Major revamp eyed for Wendy's Restaurant in Five Points
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Cities/Jacksonville/Development/Wendys-Five-Points/i-dHvJZf6/0/L/Wendys-2-L.jpg)
Wendy's plans to demolish their aging restaurant at 2006 Park Street. Once it's gone, a modern building featuring outdoor dining, lounge chairs, Wi-Fi, flat screen TVs and digital menuboards will rise in its place. Is it enough of an improvement to make Five Points a better pedestrian scale environment or should the design team head back to the drawing board?
Read More: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2016-nov-major-revamp-eyed-for-wendys-restaurant-in-five-points
The new corporate Wendy's layout is much more interesting than the old template they had used.
The semi Bauhaus-Americana design has more eye appeal externally.
I think this will work fine in 5 Points. An exterior design approach of modern Savannah probably would blend in with the nearby residential, but I dont live near this location, so aesthetics would be more a local call.
So they're just going to tear down the building and put a fancy new one on it's exact footprint? Are they going for a PUD because the current zoning won't let them do that?
Aging restaurant? I prefer to think of it as historic building stock...
A lot more could be done with the site plan. I'd love angle parking around the exterior and multiple retail bays with a shared patio, but I'm guessing proximity to the intersection would prevent that layout. I know they'll want to keep a drive-through, but I still think the site should be reworked from the prior configuration.
We'd love to get people's idea on how the site plan could be improved.
5 Points is the hottest retail area in the urban core. I think the economics could justify something a little better.
It strains belief that the exact same siteplan from the 60's is the best possible idea...
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 10, 2016, 11:33:00 AMI know they'll want to keep a drive-through
I think this is the #1 reason they are sticking with the existing site plan. It would be very difficult to put the building up on the corner and maintain a drive through.
Something to add.. the Wendy's at San Juan & Hamilton was partially torn down, and rebuilt with the new modern design. I didn't take photos, but if you look at the older building on Street View, you can get an idea of what was left and just rebuilt.
As someone who lives nearby, I think the building should be pushed up to the corner. If the drive thru is necessary and there's concern about traffic backing up onto Park Street, then move the pick-up window closer to the sidewalk on Margaret. Please tell me this doesn't have to remain a suburban design for another 50 years! We can do better.
That is undeniably a great location. However that particular Wendy's is such a terribly run place I would rather see a newer restaurant there, like Chipotle or something?
The last time I went there my daughter tried to get a plain hamburger. 3 times they could not get the order correct. It was "the last time I went there."
Imagine what Chik Fil A could do there.
Quote from: MusicMan on November 11, 2016, 08:38:07 AM
That is undeniably a great location. However that particular Wendy's is such a terribly run place I would rather see a newer restaurant there, like Chipotle or something?
The last time I went there my daughter tried to get a plain hamburger. 3 times they could not get the order correct. It was "the last time I went there."
Imagine what Chik Fil A could do there.
Yes. Let's imagine traffic backed up down Park St to Stockton from 11-2 every day. And you can forget using Park as a commute in the am as the already congested area would be backed up clear to the other Chick-fil-A.
The area would be completely un-navigable by car during mealtimes.
And personally, I like CFA, but I actively avoid it during peak times.
I disagree. The majority of customers I have observed are women with kids during the lunch rush, and they are not likely to change their patterns to drive down to 5 Points instead of the Roosevelt location. I mean, if that Wendy's was an excellent well run Wendy's the problems you mention would probably exist in that location NOW, but it's not. It's a POS, and I'm sure many would be and return customers don't go there anymore because they can't get complicated orders like "a plain hamburger" right.
I would say, if they put anything that was professionally managed and well run you will experience more traffic on that site, so maybe they should just keep the management and staff in place inside the new structure.
And to be honest, I live in San Marco so I'm not there as often as I used to be when I lived on Oak Street.
Considering Wendy's wants to upgrade the site with a better restaurant, I believe it's safe to say anything other than a Wendy's there isn't a realistic option on the table.
