The GFS is a tragedy.  What on earth was South Euclid thinking letting them build that thing so far back from Cedar?!?!?!  What a missed opportunity to create some better density. 

You're certain nothing is planned to go in front of it?

No, there are things planned, like lots of parking spaces and pencil-thin grass medians.

Don't forget garbage all over the fence along cedar. Such wonderous art

 

This piece of #%*@ is what I feared when Coral was chosen as the developer.  I have no doubt that the GFS will be a ghost town given all the other options around.

 

I am so sicken by this (and what it could have been) that I would support the Oakwood development (something I oppose) just to teach Coral a lesson.

Speaking of GFS, has anyone had any experience in one of these stores?  My only opinion of GFS is seeing their trucks deliver food to my k-12 schools and how amazingly bad all of the school lunches were.

 

If their unit prices are low enough (below dave's, zagara's, walmart, marc's, geagle), and they flood the local mailboxes with coupons, I have no doubt it will be the opposite of a ghost town.

South Euclid is also to blame here.  They are so desperate for any development that they'll approve anything.  I have to say I don't think there is a single redeeming commercial structure in that entire town.  Just take a look at the main drags along Mayfield, Cedar, and Monticello.  All junk.

^How dare you.... Warehouse Beverage is the crown jewel of the east side!

 

But seriously, this development sucks.  And, yes, SE needs to learn that desperation is a stinky cologne.  Developers smell it and we end up with this cwap.

^^^On occassion I have to, out of neccessity, visit the GFS on Lorain Rd. in North Olmstead in the heart of a huge population base with many other businesses around (about twice a month at various times).  It is the rare occassion that I have seen more than one cashier on duty.  Never a line.  Prices are not anything special.

They're building all this when there are still leasable spaces in the University Square development that even after 8 years have never been occupied. I do think the GFS will do good here though, but it sucks it looks like this.

So I've got a question - and I'd really appreciate some thoughts on this.  I grew up near Cedar Taylor and have shopped in this neighborhood all my life.  I, too, am deeply upset by the design.  But since we all seem to agree this is "cheap looking" and the wrong way to go, I wonder why developers don't seem to agree.

 

 

Imagine if this development was built along cedar and included a widening of the sidewalk and some benches and trees (and perhaps built in higher quality bus stops).  They could have gone ahead and had all of the parking in the back, more than enough space, but created a strong presence along cedar.

 

The difference in cost would be almost negligible as streetscaping of this scale is not much more expensive than those grass medians and their curbs in the parking lot.  Perhaps some tree plots and benches (or brickwork if they wanted to "go all out") could add to the price, but we're NOT talking about more than a 1%-2% added expense.

 

 

So my question is, WHY NOT?  I understand the "suburban mall" model is now the standard, but people have been touting the importance, and economic benefits, to dense and interesting construction.  A little goes a long way in terms of design and layout.

 

 

Do developers seriously not understand this?  Or is there an economic explanation for why a 'front yard" of parking spaces and various cheap looking box stores are the go-to in these cases?

 

 

 

 

 

Much of the development ideas you see in place are driven by the national chains more than the developers themselves.  Target, Giant Eagle, Starbucks, etc tell developers what they need - drive up windows, parking in front, etc.  None of these chains want to see primary parking in back, they want it in front.  Their store footprints are laid out this way with front facing entrances, window displays, checkout lines, etc.  Deviating from this costs alot of time & money to redesign.  I totally agree with you though.

GFS should have gone in where Tops was and the strip mall that was there should have stayed (yes, it was ugly, but it had functioning businesses) until there was actually money to rebuild it right.  The problem, though, is that the south side of Cedar is University Heights and the north side in South Euclid (and also that I don't believe Coral owns University Square).  Regional cooperation would have been nice here.  There's no way South Euclid should have torn down the old plaza when they did.

