Jump to content
KJP

Cleveland: Downtown: Sherwin-Williams Headquarters

Recommended Posts

21 Stories on such a prime location?  It's better than a parking lot!  Hopefully the project will grow to include other things.  Why do we need more parking in the core of the city with the RTA Healthline RIGHT IN FRONT of the buildings door?


 

Jacobs, Hines to build 21-story office tower on Public Square

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/business/2008/05/jacobs_hines_to_build_21story.html

Posted by mjarboe May 28, 2008 11:39AM

 

Richard E. Jacobs GroupThe Richard E. Jacobs group has formed a joint venture with international real estate developer Hines to build a 21-story office tower on Public Square.

The Richard E. Jacobs Group will partner with international developer Hines to build a 21-story office tower on Public Square in downtown Cleveland.

 

The tower, aimed at major downtown tenants considering new office space, could cost about $180 million to build. Construction could start next year, with a possible opening date in late 2011, officials with the Jacobs Group told The Plain Dealer this morning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my view, that is a perfect height for this spot.  I also like the renderring in the PD.

 

I agree. I'm glad they're taking the market into consideration in planning the height of this building.

 

I love the fact that they're going with an international architectural firm, also. I love the rendering in the PD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not get ahead of ourselves, I don't see any way this gets built unless they get one of the large tenants still out there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No kidding, it looks one dimensional.  I saw drawings on the old City Vision 2000 or whatever it was called thread, and there was a rendering of an expanded mall over the railroad tracks that actually looked somewhat representative.  I was actually almost fooled and thought it was like a real photo, going, "Wait, when did the mall look like THAT?"  Some time during the 1990s I guess it was decided that all renderings must be either sketchy cartoons or computer-generated blocks of near-translucence in which the primary material for construction appears to be an eerie blue haze

 

21 stories does feel a little shy but as my girlfriend who only exists for the purposes of making this joke tells me all the time, size is mostly about ego anyway.  Still, I was with whomever upthread was hoping for something about the height of Erieview or greater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone think Squire Sanders & Dempsey is a shoo-in for this building because they already are in a Jacob's owned property? (maybe a stretch)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone think Squire Sanders & Dempsey is a shoo-in for this building because they already are in a Jacob's owned property? (maybe a stretch)

 

Well, I don't know.  Then Jacobs has a void to fill in their current location. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I love the fact that they're going with an international architectural firm, also.

 

International, yes, but not particularly exciting.  Which is fine, I guess.

 

I'm a little disappointed that it will be straight office with no residential or hotel.  Not surprising, but still a little disappointing given the ambitions of Wolstein and Stark.

And I'm absolutely terrified of that parking garage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone think Squire Sanders & Dempsey is a shoo-in for this building because they already are in a Jacob's owned property? (maybe a stretch)

 

Well, I don't know.  Then Jacobs has a void to fill in their current location. 

 

SS&D has already explicitly said they are looking. Don't recall if it was a space crunch, or just end of lease.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting that Stark and Jacob's decide to collaborate on a TIF,and then a 20-ish story office tower jumps one block over from Stark's project, which will now have office held off until the future, to Jacob's lot.  All within a 2 week period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Well, I don't know.  Then Jacobs has a void to fill in their current location."

 

Given that Key Tower has had something like a high-90% occupancy since it was built, I wouldn't be too worried. Even if it's not brand-new, they're on the upper floors of Key and no 20-some story building can offer comparable views. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with you Straphanger.  Gensler is far from exciting, but really, this is one spot where it's like, just get something on there. 

The height I like, lets the Terminal Tower remain viewable from any direction.  BP killed the downtown approach from the east, and I'd hate to miss a full view from the Shoreway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I wouldn't worry about losing the Shoreway view:

 

cleskyshorewayjacobshines.jpg

 

I'm ballpark-guessing this tower will end up around 350 feet - LEED requirements generally include higher floor heights to accomodate underfloor air systems along with fiberoptics and other infrastructure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We often complain that the biggest eyesore in all of Cleveland is a parking lot at Public Square. Now we are getting a skyscraper and some of you are complaining? I am actually very happy for this announcement! Surely, a taller building would be nice, but let's focus on something instead of nothing, especially with this economic downturn we're currently experiencing. I think this is great news especially since it will coincide with Stark's big project.

