Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Mrs. Morris Smith, would you please call the role? Patrick here. Michael D. Sims here. William Hutton here. Thomas Casmir here. Natali here. Thomas Dav here. Marcus Taylor button here. Eight present. We have a quum. Thank you. Uh commissioners, you should receive in your uh board packet a uh copy of the meeting minutes for May 19th, 2025. The chair would enter entertain a motion to approve. Motion to approve. Second. Moved by Commissioner Dy. Seconded by Commissioner Hutton. Is there any discussion? Any discussion? Any discussion? Roll call on the motion. Roger. Yes. Yes. Sim. Yes. William. Yes. Thomas. Yes. Patel. Yes. Thomas. Dean Button. Yes. Eight eyes. Zero. Motion pass. Thank you. Next item on the agenda is old business. Any old business? There is no old business. Thank you. Item five is new business. Uh, first petition is CP25-05, a petition of Hammond Merkantile Plaza LLC for approval of a one lot subdivision of Hammond Brier East Merkantile Plaza addition to the city of Hammond located at 3514 169th Street which is zoned C2 within the city of Hammond, Lake County, Indiana.

uh chair would ask if the notification requirements for the petition have been met. Yes, they have. However, note for the record notice of affected property owner letters were mailed to property owners within 300 ft. However, the individual site addresses were not included in the letters. I'm sorry, the individual site addresses were not included. Not included. Uh, I guess I would ask Mr. Weslin, do you see any uh concern over the public notification requirements? No, I Brian, as long as this is the issue Brian and I spoke about earlier last week, I think um it meets the state the notifications did meet the state statute and you're uh okay to proceed legally. Thank you, Mr. Wrestleman. uh petitioner, if they could come forward, state your name, sign in, uh your address, and uh present the petition to the plan commission, please. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh my name is Jim Weezer. I'm the attorney for the project. Uh my law offices are located at 429 West Lincoln Highway in Cherville. And um I have with me, I'm going to put my name in here, uh Russ Posen. And Russ is with the DVG team, uh, the engineering firm, and he's the, uh, whatever. He's got a big title. I can't keep track of it, but anyway, he's certainly the project manager for this project. Thank you. Uh, I'll just get this in real quick.

Okay. Uh thank you very much. Thank you. Um this uh this is a proposed uh project consisting of uh two petitions that we have before you this evening. The first petition being CP2505, which is a um a request for a one lot subdivision uh to the uh city of Hammond. Uh the project is located at 3514 169th Street. So, it's in the the uh Brier Ridge um at the Brier Ridge uh shopping center area. uh and um uh is actually uh proposed to replace the uh existing building that was there for many years that housed the bank and has been vacant for some period of time. So it's that particular that lot only which is about.7 acres. It's that lot only that we're asking to um subdivide. Uh so it uh presented some I don't know if they were unique issues but some interesting issues uh particularly regarding cross access agreement. We we needed that agreement for parking and and a an easement that runs along the property line for utilities. So there were um some um items that we obviously needed to work through with staff and and fortunately enough we were able uh to do that and we will be I know one of the conditions that the staff had put on uh as in the event that there's to be a uh successful uh passage of this would be that uh we provide the city with the recorded easements uh which we will do. will have those easements recorded and and provide provided to the uh to the city. So the the idea is to um uh have

um two businesses located there. One business would be a dollar tree uh large it's a large larger of the two by far and that's going to be uh located in the now the building's going to be removed. The building is going to be raised and there'll be a Dollar Tree that's going to be constructed and then there's uh hopefully connected with that will be a some type of a uh of a restaurant that will have a drive-thru. And there was a lot of work that was done on that as well to make sure that we configured it so that the traffic flow uh was appropriate and uh and wasn't and wouldn't cause or at least was designed not to cause any um any uh unusual problems or concerns. Um the uh I I did want to make one point that the the subdivision the um subdivision plat given the the property line went out to the center line of 169th. So in order to uh properly uh uh provide for the uh for the uh uh an accurate plat to be made. Uh we are um uh we are including in this we'll either dedicate or rededicate whatever is required the half street of 169th to to provide uh for that so that the city has that now and for sure without any question in in their um in their inventory. Um there's appropriate and existing utilities there. Uh, I probably am not the person to be discussing that or in any great detail or answering any questions. That's why we've got Russ here. He knows that stuff and he'll um he'll be glad to answer any questions that you have regarding that. Um, it's our belief that this this will be a

