Social Capital OKC

[jccouger]

I was speaking more of the feel than the architecture. An open air cafe directly across from a huge urban park.

The hanging vines & re-use of an old building kind of give it that "look" as well.

[Pete]

They have filed a building permit application.

We should start seeing some activity soon.

[Anonymous.]

View from behind overlooking the park and skyline:

[Pete]

Work has started.

The name is Social Capital OKC.

[catch22]

I’ll give the name a solid 3/10. Glad to see work starting.

[baralheia]

Yeah... The name is pretty meh... but I'm super excited about this development regardless and I think they're gonna knock it out of the park!

[5alive]

The name sure doesn't roll off the tongue or lend itself to be shortened ...

[shawnw]

It was probably going to be "Capitals" but the ice cream guys beat them to it....

[Pete]

[PaddyShack]

So this is pretty much a new build with how much they demo'd...

[Ross MacLochness]

Wow.... They are basically building a new building... Super cool they are keeping those old walls!

[shawnw]

I'm a preservationist, but this was such a sham way to avoid building to code where density is needed most.

[Pete]

There are a lot of examples of great projects where nothing was left but the original walls.

[shawnw]

Agreed. I'm not saying all such scenarios are abominations, but it's clear that in this particular place where density is needed, they specifically sought to skirt code/height requirements.

[d-usa]

At some point we need to be able to compromise between preserving a building while at the same time letting the owners conversnit into something functional.

[Pete]

[Anonymous.]

I wonder if that little piece of wall was supposed to come down like that or if it fell due to the altered structural integrity.

[Dob Hooligan]

Agreed. I'm not saying all such scenarios are abominations, but it's clear that in this particular place where density is needed, they specifically sought to skirt code/height requirements.

Could someone elaborate on these points? Afraid I'm not really following the specifics of the poster.

[shawnw]

If they had built new along the park there would have been particular height and design requirements . Instead the chose to renovate a 1-story structure and our code doesn't currently have the strength to enforce certain things with existing structures (though the city is working on it). It's just a poor land use in a spot that could easily have gotten a much denser development. I'm sure it will be a great place, but as (hopefully) taller/denser developments go up around it, it will be obvious that this was not the optimal use for this bit of land.

[SEMIweather]

They're at least adding a second story, right? Or did that fall by the wayside?

[Pete]

They're at least adding a second story, right? Or did that fall by the wayside?

Yes, they are. Their plans haven't changed.

This really should be a cool project. You can get a real feel for it once you are down there and see how it is positioned facing the park with the sun at your back late in the day. Should be a great spot.

[Dob Hooligan]

Help me with something here; I have always been told most zoning restrictions are an effort to limit density. As in, and forgive me for sounding unsophisticated, "dirt is the key and developers want to get as many wallets above their limited dirt as possible". Which is why there are so many issues regarding number of parking spaces on a lot (as well as their size, location and landscaping in lieu of), bathrooms, etc.

[dankrutka]

I'm all about density, but is there not room for the redevelopment of shorter, older structures within the overall urban fabric? This seems to be a high quality development and there is a lot of land around the park where there is no plan for development any time soon. I don't see the problem.

[shawnw]

IMO yes but not in this spot. It would be like building a 1 or 2 story structure where stage center was.

[Pete]