 

Also, Mayday, I am wondering if your rendering does hold true, would it take away that amazing view from the Shoreway where you can see all the way down Euclid Avenue past CSU?? One of my favorite views of anything anywhere is on the Shoreway headed east, first you can see all the way down Superior for a split second, and then you can see at the slanted angle, all the way down Euclid, lined with buildings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I wouldn't worry about losing the Shoreway view:

 

Now I am worried.  The Shoreway view was beautiful, especially in that shade of golden red with the sun going down, until that Photoshop-looking gray building appeared on the scene! :)

 

Kidding, of course...I think this is great and I don't understand the pessimism.  I think the size will perfectly transition Public Square into Stark's development.

 

And to answer bizbiz...unless the building is built RIGHT up to the W. 3rd. St./Superior Ave. corner, I don't think it will block the view down Euclid:

 

euclidview.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This comment would fit better on the last page, but I keep saying we need more glass on the skyline.  I'm all for this building.

 

Some more neo-classical, Minority Report-esque buildings like Stokes would be cool, too.

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I'll be the bad guy and post the rendering from Photobucket....

 

PublicSquareTower.jpg

 

BTW, I think this building and the Ernst & Young building are the "right" heights. When I mean "right" I think it provides sustainable density to downtown Cleveland. You don't need 50-story monstronsities to restore the lacking street life to our downtown. But if these buildings are built without significant mixed uses on the ground floors (ie: more than a tiny newstand) and rely wholly on internal access to/from structured parking, then there is little chance for the buildings to interact on a pedestrian scale. I hope this building doesn't follow Key Tower's lead in a lack of ground-floor mixed use. Key Tower should be a huge source for pedestrian traffic, but if you stood outside the front doors you'd swear the building was nearly empty -- not nearly full.


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when the cement on my bridgework cracks and my fake teeth come out you can see all the way to the back of my mouth.  in the clevealand of my mouth, my tongue is euclid avenue.  but that doesn't mean I am going to leave it that way.  of course, in this same metaphor, this rendering is like a grill full of gold teeth.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gross...


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First let me say that since I no longer live in Cleveland my opinion of this proposal is certainly not as germane to this thread as those still residing there. It seems most of the comments thus far are in favor of a project of this size for this site. With that in mind I say congratulations, you're finally getting rid of that awful surface lot. IMHO this is just simply heart breaking. Since the cancellation of the Ameritrust Center, which I considered a very good KPF effort, I always held out hope that this critical site would be reserved for something truly grand. I even hoped it would be the site of Clevelands first, and probably only, supertall. I understand the idea of sustainable density; however placing this building on this site will not do anything more for downtown street life then if it was 1 block west. Again it's only my opinion but this building would be a better fit for the southeast corner of the "Pesht" development. I'm only speaking of height here. I'll reserve judgement on design for the time when more, and better, renderings are available. I don't like the sound of a 3 story parking podium on the "Pesht" side so seeing some street level elevations would be interesting.

BTW, Jacobs had to partner with Hines for this...really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Part of me agrees with a bit of disapoointment on the scale of the project, but if this tower is built along with what we call Pesht it will really fill up a hole in the heart of the city.

 

Just wondering, how will this building interact with the 55Public Square building

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I understand it fills up a hole but it's a small hole and once "Pesht" is done, especially if it included an office tower component on the southeast side, it would seem much smaller. This just does not do justice to the potential of the location.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'd be great to see a site plan, but maybe there will be one in tomorrow's paper.  I think it'd be cool to see the building oriented parallel with the main part of the Terminal Tower.  Seems like it'd be pretty boring making it parallel to Ontario and Superior. 

 

Also, I'm interested in how this proposal will interact with 55 Public Square.  Hopefully there's a good degree of variation between the two.

