Jump to content
KJP

Cleveland: Downtown: Sherwin-Williams Headquarters

RISK OF CLOSURE

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Potamus said:

To a certain extent, whether SHW builds a skyscraper or several smaller buildings may be less important than what they do at the ground floor.  Is there any publicly accessible retail or services or is it all closed off just for their employees?  Even if it's not publicly accessible, will it have visible activity or just be relatively blank walls? I'd imagine a lot will be inaccessible, so if they did take the whole super block, it'd be pretty dead at night.  So, in the end I'd probably prefer a middle ground - not a single super tall which tends to limit activity on the street, but not many many low rise buildings with lots of blank walls either.  Ultimately, and this probably guess without saying, the design will be important regardless of the form.

I just got back from the GIS Conference in Columbus and can't help but think of Nationwide's 'campus' down there, with tunnels and tubes running about and very little street presence. I know that was built when planning concepts were different, but it really is a dead zone to outsiders. To echo @mu2010 I hope the city pushes multi-use and retail in the area (it may be dead down there now w/empty storefronts, but 3k centrally located people will demand retail and good lunch options!).

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a design perspective, if SW choices to build on both the Jacobs lot and the Weston crater, what I don't want to see is one or more pedestrian tunnels over West 3rd.  I know they will want an indoor connection for such a design scheme so I hope-even though it will be much more expensive-that thought is given to a tunnel instead

Edited by Htsguy
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the rapid right of way has been there since I was in high-school in the early 70's. I used to drive down Shaker Blvd (sometimes Chagrin) from SOM Center Rd. and it was a wasted resource then; it still is.

Edited by Frmr CLEder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope you get a nice campus there with a nice tall iconic skyscraper surrounded by lower buildings with good street presence and lots of retail. At least one Ohio city should get an iconic new skyscraper-Lord knows we aren't going to get one down here. Good luck! Fill in that parking crater!

 

A win for this in Cleveland is also a win for all of Ohio! As a state we are all in this together. NO to sunbelt relocation!

  • Like 9
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to be negative here, but I really hope the city leaders realize if SW leaves it's going to be more than the income tax they lose. Just walked down E4th on this beautiful Cleveland Friday and let me say I'd guess at least 20% of the people I saw spending their money at these local businesses are SW employees.  I'd say a higher percentage Mon-Thurs given no games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, surfohio said:

Some of those Westin superblock renders were really sweet. If SW does build there I hope they generously borrow much of that design. 

http://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2017/10/downtown-clevelands-next-big-building.html

 

WHD-Superblock9.jpg

Would be great for y'all to have something like this, but with the tallest tower on  the square to have a more distinctive top rather than a flat roof. Another tall spire to match the two tallest in the city would make a nice grouping. Two spires are two spires, three spires would make a nice cluster. JMO.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, surfohio said:

Some of those Westin superblock renders were really sweet. If SW does build there I hope they generously borrow much of that design. 

http://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2017/10/downtown-clevelands-next-big-building.html

 

WHD-Superblock9.jpg

 

3 minutes ago, Toddguy said:

Would be great for y'all to have something like this, but with the tallest tower on  the square to have a more distinctive top rather than a flat roof. Another tall spire to match the two tallest in the city would make a nice grouping. Two spires are two spires, three spires would make a nice cluster. JMO.

 

The tallest building in the Westin superblock (shown in the rendering) is NOT on Public Square. There is another empty lot in between (to the left of the tallest glass tower in the illustration), referred to as the Jacobs lot. The Jacobs lot is bordered by west roadway (Public Sq), Superior, West 3rd, and Rockwell. The Westin superblock proposal would have still allowed for a more impressive tower directly on the Square.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ yeah, the flat, empty roofs on all four of those taller structure renders is very unimaginative and wasteful. its like they got to that and ran out of gas - ha. however, the rest is awesome. something like that would be great. just fix the rooftops. those are money. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

 

 

The tallest building in the Westin superblock (shown in the rendering) is NOT on Public Square. There is another empty lot in between (to the left of the tallest glass tower in the illustration), referred to as the Jacobs lot. The Jacobs lot is bordered by west roadway (Public Sq), Superior, West 3rd, and Rockwell. The Westin superblock proposal would have still allowed for a more impressive tower directly on the Square.

Yes, ideally the development would include the Jacob lot and all or a portion of the Weston Superblock.

Edited by Frmr CLEder
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

 

 

The tallest building in the Westin superblock (shown in the rendering) is NOT on Public Square. There is another empty lot in between (to the left of the tallest glass tower in the illustration), referred to as the Jacobs lot. The Jacobs lot is bordered by west roadway (Public Sq), Superior, West 3rd, and Rockwell. The Westin superblock proposal would have still allowed for a more impressive tower directly on the Square.

