McDonald’s proposes smaller Taneytown restaurant, seeks parking and signage variances

McDonald’s representatives presented a concept plan on the proposed redevelopment of 520 East Baltimore Street and asked the Planning Commission to forward comments for an October 22 Board of Zoning Appeals hearing on parking and signage variances.

The plan calls for demolishing the existing roughly 6,000‑square‑foot restaurant and replacing it with a 4,181‑square‑foot building, with a side‑by‑side double order‑point drive‑through and 21 on‑site parking spaces. Brandon Rao of Boller Engineering said the site is about 35,000 square feet and is currently in the city’s General Business zoning district. “The new building will be 4,181 square feet,” Rao said during the presentation.

Commissioners and members of the public raised questions about whether 21 spaces — down from 34 today and below the city code requirement of about 42 spaces — will accommodate customers and employees, and whether the adjacent Taneytown Shopping Center has legal capacity to absorb overflow parking. Rao said a parking study found only 15 spaces used at peak on the existing lot and that the larger shopping center had substantial unused capacity at the sampled times; he added that he would discuss specifics with McDonald’s and the traffic consultant. The planning commission asked staff to pass the commission’s concerns to the Board of Zoning Appeals, including a request that the applicant investigate cross‑easements or written permission with the shopping center and that any off‑site parking be accompanied by safe pedestrian access and lighting.

The project team also disclosed a recorded, tentative SHA (State Highway Administration) right‑of‑way along the East Baltimore Street frontage. Rao said he contacted Anish Thomas in SHA District 7, who said SHA has no active plan to acquire the strip now but wanted to reserve future rights; on that advice the applicant left a green buffer area along the frontage and avoided placing building, dumpster, or drive improvements within the recorded strip. The applicant also noted the proposed dumpster is located within an existing sewer and water easement; the concept plan includes a note acknowledging the city’s right to relocate the enclosure at the applicant’s cost if the utility easement must be accessed for repairs.

On circulation and deliveries, Rao said WB‑62 (65‑foot) tractor‑trailers used for McDonald’s deliveries can circulate the site and that deliveries are timed to avoid peak drive‑through hours. He said the rebuilt site reduces impervious area and that stormwater runoff would continue to be treated by a regional facility nearby.

The planning commission did not take a formal final action on the concept plan. Commissioners agreed to forward comments to the Board of Zoning Appeals emphasizing concerns about the reduced on‑site parking and the need for documentation (cross‑easement or lease) if off‑site parking in the Taneytown Shopping Center will be relied on, and recommending coordination on pedestrian crosswalk(s) and lighting if off‑site parking is to be used.

The applicant plans to pursue the parking and signage variances at the October 22 Board of Zoning Appeals hearing and to return to the city for subsequent site plan reviews.

A closing note: speakers repeatedly separated discussion (questions and public comment) from formal action — no variances or variances recommendations were granted by the commission tonight; the body transmitted comments and concerns to the Board of Zoning Appeals for consideration.