CLEVELAND — In the days leading up to a July 20 meeting about Sherwin-Williams’ proposed downtown Cleveland campus, the city of Cleveland received dozens of comments from the public regarding the proposal.
On Wednesday, the city released the public feedback to the proposal following a public records request.
Among the feedback, numerous residents expressed concern over a skybridge that would extend over West Third Street. Another, smaller skybridge would go over Frankfort Avenue. Both skybridges would connect to Sherwin-Williams’ proposed 36-story office tower.
The skybridge over West Third Street would be connected to an adjacent two-story pavilion. The Frankfort Avenue skybridge would go to the tower’s parking garage.
A joint committee of city and downtown leaders weighed these public submissions on July 20 when it gave a conditional approval for its concept. The joint committee consisted of members of the Cleveland City Planning Commission, Downtown/Flats Design Review Committee, Cleveland Landmarks Commission and Warehouse Historic District Design Review Committee.
Approving the concept was by no means a final approval, but the vote allows Sherwin-Williams to continue designing its headquarters. As part of the conditional approval awarded to Sherwin-Williams on July 20, it would come back to the joint committee with additional designs and considerations for the skybridge.
Downtown Cleveland currently has several skybridges, including two that are connected to Rocket Mortgage FieldHouse, one that is attached to Tower City Center and another attached to Cuyahoga County administrative offices.
Out of 16 public comments that addressed the skybridges, 15 voiced concerns or opposition to the skybridge. Their concerns ranged from the aesthetics of such walkways to how the public interacts with downtown.
“We know from experience here in Cleveland and across the country that skybridges are antithetical to vibrant cities and street life, and cater to folks from outside the city who would prefer to drive in and out, cause auto traffic and emissions, but never actually engage with the city,” wrote Cleveland resident Trevor Pollack. “The Sherwin-Williams headquarters project is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to impact the public experience, vibrancy, safety (particularly for people on foot and bicycle), and environment.”
Allan Dreyer, a member of the Downtown Landmarks Commission, echoed the concerns voiced by the public.
“I think there are a lot of things to like about [the proposal],” Dreyer said. “Conceptually, I don’t like the skybridge. I don’t like skybridges in general for a lot of reasons. But if it’s got to be a skybridge, make it something. Don’t try to hide it. I think that is the distinction a lof people are trying to make it. Make it part of the architecture.”
The next step for Sherwin-Williams is to submit its schematic design on Aug. 31. The joint committee will meet Sept. 14 to consider the schematic design. Sherwin-Williams would then bring its final design proposal to the committee in November for a vote.
Details of the plan are available on the Sherwin-Williams website.