Well the proposed building looks much better so that is good news.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 11, 2016, 10:08:07 AM
Considering Wendy's wants to upgrade the site with a better restaurant, I believe it's safe to say anything other than a Wendy's there isn't a realistic option on the table.
At this point. I think the key is having a layout that another restaurant can take over that works for the neighborhood, if and when Wendy's sells out a decade from now because the land and location are worth more than the business. They have three driveways at this point. They can remove one on Margaret, flip the store to the street, put some outdoor seating like they are talking about, and still easily have a drive-thru and sufficient parking.
If Wendy's is paying to construct a Wendy's drive through, it will be pretty much impossible (by law) to make them design and pay to construct a full restaurant designed for a future unknown use or tenant. If they sell a decade from now, it's just as likely the new buyer will demolish and construct something that fits their needs, which could be anything from retail with upper level residential to office space or a hotel. Whatever happens concerning Wendy's right now will most likely have to include being able to fit Wendy's needs.
The first thing that needs to be figured out is - what kind of area does 5-points want to be because how any area is developed is just a means to a way of life. If the majority of neighborhood residents want walkable urbanism (and I think they do but no know how to actually do it) then build walkable urbanism.
Start by moving the building to the corner and massing it at the intersection. Next, go two stories. This will decrease the building footprint which will allow more parking behind the building and increase seating capacity. It will also help define the public realm and make an excellent terminal view for traffic coming south on Park...plus, provide a destination for pedestrian throughout 5-Points. Make access to the drive-thru (and parking) come off of Park with an exit on to Margaret (one way interior traffic flow). They have three sidewalk cuts now - it should be reduced to two.
The important thing to remember is that Wendy's will build whatever the City requires them to. Wendy's operates in some of the most design-restricted areas in the world. They might cry and moan about it but at the end of the day if they want access to customers they need to comply with the design standards those customers expect.
Coming down on Wendy's over the design would probably just result in them leaving the old building there. The better hope is that eventually someone buys them out entirely and does something else with the space.
Nothing in the city's current regulations forces Wendy's to build a two story structure or shift from the drive through they've operated on the site since 1974. Although the Overlay pretty much sets the path to what the city wants the area to become, to actually get there, public money needs to be invested first to transform the public ROW to support that vision. Until that happens, you're probably going to fail at attempts to force private business owners to move electric overhead utility lines, poles, rebuild streets, etc. All of those things I just mentioned are specific challenges with significant modification of this site.
Well, like I said - cities are just a means to a way of life. Figure out how we want to live and then build that city. If some power lines and a drive-thru are what the people want then build powerlines and drive-thrus. If we want something else then build that. If Wendy's can't/won't do it then just leave what is there now.
The future is now.
We can't rely on Wendy's to build our dreams for stuff on public ROW that would blow their entire budget. If the future is truly now, then we need to open our pocketbooks and do our part. Until then, it will be an uphill battle with most individual projects that pop up.
So forget the issues about investing in the public ROW and regulations that force Wendy's to construct around an unknown future tenant. Why couldn't FlaBoy's other suggestion work? i.e. "They have three driveways at this point. They can remove one on Margaret, flip the store to the street, put some outdoor seating like they are talking about, and still easily have a drive-thru and sufficient parking" Why couldn't that work?
If Wendy's isn't going to follow any design other than what Wendy's proposes themselves, then I'm not sure I understand the point of this thread.
The restaurant is already on the street. It's just on Margaret instead of the corner. Since the lot is only 125x125, shifting to the corner means they'd lose most of their parking if they still want it to be a drive through fast food restaurant. The sidewalk is located on public ROW, so adding outdoor seating would be in public ROW too. Within the ROW where these things would go, there's a bus stop, utility poles and mature trees that would have to come out. If they aren't willing to lose most of their current parking, the replacement parking would need to be added within public ROW too. All thst stuff in the public ROW gets to be pretty expensive when you add it up. Situations like this in similar districts across the country are generally resolved in the form of public parking garages (Ybor City), shared parking (San Marco Square), streetscapes with on-street parking (Winter Park), mass transit, etc.
