Metro Phoenix Dining Thread

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

I don't use drive thrus either but c'mon, you know that lots of people do and you're being nothing but obtuse about it.

Of course lots of people use drive-thrus. Lots of people also vape and do other things that should not necessarily be encouraged or accommodated. There are hundreds of square miles of Phoenix full of drive-thrus for the enjoyment of those who prefer them. Those who seek a more walkable urban lifestyle are not being obtuse when they try to maintain just a few square miles in the city center where drive-thrus don't blight the landscape.

[biggus diggus]

So people who live downtown shouldn't have things they like because you don't want to look at them? I wish you'd be a little more open-minded. It's great that you like to walk and ride your bike, I commend you for it. I walk and ride bikes too sometimes, but we're the minority. Nobody's going to go downtown if you make it inhospitable for them.

it seems like an emotional argument on your part.

I don't have a problem with kids vaping, either. It's their decision to make if they want to put that garbage in their lungs.

7th Avenue is a highway. They're building a chicken fil a on a highway NEAR downtown. It'll be okay, I promise you that. If everyone who wanted chick fil a had to walk, ride a bike or take a bus to get there, chick fil a would go out of business.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

So people who live downtown shouldn't have things they like because you don't want to look at them? I wish you'd be a little more open-minded. It's great that you like to walk and ride your bike, I commend you for it. I walk and ride bikes too sometimes, but we're the minority. Nobody's going to go downtown if you make it inhospitable for them.

it seems like an emotional argument on your part.

I don't have a problem with kids vaping, either. It's their decision to make if they want to put that garbage in their lungs.

7th Avenue is a highway. They're building a chicken fil a on a highway NEAR downtown. It'll be okay, I promise you that. If everyone who wanted chick fil a had to walk, ride a bike or take a bus to get there, chick fil a would go out of business.

It's not question of what I or anyone else want to look at. It's a question of all the deleterious impacts on the urban landscape and public health that accrue when vehicles are idling in driveways that interrupt sidewalks and bike lanes and more asphalt is poured in place of buildings and more productive land uses. People who don't share these values have hundreds of square miles of suburbia available to them. It's not as if drive-thrus will ever be banned citywide.

The "7th Avenue is a highway" excuse is just more of the same vicious cycle status quo-ism that prevails among defenders of these drive-thrus. We don't require pedestrian-friendly design, so the environment becomes even more like a highway, further justifying additional development that is hostile towards pedestrians. The cycle never ends, and I'm proud if I come across as "emotional" in opposition to it.

Finally, I'll add that no one is going to come Downtown to eat at a fast food restaurant that has locations throughout the metro area. People who don't already live or work downtown are drawn to visit for events and experiences not replicated everywhere else. Making Downtown just another patch of suburbia with a few high-rises isn't a viable strategy to increase the area's appeal.

[ASU Diablo]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

It's not question of what I or anyone else want to look at. It's a question of all the deleterious impacts on the urban landscape and public health that accrue when vehicles are idling in driveways that interrupt sidewalks and bike lanes and more asphalt is poured in place of buildings and more productive land uses. People who don't share these values have hundreds of square miles of suburbia available to them. It's not as if drive-thrus will ever be banned citywide.

The "7th Avenue is a highway" excuse is just more of the same vicious cycle status quo-ism that prevails among defenders of these drive-thrus. We don't require pedestrian-friendly design, so the environment becomes even more like a highway, further justifying additional development that is hostile towards pedestrians. The cycle never ends, and I'm proud if I come across as "emotional" in opposition to it.

This. Well said.

[biggus diggus]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

Finally, I'll add that no one is going to come Downtown to eat at a fast food restaurant that has locations throughout the metro area. People who don't already live or work downtown are drawn to visit for events and experiences not replicated everywhere else. Making Downtown just another patch of suburbia with a few high-rises isn't a viable strategy to increase the area's appeal.

Friend, everyone is not you. I assure you many people visiting downtown for court, business, sports, theater, friendships, etc. will want to have starbucks and or chick fil a. Is downtown *only* for people who want local one-off experiences they biked to? No, it isn't and that's an elitist train of thought.

