was built to be expandable. That land between the ballpark and Joe Carter Avenue could be used for expansion of the ballpark some day, if that's necessary. I also think building the Bricktown parking aarage, and possibly even the Hampton Inn might hault possible expansion plans for The Brick.

I think there's plenty of land on the parking site to the east of Joe Carter Avenue to develop.

I appreciate Mick for being overly cautious. We need to be more cautious in the types of development we allow in Bricktown. Lower Bricktown has been a joke IMO. But, concerning that, you have to remember, back in the early 1990's Hogan's project actually looked pretty good. I mean, come on....a movie theater downtown? Back then, even Hogan's plans looked too ambitious. Our expectations have gone way up since then.

I say get on with it already and open the land up for proposals, all of which have to include structured parking to replace the parking lost for the Redhawks. In the end, we have to provide parking for the Redhawks, but I think we can do that via structured parking instead of surface parking.

I just hope Mick doesn't sit on it so long that we get nothing out of this.

We certainly don't want to stall developers that want to spend hundreds of millions.

On the other hand, as we've all discussed in regard to OCURA, the city shouldn't be just accepting whatever local developers want to propose. We should make sure that the widest possible field gets the opportunity to submit a proposal.

It sounds like the biggest hold up is the land immediately adjacent to the Ballpark, and the mayor is wise to set that aside. The city has a big investment in that park and once that property is developed, our future options become very limited.

It's great that Funk has some ambitiious plans but I think he's being a bit arrogant here... Because he's leasing these parking lots he feels like he has some sort of right to develop them and demand the city sell him the land?

I think we should develop an RFP for the property east of Carter Blvd. only, then make a decision. Although if this falls to OCURA, heaven help us. But the Bricktown Design committee should definitely be involved.

That looks like the best chance for real retail in bricktown we have seen in a long time. I think tieing it into bricktown is key and, to effectively do that, I think part of it has to be located on the west side of Carter. Pedestrian flow is horrible from lower bricktown into bricktown. They are too rigidly divided, imo. Placing this whole development on the east side with more surface parking seperating the two only creates the same type of divide.

I think some of the concerns with regards to expanding the ball park are warranted, but the who, when, what, and why aren't even on the table at this point. Is it wise to turn away developers with a plan and with resources now in the hopes that maybe one day a soccer team will be interested in playing there? What are the actual plans for expansion? Can these plans be mixed with those? Or does the city really want to hold onto it because it thinks that it can add retail, lodging, and housing to that land by including it in an expansion plan? I would say that if it turns this down, then any expansion plans should include such services.

It really is a great idea and I think the city needs to learn to hold developers to their ambitious plans instead of simply dismissing any that it considers too grandiose for Oklahoma City. The problems in the past have been just as much becuase the city ultimately lets the developers half ass their projects as it has been the city rejecting better plans.

That looks like the best chance for real retail in bricktown we have seen in a long time. I think tieing it into bricktown is key and, to effectively do that, I think part of it has to be located on the west side of Carter. Pedestrian flow is horrible from lower bricktown into bricktown. They are too rigidly divided, imo. Placing this whole development on the east side with more surface parking seperating the two only creates the same type of divide.

That is my concern as well. I think the ballpark, IF it ever needs expansion, could be expanded upward, as opposed to outward.

Personally, I think the structure was built as a baseball park, not a soccer field. If we want a soccer field, we need to develop a multi-purpose venue for that option. Baseball parks really aren't good for anything other than baseball, especially the way our park was designed.

Still, I'm with MalibuSooner. Just because Funk has a lease on parking lots for the Redhawks, doesn't give him the right to develop on that land. If the city wants to open the parking lots up for development, that's up to them.

One problem with developing that site.....it would block the main front of the Coca Cola Events Center.

That is my concern as well. I think the ballpark, IF it ever needs expansion, could be expanded upward, as opposed to outward.

To go upward, you'd have to go outward some.

One thing I will add.....anytime someone offers to invest $200 million into our city, we shouldn't take that lightly.

One problem with developing that site.....it would block the main front of the Coca Cola Events Center.

They shouldn't have expected that to stay a surface lot forever.

I agree about the soccer issue, and that Funk shouldn't automatically get the right to develop it. RRP it now, Cornett!

