Is Minneapolis the first, or is Minneapolis the only?

 

 

^how unAmerican!

HAH, what garbage! My car puts out more smoke starting and stopping than it does just running...

I think the argument here is that if you ban uses that are almost exclusively built for private automobiles, it encourages better development that caters towards transit and pedestrians. This cuts down the reliance on automobiles, and therefore leads to better air quality, less traffic, healthier citizens, and better development.

 

The easier you make it for people to own cars, the more cars you're going to have.

Drive-thrus lead to more and often wider driveways (a business which might only have one driveway instead has two), leading to more potential conflict points between cars and bikes/pedestrians. The more driveways a street has, the more dangerous it is for vulnerable road users. They also encourage idling vehicles, which is terrible for air quality.

This seems like it would have a negative effect on 2nd/3rd shift workers and other late night diners. Often the only late night food places open are fast food drive-thrus.

Even when developed under an FBC, drive thru's still manage to suck:

 

In Bellevue, KY:

https://goo.gl/maps/gGkPb4CzPKB2BXMG6

 

This one in SLC is nicer but still...

https://goo.gl/maps/wHUxr4iDuTVkawZM9

 

And the ultimate drive thru in Columbus, OH:

https://goo.gl/maps/zunYJJtQ55t1nfQV6

 

16 minutes ago, Cavalier Attitude said:

This seems like it would have a negative effect on 2nd/3rd shift workers and other late night diners. Often the only late night food places open are fast food drive-thrus.

There is no reason that it has to be this way. If city codes prevent this development, businesses will adapt if there is a demand for late night food places. If they don't they'll just be pushed out to the suburbs and not clutter the urban fabric of the city.

 

And existing drive-thrus won't be outlawed. New ones just won't be approved. So it will be a gradual shift. This just prevents bad development from ruining the city. I think it's a great step forward. There is obviously the chance for unintended consequences, but we have to start making changes if we ever want our cities to resemble livable, walkable places again.

17 minutes ago, Cavalier Attitude said:

This seems like it would have a negative effect on 2nd/3rd shift workers and other late night diners. Often the only late night food places open are fast food drive-thrus.

 

Reopen dining rooms and park your cars. You rarely see drive-throughs in Europe. My European wife often wonders where are all the Americans. She never sees them out and about except in cars. It makes it very hard for her to meet people in the neighborhood, make new friends, feel less isolated, etc.

42 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Reopen dining rooms and park your cars. You rarely see drive-throughs in Europe. My European wife often wonders where are all the Americans. She never sees them out and about except in cars. It makes it very hard for her to meet people in the neighborhood, make new friends, feel less isolated, etc.

There are also very few businesses catering to 2nd & 3rd shift workers in Europe.

Cincinnati's zoning code has banned drive-thrus in any of the pedestrian-oriented commercial districts, and there's restrictions in mixed commercial districts.  That's been on the books for a while. 

On ‎8‎/‎14‎/‎2019 at 10:11 AM, JYP said:

This one in SLC is nicer but still...

https://goo.gl/maps/wHUxr4iDuTVkawZM9

 

 

It's surprising what a difference its alignment with the street wall makes even though the building doesn't "face" the main street.  

2 hours ago, jjakucyk said:

Cincinnati's zoning code has banned drive-thrus in any of the pedestrian-oriented commercial districts, and there's restrictions in mixed commercial districts.  That's been on the books for a while. 

 

The KFC/Taco Bell in Northside might have been the last drive-thru built in the city.  Oddly I can't remember what was there before (whereas I distinctly recall the lumber yard where The Gantry now stands).  

 

I also wonder if this zoning rule explains why the White Castle on Central Parkway refused to move.  I doubt that a drive-thru is transferable to a new location like a liquor license.  

 

 

The whole Hopple Street corridor, including White Castle, is CC-A (Commercial Corridor - Automobile) so there's no restrictions on drive-thrus.  The real crime is that pretty much all of Central Parkway on the west side of OTR is as well.   

1 hour ago, jjakucyk said:

The whole Hopple Street corridor, including White Castle, is CC-A (Commercial Corridor - Automobile) so there's no restrictions on drive-thrus.  The real crime is that pretty much all of Central Parkway on the west side of OTR is as well.   

 

Cincinnati should do away with CC-A zoning altogether.  I can’t think of a single area of the city where it would it would be desirable.

I have a soft spot for Drive through liquor stores, brings back memories of the teenage years as they were often the easiest places for high school kids to buy beer.

Those aren't really compatible with modern beer culture though. They're made for getting a 12-pack of Budweiser and a carton of Marlboros real quick rather than browsing IPAs.

