I finally got my hands on renderings for the Chick-fil-A planned to replace the KFC/Taco Bell at 220 Riggs Road NE, courtesy of ANC Commissioner Alison Brooks (4B08). Also, a neighbor sent me a Reuters article entitled, “U.S. restaurants remove dining rooms to speed off-site food frenzy.” It describes the use of so-called “dark kitchens” and the real estate and labor cost savings that result from providing service only via drive-thru or pickup windows for mobile orders:
The newest Chopt Creative Salad Co location, which opened Tuesday in New York, is unlike any of the chain’s other 61 sites. It has no cash registers or tables for customers.
Atlanta-based Chick-fil-A Inc has similar sites in Nashville and Louisville, where customers order and prepay online with the option for delivery or pickup.
Chick-fil-A is also trying something different, opening three pilot “delivery kitchens” this year – in Chicago, Los Angeles and near San Francisco. The latter is run by delivery platform DoorDash Inc.
At those sites, the chicken chain shares kitchens with other restaurants to prepare food for delivery only.
Off-premise digital orders are a major growth area for fast-food and fast-casual chains. More are turning to these so-called dark, virtual or ghost kitchens, which can also save labor and real estate costs.
“U.S. restaurants remove dining rooms to speed off-site food frenzy” by Hilary Russ, available at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-fastfood-kitchens-idUSKBN1XP1A1
Unclear if that is what is going on for the location planned for this neighborhood, which will be drive-thru only with a walk-up window. But as I mentioned before, 2,600 square feet is more than enough space to have interior seating, so surely the decision not to include interior seating is a business cost decision, not one based on “room.” And if that space is not being used for interior seating, then what is it being used for. Plenty of businesses have figured out how to streamline mobile order and pickup while also providing standard in-person ordering and dining. This is a by-right project, but ANC 4B should find out exactly what Chick-fil-A is planning for this location.
Edit: Media also report on Chick-fil-A’s recent change in charitable donation priorities.
Next Stop...Riggs Park 
I’m not opposed to a Chick-fil-a in the community, but this design leaves a lot to be desired, and in some ways is even a step back from the KFC/Taco Bell.
Some of the main issues I see:
1) No indoor seating
2) The building is basically an island surrounded by asphalt. At least the KFC/Taco Bell sits at the edge of the 3rd St property line. The Chick-fil-a appears to be pushed back, to allow double drive lanes that pass in front of the 3rd street side of the building (the outdoor seating area). If anything, this makes this corner look less dense and less pedestrian friendly.
3) The lack of indoor seating makes the building look like a closed box from the Riggs Rd side, with just a few small windows. Not a great look for a prominent corner on the community.
Some recommendations:
1) Push the “front” of the building (i.e. the outdoor seating area) to the edge of the 3rd St sidewalk, so pedestrians can easily access the restaurant, and so that 3rd St sight lines are more attractive from a pedestrian perspective. In other words, remove the drive lanes that pass in front of the outdoor seating area.
2) Ideally add a small indoor seating area, with floor to ceiling windows that look out to both 3rd St and to Riggs Road.
3) Add some sort of architectural features that improve the attractiveness of the building when viewed from Riggs Road. Can larger windows be added, for example, that provide light into the kitchen? If the interior design doesn’t allow for that, then I’d suggest a neighborhood-centric mural and/or architectural ornamentation (combined with landscaping) that improves the attractiveness of the building from Riggs Rd.
Follow-up question: I understand that this is a by-right project that doesn’t require planning approval.
But does by-right status also apply to knocking down the adjacent vacant building (which was never a fast food restaurant) to construct a business with a different use?
That’s a good question. These properties are in the PDR-1 zone, which Office of Planning says does not address drive-thru accessory in a straightforward manner. The developer said BZA approval is not required, but I don’t know if that is based on some determination they received or if it’s sort of “we’re going to say this with enough confidence that everyone will believe it’s fact” thing going on. The one reason I think 4B should find out is that with Fort Totten Square, despite due diligence, the developer realized really really late in the game that fast food was not a permitted use and ended up having to seek relief from the BZA to get the Five Guys (and Subway) in.
Thanks, that’s helpful info.
I did some looking around on the DC Zoning regs website. Section 11-U803 of the planning regs (Use Restrictions for PDR Zones) says that: “The following uses shall not be permitted on any lot located in whole or in part within one hundred feet of a residential zone: … e) Drive-through operations as either a principal or accessory use”.
The full text can be found here: https://dcregs.dc.gov/Common/DCMR/RuleList.aspx?ChapterNum=11-U8
I’m not sure if Mixed Use Zoning (e.g. Fort Totten Square) counts as a residential zone in the definition above. But if it does, it sounds like BZA relief might be needed in this case too. Perhaps that could give the community a bit more influence on the design of this development.