11 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

This "skateboarding" and "homeless" chatter is just mindless at it relates to better design principals and a more inviting urban environment for employees, clients and the general population that troll the streets of Cleveland.  The current offerings are just pedestrian (and not in a good way) and I was hoping this project was going to be more of show piece for the city.  I absolutely hate what they are doing on the Jacobs lot but I have gotten over it.  Still, I was hoping that the landscape plan in front of "the shack" would be a show stopper, especially given its proximity to Public Square.  It is not much better than what you would see at  a bland suburban office park.  It might be marginally better than say Landerhaven, but that is not saying much.

 

Exactly...cities and companies alllll over the country have figured a way to coexist in downtown settings. When you're in Boston, NYC, Chicago, Pittsburgh, etc., they still manage to integrate pedestrians into building design. Also with Key and most of our large office buildings downtown, members of the public are able to go inside (not to elevators), but can at least take in the space. SHW on the flipside is doing the bare minimum and the city/county/state has been a-ok with it, despite dolling out millions in subsidies.

Edited October 3, 20222 yr by GISguy

28 minutes ago, TBideon said:

Good grief, you guys are arguing about benches.

 

I get it, but at the same time why do we always need to settle? It's dramatic, sure, but when every other city does it right why can't Cleveland? 

 

We literally have a member of landmarks complaining about height and density of a project across the river and got them to revise designs. Over here it's benches/public features and we're afraid that SHW is going to leave over them, come-on.

 

Edit: and we (the taxpayers) gave them over $100M in subsidies. I think it's fair to demand better of SHW.

Edited October 3, 20222 yr by GISguy

I agree that arguing about benches in this context is a reasonable thing. The removal of benches to prevent unhoused people from potentially using them just makes everything less comfortable and less usable for everyone. It basically just ensures that people will now sit on the ground or something - they don't go away. I feel a good equivalent is that new planter situation with the plastic shrubs in front of the casino's "outdoor gaming area". They create a dead zone and so people just sit in between on the ground. They also seem to act as new receptacles for garbage/litter. The best thing that SHW could do is to have a lot of benches and also have a lot of trash cans with an accompanying plan to maintain the trash cans. If there was a lively space with lots of seating it would look better and feel safer than an activity-less no-man's land.

2 hours ago, GISguy said:

 

I get it, but at the same time why do we always need to settle? It's dramatic, sure, but when every other city does it right why can't Cleveland? 

 

We literally have a member of landmarks complaining about height and density of a project across the river and got them to revise designs. Over here it's benches/public features and we're afraid that SHW is going to leave over them, come-on.

 

Edit: and we (the taxpayers) gave them over $100M in subsidies. I think it's fair to demand better of SHW.

 

 

I don't know how I feel. I may 100% agree with you if Public Square, which is full of benches, tables, grass, and other seating surfaces wasn't right there.

 

On top of that no other building around public square has public benches, so why should SW be forced to, again with a public park chock full of them, right across the street?

In all the great cites of the world, there are literally hundreds of thousands of buildings without public interaction.   I don't see what the outrage is here.   I would prefer that SW had ground floor retail etc but in the end, it's still great to see them investing in downtown Cleveland.   Hopefully this will spur more developement with street level presence. 

1 hour ago, Mov2Ohio said:

 

 

I don't know how I feel. I may 100% agree with you if Public Square, which is full of benches, tables, grass, and other seating surfaces wasn't right there.

 

On top of that no other building around public square has public benches, so why should SW be forced to, again with a public park chock full of them, right across the street?

the scope of this project is not just the frontage on public square. w6 and St Clair is not on public Square and is a part of the development.

 

the planning commission was pretty much just asking them to put some seats along St Clair or w6. there ia going to be like 1500 feet of continuous space on superior/w6/st Clair that are just iron fence in front of a parking lot.

1 hour ago, Whipjacka said:

the scope of this project is not just the frontage on public square. w6 and St Clair is not on public Square and is a part of the development.

 

the planning commission was pretty much just asking them to put some seats along St Clair or w6. there ia going to be like 1500 feet of continuous space on superior/w6/st Clair that are just iron fence in front of a parking lot.

The property fronts those streets, but the actual first phase of this project only fronts Superior and West 3rd with Frankfort soon to be vacated.

 

There aren't any existing privately sponsored benches on either of those streets right now either. It's not like they're getting rid of benches that exist now.

When this building is complete there will be less than 1500' of continuous frontage that is fence.

Edited October 4, 20222 yr by Mov2Ohio

Hi folks, the forum’s private messaging is still fully functioning, as are the Admin tools for deleting off topic posts and suspending repeat offenders.

Picture from Sat, Oct 1st

 

I count seven stories already?