significant improvement to that area uh to bring in a new uh business or actually two new businesses uh to generate the tax dollars that the businesses will generate. There's no request here for any type of uh incentive tax abatement or anything. There's no we're not requesting that. It's just a matter of putting in a uh a brand new uh business and a brand new building uh that um we think will be an asset to the community and an asset to that uh particular uh particular area. Um having said all that, that's pretty much the overview. I'll pro I'll talk more about uh the the next one, the development plan uh 256, and be happy to answer any questions that any members of the plan commission may have or the staff and probably we'll acknowledge that that will be Russ that will be making those responses. So, thanks for your time and then um we'll we'll try to respond to anything that we can. Thank you, Mr. Weezer. Uh any questions from the commissioners to the petitioner? Any questions? I would just note I noticed that uh in your letter uh to the commission that this is a $2.5 million plus investment. Yes, it is. Yes. Just wanted to make that. I meant to do that. Thank you. Y Thank you very much, Mr. President. Uh Mr. Poland, staff has a question. Mr. Poland, um Mr. Weezer, in in your opening remarks, I think you misspoke on something. Okay. You talked about that the basically you referred to the um common the the existing agreement on the shopping center and uh shared access but you said shared parking and I think that was that's incorrect because we've already discussed that uh there wasn't a shared parking agreement which is why we're talking about going to the board

of zoning appeals. Yeah. I'm sorry if I said I didn't mean that. It isn't shared it isn't shared parking. we have to go to the board of zoning appeals to obtain that. It's but it's a you're right. It's exactly as you it's exactly as you stated and I apologize for having made that that statement. Yeah. Um and then I think what the access seasons that we're talking about also cover utility cross that crosses the property because you have utilities going from this site over to the O'Reilly property and then out to the street. So, so it's access and utilities that that the e that the agreements are Yeah, that No, that's correct. Is that all, Mr. Poland? Uh, I have comments that I'll hold off to later. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Weasel. Thank you very much. Yep. Uh, at this point in time, we're going to open it up for a public hearing. Uh if there's anyone in the audience that wishes to speak on behalf of this petition either in favor, in opposition or just to make a comment on this petition, the chair would entertain that opportunity now. Public hearing is now open. Public hearing is now open. Anyone online wishing to address the commission on this petition? Hearing none, I'll close the public hearing. Assume there's no further comment you have, Mr. These are at this time not at this particular Okay. Yes. Thank you. Uh at this point in time, I'd turn it over to Mr. Poland for staff uh comments and recommendation. Yeah. I just want to address a couple of things so the plan commission is aware. Um as Mr. We are indicated one of the uh items on the subdivision plat is the uh proper dedication of the portion of 169th Street that's adjacent to the on

the north side of this property. Um this is an existing um parcel tax parcel. Um this is um in essence converting the uh legal description into the proper format. One of the advantages of the C2 Shopping Center District requirements in the zoning ordinance allows the plan commission to make a couple of modifications that would otherwise um have to go to the border zoning appeals. Um the first thing is establishing that the outlots on this shopping center district and and to note that the shopping center district includes um the large parcel with the miscellaneous buildings and and and units in there. it um it includes the Sharks restaurant, uh the O'Reilly property, the gas station, and the church that's located um off of Grand Avenue. The minimum lot size requirement is four acres, but it allows the plan commission to um accept smaller lot sizes as long as the outlots or the smaller lots um collectively are less than 40% of the entire uh shopping center boundary area. And um this is just this is pretty close. It's it's it's you know slightly above um 40% but it's negligible when it comes about from from the math standpoint. Um I've already made reference to the um street. I made reference to the cross access and uh sanitary district easements. Um there's also um an

