12 hours ago, KJP said:

 

Bingo. I've noted that the training activities that will be relocated downtown will require an average of more than 100 additional hotel rooms per weeknight.

 

There is increased interest in providing more hotel space as part of and/or next to the new SHW HQ. One of them is rumored to be a five-star brand.

 

 

Interesting coincidence that in the Rockefeller rehab story SHW was mentioned as a possible lessor of 100 of the proposed mini-apartments. Will the Rock become a SHW dormitory?

2 hours ago, Foraker said:

 

Do you have a link to those plans (even if redirecting to another thread)?  I'm curious to know what is missing, and I doubt that I'm alone in that.  ?

 

Here ya go @Foraker .....

 

 

 

I'm putting this out there because I know that I am not the only forum denizen to wonder if this pandemic may halt or greatly alter Sherwin-Williams plans on erecting a large corporate headquarters tower in Downtown Cleveland.

 

With no foreseeable ending of the pandemic right now, many large companies are looking long and hard at the usage of their respective offices.

 

???

 

Sherwin-Williams is mentioned in this article.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2020/08/some-northeast-ohio-corporations-on-the-fence-about-downsizing-office-footprints-for-a-post-covid-work-from-home-world.html

Edited August 19, 20204 yr by John D. Baumgardner

Sherwin Williams stock is up massively during the pandemic and is constantly still growing. There may be a delay, but it will not be halted.

33 minutes ago, John D. Baumgardner said:

 

I'm putting this out there because I know that I am not the only forum denizen to wonder if this pandemic may halt or greatly alter Sherwin-Williams plans on erecting a large corporate headquarters tower in Downtown Cleveland.

 

With no foreseeable ending of the pandemic right now, many large companies are looking long and hard at the usage of their respective offices.

 

???

 

Sherwin-Williams is mentioned in this article.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2020/08/some-northeast-ohio-corporations-on-the-fence-about-downsizing-office-footprints-for-a-post-covid-work-from-home-world.html

 

Noise.

38 minutes ago, WindyBuckeye said:

Sherwin Williams stock is up massively during the pandemic and is constantly still growing. There may be a delay, but it will not be halted.

This isn't a commentary on how successful Sherwin Williams is as a company.  It's a commentary on what their future office needs will be.  Those are different things.  They very well may continue to rapidly increase their workforce.  If much of that workforce is remote, however, it would affect office needs.  That being said, I want to point out that I am making no commentary on what I believe will actually be built, as I have no knowledge or opinion on that.

Edited August 19, 20204 yr by TH3BUDDHA

7 minutes ago, TH3BUDDHA said:

This isn't a commentary on how successful Sherwin Williams is as a company.  It's a commentary on what their future office needs will be.  Those are different things.  They very well may continue to rapidly increase their workforce.  If much of that workforce is remote, however, it would affect office needs.  That being said, I want to point out that I am making no commentary on what I believe will actually be built, as I have no knowledge or opinion on that.

Yes they're different things, but with constant growth throughout the pandemic and a need for an increased workforce, SW will need to build their HW in a similar timeframe. SW is not going full remote in the future and SW is building for the next 100 years of a growing company. This shouldn't alter their plans significantly, but I see your point with my initial post being a different thing in a way.

2 minutes ago, WindyBuckeye said:

Yes they're different things, but with constant growth throughout the pandemic and a need for an increased workforce, SW will need to build their HW in a similar timeframe. SW is not going full remote in the future and SW is building for the next 100 years of a growing company. This shouldn't alter their plans significantly, but I see your point with my initial post being a different thing in a way.

 

And as devil's advocate @TH3BUDDHA ... SHW is a wildly conservative company inasmuch as they expect productivity and accountability from employees. Unlike many other major corporations, from my understanding, they are dying to get the workforce back in the office. 

Sherwin-Williams has, and as far as I know continues to have the belief that this headquarters is a key part of their strategy of becoming more attractive to young, talented employees. They do not foresee that working remotely is a long-term sustainable approach for a productive, innovative and stable company.

