H Street NE's 7-Eleven can still sell its fast food items under its current certificate of occupancy, a zoning board ruled Tuesday. (Photo: TBD Staff)

Wing lovers, rejoice. Dog owners, maybe not so much.

H Street NE's contentious chicken bone debate came to what appears to be a final resolution Tuesday, as D.C.'s Board of Zoning Adjustment ruled that 7-Eleven does not need to be reclassified as a fast food establishment.

The decision came out of an appeal filed by Advisory Neighborhood Commission 6A that argued that the 7-Eleven at 957 H St. NE ought to be forced to re-apply for a new certificate of occupancy, one that reflects the convenience store's emphasis on the sale of fast food items. The ANC has long been concerned that the store's offerings of ready-to-eat snacks like pizza slices, nachos, and hot dogs were contributing to an increase in litter around the neighborhood.

But negotiations between the commission and 7-Eleven broke down last month over a single sticking point: boned chicken wings. The operator of the store refused to stop selling them, despite community concerns that chicken bones were ending up on the ground, potentially attracting vermin and posing a choking hazard to dogs.

Tuesday's hearing before the Board of Zoning Adjustment didn't actually end up addressing that bone of contention, however, as the board established early on that the appeal process could only concern itself with the method by which the city's zoning administrator, Matt LeGrant, arrived at his decision to grant 7-Eleven a certificate of occupancy in the first place. Commissioner Drew Ronneberg, representing ANC 6A at the hearing, had lined up a handful of witnesses to testify about the convenience store's trash issues, but none of that testimony ended up being presented to the board.

Instead, Ronneberg was forced to focus strictly on the merits of his appeal, which posited that LeGrant had made an error in granting the certificate of occupancy based on two mistakes. One, that the certificate listed the type of business as a "market," which is not technically one of the classifications listed within the city's zoning regulations. And more importantly, that the 7-Eleven exceeds the standard threshold of 15 percent of its business devoted to "fast food" type sales, a no-no for an establishment that is not zoned as a fast food restaurant.

What followed was a laborious, three-hour hearing that went way down into the weeds of zoning regulations and procedures. Fully 30 minutes were devoted to determining whether Ronneberg had even had a chance to review the materials that LeGrant used to make his original decision, and it eventually came out that he hadn't specifically asked for most of them. The board then had no choice but to deny the commissioner's motion to push the hearing back another 60 days.

"I understand that it is frustrating sometimes to get documents from the D.C. government," said board member Konrad Schlater. But "it is the appellant's burden to provide the information to support its appeal."

With the hearing then going forward, the board was left to weigh Ronneberg's remaining arguments, the "market" issue and the 15 percent cap on sales of items that constitute a "subordinate" or "accessory" use. "7-Eleven has seen a decline in its tobacco sales, and so has focused more on fast food," Ronneberg said, pointing to the large advertisements seen on bus shelters all over town offering "2 slices for $2.22."

"If this C of O is in danger, then every 7-Eleven all over our city is in danger, as is every mom and pop market in all eight wards of our city," countered attorney Jerry A. Moore, representing 7-Eleven.

As the hearing wore on, subtle smiles could be seen on some of the board members' faces as the two sides went back on forth on the minutiae of what constitutes fast food and what doesn't. Turns of phrase such as "the hot dog roller was never put to the test," or, "I did not include the Slurpee machine" made what was otherwise a typically dry zoning hearing just ever so slightly less dull.

Ultimately, the board voted 3-0-2 to deny Ronneberg's appeal, with the caveat that the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs must issue a revised certificate of occupancy that classifies the 7-Eleven as a "grocery," as zoning rules dictate, as opposed to a "market," which it turns out is a building regulation term. The evidence that 7-Eleven came close to exceeding the 15 percent threshold on fast food, the board reasoned, while "not insignificant," still showed that fast food was "clearly subordinate" to the convenience store's identity as a grocer.