I still think this such a disjointed plan.  I personally think that the cutsie little center should be on the "super block" and the tower should be on the square.  Unfortunately , the connectivity of the center and the parking garage to the tower would not work out the way SHW envision it if the tower were on the square...because (OMG) people would actually have to leave the hamster cage to get to other buildings!  I wish they would have let Geowizical take a crack at the renders, so far those have been the best.

The strangest part to me is they supposedly didn’t start actual design work until last month. 

@KJP Are these the images you left out of your article a few days ago? 

13 minutes ago, cadmen said:

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. 

 

Let's hope there's significant momentum toward spinoff development. I know none of us wants to see these blocks of prime real estate looking incomplete for years and years. 

Oh, any news on the fate of the Gilman building? Could be a pretty great anchor for new retail/residential. 

6 minutes ago, Sapper Daddy said:

@KJP Are these the images you left out of your article a few days ago? 

 

I never had images, just word descriptions. But I'll write tomorrow about these images and when they were developed.

Where is the 5 star hotel?

19 minutes ago, skiwest said:

Where is the 5 star hotel?

 

Why do you ask?

1 hour ago, cadmen said:

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.

 

The thing is, that while the average person on the street might not think about it in so many words, I think when they are on Public Square and the only thing on that lot is a lobby to an office building that isn't even on the same block (seriously?!) and some conference center that they can't ever see, they'll know that "something" is wrong with the situation and that an opportunity to enliven an important public space was missed. 

 

People intuit those things, even if they don't spend hours on internet forums debating them.

The only hope I have for the Jacob's Lot build is that it at least has a green roof feature.   I say this because Rebol ,on Public Square, is an eyesore when viewed from above ground.  55 Public Square and even the new SWH's will prominently look down at it

38 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Why do you ask?

Well, I thought it had been mentioned a while back that SHW wanted a hotel for employees and visitors comimg to the HQ for meetings, trainings, etc.

3 hours ago, skiwest said:

Well, I thought it had been mentioned a while back that SHW wanted a hotel for employees and visitors comimg to the HQ for meetings, trainings, etc.

 

Ah, got it. There was some talk about it a while ago, but I never heard anything about it from the design team. The Magellan development was supposed to have a 5-star hotel included but they backed out. I haven't heard if a new flag has been chosen.

I like this plan the more I look at, it still lets 55 public square be a prominent part of the square instead of blocking it, and creates a layered multi tiered effect like a room with varying heights of things around it. I really like 55 though. I think its a good approach at filling in gaps in a CBD like Cleveland's.

theres 12 buildings on public square. they are all at least six stories tall and are built out to the sidewalk. 

 

this is a 2 floor corporate auditorium with a major set back from the street and its main access point is a tube that crosses w3rd.  there should be major pushback against the pavilion, imo.

 

I can live with the other distasteful things about this plan. but look out for a) very shallow retail space in the garage that shw has no intention of ever leasing and b) those new surface lots to be there for a couple decades.

 

the tower should look nice and itll be neat seeing them build a large skyscraper (I missed out on society and sohio)

7 hours ago, KJP said:

 

Ah, got it. There was some talk about it a while ago, but I never heard anything about it from the design team. The Magellan development was supposed to have a 5-star hotel included but they backed out. I haven't heard if a new flag has been chosen.

Magellan backed out if the whole project or just the hotel part of it?

5 hours ago, Whipjacka said:

theres 12 buildings on public square. they are all at least six stories tall and are built out to the sidewalk. 

 

this is a 2 floor corporate auditorium with a major set back from the street and its main access point is a tube that crosses w3rd.  there should be major pushback against the pavilion, imo.

 

I can live with the other distasteful things about this plan. but look out for a) very shallow retail space in the garage that shw has no intention of ever leasing and b) those new surface lots to be there for a couple decades.

 

the tower should look nice and itll be neat seeing them build a large skyscraper (I missed out on society and sohio)

Agree with you here.  They need to push back on this lame building on the square.  And has there been any mention of the parking garage being built to support a potential tower above one day?  I think that needs to be part of the pushback too.  No public access to the tower - oh well, we can live with that.  Like Whipjack said - it'll be nice seeing a skyscraper being built.  