The reason most of the parking would be lost by shifting to the corner is because a modified drive through would end up eating most of the lot to allow drive through traffic to stay on-site instead of backing up into the street. This is due to the lot being pretty small for a drive through.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 12, 2016, 11:42:33 AM
The reason most of the parking would be lost by shifting to the corner is because a modified drive through would end up eating most of the lot to allow drive through traffic to stay on-site instead of backing up into the street. This is due to the lot being pretty small for a drive through.
Thanks for this last bit. At least for me it was what I didn't understand.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 12, 2016, 10:25:35 AM
We can't rely on Wendy's to build our dreams for stuff on public ROW that would blow their entire budget. If the future is truly now, then we need to ope6n our pocketbooks and do our part. Until then, it will be an uphill battle with most individual projects that pop up.
Urban design is more than just a dream. It is good for business and makes economic sense. Before there was wide access to cheap debt everything was built to urban design standards, and the standards weren't even a requirement. Could you imagine a business in 1905 saying they only wanted to construct a building with a 20 year lifespan? They would be laughed out of business.
Unfortunately, the reality is that selling hamburgers and frostys has little to do with urban design. Wendy's is a company that has been in business since 1969 and is now worth $1.9 billion in revenue. A franchisee has operated at this location since 1974. No one is laughing them out of business. They have a business model that doesn't rely on the concept of urban design (at any cost necessary) and COJ doesn't have anything on the books to make them shift the building from its current location. Any realistic alternative will have to acknowledge and overcome these facts. Coming from a point of theory without proving it makes economic sense, in this particular case, will most likely end in failure of improving upon what's already been presented.
Call me naive, but I live in a city which is NOT growing, where companies simply pull out and leave a dying shell of a building to grow weeds on. Any time a company says that they like doing business here enough to tear down the aging structure and put up a brand new one (with several improvements), I say "Thank you very much for investing your money here." The mood of this thread seems very much the opposite. There is little gratitude, just what seems to be people telling this business how THEY should be spending THEIR money, simply because it's in (or close to) their neighborhood. Am I mistaken in this read?
The difference is attitude. Wendy's wants our money. If they don't want to build in a sustainable and neighborhood enhancing way then I say "next", because there are plenty who do. Wendy's needs customers far more than we need another place to buy hamburgers.
Quote from: Kerry on November 13, 2016, 04:44:33 PM
The difference is attitude. Wendy's wants our money. If they don't want to build in a sustainable and neighborhood enhancing way then I say "next", because there are plenty who do. Wendy's needs customers far more than we need another place to buy hamburgers.
And, to me, that's a matter of opinion. They ARE enhancing your neighborhood by putting up a much more aesthetically pleasing design, which incorporates outdoor seating. Also, it's not ANOTHER place to buy hamburgers; it's been there for a long time, apparently, and they are showing their commitment to that neighborhood.
To be fair, yes they are investing in a new building that will be a huge improvement over what is there now. I liken that to getting a hot fudge sundae as a surprise dessert. But if they were able to mass the building at the corner and eliminate a curb cut it would be like getting a hot fudge sundae as a surprise dessert and then discovering a $10 bill at the bottom. There are so many advantage to good urban design that opportunities like this can't just be passed up because some other man-made objects are in the way.
I know this isn't on the same scale (their lot was about 190' X 180') but it does show that Wendy's is perfectly capable of locating in a walkable urban environment.
http://www.columbusunderground.com/mixed-use-development-proposed-at-site-of-campus-wendys-bw1/comment-page-2
QuoteTwo local developers are interested in constructing a five-story mixed-use building at the current site of the Wendy's restaurant at 18th and High. Solove Real Estate, in partnership with Celmark Development, will present the project for conceptual review at a meeting of the University Area Review Board tonight.
