2 hours ago, 327 said:

Detroit is about to get a new tallest building, and the renderings look pretty nice.  Gotta keep pace!

 

Right! Who cares about the economics of such a thing! Just get it built. lol.

15 hours ago, KJP said:

Supporting Progressive doesn't mean supporting urbanism either.

 

Jacobs Group isn't taking the lead in many if any real estate developments. If the Jacobs Lot is developed, they will likely least active member of a multi-faceted team.

Indeed, Jacobs Group is almost a dormant company. They've been selling off land or in some cases, they are almost silent partners. They don't develop much of anything on their own anymore. Their last major development was Cabela's and that was nearly four years ago. The Public Square lots aren't even listed on Jacobs' own website although much of that site is very outdated.  

 

I'm not sure how Jacobs Group's ownership group is structured and I'm curious to know how local it is. As mentioned, Jeff Jacobs lives in Florida. His company is based in Colorado. Most of his major developments are out West. He's been buying up quite a bit of property in Reno. His Cleveland holdings are the only ones that don't include casino gaming of some kind. That leaves Nautica as an outlier among all of his investments. I think that's one reason it takes a backseat. His focus is on casinos, not real estate.

Cleveland needs to update how it taxes land versus buildings, especially in Downtown.  I've heard that Pittsburgh at some point altered its tax policy in downtown to discourage demolition of buildings only to make way for surface parking lots.  As a result, Pittsburgh's downtown is largely void of surface parking lot craters.  I've always felt that surface parking lots are one of the biggest impediments to growth in Downtown Cleveland. 

 

I'm amazed at how land owners have been able to maintain preferential tax policy, which has scarred downtown for decades and destroyed neighborhoods.  If the city wants to encourage development, its tax policy cannot encourage and promote/enhance the profitability of the lack of development (surface parking lots).  I'm not an expert on tax policy or city politics, but I would think that a proposal to increase taxes on land uses such as surface parking lots (which put unnecessary burdens on city services (non-efficient use of land causing lower density) and the environment) would enjoy a fair amount of support. 

 

I think that downtown Cleveland would have a totally different feel if the Warehouse District, Jacobs and Nucleus lots were developed.  The size of the developments would not even matter.  If that land was built upon and was not barren wasteland, downtown Cleveland would feel so much bigger, connected and more vibrant.

Edited October 31, 20186 yr by NYC Boomerang

Good comments, NYC- looking at models of reasonably similar markets and how they’re succeeding in areas where we need to up our game is logical. Seems to me that for some of us, the first reaction or default is to explain why Cleveland can’t support more big city  Development. And though I agree we can’t just throw economics out the window, I like 327’s competitive mindset. We are, after all, in many ways competing against cities like Detroit and Pittsburgh. 

Any and possibly every big rust belt city. From Rochester, NY to St. Louis, MO.

11 hours ago, CleveFan said:

Good comments, NYC- looking at models of reasonably similar markets and how they’re succeeding in areas where we need to up our game is logical. Seems to me that for some of us, the first reaction or default is to explain why Cleveland can’t support more big city  Development. And though I agree we can’t just throw economics out the window, I like 327’s competitive mindset. We are, after all, in many ways competing against cities like Detroit and Pittsburgh. 

 

And we should be looking to see what those cities are doing to entice development, attract businesses and creating a market that encourages future development in the city. The State and Federal Tax credits have done a pretty good job on the residential front, so now more needs to be done on the business side of things. That said you still can't just throw up a skyscraper because they did so down the road. I would love to see Cleveland with many more high rises of all use types go up, and I think we will see that moving forward, but sometimes I think forumers here think this is Simcity where you can just plop down a new building vs a real city with real decades old issues, that are only recently being overcome. 

 

Perhaps if Key/Society Didn't buy Ameritrust that lot would have a 70 story office tower and hotel. Perhaps we'd have a 60 story building straddling the railroad tracks north of city hall if Progressive hadn't decided to build a corporate campus in the early 90s. Cleveland's office market was overbuilt by 1991 with the Fifth Third and Key Tower Building's coming online, which obviated the need for new office product. Then by the early 00's there was a recession, that Cleveland never really got out of by the time the 2008 recession hit. All of these things built the environment we are currently in and can't be ignored. 