1 hour ago, cfdwarrior said:

Magellan backed out if the whole project or just the hotel part of it?

 

The hotel backed out. They're trying to ID a new flag.

I like the plan and looking forward to seeing the final designs later this year.   I think the building on the Jacobs site has the possibility to be a jewel box with a glass tower behind it.   The only disappointment to me is that the linear around the parking garage isn't part of the project and tagged as future development.   They need to be pushed to have that completed.   

1 hour ago, RE Developer In Training said:

They need to push back on this lame building on the square.  And has there been any mention of the parking garage being built to support a potential tower above one day?  I think that needs to be part of the pushback too.  No public access to the tower - oh well, we can live with that.  

Designing the parking garage to accommodate a future tower makes sense.  That would be much better than saving a parcel for expansion which might not happen for several decades if at all. 

1 hour ago, CleWestSide said:

I think the building on the Jacobs site has the possibility to be a jewel box with a glass tower behind it.

 

What does that even mean?  Why should the public want a "jewel box" on Public Square, instead of a building with publicly accessible uses?

6 hours ago, Whipjacka said:

theres 12 buildings on public square. they are all at least six stories tall and are built out to the sidewalk. 

 

this is a 2 floor corporate auditorium with a major set back from the street and its main access point is a tube that crosses w3rd.  there should be major pushback against the pavilion, imo.

 

I can live with the other distasteful things about this plan. but look out for a) very shallow retail space in the garage that shw has no intention of ever leasing and b) those new surface lots to be there for a couple decades.

 

the tower should look nice and itll be neat seeing them build a large skyscraper (I missed out on society and sohio)

 

If anything they should force Sherwin Williams to put public space on the roof of this auditorium, so the surrounding buildings of the square are not looking down at an asphalt roof and mechanicals.    I could get behind a rooftop event/dining space.   

Sooooooooo a perfect reason to expand is having Valspar come over. I figured this would have been the perfect chance to combine the two companies, are they doing that?

32 minutes ago, skiwest said:

Designing the parking garage to accommodate a future tower makes sense.  That would be much better than saving a parcel for expansion which might not happen for several decades if at all. 

 

I'm guessing that would add a LOT of cost to the garage.

I was told that they're maintaining a large presence in Minni, but mostly the RD folks there.  I believe a lot of HQ type will be coming over time. 

1 minute ago, JohnSummit said:

 

I'm guessing that would add a LOT of cost to the garage.

I'm sure it would, but the cost could be offset by selling the property they are saving for future expansion.

4 minutes ago, RE Developer In Training said:

I was told that they're maintaining a large presence in Minni, but mostly the RD folks there.  I believe a lot of HQ type will be coming over time. 

Fantastic news

I’m all for public access but what’s the idea?  Sohio/BP/Huntington Building has had it for decades and no one uses it. 

Seriously. I wander around on lunch breaks and have tried my luck at going into the majority of downtown buildings - not many office buildings have public access and if they do security will give you strange looks until you head out. BP's area is nice and folks do use it but it seems to mostly be office staff hanging in there (and me with some crappy taco bell lol). 

 

What public access do folks envision? A walk through? Restaurants? 

Edited July 2, 20213 yr by GISguy

The a Highmark building in Pittsburgh is a good one. First level retail with a food court a level up. That said, it’s a denser downtown there so there’s lots more foot traffic. A better experience might draw more people - but do we have the demand? 

4 minutes ago, OldEnough said:

The a Highmark building in Pittsburgh is a good one. First level retail with a food court a level up. That said, it’s a denser downtown there so there’s lots more foot traffic. A better experience might draw more people - but do we have the demand? 

 

Pgh is noticeably more lively but so much more scrunched together into the golden triangle. It's a blessing and curse to live on the lake! That's kind of what BP is (kind of has "retail") but also you have their food upstairs. 

1 hour ago, RE Developer In Training said:

I was told that they're maintaining a large presence in Minni, but mostly the RD folks there.  I believe a lot of HQ type will be coming over time. 

