Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-04-17 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, April 17, 2025 at 6:00 PM MINUTES ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Commissioner Jessica Perreault Commissioner Sam Rust Commissioner Matthew Sandoval Commissioner Jared Smith Chairperson Maria Lorcher ABSENT Commissioner Brian Garrett ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] Approved 1. Approve Minutes of the April 3, 2025, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Motion to approve made by Commissioner Perreault, Seconded by Commissioner Rust. Voting Yea: Commissioner Perreault, Commissioner Rust, Commissioner Sandoval, Commissioner Smith, Chairperson Lorcher ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] ACTION ITEMS 2. Public Hearing for Sadie Creek Drive-through (TEC-2025-0001) by Mike Maffia, MGM Meridian 2, located at 3030 N. Cajun Ln. Approved Application Materials: https://bit.ly/TEC-2025-0001 A.Request: Time Extension: for a two (2) year time extension for the (H-2021- 0006) due to delays caused by adverse market conditions, including increased construction costs and limited tenant interest. The City is also processing an application for a Development Agreement Modification to separate this property from the current Development Agreement Motion to approve made by Chairperson Lorcher, Seconded by Commissioner Sandoval. Voting Yea: Commissioner Perreault, Commissioner Rust, Commissioner Sandoval, Commissioner Smith, Chairperson Lorcher 3. Public Hearing for Mondt Meadows Subdivision (H-2024-0067) by Gregg Davis, Breckon Land Design, located at 6101 and 6162 S. Terrega Ln. Recommend Approval to City Council Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2024-0067 A. Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (CPAM) to change the future land use designation on 10.28 acres of land from Medium Density Residential (MDR) to Low Density Residential (LDR). B. Request: Annexation of 10.84 acres of land from RUT in Ada County to the R-2 (8.48 acres) and R-4 (2.36 acres) zoning districts C. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 11 building lots (10 new and 1 existing) and 4 common lots on 10.28 acres of land in the proposed R-2 and R- 4 zoning districts. Motion to recommend approval made by Commissioner Sandoval, Seconded by Commissioner Rust. Voting Yea: Commissioner Perreault, Commissioner Rust, Commissioner Sandoval, Commissioner Smith, Chairperson Lorcher 4. Public Hearing continued from April 3, 2025 for In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile (H- 2024-0058) by In-N-Out Burger, located at 5985 & 6037 N. Ten Mile Rd. Denied Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2024-0058 A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment in the C-G zoning district within 300 feet of another drive-through facility, existing residences and a residential districts. The request includes extended business hours of operation beyond the 6:00am to 11:00pm limit, with hours from 6:00am to 1:00am Sunday through Thursday and 6:00am to 1:30am Friday and Saturday. Motion to deny made by Commissioner Sandoval, Seconded by Commissioner Smith. Voting Yea: Commissioner Perreault, Commissioner Sandoval, Commissioner Smith, Chairperson Lorcher Voting Nay: Commissioner Rust ADJOURNMENT 10:11 PM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To view upcoming Public Hearing Notices, visit https://apps.meridiancity.org/phnotices --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting April 17, 2025. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of April 17, 2025, was called to order at 6:04 p. m. by Chairman Maria Lorcher. Members Present: Commissioner Maria Lorcher, Commissioner Jared Smith, Commissioner Matthew Sandoval, Commissioner Sam Rust and Commissioner Jessica Perreault. Members Absent: Commissioner Garrett. Others Present: Tina Lomeli, Kurt Starman, Bill Parsons, Linda Ritter, Kyle Ludwig and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE Brian Garrett X Jessica Perrault _X Matthew Sandoval _X Sam Rust X Jared Smith X Maria Lorcher - Chairman Lorcher: Good evening. Welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for April 17th, 2025. At this time I would like to call the meeting to order. The Commissioners who are present for this evening's meeting are in City Hall and on Zoom. We also have staff from the city attorney and the city clerk's office, as well as the city's planning department. If you're joining us on Zoom this evening we can see that you are here. You may observe the meeting. However, your ability to be seen on screen and talk will be muted. During the public testimony portion of the meeting you will be unmuted and, then, be able to comment. Please note we cannot take questions until the public testimony portion of the meeting. If you have a process question during the meeting please e-mail the city clerk at meridiancity.org and they will reply as soon as possible. If you simply want to watch the meeting we encourage you to watch on the streaming on our city's YouTube channel. You can access it at meridiancity.org/live. With that let's deal with roll call. Madam Clerk. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Lorcher: The first item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda -- of the agenda. There are no changes in tonight's agenda. Can I get a motion to adopt the agenda as presented? Rust: So moved. Sandoval: Second. Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to -- to adopt the agenda. All those in favor Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 2 of 69 say aye? Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] Approved 1. Approve Minutes of the April 3, 2025, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Lorcher: The next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda, which include to approve the meetings minutes of the April 3rd Planning and Zoning meeting. Could I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda as presented? Perreault: So moved. Rust: Second. Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to accept the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] Lorcher: So, for our large audience today I would like to explain the public hearing process. Many of you this will be your first and only time at a public meeting. So, we would like to go through some of the housekeeping at this time. We will open each item individually and begin with the staff report. Staff will report their findings on how the item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and our Unified Development Code. After staff has made there presentation the applicant will come forward and present their case and respond to staff's comments and they will have 15 minutes to do so. After the applicant is finished we will open the floor to public testimony. Each person will be called only once during public testimony. The Clerk will call the names individually of those who have signed up on the website in advance to testify. You may come to the microphones in Chambers or you will be unmuted on Zoom. Please state your name and address for the record and you will have three minutes to address the Commission and because we have a large crowd you will be cut off at three minutes. If you have previously sent pictures or a presentation for the meeting it will be displayed on the screen and our clerk will help you run the presentation. If you have established that you are speaking on behalf of a larger group, like an HOA, where others from that group will allow you to speak on their behalf, you will have up to ten minutes. After all those who have signed up in advance have spoken we will invite any others who wish to testify. If you wish to speak on a topic you may come forward in Chambers or if on Zoom you may press the raise hand button in the Zoom app or if you are only listening on the phone please press start nine and wait for your name to be called. If you are listening on multiple devices, such as a computer and a phone, please be sure to mute those Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 3 of 69 extra devices, so we don't experience feed -- feedback and we can hear you clearly. When you are finished, if the Commission does not have questions for you, you will return to your seat in Chambers or be muted on Zoom and no longer have the ability to speak. Please remember we will not call on you a second time. After all testimony has been heard, the applicant will be given another ten minutes to come back and respond. When the applicant has finished responding to questions and concerns, we will close the public hearing and the commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss and hopefully make final decisions or recommendations to City Council as needed. So, that is the process for our public hearing. ACTION ITEMS 2. Public Hearing for Sadie Creek Drive-through (TEC-2025-0001) by Mike Maffia, MGM Meridian 2, located at 3030 N. Cajun Ln. A Request: Time Extension: for a two (2) year time extension for the (H-2021-0006) due to delays caused by adverse market conditions, including increased construction costs and limited tenant interest. The City is also processing an application for a Development Agreement Modification to separate this property from the current Development Agreement Lorcher: So, tonight I would like to open the public hearing for Sadie Creek Drive- through, Item no. TEC-2025-0001, on Cajun Lane, requests a time extension and we will begin with the staff report. Ritter: Good evening, Commissioners. I'm Linda Ritter, associate planner for the City of Meridian. So, tonight we are here -- the applicant is requesting a two year time extension. The site is located at 303 North Cajun Lane. It consists of 1.16 acres of land and it's zoned C-G. Again, the applicant is requesting the two year time extension for the previously approved CUP, which was approved. The application number is H-2021- 0006. Due to the delays caused by adverse market conditions, including increased construction costs and limited tenant interest. The city is also processing an application for a development agreement modification to separate this property from the current development agreement. So, on April 1st, 2021, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved the conditional use permit for the Sadie Creek drive-through, because it is within 300 feet of another drive-through. The CU -- the CUP approval was valid for a period of two years. Certificate of zoning compliance and design review will still need to be submitted and approved by the planning division prior to the building permit submittal. After that approval a two year time extension was requested and approved by the director in order to commence the use as permitted in accordance with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval and acquire building permits and commence the construction of permanent footings of the structures on the ground. The time extension was valid until April 1st of this year. The applicant stated additional time was needed to complete the transfer in ownership due to the delays and inflation resulting in higher construction costs. So, at this time F Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 4 of 69 applicant requests an additional application that allows them time to work with a reputable credit union, who has shown interest in purchasing the property and building a new branch, which includes a drive-through, which is essential to their operations. This is the approved site plan that was done in 2021 and this is their approved landscape plan. Staff is asking, however, the Commission to remove Condition No. 3 from the staff report, as it was not a condition of the original approval and should not have been added to the already approved project and with that staff recommends approval of this proposed time extension for a period of two years, with the application expiring in April 1st of 2027 with the removal of the language from Condition Three. And at this time I will stand for any questions you may have on this application. Lorcher: Would the applicant like to come forward? McDougald: Good evening. Brandon McDougald at 1100 West Idaho Street, Boise. Nothing really further to add there. I think Linda has done a great job, but I'm here to answer any questions that you may have. Lorcher: Commissions, do we have any questions for the applicant at this time? Perreault: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: Just one question. There has been a lot of development on this corner in the last four years. Is there something unique about this parcel that's created challenges getting a purchaser? McDougald: Yeah. Speculation here, but -- but I think access is -- is probably one that -- that certainly is -- is potentially an issue, just -- just because there is no direct access to these parcels, right, whereas the parcels to the north have pretty direct access right off of Ustick Road. Lorcher: Madam Clerk, do we have anybody -- oh, thank you very much. I will call you back when we are done with public testimony. McDougald: Thank you. Lorcher: And Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up for public testimony for this application? Lomeli: Thank you, Madam Chair. We do have a Jeff Wertz that indicated for the Sadie Creek sign up that he wished to testify. Not sure if that was intended. Got it. Okay. No problem. Okay. Thank you for that. Madam Chair, I do have a Steve Lozano that wished to testify -- okay. Lorcher: Thank you. Okay. We are still in a public meeting, so please be respectful. F Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 5 of 69 Anybody else for the Sadie Creek drive-through? Okay. The applicant, would you like to come forward and say anything else or are you good? All right. thumbs up from him. May I get a motion to close the public hearing? Rust: So moved. Perreault: Second. Lorcher: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for Sadie Creek Drive-through, Item No. TEC-2025-0001. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Lorcher: I think it's reasonable that the market has changed as far as development interest rates, usage and to be able to develop this corner in a timely manner, which makes sense for both the client and for the city, makes sense to me to give me the exception. Perreault: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: I agree. They are not asking to change anything regarding the -- the property itself, just the extension. So, I agree that it's reasonable. Lorcher: Okay. With that in mind, after considering all staff, applicant and public testimony I move to approve File No. TEC-2025-0001 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 17th with no changes or modifications. Sandoval: Second. Starman: Madam Chair, make sure and confirm for the maker of the motion and the second that the motion included the striking of Condition Three that Linda spoke about. Lorcher: Linda, can you put it back up, please? And the removal of Condition Three, which requires to dedicate 12 feet of right of way to the Idaho Transportation Department and reconstruct the right turn lane to current standards on the southbound right turn lane on Highway -- on Eagle Road to the east of Seville Lane that doesn't meet current ITD standards. May I have a second? Sandoval: Second. Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to approve Sadie Creek drive-through. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 6 of 69 MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 3. Public Hearing for Mondt Meadows Subdivision (H-2024-0067) by Gregg Davis, Breckon Land Design, located at 6101 and 6162 S. Terrega Ln. A. Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (CPAM) to change the future land use designation on 10.28 acres of land from Medium Density Residential (MDR) to Low Density Residential (LDR). B. Request: Annexation of 10.84 acres of land from RUT in Ada County to the R-2 (8.48 acres) and R-4 (2.36 acres) zoning districts C. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 11 building lots (10 new and 1 existing) and 4 common lots on 10.28 acres of land in the proposed R-2 and R-4 zoning districts. Lorcher: The next item on the agenda is for -- I'm not going to be able to say this right. Mondt -- Mondt Meadows Subdivision at Terraga Lane for amendment to the Comprehensive Plan future land use map, annexation and preliminary plat. We will begin with the staff report. Ritter: Thank you, Commissioners. This is an application again for annexation, a Comprehensive Plan map amendment and a preliminary part. The site consists of 10.28 acres of land, is currently zoned RUT in Ada county and it's located at 6106 and 6162 Terrega Lane. So, parcel 6101 Terrega Lane was created for a property boundary adjustment through Ada county. It was one lot and, then, they split it in order to make Lot A for a portion of the proposed annexation and preliminary plat. So, the applicant is proposing an annexation of 10.84 acres of land to be zoned R-2 and R-4. 8.4 acres of land will be R-2 and 2.36 acres will be R-4. The change to the Comprehensive Plan map. They are going from medium density to low density, because they would like to make half acre lots or acre lots and, then, the 2.36 R-4 are the minimum standards of 8,000 square feet of property. They are proposing 11 building lots, ten new lots and one existing and they will have four common lots. This is the exhibit map for the R-2 and this is the exhibit map for the R-4. This is a preliminary plat for the property. They will take access off of Sublimity Lane -- I mean Avenue. This -- this roadway has already been built. Brighton built it with their project that is in this area. It will have a private road coming off of the new road, the Escalation Drive that they are proposing. This private road will have a gate for these four lots that are here and, then, you will have Mondt Meadows Way that will go up into -- this is still county property here, but will eventually be developed. They got permission from the property owner to do a fire turnaround -- a temporary fire turnaround and this portion of the property is for a future phase where there is a current house now. These are just pictures of the roadway that has been built out there to access this property. This is a proposed landscape plan. These are the amenities that they are proposing for the development. The amenities Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 7 of 69 will be in this area, so they will be required to have -- they were required to have a minimum of two amenity points. They have proposed an outdoor fire ring, a picnic table, bench and picnic shelter. These are the building elevations that were proposed. The building -- they provided eight conceptual building elevations for review. The homes in Mondt Meadows will include the ten homes with a mix of different product type, two story and single story detached family homes. Buildings will be designed with elevations that create interest throughout the use of broken planes, windows, fenestrations that produce a rhythm in materials and patterns. Design review is not required for single family detached structures. However, because the rear and sides of the homes facing Sublimity Avenue will be highly visible, staff recommends a DA provision that require that these elevations incorporate articulation through changes in two or more the following modulation. So, projections, recesses, setbacks, pop-outs, bath, banning, porches, balconies, material types or other integrated architecture -- architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are invisible from adjacent public streets. Single story homes are exempt from this requirement. There are a couple of waterways that are on the property. This is the Watkins Drain, so it's a private drain that runs along the property. They are required to put this within a 38 foot easement. The applicant is proposing to leave the ditch open and keep it natural. The applicant needs to submit documentation requesting a way so Council can leave that ditch open. There is a dry ditch that runs along the property to the west there, which is part of the plat. The applicant will need to provide written documentation showing that the dry ditch has been abandoned and is no longer in use by the affected property owners. This will need to be provided to us prior to the city engineer's signature. There are several easements that are on the property in which the applicant will be relinquishing. The applicant will need to provide written documentation to relinquish those instruments and those shall be submitted to the city prior to the city engineer's signature on the final plat. These are just pictures of the area. It's a beautiful area. This shows the existing homes in the area. This particular building is on -- the plat map they show it at the shop, but on the county's website they show it as residential. So, it does have living quarters and if the property owner is planning to build an additional structure on that they will have to -- this will become an accessory dwelling unit and they will have to meet the requirements for the house in order for that to become an accessory dwelling unit. So, that is a condition of the permit. Oops. Sorry. Go back to a previous slide. So, this property does align with a previous project Sky Ranch, which stubs to the future development. So, within that future development they need to make sure that any roads that are put in there aligns with Sky Ranch. So, Sky Ranch is over here. So, those aligned with this future development. So, however they designed that they need to align with that development, so there is connectivity there and so at this time I will take any questions that you may have on this project. Lorcher: Commissioners, do you have any questions for staff at this time? Perreault: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Perreault. 10 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 8 of 69 Perreault: Thank you. Good evening, Linda. I didn't see any comments from the fire department in the file. Could you go over the fire access one more time? Ritter: Yes. So, fire -- in the beginning they had a fire turnaround right here, which fire was like it had to meet the fire requirement. There should have been an e-mail from the fire marshal in the -- that was up loaded to the public portal. But fire did look at this and they had no issue with the temporary turnaround that they are providing on this property in order for fire to come in and access and, then, turn around and come back out. Lorcher: Would the applicant like to come forward? Good evening. Breckon: Good evening. John Breckon, Breckon Land Design. 6661 North Glenwood Street, Garden City. Lorcher: And how do you pronounce the name of the -- is it Mondt? Breckon: Mondt. Yes. Lorcher: All right. Got it. Breckon: Some of these slides are redundant. Linda did a great job, so I will just kind of breeze over those. There is a -- there is a couple things I would like to add. This is just some of the statistics and we can go back to these if -- if you have questions. This is -- kind of depicts the -- the zoning there and might be able to help answer some questions about why we are wanting -- wanting to change the zoning. But in -- in essence, there is -- the area on the north side -- let's see if you can see my cursor here. This is still in the county and these are all one acre lots and -- and, then, Sky Ranch is R-15. It's much smaller and so this piece lies in between and we trying to provide some transition between these existing approved -- or existing -- already built developments. I also have some information. We are also working on this adjacent property and have been coordinating those efforts to the north, as well as the neighbors to the south here that are -- that are still in the county, particularly on the irrigation supply. This just shows where our schools are. Fire access. Fire stations. This is just the overall plan and so I will go back to that one, because this one shows -- so, there is -- Linda touched on it. There is -- there is the Watkins ditch, which is the drain ditch here on the east side that we are wanting to enhance with some landscaping and provide a nice buffer there and -- and retain that as open ditch, because it is very large. It's -- it's got a 48 inch pipe and so we are hoping to make that more of an amenity. And, then, the irrigation supply comes up from a pipe on this northern property and we have been coordinating that so that we can provide pressure irrigation to this future project to the north, as well as the neighbors that are adjacent that have irrigation water rights coming off of that. Right now that ditch that Linda showed is -- it really doesn't work. They -- they haven't been able to get water for -- their water for years. So, we are hoping to remedy that with -- with this new irrigation system. This just kind of shows an overview here. So, you can see the Sky Ranch, which was approved earlier this year and that -- and that preliminary plat, as well as the Shafer View Ridge that we are working on. We F11 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 9 of 69 are planning on submitting a preliminary plat on that in the next couple weeks and so we have been coordinating those efforts. You can see, you know, part of this is -- is just making sure that that works for access, as well as the utilities connections and so that's a large part of what we have been working on and you can see the little blue spot here is a proposed irrigation pond for the pressurized irrigation system. This just shows some of the utilities plans for those. This is sewer connecting into the existing trunk line in Sublimity Avenue. This just talks about the irrigation system and, of course, Linda already touched on this, as well as the building elevations. I will stand for questions. Lorcher: Commissioners, do we have any questions for the applicant at this time? Okay. Thank you very much. Breckon: Thank you. Lorcher: Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to testify for the Mondt Meadows Subdivision? Lomeli: Thank you, Madam Chair. We do have some people that signed up. I guess we will just see if they intentionally signed up for this hearing. I have a Diane West. Okay. Lorcher: Diane is for a different application. Okay. Thank you. Lomeli: Mike Gallenstein. Lorcher: Thank you. Okay. Sorry, it can be confusing. Lomeli: Marcella White. Lorcher: Okay. Is this for the Mondt Meadows? Okay. Did you have -- did you want to testify though or -- okay. It's here if you want it. Okay. Lomeli: Madam Chair, there is one more name. I believe it's Kerry Smith. The handwriting is a little hard for me to read. Lorcher: Kerry, did you want to testify for Mondt Meadows? No? Okay. Anybody on Zoom? Lomeli: Nobody has their hand raised on Zoom or signed up to testify. Lorcher: Oh. Would you like to testify for Mondt Subdivision? Okay. Please come up to the podium. If you can state your name and address for the record that would be great. Either one. White: Carsten White. 6162 South Terrega Lane, Meridian, Idaho. 83642. So, Marcella White's my mom. F12 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 10 of 69 Lorcher: Okay. White: That shop that you saw on the plans there that's where I live currently and -- Lorcher: Okay. White: -- then one of these lots will be one that I'm living at. So, I just wanted to tell you that this is -- we have lived here for 20 something years and a couple of my brothers and I we are all planning on moving back here and -- to these lots and just have a family neighborhood here. So, we want to keep them, you know, lower density and hoping to get those acre lots approved for there, so we can all have a little space to roam and let our kids run around and they have a good time and enjoy Meridian. So -- so, that's all I had. Do you have any questions? Lorcher: No. I think we're good. Thank you very much. White: Thank you. Lorcher: Madam Clerk, are we good? Lomeli: Madam Chair, yes. No one else has signed up. Lorcher: John, did you have any other comments that you would like to add before we close the public hearing? Commissioners, any questions before I close the public hearing? All right. Can I get a motion of close? Rust: Move to close the public hearing. Sandoval: Second. Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for Mondt Meadows Subdivision, Item No. H-2024-0067. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Lorcher: Well, it's not very often we go from R-8 down to R-4 and R-2. So, everybody likes a little wiggle room, so I appreciate the comments from the family to be able to have some open space for -- and subdivide their -- their personal property for others to enjoy as well. Any other comments from Commissioners? Rust: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Rust. Rust: Yeah. I agree with you. I generally support families wanting to do what they F13] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 11 of 69 want with long time family ground. I love the idea of families coming back and living together and I also like lower density in this area and just a mix of housing types. Yeah, there is maybe a little bit of risk because of the R-15 that values won't be as high, but I think the family understands that. They have a -- a vision that is bigger than extracting the most value possible and -- and I'm in support. Lorcher: Okay. Any other commissioners -- comments or a motion? Sandoval: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Sandoval. Sandoval: After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval of File No. H-2024-0067 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 17th, 2025, with no modifications. Perreault: Second. Rust: Second. Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to approve Mondt Meadows Subdivision. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 4. Public Hearing continued from April 3, 2025 for In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile (H-2024-0058) by In-N-Out Burger, located at 5985 & 6037 N. Ten Mile Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment in the C-G zoning district within 300 feet of another drive-through facility, existing residences and a residential districts. The request includes extended business hours of operation beyond the 6:OOam to 11:00pm limit, with hours from 6:OOam to 1:OOam Sunday through Thursday and 6:OOam to 1:30am Friday and Saturday. Lorcher: Okay. The next item on the agenda is Item No. 2024-0058 For In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile for a conditional use permit because it's within 300 feet of another drive-through and requests extended hours. We will begin with the staff report. Parsons: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. Next item on the agenda, as you mentioned, is the In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile. It is a conditional use permit or a drive-through within 300 feet of an existing drive-through and existing residential uses. This subject property is currently zoned C-G in the city and it consists of 2.22 acres of land and it's, essentially, two lots within the Lost Rapids Subdivision that was approved by City Council in 2018 and the primary chain or user on the site is 14 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 12 of 69 Costco. The Comprehensive Plan designation for this site is commercial. Really, the -- the two issues tonight really is the drive-through and the hours of operation and that's where staffs recommendation of denial came from. I would let everyone know in the audience that in a commercial district a restaurant is a principally permitted use. So, the reason why we are here this evening is primarily for the drive-through use, because, again, it is within 300 feet of an existing drive-through that is just north of this site and, then, also the R-40 are multi-family development that is just directly to its west. So, that's what's triggering us all being here this evening having a conversation. I would also mention to the Council -- or the Commission that this site is developed with more than one drive-through on it. This is not the first drive-through within the Lost Rapids Subdivision. It's -- I had -- I don't know the exact number, but I think this is the sixth or seventh proposal for the site. So, it is pretty heavily trafficked with additional drive- throughs that range from banks, coffee kiosks, other food and beverage restaurants. One could even argue that the -- the fuel facility and all the cars going there to get the gas at the corner, so they have to drive through the site and -- and fuel there. So, this site does get congested during -- during the -- throughout the day and it's also located along two major road corridors. So, we have Chinden, which is a state highway, and, then, we also have Ten Mile, which is a five lane arterial roadway, which connects, obviously, Chinden and all the way down to the interstate. So, we all know that Ten Mile is heavily trafficked. It is -- at some parts of the day it is at capacity or over capacity, meets -- does not meet ACHD's thresholds, it operates at a level of service F and looking at the -- the public record this evening I had a chance to look at ACHD's comments and they said there were no mitigations required for this particular application. So, I just wanted to go on record to share that with you that, basically, when Costco came in those improvements were done as part of that project and that's why Chinden was widened and also Ten Mile was widened between Chinden and McMillan Road. So, here is -- here is -- here is the -- the property represented on the aerial. You can see it's -- it's two parcels, as I mentioned, and approximately 2.2 acre. So, I think there is probably one or two lots left to develop in this area. As I mentioned to you, the applicant has requested extended hours of operation for this site. Typically in a C-G zone when you aren't adjacent to a residential use, hours aren't typically discussed as much. They aren't -- they aren't really restricted in the C-G zone. This particular case -- initially when staff had looked at the application we thought it -- it did abut a residential district, but if you had -- if I could zoom in on this map here, you would see that Costco actually controls a 20 foot sliver that is between this property and the R- 40 piece. So, therefore, if this site -- if these two lots did abut the R-40 piece, they would be going through -- they would have two conditional use permits in front of you, one for the drive-through and one for the extended hours. However, because there is a conditional use permit in play, this body, through the UDC, the city ordinance, has the ability to restrict the hours regardless of that pertinent code section. It just doesn't require another CUP. You could act on the hours of operation based on a CUP for the drive-through use only and that's what we conveyed in the staff report. So, again, the applicant has proposed -- proposed hours between 10:30 a.m. and 1:00 a.m., Sunday through Thursday and, then, from 10:30 a.m., until 1:30 a.m., Friday and Saturday and their deliveries are proposed to occur between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. So, essentially, when you add all that up it almost implies that this would be a 24 hour F15] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 13 of 69 operation on the site. I would also mention to you that when the Costco development went in they self-imposed hours of restrictions on themselves and restricted their deliveries between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m. So, no deliveries were occurring between those hours and that's why it's important, from staff's perspective, that we were not supportive of these hours of operation, because of what is -- what other businesses have been restricted on the site, particularly the -- the Costco. Access to the site, as -- as you know comes off of Lost -- Lost Rapids here. That's the collector roadway. But internally this is just a cross-access driveway that's shared between the commercial lots and so their two accesses are proposed from that shared driveway between all of that commercial and resident potential development in the area. With any drive-through there are specific use standards and you see that the applicant has to comply with. So, I will dive into that and let you know why staff has not supported this application or the drive-through the way it is presented to you this evening. So, the first -- with any drive-through we require them to show their menu board, drive-through window, stacking lanes, et cetera, on the site, which they have done. They are in compliance with the UDC requirements. We also require that they demonstrate safe pedestrian and site circulation for the site. It's hard to say. I can't say that they have done that with this particular site plan yet. What I can tell you is the additional stacking that they show on the site through their stacking analysis shows that they can accommodate up to 29 vehicles stacking on this particular property and you see that in their site plan here. So, this is not your typical drive-through by any means. This is far and beyond what we typically see with a drive-through and it's more than what we typically see in this development with the other six drive-throughs that are currently developed in here. But we all know that this particular restaurant is very popular. It was proven when it went into The Village. If you had a chance to drive through when they first opened, they had the parking lot and like an obstacle -- I thought it was at Disneyland. It looked like an obstacle course with cars going through that parking lot and stacking of vehicles trying to get them through that -- that queuing and I have to at least admit -- or applaud the applicant for doing that, because having those plans in place are a good thing when you know something is going to be popular when it first opens. I would also mention to the Commission that current UDC standards for drive- throughs don't address these high capacity drive-through facilities or the popular facilities, which we have general standards that you have to meet and I say the applicant's doing the best that they can, but given the history and the popularity that's where we kind of differ with them on this particular case, because given its proximity close to Lost Rapids there is a potential for cars to stack not only on the main drive aisle, but also on the adjacent right of way, which gives us concerns, which is why some of the findings that we have made to support the denial we have stated those were our concerns with this particular application. The other component of this is the applicant did provide a traffic study. So, typically, when we have these types of facilities and we want -- we question how it's to operate, an applicant will give us what's called a queuing analysis or a traffic study and in that they have shown a mitigation plan for how they could accommodate additional vehicles as well. So, right now in front of you you're looking at this site, you can see it's showing 29 cars in the stacking lane and, then, in that mitigation plan the applicant proposed to close off the southernmost access and, then, allow additional cars to stack here to -- to allow for peak traffic times. The other F16] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 14 of 69 component of a drive-through, whenever we have a drive-through that exceeds a hundred feet in length, we also require an escape lane and that's why you see this additional lane that's not loaded up with vehicles, because that's the escape lane in case somebody forgets their wallet or there is an incident or a crying baby in your car and you have to get out of the drive-through, it's important that allowed people -- to get people out of those drive-throughs so they are not stuck in there for over time -- long periods of time. The other thing -- component with this is with restaurants in the UDC we require additional parking for restaurants and so the applicant is required to provide only 16 parking spaces per the code based on the square footage of the restaurant. They are providing 73. So, they are well in excess of UDC standards for parking. In looking at the public record this evening and the reason why we have a full room tonight is because we have had over 324 pieces of written testimony on the site, which probably is a record for Meridian, if I'm not mistaken. Some of them are in -- you know, most -- a majority of them are in opposition, but some of them are in -- are in favor of the -- the project as well. Most of the concerns do -- are around stacking, traffic, noise, compatibility with the adjacent neighborhood, all of the things that we noted in the findings when we had recommended denial of this particular project. So, again, staff is recommending denial per the findings in the staff report and I will go ahead and stand -- conclude my presentation and stand for any additional questions you have. Lorcher: Commissioners, do we have any questions for Bill at this time? Would the applicant like to come forward? Lomeli: Madam Chair, I do you have a handout that the applicant has provided ahead of time. I don't know if he would like for me to hand that out now or -- T.Smith: Yeah, you're welcome to. Lomeli: Okay. I will hand that out now. Lorcher: Hi. If you could just state your name and address for the record while she's handing those out. T.Smith: Todd Smith. I'm the development manager for In-N-Out Burger. 