Not at all. It kills 5th Street. That pretty park is located a few steps up and is roped off. It's not at all inviting in person and that's how they like it.

i like p&g twins, but i don't love them.

 

but i would like them a bit better in their stretched out tall version, the tokyo metropolitan building.

 

just because 797' and observation towers.

 

its way overkill though -- i dk if it would even fit taking up the whole west side of public square -- 2M+ sq ft lol.

 

 

 

I wouldn't be opposed to 2 shorter towers for the SHW Headquarters.  I remember how nice the scale of Public Square was when One Public Square and 33 Public Square still stood.   The attache link has some great photographs of surrounding buildings of Public Square that were lost with Cleveland's progress.  

 

https://de.phorio.com/file/512414398/

 

I also browsed Pickard Chiton Architects website and noticed their 2021 Norfolk Southern Corporation'd build was similar in size 1,000,000 sq feet with parking for 2000 parking spaces. I would be happy to see something similar merging into the historic Warehouse District's scale 

 

https://www.pickardchilton.com/work/norfolk-southern-headquarters

11 hours ago, dave2017 said:

I remember how nice the scale of Public Square was when One Public Square and 33 Public Square still stood.

Except this is the 2020s, not the 1920s. We now have 200 PS, Terminal Tower and Key Tower on the flanks. Norfolk Southern's campus is very nice in "midtown" ATL. If it were located downtown on Peachtree, that may require a re-evaluation of its appropriateness for that location.

Edited January 6, 20214 yr by Frmr CLEder

14 hours ago, Frmr CLEder said:

^ 530 ft is the height of Erieview Tower.

Completely acceptable! :) 

The issue with a shorter building to me is how out of place it would look on Public Square. You have 3 buildings surrounding it that would be double the SW building's size, it would look ugly. If the building was built on the parking lot by the greyhound station or the edge of downtown on Superior Avenue then fine those fit in with the surrounding buildings. With this location it doesn't. At all. 

1 hour ago, MyPhoneDead said:

The issue with a shorter building to me is how out of place it would look on Public Square. You have 3 buildings surrounding it that would be double the SW building's size, it would look ugly. If the building was built on the parking lot by the greyhound station or the edge of downtown on Superior Avenue then fine those fit in with the surrounding buildings. With this location it doesn't. At all. 

 

I don't know about that, I think just closing the open side of the square will make a dramatic difference in how the square feels.  On the ground it won't matter that much whether the tower is 27 stories or 40.

 

This is going to sound trite, but I think the city needs to concentrate more on how the city looks from the sidewalk, rather than a blimp.  I am just happy for the density, and will consider this a failure or success based on how well it interacts with the street.  

17 minutes ago, punch said:

This is going to sound trite, but I think the city needs to concentrate more on how the city looks from the sidewalk, rather than a blimp.  I am just happy for the density, and will consider this a failure or success based on how well it interacts with the street.  

Five ten story buildings would do far more for the urbanity of downtown opposed to one 50 story. No one goes to DC and says "Wow this isn't a real city, there are no high rises!" 

2 hours ago, MyPhoneDead said:

The issue with a shorter building to me is how out of place it would look on Public Square. You have 3 buildings surrounding it that would be double the SW building's size, it would look ugly. If the building was built on the parking lot by the greyhound station or the edge of downtown on Superior Avenue then fine those fit in with the surrounding buildings. With this location it doesn't. At all. 

 

75 public square, the renaissance, the casino, the park building, May Company Building, US courthouse, the old bank building and the old stone church are also on public square and the sherwin williams building will be taller than all of them. 

Two cents.  Don't have a problem with two shorter buildings although I would like to see the Jacobs building more in the 30-33 story range. Like many posters, my bigger concern is the street level of the buildings rather than the height.  I like the idea of something tallish on the Weston lot as my big fear was just a big old parking garage plopped in the center of the block connected to the Jacobs lot building with a bridge over West 3rd (you know, how things use to be built and unfortunately still are way too many times).  Of course along with the taller Weston building I would like to see some companion development to create a street wall around the entire block in the 6-10 story range either immediately or in a future Phase (although I am also not a fan of Phases since it seems like phase 2 always take forever to happen).