😁

This is going to be the most well documented construction project in Cleveland history 🤣

Going to be?  We're on page 146 and it's still basically a Crane N' Friends.  When the first floor is built, we'll be on page 166, guaranteed.

^ sooo you are saying ... a lot of talk ... and glacial progress?

 

welcome to cleveland new friend lol. 😂

21 hours ago, ColDayMan said:

Going to be?  We're on page 146 and it's still basically a Crane N' Friends.  When the first floor is built, we'll be on page 166, guaranteed.

Pfft, I’ll be happy to do my part to get us to 170 before then 😆

The more pages, the higher the tower goes ..right?

Funny story - I took my bike to work this morning and rode past the site, where I'm 95% sure I witnessed what is likely the first bowel movement at the new Sherwin Williams HQ. Guy literally had his pants down with his cheeks up against a gap in the fence. 

 

Some people have hidden talents, mine seems to be witnessing bodily reactions at inopportune times. 

19 minutes ago, YABO713 said:

mine seems to be witnessing bodily reactions at inopportune times

LOL. What is the opportune time to witness that?

13 minutes ago, Ineffable_Matt said:

LOL. What is the opportune time to witness that?

St Patrick’s Day or the Browns Super Bowl Parade. That’s pretty much it

On 10/4/2022 at 7:46 PM, dwolfi01 said:

This is going to be the most well documented construction project in Cleveland history 🤣

 

I'd say the Global Health Center, Convention Center, Hilton Hotel complex might rival this.

New World Class Signage ™️ 

View of the crane(s) from Edgewater (10-5-22)

 

 

View from The Clinic ~4 miles east (9-30-22 / 10-4-22)

 

 

 

 

 

Great shots @NorthShore647

@NorthShore647is photog of the year on the Northeast Ohio developments page! 
 

I’m licking my chops thinking how great of an addition SW will be to that skyline! 

 

Will Sherwin-Williams HQ be a pretty bunker?

By Ken Prendergast / October 6, 2022

 

To sit or not to sit, that was the question that caused the biggest debate today among members of a design-review panel of Cleveland’s City Planning Commission prior to supporting landscaping and site amenity plans for Sherwin-Williams’ (SHW) new global headquarters. The question became a point of debate over concerns of whether adding benches to the outdoor areas of the downtown HQ would attract homeless people to sleep there as is already the case at locations throughout the adjacent Public Square.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2022/10/06/will-sherwin-williams-be-hq-a-pretty-bunker/

 

Does this building have a name, or am I not picking up on it yet?

 

It keeps being referred to as the "New Global Headquarters" that is part of the "Headquarters Campus", but did they name the building? Like Key Bank tower, or the Sohio Building, or just use the address.

 

They can just go with the Sherwin Williams Tower (or building), but The Sherwin Williams Global Corporate Headquarters Tower is a lot to emboss above the front door, and there is nothing indicating a building name on their website? 

https://corporate.sherwin-williams.com/media-center/building-our-future.html 

 

This may not be the most popular opinion but I think any upset over SW not doing enough for the general public on its grounds is misplaced.
 

 There are multiple thousands of office buildings around the country that simply serve to advance their companies interest.  
In most cases, that process is, on its own, a great contributor to its city as it brings employees to its location, contributes to the tax base and benefits other businesses of all kinds  in the community.  The company’s business is its business and its not usually under the kind of scrutiny that this new SW HQ has been under.  
 

If there’s a well known and documented pattern of homeless people sleeping on park benches in the adjacent public square, then SW is wise to ensure that its own grounds are safe for its employees and not used  for that purpose.  
 

The company has given excellent consideration to the aesthetics of its front lawn and to other aspects of its ground floor aesthetic - and the grounds in front of the Welcome Pavillion will be, most likely, extremely attractive.  
 

We can argue about sky bridges and the lack of retail on THEIR property, how tall they could’ve built and whether the tower is that special - but they are no different from most major companies  in focusing on the design that they believe works for them.  
 

Cleveland will benefit immensely from the optics of their presence and the many direct and indirect benefits to other businesses  in the  city - for generations to come. I’m really good with that.  Really good. 

44 minutes ago, CleveFan said:

This may not be the most popular opinion but I think any upset over SW not doing enough for the general public on its grounds is misplaced.

 

I think this is where a lot of things get lost. Critiquing something does not mean you don't approve. We all here are ecstatic about this building but does that mean we have to agree 100% on every part of it? No way. So any argument against the design or use of spaces is already coming from a good place. 

 

You are absolutely right it is a great benefit to the city but that doesn't mean we can't geek out about the details and fantasize about how we'd make the property perfect in our eyes. Hell if that were the case Cleveland would be home to 90% of the tree biomass in all of America 🤣

12 hours ago, KJP said:

 

Will Sherwin-Williams HQ be a pretty bunker?