I think similar economics and the resulting effect have plagued most Midwest cities - sometimes, perhaps it takes a man/woman  with a love for a city, a vision to build something “transformational” and the money to help to push beyond economic barriers. Imagine if Dan Gilbert felt about Cleveland the way he feels about Detroit. 

Just now, CleveFan said:

Imagine if Dan Gilbert felt about Cleveland the way he feels about Detroit. 

 

I'll be honest - I'm glad he doesn't. Some of the top-down investment schemes in Detroit scare me in the face of another impending market implosion. It's like he;s playing SimCity with a money cheat. Cleveland is a profoundly aggravating place, but if there is any facet of this annoying city it's that investment has been marginally more incremental and, ideally, sustainable.

 

Though I absolutely agree that someone probably needs to just jump in with a catalytic project here. I still think there is some potential for a more permanent downtown transit hub integrated into a larger building on this lot.

Edited November 2, 20186 yr by jws

On 10/31/2018 at 4:52 PM, NYC Boomerang said:

I think that downtown Cleveland would have a totally different feel if the Warehouse District, Jacobs and Nucleus lots were developed.  The size of the developments would not even matter.  If that land was built upon and was not barren wasteland, downtown Cleveland would feel so much bigger, connected and more vibrant.

 

I think that many people equate downtown to have giant skyscrapers and that’s all they want. Jacobs lot makes sense for a skyscraper, but much of the empty lots really don’t need it. Similarly scaled buildings to the rest of Warehouse District makes sense. Pedestrian level is more important than having a robust skyline. Weston’s plans are nice, but would still be great minus the towers. 

On 10/31/2018 at 4:28 PM, Mwd711 said:

The Public Square lots aren't even listed on Jacobs' own website although much of that site is very outdated.  

 

That certainly may be one reason why the Public Square lot isn't listed. But there appears to be another reason. And it's the reason many of us have hoped for. I just found out from a very good source that it's the site SHW prefers. But I don't know if it's a done deal.

1 hour ago, KJP said:

 

That certainly may be one reason why the Public Square lot isn't listed. But there appears to be another reason. And it's the reason many of us have hoped for. I just found out from a very good source that it's the site SHW prefers. But I don't know if it's a done deal.

 

i assume that HB469 transformational tax credit will will play a MAJOR role in Sherwin Williams decision to build this tower.

When do you think we can hear some news on this Jacob's public square property?

^Does the project  still have to be mixed use pursuant to the currently proposed legislation in order to get the tax credit?

I wish the proposed Ameritrust Tower could  still be built. I feel the design still holds up.

4 hours ago, dave2017 said:

I wish the proposed Ameritrust Tower could  still be built. I feel the design still holds up.

 

Ditteaux.   It's a great design that's at least somewhat timeless, infinitely better than Jenga Tower (aka Nucleus).   

 

But even without the latter does enough demand exist for a 1,200' tower?

11 hours ago, simplythis said:

 

i assume that HB469 transformational tax credit will will play a MAJOR role in Sherwin Williams decision to build this tower.

When do you think we can hear some news on this Jacob's public square property?

 

It may. And under the current definition of a transformational development, this project would probably qualify if it includes parking and/or retail to go with the offices. But SHW was near to giving this office tower the green light before the Valspar deal, and that was before anyone was talking about the transformational tax credit. So they might proceed without it this time, too. As for when they might announce it...if the planning for it advances enough, the company-wide sales meeting in Orlando in January might be good timing. 

2 hours ago, KJP said:

 

It may. And under the current definition of a transformational development, this project would probably qualify if it includes parking and/or retail to go with the offices. But SHW was near to giving this office tower the green light before the Valspar deal, and that was before anyone was talking about the transformational tax credit. So they might proceed without it this time, too. As for when they might announce it...if the planning for it advances enough, the company-wide sales meeting in Orlando in January might be good timing. 

This is huge news!

Sorry. My source whose firm worked with SHW on the HQ project clarified that SHW was favoring the Jacobs Lot two years ago. He says his firm is not currently doing any work with SHW on this project.

1 hour ago, KJP said:

Sorry. My source whose firm worked with SHW on the HQ project clarified that SHW was favoring the Jacobs Lot two years ago. He says his firm is not currently doing any work with SHW on this project.

So what does this clarification mean?      No Public Square Tower  OR  NO TOWER anywhere?

I work at Sherwin-Williams, so the day a new tower is announced, my office will be throwing a party. So excited if this is announced next year.

