Sunbeam

[Pete]

[template=]
development
|category1=Office Buildings
|category2=Current
|category3=Classen
|category4=
|
|project=
|address=1411 Classen
|status=under construction
|owner=Sunbeam Family Services
|cost=
|architect=
|start=
|finish=
|contractor=
|height=
|sq. feet=
|acerage=2.62
|other=Site of old Classen Terrace building
|
|image=
|
[/template]
Information & Latest News

6/21/13: Sunbeam breaks ground
8/18/12: Sunbeam Family Services buys property
Links

County Assessor Record
Gallery

[Just the facts]

That property is severly under-used. The building might be old, but that doesn't mean the original developer had any insight on to construct an urban building. It is setback nearly 70' from the street and over 80% of the lot is parking - and the lot is an entire city block. I don't know what kind of design Sunbeam is working on but it can't get any worse than what was done in 1954. Mistakes made in the past shouldn't be kept just because they are old. Even an old mistake is still a mistake.

[betts]

The best news is that Marva Ellard is still looking. I'm hoping some day we will get so see some new construction from her. I liked her plans for the old Mercy site.

[metro]

Sad, I really like that building, it's got good mid-century modern styling.

[Pete]

It was very cool back in the day but when HTB moved into the old Maywood Presbyterian, it went into sudden decline.

It's been vacant for almost twenty years! Sad to see it go but something had to be done.

[BDP]

So, do we have any idea what they are building there? I am kind of indifferent on the structure, but I think demolition should be predicated on what will replace a building, especially of a certain age. Even worse than tearing down historic structures is tearing them down with no concrete plan or assured means in place to replace them. I'm not even asking that they be good plans at this point, just any plans before demolition is allowed to occur.

[Pete]

Sunbeam is planning to build a new office structure and consolidate from some scattered buildings in Midtown.

Haven't seen anything go to the Urban Design Commission as of yet.

[Just the facts]

I wish Classen and Lincoln would become urban corridors with structures built closer to the street and parking behind the buildings.

[metro]

Hopefully it will have an urban design, but we will probably get some sort of suburban looking building.

[Spartan]

I would have loved to see Marva work her preservationist magic on that building, it would have been a great project. This one is hard to argue against, though you can't control who buys a building, even if it's someone you don't exactly expect great things to come from.

This is why we have codes and design standards.

[Just the facts]

I would have loved to see Marva work her preservationist magic on that building, it would have been a great project. This one is hard to argue against, though you can't control who buys a building, even if it's someone you don't exactly expect great things to come from.

This is why we have codes and design standards.

Are you sure she would have tried to save this building or did she just want an entire city block adjacent to a major street? Her Mercy proposal would have fit nicely on this block.

[Spartan]

Not saying that wouldn't have been fine, too. I just think some interesting things could have been done with this, but it is definitely an eyesore right now. This is one building that does need to go. (do I get +rep points for saying that?)

[MDot]

Not saying that wouldn't have been fine, too. I just think some interesting things could have been done with this, but it is definitely an eyesore right now. This is one building that does need to go. (do I get +rep points for saying that?)

+1,000,000

[OklahomaNick]

I think you could say that a crack house right south of the new I-40 was set to be demolished and someone on here would protest it, and say we should just renovate it! LOL

[soonerguru]

I think you could say that a crack house right south of the new I-40 was set to be demolished and someone on here would protest it, and say we should just renovate it! LOL

Complete non-sequitur bull****.

[SoonerBoy18]

I want to know why people like this building? Why do so many Oklahomans like to see historical buildings still in use? If the owner doesnt care for them, why should we?

[catch22]

I want to know why people like this building? Why do so many Oklahomans like to see historical buildings still in use? If the owner doesnt care for them, why should we?

If you don't know your past you are doomed to repeat it.

[Rover]

If you don't know your past you are doomed to repeat it.

And what is this supposed to mean? That if you tear down any building of any kind for any reason then you will tear down EVERY buildiing? Lol

[hoya]

I want to know why people like this building? Why do so many Oklahomans like to see historical buildings still in use? If the owner doesnt care for them, why should we?

Oklahoma does not have a good history with saving historic buildings. The problem is that we tear down many old buildings, buildings that are examples of older architectural styles, simply because it is cheaper to build new. Depending on the new construction, it may be good (the new Devon building) or something cheaply thrown together. We don't want strip mall construction in our downtown area. It isn't built to last. It loses value quickly and contributes to urban decay. Meanwhile, renovation of older properties usually requires greater financial investment and thus more closely ties a developer to the property.

[mcca7596]

I want to know why people like this building? Why do so many Oklahomans like to see historical buildings still in use? If the owner doesnt care for them, why should we?

A lot of times, newer buildings don't have the same relationship to the street and don't contribute to a safe pedestrian experience.

[dankrutka]

I want to know why people like this building? Why do so many Oklahomans like to see historical buildings still in use? If the owner doesnt care for them, why should we?

It is often a matter of quality over quantity.

[Spartan]

Define "crack house." There are a lot of buildings in that C2S area that should be saved. It would be the zenith of ignorance (not that that's you or anyone in this thread, just addressing an idea that is indisputably out there) for people to propose wiping clean an entire part of town that they've never been to and driven through. If you are ever feeling adventurous, drive down SW 3rd Street and think Bricktown in the 70s/80s.

[betts]

Define "crack house." There are a lot of buildings in that C2S area that should be saved. It would be the zenith of ignorance (not that that's you or anyone in this thread, just addressing an idea that is indisputably out there) for people to propose wiping clean an entire part of town that they've never been to and driven through. If you are ever feeling adventurous, drive down SW 3rd Street and think Bricktown in the 70s/80s.

I wouldn't even call it adventurous to drive down SW 3rd. I think it's necessary to be any part of a discussion about what should be done with Core to Shore. There are some great buildings down there with a lot of potential and I agree that it would be shortsighted to raze anything. But, I believe the Parks Subcommittee is going to look at all the buildings on park land and see if they can be repurposed, which was good news to me.

[Spartan]

Even though I think most all of them are structurally stable and could find legit adaptive re-use, if they're on park land, I was wondering if it would be possible to strip the building down a little bit, leave one facade complete, and turn it into a pavilion that honors historic Oklahoma architecture. Maybe the other three sides could then be glass, to make the building feel more connected to the park, or just open-air if possible. It would be an interesting idea...working with what the land gives you, in this case, historic buildings (usually it's trees, creeks, elevation changes, etc).

[Rover]

Htb used to be one of my clients and I've been in this building many, many times. It was not an architectural masterpiece nor was it necessarily an above average quality building. It is an ordinary building at best. By definition, since it is already built I guess it is "historic", but questionable as to it's significance.

It is also easy and simple thinking to believe every new building is worse than ones built a few years ago. Many buildings built in this vintage were not of highest quality.