 

And I keep wondering if/when the flex office space and its 200+ employees on Hinckley Parkway might move downtown. The 1 million-sf tower isn't big enough to accommodate them and whatever they bring down from Minny. Perhaps that's for the future phase?

8 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

And I keep wondering if/when the flex office space and its 200+ employees on Hinckley Parkway might move downtown. The 1 million-sf tower isn't big enough to accommodate them and whatever they bring down from Minny. Perhaps that's for the future phase?

I like this speculation, but like other posters I am concerned that that surface parking lot designated future development is going to be around for a long time.  Hopefully not 30 years like the Jacobs lot.  As I have expressed on other occasions, I am not a fan of "phases" in Cleveland as the second phase always seems to take forever to happen for one reason or another (the big one usually being $$).

 

Also does any of these bare bone conceptuals answer the question put forth by @gottaplana couple times the past month that he heard  the tower was going to contain extra space for lease to outside firms (thus adding support to his arguments that Nucleus would then surely never happen)?  In my mind 36 stories with plans for future SHW offices next door suggest the answer is no.

1 hour ago, OldEnough said:

I’m all for public access but what’s the idea?  Sohio/BP/Huntington Building has had it for decades and no one uses it. 

That's my thing. This is a HQ office building on private property. What are people expecting in terms of publicly accessible space. You have an entire Public Square, The atrium in the BP building, the adjacent malls and Tower City all nearby. What is SW supposed to provide??

 

Is every private development supposed to offer public space? 

Edited July 2, 20213 yr by Mov2Ohio

Arm chair QB here, but it would have been interesting if they could have vacated W3rd from Superior to St. Clair, and widened Frankfurt from PS to W6th. May have eliminated the need for 2 pedestrian bridges at the very least, and allowed the site plan to work how many on this forum would have preferred (tower on PS).

5 minutes ago, w28th said:

Arm chair QB here, but it would have been interesting if they could have vacated W3rd from Superior to St. Clair, and widened Frankfurt from PS to W6th. May have eliminated the need for 2 pedestrian bridges at the very least, and allowed the site plan to work how many on this forum would have preferred (tower on PS).

I have posted before that I prefer it on the Weston lot after viewing the skyline mock ups a couple of weeks ago on the forum.  I believe at the proposed height it would not interact well with the Terminal Tower from various perspectives if built on the Jacobs lot and it looked much more dramatic on the skyline offset from the TT.

41 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

Also does any of these bare bone conceptuals answer the question put forth by @gottaplana couple times the past month that he heard  the tower was going to contain extra space for lease to outside firms (thus adding support to his arguments that Nucleus would then surely never happen)?  In my mind 36 stories with plans for future SHW offices next door suggest the answer is no.

 

I don't know how that rumor was phrased, but if it was for "a Fortune 500 company seeking to build a new HQ with some leasable space," that could be for Cliffs. I've heard several rumors that Cliffs wants other office tenants in its building, preferably companies it regularly does business with.

 

Back to SHW, I have some additional details that will help refine the SHW skyscraper massing. Might as well throw an article in together with it.... 😉

I hope I'm wrong, but I'm skeptical that the remaining surface lots will be built on anytime soon.  The SW parking garage will not have capacity for 100% of its employees.  These lots were already parking before, now there's going to be increased demand for parking from the new HQ next door.  The effects of supply and demand simply point to parking.  Unfortunately it is a low-overhead (cheap) way to make money off land downtown, while adding virtually nothing to the urban fabric.  Time to tax surface parking downtown!

They did dig up the lot at the corner of West 6th and Superior. So maybe a second tower won’t be far behind. 

As much as l hate the existing parking lot tundra the 3 structures planned will do away with a big chunk of them. And l agree that with the way things go in this town it could very well take years to fill in the rest but who knows, SHW just might kickstart more development sooner. I can see that happening.

 

So my biggest complaint with the project is that joke of a building on the Jacob's lot. Two stories AND a walkway? It's imbacilic. If you are going to move the tower off the square (a questionable choice at best) then the Jacob's lot structure needs to be at least six stories for symmetry. You don't have to be an expert to understand sightlines. That would be a great place to incorporate the hotel on top of their little conference center. 