According to the proposal, Wendy's would remain a tenant on the first floor, while the upper four stories would hold 62 (mostly two-bedroom) apartments units. Two additional storefronts would bring the total retail space to just over 3,100 square feet . Parking for 143 cars would be provided in a multi-level parking garage, which would be entered from 18th Avenue on the side of the building.
Big difference is someone else is constructing the Columbus mixed-use development and Wendy's will be a tenant. In this case, this is simply Wendy's wanting to upgrade their restaurant. There is no mixed-use development firm attempting to build on the property. I imagine, the developer who proposes a five story building in an office character area will probably get tar and feathered for the project being too big and out of scale with its surroundings.
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Learning-From/Columbus-Ohio/i-nvCPg3z/0/M/P1570023-M.jpg)
High and 11th
Another big difference is that High Street is a hell of a lot denser than anything in Riverside. OSU's main campus is also right around the corner. What the market can support in Columbus' urban core is not necessarily what the market can support in Five Points.
Quote from: Kerry on November 13, 2016, 09:26:35 PM
To be fair, yes they are investing in a new building that will be a huge improvement over what is there now. I liken that to getting a hot fudge sundae as a surprise dessert. But if they were able to mass the building at the corner and eliminate a curb cut it would be like getting a hot fudge sundae as a surprise dessert and then discovering a $10 bill at the bottom. There are so many advantage to good urban design that opportunities like this can't just be passed up because some other man-made objects are in the way.
I actually don't disagree with this statement in bold. However, good urban design starts with the public side finding a solution to the other man-made objects standing in the way. In Columbus, they figured that out and invested in the infrastructure and land use policies to incrementally build and support denser development a long time ago. We've got to find a way to do the same. So if there are corridors where great change is desired, let's get to burying power lines, adding on-street parking, pedestrian scale lighting, etc. that makes it a lot easier to then work with the private sector and market rate conditions.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 12, 2016, 11:39:31 AM
The restaurant is already on the street. It's just on Margaret instead of the corner. Since the lot is only 125x125, shifting to the corner means they'd lose most of their parking if they still want it to be a drive through fast food restaurant. The sidewalk is located on public ROW, so adding outdoor seating would be in public ROW too. Within the ROW where these things would go, there's a bus stop, utility poles and mature trees that would have to come out. If they aren't willing to lose most of their current parking, the replacement parking would need to be added within public ROW too. All thst stuff in the public ROW gets to be pretty expensive when you add it up. Situations like this in similar districts across the country are generally resolved in the form of public parking garages (Ybor City), shared parking (San Marco Square), streetscapes with on-street parking (Winter Park), mass transit, etc.
I think they could have up to 12 parking spots if they move the building. It may not be 15, but 12 spots is a lot for that Wendy's. I actually don't think I have ever seen more than 3 or 4 cars in that parking lot. Most of the business generated is from walk ups during lunch/surrounding residents and the drive thru.
The typical Wendy's drive thru has around 30 spaces. The 12 space number comes from the parking requirements associated with the overlay's designation of the site being within the office character area. From a technical perspective, I'm not sure that number accurately represents their true need.
Nevertheless, when it comes to give and take, if the reduction of on-site spaces can be made up by adding an equal amount of spaces on the street (within public ROW), the argument for moving the building to the corner becomes stronger. If another funding source is established to pay for the modification within the public ROW, then we'd be reaching the point where the economics start to change for the better.
I work in 5 Points and would very much appreciate upgrades to this Wendy's location. It is a sad, smelly, and outdated facility currently (and horribly mismanaged, but that's another discussion). As much as I'd like to see them push the building to the corner as many have suggested, I agree with Lake that it would inevitably reduce parking spaces below the threshold that I'm sure the Owner would accept. Worse, it would create a backup on Park that would be a traffic nightmare for the neighborhood. Cars are always stacked up in a queue in the parking lot and sometimes already spill out onto Margaret Street after wrapping around the building.