2 hours ago, simplythis said:

So what does this clarification mean?      No Public Square Tower  OR  NO TOWER anywhere?

 

Here is what I know....

 

About one month ago, I received information from someone who is very level-headed and whose firm met with a client they could not name. But they said the client was seeking to consolidate its offices into a 40+ story HQ tower. While there's only one company headquartered in Cleveland who has scattered offices and could justify a tower that big, in later conversations I specifically mentioned Sherwin Williams to verify the client and the source associated Sherwin Williams in a response about the project.

 

The person who said Jacobs Lot works at a company who did design work for the HQ project prior to the Valspar deal. It was my assumption that this company was still doing design work for SHW because, when I asked him about this project a month ago, he responded only with "Sworn to secrecy." But I pushed him a little yesterday and got him to acknowledge that the Jacobs Lot was the site for the HQ. Later, after posting the information here on UO, I realized I should have asked how recent that information was. So I asked him and he said "at least 18 months ago." I asked him, so your firm is not currently working on this project? He replied, "No."

 

Furthermore, another source whose relative is an executive with SHW said he was on a committee working on the HQ project in 2016. He said he is not on any such committee now and knows of no renewed efforts to pursue the HQ project. He said it's possible it may have restarted but he doubts it.

 

One month ago, after getting the tip that the project had restarted, I contacted someone I've known for 20 years who works in an executive position at SHW and asked him about it. I told him I planned to write a blog about it. He said to me "This is off the record, OK? There is no HQ project. You can't even use this information on background. There is no project." I asked, why is this off the record if there is no project? Why not just say it publicly? "Because there is nothing to discuss," he said. BTW, that same source denied now (and two years ago) there was anything happening two years ago with any HQ project, too. He said it was just a bunch of real estate developers trying to stir up interest in their own businesses.

 

So what do you think is happening here? Something or nothing?

Edited November 15, 20186 yr by KJP

I think it could be something similar to Cleveland's Amazon bid, where nothing is relatively open to the public. You already have some inside info on it from top execs, and the person that says its off the record is just trying to cover their traces.

 

I believe they want a building taller than key. They're a growing 500 company, with recent acquisitions. I'm 100% sure they will either use the prior Ameritrust design, or go for a cheese grater / fractal design like in London and Sanfransico. I can see those designs picking up popularity since the Middle East is finished with Burj Khalifa and in the process with Jeddah 'Kingdom' Tower. If they do need a building smaller than key, there's already a rendering showing a scaled back version of Ameritrust. What could have been may just be a reality.

Edited November 15, 20186 yr by tastybunns

I doubt they'd revive a project from the early 90's. In general, architecture has vastly changed since then. It will most likely be a modern-styled building.

But who knows. They could surprise us.

i just really hope they do something, Turning the landmark into apartments i think would be an awesome addition in that area as well.. 

16 minutes ago, G00pie said:

i just really hope they do something, Turning the landmark into apartments i think would be an awesome addition in that area as well.. 

I just hope they do something too... It wouldn't surprise me if this doesn't happen for awhile though.

This site is very quick to cut off- topic postings; I guess there’s no way to cut off posts based on assumptions and out-of-date whisperings. But then again, the rumors get us all excited ....

 

36 minutes ago, CLE_Millennial said:

I just hope they do something too... It wouldn't surprise me if this doesn't happen for awhile though.

 

Especially after seeing this....

 

Sherwin-Williams: Minneapolis 'Like a second headquarters' after Valspar deal

https://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/news/2018/11/12/sherwin-williams-minneapolis-like-a-second.html

Don't let that headline bother you @CLE_Millennial. Instead, there is reason for much hope.

1 hour ago, KJP said:

Don't let that headline bother you @CLE_Millennial. Instead, there is reason for much hope.

KJP you’ve been on a roll lately with lots of subtle hints about so many projects. Don’t tease us!!! ?

I am going to write this in a way to keep people out of trouble which means it won't be as specific as many of you want. But I am aware of two firms that provide services to construction projects and they are working hard on this project. One of them is clearly working on a SHW HQ. Today I was reminded how much they are working on it. The other is probably working on a SHW HQ. I say probably because the source said the firm is working on a very large office development on the west end of downtown but that's all they could say. They wouldn't ID the client. Regarding that information, I asked the source if it was Weston and he said no because it was his understanding that the Weston project is inactive. That points to the Jacobs lot, and a friend who worked with SHW in 2016 on the HQ project said it was going on the Jacobs lot. He was in a very good position to know. Today's source about the "very large office development" was confident the project was going to happen considering how much work has already been done. For all I know, these two sources could be taking about two separate large office developments but I find that very hard to believe. 