9 minutes ago, KJP said:

Sherwin-Williams has, and as far as I know continues to have the belief that this headquarters is a key part of their strategy of becoming more attractive to young, talented employees. They do not foresee that working remotely is a long-term sustainable approach for a productive, innovative and stable company.

I will say this.  As a young worker in software development, my company has gone fully remote for good.  I'm not a huge fan and want to go back to an office setting at some point.  I just like the social aspect of being in an office.  There are people that I used to talk to daily that I meet with on zoom maybe twice a month now.  This may affect my job search down the line.  It will be very interesting to see how the "the pandemic will usher in an age of remote work" actually ends up playing out.

1 minute ago, TH3BUDDHA said:

I will say this.  As a young worker in software development, my company has gone fully remote for good.  I'm not a huge fan and want to go back to an office setting at some point.  I just like the social aspect of being in an office.  There are people that I used to talk to daily that I meet with on zoom maybe twice a month now.  This may affect my job search down the line.  It will be very interesting to see how the "the pandemic will usher in an age of remote work" actually ends up playing out.

 

I second your feelings. While I do enjoy the freedom of working at home, I also find value in being in the office. I'm not an overly social person, but I find it easier to be more productive through in person communication. I also feel Zoom/Teams meetings are very limiting, and become more limiting as you add more people. 

 

So, I don't blame SW for continuing to view WFH as a short-term setup. I'm sure many companies, including SW, will be more flexible with WFH setups in the future; however, I just don't see many positions transitioning to 100% WFH setups. 

4 minutes ago, TH3BUDDHA said:

I will say this.  As a young worker in software development, my company has gone fully remote for good.  I'm not a huge fan and want to go back to an office setting at some point.  I just like the social aspect of being in an office.  There are people that I used to talk to daily that I meet with on zoom maybe twice a month now.  This may affect my job search down the line.  It will be very interesting to see how the "the pandemic will usher in an age of remote work" actually ends up playing out.

 

I think we'll see some companies back track on this eventually. I personally feel a lot of places jumped the gun going permanent full remote with no eventual flex options when its safe again.  Agree with @YABO713 I don't see SW making this mistake.  

The most dramatic office space about-face has to be REI. They've decided to sell their new 380,000sq ft HQ in Bellevue Washington -- planning started in 2016, move-in was to begin last month. Some employees will work from home, some will work out of the the old offices scattered around Seattle. Capital from the sale will be redeployed.

 

I'm not suggesting Sherwin-Williams will follow suit... but it is an interesting move by REI - time will tell.

 

"REI Sells Its Headquarters. Others Should Take Notice." - Forbes 18 Aug 2020

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/retailwire/2020/08/18/rei-sells-its-headquarters-others-should-take-notice/#a71eca53166a

 

 

 

 

 

I don't know if permanent remote is a mistake - the lack of a commute is completely life-changing, and internal networking is what you make of it, whether by WebEx or near a water cooler - but I don't think there will be a true nationwide shift to remote if things normalize at the end of the year/early next year.

Edited August 19, 20204 yr by TBideon

The flip side to this is that the pandemic may actually drive companies, including SHW, to increase their office footprint.  Space and distancing guidelines may necessitate an increased amount of square footage per employee to keep them spaced further apart, recognizing the potential for future pandemics.  The in-between result may be some staff work from home, those who don't will need to be further apart, netting out to zero change in overall space needs.

This is the worst pandemic in 100 years. And there are many similarities between the 1918 pandemic and this one, in terms of the global scale and people's immediate overreactions to it that show they weren't warranted after only a year or two. After 1918 in the USA, things soon returned to the way they were before the pandemic (even with the postwar recession and high interest rates that followed WWI). Look at what happened to cities in the 1920s, right up until the Great Depression. They experienced a tremendous peak. Downtowns in America's largest cities saw their greatest explosion of office development, greatly increasing density. So when I hear these long-term predictions of what cities or work settings will look like 10 years from now because of COVID, I consider it to be unknowable hyperbole. After every big crisis, we hear outlandish predictions. We heard predictions that 9-11 would cause the death of the "supertall" skyscraper and a dispersal of office jobs to the suburbs. The exact opposite happened. After the Great Recession, we heard that the urban housing market was a fad and would not recover. Instead, it adapted with an explosion of multi-family rental construction.

