The Spokane City Council’s recent approval of an emergency one-year moratorium on drive-thru permits is a glaring example of regulatory overreach that prioritizes theory over the daily needs of citizens and is ultimately a pointless restriction.

By prohibiting the acceptance, processing, and approval of building permit applications for drive-thrus around the city of Spokane's busiest traffic corridors, the council is going beyond planning for the future to interfering with the free market and ignoring the realities of life in Spokane.

According to city planners, the primary goal of the moratorium is to protect and plan for future transit-oriented growth by implementing a one-year halt on permits for new drive-thrus. The pause will give time for planners to determine the best way to incorporate pedestrian safety near bus stops going forward and help the city maximize about $82 million in federal funding for transit infrastructure.

But the city has only a handful of active high-traffic corridors capable of moving citizens around town and across the Spokane River, including the Division Street Corridor, Hamilton Corridor, North Monroe Street, and East Sprague Avenue. The moratorium is targeting those corridors in addition to other areas near high-traffic transit stops. 

The initiative touts support for increased walkability and vibrancy in these high-density corridors, but think about Division Street, which was never meant to work for pedestrian traffic. There are other neighborhoods that are better suited to a developing a walkable environment, than a six- to seven-lane major arterial.

Since the moratorium was fast-tracked as an emergency, the ordinance was allowed to take effect immediately and bypass the standard two-month public review process. Council President Betsy Wilkerson and Councilman Michael Cathcart have asserted that there was no actual emergency, noting that traffic and development trends on Division Street were neither "sudden" nor "unexpected." 

Additionally, planning officials were unable to cite specific examples of new developments that created the sudden sense of urgency.

The proposal was released to the public on a Friday and voted on the following Monday, a timeline that the Spokane Business Association described as a "legislative ambush" and a "cloak-and-dagger assault" on entrepreneurs and working families. Critics of the moratorium say the process intentionally limited the ability of stakeholders to provide meaningful feedback or prepare for the sudden change in code.

The city is prioritizing "transit-oriented theory over human reality," says Spokane Business Association President Brad Barnett.

Cathcart also notes that the sweeping regulation could chase away desired development and has characterized prior studies used to justify the ban as "failed policy" that hasn't produced the intended results.

The moratorium isn't just limited to fast-food restaurants either; it's an expansive ban that prohibits new permit applications for a wide variety of essential services, including pharmacies, banks, gas stations, car washes, and oil-change centers. 

Some also argue the moratorium is overreaching because its impact will be "minuscule" compared to existing high-traffic businesses and future high-density residential developments. Our corridors are already heavily developed with drive-thrus, and the ban does nothing to address the safety risks posed to pedestrians by those existing access points. 

We support the need for more walkable neighborhoods, but also a common sense approach to make that goal a reality for our community.