Yeah I overlooked that at first. The tallest building should probably be on the Jacobs lot unless they can do something really creative with the Jacobs lot to help activate it and the square while also closing that piece of Frankfort street so that lot would not be encircled completely by roadway. I don't know what that activation would be to be honest. Other than that, i agree-put the tallest iconic building on the Jacobs lot(and no flat roof).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^why would you want to close Frankfort?  There should NOT be more street closures anywhere---this is getting completely crazy. Cleveland already has crazy long blocks--removing more streets makes things even worse.

Edited by Pugu
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Pugu said:

^why would you want to close Frankfort?  There should NOT be more street closures anywhere---this is getting completely crazy. Cleveland already has crazy long blocks--removing more streets makes things even worse.

Making it pedestrian only wouldn't hurt in that regard. And if the development has some park space and retail it'd be a perfect location for it. But that is still a bit IF

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mean to be a downer but I simply see no justification for SW to include retail in their development, unless it is a new branded SW/Valspar retail concept and perhaps a cafeteria, gym or day care, but those would be for employees.

Edited by Frmr CLEder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frmr CLEder said:

I don't mean to be a downer but I simply see no justification for SW to include retail in their development, unless it is a new branded SW/Valspar retail concept and perhaps a cafeteria, gym or day care, but those would be for employees.

There should be street level retail where ever it's built.  Period!  Or it become another white elephants serving on one purpose.  A mixed use development keeps the building and street/streetscape active a multiple times of the day.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

Good luck with that!

As an example, lets say this project is built on the West 6/9 lots.  Building retail on Superior and West 9 adds value.  The building/buildings do not become physical and mental barriers to the Warehouse district and EBF, but having needed/every day and select retail will provide connectivity to Public Square/Tower City through to Gateway, E. 4th and the convention center areas.

 

If it's strictly built as an OFFICE building it becomes a barrier and a dead zone.  Just like the cleveland clinic has done in the Fairfax/Hough neighborhoods or larger scale examples downtown Atlanta, Miami, Houston, Charlotte, Dallas, Tampa, etc. with skyscrapers that LOOK nice in a picture but do not function well in an 24 hour urban space.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MyTwoSense said:

with skyscrapers that LOOK nice in a picture but do not function well in an 24 hour urban space.

 

That's exactly why I'm something of a skyline skeptic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MyTwoSense said:

As an example, lets say this project is built on the West 6/9 lots.  Building retail on Superior and West 9 adds value.  The building/buildings do not become physical and mental barriers to the Warehouse district and EBF, but having needed/every day and select retail will provide connectivity to Public Square/Tower City through to Gateway, E. 4th and the convention center areas.

 

If it's strictly built as an OFFICE building it becomes a barrier and a dead zone.  Just like the cleveland clinic has done in the Fairfax/Hough neighborhoods or larger scale examples downtown Atlanta, Miami, Houston, Charlotte, Dallas, Tampa, etc. with skyscrapers that LOOK nice in a picture but do not function well in an 24 hour urban space.

MTS I think you are pretty much preaching to the choir here.

 

Unfortunately, SW has never shown an interest to engage in such development and the city probably has zero leverage to press for it (nor the leadership to create such a vision).  They will just be happy they are staying downtown and won't want to rock the boat.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Htsguy said:

MTS I think you are pretty much preaching to the choir here.

 

Unfortunately, SW has never shown an interest to engage in such development and the city probably has zero leverage to press for it (nor the leadership to create such a vision).  They will just be happy they are staying downtown and won't want to rock the boat.

Agreed and I appreciate the value however, I don't know of many urban corporate HQs that include retail as part of their developments (form follows function). That's not their purpose.  A retail or mixed-use requirement placed on an "urban campus" may force them to look at suburban options.

 

One urban, mixed-use HQ however, that's not a campus, but that does immediately come to mind is Time Warner Center on Columbus Circle in Manhattan.

Edited by Frmr CLEder
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

MTS I think you are pretty much preaching to the choir here.

 

Unfortunately, SW has never shown an interest to engage in such development and the city probably has zero leverage to press for it (nor the leadership to create such a vision).  They will just be happy they are staying downtown and won't want to rock the boat.

SW has never had the need,  Correct?  What large scale corporate HQ project has SW been involved with? 

 

I'm just using the Warehouse District lots as an example.  What happens at street level will be determined by location.  

Edited by MyTwoSense
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Frmr CLEder said:

Agreed and I appreciate the value however, I don't know of many urban corporate HQs that include retail as part of their developments (form follows function). That's not their purpose.  A retail or mixed-use requirement placed on an "urban campus" may force them to look at suburban options.

 

One urban, mixed-use HQ however, that's not a campus, but that does immediately come to mind is Time Warner Center on Columbus Circle in Manhattan.

