Thanks to @KJP, learned of more nonsense from SHW's little building plans: 

 

"SHW considers Frankfort to be an alley. City planners consider it to be a street. If it is a street, then SHW must provide a liner building with actives uses along Frankfort's frontage, minus its proposed vehicular entrance at the west end of the deck. If it is an alley, SHW doesn't have to provide active uses or even a liner building. By vacating Frankfort, that debate is moot."  https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2021/07/shw-skyscrapers-crown-soars-street.html

 

Frankfort AVENUE is not only a street, it's actually an avenue. It certainly not an alley. Alleys are not four lanes wide and the city and Councilman McCormack should know this. The city gives away too much free land to private interests which makes the city less walkable with giant blocks. And of course, in this case, SHW doesn't just want free land, it wants to be free of creating anything decent along Frankfort--and the easiest way to do this is to make it disappear.

 

I know my comment above was disliked by some, but the truth hurts. We are so used to despair we grovel and take whatever we can. 2-4 stories on public square? catwalk over W. 3? locking up dedicated, vacant space along W. 6 for decades, and now 'vacating" Frankfort Ave?

 

 

42 minutes ago, Whipjacka said:

@KJP do you have any sense if shw is being sincere about developing w6 and at clair? 

 

There's now apparently two groupings of land -- land that SHW might take the lead in developing (such as for future expansion) and land that SHW might make available to others to develop through certain members of its development team....

 

+ CBRE Inc. – Real estate and economic development advisor

+ Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP – Legal and economic development counsel

+ inSITE Advisory Group – Economic development advisor

 

It's too soon to know for certain how intent SHW is for pursuing either. The HQ work won't be done for three years although the parking deck will apparently be done earlier. SHW needs the surface lots for construction staging. So I don't understand why SHW needed to hire the above-named companies last September, four years before the project's estimated completion.

 

As for the expansion lot, one has to ask if SHW sees a big building going up there anytime soon. The reason is, why put an outdoor terrace in the tower's lower midsection facing west if a big building may rise next to it in five years? Then again, depending on the design of the expansion, there could be enough separation between buildings so that it doesn't matter. Perhaps the expansion building is skinny or angled so it doesn't block most views from the main HQ tower? But I think it is interesting that SHW felt the need at this early stage to clarify which land it envisions for HQ expansion and which land it would market for development.

Thanks  @KJP  and @Geowizicalfor all your time and effort in reporting and rendering what the  SHW Headquarters may resemble.  I hope you don't mind that I was playing around with your rendering while thinking of how they may light it's crown.  What if the top diagonals were various angles in a stylized  "s" pattern? The view of the tower's crown would be slightly different from all sides and provide various looks .  The center cross angle could be lit with color changing led strips and the top edge of the "s" pattern would be lined with led. East and West facades would carry the Sherwin Williams logo.  The glass curtain walls would look solid during the day and become translucent as the lighting is illuminated at night. I think it gives a nod to our "crooked" river and brings a vibrancy to the skyline

Edited July 6, 20213 yr by dave2017

21 hours ago, cle_guy90 said:

Honestly my biggest problem with this whole project is the pedestrian bridge over west 3rd. I know in one article Kelley (I believe) said that bridge should get some pushback. Turn that into a tunnel and SHW will get my stamp of approval which probably will make or break this project ;) 

 

Honestly I can't believe I'm the only one to say this so far... But wouldn't this be a great opportunity to make a street pedestrian only? At least for that stretch

17 minutes ago, YABO713 said:

 

Honestly I can't believe I'm the only one to say this so far... But wouldn't this be a great opportunity to make a street pedestrian only? At least for that stretch

I think @w28th suggested this a few days ago as well.  In general I don't I have a problem with this but I guess a concern would be that it would eliminate a second north south route (after Ontario) downtown and both streets are right next to each other.  Traffic on w6th and 9th could become a nightmare

Edited July 6, 20213 yr by Htsguy

I also think W3rd is the wrong street to close to cars. It is too close to PS, and it has an entrance/exit to the Shoreway. Closing this section would likely significantly complicate routes in and out of the city, meaning more traffic. 

4 hours ago, dave2017 said:

Thanks  @KJP  and @Geowizicalfor all your time and effort in reporting and rendering what the  SHW Headquarters may resemble.  I hope you don't mind that I was playing around with your rendering while thinking of how they may light it's crown.  What if the top diagonals were various angles in a stylized  "s" pattern? The view of the tower's crown would be slightly different from all sides and provide various looks .  The center cross angle could be lit with color changing led strips and the top edge of the "s" pattern would be lined with led. East and West facades would carry the Sherwin Williams logo.  The glass curtain walls would look solid during the day and become translucent as the lighting is illuminated at night. I think it gives a nod to our "crooked" river and brings a vibrancy to the skyline

@dave2017 That looks awesome.  I would take that in a heartbeat. But its  probable a little too fancy for SW.  Do you have anymore angles of this.