Regarding tying BT and LBT, it sounds like there will only be a small hotel and condos west of Carter -- and only four stories for each! That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. That's a perfect site for a higher-rise hotel or condo structure, as we've talked about the views over the ballpark with the CBD as a backdrop. It would be a shame to waste that opportunity.

The city should hold that land until MAPS3 takes shape and if and when it goes out to RFP, I would like to see something more ambitious for what Funk has proposed for that particular parcel.

Plus, just because he says he wants to bring retail to that site doesn't mean it will happen. I'm sure Hogan tried to get more retail to LBT, too. If Funk has commitments from some of these retailers, that's one thing... But I doubt that very seriously. How many developers have mentioned those same names? And what specifically about this development is going to make Whole Foods decide it's time to come to OKC?

I think that Mayor Mick is doing the right thing and waiting for MAPS 3, along with the core to shore. We need to look at the big picture and how it will all tie together in the future.

I don't really see how investing $200 million in Bricktown wouldn't work with the overall plan the city has. Do our city leaders really like expansive seas of surface parking lots that much? I wouldn't put it past them.

I can't believe Randy Hogan has surface lots right on the canal. Absolutely ridiculous.

Bricktown is not part of Core2Shore.

It's not like there is a shortage of land downtown. The Mayor said that land was being looked at for a MAPS 3 project. Could they be eyeing it for a Soccer stadium or a new Sonics Arena?

Neither would fit on the land in question.

Nor do they belong in Bricktown.

I was so happy when I heard the news this evening. We need to develope the outskirts East.
The problems with crowds late at night are a serious issue and seem to not be getting resolved too quickly. Perhaps new developments and more lights will clean up the area near I HOP late at night. I had a cop tell me he wouldn't take his family down there at certain time. I think it would really be nice to see some development. I think 4-5 stories would be a joke. View is key selling factor of condos and 4 to 5 stories wouldn't offer the view to demand the premium payments on condos.
I am thankful and hope the city jumps on this opportuity to Make Bricktown better

Bricktown is not part of Core2Shore.


I am not saying that Core to Shore is directly a part of Bricktown. I am saying that MAPS3 along with Core to Shore needs to be looked at for each and every future development that has to do with downtown, Bricktown and Core to Shore future development.

If Funk want to build condos, retail, and a Hotel such as the Ritz, we need to look at Core to Shore and to see how it will all tie together. I believe that Core to Shore plans show a five-star hotel such as a Ritz Carlton near the soon to be expanded Myriad Gardens. I also believe the plans for the new downtown boulevard (I-40 relocation area) is where the major retail area will be at.

The Mayor is spot-on with wanting to look at the whole big picture for the future of downtown.

Funk is acting like he's all confused about what the city wants to do be it's pretty clear that 1) they don't want the land west of Joe Carter developed in the near future and 2) don't want to sell but would rather JV or land lease.

I don't think it's so much that they are unclear... Just that he doesn't like the restrictions proposed.

"I'm not a believer in that the best interest of taxpayers is to be involved in the development business

Bass Pro anyone??? Anyhow this is a project that can make Bricktown long term viable if executed properly. I think Funk has the plans and resources already in place to make it succeed. Last time I checked, the city was in the development business of Bass Pro, a huge mistake for Bricktown. As Patrick said, $200 million should not be taken lightly, I don't know of any one project in OKC history costing $200 million at once. This should be given top priority IMO, especially since one of OKC's most giving philantropists is behind it.

I think this is an offer the city can not refuse BUT this time the city is in complete advantage. Not to say that Funk and CO are new to the market or anything, but this development is set to put OKC in the next league as a solid Tier II performer.

This is why OKC needs this development, and $200M is not too shabby either. But I also like the approach the city ist taking.

Here is my suggestions: take each article of the development line by line and get commitments in place. If they are there and it all looks in-check with the master plan for downtown - then go for it.

I dont think Funk should be so excited or confused with the city's approach. OKC is a bigger city now than it was in 2000 and certainly downtown is a major draw moreso than it was since the 1970's. And like was said, we don't want to make the same mistakes, especially shelling in a sea of low-rise condos in one of the last single tract all-inclusive development plots left in primary bricktown.