13502 Hamburger Lane, Baldwin Park, California. Lorcher: Okay. You will have to speak a little bit louder. T.Smith: Sure will. We have the -- by chance the presentation cued up? Lorcher: She will get that in one moment. Okay. We will have him speak up. T.Smith: Yeah. I will move in. Yeah. There we go. Lorcher: If the mouse is being touchy try your arrows. 17 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 15 of 69 T.Smith: Yeah. Yeah. There is a lag. I'm just trying to get used to that here. Lorcher: Yeah. T.Smith: Okay. I see that working. Great. Good evening, City of Meridian Planning Commission and members of the Meridian community. My name is Todd Smith, I'm the development manager for In-N-Out Burger responsible for the project before you tonight. I'm excited to be here with you and I want to thank city staff, as well as the planning commission for your time and attended to the project. It is appreciated and I know this one is not an easy one. I would like to take this opportunity to provide some background for In-N-Out Burger. In-N-Out Burger was founded in 1948 by Harry and Esther Snyder in Baldwin Park, California. Harry is a World War II veteran who used GI bill money to open a modest ten-by-ten foot hamburger drive-through restaurant in Baldwin Park. In fact, Henry -- Harry invented the two way speaker for the drive- through so orders could be taken remotely. In-N-Out Burger is a family-owned business. All 419 In-N-Out Burger stores are company owned and operated. We do not franchise. The company is currently led by Lynsi Snyder, the granddaughter of Harry and Esther. In-N-Out recently celebrated in 75th anniversary and the first Meridian, Idaho, store was the company -- company's 400th store. Idaho is also now the eighth state in which In-N-Out operates. All restaurant supplies and food products are delivered from company-owned and operated distribution centers and hamburger patty production plants by company-owned delivery trucks. We do this to maintain our strong company culture and our incredible customer experience and, most importantly, the high quality food we serve. Lynsi continues to lead the company as a family business and holds firmly to the founding values, guiding principles and the culture of the company. I would like to emphasize some of the values with our In-N-Out Burger mission statement, particularly number three, assisting our communities in our marketplace to become stronger, safer, and better places to live. In-N-Out Burger is widely recognized as one of the best places to work. We hire employees for each store and always pay above minimum wage, even for our level one entry level employees and throughout the company. In-N-Out Burger enhances the communities in which we operate with two foundations. The In-N-Out Burger Foundation started in 1984 by Esther Snyder with a focus on helping abused children and also the Slave to Nothing Foundation started by Lynsi and her husband Sean in 2018 to fund solutions to human trafficking and substance abuse. In-N-Out underwrites these programs to ensure that every penny goes to the intended recipients. Just today and since the December opening in 2023 of our Meridian store In-N-Out through its foundations and -- and other giving has given over 160,000 dollars to organizations in the state of Idaho since entering the state of Idaho and most of those are centered in the Boise and Meridian area. As a reminder In-N-Out opened its very first store in Idaho, as I mentioned, in Meridian here in December 12th, 2023. That store opened at tremendous customer response and while the response might have been overwhelmed to another QSR operator, it did not overwhelm In-N-Out. We worked with all local stakeholders well in advance of the opening, including city development services staff, fire department, police department, The Village at Meridian Mall management, Ada County Highway District, Idaho Transportation Department and others to craft and execute an opening Fl-81 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 16 of 69 plan that eliminated any disruption to the adjacent highways and to the shopping center itself, which we did. We managed -- as mentioned in the introduction, there were no impacts to the local roadways by our comprehensive planning. We have subsequently opened two more locations, one at the Boise mall located on Milwaukee Street at Boise Town Square Mall and that opened on October 25th and also at Nampa that opened on January 29th, 2025. Worth noting is that both locations opened and continue to operate without impact to the surrounding roadways or surrounding businesses. In fact, we have received praise from many stakeholders involved in these locations for executing the plans in managing our -- our operations so well. The Nampa chief of police sent in a comment personally noting how smoothly things have gone for our Nampa location. I hope you had an opportunity to see it and to read that. I explained at the pre- application meeting how we expected the business to level off among all the stores as others open in the area and that is what happened. We saw the big Meridian opening and slowly as we -- as time went on we opened new stores in all our operations started to normalize. So, this leads me to the project before you tonight. The property is -- is zoned C-G. The city code defines the C-G zone as, quote, the largest scale and broadest mix of retail, office, service and light industrial uses. This zoning designation is, by definition, the most comprehensive and inclusive of all commercial zoning. Such zoning is designated for all retail uses and specifically for uses such as the one before you tonight. Extended hours of operation is an issue raised in the review process, as noted in the staff report. In-N-Out Burger, as noted in our mission statement, is dedicated to serving our customers. Our customers come from all walks of life and have variance -- and varying schedules. We maintain store hours universally across all of our stores and we do this so that there is no confusion that you know the hours in which we operate, you can go to any In-N-Out and you will know when we are open for business. We also provide discount meals for law enforcement and there are many similar essential services that work varying schedules, work late at night and they need opportunities to come, get a fresh, low cost, high quality meal and we can provide that for them. The zoning code is clear about hours of operation within the C-G zone as mentioned in the staff report. The code section states specifically that the hours of operation within the L-O and C-N district shall be limited from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Business hours of operation within the C-C and C-G districts shall be limited from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. when the property abuts a residential use or district and staff noted the fact that we actually do not abut a residential use or district in this case. The entire shopping center was approved in I believe 2018 and contemplated a large scale shopping center for all of the parcels on the premises, with drive-through uses included in the center at full build out. The shopping center has similar drive-through uses that have been approved while located as well within 300 feet of residential and as well as 300 feet within another drive-through. Again drive-through uses were considered with the original retail center approval. Our project is consistent with the overall shopping center that was originally approved with drive-through uses currently in operation or under construction. We meet all other provisions of the drive-through establishment code requirements as noted in the city municipal code and we ask that we be approved as others have been. The site is a -- a very large site, actually. It is double the size of most of your Idaho sites at 2.2 acres. This is unusual for not only our business, but any drive-through business. It's a very, very large site and that large site, as noted, provides F-19 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 17 of 69 a lot of space for us to provide plenty of parking. We have over four times the required parking available on site. We have a very large drive-through lane that can hold up -- just in standard practice, hold up to 29 cars and so due to the -- the larger parking area we have additional space to even provide additional what we call overstack parking should a temporary peak occur. Here is an example of the overstack plan that shows 52 cars in the lane all contained on site with still full site circulation available to the customers as they come through. Our -- we have observed queue data taken from The Village store at the -- in Meridian here back in December, which was during the busy holiday shopping season and in that study the peak -- the very largest peak we saw in that observed data was 46 cars and so as you can see here we can cover that peak and more and on site we have additional room where we can even add additional cars when needed if it were ever needed. But our data shows right now it wouldn't be. The average in that queue study during weekdays and other times was 30 cars and here we provide in our drive-through lane a 29 car stack. So, we handle the typical maximum drive-throughs on average. All that data was taking -- was taking place prior to the Nampa store opening. With the Nampa store having opened I'm sure things will continue to level off and subside even more as the -- as the business gets distributed to even more sites and locations and Nampa being somewhat remote is collecting a lot of business there away from the other stores. Knowing the concerns of traffic, we still took it upon ourselves to have a traffic engineer conduct a focus traffic analysis of the Lost Rapids intersection and the roadways around our project site, so we can more clearly understand the issues if any did exist. The traffic study results have confirmed that there is no change in the levels of service at the Lost Rapids intersection or adjacent roadways with -- with the addition of the In-N-Out restaurant. It is important to note also that the proposed Highway 16 extension will have a dramatic effect and impact for the benefit of this area as well, which is not accounted for to date and I would note that according to a -- a 2018 Idaho Transportation District presentation, which noted that the highway -- expansion of Highway 16 could create a ten to 20 percent decrease in traffic on Black Cat Road between McMillan Road and Franklin Road. Ten Mile Road between Ustick Road and Chinden Boulevard could see a 30 percent reduction in traffic. So, we know that the addition of the Highway 16 extension will dramatically improve the traffic flows there. In fact, I was talking to our division manager for our Idaho stores who lives in the northern part of the Treasure Valley and he told me directly -- he said -- he is excited. When Highway 16 opens he will never drive Ten Mile again. He will just fly right over when he has to get to work and back to doing other things. I would like to take a -- a quick walk through the -- the staff findings. Some we disagree with. Finding number one, which stated that the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which it is located. Again, I would like to remind you the site is 2.2 acres. This is a very large site and it's larger than any other drive-through on the -- those premises and it's bigger than the typical drive-through that we utilize in In-N-Out and is more than sufficient for this project. The stacking lanes as shown are sufficient based on observed data that we took in our data analysis and queue analysis. It shows that we have plenty of room to -- to cover what that data showed with room to spare. Site parking is 73 spaces, which is more than four times the required parking. Even if the overstack plan were to take up 15 of those spaces we still have 58 spaces F20] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 18 of 69 remaining for customers and others. Finding number two. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this title. The operating hours here are consistent with the C-G zone and the staff report has acknowledged that and as I mentioned, the code -- we are in compliance with the code in that regard. The policy that staff sited to minimize noise, lighting and odors of commercial or residential dwellings by enforcing city code is the language in the policy of the Comprehensive Plan and we agree, we will comply with city code and we are in full agreement to use the enforcement of city code that we comply with those regulations. So, we believe we are meeting those findings as required. The staff makes these findings without any evidence that the project generates excessive noise, more traffic congestion. In fact, staff didn't even request a staff -- or traffic analysis from us. We provided it on our own from listening. Finding three. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Is that beeping indicating my time is coming up? Lorcher: It is and you will have a chance to -- at a rebuttal as well. T.Smith: Am I at time or can I go one more -- one more minute? Lorcher: If you can wrap up your thoughts. That's okay. T.Smith: I will -- I will wrap it up. Just to conclude, we do feel that we meet the findings and we have submitted materials that demonstrate that we have met the findings required for approval of the project. The proposed In-N-Out store is consistent with the original shopping center and plan approval. Back in 2018 that contemplated the full build out of that property. The proposed In-N-Out is consistent with the C-G zone and its allowed uses. The proposed In-N-Out is consistent with the C-G zone hours of operation given that it does not directly abut residential uses or districts. The proposed In-N-Out will not result in a change to traffic, existing levels of service at the intersection at Lost Rapids and adjacent roadways. The Highway 16 extension will considerably relieve traffic on Ten Mile at this location about the same time that our store would be projected to open. The proposed project is compatible with the shopping center uses and the proposed In-N-Out is consistent with the city drive-through code and with the previously approved drive-through uses in the shopping center that are also -- many of them within the 300 feet of others and 300 feet of residential. I really appreciate your time and I would just like to note if questions come up I do have our traffic engineer here available as well to support those questions if you want to ask any about the traffic plan or that report that was included with our application and I am available for questions. Thank you for your time. Lorcher: Hold one second. Commissioners, do we have any questions for the applicant before he sits down? Sandoval: Madam Chair? F21 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 19 of 69 Lorcher: Commissioner Sandoval. Sandoval: Two questions. I will do them one at a time. First overstacking. When you shut off that south entry what happens -- have you modeled that with emergency services? Is there still turnaround room for fire? T.Smith: There is plenty of turnaround room and when you see the site plan there is a full loop that goes around on site and it actually helps order as the -- the flow of traffic would -- would come in that other end and, then, cycle through the site more efficiently and, yes, essential services would get in there no problem and at any point our store associates, especially in the conditions where overstack is occurring, they will be out on the property and they would direct traffic or anything that would be necessary to help them as well. But it has full turnaround and full access. Sandoval: Okay. Thank you. And second question. I think I may know the answer to this, but I would -- I want to ask it anyway. Is it feasible or are you willing to limit your operating hours from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. or 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.? T.Smith: Well, we open at 10:30; right? Sandoval: When I say -- let me clarify. When I say operating hours I mean deliveries as well. T.Smith: So, deliveries are one thing and right now I -- I know we do our -- our deliveries off hours, you know, and as noted in our application we say between 2:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., but deliveries aren't coming at -- at 2:00 a.m. here. But we just leave a window that fits with the logistics of the stores. I will try to reach out and double check, but I don't even think the deliveries are occurring prior to, you know, 4:00 or 5:00 in the morning or anything like that. So, I -- I -- think we are in a better position there. I would have to confirm that. As far as store hours go, again, that's universal across our company. It's important to us. It's an important service to our customers and we have a wide variety of customers that rely on our regular store hours and -- and we look to serve those and so we are consistent with our -- our store operating hours. Delivery hours I will -- I will try to clarify for you on rebuttal. Sandoval: Thank you. Lorcher: Do you have questions, Commission Rust? Rust: Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair. Two questions for you as well. Quite a few public comments were curious about your site selection process. Could you elaborate a little bit on what your process looks like and anything that you could share about your site selection process for this particular site? T.Smith: Well, I can -- I'm not even fully aware of all the details of all the site selection that goes in, but, obviously, they have to meet certain criteria that are helpful to the F22 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 20 of 69 company and there is certain matrix I'm sure that they look at. But I mean the primary criteria here -- I mean we are looking at a C-G zone on -- on arterials and shopping that are already -- on a shopping center that already has projected drive-through uses at build out. I mean this is an ideal fit, because that's what the C-G zone is for, that's what the original approval contemplated and -- and so this meets I would think all of our requirements necessary and I believe it meets the city requirements as well. Rust: Thank you. Follow up on some of the delivery questions that have already been raised. In the staff report it mentions that there is not going to be any backing up, no large trucks. Can you describe the size and type of truck and generally how many deliveries you're accepting on a daily basis regardless of time? T.Smith: And so it's a -- it's a large truck, like an 18 wheeler truck typically that would do it and make its rounds and -- and they are all company-owned as I mentioned. Again, there is that full circulation on site so that the truck -- we always measure that as a part of our site designed to make sure our truck deliveries can be executed on site without any complications or problems. So, that is helped by not having to back up or going back to your point that that's not a problem for us, because that circulation is so good. As far as deliveries -- typical deliveries could be about three times a week roughly, depending just on what it's needed and -- and how busy the store is and when deliveries are needed. Rust: So, to follow up, three truck deliveries per week generally speaking? T.Smith: Roughly on an -- on an average and that could ebb and flow, you know, depending. Rust: Sure. Thank you. T.Smith: Thank you. Lorcher: Commissioner Perreault. Perrault: Thank you, madam Chair. I want to go back to that conversation about shutting off that south entrance. Then all traffic will be coming in the north entrance and you have one -- T.Smith: Yeah. The north entrance of our site. Perreault: Correct. T.Smith: Yeah. Uh-huh. Perreault: You have one exit heading away from the site and two coming in the site, with the possibility of -- of course drive-through traffic stacking up into the drive-through itself, depending on how busy it is. That -- that just -- it's going to create a bottleneck 23 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 21 of 69 realistically. If they are -- if that entire queuing is full to 52 cars or 58 cars, whatever you stated. Can you talk about how that's going to flow with just one entrance and -- and two -- with two lanes and, then, one exit with one lane. T.Smith: Just let me clarify. What we show here is just one example. Our store managers and our associates are highly trained with our operations and they are very proactive and experienced on how to manage the queue and the queue flow and the traffic flow and keeping that flowing appropriately and keeping accessibility fully accessible and in this example we do show that it -- it blocks that -- that southerly access, but that may not be necessary. They -- it's possible that the associates could keep a gap there if that's found to be better and how they stack the cars on, they will be actively participating in managing how that overstack is happening. So, they will be directing cars and traffic to keep it flowing and moving actively as that's going on only in those -- in those peak times when it's necessary. We have cameras in store that are constantly monitoring the drive-through and so our management and our associates on site know exactly what's going on in our drive-through and in the parking lot and they are active in managing that and as you can see from all of our stores, Nampa had similar issues, very constrained site, a lot of traffic congestion prior to our opening and here we have the chief of police praising us for how efficient that has been and how there has been no impact as a result of it. The experience and the track record of In-N- Out is that we manage our sites and keep that flow going well and it's not a problem. Perreault: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: As we know all the rest of the In-N-Outs in the area are on -- in commercial areas with no residential nearby. Please don't. Lorcher: No. That's not appropriate. We will ask you to leave if you cannot conduct yourself in a public meeting. Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. Are you prepared to turn customers away if the traffic flows out onto Lost Rapids? T.Smith: We certainly will not allow that to happen. If there starts to be congestion, yes, we would take action as necessary and our -- again our associates are -- are highly experienced in handling that in a manner that still serves the customer well and now this is the fourth store in Treasure Valley. There are certainly options. Certainly, if I saw a problem or -- or a long line I might choose to go to a different In-N-Out myself, which is -- that's five minutes away or whatever the case might be. But that will definitely be handled so that those impacts don't occur. And our stack demonstrates consistent with our existing queue date -- data that we have observed, that we have plenty of room to manage that, so that will not happen and this site is so large -- again, we could add additional stacks in there if we had to and still keep the -- the flow on site and probably get in the neighborhood of 72 plus cars on there if we had to. We have an extraordinary F24] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 22 of 69 amount. T.Smith: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Oh. Commissioner Smith, I -- yeah. Would you like -- have a question for the applicant? Smith: Yeah, I heard this a couple times now. It's not quite making sense to me. This idea that because there are other In-N-Outs in the area there are other options. You know, this -- the idea of leveling out. It -- it seems like the argument is almost that these In-N-Outs are going to be cannibalizing kind of traffic from each other. Now, I -- I mean I'm not -- I'm not -- I don't want the financial analysis, but that doesn't seem like that would make sense to me for In-N-Out to want to put something here if it's going be more operating costs for the same amount of customers. So, there surely will be more customers net in In-N-Out's plan based on this. I'm just curious is there any -- the -- the application -- you -- you're referring to kind of this idea of leveling out from one site to another. Has there been any analysis of that actually having happened of a new site coming in near another site and what the aggregate kind of traffic to both of them has been. Obviously it's not going to be one to one, but it wouldn't make sense for there to be no additional, you know, sales made for In-N-Out to want to put a store here. So, I am just confused at what that kind of talking is. T.Smith: Yeah. So, the point of that is, for example, when we opened Meridian in December and for the first several months what did that look like? How busy was that? Then we opened Boise. Meridian -- those lines, while still busy, softened. Boise opening was nowhere close to the Meridian opening. Nowhere close. And it was very manageable. Nampa same thing. And so when what I'm talking about leveling, it's getting down to more typical business and drive-through queuing; right? It's -- it's not like it -- when we had the one store and the line was 60, 70, 80 cars and things like that. So, as we added stores you can see that our operations now are normalizing to more typical -- typical drive-through queuing, which is, for example, like the 30 car average queue that we saw at Meridian now. Still very busy, but still within very manageable levels that we can easily manage on site -- on site and that will have very -- no -- no impacts to the roadways or the access or those kinds of things and so the leveling I'm talking about is just getting down to normal queuing that's easily managed on site, which makes this a good fit. Lorcher: Commissioner Smith. Smith: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Go ahead. Smith: So, just say as a -- as a follow up, I mean -- so, don't tell anyone, but I'm originally from southern California, so I enjoy In-N-Out quite a bit to be -- to be really candid. But I have been personally in line for, you know, almost an hour at a -- at the 25 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 23 of 69 location when I know there is five or so locations nearby and they have all been there for -- for five years or so. Is -- is your application -- is part of your planning and your strategy contingent upon this idea that there will be leveling off and, if so, if that doesn't happen, what -- what approaches are you going to take to mitigate that if -- if that leveling off doesn't happen. You know, if -- if it looks more like it does in California than in Nampa. I'm just a little bit confused about that. T.Smith: No, it's not contingent on that. The point we are making is, though, it's -- we have designed the site to handle the capacity that this site is going to have and we can keep it on site and the site is so significantly larger with more parking, more space, and available queuing capacities that it far exceeds what's expected to be at this store and we can handle even beyond what our current stores in Idaho are showing at their peaks and so we don't -- we will manage that there won't be any off-site complications. Lorcher: Commissioner Smith. Smith: That -- that's good for now. Thank you. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you very much. T.Smith: Thank you. Lorcher: Madam Clerk, we will start with the public testimony and before you call the first name I would like everybody to know that all the Commissioners present, including Commissioner Smith, have read through all of the public comments. We have read all of them, including the gentleman who had 161 pages. So, we are very familiar with the comments that have been made and we -- you know, we are well versed and you are -- the people who are for and not in support of this project. So, keep that in mind that we hear you, we understand, we have heard the written -- we have read all the written comments. So, with that in mind this -- the information that you are bringing -- you have your right to have a public -- this is a public hearing, you have a right to come forward. We love to hear from you. And if you have some new information we would love to hear it. So, Madam Clerk, with that in mind who would like to testify first? Lomeli: Madam Chair, the first person I have is Dianne Hough. She has a presentation and a handout. I do have a question for you. She has indicated she is representing Bainbridge's HOA. However, others have indicated they are representing Bainbridge. Would you like for me to provide them all ten minutes or how would you like to proceed with that? Lorcher: What is her position? Lomeli: She would have to speak to that. Lorcher: What is your position? Got it. Okay. So, you are not part of the HOA and so who -- is the president of the HOA here tonight? 