Debate the merits or lack of thereoff of SWHQ all day.  But cut out the personal sniping and strawmen and silly generalizations or I will cut them out.  Capisce?

On 6/15/2021 at 1:11 PM, mrnyc said:

yeah good to see they are mostly going for normal cubes, with huddle rooms and cubbies. and a mini conference bar!

 

Well anything is better than "open plan", which was invented by Satan.

Sounds like there is little to no hope left for Frankfort. It's unfortunate and kind infuriating because it's in their best interest. They want an attractive "campus" that will pull in new young talent but are actively developing a non-place/service gutter out of, in my mind one of their strongest assets, Frankfort. From a urban planning standpoint they are in over their heads developing this. And that's okay, they are a paint company not an urban development company. Get outside help, that's what they are doing with the Brecksville campus and DiGeronimo, why not here? I said this before upthread, they should just back the garage off, into the center of the block (might have to increase garage a floor) and sell/partner up with developers to build around the garage. Like what they proposed with the northern side along St Clair. Developers will have more incentive to build something active and engaging. Imagine a selling point of an East 4th esque corridor right at your doorstep to employee prospects. I just don't understand why they are going this route, it's so close to being a true asset, it wouldn't take much. Come on SW, can you see it? Printers Painters Alley!

2 minutes ago, viscomi said:

Sounds like there is little to no hope left for Frankfort. It's unfortunate and kind infuriating because it's in their best interest. They want an attractive "campus" that will pull in new young talent but are actively developing a non-place/service gutter out of, in my mind one of their strongest assets, Frankfort. From a urban planning standpoint they are in over their heads developing this. And that's okay, they are a paint company not an urban development company. Get outside help, that's what they are doing with the Brecksville campus and DiGeronimo, why not here? I said this before upthread, they should just back the garage off, into the center of the block (might have to increase garage a floor) and sell/partner up with developers to build around the garage. Like what they proposed with the northern side along St Clair. Developers will have more incentive to build something active and engaging. Imagine a selling point of an East 4th esque corridor right at your doorstep to employee prospects. I just don't understand why they are going this route, it's so close to being a true asset, it wouldn't take much. Come on SW, can you see it? Printers Painters Alley!

 

How insular is their corporate culture, currently?   Progressive is known for having one, and is pretty much honest about it.  Same with a lot of the tech companies in California.   If SW has it and wants to maintain it, or wants it, this is what they'll do.   It's what Progressive would have done.   Not all companies that have one are honest about it, though.

I'm resigned to the idea that Frankfort was a lost cause.  I just wished it could have been leveraged for something else.  Maybe it was and we aren't aware, but it feels like it was given up without much in return.

 

Does anyone else find the green space at the southeast corner of the Jacobs lot a little out of place?  I feel like PS should be treated like an outdoor room with 4 walls, and that notch seems weird to me.

I think the sky bridges are a forgone conclusion just like Frankfort Ave.  Sky bridges don't have to be after thoughts though.  They can be cool ways to connect separate buildings into one comprehensive design.  These won't- but they could!  I'm starting to think the original Nucleus design might have worked well on this site.  It would have allowed them to have separate buildings connected in a cool and unified design.

SW will have their way; we can count on that.  Is there any mitigating factor here though?  Its been a while since ive been back to Cleveland and im trying to remember the geography

The biggest mitigating factor is that this is the beginning of the end for the Parking Lot District.  I don't think anyone- whether they're for or against SHW's current plans- would disagree. 

 

6 minutes ago, Oldmanladyluck said:

The biggest mitigating factor is that this is the beginning of the end for the Parking Lot District.  I don't think anyone- whether they're for or against SHW's current plans- would disagree. 

 

 

@Oldmanladyluck That would be the "historic parking lot district." LOL

 

4 minutes ago, Oldmanladyluck said:

The biggest mitigating factor is that this is the beginning of the end for the Parking Lot District.  I don't think anyone- whether they're for or against SHW's current plans- would disagree. 

 

 

Always embarrassed to walk people past here that are from out of town...and I've only lived here a small fraction of the time that it's been parking, can't imagine having to look at this for 20+ years...

Some signage indicating it is the future site of Sherwin-Williams World Headquarters would be nice. 

