I don’t care about how much criticism people give this project, once it’s built we’ll fall in love. Approve it all and get the shovels in a ground tomorrow.

We knew what we were getting with the main SW Tower. Is it an iconic, building that rises to the design level of its well known  Big 3 neighbors?  No, but its angled upward reaching rooflines,  subdivision  into four seemingly slimmer towers,  its modern blue glass and “real skyscraper” height are all very welcome design elements. 
 

Given what we know about SW’s profile and the starting point, exemplars and evolution of this project, I feel pretty good about what the city is getting.  
 

Clesrly, SW didn’t want to build on the footprint of the smaller Jacobs lot - that possible building with equivalent square footage could have easily eclipsed the Terminal Tower.  But they didn’t want a building of any real height blocking the view from their tower to Public Square / or the view across the square to their tower. 
 

Their solution was the  pavillion - which creates the impression of Public Square extending to their tower with its transparent, landscaped, low-to-the-ground profile.  That choice may  create a feeling of a bigger public square.  It may have also evened out the spacing of the four guardian towers around the square. 
 

How effectively they implement the landscaping in front of the pavillion and along the perimeter of their campus will be important - if done well, it should soften and further beautify the Streetscapes around the campus. 
 

The SW complete PDF suggests significant lighting atop the tower - it will be interesting to see how that and or any signage adds to the building’s distinctiveness. 
 

At the end of the day, love it or not particularly love it, this project will be extremely impactful in upgrading the look of downtown Cleveland and particular, completing a very attractive public square. 
 

Can’t wait to watch  it rise. 

Edited August 31, 20213 yr by CleveFan

Now lets see some renderings of their plans to illuminate this baby at night!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Knee jerk reactionary stuff:

 

1. The ground floors do look much more inviting than I imagined, thank goodness. 

2. The gap between 55 and SW and overall view from PS looks like Bismark ND or some much smaller city. 

3. Lack of activity along vacated Frankfurt is a loss. Interesting cities have great side streets not superblocks. 

4. The gerbil tubes don't look terrible. 

5. The blank wall behind Rockefeller does look terrible...here's hoping SW can paint some windows on there. 

 

Okay let's get this thing going asap. 

Overall about what I expected. The pavilion is actually looking better than I initially expected, though far from thrilling. The multi-level terrace overlooking Superior is a nice addition too. Definitely looking forward to seeing what the lighting will be.

11 minutes ago, surfohio said:

Knee jerk reactionary stuff:

 

1. The ground floors do look much more inviting than I imagined, thank goodness. 

2. The gap between 55 and SW and overall view from PS looks like Bismark ND or some much smaller city. 

3. Lack of activity along vacated Frankfurt is a loss. Interesting cities have great side streets not superblocks. 

4. The gerbil tubes don't look terrible. 

5. The blank wall behind Rockefeller does look terrible...here's hoping SW can paint some windows on there. 

 

Okay let's get this thing going asap. 

Agree with all of this. That big sky between the tower and 55 really is jarring. Hopefully something closes it up a bit in the coming years, although these renderings don’t seem to include the parking garage?

5 minutes ago, roman totale XVII said:

Agree with all of this. That big sky between the tower and 55 really is jarring. Hopefully something closes it up a bit in the coming years, although these renderings don’t seem to include the parking garage?

Unfortunately, I don't think that gap will be filled. You have the garage talking up most of the northern Weston lot (I think its there in the render, just too short to see) and beyond that will be warehouse district scaled height.

Edited September 1, 20213 yr by viscomi

I believe this will be the most impactful downtown project since the Terminal complex. With its clean design, much needed splash of glass (and hopefully some great lighting) it should be a real stunner. And what it lacks in height vs Key it more than makes up for in every shear volume of surface lots it will gobble up. Spin off developments will be a bonus. 

the pavilion is so short you won't even be able to see it from the roadway until you are west of Ontario. it has a lower profile than the second floor awnings on the hotel. so stupid. 

 

it's obviously their right to build the tower on west 3rd, but dont buy into their line that they did it out of respect for TT 

18 minutes ago, viscomi said:

22 minutes ago, roman totale XVII said:

Agree with all of this. That big sky between the tower and 55 really is jarring. Hopefully something closes it up a bit in the coming years, although these renderings don’t seem to include the parking garage?

Unfortunately, I don't think that gap will be filled. You have the garage talking up most of the northern Weston lot (I think its there in the render, just too short to see) and beyond that will be warehouse district scaled height.