There are many, many people who live downtown or near downtown who choose to use their car every day, choose to drink starbucks from the drive thru, and choose to eat at fast food chains. It sounds like you think choosing to visit downtown or live downtown means one should be forced to live a lifestyle that they may not want. Nothing should be so absolute.

One of the world's biggest mcdonald's with an *enormous* parking lot and drive thru was just a couple blocks from my condo in downtown chicago. A very walkable, bikeable, and urban city would you agree?

A chick fil a on the side of a six lane highway isn't going to ruin downtown phoenix.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

Friend, everyone is not you. I assure you many people visiting downtown for court, business, sports, theater, friendships, etc. will want to have starbucks and or chick fil a. Is downtown *only* for people who want local one-off experiences they biked to? No, it isn't and that's an elitist train of thought.

There are many, many people who live downtown or near downtown who choose to use their car every day, choose to drink starbucks from the drive thru, and choose to eat at fast food chains. It sounds like you think choosing to visit downtown or live downtown means one should be forced to live a lifestyle that they may not want. Nothing should be so absolute.

One of the world's biggest mcdonald's with an *enormous* parking lot and drive thru was just a couple blocks from my condo in downtown chicago. A very walkable, bikeable, and urban city would you agree?

A chick fil a on the side of a six lane highway isn't going to ruin downtown phoenix.

Of course everyone is not me. I'll readily admit to being in the minority with respect to the overall population. Sometimes I even feel adrift in a sea of faux urbanism within this forum. Fortunately, the majority who prefer a car-oriented lifestyle (or simply have no experience with any alternative to one) have nearly all of the 500+ square miles of Phoenix to choose from. All I and other "elitists" ask for is a limited zone that prioritizes pedestrians and non-automotive modes.

This doesn't have to involve forcing anyone to do anything. In fact, it's a far greater act of coercion to impose a single suburban template on an entire vast city. Instead, it's about not shielding people from the consequences of their choices. Sure, people can drive downtown if they want, but they shouldn't expect to purchase food while seated in their vehicles or find unlimited free parking everywhere they go. There are plenty of other places for that.

With respect to Chicago, that city has enough urban vitality that it can survive the injury inflicted by that McDonald's. Phoenix already has too many holes in its urban fabric, and we shouldn't use existing ones, here or elsewhere, to justify allowing more to be created. Of course, a single Chick Fil-A won't kill Downtown, but it's still a negative development that I'll speak out against when given the opportunity.

[biggus diggus]

I guess we'll just declare downtown a fast food free zone. C'mon, criminalize fast food. Relegate it to the suburbs.

If you want to make everyone conform to your idea of perfection I think you should buy a sim city video game.

My final thought: you're talking like this is Central and Roosevelt getting a drive thru and I could see valid frustration if that were the case. This is the side of one of the busiest roads in the area and just off a freeway, it's a ridiculously logical place for it in my opinion. As you said, you're in the minority. People in the area will be really happy to have this place.

Sorry for the added dose of sarcasm, I'm still fired up about the Supreme Court's doings this morning. I really do think you're being unreasonable about this, but I'm not trying to be really rude about it.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

I guess we'll just declare downtown a fast food free zone. C'mon.

If you want to make everyone conform to your idea of perfection I think you should buy a sim city video game.

I have never expressed an objection to fast food. There's a Chick Fil-A on Taylor Street that fits well into the neighborhood. It's the drive-thru lanes that are the issue.

[biggus diggus]

Apparently there's a big enough demand for multiple locations.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

Apparently there's a big enough demand for multiple locations.

That's evidence that suburban design patterns don't have to be accommodated to cultivate these types of affordable eateries. When there is sufficient demand, chains and their franchisees will adapt their business models for an urban environment.

[MiEncanto]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

I have never expressed an objection to fast food. There's a Chick Fil-A on Taylor Street that fits well into the neighborhood. It's the drive-thru lanes that are the issue.

I want to reinforce that I don't object to your broader goal of a more walkable downtown. But I think the problem is the voices for this are often a bad vessel for these arguments: you sound like an extremist when you oppose a drive thru on 7th Ave and then people won't take your more valid arguments seriously.