1 hour ago, GISguy said:

 

Always embarrassed to walk people past here that are from out of town...and I've only lived here a small fraction of the time that it's been parking, can't imagine having to look at this for 20+ years...

 

It's difficult. I often cover it by saying Pesht, Jacobs/Hines tower, Weston is proposed here.

 

49 minutes ago, skiwest said:

Some signage indicating it is the future site of Sherwin-Williams World Headquarters would be nice. 

 

From my understanding, there will be logos on the east and west sides of the tower.

 

https://planning.clevelandohio.gov/designreview/brd/detailDR.php?ID=3799&CASE=DF 2021-016

http://cdn.urbanohio.com/monthly_2021_07/image.png.b7e934a7434b16fa5831298cd074ceea.png
 
https://planning.clevelandohio.gov/designreview/brd/detailDR.php?ID=3799&CASE=DF 2021-016

When they said they're gonna move fast they meant it lol.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

If the city vacated Frankfort, does SW now have to pay taxes on that land? 

3 minutes ago, Foraker said:

If the city vacated Frankfort, does SW now have to pay taxes on that land? 

YES, when a City vacates a road the property reverts back to the adjoining properties and therefore they will own the road and have to pay property taxes AND will also have to maintain the now private road at their own expense.

Not sure if this has been stated yet since I’m new to this site, but I personally wish they would flip the places of their main office tower and pavilion.
 

In my opinion, the tower would be a better fit in relation to the buildings surrounding Public Square, helping to fully enclose it. It’d also likely do a better job at hiding the parking garage if you were standing inside the square.
 

I understand why they’re likely doing it like this- the difference in size of the blocks- but they could’ve used that as an opportunity to increase the height of the tower. Again, just my opinion. 

Edited July 10, 20213 yr by BuckeyeNative

After seeing the Skyline renderings, I think moving it off the Jacobs lot was in part due to SW not wanting to block the Terminal Tower on the skyline view which I have come to agree with. Im more ok now with their Tower being adjacent too; versus on the Square, as I think it makes for a fuller “from the Lake” skyline view. I believe SW did allude to in some article not wanting to “overshadow” the luster of TT. However, that 2 story Paint Museum is a No Go all day long

Edited July 10, 20213 yr by ogibbigo

Oy....it's not a paint museum. Depending on its design, its near-50-foot height may scale well with that of the roofline of the Old Stone Church.

It's much better then having a 600' tower on the square, immediately step down to a 45' tower behind it...IMO.  

Those are all good points that I can get behind. I guess that’s why I’m not the one drawing up the plans! 🙂

Maybe they can add another floor to the "paint museum" for a paintball room.  😆 

 

14 hours ago, BuckeyeNative said:

Not sure if this has been stated yet since I’m new to this site, but I personally wish they would flip the places of their main office tower and pavilion.
 

In my opinion, the tower would be a better fit in relation to the buildings surrounding Public Square, helping to fully enclose it. It’d also likely do a better job at hiding the parking garage if you were standing inside the square.

 

It has taken some time adjusting to the idea of not having Cleveland's next big one on Jacobs lot. For decades it kind of was the defacto assumption. I personally came around at some point and see the merits in not having it that way. Something similar to Cleveland hotel here would be perfect, but that's not happening either. Where we are at with the current massing I would like it to keep the stately vibe already present on the square. The BP atrium is really the only outlier in this regard...can we bring back Williamson building there :( 

It won't be stately though. I don't think it it will be a glass box persay, they will probably throw in some weird angles to "mix" it up. It is what it is though. If I had to pick one thing for SW to somewhat drastically change it would be the parking garage and it's relation to Frankfort/W3rd. I'll spare you all, going down that road again 😆

I hate to keep bringing up Weston, but the beauty of their plan had parking hidden in the center surrounded by offices, residential and retail.  But I guess we can forget about that. It would be nice if SWH could put the training/conference center on top of the parking garage and leave the Jacobs lot for a nice 10-story boutique hotel.  But I guess we can forget about that also.  As for the tower, apparently it will have a slanted roof - that's nice.  I also hope it will be tapered a bit towards the top.  That would give it a better look IMO.  It would mean smaller floorplates on those floors, but they could go just a little taller.  That's what irks me about 200 Public Square.  A taller, more slender tower would have looked better than the stocky tower which obstructs views of Terminal Tower from points east.  I realize there was a height restriction imposed by city council, but it should have been allowed to go taller.  

@skiwest The SHW tower will have two slants on the roof, like this:

 

|\     /|

|  \ /  |

|    \  |

|      \|

|       |

 

So no matter if you look at it from the east or west, it will look like that.

