I will be very disappointed if this thing doesn't go on Public Square.  This is a once in a generation chance to do something significant with that long-festering wasteland.

While I would be elated for Sherwin-Williams to remain in Cleveland, I am being cautiously optimistic until an actual and formal announcement is introduced by the company.

 

I know that I am not alone in feeling a bit let-down if S-W does build their headquarters on that small sliver of land behind Tower City. I don't believe that anything of prolific stature and architectural significance could be erected there due to the confines of the available space.

 

Certainly, building at the riverfront site would provide less of an impact on our skyline because it would be far less visible from other vantage points in Downtown.

 

Building a new headquarters anywhere outside of the Jacob's or Weston lot's just simply leaves me feeling a bit crestfallen.

 

I personally would NOT want to see a NEW Justice Center and Jail complex rise on Public Square ... That space has been aching for a signature skyscraper for eons and eons. C'mon Sherwin-Williams, make yourselves very visible to the World with a glittering and prolific monstrosity in the heart of the city.

 

Just my two cents, rant over. ???

My sentiments exactly!

4 hours ago, CLE_Millennial said:

I'll take it! Definitely interesting for sure. I have no idea whet the skyline would look like if they choose this site. Very excited to hear their official announcement.

 

Also looking forward to some skyline massings, but I think @GISguy has made an excellent point. Public access to the river should be a given. 

Edited October 29, 20195 yr by surfohio

Understood, but not sure, from a security perspective, how that could be accomplished on a corporate campus.

On 10/29/2019 at 2:17 PM, Frmr CLEder said:

Understood, but not sure, from a security perspective, how that could be accomplished on a corporate campus.

 

I mean, they have nearly 200' of river property that isn't anything more than a fenced in walking path/courts. I always think of my old neighborhood in Pittsburgh (north side) when it comes to these types of ideas, Alcoa/Arconic had a major office on the river, and on the southside there's plenty of HQ's that also have river access. I get that it isn't a campus environment but I really think it's important to make sure the riverfront stays public. Once it's private, it will be forever, much like a HQ, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity.

 

 

 

Northside

 

 

Southside (notice American Eagle HQ)

 

Edited March 31, 20205 yr by GISguy

3 hours ago, PaxtonMarley said:

...and don't forget the third option, the suburban Atlanta office park.  An "expert in office relocation" seemed very certain ATL was a slam dunk.

So what did Mr Boyd say

Okay, dumb question, but does the riverfront plan include the lot/space where the LeBron billboard once was?

1 hour ago, ydard said:

I will be very disappointed if this thing doesn't go on Public Square.  This is a once in a generation chance to do something significant with that long-festering wasteland.

I'll just be grateful they stay in Cleveland and downtown too! 

 

51 minutes ago, cfdwarrior said:

Okay, dumb question, but does the riverfront plan include the lot/space where the LeBron billboard once was?

 

Haven't heard anything about that spot.

@KJP Do you have the (1980s?) vision for the current Bedrock site? @Geowizical's unofficial massing for the site is reminiscent of that by comparison.

Just now, Boxtruffles said:

@KJP Do you have the (1980s?) vision for the current Bedrock site? @Geowizical's unofficial massing for the site is reminiscent of that by comparison.

 

Yes, I do. This is from 1990.... ? 

 

 

BTW, here are all of the views of the CityBlock/SHW area that @Geowizical sent to me....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 29, 20195 yr by KJP

10 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Yes, I do. This is from 1990.... ? 

 

 

If we can realize this between SW and Bedrock, I think the riverfront is the right choice. It literally creates a whole new field of depth to the skyline—and even if they’re at a lower grade, it provides cohesion and grandeur to the skyline. 
 

This, paired with a JC tower, would provide a north-south axis of height on our skyline currently reflected only on the ninth street corridor. 

Edited October 29, 20195 yr by Clevecane

Also, consider this the first construction photo ?

24 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Yes, I do. This is from 1990.... ? 

 

 

With the shape of retail in the Amazon era, we should be fortunate a lot of this didn’t happen. I like the potential of Take 2. SHW, CityBlock, Bedrock. I feel the London Stock Exchange planting roots here will give CityBlock a leg up on a lot of the competition. It’s a huge underrated development imo. Major street cred for CLE

Edited October 29, 20195 yr by marty15

1 hour ago, Clevecane said:

If we can realize this between SW and Bedrock, I think the riverfront is the right choice. It literally creates a whole new field of depth to the skyline—and even if they’re at a lower grade, it provides cohesion and grandeur to the skyline. 
 

