I don't know about everyone else on this forum but l love a glassy build for Cleveland. We have way to much beige and glass really brightens up the skyline (please no stripes).

 

Now if we're talking about a new built Sun Belt city that is nothing but glass then, ok, do something else, mix it up a little. But that's not us. We NEED some modern. Tell me that puffy clouds reflected on the Hilton doesn't brighten your day?

 

We already have plenty of old style buildings and while some are iconic like Terminal Tower, Key, whatever we're calling that gem on Huron now, many are just old. 

 

In summary, more glass please.

 

I am most interested in the street activation of this project so I am curious about what is going to happen with West 3rd.  @KJP per your article, do you know if the Code requires the entire facing of the garage along West 3rd to be covered with some sort of functioning space (similar to the garage at the Cleveland Clinic which is faced with offices) or is it only the 1st floor where retail will go in (similar to the new Lumen parking garage)?  Obviously I favor the former.

Edited June 30, 20213 yr by Htsguy

20 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

I am most interested in the street activation of this project so I am curious about what is going to happen with West 3rd.  @KJP per your article, do you know if the Code requires the entire facing of the garage along West 3rd to be covered with some sort of functioning space (similar to the garage at the Cleveland Clinic which is faced with offices) or is it only the 1st floor where retail will go in (similar to the new Lumen parking garage)?  Obviously I favor the former.

 

If they follow the city code (https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/cleveland/latest/cleveland_oh/0-0-0-48478), it appears that the liner building must be the height of the parking garage.

1 hour ago, Dino said:

I'm glad CPC is involved and the approval process is being expedited, but also very frustrated that there's zero public involvement.  Small business owners and homeowners can sometimes spend months getting put through the ringer at local design review, Landmarks and CPC for things like signage, roof replacements, and minor rehabs.  Think of what developers in Ohio City, Tremont, or Little Italy have to go through.  Meanwhile perhaps the most important project in a generation won't be made public until it is more or less already approved?  I'm not saying they should spend a year scrutinizing every little detail of the SHW project, but is it too much to ask to see a rendering?

 

FWIW, whatever behind the scenes discussions have been occurring would have to be with planning staff, not the CPC itself, and would carry no legal weight.  But it's obviously on CPC whether it uses its independent approval authority to push for anything city staff may have rolled over on.

23 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

If they follow the city code (https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/cleveland/latest/cleveland_oh/0-0-0-48478), it appears that the liner building must be the height of the parking garage.

Based on the code, I believe the liner building would be required at Frankfort as well.  Only frontages on alleys, ways, and courts are exempt, and I don't think Frankfort qualifies as an alley- see below.  I believe it is a 40' ROW

 

§ 325.04  Alley

“Alley” means any public space or thoroughfare twenty (20) feet or less in width, but not less than ten (10) feet in width, which has been dedicated or deeded to the public for public travel and affords access to abutting property.

6 minutes ago, Dino said:

Based on the code, I believe the liner building would be required at Frankfort as well.  Only frontages on alleys, ways, and courts are exempt, and I don't think Frankfort qualifies as an alley- see below.  I believe it is a 40' ROW

 

§ 325.04  Alley

“Alley” means any public space or thoroughfare twenty (20) feet or less in width, but not less than ten (10) feet in width, which has been dedicated or deeded to the public for public travel and affords access to abutting property.

 

The way around that is to ask the city to vacate Frankfort. For example, this Friday's agenda:

 

https://planning.clevelandohio.gov/designreview/drcagenda/2021/PDF/CPC-Agenda-WebEx-meeting-070221.pdf

 

2. Resolution No. 486-2021(Ward 3/Councilmember McCormack):

Declaring the intent to vacate a portion of Frankfort Avenue N.W. extending from West 6th Street to West 3rd Street.

 

Quote

Based on the code, I believe the liner building would be required at Frankfort as well.  Only frontages on alleys, ways, and courts are exempt, and I don't think Frankfort qualifies as an alley- see below.  I believe it is a 40' ROW

 

§ 325.04  Alley

“Alley” means any public space or thoroughfare twenty (20) feet or less in width, but not less than ten (10) feet in width, which has been dedicated or deeded to the public for public travel and affords access to abutting property.

I hope the city stands firm that Frankfort Ave. can not classified as an alley by SW and thus needs the same liner building treatment. 

Edited June 30, 20213 yr by viscomi

2 minutes ago, Mendo said:

The way around that is to ask the city to vacate Frankfort. For example, this Friday's agenda:

 

ugh. A portion of Frankfort? I wonder what side and for what?

7 minutes ago, viscomi said:

 

ugh. A portion of Frankfort? I wonder what side and for what?