By Ken Prendergast / October 6, 2022

 

To sit or not to sit, that was the question that caused the biggest debate today among members of a design-review panel of Cleveland’s City Planning Commission prior to supporting landscaping and site amenity plans for Sherwin-Williams’ (SHW) new global headquarters. The question became a point of debate over concerns of whether adding benches to the outdoor areas of the downtown HQ would attract homeless people to sleep there as is already the case at locations throughout the adjacent Public Square.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2022/10/06/will-sherwin-williams-be-hq-a-pretty-bunker/

 

 

“We’ve been hearing a lot about Sherwin-Williams comfortability on certain things and that’s not really our concern. Our main focus should be the comfortability of the public and not the multi-billion-dollar company,"  said design review committee member Alan O’Connell, an urban designer and former president of the Downtown Cleveland Residents Association.

 

Wow.  Just wow.

 

Placing the whims of random passerby (at best) over the objectives and desires of an entity spending up to half a billion dollars developing  a key piece of land.

 

This guy is a modern equivalent of Norman Krumholz on the RTA board and should not serve on this board or in any position with even indirect authority.

WOW is right!  I never realized that "comfortability" was a word.  I would have written "comfort" or maybe "comfort level."  Never too old to learn!  LOL

Edited October 7, 20222 yr by urb-a-saurus

41 minutes ago, urb-a-saurus said:

WOW is right!  I never realized that "comfortability" was a word.  I would have written "comfort" or maybe "comfort level."  Never too old to learn!  LOL

 

Me too and I'm supposed to be a wordsmith! I googled it and double-checked it in the spell-checker to make sure it was a legit word. Sometimes I have to spend as much as much time on the technical constructions and formatting of an article as I do on the research for an article. Other times just I have to push it out the door before I pick up my son from school, take him to soccer practice, etc. or its publication will be delayed by hours.

Outstanding photos @NorthShore647!!!

Saw this on Facebook just now...

its good to rally and hold sw hq construction to its minority hiring commitments and push for more, but you gotta pay al to get him to show up anywhere, so i dk if his name recognition is worth his fees. apparantly it is.

 

funny but i have been on three plane flights with al i can recall. he must do these events constantly.

4 hours ago, E Rocc said:

 

“We’ve been hearing a lot about Sherwin-Williams comfortability on certain things and that’s not really our concern. Our main focus should be the comfortability of the public and not the multi-billion-dollar company,"  said design review committee member Alan O’Connell, an urban designer and former president of the Downtown Cleveland Residents Association.

 

Wow.  Just wow.

 

Placing the whims of random passerby (at best) over the objectives and desires of an entity spending up to half a billion dollars developing  a key piece of land.

 

This guy is a modern equivalent of Norman Krumholz on the RTA board and should not serve on this board or in any position with even indirect authority.

Asking a company (or other developer) to put seating in an outdoor space that absolutely should have seating is not remotely comparable to Krumholz advocating against good transit projects because they would benefit people who have money. 

The issue of just how open, how accommodating a large corporation should be to the public is a difficult one in the present climate. Should there be benches? A welcoming environment that says "We are part of the urban fabric of downtown and embrace the public." Of course. Should a conservative old-line company that could invest in a new corporate headquarters ANYWHERE be able to turn its back on the public because some of in that public are undesirable? Yep. Notwithstanding public funds that are being used to subsidize the new headquarters, the property is Sherwin William's and they have leverage here. Do they have a right to not want certain people to sully the sensibilities of some employees as they make their way into and out of the building? If it's their property, I'm afraid they do. 

 

 Both positions are correct. To me, the larger question is how did we get here? What has gone wrong in society where we even have to have this debate? Well...we know what has happened. In so many ways our society is broken. And that has created poverty, drug use, homelessness. A society that has coarsened. We've created problems that are so great it's easier to turn a blind eye because we just can't bear anymore. 

 

Those of us who love urban environments hate to see this of course. We long for the old days where everyone came downtown dressed up and ready to work, shop and play. Those downtowns still exist elsewhere in Europe and other places. But not in most American cities. I don't know...we can talk public interface, trees, streetcars, whatever, but not a lot of that matters until we figure out how to fix American society. 

 

Article updated with today's binding vote and Mr. Fluker's controversial quote.

 

19 hours ago, KJP said:

 

Will Sherwin-Williams HQ be a pretty bunker?

