Minneapolis moves to ban new drive-throughs

[JManc]

Originally Posted by Chef

A fast food restaurant without a drive-through makes less money, which makes them less likely to be built in the first place. It also means you might get something like this which is on the same street a few blocks away:

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9627...7i13312!8i6656

Only if there's a demand for mixed use development of which it looks to be the case in that area. A developer is not going to let a Burger King get in the way if there's a huge opportunity no matter how profitable the restaurant is.

[the urban politician]

^ Yes, plus cities indirectly get a lot of tax revenue from fast food chain restaurants.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Yes, plus cities indirectly get a lot of tax revenue from fast food chain restaurants.

cities could make even more tax revenue if these stupid fucking suburban-style fast food shit-boxes that were so obnoxiously imposed upon city neighborhoods in the 70s/80s were blown to smithereens and replaced with proper urban development that would actually make the land pay and increase property tax revenue 10-fold.

take a look at this utterly shitacular train-wreck of unmitigated suburban awfulness 3 blocks from our house. it's a full block site (0.75 acres) fronting a major commercial city street with one lone stupid little fast food restaurant w/ drive-up and 40 parking spaces. in all the times i've walked past it, i can't ever remember seeing the parking lot even 25% filled, it's usually more like 10% (it's burger king, which is terrible, so of course nobody actually goes there). it's such a monumental waste of space and potential. the owner is almost certainly just landbanking the site until they can get a big payday for it, but for the decades that may take, the neighborhood must suffer its wretched presence.

if i were king of the universe, i would not only make it illegal to build such terrible crap in urban neighborhoods to begin with, i would also rain hellfire missiles down upon all such existing locations in our cities.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

the owner is almost certainly just landbanking the site until they can get a big payday for it, but for the decades that may take, the neighborhood must suffer its wretched presence.

so the issue is greedy property owners sitting on property no matter how decrepit or wasteful, they are holding out for the right price. That..I wish the city could do something about. The urban aesthetic has to suffer for their greed.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

cities could make even more tax revenue if these stupid fucking suburban-style fast food shit-boxes that were so obnoxiously imposed upon city neighborhoods in the 70s/80s were blown to smithereens and replaced with proper urban development that would actually make the land pay and increase property tax revenue 10-fold.

take a look at this utterly shitacular train-wreck of unmitigated suburban awfulness 3 blocks from our house. it's a full block site (0.75 acres) fronting a major commercial street with one lone stupid little fast food restaurant w/ drive-up and 40 parking spaces. in all the times i've walked past it, i can't ever remember seeing the parking lot even 25% filled, it's usually more like 10% (it's burger king, which is terrible, so of course nobody actually goes there). it's such a monumental waste of space and potential. the owner is almost certainly just landbanking the site until they can get a big payday for it, but for the decades that may take, the neighborhood must suffer its wretched presence.

if i were king of the universe, i would not only make it illegal to build such terrible crap in urban neighborhoods to begin with, i would also rain hellfire missiles down upon all such existing locations in our cities.

When I clicked on the link, I dragged the image a bit, and saw the Isla Filipina in the strip mall next door to the BK. Have you eaten there? If you have, is it any good? Just curious.

Looking at its sign, I see it also serves teriyaki chicken (WTH?), and refers to lumpia as "eggrolls." Haha!
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9685...7i16384!8i8192

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by JManc

so the issue is greedy property owners sitting on property no matter how decrepit or wasteful, they are holding out for the right price. That..I wish the city could do something about. The urban aesthetic has to suffer for their greed.

Isn't that the case everywhere? Or everywhere except Houston? In that Chicago Burger King example, if the franchise owner paid the same tax rate on the parking lot as they do for the physical building then they would probably find something much more productive to do with that under-utilized parking lot space.

Sort of related, there was a story in the Detroit Free Press a few months ago investigating the ownership of the surface lots covering downtown Detroit. Pretty much all of the current lots replaced buildings. The tax code in Detroit actually favors that such conveniently located property be used as parking lots, because the owners pay almost nothing in taxes on lots with no building on it.

https://www.freep.com/in-depth/money...rs/1980619002/

[JManc]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Isn't that the case everywhere? Or everywhere except Houston? In that Chicago Burger King example, if the franchise owner paid the same tax rate on the parking lot as they do for the physical building then they would probably find something much more productive to do with that under-utilized parking lot space.

Sort of related, there was a story in the Detroit Free Press a few months ago investigating the ownership of the surface lots covering downtown Detroit. Pretty much all of the current lots replaced buildings. The tax code in Detroit actually favors that such conveniently located property be used as parking lots, because the owners pay almost nothing in taxes on lots with no building on it.

https://www.freep.com/in-depth/money...rs/1980619002/

It absolutely happens here. The city is full of surface lots and throw away development owned by investors sitting on them for decades until they're ready to cash out.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

Isla Filipina in the strip mall next door to the BK. Have you eaten there? If you have, is it any good? Just curious.

we've eaten there many times, or more typically get take-out because the dining area is very small, often with a wait for a table, and our kids don't do great with waits (like most small little mom n' pop ethnic places, they don't take reservations).

but on the plus side, it is BYO, so it makes for a great inexpensive date night place.

i'd say the food is very good, but i don't have a ton of experience with filipino food, so my opinion may not count for much, nor can i speak to its authenticity. (4.5 stars on google, FWIW)

my wife's friend's boyfriend is filipino-american (both parents born in the philipines) and we went there with them once. he said the food was very good, though he said he prefers the food at a filipino place about a mile west of us over in albany park that we still have yet to try (so many little ethnic hole-in-the-walls around us, and so little time to try them all).