 

So when I hear that the American office work setting will see permanent repercussions from COVID, I find that very hard to believe. Maybe those who make such hyperbolic predictions haven't been alive along enough to appreciate how durable a lifestyle is. People don't work together in a communal setting because of some ephemeral fad, but because of centuries of proven experience that people are more productive, innovative and best guided by that organization's culture when they all work together under the same roof or roofs. Things just don't change that fast. There may be some evolutions or transitions as a result of COVID, such as some jobs transitioning to four- to six-day workweeks in which people work at the office only two to three days a week and at home the rest of the time. But I am very skeptical as to how long these might last too.

 

And may I remind that Sherwin-Williams is a conservative company. They strongly believe that's why their company's stock price is so high. They don't jump on every fad but they do pay attention to multi-year trends. They behave as though a steady ship allows them to endure emergencies and downturns (e.g. their earnings remained strong during the Great Recession). And they behave in a manner that shows overreactions will cause investors and customers to walk away from them. This is a company that has grown steadily over 150 years and let others take the big risks and, if they succeed, then SHW will buy those companies.

 

There is a SHW story I will not publish until ground is broken which will underscore how much SHW believes this HQ project is about attracting talent to their company. They consider this project as essential to its future.

Edited August 19, 20204 yr by KJP

1 hour ago, KJP said:

This is the worst pandemic in 100 years. And there are many similarities between the 1918 pandemic and this one, in terms of the global scale and people's immediate overreactions to it that show they weren't warranted after only a year or two. After 1918 in the USA, things soon returned to the way they were before the pandemic (even with the postwar recession and high interest rates that followed WWI). Look at what happened to cities in the 1920s, right up until the Great Depression. They experienced a tremendous peak. Downtowns in America's largest cities saw their greatest explosion of office development, greatly increasing density. So when I hear these long-term predictions of what cities or work settings will look like 10 years from now because of COVID, I consider it to be unknowable hyperbole. After every big crisis, we hear outlandish predictions. We heard predictions that 9-11 would cause the death of the "supertall" skyscraper and a dispersal of office jobs to the suburbs. The exact opposite happened. After the Great Recession, we heard that the urban housing market was a fad and would not recover. Instead, it adapted with an explosion of multi-family rental construction.

 

So when I hear that the American office work setting will see permanent repercussions from COVID, I find that very hard to believe. Maybe those who make such hyperbolic predictions haven't been alive along enough to appreciate how durable a lifestyle is. People don't work together in a communal setting because of some ephemeral fad, but because of centuries of proven experience that people are more productive, innovative and best guided by that organization's culture when they all work together under the same roof or roofs. Things just don't change that fast. There may be some evolutions or transitions as a result of COVID, such as some jobs transitioning to four- to six-day workweeks in which people work at the office only two to three days a week and at home the rest of the time. But I am very skeptical as to how long these might last too.

 

And may I remind that Sherwin-Williams is a conservative company. They strongly believe that's why their company's stock price is so high. They don't jump on every fad but they do pay attention to multi-year trends. They behave as though a steady ship allows them to endure emergencies and downturns (e.g. their earnings remained strong during the Great Recession). And they behave in a manner that shows overreactions will cause investors and customers to walk away from them. This is a company that has grown steadily over 150 years and let others take the big risks and, if they succeed, then SHW will buy those companies.

 

There is a SHW story I will not publish until ground is broken which will underscore how much SHW believes this HQ project is about attracting talent to their company. They consider this project as essential to its future.

Not sure there's many parallels to be drawn between this eventual post-pandemic society and the country following the pandemic of 1918. I'd argue that people have worked communally not because it's been a proven winner over the course of history, but because up until recent advances in tech, it's been the only option.

I agree it's premature to think this is the end of the corporate office, but it's seems equally rash to think things will be business as usual.

 

It doesn't sound like the pandemic will impact SHW's plans, which is exciting. But it may affect others. Some companies will see the office as an unessary expense and view in-person attendance as a recruiting disadvantage. Some just the opposite. I think it's too early to make the call either way.

