McDonald's challenges Planning Department

McDonald's Corporation, which plans to rebuild its restaurant at 1251 Union Avenue, has balked at the architectural standards that the Planning Department seeks to apply to the new building and challenged its authority to impose them.

The company proposes a rectangular flat-roofed building, its facades broken by the use of different materials — brick, glass and stone — and decorative awnings, that closely resembles the rebuilt McDonald's in Rochester. The long sides of the rectangular structure parallel Union Avenue while the north end of the building, perpendicular to the street, features stonework and signage. Because of the placement of the drive-up windows at the rear of the building and the arrangement of restrooms and freezers inside the building, apart from an entrance, the facade facing Union Avenue is largely blank.

The position of the building last night left some Planning Board members wondering whether the end or the side was the front.

Planning Director Shanna Saunders asked McDonald's to design the building in the "New England" style, with a peaked roof and clapboard siding, like the newly constructed Dunkin Donuts and Dairy Queen outlets further south on Union Avenue. She said that she was disappointed when the company flatly refused.

Representing McDonald's, attorney Regina Nadeau reminded the board that the "Site Plan Review Regulations," which were most recently amended last July, prescribe that the Planning Board "shall ensure compatibility of design, materials, and colors with adjacent buildings." She noted that the northern end of Union Avenue consists primarily of commercial structures built in the 1950s and 1960s and presented photographs of seven buildings immediately adjacent to the McDonald's property — Burger King (empty), Fitzgerald Motors (empty), John's Corvette, Lakes Region Veterinary Hospital, St. Vincent DePaul Society and the city's sewer pumping station — all built with flat roofs and similar materials.

Nadeau pointed out that Dunkin Donuts and Dairy Queen are a quarter-mile away and adjacent to buildings with pitched roofs and clapboard sidings. Moreover, she said that most of the buildings between Dairy Queen and McDonald's have flat roofs.

Far from authorizing the Planning Board to change the architecture of the area, Nadeau insisted that the regulations require the board to maintain it. "This provision calls for maintaining the character, not changing it," she said. "We don't want to change our plans," she continued, "because we are compliant."

Board member Tobias Paddock said that Nadeau had persuaded him that "the bar in certainly very low in the neighborhood and you have integrated your building with the other ugly, mundane structures."

"They did what they were asked to do by the black and white of the ordinance," Nadeau replied.

"We look at the transportation corridor," said Saunders, explaining that for the past five or six years her department has taken "a very open-ended view of the regulation" and effectively applied it to the length of Union Avenue. Other corporations, she said, "have been willing to work with us."

"It's certainly a noble goal," said Nadeau, "but,there is nothing in the ordinance that allows you to change the architecture. It has to be adopted."

Echoing Saunders, Don Richards spoke of the uniqueness of the community and stressed that Union Avenue overlooked "one of the most beautiful lakes in the United States. "New buildings," he said have conformed to the type of architecture we would like to see."

Nadeau presented the board with a memorandum claiming that the architectural features sought by the Planning Department were contrary to the site plan regulations and that the board would exceed its legitimate authority and violate McDonald's right to due process by requiring them. Although she did not speak of litigation, board chairman Kyril Mitchell asked, "Is there a constructive solution so we would not go through legal channels?"

Several members of the board likened the building to a "warehouse" while Warren Hutchins said "you've got an industrial building here. It's just unacceptable."

"It is what it is," said Paddock, suggesting that the board seek to improve the appearance of the blank, unbroken wall facing Union Avenue. He acknowledged that the placement of the building could not be changed without encroaching on wetland buffers, but said that "there are reasonably inexpensive things that could be done."

After noting that the building would be screened by street trees, Adam Guilmette of McDonald's agreed and offered to return with a number of alternative designs for "dressing up" the blank wall.

"Make the side of the building look like the front of the building," said Richards, prompting Hutchins to counter "make the front of the building look like the side of the building."

Hutchins reluctantly proposed that the board negotiate an acceptable facade, which would then be presented to the general public.