An early rendering of the planned Chick-fil-A in Van Ness.
The District’s Public Space Committee has denied Chick-fil-A’s request for a drive-thru at its planned Van Ness location. But it might not have the last word.
At its meeting on Thursday, April 28th, the five-member committee voted unanimously to deny Chick-fil-A a permit to make curb cut modifications for a drive-thru at 4422 Connecticut Avenue, which is the site of the Van Ness Burger King.
The committee made its decision based on testimony from Chick-fil-A, Van Ness community members and representatives, and DDOT and Office of Planning staffers. Ryan Westrom of DDOT and OP’s Tim Maher recommended against approving the curb cuts, concerned that the increased drive-thru traffic projected by Chick-fil-A would result in more pedestrian-motorist conflicts.
Chick-fil-A representatives and consultants spoke next. Their presentation, as at previous ANC 3F meetings, focused on the operation of the drive-thru. They again detailed a plan to have three to four employees taking orders on iPads on the north driveway, more employees another station for taking cash in the back, and another area on the south driveway with a door for more staff to deliver the food. They also mentioned using the rear parking lot for overflow, assuming there would be available spaces.
“What would prevent a back up onto Connecticut Avenue?” they were asked. Chick-fil-A had a ready response: They would hire an off-duty police officer to direct traffic. Matthew Marcou, the chair of the Public Space Committee, raised his eyebrow at this, and quipped, “DDOT can’t get any for other projects.”
Chick-fil-A also promised to have additional staff on hand to quickly handle orders if a surge in drive-thru business was causing backups. ANC 3F Commissioner Sally Gresham said promises of “self-monitoring” – which Chick-fil-A representatives continued to stress – were not enough. The city had no enforcement mechanism, she testified, if Chick-fil-A did not uphold its agreements.
ANC 3F voted unanimously in February to oppose Chick-fil-A’s drive-thru. Steve Gresham, a member of an ANC committee formed to study Chick-fil-A’s application, testified about flaws in the drive-thru system, such as the lanes being too narrow to accommodate employees taking orders. And during peak hours of business, he said, cars could be blocking the sidewalk at either the entrance or exit of the drive-thru more than half of the time.
ANC 3F hired Karina Ricks, a former chair of the Public Space Committee, to consult. She stated in written testimony that the drive-thru did not meet regulatory muster. Ricks also said the drive-thru would create an unsafe environment for pedestrians and bicyclists – conditions that would run counter to DDOT’s moveDC, the long-term DC transportation plan, and the goals of Vision Zero to reduce all traffic fatalities and serious injuries in the District to zero by 2024.
In addition, she said, the city was making substantial investments in Van Ness, in planning and implementation, to create a vibrant, walkable commercial area.
Dipa Mehta, a co-chair of the economic development committee of Van Ness Main Street, presented research showing a safe, walkable environment is a key ingredient to fostering economic development. The car traffic generated by Chick-fil-A would be detrimental to the business climate at Van Ness, she said.
Chick-fil-A has stated in the past that the Van Ness location does not currently generate enough pedestrian traffic to support its business. However, Marlene Berlin, a Van Ness Main Street board member, testified that Chick-fil-A was underestimating the chain’s potential to attract walk-in customers from the immediate area, given the large number of high-rise residential buildings nearby.
Marcou asked Chick-fil-A about pedestrian traffic in Tenleytown, where Chick-fil-A is building a restaurant without a drive-thru. The answer: They had not done a pedestrian count there.
Though comments on Forest Hills Connection articles about Chick-fil-A’s plans indicate at least some residents support a drive-thru, the opposition has been more outspoken and organized. A Ward 3 Vision petition opposing the drive-thru collected 366 signatures. In addition, The Northwest Current published an open letter to Mayor Bowser from several signatories, including the owners of Bread Furst and Acacia Bistro, and co-presidents of the Hastings Condo Association, representing the building just north of the site at 4444 Connecticut. They asked for Bowser’s support in opposing the drive-thru.