This, paired with a JC tower, would provide a north-south axis of height on our skyline currently reflected only on the ninth street corridor. 

Ha - you just want a better view from your office. ?

1 hour ago, marty15 said:

With the shape of retail in the Amazon era, we should be fortunate a lot of this didn’t happen. I like the potential of Take 2. SHW, CityBlock, Bedrock. I feel the London Stock Exchange planting roots here will give CityBlock a leg up on a lot of the competition. It’s a huge underrated development imo. Major street cred for CLE

Couldn’t agree more. You have to think having all these tech companies showing interest in city block was one of the factors the London Stock Exchange  chose here. Scranton peninsula will blow up with this 

Edited October 29, 20195 yr by WindyBuckeye

2 hours ago, KJP said:

 

Yes, I do. This is from 1990.... ? 

 

 

 

Ken - Excellent find.  This pic was in a short-lived magazine--unimaginatively called Downtown Magazine.  I don't know how many issues they had, but I also still have my copy of this one.

But I agree with the commenters here.  I couldn't imagine a million-odd square feet of upscale mall stores and department stores on Huron Avenue--especially with the retail apocalypse going on right now.

While tempting to think of the "what if" had Tower City been built to its full vision, I agree with the above.  It could have been disastrous, even worse than what we have now.  Its going to be fascinating to see what happens in the next few months and years once we know where SW finally lands.  Even if SW chooses Public Square, I think it still will impact TC/City Block and all the momentum there.  But certainly the riverfront option adds a certain shot in the arm.  Now I don't know which one I want more!!

Edited October 29, 20195 yr by mrclifton88

5 hours ago, GISguy said:

 

I mean, they have nearly 200' of river property that isn't anything more than a fenced in walking path/courts. I always think of my old neighborhood in Pittsburgh (north side) when it comes to these types of ideas, Alcoa/Arconic had a major office on the river, and on the southside there's plenty of HQ's that also have river access. I get that it isn't a campus environment but I really think it's important to make sure the riverfront stays public. Once it's private, it will be forever, much like a HQ, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity.

 

 

Northside

 

Southside (notice American Eagle HQ)

Having worked for companies involved with Biological and Chemical R&D, I know that corporate security is of paramount importance. I simply cannot visualize an urban campus that includes R&D in that location that also provides unfettered public access.

Edited October 30, 20195 yr by Frmr CLEder

Any thoughts on whether Landmark could be included in the arrangement as some sort of property swap in exchange for the Bedrock site?  I would imagine Bedrock would love to get their hands on that complex.

14 hours ago, Frmr CLEder said:

Having worked for companies involved with Biological and Chemical R&D, I know that corporate security is of paramount importance. I simply cannot visualize an urban campus that includes R&D in that location that also provides unfettered public access.

I don't think anyone is asking for unfettered access. Just don't monopolize the river, that's all. 

Looks like there is some SWH news!

 

http://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2019/10/sherwin-williams-hqr-is-down-to-two.html

14 minutes ago, surfohio said:

I don't think anyone is asking for unfettered access. Just don't monopolize the river, that's all. 

 

That might require some unsightly fencing though.

Edited October 30, 20195 yr by viscomi
Breen's current fencing. Barbed but I guess not that horrible. You could line with high shrub screening.

A decorative security fence set back from the river to allow a boardwalk/public access is the hope. 

8 minutes ago, marty15 said:

A decorative security fence set back from the river to allow a boardwalk/public access is the hope. 

It would be nice to have public river access but I can guarantee you that their campus will be very secure; especially for a new HQ with accompanying R&D facilities.

Edited October 30, 20195 yr by Frmr CLEder

49 minutes ago, ctown60 said:

Looks like there is some SWH news!

 

http://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2019/10/sherwin-williams-hqr-is-down-to-two.html

 

the reason why you are receiving bewildered reactions to this is because this was discussed here ad nauseam already. It doesn't look like you glanced at previous posts. Things move quickly here.