easement that is actually on the O'Reilly property. Um it was a cross access easement that was set at the time that the O'Reilly lot was created and the agreement also um modifies that boundary and extends it to uh touch the southern boundary of of the O'Reilly lot which is also corresponding to the southern boundary of the subject property. Uh I can go ahead and go to staff report. Sure. Okay. We did not receive any objections from all the review agencies. Uh staff's opinion is that the plat meets the requirements set forth in the subdivision control ordinance and recommends that the plan commission grant preliminary and final approval of the sub of the subdivision plat subject to the completion of any technical corrections of the plat and the proposed easement documents and the recordation of the easement documents before the recording of the subdivision plat. If the plan commission agrees with the staff report, it is recommended that the staff report is adopted as findings effect. questions from the commission to uh staff. Mr. President. Yes, Mr. Casemir's back. Just to make sure I understand. So, the O'Reilly building and the bank building were one uh lot and now we're splitting the O'Reilly off. No. Is that what I No, the the O'Reilly lot was actually a part of the main property and it was I don't know what four or five years ago that the O'Reilly lot was created and the um Hammond Brier East Shopping Center edition was created that that time and it excluded the Sharks building and the former Merkantile Bank building

that was there or and I think it was what Harris or whatever it became after that Right. Um, so this subject property has always been separately identified as its own tax parcel and we're just, you know, the subdivision is specific to that parcel. Gotcha. Any other questions for staff? Okay. Hearing none, the chair would entertain a motion to grant preliminary and final approval of the subdivision plaid subject to the completion of any technical corrections to the plaid and the proposed easement documents and recordation of the easement documents before recording the subdivision plaid. Is there such a Thank you, Mr. Tabertton. Seconded by Commissioner Dye. It's been moved and properly seconded for the subject uh motion. Is there any discussion? Any discussion? Any discussion? Roll call on the motion. Dr. Yes. Michael D. Yes. S. Yes. William Hutton. Yes. Thomas Casper. Yes. Dance. Yes. Thomas. Yes. Button. Yes. Eight eyes. Zero nays. Zero extensions. Motion pass. Thank you. Congratulations. Uh plan commission. Uh we would uh the chair would entertain a motion to accept the staff report uh be adopted as a finding of fact. Thank you, Mr. Tabern. seconded by Mr. uh Councilman Spatali. Uh it's been moved and properly seconded for the uh staff report to be adopted as a finding of fact. Is there any discussion? Any discussion? Any discussion? Roll call on the motion. Roger. Yes. Michael Dodge. Yes. Ronald Sims, yes. William Hutton, yes. Thomas Casmir, yes. Yes. Thomas, Dean Button, yes. Eight eyes, zero nays, zero abstensions. Motion passed. Congratulations on your petition.

Thank you. Uh item five, uh carrying on with new business, uh CP25-06, petition of Merkantile Plaza LLC for the approval of a development plan in in a C2 shopping district located at 3514 169th Street within the city of Hammond, Lake County, Indiana. Uh Mr. President, uh Mr. Just to make a technical correction, it should say petition of Hammond Merkantile Plaza. Thank you. The agenda item will be corrected or as noted. Uh Mrs. Morris Smith, have the notification requirements for the petition been met? Yes, I have. Thank you. Uh petitioner can please make a presentation to the plan commission. Mr. Weezer. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Uh, I'm still Jim Weezer and uh my offices are still the same. Uh, just thought I'd let you know. Um, I um I just want to make one comment uh initially and that is that um as you know um your staff does a very thorough job of uh of reviewing all of this and and working with us. That's the key thing. and working with us to make sure that um everything is appropriate and proper and meets all of your uh subdivision ordinance requirements and and other requirements. And in this particular case, um I did want to let you know it is in the staff um uh recommendation. I but I did want to let you know that we did because this because this is a a a a an area a redevelopment area. We went to the um we appeared before the redevelopment commission uh on April 15th, but I I