 

I think it’s becoming more common. Comcast Center has the massive retail floors. Salesforce has the transit station and park. RenCen has it’s gigantic interior empire. I believe the new Instagram offices will also offer condos. And Dollar Tree is building it’s own downtown around it. I’d hope a forward-looking S-W would see the benefit of incorporated shared uses into their HQ. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A building can have a big skyline presence AND a good street level presence...its not that damn hard to figure out. Retail might mean a 7-11 and a cleaners. Better than a blank wall

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. One of the problems with new construction in a lot of cities is they have these massive retail spaces that sit empty for years. Mixed use buildings are nice on paper, but we have enough empty storefronts as it is. Who needs one that's the size of a block. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^There's an easy solution:  stop building giant retail spaces. have a bunch of small ones.  Its a lot harder to find a tenant who needs 100,000 sq feet. --and that's less vibrant than 20 little shops/restaurants that are easier to rent and provides more interesting street lift to an area.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But why build that when we already have an endless supply of existing, smaller, vacant retail spaces in the downtown malls, the arcades, and on the streets? Why do there have to be even more with a new skyscraper? It's just another burden for the property manager and tenants. 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I'd rather build the space for retail that may be filled a year down the line when the market may be ready for it than to build a blank wall that adds nothing to the street and is an extra and expensive cost to reverse just because we already have empty storefronts. These types of developments are one shot deals, there is no re-do for a LOOOOOONG time. Build for the long term vision of a neighborhood not the short sighted present day. 

Edited by MyPhoneDead
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If retail is incorporated, the only streets that may support it would be W. 3rd & 6th, Frankfort and St. Clair. Superior is already a dead zone (Renaissance and garage on one side, parking crater on the other and a very wide Avenue in between the two); ever try crossing Superior there? Retail on the parking crater side of Superior would more than likely be unsuccessful.

Edited by Frmr CLEder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

If retail is incorporated, the only streets that may support it would be W. 6th, Frankfort and St. Clair. Superior is already a dead zone (Renaissance and garage on one side, parking crater on the other and a wide Avenue in between the two). Retail on the parking crater side of Superior would more than likely be unsuccessful.

 

Adding retail opposite the Reaissance and extending West is a plus for the community, downtown and the city as a whole.  This would eliminate/reduce a dead zone, one of the main reasons for adding neighborhood necessary retail at street level.  

meryl streep GIF

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MyTwoSense said:

 

Adding retail opposite the Reaissance and extending West is a plus for the community, downtown and the city as a whole.  This would eliminate/reduce a dead zone, one of the main reasons for adding neighborhood necessary retail at street level.  

meryl streep GIF

It will still be a dead zone when there is nothing there on the ground floor. E9 & Euclid, Euclid where Chipotle is has a few vacancies in the last few years, there is literally nothing in Tower City or the Euclid Arcade, The Garfield on the E6 side has been vacant - since it's been built. Put something else in the ground floor because if it's retail, it'll be siting empty for years

  • Like 1
  • Poison 1
  • Dislike 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pugu said:

^There's an easy solution:  stop building giant retail spaces. have a bunch of small ones.  Its a lot harder to find a tenant who needs 100,000 sq feet. --and that's less vibrant than 20 little shops/restaurants that are easier to rent and provides more interesting street lift to an area.

 

 

Unless they can reel in a long-term tenant like a City Target.   Public Square would be a great location for one. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

It will still be a dead zone when there is nothing there on the ground floor. E9 & Euclid, Euclid where Chipotle is has a few vacancies in the last few years, there is literally nothing in Tower City or the Euclid Arcade, The Garfield on the E6 side has been vacant - since it's been built. Put something else in the ground floor because if it's retail, it'll be siting empty for years

Jennifer Lopez What GIF by NBC World Of Dance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, it’s all about what SW wants. I don’t want anything that’s going to be an impediment to them staying. If they’re ok with retail then fine. Maybe they can even have a flagship SW store there. But if it’s going to be an impediment to the most important thing (which is keeping them here) then it’s not worth it. Give SW what they want

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If currently there are numerous vacant retail sites, especially in high traffic downtown areas, it will be a tough sell for new development.  That area however could use a grocery or convenience store.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, MyTwoSense said:

 

Adding retail opposite the Reaissance and extending West is a plus for the community, downtown and the city as a whole.  This would eliminate/reduce a dead zone, one of the main reasons for adding neighborhood necessary retail at street level.  

meryl streep GIF

It would still be a dead zone. W. Superior is not conducive to shopping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, inlovewithCLE said:

To me, it’s all about what SW wants. I don’t want anything that’s going to be an impediment to them staying. If they’re ok with retail then fine. Maybe they can even have a flagship SW store there. But if it’s going to be an impediment to the most important thing (which is keeping them here) then it’s not worth it. Give SW what they want

And that is part of the problem.  If you go in with a "give them what they want", will they do what is best for them solely or will they do what is best for them, Cleveland going forward and the neighborhood they are HQd??

In today's world company's are socially conscientious.  I want a win-win for all

I would like to ask, who is OK with just another office tower that serves just one function?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is being closely monitored by admins and mods and it will be locked if rules are not being followed!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...