No, they’re not looking out for Burbank’s best interests


From Fronnie’s blog last week. Remember that this is trafficky Alameda and Olive they’re talking about:

As for an El Torito replacement, Burbank Community Development Director, Patrick Prescott, said in an email: “We had an inquiry from Chick-Fil-A for that location, but we told them we would be hard pressed to support a drive through at that location because it would not comply with the Media District Specific Plan’s call for pedestrian oriented design and because of potential negative impacts on adjacent single family neighborhoods. That’s the only restaurant that has reached out to us about the site.”

No, but Talaria down the street was A-OK.

And not that we’re especially big fans of Chick-Fil-A and its right-wing politics, but in the world of fast food restaurants this would be considered an extremely boutique attraction. Compared to everyone else they don’t locate anywhere. No sane (or responsible) city planner would give them such stupid shit about a drive-in located in what is clearly a business district, and so whose interests are really being represented here?

Like, who doesn’t want the potential competition?





Filed under Uncategorized

27 responses to “No, they’re not looking out for Burbank’s best interests

  1. Anonymous

    And another conspiracy theory is hatched…

    • semichorus

      Hardly a conspiracy. And are you actually claiming that staff doesn’t ever represent or promote the interests of private parties?

      On Planet Burbank?

      Or, only idiots would give Chick-Fil-A a hard time in locating here.

      • Anonymous

        “so whose interests are really being represented here?
        Like, who doesn’t want the potential competition?”

        Classic Jimmy conspiracy theory.

        • semichorus

          Ask Tom Tunnicliff’s people about what happened with Grounds Zero after Starbucks expressed interest in downtown Burbank.

          Then ask about Manhattan Bagel.

      • DixieFlyer

        You made your points too simple for anon (guess who?).

        Prescott was the lunk-head who the Judge criticized over the Walmart.

        Poor performance, consistently.

        NO conspiracy, just stupidity.

        • semichorus

          Can you imagine hassling Chick-Fil-A? Other cities would offer up their firstborns just to have one come in.

          And what phony reasons to reject it. Too bad such concerns were not expressed down the street over, yes….


  2. James Carlile Nemesis Club

    Jimbo needs more Jesus in his life, and his chicken sandwiches.

    • semichorus

      I actually need an Arby’s more.

      • James Carlile Nemesis Club

        You know what perplexes me Jimbo. There are many things we toatlly agree on that make me wonder about the friendship that could’ve been…

        But then, a topic comes around that reminds me of your extensive brain damage, no doubt brought on by decades of oxygen deprivation from your head being so far up your rectum.

  3. The curb along Olive is a no stopping zone, needed for the right turn lane/ signal at Olive…. which has been there for probably 10 years. Basic traffic engineering tells you don’t want drive-thru queues blocking a red zone/signalized right turn lane on a major artery at a congested intersection.

    Drive thru ingress would need to come off the rear alley or Fairview, which would probably lead to drive thru queues blocking the alley and/or Fairview.

    City did not block Chick-Fil-A, they blocked a Chick-Fil_A with a drive thru.

    • semichorus

      The site can be easily redesigned. And what explains the rejection over neighborhood “pedestrian” simpatico? That’s a new one.

      You’d think these development guys were living in New York by the way they throw around this silly new “mixed use” thing, like it was Broadway above 96th. Nueva Burbank, yes.

      • Anonymous

        The site cannot be redesigned to address Ralph’s concern about drive thru ques spilling onto the street right by the intersection of Olive and Alameda.

        You asserting that it could be does not make it true.

        • semichorus

          That current site will not remain. It’s a big lot.

          This is also a commercial neighborhood. I have about as much sympathy for those neighbors as I do for the ones who complained all the time about Monte Carlo on Magnolia. Too bad people on the Hill (near Glenoaks, say) don’t get the same concern.

      • Matilda

        Something more here than the superficial reason as presented. I really don’t know but you touched on the fil-A politics and perhaps it touched a nerve with the director. I see the promotion of foot traffic now as a new reality so does this confirm the massive traffic issues are out in the open?
        It seems the only way to get around in this overcrowded (developed) area is by foot, so why not encourage the surrounding office workers a new place to dine. I’m in!

  4. Irwin Fletcher

    No more ‘closed on Sundays’ franchises please. That is a valuable corner and should be open 7 days a week.

  5. BURBANK Bukkake

    The location in Hollywood has no problem with traffic, yet a crowded sunset blvd and residential street. Somehow they made it work. Prescott bought claim that it will impact the residential streets. Like all those closures across from talaria haven’t impacted. Phony argument. Didn’t stop,them approving Dog Haus or strsbuxk on,olive .. those residential streets are jammed with customers.

    • Hollywood location has no driveways on Sunset or Highland.

      You can make any commercial site “work,” but the city adopted The Media District Plan.

      I think your concerns should be addressed to the City Council, they are the ones who enacted the Media District Specific Plan.

    • The simple fact here is that Prescott and the gang are terrified of the adjacent neighborhood outcry that prompted the cul-de-sacs for Talaria. Anything that reeks of traffic is gonna get shot down there. The Big “T” is going to haunt this council at election time.

      • semichorus

        They obviously weren’t scared enough of Talaria.

        My suspicion is that someone or someone(s) doesn’t want Chick-Fil-A at that site because they (or someone else) already has big designs on the property. Compared to the inherent wonderfulness of Burbank 2035 and the glories of Mixed Use, a fast-food joint would be a waste of good Media District property.

        Prescott gave it away I think by citing the sought-for “pedestrian” thing. That’s code for work/shop/home. I also don’t believe the claim that no one else has shown interest in this Olive Ave property (!) That little fib alone suggests that something’s going on.

  6. Anonymous

    It’s a big lot, twice or three times the size that a fast food franchise would use. I doubt that Chick-fil-a would actually go forward with that location.

  7. Al in SoCal

    Curious to see what folks would want here – rather than the litany of businesses you would not want to see there.

    Mimi’s Cafe? Down south they have Cracker Barrel – it’s pretty good. How about Norm’s – though I know Burbank is diner central … I think it’s far better than the numerous Denny’s we have.

    • Anonymous

      Good idea. It would be best if all interested parties were made public so the neighborhood could have a voice. Instead of cherry picking from staff.

      • Al in SoCal

        I’m pretty disappointed w/ the ‘choices’ at Empire Ctr – I mean 2 of the worst of the worst chain restaurants side by side – neither serving breakfast – leaving only Wendy’s & Hometown Buffet …

        For Empire:
        Doesn’t have to be a chain restaurant either – how about some kind of rotating pop-up in that space. Must have breakfast!

        For El Torito Space:
        How about something like Famima (something like it – since they are now closed):

  8. DixieFlyer

    BTW, since we no longer have Redevelopment handing out MONEY.

    What say so do we have over the choice of establishment?

    As for Empire Center, the OWNER of the project selected the businesses.

    Someone or some entity INVESTS their money in any site.

    It’s called Venture Capital.

    It’s NOT our money.

    As a matter of fact, there was a drive-up Photo kiosk for quite a while at that very location!!!

  9. Anonymous

    El Torito and prior, Acapulco’s, already were using residential streets for parking. Indeed, a drive through could be designed to provide the same or less traffic. No, something more is going on here. And, if true to form, it has everything to do with insider input and preferences.

Leave a Reply- (comments take a while to appear)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s