just I and I apologize. I just noticed this now, but it says 2020 and I think that meant 2025. Um Brian on page two where it says staff recommendation. Um that's April 15, 2025 on the subdivision one. No, no, no. I'm sorry, Brian. This is on the um development plan um on CP25-06 on page is it two? Maybe it's three. Page three. I apologize. Page three. Um sure. Thank you for that correction. Okay. Yeah. And I I should have told I would have told you earlier had I noticed it, but I just noticed it now coming up here. Um the and of course the development plan includes um uh a lot of what we discussed in the subdivision uh uh plan. Uh but I I thought that some of the important things to um to highlight uh is the you know that we we've included in there the appropriate landscaping, appropriate screening uh the exterior architectural features uh to be compliant with your requirements uh and and consistent with the um uh with the adjoining uh uh properties uh that are located in uh in that particular area. Um the uh the it says that preliminary signage information and lighting meet the applicable provisions of the C2 Shopping Center District and the zoning ordinance and I wanted to make sure that you were aware of that as well. Um the uh the development plan, as I stated before, includes pretty much everything that was contained in the in the subdivision uh in the subdivision plan presentation uh that that I previously made. Um the uh the as I said before, the the plan is the the building is to consist

of two uses. Um uh both of which uh we believe will be uh great additions to the community and that that particular area to the city in in general in terms of the uh of of the uh large uh retailer that is going to be using it and and hopefully the um the restaurant service that is going to be using it. both of which we think are good additions to that to the to the east side of the of the city and to the Hesville community. Um where for the first 12 years of my life I hung around in. So, uh, so I'm pretty familiar with that with that area. Having grown up in Woodmar, but hung up hung around there. When I went to Our Lady of Perpetual Help, they wouldn't let me into St. John Bosco. They knew what I was like, so they they forced me to they forced me to go there. But so, I'm I'm really familiar with the area. Um, and I think this is a great addition. Um, you know, the the the cross access ease access easements as as Bryant pointed out before uh are going to provide access to 169 um uh and uh you know we will be as I said recording those documents and and uh preparing for them. Uh we had a lot of discussion uh with both um Brian and Tom regarding the um how the internal uh uh traffic pattern was going to work the way that it was laid out and and and with our engineers as well. I know Brian was on several of those and I was on several of those uh uh teams calls and uh and we also had one or can't remember at least one if not two meetings with um Brian and Tom personally and that was an issue

that that um was a a challenge quite frankly to make sure that it was correct and it and it worked and that it wouldn't create traffic uh concerns or traffic problems, backups, things of of that nature. Um, and so there was a lot of time spent in the development plan on working on that and working that out. So I I'd say having having said that and having already presented on uh on the subdivision, I'm again happy to answer any questions uh and then would obviously uh let uh Brian make his comments as well. Thank you, Mr. Weezer. Questions from the commission to Mr. Weezer. Sure. Mr. Mir Zach, was was there any like um concern that um at that location, this will be like the third store at that location at that relatively close to that intersection of this type of uh retail location? And you concerns like its success or something or Well, because there's two other um what everybody I guess we consider dollar stores right there. Um is there a concern that the competition could either lead to this store not performing as well or one of the other stores losing and then there's an you know and then they go out of business or anything like that or is it have there been any you know I don't know if that's been looked at at all if there is any uh I I can say I haven't had that direct conversation with my client but I can say that I know that they they investigated that and looked at that at the outset and came to the conclusion that it was going to work and be very successful. the wise and the wherefors I can c canly have to tell you I don't know but I know that they they said that