Only one resident testified in support of the Chick-fil-A drive-thru. However, he explained that he had business ties to the location (Corrected: See David Bardin’s comment below). He said similar driveway situations exist in nearby locations – at the Park and Shop in Cleveland Park, at the Whole Foods in Tenleytown, and at the Tenleytown CVS – and pedestrians adjusted.
Committee member Reg Bazile cut him off. “Those locations are not similar,” he said.
Marcou recommended that Chick-fil-A continue to pursue a Van Ness location, only without the drive-thru element. Chick-fil-A also has the option of going to court. That’s what a citizens’ group did in 1980, when a Burger King franchisee sought and received permits for the drive-thru in 1980. The court sided with the franchisee.
Van Ness Main Street President Mary Beth Ray said the community would support the restaurant without the drive-thru.
“Our research has shown how wildly popular their food is, and we hope [Chick-fil-A’s] interest in Van Ness goes beyond the drive thru,” Ray said in an email. “Van Ness is open for business.”
We’ve changed the headline and corrected throughout to reflect that the Public Space Committee is not part of DDOT, but a separate part of DC’s government.
Adrian Salsgiver says
We don’t want those frumpy Republicans from Chick-fil-A in our nice neighborhood. But if they put a big Trump for President sign in the window then it would be okay with me.
MS says
I have said, the REAL reason that Marlene Berlin and her crew are opposed to CFA is because they oppose the politics of the corporate owner. Well, congrats, you have succeeded in creating yet another empty storefront on Connecticut Ave, to join the former Walgreen’s, the former’s Epicurean, etc., etc., etc. Nice job!
Tracy J. says
Marlene, please keep your comments civil and constructive. And provide evidence.
Also, the BK isn’t closed yet.
John says
Not in the least. The concerns over a very busy drive thru are legitimate. This is proven by how poorly Chick-Fil-A was in addressing the concerns. Sure, some were against it for political reasons, but not all. You simply can’t extrapolate no matter how easy it is to dismiss the entirety of the criticisms do to its existence.
Besides, CVS is responsible for the empty Walgreens, not Marlene Berlin.
Further still, there are already 2 tenants in the new Park Van Ness building, the still relatively new Bread Furst is thriving, etc, As is Thai Pad, etc.
Turnover != failure.
David Jonas Bardin says
You report that “Only one resident testified in support of the Chick-fil-A drive-thru. However, he explained that he had business ties to the company.” That witness, Mr. Becker, actually said he was real estate broker for the landowner of 4422 Connecticut (i.e., BB&H) – not for Chick-fil-A – and that he had lived at Connecticut & Davenport until recently.
Tracy J. says
Thank you, David. The above copy was amended to direct readers to your comment.
Victoria Cordova says
I’d like to mention the somewhat ignored problem of increased car traffic coming out of the alley (which already gets a lot of volume) colliding with pedestrians and cars on Albemarle approaching the intersection with Connecticut. It sometimes produces real gridlock and a potentially dangerous mix — another factor to be considered.
Samir says
Anywhere CFA puts a location is a traffic issue. Your citation with what happened in Washington is pretty much almost always the case.
One thing that hasn’t been addressed in their proposal that I would advise is just regular parking.
We own a Chevron next to a CFA. And while we enjoy the symbiotic relationships our businesses hold, the amount of policing we have to do to keep our traffic flow clear of illegally parked CFA customers is a MAJOR burden on our operations. We’ve even had a CFA customer hit our own personal vehicle while parking in our lot causing over $3800 in damage. CFA is lucky that the bank across the street closed that branch–their employees use that parking lot; and their parking lot will regularly still be overflowing with vehicles.
There are ordinances in every municipality that require a certain number of parking spots for a business based on its size, type, etc. CFA locations should be given their own regulations because of the nature of its business and how existing ordinances don’t address its traffic properly. This would solve the problem before it starts in every location. If your municipality did this, they could set the standard that all others would eventually follow.
Be sure CFA addresses parking, drive through flow, pedestrians, and all other forms of transportation (bikes, etc.). Make them invest in traffic studies, and then get second opinions. CFA is a great business to have in your area, but the ingress/egress needs to be address on all levels for it to be a true success. Good luck.