1 hour ago, KJP said:

There is a SHW story I will not publish until ground is broken which will underscore how much SHW believes this HQ project is about attracting talent to their company. They consider this project as essential to its future.

Sounds interesting, any clue when we may be able to read about it?

35 minutes ago, Sapper Daddy said:

Sounds interesting, any clue when we may be able to read about it?

 

See my comment you quoted.

 

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2020

Sherwin-William HQ+R&D project restarts; development team announced

 

Reports are coming out today that Sherwin-Williams (SHW) has restarted the development of its global headquarters plus research and development facilities (HQ+R&D). But the months-long pause has pushed back the project's completion from 2023 to 2024. The reason is the global pandemic and the economic disruption that it is causing.

 

The information came in an e-mail sent to company employees today, with a formal public announcement posted later at SHW's HQ+R&D website. Additional information is also being publicized, including the names of the HQ+R&D development team, some of whom NEOtrans reported nearly a year ago.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/09/sherwin-william-hqr-project-restarts.html

Edited September 15, 20204 yr by KJP

6 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2020

Sherwin-William HQ+R&D project restarts; development team announced

 

Reports are coming out today that Sherwin-Williams (SHW) has restarted the development of its global headquarters plus research and development facilities (HQ+R&D). But the months-long pause has pushed back the project's completion from 2023 to 2024. The reason is the global pandemic and the economic disruption that it is causing.

 

The information came in an e-mail sent to company employees today, with a formal public announcement later at SHW's HQ+R&D website. Additional information is also being publicized, including the names of the HQ+R&D development team, some of whom NEOtrans reported nearly a year ago.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/09/sherwin-william-hqr-project-restarts.html

THANKS KJP for another great article!

 

And here's a nice example of a 60 story building SHW lead architect designed in Chicago:

 

 

 

Great to get this confirmation in the form of @KJP’s article that yes, the HQ is going forward on the same scale as expected, pre- Covid. We have a signature skyscraper architecture firm and a 45-55 story tower - that’s sounding like potentially the 2nd tallest tower in the city.  The timetable is only one year later - can’t wait to watch  this rise. 

29 minutes ago, Larry1962 said:

THANKS KJP for another great article!

 

And here's a nice example of a 60 story building SHW lead architect designed in Chicago:

 

 

 

If this is what we get, awesome! It is modern without being gaudy or too trendy. And will play nice in the Public Square sandbox.

Yes, I would take that in a heartbeat. Even with the stripes lol.

Pickard Chilton (SHW's architect) has a nice portfolio, it makes a statement without being radical.  It's easy to see some of their designs on Public Square. Well, maybe not the Exxon "campus" or the dull-as-dirt "box" in Denver, but most of the 30-story and up towers would fit very well.

 

https://www.pickardchilton.com/

Woot! Pickard Chilton did the Devon Energy Center in OKC, which is, in my opinion, one of the most attractive high rise office buildings from the past ten years. 

 

I would also point out that the press release said the delay is from "late 2023" until 2024. So we could be (theoretically) looking at a delay of merely a couple months

1 minute ago, LlamaLawyer said:

Woot! Pickard Chilton did the Devon Energy Center in OKC, which is, in my opinion, one of the most attractive high rise office buildings from the past ten years. 

 

I would also point out that the press release said the delay is from "late 2023" until 2024. So we could be (theoretically) looking at a delay of merely a couple months

 

I'm thinking more like 5-6 months but, yes, it's not a full-year's delay. The HQ+R&D was paused from March until now. That's six months. And I really like Morikis' quote about remote working. He dismissed it as a workable solution long term. Don't expect this project to be scaled back because of COVID-19.

Any idea when we will see any plans/renderings?

Given this timetable and how they have gone about releasing information thus far, when would you guess we might see the first renderings?

Given SW's conservatism, I wouldn't be at all surprised by a design like this Pickard tower in Nashville. I'll take it!

 

If it's a 5-6 month delay, I would think by February or March. But Vocon has been working on the programming for this for a long time. They know how much space they need for the HQ and how to organize it spatially. Pickard Chilton will clothe it. So I'm hopeful that we might see the HQ renderings by Christmas.