BTW, going to two stories is highly unlikely for such a small establishment. You'd need two fire stairs and an elevator serving the second floor, which combined would take up half of the floor area of this building.....just not practical.
What I find interesting is that no one is calling BS on the "Outdoor Dining" in the City ROW Does anyone really think that sitting at a table in a 4 to 5 foot gap between the sidewalk and the curb on Margaret will be a pleasant (or safe) experience? I can't imagine the City allowing this. It would be much better to reduce indoor dining and create outdoor covered space between the sidewalk and the building on the Wendy's property rather than the Right of Way.
It appears they have roughly 20 feet of space to work with from back of sidewalk to back of street curb within the public ROW. The sidewalk in this Chicago image is roughly 15' to 20' in width.
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Cities/Chicago-Outdoor-Dining/i-6s8q6gk/1/L/DSC_0059-L.jpg)
Not claiming anything they do will look like this but that's enough width to add in some linear outdoor dining if the utility zone is converted into additional sidewalk. One modification I'd suggest is narrowing the driveway openings and using the saved square footage to enlarge the length of that proposed outdoor dining area.
In our travels last summer, we stopped by a Noodles and Co. in Lexington. This was on an insanely busy 8-lane road. They had outdoor seating, but to keep the noise down (and to keep the riff-raff from bothering the customers) they installed very tall glass panels, which served their purpose quite well. Even with all of that traffic, it was great to sit outdoors and enjoy the fresh air. I wonder if the Wendy's people might consider something such as this?
Quote from: TimmyB on November 13, 2016, 04:23:49 PM
Call me naive, but I live in a city which is NOT growing, where companies simply pull out and leave a dying shell of a building to grow weeds on. Any time a company says that they like doing business here enough to tear down the aging structure and put up a brand new one (with several improvements), I say "Thank you very much for investing your money here." The mood of this thread seems very much the opposite. There is little gratitude, just what seems to be people telling this business how THEY should be spending THEIR money, simply because it's in (or close to) their neighborhood. Am I mistaken in this read?
While I don't totally disagree with you... the building is 42 years old. So its not like they've been pumping money into the area. The place is a dump. This spot does consistent business and like most fast food the drive-thru stays busy. So they really have no incentive to go above and beyond (and by waiting 42 years before making improvements) have proven that. But with no other drive-thru places nearby, Wendy's will stay busy. Glad they are finally upgrading. But the small lot does make any significant change a challenge (even if the desire was there to do it).
Quote from: exnewsman on November 15, 2016, 01:47:16 PM
Quote from: TimmyB on November 13, 2016, 04:23:49 PM
Call me naive, but I live in a city which is NOT growing, where companies simply pull out and leave a dying shell of a building to grow weeds on. Any time a company says that they like doing business here enough to tear down the aging structure and put up a brand new one (with several improvements), I say "Thank you very much for investing your money here." The mood of this thread seems very much the opposite. There is little gratitude, just what seems to be people telling this business how THEY should be spending THEIR money, simply because it's in (or close to) their neighborhood. Am I mistaken in this read?
While I don't totally disagree with you... the building is 42 years old. So its not like they've been pumping money into the area. The place is a dump. This spot does consistent business and like most fast food the drive-thru stays busy. So they really have no incentive to go above and beyond (and by waiting 42 years before making improvements) have proven that. But with no other drive-thru places nearby, Wendy's will stay busy. Glad they are finally upgrading. But the small lot does make any significant change a challenge (even if the desire was there to do it).
There are other factors that come into play, and I (not being a local) am purely speculating. Does anyone know if this is a corporate store or is this a franchisee? I know that Wendy's corporate is involved in a huge row (involving lawsuits, etc.) with one of their very largest franchisees on the east coast. It involves exactly what is taking place here: updating the restaurant to Wendy's new specifications, as well as shifting over to their new kiosk-based POS system. It could be that this franchisee is getting a kick up the backside (with the threat of losing a $1m-plus franchise location) and finally acting after 42 years.