I think the best argument for a walkable downtown is: we are a driving society and people crave the different feel of a walkable downtown zone. People DRIVE to Roosevelt Row in First Friday for this reason. People will drive or ride to downtown to experience a pedestrian only district.

And some of those folks have kids and may even hit the Chic FilA on 7th on their way because it works for them.

Finally, I'll remind that for employment, downtown is dominated by government and that doesn't seem to be changing. Govt employees simply do not eat hipster food for lunch or dinner. They mostly cannot afford it. A drive thru Chic Fil A is very helpful for this demo. If it weren't for all the government buildings downtown, there would be darn few workers so catering to them in small ways is worth it.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by MiEncanto

I want to reinforce that I don't object to your broader goal of a more walkable downtown. But I think the problem is the voices for this are often a bad vessel for these arguments: you sound like an extremist when you oppose a drive thru on 7th Ave and then people won't take your more valid arguments seriously.

I think the best argument for a walkable downtown is: we are a driving society and people crave the different feel of a walkable downtown zone. People DRIVE to Roosevelt Row in First Friday for this reason. People will drive or ride to downtown to experience a pedestrian only district.

And some of those folks have kids and may even hit the Chic FilA on 7th on their way because it works for them.

Finally, I'll remind that for employment, downtown is dominated by government and that doesn't seem to be changing. Govt employees simply do not eat hipster food for lunch or dinner. They mostly cannot afford it. A drive thru Chic Fil A is very helpful for this demo. If it weren't for all the government buildings downtown, there would be darn few workers so catering to them in small ways is worth it.

All this talk of 7th Avenue being like a highway ignores the fact that these drive-thru lanes will be accessed via McKinley. That allows encroachment that injures the pedestrian-centric area between the 7s.

In terms of government workers, they eat at all sorts of places, just like private sectors workers, concert audiences, sports fans, convention attendees, or other constituencies.

A healthy downtown accommodates these preferences by offering restaurants of all types, but that doesn't mean drive-thrus have to be involved. A better solution is more restaurants in proximity to government buildings.

[biggus diggus]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

A healthy downtown accommodates these preferences by offering restaurants of all types

including the ones you're vilifying. Read your own statement a few times and let it sink in.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by Code5

Yup. Lets encourage more cars in downtown.
How exciting. I absolutely hate Chick-fil-A.

Its off 7th ave and its a big empty lot. Land apreciates up, sure its a chik fi let now but assuming downtown grows eventually that land is worth more as a mid rise or a high rise.

There is nothing wrong with having a chik filet next to a starbucks off of 7th ave literally across the street from a small used car dealer.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

including the ones you're vilifying. Read your own statement a few times and let it sink in.

I was talking about accommodating different price points and types of food. The only thing I've criticized is drive-thru lanes and then only in the context of an urban setting.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by YourBuddy

A lot of people want more freeways and more lanes on roads, sometimes what people want and what is good for the city don’t align.

And the petty tyrant of the urban enthusiast always reveals itself.

I couldn't stand being an Urban Planning Major.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by Obadno

Its off 7th ave and its a big empty lot. Land apreciates up, sure its a chik fi let now but assuming downtown grows eventually that land is worth more as a mid rise or a high rise.

There is nothing wrong with having a chik filet next to a starbucks off of 7th ave literally across the street from a small used car dealer.

While I disagree with your second paragraph, the first paragraph I cautiously and optimistically hope is right. Having a cookie cutter fast food restaurant on the site means hopefully no historic preservation concerns if a more intensive land use is possible a decade from now.

[biggus diggus]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

. The only thing I've criticized is drive-thru lanes and then only in the context of an urban setting.

This is where my logical brain is melting.

That is *not* an urban setting. If it can work at Clark and Ontario it can work just fine on 7th avenue.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

This is where my logical brain is melting.

That is *not* an urban setting. If it can work at Clark and Ontario it can work just fine on 7th avenue.

It's not an urban setting because the city has chosen to treat the 7's as expressways, even though they run through the heart of central city neighborhoods. That's a choice that can and should be questioned, but instead we keep digging ourselves deeper into a hole.

Chicago's survival of the wound inflicted by the McDonald's you've described there isn't justification for similar injury in Phoenix.

[CrestedSaguaro]