Topic: Cleveland: Jacobs' Public Square Property

[Scav]

not to restoke the coals of a deadly flame...


but..


what makes everyone on here seem to think that this small building will interact better with the street than a taller one?

there is an inherent quality about the scare of a taller building versus a smaller one to someone walking by.. but nothing a good design couldnt very easily fix.

i would love to see this building able to have a Phase II where it would become the skyscraper that was destined to be on that property.

[KJP]

not to restoke the coals of a deadly flame...

But you're going to anyway, right?!

[3231]

not to restoke the coals of a deadly flame...


but..


what makes everyone on here seem to think that this small building will interact better with the street than a taller one?

there is an inherent quality about the scare of a taller building versus a smaller one to someone walking by.. but nothing a good design couldnt very easily fix.

i would love to see this building able to have a Phase II where it would become the skyscraper that was destined to be on that property.

I think that you are confusing design and urban planning issues.

[the pope]

what makes everyone on here seem to think that this small building will interact better with the street than a taller one?

I look at it this way, I'd rather have 1,000 employees holed up in a poorly planned building, than 5,000 employees holed up in a poorly planned building.

[Mov2Ohio]

not to restoke the coals of a deadly flame...


but..


what makes everyone on here seem to think that this small building will interact better with the street than a taller one?

there is an inherent quality about the scare of a taller building versus a smaller one to someone walking by.. but nothing a good design couldnt very easily fix.

i would love to see this building able to have a Phase II where it would become the skyscraper that was destined to be on that property.

In my opinion once you go above 2 stories height is irrelevant when talking about addressing the street. If a 10 story building has stores lining the street it would have the same effect as a 110 story building with the same number of stores on street level. Only difference is a lot more people would be coming in and out of the 110 story building. Right now a smaller building makes sense because office demand isn't enough to justify a 70 story tower and all the other proposed office buildings being built. I understand Jacobs as a business man sees this as an opportunity to make moves while there is a demand, but I personally would have liked this to have been at least 600'

As said before this is just preliminary and there are too many variables out there right now (new convention center, growing demand for luxury downtown living spaces and other office properties that may or may not get built), to think that the rendering will be what's actually constructed there in a few years.

[KStay2]

what makes everyone on here seem to think that this small building will interact better with the street than a taller one?

I look at it this way, I'd rather have 1,000 employees holed up in a poorly planned building, than 5,000 employees holed up in a poorly planned building.

What does that even mean?

[the pope]

what makes everyone on here seem to think that this small building will interact better with the street than a taller one?

I look at it this way, I'd rather have 1,000 employees holed up in a poorly planned building, than 5,000 employees holed up in a poorly planned building.

What does that even mean?

Lets assume the worse and we end up with another Key Tower with no presence on the street. I'd rather have fewer people held hostage in a smaller building, than more people held hostage in taller building (this is a very weak argument to prefer a smaller building).

[KStay2]

I see.. whatever floats your boat I guess.. I'd love to see a conversation between you and the "we need a big building for the skyline" person on here.. that'd be hilarious.

[Cleveland]

Jacobs building is good for the skyline because it ads density. I believe thats what makes a good looking skyline. Cleveland needs in the "future" taller buildings away from public square 40+ stories to give the city a more populated look. Not just buildings in one area look at chicago for instance. it would be nice to see some skyscrapers along lake Erie. This is my opinion.

[the pope]

I see.. whatever floats your boat I guess.. I'd love to see a conversation between you and the "we need a big building for the skyline" person on here.. that'd be hilarious.

That conversation has been had by me and many others on this forum dozens of times, because we all know a city's true greatness is measured by the height of its skyline.

[Cleveland]

yes i agree a city is measured by its height but in the case of Jacobs 21 story tower this is good because it adds density but if we could get some developers to build along the lake or the river with some highrises like i said it would really make Cleveland standout. But of course this is easier said than done due to our economy.

[the pope]

Jacobs building is good for the skyline because it ads density. I believe thats what makes a good looking skyline. Cleveland needs in the "future" taller buildings away from public square 40+ stories to give the city a more populated look. Not just buildings in one area look at chicago for instance. it would be nice to see some skyscrapers along lake Erie. This is my opinion.

Yeah, chicago's got a reaaal bad skyline going on there....

yes i agree a city is measured by its height but in the case of Jacobs 21 story tower this is good because it adds density but if we could get some developers to build along the lake or the river with some highrises like i said it would really make Cleveland standout. But of course this is easier said than done due to our economy.

Uh, I was using sarcasm, are you using sarcasm on sarcasm....?

[Cleveland]

alittle bit haha

[w28th]

not to restoke the coals of a deadly flame...


but..




what makes everyone on here seem to think that this small building will interact better with the street than a taller one?

there is an inherent quality about the scare of a taller building versus a smaller one to someone walking by.. but nothing a good design couldnt very easily fix.

i would love to see this building able to have a Phase II where it would become the skyscraper that was destined to be on that property.

There are 6 pages on this thread that talk about the difference.

[jam40jeff]

we all know a city's true greatness is measured by the height of its skyline.

And we have a 970 foot p3n1s!