 

Yes the gap formed by the 4 story tall parking garage seems likely to stay. Here are some renderings of the 4 story garage:

 

 

 

 

If the remainder of the Weston North Block around the parking garage gets developed, it seems likely that it would be something similar in scale to the existing buildings in the Warehouse District along St. Clair and West 6th (~5 stories). Aside from these lots, there isn't much room behind the garage/to its north west to fill in the "gap." Potential future projects like the Magellan-Weston project, a new Courthouse tower at Fort Huntington Park, or some new development on the Justice Center block may be too far north to fill in the "gap" from Public Square. 

 

4 minutes ago, OldEnough said:

I believe this will be the most impactful downtown project since the Terminal complex. With its clean design, much needed splash of glass (and hopefully some great lighting) it should be a real stunner. And what it lacks in height vs Key it more than makes up for in every shear volume of surface lots it will gobble up. Spin off developments will be a bonus. 

 

I hope all the stuff gets built out, but until it does, they are only removing 2/5 of the parking lots

I feel like the gap between the tower and 55 Public Square looks much more pronounced from that angle in the rendering than in reality from the pedestrian level. Walking around that area and picturing how everything will appear you get the sense that it will seem much more dense and compact, especially given the vast emptiness that is there now. Is this perfect from our UO sensibilities? No. But wow is this going to completely transform downtown in a way we’ve not seen in a long time. I’m hopeful this will spark ongoing development and that this ugly blemish will finally be plugged once and for all. 

This top is a mess. Instead of being bold, clean  and confident, it is a mishmash. 

This may why we are not seeing any detailed artist's renders of how the finished product will look from these angles.

 

For now it appears as a hodgepodge of afterthouts on how to bring the ultimate upper reaches of the tower to a purposeful look.

 

I continue to push my argument that the drawings must show a more finished look in the final design to be approved, and not these hollow open parapets. The City's design review teams should examine this aspect and request that it be addressed by SW.

Edited September 2, 20213 yr by ExPatClevGuy

Initial thoughts—

1. The tower is very nice and about what I expected. It does seem like the two peaks on top aren’t symmetrical. I.e. the west one looks shorter. That annoys me although there’s no real reason it should.

2. The w. 3 garage facade is really nice. I think that’s a huge win and I like the glass so much more than a lot of the other facades you see which look like artsy bullet riddled metal.

3. The pavilion looks like an extension of the tower which makes it stand out a lot less. I guess that’s a good thing?

4. The landscaping looks like an extension of public square in a very welcoming sort of way. I worry how much it will actually feel that way though given there is a fairly active street dividing it. 

 Sherwin Williams is effectively creating a quasi-public mini park as a welcome mat for all of us who are actually not welcome to come inside.

 

There is no known active public use for this space like a restaurant or cafe, so I wonder what the actual feel of this landscaped area will be.  I'm curious whether or not it will feel like a pretty-but-overtly-policed fortress where lingering in the garden or near the glass walled perimiter is oviously forbidden.  

Edited September 1, 20213 yr by ExPatClevGuy

1 hour ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

 Sherwin Williams is effectively creating a quasi-public mini-park as a welcome mat for all of us who are actually not welcome to come inside.

 

There is no known active public use for this space like a restaurant or cafe, so I wonder what the actual feel of this landscaped area will be.  I'm curious whether or not it will feel like a pretty-but-overtly-policed fortress where lingering in the garden or near the glass walled perimiter is oviously forbidden.  

Didn't it say there was a first floor cafe in the renderings? 

Not surprised about anything here. The parking garage, skywalks and pavilion are big disappointments. Would have enjoyed a more dense feeling with the tower on PS, but that’s me. Also, the exposed columns along the East and south facades are very weak design elements. Feels like a reaction to bad design review comments, I suspect Landmarks to be the culprit based on past commentary. This effect exists on the EY Tower to poor results. Overall a big yawn from a strictly design perspective, but looking forward to a 600’ tall building going up downtown.

@KFM44107 A cafe perhaps, but this does not necessarily mean a cafe that is open to the sidewalk and accessible by the public. 

This is a sneaky trick used to get approvals of designs for a few downtown DC office buildings over the years before City Hall got wise to this practice.  Originally the cafes went in, but were only accessible by employees from inside the building. In one case known to me there is a double door entrance to a cafe at 9th & H Streets, NW - but it is locked from the outside and used only as an emergency exit. It's a shell game sometimes so planners & approvers have to have good eyes, then ask the correct questions.

Edited September 1, 20213 yr by ExPatClevGuy

2 hours ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

 Sherwin Williams is effectively creating a quasi-public mini park as a welcome mat for all of us who are actually not welcome to come inside.