well let me back up just for a second um the this this client um has successfully done this uh throughout the Midwest uh very successfully and um uh we have we have examples of the success that they've had in in in the city of Hammond on, but also in neighboring communities. Uh, several in Marville. I'm trying to think of the ones we provided. There were, I think, five alto together. But they know their business and they know their their demographics and they know their traffic patterns and based on all of that, I know that they concluded that this was going to be a a a successful venture for them. I can't comment on what exists already. Uh but I know that to be the case. Any other questions for uh Mr. Weezer? Uh Brian Poland, go ahead. It's not fair that you get to ask questions. Goes with the territory. Um if I remember correctly, this is same petitioner also did the O'Reilly site. That's correct. Yeah. And um gee, I forgot my other question. Um well, if I think of it, I'll come up with it. Okay. Any other questions for Mr. Weezer? Um I appreciate your early comment about how we're we try to be, you know, very thorough in what we do and we just want the project to be successful all all around, I think, for for the city and for your client. And so I appreciate your comments. Yeah. Well, you're welcome. Totally totally understand. And I mean, you you've got to do what's the right thing and you've got to be compliant. And nothing gets away from Brian. We all know that. So, yes, sir. It was good.

Just remember my other question. Oh, I stalled too long. Sorry. Um, just for confirmation, you know, the the second unit is the restaurant um drive-thru. At least that's what your the your client's trying to go for, but at this point they have no tenant identified. That's correct. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Weezer. You're welcome. Okay. At this point in time, uh we open it up for public hearing on this petition. So, uh is there anyone in the audience wishing to make comment in favor or in opposition to the petition as presented? Anyone wishing to comment on the petition? Anyone online wishing to comment on the petition? Hearing none, I'll close the public hearing portion of the meeting. Uh, at this point in time, we'll turn it over to staff for staff report. Okay. Um, just again to identify um some items in from the staff report. Um, also the in the C2 shopping center district provisions of the zoning ordinance, it does allow the plan commission to modify the setbacks on the property rather than going to the board of zoning appeals. The way the ordinance is structured right now, um, the building has to be set back 50 ft from all property lines. And since the other part of what we're allowed to do is have those um lots smaller than 4 acres based on what I discussed under the subdivision plat, it's kind of interrelated that if you have a smaller lot and obviously they would not be able to meet the 50 foot setbacks. Um this was understood when that provision was written in the zoning ordinance that that we would have the circumstances um of where the plan

commission is granting um allowances for reduction of the um setbacks and things like that. It's not technically a variance. It's just an allowed uh reduction. And um you know as and I appreciate Mr. Weezer's comments um because we try to be very thorough and things do slip by us. you know, we're not perfect, but um you know, we've gone through all of the um the landscaping, the lighting, um the preliminary signage. Um and I've identified that at this stage, um there is a need to go to the border of zoning appeals for uh the number of parking spaces and for this drive-thru, it also needs a conditional use. um approval by the BZA. So, uh assuming the plan commission grants um approval of this um that would be the next step is to then go to the board of zoning appeals. Um the I think the advantages of this particular development which realistically makes it easier is that it is a pre-existing parcel. It had a building on it. Um the building is new building is not substantially different in size as to the bank building. Um the bank also had its um ATM drive through. So there's a lot of commonalities with this. Um the reason I made reference in the subdivision part of it of this cross sement that's on the O'Reilly property. It was created at the time of the O'Reilly subdivision because the bank's ATM was kind of crossing the prop this property line and um a to use the the ATM one

would have to drive on the now O'Reilly property and this access seizement is situated in such a way that the um part of the drive-thru lane would have to cross into that property or at least the um and and Mr. Button, don't overreact. The bypass lane that that that is is there um is um technically on the O'Reilly property and it does it it makes that traffic flow a lot more um convenient and makes sense. Um we had again as Mr. We are indicated, you know, we had a lot of discussion of where the loading dock is and how that flows through the property and um it's it was um um fun. I I have to say this was fun to to do have all those conversations and try and figure out how to make this work. That being said, um the staff recommends that the plan commission approve the final development plan and the modifications to the area width and setback requirements for the proposed two-unit commercial building subject to one, the final technical review and approval of the plans by city staff. Two, approval of any actions that may be required by the board of zoning appeals. and three, approval of the plan commission case for 255 and its conditions. So concludes your presentation, Mr. Poland. Well, I'm asking for the first motion and then I'll do the finds a fact. Okay. Part of it. Questions for Mr. Poland on his report. Mr. President, Mr. Casmir's at how many uh just out of curiosity how many parking spaces is it actually short of the requirement Tom do you remember the number 22 so it's