 

The perspective doesn't seem right on the rendering.  While I like the project, my first impression of the design is that it isn't extremely exciting.  I'll withhold my opinion until I see more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm i am kind of split right now...

 

on one hand there are PLENTY of places for a new skyscraper to be built in the future if need be, and this kind of density is great for the city. it will transition nicely from public square to WHD.

 

 

on the other hand its disappointing to see this here, as i was expecting more.. and would not mind waiting a few years on this project to see cleveland get an even taller building than key.. could you imagine standing in public square after a building of that kind of height was build there? it would be inCREDibly gorgeous.

 

 

now that i said all that.. i wouldnt mind waiting :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from the decent old-stock buildings, to ameritrust tower dreams, to the 20+yr gap to this small, uninspired building? wow, how much more symbolic can one patch of land be to the history of cleveland business as a whole?  :|

 

that said, the rendering is okey doke. i'll settle for it as long as it interacts well with the "pesht" side and there is ground floor retail around it. maybe even a little local cafe with outdoor seating would be nice too. what's really too bad is that this building is too small for any other type of mixed use on the upper floors. hey unless they sneak a cool rooftop bar on top, then all is forgiven!  :laugh:

 

i agree with others that it's real shame to waste thee prime showpiece lot downtown on something so mundane as this uninspired building (at first glance/so far), but as ryansav said above the reality is there are plenty of other places for a big tower someday. so i'll be very happy to see the most embarrassing parking lot in the city gone and a new building on public square.  :clap:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how long have we been waiting for anything on this block?

 

wait any longer and we end up with a renaissance center (the ultimate 700ft street life sucker)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ you know what? the ren cen is actually an apt comparison to this building in a sense if they don't include any mixed use stuff on the ground level. i would imagine they will, but who knows? from the rendering it looks like they are ambivilent about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ you know what? the ren cen is actually an apt comparison to this building in a sense if they don't include any mixed use stuff on the ground level. i would imagine they will, but who knows? from the rendering it looks like they are ambivilent about it.

 

Scale it down (a lot) and you end up with Key Tower, tons of people working inside, however, no reason for those people to leave, or the public to enter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i just hope they don't repeat that kind of previously common mistake. after all, it is right on the city's main public square, at the very least it should engage that setting & have some public life in and around it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I as most posters am a little disappointed. I was hoping for a signature 70 story mixed use building for this parcel. However since there is so much competion and it appears that we could get all 4 major projects off the ground ( FEB, Stark, Jacobs & K&D Ameritrust ) I would settle for a scaled down version versus nothing. Here's hoping that he could get a couple leases that would allow him to do an expanded project just as FEB did. FEB started as a 220 million dollar project and grew to a 530 million. Here's hoping that this project can do the same. He would have to get leases that would start at the end of 2012 or later if he is to build a larger building and I don't know if any of these tenants could wait an extra  1 or 2 more years for a larger building.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 stories?!?!? WTF!!!! is this a joke or somethin? call me shocked from everything i heard and expected......wow. THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT LOCATION FOR A TOWER IN DOWNTOWN CLEVELAND AND WOULD BE PERFECT I MEAN PERFECT FOR A NEW SIGNATURE TALLEST.

 

where else would you build a new tallest? this is RIGHT ON PUBLIC SQUARE

 

proves that cleveland cant think BIG and wants to trap itself in this mentality

 

ridiculous

 

jacobs has been plannin this sh!t forever and been sittin on the lot for YEARS and the best he can do is a rinky dinky little tower? if this gets built im gonna be pissed. he had a plan (multiple...im not talkin about the ameritrust tower) for somethin 1300 ft and now this?

 

id rather this be a parking lot than a 21 story building on that site

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After thinking about this, I feel that it is much much better than tossing up another 65-story tower. Please, let's be real. Cleveland does not have the office market at this point to digest a such a huge tower. We'd probably see another 15 years of no-office-growth if we over built during another recession. Sure, the skyline pumps up our ego. But honestly, Key Tower does nothing for street life. Image if we had three 20-story towers interspersed throughout the WHD--that would create so much more life and give downtown a much more active feel.