4 hours ago, jjakucyk said:

The whole Hopple Street corridor, including White Castle, is CC-A (Commercial Corridor - Automobile) so there's no restrictions on drive-thrus.  The real crime is that pretty much all of Central Parkway on the west side of OTR is as well.   

 

The original Camp Washington Chili did not have a drive-thru.  The widening of Hopple St. in that area was a big waste of money. 

Too bad Oakley keeps getting drive-thrus. 

Really, really bad idea and a classic example of planners/social engineers attempting to thwart strongly trending individual preferences.   The entire point of fast food is convenience.   Even Starbucks has been moving towards drive thrus and Subway has started to.   Pizza Hut is phasing out "dine in" and even McDonald's is experimenting with kiosk-only places with no tables, chairs, and (perhaps especially) restrooms.  This corresponds with a major cultural megatrend:  reducing extraneous interaction.

Restaurants will either locate elsewhere, or adopt another McDonald's innovation:  app based ordering with curbside pickup.

 

Of course, if one wants to reduce parking needs this isn't the way to go about it.

1 hour ago, cincydave8 said:

Too bad Oakley keeps getting drive-thrus. 

 

I'd be okay with them if they were situated like the Salt Lake City Chick-Fil-A along Vandecar way or Madison

1 hour ago, E Rocc said:

Really, really bad idea and a classic example of planners/social engineers attempting to thwart strongly trending individual preferences.   The entire point of fast food is convenience.   Even Starbucks has been moving towards drive thrus and Subway has started to.   Pizza Hut is phasing out "dine in" and even McDonald's is experimenting with kiosk-only places with no tables, chairs, and (perhaps especially) restrooms.  This corresponds with a major cultural megatrend:  reducing extraneous interaction.

Restaurants will either locate elsewhere, or adopt another McDonald's innovation:  app based ordering with curbside pickup.

 

Of course, if one wants to reduce parking needs this isn't the way to go about it.

 

Millennials are more likely to order food via GrubHub or UberEats than to wait in a drive-thru lane.
 

There are plenty or reasons to support a ban on these (carbon emissions, auto-centric lifestyle, etc) however I have seen enough reasons to believe one is not entirely needed. If we require them to meet the street with an entrance, proper 1-story heights, and enough clear glazing they can become a good transition from auto-centric areas to more pedestrian-oriented areas. We have plenty of these places in cities across the country. The outright ban strategy is more about sending a message about your cities priorities. It's not needed but looks good as a news headline.

 

Also in many of these places, if a fast-food company wants to locate there, they will find a way. First they will challenge the rule as far as the appeals process will go and if they lose they usually build the store to the city's rules or don't build it at all.

Along with the build-to lines and glazing requirements, restricting the number of allowable curb cuts is another way to de facto ban or at least limit drive-thrus.  Also keep in mind that a drive-thru takes up a decent amount of space that could otherwise be used for parking.  The queue is basically a parallel parking lane that just moves slowly.  So I don't think eliminating a drive-thru would require adding more pavement, just reallocating it. 

 

Also something that hasn't been mentioned but which makes a drive-thru less compatible with an urban environment is noise.  I'm not one of those people who think that we should concede all urban neighborhoods to being noisy and that residents should "just deal with it."  Yeah if you live over a bar you shouldn't expect it to be quiet, but a lot of commercial streets back up to residential, and the ordering station for a drive-thru is usually also in the back.  So you have people shouting back and forth at a crappy speaker at all hours of the day.  Car washes are also noise problems, not so much for the washing but the drying.  There's no reason for them to be in prime walkable areas anyway since unless you're one of the few attendants who works there, you have a car if you're going to such a place.

 

I guess it's all just a manifestation of how cars degrade the urban environment more so than in suburban or rural environments.  When people complain about the city being crowded, noisy, dirty, smelly, dangerous, busy, or stressful, it's nearly always because of cars, whether being in proximity to them or trying to use them.  The city will never be as good as farther out places in accommodating cars, so it shouldn't try, and instead should attempt to mitigate their impacts as much as possible. 

14 hours ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

The KFC/Taco Bell in Northside might have been the last drive-thru built in the city.  Oddly I can't remember what was there before (whereas I distinctly recall the lumber yard where The Gantry now stands).  

 

I also wonder if this zoning rule explains why the White Castle on Central Parkway refused to move.  I doubt that a drive-thru is transferable to a new location like a liquor license.  

 

The KFC/Taco Bell has been there since at least 2011 based on street view. Not sure how long before that. 

 

Drive-thrus are not transferable. 

 

EDIT: Based on Google Earth aerials, the KFC has been there since at least 1994.