Well it seems pretty clear that it is in the works to vacate Frankfort between w3rd and w6th (and obviously request by SHW given its design) so the parking garage does not have to be activated by fronting the garage on that side as @Dino points out would have been necessary per Code.

So vacate, while leaving the actual street as is? Will it become SW's responsibility then, if granted?

Edited June 30, 20213 yr by viscomi

1 minute ago, viscomi said:

So vacate, while leaving the actual street as is? Will it become SW's reasonability then, if granted?

 

Vacated city streets are combined into adjacent parcels. SW could keep the street as a private alley, or dig it up and build their garage directly attached to their HQ as if Frankfort were never there. 

 

The site overview from SW shows the garage as separate building, and KJP's articles say the intent was for it to become an alley for a loading dock.

I'm guessing the City will approve this but ask for a public right of way easement in exchange for vacating the street.  This would maintain the "street", but allow SHW off the hook for the liner building and most likely avoid variances and easements required for the bridge they want to do.  And if that's what happens, it's probably not the end of the world.

 

But...this is exactly why I'm frustrated the design is not being shared.  Decisions are being made quietly and without anyone seeing the "big picture".  Landmarks typically requires seeing proposals for new construction before approving a demo; sometimes they make approval contingent on pulling the permit for new construction.  I think CPC should at least demand to see the actual designs (thereby making them public) for the development before acting on this.

 

 

1 hour ago, Dino said:

Based on the code, I believe the liner building would be required at Frankfort as well.  Only frontages on alleys, ways, and courts are exempt, and I don't think Frankfort qualifies as an alley- see below.  I believe it is a 40' ROW

 

§ 325.04  Alley

“Alley” means any public space or thoroughfare twenty (20) feet or less in width, but not less than ten (10) feet in width, which has been dedicated or deeded to the public for public travel and affords access to abutting property.

 

59 minutes ago, Mendo said:

 

The way around that is to ask the city to vacate Frankfort. For example, this Friday's agenda:

 

https://planning.clevelandohio.gov/designreview/drcagenda/2021/PDF/CPC-Agenda-WebEx-meeting-070221.pdf

 

2. Resolution No. 486-2021(Ward 3/Councilmember McCormack):

Declaring the intent to vacate a portion of Frankfort Avenue N.W. extending from West 6th Street to West 3rd Street.

 

 

58 minutes ago, viscomi said:

I hope the city stands firm that Frankfort Ave. can not classified as an alley by SW and thus needs the same liner building treatment. 

I feel like everyone involved in planning and approving this project should be required to repeatedly walk Short Vincent to be reminded why making Frankfurt an alley is a terrible idea. 

SHW and the city were at odds over whether Frankfort should be considered a street or an alley and thus whether the parking deck needed to have a liner building on it. Vacating Frankfort makes that debate moot. But since SHW will have its HQ loading dock on Frankfort and possibly a garage entrance/exit, it will remain a vehicular thorough route and not have the garage butt up against the HQ tower.

 

I've often been told to look at the BOK Park Plaza for the closest model to what SHW and Pickard Chilton want to do with the HQ, especially at/just above ground level. Note that just north of BOK Park Plaza is an alley that is no longer public. It is a loading/service drive for the skyscraper with a skywalk over it to the parking garage next door. I've been told that's what SHW/PC have in mind here in Cleveland. https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4673499,-97.5194859,3a,75y,236.58h,102.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBRJtV3RA8Vo_gokFbPzHbQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I don’t understand the need for so much secrecy. It’s not like we’re never gonna see it. 

I wonder how much it irks TPTB to have some of the wind taken out of their sails on UrbanOhio's reporting of the design concepts. 

2 hours ago, marty15 said:

I don’t understand the need for so much secrecy. It’s not like we’re never gonna see it. 

Such paranoia. It seems a bit... excessive.

3 hours ago, dave2017 said:

I wonder how much it irks TPTB to have some of the wind taken out of their sails on UrbanOhio's reporting of the design concepts. 

 

Sadly, a lot. Enough that SHW went from sending emails with warnings "not to talk with media" to employees back in 2019 to threatening to prosecute "the source." They even fired a recently retired executive who was kept around to work on the HQ project. He wasn't a source and they brought him back after his firing because the info kept flowing to me and I kept on writing articles. They designated a lady in their communications department to report on my blog and social media activities to an executive, a VP of communications, IIRC. They have no idea how many leaks and resources there are. My first source, way back in 2018 who confirmed that there was an HQ project, I used only once. Others I use often. Some, sparingly. Sometimes I post intentionally misleading info (it's stuff that doesn't change the basic story) to protect sources. But my blog and I exist because nature abhors a void. Their paranoia PR is the absolute wrong approach. They are so afraid of losing trade secrets that SHW extends that fear to many other aspects, including this project.

