Originally Uploaded to flickr by DarwinBell
UPDATE: I’ve just learned that Dulce will remain open for lunch, but will cease dinner operations for the time being.
As many of you know by now, Dulce (1123 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE), is temporarily closing its doors after tonight. They will reopen when they get their liquor license, which they had expected well before now, but after last night’s ANC 6B meeting, it appears this is still a few months off.
Back in September, Kate and Amber visited Dulce, and you can read about their fantastic experience HERE.
I think this is sad news for the neighborhood. It is unfortunate that a handful of neighbors have managed to force a small business to close, even if only temporarily. Even a few ANC commissioners admitted last night that Dulce is the victim of circumstances far beyond their control — the former tenant was a bad neighbor and so residents and commissioners are wary of anyone new coming into the space. Expecting bad behavior from Dulce because the former occupant was troublesome makes about as much sense as expecting Chesapeake Room to sell flowers because they now occupy a spot that was once a florist.
Dulce will still be open for any private events that have already been scheduled. They are eager to reopen and prove themselves to the neighborhood — even though in this writer’s opinion, it’s truly unfortunate that they are being forced to jump through these hoops. Stop in tonight and say, “Goodbye for now,” and keep your fingers crossed for a speedy return.
It’s ridiculous to suggest the neighbors are closing down Dulce. The neighbors object to an entertainment endorsement and late hours of operation sought by Dulce (2am weekday, 3am weekend).
No one “expects bad behavior,” nor would the neighbors tolerate bad behavior. But you fail to mention that the owners of Dulce also own H Street Martini Lounge. There is concern given the temporary police closure of H Street Martini Lounge and pending ABRA investigation into the stabbing incident on October 29, 2009. However, there would be equal opposition to Rock ‘n’ Roll or Hotel or H St. Country Club opening in this location.
The neighbors impacted have every right to pursue a Voluntary Agreement which suits the location in a small commercial strip in a largely residential area. When your corner drycleaner or bodega applies for a C tavern license with entertainment endorsement and late hours I’d like to how you and your immediate neighbors respond.
FYI — there were two petitions against this license, one of which contained over 20 signatures from immediate neighbors (only 5 required by ABC) — what’s your definition of a “handful of neighbors?”
I will preface my comment here with two things: first, I speak only for myself and second, I’m not going to engage in a lengthy back and forth on this issue, but some things require clarification and correction.
1. Dulce has rescinded their request for an entertainment exception. As such they’re asking for a clarification on the “no third party promotion” contingency on their V/A. Since many of the commissioners didn’t understand what that meant – never mind the fact that they’re the ones that added it – I think requesting a clear definition of terms is appropriate. The owners of Dulce continue to try to work with their neighbors to reach an agreement – they’ve never been opposed to a V/A and have again changed their license request. At this point, it seems likely that they will end up with a CR license.
2. There were more than a few residents and commissioners in attendance last night that said that the reason for extreme caution has nothing to do with Dulce, and everything to do with bad experiences in that location in the past.
3. The incident at H St. Martini Lounge has NOTHING to do with this situation. Yes, both businesses are owned by the same people. But they are entirely different businesses. H St. Martini Lounge is a bar; Dulce is primarily a restaurant. The only reason they initially asked for the entertainment endorsement was in an effort to make use of the huge space that they have upstairs. But, as I mentioned above, that request has been dropped.
4. Pennsylvania Ave is a commercial corridor. It is not, nor has it been in recent – and not so recent – memory, residential. If I chose to live close to an existing commercial corridor, I would be happy that there were local businesses attempting to make a go of it.
5. In one of the largest neighborhoods in the city, yes, I consider 20 people a handful, regardless of what ABRA requires.
6. Since Dulce is requesting the same type of license and V/A as the owner of La Plaza is requesting for his new place in the former location of Pacific Cafe, I hope that because there doesn’t seem to be any opposition to his application, that will help move the process along for Dulce.
Sad, sad….what ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Not an exact analogy, but still Dulce should not be punished for something they haven’t even done yet!
I’ll be honest. I never play the race card, but if this had been a white-owned business, they wouldn’t be getting this kind of back fire. Sorry, but it’s true, whether it be merely subconscious or not. The same is true with the streetcar plans to run through the Hill. People will oppose it, because it runs to poor areas of the city.
This business is on a MAJOR thoroughfare. Your NIMBY rights go out the window the minute you sign a lease or contact to live within a block of a major commercial and traffic thoroughfare.