It's a franchisee based out of the northeast.
Quote from: TomHurst on November 14, 2016, 02:17:04 PM
What I find interesting is that no one is calling BS on the "Outdoor Dining" in the City ROW Does anyone really think that sitting at a table in a 4 to 5 foot gap between the sidewalk and the curb on Margaret will be a pleasant (or safe) experience? I can't imagine the City allowing this. It would be much better to reduce indoor dining and create outdoor covered space between the sidewalk and the building on the Wendy's property rather than the Right of Way.
I agree that 2 or 3 poorly placed tables won't do anything to improve the outdoor environment. Last weekend I was in one of the remodeled stores and the "fireplace" and "lounge" areas didn't do anything for the ambiance of the restaurant. A well laid out traditional restaurant would function much better than some cheaply done gimmicks.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 14, 2016, 03:07:23 PM
It appears they have roughly 20 feet of space to work with from back of sidewalk to back of street curb within the public ROW. The sidewalk in this Chicago image is roughly 15' to 20' in width.
You're right....I looked closer yesterday and it appears that they have closer to 12' of space from sidewalk to curb (17' or so including the sidewalk). Still not ideal but possibly doable if it's designed right. Placing the seating against the building as shown in your photo and moving the sidewalk out toward the curb would be ideal but not likely in this situation.
^While I believe it would be quite difficult to be successful in moving the building to the corner, I do believe the integration of the site, with its surroundings, can be greatly enhanced through better design and landscaping in specific locations like this potential seating area. While not as sexy as a mixed-use building or space with no drive thru, it can be an affordable, market-rate solution to incremental enhancement of the area.
But do diners really want to advertise that they're eating Wendy's?? I always inhale my spicy nuggets and frosty and then throw away the evidence so my wife doesn't find out. Outdoor seating here may be on par with Daily's in San Marco.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 15, 2016, 02:06:41 PM
I agree that 2 or 3 poorly placed tables won't do anything to improve the outdoor environment. Last weekend I was in one of the remodeled stores and the "fireplace" and "lounge" areas didn't do anything for the ambiance of the restaurant. A well laid out traditional restaurant would function much better than some cheaply done gimmicks.
Ha, I just realized that I've been to one as well. We made a pit stop in some small town about an hour south of ATL. It was a Wendy's attached to a gas station but it was sleek, contemporary, and there was even a round table of retired aged couples having a get together. I jokingly remarked that Wendy's must be a "nice night out" in this town. Didn't realize Jax would soon be in on that joke.
Quote from: ProjectMaximus on November 16, 2016, 10:20:34 AM
But do diners really want to advertise that they're eating Wendy's?? I always inhale my spicy nuggets and frosty and then throw away the evidence so my wife doesn't find out. Outdoor seating here may be on par with Daily's in San Marco.
Depends on the person. I doubt it would appeal to a diner who eats at farm-to-table restaurants that is used to using UBER. However, there's another segment of the local population that Wendy's caters too that probably would.
Quote from: ProjectMaximus on November 16, 2016, 10:20:34 AMQuote from: Captain Zissou on November 15, 2016, 02:06:41 PM
I agree that 2 or 3 poorly placed tables won't do anything to improve the outdoor environment. Last weekend I was in one of the remodeled stores and the "fireplace" and "lounge" areas didn't do anything for the ambiance of the restaurant. A well laid out traditional restaurant would function much better than some cheaply done gimmicks.
Ha, I just realized that I've been to one as well. We made a pit stop in some small town about an hour south of ATL. It was a Wendy's attached to a gas station but it was sleek, contemporary, and there was even a round table of retired aged couples having a get together. I jokingly remarked that Wendy's must be a "nice night out" in this town. Didn't realize Jax would soon be in on that joke.
Don't worry. We'd just be on par with Chicago!