[gavster]

One project that could possibly change this project is the convention center. If rebuilt at the current site the county would need to start looking for office space immediately, in which they could turn to Jacobs which could easily add 15-20 stories to accommodate them. Also if the convention center is chosen for the tower city site Jacobs could add a hotel to his project adding possibly another 10 floors. If they decide it's too expensive to build at this time or if medical mart for whatever reason backs out we'll pobably just get the 21 story building being presented.

[KJP]

If the county is going to move its offices into new quarters, it's going to move all of them into a single consolidated building as they had planned to do at the old Ameritrust Center. To put all those offices in one building will require a pretty large building in its own right.

I've heard rumblings that Stark is trying to get DFAS into a building on his project site, and I wouldn't be surprised if he's trying to do the same with the county. I'm sure the port authority could give him some good financing on both.

[gotribe]

If the county is going to move its offices into new quarters, it's going to move all of them into a single consolidated building as they had planned to do at the old Ameritrust Center. To put all those offices in one building will require a pretty large building in its own right.

I've heard rumblings that Stark is trying to get DFAS into a building on his project site, and I wouldn't be surprised if he's trying to do the same with the county. I'm sure the port authority could give him some good financing on both.

I was pretty much thinking the same thing.  And also, with the amount of available open land/parking lots in the vicinity of PS, I really do not think it will be necessary to raise the buliding height based on needs for covention center needs.  It really isn't as if there is a land crunch around the proposed sites for a convention center.  Hotels and office buildings will have plenty of land to pick from in Starks development.  I couldn't be happier with the proposed hieght of Jacob's Tower. 

[cardsnxtyr]

Will this building be built right up to the sidewalk or will it be set back from the street so there can be room for "greenspace" right across from Public Square. I know it was the first rendering and all, but in it they showed a pathway leading up to the building with trees and benches in front of the building. Or is it too early to know this answer for sure?

[Htsguy]

^Oh boy...you're in trouble now if your post (it is not clear) is advocating green space in front of the building rather than building right up to the sidewalk.     Set backs (and for good reason most of the time) are not well received on this forum.

That said, if I recall the "rendering" the green space was one of the quadrants of public square.

[McCleveland]

^ That rendering is actually showing the NW quadrant of public square....  but it certainly premature to know their exact site plan.

[cardsnxtyr]

Let it be known that i am TOTALLY AGAISNT setbacks, especially on public square, sorry for the misunderstanding there.
With the square right across the street there is no reason this building needs to be setback from the sidewalk.

[McCleveland]

Let it be known that i am TOTALLY AGAISNT setbacks, especially on public square, sorry for the misunderstanding there.
With the square right across the street there is no reason this building needs to be setback from the sidewalk.

agreed.  and I'd be shocked if they did anything like that.

[Florida Guy]

I don't think that there would be room for a setback. I cringed when I first saw the rendering but then I realized the green space was Public Square.

[Hts121]

The lot where it will be built is not big enough to allow the green space in front AND a garage in the rear.

[KJP]

Unless they're proposing to put the garage below ground and the greenspace on top of it.

I think there is room for a setback, which I don't support. Remember that the proposed Ameritrust Tower was to have a 50,000-square-foot base.

[Hts121]

Agreed, but all the early indications I have read have the garage fronting W. 3rd St.

[MyTwoSense]

I think it would be better hidden on Rockwell.  Or how about NO GARAGE?!

[3231]

^there probably would be traffic issues, but it would be nice to front the garage on Frankfort (if that is the name of the street that is to the immediate north).

[MyTwoSense]

^there probably would be traffic issues, but it would be nice to front the garage on Frankfort (if that is the name of the street that is to the immediate north).

We meant the same street.  LOL....BUT, you're right, Rockwell is East of Ontario and Frankfort is West of Ontario. 

[Scav]

yes yes i restoked it (and sorry for the late reply as i see the conversation has already passed me)

but just to clairify my question WAS answered.. its an urban planning issue not a design issue. I guess now that you mention that its just the mood that more ppl vs less set than another i would agree.. however..


i can wait 10 years, just give me all four tallest buildings on public square.

thats my opinion though.

[Pete]

...the county would need to start looking for office space immediately, in which they could turn to Jacobs which could easily add 15-20 stories to accommodate them.

There is no way that the county government will be in Jacobs' tower.  First, the county commissioners have spotty credibility when it comes to making major financial decisions lately, so purchasing the most expensive office space in town would likely damage their political credibility even further.  They need to improve credibility with voters (especially during an economic downturn), not lease prime space on the square. 

If the county moves their offices, they are going to consolidate most of the offices scattered around town onto one site, and will likely need to lease their own building.  Anybody that has worked in one of the buildings where the county leases space knows that county offices do not make good neighbors.  Most county offices are social services (drug rehab, family services, mental health, etc.). The targeted tenants with deep pockets desiring Class A offices will not lease space in a building with druggies running around screaming at people in the elevators and psychos defecating in stairwells. 

The county needs a modern but mostly empty building with low rents (like EOG at E.9th & Superior) at around $12 a foot versus $30 per foot rent in a new tower.

[gavster]

good point Pete.

[KStay2]

^^Damn, well put.

[Flee2theCleve]

"psychos defecating in stairwells"....WOW!