Can they move to the future Game Stop location? Seriously though, what do restaurant and 3a.m. have to do with each other? On the other hand SG, imho a community is always made stronger by people who actually spend time to express their concerns and make an impact, I’m glad some are speaking up. Now Dulce owners, it’s up to you to demonstrate your good faith and commitment in running a business that adds to this area.
Completely OT, this blog seems to be picking up some readers, good!
The owners of Dulce have “demonstrated their good faith and commitment to running a business that adds to this area.”
They signed an expensive lease, put a lot of money into renovation, decoration and furnishing a space where previous restaurants have had a hard time making it. They hired a good chef and everybody seems to be delighted with their menu. Dulce provides jobs and revenue to the city where none existed before.
They’ve been willing to jump through a lot of hoops to reach a voluntary agreement with the ANC, and they were hoping that it would include the flexibility to provide some appealing entertainment options that would make the business more viable.
What more do you want? Another empty storefront?
Clearly this is a restaurant. Haven’t you heard the many reports of good, affordable food? I am sick to my stomach that people investing in a historic building along a HUGE and BUSY corridor are being denied the benefit of a liquor license. This is not a side street. It’s freakin Pennsylvania Ave. Sorry, but a vocal tiny group of neighbors do not necessarily speak for a community. See Mt Pleasant as an example, or even Ward 3. There is usually a silent majority that lacks the time or insider knowledge to participate. I for one had no idea what the ANC did or how to partcipate until 3 years ago, even though I grew up here (Ward 3).
No one is being denied a liquor license — Dulce does not wish to enter into a voluntary agreement that is satisfactory to its neighbors.
And if Dulce is “primarily a restaraunt”, why not apply for a Class C Restaurant license rather than the more expansive Class C Tavern license? They likely would have met no objections on anything issue other than possibly hours.
Busy commercial corridor? I’m sorry, but this just isn’t true. Maybe it’s a busy commuter corridor, but you could make that claim for C St. NE, Independence or Constitution Aves. Nothing in this one block strip on the south side of Penn is open past 10pm — the Fragers strip is entirely closed by 7pm at the latest. Residents’ properties along 11th, 12th, G and Penn directly adjoin this strip and have every legal right to pursue a satisfactory VA.
That’s hardly the same thing as “a handful of neighbors have managed to force a small business to close.” That’s just nonsense.
beg to differ: is the area zoned commercial? i believe the answer to my rhetorical question is yes.
then it’s a commercial corridor. just because it doesn’t meet some arbitrary definition that you’ve decided to create for commercial strips doesn’t make your assertion ironclad fact.
@IMGoph
You seem confused. Who questioned the commercial nature of this southern half portion of a single block of Penn? Commercial zoning is not a free hand, especially when ABRA is involved. there are tons of commercially zoned properties in residential areas — no one’s disputing. Few are regulated to the extent as those carrying liquor licenses. Bought any single serving alcoholic beverages on H St. lately?
There is a strict process for ABRA that gives ANCs and impacted communities (not just sympathizers) a voice in determining a fair VA. The parties to the VA are the business, the ANC and by extention residents of the ANC.(especially those within the single member district).
i think this is really unfortunate. the owners of dulce opened a great restaurant with good quality, affordable food in an area that is sorely lacking in food options. they are extremely nice people who provided nothing but the best service when i went there. it is a shame that so few people (yes, 20 people is very few) have so much control over our neighborhood.
the specific events that occurred at H St have NOTHING to do with dulce, same owner or not. that is a ridiculous comparison.
i hope they get their license soon.
The people around this area are the biggest whiners ever. They hate everything. Dulce is a great place to eat. They have the best food and great service. It’s a shame, people who don’t know what something is about ,always want to complain. The complaints are about nothing anyone can prove. Why petition for this establishement not to have a liquor license.
Just because there are some malcontents in the neighborhood and there are few, those are the ones that cause the most problems. None of you who oppose the restaurant is psychic, you don’t have a crystal ball, you don’t know what the future holds. Just because you are miserable human beings with no life, don’t make it hard for other people that are good people and want to do good things in the community. See people that is called “hating “. Stop being haters.
I highly recommend Dulce obtaining their liquor license.
For those that oppose, GET A LIFE, LOSERS.