Absolutely ridiculous especially because so many decisions of this city are already concluded behind closed doors with no possibility of public involvement, or at least an understanding, and all that has had genuinely detrimental results

I get the need for secrecy with projects in some cases. For example, could you imagine the backlash and hoops from residents if a developer gave every early design idea for  anew apartment building in Ohio City. It would be madness. BUT, in this case, I don't think the secrecy is warranted. If only SHW knew how excited this city is for their new HQ. Not even just us urban folk. Literally everyone I have talked to. They should embrace that and make it fun for everyone along the way. What an instant PR success that would be.

 

 

12 hours ago, KJP said:

 

Sadly, a lot. Enough that SHW went from sending emails with warnings "not to talk with media" to employees back in 2019 to threatening to prosecute "the source." They even fired a recently retired executive who was kept around to work on the HQ project. He wasn't a source and they brought him back after his firing because the info kept flowing to me and I kept on writing articles. They designated a lady in their communications department to report on my blog and social media activities to an executive, a VP of communications, IIRC. They have no idea how many leaks and resources there are. My first source, way back in 2018 who confirmed that there was an HQ project, I used only once. Others I use often. Some, sparingly. Sometimes I post intentionally misleading info (it's stuff that doesn't change the basic story) to protect sources. But my blog and I exist because nature abhors a void. Their paranoia PR is the absolute wrong approach. They are so afraid of losing trade secrets that SHW extends that fear to many other aspects, including this project.

Sounds like a terrible place to work.

Edited July 1, 20213 yr by marty15

11 hours ago, YO to the CLE said:

I get the need for secrecy with projects in some cases. For example, could you imagine the backlash and hoops from residents if a developer gave every early design idea for  anew apartment building in Ohio City. It would be madness. BUT, in this case, I don't think the secrecy is warranted. If only SHW knew how excited this city is for their new HQ. Not even just us urban folk. Literally everyone I have talked to. They should embrace that and make it fun for everyone along the way. What an instant PR success that would be.

 

 

Good point.  Way to alienate an entire region that was rooting for you and gave you millions of dollars SHW.  

26 minutes ago, Dino said:

Good point.  Way to alienate an entire region that was rooting for you and gave you millions of dollars SHW.  

My guess is that the only people they are alienating are the Cleveland members of Urban Ohio.  I doubt if even 10% of the "region" are even aware they are building a new headquarters and most of them could care less what it looks like.

2 hours ago, Htsguy said:

My guess is that the only people they are alienating are the Cleveland members of Urban Ohio.  I doubt if even 10% of the "region" are even aware they are building a new headquarters and most of them could care less what it looks like.

 

Yep, you're probably right.

SW is submitting their conceptual design to the city today. I'm not 100% familiar with the process or how long it takes, but I would imagine something this month we should have some sort of idea what the final design/building may look like.

Edited July 1, 20213 yr by Stang10

3 hours ago, KJP said:

 

Yep, you're probably right.

I doubt that 25% of the region even knows that Sherwin-Williams is headquartered here.

32 minutes ago, Stang10 said:

SW is submitting their conceptual design to the city today. I'm not 100% familiar with the process or how long it takes, but I would imagine something this month we should have some sort of idea what the final design/building may look like.

Not doubting you one bit, but @KJP can you confirm this to be true?

My question is if the City stands firm on their zoning overlay and doesn't vacate Frankfurt would SHW really throw everything away and start over?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

2 minutes ago, GREGinPARMA said:

Not doubting you one bit, but @KJP can you confirm this to be true?

 

Although it seems it bit quick, I wouldn't necessarily doubt him. I will inquire.

 

28 minutes ago, GREGinPARMA said:

Not doubting you one bit, but @KJP can you confirm this to be true?

He was right

 

https://www.crainscleveland.com/real-estate/new-sherwin-williams-hq-could-rise-36-stories-design-package-shows

4 minutes ago, marty15 said:

 

Wait - Am I (are we) supposed to know what that lighter blue thing is?  I feel like I should and maybe my brain has already started celebrating the 4th - but I got nothing!!!

** Cleveland.com Subscriber Exclusive **

 

Sherwin-Williams reveals more about plans to build fourth tallest building in Cleveland

Eric Heisig - Cleveland.com - July 1, 2021

 

 

"On display in a conference room Wednesday was a model of downtown west of East 9th Street. The company did not permit reporters to photograph any of the meeting, but the model showed that the new headquarters would tower over the rest of the Warehouse District. It showed in detail, through a series of white pieces standing in for buildings, how the Sherwin-Williams will control three blocks of downtown ... Architect Bill Chilton said work on how the buildings will look and what materials it will be made of just started last month. ... 'I think that it’s not lost on Sherwin-Williams that the tower top, its presence on the skyline, is certainly an opportunity for the city of Cleveland,' Chilton said. 'It’s also an opportunity for Sherwin-Williams from a branding standpoint. And so are you going to see a flat top?' the architect continued. 'I don’t think so.'"