This is Great news!!  I’m excited for Cleveland, this will so transformative for the city - in many ways!!!

 

Also, because I’m still holding on to hope... this could be a 1k ft tower.  
If it ends up being 55 floors with 17ft ceilings, plus rooftop architecture.

Or if there’s shorter ceilings, but some height add from a parking garage.  Maybe higher ceilings in the lobby and  penthouse, plus mechanical floors.
It’s possible if some combination of the above happens.

 

Just hoping that CLE can join the Thousand-Foot club with this tower!!

No (new) news is good news.  Great news, in fact, considering the mass uncertainty that's hit the commercial real estate market around the world in the last 6 months.  "2020, man..." has become such a tagline that it's hard to remember that SW's HQ announcement actually came in February of this year.  For the first time in half a century. Cleveland is well-positioned to come out of an economic (and in this case, social) crisis with its flag flying high.

 

1M s.f. HQ, and that number does NOT include parking.  Wonderful news.  No need to choose between height/density or skyline/street-level activity.  We're getting both.  Can't wait!

Edited September 15, 20204 yr by Down_with_Ctown

2 minutes ago, gruver said:

Given SW's conservatism, I wouldn't be at all surprised by a design like this Pickard tower in Nashville. I'll take it!

 

I like the skyscraper but not the pedestal, which I am assuming is a parking garage.  As much as I don't want the parking garage to dominant the Weston lot (which I think is probably going to happen), I will settle for that as long as there is no parking on the Jacobs lot unless it is underground.

Also worth pointing out the press release said they plan to spend a "minimum" of 600 mil (aka, it clearly WILL be more than that). That's good to hear for those of us interested in a well put together project since the $600 mil price tag always seemed worryingly lean to me for what they plan to do.

I doubt we'll join the 1,000 foot club here... and really no reason to other than pride lol. 

 

I think SW could do something outstanding, yet conservative in the 600 - 800 foot range. 

 

Finally, I'm sure this is an unpopular opinion, but I think our skyline would look better with a 600-800 footer - it would do wonders for the volume / density aesthetic

10 minutes ago, YABO713 said:

I doubt we'll join the 1,000 foot club here... and really no reason to other than pride lol. 

 

I think SW could do something outstanding, yet conservative in the 600 - 800 foot range. 

 

Finally, I'm sure this is an unpopular opinion, but I think our skyline would look better with a 600-800 footer - it would do wonders for the volume / density aesthetic

I agree with you 100% but did not have the balls to say such a wicked thing on the forum.  You're my hero.?

Edited September 15, 20204 yr by Htsguy

8 minutes ago, YABO713 said:

I doubt we'll join the 1,000 foot club here... and really no reason to other than pride lol. 

 

I think SW could do something outstanding, yet conservative in the 600 - 800 foot range. 

 

Finally, I'm sure this is an unpopular opinion, but I think our skyline would look better with a 600-800 footer - it would do wonders for the volume / density aesthetic

 

I couldn't agree more with your "unpopular opinion". I will add that anything less than 600 would be a disappointment and IMO 800 is the perfect height for that site.

22 minutes ago, YABO713 said:

I doubt we'll join the 1,000 foot club here... and really no reason to other than pride lol. 

 

I think SW could do something outstanding, yet conservative in the 600 - 800 foot range. 

 

Finally, I'm sure this is an unpopular opinion, but I think our skyline would look better with a 600-800 footer - it would do wonders for the volume / density aesthetic

The solution is simple: just build another 5-10 600-800' buildings, then the 1,000' SW building wont look out of place. ?

18 minutes ago, Ineffable_Matt said:

The solution is simple: just build another 5-10 600-800' buildings, then the 1,000' SW building wont look out of place. ?

I really like their River Point tower in Chicago... 52 stories 730 ft.

 

I'd like to see some curvature to this project to separate it from the very angular Key Tower and 200 Public Square.

 

7 hours ago, YABO713 said:

I doubt we'll join the 1,000 foot club here... and really no reason to other than pride lol. 