Wendy's East Village - Before (2014) & After (2016)
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/Miscellaneous/i-fpP39dB/0/X3/Wendys-X3.jpg)
Those are two great pics, Lake. It would be hard for anyone to look at those two and say truthfully that they didn't improve their image (and that of the neighborhood) with that rebuild. The nice part about Jax is, they will be able to use that outdoor space year round; Chicago, not so much.
Quote from: ProjectMaximus on November 16, 2016, 10:20:34 AM
But do diners really want to advertise that they're eating Wendy's?? I always inhale my spicy nuggets and frosty and then throw away the evidence so my wife doesn't find out. Outdoor seating here may be on par with Daily's in San Marco.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 15, 2016, 02:06:41 PM
I agree that 2 or 3 poorly placed tables won't do anything to improve the outdoor environment. Last weekend I was in one of the remodeled stores and the "fireplace" and "lounge" areas didn't do anything for the ambiance of the restaurant. A well laid out traditional restaurant would function much better than some cheaply done gimmicks.
Ha, I just realized that I've been to one as well. We made a pit stop in some small town about an hour south of ATL. It was a Wendy's attached to a gas station but it was sleek, contemporary, and there was even a round table of retired aged couples having a get together. I jokingly remarked that Wendy's must be a "nice night out" in this town. Didn't realize Jax would soon be in on that joke.
Not sure if you were serious or not, but have a feeling you probably were in your last paragraph. I think your attitude here may be a reason why small town America voted the huge fuck you in this election. I happen to live here but grew up in small town rural America. When I go 'home' now there is a McDonalds in my hometown and the locals flock to it. Because they live paycheck to paycheck and it is one of only three options within a half hour for their night out. And most quite frankly can't afford the gas money to drive the 20 miles to other options for their night out. I guess coming from rural American and now living in a city I see the other side.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 16, 2016, 10:51:31 AM
Depends on the person. I doubt it would appeal to a diner who eats at farm-to-table restaurants that is used to using UBER. However, there's another segment of the local population that Wendy's caters too that probably would.
I don't feel very strongly that it will be this way, and I hope I'm wrong in any case, but I just fear this outdoor seating area may be very underutilized. And if it's the primary improvement from a pedestrian perspective then it might be a disappointment. Do a lot of people eat inside now? I've seen the drive-through utilized, but usually not the parking. Obviously the location is far better than Daily's in San Marco but it would be a shame if it ends up empty like that. At least looking nice (but empty) would indeed be an improvement.
Quote from: TimmyB on November 16, 2016, 11:20:47 AM
Those are two great pics, Lake. It would be hard for anyone to look at those two and say truthfully that they didn't improve their image (and that of the neighborhood) with that rebuild. The nice part about Jax is, they will be able to use that outdoor space year round; Chicago, not so much.
No doubt, I don't mean to suggest it's not better than the building there now.
Quote from: edjax on November 16, 2016, 06:50:59 PM
Quote from: ProjectMaximus on November 16, 2016, 10:20:34 AM
Ha, I just realized that I've been to one as well. We made a pit stop in some small town about an hour south of ATL. It was a Wendy's attached to a gas station but it was sleek, contemporary, and there was even a round table of retired aged couples having a get together. I jokingly remarked that Wendy's must be a "nice night out" in this town. Didn't realize Jax would soon be in on that joke.
Not sure if you were serious or not, but have a feeling you probably were in your last paragraph. I think your attitude here may be a reason why small town America voted the huge fuck you in this election. I happen to live here but grew up in small town rural America. When I go 'home' now there is a McDonalds in my hometown and the locals flock to it. Because they live paycheck to paycheck and it is one of only three options within a half hour for their night out. And most quite frankly can't afford the gas money to drive the 20 miles to other options for their night out. I guess coming from rural American and now living in a city I see the other side.
