Posted Sep 23, 2020, 3:53 PM
|
 |
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 52,200
|
|
|
No, We Still Don't Need Drive-Throughs
No, We Still Don't Need Drive-Throughs
September 21, 2020
By Daniel Herriges
Read More: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/...drive-throughs
Quote:
.....
No doubt there will be strong pressure from chains on city planning departments to approve their new, drive-through-heavy, template designs even in urban environments where they’re not appropriate. Cities should be prepared to resist that pressure. But will they be? Or will they buy into the simplistic notion that the drive-through, thanks to COVID-19, is now the future?
- A drive-through is a markedly low-returning land use, in terms of the tax revenue it brings in versus other uses of the same land. It just so happens that the article that first brought Strong Towns to many readers' attention way back in 2012 was a proof of exactly this concept: a brand new Taco John's in Brainerd, Minnesota, when you actually do the math, is significantly less valuable than even a fairly drab, run-down strip of small local storefronts. — The reason is simple: the amount of non-place a drive-through restaurant requires is massive, and this drives the value down. It's not just the driving lanes and parking lot; it's things like stormwater buffers that end up being required to make up for all that asphalt.
- The flip side of revenue is expenses, and drive-throughs also impose more costs on your city than a lot of other things that could occupy the same piece of land. One reason is that they are absolutely massive local traffic generators. Sean Hayford Oleary made a striking comparison on Twitter between a Taco Bell and a 185-unit apartment building: which do you think brings in more revenue per acre? Which do you think is responsible for more traffic? It's an odd quirk of Your Brain on Cars™ that it's rare to see a groundswell of NIMBY opposition to a new Taco Bell because of traffic, but nearby traffic impacts are a common theme of the opponents of new apartment construction. Go figure.
- A drive-through makes for a miserable environment to walk, ride a bike, or use a wheelchair or other assistive mobility device. Every driveway access to or from the street is a potential conflict point where crashes can happen, because it's a site for unexpected behavior. Drivers may not be looking for people on the sidewalk, or someone may not expect the vehicle in front of them to brake. On top of this, you have the "wasteland" factor: people on sidewalks feel most comfortable when there is a space-defining, hard edge to follow (a psychological phenomenon called thigmotaxis), such as a continuous wall of storefronts. Driveways break up this wall, and create an imposing and unpleasant environment to walk through.
Drive-throughs just aren't necessary. The needs they meet can be met in other ways.
• Maybe you have a disability and going inside the business is a significant hassle, unsafe, or impossible for you.
• Maybe you are high risk for COVID complications for one or more reasons, and so you are really are not comfortable going in, even just to stand in line for take-out.
• Maybe you are a parent with a young child, who is spared by the drive-through from the need to unbuckle your kid from a car seat and get them into a stroller all while averting any meltdowns.
.....
|
Total value of the “Old and Blighted” block: $1,104,000. Total value of the “Shiny and New” drive-through Taco John’s block: $618,000.
That T-Bell likely generates more traffic than the 185-unit apartment building behind it. Despite being lower-taxed residential, the apartment generates 1.4x as much property tax as the T-Bell (per acre — or 6.7x total).
__________________
ASDFGHJK
|
Prev
Linear Mode