 

I think SW could do something outstanding, yet conservative in the 600 - 800 foot range. 

 

Finally, I'm sure this is an unpopular opinion, but I think our skyline would look better with a 600-800 footer - it would do wonders for the volume / density aesthetic

@YABO713I actually think that a lot of us hardcore tower-loving Forumers agree with you on that opinion.  A 600-800 footer would help bridge the Key Tower's nearly  1,000 feet high profile  to our group of 400-500 foot towers, improving the feeling of density and proportion in the skyline. 

 

Anyway, this project will be transformative for the CLE. 

Edited September 16, 20204 yr by CleveFan

I agree that good scale will  make a huge difference.  I also admire the mentioned architect's Devon Energy tower in Oklahoma City, the tallest building between Chicago and Dallas.  That building though is so incongruously out of scale with the rest of the city, that the rest of the town looks like baseboard woodwork below it. 

Somewhat taller, (or several somewhat shorter) than Key/BP will add grace and balance to the appearance of our entire downtown skyline.  SW is a class act, so I have high expectations that they will be sensitive to this aspect of the design, and also work sensitively with the Warehouse District and the rest at street level. 

Good Lord. I just took a Google driving tour of downtown Nashville, and Ugh!. 
That burgh did not seem to hold developers to anything but towers over garages, and more garages still.

Image: Oklahoma City, featuring Pickard Chilton's enormous Devon Tower

Edited September 15, 20204 yr by ExPatClevGuy

I really don't think a 1,100' tower would look bad on the square at all. It would look nice; it's not that much taller than Key honestly. Just doing the math though, you realize that the only realistic way this project would get over 1,000' is with a Burj-Al-Arab-esque architectural spire (i.e. a spire that is more than a third the height of the building as a whole). And a 600' tower would look nice too. Honestly anything over 400' will create a really cool ground level feel on Public Square. I could understand being disappointed with something under 300' tall given the high visibility of the location, but being disappointed with a 600' tower is (I think) lacking perspective.

 

To go on a brief rant: I have no issue with tall buildings. But I do suspect that a lot of people on this forum (including myself) are more concerned about Cleveland's 30% poverty rate or the seven straight decades of population loss than about a lack of tall buildings. If I could snap my fingers and put us at 10% poverty but it would mean the city never gets a 1000' tower, I wouldn't hesitate. If I could snap my fingers and bring 300,000 more people to the city but we'd never get a 1000' building, I wouldn't hesitate on that either.

A large, glassy building like that on public square will be an amazing addition to the skyline. And thanks for sharing the article,  KJP

I love the Pickard Chilton pick as the lead designer for the exterior. Although I was crossing my fingers for Lord Norman Foster or Skidmore-Owings & Merrill (Pipe dreams to the max), I'm a big fan of Devon Energy center & The Northwestern Mutual tower in Milwaukee. At least we can all rest assured we won't see an architectural dud on par with the Justice Center. 

Another reason I love the pick is because Pickard-Chilton seems to be very fond of height boosting architectural elements, which is something I think we've all been holding out hope for. I still dream of a 1000 footer on this site, ever since I saw renderings of the Ameritrust as a kid. I think a supertall, if possible, would actually look great from any angle on that site. No matter what viewpoint you choose, the building wouldn't tower over it's neighbors, with the exception of the west side view where I think it could actually work. Honestly, I'll be happy with anything over 500ft. 

For reference, here's their Denver project:

^ That's ONE of their Denver projects.  There are two others.  This is the one I called dull - nice on 25th Street, but not on Public Square or even W6th St..

 

Not sure if this means anything since Dodge Reports will often post price tags for projects that are way off (usually too low), but their listing for the HQ project is $1,400,000,000 and the R&D center is $25,000,000 - $49,999,999. FWIW....

19 minutes ago, KJP said:

Not sure if this means anything since Dodge Reports will often post price tags for projects that are way off (usually too low), but their listing for the HQ project is $1,400,000,000 and the R&D center is $25,000,000 - $49,999,999. FWIW....

$1.4 billion? I didn't know they were putting the Burj Khalifa up on Public Square.