Now, suggestions for the city: If you're gonna hang-on to the land west of Carter, then there needs to be some mention of it as far as zoning/master plans are concerned. I agree that if the city is holding the land to expand the stadium for anything other than baseball is not a good idea. the Ballpark is a baseball stadium and should be expanded to 20,000 seats for Baseball only. If the city wants a soccer franchise, then it should build another stadium, also was mentioned.

Bottom line, while OKC definitely needs this $200M private injection - I think we all can say the city's approach with caution is mostly appropriate. We need to make sure the development fits the overall objective - and I can bet you that those condos need to be about 5 floors taller and the retail/hotel elements need to have signed letters of intent before the project should succeed. One more point, the designs should be mandated to be red brick with flat urban roofs and underground or garage style parking; retail should be on first (and second) floor storefronts.

If the condo elements were say 12 stories (or creatively taller) then there would be NO NEED to develop the land adjacent to the Ballpark W of Carter as the top units would command the price worthy of such a view!

I think OKC is at this level and should demand nothing less. Perhaps we can also demand that Hogan go in and develop those surface lots in Lesser Bricktown while we are at it!!!!

And yes, this should be given TOP PRIORITY since it is a $200M private investment. The city should be meeting day and night for the next month or so to get Funk and Co in gear and there should be a groundbreaking by the end of summer!!! :congrats:

4 or 5 stories would work just fine. The height could be varied unit to unit to provide the view aspect. Also, 4 or 5 stories would be more in line with the scale of original Bricktown. I'm afraid if the condos and such were to go so high, to maintain the budget it would leave large areas of open space at the street level.

But I agree...NO SURFACE PARKING!!!

So apprarently it's "inspired" by this:

Levi's Commons (http://www.leviscommons.com/FuturePhases/index.html)

Sounds like there is a lot of distrust of Funk by various city leaders:

****************************


Tue May 29, 2007
Two clashing development ideas made public

By Steve Lackmeyer
The Oklahoman

Downtown is abuzz about the $200 million development proposed by RedHawks owners Bob Funk and Scott Pruitt for east of the AT&T Bricktown Ballpark — a deal that is getting a less than enthusiastic reception at City Hall.


At first glance, what's to turn down? Funk, CEO of Express Personnel, a local company with $1.8 billion in sales last year, and Pruitt, a Tulsa attorney and former legislator, are saying the sort of things that Bricktown folks in particular want to hear.

They want to replace a surface parking lot with a lifestyle center inspired by the Town Center at Levis Commons in Washington, D.C. They envision tenants like Crate and Barrel and Whole Foods. And they see the underused southeast plaza to the ballpark being converted into a five-star hotel, with the adjoining employee parking turned into condominiums.

And at the heart of it all would be 1,900 controlled access parking spaces.

City Manager Jim Couch and Mayor Mick Cornett say they're moving slowly because they want to ensure the property is put to the best use.

Neither side can move forward without the other side's consent.

But this dance involves people with an unsettled past, and that has some downtown observers wondering whether the public is hearing the whole story.

Flash back to 2000. Bob Funk, the new owner of the Blazers ice hockey team, had vanquished a potential rival in a bidding war on lease terms against a failing International Hockey League team looking for a new home.

With a predicted IHL collapse, Funk sought to change those lease terms.

It was a negotiation that perhaps all sides can agree ended in some hard feelings.

Threats were made. Voices were raised.

Neither side ended up leaving the table completely happy with the results.

But the Blazers did get to celebrate a 10th anniversary, and Funk and Pruitt have clearly reversed declining attendance and fortunes for the RedHawks since buying the minor league baseball team in 2003.

Funk and Pruitt are being represented in their development talks by Keith McFall.

He's the same attorney who led team negotiations on the original ballpark lease — an agreement that some city council members later regretted because they felt it was too generous to the RedHawks' former owners.

So some downtown are wondering — could personality differences be at play in this fuss over Funk and Pruitt's proposed development?

The more paranoid even wonder if a rival may be lurking behind the scenes.

But consider this: At City Hall, leaders are taking an "anything is possible” approach to downtown's future.

And that includes the possibility raised by Cornett of adapting the ballpark into a multi-use facility for football and soccer.