26 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 24 of 69 Lomeli: Madam Chair, yes. I have Wade Ramsey that has signed up. Lorcher: And where is Wade? Wade, do you have permission from your HOA to speak on their behalf or are you here to speak for yourself? Okay. And you're okay with that? Okay. Can we call Wade first then? Lomeli: Yes. Madam Chair, Wade does have a presentation. Ramsey: Will you drive that or do I need to? Will you drive that presentation or do I need to? Okay. Lorcher: The arrows work better than the mouse. And if you can come closer to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. Ramsey: Sorry. My name is Wade Ramsey and I live at 4013 West Lost Rapid. I'm trying to get to the presentation. Lomeli: Madam Chair? Ramsey: It's labeled his Bainbridge Ramsey is what is was labeled as. Lorcher: So, Mr. Ramsey, you are representing your HOA and your community? Ramsey: Yeah. Lorcher: You will have ten minutes to speak. Ramsey: Thank you. So, my name is Wade Ramsey. I live at 4013 West Lost Rapids in the Bainbridge Subdivision. I am the elected board president of the Bainbridge Homeowners Association and I'm here representing 572 homes or about 1,200 voters that live in our community. The attached map you see there of the area will help clarify where I imagine most of the people in this room are from. The orange star in the center there is the In-N-Out location. Bainbridge is the largest on the map that is bound by Ten Mile, Chinden, Lost Rapids and Tree Farm. The other representative communities of Cadence and Olivia are also labeled here. I won't speak for Rick and Bri Jones for their respective communities, but for Bainbridge residents we are almost unanimous in our position to this location for In-N-Out. Late last year we conducted our normal annual survey of our membership, but included a question about the potential In-N-Out plan, because it had been rumored at that point. Eighty percent of our respondents voiced opposition to this location at the time and 13 percent voiced some level of support. Come to find out 80 percent may be low and I will show you how we know that. Over the last few weeks I went through every public comment submitted to the city for you to consider. Go to the next slide if I can here. Lorcher: Try your arrow buttons. F27] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 25 of 69 Ramsey: My arrow button doesn't seem to work. Lorcher: That was my secret special -- Ramsey: There you go. Lorcher: Okay. Ramsey: This is a zoomed out version of where the responses were from. Here is the feedback map. As of 3:30 today there were 264 unique submitted comments and they are running 74-26 against this proposal. That's slightly updated numbers from this slide, but the percentages haven't changed. The red are -- are folks opposed to this specific location and in green are the folks who submitted comments in general support of In-N- Out. This is a zoomed out view that's roughly the bounds of Meridian. I will point out that the green supporters are primarily in a confined area and almost none of them nearby this location. There is five In-N-Out supporters that aren't shown in Kuna, Star and Nampa. More than that in a moment. But let's do that. This is the area involved. Looking at the feedback addresses on this map that's 96 percent of that feedback is negative that we do not support this location. I will offer a couple notes. About a dozen of the supporter letters didn't provide addresses, so they couldn't be mapped. The vast majority of those supporter locations as you saw are almost certainly the product of perhaps paid boarded or canvassers that we have heard In-N-Out hired to -- to find supporters. Not only are they all in the same general area, but the a-mails are all very similar as you saw. They mentioned In-N-Out has great quality food, is great for late night workers and don't -- they don't think traffic -- that they won't deal with, of course, isn't going to be a problem. They are hand signed, as if the person was handed a letter to sign at their front door and about half scribbled their address or a phone number. Several of the names are different and the phone numbers are the same. Two of the supporters told me verbally that they have been offered coupons in exchange for signing their letter. Almost all were submitted in batches in person here at City Hall instead of an e-mail of the comment. Only one supporter of In-N-Out wanted this specific location. One. And he wanted it because it was close enough for him to walk there. That's it. Everybody else was supported -- supportive of a general store in northwest Meridian and I will tell you I think most of us are fine with a store in north -- northwest Meridian. It's very important that you understand that point. Our opposition is about this location. We don't oppose In-N-Out in a different location. We have no comment on the quality of their food. That's fine. There are locations available -- a lot of locations available for them a mile or less in every direction but this one. Those locations offer better traffic infrastructure with no neighborhood impacts. This location is our issue. A location at Orchard Park or Scheels, for example, keeps all the supporters very happy, those green houses, and makes all the red houses happy. A fast food restaurant of this traffic volume open after midnight inundates the surrounding homes with light, drive-through speakers, idling cars and the general noise and light involved until the employees leave an hour after closing. Your own staff report highlights these concerns as reason to deny this proposal outright. Lest you believe In-N-Out skewed data that the traffic won't be that bad, let me point out a data point one of our members F28] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 26 of 69 discovered. There is a trade publication called QSR. In 2022 it highlights the fact that the industry average for fast food visits is 121,000 people a store. For In-N-Out the -- the industry leader, it is 700,000. Not 121,000, 700,000. That's six times the national average. We have worked together with Planning and Zoning over the -- over the years to ensure that Costco and the other businesses that developed there that are finished and quiet by midnight. Costco twice has verified that to the CUP. We have worked with Burger King and all the others to make sure they are closed and finished by midnight. That it is dark and quiet in the middle of our neighborhoods and In-N-Out active until 2:00 a.m. undermines those efforts and our hard work over the last few years of our partnership. By the way, there are eight drive-throughs right now in that area and the ninth will be Pollo Loco or whatever that's supposed to show up on the north side. The biggest problem for this location is unique to In-N-Out and the reason we are all here and I will show you the next slide here. In-N-Out paid for a traffic study that compares this residential location with 20 California stores. Twenty. All on interstates or big box shopping mall areas and I don't mean big box like a Costco, I mean big box locations -- all of them have big box locations like the Home Depot and a grocery store or a Walmart or a Lowe's or a Costco. Multiples of those. None of them are anywhere close to this residential density or these -- these traffic choke points. Most of my numbers here are transplants looking to flee that sort of traffic and yet their own traffic study concedes that there is barely the infrastructure for their anticipated volumes once normal operations resume, meaning after the chaos and volume of the new store settles down. That still hasn't happened at The Village in 17 months. In-N-Out's traffic study looked at one location on this map, the infrastructure at Lost Rapids in the blue sign arrow on your -- on your screen. That one intersection is where they look for data and they have looked in early December. By conducting a traffic study in December they picked the least busy time of the year right there. The study entirely ignores the several traffic choke points shown as yellow arrows just 650 feet north of that and 200 feet west of that intersection of Lost Rapids. Those are the choke points where traffic will end up being the most congested, not the intersection. It ignores the fact that there were afternoon school bus stops -- school bus stops for all ages less than 500 feet away. The study ignores along Lost Rapids or Keith Bird Park right in the middle of the map -- notice the paint there. That is 1,200 feet away on Lost Rapids. For eight months a year from 4:00 o'clock until 8:00 p.m., four or five nights a week, prime drive-through time for dinner, that is effectively a one lane street. It's not supposed to be, but is a one lane street because of activities in Keith Bird Park where people park in both by -- bi-planes on each side. It ignores there is a common space whiffle ball field 750 feet away -- that's the yellow triangle -- from where In-N-Out wants to go. That's middle school kids playing right there. The traffic study ignores the location -- that it's one mile from Rocky Mountain High School and just over two miles from Owyhee. In-N-Out will be a destination of choice for those kids on a quick lunch break and we all know how attentive those careful drivers are speeding through neighborhoods to get to and from lunch between classes. It ignores for eight months a year Heroes Park which is close to 600 -- as close as 600 feet away is used every weekend and multiple evenings a week for youth athletics like soccer and lacrosse tournaments. That's frequently 700 to 800 cars and 1,500 people at Heroes Park. Both church parking lots on Ten Mile, Costco, and every side street within walking distance has a car parked on it for those uses. The F29] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 27 of 69 expanded parking lot of Heroes Park last year made those events larger and cover more days. So, the overall effect is worse, not better. Their traffic study pronounces the left turn lane on Ten Mile, that blue arrow again, as suitable for ten vehicles to turn onto Lost Rapids and that's sufficient. As everyone in this room can attest, multiple times a today that lane is backed on to Ten Mile -- is over a dozen cars waiting to turn left. Lorcher: You have to wrap up. Ramsey: Okay. It certainly ignores the issue you're going to deal with at next month's meeting for Darrow Park where you are going to dump 300 houses there at Moteo -- Milano Drive. Each of those reasons are alone to deny this permit. Some of those are reasons the city staff report urges you to deny this ask. At a minimum, as the report requests, there must be an actual traffic study completed. We do not need more drive- throughs here. For all those reasons we ask you to continue to support our neighborhood on this most critical issue. Vote no. Lorcher: Thank you very much. Ramsey: Thank you. Do you want me to exit out of this? Oh. You will do that? Thank you. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you. I would like to hear from the HOAs first, because that might collectively incorporate a lot of the people here. Do we have another HOA person? Lomeli: Madam Chair, yes, we do. I have Mike Gallenstein for Spurwing. Lorcher: You're only representing yourself? Okay. Lomeli: Madam Chair, I have several people that have signed up for Cadence HOA. I'm not sure who their president -- or who would be representing for them. Lorcher: Are you representing the community? And anybody from Cadence, they give permission to do that? Okay. Ms. Brick Oliver. Okay. Madam Chair, she has a presentation as well. Lorcher: While they are queuing that up, can you give your name and address for the record, please? Oliver: Good evening. My name is Brick Oliver -- is this -- can I -- Lorcher: Either one. So, just get really close. Lomeli: Madam Chair, my apologies. She has a handout as well, so I will hand that to -- 30 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 28 of 69 Lorcher: Okay. Oliver: It can just go up on the screen. Oh. For that -- oh, for the border. Sorry. My name is Brick Oliver. I live at 3879 West Silver River Lane. Lorcher: And you represent? Oliver: Cadence at Bainbridge HOA. Lorcher: And that's the 55 community? Oliver: Yes, it is. Lorcher: Okay. Oliver: Tonight I'm here to represent the 165 homes and their owner occupants that live in our community. Cadence at Bainbridge is a 55 and up gated community. There must be at least 155 and up homeowner -- homeowners and other household members must be over 18. Our neighborhood is located west of Costco in the Olivia apartments across Lost Rapids from Bainbridge and the Keith Bird Legacy Park and along the south side of Chinden Boulevard. The association understands that drive-throughs require a conditional use permit and, in fact, this location is no stranger to drive-throughs. As you have heard already tonight there are about to be eight drive-throughs on that location near Costco. The In-N-Out proposal had come up with some of our HOA meetings and eventually it became a pretty hot topic. Many of us participated in the phone meeting with the representative from In-N-Out last fall. It was obvious, then, that this was a very bad and unpopular proposal. I felt that before I could properly represent the Cadence residents I needed to know how they felt about the proposal to build an In-N-Out restaurant that will essentially come into a part of our largely residential neighborhood. So, a survey was sent to every household and in discussing survey results it's important to note that many of our residents reside elsewhere for parts of the year. Also some responses represented individuals and some represented the household. There were three questions. One, do you support the proposal to allow In-N-Out to build a drive- through restaurant on the corner of Ten Mile and Lost Rapids? Two. Would you be attending the P&Z meeting currently scheduled for April 3rd. Obviously, it's been rescheduled. At 6:00 p.m. Three. Will you be speaking at the Planning and Zoning meeting on April 3rd? I also ask for comments. I received 51 responses. Again, responses could have represented more than one person. Ninety-eight percent of the responses were opposed to the In-N-Out proposal. The comments were unanimously negative and often with repeated themes. Ridiculous. Too congested. Traffic nightmare. Horrific backup of traffic. Can't believe it's even a consideration. Light pollution. Safety issues. Accidents with cars exiting. Kids on the sidewalk have almost been hit. Costco is enough of a burden to local traffic. Will another traffic study be done or will the city rely on the study paid for by In-N-Out? Although the site is zoned as commercial, In-N-Out traffic and hours are not a good fit. I could go on. However, I will let the Cadence residents who are signed up to speak here tonight do so for 31 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 29 of 69 themselves. Many of us moved to Cadence because we have children and grandchildren living in the area. This proposal gives us concerns for their safety while playing and driving in the area. There is a church directly across the street from the proposed site. I don't know how to get the arrow working. Lorcher: Try up and down. Oliver: Okay. Yeah. So, here is the proposed site and here is the church. Lorcher: Okay. Oliver: I wanted to use this graphic because I feel like it more represents our neighborhood than the fuzzy gray ones that In-N-Out provided. I find it stunning -- oh, I'm sorry. There is a very actively used park a couple of blocks away that Wade talked about. Kids playing soccer and basketball. Walkers and dog groups. There are school bus stops on Lost Rapids near the park. There are bike lanes on both sides of Lost Rapids. I find it stunning that In-N-Out dismisses these concerns by stating that as they build more locations, the traffic at each one will eventually settle down. I would encourage them to be more responsible to the communities they want as customers. Next my presentation turns to the findings that the plan -- the Planning and Zoning Commission is required for each conditional use permit. Specifically Meridian City Code 11-513-6.E. It states that the Commission shall -- shall base its determination and find, first of all, that the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use. In-N-Out is not a typical drive-through. We have seen the popularity of its In-N-Out with its opening at The Village and that opening raises significant concerns for the neighborhood because of the noise and congestion In-N-Out will bring. The site is too small. I heard that it's very very large, but if you just kind of-- I don't -- if it's large enough, I will accept that, but it's going to be a mess for the traffic on Ten Mile and West Lost Rapids. The proposed site -- number two. The proposed site use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and I cannot speak to that. Number three. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood. The In-N-Out is not compatible with other uses in the neighborhood and will adversely change our neighborhood. Number four. That the proposed site will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Parking anywhere near this site will be impacted. Also there will be fast food trash left behind everywhere. Number five. That the proposed site use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services. We believe that the In-N-Out traffic will spill over into already busy public streets. The existing configuration of turn lanes on Chinden Boulevard and West Lost Rapids should be deemed inadequate. Number six. That the proposed site will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services. We feel In-N- Out's hours of operation will be detrimental to the community. Number seven. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, et cetera. Our response is that In-N-Out will bring excessive traffic noise, fumes and odors to the neighborhood. While we have been accepting of the commercial uses adjacent to our neighborhood, In-N-Out's popularity and excessive draw will be detrimental to the residents that use F32 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 30 of 69 Lost Rapids and Ten Mile Road. We ask that the Planning and Zoning Committee deny the application, because the conditional use cannot comply with the required findings number one, three, four, five, six and seven. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak tonight. And in closing, please, don't let this be the entrance to our neighborhood. Lorcher: Commissioners, do you have any questions for Ms. Olivia -- Oliver? Perreault: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Yeah. Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. I don't have any questions. I just have a -- a statement if that's okay. Lorcher: Uh-huh. Perreault: I just want to clarify when we talk about traffic studies, the city does not determine that a study is required. That is the Ada County Highway District. The city has no ability to set conditions with regard to traffic, turn lanes, anything along those lines. The city can -- can share with the commissioners what the -- the highway district is requiring, they can help answer questions for us, but ultimately this city has -- has no decision making ability in that regard. So, I have seen that come across a lot of the statements and even the -- even the applicant had said something to that -- you know, that the city didn't require a traffic study. The city is not the one that makes that decision. The second thing I want to say is we realize this is a highly emotional decision and that this really affects your daily lives, but the high emotion can sometimes be a bit challenging as we are making this decision, because our goal is to be as objective as possible as -- as we have to -- to take into consideration what city code is and we take into consideration a variety of other factors. So, we understand that. But if we could keep some -- some of the clapping and whatnot to a minimum it would be really actually helpful for us. Thank you. Lorcher: Thank you. Madam Clerk, are there any other HOA representatives? Lomeli: Madam Chair, I have a William -- forgive me for pronouncing this incorrectly -- Riley for Irvine Meadows. If you would like to represent -- Lorcher: Is there anybody here? Okay. Lomeli: Madam Chair, we also have a Bri Jones with property management Aurora Living -- Aura Living. Lorcher: Are you here to represent your group or yourself? Okay. And they have given you permission to do so? All right. And, I'm sorry, I didn't catch your name again. 33 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 31 of 69 Jones: It's Bri Jones. Lorcher: Can you talk into the microphone just -- Jones: It's Bri Jones. Lorcher: And your address? Jones: 3400 West Lost Rapids Drive. Lorcher: And what group are you representing? Jones: Aura Living with Olivia Apartments and Townhomes. Lorcher: Okay. Jones: I'm the property manager for the company. Lorcher: Okay. Go ahead. Jones: Okay. Just to -- obviously you have heard quite a bit about the traffic. I would like to speak specifically about our property in our community. One thing that I have not heard come up is the construction during this time. I personally was in a construction trailer on that lot in May of 2022 to October of 2022 while we were building Olivia Apartments. We did have two entrances, one for us to use for our prospects coming into that lot so that they could come into the -- the trailer with us and, then, the second was for the construction crews coming in and out with their trucks. That did cause quite a lot of congestion on that road and, I apologize, there doesn't seem to be a name for that road. I'm not speaking on Lost Rapids, I'm speaking on the road connected to Costco. So, coming in and out of that lot -- and, mind you, there wasn't, you know, a -- a main infrastructure for that, it was just some metal ramps, but it did cause quite a bit of construction issues getting in and out of there, having to cause traffic to get those semis through that area and so, personally, I have seen what that construction looks like. Once we open and we have been open since August of '22 is when we opened our first building and have been occupied since. That road does still get congestion every once in a while. We also do see semis that like to park on that road and we are unsure where they are coming from, so already that brings it down to one lane and that's not speaking on the -- the construction that may come with that and we are aware that, obviously, at some point they are going to put something there, so no matter what that will be an issue for later dates as well. But to speak on that traffic, that is our main concern is there is a secondary entrance on that side and so for our residents being able to come in and out of that side entrance is going to be more difficult. The other part of that that I would like to speak on for our community is we have got at least 21 units that will be facing directly into that -- that lot there and so for us being open at 1:30 to 2:00 in the morning is going to cause a lot of light pollution and noise pollution into those homes and some of those apartments are directly facing it, meaning that their F34] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 32 of 69 bedrooms, their living rooms, their kitchens are directly facing that lot and, again, not to say that there isn't going to be something there, it's more so the hours of operation being open as late as they will be that is a concern for us. We also were opposed when Costco came up and tried to open their hours of delivery. So, we were part of that communication and making sure that that didn't go through, because of having residents right there and so for us if In-N-Out is to open those hours of operation and their delivery's up, it would be -- it would make sense for Costco to, then, you know, reapproach that subject of trying to open those hours up again as well and so for us in our community that would mean we have potentially two businesses directly next to us trying to open hours of delivery at 2:00 to 5:0 o'clock in the morning, which can be a huge disruption to all of those residents that live in those homes. We have 102 apartments total. Over 200 residents. Over 80 animals. And so for us the just day-to- day traffic is a concern, even just walking around with their animals and with their children of what that traffic may look like and part of that is on Lost Rapids right at the main entrance of Olivia Apartments there is a bus stop that comes twice a day and so for us it would just be a concern as well that that traffic is going to get more intense with those bus pickups, as well as making sure the safety of those kiddos trying to get out of the bus and so for us, again, just to recap, it's going to be the light and sound issues coming from In-N-Out at those later hours in the day. It sounds like they are parking, which was one of our concerns, does seem to be pretty appropriate for that size. So, really, it's just going to be the congestion on that road and the sound and light and in those longer hours for all of our residents in that home and that's all I have. Lorcher: Okay. Commissioners, any questions for Bri? Thank you very much. Jones: Thank you. Lomeli: Madam Chair, no one else has indicated they are representing an HOA. Would you like me to start with Dianne? Lorcher: Go ahead and start at the top of the list. Lomeli: Okay. We have Dianne Hough that has a handout and a presentation. Hough: I was just going to stick to my presentation and I can't, because I have to refute Todd Smith's representation about a few things. Lorcher: If you can give your name and address for the record. Hough: I apologize. I'm just nervous. I'll get out. I don't run an HOA. I just have a home. Lorcher: You're okay. Hough: Okay. My name is Dianne Hough and I live 5876 North Vicenza Avenue in Bainbridge. F35] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 33 of 69 Lorcher: Okay. Hough: Is it inappropriate to refute some of the things that were said earlier at this -- Lorcher: You may say whatever you would like to. Hough: Okay. I will talk fast I know. Lorcher: You have three minutes. Okay. Okay. It is -- in my opinion when they say parking is there and they did so much with their parking on their lot, that doesn't address traffic and traffic is what we are opposed to. Okay? Forty-six cars driving through the drive-through and all of that, it creates a lot of pollution. Somebody should be addressing that issue in of itself, because our neighborhoods are right there. I'm thrilled that Olivia is here, because, guess what, that little tiny road, it's just a two lane that pulls into to -- to Costco, there are within -- the -- the -- the -- on either side there are apartments that look right down on the In-N-Out. That was not really presented well. But that's the truth. And so, anyway, the fact that Highway 16 will relieve all this congestion that we are experiencing, I call bullshit on that one. I don't know if that's fair. But it won't. It won't. We live there. We know what's happening and Highway 16 is a different animal and it takes people out further into the valley out to Emmett and all of that. So -- so that's our main thing. But let me just hit had a few high points if you have my presentation up. Lorcher: Yes. We have it in our hands. Hough: Okay. Lorcher: And I think she also has it on the screen. So, if you wanted to -- Hough: Okay. Let me just see if I can get this up and down things to work now. I'm kind of settling down. So, up and down. Down. Down. Down. Up. Up. Okay. Here we go. So, I -- I just had a cover letter that I put in with my presentation, primarily for your consideration. Oh. Go back. I'm sorry. But the one -- the areas I wanted to highlight -- is it still jumping around? Lorcher: You can go ahead and speak with it. We have it in our hands here. Hough: Okay. But the area that is highlighted, the thing that I want to actually -- let's see if this is the area where -- oh. Let's go on up. Oh, I'm using the screen. Lorcher: We are little old school here. Hough: I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Go -- go the other way. I guess the up arrow is really moving downward. Okay. Okay. We will slow down here. Okay. Oh. Well, you can tell I'm not a pro with this. Okay. Ten Mile and Lost Rapids. That was -- was what was considered in the traffic thing. But that was from an evaluation that was done for this 36 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 34 of 69 project in 2017. Do you know what's happened in that area since 2017? That's the one they used and it's in their document. So, let's see if I go -- okay. Will go on down. So, to me that is a real red flag of a little bit of deception truthfully and -- but that's my opinion. Lorcher: If you could just wrap up that would be great. Hough: Oh, gosh. Well, then, let's get down to the pictures of our beautiful community. We will do it really fast. This -- well, they are not coming out very -- are they coming out better to the audience? Because I -- they are pretty blacked here, but it was a rainy day, but this is our activity in our interior part in Bainbridge and -- and I go on to tell you that the day that these were taken we had three flag football teams practicing. We had -- and all the parking lots were full that are provided by us. We have 24 parking slots, plus two handicapped and they were full. So, it falls out into the neighborhood and up -- please go up. I would just as soon talk to this thing see if it works. Lorcher: Right. I need you to finish up. There is a lot of people that -- Hough: Okay. Okay. So -- so, my -- the reason for me really needing to speak, although I'm not a great speaker, is that we have -- the park is the heart of our neighborhood and we have lots and lots of activities going on, including dog training lessons twice a week and these kids practicing their sports in our neighborhood twice a week and all of that and so I feel this has been ignored somewhat -- not by you, but understanding that all of those houses have been built in this neighborhood. Bainbridge was -- the sign of Bainbridge came up first, so we all jumped in to that and bought homes there, as many as -- you know. And, then, it grew up to a huge number. Lorcher: I do need you to finish. Hough: Okay. So, I guess all I want to say is please don't let them ruin our neighborhood. Please. Lorcher: All right. Thank you. Madam Clerk? Lomeli: Madam Clerk, we have John Wheeler. He had a presentation as well. Wheeler: I'm John Wheeler, 6175 North Vicenza Lane, Meridian. I'm one of those folks in that cluster of houses that you saw when the Brick was up talking about the Bainbridge community. We live right next door to Costco and so forth. So, I'm a regular user of these roads. I would ask you to put up figure -- figure two. It seems to me that the -- and you have my -- I'm not going to read my comments. You have those. I have concluded that this study had a fatal flaw and that is it totally failed to consider -- and now I can't find it. Totally -- there we go. Totally failed to consider this intersection on the road -- there is a road that comes up on the -- between the apartments and this this lot -- 37 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 35 of 69 Lorcher: Right. Wheeler: -- up from Lost Rapids, goes up -- on up into Costco. It also services a number of businesses that are alongside on the -- on the east side and, then, gets up to the elephant in the room, which is Costco. It -- that -- that's the whole -- that's the south entrance into the -- into Costco and so it's a major major access road and there -- there is nothing in the study about that at all. The existing traffic is such that all of that traffic going to Costco, to the businesses to -- that are on the pad to the east, going up to the gas station and so forth, all come up that road. Now, that -- that would be just fine by itself. The problem is that -- and I have got this circled at the top of the exhibit -- or the figure two. I have got a circle of an intersection that -- that is an access road coming in from Ten Mile and it intersects with this north-south access road. At that intersection you have got a stop sign that stops the north -- north going traffic and, then, on the other side of the south traffic. There is no sign for the traffic coming in off of Ten Mile. So, what happens is -- and this -- this is current. This is without -- that's my -- my audience. So, there is a -- there is -- there no stop sign there and I suspect the reason is because it's only about 200 feet from north -- from the Ten Mile to this intersection. So, if you had a stop sign you -- you would have backup onto Ten Mile. So, that traffic comes in. At the current time that -- most of that all turns right and goes up to Costco. Okay? What -- that's the current context. And then -- and this -- a number of people have alluded to -- and your staff did -- but, incidentally, ditto all your remarks. I -- I really appreciate those. That traffic going up turning to the right means that you can get -- you can -- with -- the traffic coming south is able to come around and make a -- make their left turn going out to Ten Mile or they can go straight. The people going north sitting at that stop sign, when that stuffs coming in off of Ten Mile -- when that's coming in off Ten Mile you have no time to get out there. If you eventually just hold your breath and, then, take off and try to work yourself into a gap someplace in the traffic. Now, that's the existing -- that's the existing traffic. Lorcher: I need you to finish up, please. Wheeler: Now -- yeah. I will. Go to -- go to number six. The -- the study says that 26 percent of the traffic for that -- for In-N-Out is going to come through that intersection going in and out. Now, I submit to you that what will happen is -- because that traffic now has to go to the left. That means the people coming north on that road are completely blocked and the people trying to turn to the -- out to -- that go the other direction are also completely blocked. You will have absolute gridlock. So, enough said on that. I strongly urge that you deny this. We agree with the staff. Lorcher: Thank you very much. Madam Clerk? Lomeli: Thank you, Madam Chair. The next person up we have is Bob Hough. Lorcher: We are not going to do this in the public meeting, please. Go ahead. Lomeli: Bob has a presentation as well. F38] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 36 of 69 B.Hough: My name is Bob Hough. I live at 5876 North Vicenza, just down the street from this gentleman, and I hate to say that he stole all my go-to points. So, I -- I won't take up anymore time. I had a better picture, but -- Lorcher: Okay. Hough: But the -- the study did the -- the north -- the Ten Mile and the intersection it ignored the access roads as he pointed out and with the addition of two new driveways and clamping down on -- in the Cafe Rio, those businesses only have one exit and one entry point that's right next to In-N-Out. Anyway, there can be a lot of congestion. The left turn at the intersection of the access road for east-west and Ten Mile is a dangerous one. Who hasn't had a truck pull up next to them and block -- block your vision to the right, now I don't know whether I'm making a safe left turn or not. The congestion at that in -- inside intersection is exactly as he -- as he said and there is a lot of people that come down Lost Rapids and they have flunked turn signal school, so you never know whether they are going to go straight or come in and that's a congestion point, too. So, the study ignored all those things saying there is not going to be impact on the surrounding areas is a much of -- or as my wife says, BS, and I thank you very much for your consideration. Lorcher: Thank you. For this evening we have heard quite a bit on the access roads and traffic and I -- I think we understand that. We will continue to go through the names. So, if there is something more to -- to respect your time this evening, if we have got something different to add to that, I don't think we need to belittle the point of traffic unless you really wouldn't like to have your say. So, with that, Madam Clerk, who is next to speak? Lomeli: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have Val Daigle and he has a handout. Lorcher: Okay. If you can state your name and address for the record that would be great. Daigle: My name is -- my name is Val Daigle. I live at 4134 West Lost Rapids Drive and what you were passed out is -- my nine year old granddaughter's computer was down, so she had to resort to hand drawn issues. Lorcher: Well, she did a great job. Daigle: In essence it was just all covered about the access road going north and south and you will see those are indicated with red arrows. Lorcher: Uh-huh. Daigle: And the second page is just kind of a zoom on that. Well, what I would really like to speak to is my first-hand knowledge and experience 30 years ago with In-N-Out going in in San Diego and I watched it, it went in in an identical location. A corner lot 39 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 37 of 69 with a strip center shopping area that had restaurants, had a VA building, a dog grooming, everything. The -- when they -- when they built it -- if you can picture Lost Rapids on the south and Ten Mile on the east, that's the same layout -- pardon me. Lorcher: We will get that later. Daigle: Same layout of -- of what we have here and what happens is -- what has happened -- when they constructed it the traffic backed up coming out of In-N-Out. All of the people trying to get -- they had an ingress and an egress, just like we do here, and the traffic came out, it backed up the ingress, so that you were down to one lane and all cars trying to ingress and egress were using that single lane and it backed up out onto the public road, i.e., Lost Rapids and back out and that's what we are going to see here. Thank you. Lorcher: Thank you. Daigle: Do I have any time left? Lorcher: She already reset the clock. Madam Clerk. Lomeli: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have Donald Dalton and he has a handout. Dalton: Don Dalton. I live at 4057 Lost Rapids Drive. I wasn't intending to speak tonight, but my wife put this together and ran it over and I think it addresses all the same issues that everybody's talked about tonight. Traffic concerns. Traffic study. I don't think is really going to prepare us for what's going to happen with In-N-Out here and a concern I have is it's going to devalue house properties around here. It's got to affect property values because of all the traffic and noise and I wonder what these guys driving these trucks delivering to In-N-Out -- I mean to Costco are going to stop and get their hamburger, so where are they going to park those trucks? They are going to be doing that. You know that. So, that's about all I have to say. That's my concern. So, traffic and property values and the kids at the park -- in the park across the streets there are going to be kids wanting to come and get those burgers after those games as well, too, so it's a problem, so -- thank you. Lorcher: Thank you very much. Madam Clerk? Lomeli: Madam Chair, we have Richard Arani. Lorcher: Richard, are you good? Okay. Thank you for being here. Lomeli: Next is Bill Beye, I believe. B-e-y-e. Beye: Good evening. Lorcher: Have to get very close to the microphone and if you can state your name and F40] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 38 of 69 address for the record. Beye: I shall. My name is Bill Beye. Lorcher: Thank you. Beye: I reside at 6264 North Bolsena Road, Meridian. Running the realm of redundancy, but I will tell you for 46 years I was a 12 unit Arby's franchisee, 270 employees. I was in the industry. I am not an antagonist. In-N-Out Burger is a fantastic concept. I'm one of their primary customers. However, having been said, this -- this site is not advisable for their location. I will simplify it. The surrounding arterials are not capable of handling the car load for the drive-through and the walk-in that they will generate. I would love to see In-N-Out Burger in Meridian, but not at that location. The first presentation was full of positive research and knowledge, but as we go down the road, we are getting into redundancy. Arterials cannot handle the load period. Thank you for your attention. Lorcher: Thank you. Madam Clerk. Lomeli: Madam Chair, I have Sean Sherman. Sherman: Yeah. Sean Sherman. 