Posted on 10/16/2019 6:25:46 PM PDT by Mount Athos
A growing number of local legislatures in cities across the country want to put an end to drive-thru windows.
In August, Minneapolis became the latest city to pass an ordinance banning the construction of new restaurant drive-thrus. Officials say the ban will help curb pollution, make the city more walkable and improve health problems pertaining to obesity. Other places that have enacted similar measures say they are aiming to combat traffic, cut carbon monoxide emissions and litter.
Thus far, cities in California, Missouri and New Jersey have implemented similar bans.
Still, many consumers are worried about one of their favorite conveniences being taken away. Some have pointed out how important drive-thrus are for customers who are disabled, the elderly and parents who may not easily be able to get their kids out of the car for a quick bite.
Other folks say they think the bans won't help decrease CO2 emissions because people may just leave their cars running while they wait for someone else to pick up the food.
There is, however, increasing support for the bans. Some say curbing access to even faster fast food may help aid in reversing urban obesity rates, while also helping to improve road traffic accidents.
According to the National Restaurant Association, 25% of restaurant visits in the U.S. occur at a drive-thru window.
One of the first municipalities to prohibit new and expanded drive-thrus was South Los Angeles in 2008. They also banned the construction of new stand-alone fast-food restaurants. In 2015, a non-profit research organization called RAND published a study examining the ban's impact on diet and obesity in L.A. County from 2007 to 2012. Its researchers found obesity actually increased among residents in the area.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
If you keep them from the drive thru they are just going to order from Grub Hub. That will mean another car on the road and more pollution.
As usual they will make the "problem" they are trying to solve worse.
“There is, however, increasing support for the bans.”
Less products sold, less tax income.
Raise tax on remaining product to make up the difference.
Even less product sold.
Raise taxes on remaining product sold.
Etc. Etc. Etc
“But it be for de chillun’” /s
Cities in Missouri, not the state.
No kidding. I was expecting it to be Columbia, home of Mizzou.
But it’s a St. Louis suburb, Creve Couer.
The coffee drinkers waiting at Starbucks drive-thru at 7:00 a.m. are not going to be happy :(
In effect this legislation favors existing restaurants with drive through over new restaurants.
I can see the price of existing restaurants with a drive-thru in these cities sky rocketing over the price of a new restaurant simply so that a buyer will be grandfathered under the law (even in a less desirable location).
The law of unintended consequences is as powerful and as inescapable as the law of gravity.
Walgreens drive-thrus? Will they close?
If they ban drive-through a, they should ban the rising trend of delivery service. Same things...traffic, exhaust, laziness.
My cousin and wife were on trying to diet and she thought they should put their picture on the fridge door. My cousin said, “No, we need to put it on the door at Casey’s.”
Good point, I thought.
Folks from certain stats can’t keep saying “CITIES not the state”
Those cities do in fact belong to your state whether you want them to or not.
No one makes a distinction between staten island and manhattan when they talk about nyc.
though the 2 couldn’t be more different.
People from those states need to own up to the fact that the cities are INDEED as much a part of that state as anywhere else.
No urban drive-throughs, more ambulance use / emergency room use.
Imagine how much lower co2 emissions would be if they just outlawed pets. No more dogs barking at night either! Of course, sooner or latter, they will get around to us, too.
Yeah I don't get it. I wonder if it's fake news.
looking....
It seems they had a problem with the drive through being to close to other peoples property. (IE: fake news. had nothing to do with global warming)
http://www.newsmagazinenetwork.com/nn/2014112654439/drive-throughs-get-green-light/
How about the drive-thru bars in Louisiana?
If you keep them from the drive thru they are just going to order from Grub Hub.
**********
Vote Democrat, and they’ll ban that too.
” people may just leave their cars running while they wait for someone else to pick up the food.”
now, that there, are the words of a smart person. Yes, people will leave the car running with the a/c on, while Dad goes in for the food, delivered to him by a robot, who doesn’t care if it stands at a counter or at a drive-thru window
As I understand it, Staten Island and each of the boroughs has its own borough president.
The above article though said “South Los Angeles” - I was unaware that a portion of a city (other than one structured like NYC) could do that.
Although that’s generally a rather poor section of the city, no? Is it not like they have to worry about anyone opening a new drive-through, or restaurant of any kind?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.