GFS should have gone in where Tops was and the strip mall that was there should have stayed (yes, it was ugly, but it had functioning businesses) until there was actually money to rebuild it right.  The problem, though, is that the south side of Cedar is University Heights and the north side in South Euclid (and also that I don't believe Coral owns University Square).  Regional cooperation would have been nice here.  There's no way South Euclid should have torn down the old plaza when they did.

 

Agreed.  Despite that I really hated Tops, it was nice to go there when it was pouring rain or dumping snow outside so that I didn't have to push a whole cart full of groceries through the elements!  And now it just sits like most of that development.....

meanwhile, there is practically no parking for the starbucks on Ced/Warr. I meet clients there on occasion - and it's always funny how sometimes you have to park across the street, even though there's a huge space of NOTHING right next door.

Thanks "gotta plan" and I do understand what you're saying.

 

I have, however, seen Targets and even a Walmart (gasp!) built into urban spaces.  They clearly have the capacity to redesign stores for these environments, and probably have these alternative skematics available.

 

Even more importantly, one would think that larger stores are adapting and evolving (to stay alive) to alternative designs (beyond the big box suburban style).  It just seems that the extra up front costs to making these changes would be more than made up in the long run as the enhanced shopping/living experience makes the Cedar Center area a true economic hub.  It would help it combat the alternative shopping options.

 

I understand 10 minutes with photoshop does not an architect make...  but here is a very simple alteration.  With some internal reconfigurations and a few "parking in back" type signs, you'd have a gorgeous streetscape and very successful center.  (in my humble opinion)

Yeah, I'll never understand why something like what Burnham drew up is harder / more expensive to construct than what is being proposed. Just take the plan and turn it upside down!

South Euclid is also to blame here.  They are so desperate for any development that they'll approve anything.  I have to say I don't think there is a single redeeming commercial structure in that entire town.  Just take a look at the main drags along Mayfield, Cedar, and Monticello.  All junk.

 

Hey... could be worse. Could be somewhere like Beachwood which doesn't have a single redeeming structure of any kind.

 

As to how these things happen. Yes, South Euclid is partially culpable. Fact is that most of these "cities" don't have the capacity to employee the type of personel that can help guide these proceses. You end up with completely unqualified people in charge listening to what the developers and retailers tell them with little to know pushback. The vast majority of our overabbundace of "cities", villages, townships, etc. don't have economic development directors or planners on staff. Hence a lot of times they take the "bird in hand" which can have disasterous results.

They're building all this when there are still leasable spaces in the University Square development that even after 8 years have never been occupied. I do think the GFS will do good here though, but it sucks it looks like this.

 

If by 'they' you mean the City, keep in mind that University Square is in UH and this development is in SE.  SE's motive is to increase revenue through business and property taxes.  It gets nothing from US, full or not.

I guess I mean they as in they the developers... they're pouring more water into a cup that's already overflowing.

Could be somewhere like Beachwood which doesn't have a single redeeming structure of any kind.

 

I beg to differ!

 

A THE Nice House in Beachwood

 

But yeah, after this one, it'd be hard to find another.  (Although I think the clubhouse at Canterbury is technically in Beachwood, even though some parts of the course are in Shaker Heights.)

Could be somewhere like Beachwood which doesn't have a single redeeming structure of any kind.

 

I beg to differ!

 

A THE Nice House in Beachwood

 

But yeah, after this one, it'd be hard to find another.  (Although I think the clubhouse at Canterbury is technically in Beachwood, even though some parts of the course are in Shaker Heights.)

 

Funny, I've noticed that house before, too, and that's immediately what I was thinking of.  Seems out of place there.

They're building all this when there are still leasable spaces in the University Square development that even after 8 years have never been occupied. I do think the GFS will do good here though, but it sucks it looks like this.

 

If by 'they' you mean the City, keep in mind that University Square is in UH and this development is in SE.  SE's motive is to increase revenue through business and property taxes.  It gets nothing from US, full or not.

 

Another interesting thing here is that I believe SE has been trying to convince CH-UH to throw more tax abatements to the developer.  That part of South Euclid is the only part of the city that is located in the Cleveland Heights-University Heights School District.