 

I would not object to a really tall building (750-900 feet) as long as a shorter building was still in the cards.  Also, if that was the scenario, I would actually like to see the much taller building on the Weston lot rather than Public Square.  Viewing some of the great massings of a really tall building for the project  posted last week, I was having a problem with the way the building was interacting with the Terminal Tower, especially when viewed from the lakefront.  I think my concern would be abated a bit if the taller building was more more to the west.

my real fear is something like this. with w3rd bisecting two identical office-park towers 

 

 

1 hour ago, punch said:

This is going to sound trite, but I think the city needs to concentrate more on how the city looks from the sidewalk, rather than a blimp.  I am just happy for the density, and will consider this a failure or success based on how well it interacts with the street.  

But...shorter buildings make me feel like less of a man! I need vigorous, turgid towers puncturing the atmosphere. 

Please correct me if I’m wrong, @KJPand knowledgeable forum folk -but the previous  reports of a potentially Key Tower- esque height assumed  the lion’s share of the HQ’s million square feet were contained in a main/base headquarters tower. The “second”  building would contain “other”  components and a significant parking base. (Do I have that right?) But when you “split” the 1,000,000 square  feet HQ  into two pretty similarly sized buildings - depending on floor plate size - it yields two 20-something story buildings.  As a reference, The E&Y tower is just short of 500,000 square feet.  Imagine two buildings in that general ballpark as your HQ. You’re still left with property for future expansion. You’re back to the “campus” approach which SW may have preferred all along  - I just don’t think it’s “fine” for a PS address.  As far as how it acts at street level - a taller base tower doesn’t automatically preclude better street interaction - it depends on the execution of the design. If the mid rise  campus HQ was the plan all along, I would’ve thought the Bedrock location was perfect. 

Edited January 6, 20214 yr by CleveFan

I'm content to wait and see. A really tall and massive building filling the Jacobs lot will take a lot of light out of Public Square. Not sure that's a good idea.

Ohio TestBor, the firm that is doing the drilling to bedrock, is now working north of Frankfort but away from West 3rd. I don't know if they've drilled near West 3rd (north of Frankfort) earlier today or yesterday.

Edit - posted this at the same time as KJP. Here’s proof.😉

 

Drilling continues - and expands its footprint! Today, crews were in the lots on the north side of Frankfort Ave (near the yellow circle).

 

Between the main Jacobs Lot tower & additional development across the Weston superblocks, this HQ will be a game changer for dtCLE!

Im still hoping for that “will rival Key Tower” skyscraper on the square...yet as long as these seas of parking lots finally disappear is all that matters.

A company as prominent as SHW should have a tower that proudly stands out in the Cleveland skyline rather than a 27 story building that will be lost amongst all the other buildings of similar height. 

 

9 minutes ago, skiwest said:

A company as prominent as SHW should have a tower that proudly stands out in the Cleveland skyline rather than a 27 story building that will be lost amongst all the other buildings of similar height. 

 

I agree...SW needs a trophy skyscraper on its hometown Public Square.  Taller the better and not a Cincy styled P&G campus.

 

one would never know SW is headquartered in CLE. A sleek modern 21st century skyscraper does that. 
 

let’s get the plans released.
 

We need some good news!

Edited January 6, 20214 yr by CLENYC

short tower fans -- be careful what you are ok with you may get it.

 

'member when richard jacobs was gonna get hines to build that $180M 21 story spec office building in 2008?

 

dodged that one!

 

 

 

edit: this happened when i wrote d*ck jacobs lol

Edited January 7, 20214 yr by mrnyc

 

While densifying downtown and developing the superblocks are most important and not the number of tall buildings the city has, man will it be disappointing if we don't get at least a 500 footer out of this. 

 

@KJP What are the chances that the massive amount of parking in the superblock will be underground? There is so much parking involved in this project, I'd hate to see 8-10 floors of visible, aboveground parking. Alternatively, is there any chance that aboveground parking could be wrapped by other uses, such as office space or hotel rooms? Lastly, do you know if there are plans to have groundfloor retail on both blocks?

