Opposition party

Despite the legions of die hard In-N-Out fans that exist out there, there is always someone somewhere out there that isn’t going to like the exact spot that any proposal wants to locate to.   For development projects the issues are always: (1) traffic, (2) noise, (3) crime.   I think crime and noise possibly could be swapped around, but in general those are the big three.   Sometimes opposition works to take down a potential business.   In Alameda, Inkies was forced to pull their permit application because of opposition and some general nastiness from a few in the tattooing community.   I’ll point out that the space that Inkies was to occupy on Webster Street is still vacant a year and a half later.  Opposition — and the ability to play a long game — forced Target out of South Shore.  I’m not sure the replacement shop, Ross Dress for Less, is necessarily an improvement, but whatevs.

But in general, opposition to a particular business relocating to a certain place tends to be a lot of sword rattling and in the end the business goes in anyway.   Personally, working with a business and a developer to improve the plan is a much more fruitful exercise than simply saying “no way!” Anyway, I did a quickie search of the Google to see how much opposition has faced In-N-Out when they have tried to open in new stores,  let’s just say that the arguments in Alameda against In-N-Out are nothing that In-N-Out hasn’t heard before.

And you know that whole thing about people saying that they don’t dislike In-N-Out in general, but it’s not right for *this* location (whatever *this* is?)  Yeah, In-N-Out gets that all the time too.

Santa Rosa:

In 2009 In-N-Out was looking to open a store in Santa Rosa.  Naturally, opposition:

Jenny Bard, the regional air quality director for the American Lung Association, said exhaust from cars waiting in a drive-through would be harmful to the environment.

She said she’s not opposed to In-N-Out per se, saying her son got his first high school job at one in part because it paid well — $9.25 an hour back in 2003. But she can’t stomach the fumes.

But despite the opposition, it won approval anyway:

In a surprise unanimous vote, Santa Rosa’s Planning Commission Thursday agreed to let the popular fast-food burger chain locate a restaurant on Steele Lane Drive, despite worries that it would add to traffic congestion, would contribute to greenhouse gas emissions from idling cars, and promote obesity in neighborhood children.

…

Clean air advocates had marshalled forces to oppose the 232-store chain’s use of drive-through windows, arguing it was a major producer of greenhouse gases because of the lines of motorists waiting for their orders.

Others said Steele Lane and County Center Drive, which feeds vehicles into the county’s administrative complex to the north and Highway 101 to the west, already are congested.

And it opened anyway.

San Carlos:

Same deal, same concerns:

But not all of the buzz about In-N-Out coming to San Carlos has been positive.   Residents in close proximity to the proposed site are worried about the effects of increased traffic to an already overloaded intersection at Holly and Industrial.  Others have publicly questions whether selling the land outright to In-N-Out as opposed to leasing it was the best choice for a cash-strapped city.  Regardless of where you stand on these issues, the point is clear — not everyone is on board with this plan.

And here’s what happens when folks don’t pay attention to signage and things during the design review process because when you are so bent on just not letting the business come in, you miss the details:

The new restaurant was built in June, and residents knew that there would surely be a large sign to identify it…but they had no idea it would stand 65-feet tall, and visible from more than a half-mile away.

…

In-N-Out said it is trying to be a good neighbor. The San Carlos location is the first in the country to have air scrubbers installed to control the smell of fried food.

And when neighbors said the speakers were too loud, they stopped using them.

The company said the city of San Carlos approved their plans with virtually no complaints. They told CBS 5 they’ll listen, but any changes now are completely up to In-N-Out.

“It would be exceedingly difficult and not likely that we would be able to lower that sign and still make our business work there,” said Carl Van Fleet, In-N-Out Vice President of Planning and Development.

Novato:

Same same same:

At least half the questions centered on traffic. Kuo and Kennedy repeated themselves several times when they said a traffic study done by an independent firm and paid for by In-N-Out is near completion and will include a list of expected impacts from the restaurant being built. Kennedy said In-N-Out would work with the city engineers to figure out what sound and traffic mitigation efforts would be necessary.

…

Another man who said he owned a condominium nearby was upset about the expected concentration of people and traffic on the now-dormant property and possibly lawbreakers mingling late at night. Kennedy said security officers could be hired to monitor the property 24 hours a day if it proves necessary.

…

Without waiting for the traffic study, several neighbors guaranteed that traffic would increase in the Rafael Village and Pointe Marin areas just west of the restaurant’s proposed location and create problems getting back onto Highway 101 south of the site.

In Novato though, the confluence of neighborhood opposition, soil challenges and availability of other parcels got In-N-Out to pull out of one location and pop their restaurant into another.   The Novato In-N-Out will be open sometime this summer.

San Leandro:

This site cryptically says that the opposition to the San Leandro In-N-Out was “trashed” but nothing specific about the opposition.   The store, of course, opened.

I will point out that opponents have been successful in stopping In-N-Out in some locations.   Walnut Creek residents were able to stymie a second Pleasant Hill location by having the City add so many limiting measures that it became impossible for In-N-Out to operate how they like, so they just pulled out:

To appease opponents, In-N-Out reduced the size of the restaurant and removed eight of the proposed outdoor seats. The revised development plan also moved the building, drive-thru lane, menu board and speaker farther from the houses directly behind the site. But In-N-Out balked at a long list of conditions the city proposed in fall 2011, including steps the company would have to take to prevent customers from parking on residential side streets.