Also, this is to beg to differ,
Why do you care so much? How does this affect you? Explain I know it doesn’t, You are the primary hater. I can tell by your blogs, u really have no life. U really are the “weakest link.”
@anon 5:31
THIH doesn’t have the full story here and you obviously don’t have a clue. But please, continue to rip the impacted neighbors as NIMBYs and worse.
Why haven’t you made the “full story” available to THIH, beg to differ?
Nichole Remmert is a diligent and thorough reporter. She would certainly give you a fair hearing and report your opinions accurately.
Accusing those who disagree with you of being “clueless” is counterproductive. None of us likes nuisances down the block, but many of us obviously disagree with you that Dulce would be a bad neighbor.
If you know something that we don’t know, what is it? Please, give us a clue.
Frankly, I think the new owners haven proven by there Illegal action on H St, that is tampering with evidence and hinder a police investigation , or at least allegedly done so by a MPD Det, they are NOT to be trusted.
Also the closing of the establishment after dark, proves their ignorance in how to win over a community.
If I owned a business such as Dulce, Id keep my business open to PROVE to neighbors how good I was, not close it in a frivolous protest.
Penn Ave as a Commercial corridor effectively stops at the 800 block. Every other business from 800-1400 closes at or around 7pm, so comparisons to H St are Ludicrous.
As a neighbor, I have NO problem whatsoever with a RESPONSIBLE business opening in that location, no matter who operates it. I do have a problem with IRESPONSIBLE business owners.
I don’t see a place in this family friendly community for ownership that has no respect or desire to embrace the community in which it exists.
To the owners, if they are reading this, Shame on you Sir and Ma’am, You attempt to provide a service, and when you don’t get your way, you cry, complain and close down your business in protest? I’ve been in a VERY successful business for over a decade on the Hill, and that is not the attitude to excel here! I wish the both of you much luck in your next endeavor, as it seems you have neither the intelligence or fortitude to make it here.
I guess what I was asking about earlier was the two aspects of Dulce: The restaurant and then the space upstairs. Obviously the downstairs is designed for sit down dining and from looking over the menu I did see some very reasonable prices. I’m sorry I didn’t take a chance and just go in. Hope I get another chance.
Then there is the upstairs and that seems to be solely designed as a late-night club. I mean the kitchen is not going to be open until 03:00 right?
Now, having said that. This place reminds me a bit of Trusty’s up the street…have there been any problems there? Or at Wisdom?
Hah, maybe this is all moot…just saw the Tweet on Capitol hill Bikes losing their lease…at this rate no small business will survive here anyway. Game Stop is just the beginning, TGI Fridays here we come.
beg to differ: clueless?
really, thanks. i had no idea how the ABRA process works in the city. thank you so much for educating me. if not for you, i’d just be a clueless idiot up here, calling NIMBY when i see it.
the fact is that my point still stands. i fully realize that opening a business in a commerically zoned building does not give one carte blanche to serve alcohol. my point was that it sure has hell looks like the nearby residents are simply using alcohol as a crutch to do anything they can to keep a business from opening in this space. maybe because they were burned by the previous business—that, i don’t know.
other commenters have noted that, if you have more information, please share it. otherwise, it seems pretty petulant to tell us that we don’t know the full story, give us a pat on the head, and then tell us to run on our way.
Hello all,
We will like to clarify a few concerns addressed on this link. First, we are not closing as a form of protest by no means. And yes, that would be irresponsible and childish (actually, the only people that would be hurt by such an action is ourselves). We are eliminating dinner and weekends at this time until we get the license. Many people have been requesting drinks with their meals, and others have said they will return once we get an ABC license. Our dinner and Saturdays have been slow (according to feedback, people prefer an establishment that offers wine, beer, etc) and since the ABC protest process can potentially be lengthy, we decided to continue to open for lunch only. Monday – Friday from 11:00am – 3:00pm. The decision came after the ANC meeting as we sort after ways to remain open while going through the protest.
To address other rumors – Dulce Cafe & Lounge has absolutely no intentions of running a nightclub or nightclub-like activities or an after-hours location.
We initiated and reached out to the ANC first to introduce ourselves and have always stated to them that we will be happy to enter into a voluntary agreement (and still will be happy to enter into a VA). We meet with the ANC and a few protesting neighbors two weeks ago. We have informed the ANC numerous times that we want to work with the community and not against it. We verbally agreed to closing at 10:00pm Sunday – Thursday and 1:00am on Fri & Sat. Also, we eliminated the entertainment endorsement. Everyone in the room agreed this was something the neighbors can live with.
