Printable View
Funnel Design owner Sean Cobb is asking for permission to demolish this build constructed in 1909 and replace it with 4 living units. Also owns the newly redone parking lot directly to the west.
It's directly south of The Yard.
Downtown Design Review Committee will consider at its next meeting.
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/14nw7c.jpg
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/14nw7.jpg
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/14nw7d.jpg
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/14nw7e.jpg
It is safe to assume the drives would be situated facing east?
No, west.Quote:
Originally Posted by warreng88
Love the idea of housing but lets see some density and get ouuuta heeeaaah with those driveways.
Edit: didn't realize that drives would be facin west and that these condos would be positioned behond one another on the skinny lot. Makes more sense.
I'd rather see this go on an empty lot and the existing building get rehabbed for use, to be perfectly honest. That aside, it doesn't look like a bad project, and I'd like to see it get built - just hopefully on an open lot.
Like the project, not the demo. I realize it seems largely unremarkable, but we have so few buildings left from this era, and there are SO many empty lots...
100% agree. I was hoping this would become a little dive bar or even a tapas bar. Wish it could be savedQuote:
Originally Posted by shawnw
The building isn't structurally sound and they would have had to build a new building from the ground up inside the brick walls fwiw. I am honestly ok with this demolition. This project in my mind serves a higher and better use than a one to to story tapas bar.
Agreed 100%. I’m all for preserving old buildings and renovating them as long as it is to the best interest of the area. But Just because an old building exists doesn’t mean it has to be kept.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross MacLochness
I get what you guys are saying, and I agree to an extent. I'm certainly not saying every expense should be taken to save this building either. But, however well intentioned, I suspect that view (don't save it just because it exists) is what got us to this point (very few 1909 buildings standing).
It's important to note this owner purchased in 2008.
When someone has owned a building that long it raises the question of demolition by neglect.
Great point
Yeah this building should be saved. Look at how many empty lots there are. They could have built this on top of the existing building and added structured parking on an adjacent lot with a direct connection to this building.
I don’t hate this project but meh...
Front facing garages when there is an alley in rear...
also I don't see sidewalks
these garages are on the alley. the building is aligned longways N/S with the garages facing west.Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanCOWBOY
AH, that would likely explain the sidewalks then, oops
There is a sidewalk (kinda) on 7th shown in the rendering.Quote:
Originally Posted by shawnw
Demo permit has been issued and I suspect this building has already been scraped.
This building was demolished today.
Have yet to see any building permit applications for what is to replace it.
Excellent. We shouldn’t force building owners to improve buildings when it makes no financial sense to do so. This density will spur more density.
*edit. Assuming what was proposed actually gets built.