 

Here are my thoughts:

-a huge tower would put a huge dent into the local office market. This would stunt future mixed-use developments.

-it would create some serious traffic issues because of the parking garage that it would bring along with it--let's be honest, Jacobs is not counting on future workers to take the bus and ride the rapid.

-tall towers tend to provide a lot of amenities that keep occupants from leaving the building.

-tall towers make us feel proud

-tall towers look good during the NBA and MLB playoffs

-tall towers suck the life out of other parts of downtown

-demanding a 50+ skyscraper is the short-sighted and egotistical way to go. A bunch of 20-story and 10-story office buildings will do a lot more for street life than a tower ever will.

-tell me, how does the street level retail look around Key Tower??

 

This is the best case scenario. Architecturally, it allows Key and Terminal to stand out. I think that our taller buildings are already too concentrated in one area. I'd love to see one pop up in PHS some day--we need a little balance to our skyline. When they are concentrated as they currently are, it makes the rest of downtown look miniscule.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can bitch and  complain all we want but:

[*]The vacant lot will be filled

[*]This is a rendering not a final design

[*]As with the FEB, who knows if there will be "add ons" that enhance the project.

[*]Your complaining about "height" on Public Square, there is no need for all the towers to be centered around Public Square.  There are other places where a 30 story plus tower can be constructed.

[*]Where any of you in the board room discussing this project?  NO!

 

It is what it is, and until any of us here can finance and construct a tower, this is what we're getting...so get over it now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^well I was waiting for 216's post....I could have probably written it myself base on his previous posts...he sure is a size junkie...I guess what I find "ridiculous" is that the height of a building any where in the city is an indictment against it...or for that matter that the citizens of the city have any control (or really say other that of the design committees and planning commission) in regards to how a private developer decides to spend his millions of dollars on his property...I said it before and I will say it again...it is "real easy" for certain people to spend other people's money.

 

I certainly would like to see more renderings...my real concern right now (other than the fact that I would have preferred more of a mixed use for the site) is with the parking garage on the west side of the building...this is going to turn the east side of West Third into a pretty barren stretch of sidewalk form Superior to Lakeside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please, let's be real. Cleveland does not have the office market at this point to digest a such a huge tower. 

 

how do you know? there are still several companies lookin for office space, theres the new convention center/medical mart being built, opportunity for new hotel space, mixed retail, new residential, etc. jacobs could easily fill a building like he had been planning if he had the vision and finances. people said the same exact thing when key tower went up yet our class A vacancy rate is LOWER than what it was after key was built.....15 years later. our CBD is expanding. our downtown population is rising.

 

 

But honestly, Key Tower does nothing for street life. Image if we had three 20-story towers interspersed throughout the WHD--that would create so much more life and give downtown a much more active feel.

 

STOP TALKING ABOUT "STREET LIFE"! how the hell does a 20-story building create more street life than a 60-story one? this is the CBD, where believe it or not. SKYSCRAPERS EXIST.  want to talk about street life and creating life downtown? go to the pesht thread, FEB thread, or midtown/CSU college town. THOSE ARE WHERE DENSE STREETSCAPES THAT INTERACT WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD NEED TO BE BUILT. this building is ONE BUILDING ON ONE SINGLE PLOT OF LAND. its not some huge mixed-use neighborhood being created like starks warehouse district plan. i seriously dont understand what part of this you dont understand.

 

 

Your complaining about "height" on Public Square, there is no need for all the towers to be centered around Public Square.  There are other places where a 30 story plus tower can be constructed.

 

im also complainin about your grammar. where would a better location be for a skyscraper taller than key be ? serious question

 

or for that matter that the citizens of the city have any control (or really say other that of the design committees and planning commission) in regards to how a private developer decides to spend his millions of dollars on his property

 

they dont, so why is 2 cents sayin this?

 

#

# Where any of you in the board room discussing this project?  NO!

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, if you follow Kunstler's "victims" of the Long Emergency, supertalls are among the casualties. Supertalls (higher than 20 stories) are energy-suckers, according to him.