It's not difficult to imagine Cornett, who lured the NBA to town, dreaming of someday making Bricktown host to high school football play-offs or even a college bowl game.

That adaptation can't happen if Funk and Pruitt are allowed to proceed with their own plans.

So these competing visions for downtown, kept quiet for months, are now public.

And with that harsh spotlight serious questions are asked, and personality clashes are kept under wraps, unless they risk embarrassing out-of-control egos.

Let the debate begin.

I sure hope the city takes a closer look at this proposed development. Mixed use sports stadium doesn't make sense anymore. Perhaps a soccer/futbol/football stadium would make sense, but I'd like to see it along the Oklahoma River or south of downtown. I'd hate to ruin the good seating layout of the Bricktown Ballpark for a few soccer and football games a year, even though I'd rather go see a soccer game anyday over baseball.

The problem I have with the city is not that they are being cautious, it is why they are being cautious. If they want to say "we need to go slow to make sure it happens as promised" or "we need to make sure they have all the right commitments and resources in place before we proceed" or "we need to review the plans to see what aspects of the project we can ensure are built appropriately", then I’d be all for it and I'd actually be impressed.

However, they literally are saying "we're going to delay a $200 million development because, maybe we'll think of something else to do with that land one day". They have absolutely no concrete plans for the area. Even Lackermeyer's article is misleading. At best, there is only one plan for that land right now, not two. The most recent article makes it clear that political egos are the main reason this development will be delayed or withdrawn. Unless Cornett shows the actual plans for that stadium, then it's obvious that he's just making stuff up to delay the project because of some other issue.

Instead of holding out for development ideas from people that they like better or waiting around for something they feel is safer, the city needs to learn how to hold developers to their plans. Hogan is a great example. Maybe he did try to lure some of these retailers to the area, but with WHAT? He never had a plan, he never built anything for retail of any scale, and he's dragged his feet at every stage. Who knows if Funk and co can pull it off, but they do have a plan and they do sound ready to build. The city should be finding a way to use the stake it has in that land to make sure that the development happens as promised. Instead, they seem more interested in just making sure it doesn't happen at all.

All I'm saying is that if the city wants to put these people off, then they better come up with a counter proposal, some sort of concrete reason to not do this. As of right now they're just saying that maybe they'll get around to thinking of something to do one day, so they don't want anything done today.

I think, if we are going to go after professional sports we need to choose one thing and do it well. I would like to see an NBA team here, and plans for a new arena/convention center in the Core to Shore area. A possible MLS team and high school football championship games or a third tier bowl game should not be reason to defer a development that would be an asset to the city. If there truly would be the possibility of a five star hotel and important retail in that space, it would be a great addition to Bricktown. I have no problem with caution either, as long as it is well placed and reasonable. If an arena in which to play MLS soccer or host a bowl game might eventually be desirable, designate an area in the core to shore plan for a possible future arena.

I agree...The mixed use stadium is a weak excuse to hold up this kind of deal for OKC...Worry about some lame soccer and football exhibitions and bowl games later

Fine w/ them being cautious, but if they stall too long the interest level may go away

I agree...The mixed use stadium is a weak excuse to hold up this kind of deal for OKC...



That whole deal is about as cool as watching Jerry Rice run a down and out in the old 49er/Giant stadium (the name escapes me right now) starting at "first base", up the field to home plate, and out to third base. The baseball/soccer/football/whatever combination sounds weak.

Candlestick Park

Other ballparks that have been converted to football stadiums:

Angel Stadium of Anaheim
Mile High Stadium

Sorry, but Funk & Pruett remind of those ESPN sportscenter commercials with the guys talking out of their butt.

Everybody's proposal & drawings look spectacular when first presented. But throwing out Ritz Carlton, Whole Foods & Crate & Barrel like they having something concrete in the works makes me leery. I'm sure he is saying "why not"? That's fine. But people are going to remember those statements & names and be upset if that doesn't happen.

What gives them right to develop to land? And with any competition?

I don't believe under any circumstances the city should sell the land. Lease, yes. Sell, no. They aren't making anymore of it at that location.

If they could pull it off, thats great. I just don't believe everything I see from somebody's proposed drawings.

