Calgary considering banning new Drive-Thrus

[zukes]

They're trying this BS here in London too. What a frickin' crock!

[Locke]

Originally Posted by zukes

They're trying this BS here in London too. What a frickin' crock!

At least in London you probably have enough disenfranchised youth to actually staff the damn restaurant.

[Kerplunk]

While I never use drive-thrus (prefer to get out and walk a bit), I can see how many people would find them convenient. The actual banning of them for the reasons stated is pretty weak. While it will cut down on emissions while idling in line, the places will need larger parking lots to cover the walk in customer. And with people being how they are, everyone will loop in the parking lot for 5 minutes trying to get a spot by the door anyway.

As for the face-to-face interaction...will this really improve anything. I have rarely had an in-depth and riveting conversation while getting a coffee or a burger. I don't see this getting better when you add more people to the line.

They should just let the businesses decide what their customers want.

[Locke]

You're all forgetting about late-night service. Wendy's isnt going to keep the restaurant open until 2, so if a new Wendy's pops up in, oh, I dunno, Heritage Point with no Drive-Thru, you wouldnt be able to get anything after it closes.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by fotze

Did you do what I did, turn the radio up to full blast, turn the windshield wipers on full blast, turn the air conditioning full blast for your mom when she started the car up.

Ha ha. I wish I had thought of that. I was more keen on ducking down and honking at people and then watching them look around. Playing with the cigarette lighter was okay too.

It's probably against the law now, but I always had a pretty good time when my mom left me in the car.

[Slava]

^ I burned my thumb pretty good screwing around with the cigarette lighter as a young lad! I also turned on everything full blast as well...hilarious for about one second until dad gave me a good smack! (Spanking was not only legal, but in fashion back then!!)

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Locke

You're all forgetting about late-night service. Wendy's isnt going to keep the restaurant open until 2, so if a new Wendy's pops up in, oh, I dunno, Heritage Point with no Drive-Thru, you wouldnt be able to get anything after it closes.

You're absolutely right, I totally forgot about that.

Not to mention, its safer to run a drive-thru at later hours, since most tend to have security cameras, and no entry into the restaurant.

[Traditional_Ale]

The simple answer is:

10% price increase for the drive-thru window.

The lazy people will still use the drive-thru, but at least the cheap-ass s won't!

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Regarding the environmental impact of drive-thrus, some say it's no worse than the alternative.

http://www.drivethrutruth.ca/say.html
http://www.drivethrutruth.ca/PDF/rwd...ent-may108.pdf

(The) congestion that occurs in the parking lot, together with the start-up emissions and emissions from the extra travel distance to get to and from a space, all contribute to produce somewhat higher emissions per vehicle compared to a store that has a drive-thru.

Pfffft! 30 seconds of congestion causes more pollution than being stuck in a drive-thru for a couple minutes? What a mickey mouse study. I've never been in a fast food parking lot waiting for traffic longer than I have been waiting for my burger in the drive-thru.

I have no doubt that scrapping drive-thrus will cut down on emissions, but I don't like this way of going about it at all. There are much better steps the government could be taking to cut down on emissions that are actually worth while.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

The simple answer is:

10% price increase for the drive-thru window.

The lazy people will still use the drive-thru, but at least the cheap-ass s won't!

I don't know that you can draw the line right there... People that don't care about an extra dollar (me) will use the drive thru because it's so handy sometimes.
When I'm in a bit of a rush I'll dodge the mile long Timmys drive thru line and go inside. If I'm not in a rush, I like the drive thru because I can read my notes and make some calls or listen to QR or Rome while waiting.

I find it funny how some people (habby) are equating it to laziness. Coming from a guy that has his own issues with the rest of the world not being considerate of his lifestyle (biking), how can you call a parent lazy for "not taking the extra five minutes" to bring in all the kids.
Personally, I call it considerate. Kids are fidgety and loud. When they get into a place like McDicks they all start begging mommy for this and that... Let it take place in the car. And save mom a grey hair by letting her leave all the little ones strapped in instead of having to drag the kids in and then drag them out, hands full of food, through the parking lot.

[4X4]

And to be clear, I'm not saying not to bring kids into McDicks. I'm saying that sometimes the parents just want to get food and take the family home and eat it there. Why bring them all in to a place when it's going to be consumed elsewhere?

[Dan02]

You know having a nominal drive through surcharge(say 10-25 cents) which funds some environmental program wouldn't be the stupidest idea ever concieved. Sorta like deposits on pop cans, if you're not lazy you can avoid the charge.

[habernac]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Spoken like someone who doesn't have 2-3 kids aged 3-6.... It's hard enough with 3 10-14 year old kids.

I have a two year old. Soon to be another. Yes, it's a pain with car seats, etc. Not a big deal in the large scheme of things.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by habernac

I have a two year old. Soon to be another. Yes, it's a pain with car seats, etc. Not a big deal in the large scheme of things.

In the large scheme is idling your car for a few extra minutes a big deal either?

[habernac]

Originally Posted by Dan02

In the large scheme is idling your car for a few extra minutes a big deal either?

when there's thousands of cars doing it, yes it is.

[jammies]

I'd like to see a study done on what percentage of emissions are actually created by the average motorist sitting in a drive-thru. Especially compared to, say, how much is created by zoning far-flung suburbs that are 45 minutes or more from downtown without adequate public transportation. Or how much is used by people driving around my block downtown looking for non-existent parking spaces. Or by those who have to sit on 36th Street NE for three lights because the LRT was sent thru the centre of a major thoroughfare by idiots in the planning department.

It's a stupid idea because in the grand scheme of things, the savings on gas and pollution would be minuscule. I'm all for punishing those daffy suburbanites, but this is just silly. Next they'll be sending out the bylaw police to make sure you only buy groceries once a week, schedule any appointments you have at the same time, and draft behind any big trucks you might see on your way.

[Flames09]

I wouldn't have a problem with that it would also force you to get out of your car and not be lazy, side note I'm glad Superstore is also banning plastic bags, carry your stuff or bring your own!!

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Flames09

I wouldn't have a problem with that it would also force you to get out of your car and not be lazy, side note I'm glad Superstore is also banning plastic bags, carry your stuff or bring your own!!

I dont consider going through a drive thru being lazy, I consider it an efficient use of my time.

I could instead circle to find a parking spot and then stand in line inside which would not be efficient use of my time.

On the other hand, if I see a large line up at the drive thru I do not use it.

My time is more important to me that waiting in line, sometimes it can not be avoided, many times it can.

[onetwo_threefour]

Originally Posted by troutman

it would improve communities by making people talk face-to-face instead of through a speaker

No thanks, I have no desire to get-to-know all the Canuck fans working in our fast food joints.

Hah... That reminds me, I went to the football game a couple of weeks ago and sat beside this kid... probably 18 or 19, who was wearing Canucks shoes, and rooting for Edmonton in the game. I wanted to follow the kid to the bathroom and pee on his shoes at half-time, but it's not really my style. Not to mention that he was at the game with his parents (also loud supporters of the Eskies) who might have become upset. Of course the best thing was that we destroyed Edmonton in that game even with trying every quarterback the Stampeders had on the roster that night.