Hammond Board OKs drive‑through conditional use; considers parking reduction for Mercantile Plaza project

The Hammond City Board of Zoning Appeals on June 3 approved a conditional use request to allow a drive‑through at a proposed restaurant and took up a related request to reduce parking requirements for a redevelopment at 3514 (address as listed in the petition).

The approvals affect Hammond Mercantile Plaza LLC’s plan to demolish an existing bank and build an approximately 12,000‑square‑foot retail center that the petitioner says will include a Dollar Tree store and an about 1,800‑square‑foot restaurant with a drive‑through window. The petitioner presented site and construction drawings showing a drive‑through lane and traffic stacking; staff recommended approval of the conditional use and of the variance subject to conditions, including recorded cross‑access and sanitary sewer easements.

Jim Weiser, the attorney representing Hammond Mercantile Plaza LLC, told the board the redevelopment “is approximately 12,000 square feet” and that the team already obtained redevelopment commission approval and subdivision approval from the plan commission. “We provided findings of fact to demonstrate that those [conditional‑use] standards were, in fact, in our opinion, satisfied,” Weiser said. He also said the applicant agrees to record the easement documents listed in the staff recommendation.

Why it matters: the dual approvals change how the site can be used and how many off‑street parking spaces will be required. Board members asked about safety, stacking, peak parking demand and how the design anticipates customer behavior.

Staff and petitioner details

Andrea Rigona, identified as the project manager for Hammond Mercantile Plaza LLC, confirmed that the developer’s construction drawings — submitted to state review in Indianapolis — show the drive‑through window in the location depicted in the site plan and that the team received state release for those drawings.

Jennifer Mitchell, a civil engineer from BLA Inc., presented a commissioned parking study that used the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) parking manual (2023 edition). Mitchell said the city code calculation would require 49 parking spaces for the proposed uses, but the ITE‑based study found a peak parking demand of roughly 24 cars for the combined Dollar Tree and drive‑through restaurant uses and recommended providing 25 spaces on site. “Based on the land uses of restaurant with drive thru and the Dollar Tree store … 25 parking spaces would be required,” Mitchell said.

Mitchell said the study treated the retail and drive‑through restaurant peak demands conservatively and noted changes in customer behavior since the pandemic — including higher rates of preordering and drive‑through pickup — that reduce peak parking demand. She added that the proposed parking ratios were 1 space per 750 square feet for the retail portion and roughly 1 space per 175 square feet for the restaurant portion (as presented to the board).

Board discussion and conditions

City staff told the board the project parcel is less than one acre and that, because the site is compact, the plan maximized the number of parking spaces possible while meeting landscaping, setbacks, loading and other code requirements. Staff noted the lack of an executed cross‑parking agreement with adjacent property owners and identified the need to record cross‑access and sanitary sewer easements if the board approved the petitions.

When asked about stacking for the drive‑through, the petitioner said the design provides a minimum of eight vehicle stacking spaces on site, with four stacking spaces between ordering/payment and window pickup. Weiser and the project team said those dimensions and the recorded easement language are intended to allow safe ingress and egress to both east and west along 169th Street (address as listed in the filing).

Votes and formal actions

The record shows the board adopted the staff report and findings into the record and then approved the conditional use petition Z‑25‑07 for a drive‑through in the C‑2 shopping center district, with a roll call showing five ayes and no nays. The approval was subject to the conditions in the staff report, including recording the cross‑access and sanitary sewer easements identified by staff.

Staff also recommended granting the developmental variance V‑25‑08 to reduce parking to no less than 25 spaces; the petitioner presented the BLA parking study and the plan commission’s prior approvals as supporting materials. The staff recommendation included technical corrections to the staff report (for example, a notation that gross floor area, GFA, should be used in a line of the report) and a condition that at least 25 parking spaces be provided on the subject property. (The transcript records motions and staff recommendations for the variance and that motions were seconded; the final roll‑call tally for the variance is not shown in the provided transcript segment.)

What happens next

If the petitioner proceeds, the recorded easements required by the approvals must be filed as conditions of the city’s action before the approvals can be fully implemented. The petitioner has state‑approved construction drawings and said it will build the drive‑through as shown in the submitted plans; the developer also noted that securing a specific restaurant tenant is ongoing and that tenant selection will determine final interior configurations. The project team and staff indicated the redevelopment will proceed through the city’s building‑permit and recordation steps after those conditions are met.

The board heard no public opposition during the comment periods recorded in the transcript for these items.