14 minutes ago, mas1092 said:

While densifying downtown and developing the superblocks are most important and not the number of tall buildings the city has, man will it be disappointing if we don't get at least a 500 footer out of this. 

 

@KJP What are the chances that the massive amount of parking in the superblock will be underground? There is so much parking involved in this project, I'd hate to see 8-10 floors of visible, aboveground parking. Alternatively, is there any chance that aboveground parking could be wrapped by other uses, such as office space or hotel rooms? Lastly, do you know if there are plans to have groundfloor retail on both blocks?

 

I don't want to say there is zero chance that any parking will be below ground because I don't know. But I would be very surprised that it would, given the huge amount of parking involved (1,500-3,000 spaces). That would be horrendously expensive. However.... There might be some below-ground parking underneath the base HQ building on Public Square, primarily for executives. There will also probably be a loading dock down there too. I hope that the parking decks will be wrapped with other uses, such as a hotel, training center, etc. SHW will hopefully put the parking decks in the center of the Superblock, with one on either side of Frankfort, and leave some vacant spaces around their perimeters for buildings.

Did the city ever pass code to require parking structures be wrapped or otherwise not visible in that area? I know that was a goal when the prior vison for Weston lots was released.  

I have to believe that similar to high rises in Miami that are built on pedestals, the garages would be on the interior of the first 8-10 floors, with retail on 1 and offices wrapped around the exteriors of 2 - 10.

Edited January 7, 20214 yr by Frmr CLEder

If the base building was built above a substantial parking pedastel, for those disappointed at the thought of two shorter buildings for the HQ, it still might mean at least something akin to Erieview Tower, just based on a 27 story office with floors of about 16-17 feet each. I strongly wanted something vertically in league with the Big 3 (and still hope that might happen ) but a 530 footer wouldn’t be too bad, particularly if the design

was iconic.  And, a second building of 20 expansive office floors  above a parking pedastel could push towards the Courthouse height.  I’m just hoping the world HQ looks the part. 

On 1/6/2021 at 12:18 PM, westerninterloper said:

But...shorter buildings make me feel like less of a man! I need vigorous, turgid towers puncturing the atmosphere. 

This feels oddly fitting for that moment in history

Thanks as always to @Geowizical! 

 

 

FRIDAY, JANUARY 8, 2021

Sherwin-Williams HQ design concept comes into focus

 

Three sources have confirmed it -- the new Sherwin-Williams (SHW) base headquarters (HQ) tower on Public Square will reportedly top out at 27 stories -- or more than 400 feet high. Plus, there will be a second headquarters office building of about 20 stories tall exceeding 300 feet in height.

 

Turns out this basic concept -- two 20-something-story HQ buildings -- has been SHW's plan all along.

 

There are also likely to be other significant structures on SHW's 6.8-acre planned urban campus that is now a swath of lifeless parking lots in downtown Cleveland's Warehouse District, based on what sources have said this week.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2021/01/sherwin-williams-hq-design-concept.html

 

A couple more views.....

 

 

So...tiny! 🥴

Any word on if they plan on having ground level retail and not an isolated fortress?

22 minutes ago, cle_guy90 said:

Any word on if they plan on having ground level retail and not an isolated fortress?

 

From the article:

 

Limiting parking garage vehicular access to a secondary street like Frankfort would conform to the Superblock's Urban Overlay District zoning. So would hiding parking decks behind usable spaces like offices, hotel rooms, training facilities -- or at least having ground-floor commercial spaces like restaurants and retail.

 

"The Urban Overlay (UO) District is established to foster a high level of walkability and design quality for Cleveland's urban streets," according to the City Planning Commission Web site. "The UO will do this by requiring pedestrian-oriented building features, preserving and enhancing the architectural character of new and existing buildings and protecting public safety by minimizing conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians."

