Milton planners approve McDonald’s preliminary site plan

A last-minute change of vote by Milton Planning and Zoning Commission’s chair April 18 allowed for approval of a McDonald’s preliminary site-plan application to build a 4,000-square-foot restaurant within the Food Lion shopping center at the corner of Route 16 and Union Street Extended. 

Commissioner George Cardwell moved to approve the application with conditions related to traffic within the shopping center. That motion failed due to a lack of a second. 

Commissioner Jeff Seemans then moved to reject the application, which was seconded by Commissioner Lynn Ekelund. That vote was deadlocked, with Chair Richard Trask joining Seemans and Ekelund, and commissioners Don Mazzeo, Cardwell and Maurice McGrath voting against the motion. Commissioner Andrew Gogates, the potential tiebreaking vote, was unavailable to attend the meeting. 

That left the commission in a pickle because by code, they had to make a decision within 30 days of closing the public hearing, which happened March 21. Milton code allows for either approval or denial; upon denial, the commission could ask the applicant to resubmit or call for further study. One option would have been to call a special meeting to have all seven members present, which would have only required 24 hours’ public notice, but the commission would have had to call that within three days. 

Needing to take some kind of action, Trask announced he was changing his vote, which would allow McDonald’s to go through to the final site-plan process, but would also force the restaurant to meet conditions before final approval could be granted. 

Cardwell then restated his original motion to approve the application, and Trask, Mazzeo and McGrath joined him in voting to approve, with Ekelund and Seemans voting no. By a 4-2 vote, McDonald’s was through.  

The primary targets of the commission’s conditions are the drive aisles to the restaurant within the shopping center. While plenty of concerns have been expressed about ingress and egress for the restaurant from the main roads, there was not much the commission could impose on McDonald’s because those roads are controlled and maintained by Delaware Department of Transportation. 

McDonald’s has proposed using the existing entrances and exits to the shopping center, and then the existing drive aisles to get to the restaurant. The proposed restaurant would comprise 60 seats, 39 angled parking spaces, drive-thru windows, landscaping, lighting and other improvements, and would operate from 6 a.m. to 11 p.m., seven days per week.

Several members of the commission expressed safety concerns about motorists using the drive aisles as a dedicated roadway, and speeding through to get to McDonald’s. The restaurant is estimated to generate about 700 trips per day, according to McDonald’s own estimates. Trask also raised concern about emergency vehicles’ ability to maneuver around the site. 

“There’s a conflict with people parking and trying to get out of there with people trying to get into the McDonald’s restaurant,” Trask said. 

“The metric to keep in mind is we’re trying to minimize conflict. And all these stalls along this drive aisle where the traffic has to back out into that drive aisle maximizes that conflict,” Cardwell said.

Ekelund went further, saying the design represented a significant safety hazard.

“People going to McDonald’s, they have one thing in mind: go to McDonald’s. People who are shopping there are looking for a parking space. So they naturally are going to go slow because they are looking for the closest parking space. Whereas someone who wants a cup of coffee in the morning, they’re just bolting down there. I don’t think they’re going to be driving as slow as normal, and I think you’re putting people at risk,” she said.

Bill Rhodunda, attorney for McDonald’s, said he did not foresee McDonald’s having problems addressing any of the commission’s conditions. In regard to use of the drive aisles, he said McDonald’s did not have a problem with putting in directional signs to improve traffic flow. Rhodunda also said he did not have a problem with having a parking consultant review the plans to ensure the lot is safe, which the commission made part of its conditions.

Engineer Steve Fortunato said of the commission’s comments, “I think everything we’re talking about is speculative; making a judgment that people driving to McDonald’s are going to be driving faster than anywhere else.” 

Still, Ekelund was not convinced, explaining her vote to reject the McDonald’s application by saying she wants more information to ensure it’s safe before moving forward. 

Seemans gave four reasons for voting to reject the application: traffic problems at the intersection of Route 16 and Union Street Extended, the entrance/exit onto Union Street Extended is unsafe and inadequate to handle the amount of traffic McDonald’s will generate, the access into the site from within the shopping center is inadequate and poorly planned, and finally, the proposed design of the building does not fit in with the character of Milton. 

Cardwell, Mazzeo and McGrath said despite some misgivings about the project, the use is appropriate for a commercially zoned parcel, and traffic concerns will be addressed within the conditions that must be met before final approval. 

Trask originally sided with Seemans and Ekelund on the basis that the drive aisles were inadequate and allowing McDonald’s would open the door for other large corporate fast-food chains to come into Milton. 

However, under the gun to make some kind of decision, which the commission by code was mandated to do, Trask elected to vote in favor of granting preliminary approval, which allowed the commission to kick the can down the road to final approval, where the application could again be approved or rejected.