Could the other project be the City Club Apartments or is it mayb the Nucleus Office Tower

No they said office building. It could be nuCLEus because the source was confident about at least some of it happening. But the geography doesn't work out unless the person misspoke about it being the west side of downtown. The person said that, whatever this very large office building is, "it is happening."

Does "very large office building" = 50+ stories?

Fingers crossed!!!

Don't know, but the other source said a couple months ago that the SHW HQ would be "40-plus stories and 1 million square feet."

 

With able room to expand a fortune 500, there is an obvious need for 'Extra Room'. If SW decides to add some extra floor-space they can rent floors out to other companies in need. Do tell about the 50+. So if they're working on blueprints, this probably means Ameritrust is out of the picture. I'm more than expecting something vibrant that screams paint and chemicals. Everything is about new age architecture am i right?
I'll try my best to gather up what my thought is. Stay tuned in the Cleveland Architecture thread.
 

 

P.S. sorry I cant embed the links, they don't show up for me. I've taken it up with @MayDay about the issue to notify @richNcincy.

Very interesting. Does the timing on any of this line up for the next big SW meeting?  I thought you said that takes place in January but I may be mistaken. 

Yes, the annual SHW sales meeting is typically in January but the last time I looked (a couple months ago), I couldn't find any information about it. But if there is one, it would explain people working long hours on this. It's as if they're trying to meet a deadline. 

44 minutes ago, tastybunns said:

P.S. sorry I cant embed the links, they don't show up for me. I've taken it up with @MayDay about the issue to notify @richNcincy.

 

It should auto embed the links.  It took me a few times of copying and pasting until it finally worked. 

While my first source maintains that his firm is working hard on a new SHW headquarters, my second source says: the "very big office project downtown" isn't downtown at all. And it's not even very big. Nor is it breaking news. It's Medical Mutual's renovation of the former American Greetings offices in Brooklyn. Sorry folks. But allow me to be more angry than you because my source gave me sloppy info and got me excited for no reason at all. I shared with you what I thought was good information. Turns out my second source wasn't accurate. Fortunately I don't run into that source very often. Still hoping my first source is accurate.

How reliable is the first source ? ?

I think it's pretty good. I trust him and talk with him much more frequently. 

I must confess that all of this speculation is rather exciting, even laying a foundation for fervent optimism, but ....

Having had many conversations about this matter with a friend who is in a mid-level management position at S/W, he has indicated that there has been no talk of the company building a new skyscraper HEADQUARTERS.

 

As much as I would love to see something constructed on the same scale as the Key Tower, I would not get my hopes too high. I think that even if the company proceeds with a new headquarters building it certainly would likely not eclipse the size and scale of Key Tower.

 

On a side note, I would love to see the original plans for the defunct Ameritrust Tower, or even the plans for the Progressive Insurance Tower  utilized.

 

However, we can still DREAM BIG, can't we.

Edited December 15, 20186 yr by John D. Baumgardner
edit

Welcome John. I spoke a few months ago with the brother of a man who is an upper-level executive at SHW who was on a committee three years ago to plan a new HQ tower. However his brother says he has not heard anything new since the Valspar deal was announced. It's possible he's either lying, that his committee's past work is still still applicable and thus doesn't need to be significantly updated/refined, or everything is still on the shelf gathering dust because there's nothing going on.

8 minutes ago, KJP said:

Welcome John. I spoke a few months ago with the brother of a man who is an upper-level executive at SHW who was on a committee three years ago to plan a new HQ tower. However his brother says he has not heard anything new since the Valspar deal was announced. It's possible he's either lying, that his committee's past work is still still applicable and thus doesn't need to be significantly updated/refined, or everything is still on the shelf gathering dust because there's nothing going on.

Thank you for the WELCOME, KJP!

 

It is my hope that Sherwin-Williams will eventually construct a unique and dynamic headquarters here, hopefully in the form of a skyscraper. I rely upon the knowledge of the friend I mentioned in my original post, but it is very possible that he isn't entirely privy to any potential details of a new headquarters. All he has said to me is that there has not been any discussion in meetings with other departmental head figures.

