Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Redevelopment Retail topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board asks for parking and seating data as developer outlines Shake Shack and Cava at former Walgreens

Thomas Cicero Planning Board · June 18, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Naparella Consulting presented plans to divide the former Walgreens into four tenant spaces, with Shake Shack (drive‑through) and Cava named as tenants; the planning board asked for seat counts, parking ratio justification and any county/DOT coordination after staff noted the site shows fewer spaces than some parking‑ratio standards suggest.

Neil Zinsmeyer, the site engineer for the proposed redevelopment of 7973 Bridal Road, told the planning board the building will be divided into four tenant spaces and that tenants already expressing interest include Shake Shack (drive‑through) on the south side and Cava on the north side.

Zinsmeyer said the submitted package included a full utility plan, landscaping, lighting and updated architectural elevations. Board members asked for additional documentation because the proposed parking count (68 spaces on site) appeared low compared with typical restaurant parking ratios cited by members (one member referenced a 1 per 60 square‑foot rule that would imply roughly 96–97 spaces for two restaurants). Zinsmeyer and retail representative Matt Lester said prospective tenants are comfortable with shared parking and delivery service trends such as DoorDash, but the board requested seat counts and the retailers’ stated parking requirements in writing to support any waiver of the typical parking standard.

Staff also noted the applicants had performed a traffic report and contacted the state DOT; the board asked the applicants to confirm whether county review would be required and to forward any outstanding agency comments to the planning office for circulation.

The board did not vote to approve the plan at this meeting and asked the applicant to return with the requested parking information and any county/DOT comments.