 

Also, the author of that blog is here on this thread too. His handle is @KJP

Edited October 30, 20195 yr by NewtoCLE

41 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

It would be nice to have public river access but I can guarantee you that their campus will be very secure; especially for a new HQ with accompanying R&D facilities.

 

Honest question: do you think it's unreasonable to ensure a pubic access along the river? 

Sherwin Williams should definitely get first choice of where they want to build, especially since the new Courthouse Tower is so far down the road.  I hope SHW get's the Jacobs lot.  However, I don't see why the below graphic couldn't work to solve both needs.  SHW gets space to build a multi-building campus and the Courthouse Tower still has a site near Public Square.

^^ I know your question isn’t directed at me, but I’ve some reasonable experience in this area and although SHW are hardly working on the Manhattan Project at Breen, I very much doubt they want public access coming within 30-50 yards of the R&D building at grade. IIRC you can’t even get into Breen off Canal Road and have to drop down to the riverside and get through gated security in order to enter. 

As for the campus in general, again, I very much doubt they would want the public wandering around it and I feel that is probably a strong factor in why they’re favoring the riverside over PS. They can control access more easily. 

To address your question more directly, I think it’s not unreasonable to ask and advocate for public access to the river, but I feel it’s going to be SHW’s call and theirs alone, as to whether it happens. It pretty much depends on the site layout they want. 

Edited October 30, 20195 yr by roman totale XVII

Industrial espionage is real. SW has competitors. The company's future is dependent upon the development of new products and their uses. If SW is conducting research into and/or developing new coatings/new organic polymers, or a new breakthrough technology for development of such, I doubt that they would want anyone having easy access to that research.  I appreciate the desire to have unlimited river access but it will be up to SW to decide what best meets their corporate interests.

 

All of this being said, a photo of the grounds shows a basketball court and tennis courts. Are those open to the public?

https://images.app.goo.gl/S4eqRxGFwXbKMJdv7

 

And polymer chemists in the lab.

https://images.app.goo.gl/bwFXCzvcWvyfJaiS8

Edited October 30, 20195 yr by Frmr CLEder

6 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

Industrial espionage is real. SW has competitors. The company's future is dependent upon the development of new products and their uses. If SW is conducting research into and/or developing new coatings/new organic polymers, or a new breakthrough technology for development of such, I doubt that they would want anyone having easy access to that research.  I appreciate the desire to have unlimited river access but it will be up to SW to decide what best meets their corporate interests.

Do we think S.W. will require as much security & privacy as the United States Navy?
The Navy accepts a quite pleasant boardwalk & walking trail along the Navy Yards in DC. It runs between their Sea Systems Command facility and the scenic Anacostia river near downtown.

Edited October 30, 20195 yr by ExPatClevGuy

^ In San Diego too the trend is steadily moving toward more public access along the waterfront. The Port and US Navy are working with developers to make this happen. 

Nobody is suggesting that they put their top secret research in publicly available space, but plenty of very secure facilities are located with public walkways adjacent to them.  I don't think that a secure facility and public access to the outsides of buildings are at all incompatible.  They may decide that they don't want to allow the public near their campus, but that won't be because of their research, but for the same reason that lakefront property owners don't want public access along the lake- its THEIR lake, public be damned.

 

I hope that isn't how S-W feels, though.

11 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

Industrial espionage is real. SW has competitors. The company's future is dependent upon the development of new products and their uses. If SW is conducting research into and/or developing new coatings/new organic polymers, or a new breakthrough technology for development of such, I doubt that they would want anyone having easy access to that research.  I appreciate the desire to have unlimited river access but it will be up to SW to decide what best meets their corporate interests.

Again, "easy access" is something that nobody is arguing for. I used to park in the Flats and walk right past their paint testing plates which are clearly visible from outside their fence. They're located alongside a public waterway, what reasonable expectation of privacy could there be at that location? 

But Cleveland is a much higher-priority target than the primary US Navy Pacific port in San Diego or the US Navy HQ in Washington! Isn't that why we have jersey barriers and a large and armed police presence on Public Square??

1 minute ago, X said:

Nobody is suggesting that they put their top secret research in publicly available space, but plenty of very secure facilities are located with public walkways adjacent to them.  I don't think that a secure facility and public access to the outsides of buildings are at all incompatible. 

 

I hope that isn't how S-W feels, though.