Thanks @Geowizicalfor the massing and @KJPfor your reporting work, as always.  I know it's just a massing, but that first pic looks like someone accidentally cut the main tower in half,  with the "piece" on the left looking like a mistake.   Look, I get it - overall this is a fantastic win for the city.  The jobs, the energy this injects - all definitely good!    We still have to see a lot of detail in this project from floor heights to exactly what's going on at street level - how these massive garages are presented, etc.   And I'm thrilled to lose the parking lot sea that we've had for decades -  the city is going to look so much better on many levels.  But a big part of what we talk about here on the Forum goes beyond that - it goes to artistry and how a building inspires us.   Looking at this and understanding it's a "forever thing" - I just don't  see that this just had to be on the Jacobs lot.  I think if it was anywhere else in downtown, I'd be feeling different - and exuberant. But after the lofty expectations that have been predicted for this project at this site -- the impact of this world HQ is just not in the same league as its iconic neighbors on Public Square and in that sense, its pretty disappointing   Look, I hope the details of the design prove me wrong.  There's still a lot to be revealed.  

Edited January 8, 20214 yr by CleveFan

I'll be honest with you... I didn't want to write the last two articles. When the first source reported in with the estimated building heights, I ignored it because I thought "it must be wrong." It didn't fit anything that I had reported previously. But when I shared the rumor here on the board, one of my other sources saw it and contacted me. He said this had been SHW's approach going back more than a year ago. So I wrote up the first article and another source saw it and confirmed it with more specificity.

 

I would prefer a taller building but I also want those huge parking lots gone. SHW is going to want to be on Public Square. It's where one of the Cleveland's oldest and largest corporate citizens belongs. The large acreage involved lends itself to SHW's vision for an urban campus. And as I began to do the calculations based on floor heights, I realized the base HQ building is not going to be a small building, and neither will any of the others. They will all provide significant density and vibrancy downtown, especially if they activate their ground levels.

 

So I'm coming around to this idea what Sherwin Williams wants to do. In the end all we can do at this point is urge that this have good design that activates the street levels. Everything else above it is just opinion.

Shame it’s not the tall tower many of us wanted, but it’s going to be so good to see those lots die and Public Square is going to be transformed. 
Given the architect chosen, I’m confident the offices will look good and I hope the parking garages design are given some thought. 
Street-level interaction is going to be the key to success and the use of the word ‘campus’ in the article gives me the heebie-jeebies a bit. 

A huge disappointment for a Public Square address, but it's their money (except for the massive city, county and state subsidies).

Edited January 8, 20214 yr by Frmr CLEder

Also, is the stepping of the Jacobs lot building just an assumption by the modeler, or does it come from insight gained from the sources?

56 minutes ago, w28th said:

Also, is the stepping of the Jacobs lot building just an assumption by the modeler, or does it come from insight gained from the sources?

 

My only instructions to the modeler was where to put which buildings where, how much ground they will cover, and how tall. The actual form, color, texture, etc. of the buildings was up to the model.

If we count the Terminal Tower complex as 3 buildings, there are 12 buildings that sit on Public Square.  THREE are tall, the other 9 are not.  A 400+ foot building will look spectacular..../Its not going to be a strip mall for gods sake.  I'm just hoping they wrap those garages with offices and retail

Again, no problem with the suggested heights and pleased a large majority of the Weston lot will also be developed and not left to a phase 2 (although there clearly will be some sort of phase 2 on the lot per the reporting).  I am most concerned with how these massive parking garages will be addressed and whether they will be a wart on a potentially great campus.  Fingers crossed for a hotel.

 

BOTTOM LINE I JUST WANT TO SEE A DESIGN SO THAT WE CAN GO CRAZY WITH IT THIS DREARY WINTER.

 

 

2 minutes ago, mack34 said:

If we count the Terminal Tower complex as 3 buildings, there are 12 buildings that sit on Public Square.  THREE are tall, the other 9 are not.  A 400+ foot building will look spectacular..../Its not going to be a strip mall for gods sake.  I'm just hoping they wrap those garages with offices and retail

I think the proposed building height on the Jacobs lot will mesh well with the Terminal Tower as borne out by the posted massing.