Another issue, I see Bass Pro refered to as a "huge mistake". While I'll agree on certain issues about the Bass Pro deal, what exactly makes it a huge mistake?

It's not right for Bricktown.

I was wholeheartedly in favor of it at the time, but I have changed my mind.

Own = higher quality buildings.

Lease = Designed to fall apart when the lease expires.

Case Study: Capstone Development and Oklahoma A & M regents.

I wonder if it (bass pro) would be the closest to a Ritz in the U.S. if all pans out... :)

If they were that concerned about expanding the ballpark (which won't work for MLB and would be stupid to put a soccer field or football field in) we should technically just have parking lots where the parking garage is and where they are building the Hampton Inn.

Why wouldn't expansion of the ballpark work for MLB? They have plenty of room to add seating in the outfield and even another level in the infield. IMO.

Why wouldn't expansion of the ballpark work for MLB? They have plenty of room to add seating in the outfield and even another level in the infield. IMO.

I don't think it would work nor do we have the space Watson. You'd have to triple the capacity to get it to MLB standards, not to mention MLB isn't even one of the leagues we're talking about getting down the road. NHL, MLS and football is the only thing the city and others have even talked about going after down the road.

I think the city is being very wise about the land west of Joe Carter. It's a small part of the proposed development but would forever restrict what could be done with the Ballpark, an important city asset.

As I said before, prepare an RFP for the property east of Carter and let Funk & Co. submit a bid along with any other interested parites. If they have the best plan, then let them go forward.

If they were that concerned about expanding the ballpark (which won't work for MLB and would be stupid to put a soccer field or football field in) we should technically just have parking lots where the parking garage is and where they are building the Hampton Inn.

I'm with you. If we would ever want to make the Brick a major league park, its capacity would have to go from 13k to approx 35 k. That's a huge jump, and if we expanded, a huge percentage of the seating would be in the upper bowl, which would look terrible as a new ballpark (or at least a refurbished one). There's already a hotel going up in left field, so why not start building stuff in right field?

On another note, I really would like to see something like branson landing happen out there. that place is great because it is dense and is very pedestrian friendly, departments we are realy lacking in right now in that area.

Why wouldn't expansion of the ballpark work for MLB? They have plenty of room to add seating in the outfield and even another level in the infield. IMO.

It'd be impossible without completely redoing the ballpark. Expanding the seating can be done, just not up to MLB standards. And as nice as the Brick is in AAA ball, you'd have to start from scratch if you want to be considered with the big boys in MLB.

Wed May 30, 2007
City memo rebuffs mixed-use proposal
RedHawks owners' options limited

By Steve Lackmeyer
Business Writer

RedHawks owners Bob Funk and Scott Pruitt only can develop land east of the AT&T Bricktown Ballpark if they give up control of the parking area and agree to compete with other developers for the city-owned property, according to a memo obtained Tuesday by The Oklahoman.


Funk and Pruitt have spent the past year pitching plans for a mixed-use development that would include retail, housing and a hotel and complained last week that Oklahoma City officials had gone months without responding to their offer to either buy or enter into a long-term lease.

The men say they are prepared to invest up to $200 million on the project, which would develop both sides of Joe Carter Avenue and add 1,900 controlled-access free parking spaces.

Memo cites sale concerns
An undisclosed bid by the pair to buy the property was considered in at least two closed city council executive sessions. But a memo delivered to Funk on Saturday indicates a purchase is out of the question, and a "public-private” option mentioned by Mayor Mick Cornett and City Manager Jim Couch last week would bar the team owners from submitting development plans.

"They can either sell their interests and enter the RFP (request for proposals) process, or they can be part of a public-private partnership and we would still put out an RFP,” Cornett said.

The memo, authored by Couch, cites a concern that a sale of the property to Funk and Pruitt could be challenged by a taxpayer lawsuit similar to those filed against the original ballpark lease and development of Lower Bricktown. It also discourages Funk and Pruitt from pursuing a public-private partnership.

Funk reacted with bewilderment at the city's stance, which was not publicly discussed until inquiries last week by The Oklahoman.