anyway, here's a link to Isla Pilipina's menu: https://islapilipina.com/#menurow

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

we've eaten there many times, or more typically get take-out because the dining area is very small, often with a wait for a table, and our kids don't do great with waits (like most small little mom n' pop ethnic places, they don't take reservations).

but on the plus side, it is BYO, so it makes for a great inexpensive date night place.

i'd say the food is very good, but i don't have a ton of experience with filipino food, so my opinion may not count for much, nor can i speak to its authenticity. (4.5 stars on google, FWIW)

my wife's friend's boyfriend is filipino-american (both parents born in the philipines) and we went there with them once. he said the food was very good, though he said he prefers the food at a filipino place about a mile west of us over in albany park that we still have yet to try (so many little ethnic hole-in-the-walls around us, and so little time to try them all).

anyway, here's a link to Isla Pilipina's menu: https://islapilipina.com/#menurow

Thanks for the link. The menu actually does look pretty good; in fact reading it now, it's making me hungry, being that only had a small sandwich for lunch.

Looking it up on Google maps again, and looking at the pictures some people posted, it's really making me hungry. This looks particularly good to me:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Is....6916932?hl=en

I'm in the mood for fish I guess!

[10023]

Originally Posted by JManc

Exactly. Most fast food joints are not by their nature designed from an urban perspective. A McD's without a drive-through will still be a stand-alone structure surrounded by a sea of surface parking.

Most fast food chains as Americans know them are not. Most fast food joints, which would include everything from a NY pizza by the slice place, to a London kebab shop, to a Berlin currywurst stand, to a México City taqueria, are little grab and go storefronts that are very fast and very urban.

And even McD’s and others are perfectly capable of building urban format stores.

[10023]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ To you, nothing is edible. You should just stop eating

I love food. But the burger at Au Cheval is about the minimum standard worth eating, especially for something that unhealthy (and therefore not an everyday meal). Or for a pub burger, something like the one at JG Mellon in NYC.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by 10023

I love food. But the burger at Au Cheval is about the minimum standard worth eating, especially for something that unhealthy (and therefore not an everyday meal). Or for a pub burger, something like the one at JG Mellon in NYC.

I get it. You’re talking about quality, but you are using the word “inedible” inaccurately over and over again, and it comes across as snobbish—which reading your posts over the years, is seemingly your intent.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by 10023

And even McD’s and others are perfectly capable of building urban format stores.

But they are not going to unless local ordinance mandates it or market is profitable enough to make the investment. McD's will default to the suburban style stand-alone restaurant if they can.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by JManc

McD's will default to the suburban style stand-alone restaurant if they can.

the world's most obnoxious example of this unrelentingly stubborn mentality:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8931...7i16384!8i8192

that whole block of shit can't be hellfired out of existence fast enough.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

the world's most obnoxious example of this unrelentingly stubborn mentality:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8931...7i16384!8i8192

that whole block of shit can't be hellfired out of existence fast enough.

lol...wtf? How many millions did they spend on that?

[sopas ej]

Not related to any previous post in this thread, but I have a question...

Is Chicago's "downtown" strictly defined as anything inside the Loop, or does downtown Chicago extend beyond the Loop?

The Magnificent Mile is considered part of downtown but is outside the Loop, right?

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

the world's most obnoxious example of this unrelentingly stubborn mentality:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8931...7i16384!8i8192

that whole block of shit can't be hellfired out of existence fast enough.

I stayed at that DoubleTree in the next block once. It's crazy how so many surface parking lots were allowed to be built in a prime real estate area of the city.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

Is Chicago's "downtown" strictly defined as anything inside the Loop, or does downtown Chicago extend beyond the Loop?

"downtown chicago" isn't strictly defined as anything.

it's a nebulous term without a strict definition, as is the case for many other cities when it comes to the word "downtown".

"downtown chicago" could be limited to just the loop proper, or anywhere within the central area, or even anywhere within city limits, depending on who you're talking to.

just about every chicagoan has had an experience with a clueless suburbanite referring to wrigely field as being "in downtown chicago". wrigley is 5 miles north of the loop.

Originally Posted by iheartthed

It's crazy how so many surface parking lots were allowed to be built in a prime real estate area of the city.

back in the 60s/70s, rivernorth was hardly "prime real estate". thus why so much of it was leveled for parking lots, just like the fringe areas surrounding most US city CBDs back in the bad old days.

[10023]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I get it. You’re talking about quality, but you are using the word “inedible” inaccurately over and over again, and it comes across as snobbish—which reading your posts over the years, is seemingly your intent.

If anything it is hyperbole. But in a sense it’s true, because I would not eat a McDonald’s burger. For me it is not edible, or in other words, inedible.

[10023]

Originally Posted by JManc

But they are not going to unless local ordinance mandates it or market is profitable enough to make the investment. McD's will default to the suburban style stand-alone restaurant if they can.

And that’s exactly why local ordinance should mandate it. Otherwise they will inflict negative externalities on the surrounding neighborhood that are not reflected in the cost to the company or its customers.

Allowing McDonald’s to build a suburban format store in the city is like allowing a factory to belch chemicals into the air with no pollution controls. It’s cheaper, but it has a cost that the free market doesn’t accurately price.