 

Even without a post-peak oil economic collapse, I agree that this building is the right scale for the times. It won't forestall expansion of the downtown office market for years to come, compared to a supertall that would put so much leasable space on the market that it would depress prices and take years to fill.

 

And, from the rendering (I realize it's very preliminary), but it appears Jacobs is proposing to put the parking below ground with greenspace on half of the site and the tower on the other. If so, the question is which half? And will the half of the parking structure that has the greenspace on it allow a second tower to be built on it?


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how do you know? there are still several companies lookin for office space, theres the new convention center/medical mart being built, opportunity for new hotel space, mixed retail, new residential, etc. jacobs could easily fill a building like he had been planning if he had the vision and finances. people said the same exact thing when key tower went up yet our class A vacancy rate is LOWER than what it was after key was built.....15 years later. our CBD is expanding. our downtown population is rising.

 

i know because I pay attention to the office market. You obviously do not. How many cities in the US have seen 16 years pass without putting up a single office building? We need to understand our strengths and weaknesses. We are seeing some office tenants relocate within downtown. This is not expansion, is it relocation. It is good to a point. Please let me know which other office tenants are looking to expand in or to downtown that would justify such a large building. The current roster does not justify such growth.

 

STOP TALKING ABOUT "STREET LIFE"! how the hell does a 20-story building create more street life than a 60-story one? this is the CBD, where believe it or not. SKYSCRAPERS EXIST.  want to talk about street life and creating life downtown? go to the pesht thread, FEB thread, or midtown/CSU college town. THOSE ARE WHERE DENSE STREETSCAPES THAT INTERACT WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD NEED TO BE BUILT. this building is ONE BUILDING ON ONE SINGLE PLOT OF LAND. its not some huge mixed-use neighborhood being created like starks warehouse district plan. i seriously dont understand what part of this you dont understand.

 

I have an idea. Let's build a 200-story building on Public Square. It would make us look so cool. 

Streetlife is so overrated--kind of like oxygen's importance to the human race.

 

Your complaining about "height" on Public Square, there is no need for all the towers to be centered around Public Square.  There are other places where a 30 story plus tower can be constructed.

where would a better location be for a skyscraper taller than key be ? serious question

 

I think PHS would be a great location for a skyscraper. If the tall buildings are spread out over a cbd, it helps create the feeling that the downtown is larger. Take a look at downtown from 490 or 90--it appears that we only have three buildings in our downtown. That said, a skyline is the least important thing for a downtown. An active streetlife is what brings and keeps people downtown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, from the rendering (I realize it's very preliminary), but it appears Jacobs is proposing to put the parking below ground with greenspace on half of the site and the tower on the other. If so, the question is which half? And will the half of the parking structure that has the greenspace on it allow a second tower to be built on it?

 

what the hell does downtown need greenspace for? all this "green space" "pocket park" "plaza" stuff is stupid. theres enough of that already. what downtown needs is buildings at street level on these gaping parking lots.

 

want to build a 20-story tower? build it on the lot directly across from the public square lot in starks plan or somewhere else in the city's numerous parking lots downtown that need to disappear

 

the comments by people are an overall "lets settle for anything that gets built because hey! at least something is being built in cleveland finally" attitude

 

im amazed that jacobs would sit on this lot wanting to build an iconic scraper taller than key and announces this uninspired 20-story tower now

 

i know because I pay attention to the office market. You obviously do not. How many cities in the US have seen 16 years pass without putting up a single office building? We need to understand our strengths and weaknesses. We are seeing some office tenants relocate within downtown. This is not expansion, is it relocation. It is good to a point. Please let me which other office tenants are looking to expand in or to downtown that would justify such a large building.

 

i do too, nice blanket statement. other cities overbuilt and have higher vacancies than cleveland does or have officials/developers without a suburban mentality and making it harder for businesses to be downtown

 

companies in cleveland....ones located downtown .....arent expanding? please. there arent LARGE companies located in the burbs that the city shouldnt be luring downtown with proposals?