 

There is no known active public use for this space like a restaurant or cafe, so I wonder what the actual feel of this landscaped area will be.  I'm curious whether or not it will feel like a pretty-but-overtly-policed fortress where lingering in the garden or near the glass walled perimiter is oviously forbidden.   this building will be forever cemented as a ‘Cleveland landmark’. 

The whole public access aspect needs to be tempered just a bit. This will definitely be a Cleveland landmark and transformational project for the city. But we also need to recognize this is a (very) private company and it chose to remain here & build it’s WORLD headquarters. They’re doing this with their own money, (yes, with some government subsidies), but the majority of the money is being provided  by themselves. Does that mean they can do whatever? Absolutely not. But this argument of ‘public space’ seems a bit confusing. I mean, what do you want to do in this building besides stand on the pavilion and look at buildings. 

There is a cafe, but no sign of even an emergency exit one can sneak into the cafe from. Would have to sneak past security just to get a cup of coffee.

 

 

I'm hoping the "paint museum" sticks as a forever moniker that SW has to keep batting down, so they can eventually see how arrogant of choice it was to put a building of this design and function on public square. Form follows function applies to both interior and exterior spaces, including within public design and interaction.

 

I also find it interesting that SW didn't like Eaton's headquarters, but overall this design has a very similar feel to that suburban building.

https://www.crainscleveland.com/manufacturing/sherwin-williams-readies-next-cleveland-city-review

 

According to Stan Bullard's new article linked above in today's Crain's online - "About one-third of the parcel facing Public Square will be devoted to heavily landscaped green space on the pavilion's east side, virtually making it seem like an extension of the rejuvenated square."

 

What I want to know now is whether Sherwin Williams will add any complimentary "Jersey barricade elements" to these gardens; for enhanced harmony with America's most expensive & decorative Jersey placement.

(Thank you RTA & City 'o Cleveland for bringing us this thoughtful & artitstic solution to the center of Cleveland's preeminent public park.)

 

SW, don't let us down!

@ExPatClevGuyRTA had nothing to do with the jersey barriers. They didn't want them. That was all City of Cleveland.

I still cannot get over the small size of the pavilion on the Jacobs lot (and I am not even one of those people who oppose the concept in general or even then fact that there is no real public access or use inside).  If somebody from out of town viewed it from across the square they might think it was simply a concession stand for the square and try to hunt down an ice cream cone.  It does nothing to close up or define the square which I would like to see.  I will be interested to hear the comments of the architects on design review or the planning commission.  Not that I believe their opinions will change anything.  Let's face it.

Edited September 1, 20213 yr by Htsguy

@Htsguy You nailed it with the concession stand reference. Anyone who is familiar with Love Square in Philadelphia will likely approach this new off-limits Paint Museum seeking to purchase a Cleveland Rocks tee-shirt. 

They've got one of these two story jobs on their square in Philly too. Yes it's similarly weird & out of scale for its surroundings, but at least it looks like what it actually is a gift and snack shop with windows at the treeline.

8 minutes ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

@Htsguy You nailed it with the concession stand reference. Anyone who is familiar with Love Square in Philadelphia will likely approach this new off-limits Paint Museum seeking to purchase a Cleveland Rocks tee-shirt. 

They've got one of these two story jobs on their square in Philly too. Yes it's similarly weird & out of scale for its surroundings, but at least it looks like what it actually is a gift and snack shop with windows at the treeline.

 

I miss the old Love Park.  The redesign is too cold and sterile.

 

The difference between the Love Park example and Sherwin-Williams is this SHW pavilion is actually going to be attached to a world headquarters across a street via a pedestrian bridge.  It will most likely be off limits to the public and have very little interaction with the surrounding area.  Let's hope they have a really good landscape architect help flow their design into Public Square's.

"The pavilion will have a monumental entrance and serve as the main entrance to the complex ..."  I could imagine a bigger monument; but it will definitely add foot traffic to the Square and will perhaps look more impressive from the pedestrian's point of view.

43 minutes ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

https://www.crainscleveland.com/manufacturing/sherwin-williams-readies-next-cleveland-city-review

 

According to Stan Bullard's new article linked above in today's Crain's online - "About one-third of the parcel facing Public Square will be devoted to heavily landscaped green space on the pavilion's east side, virtually making it seem like an extension of the rejuvenated square."

 

What I want to know now is whether Sherwin Williams will add any complimentary "Jersey barricade elements" to these gardens; for enhanced harmony with America's most expensive & decorative Jersey placement.

(Thank you RTA & City 'o Cleveland for bringing us this thoughtful & artitstic solution to the center of Cleveland's preeminent public park.)