Well, maybe if they put a revolving paint can on top of the main tower, it will add a little more height. 

Another thought.  Hate to keep moaning over the parking garages, but I definitely would prefer them to be on the Weston lot interior rather than a pedestal for the 20 story Weston building even if it would give it more height and prominence.  Never have been a fan of pedestal garages.  You see them all over Chicago and they seem to be done well only about 25% of the time.  If a pedestal is necessary due to the size of the garages I hope it is some sort of configuration where it might only be 4-5 stories on the street and then flowing some how into a taller garage in the center of the block.  Also would preferred that the first couple of floors are activated with offices, lobbies or retail rather than just the usual first floor.

So why all the core sampling/drilling when these buildings won't need caissons?  If this weren't on public square, and if weren't the whale company to build an iconic building, I would be happy with this project.  Unfortunately, it IS public square and it IS the only company I can see in my lifetime that could have built something iconic (and tall).  When it was reported that the new tower would rival Key tower, I was very excited...I'm not sure how this rival's Key.   I am torn...sort of like trying to be happy the Browns made the playoffs, only to have half of the team infected with covid...

Edited January 8, 20214 yr by cfdwarrior

5 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

Another thought.  Hate to keep moaning over the parking garages, but I definitely would prefer them to be on the Weston lot interior rather than a pedestal for the 20 story Weston building even if it would give it more height and prominence.  Never have been a fan of pedestal garages.  You see them all over Chicago and they seem to be done well only about 25% of the time.  If a pedestal is necessary due to the size of the garages I hope it is some sort of configuration where it might only be 4-5 stories on the street and then flowing some how into a taller garage in the center of the block.  Also would preferred that the first couple of floors are activated with offices, lobbies or retail rather than just the usual first floor.

Will the city review board have any say in this or will they take "we are just glad to have something" approach?

Like most people, I was hoping for an iconic skyscraper over 500'.  While it won't impress outsiders as much, I think those of us that live here will benefit more by completely filling in this site with buildings 10-30 stories high.  It will go a much longer way in making Cleveland feel like a "big city" again.  I think DC is a great example of that-they don't have many buildings over 10 stories, but it's really dense.  Plus, the 27 story building might get close to 500' anyway.  We are all reacting to massings showing the skyline view, which might have us all feeling a little disappointed.  Can we see the massings from a few street level vantage points?  Seeing how massive this is at street level might give us a different perspective.

 

How about it Geowizical?

On 1/8/2021 at 9:25 AM, Dino said:

Like most people, I was hoping for an iconic skyscraper over 500'.  While it won't impress outsiders as much, I think those of us that live here will benefit more by completely filling in this site with buildings 10-30 stories high.  It will go a much longer way in making Cleveland feel like a "big city" again.  I think DC is a great example of that-they don't have many buildings over 10 stories, but it's really dense.  Plus, the 27 story building might get close to 500' anyway.  We are all reacting to massings showing the skyline view, which might have us all feeling a little disappointed.  Can we see the massings from a few street level vantage points?  Seeing how massive this is at street level might give us a different perspective.

 

How about it Geowizical?

 

it would be like cmsd 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 15, 20214 yr by MrR

7 hours ago, surfohio said:

 

From the article:

 

Limiting parking garage vehicular access to a secondary street like Frankfort would conform to the Superblock's Urban Overlay District zoning. So would hiding parking decks behind usable spaces like offices, hotel rooms, training facilities -- or at least having ground-floor commercial spaces like restaurants and retail.

 

"The Urban Overlay (UO) District is established to foster a high level of walkability and design quality for Cleveland's urban streets," according to the City Planning Commission Web site. "The UO will do this by requiring pedestrian-oriented building features, preserving and enhancing the architectural character of new and existing buildings and protecting public safety by minimizing conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians."

Don’t know how I missed that, thanks!

I'm waiting (hoping) for KJP to drop the next article saying that the Sherwin Williams main tower may only be 27 floors, but the base hotel that it is being built upon will be 20 floors!

I am not at all concerned with the height of the building. My only concern is about ensuring prober urban form.