 

I know SHW doesn't listen to the likes of us but if they just LOOK at the plans reported they will see the massive imbalance. It's just awkward as hell. Two stories my ass. 

^But they should listen since they are getting substantial incentives from the city and state.

Am I the only that thinks it is weird that they are not incorporating a hotel into this initial plan?

 

Are they confident that existing hotels cover their needs or are they confident that someone else will build a hotel in other land?

3 hours ago, OldEnough said:

I’m all for public access but what’s the idea?  Sohio/BP/Huntington Building has had it for decades and no one uses it. 

DING DING DING - THIS EXACTLY! There HAS to be a sustainable plan. Not just another rest stop for the wandering homeless to relieve themselves and panhandle for money. That's unfortunately a very big reality here in the CLE

1 hour ago, ragarcia said:

Am I the only that thinks it is weird that they are not incorporating a hotel into this initial plan?

 

Are they confident that existing hotels cover their needs or are they confident that someone else will build a hotel in other land?

 

CLE hotel occupancies were around 70% maybe before the pandemic, so the current stock probably does accommodate them since there is capacity.

 

They may be trying to see how it goes and expand with one on one of those expansion lots/buildings. 

 

They seem to be a conservative company, and given everything else we've heard about this process, it certainly does not seem weird They aren't doing everything at once.

I can somewhat understand building temporary surface parking behind the tower, which is potential expansion place for the company.

 

What I don't understand is temporary surface parking around the parking garage, which seems to be designated for mixed-use development unrelated to the company. There is no good reason they cannot find a development partner that can come in and build this out as soon as they finish using the land for staging. 

17 hours ago, ink said:

What I don't understand is temporary surface parking around the parking garage, which seems to be designated for mixed-use development unrelated to the company. There is no good reason they cannot find a development partner that can come in and build this out as soon as they finish using the land for staging. 

What happened to Weston?  They had a great plan for the area a few years ago.   Perhaps they can get back into the picture and team up with SHW. 

 

Edited July 3, 20213 yr by skiwest

4 hours ago, KJP said:

 

I don't know how that rumor was phrased, but if it was for "a Fortune 500 company seeking to build a new HQ with some leasable space," that could be for Cliffs. I've heard several rumors that Cliffs wants other office tenants in its building, preferably companies it regularly does business with.

 

Back to SHW, I have some additional details that will help refine the SHW skyscraper massing. Might as well throw an article in together with it.... 😉

ANOTHER article! two in one week about SHW HQ? *heart be still* seriously i'm like a kid in a candy store when i hear an article is gonna drop!!! :) 

2 hours ago, Mov2Ohio said:

 

CLE hotel occupancies were around 70% maybe before the pandemic, so the current stock probably does accommodate them since there is capacity.

 

They may be trying to see how it goes and expand with one on one of those expansion lots/buildings. 

 

They seem to be a conservative company, and given everything else we've heard about this process, it certainly does not seem weird They aren't doing everything at once.

I would think if 70 per cent was average and the rates were good a new hotel on the scale of the Hilton would be in the pipeline somewhere.  

6 hours ago, Mov2Ohio said:

That's my thing. This is a HQ office building on private property. What are people expecting in terms of publicly accessible space. You have an entire Public Square, The atrium in the BP building, the adjacent malls and Tower City all nearby. What is SW supposed to provide??

 

Is every private development supposed to offer public space? 

True...but, in a downtown setting, it shouldnt hinder public access to some degree either.  This is not some stand alone building in a wheatfield. This is an important piece of of the city's fabric

1 hour ago, fuel1411 said:

ANOTHER article! two in one week about SHW HQ? *heart be still* seriously i'm like a kid in a candy store when i hear an article is gonna drop!!! :) 

 

Thanks but I'm probably going to sit on the story until next week. Nothing huge, just some insights into the latest release by SHW.

There is nothing surprising here if you have followed KJP’s blog over the past several years. If one analyzed all of his posts on a graph they go up and down but would be pretty much in line from what he has been reporting all along.

 

It will be interesting to see the actual renderings with the angled roof vs the square box.

 

Superb reporting KJP! Thank you!