 

SW, don't let us down!

How did RTA get blamed for that? 

Several months ago, I recall reading that the West 3rd Street parking garage will be designed so as to accommodate future development on top of the existing four stories (a la the Beacon).  Now, I know S-W is also reserving the NE corner of West 6th and Superior for a future 20-story or so office tower (across the street from the existing Rockefeller building).  That's a lot of space, so I'm guessing the parking garage won't be developed anytime soon.  But it would be nice to learn that the option for extended height on that big a base so close to Public Square is out there.

10 hours ago, OHinMD said:

The whole public access aspect needs to be tempered just a bit. This will definitely be a Cleveland landmark and transformational project for the city. But we also need to recognize this is a (very) private company and it chose to remain here & build it’s WORLD headquarters. They’re doing this with their own money, (yes, with some government subsidies), but the majority of the money is being provided  by themselves. Does that mean they can do whatever? Absolutely not. But this argument of ‘public space’ seems a bit confusing. I mean, what do you want to do in this building besides stand on the pavilion and look at buildings. 

 

SW is missing out on a very unique opportunity by not making their Public Square frontage accessible.

 

For instance it would be so cool if they sponsored local and nationally renowned artists to display their work in their Pavilion - an art gallery filled with works made with SW paint of course. 

 

14 minutes ago, surfohio said:

 

SW is missing out on a very unique opportunity by not making their Public Square frontage accessible.

 

For instance it would be so cool if they sponsored local and nationally renowned artists to display their work in their Pavilion - an art gallery filled with works made with SW paint of course. 

 

Agreed.  I realize they are obsessed with security, but  they could certainly allow public access to the ground floor of the pavilion without allowing public access to the upper floors.

 

Edited September 1, 20213 yr by LibertyBlvd

Regarding the lighting, Sherwin has a unique opportunity with the slope roofline and middle cutout that I hope they don’t miss. Sherwin neon paint can logo at top elevation that “tips” over with light change and when it does so, LED “paint” runs down the slope to the middle cutout and down to ground level. Rough illustration attached. Doesn’t need to be continuous, maybe a show it does every so often and can obviously change to whatever their feature seasonal color is. 

Yes, absolutely obsessed with security. Paranoid is more like it.

1 hour ago, KJP said:

Yes, absolutely obsessed with security. Paranoid is more like it.

But isn’t it purely speculation and supposition at this point that the cafe/“paint museum”/company store/whatever else ends up on the ground floor of the pavilion will be completely off limits to the public? Has SW explicitly stated this yet?

 

I understand the skepticism based on the culture of the company, but maybe we should pump the brakes on assuming that there will be no public elements to the pavilion at all until that much is confirmed.  

I have to assume that Sohio/BP America were similarly security conscious given their industry, but they integrated the huge atrium/shopping arcade facing Public Square. Or for a more contemporary example, look at the Salesforce Tower in SF, another industry in which the threats of industrial espionage are significant, let alone the more benign nuisance concerns of present day downtown San Francisco.  
 

If SW does end up confirming the worst fears of a completely locked down campus, then I hope the powers at be will use these and other examples in their pushback. Until then, I’ll remain optimistic. 
 

Edited September 1, 20213 yr by brtshrcegr

20 minutes ago, brtshrcegr said:

But isn’t it purely speculation and supposition at this point that the cafe/“paint museum”/company store/whatever else ends up on the ground floor of the pavilion will be completely off limits to the public? Has SW explicitly stated this yet?

 

I understand the skepticism based on the culture of the company, but maybe we should pump the brakes on assuming that there will be no public elements to the pavilion at all until that much is confirmed.  Until then I’ll remain optimistic. 
 

 

True. SHW design team reps say it is "likely but not finalized" that the pavilion will be open to the public. Starting at this time of the meeting and for the next minute or so, public access to the pavilion is discussed:

 

 

Great, now they only need to double the square footage (Mr. Dead Horse Beater here).

And, yes, I was overly dramatic in my post last weekend in which I said if SHW doesn't want to impress you, you're not going to be allowed in. I'm glad that this company/brand store and barista are "likely" to be open to the public.

4 hours ago, Down_with_Ctown said:

Several months ago, I recall reading that the West 3rd Street parking garage will be designed so as to accommodate future development on top of the existing four stories (a la the Beacon).  Now, I know S-W is also reserving the NE corner of West 6th and Superior for a future 20-story or so office tower (across the street from the existing Rockefeller building).  That's a lot of space, so I'm guessing the parking garage won't be developed anytime soon.  But it would be nice to learn that the option for extended height on that big a base so close to Public Square is out there.