By Ken Prendergast / October 6, 2022

 

To sit or not to sit, that was the question that caused the biggest debate today among members of a design-review panel of Cleveland’s City Planning Commission prior to supporting landscaping and site amenity plans for Sherwin-Williams’ (SHW) new global headquarters. The question became a point of debate over concerns of whether adding benches to the outdoor areas of the downtown HQ would attract homeless people to sleep there as is already the case at locations throughout the adjacent Public Square.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2022/10/06/will-sherwin-williams-be-hq-a-pretty-bunker/

 

Never doubt the ingenuity of the homeless. They gonna find a way to sleep on a "sitting rail".

Edited October 7, 20222 yr by Silent Matt

Or just sleep on the ground. I hear that's pretty flat.

Friday update pic.  

4 hours ago, KJP said:

Article updated with today's binding vote and Mr. Fluker's controversial quote.

 

 

The Independence  and Brecksville Chambers of Commerce love that quote.   I was wondering how I missed it the first time.

Edited October 7, 20222 yr by E Rocc

All this BS officials at SHW keep blurting out about the "safety and security of its employees"  to justify, lets face it , an anti urban design in the actual heart of a city (since 1796) has me concerned about the development of the remaining parcels along St. Clair and  West 6th.  They basically surround the fortress SHW is developing.  What kind of restrictions are they going to demand of possible developers on the two sites that should be  pedestrian paradises given their proximity to the rest of the Warehouse District?

 

I know I gave August Flucker a lot of flake in connection with that University Circle development where the town homes had to be demolished, but today he is my hero with his comments.  And he was right to compare- and praise- the open and welcoming developments plans of the Cleveland Foundation in Midtown with the insular designs offered by SHW .

Edited October 7, 20222 yr by Htsguy

7 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

The Independence  and Brecksville Chambers of Commerce love that quote.   I was wondering how I missed it the first time.

I am sure many of my personal heros populate the Brecksville and Independence Chambers of Commerce.

4 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

All this BS officials at SHW keep blurting out about the "safety and security of its employees"  to justify, lets face it , an anti urban design in the actual heart of a city (since 1796) has me concerned about the development of the remaining parcels along St. Clair and  West 6th.  They basically surround the fortress SHW is developing.  What kind of restrictions are they going to demand of possible developers on the two sites that should be  pedestrian paradises given their proximity to the rest of the Warehouse District?

I assume they will not want any high-rise structures that might obstruct the views from their fortress.  But that's fine.  Buildings of comparable height to the existing Warehouse District buildings would be my preference.

8 minutes ago, LibertyBlvd said:

I assume they will not want any high-rise structures that might obstruct the views from their fortress.  But that's fine.  Buildings of comparable height to the existing Warehouse District buildings would be my preference.

I would not want particularly tall buildings on those parcels either.  I do hope, however, SHW lets them have windows and doors.😉

31 minutes ago, LibertyBlvd said:

I assume they will not want any high-rise structures that might obstruct the views from their fortress.  But that's fine.  Buildings of comparable height to the existing Warehouse District buildings would be my preference.

If I remember correctly from the peek they gave us of all phases the “future developments” around the garage were like 3 stories and the building next the main tower, I think we guessed was like 30 stories

Edited October 7, 20222 yr by BoomerangCleRes

benches, schmenches, they should have brought back up the anti-pedestrian horrorscape alley that will be frankfort and hectored them again to add some retail. i mean would a freakin coffee kiosk built into a corner be that bad? anyway, that’s the rub.

 

but is no one going to remark on the good news kjp alluded to up there about phase two? sounds like its as much of a lock to happen as anyone could guess or hope for at this point. and that maybe it starts soon, like when they are done or about done with hq? that would make for around a billion dollar sw investment.

25 minutes ago, mrnyc said:

benches, schmenches, they should have brought back up the anti-pedestrian horrorscape alley that will be frankfort and hectored them again to add some retail. i mean would a freakin coffee kiosk built into a corner be that bad? anyway, that’s the rub.

 

but is no one going to remark on the good news kjp alluded to up there about phase two? sounds like its as much of a lock to happen as anyone could guess or hope for at this point. and that maybe it starts soon, like when they are done or about done with hq? that would make for around a billion dollar sw investment.

 

Agreed.  I'm more interested in the phase two structure potentially bringing in positions from outside the region.  That would be a real sign of city growth. 

1 minute ago, superior said:

 

Agreed.  I'm more interested in the phase two structure potentially bringing in positions from outside the region.  That would be a real sign of city growth. 

 

 

that building is going to have to be more ‘open’ than the hq bunker if they are going to have space for visitors, contractors and the like coming and going inside. plus thats away from public square, so maybe they can put a little street facing cafe at the entrance there? you know, like a um, err, grown up city building. or i have to say like olde cleveland would have had? ha. anyway, i know thats down the line, but its worth a pitch by the city planning folks when they get there.

Many of our complaints lose their significance if they end up developing their surface lots.  The worry is if they have no intention on developing the lots and are just saying the things they think they need to say.