The discrepancies in the voluntary agreement are:
1. Although we will close at 10:00pm, we want customers who have not completed their meal and/or drink by 10:00pm, to be able to finish and enjoy it. The way the hours are written, everyone must be out by 10:00pm, if not, we are in violation of the VA.
2. We have a small outside deck on the second level, and we want to be able to use it until sundown until it’s enclosed.
3. We have requested for the language of “third party promoter” to be revised and/or eliminated. This will allow other people to promote and/or advertise the Café & Lounge.
We informally (outside of the meeting via email) agreed to the ANC’s hours of operation of 12am Sun – Thurs, and then to accommodate other additional protesting neighbors by cutting back the hours of operation again to 10:00pm.
With H Street incident, we did not do anything illegal and will never do anything as such. MPD is currently conducting a formal investigation, and as there is nothing to hide we can provide an update once they have completed. As a FYI, Dulce is a completely different business and concept. Dulce is not just a bar and is created for people right here in the neighborhood.
Despite the strong opposition against us, we think this is a wonderful community. We have met some fantastic people, and found most of our neighbors to be very welcoming and supportive. We love it here and think it’s a great place!! We are always open for comments and suggestions; our email is dulcedc@ymail.com. Thank you
John, obviously is part of a group of people that like to pass judgement without all of the facts. When you referenced the actions on H. St., you failed to mention the detective that stated that the owners did cooperate and did not hinder the investigation. This was only one detective’s opinion.
It’s funny how you only focus on the negative, John. You didn’t mention the many H. St. neighbors that went the the hearing in support of the owners. Did you even attend the hearing, or are you relying on second hand information. My guess is that it’s the latter.
I spoke with the owners. They mentioned that the reason they had to shut the doors is purely financial. It would be a hardship on the business for them not to have revenue from selling alcohol. The neighbors are dragging this process out for so long, my guess is they want to force Dulce out of business.
Some of you are really not concerned about the well being of our neighborhood, only about your own agenda. One of our “concerned” neighbors came by with a petition for me to sign saying that Dulce wants to stay open until 6am. REALLY???!??
I say to the naysayers as I said to the person that came to my front door. You have the right to voice your views and to protest. YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO SPREAD RUMORS AND ALLEGATIONS THAT HURT OR INJURE OTHERS!!!
This is a “free” country. Oh, except our little neck of the woods.
Just sad!
Just to clarify — the protest required a minimum of five signatures by ABRA — in a brief neighborhood canvas the protesters gained over 20 signatures and submitted the protest. They didn’t fan out around ANC6B or beyond the immediate area, and did not need to spend any significant amount of time or effort gathering signatories. They could have easily gathered hundreds of signatures. Other impacted neighbors have supported the action after the fact without being signatories.
It sounds like there’s support for Dulce to operate a CR (restaurant) licensed establishment — again, if that was their wish they should have applied as such. Instead they applied for a CT (tavern) license and requested the latest possible hours and an entertainment endorsement, both nonstarters for the neighbors directly impacted. Even when offered a compromise in the VA by the ANC (limited events and slightly earlier hours) Dulce rejected the offer at the October 13, 2009 ANC6B meeting , which formally triggered the protest process by ANC. Dulce would have still faced neighborhood protests on some points, but ultimately they rejected the ANC offer as well, so this isn’t just about “a handful of neighbors.” A verbal agreement was later reached between Dulce and the protesters on hours and no entertainment endorsement (again, the protest included the ANC by default since Dulce rejected the ANC proposed VA), only to have Dulce back out of the agreement by e-mail three days later (disappointing but certainly their right). Ms. Humprhies’ above reply accurately describes the outstanding issues to be resolved.
@Nichole Remmert
With all due respect, this is not reporting. You express your opinions and cheerlead for local merchants. The Hill is more than what you can buy, sell, and consume. And as to your point 6. — Henry Mendoza only presented an informal presentation and has been in regular contact with the immediate impacted neighbors in his application process. Maybe he was the beneficiary of watching the Dulce process unfold and could proceed accordingly. At this time we are confident that he will address the neighbors’ primary concerns, and the only sticking point to date is the future of the illegally built deck on the side of the property (pre-existing and not built by Mr. Mendoza). Had Dulce engaged more of the immediate neighbors rather than CHAMPS members and your blog they could have worked out a mutually satisfactory VA. But ultimately La Plaza (or whatever Mr. Mendoza chooses to call it) will not have a VA with terms significantly different than Dulce’s as your statement implies.