 

like i pointed out before, office vacancy rates are the lowest theyve been in years. thats not a sign of expansion?

 

Squires, Sanders, and Dempsy,  Baker & Hostetler, Huntington Bank are just a couple looking for new class A space. i dont know the exact #s of space they take up so i would have to look them up and put the figures together

 

office + ground floor retail + hotel for convention center + condos = easily able to build a new tallest

 

 

older buildings could easily be converted to residential for the growing downtown population and office space for other smaller up and coming (tech) companies that are looking to be downtown

 

 

 

 

I think PHS would be a great location for a skyscraper. If the tall buildings are spread out over a cbd, it helps create the feeling that the downtown is larger. Take a look at downtown from 490 or 90--it appears that we only have three buildings in our downtown. That said, a skyline is the least important thing for a downtown. An active streetlife is what brings and keeps people downtown.

 

playhouse square? youre seriously complaining about "street life" on one lot on public square where a skyscraper could be built yet youd rather see a 60-story building in playhouse square? talk about ass backwards. as if there arent enough gaps in the skyline how would a 1000-footer over there look compared to filling a gap where the big 3 are? theres active streetlife downtown on superior and euclid.....oh wait......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
where would a better location be for a skyscraper taller than key be ? serious question

 

Are you serious?  Just to name a few.

[*]East Ninth and Lakeside

[*]Pick a spot between Huron and Canal streets

[*]The parking lot on Euclid, between East 6 and East 9 Streets.

[*]The parking lot on Prospect, between East 6 and East 9 Streets.

[*]East 9 and Bolivar.

 

Nobody here is saying it's "perfect" but its what is economical NOW.  You can't provide the P&L/Financial Package or Real Estate forecast for this project, so how can you make statements like "it has to be taller" and base comments solely on a RENDERING?

 

Is any of this sinking in man?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, let's wait and see what happens with the proposal.  Remember, nothing about the design is final, and we all know that he has been waiting for the right time to build on that lot.  You never know, the plans could definitely expand.  What's good to know is that he is serious about building on this lot, FINALLY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

where would a better location be for a skyscraper taller than key be ? serious question

 

Are you serious?  Just to name a few.

[*]East Night and Lakeside

[*]Pick a spot between Huron and Canal streets

[*]The parking lot on Euclid, between East 6 and East 9 Streets.

[*]The parking lot on Prospect, between East 6 and East 9 Streets.

[*]East 9 and Bolivar.

 

Nobody here is saying it's "perfect" but its what is economical NOW.  You can't provide the P&L/Financial Package or Real Estate forecast for this project, so how can you make statements like "it has to be taller" and base comments solely on a RENDERING?

 

Is any of this sinking in man?

 

Prospect is SCREAMING for some type of development.  That street has one too many surface parking lots east of East 14th.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^I think design is very important. However, this block is such a huge and damaging hole in our urban fabric. I'm willing to accept a half-*ssed design if we could plug this hole in downtown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prospect is SCREAMING for some type of development.  That street has one too many surface parking lots east of East 14th.

 

I'd love to see something huge on Prospect across from E.4th street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop being homers and lets call this what it is: a small time development for a small time city. Putting the issue of height aside for the moment, the building is bland and forgettable despite occupying what may be the city's premier lot. It looks as if it could've been built in the late 80's.

 

Getting to height...21 storeys??? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Even those who maintain that a supertall is not necessary--to those: can you say "Sour Grapes" (if a 1200 foot monster was announced, you'd all be jumping for joy and you know it)--would admit that 300 feet is ridiculous for this site. It must be at least 700 feet, preferably 1200. There are no lake views. There is no ooohhh or ahhh factor. It doesn't do anything to bolster civic pride the way having the formerly tallest between NYC and Chicago did. You want to build one of these mini-scrapers? Fine, bury it out of sight in suburbia-downtown (FEB).

 

A classic example of Cleveland's uncanny tendency to settle for second-best. Demand better, folks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...