Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Proposal for drive‑through at Crossgates‑area site prompts traffic, zoning and environmental review
Loading...
Summary
A developer seeking a use variance to allow a drive‑through restaurant on several Western Avenue parcels was told to expect a full environmental assessment and a traffic study; the applicant representative said redevelopment has been pursued for nearly five years.
A proposal to allow a drive‑through restaurant on a roughly 2.55‑acre parcel near Crossgates Mall drew questions from the Albany County Planning Board on May 15 about traffic, zoning constraints and needed environmental review.
Board staff recommended the referral be treated as a Type I or unlisted action requiring a completed environmental assessment form and a full traffic study because of the site's location at a high‑traffic intersection. The packet recommended that the matter be returned to the town for site‑plan review and special‑use permitting, and that the New York State Department of Transportation review any proposed new or modified access to a state highway.
A project representative who identified himself as David Aiken told the board, "This is a site about 2.55 acres that we've been working to facilitate redevelopment of for almost 5 years at this point," and said the use variance is a first step so the applicant can go to the Guilderland Zoning Board of Appeals for relief and then return with a fuller site plan and environmental materials. Board members pressed on which parcels are in the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) zoning district and which are in the underlying General Business district and noted that drive‑throughs are a prohibited use in the TOD, which is why the use variance was requested.
Board members repeatedly emphasized traffic concerns. Speaker 3 urged that the "end user should matter," saying the projected traffic impact depends on the restaurant operator and that a chain with high drive‑through volumes would generate different impacts than a lower‑volume tenant. The applicant representative agreed to provide the necessary traffic diligence and to coordinate required reviews with the town ZBA and planning board before the county would see a final special use/site plan referral.
The county's recommendation in the referral packet included requiring a completed traffic study and, where applicable, NYSDOT and other state reviews. No final county approval of a use variance is possible; the county's role is advisory at this referral stage.