3400 West Lost Rapids Drive. So, I just want to start by saying thank you, Commissioners, for letting us speak today at this public hearing. It definitely helps out, just hearing the public speak like this on this issue. But just like you Commissioner Smith, I grew up in southern California as well. In-N-Out was the -- the definitely go to spot for me -- for me and my friends are growing up. Love going there all the time. And I, actually, grew up less than an hour away from Baldwin Park and, then, the Air Force decided to move me here to Boise area not so long ago and was through the roof excited to hear about an In-N-Out in the area. Unfortunately, this proposed site is a no go. This -- this is not where we should be building In-N-Out, mainly because, like I said, going into the redundancy of the traffic, the traffic zone -- excuse me. The traffic zone, especially with Costco being right there and the amount of traffic that I see, I am actually one of the 20 units that Bri brought up earlier that faces that proposed site and I see traffic all the time coming in through In-N-Out and that road right there in between the proposed site and if this goes through it's -- simply put it's going to be a ridiculous mess. Again, not going to go into the whole -- whole lot of that. And, then, also going into the -- the hours. Them being open to 1:00 a.m. -- 1:30 a.m., it's just not feasible for the people that live in those units, because people are shift workers, people need their sleep to carry out essential jobs, and, of course, myself being Air Force, my fiancee is an essential -- essential healthcare worker. So, she -- she needs her sleep. I need my sleep. We -- we can't be getting that done by simply having someplace -- someplace open that's going to be open until 1:30 in the morning. Pretty much it. Thank you for your time. Lorcher: Thank you very much. Madam Clerk? F41 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 39 of 69 Lomeli: Madam Chair, I have Clayton McCormick. McCormick: So, it's Clayton McCormick. I live on 6014 North Ten Mile. Lorcher: Uh-huh. McCormick: So, it -- traffic has been talked about, but for me it's really the noise. So, I live like directly east of the proposed site. I don't know if there is a map up there, but like 200 feet of our property line is 40 yards away. Lorcher: Okay. McCormick: His bedrooms, 54 yards away, as best as I can tell, and I think while I understand the zoning idea, it is -- it's actually very quiet by 11:00 p.m. and so it -- you wouldn't think that based on the area, but completely quiets down. Every night at 11:15 we hear Cafe Rio empty their -- they drag a big cart across the parking lot and it's loud. Wakes us up almost every night. And so it's -- I think it's just a different perspective to say in this conditional use permit, you know, the -- it's -- what's the intent of that and in this particular case Costco, what's the first thing they did when they asked for reduced hours, is they said, well, we want to go outside that. So, in -- in -- in terms of In-N-Out, I fully expect a restaurant, other commercial place to be across the road. We love the Chocolate Factory. It's right across the road, too. But just something that's more reasonable. So, I think it's just really the noise -- the noise aspect of it for us. I just speak for -- just for us, but it's definitely -- it's -- it's actually a quiet area, quieter than you would think, especially with the hours of Costco. So, yeah, that's it. Lorcher: Thank you very much. Lomeli: Madam Chair, we have Pat Catanzaro. I apologize if I'm pronouncing that incorrectly. Catanzaro: My name is Pat Catanzaro and I live in 5884 North Carlese Avenue in Bainbridge. I'm not going to give my original presentation, because a lot of it would be repeat. But -- and I -- and I also don't speak extemporaneously and I'm very nervous right now, so excuse me. I would have to ask the question -- you said City of Meridian doesn't do the traffic study, Ada County does. Why isn't Ada county doing one? We are all saying the same thing. It's going to be horrendous traffic. So, how do we get Ada county to do one? No thoughts on that? Lorcher: Well, we are -- this is kind of a one way. So, you give us your -- Catanzaro: Okay. Lorcher: -- public testimony and -- and we listen -- we listen and during our comments we will address the Ada county. F42] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 40 of 69 Catanzaro: Okay. Lorcher: So, this is your time to speak. Catanzaro: Okay. Lorcher: And, then, when we have our discussion we will address that. But go -- go ahead. Catanzaro: Okay. So, I will go a little bit further than other people have as far as the -- where Lost Rapids has an ingress and egress to the Costco -- Lorcher: Uh-huh. Catanzaro: -- is where the In-N-Out is going to be. If they -- please don't do that. But if they do I have to say at this point right now, when I drive that street several times a day, I can already see there is going to need to be a light there. There is another light, what, a hundred yards away. Is that even allowed? Like -- need to think about that. I don't -- somebody needs to understand that already it kind of needs one, because that guy that said you just close your eyes and, you know, fly out and hope you make it, it's already like that. And as much -- let me see. Okay. As much as the -- the In-N-Out fellow said that we don't abut a neighborhood -- is that what he said? We are a neighborhood and there is several neighborhoods and just for a minute I would like for all of you to join me and imagining an In-N-Out at the -- at the entrance to your subdivision or on your street operating until late at night and clogging up the road you and your neighbors use to enter and exit the subdivision. Or even worse some of the In-N-Out customers might figure out that there is a shortcut through your neighborhood to where they need to go, causing increased traffic through your neighborhood and since they don't really care about your houses and your kids, they are probably sailing by your house ten to 15 miles above the speed limit. If this is a scenario that would make you uncomfortable if it happened in your neighborhood, then, please, don't make it happen in mine. Lorcher: Thank you. Lomeli: Madam Chair, the next person is Dianne West. West: Dianne West. 5986 North Exeter Avenue in Bainbridge. The file that I have given you is -- that I took from the Idaho Department of Transportation highway safety dashboard database and just to be quick in my three minutes, you can see in 2020 there were no serious injury or fatalities at the intersection of Chinden and Ten Mile, Chinden and Tree Farm, Chinden and the little business entrance by Costco and the other drive-throughs, the Ten Mile little business entrance that people talked about earlier that has the stop signs and the Ten Mile Lost Rapids, 2020 no serious and no fatalities. 2021 five serious. 2022 one fatality. So, these numbers, even though it says five, they weren't all five serious. There was at least one serious in there. One fatality. You get the idea on how much the traffic flow of people trying to get in and out of that F43] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 41 of 69 corner has just exploded and these are just the reported. It's not all the fender benders and everything else. These are the ones they got reported. So, there is that information and those are the maps that I got that data from for that table. So, just to reiterate some of the other points that we have two high schools within two miles with new drivers that are getting their learners permits and coming here at lunch and we know how many accidents have happened along McMillan since Owyhee opened. They talked about normalizing the traffic flow that In-N-Out knows what they are doing, their people know how to do it and, Commissioner Smith, I also moved here in 1998 from California and I go to California often enough to know that I still go there and the traffic is out on the streets and those guys are out there like it a Dutch Brothers taking your orders and whatever and you are still sitting 45 minutes in line and the traffic is all the way out to the street. So, I'm not sure everybody knows how to normalize an In-N- Out and whether or not that's really true or not. You talked about distribution center hours and a lot of times the distribution centers -- I was in the food industry -- the distribution center hours vary on how many stops they have to make. So, there is no way to say, depending on how many restaurants are in the area and how they expand, how those hours of distribution are going to fluctuate. Sure, they are 4:00 a.m., but is that 4:00 a.m. for Meridian? Is that 4:00 a.m. for Boise? Is that for 4:00 for Nampa? And where do the other restaurants fit in in that timeline? I was confused about something that the In-N-Out representative said with -- that -- that only Costco abuts their business and that the code doesn't apply because there is no residences and, I don't know, maybe he hasn't been out there -- and, then, he also probably hasn't been to Meridian, because he said you can always choose another In-N-Out five minutes away and that's not how traffic works in Meridian. If you are going to go to The Village from that location, it's going to be 30 minutes away. Nampa is 30 minutes away. Going to the mall is 30, 45 minutes away and also in support of our neighbors that are there, slamming doors, loud music, loitering, everything else that goes on at 1:00 a.m. Lorcher: Thank you. West: Thank you. Lorcher: Madam Clerk. Lomeli: Madam Chair, I have Mike Gallenstein. Gallenstein: Hello. My name is Mike Gallenstein. I live at 6784 Topaz Jewel Place in Meridian. I'm actually in the development of Spurwing Greens Masters Association. We had a recent annual meeting at the end of March. I was a former officer of the HOA. The discussion of In-N-Out came up during that meeting and there was quite a bit of dissent among the attendees relative to the In-N-Out proposal and I just want to convey that I believe, although I cannot represent the HOA officially, I can indicate that I think that mobilization from -- to Spurwing Greens would be mobilized to -- in opposition of this proposal. As many -- many people have said, In-N-Out Burger makes a great product, but they have a traffic problem. Like the commissioner -- and probably a few people here -- I also was from California and to cut it short, they have a poor track F44] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 42 of 69 record. I can list off six to half a dozen places right now and I have been to the Baldwin Park location. It has a traffic problem. It overflows into the main street that goes by there and the third point I would like to make is one thing that really has been brought up, particularly for locations like this that have after hours, it does require additional police patrols. You draw traffic from -- particularly with your open be more extended hours. It does draw traffic from outside the area, because that's a known place after hours to go eat and so from my experience in California with In-N-Out it did require additional police patrols and other -- not only to manage some of the traffic accidents that arise, but also just the -- the general traffic. Plus I think the police like to eat there. But, anyway, those are three things for consideration. Thank you very much for your time allowing everybody adequate time to present their views. We really appreciate that. Lorcher: Thank you. Lomeli: Madam Chair, we have Steve Lozano. Lozano: Steve Lozano. 2727 West Lost Rapids. So, a lot of the points were driven by -- it looks like a Bainbridge president. Really good points. I actually live on the east side of Ten Mile and even though I'm not, you know, right next to it, we right now have traffic problems. It -- it's crazy. The -- I live right off -- right where -- right here in this area right -- vicinity right here. So, you have the high school students that live -- or -- there are -- on the east side, right, of this subdivision. They use this street as a corridor. I mean during lunch In-N-Out, In-N-Out and like it was the point that was driven, they are not considering -- I mean they speed right through it and this has been an issue since we have lived there that my wife and -- and, then, including soccer folks coming -- speeding through there and running the -- the stop sign in the corner, because it's only a two -- a one-way stop. So, my wife has gone out there to, you know, record this, to bring it to the city, like we have to try to do something. So, I was on there -- our Lochsa Falls HOA before and I did have studies done on Lost Rapids, Long Lake and Caves Creek and Caves Creek -- I mean they were going like almost 40 and it -- it met all the criteria to put speed bumps and they were going to send out the survey for -- to have the neighborhoods around that area -- or the homeowners sign to put the speed bumps. Well, because they -- Ada County Highway District couldn't figure out the new taxing system, they never sent it out and we have to start over. So, that was -- that was like three years ago. Lost Rapids -- we were like four cars -- by four cars they wouldn't put a speed bump in there and, then, Long Lake -- there is an elementary school there and you have got people going 40 through there. Even during school hours people have almost run over kids when the buses have their stop signs and not to mention on Lost Rapids and Wolf Rapids where -- I kind of live by Heroes Park -- that area as well there is a bus stop right there as well. So, all that -- it -- it gets busy, you know, with -- especially during the soccer season -- really busy and it's just been a pain since we have lived there. And, then, recently like my wife where she was recording some of the kids, you have some of these high school students come back and curse at her. Why are you recording me? I mean it was pretty bad this type of stuff going on. We have called PD a couple times, but -- I mean there is -- the resources are not there. So, are F45] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 43 of 69 they going to be here if In-N-Out goes there? There -- there is simply the -- the City of Meridian does not have the resources. They don't have it in Ada County Highway District and they don't have it in -- in the city. A couple more points. The gentleman brought up a couple points about data analysis that they did in modeling. He kind of reminded me-- I don't know if anyone watched it -- Sully in the movie. Tom Hanks. They said we had all these models and, you know, you didn't follow a procedure. They didn't account for human factor and that's exactly what they are doing. They got all this data modeling and they are not accounting for any of this human factor here, traffic or anything. Thank you. Lorcher: Thank you. Lomeli: Madam Chair, I have Jeff Wertz. Wertz: Madam Commissioner, Members of the Commission, my name is Jeff Wertz. I live at 5780 North Bolsena and I would urge that you deny the petitioner's application in its entirety for the following reasons -- not to mention what's been said before, but if you should approve the change in hours, then, what is to stop all the other -- as -- as the businesses from changing their hours and so you just -- you just unleash something. My wife and I spent considerable amount of time visiting all the In-N-Outs. Not eating. We would just take our dog for a ride at night or during the day and we watched the traffic. We went to the one at the mall and watched that. We went to the one over in Nampa and that was a zoo getting in and out of there. And, then, of course, the one we drive by all the time at the -- downtown there. But this is what we noticed. It's not residential. It's all business around there. There is plenty of room to expand. The cars can go -- they never get backed up, because there is always some place for them to go. This location has nowhere for them to go. You have one access in and out and that's all you have. So, when it backs up and it will back up. My question to you, if you approve this, is what is the solution to the problem? How are you going to fix it? There is no fix for it. The only fix is to deny it in its entirety and never let it get started. That would be my suggestion and I hope that you agree with it, because if you don't and you allow In- N-Out to create that drive-through and change those hours -- I don't live next door to it, so I can't say, but I -- I wouldn't like it if I did. But if you allow them to do that, you can't turn back time, you cannot deny, cannot change it, it's done and it's over. It will be a problem. That's -- that's guaranteed. Anyway, I thank you very much for your time. Lorcher: Thank you. Wertz: Thank you. Lorcher: It is almost 8:30. We have been doing this for over an hour. We are going to take a five minute break to kind of regroup, restroom break, whatever you might need. So, let's regroup again at 8:35, Madam Clerk. Thanks. (Recess: 8:28 p.m. to 8:36 p.m.) F46] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 44 of 69 Lorcher: Okay. We still have some more public testimony. We would like everybody to be able to have their say if they choose to. Thank you for allowing us to have a break. The clerk will call names. All right. Madam Clerk, we finished up with Jeff and who was next? Lomeli: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have Becca Gulden. Lorcher: I'm sorry, what was the name? Lomeli: Becca Gulden. Gulden: Thank you. I'm Becca Gulden. 5772 North Calcutta Avenue. As you can see I have three children and I will try to keep this brief. Honestly, I don't feel that this particular restaurant is congruent for the community. There is a true risk and safety factor and, yes, you know, they just displayed high quality service, high quality food. That's not the problem. We appreciate the restaurant in the state. It's wonderful. However, I do not believe that it makes sense in this current location that they have spotted out and I believe it belongs somewhere else that will not impact the community in such a negative way. I do want to point out, without being contentious, but, honestly, the -- the facts that were presented, there were some gray areas and there were some honest factors of wiggle room for operating hours and that is a true concern of mine and so I just wanted to point that out, that there isn't just a straight yes or no or this is what will be done. So, I just wanted to let that be known. And thank you. Lorcher: Thank you very much. Lomeli: Madam Chair, I have Robyn Sellers. Robyn Sellers. Sellers: Good evening. Robyn Sellers. I live at 2355 West Grassybranch in Meridian. I am the economic development director for the city of Nampa and here to talk on behalf of our experience in the city of Nampa with In-N-Out in that location. This was the third location that In-N-Out put in in the Treasure Valley and we had many neighbors and citizens at that location and also city employees who did not like the location that it went into, but our experience with working with In-N-Out with our planning and zoning and, then, all of our city staff to be able to make that site work with In-N-Out was incredible to work with. The site there is 1.4 acres and so much smaller than what you have there. On our opening week our highest queue was 60 cars in the drive-through. And, then, there is much -- much less parking at the site number in Nampa. We do not have residential that abuts that, but we have many many businesses that are in that area working with those neighbors to make a traffic plan. I -- one of the things at our city level is we have really worked with them on -- and they worked so well to create a traffic plan for those opening weeks and on the following weeks, making sure that if the queuing got off they responded very very quickly and -- and they have an opening team that that's what they do. So, our experience is you guys have a Village, our experience on a much smaller site closer to what this site is. It worked really well. We also had worked with our police department to be able to make sure that that worked and just F47 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 45 of 69 wanted to say that that experience with In-N-Out at the Nampa site at a third location, the opening week and a half, two weeks was quite busy and, then, it did level out. We do have peak times where we do have more people there, like a Friday -- Friday night and a Saturday out by that Costco that's in Nampa. So, I do live really close to this In- N-Out, too. This does affect me. I live in Bridgetower. It's not right in my neighborhood, but we are -- we are excited for another opportunity to have an In-N-Out here. So, thank you. Lorcher: Thank you very much. Lomeli: Madam Chair, the next person is Jonathan Walker. Walker: Good evening. Jonathan Walker. 4102 West Silver River Street. I have some -- please pull up the traffic study for me. This isn't going to specifically about traffic, it's going to be about queueing lengths and how they are measured. While he is pulling that up, I will go ahead and read -- a quote on page 22 of the study. It states that the 85th percentile is the design standard typically used in the traffic engineering profession for evaluation of on-site development operations, such as parking and drive-through queuing and that's from the applicant's material. Lorcher: And where is this traffic study from? Walker: This is the -- the traffic study provided by the applicant. Lorcher: Okay. Walker: It's -- it's not this one. It's going to be -- I think that's page 20 -- like page 25. Right there. Okay. Right up there. Okay. So, this is the -- from what I understand this is -- this is the study that was conducted for the queue length, the robust study that was done was talked about by the applicant about the traffic during the busy holiday season. First thing I want you to notice is if you actually look at the details -- and I think you got to look at it further on down the page, the study actually only consisted of two days, one week day and one weekend day and that's where all of this data comes from that they are using on the lines. Second of all if you go ahead and you look at the -- the -- oh, if you just go over there. Okay. So, you have the observed queue length vehicles, you have the average, the 85th percentile and the 95th percentile. We heard the applicant talk about the 95th percentile and he said so, you know, the -- the 95th percentile on a weekend was 46 cars. That's the max. That's what's it going to be. But if you look at the 85th percentile we see it's 44 cars and from the applicant's own material on page 22 it states that the 85th percentile is what is generally used to create the queue length and judging by -- and this is not even on like a Memorial Day weekend or a busy holiday season, this was December 5th and December 7th respectively that these numbers were there. So, judging by what I read on page 22 and what I see here, the basic queue length should be 44 vehicles and it's not that. It's 29. Could we go to the one with the overflow and the fire lane now -- or the escape lane? This is what it would look like with that full amount of cars. You see up there on the left side on the west side of F48] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 46 of 69 the driveway right there. That is what it would be with 50 vehicles and that's just on an average Saturday in December, not a Memorial Day weekend, not a very busy day, not a holiday weekend and where are those cars going to go? We talked about an escape lane for someone that forgot their wallet, something like that, but it's also for safety reasons in case of an emergency. The escape lane that I see on here -- and maybe I'm wrong -- but it goes up the right side, nothing on the south, nothing on the west and the reason this speaks specifically to the heart of the issue here tonight is if you scroll this up a little bit, if I can see the top of the page -- could I just finish this point -- is this goes right to the heart of the issue is this is not only less than 300 feet away from the next drive-through, it's almost touching it. You don't have a reasonable escape lane that covers the whole property and by giving them the CUP is going to create a safety issue and that is directly to the issue of why those municipal codes exist and they will be touching, there is no reasonable escape lane for all these vehicles that by their own study or what should be used. Thank you. Lorcher: Thank you. Lomeli: Madam Chair, I have a Kim Smith or a Kerry Smith possibly. Okay. Next we have signed up as Robin Friehling -- thank you. Friehling: Hi. My name is Robin Friehling and I live at 5698 North Calcutta in Bainbridge. I want to make a point about safety that will build on what Ms. Catanzaro said and also what Mrs. Gulden with the three kids. Said she lives three houses down form this. So, coming before this planning board in the near future is the Adjaro Subdivision project. Okay? If you look on the map and you see North Fairborn, the North Fairborn ends one the south side. There is currently a fence. If the Adjaro Subdivision is approved that fence will be removed. If you go up north they are one. When you go around the curve at the top you end up on West Wolf Rapids. You can't see it, it's not marked, but there is a space going out to Lost Rapids that's the continuation of North Calcutta. As was discussed, if the traffic backs up on North Ten Mile and the idea that you can fit ten cars in that turn lane, I come home from Boise every day from work up North Ten Mile, make that left, I would have to stop in the left- hand lane to inch up to get in there to fit ten cars. So, what will happen if it is approved is that people will start making the left turn into Adjaro, figure out that Fairborn opens up, go up Fairborn, come around the curve, which we already have a problem where people come around it too quickly and the people coming in from North Calcutta making the left on Wolf Rapids have to be very careful not to have the head on and so we would have people who aren't familiar with the community coming up that road. They are exiting out that little extension of North Calcutta, to the right, to get to Costco, In-N-Out, et cetera. The other thing to note is between Vanderbilt, which isn't marked, it's on the opposite side of where you see West Wolf Rapids, that's Vanderbilt, is where our community pool is, as well as a small playground. There are a number of young children on my street North Calcutta, the Golden kids being among them and on North Fairborn. There is a tremendous amount of traffic of kids coming across to go to the park, to go to the pool. People are not familiar with that. They cut through that development, there are kids all over the place. When I come home I come around that F49 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 47 of 69 corner without my foot on the gas, because I know there are so many kids running across the street. The last place is -- excuse me -- where West Vanderbilt comes into North Fairborn, Vanderbilt being the unmarked street, our mailbox bank is right there on the left-hand side, so most times during -- coming from work, going to work, people are pulled over to get their mail out of the community mailbox. So, now you have a space that's not really sufficient for two way traffic. So, it's a problem the way we have been looking at the traffic, but there is an extended view of a problem likely to occur. Thank you. Lorcher: Thank you. Lomeli: Madam Chair, we have a Marcello White, I believe. Lorcher: Okay. Lomeli: Sean Sundwall. Sundwall: I'm a little nervous to give my address out, because I'm actually for this project. Sean Sundwall. 5462 North Assisi. I'm in the Bridgetower West community, which abuts Bainbridge. I served on city council in a small town in western Washington for four years. I -- I -- the -- the thing is is people who are for stuff don't come. They just don't come and when I hear 80 percent of 40 percent of an HOA, that's not -- that's not a good sample. You guys can't base a decision on 40 percent of respondents in a -- in a community, the same community where three people filed a lawsuit after you guys approved Costco. So, there is a serious case of NIMBY here and it's concerning. So, I have three -- I have three teenage boys at home. In-N-Out -- they happen to be from southern California. In-N-Out is a great employer for youth. We have talked about all the high school traffic. Yes, the high school drivers are sucky -- I'm an insurance agent. They are sucky. Okay? It doesn't mean we don't build stuff because they suck. So, Thad, who might be watching, wants to work there. Okay. He will probably ride his bike to go work there. They give a good wage. They hire -- they hire people at 15 and a half, I believe. So, I think it's great for our youth. It was also mentioned earlier it's a great place to hang out for youth. How many of those places do we have? The three banks that are on that block? The 73 chicken restaurants that are there? So, I would also say that the best thing that this city can do for safety on Lost Rapids is take it -- the three dozen cars that are parked twice a week on both sides where it says no parking, it is very difficult to get through there. You can't ride your bike. You have to be on the sidewalk. That's what I would like to see. What else? And having been on -- on -- on a city council before and I don't know, you know, the chief -- the city attorney, I would be concerned -- it feels like In-N-Out has met all the legal requirements for this. I don't know if the word is entitlement, but I feel like they have done that and I would be concerned if I was a city about being sued by In-N-Out and I wish they would, because I'm a huge -- I'm a huge proponent of this project. Do I wish that -- what I will call Costco Boulevard was wider? Of course I do. We go to Costco four times a week. Yeah, I wish that was wider. Maybe that could be incorporated in their plan to cut out a little of the 2.2 acres and widen that a little bit. That might be an option. But I am a F50] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 48 of 69 supporter and when I go best sit -- sit back down I will be a very lone man. Thank you. Lorcher: Thank you. Lomeli: Madam Chair, if I'm reading this correctly, I believe it's Maritza Gardner. Gardner: Good evening. My name is Maritza Gardner. I reside at 6590 North Spindrift Way out of Spurwing, out of Chinden and Ten Mile. I'm not going to go over what I prepared here, because it will be redundant. Everybody has covered most of the points. I do have a side note and is the fact that since we moved here three years ago from south Florida and we came here to retire to have an area that could be quieter, safer, less traffic with better quality of life and that's the reason why you moved to Meridian. Another thing that I wanted -- and it looks like is not happening that way, it's growing way too much for us, but on a side note, I feel that Meridian has too many fast food restaurants. We call it, between me and my husband and our friends, the fast food capital of Idaho. From Cloverdale to Ten Mile, all of them are fast food places. There is no quality of restaurants. There is no quality of food. I would not call In-N-Out a restaurant, I would call it a fast food establishment. I don't consider -- I don't consider a burger and French fries as a high quality meal. I have never been to In-N-Out and I want to keep it that way, but I would like for you -- and I plead to you as the zoning and planning committee to not only consider the fact that perhaps this establishment and this proposal meets all the zoning requirements, we need to look at the impact of this in the community. All the other In-N-Outs that I have seen are in mainly business areas. This is the one that has mainly neighborhoods and we are in -- right in the middle of this and perhaps it may not affect any of you, because you don't live near the area. So, approving or disapproving may not affect you, but it will affect the quality of life and the safety of the residents and I will plead to you please to consider the sentiment, the opposition that has been expressed by most of the people here, which are the residents here in Meridian. Perhaps there is another area that In-N-Out can consider that may not have this negative impact on the neighborhood and I -- please please please -- I think it's also part of your responsibility to consider the negative impact of construction and the growth, especially this type of establishments in the neighborhood and I think this is going to be negative to the quality and -- quality of life and the safety of the residents. Thank you for your time. Lorcher: Thank you. Lomeli: Madam Chair, I have Jason and/or Lindsay Poyser. I don't know if they both would like to come up. There are on the same line or -- she can speak to that. Poyser: Hello. My name is Lindsay Poyser. I live at 3805 West Renhold Drive in Meridian. I'm part of Bainbridge as well. I am one of those southern California transplants from three years ago. We moved with our twin daughters up here, two and a half -- three years ago because we -- our house in California backed up to a -- a shopping center and in that shopping center was homeless people. There were gunshot incidences. We lived next door to a registered sex offender that was released F51 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 49 of 69 on early release, so we did not bring our politics with us, but that being said with the growth and income of people to that area, the park is of Keith Bird is my main concern, because my kids go there on a daily basis to play and we moved up here for the safety, so that we can raise our girls and give them the best chance possible and having -- having an In-N-Out, while it would be great to be able to walk there, because we do go there. In fact, my mom went to high school with the original founding fathers of In-N-Out in California. So, that being said, though, is the location of this project. It's so -- and the kind of people that it would draw not only to the traffic, but to the park. People like to go and eat and sit in their cars and kind of tailgate and that would be an issue for the safety. Lorcher: Thank you. Lomeli: Madam Chair, did Jason want to speak? Thank you. Lorcher: Okay. Lomeli: The next person is Todd Nunn. Lorcher: Okay. Lomeli: I have next, Dwight and Kathy Comstock. I don't know if they would both like to come up. Lorcher: Okay. Lomeli: Michael McAllister. McAllister: Good evening. Thank you. Michael McAllister at 5733 North Levenham Avenue in Bainbridge. We moved here almost five years ago. We love the area. I understand there is growth. It's going to happen. It's coming. But I think what we need to look at in this area is smart growth. Just because some place is zoned for a specific type of business doesn't necessarily mean that that's the best fit for the neighborhood. The 2.2 acres in there I'm sure we could find other uses, such maybe as like a UPS type store, a hair or nail place, a small breakfast location, a health food store. It seems like Meridian is becoming nothing but fast food and I think we need to really look at that type of stuff of how we are going to take care of things in the future. Obviously, the traffic is a big issue and I don't want to get into that, because that's been beat up all night long on that. But I really would think that In-N-Out would be much better off like in WinCo, by Linder Avenue where that's set up for that, maybe out on Ten Mile by 84, somewhere in those locations that are big, there is no houses nearby, and they are set up for that type of operation. That's all I had to say. Thanks. Lorcher: Thank you. Lomeli: Madam Chair, I have Dale Draney. F52 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 50 of 69 Draney: Thank you. I would like to speak to the business and -- Lorcher: If you could just say your address also and your full name for the record. Draney: Dale Draney. A live at 3447 West Wolf Rapids Drive. Lorcher: Thank you. Draney: And that's right at the end of Calcutta, right adjacent to Lost Rapids. I'm about a hundred yards or less from this site you're talking to -- talking about. I got a couple issues about the traffic that I think has been overlooked. One -- may not be a big major one, but if you look at this -- the apartment on R-40. Lorcher: Uh-huh. Draney: Okay? I walk all the time right through the middle of those apartments. They have a walkway, so you can go right into Costco. Three hundred steps and I'm in their front door. Anyway, if you're coming down that access road down towards the church from Costco -- Lorcher: Uh-huh. Draney: -- and if you block that access road this lot for this restaurant will force traffic in the emergency road that goes right into those apartments. I have driven through it in the last week, because the traffic builds up here at a stop sign and you can't get out. So, you have a tendency to just turn there and drive through the apartments and come right out their entrance. What's going to stop that? You're going to have a problem there. And the other thing that I think about is if you're out RV'ing with a 30 foot trailer in the mountains or whatever and -- or a camp trailer, motorcycle trailer, and you come in here and you want to go to the In-N-Out Burger, you're going to look at that church parking lot right across the street and that's where you are going to park. You are going to pull in there. I see big trucks pull in there all the time to unload their equipment to go do projects in around our community. People are going to stop there and, then, you are going to have people crossing that road and there is people making the left-hand turns there and going like crazy down Lost Rapids. So, I'm a little concerned about use of that property for a lot of people that can't get in and maneuver their RVs. Now, I have an RV and I -- I do not take it into the Costco parking lot, because it's jammed full. So, my point here would be that you got two businesses here that want to occupy this corner that are pretty much massive. You got Costco that's a -- a -- a shopper's magnet, Costco is the number one retailer in the world today. Every retailer -- every new retailer wants to be beside Costco. It is the volume that it creates. I'm an investor in Costco and they are so sure that their growth is happening so rapidly that they announce their volume monthly. They don't wait for the quarter. Okay? So, here is one point about this. The gentleman that come up here and talked about this earlier said that, well, we will open this In-N-Out Burger and, then, as the months go by volume will 53 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 51 of 69 slow down, it will, you know, get normal. Well, I came from the retail industry. I have worked for thousand store chains, managed many stores, worked in the corporate offices. I have never been in an executive meeting where anybody stood up and said, well, we are going to open this brand new store. Say the store manager was talking and says -- and I will make sure that in two or three months it doesn't do that much volume anymore. That guy would lose his job. He would -- that just doesn't happen in retail. We are talking about a 1.8 billion dollar privately owned company out of California. Costco has the desire for that -- that major growth. I would predict that in -- in five years I think they will outgrow this site. I have watched Costco before and they did this in Clackamas, Oregon. They had to move. The site wasn't big enough anymore. I go over -- I walk over there all the time. I don't drive my car, because it's so congested and anyway -- Lorcher: Okay. I will have you wrap up. Thank you. Draney: Okay. Well, anyway, that's pretty much my point that both of these chains are having major growth, tremendous growth, customer magnet and Costco and a car magnet In-N-Out Burger, I ate at it one day at The Village, there weren't more than ten people inside the restaurant, but the cars were lined up around the parking lot. Okay? So -- Lorcher: Thank you. Draney: -- don't tell me the growth is going to go down. Lorcher: Thanks. Lomeli: Madam Chair, I have Sue Olwick. Lorcher: Okay. Lomeli: Carsten White. Lorcher: Okay. Lomeli: I have Barry Steets. Mike A. Madam Chair, that's all that I have for sign -- signing up. Those last names that I listed were online sign-ins and nobody on Zoom is raising their hand. Lorcher: Okay. Is there anybody in Chambers that would like to speak? This gentleman here. Haenszel: My name is Brian Haenszel. 