 

 

Here are some additional graphics from packet submitted to the city:

 

 

 

 

 

I see a parking garage lined with retail!

EDIT: Is it only west 3rd lined with retail? Also is it unheard of for the city in agreement to vacate Frankfort that the "future expansion" has to be completed or progress has to be made by a certain time? I just hope the SHW doesn't put it in their plans just to please the city in order to get what they want just to go against it later on.
Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

The "pavilion" looks a bit underwhelming, but I guess it will be better than a surface parking lot.

 

Edited July 1, 20213 yr by skiwest

18 minutes ago, skiwest said:

The "pavilion" looks a bit underwhelming, but I guess it will be better than a surface parking lot.

 

 

"Better than a surface parking lot" is about the nicest thing I can say about anything here. Other than the new surface parking lots. 

They show the context as if the context of public square is a 2 story buildings set back from the street

So, so, very meh.  I can't imagine that this site could have been developed with any less care, vision or public mindedness. 

 

At least they're not going to Atlanta?  I guess we should be happy for whatever we get?

9 minutes ago, X said:

So, so, very meh.  I can't imagine that this site could have been developed with any less care, vision or public mindedness. 

 

At least they're not going to Atlanta?  I guess we should be happy for whatever we get?

Unfortunately I have to agree.

 

I hope there is at least some minor push back by the Planning Commission (although I don't expect it...let's be real) in regards to surface parking and the awful interaction of the tower and the parking garage on West 3rd.  However, they have already been dealing with the PC staff according to reports and this is still the result.

Looks good to me. Lets Go!!

They’re gonna have to work *very* hard not to have that 2 story pavilion on PS look like crap. I’m not hopeful.

2 hours ago, X said:

So, so, very meh.  I can't imagine that this site could have been developed with any less care, vision or public mindedness. 

 

At least they're not going to Atlanta?  I guess we should be happy for whatever we get?

What did you expect? None of this is a surprise. This is exactly the massing (not final design) that has been discussed here for months and months. The only difference is the “Welcome Center” will be two stories and I thought it would be three. 

A few days ago everyone’s all excited about this project because we found out it’s going to be at least 600 feet, and now people are upset because it looks exactly like we thought it would look all along as far as massing.
 

This building will be absolutely fine; it was never going to be an architectural masterpiece, but for what it is supposed to be, it’s fine.

 

The surface parking lot west of the tower reserved for "future expansion" could be there a loooong time.   😒

I’ll be happy if that many actual trees are planted. That’s where I’m at.

I have never been a fan of pedestrian bridges.  Is there a reason why they couldn't tunnel instead?  Unfortunately, much of the western edge's of this plan remains undeveloped.  It sure doesn't seem any activation has been planned.  

27 minutes ago, roman totale XVII said:

They’re gonna have to work *very* hard not to have that 2 story pavilion on PS look like crap. I’m not hopeful.

Giving credit to @Whipjackafrom back in January  

4 minutes ago, dave2017 said:

I have never been a fan of pedestrian bridges.  Is there a reason why they couldn't tunnel instead?  Unfortunately, much of the western edge's of this plan remains undeveloped.  It sure doesn't seem any activation has been planned.  

I think they look kinda cool unfortunately theyre inherently bad for getting people on the sidewalk and in stores so they really shouldn't be used

8 minutes ago, dave2017 said:

I have never been a fan of pedestrian bridges.  Is there a reason why they couldn't tunnel instead?  Unfortunately, much of the western edge's of this plan remains undeveloped.  It sure doesn't seem any activation has been planned.  

A pedestrian bridge to a 2-story building seems rather odd.

The best thing is SHW stays in town. The next best thing is the welcome addition of a 600 foot tower as seen from any 360 degree distance. That appears to be it though. The size and location of the Public Square building is a massive fail. Same with ground level interaction from what we know. 

 

So yes, the pluses definitely outweigh the minuses but oh what could have been. Having said that our concerns are just that. Our concerns. People on this forum have a heightened sense of urban design (what works and what doesn't) but yeah, the general public could care less. 

 

And to be fair, we all know SHW is a conservative company so what did we really expect? As the mayor likes to say "It is what it is." Let's just be happy they are staying here and adding a really nice addition to the skyline.