David Jonas Bardin says
Councilmember Cheh, Thanks for your thoughtful letter to the Public Space Committee:
April 27, 2016
Matthew Marcou
Acting Associate Director
Public Space Regulation Administration
District Department of Transportation
1100 4th St. SW, Suite E-360
Washington, DC 20024
Dear Chairman Marcou and Public Space Committee Members,
I write regarding Chick-fil-A’s application for a public space use permit at 4422 Connecticut Ave., NW, application #116016. According to 24 DCMR § 100.1, a permit for the use of public space may be approved if, on the recommendation of the Public Space Committee, the Mayor finds that the use will not 1) adversely affect the public interest; 2) endanger the public; 3) substantially interfere with pedestrian or vehicular traffic; or 4) increase the area of public space that the applicant is authorized to use by other law or regulation.
I ask that you carefully consider these factors in evaluating Chick-fil-A’s application to approve a proposed drive-through at 4422 Connecticut Avenue NW. Although a drive-through currently exists at the property, Chick-fil-A asks for a significant expansion of its use. The company’s own study anticipates a 200 – 300% increase in hourly drive-through traffic at peak periods—including weekday evenings and midday on Saturdays, which are also peak periods for pedestrian use of the sidewalks along Connecticut Avenue. It would seem that Chick-fil-A’s proposed use of this property would substantially interfere with pedestrian traffic.
The proposed expansion of the use of the drive-through at 4422 Connecticut Avenue NW could also adversely affect the public interest. As the Office of Planning has noted in its comments on this application, a drive-through use is not appropriate at this location “considering the highly pedestrianized nature of Van Ness and ongoing plans to make it a highly walkable retail corridor.” Permitting the expanded use of this drive-through would provide a great financial benefit for Chick-fil-A, but that benefit might come at the expense of the public interest in a safe and easily traversed public sidewalk in this area.
Other factors may also contribute to the inappropriateness of permitting increased use of the drive-through at 4422 Connecticut Avenue. Directly next door to 4422 Connecticut Avenue is a popular car wash that often causes vehicles to queue on Connecticut Avenue. Expanded use of the drive-through at 4422 Connecticut Avenue would likely result in a similar pattern, impeding vehicular traffic by further backing up cars on Connecticut Avenue. This traffic back up would in turn exacerbate the risk to pedestrians by causing vehicles to block the sidewalk so that pedestrians have to navigate around them. In addition, residents have raised concerns about the fact that the landowner improperly manages stormwater at the property, creating a public nuisance that already substantially impedes pedestrian use of the sidewalk during heavy rainstorms.
Finally, I would also note that the relevant Advisory Neighborhood Commission, ANC 3F, strongly opposes the expanded use of this property as a drive-through, based in large part on the substantial increase in risk to pedestrians. In light of all of these concerns, I request that you closely examine Chick-fil-A’s proposal for a heavily-frequented drive-through at 4422 Connecticut Avenue. I strongly believe that when you consider all of the relevant factors, you will concur with the ANC’s recommendation.
Regards,
Mary M. Cheh
Andy P says
I have to say I absolutely agree with all the objections voiced by the ANC and others. The backup at the nearby carwash on weekends already demonstrates the problems a drive through would cause in this location. Having this back-up occur during the morning and evening food rush would be exponentially more inconvenient and dangerous for motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians alike.
A CFA in this location would essentially be paying for a very small amount of real estate, then leveraging public space (Connecticut Ave) to line up their customers at a large cost to the public.
Samir says
Andy, your last statement sums up what all CFA locations seem to do–leverage public space as well as others’ space for their operations–and without additional compensation I might add. It is an unfair business practice with ultimately profits CFA and leaves the rest of us with a bill.
This is actually the heart of the issue that CFA refuses to properly address company-wide because, well, it doesn’t make cents. More communities need to take a stand like yours against CFA (or any company for that matter) unfairly leveraging others’ real estate, whether public or private, for their own benefit.