said board member Chris Koyste.

How the McDonald’s application fared was considered especially significant by the small-business community because it offered a likely vehicle for establishing precedent.

The company-owned restaurant has been at Philadelphia Pike and Harvey Road for nearly 20 years. Like many, if not the majority of, long-established businesses in the county, it does not meet all the new code requirements and it can be argued that having to come into compliance would render expansion or modernization prohibitive even though desirable by economic development standards.

Several members of a delegation of Claymont residents said in fact that, except for some complaints about trash on the site, McDonald’s is a desirable neighbor and a business that they patronize.

The group, which included Eighth District state Representative David Brady, argued, however, at a long and frequently contentious public hearing that the new law should be used to improve the appearance and character of older communities.

"Let’s use the provisions of the U.D.C. as tools to uplift communities like ours," Brady said. On the other hand, said Martha Shiek, "we believe that granting any or all of these variances [would be] detrimental to Claymont."

Lawyer Pam Scott said that tearing down what she called an obsolete structure and replacing it with a more efficient one is necessary to enable franchisee Craig Welburn, who holds eight McDonald’s franchises in Pennsylvania and acquired his first in Delaware last April, to "remain competitive." The company owns the building.

"I’m not proud of this restaurant," Welburn testified. "We’re one of the dinosaurs as far as McDonald’s is concerned."

Of some 26,000 outlets around the world, the one in Claymont ranks about 5,000th chronologically, he said, adding that most of those have been either rebuilt or refurbished.

Scott denied that doing the same thing in Claymont would do harm to the neighborhood in general, and in particular to the historic Lackey mansion which is behind it. "It’s a tough site; we’re trying to make it better," she said.

"We don’t need a larger, bigger, brighter McDonald’s," Ray Hester said.

"We don’t want Philadelphia Pike to become another [Route] 202 (Concord Pike) or Kirkwood Highway," added George Lossé, president of the Claymont Community Coalition.

Faith Elad, who with her husband, own, live in and conduct a business in the Lackey mansion, presented the board with a 70-signature petition opposing granting the variances. She said the McDonald’s plan was "a bold move to destroy the appearance of the neighborhood."

Welburn apologized to her for the trash blowing onto her property and promised to take steps to prevent a reoccurrence.

McDonald’s proposed tearing down the existing square structure and replacing it with a rectangular one perpendicular to Philadelphia Pike. Features of the new restaurant would include a second drive-up window, a self-service beverage counter and a larger cooking area.

Nancy VanKleunen Curran, the company's project manager, said that, although there would still be a single-file drive-up lane, a second window, to accept payment while the other dispensed the food, has become a competitive necessity. It was later brought out in testimony, however, that area competitors Arby’s, Burger King and Boston Market do not have two windows.

She also said that "moving the basement to the first floor" was important from the standpoints of safety and security as well as convenience and operational efficiency. The present basement is used mainly for storage. "I don’t see why the community should suffer to keep their people from going up and down stairs. I go up and down stairs many times every day," said Lossé, who has to walk with the aid of a cane.

Scott maintained that, without a basement, the new building would be smaller than the present one, with total area of 3,982 square feet compared to 5,636 square feet. The Claymonters argued that the fact the single-level building would occupy 3,982 square feet of ground instead of the present 2,818 makes it larger. Scott said there is no planned expansion of restaurant seating capacity nor an increase in the number of parking spaces.

Even if the new building were to be a "carbon copy" of the present one, it would not meet requirements of the development code, she said. The site is paved to its property lines and space next door is leased from Fusco Enterprises to handle spillover parking. Still, she added, there is room for some additional landscaping, although not as much as the code requires. The site is nine-tenths of an acre.

"The lot is simply too small to accommodate a fast-food restaurant with a drive-through (sic) [window]," the Department of Land Use’s recommendation said.

"I don’t think it can be brought up to code and survive as a McDonald’s," board member Paul Clark said. He and colleague Thomas Marconi maintained that the adjustment board’s job is to apply the development code in a way that does not force closure of existing business or prevent their being competitive.

"There is a lot that McDonald’s can do to remain competitive. What they’re asking us to do is to give them a competitive advantage over their competition," said Chris Koyste, who led the opposition to approval of the variances.

Clark indicated he felt opposition to them was shortsighted. "If there weren’t so much emotion here tonight, people would say this [McDonald’s plan] was a good first step in the right direction."