Word is that there are utilities beneath the road that existed in the mid-back of the property that could not be removed without added cost that the developer could not/would not bear.  So it is not a matter of just moving buildings around like puzzle pieces.  They just didn't have the money, and I think the officials who championed the use of eminent domain to take and raze the previous center are just happy to get anything moving there.  It is also hugely unfortunate that the University Square concept failed to catch on, to the point where another developer apparently can make shows of "sustainable development" on a former country club just to satisfy big box retailers who could easily set up shop in any one of the vacancies at University Square.

University Square isn't doing that badly, is it?  Although this certainly won't help.

It never really was doing that good.  Good concept.  Bad design and even worse execution.

It does house the highest revenue Target in NEO and a Macys.  It does have a fair amount of vacancies (especially since Tops closed), but the stores that are there seem to do well.

 

I like the parking lot design, although it has had structural problems.  The interaction with the street is pitiful, though.  The same goes for Whole Foods, where shoppers coming off the bus have to walk around the back of the store to enter, even though it's built right up to the sidewalk.

Good to see that the Target does well because I love that Target.  The Tops space has been vacant for years and there are vacancies of 27k, 16k and 15k square feet that have never had a tenant (on the top floor).    I believe the first floor also has a vacancy of 25k, which I don't think has ever been filled.  http://www.inlandgroup.com/inlandus/Images/300B36128_site.pdf

It does house the highest revenue Target in NEO and a Macys.  It does have a fair amount of vacancies (especially since Tops closed), but the stores that are there seem to do well.

 

I like the parking lot design, although it has had structural problems.  The interaction with the street is pitiful, though.  The same goes for Whole Foods, where shoppers coming off the bus have to walk around the back of the store to enter, even though it's built right up to the sidewalk.

 

I could be wrong, but I believe that Whole Foods used to have a front entrance, but it's been closed off.

Yes.  That target is the best I have been in.  The shopping cart / escalator thing is worth a visit by itself.

 

But I say US is a good concept but bad design because I have been in other, similar shopping centers which are laid out much better.  To me, US is somewhat confusing as to which level each store is on (the signs don't help much) and it can be a bit confusing how to get from one level to the next.  I also don't think enough natural light is let into the parking deck.

I could be wrong, but I believe that Whole Foods used to have a front entrance, but it's been closed off.

Yep, it was in the wine department.

South Euclid sells Cedar Center property to Bob Evans Restaurants; construction to begin soon

Published: Tuesday, October 11, 2011, 7:40 AM

By Jeff Piorkowski, Sun News

 

City Council, at its Oct. 10 meeting, agreed to a $900,000 sale of .7 acres of property at Cedar Center North, on the north side of Cedar Road, at Warrensville Center Road.

 

The outparcel Bob Evans purchased is on the western end of the development, near the front of the Gordon Food Services building. GFS is the first new building to be constructed at Cedar Center North and is almost completed.

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/sunmessenger/2011/10/south_euclid_sells_cedar_cente.html

 

 

There was also this earlier article from the Sun, which stated "The plan calls for about 42,000 square feet of retail buildings situated in a contiguous line at the rear, or north end of Cedar Center. These buildings will have varying materials fronting them and will be of differing heights, in order to give each storefront its own look and to give aesthetic variety to the line of stores."

 

And then out front, a Bob Evans.  Lovely.  What makes this such a terrible idea is that even when a Bob Evans fails, it's ALWAYS a Bob Evans. 

The GFS looks even worse than I thought it could.  Just LOVE all the parking right up to Cedar.  At one time in the grand plans, wasn't there suppose to be some sort of signature building on the corner.  Now just asphalt.

 

Well thank God for the Bob Evans and their wonderful design aesthetic.

So true.  That complex is a whore show.  Just when you thought South Euclid couldn't sink any lower....

When they labeled certain plots in this development for "restaraunt", I have to admit, the possibility for something of the Bob Evans ilk never dawned on me.

 

I think what we are seeing can properly be termed "regressive development".  Should've left it the way it was.