 

😆 Oh dear. I'm presuming they'll be careful enough not to make it too evocative of anything that will earn it a weird nickname, like oh... the Batman Building or something equally as unwelcome.

I do trust that the taste level at both Pickard+Chilton & Sherwin Williams generally varies between nondescript to buttoned-down, and not too far into the wild or weird.

Edited July 10, 20213 yr by ExPatClevGuy

The Incredible Hulk. 😊

BTW, the angled rooflines won't be that steep. But I also doubt they will be as shallow as Geo's recent massings. But they do give a sense of what it could look like.

I'd love love love it if the roofline was dramatic and structural, like P+C's 1180 Peachtree in Atlanta. Probably won't be, but a guy can dream!! 😉

Let's see, originating as a glass box-like tower, but with some interesting, defining contours/lines, a slightly sloped roof, but more than one roof line, and a bit over six hundred feet (I know,  more than a bit - more like 70 feet in this case).  This "fantasy" rendering of "One Lakeview"  would check all the boxes and look real sweet in our skyline, IMO.  Maybe SW just needed to check the skyscraper page like @ExPatClevGuydid upthread, rather than pay big bucks to PC!   Anyway, we won't be speculating or dreaming too much longer about exactly what it'll look like. 

On 7/10/2021 at 4:12 PM, KJP said:

BTW, the angled rooflines won't be that steep. But I also doubt they will be as shallow as Geo's recent massings. But they do give a sense of what it could look like.

Im wondering if the angled roof might resemble Citibank in NYC

14 minutes ago, B767PILOT said:

Im wondering if the angled roof might resemble Citibank in NYC

 

Half of it will. The other half will look like someone turned Citibank 180 degrees and put it next to the first half. It will look like when the up and down escalators are next to each other in a department store.

1 hour ago, CleveFan said:

Let's see, originating as a glass box-like tower, but with some interesting, defining contours/lines, a slightly sloped roof, but more than one roof line, and a bit over six hundred feet (I know,  more than a bit - more like 70 feet in this case).  This "fantasy" rendering of "One Lakeview"  would check all the boxes and look real sweet in our skyline, IMO.  Maybe SW just needed to check the skyscraper page like @ExPatClevGuydid upthread, rather than pay big bucks to PC!   Anyway, we won't be speculating or dreaming too much longer about exactly what it'll look like. 

 

668 feet would put the three tallest buildings in Ohio, and four of the five tallest, on or near Public Square.

 

Works for me.  :)

9 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

668 feet would put the three tallest buildings in Ohio, and four of the five tallest, on or near Public Square.

 

Works for me.  :)

 

But how many cranes? :P 

 

But seriously- never having seen a real tall building (lumen was prob my first ground up build I've seen on the daily) go up here, what type of setup should we expect? 

On 7/10/2021 at 4:00 PM, ExPatClevGuy said:

😆 Oh dear. I'm presuming they'll be careful enough not to make it too evocative of anything that will earn it a weird nickname, like oh... the Batman Building or something equally as unwelcome.

I do trust that the taste level at both Pickard+Chilton & Sherwin Williams generally varies between nondescript to buttoned-down, and not too far into the wild or weird.

 

Could be worse, it could end up like 30 St. Mary Axe in London, the nicest nickname for which is the Gherkin....

@E Rocc I do prefer The Gherkin to The Shard.

I wish they’d make it more angular, like the Bank of America Tower in NYC. 

Sounds a lot like Pickard Chilton's 1144 Fifteenth in Denver:

 

 

2 hours ago, GISguy said:

 

But how many cranes? :P 

 

But seriously- never having seen a real tall building (lumen was prob my first ground up build I've seen on the daily) go up here, what type of setup should we expect? 

 

Sohio/BP America/200 PS and Society/Key Tower both had two cranes atop them.

24 minutes ago, Chazz Michael Michaels said:

Sounds a lot like Pickard Chilton's 1144 Fifteenth in Denver:

 

 

Hopefully it looks that good

2 hours ago, GISguy said:

 

But how many cranes? :P 

 

But seriously- never having seen a real tall building (lumen was prob my first ground up build I've seen on the daily) go up here, what type of setup should we expect? 

Apologize for the poor quality, but you can JUST make out the two cranes sticking out the center of Key Tower. 3 if you include Marriott, so that.

Just now, Mov2Ohio said:

Apologize for the poor quality, but you can JUST make out the two cranes sticking out the center of Key Tower. 3 if you include Marriott, so that.

 

Great photo! Going to be really exciting!!