I do sympathize with Dulce from a business perspective, but ultimately I have no horse in that race. The primary issue is adverse impact on the peace, order and quiet with late night operations and the entertainment endorsement (agreed on all sides that this request has now been dropped). The impacted neighbors and ANC are under no obligation to roll over on the business’ desired terms of their liquor license. Please read DC Title 25 and DCMR 23 or contact ABRA if you’d like a fuller understanding of the licensing process.
@beg to differ – this is a blog, not a newspaper. I make it very clear in every post that I am expressing my opinions in addition to the facts.
And, yes, in this case – I am definitely cheerleading for Dulce. Until they demonstrate that there is some reason not to support them, I am going to applaud any effort to turn an empty storefront into a viable business.
Oh, and I’m very aware that the Hill is more than what you can buy, sell and consume. I love my neighborhood and neighbors, and I enjoy the quiet in my neck of the Hill. Of course, I get that quiet in part because I chose not to live next to a major commuter and commercial corridor.
Nichole Remmert has no idea what she is talking about. She needs to do her research and find out WHAT neighbors can protest over and WHAT these neighbors did protest!! She claims to be stating her opinion and the facts…..she has the facts ALL wrong. All of the cry babies who think the neighbors are forcing Dulce to close need to look at the facts. The Humphries are closing (for now) strictly due to financial reasons. They can’t cut it without selling booze. And, the neighbors and the Humphries had agreed to a voluntary agreement…..the Humphries backed out 3 hours prior to signing! WHY? Again, strictly for financial reasons. I have no sympathy for the Humphries…they know this process and how it works! Do these people posting these comments think the Humphries are stupid? They went thru the same process with the H ST Martini Lounge. Get real people!
beg to differ: when someone trots out the “i’m a native washingtonian” or “i’ve lived here longer than you” or your new gem, “some of the protesters have been on the hill longer than you’ve been alive,” i have a tendency to reflexively downgrade my opinion of their opinions by a factor of 3.
just because someone is young, or was born somewhere else, doesn’t mean a flying whit when it comes to the value of their opinions. your dismissive attitude towards nichole speaks volumes for appreciation of ideas that are out of step with your own. i would hope you’d reconsider your bias against the opinions of people who are young, just because they’re young. i’m sure if nichole could go back in time and be born 40 years earlier just to make her opinions more valid in your eyes, she’d look into it. but, for now, since we can’t warp the space-time continuum, you’re just going to have to accept that writing people off because of age is an unfair practice.
The bottom line in all of this is that Nichole, no matter her age, just does not have her facts right.
@Marie, exactly what facts do I have wrong? Dulce is temporarily closing for dinner because it’s not financially viable for them to do so without a liquor license. A liquor license that a group of their neighbors are protesting. What is incorrect? I was at the ANC meeting on Tuesday – I heard all of this first hand. What is incorrect?
I like things simple: It will be nice to have a place to eat in the former Pacific space and also to have Dulce in its current space offering dinner with a glass of wine.
btw, New York Pizza stopped serving beer more than a year ago, does anyone know what drove that decision?
1. There were more than a few residents and commissioners in attendance last night that said that the reason for extreme caution has nothing to do with Dulce, and everything to do with bad experiences in that location in the past. There were 2 commissioners who stated this and no residents. I was there as well.
3. The incident at H St. Martini Lounge has NOTHING to do with this situation. Yes, both businesses are owned by the same people. But they are entirely different businesses. H St. Martini Lounge is a bar; Dulce is primarily a restaurant. The only reason they initially asked for the entertainment endorsement was in an effort to make use of the huge space that they have upstairs. The incident has EVERYTHING to do with this situation. It points to poor management on the part of the owners. Unless they take some business management courses, one can only expect the same at Dulce. The Humphries asked for an entertainment endorsement for they reason they en entertainment endorsement is an option when applying for these licenses – dancing, loud music, etc., to attract large groups and make money. If this establishment is to be primarily a restaurant why not extend the restaurant upstairs in the HUGE SPACE?
4. Pennsylvania Ave is a commercial corridor. It is not, nor has it been in recent – and not so recent – memory, residential. PA Ave., is a commercial corridor but the neighbors who filed the protest live in a RESIDENTIAL area that abuts the commercial corridor. Unfortunately, this is where age plays a role since this was a residential area way before you were here. In fact, the top part of Dulce was originally apartments!
