On June 21, a public hearing of the city’s planning committee was continued in regards to the regulation of drive-thrus and queuing lanes in the new zoning by-law.
This resulted from last minute concerns brought forward by commercial interest at the June 1 public meeting, which was the end of a long public input process for the draft zoning bylaw.
Staff presented changes that addressed these concerns, and these were passed by the planning committee with a 3-2 vote. These type of accommodations are laudable, but they must be balanced. In this case, only commercial interests were addressed, not the wider community interests.
Let’s look at two of the changes made.
First, the setback of queuing lanes from a residential zone has been reduced to 10 metres (from 15 metres, and 30 metres from the order box). That is about the distance to one of your neighbours’ driveways.
What would the impact of all those idling vehicles be on residents’ health, children playing, or a vegetable garden?
Second, the draft zoning bylaw limited drive-thrus to two commercial zones, C2 and C5. With the changes made, drive-thrus for restaurants, for example, could be included in the additional zones C3, C4, C7 (further commercial zones), I (institutional), P (park), OSR (open space recreation), M1-1, M1, M2 (some industrial zones).
A restaurant associated with a park or a school could have a drive-thru. This is a very big difference, and creates the potential for many more new drive-thrus.
These significant changes were not part of the lengthy public review process – residents have not had a chance to have their say about whether they agree.
Reviewing the zoning bylaw is an opportunity to think about how it can be made most consistent and supportive of our city’s goals. One of those goals is to become the most pedestrian friendly municipality in Ontario by 2015.
The Sustainable Mobility Plan, recently received by council, gives a number of recommendations around drive-thrus to improve pedestrian and cyclist safety and make a more pedestrian-friendly environment.
EarthCare’s Local Action Plan recommends discouraging new drive-thru facilities to improve air quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The changes made are counter to these goals. It is a lost opportunity to take steps forward as a healthy community (and, since new zoning bylaws do not affect existing businesses, without any cost to existing drive-thru facilities).
This decision will now go to council. Will they give the public the chance to have their say on these changes? Will they seek a solution that meets commercial interests while at the same time meeting wider community interests, and advancing goals of a healthy community? Let’s wait and see.
Naomi Grant
chair, Coalition for a Liveable Sudbury
Greater Sudbury