"A week ago there were four or five options on the table,” Funk said Tuesday. "In six days, without meeting with the city, they've limited us to only one option. The option of developing the land west of Joe Carter — gone. A ground lease — gone. A public/private partnership — gone. Purchasing the property outright — gone.”

Funk said his partners will continue to pursue purchase options in a meeting today with Couch and Cornett.

"We want to purchase the property and redevelop the area with retail, free parking, housing and a grocery store,” Funk said. "We hope the city will set a price for the land — $1 million, $2 million, $3 million — give us a price.”

Decision based on policy
Assistant City Manager Cathy O'Connor said the decision not to sell the property ultimately was a policy decision by the city council. "We have to be certain that they don't make an unreasonable level of profit from the transaction — something greater than the value of their leasehold interest in the property,” O'Connor said. "In order to achieve that and control it, they have to make a decision as to whether or not they want to be the redeveloper or participate with the city in redeveloping the property.”

O'Connor said Funk and Pruitt could be a part of a selection committee if they chose to pursue the public-private route and would be a financial participant in the development.

But in the memo, also delivered to each member of the city council, Couch hints the public-private route is not supported by the entire council.

"In good faith, since Option No. 2 (public-private partnership) has been offered and the Baseball Club (Funk and Pruitt) has initially expressed its preference for that option, we believe we should at least explore the possibility of pursuing it if that is your desire,” Couch wrote. Couch added Funk and Pruitt likely would benefit more financially from selling their share in the lease and competing for the chance to develop the land the team currently controls as part of their 17-year lease of the ballpark.

"The city seldom, if ever, reaps a large monetary benefit from a redeveloper or its tenants in the form of direct payments by the redeveloper or the tenants to the city,” Couch wrote.

"Any private company that considers participating with the city as a shareholder in an economic development arrangement covering public land should be fully aware of this important point.”

Can a deal be struck?
Cornett said, "I don't know” when he was asked whether he thinks a deal can be struck with Funk and Pruitt on the development. But he said he agrees the land east of Joe Carter Avenue should be developed into a use higher than surface parking.

"I've consistently met with out-of-state developers — mixed-use, large-scale developers — on various sites including this one, and there has been interest,” Cornett said. "They are waiting for more downtown housing to occur and for Bricktown to mature a bit more.”

Cornett said precedents exist with both the recent opening of the Skirvin Hilton Hotel and the East Wharf development for a successful deal with Funk and Pruitt. But he emphasized their lease does not entitle them to exclusive development rights.

"In theory, our take is it's public property,” Cornett said.

Funk, who last week complained he wasn't hearing any answers for months from the city, indicated Tuesday he's unhappy with the response now that the city has broken its silence.

"We are deeply rooted in Oklahoma City and we want to make it a better place to live and a better place to work,” Funk said. "It would be a shame for Oklahoma City to lose out on a $200 million investment over something like this.”

Looks like it's time for an email barrage to Cornett and Couch!

:fighting3

It sounds like the city is doing the right thing here, IMO.

If Funk has the best proposal, he shouldn't mind competing with other developers.

It seems to me he's been trying to get a sweetheart deal from the city and Mick knows that land is very valuable and that we shouldn't be selling public property to developers, especially after it was the investment of citizens that generated that value.

I'm sure Funk released the renderings only after he realized the city wasn't just going to do what he wanted and was trying to get public sentiment in his favor. "Look! I'm trying to build this beautiful development and bring high-end retail and a grocery store, and the city is standing in my way!" Never mind he doesn't own the land, almost certainly doesn't have any sort of commitments from tenants, etc. There was an article in the Oklahoman today that mentiioned Whole Foods would not put their first location in a downtown area.

It's nice that he wants to invest money in OKC but he should have to compete like everyone else. And if his proposal isn't chosen then he could certainly build elsewhere, just like McDermid and others have done. That is the true test of a developer's intentions and there will be plenty of property to be developed once I-40 is relocated, for example.

I think Mick has done a great job and he's obviously not willing to give away the farm so a developer can get rich with public incentives, only to have them not build anywhere close to what they proposed, ala Hogan and Henderson (Legacy project). The mayor seems to be suspicious of Funk's intentions and he probably has a right to be based on the recent reporting in the Oklahoman.

Malibu,

Well said.

I agree, something with this deal smells Funky.