Could be the start of something really cool for Detroit.
http://bit.ly/r5U7BM
Could be the start of something really cool for Detroit.
http://bit.ly/r5U7BM
Just in time, this op-ed in yesterday's New York Times: Should Cities Drive Food Trucks Off the Streets?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/17/su...20truck&st=cse
Some food for thought.
Yes, if by "cool" you mean fewer jobs, less tax revenue, and more urban blight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitkid
Fnemecek How can any new business be a bad thing for Detroit? It amazes me that people see competition as a bad thing. And as far as less tax revenue, these trucks are paying for an oeprators license and pay taxes like everyother business. So a landlord doesn't get a rent check, who cares. Urban blight? Have you been to Detroit? have you seen a vibrant street food scene in other cities?
SWMAP, I think the city is going to try and create a designated area for food trucks like Mark's Carts in Ann Arbor.
Did you read the article? Its not just about parking!
hopefully there will be some progressive legislation on food trucks; encourage more local entrepreneurship.. how much does such a truck cost to buy?
If Detroit can find a suitable vacant lot, shouldn't be too hard, to serve as a destination for them I think it would alleviate a lot of the issues raised in the times' article. If Detroit's problem is that it has too many food trucks then it will be a welcome problem. I just don't see that happening.
As for competition with restaurants, the ordinance states that no mobile food unit can locate within 100 ft. of a similar establishment, I dont think that is going to change even if they draft new less prohibitive regulations.
Is it my fault that you're bad at math?Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitkid
If 10 of these trucks succeed and 1 regular restaurant goes under as a result, it's still a net loss in terms of jobs and tax revenue. Less tax revenue and fewer jobs will invariably equal more urban blight.
It amazes me that our educational system is so bad that people actually think that this will be a positive for the community.
I pack my lunch almost every day. What if I start buying from a somewhat reasonably priced food cart? Now I'm a job creator. Call the GOP.
I don't want to spend 10 bucks on lunch every day [[that inevitably comes with fries) and a lot of people can't sit down like a civilized person for lunch [[I normally have to eat mine in the office, construction guys are too sweaty or dirty to sit inside, etc...). This is hardly the end of the world and will compete with fast food more than traditional restaurants and I can't wait to get some new options.
"Although Mayor Rahm Emanuel supported the trucks during his recent campaign, the alderman who heads the committee that will consider the proposal said it won’t pass without restrictions that would keep food trucks at least 200 feet away from restaurants."
Are restaurants really that worried about competition from a truck? Why don't they open up their own trucks? If I were a restauranteur I'd be ecstatic about the proposition - you could open another location at a fraction of the cost.
El Gaupo has seven employees... That's seven people getting paychecks. I know of many small restaurants that have fewer than that.
You say that one restaurant going out of business creates urban blight? You know what creates urban blight, having stagnant or no economic activity. I would gladly welcome 10 thriving food trucks at the expense of one restaurant that couldn't face a little competition. The added foot traffic alone is a huge benefit.
And lets jjsut take a look at this : "If 10 of these trucks succeed and 1 regular restaurant goes under as a result, it's still a net loss in terms of jobs and tax revenue. Less tax revenue and fewer jobs will invariably equal more urban blight."
These trucks are forced to pay two rents, the rent at a commissary and the rent at the parking lot. The owners of both the commissary and the parking lots pay income taxes. Does every restaurant owner own the bricks and mortar location of their restaurant? No they don't. They rent out their space. The owners will pay taxes on the food they sell. The owners also pay fees just to operate in the city.
So, the argument against them is the same old argument you hear from those willing to accept the status quo. Change is bad. Competition is bad. Let's keep our head in the sand and say anything new is scary and will hurt Detroit.
For God's sake get out of your own way.
I hope these trucks serve the off-business hours, such as late night bar crowd. Most of the restaurants are done serving downtown at or before 2AM. The only options are usually coney, coney, or more coney. And, while I love coney, something different would be nice.
