Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Rumour has it Sherwin Willians is eyeing a super tall abutting Public square for their new HQ.
That rumor has been going around for a while now and it has been brought up in this thread. But it doesn't as if Sherwin Williams is going to go the super tall route for that site. Basically, the company is looking at 1.8 million square feet. To fit that on the Public Square lot, the building would have to be ridiculously tall (1,500 plus).
Even with Key Tower being 950, something that tall would look out of place, especially with the other two skyscrapers on Public Square being in the 770 and 660 range.
So, it seems logical that the headquarters will include more than just the Public Square lot and that could include part, if not all of a gigantic parking lot just west of the Public Square lot. That could lead to a 700 to 800 foot tower to fill out Public Square and then an urban campus-like portion next door (research and development) with a couple 300 to 500 foot towers.
That would be the better plan, IMO. For one, Cleveland essentially already has a super tall in Key Tower. It's perfectly fine to let that continue to be the tallest and then add another significant skyscraper and a couple smaller ones that creates more density.
That rumor has been going around for a while now and it has been brought up in this thread. But it doesn't as if Sherwin Williams is going to go the super tall route for that site. Basically, the company is looking at 1.8 million square feet. To fit that on the Public Square lot, the building would have to be ridiculously tall (1,500 plus).
Even with Key Tower being 950, something that tall would look out of place, especially with the other two skyscrapers on Public Square being in the 770 and 660 range.
So, it seems logical that the headquarters will include more than just the Public Square lot and that could include part, if not all of a gigantic parking lot just west of the Public Square lot. That could lead to a 700 to 800 foot tower to fill out Public Square and then an urban campus-like portion next door (research and development) with a couple 300 to 500 foot towers.
That would be the better plan, IMO. For one, Cleveland essentially already has a super tall in Key Tower. It's perfectly fine to let that continue to be the tallest and then add another significant skyscraper and a couple smaller ones that creates more density.
I'd take a hypothetical skyline of:
1. 950
2. 800*
3. 770
4. 660
5. 550*
6. 530
Over:
1. 1,500*
2. 950
3. 770
4. 660
5. 530
*Sherwin Williams
I think the thought was ~1000ft tower (or at least a new tallest for Cleveland) on the Jacobs lot then a low rise/mid rise behind for R&D.not a 1500ft tower on one lot.
I think the thought was ~1000ft tower (or at least a new tallest for Cleveland) on the Jacobs lot then a low rise/mid rise behind for R&D.not a 1500ft tower on one lot.
Yeah, that's kind of what I was getting at.
The Jacobs lot is not big enough in itself for the entire headquarters, so personally I would be satisfied with a 800 footer on that lot if it means that the buildings on Weston lot next door would gain more significance.
I think 800/550/300 would have a bigger impact on the skyline than 1,000/400/250, but that is subjective.
Plus, while not NYC or Chicago, Cleveland has been a skyscraper city in its own right by building the Terminal Tower (second tallest in the world when completed). Then Key Center in the early 90s, which when completed, only L.A. (US Bank), Atlanta (Bank of America) and Houston (JP Morgan and Wells Fargo) had a taller building. So, I could see a push for a 1,000 footer to be built to join that short list of cities that can make that claim.
The Jacobs lot is not big enough in itself for the entire headquarters, so personally I would be satisfied with a 800 footer on that lot if it means that the buildings on Weston lot next door would gain more significance.
I think 800/550/300 would have a bigger impact on the skyline than 1,000/400/250, but that is subjective.
Plus, while not NYC or Chicago, Cleveland has been a skyscraper city in its own right by building the Terminal Tower (second tallest in the world when completed). Then Key Center in the early 90s, which when completed, only L.A. (US Bank), Atlanta (Bank of America) and Houston (JP Morgan and Wells Fargo) had a taller building. So, I could see a push for a 1,000 footer to be built to join that short list of cities that can make that claim.
It would be interesting to see this, as I don't think any of the "decline" cities have built any substantial high rises since the 90's. Surely cities like Cleveland, Detroit, and Pittsburgh had designs on building the worlds tallest skyscrapers in the 50's and 60's.
It would be really cool to see one of them build a 1000 footer out of nowhere just to shake up the narrative and remind the new "boom" cities that can't build a 500 footer who the boss is.
I picked Charlotte but the I saw Dallas,Its a tie but the way Charlotte is going,It would be something I think would be possible with so many banking operations.It would be a huge image boost that Dallas doesnt really have a need for.I think its irrelevant as there are just not much interest in building super-talls due to cost
Dallas got over 3X the votes of Austin in the poll.
Waterline (the one linked) is currently under construction and it will become the tallest building in Texas. Austin also announced the Wilson Tower (which would be 1035 feet) but unfortunately the project has been scaled down from 80 floors to 45 so it probably will not hit 1000 feet. Don’t know why people were not voting Austin in this poll.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