so it's so Russ P and DVG 1155 T road crown point Indiana uh per the just the required parking it's 47 and 25 spaces are provided but we are confident that that will function properly. And then then I believe on the first uh order of business you did state there is no shared parking agreement in in the current common um the I'm sorry for whatever the common area common area agreement that ex yeah they're not allowed to park on the other property. I have to say practically speaking I think people will be parking on the adjacent property. That's pretty much you know people will do what people will do. Um, but technically they don't have a right to do that. Mr. Posen, would you make sure you sign in for us so we have a record of your details? Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Poland? Uh hearing none, the chair would entertain a motion to approve the final development plan and the modifications to the area and with and setback requirements for the proposed two-unit commercial building subject to one final technical review and approval of the plans by city staff. Two, approval of any actions that may be required by the board of zoning appeals. And three, approval of plan commission case number CP25-05 and its conditions. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Miss uh Commissioner Dabberton, seconded by Commissioner Dye. Is there any discussion on the motion? Any discussion? Any discussion? Roll call on the motion. Roger, yes. Michael Dy, yes. Ronald Sims, yes. William Hutton, yes. Thomas Casmir, yes. Natali, yes. Thomas Dton, button, yes. Eight eyes, zero nays, zero extensions.

Motion pass. Thank you. Back to you, Mr. Poland. Yeah. Um just for everybody understand the um development plan provisions of the zoning ordinance are are are different when it comes to findings of fact and that's why we have this section here. Uh staff recommends that the plan commission adopt the staff report and I'm going to say as modified um due to the comment that Mr. are made uh on the date of the redevelopment meeting um as findings of fact and also make the following findings of fact under 2705A1. The development plan complies with the applicable provisions of the title of title 8 C2 shopping center district and the zoning ordinance 8514 as amended. Staff recommends the development plan be approved in the proposed area with requirements per title section 8.30 30 and the proposed setbacks per title section 8.31. Then under 27.05A2, the Hammond Brier East Merkantail Plaza Dision is compliant with the subdivision control ordinance. Under 2705 A3, the proposed development is compatible with the adjacent development. And under 2705A4, the proposed development is consistent with the intent and purpose of the zoning ordinance 8514 and the comprehensive plan. Thank you, Mr. Tabertton. Do I hear a second? Second, Mr. Thank you, Commissioner Dye. It's been moved and properly seconded to adopt the staff report as modified as a finding of fact and the uh list of following findings of fact as uh conveyed by Mr. Poland. Is there any discussion? Any discussion? Any discussion? Roll call on the motion. Roger. Yes. Michael Dash, yes. Ronald Sims, yes. William Hutton, yes. Thomas Casmir, yes. Dance, yes. Thomas Dton,

button, yes. Eight eyes, zero nays, zero. Motion pass. Congratulations to the petitioner. We appreciate your business. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Uh, is there any other new business? No new business. Hearing none. Item six, uh, uh, correspondence. No correspondence. Item seven is commissioner's comments. Well, have a happy 4th of July, uh, when it comes upon you, and I I uh there's a holiday this week, Junth. Um, so enjoy uh and celebrate appropriately. Uh, item eight is staff comments. Um, yes. I just um acknowledge I think at the last plan commission meeting I said there wasn't anything for June and obviously I was wrong. Um and so um I will say that um barring any unforeseen unexpected um expect uh comments whatever uh we will not have a July plan commission meeting. Thank you Mr. Poland. Item nine is public comment. Anyone in the audience or online wishing to address the plan commission at this time? Any comments? Any comments? Public comment is now closed. Chair would entertain a motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. Second. Second. I heard Mr. Dy and Mr. Kazamir Zach has a motion and a second. All in.