I'm sure there will be a few people who do that. The question: will there be enough new customers to offset the losses at traditional restaurants?Quote:
Originally Posted by Enduro
The answer is that it's extremely doubtful.
Anyway, one slices it, the end result of this is fewer jobs and less tax revenue in a community that can't afford to lose either.
If the food trucks are a threat to brick/mortar food places, then those places had better up their game. It's called competition, and it's what our free-market economy is all about. Up your game if you think a freakin' taco truck is going to put you under.
The consumer is always right in a market-driven economy.
It is not the city's job to protect restaurants.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnemecek
110% Strongly Agree. Free market captialism at work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BShea
First, there's no incentive for traditional restaurants to open a second location. If they open a food truck, it will be a replacement to their fixed location, which still results in a net loss in tax revenue and jobs.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBMcB
You're assuming that there will be an added foot traffic. There is simply no evidence to support such a conclusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitkid
In fact, with few jobs, less tax revenue, and more blight in the community, the most likely scenario is that there will less foot traffic in the area; not more.
The tax revenue and jobs created from those two locations is still lower than that created by a traditional restaurant at a fixed location.Quote:
These trucks are forced to pay two rents, the rent at a commissary and the rent at the parking lot. The owners of both the commissary and the parking lots pay income taxes. Does every restaurant owner own the bricks and mortar location of their restaurant? No they don't. They rent out their space. The owners will pay taxes on the food they sell. The owners also pay fees just to operate in the city.
For God's sake, please go back to high school where you belong and learn all of the things that you should've learned, but obviously didn't.Quote:
For God's sake get out of your own way.
That is why there is only one McDonalds? This isn't right--they put the truck somewhere not near their restaurant, and they can get more customers.Quote:
First, there's no incentive for traditional restaurants to open a second location. If they open a food truck, it will be a replacement to their fixed location, which still results in a net loss in tax revenue and jobs.
And by getting people out on the street, food trucks definitely improve the atmosphere. I agree with the people who say that if they city wants to regulate food trucks, it should be for other reasons than protecting restaurants from competition.
Fine, just don't complain when the unemployment rate goes up, the budget gets even tighter, and there's a bunch more vacant buildings around.
Once that happens, we won't have as many fixed restaurants or food trucks.
They can also use the food truck as a way to get more people to visit their brick and mortar locations. A few of the more upscale restaurants in NYC operate sidewalk stands to cater to the office worker lunch crowd. I have chosen to visit the some brick and mortar restaurants solely because I liked what I bought as the sidewalk stands.Quote:
Originally Posted by mwilbert
I live in SW Detroit - home of the taco trucks, and I love them. But it's a hard, hard life: sweltering or cold. There's lots of clean-up of the parking lot, flies, supply runs, etc. I have to think that many trucks vendors would love a fixed location with air-conditioning, plumbing & heat and that many of them would go that way. Seems like not too many building housed food locations would go the other way - to trucks. At least not permanently. I don't see many established restaurants deciding to run a food truck except as a sort of trendy gimmick.
And I'm sure that the trucks won't get anywhere near the stadiums! The vendors inside are paying huge concession fees and they aren't going to put up with truck competition.
Yes I would much rather eat food from some truck where there are no bathroom facilities available for employees or even patrons to properly take care of business than at a liscenced full service restraunt. A truck is not the same level of investment in a community as a resturant.
I can recall seeing a photo-essay of these things in Austin TX, I thought they were a joke. These things were all done up by hipsters. I still think they are a joke. Don't get me wrong there is a time and place for them, but the time is not now for the place called Detroit.
Well, don't eat there. Still not a good reason for them to be outlawed. If other people feel like you then the trucks won't make any money and will quickly go away.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
ihearthed, I completely agree. At some point you just have to let capitalism do its thing. Competition is the best thing for Detroit, in every capacity.
The most likely scenario would be, the crappy operators would be the ones who go under regardless of their business being a truck or an established restaurant.