 

Totally agree and I really hope you’re right. 

 

My comments are rooted in experience both working with and for old, conservative, Midwest companies in the chemicals and manufacturing industries. If they can control their space and their people they tend to feel that, by extension, they’re in more ‘control’ of their  ‘business’. The mindset is changing and I feel SHW are somewhat on the leading edge, but it’s slow. 

not to knit-pick, but there are better examples than the DC Navy Yard. The aerial image here is misleading: make no mistake, this is a closed facility. There is no boardwalk. This is a restricted access military campus.

 

Perhaps a better example in DC (just to stay local) would be the Embassy of Sweden in Georgetown which is located right on the Potomac and literally on the Georgetown waterfront and boardwalk. You can walk right up to their door.

 

Do we think the government of Sweden is so cavalier about their security and nonchalant about the very real threat of espionage directed against them? Of course not.

 

this is why they invest in a defense-in-depth approach to their physical security. They do employ controls such as contract security guards, EMF shielding countermeasures on all their windows, security cameras, and strict access control.

 

SHW can still build on the river, have a public access channel, and still allow an effective security program to protect their people, assets, and mission 

@NewtoCLE - Untrue*.  I've walked it end to end on several occasions.  I tripped hard on the uneven surface once, which I vividly remember. 
The public uses it before and after ballgames as a key entry point to the DC Waterfront for cyclists coming over the bridge from east of the river.
It's a pleasant walk. 'Lots to see inside the facility through the fence, with military ships often docked alongside too.

Also, my good friend is a supervising naval engineer working under high security and surveillance inside.  His work is highly classified.

*Always Good parties at the Swedish Embassy tho.

Edited October 30, 20195 yr by ExPatClevGuy

So I think we’ve dispelled the notion that the work at Breen is too dangerous or too top secret to have riverfront access—but just to chime in—I’ve been to many R&D facilities across the country for tech, manufacturing, chemicals, power, etc.—even tobacco—that are along public rights of way. 
 

No one is saying it should be a mixed use facility with a welcoming lobby for all to share... nor is anyone saying they should leave their doors unlocked and machinery untagged and unlocked and hope for the best. 
 

Simply stating that buildings with sealed access can commiserate with public access to nearby features...

What is the current public river access at Breen? That may be an indicator.

Edited October 30, 20195 yr by Frmr CLEder

25 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

What is the current public river access at Breen

 

3 hours ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

@NewtoCLE - Untrue*.  I've walked it end to end on several occasions.  I tripped hard on the uneven surface once, which I vividly remember. 
The public uses it before and after ballgames as a key entry point to the DC Waterfront for cyclists coming over the bridge from east of the river.
It's a pleasant walk. 'Lots to see inside the facility through the fence, with military ships often docked alongside too.

Also, my good friend is a supervising naval engineer working under high security and surveillance inside.  His work is highly classified.

*Always Good parties at the Swedish Embassy tho.

 

i stand corrected! clearly my information is dated. point taken.

 

we both are in agreement, however, on the fundamental point: totally possible

Sherwin-Williams to build its new headquarters in Greater Cleveland, sources say

https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2019/10/sherwin-williams-to-build-its-new-headquarters-in-greater-cleveland-sources-say.html#incart_push

5 minutes ago, KJP said:

Sherwin-Williams to build its new headquarters in Greater Cleveland, sources say

https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2019/10/sherwin-williams-to-build-its-new-headquarters-in-greater-cleveland-sources-say.html#incart_push

 

Those sources are @KJP and @YABO713  ?

 

Also, looks like a UO forumer  got the first comment:

 

^ Uh oh. Man the barricades. Trolls incoming!

Where does SHW manufacture their paint. I think someone mentioned an east side

suburban location. ( Warrensville Hts ? ).

Is this location subject to change?

I sure hope they dont add manufacturing in the R&D building. It would be a disaster if on the top floor XD

No, @Boomerang_Brian, wasn't me. But I'm pretty sure I know who one of Higgs' sources is. He's a city official I told two days ago about the final two sites. He said he heard the same but also heard Brecksville might still be in play. But I told him the HQ consultant was pursuing only downtown sites. If SHW/Welty hadn't rejected Brecksville yet, it's only because SHW needs it for negotiating purposes. They will keep it handy until contacts are signed.