5. In one of the largest neighborhoods in the city, yes, I consider 20 people a handful,..20 people may be a handful but the protest signatures were obtained in less than a few hours. And what’s your point here — ABRA only requires 5.
As stated earlier, Dulce is NOT “being forced to jump through these hoops”. You make this sound as if the owners of Ducle are going through unnecessary steps to obtain their license and the VA. Again, not true my dear — it’s just part of the process that most establishments on this type of busineses go through!
@Marie – Since you are referencing the H. St. incident, please explain to us the circumstances around it. It seems that you have FIRST hand knowledge of it and the owners business management skills and should be able to accurately give us all of the facts.
If I thought that the owners of any business establishment were delibrately negligent in their actions that caused hurt or harm to the community, I would be the first to scream. However, I have no knowledge of such and after reading some of the above comments, neither do you. Once again, rumor and inuendo are becoming the rule and not the exception.
I personally like the fact that I can have the option go to a great restaurant close to home, and enjoy a beer or glass of wine at 10 or 10:30 pm during the week. If you choose not to, then don’t, but don’t do all you can to squash something that hasn’t even had a chance to prove itself.
I would be mildly entertained over this whole matter if it weren’t for the fact that judgement is being passed before all the facts have been presented. I am pissed that in today’s society, people who claim that “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” is our mantra will still go out their way and make it their sole mission in life to step on hard working peoples dreams.
Question for all…Had Matchbox openened their restaurant in Dulces current location, would there be any objection? My guess is probably not. They would have been able to operate just as they are doing on 8th St.
I enjoy lively debate with good points and counterpoint. However, this is borderline rediculous.
If the owners prove that they are hurting the community, then let us use the same “process” and hold them accountable. If they to prove themselves great neighbors, I hope that each of you doubters step down from your soapboxes and embrace them with open arms. Meet the owners and staff. Taste the food. Let’s let Dulce speak for itself…and then, and only then, can we be the judge.
A competent business owner with capable business management skills would take appropriate measures to ensure that the “incident” and others that have occurred there would not occur! You can do as I did and read the public ABRA record and police reports to obtain first hand knowledge. “Question for all…Had Matchbox opened their restaurant in Dulce’s current location, would there be any objection? My guess is probably not.” Untrue. You would get the same objections from the neighbors – – -guaranteed. Don’t get me wrong… I’m all for a nice restaurant with owners that are responsible and this would be welcomed with open arms by the neighbors. I just find that the majority of cry babies don’t know the facts, more than likely don’t live near the Dulce where their lives would/could be impacted, and have probably never had to “experience” the “process'” that attempts to hold irresponsible business holders accountable.
Thanks Marie for clearing that up. I did read the reports. The key word that was left out of your statement was “alleged”. There is an ongoing investigation as stated by Dulce in a previous comment. The outcome is still pending which is why I am so vocal about this matter.
Do I think that this restaurant will be a good addition to the neighborhood, this remains to be seen. I will reserve that judgement until they prove that they are not good neighbors. That is all that I’m asking everyone to do.
Anytime any new business moves into a neighborhood, the community should be concerned. But we have an obligation to give people the benefit of the doubt unless their track record shows otherwise. The track record of the location has no bearing on the ownership just like a house has no bearing on a new homeowner.
I’m glad that you are a vocal resident. This is important to a community. All I’m getting at is instead of assuming that the owners are irresponsible, let’s stand by the phrase “innocent until PROVEN guilty”.
TJ, I agree and as a neighbor want the best for the community. Ultimately, the final outcome will be up to the ANC, the Humphries, the neighbors, and potentially ABRA! However, with the glut of restaurants on the 8th St. corridor, I’d rather see an expanded Fragers and my daughter would LOVE an Ann Taylor or Ann Taylor Loft! : )
The four blocks of 8th Street hardly qualify as a “corridor” and there are not nearly enough restaurants, bars, or entertainment venues to even begin to serve the more than 50,000 people who live in the Capitol Hill area, plus daytime workers, and visitors.
The so-called “bar problem” is that we don’t have enough restaurants and bars. We need more, and that’s going to be very hard with groups of anti-business zealots fighting investors.
LOL! We re not anti-business zealots! I am a business owner, so try again!