Edited August 21, 20195 yr by DEPACincy

14 hours ago, jjakucyk said:

The real crime is that pretty much all of Central Parkway on the west side of OTR is as well.   

 

This is a HUGE crime and should be low hanging fruit for the city to change. Music Hall is CC-A for god sakes. 

 

Also, the city should do away with single-family zoning as well. I live in a SFD-2 zone but we have many multi-family buildings in the neighborhood because they have existed that way for a long time. There's no reason someone shouldn't be able to build multi-family when there are nice examples of it already in the neighborhood and also newer examples just a few blocks away in the community commercial district. 

 

And while we're at it, the manufacturing districts don't make sense either. Most of the southern portion of Northside is either ML or MG, which means the only residential allowed is if it is adjacent to existing residential (ML) or loft apartments (both ML and MG). That area has lots of residential already and the market is moving toward replacing more of the manufacturing with residential. There's no reason you shouldn't be able to build multi-family in a manufacturing zone. 

6 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

Drive-thrus are not transferable. 

 

They are not, but like other potential non-conforming uses, they are grandfathered if the zoning changes to not allow them. If KFC/Taco Bell or a similar drive-thru restaurant is there when the building becomes obsolete in about 40 years, they will likely demolish and rebuild. At that time they may be able to keep the drive-thru if the building is on the same footprint and conforms to most of whatever the zoning code says at that time.

5 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

This is a HUGE crime and should be low hanging fruit for the city to change. Music Hall is CC-A for god sakes. 

 

Also, the city should do away with single-family zoning as well. I live in a SFD-2 zone but we have many multi-family buildings in the neighborhood because they have existed that way for a long time. There's no reason someone shouldn't be able to build multi-family when there are nice examples of it already in the neighborhood and also newer examples just a few blocks away in the community commercial district. 

 

And while we're at it, the manufacturing districts don't make sense either. Most of the southern portion of Northside is either ML or MG, which means the only residential allowed is if it is adjacent to existing residential (ML) or loft apartments (both ML and MG). That area has lots of residential already and the market is moving toward replacing more of the manufacturing with residential. There's no reason you shouldn't be able to build multi-family in a manufacturing zone. 

 

There is a huge zoning disparity in most of the city and most of it stems from the last full overhaul of the city's zoning code in the 1960's. Its been updated plenty of times since then but most of it doesn't meet modern land use and market trends. The city was working on a huge overall back in 2013 called the Land Development Code which would have fixed many things with the present zoning but it was defunded five years ago and mothballed by the administration.

 

https://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/buildings/zoning-administration/view-the-draft-land-development-code/

51 minutes ago, JYP said:

 

They are not, but like other potential non-conforming uses, they are grandfathered if the zoning changes to not allow them. If KFC/Taco Bell or a similar drive-thru restaurant is there when the building becomes obsolete in about 40 years, they will likely demolish and rebuild. At that time they may be able to keep the drive-thru if the building is on the same footprint and conforms to most of whatever the zoning code says at that time.

 

Right. I should've clarified I was just talking about transferring it to another location. If a drive-thru continues to be operated on this parcel then they have the right to operate in in perpetuity. 

3 hours ago, E Rocc said:

Really, really bad idea and a classic example of planners/social engineers attempting to thwart strongly trending individual preferences.   The entire point of fast food is convenience.   Even Starbucks has been moving towards drive thrus and Subway has started to.   Pizza Hut is phasing out "dine in" and even McDonald's is experimenting with kiosk-only places with no tables, chairs, and (perhaps especially) restrooms.  This corresponds with a major cultural megatrend:  reducing extraneous interaction.

Restaurants will either locate elsewhere, or adopt another McDonald's innovation:  app based ordering with curbside pickup.

 

Of course, if one wants to reduce parking needs this isn't the way to go about it.

 

From a production standpoint, drive-thrus are extremely inefficient since if you went inside you'd have the freedom to get your food in the order it is finished rather than having to sit there trapped behind someone who is buying $36 worth of food for their co-workers to get their food. Meanwhile your fast food that degrades in quality by the second gets cold. Sonic is the only one that I've seen that has done anything to address this so clearly it's not a priority for the drive-thrus. I've seen people stuck in their cars get visibly upset as they see me walk in then walk out with my food even before they were allowed to order.

58 minutes ago, JYP said:

 

They are not, but like other potential non-conforming uses, they are grandfathered if the zoning changes to not allow them. If KFC/Taco Bell or a similar drive-thru restaurant is there when the building becomes obsolete in about 40 years, they will likely demolish and rebuild. At that time they may be able to keep the drive-thru if the building is on the same footprint and conforms to most of whatever the zoning code says at that time.

 

 

Or begins to fall apart in 15 years like a Rally's