 

We can only hope that something WILL come to fruition. 

What's amazing is that SHW did A LOT of work on this new tower in 2014-16. They organized a management committee to determine space needs, not only for the headquarters but also for the R&D facility (the R&D facility is not referenced or even alluded to from here on out in this message) and to oversee the next steps. They did their site alternatives analysis. They talked to downtown real estate property owners and eventually settled on one site. Once they had that, they talked to a number of civil engineering firms and settled on one. They talked to a number of architectural firms and settled on one. They talked to developers but I am not aware if they had settled on one. They shared renderings with a limited number of people for a 40-story tower on the Jacobs Lot. They began talking to the city, including to the planning director and downtown Councilman Kerry McMormack. They were ready to go public at the Sherwin Williams National Sales Meeting Jan. 22-27 at the 63-acre Gaylord Palms Resort & Convention Center in Kissimmee, FL.

 

All of that summarizes information gathered from perhaps a dozens sources over the last few years.

 

And then Valspar happened.

 

What has happened since Valspar? I wrote about it here: http://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2018/10/is-sherwin-williams-ready-to-paint-sky.html

 

SHW is now more spread out than ever among Greater Cleveland office locations. SInce Valspar, SHW had to open up a fourth office location in this area. Their latest office location is on Hinckley Industrial Parkway in Cleveland. They extended their lease at the Skylight office tower for another three years.

 

I will name one source here, mainly because he lied to me. I've known SHW spokesman Mike Conway for 20 years, since he worked as the spokesman at GCRTA. When he went on to be Key Corp's spokesman, he got me into their executive dining room on the 55th floor to take pictures for Sun Newspapers. But I appreciated him doing that for me. Now, however, he lied to me at SHW. I asked him two months ago if SHW had rekindled its plans for a new SHW HQ tower now that the company has fully integrated Valspar into its company. He responded "We never planned an HQ tower then and we're not planning one now." I asked him about all the articles from 2.5 years ago about a new HQ tower. He replied something to the effect of "That was just real estate brokers trying to boost business. There was nothing to it. I told the reporters that two years ago." And with that, I know he lied. There was a lot to it 2.5 years ago. What he said next surprised me. "This is all off the record" I asked why. He said "because there's nothing to write." You know why he said it was off the record? Because he didn't want me to write anything. And he didn't want his quote "There is nothing going on" to be reprinted sometime in the future when it becomes clear that SHW really had something going on with its HQ project after all.

Edited December 15, 20186 yr by KJP

On 12/15/2018 at 12:11 PM, John D. Baumgardner said:

I must confess that all of this speculation is rather exciting, even laying a foundation for fervent optimism, but ....

Having had many conversations about this matter with a friend who is in a mid-level management position at S/W, he has indicated that there has been no talk of the company building a new skyscraper HEADQUARTERS.

 

As much as I would love to see something constructed on the same scale as the Key Tower, I would not get my hopes too high. I think that even if the company proceeds with a new headquarters building it certainly would likely not eclipse the size and scale of Key Tower.

 

On a side note, I would love to see the original plans for the defunct Ameritrust Tower, or even the plans for the Progressive Insurance Tower  utilized.

 

However, we can still DREAM BIG, can't we.

That Gehry building would have been a show stopper for this town!

 

Is this relevant?

http://rebusinessonline.com/sherwin-williams-to-sell-leaseback-more-than-100-stores-for-150m/

It's a question worth asking. SHW's debt is pretty high right now after it bought Valspar. It's possible that SHW may want to wait to pay down its debt further before adding new debt from construction a new HQ tower and new R&D facility that could exceed $1 billion total. Unless SHW doesn't want to own these new facilities to keep the debt off its books. Many companies don't like to own their HQs and other office buildings.

On 12/14/2018 at 3:25 PM, KJP said:

I think it's pretty good. I trust him and talk with him much more frequently. 

Any updates from your SHW Headquarters source?

Probably not for another couple of weeks.

Sherwin-Williams sells100 of it's retail stores and pockets an easy $150 million. I am just wondering if this move is to generate capital towards building that much anticipated and elusive new World headquarters??

 

Thoughts anyone?

 

https://www.crainscleveland.com/real-estate/sherwin-williams-sets-150-million-property-sale

Edited January 24, 20196 yr by John D. Baumgardner