14th Street Burger Joint Running Into Strong Opposition

Thaddeus Curtz, a cook at esteemed Cathedral Heights pizza place 2 Amys, would like to bring a bit of Manhattan to 14th Street, but things aren't looking too good for his business plan.

Curtz is looking to a "burger joint" known as Standard (what's with the restaurant names these days?) modeled after Danny Meyer's eatery in Manhattan's Madison Square Park, in the former Garden District space (and, briefly, proposed home of the never-to-be-seen Crepes on the Corner) at the northeast corner of 14th and S streets. I think pretty much everyone in the neighborhood would welcome a place to swing by and pick up an inexpensive burger, hot dog or order of fries for dinner (Curtz has indicated that nothing on the menu would be more than $6). However, his application for a liquor license, operating hours until 1 AM during the week, and outdoor occupancy totaling 130 people have worried a lot of neighborhood residents.



There is so much concern, in fact, that the license has been protested by both ANC 1B and ANC 2B. (Typically, only one ANC protests a liquor license application, even if the operation in question could affect residents in both.) 2B commissioners voted unanimously to protest the license at last week's meeting, with many voicing concerns over the affect that the late hours and high outdoor occupancy could have on the nearby residents. It was noted, for instance, that no one on the Commission could recall an applicant coming before them and requesting such a sizable outdoor permit.

Privately, I have been told by those close to the negotiations that an agreement could be worked out if Curtz was willing to cut back his outdoor seating hours until 9 or 10 PM during the week. However, Curtz may be reticent to do that, since the indoor space only allows for seating of approximately 15 patrons at a time. As was noted at the 2B meeting, at the price point Curtz is proposing, he would need to sell a lot of hamburgers in order to afford the lease rates at that location.

Another potentially confounding factor is that the site may in fact have environmental remediation issues, as it is believed that at one point a gas station existed on the property (which would, in fact, serve to explain the awkward arrangement of the parcel.) If true, it would present another potential hurdle for Curtz--or anyone else, for that matter--opening a restaurant on the premises.

To the matter at hand, however, it's not hard to see the point of view of the ANCs on this issue. The space in question sits directly across from, and just down the street from, numerous residences, who undoubtedly would be affected by the noise emanating from upwards of 130 people outside drinking at midnight or 1 AM. I have a limit to my sympathy for people who complain about the general noise and din of 14th and U streets--this is, after all, very much an urban neighborhood. But the size and hours that Curtz is requesting for his venture seem unreasonable considering the location of his proposed establishment.

That said, I also feel confident in saying that a business like the one he is proposing would certainly be welcome in the neighborhood, which leads me to a point that I raised last summer during the discussions that took place during the meetings of the Arts Overlay review committee. Currently, individuals wishing to open an alcohol serving establishment essentially have two options to choose from: restaurant or tavern. Restaurant licenses come with strict requirements regarding food service, the hours during which a chef must be on premises, and so forth which many owners may find untenable. A tavern license, however, is far more likely to be protested due to the nature of the operation and the late hours during which they are allowed to operate. Why not create a third classification of license--call it a Pub class license--that provides for food requirements less than restaurants, greater restrictions on hours of operation, but greater freedom to operate in or near residential areas--something that a tavern license owner would likely face strong opposition against?

An establishment requesting a pub license, for instance, might agree to operate their outdoor seating areas only until 10 PM during the week and until 11 PM on weekends, and to be closed down completely by midnight, along with a 25% food requirement (25% of their income must be derived from the sale of food products, rather than alcohol). In exchange for this arrangement, the license holder could operate at a location such as the one in question at 14th and S streets that is near residential properties and would otherwise likely be prevented from opening.

The model for such a license would be the many corner pubs one finds sprinkled throughout the neighborhoods of London, frequently in or near residential areas. These pubs provide a place of enjoyment for those in the neighborhood that is close to their homes, yet close early enough so as not to be a nuisance to nearby residents.

Since no such license currently exists in DC, such arrangements would have to be worked out through the voluntary agreement process, a cumbersome, time-intensive and, at times, adversarial process. While I don't know if Curtz would be amenable to the type of operating hours restrictions that are being discussed, I would be hopeful that a workable compromise could be worked out. In the longer term, it would be helpful for ABRA to consider the evolving nature of many of the neighborhoods in DC, with an eye towards creating liquor license laws that provide for adequate protection of residents whilst promoting development and growth throughout the city.

As far as whether we'll see Standard at 14th and S anytime soon: I will keep you posted.