They torn down Penn Station for this?  Great job Welo!

When they labeled certain plots in this development for "restaraunt", I have to admit, the possibility for something of the Bob Evans ilk never dawned on me.

 

I think what we are seeing can properly be termed "regressive development".  Should've left it the way it was.

 

Yep. The writing was on the wall when GFS was selected as the "anchor" tenant a while ago. You're just not going to get retail any better than what was there before with these two tenants. What other retail establishments will want to go into a plaza that is anchored by a low end bulk grocer and a low end sit down chain restaurant? ... let alone the possibility for any mid or upscale residential development in the future, which I'm sure has long been scrapped. I'm afraid this once great concept will turn into another Brookpark Rd/Mayfield Rd strip mall with the likes of Dollar General and a couple of Nail Salons with a sea of parking in front. Regression at its best.

South Euclid sells Cedar Center property to developer; incoming tenants named

Published: Tuesday, October 25, 2011, 9:39 AM    Updated: Tuesday, October 25, 2011, 11:44 AM

  By Jeff Piorkowski, Sun News

 

SOUTH EUCLID -- The names of more businesses coming to Cedar Center North have been released in the aftermath of the city’s sale of just over seven acres to developer Peter Rubin’s Coral Co. and its partner DeVille Developments of Canton.

 

Rubin stated after the Oct. 24 City Council meeting at which council approved the sale, that Panera Bread will be coming to Cedar Center, and that the popular China Gate Chinese restaurant, which had been located in the old Cedar Center, will return.

 

Others known to be coming in the first phase of the new Cedar Center’s development are eateries Five Guys Burgers, Jimmy John’s Gourmet Sandwiches and Chipotle.

 

Rubin would not yet divulge the identities of the other tenants to come, stating merely that they are an Italian restaurant, coffee house, women’s salon and a pet supplies store. In all, he said, these stores make up about two-thirds of the businesses coming.

“We’ll announce more in 30-60 days,” he said.

 

More:

http://blog.cleveland.com/sunmessenger/2011/10/south_euclid_sells_cedar_cente_1.html

All things considered, I can't complain.

This whole development is a joke.  It's exactly what I expected once they started scaling back the plans.

 

Bob Evans is the icing on the cake.  I can't think of a worse restaurant to have in that location.

Yeah that Bob Evans will really stick out like a sore thumb among some of those others.  And Jimmy Johns is a major taste downgrade from Penn Station which makes me frown.

Compared to the Chenorbyl we have there now, even a Bob Evans is an upgrade

Compared to the Chenorbyl we have there now, even a Bob Evans is an upgrade

 

They shouldn't have torn down the old plaza.

 

I'd prefer nothing to a Bob Evans.  At least it would leave the possibility of something better coming in some time in the future.

 

At least the CHina Gate restaurant is coming back. That's a classic.

But, yes, the setbacks and surface parking here are awful.

Compared to the Chenorbyl we have there now, even a Bob Evans is an upgrade

 

Uh-oh, sounds a lot like the "Euclid Avenue in Midtown" debate.  :-)

What a waste.  But I guess I should have moderated my expectations considering this is South Euclid we're talking about. 

What a waste.  But I guess I should have moderated my expectations considering this is South Euclid we're talking about. 

 

University Heights hasn't done much better...after all we have a McDonald's going up right around the corner.

It's been rumored that the Starbucks next door is going to move into Cedar Center North when it opens. And from the list above, sounds like a whole lot of basic chain dining for this development.

What a waste.  But I guess I should have moderated my expectations considering this is South Euclid we're talking about. 

 

University Heights hasn't done much better...after all we have a McDonald's going up right around the corner.

 

Maybe, but I don't know that any grand design was ever sold to us. 

 

Regardless, we've got O'Rielly's on our side. #TrumpCard

So, there was a Chipotle there, among other things they tore down just to build new.....  Riiiiiight.  And after waitressing at Bob Evans for a summer in college, I can tell you to never get scrambled eggs or omelet-type things there.  Everything else isn't too badly handled.