 

 

thanks for reminding us of this as if true it really keeps the enthusiasm going as long as they dont wait too long to develop it all. i hope they do keep growing and need another office tower, or sell the lot to someone who does.

 

also, arent we still pretty sure a top shelf hotel is desired? maybe that can go up over the garage.

I don't remember them saying that. it should have been a major point when trying to get the garage approved

6 hours ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

@Htsguy You nailed it with the concession stand reference. Anyone who is familiar with Love Square in Philadelphia will likely approach this new off-limits Paint Museum seeking to purchase a Cleveland Rocks tee-shirt. 

They've got one of these two story jobs on their square in Philly too. Yes it's similarly weird & out of scale for its surroundings, but at least it looks like what it actually is a gift and snack shop with windows at the treeline.

 

 

 

You don't have to look to Philly. Just look at the southern quadrant.

 

 

LoL, REBOL is only one story tall. 😆

51 minutes ago, mrnyc said:

thanks for reminding us of this as if true it really keeps the enthusiasm going as long as they dont wait too long to develop it all. i hope they do keep growing and need another office tower, or sell the lot to someone who does.

 

also, arent we still pretty sure a top shelf hotel is desired? maybe that can go up over the garage.

It will likely be a long time until a future tower is needed.   

 

I thought they wanted a top shelf hotel nearby, but that hasn't been mentioned lately. 

 

I don't think the garage will be designed to accommodate future development.   I believe that was just an idea by a forum member.

 

9 minutes ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

LoL, REBOL is only one story tall. 😆

 

When we start building more skyscrapers in Cleveland than just the five we've built in the last 30 years, perhaps we can be more picky about our built environment and be taken seriously.

By the way, one thing I’ve never felt clear on— Is the “barista” actually a Barista brand store or is it just a generic term for coffee shop?

2 minutes ago, LlamaLawyer said:

By the way, one thing I’ve never felt clear on— Is the “barista” actually a Barista brand store or is it just a generic term for coffee shop?

 

I originally thought it was a Barista brand store. But the way its being presented in these documents, such as separate from the "brand store" and using a lower-case "b" in barista, it appears to be a coffee shop. I guess we'll find out for sure someday!

It seems a lot of you complaining about SW building. Except complaining, we should be thankful they are staying in c

Cleveland and building their headquarters here except some other place.

From the renderings, I view this new building as potentially being the most attractive tower in downtown.  It will dramatically freshen up the skyline which is sorely needed.  

14 minutes ago, newyorker said:

From the renderings, I view this new building as potentially being the most attractive tower in downtown.  It will dramatically freshen up the skyline which is sorely needed.  

 

 

i wish i could say that, but i can't stand it. its all so generic and lazy. that said, i am not mad at all about a glass building, i agree it will be fresh and nice and is a great changeup for around public square. also, of course most of all i am happy to see the parking lots finally go away.

 

unfortunately, it feels like everyone is just settling here, sw, pickard, the city and all of us. so this is what we get, something shiny and new for now and seemingly ok enough, but mediocre and seemingly fortress-like.

 

i really hope that park corner is nice and the cafe is open to the public -- and are there shops below the parking deck? i hope those are nice and prove useful. and of course that the insides are liked by the employees. those kinds of things are a save.

1 hour ago, mrnyc said:

 

 

i wish i could say that, but i can't stand it. its all so generic and lazy. that said, i am not mad at all about a glass building, i agree it will be fresh and nice and is a great changeup for around public square. also, of course most of all i am happy to see the parking lots finally go away.

 

unfortunately, it feels like everyone is just settling here, sw, pickard, the city and all of us. so this is what we get, something shiny and new for now and seemingly ok enough, but mediocre and seemingly fortress-like.

 

i really hope that park corner is nice and the cafe is open to the public -- and are there shops below the parking deck? i hope those are nice and prove useful. and of course that the insides are liked by the employees. those kinds of things are a save.

Correct.  This design looks like something that Picard pulled from its generic portfolio.  

It's definitely a nice tower design, but it isn't anything spectacular. Right now it's shaping up to be my fourth favorite of the four tallest buildings in the city.

I’m not entirely sure where I would rank it among the big four until I see the final design. IMHO, the conceptual rendering shows a clean, contemporary tower that should be a strong addition to the skyline. I also believe the final design of the crown and subsequent architectural lighting could dramatically enhance the finished appearance. I think it’s shaping up to be quite handsome. The reflective glass will offer a set of fresh, dramatic views of the other neighbors around PublicSquare. I’m looking forward to the final submission in November.