You make a good point and I apologize for the way I conveyed my experience. I absolutely have empathy for the economic plight of Americans everywhere and if you knew me personally I believe you'd read my quote without thinking I was mocking the people. My comment was about the lack of amenities available in a small town (like you said...three options), not the financial straits of those who went to eat there. And in comparing it to Jax, my intention was to joke that we are on par with the amenities available in a small town. Obviously not true but that was the intention/joke.
I've only been to that particular Wendy's once with a co-worker who wanted to eat there a few years back. We ate inside and I recall it being busy during lunch. However, I haven't paid much attention to the parking demand. I suspect they know their market, which is why they're willing to make the investment as opposed to closing the location like they've done with older drive thrus in other areas. People who eat off the dollar menu like the Florida sun too, so if the weather is good, you'll have people sitting outside as well as indoors.
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Other/Miscellaneous/i-csRRWcP/0/L/Louisville%20-%20McDonalds-1-L.jpg)
A drive thru McDonald's with a similar site plan in Louisville's Highland's neighborhood
(http://photos.moderncities.com/Other/Miscellaneous/i-SxsjGxD/0/L/Louisville%20-%20McDonalds-2-L.jpg)
The Highland's is a neighborhood I'd consider comparable to Riverside. People eat outside at their McDonalds. I suspect a clean Wendy's will have no problem in this department.
People eat outside at the Jimmy Johns on Park Street. I agree that there will be no shortage of people who will eat outside.
Quote from: JaxAvondale on November 16, 2016, 11:52:17 PM
People eat outside at the Jimmy Johns on Park Street. I agree that there will be no storage of people who will eat outside.
Damn autocorrect...
*In my Trump voice*
Stop it, Siri! Stop it!
8)
Like so many venues,the "Food" will likely suck...............
The food will be what it is now.
Correct, and it will taste immensely better, if you are not in a stinky, old building! :)
QuoteWendy's revises design for new 5 Points restaurant
(http://residentnews.net/wp-content/themes/arts-culture/timthumb.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fresidentnews.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F02%2FWendys5Points_01.jpg&q=90&w=630&zc=1)
Full article: http://residentnews.net/2017/02/02/wendys-revises-design-new-5-points-restaurant/
The building is unremarkable except for its signage which sticks out like a sore thumb. Garish - what is the point or need for that in Five Points?
Quote from: Ivegotasecret on February 21, 2017, 06:34:07 PM
The building is unremarkable except for its signage which sticks out like a sore thumb. Garish - what is the point or need for that in Five Points?
The sign or the restaurant?
I'm pretty sure the restaurant is there to serve up some cheeseburgers and Frosties on the cheap. I hear their chili isn't bad, but I've never been brave enough.
The sign is there to let passer-bys know that there is, in fact, a place on the corner that serves up this deliciousness.
The chili is okay for a meal on the cheap. I spent a pretty penny over the years at Wendy's during my college days.
I worked at Wendy's while in high school. The chili meat is the hamburger that sat on the grill too long, which is then steamed. Mix that with a seasoning packet and some beans....deliciousness.
Put it in a baked potato and that was a decent college student priced meal.
^Pretty much. Chili and a baked potato. That was a go to cheap meal for me.
Lol. It may be the best thing on the menu. I'm still not ordering it.
Quote from: Ivegotasecret on February 21, 2017, 06:34:07 PM
The building is unremarkable except for its signage which sticks out like a sore thumb. Garish - what is the point or need for that in Five Points?
I mean, it's a Wendy's. It looks fine. Certainly it's miles ahead of the current Wendy's. I think their building now is to the point where it is impossible to get it totally clean. It was kind of gross when I was in high school 20 years ago (didn't stop me from eating the chili tho). Best option is a tear down and rebuild.
Quote from: thelakelander on February 21, 2017, 08:59:38 PM
The chili is okay for a meal on the cheap. I spent a pretty penny over the years at Wendy's during my college days.
I single-handedly kept the Ocala & Pensacola Wendy's in business in Tallahassee during college.
Those junior bacon cheeseburgers and five-piece nuggets <3