I doubt if anyone wants total freedom regarding food truck quantity, locations, and times. I doubt if anyone wants a total ban of food trucks. As for me, I "want" food trucks in the core, whether spaced strategically and individually in certain locations, or in "food truck parks". However, I realize the danger to the core's progress toward revitalization, if we allow excessive freedom to the food trucks. And this realization is why I engage the subject.
Rest. zzzzzzzzz
What restrictions on "food truck quantity, locations, and times ... in the core" do you propose?
How many Food Trucks should there be?
More basic - what are boundaries of "the core"?
What locations would be allowed, or prohibited?
Should they be "X" feet from a Brick and Mortar" How far is "X"?
What times would FT be allowed or prohibited? Prohibited during lunch hour?
Where would you put a Food Truck Park?
If you only talk in generalities about how much of a threat food trucks pose to downtown (not just the brick and mortar restaurants), and toss in "I want food trucks in the core" without specifics of what is acceptable to you - it comes across as being against them all.
Did you participate in Councilman Brown's meeting this week?
Don't mean to be gone so long. Been sorta trapped via some workers being out.
Actually, I didn't attend the meeting, as I usually don't do well at them, or around lots of people. Perhaps I can make the next meeting ... if I have enough workers back to cover me.
First .... your questions as to what are the boundaries of the core? Well ...for the time being, and for this issue, how about from the river, north to Union, and east-to-west from Liberty to Jefferson or even, Davis Street? I refer to this area because this seems to be the "old" area of the core, where most vacant buildings are located. Of course there are vacant buildings further out, but I suspect that most are concerned, for now, about the vacant buildings "and vacant lots/parking lots" in this central area.
How many food trucks should there be? That would depend on the decisions as to how close they are allowed to the existing B & M restaurants. Theoretically, if the distance (X) were set at 500 feet, this could, during the period from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., limit the FT's to perhaps two to three "in the old core area outlined above". This should allow sufficient protection for the invested B & M's in the core area.
Anyone not understanding why protection is needed does not understand some critical points about overall objectives concerning the core. There is more to it than "competition". Nobody is "afraid" of the competition from the FT's. It is simply that allowing free reign to food trucks in the old core area is not aligned with the goal of furthering genuine and sustained vibrancy in the core. Why and how can this be, the myopic will ask... saying ....."But FT's fill customer demand .... let the customers decide."
Are we trying to fill core buildings? Or are we trying to empty them? Are we trying to achieve fundamental goals as related to basic essences of sustained vibrancy -- which "is" building occupancy -- or are we going to allow, as happens too often, "fleeting profits to a very few" to overwhelm decisions for the good of the core community at large -- specifically, the long-term journey to genuine vibrancy and building occupancy in the core?
You ask .. What locations are to be allowed, or prohibited. Of course, this will be determined by the outcome as to the question of how close the FT's will be allowed to set up as related to the B & M's.
The question you ask about the potential locations of the food parks is interesting, as it prompts me to think seriously that this concept might be helpful to the whole problem. Why not, in addition to the two or three FT's allowed in the core via the 500 foot distance, have, on the outskirts, one or two food truck parks, each having three or four trucks operating within the park? As to location? Surely there is a vacant lot somewhere that would be appropriate.
This arrangement would allow the food truck operators to get their feet wet in the restaurant business "so as to prepare themselves for making a real investment in the core, which is to open a brick and mortar location in the core -- to occupy a vacant building or space."
After all, "the" primary goal is to somehow add building occupancy in the core. I am confident that carelessly generating legislation which allows food trucks too high numbers, too close to brick and mortars, and at competing hours, will not only destroy motivation for new brick and mortar restaurants to open and occupy empty buildings in the core, but will tend to empty those currently occupied.
Having said all the above, I wish to enter an unknown factor, which might, if it is of sufficient value, counter my argument above. The factor relates to the question.... Will the food trucks, if allowed in greater quantity than most are proposing, and allowed much closer to existing brick and mortars ...... bring into the core, "customers" who would not normally visit the core? If FT's in fact "do" bring sufficient new customers into the core, then my argument is less valid, as the net result will allow the brick and mortar restaurants to survive as a consequence of their being enough customers for all restaurant operations, both B & M, and the FT's. And this possible balanced scenario will not be a loss of building occupancy in the core.
But ... will the food trucks bring in sufficient customers from outlying areas, so that "all" proposed restaurants can survive?
Outside of the hours of say... 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. the restrictions to food truck locations could be much less, as most of the brick and mortar operations will have closed. Why do they close up? To survive perhaps. I'm sure that some of these restaurants have experimented with opening into the evening, and discovered that, for now, to do so is a significant loss. I suspect that they are ready, when and if more residents and visitors are in the core as potential customers, they will experiment again with late hours.
Special Events? Surely, all will want to give free reign to food trucks during special events. It makes sense. The brick and mortars simply cannot handle the demand. And this condition will not provide continual pressure to empty more buildings in the core -- as would be the case if careless legislation does not properly regulate the food trucks.
Summary ... I do like the idea of limited individual food trucks in the core, and encourage perhaps one or two food truck parks (three to five trucks each) in an outlying area .. perhaps in an empty lot.
