Share This Article
This Is Why You Won’t Find Fast Food In Sudbury
Sudbury residents have grown accustomed to driving elsewhere for drive-in food. But many wonder why they can’t find anything of the sort in Sudbury. Yet others wonder why there are drive-throughs for some businesses, like banks and pharmacies, but not others like fast-food restaurants. On the surface, it doesn’t quite make sense. Why allow drive-throughs for some businesses and not for others?
The story traces back to the early 1990’s, when a Dunkin’ Donuts location was proposed for 378 Boston Post Road. At the time, drive-throughs were allowed in Sudbury’s zoning bylaw, so long as you were in a business district. But the parcel in question was technically in three different zoning districts. Drive-throughs were not allowed in two of them.
There was much debate in the March 1, 1993 Selectmen’s meeting. Ultimately the Selectmen voted to deny the site plan application that was submitted in late 1992. Concerns about traffic generated by drive-in restaurants featured prominently in the discussions.
Eventually the Dunkin’ Donuts location was built, but without a drive-through. As fate would have it, by the 1994 Annual Town Meeting, the Planning Board proposed a ban on food drive-throughs:
Article 47 passed at the 1994 Annual Town Meeting (Page 127) and is part of the zoning bylaw today. That Town Meeting dragged on for almost the entire month April, 1994; beginning on April 4 and dissolving on April 27. The drive-through ban didn’t generate much debate, though there was plenty of debate at that Annual Town Meeting… it was the year that Town Meeting approved the establishment of Sudbury’s Board of Selectmen-Town Manager form of government under the “Home Rule Amendment.”
Today, drive-throughs are a subject of controversy and increasing bans across the country. While many restaurant chains began opening drive-throughs during the Covid-19 pandemic, cities and towns have grappled with the same traffic and safety concerns that were cited in Sudbury in 1994. In neighboring Marlborough, the grand opening of a Raising Cane’s location last year led to significant traffic problems. But it’s not just a matter of traffic these days, as a bevy of new concerns have cropped up. Those range from environmental concerns with lines of idling cars, as well as fears that drive-throughs encourage the use of single-occupancy vehicles for transportation, and possibly disincentivize populations from using public transportation. All of that combined has created a bit of a nation-wide trend to pump the brakes on drive-throughs.
In Sudbury, the ban on drive-through restaurants seems to be tied to a perception of higher traffic and safety impacts restaurants may have when compared to a bank or pharmacy drive-through. However, the newer environmental concerns didn’t pop up as a major consideration in any of the historical records Sudbury Weekly reviewed. We were unable to find a record distinguishing the negative impacts of one type of drive-through from another type in early 1990’s Sudbury.
The issue also gets a bit tricky for communities trying to boost economic development, as drive-through locations tend to be more profitable for restaurant businesses, and the food service industry is a major, and growing, source of employment options for workers according to the U.S. Department of Labor.
In stark contrast to the challenges some municipalities are facing with proposed drive-throughs and car-first mobility solutions, Sudbury is, at least in some ways, headed in a very different direction. With the construction of the Bruce Freeman Rail Trail (BFRT) well underway, walkability in the Route 20 commercial corridor is expected to improve dramatically. The Mass Central Rail Trail, which will intersect with the BFRT in the heart of Sudbury’s commercial corridor, would support east-west mobility on bike or foot for nearly the entire corridor.
Another article at the 1994 Annual Town Meeting created the “Village Business District” around the area of Mill Village. The report from the Design Review Board on that article cited the need for improved walkability between businesses given the increasing traffic on Route 20. The language that passed was eventually changed by way of a bylaw codification, and the original prohibitions disappeared, but at the time of the vote it prohibited “Any building, structure, or site arrangement, designed to conduct business with a person in a motor vehicle, or through a window to a pedestrian.”
The concept of a walkable, village-scale, mixed-use area may have been ahead of its time in 1994, even though the concept harkened back to the early history of the town. A mere 30 years later, two rail trails may finally provide a walkability answer in more than just the Village Business District. Though the trails could also raise new questions…
Is a bike-through restaurant allowed in Sudbury?