4192 West Sunny Cove in Bainbridge. Anyway, In-N-Out mentioned that Highway 16 would probably -- when it opens that it would probably reduce traffic by a certain percentage. I don't know what it was. Twenty percent or whatever. If Highway 16 is going to suck 20 percent of the traffic away from 54 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 52 of 69 this area, why don't they go ahead and build it over by Highway 16 and take care of business and maybe, you know, they could probably get an extra five acres over there. Also, you know, it was also mentioned Orchard Park, 84 and Ten Mile, or that corner at the -- at the corner of -- southwest corner of McMillan and Ten Mile. That place has been vacant for quite a while and I'm not sure how many acres is there, but, you know, they got signals there, too. So, I noticed on the zoning area there that In-N-Out did not show a sidewalk on that side of that unnamed street that goes into Costco and so there is no sidewalk over on that side of the road either for pedestrian and is there a cycling lane for people on bikes? The lighting issue, staying open until 1:00 in the morning with their amazing sign all night lit up and I think the last time during conversation with In-N- Out they were planning on having that lit 24 hours and, then, can you imagine being a resident in the area and all night that invention of the two way speaker. Welcome to In- N-Out Burger. Can I take your order? I urge the city to deny this and have them open it in a different location. That would be fabulous. The residents who live in that area do not need the dumpsters at all hours of the night or the deliveries that are supposedly operated by In-N-Out, why can't they tell their delivery people to show up at 10:00 o'clock in the morning instead of at 4:00 o'clock in the morning. If it's -- if there -- if it's their employees and their delivery people they should have the power. Anyway, I urge you guys to deny this. Thank you. Lorcher: Thank you. Anybody else in Chambers? Sir. Minor: My name is Joseph Minor. I live at 3939 West Sunny Cove and one thing that hasn't been addressed and I'm curious about is the number of employees that are on site at any given time and where will those employees park? Will they occupy some of the 52 parking places in the parking lot or will they park at Costco or at the church or will they take the bus, you know? Just curious. Lorcher: Okay. Well, we will address that with the applicant. Thank you. Anybody else in Chambers? Sir? Ferguson: Hello. Yes. I'm James Ferguson, part of Bainbridge. 3629 West Renhold Drive. So, yeah, a lot of these things have -- a lot has been talked about. I strongly urge you to oppose this situation. Mainly off of safety. Not safety necessarily for just adults, but for the children. If you look at the -- there was a -- a diagram up there earlier. If you look at the top right corner of that diagram you see a green -- big green spot. That's Willow Brook Elementary School. It's about 2,000 feet from the proposed site. Just southwest of that, about 2,000 feet of that proposed site, is Pleasant View Elementary School. A lot of kids there as well. Obviously just to the south -- southeast there is Heroes Park. People have talked about Heroes Park quite a bit. So, you have got three high density children-filled areas and I think that's what makes us so unique, Mr. In-N-Out guy, is that all your other places there that are here in the valley, they don't -- they don't have this criteria. It's different; right? Village. The lady that was here from Nampa talking how great it is. She -- she failed to mention that. There is not two elementary schools and a very popular park where there is thousands of these kids playing every month, they -- they -- they don't have that. So, like -- like the gentleman 55 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 53 of 69 that -- he has left now, but the -- the -- the council member -- ex-council member guy from Washington, it's funny that he used to live in Washington, but now he is here. Why is he here? Because Meridian is a great place to be, because we care about our people, we care about our kids, we care about our safety. So -- so, why potentially diminish that; right? Everybody's come here tonight and talked about the safety concerns and we have tried to provide you guys with the insight we see every day. Every day. You guys need to see it. That's our job is to help you understand it; right? Because all you have seen from the other side of the party is -- is just some stuff on some paper. I don't think that guy spent any time from In-N-Out, you know, on a weekend or weekday -- I would be surprised. I would like to know an answer to that, actually, if he comes back up here when he is given the opportunity, I would like to know if he has spent time over there and -- and if so when and how much time, because we spend our lives there and we get to see this day in and day out. So, they are -- they are trying to pitch a potential, you know, this is great, you know, let's do it, but they don't -- they don't have the insight, the day to day information. So, for me I think that's important that you guys are aware of that. Maybe you need to look further into it, because, you know, a lot of us -- what is giving our -- you know, let's say opinions. We don't have a lot of facts, although some of the people brought forth some -- I think Dianne -- Dianne brought some really good information about the traffic accidents in that intersection and it's -- it's -- they are -- they are very very consistent. I mean if you look into that I would -- I would heavily consider looking into that before you make a decision, because I got a feeling if you do look into that, you know, you will see that -- that it's already a mess and I -- as a parent I couldn't possibly let my kid ride his bike or skateboard past that intersection and feel comfortable about it. You know, we got 23 kids in our street within about a thousand feet of that proposed site, all under 11 years old. The bikes and the skateboards -- I think they need to be provided that -- that safe place to where they can, you know, grow and -- and be successful. So, thank you very much. Lorcher: Thank you. Anyone else in Chambers that would like to speak? Madam Clerk, do we have anybody online? Lomeli: Thank you, Madam Chair. No. Lorcher: Okay. Would the applicant like to come back and address some of the concerns? T.Smith: A couple of quick points. Our sign is never on 24 hours. We turn them off. Number two, employees, typically 12 to 15 employees work a shift and -- and, again, this location with 73 parking spaces has more than ample parking for employees, customers, and even overstack when necessary. There was a -- there was a lot of discussion about traffic and the traffic studies and so forth. I am going to -- going to invite Giancarlo Ganddini, the author of the study, to come up. Lorcher: Hi. If you can just state your name and address for the record, please. F56] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 54 of 69 Ganddini: Giancarlo Ganddini. 555 Parkcenter Drive, Santa Ana, California. Good evening, Chair, Members of the Planning Commission. Thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening. I do you want to put on the record that I am offering my testimony tonight as a transportation professional and technical consulting on behalf of the applicant. I hold a traffic engineering license in the state of California as part of my qualifications to do this type of study. However, I'm not a registered professional engineer in the state of Idaho and my designation should not be taken as such. With that I would like to offer some -- you know, some clarification regarding the traffic study that was prepared, as I know that was a big part of the comments that we kept hearing tonight. I think as staff indicated earlier -- or it might have been one of the Commissioners, it's not necessarily the city that requires the study, that that would have been part of the Ada County Highway District. The official traffic study for the overall development, that's the 2017 study that was referenced throughout the evening, that's the official document that more or less looked at the traffic impacts more comprehensively of a whole bunch of other intersections for the full build out of the shopping center and that's the official document. Our understanding as it was related to us for the reason that an updated study was not required was that document stands. The In-N-Out, then, at staff's suggestion, out of their own volition, went ahead and prepared a -- kind of a focused and updated version of that that was focused on the immediately adjacent intersection. Again, I believe with some feedback from city staff that was the main concern was the -- the intersection of Ten Mile and Lost Rapids and each of the -- the roadway segments that connect to that intersection, just kind of get some background as to how we arrived at that study area. The focused traffic analysis that we prepared essentially followed the same methodologies that the original study did for the overall shopping center. It was just updated traffic counts. We used trip generation data that's specific to In-N-Out, as opposed to typically would be done for trip generation rate for an average fast food restaurant, acknowledging that In-N-Out is a busy restaurant. It does have that data specific to In-N-Out based on what we have seen in another -- In-N-Out locations. That was added to the updated traffic counts that were collected in December 2024. With respect to the -- the CUP for the drive-through use, I did want to hopefully help clarify that. In terms of traffic generation, the ITE trip generation manual, which is kind of a standard document references to the volume of traffic that will be generated by different types of uses, doesn't really show a significant difference between with the drive-through or without a drive-through. The direct use is a little bit higher, about 3.7 percent for the daily period, but it's not a substantial number. Another point to may be help clarify kind of the scale of the traffic and what will be generated, some of the nuances, I guess, with trip generation and traffic, It's important to note that a lot of the -- when we look at the -- the evaluation of the trip forecasts that were made for In-N-Out that was added on top of the existing traffic counts, we were looking at just not one intersection and we added the full load of that. There is no credits there that are taken into account for the fact that some -- a good percentage of those vehicles are what we refer to as pass-by trips and those would be cars that are already traveling on the roadway system. So, when you look at the report and you see, you know, whatever the number is for daily for generation, approximately half of those, about 50 percent, is usually comes from passed-by traffic, which are vehicles already on the streets today. So, just to kind of help put that into perspective in terms of the scale 57 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 55 of 69 of the impact. So, with all that said, the -- the focused traffic analysis basically concludes that using updated traffic counts from 2024, plus the trips forecasted to be generated by In-N-Out specifically added on top of that, the intersection of Ten Mile and Lost Rapids, as well as those roadway segments connecting to it have sufficient capacity based on the ACHD standards and, then, the peak queuing can be accommodated on site and not just for kind of like an average In-N-Out restaurant, but specifically we did look at what was happening at the existing Meridian restaurant and are able to -- to conclude that the peak used observed there can be accommodated with the overflow plan on the site without impacting on site circulation or the off-site access point. So, with that I would be happy to answer any other specific questions you may have. Lorcher: Commissioners, do we have any questions for our traffic study? Commissioner Rust. Rust: Thank you, Madam Commissioner. One question. You mentioned that there is going to be some natural traffic that just turns into -- In-N-Out as a result of being in the area. Do you have a rough approximation of the percentage -- the overall percentage of vehicles that would participate there that would turn into an In-N-Out? By my calculations there are around 650 cars per day. Just taking back -- back of napkin math. What percentage of those are already going to be in the area according to your calculations? Ganddini: Like I said, the -- in order to provide kind of a focus on just that immediately adjacent intersection, those pass-by trips may reroute a little bit instead of -- for example, instead of continuing southbound on Ten Mile through the intersection, they are now going to turn right. So, the analysis just looked at the full impact. I don't have -- the report itself doesn't have the site a percentage. The ITE trip generation manual, though, does have a handbook for fast food restaurants. On average, it's about 50 percent that would be pass-by trips during the peak hours. Rust: In your expert opinion is that 50 percent figure generally accurate? I assume you do a fair amount of work with In-N-Out. Ganddini: I don't have pass-by data specific to In-N-Out. When we go out and we do the surveys for trip generation we are just counting how many cars enter and exit the driveways. It's a fairly complicated process that and we have approach In-N-Out with. Effectively we have to contact -- make personal contact with every customer and ask them, you know, where were you going, were you already driving past the road? So, that level of analysis has not -- has not been completed. Rust: Thank you. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you very much. Ganddini: Thank you. F58] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 56 of 69 Lorcher: I think you answered the employees -- where they are going to park question. I think there was also a question about sidewalk on that access road to Costco. Was that addressed at all for your landscaping and queue lanes? Is the -- is the design plan to include any additional sidewalks around the property? T.Smith: We are definitely open to it. It's something that can work in -- in kind of a strange turn of events. Typically when we submit applications for use permits and so forth there is a review conducted and planning staff will have that interaction and start to discuss some of the design parameters and provide feedback or concerns and we will work through those concerns. That didn't happen at all -- Lorcher: Okay. T.Smith: -- in this process. Very minimal comments came from the water department and we just resubmitted -- there were zero comments from planning staff and so forth. It showed up in the staff report. It's a large site. I do believe that's something that we could accommodate potentially. We could look at the design and do that. Definitely open to -- to those recommendations. What were there other questions? Lorcher: Yeah. There was also a few comments about that access road that Costco owns that goes from Lost Rapids to Costco; right? And that's the one that's on the site for Olivia. One gentleman made a comment would you consider making that road wider so that there is an additional turn lane in there. T.Smith: Again, we are open to design discussions and conditions. If staff had wanted to engage with that we would listen and see what we can do. I don't know in terms of ownership and how that would work and so forth. There is impacts and restrictions there. To what we have the authority and ability to do definitely open and consider those options in design. Definitely. We want to improve the site and make it work for sure. Lorcher: And the final one, the woman left who had asked about the Ada county traffic study, but you invited your traffic -- so I think that question had been answering and she left. So, if she's listening online or she can get some more information on that. T.Smith: So, in speaking of ACHD and ITD, again, I would reiterate this -- this circulated to them. It's their highways, their roadways, and believe me we do it with every project. If they have concerns and issues they would comment. They did not comment on this when it circulated. Also just wanted to reiterate that we meet all the requirements. This is a C-G zone. It's a commercially zoned property. It's a -- it is -- that zoning is designed for drive-through uses. The original approval there contemplated drive-through uses and -- and it was approved with that in mind and drive- through uses are there now under the same conditions that we are applying for now. We are consistent with the zoning, the city code, the city requirements and In-N-Out, I have never seen a better company that goes to more lengths with more resources to ensure traffic management, on-site management, circulation, safety, and all of those F59] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 57 of 69 things. We share those concerns. We definitely want to make sure it's -- it's a safe environment for everybody and, again, I would just invite you to consider known facts and evidence; right? Speculation and conjecture is hard for decision making. We have -- we -- we heard similar concerns about traffic at Nampa and -- and all the other sites and now what has transpired provides information and data for us and what we see is that the traffic problems that everyone was concerned about did not materialize and are not happening now. We have had people from Nampa and the Nampa police chief attest to that is as well. I would also reiterate our other sites -- Nampa as 1.4 acres. Boise is a 0.85 acres site. Meridian store is -- currently operating at the Village is 1.2 acres. This is 2.2 acres. This has parking surplus and space surplus for us to manage those things and I just want to say, I really -- I -- you guys are dedicated to a long night and I really do appreciate your time and attention to the project and it is appreciated. Thank you very much. Lorcher: Commissioners, any questions further for the applicant before we close the public hearing? Smith: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Smith. Smith: Yeah. One thing that I think is -- has been maybe a little under discussed, I know it came up as concerns was -- was hours; right? Hours of deliveries. Operating hours. I'm just curious -- and I'm going to put you on the spot, you know, not that this is a quiz or anything, but are you aware regarding limitations of hours of -- of other, you know, locations that operate perhaps with shorter hours, may be closer to 10:00 or 11:00, midnight, rather than going into 1:00 p.m. And also -- or -- and/or other locations that operate with smaller windows for deliveries and do you know if that's feasible? R.Smith: As far as hours of operation for the stores, I don't -- there is no store that I know of at 10:00 or 11:00 and -- and I have heard there may be a midnight store close here or there. I can't attest to it for sure, but it -- it may have happened and it may have been agreed to at some point in time. The deliveries -- I -- again, I -- I will try to get that information. I -- but we are open to -- to delivery timelines as well that are -- like I said, I -- I just don't see 2:00 or 3:00 in the morning happening. I -- I will check with our other stores and just see how those logistics work out and I think that is something we could discuss. Lorcher: All right. Thank you very much. Perreault: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. If my fellow Commissioners will bear with me, I -- I have some comments that I would like to share and -- if the applicant would like to respond to them, 60 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 58 of 69 that -- I would appreciate that. So, I have been serving the city in a decision-making capacity for eight years and in all the applications that I have heard, which have been in the hundreds, I have never seen an applicant provide a statement that so strongly criticizes our staff and I don't know if this -- I didn't see his. If this just came today I did not see this in the packet. I don't understand why we are just receiving this this evening when the applicant's had plenty of time to review the staff report and make these comments. If-- if it was in there and I didn't see it I apologize in advance. So, I want to go through each one of these very briefly and make some comments in regard to the statements that were made regarding how the city has handled, the assessment of this and how the staff have handled it. First of all, when we mentioned the hours -- one more thing before I get into the specifics of this document. I want to say that, obviously, the purpose of the conditional use permit -- as you know, In-N--Out does this -- you -- you guys do this all the time -- is to give latitude to the decision makers that is outside of the specifics of the code and also the purpose of the comprehensive plan is to have some subjectivity to the decision in regard to realizing that not all code can -- can accurately address every single application and so our purpose here this evening is to do exactly that, is to -- to look at the conditional use and decide whether that fix -- fits for residents, fits for the city and also fits within the comprehensive plan and the city zoning. So, we have multiple factors as you know. This is what you do. So, I just want to make that aware to the public, because it -- you keep stating, hey, we have met all these conditions and if it is that clean cut that would just be a staff level decision. We wouldn't have a public hearing, but it's just not that clean cut and that's what the purpose of the CUP is for. Okay. So, onto this document that you shared with us this evening. In terms of the hours of operation that zone, as we -- as staff stated, that zone is typically 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. and you had mentioned, well, technically it doesn't abut the property. However, I would argue that the access that goes into Costco is a driveway. It's not road. There is no sidewalks. There is no striping, there is no -- it's -- it's -- it's a driveway and if it's a driveway, then, yeah, it is abutting residential, because it's a driveway and so I disagree with the assessment that it isn't abutting the residential, because that's not a true road. If we said, yeah, there is a road that's -- that's 27 to 30 feet wide and it has bike lanes or -- or it has striping, okay, maybe -- maybe that's a -- you know, an argument that can be made. In this case I feel like that staff assessment appropriately represents the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, which is -- which is the area of our document that -- that oversees this requirement in terms of abutting the -- the neighboring property. The Comprehensive Plan purpose is for the -- the public to share with the city what they believe the city should do and how the city should approach the development of the community and in that regard I have to take into account that the Comprehensive Plan's purpose is to -- is to give us the -- the wishes of the public and if the Comprehensive Plan says we -- in the C-G zone we prefer that it be 6:00 until -- 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., I want to take that into account, because of the purpose of the Comprehensive Plan. The next thing I want to say is that you -- you had mentioned that the staff expressed vague concerns about the ability of the proposed 29 car stacking line to handle -- to handle customer traffic without obstruction of driveways, drive aisles and public right of way. Staff refers to this as a constrained site and, then, you go on to say that -- that staff is not making a correct assessment in regard to the stacking. If -- if this is a driveway, in my opinion it is, then, we are talking about 61 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 59 of 69 obstruction of driveways. We are not just talking about stacking in that lane and so I do think staff appropriately addressed that. Does it mean that the conclusion is agreeable? I will -- I will -- I will finish up and you can -- you can answer. But I do think that they have some legitimacy in how they address that concern. Next I want to say that -- that I already addressed the city's limitations regarding creating conditions on traffic. We already talked about that. This document states that the staff analysis is opinion and conjecture and not supported at all by the facts or real world situations. I would like to say that not only do our planning director and Mr. Parsons live in the City of Meridian, but our planning director has been here for 20 years and he absolutely knows everything about real world -- real world situations in our city and I think it's -- I think it's unfortunate that a -- a company with the -- the culture that In-N-Out has has been so unkind and -- and critical of our staff who not only serve our city, they are very talented professionals and we have done thousands of applications. So, this isn't new to our staff and to say that they are responding to this with opinion and conjecture is -- is, frankly, unprofessional and -- and an undesirable. Just one more -- two more things very quickly. The conditions of approval not being included, personally, as a taxpayer, I would rather the city staff spend their time on -- working efficiently and not on -- not on work that may not even be required. It doesn't say anywhere that conditions won't be created. It -- I understand that you would want to come and you would want to address those conditions. That's understandable. If -- if this Commission decides to approve this you will have that opportunity. Okay? The number of acres. This is my last point. The number of acres -- increasing the number of acreage doesn't necessarily make this a better site. Just because the acreage has been bigger, doesn't mean that this is the best location for it. So, I -- I just have kind of some challenge with the logic of that -- of that argument. Okay? It's not the city's responsibility to disprove -- you had stated why doesn't the city bring in studies, documents, facts to disprove your -- your argument. That -- the city's response -- is not responsible to disprove your argument as the applicant. It's the applicant's responsibility to prove that their project is something that fits our community. So, I wanted -- I wanted -- it was really important to me -- in -- in all the time I have done this I have never stated this to an applicant. I never said I think that your -- your -- that -- that the way that you are approaching our staff is -- is really unprofessional. So, this is a first for me and I have to say do better. T.Smith: Well, a couple of things. I -- and I do appreciate -- and I have nothing but respect for the staff and I have been working with them for a year and one thing that was troubling was I did not get the staff report until two days ago and it's very difficult to come and prepare for a meeting. I have never had that happen in 20 years and I typically get a staff report a week plus in advance and I have worked with Sonya for some time and it didn't get to me. I had requested it numerous times. I had asked for a draft and so forth and that put us in a pinch and with respect to the facts and evidence and so forth, when -- when you make findings you do have to support those findings and that was -- is what is being suggested there and you can't support it with just pure, unsubstantiated thoughts and opinions, which in -- and a lot of it was in that case, which I have tried to point out. When we look at the findings, such as the larger site and so forth, when you talk about having the capacity to have an effective use and -- and serve the -- the stacking and the drive-through lanes and so forth, that will make the site 62 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 60 of 69 functional, we have more space than is required by the city and by -- and by city code. So, usually, in my experience when you're making those findings, the staff will refer to code or other items to support their -- their point to make the finding. There has to be a nexus and that correlation. We didn't see much of that in the staff report. Your question about the stacking on the 29 cars, I think you're saying in the -- in the Costco Lane -- is that what you were suggesting by that? Because our suggestion is purely our on-site drive through queue and the 29 cars to prevent spilling over. That's our whole purpose here is the site's large enough and our queue management is sufficient enough with the space and the overstack that we will prevent any access difficulties in that Costco driveway lane and so our point is all of that 29 cars in the extending queue is on site to prevent off-site problems and difficulties and so I -- I -- I think that -- that's what you were suggesting is more of the off-site complications and problems and our reference there is to the on-site stacking and queueing to prevent the off-site problems and we have sufficient plans and space afforded to do that and accomplish that. The point about the -- the -- the -- the drive lane and the zoning, in the Comprehensive Plan future land use map, that lane which -- is owned by Costco, is zoned commercial and so the abutting parcel to us is a commercial zone and -- and that was the point we were trying to make there. It's not a residential zone or residential district, which is what is required under the code and so I will go back. My -- if -- if there is any offense or inappropriate -- inappropriateness to that document, not intended. We had very little time to try to get points made and get stuff with having a staff report with only two days and so much going on, that we just worked hard to try to respond quickly to get things in front of you and on the record. We appreciate staff's efforts. We -- I am effusive in my praise of you for -- for helping and hearing us tonight and staying through a very long meeting. I totally respect the service and I -- I totally trust in your judgment here and so I please hope you will understand that we were constrained in trying to respond very quickly, getting a staff report on Tuesday morning when I was away in meetings and other things going on and try to have something prepared for you appropriately with a lot of information tonight and, so -- if -- if it came across inappropriately I apologize for that. Not the intention. But we were trying to get a lot of data and a lot of information put forth very quickly and -- and I think most of that is some perhaps misunderstanding and we are just trying to communicate information particularly with respect to the findings. You have to have supporting evidence for findings. You can't just merely pull what you think or what you know, you have to tie it to -- to code, to data and that's what we have tried to do tonight is to present to you the requirements we meet and providing traffic data, which in my experience the cities frequently -- well, if there is concerns of traffic they will request information on traffic or have us do a study. That was not requested. It's very common in -- in -- in use permit applications that they will make those requests for all that data, so that they can better make those findings or better understand them to make those findings and so on our own we provided that reliable, observed data that we have found as evidence to support the findings in favor of us as the traffic study supports and so it's -- I -- I totally understand the process. It wasn't our intent to be offensive or unprofessional in any way. We had to put a lot of information together very quickly. I do appreciate the staff time spent on it, but I also -- it was concerning and difficult for us that we didn't engage with some of this design discussion. We didn't get -- when one of the findings is having conditions, you know, to impose on a project, we F63] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 61 of 69 couldn't even discuss those conditions. They came out of the staff report and we had -- we had to go ahead again on our own. We knew staff had expressed to us that there were -- were sensitivities to traffic and were traffic concerns and so when I submitted the application I fully expected to get some of that feedback. We didn't get it. And so we conducted our own traffic study. But, again, I -- I do appreciate the input and -- and I -- and I hope -- I hope you have some -- some grace and understanding and -- and perhaps the -- the presentation wasn't perfect, but the intent is there, is just to provide information as best we can under the circumstances and I -- I think we did that. And, again, I -- I would fall back to the consistency with code. Those are the -- the data points and the facts that these decisions are based on and the findings are based on and we meet those requirements. Lorcher: Anything else? Can I get a motion to close -- thank you very much. Can I get a motion to close the public hearing, please? Rust: Madam Chair, I move that we close the public hearing. Sandoval: Second. Lorcher: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for In-N-Out. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Rust: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Rust. Rust: I will take the first stab at this. Lorcher: Okay. Rust: Been writing down a lot of things as we have heard from public testimony. I, first of all, just really appreciate all of you coming out here tonight. You all took time out of your evening. There is a lot of research that went into this. I have been a Planning and Zoning commissioner for nine months now. This was the most prepared that the public has been. It shows your involvement in your community. I really value that. I think that's important. That's what makes cities great is when people care about their communities and when they invest and you showed investment by being here tonight. So, I just wanted to note that. I also appreciate that by and large, the tenor of the comments I found respectful and respectable. That's something that -- that I have also seen, unfortunately, go in a bad direction. I think it's really important that we maintain civility as we are debating these issues. These are -- these are thorny, complex issues that we are trying to navigate together to make a strong city and there is a lot of factors that go into this. You guys are representing your community. That's right around this project. That -- that map that had all the red dots on it and the green dots down to the -- F64] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 62 of 69 the south and east, it -- that -- that's reflective of everywhere that In-N-Out or -- or any other development is going to go. None of us would ideally want a fast food restaurant right in our backyard and yet we all enjoy the convenience of nice, clean establishments and In-N-out certainly qualifies as that. So, I do commend you all for that. I wanted to address some of the things that Commissioner Perreault brought up. I was likewise surprised and disappointed about what I -- what I felt was a lack of professionalism in this document. It reads like an internal memo and I think there is some editing, even that was just overlooked and I can tell that it was rushed. I have sympathy for the time constraints, but it -- it does read, frankly, litigious, which is not something that I want to see as a commissioner. I think that there are strong points to be made and -- and you were put in an awkward spot, if the -- if what you are saying is true on the timeline and -- and I have a lot of sympathy for that as somebody who has dealt with other planning and zoning departments and these things -- are rarely as smooth as you want them to be, but there is a way to make points that's straightforward, factual, and respectful and I feel like this document fell short of that. Moving on to some of the -- the concerns that have been raised, I do have a lot of sympathy for the applicant here. They went out and ran a traffic study on The Village. I think we would all agree that The Village site has a lot more traffic. You have got Ten -- or Eagle Road, Highway 55, Fairview, two of the biggest arterials we have got in the entire state. That site, with the amount of surface parking that's around it, is going to draw more traffic than probably any other location possibly in the entire state. I -- I know that in years past that has been the busiest intersection in the state and so I -- I think it's a very fair comparison to run a traffic study during holiday season where The Village is very busy. I went -- did -- did some Christmas shopping for my kids there during that time of year and there is just -- I tried to go to In-N-Out actually on that day, I went looked at my calendar, was December 5th and I couldn't get in, because there was such a long line of cars there. But the data that was shown in the traffic study I think is compelling to say that the -- the 95th percentile is going to 47 cars and that's all able to be contained on the site per the applicant. They could have up to possibly even 72 cars without spilling out into the road, that -- that commercial roadway that leads to Costco. So, I -- I do think that it's really important that as we weigh these applications, particularly as commissioners, that we have some leeway, but we also have to take into account the facts of the matter and -- and I think that that's -- that the facts that were presented are that they do not impede on driveways. They are able to maintain the traffic of the site. The queuing. I'm specifically talking about the queuing and the stacking inside the 2.2 acres. Obviously, this is going to result in more car trips into the area. This is going to result in increased trips into this general vicinity. That's something that was planned and that leads me to another point. I -- I really dislike how fragmented our governmental system here with regard to roadways, cities and the deciding bodies. This happens with schools as well. We get a lot of comments on residential developments about schools and we don't have any authority or purview as the Planning and Zoning Commission to go out and -- and make decisions and try to force school development. That's not in our lane. Likewise, traffic concerns -- that is part of what makes our city, but we also don't have any control as the city over the roadways. That's an Ada County Highway District and -- and I would encourage all of you -- we all deal with the traffic that's happening around here, Get involved. Research the commissioners who are doing a good job and -- and those F65] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 63 of 69 who maybe don't align with -- like take that energy that you have shown here tonight and let's -- let's put some of energy into our roads. I think that that's an area that we can improve on and improve the -- the communication between the various governmental bodies, so as an aside there. Our job as Planning and Zoning Commissioners is to look out for the interests of the city as a whole. We need to weigh the impact on you that live right around this development, but also the greater community at large. A couple of positive comments for In-N-Out. In-N-Out is a very clean restaurant. It's one of the cleanest establishments I have ever been around. Them and Chick-fil-A honestly. There was some comments about noise, odors, fumes, all those things are going to be a reality no matter what goes in here. This is a C-G zoning. It's going to be some sort of a food establishment and so in my mind when I'm -- when I'm narrowing into my decision making process I'm -- I'm discounting anything that is going to be allowed by the current zoning and, really, what we are focused here is the excessive traffic that is driven by In-N-Out's success. They have a fantastic business model. They -- they hire well. They train well. They -- there -- I'm always amazed at the efficiency inside of those restaurants. They serve a tremendous number of people and they -- they make a good product. It might not be high end quality food. I saw some -- some a-mails related to wanting Crave instead of In-N-Out and wouldn't we all, but that's not what the market is demanding and -- and that leads me to another point. I think it's very important that we as commissioners and you as the public understand that it is not our job to dictate what the market will bear and to construct with fine detail what happens inside of our community. We live in the United States of America. We are a capitalistic society. We believe that -- I firmly believe that that's the best way to allocate resources and if Meridian has a lot of fast food restaurants that's what the community is demanding. Now, there is some leeway in there and we need to be wise about how we are steering the resources that we have as a city and as a community, but this idea that -- that we as Planning and Zoning Commissioners can pick and choose based on -- on quality or -- or relative success of business model I think is shortsighted and -- and opens the door to the kinds of questions that you really do not want your city to be answering. You want the market to be answering those. You want the community to be answering those with their dollars and their traffic and -- and be patronizing the types of things that you want to see in your community. So, I wanted to address that. I have a lot of sympathy for the strong feelings that are evoked by this kind of an application, but I -- I -- I also want to point out that -- that we have to ground our decision making in facts. That does take into account the facts of how the community feels, but there was a lot of comments around we know that this will create a problem in the future. We simply can't make decisions on what we know, but can't prove and that -- that's also a slippery slope. That I just -- I wanted to point out and there was also a lot of comments around safety. I -- I think the applicant did make a good point, they -- they submitted traffic studies, they -- they have worked with Ada County Highway District and ITD. They are the ones that are responsible primarily for traffic safety and they provided no comments and said that there was no issues here. I -- I think that we have to be very careful to avoid using safety as a cudgel. We could eliminate all traffic accidents tomorrow, but none of us wants to go without cars and so we have to find that balance and it's up to the governing bodies of those respective jurisdictions to decide what is in the best interest according to code, according to the 66 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 64 of 69 standards that have been set up and a lot of those are outside of the purview of this body. I did a little bit of basic math. Seven hundred thousand visitors a day, which is roughly six times the average if -- if those facts were to be -- are true. I -- I believe they are from the QSR magazine. That breaks down to assuming that the restaurant is open for 360 days about 1,950 visitors per day. You assume about three people per car coming through. It's about 650 cars per day. If we would narrow that down even further and we say, okay, 50 percent of those were already going to be in the area, that's an extra 325 cars. That's not nothing. That's 325 cars over a 15 hour period. It's also not as big a number as I would have frankly expected when I started breaking down those numbers and so I just wanted to provide some context for that. I would like to hear from the other commissioners. But those -- yeah, I -- I really do -- this is a -- a -- a tough one for me personally. I think the last thing that I will say is part of what makes a strong community is an openness to business. In-N-Out is a good business. I really appreciate what the -- the gentleman said. He was a city councilman in Washington. We do want clean places for our youth to work and -- and we want -- we want strong businesses in our community. I would much rather -- this is a point of personal preference. I would much rather have an In-N-Out than a McDonalds, some publicly traded company. I -- I -- I have seen In-N-Out invest into their communities. I lived in Utah when they moved there. I lived in Colorado when they moved in there for the first time. They have always had a really strong reputation. It matters that -- to me that the city of Nampa felt strongly enough that their police chief wrote in a letter of support and that a member of their city staff came here tonight. That doesn't just happen. And -- and they have been, to my knowledge, a really good member of our community since they have opened at The Village. So, those are the comments that I have at this. I'm anxious to hear from the rest of the commission. Lorcher: Thank you. Smith: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Smith. Smith: Excuse me. First off, I want to -- you know, hats off to Commissioner Rust for articulating a lot of things far more eloquently than I could have. I -- I feel like I constantly give that compliment, but it constantly is true. Thank you for -- for doing the hard work for me and saying it better than I could have. I -- I generally -- I -- empathize with a lot of what Commissioner Russ has said about the types of businesses and empathize with the process in the kind of constrained the limitations of the applicant's working with in terms of timeline and things like that. There -- there is just -- there is one area that -- and this is, again, to kind of Commissioner Rust's points. On paper a lot of what the application has I'm really convinced by. Traffic study and things like that. I'm okay with. But one of the things -- and this is why I asked about it -- is -- is the noise level and given the fact that they are so close to residential regarding delivery time windows, regarding, you know, hours of operation late at night. If this were not so close to resident -- residential I would not have many of the problems, even if -- you know, even if on -- you know, I'm not even necessarily very concerned about the residential to 67 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 65 of 69 the east, given that there is a pretty significant roadway between. There is -- there is enough of a -- of a gap there I think, but it's really the south and -- and the west that are just creating some concern for me and I think that's the area where -- like we -- we have to be honest, if you're going to be closer to residential than your other applications that have been so successful, you're going to properly have to do some things a little different than you have other applications, because what worked there isn't going to work here and so that's kind of my -- my sticking point. I -- I -- to be honest with you, I -- I think I -- I don't know that I would feel super stoked about it, you know, given the current state and some of the questions that remain, but if In-N-Out had said, hey, I will limit -- we will limit hours to 11:00 p.m. and no deliveries until after 6:00 a.m., I would probably be okay with -- with signing off on it. But -- but without those I just -- there is -- there is too much heartburn there and -- and -- and there is just, you know, added on to all of the other small concerns I have with -- with -- with the -- the traffic study, with the timing, with the sample size, you know, with some of the -- the accuracy and some of the expectations of -- of the -- the normalization of traffic flows over time. All those kind of are small things that add up to maybe give me some pause, but, really, is those hours of operation that set it over the limit for me and -- and -- and I don't think I can necessarily support it mostly because of that at the moment. I'm curious here what other Commissioners think, but -- but that -- that's really the sticking point to me that -- excuse me -- for me at the moment. Lorcher: Thank you, Commissioner Smith. You want to go or you want me to go? A few notes that I wrote down is I think the community is saying that they support In-N- Out's business for the most part, but not at this location. Fifty-two vehicles on site, but doesn't address the access between Ten Mile and Lost Rapids. So, what happens when those 52 cars are constantly moving through that intersection, you know, for the 15 hours a day or however long it's going to be? Yes, the site can hold all those people, but what happens when they are constantly moving in and out while Burger King and the chocolate shop and the joint -- and the Cafe Rio are all doing the same thing at the same time. So, I do have some challenges with that. I love that they are a strong community partner and I think they are a good business for the City of Meridian, but to -- I can't ignore also the comments from the community saying that the residential in this case is just a little bit too close. Technically, by the code, because of that drive aisle is owned by Costco and it goes past the Olivia, is owned by a commercial business, so technically it is commercial, but there are apartments right there. So, you know, back in the day my husband and I owned a tow truck company we could fit anything we wanted to on that truck, but it doesn't mean we should. You know, if it's hanging out on the side or hanging out on the back, yeah, I can get it on there, but it doesn't mean we should and just because the code says this is a drive -- commercial drive aisle and there is residential right next to it, doesn't mean that that -- that it should be so close, but I will say because it is the commercial zone, there is going to be some kind of drive-through restaurant there. So, as a community should be careful what you wish for, because it might not be In-N-Out today, it could be something a lot worse tomorrow. So, we will see what that ends up being. And, then, finally, Highway 16. 1 am -- I am in the impact area of Highway 16. 1 -- I am under construction for the next four years of my life over there and we don't know exactly what the impact is going to be at Ten Mile or even 68 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 66 of 69 Black Cat when it comes to Highway 16. Will it increase our traffic at Ten Mile and Chinden? Maybe. Will it decrease it? Maybe not. Because between those next three to four years more communities are going to grow in and so, yes, Highway 16 is going to be a great thoroughfare for people who want to go to north-south, which is why it's been intended there, but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to alleviate a lot of the traffic on Ten Mile, which is already struggling and in that case, to Commissioner Rust's point, we need to look at what's in the best interest of the city. So, the best interest for the city also means timing, like is the timing of this location at this spot right now the best interest of our community and based on the fact that Highway 16 is not there to alleviate some of the traffic and I can also agree with Commissioner Smith, the hours of operation, that Costco does not have deliveries between 10:00 and 5:00 and everything is closed down by midnight, In-N-Out doesn't want to deviate from their corporate plan of being open later, that seems to be nonnegotiable. So -- and in that particular case I'm going to have to vote to deny based on the facts that we have here. Perreault: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: I think all of my fellow Commissioners are very well spoken in what they are saying this evening and I'm in agreement and so I -- I'm not in favor of the application. But I wanted to address just a couple of things. The application had mentioned that the findings weren't appropriately supported with code or with the Comprehensive Plan. So, I just want to make a couple of statements. In the staff report the staff does say UDC 1- 1-43-11 address the specific use standards in relationship to the size of the property and whether that property is large enough to accommodate the use. So, they -- they do support that with -- with the UDC. The second one is that the hours of operation question were addressed by Comprehensive Plan No. 5-01-01F and in -- in addition to hours of operation, excessive noise, traffic and congestion were overall addressed in that Comprehensive Plan section and the -- the -- the only other thing I want to say is I -- I still have a lot of concerns about shutting off the south entrance. I think that it would just ultimately not be safe for fire. I understand that -- that technically the applicant may be able to meet the concerns, but experience says that that's -- that's too much of an issue for me. Thank you. Sandoval: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Sandoval. Sandoval: I will keep this short and sweet, since everyone did a better job than I can at this. But I live in Lochsa Falls, which is right to the east. So, I'm very familiar with the area. My daughter's bus stop was off Ten Mile and Heroes Park. So, exactly where this is proposed; right? I don't want to get into the ethics of the engineering firm or how they got their data or the traffic impact study. I was relatively satisfied with their testimony on that. Now, I do think In-N-Out would bring really good job opportunities for kids, especially thinking of mine as they are growing older, getting a good paying job -- 69 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 67 of 69 that could be tough; right? And, Sam, like you have said, it's -- it's -- it's not Crave, but we need more options for people that can necessarily afford that delicious prime rib sandwich. That's not an advertisement. It's just an observation. But, yeah, I would be in support to approve this application, but only on the condition that the -- all operations would be between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and the applicant has made that clear that that's not going to be an option. So, I don't think there is anything else we could or should do but deny. Lorcher: Does anybody want to take a stab at a motion or want me to do it? Rust: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Rust. Rust: Just before we make a motion and I don't even know if doing this -- this is the only way that I know how, but would it be potentially appropriate to ask for a continuance? I know everybody is cringing at this at this moment. But I -- I would like for the applicant to take what we have done -- or what -- the feedback that we have given them and see if they can do better with us. I think it's clear that it's going to fail. I also -- I, frankly, am concerned about some of the ramifications of if it does fail and I would like to see the staff and the applicant work together to see if we can come up with -- a maybe perhaps narrower band of operational hours. I also understand that that means another public hearing and -- and all the attendance. So, I just want to at least ask the question of the Commission before we get to actually making a motion. Sandoval: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Sandoval. Sandoval: Yeah. With respect to a continuance, I don't think that's going to be favorable to anyone here, the Commission or especially the applicant. They have already made it perfectly clear that they are not willing to deviate from their standard business hours; right? So, I don't think a continuance would do anyone hear any justice really, other than delay of the inevitable, because I think they are going to come back with the same thing. That is why I asked the direct question about those operating hours, to see if there was any movement. So, I don't think we should continue, but I'm open to hear what anyone else thinks. Parsons: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Mr. Parsons. Parsons: Yeah. Just want to -- I appreciate Commissioner Rust's approach to this. I -- I like the idea of maybe working it out with the applicant, but I just wanted to remind the Commission that whatever your action is tonight, the applicant or anyone in this room has the ability to appeal your decision to City Council, so it -- I -- I hear what you are F70] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 68 of 69 saying. Yes, I don't want to go -- get into litigate this yet. We are not there yet. There is -- there is a lot more steps in the process here. So, one, the applicant will have to determine whether or not -- determine what they want to do with their -- their application with your decision tonight. So, again, if it's -- if it's for approval, then, staff would say continue it so we can bring back conditions of approval for you. We don't have that. So, automatically, I'm going to be standing up saying, please, continue the project, because we got to bring back the appropriate findings and the conditions of approval for you to take action on. With our denial we have no findings -- or excuse me -- no -- no conditions of approval and that's why we really didn't get into much of the site design this evening because of that, because we were recommending denial. It really came down -- in my rebuttal to you or my presentation to you stayed on the topic of the drive- through and the hours of operation. Those are really the two things -- that -- the owner could come in -- or the applicant could come in tomorrow, remove the drive-through and build a restaurant to UDC design review. It's -- It's permitted. They can do that tomorrow. Just remove the drive-through and operate and you can even probably operate 24 hours a day. It is not abutting a residential district. I mean that's been proven tonight. But this conditional use is what's allowing you to mitigate some of the concerns through restricting the hours. I just want to make that point. So, anyways, Commissioner, don't -- don't feel like you -- you have to continue and try to make sure the findings are in alignment. We want that, too, and we work closely with our legal department to make sure that we are on solid ground as we brought that recommendation to you this evening, but I -- I am sure that this will more likely be heading to City Council. You never know. And they will -- it will reset the hearing -- it's a whole new hearing in front of them if that's what anyone wants to pursue that avenue. But there -- there is some time there. Just wanted to share that information with you. Thank you. Sandoval: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Sandoval. Sandoval: After hearing all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File No. H-2024-0058 as presented during the hearing on April 17th, 2025, for the following reasons: The hours of operation are not consistent with the overall area or the use, as well as substantial traffic concerns. Lorcher: Do I have a second? Smith: I will second that. Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to deny In-N-Out conditional use permit for hours of operation and traffic concerns. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Rust: Nay. Lorcher: Motion carries. 71 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 69 of 69 MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. Lomeli: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Madam Clerk. Lomeli: I just wanted to, before we adjourn, let the crowd know that I do have a phone that was brought up, so if it belongs to anybody here to come grab that. Thank you. Lorcher: Can I get one more motion, please? Rust: Madam Chair, I move that we adjourn. Sandoval: Second. Lorcher: It has been moved and seconded that we adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much for coming tonight. We appreciate your comments. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:11 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. ) APPROVED 5 115 12025 MARIA LORCHER - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK F72 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Approve Minutes of the April 3, 2025, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 3 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 3,2025 Page 22 of 22 Lorcher: Before we have one more motion for the evening, this is Commissioner Grace's last meeting and the Mayor is providing you a certificate of appreciation for your service to Planning and Zoning. Grace: Thank you. Lorcher: And thank you very much. It's been a great pleasure. You started at the same time I did, so I feel like I'm losing a co-worker. Grace: Thank you very much. Lorcher: One more motion, please. Grace: Move to adjourn. Rust: Second. Grace: Second. Lorcher: All right. It's been moved -- Grace: Seconded my own motion. Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:06 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. ) APPROVED MARIA LORCHER - CHAIRMAN 4-17-2025 ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK F25 E K IDIAN:--- iuAn Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline Changes to Agenda: None Item #2: Sadie Creek Drive-Through (TEC-2025-0001) Application(s):  Time Extension Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.16 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at 3030 N. Cajun Lane. History: CUP-2021-0006; Centrepoint Mixed Use MDA, H-2022-0035 DA Inst.# 2022-079000, TED-2023-0002 Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed-Use Regional MU-R Summary of Request: Request for a two (2) year time extension for the previously approved CUP (H-2021-0006) due to delays caused by adverse market conditions, including increased construction costs and limited tenant interest. The City is also processing an application for a Development Agreement Modification to separate this property from the current Development Agreement. On April 1, 2021, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the Sadie Creek Drive-Through establishment (H-2021-0006) that is within 300 feet of another drive-through. The CUP approval was valid for a period of two (2) years. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review will still need to be submitted and approved by the Planning Division prior to the Building Permit submittal. A 2-year time extension was requested and approved by the Director (TED-2023-0002) in order to commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. The time extension is valid until April 1, 2025. The applicant stated additional time is needed to complete the transfer in ownership due to delays related to inflation resulting in higher construction costs. Per the applicant, this additional time will allow them to work with a reputable credit union who has shown interest in purchasing the property and building a new branch which includes a drive-through which is essential to their operations. Staff is requesting the Commission to remove condition #3 as it was not a condition of the original approval and should not have been added to the already approved project. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommend approval of the proposed time extension for a time period of two (2) years as requested for the application to expire on April 1, 2027 the removal of the language from condition #3. Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number TEC-2025-0001, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 17, 2025: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number TEC-2025-0001, as presented during the hearing on April 17, 2025, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number TEC-2025-0001 to the hearing date of ________________ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #3: Mondt Meadows Subdivision (H-2024-0067) Application(s):  Annexation, Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 10.28 acres of land, currently zoned Rural Urban Transition (RUT) in Ada County, located at 6106 and 6162 Tarrega Lane. History: Parcel S1131346605 was created through a property boundary adjustment through Ada County. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium Density Residential Summary of Request: The applicant is proposing the following:  Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (CPAM) to change the future land use designation on 10.28- acres of land from Medium Density Residential (MDR) to Low Density Residential (LDR);  Annexation of 10.84-acres of land from RUT in Ada County to the R-2 (8.48 acres) and R-4 (2.36 acres) zoning districts; and  A Preliminary Plat consisting of 11 building lots (10 new and 1 existing) and 4 common lots on 10.28-acres of land in the proposed R-2 and R-4 zoning districts. Property Boundary Adjustment: The property owner recorded a property boundary adjustment on January 16, 2024, to reconfigure the lot lines in order to subdivide the norther half of their property. Access: Access to the property will be via Sublimity Avenue a collector street. Landscaping: The UDC requires a twenty (20) foot wide buffer along collector roads (Sublimity Avenue). The adjacent developer to the east will be installing the landscape along Sublimity Avenue as part of their project approval. Fencing: All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. The landscape plan shows a six (6) foot tall solid vinyl privacy fencing along the perimeter of the plat and a six (6) foot open vision fence along the common area on the east side of the project. Per UDC 11-3A-7. A.3, barbed wire fencing is prohibited. The applicant shall work with the neighboring property owner to remove the existing fence and replace it with a fence that meets the current fence standards. Open Space: Based on the standards in UDC 11-3G-4A, a minimum of two (2) amenity points are required as the overall project is ten (10) acres in size. The amenities proposed are an outdoor fire ring, picnic table, bench and picnic shelter. All common open space areas are required to be landscaped with one deciduous shade tree for every 5,000 square feet of area and include a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover per UDC 11-3G-5B.3. Future Development Phase: Lot 1, Block 1 shows a future development, this development shall align with the proposed roadway connection from the development (Skyranch Subdivision) to the west. Private Street: Staff reviewed the application for private streets within the development as shown on the preliminary plat. The street is proposed to be located in common lot in the subdivision and will connect to a local street; the point of connection of the private street to the public street is subject to approval by ACHD. The Fire Department has approved the request contingent upon both sides of the street being signed “No Parking Fire Lane.” A gate is being proposed at the entry of the private street. The Director has tentatively approved the request subject to completion of the tasks listed in UDC 11-3F-3B within one (1) year in accord with the Findings listed in the staff report. Existing Structures: The current use of the property is residential with two (2) residential properties existing. The structures will remain and the existing well and septic system will be abandoned as required. City utilities are required to be extended to serve the proposed development. The plat map shows the structure on Lot 1, Block 3 of the proposed plat as an existing shop. However, Ada County Assessor describes the structure as a single-family dwelling. Lot 1, Block 3 is not eligible for another residential unit unless the existing structure is removed or converted to a secondary dwelling and meets all the UDC requirements. The existing structures will be required to connect to city services and the existing wells and septic system will need to be abandoned as required. The property owners of the two parcels shall relinquish their rights to access and utilize the private road Tarrega Lane. Written documentation shall be submitted prior to the City Engineer’s signature on the final plat. Building Elevations: Eight (8) conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed subdivision as shown in Exhibit VII.H. The applicant states the homes in the Mondt Meadows Subdivision will include ten (10) homes with a mix of different product types, two-story and single-story detached single-family homes. Buildings shall be designed with elevations that create interest through the use of broken planes, windows, and fenestrations that produce a rhythm of materials and patterns. Design review is not required for single-family detached structures. However, because the rear and/or sides of homes facing Sublimity Avenue will be highly visible, Staff recommends a DA provision requiring those elevations incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g. projections, recesses, step-backs, pop-outs), bays, banding, porches, balconies, material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from adjacent public streets. Single-story homes are exempt from this requirement. Waterways: There is a private drainage ditch (Watkins Ditch) that runs along the eastern portion of the property which needs to remain and shall be placed within a thirty-eight (38) foot easement. The applicant is proposing to leave the ditch open and keep it in its natural state. The applicant needs to submit a document requesting a waiver from Council to leave the ditch open. In Residential Districts, irrigation easements wider than ten (10) feet shall be included in a common lot that is a minimum of twenty (20) feet wide and outside of a fenced area, unless otherwise waved by City Council. Dry Ditch: Dry ditch that runs through parcel S1131346650 along the east side needs to be either depicted on the plat map within an easement or provide written documentation showing the dry ditch had been abandoned and is no longer in use by the affected property owners. Easements: There are several easements on the property in which written documentation to relinquish the easements shall be submitted prior to the City Engineer’s signature on the final plat. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map, annexation and preliminary plat per the provisions in Section IV in accord with the Findings in Section V. Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval of File Number H-2024-0067, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 17, 2025: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial of File Number H-2024-0067, as presented during the hearing on April 17, 2025, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2024-0067 to the hearing date of ________________ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #4: In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile (H-2024-0058) Application(s): Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 2.22 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at the NWC of Lost Rapids Dr. & N. Ten Mile Rd. at 5985 N. Ten Mile Rd. History: In 2018, the subject property was annexed as part of a larger development area consisting of residential & commercial property zoned R-40 & C-G and included as (2) lots (Lots 14 & 15) in Lost Rapids Subdivision. Costco developed in this area along with smaller commercial pads, many of which contain drive-throughs, along the perimeter of the development area adjacent to W. Chinden Blvd. & N. Ten Mile Rd. with multi-family apartments to the west of this site south of Costco. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial Summary of Request: The Applicant requests CUP approval of a drive-through establishment associated with the proposed In-N-Out Burger restaurant. A restaurant is a permitted use in the C-G district but a drive-through requires approval of a CUP when located within 300’ of another drive-through facility, a residential zoning district or an existing residence. The proposed business hours of operation are from 10:30 am until 1:00 am Sunday through Thursday, and from 10:30 am until 1:30 am Friday and Saturday. Deliveries are proposed to occur between the hours of 2:00 am & 9:00 am during non-business hours. The Applicant states trucks do not have to back up to deliver, which will avoid any back-up warning beeping. The C-G district limits business hours of operation from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm when the property abuts a residential use or district – technically, this site does not abut a residential use or district as there is a 20’ wide strip of land between this site and the adjacent residential development owned by Costco, zoned C-G. Although hours of operation wouldn’t be restricted by the UDC in this instance per se, hours may still be limited through the CUP. Because this site is in such close proximity to residential uses to the west, Staff does not recommend approval of extended hours of operation beyond those allowed in the district when abutting a residential use, in accord with Comprehensive Plan Policy #5.01.01F, which states, “Minimize noise, lighting, and odor disturbances from commercial developments to residential dwellings by enforcing city code.” Note: When Costco was approved, deliveries were not allowed to occur between the hours of 10:00 pm and 5:00 am to minimize noise impacts to adjacent residential neighbors. Access is proposed via (2) full-access driveways from the north/south drive aisle that runs along the west side of the site, which connects to W. Lost Rapids Dr. Drive-through establishments are required to comply with specific use standards for such as listed in the UDC. The stacking lane is required to be identified on the site plan along with the location of the menu board, speaker and window. The proposed site plan depicts stacking lanes and service locations as required. Only one (1) menu board and speaker is proposed; two (2) umbrella stands are proposed for weather protection for employees to take orders remotely farther down the drive-through lane. The site plan is required to demonstrate safe pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation on the site and between adjacent properties. Stacking lanes are required to have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways, drive aisles and the public ROW by patrons. The proposed site plan indicates capacity for 29 vehicles within the proposed stacking lanes. While this would typically be sufficient, Staff is concerned it may not be sufficient for this constrained site. These concerns are based on experience with the stacking associated with the In-N-Out at The Village at Meridian. There, during the extended period following its opening—and potentially still during peak times—vehicle queues exceeded site boundaries, spilling into internal drive aisles that serve parking for the broader development. In that case, the impact was mitigated by lower parking demand due to the area not being fully built out, and the absence of overflow onto a public ROW. Since its opening a year and a half ago, activity at that location has decreased, resulting in reduced stacking and impact on adjacent properties. While the addition of a second location may help distribute customer traffic, the proposed site presents greater risk due to its proximity to residential uses, public ROW and other high-traffic commercial uses. Vehicle queues may obstruct key internal drive aisles used for on-site parking, the access driveway off Lost Rapids, and potentially the adjacent public ROW (Lost Rapids Dr.), compounding existing circulation and safety concerns in the area. Many letters of opposition have been received from area residents and patrons of adjacent commercial uses attesting to the traffic and congestion issues in this area and concerns the proposed use will only exacerbate these issues. Another requirement is for the stacking lane to be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking, except stacking lanes may provide access to designated employee parking. Approximately 400’ of the stacking lane is a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking; however, Staff is concerned stacking will extend from this area and block circulation lanes needed for access and parking internal and external to the site during peak hours. The Applicant submitted a traffic analysis focused on the Ten Mile & Lost Rapids area, included in the public record. In short, the analysis states the proposed queuing capacity for 29 vehicles will provide sufficient storage capacity to accommodate vehicles observed at 18 other In-N-Out establishments once operations normalize. An overflow management plan is identified, which will be implemented when drive-through lane overflow occurs and will extend the available queuing area by an additional 21 vehicles to accommodate approximately 50 vehicles on-site. The plan extends the queuing area by closing the southern access point and re- purposing 14 parking spaces along the site's western boundary. This modification limits access to a single entry and exit driveway at the NWC of the site. While Staff doesn’t necessarily disagree that the proposal should be adequate once operations normalize, Staff is concerned about the impacts to internal drives and adjacent public ROW & associated public safety in the interim if vehicles stack beyond the boundary of the site. ACHD has indicated that no additional improvements are required to the adjacent streets. Off-street parking is proposed in excess of UDC standards. Based on the square footage of the building, a minimum of 16 spaces are required, a total of 73 spaces are proposed, exceeding the minimum standard by 57 spaces. Bicycle parking is proposed in accord with UDC standards. Written Testimony: Many letters of testimony (279) have been received on this application, most of which are in opposition to the proposed development due to the impact on traffic in this area, congestion within the commercial and residential development area, and public safety concerns. Staff Recommendation: Denial – If the Commission wishes to approve the request, the project should be continued to a subsequent hearing date for Staff to prepare conditions of approval for consideration by the Commission. Possible Motions: Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2024-0058, as presented during the hearing on April 17, 2025, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2024-0058, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 17, 2025: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2024-0058 to the hearing date of ________________ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) h2 Planning and Zoning April 17, 2025Commission Meeting Slide 1 h2 Agenda Item Numbers/Order: hoodc, 12/19/2006 Zoning MapAerial MapFLUM current ITD standards.55 (Eagle Rd) onto East Seville Lane does not meet SHITD standards as the southbound right turn lane on (ITD) and reconstruct the right turn lane to current way to the Idaho Transportation Department ofrightThe applicant is required to dedicate twelve (12) feet of Zoning MapAerial MapFLUM There are existing easements on the property that are being proposed to be use by the affected property ownersdocumentation showing the dry ditch had been abandoned and is no longer in either depicted on the plat map within an easement or provide written Dry ditch that runs through parcel S1131346650 along the east side needs to be •road improvements in the same location.will be relinquished with the recordation of the final plat due to the public which runs across the east 302.15’ of the south boundary of parcel S1131346650 The existing thirty (30) foot wide access easement, (Instrument No. 9037915), •required and will be relinquished with the recordation of the final plat. as well as the west thirty (30) feet of each parcel. These easements are no longer -2021There is a thirty (30) foot wide access easement (Instrument No. 7520424 & •relinquished. FLUM Aerial MapZoning Map Site Apartments W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Sadie Creek Drive-through (TEC-2025-0001) by Mike Maffia, MGM Meridian 2, located at 3030 N. Cajun Ln. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/TEC-2025-0001 A.Request: Time Extension: for a two (2) year time extension for the (H-2021-0006) due to delays caused by adverse market conditions, including increased construction costs and limited tenant interest. The City is also processing an application for a Development Agreement Modification to separate this property from the current Development Agreement 26 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : April 17 , 2025 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 2 PROJECT NAME : Sadie Creek Drive - through ( TEG2025 - 0001 ) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name 1 ' 4 / c o ( N � 'J g3�f 5 2� Z� u► (.oS� i�� t �SIJ � , X ICA 3 cluo 6 J � 7 q 10 f 11 12 13 14 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C��fEPIDIAN*,­, DEPARTMENT REPORT HEARING 4/17/2025 Legend - DATE: Project Location i TO: Planning&Zoning Commission Area of impact : City Limits o FROM: Linda Ritter,Associate Planner 0 Analysis 208-884-5533 Irifter@meridiancity.org , APPLICANT: Mike Maffia,MGM Meridian 2 t SUBJECT: TEC-2025-0001 Sadie Creek Drive-Through , LOCATION: 3030 N. Cajun Lane, located in the NE '/4 of Section 5,Township 3N,Range lE (Parcel# S1105110120) I. PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Summary Request for a two (2)year time extension for the(H-2021-0006)due to delays caused by adverse market conditions, including increased construction costs and limited tenant interest. The City is also processing an application for a Development Agreement Modification to separate this property from the current Development Agreement. B. Issues/Waivers The property was originally purchased with the intent of leasing to Starbucks,but they ultimately decided not to proceed. Since then,the applicant has actively marketed the site and now has strong interest from a reputable regional credit union looking to build a new branch. Their plan includes a drive-through,which is essential to their operations. C. Recommendation Staff recommend approval of the proposed time extension for a time period of two(2)years as requested for the application to expire on April 1,2027. D. Decision Pending City of Meridian I Department Report 1. Project Overview ■ II. COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1: Land Use Description Details Map Ref. Existing Land Use(s) Commercial - Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial - Existing Zoning General Retail and Service Commercial District(C-G) VLA.2 Proposed Zoning General Retail and Service Commercial District(C-G) Adopted FLUM Designation Mixed-Use Regional(MU-R) VLA.3 Proposed FLUM Designation Mixed-Use Regional(MU-R) Table 2: Process Facts Description Details Preapplication Meeting date 1/28/2025 Neighborhood Meeting 2/13/2025 Site posting date 4/3/2025 I11. STAFF ANALYSIS A. General Overview Per UDC 11-6B-7C, "Upon written request and filing by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with subsections A and B of this section,the director may authorize a single extension of time to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat not to exceed two(2) years. Additional time extensions up to two(2)years as determined and approved by the City Council may be granted.With all extensions,the director or city council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of this title." Table 3: Project Overview Description Details History CUP-2021-0006; Centrepoint Mixed Use MDA,H-2022-0035 DA Inst. #2022-079000,TED-2023-0002 B. History On April 1,2021,the Planning and Zoning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the Sadie Creek Drive-Through establishment(H-2021-0006)that is within 300 feet of another drive-through. The CUP approval was valid for a period of two(2)years. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review will still need to be submitted and approved by the Planning Division prior to the Building Permit submittal. A time extension was requested and approved by the Director(TED-2023-0002)for a two(2)year time extension in order to commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground.The time extension is valid until April 1,2025. The applicant stated additional time is needed to complete the transfer in ownership due to delays related to inflation resulting in higher construction costs. The applicant is now requesting an additional two(2)year time extension due to delays caused by adverse market conditions, including increased construction costs and limited tenant interest. Per the applicant,this additional time will allow them to work with a reputable credit union who has shown interest in purchasing the property and building a new branch which includes a drive- through which is essential to their operations. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics ■ IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Meridian Planning Division 1. The applicant shall comply with all the previous conditions of approval associated with this development except as modified with this approval and compliance with any future amendments approved with this Development Agreement Modification application.(CUP- 2021-0006; PBA A-2018-0361 (ROS#11747,Parcel F); Centrepoint Mixed Use MDA H- 2022-0035 DA Inst. #2022-079000,TED-2023-0002). 2. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review is required to be submitted,reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to the Building Permit submittal. 3. The applicant is required to dedicate twelve(12) feet of right-of-way to the Idaho Transportation Department(ITD)and reconstruct the right turn lane to current ITD standards as the southbound right turn lane on SH-55 (Eagle Rd) onto East Seville Lane does not meet current ITD standards. B. Idaho Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridiancity.orglWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=391630&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X C. Idaho Transportation Department(ITD) httWs://weblink.meridiancity.orgzl ebLink/Browse.aspx?id=391630&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X V. ACTION A. Staff: Staff recommend approval of the proposed TEC application and find it in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and the UDC with the conditions included in Section IV. B. Planning and Zoning Commission: Pending City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ ' 1 1 ct Location of Impact a �1ff Analysis -r /5 ■ ! 1P - i . w -�-USTICK — f�{ t — Ik W�� Liz �1— _s_II �.. �- ,F.AIRV.'IEW--I.. NINNONINNow— • + - -w 1T • • I--�I�CL�' •fir �-�I�r � n_._ _ �IpAnll Y.n yu•n.• -.•S�Ifr•o:::..;.�1�'`f-■■mI 111�,�- _'j r'1.1•� �na_Y" _ill'iii:E 9�►•4:a: imow, legend l.:.l.-:.a:W.\L�j ni n+1i.7.tir■....a- �:iJi�_♦ •i.•I�..n.nr•: iii:. Project Locationatl Area of Impact IIIIYIfall_■1■rllilr■■IHr ♦ • ..�I rnn,r\G��n�nun�III.•nny'.IIIIIIII■ `i ln.u.��■ IIIIIIIIIII +11' - :"' '_r,......n_�a.n,lar„P..,.�. :i/ nnm=?'..:-�:-s eir' -.G.i a7: „�: .• �' O�:mil Analysis a , IN 1111111■■ it ,rn��� . ��.,,••• :..1.. m11u■ _ � ::�911�■r-- Y■v► _ . n i ra■■.. ] =� rI ,,,.I� lz •�i■■■■■ - J _IIIIl11111„r -I 1�� •--_ _ {��_rr.����1�3 � .•.•.•�� �q �,In y.nr.:_...ur•ro.:iiI_ u ..:..:.::. - Vs► -,nl�:9 ra.■��■ ���' a.Ilit{.-J:'.:iii.�d 1::'�al:i.F 11.1wmm:::::.�. �� GI/. `fr ,iY�- =m n•`•rq a��. �, IS%.'iii in::.'::;::'�i�":'mvsn ire:�i�....mr�2 P..i�i■ __ ..��� + e":yn4ia//ii■ �iii1 �.. • . _ 2 r �, ■1�ia.�^ uR�:. 1"•% �[ 'as __. •, ■/I�r�i■*�A�'•rw .. ; + •�i ..��i:iin'Ir . _,I:_ _ :ii �9 ll� MIN INN r ,II♦ = Ili iii:::::a nm:.tl►A irk ��i!'i'i:. ���- . .lin�i ;l •nil t•:iiip 'i11= ` nun-_'"' ��I�f/ice ����iiiii:•'•.9::: �, r..n�'ur� • ::iiii . IIiL h•:��d:lil.e N A n`' '•,iln9S .�:iiri =8... III1'y ;I.1' ' '•>:;���fiAf/1 `►"'-..nnj;;ytl��%�■n�3 : USTICK 'a. ., .... •rr1.�•:■1.IIIA! � ■ 1■' - � Ir II � �. ...p/:.j:'-'e ell nriiiin�u� �:, i.i_::�frii � [ -�_ � . :_ '�1 _ II/ .p'•.:"'Si�,-":_mr i_1 ::�.•Si � of i^- _ _ -__ �-■n• ::� ► •-■:1:-; 1 Will 1116.■... -nir-•---`` �ririuq r� ngiii� ■_r ■ -.:, ;IIIIIII��a uum►lflll lun iln::■._:.....iiw1 ' pn■__ui " V a\/N�:••••• 'nn as �,��•_IIII::IIIF--' Hill.. ==-`n'r3 •:fir•♦ nllllllr�A � w:.�P•d::lul::111[a.III( IIIIIIIIIII::■a"iiili� � ia:►,. IIr111...� �: ;f, � IIIII IIIrl11,n� �Yn.1.1101111.\I Lllnn 11111111 :Ri:iii-■•••",Illi •�1 '"■ _•^.:`;:I'.:n:i. �' —1 - n M1r'� :n n,111011hn r O L•.��':i1}1 _ 1: �� �•n•. Al[ - i1111. 1ir1111'IRItIr� �:hii:iii:rill��: :s ■?'• • � .:'.'.:�3 iniii'1 ii r� � ''ll .I�-.'.'. ' iiiiii=:::Irii:A� �i .....u..:iun■...—M.n.-I .. r=:,,;N v '';r::..frlr,.;,,.�a:Y. 1 illlll►..::11.1■.� .,1rr,.r.......^�■■■=a•.:..,;•.. LA n"ii lniri�r:•. :�.• ":-- ►:� - ►-..Iluegl-•Yip•:i::::u1=■••�� iiiiiin- `;as- �...L: ,•" _ ..-:. .�i�• II •III111111= '-'"� =e�::::€ INN :_g•` ::::sir r =- -'n•..r....■. INa iiN.u,r, J IIII� ■t' •u�T i=.�' r....: :�•�_�_�. ..:: ©� ''� irk',_�►• F y ' — AIRUIEW --sill .r i�� _ .u.m.•-ilia.. H� =I 5=:'}'Arhp 1R :_:i'i+� ■ _ _- _____ { - w P i�r•�isi.-�■- • aI - nay.iOnI:C.n■I�. 'S\SI :uiil:: ,_!i 4_•:i::�S\"Ei�.Z. I'� ��' •• n::lq�� um-•. i:N •^i','�'.•'•'► .::•• 5•,Inm1: �i^'"' +' u '•ice:rr �1 :l f_:rl gAnn1P.-r.f,f,.■ nilnu Project '�ij Ial.llllfl■ :�■'R'1y7�:0 -11 ■■ nnm-:e.:_ -_nliir II 'Gii j� III 1�`Ira+�'6,=r 1 Area Impact • I - �- >:r rnri: C�.IN`I:'•ll:T1an' �:l:a E:*�i�-� --7- Analysis i, .. + __.•--__P wP'll■u■lfwt■-: = 'uiu r,-jn��o::►HAA1..rn4•••■1•k 5 G 11 ■U■■i• �- ... ly r- ..�:: a■��1��4��lIp1._ •.:::lle:.".:S`:::;:':a:;I::I ��C: ��::. .ter n.. �_ , � ` r •'k~ •■:•'::, :: •iil:a.d�^....n„1 ..,�>•u.i::■i- ]fii���■-■I�L• • _ .,.C: '.ii::::::: :_.!Inn■nunnnrrrrn ■1�:i�.iLmR,!i. _ ... l �/-'^■■-14W. W.W.W.W.W. W. � •• •••• ' ■'� .::.. l �u°i=a ..:IS. OEMUSTICK _ r:a�_li ar1.�-S.M..114111- \ii 4 - :::ilr � .annkr,�•.��.. - �. :,mi'ri'iu iii�::I::i:■ii'I u'lioiu I iii:■:•H' G•••Illl rr' � 1...:n ■�_:IR1 1 m u III ,e ::.::-_.,��i�:1 �,',:�' .'.-•.::- "'C�'S,�auf`.ws.MA1111111A � a'iii::'1+■�- � ■■•'��='-'? 1111`i 9'lll lun:ui'.?--:iti"'i:::::1 ii,:-r�-.,.,. IurunlP rypl , pun... nmeuu„IlGlmus:,,,y Ir mrd 11111111111111� lsi:::e:'ii'.+d-+, @:: V r - ••'!+� I:ure:: nnl■Ilu■m.. _y�0 a?L.•ip O:L/.•�a� S� O Ga.GC�+ .nrl::�`onumll::� :::�`�■ii:iiillli jil,Pn ♦ . unun ♦ n nlw' nm anon 1 :rurm illlllun, .:., u11sses S'_:F;�=•CGS-: �ti ... so ISO • - ...,. '� W ■■ fir•_;,, :::::: -_�_—=: = Ruin ■u u C IN low`u'1 - e - FA'I�RYI�EW �- ,,r- n�■If■n��■: o D - - o - o - - o - o f1 � . w■ . 1 I a-unnnn F- �r h�'ni� ��111■ _ 'iti�l�::::' - .s......-it!•■�77�..,.,�•�i Legend �: .'-�..'.'•e, R`t Jllil:....::;.: �•4„=,,,easy Project Location I ,.�iii..saa•n17�1►11,Iy��-••=11'�♦ :u::• ri::::'::i:ii::is:• IIIIIIIP • ��A���p� ■��-AG 1:1]la ]C�:IGG,s. y� ♦ , ;� f�•r..r �.,•,�,.Illlllfl:=•:,..,a..:i■ CIIIIINIIl1 �Ko�a•,• �a-.:;,■_. .;Ilnrr,,.:;,a::::• II,P.,.- :,r:•;.. Area I�,•'lllllll�� �$fi� �;:_-_:: ,.: I,111::: ► E,:;al::.City Limitsn: •:•,- — .. ,a R... . �:•;Y^ a�+•::—. —r.R Planned Parcels �.111IIIII■■■Iw■ riiu,■us♦. '•�'�'`t 1� ""'• ....u..L�11111■II■1:■u1u111rfk��.`.�..::■.■■116■■�.:. i �_u�1�1:.'��I►♦_ w � �...rr�•v. �� _.n. •.a.•o nlnnnlln.a.a isa . 7a✓'1=_-■ � �•rlt. 1■■■■�� !II"__=• r,..r.:annuru....ul..l �� :�•�'�' s ` ��:.:• :u::n;i�a—■.��■�■■rr,�f S. . ..:.::;::�i'r:'...Il:rsr Analysis Ire ,..- u..-■ .+ _.� �.. _ �_::..::..... -.1:ILa614:,::r:1Ga¢arl%.nna 1 ♦ rail- ...�G+. _ •.J ■■ _ ,.a .,r ��-* ■ ••' „• -� :/► irnna.C•'•r = Y -: • �. ram/, "q,....,�■:.:.:i::: - ail..�_� -�� 7�`-��■" R.n, •y��i�1'�1 I•ll ,•1� ',firer: _�� �.:°�� un-ue�ia' = �■ ice.-� ��•I. Ili.. 1:°....-. .nit,'*pen rr� —�■ .nin° uuns•7y'- -4fi aHE� i - _ .►� Ir I■-:VS�::::�"::: ::::C :::::I "'�� ��� ■' �� � _ �� +■��Ii■1i#1� ql-iy.C■ryl u■�3A1 MEN - ....._rl: p,.: ter;�' USTICK � ='r;; •._..r...��_I����u.�•:..11n! 'i'�'�R:yi T iun ' -_ � 1 li� -�ie� � �■i nt•mil iu `-llijYj �. •n,a .ml,l�n, ■:'::__�■■ ��� III _•�:pl.l :I- ■ iliul ',�:Sinn•�+dr, li• •r','plii th � ■ : li .:F.I�Esea, ti I`ni�.,.,. 11 .. rr1�. �••••1, �n�_ nnn+ Illlllllllllllry;a umntli,in,ln..••n.,l i�tii'i:l e-::i'• ' r V ►\Ii,�=:...�::::L ~,� 1.A� Q■ 1�� .I tP_lue•- nnlum--•..nu.- �� nlrllllf•=a• - 1 - �■-+ ..•a:�lnl::111G:�( 11111111111::�V,n••: tl1111 •/�♦:•:�ii�: �♦r unu lLi �:'::::a � �■, I � �a::i:.•■...ii�llli -1,a r- � ■■■a • ���/�1I ♦♦rT•nu nw nw' nnin anon :ruruyElllllhn, ��PP�� .�.bon�isf.' N "e`:.•:=�1 I:::.,.., 'r--- �.'��1III� '� r n ulnl•, . . I�V O,�� u 1114�G.:f y' :�:p-=iniinu.a � +J■4■ : nn_:a ,.:::::::::::u:Ill�i n2 1•■■ 6 I ul�. 6:� �1 ' • _ :,.•..:::.-- . C=--Ill. ..nn,n.nn.. iunn:►lI•inlUnu "•••imun�=�,•,nl,,:...5. -�' l7 -G'm=onu_li i..::iii::::i::�n� 11 Iu ,•1 V ,•I::•:'::vu,Y.'.�::L'al■r- •�- l p1■/IIIO■a uu ,..•� Zit riiiiii.. mum■.■n-• --'=1innl nl un � •.L u. .:. p!_�• , Ili ♦d:-'.':: ',�,,,. '�• _4:::=::� ::::•��a��'`� �W� tlll�\�'111111111°':;.:•.n,;..—_ ,Rua■ ... B„ :i'IIn:�L1:,�a1: ■,..r,�o� .J■ IIII�■■te ,fir i�1iq ....• -�■_��� ..:: •. ,u■unNair,in 7- yG oleo■ _ . -■!::ISi�..,bi..�„ in Ellin NIP {..,� FAI RY3 E,W I•r,anR.■1:ui' '=1C7?51,.- _■ ■. _�a;n:S77 1 I r /-1• r -1 1 1 B. Approved Site Plan (date: 1/27/2021) ,}pl�l�l�wll�r THE '. .,.". LAND 6Ii8,IP I ` _ arwuru`"� ■ ca wwrwrwnr. T Condltlonal Use Permit-Site Pia. C. Approved Landscape Plan(date: 1/27/2021) IPLW LE ..._ — -=- — -: ---- Lw sa%i1.:Fr --i"rciMd a ? I: MUM El awnEl ---• - — - 0 LIAO City of Meridian Department Report VI. Exhibits ■ D. Existing Conditions w �� MAN a _ _ -[ ! .ni.�MSr• -y `j lip City of Meridian Department Report VI. Exhibits ■ E. Service Accessibility Report Overall Score: 37 �Slst Percentile Location In City Limits GREEN Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains < 500 ft.from parcel GREEN Floodplain Either not within the 100 yrflaodplain or > 2 acres GREEN Emergency Services Fire Response time < 5 min. GREEN Emergency Services Police Meets response time goals most of the time GREEN Pathways Within 1/4 mile of current pathways GREEN Transit Not within 114 of current or future transit route RED Arterial Road Buildout Status Ultimate configuration (#of lanes in master streets GREEN plan) matches existing (# of lanes) School Walking Proximity Within 1/2 mile walking GREEN Either a High School or College within 2 miles OR a School Drivability Middle or Elementary School within 1 mile driving GREEN (existing or future) Either a Regional Parkwithin 1 mile OR a Community Park Walkability Park within 1/2 mile OR a Neighborhood Park within GREEN 114 mile walking City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Exhibits ■ W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Mondt Meadows Subdivision (H-2024-0067) by Gregg Davis, Breckon Land Design, located at 6101 and 6162 S. Terrega Ln. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2024-0067 A. Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (CPAM) to change the future land use designation on 10.28 acres of land from Medium Density Residential (MDR) to Low Density Residential (LDR). B. Request: Annexation of 10.84 acres of land from RUT in Ada County to the R-2 (8.48 acres) and R-4 (2.36 acres) zoning districts C. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 11 building lots (10 new and 1 existing) and 4 common lots on 10.28 acres of land in the proposed R-2 and R-4 zoning districts. F35 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : April 17 , 2025 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 3 PROJECT NAME : Mondt Meadows Subdivision ( H - 2024 - 0067 ) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name 1 , M 2 Ly 1AI o � � c�j />< 4 Id 11 s .- : 5 10 11 12 13 14 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C��fEPIDIAN*,,--, DEPARTMENT REPORT HEARING 4/17/2025 Legend DATE: Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission :::Area of Impact 4= City Limits - FROM: Linda Ritter,Associate Planner ®Analysis -_ 208-884-5533 -Iritter@meridiancity.org �r 5 APPLICANT: Gregg Davis,Breckon Land Design SUBJECT: H-2024-0067 --, � Mondt Meadows Subdivision AZ, , CPAM, PP J ' LOCATION: 6101 and 6162 S. Tarrega Lane, located in the SE '/4 of the SW '/4 of Section 31, _7 T.3N,R.1E,Parcels S1131346650 and S1131346605 I. PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Summary • Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map(CPAM)to change the future land use designation on 10.28-acres of land from Medium Density Residential(MDR)to Low Density Residential(LDR); • Annexation of 10.84-acres of land from RUT in Ada County to the R-2(8.48 acres) and R-4 (2.36 acres)zoning districts; and • A Preliminary Plat consisting of 11 building lots (10 new and 1 existing) and 4 common lots on 10.28-acres of land in the proposed R-2 and R-4 zoning districts. B. Issues/Waivers • The Future Land Use Map designates this area as Medium Density Residential. The property owner is requesting a change to Low Density Residential to allow for larger estate lots, consistent with the existing development pattern in the area,with the intent of preserving the property for future generations. • The existing house is within a thirty(30)foot irrigation easement to the north and thirty(30) foot access easement to the west. These easements will need to be relinquished or vacated before the City Engineer signs the final plat. • Per UDC 11-3A-6, in Residential Districts, irrigation easements wider than ten(10) feet shall be included in a common lot that is a minimum of twenty(20)feet wide and outside of a fenced area,unless otherwise waived by City Council. There is a 30-foot-wide irrigation easement along the northern portion of the property,which is required to be placed in a common lot unless the requirement is waived by Council or documentation is provided showing the easement has been relinquished by the owner. City of Meridian I Department Report 1. Project Overview ■ • Council waiver to leave the private drainage ditch(Watkins Ditch)that runs along the eastern portion of the property open within a thirty-eight(38) foot wide easement. C. Recommendation Staff. Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map, annexation and preliminary plat per the provisions in Section IV in accord with the Findings in Section V. D. Decision City of Meridian I Department Report 1. Project Overview ■ I1. COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1: Land Use Description Details Map Ref. Existing Land Use(s) Residential - Proposed Land Use(s) Residential - Existing Zoning Rural Urban Transition(RUT VII.A.2 Proposed Zoning R-2 and R-4 Adopted FLUM Designation Medium Density Residential VII.A.3 Proposed FLUM Designation Low Density Residential Table 2: Process Facts Description Details Preapplication Meeting date 11/5/2024 Neighborhood Meeting 11/21/2024 Site posting date 4/7/2025 Table 3: Community Metrics Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference Ada County Highway District IV.G • Comments Received Yes, Staff Report - • Commission Action Required No - • Access Sublimity Avenue - • Traffic Level of Service See Figure 2:ACHD Summary Metrics - ITD Comments Received No Comment or Concern Error! Reference source not found. Meridian Fire Turnaround shall be in accordance with 2018 International Error! Fire Code,Appendix D,and shall meet the minimum Reference specifications of 96'exclusive of shoulders and curbs. source not found. Meridian Police No Comment Error! Reference source not found. Meridian Public Works Wastewater IV.B • Distance to Mainline Available at the site • Impacts or Concerns See Site Specific Conditions of Approval Meridian Public Works Water IV.B • Distance to Mainline Water is available at the site • Impacts or Concerns No Note: See City/Agency Comments and Conditions Section and public record for all department/agency comments received. Mondt Meadows Subdivision AZ,CPAM,PP H-2024-0067 (copy this link into a separate browser). City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics ■ Figure 1: One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Metrics Reference Parcel:S1131346650 Date Retrieved:2025/ 1/3 Parcel Count Parcel Acreage Infill Indicator: 485 1,044 Surrounding Area 45% vot city 397 ® City Limits ■ Not City Household Household& Population Growth Households 02020 Population Change:113.9°I° Population 723717172, ■Growth (Household and Population Change since 2010 Decennial) 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 Use Types Residential Addresses All Addresses a% ■ Single-family is 7% Multi-family0% ® Commercial Preliminary Plats (last 5-years) Conditional Use Permit(last 5-years) Proposed Proposed Pending Pending Approved Approved 1000 2000 3000 0 10 20 30 4U ■ Single-family El Multi-family City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics ■ 2.00 500 Single-family y 1.50 (AResidential Parcel Diversity a 1.00 U E3 Parcel Count 0.50 L a.09 a *Average Acres 0.00 a:aa 0 R-2 R-4 R-15 Average Single-family Density by Zoning Average 15.00 �11.49 ResidentialDensity 10.00 06.29 5 94 p 5.00 1.85 0.00a.oa Dwelling Units I Acre R-2 R-4 R-8 111-15 Notes: See VIII.Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps,Tables,and Charts. Fieure 2:ACHD Summary Metrics Level of Service Planning Thresholds 1. Condition of Area Roadways Traffic Count is based on Vehicles per hour(VPH) Roadway Frontage Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Classification Traffic Count Level of Service "*State Highway 0--feet ArteCJaJ 1,798 WA 69fhleridian Road * Lake Hazel Road 0-feet Principal Arterial 167 Better than °E" *Sublimity Avenue 47-feet Collector N/A NIA *Acceptable level of service for a two-lane principal arterial is 'E" (690 VPH)_ *Acceptable level of service for a five-lane principal arterial is'E" (1,780 VPH)_ "Acceptable level of service for a two-lane collector is "D" (425 VPH). "*ACHD does not set level of service thresholds for State Highways_ 2. Average Daily Traffic Count(VDT) Average daily traffic courts are,based on AGHD's most current traffic counts_ • The average daily traffic count for SH-69 (Meridian Road) south of Amity Road was 39,546 on October 8, 2024. • The average daily traffic count for Lake Hazel Road east of SH-69 was 3,747 on June 12, 2018_ Since these counts were taken Lake Hazel Road from SH-69.iMeridian Road to Locust Grove Road has been widened to 5-Janes. There are no existing traffic counts for Sublimity Avenue north of Lake Hazel Road_ Notes: See VIII.Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps,Tables,and Charts. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics ■ Figure 3: Service Impact Summary . Service Impact Tools Ready Caution OP 0 IRO - Notes: See VIII.Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps,Tables,and Charts. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics ■ III. STAFF ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code(UDC) A. General Overview The current Future Land Use Map(FLUM)designation for the properties is Medium Density Residential and the zoning district is RUT as the property is located within Ada County. The applicant is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment(CPAM)to change the FLUM from MDR to LDR to accommodate zoning that allows large and estate lots at gross densities of three dwelling units or less per acre. Low Density Residential is adjacent to the property to the north,Mixed Use Regional(MU-RG)is to the west and Medium Density Residential is to the east and south of the proposed project.After reviewing the comprehensive plan and nearby properties, staff believes the requested Low Density Residential designation is appropriate given the proximity to the existing large estate development to the north.Additionally,the Low Density Residential FLUM designation,which already exists to the north of this property, further supports this recommendation. Medium Density Residential: The Comprehensive Plan identifies Medium Density Residential land uses as the development of dwelling units at gross densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as a park, school, or land dedicated for public services. Low Density Residential: The Comprehensive Plan identifies Low Density Residential land uses as the development of single-family homes on large and estate lots at gross densities of three dwelling units or less per acre. These areas often transition between existing rural residential and urban properties. Developments need to respect agricultural heritage and resources,recognize view sheds and open spaces, and maintain or improve the overall atmosphere of the area. The use of open spaces,parks,trails, and other appropriate means should enhance the character of the area. Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as a park, school, or land dedicated for public services. Staff s analysis of the CPAM request are as follows: 1. Alignment with Existing Uses: • The current use of large estate residential lots aligns more appropriately with the Low Density Residential(LDR) designation,which accommodates lots ranging from 8,000 to 12,000 square feet or larger. 2. Compatibility and Planning Goals: • R-2 and R-4 Zone Suitability: The proposed zoning is consistent with the characteristics of large estate lots,mirroring similar developments to the north and south. • Surrounding Zoning: - The properties to the north and south are zoned Rural Urban Transition(RUT). - The northern property, designated for Low-Density Residential use, is planned for R-4 zoning. - The southern property remains RUT with a minimum lot size of five acres. - The proposed R-2 and R-4 zoning aligns with existing land use patterns and zoning designations. 3. Site Design and Community Impact: • The Low Density Residential designation supports the continued development of large estate lots, fostering a cohesive and compatible land use pattern. • Adjusting the Future Land Use Map(FLUM)to LDR maintains consistency with existing uses and complements surrounding residential development. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ Given the proximity of large residential estate lots to the north and south, staff finds the proposed Low Density Residential FLUM designation appropriate for this location. Table 4: Proiect Overview Description Details History Parcel S 1131346605 was created through a property boundary adjustment through Ada County. Phasing Plan 2 phases Residential Units 11 (10 new and 1 existing) Open Space Provided: .63 acres/12%—Required: .42 acres/8%R-2 Provided: .43 acres/16%-Required: .32 acres/12%R-4 Amenities 2 amenity points/ 0 Physical Features Watkins Drainage Ditch Acreage 10.28(R-2: 7.89 acres and R-4:2.36 acres) Lots 11 building lots(10 new, 1 existing)and 4 common lots Density 1.26 dwelling units per acre B. History The property resides within Ada County and is currently zoned RUT. The property owner recorded a property boundary adjustment on January 16,2024,to reconfigure the lot lines in order to subdivide the norther half of their property. See Record of Survey below. RECORD OF SURVEY CtXWTY RECWVV?S CER7"CA 7E eavn�nnr«rvF Avrc�srNFvr emz NAHPF r*xre an i .xwrrcw cr LAM]Lm Vr rr¢nr,f+ T :,saem mM..rr Y- 2k3s TJ�5�iJ[pF RE$w 1/¢01$['orrpv Sr.T'N.Arr. ADA COUNTY—STATE OF AAXO .as n� B =�°'�`J ti I r r� T r rrsrcw �i ac7""� �x RfFERt7YCE5 i � p f.^f SAMS OF HEARING ° $ s 89 SPY wEErwEF++roV+v LEGE7'ID eaervrRca�•.o-e is u.p rrrF f/[��x�mrwnr ro I � __ _ �r may, �I Mx r,fuC1::W. _ _•_•_a]mr �w ��� - _5 E➢3701"_F___!�,�ti= �T>mTTlT°aaere rwwn � E 0 RYN'+ IXB 0.0>'�AE<M` mrav chi+u' SIMYEY47R'S lJARRA TILE: { � 1 q P • M,� in. aw 4y n to '' --L 2- W.n riff 17 rcewu �5 C£R7MiCA TE OF Sl/RLEYTAR ,acc,.wArF DISG.AIAIfR MaPvc � ° a»o„ r r r Prr+.W+-�'KrM.°NKY wrr,Gtt acwau z., lmm�w aw �ovs uW/¢rt COVutt pfavu°aµ{s taMG rR9 ° w�T w.,nG ra r+.E�Y°l.+A•!CE cr y i � � P �+ rean�a aeL m o�p s-rs�r i dyi NWY r � —rTs.ou•_ — �._ ,fus..W S r7[er' oa§' rcaw�r ^'l,S 8 WW'F n A•vd"]B'w esx S 69 f6'38"FP w^°�[ •nQ'is vmxu ilF F [r r CMVE TA${,[ �l �� P '<. ACCURATE _ `4„ a. . ••: - •. e -------------x5L1%8'BABEL XD.45----------r.2X. R.rrr.i R-, '•ern-`er. --- R.r.c ems. a �.' mmc um asm: une,dee•wr City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ There are existing easements on the property that are being proposed to be relinquished. • There is a thirty(30)foot wide access easement(Instrument No. 7520424&2021- 049475),that runs across the north boundary of both parcels in the project,as well as the west thirty(30) feet of each parcel. These easements are no longer required and will be relinquished with the recordation of the final plat. • The existing thirty(30)foot wide access easement, (Instrument No. 9037915),which runs across the east 302.15' of the south boundary of parcel S l 131346650 will be relinquished with the recordation of the final plat due to the public road improvements in the same location. • Dry ditch that runs through parcel S 1131346650 along the east side needs to be either depicted on the plat map within an easement or provide written documentation showing the dry ditch had been abandoned and is no longer in use by the affected property owners. C. Site Development and Use Analysis 1. Existing Structures/Site Improvements (UDC 11-1): The current use of the property is residential with two (2) existing structures. The plat map shows the structure on Lot 1, Block 3 of the proposed plat as an existing shop. However, Ada County Assessor describes the structure as a single-family dwelling. Lot 1, Block 3 is not eligible for another residential unit unless the existing structure is removed or converted to a secondary dwelling and meets all the UDC requirements. The existing strucutres will be required to connect to city services and the existing wells and septic system will need to be abandoned as required. Lot 1, Block 1 shows a future development, this development shall align with the proposed roadway connection from the development(Skyranch Subdivision) to the west. 2. Proposed Use Analysis (Comp Plan 2.01.01 C, UDC 11-2): The applicant is proposing single-family detached homes which are listed as a principal permitted use in UDC Table 11-2A-2 for the R-2 and R-4 zoning districts. The project will be developed in two phases. The developer provided a future layout showing how the property will be redeveloped. The future phase roadway shall align with the approved project to the west, Skyranch Subdivision. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.01.01 C allows for a range of residential land use designations that allow diverse lot sizes, housing types, and densities. 3. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): • In the R-2 zoning district, a twenty (20)foot landscape buffer is required along Sublimity Avenue and a ten (10)foot landscape buffer is required along Street B. The maximum building height for this area is thirty-five (35)feet with an interior setback of 7.5 feet per story and a rear setback of fifteen (15)feet. The maximum street frontage is eighty(80) feet. • The dimensional standards for the R-4 zone are the same as the R-4 except the interior setback is five (5)feet and maximum street frontage is sixty(60)feet. D. Design Standards Analysis The proposed plat and subsequent development are required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 and 11-2A-7 for the R-2 and R-4 zoning districts. The proposed lots comply with the dimensional standards of the above-mentioned districts. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ 1. Existing Structure and Site Design Standards (Comp Plan 5.01.02A, UDC 11-3A-19): The current use of the property is residential with two (2) residential properties existing. The structures will remain and the existing well and septic system will be abandoned as required. City utilities are required to be extended to serve the proposed development. Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.01.02A requires the applicant to maintain and implement community design ordinances, quality design criteria, and complete street policies to set quality standards citywide. 2. Qualified Open Space &Amenities (Comp Plan 2.02.00, Comp Plan 2.02.0IB, UDC 11-3G): Based on the standards in UDC Table 11-3G-3, a minimum of 8% (or 0.42-acres)for the R-2 zoning district and 0%for the R-4 zoning district, as it is less than five(5) acres in size) of qualified open space is required to be provided within the development. An open space exhibit was submitted as shown in Section VITF, that depicts 9.65% (or 0.988-acres) of open space that meets the required quality and qualified open space standards. Based on the standards in UDC 11-3G-4A, a minimum of two (2) amenity points are required as the overall project is ten (10) acres in size. The amenities proposed are an outdoor fire ring, picnic table, bench and picnic shelter.All common open space areas are required to be landscaped with one deciduous shade tree for every 5,000 square feet of area and include a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover per UDC 11-3G-5B.3. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.02.00 requires the applicant to plan for safe, attractive, and well-maintained neighborhoods that have ample open space, and generous amenities that provide varied lifestyle choices. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.02.0IB requires the applicant to evaluate open space and amenity requirements for consistency with community needs and values. 3. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): i. Landscape buffers along streets UDC 11-2A-6 requires a twenty-five (20)foot wide buffer along collector roads (Sublimity Avenue). The adjacent developer to the east will be installing the landscape along Sublimity Avenue as part of their project approval. ii. Tree preservation Per UDC 11-3B-10,the applicant shall preserve existing trees four-inch caliper or greater from destruction during the development. Mitigation shall be required for all existing trees four-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of one hundred(100)percent replacement(Example: Two(2)ten-inch caliper trees removed may be mitigated with four 5-inch caliper trees,five(5)four-inch caliper trees, or seven(7)three-inch caliper trees).Deciduous specimen trees four-inch caliper or greater may count double towards total calipers lost,when planted at entryways,within common open space, and when used as focal elements in landscape design. If trees are proposed to be removed from the property that meet the criteria listed above, the applicant shall add a mitigation section to the landscape plan with final plat submittal. iii. Storm integration Per UDC 11-3B-11,the applicant shall meet the intent to improve water quality and provide a natural, effective form of flood and water pollution control through the integration of vegetated,well designed stormwater filtration swales and other green City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ stormwater facilities into required landscape areas,where topography and hydrologic features allow if part of the development. Development will be required to meet UDC 11-3B-11 for stormwater integration. iv. Pathway landscaping Landscaping for pathways shall meet the requirements outlined in UDC 11-3B-12. The applicant is required to provide a landscape strip a minimum of five(5) feet wide shall along each side of the pathway. Designs are encouraged in which the width of the landscape strip varies to provide additional width to plant trees farther from the pathway, preventing root damage. The minimum width of the landscape strip shall be two (2)feet to allow for maintenance of the pathway. The landscape strips shall be planted with a mix of trees, shrubs, lawn,and/or other vegetative ground cover. There are no pathways required or being proposed for this development. 4. Parking (UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided for each home based on the total number of bedrooms per unit as set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-6. On-street parking is also available on the proposed streets. i. Residential parking analysis The proposal will be required to meet the standards for parking as set forth in UDC 11- 3C-6. 5. Building Elevations (Comp Plan 2.01.01 C,Architectural Standards Manual): Eight(8) conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed subdivision as shown in Exhibit VII.H. The applicant states the homes in the Mondt Meadows Subdivision will include ten (10) homes with a mix of different product types, two-story and single-story detached single-family homes. Buildings shall be designed with elevations that create interest through the use of broken planes, windows, and fenestrations that produce a rhythm of materials and patterns. Design review is not required for single-family detached structures. However, because the rear and/or sides of homes facing Sublimity Avenue will be highly visible, Staff recommends a DA provision requiring those elevations incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g.projections, recesses, step-backs,pop-outs), bays, banding, porches, balconies, material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from adjacent public streets. Single- story homes are exempt from this requirement. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.01.01 C encourages the applicants to maintain a range of residential land use designations that allow diverse lot sizes, housing types, and densities. 6. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3A-7. The landscape plan shows a six(6)foot tall solid vinyl privacy fencing along the perimeter of the plat and a six(6)foot open vision fence along the common area on the east side of the project. Per UDC 11-3A-7.A.3, barbed wire fencing is prohibited. The applicant shall work with the neighboring property owner to remove the existing fence and replace it with a fence that meets the current fence standards. 7. Parkways (Comp Plan 3.07.01 C, UDC 11-3A-17): Per Comp Plan policy 3.07.01C appropriate landscaping,buffers, and noise mitigation with new development along transportation corridors(setback,vegetation,low walls,berms, etc.) is required. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ Per the UDC the minimum width of parkways planted with Class II trees shall be eight(8) feet. The width can be measured from the back of curb where there is no likely expansion of the street section within the right-of-way;the parkway width shall exclude the width of the sidewalk. Class 11 trees are the preferred parkway trees. The applicant is proposing a parkway along E.Marcela Street. E. Transportation Analysis 1. Access (Comp Plan 6.01.02B, UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-3H-4): Access to the property will be via Sublimity Avenue, a collector road. The property owners will need to relinquish their rights to the private road(Tarrega Lane). Written documentation is required prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat. 2. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): All sidewalks constructed as part of this proposal are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17 3. Private Streets (UDC 11-3F-4): 4. Staff have reviewed the application for private streets within the development as shown on the preliminary plat. The street is proposed to be located in common lot in the subdivision and will connect to a local street; the point of connection of the private street to the public street is subject to approval by ACHD. The Fire Department has approved the request contingent upon both sides of the street being signed `No Parking Fire Lane."A gate is being proposed at the entry of the private street. The Director has tentatively approved the request subject to completion of the tasks listed in UDC 11-3F-3B within one (1)year in accord with the Findings listed in Section V below. 5. Subdivision Regulations (UDC 11-6): i. Dead end streets No streets or series of streets that ends in a cul-de-sac or a dead end shall be longer than five hundred(500)feet except as allowed by UDC 11-6C-3. There are no dead end streets being proposed that are longer than five hundred(500) feet. ii. Block face UDC 11-6C-3-regulates block lengths for residential subdivisions. Staff has reviewed the submitted plat for conformance with these regulations. The intent of this section of code is to ensure block lengths do not exceed 750 ft, although there is the allowance of an increase in block length to 1,000 feet if a pedestrian connection is provided. In no case shall a block face exceed one thousand two hundred(1,200)feet,unless waived by the City Council. As currently designed, the proposed plat meets the block face requirements. F. Services Analysis 1. Waterways (Comp Plan 4.05.OID, UDC 11-3A-6): Per UDC 11-3A-6, requires limiting the tiling and piping of natural waterways, including, but not limited to, ditches, canals, laterals, sloughs and drains where public safety is not a concern as well as improve,protect and incorporate creek corridors (Five Mile, Eight Mile, Nine Mile, Ten Mile, South Slough and Jackson and Evan Drains) as an amenity in all residential, commercial and industrial designs. When piping and fencing is proposed, the standards outlined in UDC 11-3A-6B shall apply. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ In Residential Districts, irrigation easements wider than ten (10)feet shall be included in a common lot that is a minimum of twenty (20)feet wide and outside of a fenced area, unless otherwise waved by City Council. There is a private drainage ditch (Watkins Ditch) that runs along the eastern portion of the property which needs to remain and shall be placed within a thirty-eight(38)foot easement. The applicant is proposing to leave the ditch open and keep it in its natural state. The applicant needs to revise their narrative to request a waiver from Council to leave the ditch open. Comprehensive Plan policy 4.05.OID requires improving and protecting creeks and other natural waterways throughout commercial, industrial, and residential areas. 2. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-15): The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(UDC 11-3B-6). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single- point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 3. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate drainage system is required in all developments by the City's adopted standards, specifications, and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practices as adopted by the City as outlined in UDC 11-3A-18. Storm drainage will be proposed with a future construction application and shall be constructed to City and ACHD design criteria. 4. Utilities (Comp Plan 3.03.03G, UDC 11-3A-21): Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development.All utilities are available to the site. Water main,fire hydrant and water service require a twenty foot(20) wide easement that extends ten (10)feet past the end of main, hydrant, or water meter. No permanent structures, including trees are allowed inside the easement. Comprehensive Plan policy 3.03.03G require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks, water and sewer utilities. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Meridian Planning Division 1. A Development Agreement(DA)is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. A final plat will not be accepted until the Annexation ordinance and development agreement are approved by City Council. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at a minimum,incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat, landscape plan,phasing plan,and conceptual building elevations for the single-family dwellings included in Section IV and the provisions contained herein. b. The rear and/or sides of 2-story structures that face Sublimity Avenue shall incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation(e.g. projections,recesses, step-backs,pop-outs),bays,banding, porches,balconies,material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. c. No building permits shall be issued prior to the plat being recorded. d. The Open Space amenities shall meet the following requirements: the picnic area shall include tables,benches, landscaping, and a structure for shade; and the outdoor fire ring shall meet fire safety standards, is located on a noncombustible surface and includes fixed seating. e. The property owners of parcel(s) S 1131346650 and S 1131346605 shall relinquish their rights to access and utilize the private road Tarrega Lane. Written documentation shall be submitted prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat. f. The existing homes shall connect to City water and sewer service within 60 days of it becoming available and disconnect from private service, as set forth in MCC 9-1-4 and 9- 4-8. g. The single-family structure on parcel S 1131346605 located at 6162 Tarrega Lane can remain in its current location once the following easements have been relinquished: o There is a thirty(30)foot wide access easement(Instrument No. 7520424&2021- 049475),that runs across the north boundary of both parcels in the project,as well as the west thirty(30)feet of each parcel. These easements are no longer required and will be relinquished with the recordation of the final plat. o The existing thirty(30)foot wide access easement, (Instrument No. 9037915),which runs across the east 302.15' of the south boundary of parcel S 1131346650 will be relinquished with the recordation of the final plat due to the public road improvements in the same location. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ h. Written documentation to relinquish the easements listed above shall be submitted prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat. i. Lot 1, Block 1 shows a future development,this development shall align with the proposed roadway connection from the development(Skyranch Subdivision)to the west. 2. Submit the following revisions for the Preliminary Plat included in Section VII, dated 3/17/25: a. Revise the plat map to depict the dry ditch on parcel#S1131346650 and its associated easement or provide written documentation showing the dry ditch had been abandoned and is no longer in use by the affected property owners. b. Lots shall meet the dimensional requirements of the R-2 and R-4 zoning districts per UDC 11-2A-4 and UDC 11-2A-5. 3. The Landscape Plan included in Section VII, dated 3/17/25, shall be submitted for review and approval with the following revisions prior to final plat approval: a. Show the open vision fence location. b. Tree mitigation for the future development shall be addressed on the revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application. 4. The applicant shall comply with the open space exhibit approved as part of this plat application that depicts 8%(R-2)and 12%(R-4)or 1.06-acres(0.74 acres required) of qualified open space and exceeds the required amenity points. The picnic area shall include tables,benches,landscaping, and a structure for shade. The outdoor fire ring shall meet fire safety standards, is located on a noncombustible surface and includes fixed seating. 5. The applicant shall construct all proposed fencing and/or any fencing required by the UDC, consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7 and 11-3A-6B, as applicable. 6. The development shall comply with standards and installation for landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-3B-5 and maintenance thereof as set forth in UDC 11-3B-13. 7. The development shall comply with all subdivision design and improvement standards as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3,including but not limited to driveways,easements,blocks, street buffers, and mailbox placement. 8. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family detached dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 9. The private streets are approved subject to completion of the tasks listed in UDC 11-3F-3 within one year. Documentation of such shall be submitted to the Planning Division in order to receive final approval. 10. The private streets within the development shall be 26-feet wide and constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-H-413.2. 11. The Applicant shall have a maximum of two(2)years to obtain City Engineer's signature on a final plat in accord with UDC 11-613-7. 12. The Applicant shall comply with all conditions of ACHD. 13. Staff's failure to cite all relevant UDC requirements does not relieve the applicant from compliance. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ B. Meridian Public Works Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. To meet to-and-through requirements make sure the main is 8"up to the property boundary and have a 6"hydrant lateral coming off of the main. Fire hydrant appears to be located on property to the north. The City will require a 20ft easement up to the fire hydrant(easement centered on the lateral). The City requests that the easement extends 10'past the hydrant but only 5'is required. This easement will need to come from the owner of the property. 2. Provide 20'Easements for mains,hydrant laterals and water services. Easements should extend up to the end of main/hydrant/water meter and 10'beyond it. Water and sewer running in parallel require 30ft easement. 3. Water mains need a casing when crossing irrigation that limits access to times of the year. Either provide casing or proof that the City will have access at all times. 4. Water mains are not to be installed along driveways. Instead,locate water meters in landscaping area and run services to houses. 5. Meters should be located close to the road. 6. Services cannot cross private property other than the property being served. 7. No permanent structures (trees,bushes,buildings, carports,trash receptacle walls,fences, infiltration trenches, light poles,etc.)to be built within the utility easement. 8. Ensure no sewer services pass through infiltration trenches. General Conditions of Approval 1. Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department,and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet,if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2. Per Meridian City Code(MCC),the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 3. The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works),a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A)and an 81/2"x I I"map with bearings and distances(marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 4. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(UDC 11-3B-6). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ 5. All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 6. All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 7. Any wells that will not continue to be used must be properly abandoned according to Idaho Well Construction Standards Rules administered by the Idaho Department of Water Resources. The Developer's Engineer shall provide a statement addressing whether there are any existing wells in the development,and if so,how they will continue to be used, or provide record of their abandonment. 8. Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. 9. Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. 10. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing,landscaping,amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. 11. All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures.Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 12. Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 13. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 14. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 15. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 16. Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 17. The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 18. The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 19. At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ 20. A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting.A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org//public works.aspx?id=272. 21. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit,cash deposit or bond.Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 22. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. Meridian Fire Department 1. Turnaround shall be in accordance with 2018 International Fire Code,Appendix D, and shall meet the minimum specifications of 96'exclusive of shoulders and curbs. D. Irrigation Districts 1. Nampa&Meridian Irrigation District https:llweblink.meridianciU.oLgzl ebLinklbrowse.aspx?id=379817&dbid=0&repo=Meridia nCi 2. Boise Project Board of Control https:llweblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLink/browse.aspx?id=379817&dbid=0&repo=Meridia nCi E. Idaho Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=379817&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X F. West Ada School District(WASD) or Other District/School https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=379817&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X G. Ada County Highway District(ACHD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=379817&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X V. FINDINGS A. Annexation (UDC 11-5B-3E) Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings ■ 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Stafffinds annexation of the subject site with an R-2 and R-4 zoning designation will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Low Density Residential FL UM designation if the Comprehensive Map amendment is approved and if the Applicant complies with the provisions in Section IV. As the designation will be in line with the large estate surrounding properties in the area. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Stafffinds the proposed lot sizes and layout proposed will be consistent with the purpose statement of the residential districts if the Comprehensive Plan map amendment is approved and that housing opportunities will provide consistency with the Comprehensive Plan for that area. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Stafffinds that the map amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Stafffinds the proposed annexation shall not result in adverse impact ofservices. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Stafffinds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City if the property is developed in accord with the provisions in Section IV. B. Comprehensive Plan(UDC 11-513-71)) Upon recommendation from the Commission,the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan,the Council shall make the following findings: 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the other elements of the comprehensive plan. Stafffinds the proposed amendment to R-2 and R-4 is consistent with the zoning in that the proposed development will integrate with the existing land use to the north and south of the property that reside in Ada County and have existing large estate lots. 2. The proposed amendment provides an improved guide to future growth and development of the city. Stafffinds that the proposal to change the FL UM designation from Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential will allow a transition in uses between existing Rural Urban Transition five(5) acre lots to half acre lots providing a larger estate lot than allowed within the medium density residential designation. 3. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Stafffinds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan as noted in Section III. 4. The proposed amendment is consistent with this Unified Development Code. Stafffinds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified Development Code. City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings ■ 5. The amendment will be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses. Stafffinds the proposed amendment will be compatible with abutting existing residential uses in the near vicinity. 6. The proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities. Stafffinds that the proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities in this portion of the city. Sewer and water services are currently available to this site. 7. The proposed map amendment(as applicable)provides a logical juxtaposition of uses that allows sufficient area to mitigate any anticipated impact associated with the development of the area. Stafffinds the proposed map amendment provides a logical juxtaposition of uses and sufficient area to mitigate any development impacts to adjacent properties. 8. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City of Meridian. For the reasons stated in Section V and the subject findings above, Stafffinds that the proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City. C. Preliminary Plat(UDC 11-613-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat,or short plat,the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; Stafffinds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC if the Applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Section IV. 2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Stafffinds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. Sewer and water are available at the site. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; Stafffinds the proposed plat is in substantial conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's Capital Improvement Program. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Stafffinds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Stafffinds the proposed development is not detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Stafffinds the development is preserving the irrigation ditch by keeping it open as a natural feature. D. Private Streets In order to approve the application,the Director shall find the following: City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings ■ l. The design of the private street meets the requirements of this Article; The Director finds that the proposed private street design meets the requirements. 2. Granting approval of the private street would not cause damage hazard, or nuisance, or other detriment to persons,property, or uses in the vicinity; and The Director finds that the proposed private street would not cause damage, hazard, or nuisance, or other detriment to persons,property, or uses in the vicinity if all conditions of approval are met. 3. The use and location of the private street shall not conflict with the comprehensive plan and/or the regional transportation plan. The Director finds the use and location of the private street does not conflict with the comprehensive plan or the regional transportation plan because the proposed design meets all requirements. 4. The proposed residential development(if applicable) is a mew or gated development. The Director finds the use and location of the private street does not conflict with the comprehensive plan or the regional transportation plan because the proposed design meets all requirements and is gated part of the development. VI. ACTION A. Staff: Staff recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map, annexation and preliminary plat per the provisions in Section IV in accord with the Findings in Section V. B. Commission: Pending C. City Council: Pending City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Action ■ ' 1 , . Z ct Location of Impac .......... LU -': Analysis f- � fy l w I i I r.i l Lkfm HAZEL I Legend ; Project f Location Analysis %'!Area of Impact 11� L1Je- ■r ���p ♦~� •••••,ii 11 0RUT 11 ` ■s 1 �� ounuu, hw4Mrann,I ENo.ff � ril nar•,I , �. ME E p milli KE _�nn Legend .- f 4 � 1 Project Location Q Low Density: Area of Impact Residentia . Analysis r ffiedlu s uiin� mnrii I �� r� 1\ 9 milli jig 111 ■� t■ Illnlllll I`�� Density 11111111�= �nnmm� =� _-Resi NINYN _ 'ann � i1NIB �+1 . — • .. _ LAKE HAZEL 1$r,► ,Med-High Density I�i,rgp� Residential -1 a 1. . . Legend LocationProject c Area of Impact fY�nnln IuuR1 � i:n City Limits W nun morn = I��nr• '�='r "7 _ _8411_',-1 1�'- ww ww =[Ellllitllll `•a,lt - � .�v, Planned Parcels ___ o :: nnnnnm - �►j �� 1 . Analysis =cliu�luuiul ul� __unuunw=_.� �j 111111' 1 Illlr� 1 til�til�l�l Irinn�f •. ,,,, Inllr� =_d' �ppgll 111':111l IIII _ IIIII�liil-�ll'wnlnui ,�. „�� n HIllh� -- 1}■ .It.,IL.ILA...6..11..11..�- =__ lli 11�� _ on•�� -=IIIIIIIIIIIIIuI IIIIIIIIIII 111 "'�l ■ __=lllllllllllllllll� iIIIIIIIIIII _ 1.111=_ -IIIIIIIIIIRIIII I-IIIIIIIII'II 11= �+�� rl�zir��:9-11111.--�mtunlul u _ ��mrr ql IIIIII.1�11�___�J _111`11111 1 J -�-=111111111111� �- I 11� 1 LAKE HAZEL - - Ilnlllllln'Illilllilllll=i.-_ Il�llllllljlllllll ill ol.y pin• - ��m ra+� 4 y���IIII =IDnl 111[I is BE 11111111=i=_ ��= --- i1�==m 7111`IIIII�l�l�lllln Illllu"1 �Ir 5. Map Notes Recent Area Preliminary Plats(within last 5-years): H-2021-0020,H-2022-0036,H-2023- 0041 Recent Area Conditional Use Permits (within last 5-years): H-2020-0009, H-2020-0057, H-2020-0117,H-2021-0021,H-2021-0036,H-2021-0087, H-2020-0056, H-2019-0097 H-2022-0036,H-2022-0050,H-2023-0041,H-2024-0014,H-2024-0041 B. Subject Site Photos w., - M t City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ 1, ,V City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ 'i r l City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits F61 City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ i a' t . A. y �a 1 r City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ r _ a I�,FH iA • is .-� - __ _____��-:,,ii�l1 ^. !• - i Ip��il1 '�. #4'$��r{��Yp ,��y.- a -,;,"fi 11llll!! _ Y i �� ��-r ems+ ��� a��t �. a.� !���� �� � �„ .t %Y'�$s�`as�'�' ^g. J� ` s� ��1.' ""�� 't� �'•l�''rlb> •f' y � 3 �, "S . ��t. Asa r 1 • n -rH� ✓ti .Y ye„xa e ZAut � t ' r , ryyi �14 4 mz maw mm$ �c. u w t>l•r e I •.. �M �� fir.-.'.. � i MeridianDepartment 10 �r-dPkL jr- 14 } v �.—+�l'�,1� �� '. � -''.}• ti.yam,�; � _z ,� '� �a • 1 '�4•�54�L'}' i V - �fir"�• ..z rtx• ' '-� - +� �`•'' 'fir r' tiJ. , .# t .w City of MeridianDepartment Re 11Exhibits i . � 7 ry 7 ti - DepartmentCity of Meridian po C. Service Accessibility Report PARCEL S1131346650 SERVICE ACCESSIBILITY Overall Score: 1 �2nd Percentile Description Location Within 112 mile of City Limits YELLOW Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains 500-2,400 ft.from parcel YELLMV Floodplain Either not within the 140 yr floodplain or > 2 acres GREEN Emergency Services Fire Response time 5-9 min. YELLOIV Emergency Services Police Meets response time goals some of the time YELLMki Pathways Within 1/4 mile of future pathways YELLOW Transit Not within 1/4 of current or future transit route Arterial Road Buildout Status Ultimate configuration (#of lanes in master streets YELLOW plan) > existing (* of lanes) & road IS in 5 yr work plan School Walking Proximity From 112 to 1 mile walking YELLOIV School Drivability Not within 2 miles driving of existing or future school 1PRED Either a Regional Park within 1 mile OR a Community Park Walkability Park within 1/2 mile OR a Neighborhood Park within GREEN 1/4 mile walking City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ A Preliminary Plat(date: 4/7/2025) � `fig ❑' ❑' i F.� S 1611m I - ❑ gym "r- -------- - ------I ----------- - -�----r- m p p i n GIB mM I M I ) M _ _ a � � I IsFI An Al ;Iuc-i I I I I I am d I $BLOGK4 A$yzyGm$l SsFmTor0 0�oy�g S OC�lo�I�Il��Z;n�II r L------JL---- z—ZTaT+D0 lCDam7l O 2 Z Ir---r--- i pr� D`-------_. m aa0 O y r NQO, Z uN12 nzpv w 5LOGK3 A®& p a "' � 1' pq I !^ � �8 NHrrE IOBE OWATIR l/lll _e 8 ------ I 1 Q ��s��� Ijr• I I I Y I I � � F�i■ �0 r �O I I ' 1 / D . ... 1 r� v m Mz MONDT MEADOWS SUBDIVISION $e l l a 6162 S. TARREGA LANE !I MERIDIAN, ID 83642 PRELIMINARY PLAT PRELIMINARY PLKF-- City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ E. Landscape Plan(date: 4/7/2025) I O ' m " ®. «� --- --i r--- --r r----i-, tr I - ' I _ D i ou _ 1 y 1 , M w,�v rr RR 1 g$ t g} .i-...- �. r----,—r r-------z.r----'�i--�-- —` y � � ■k: ��° BI�}$S1 i$ 8�6�F${ qF II II I — I g $ F X ------------------ r L__----J L______] Ir-----------� r--------i—� §gva � V Jill I _ --- - - I I�gi_Imil jlmI �#gill- i r-----� a gg jp p F H--gy ���� � ���;��� ---- --- . e wooeuwewr�varq' -1-J 9 Rill lips a@a@ y� 8 pp 9 Jill I,�jq�1 Q ' 999 € 111 I I I I I I ' I I II I I I f I I f a a I I A I �I i >E yy YY yy 14 ------` ---- L--`-------- 1—�' i� z a auru�rnr Arae�pnurri o qa $ga 3 _ m F4 FF P'I F F4AA� §4 9E m �s a 8§ Z rn MONDT MEADOWS SUBDIVISION ' 6162 S.TARREGA LANE " a g MERIDIAN,ID 83142 EL11MINARY PLAT OVERALL LANDSCAPE PLAN City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ F. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(date: 4/7/2025) CITY OF MERIDIAN SINGLE FAMILY (R-2 AND R-4) OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS QUALIFIED OPEN SPACE R-7i as GPE34 SPACE TOTAL AFm A. slalsgRy fM QYME TMaURE" =.TJ1 SP tlpa 9F{.42AW mm5FtBOACJ RK*LIFIEJ7 OPE14 SPWCU {-5-25 AG] V, 13% Q-4•12%ORN 5PAr.•E IQj.AAL& M JE .MOP{9.5 hi} REWRED 115,142 5F E9}Dq 5F{3]+wJ 0;,e2AEIpw op"9P-L Nam AO 12% LANDSCAPE LEGEND GUFLIFIFD tlP@I SPlrCE w Q H a z •-T AREA-5.340 SQ.RT. AREA-29.747 SQ.FT. r - - - - - - E. E 30ALATION DRIVE 4712025 4r �y Y x 9 NICNDT MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PRDJECT#2aosa Y� S. TARIREGA LANE, MERIDIAN . --- OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT EX1.2 City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ G. Open Space Amenities Exhibit(date: 4/7/2025) r1PERGOLA AMENITY /n1FIRE PR AMENTY /i-1TABLE AMENITY y Z CALLOUT LEGEND — � � a �W �ZN 7 CO ul O X qI� 0Q¢ Q~c Z tAMENRY AREA ENLARGEMENT n6ENCH AMENITY " T Exii -r - nPERGOLA AAAENITY AFIRE PIT AMENITY STABLE AMENITY r1 0 ,M on a:ia fV2 BENCH AMENITY City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ H. Building Elevations (date: 12/13/2024) 7.4 �r r �A City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ f qPh } City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ ■WAvow-.lor"w- f f City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ I. Annexation Legal Description &Exhibit Map .,ACCURATE *-I, r re SURVSwING & MAPPING r f r A V I LE Jab No_23-257 Exterior Boundary Description A parcel of land being a portion of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 31,Township 3 North,Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian,Meridian,Idaho,being more particularly described as fellows: BEGINNING at the found 2 inch aluminum cap on a 5/8 Inch iron pin stamped PL5 11463 at the Center-South Sixteenth Corner of Section 31,T.3 N.,R.1 E.,from which the found 5/8 inch iron pin with plastic cap labeled PLS 12459 at the Quarter Corner common to Sections 31&6 bears 500'15'S44 W a distance of 1341.76 feet; Thence along the east boundary line of the said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 315 W 15'S4"W for a distance of 391.80 feet to a found 5f 81'inch iron pin with a 2 inch aluminum cap stamped PL5 11463; Thence 5 00"15'54"W a distance of 391.80 feet to a found 5je inch iron pin with a 2 Inch aluminum cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence 133.61 feet along curve to the right,said curve having a radius of 523.50feet,a central angle of 14'87' 23"and a long chord bearing N 82°25'25"W a distance of 133.25 feet to a fund 5/8"inch iron pfn with a 2 inch aluminurn cap stamped PL5 11463; Thence N 75'06'43"W fora distance of 94.39 feetto a found 5/801 inch iron pin with a 2 inch aluminum cap stamped PL5 11463; Thence 122.R4 feet along a curve to the left,said curve having a radius of 476.50 Feet,a central angle of 14'43' 21"and a long chord bearing N 82'28'24"W a distance of 122.10 feet to a found 5/9"inch iron pin with a 2 inch aluminum cap stamped PL511463; Thence continuing N 89'So'D4"W fora distance of 308,87 feet to a found 5f811 inch iron pin with a 7 inch aluminum cap stamped PL5 11463; Thence N 89'49'59"W for a distance of 653,49 feet to a found 1/2 inch iron pin with a plastic cap labeled PLS 11463; Thence N 00'06'14"W for a distance of 334.40 feet to a found stone monument with a chiseled"x"; Thence S 89'5V 3r E fora distance of 1309.14 feet to a found 5/8"'inch iron pin with a 2 inch aluminum cap stamped PILS 11463,said corner being the Center-South 1/16th Corner the POINT OF RIEGINNING; Said parcel contains 10.278 acres,more-or less. Q � 11463 1520 W.Washington St.,Boise,ID 83702 •Phone:208-488-4227 • � www.acc❑rate5urveyors-corn City of Meridian I Department Report Vll. Exhibits 79 EXHIBIT MAP A PORTION OF LAND LWNC WITHIN THE SE 114 OF- THE SW 114 OF SEC77ON X. T31d.. R.1E., B.M. ADA COUNTY—STATE OF IDAHO Q415ELE0 X" IN S7ONE S 89'51 33"E 1309.14' SCALE: 1"-200' 11167N a 10.278-+AC, ' . n 3 z v, a• �N m� N89 49 59 W 653.49 3p8.$7 m M LEGEND m BOUNDARY LINE N 7,5 p1'43" C2 ' °SECTION LINE 94.39 ` PARCEL LIME q m FOUND 2"ALUA41NLW CAP [n 4 IN ASPHALT ■ FOUWTH P AS77 IRON PIN, 3631 N 89 4_2_74" W__2494.4C_' 1 E_ 31 ]14 CORNER N47H PLA571C CAP, AS NOTED __�_ T.3 N. I> FOUND 5/8"IRON PIN H7F11 1 6 SECTION CORNER E [A}f(E HAZEL RD. T•2N. R.1.E B. 6 2"ALUMINUM CAP, PLS 11463 R.1 W.I R.i E. FOUND 112"IRON PIN, WTH PLAS77C CAP, PLS 4725 O SET 518"IRON PIN W7H 2"ALUMNUM CAP, PLS 11463 P.O.B. POINT OF BEGINNINC S' ATE CURVE TABLE ACW V ' SURVEYINO & NAPP1#0 1146 3 53 1520 W.Washington SL CURVE ARC LENGTH RADIUS DELTA ANGLE CHORD BEARING CHORD LENGTH i 122.44' O*L r Idabo 8370 2 3 . 0' .1 9 (203)488.4227C2 52351 14'37'23' N 62-25'25" W 1 133.25' OF Accurat r"PF,54 um N J. DATE DEC 7024 "24-ZM City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ J. R-2 Rezone Exhibit(date: 3/18/2025) 4�i� racy .,ACCURATE � �o 5JRVEYikG & MAPPING t 8 F R V;T. Job No-24-244 Description for Re-Zoning A parcel of land being a portion of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 31,Township 3 North,Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Idaho,being more particularly described as follows-. BEGINNING at the found 2 Inch aluminum cap on a 5/8 inch iron pin stamped PL5 11463 at the Center-South Sixteenth Corner of Section 31,T_3 N„R.1 E.,from which the found 5/8 inch iron pin with plastic cap labeled PLS 12459 at the Quarter Corner common to Sections 31&5 bears S 00'15'54"W a distance of 1341.76 feet; Thence S 89'51'33"E for a distance of 62.50 feet to a point on the centerline of S,Sublimity Ave.as shown in the proposed plat of Apex Northwest Subdivision#4,Page 2,Block 14; Thence 5 00'15'54"W along the centerline of said 5.Sublimity Ave.for a distance of 391.80 feet; Thence N 89'51'33"W for a distance of 62.50feet to a found 5/8 inch iron pin with a 2 inch aluminum cap stamped PL5 11463; Thence 133.61 feet along a curve W the right,said curve having a radius of 523.50 feet,a central angle of 14`37' 23"and a long chord bearing N 82'25'25"W a distance of 133.25 feet to a found 5/81'inch iron pm with a 2 Inch aluminum cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence N 75'D5'43"W for a distance of 9439 feet to a found 5/8"Inch iron pin with a 2 inch aluminum cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence 122.44 feet along a curve to the left,said curve having a radius of 476.50 feet,a central angle of 14'43' 21"and a long chord bearing N 92'28'24"W a distance of 122.10 feet to a found 5/81h inch iron pin with a 2 inch aluminum cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence continuing N 89'50'04"W for a distance of 308.87 feet to a-Found 5/81h inch iron pin with a plastic cap labeled PLS 4725; Thence N 85'49'59"W for a distance of 346.90 feet to a set 5{3tn inch iron pin with a 2 inch aluminum cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence N GO'10'01"E fora distance of 334.54 feet to a set 5/8t'inch iron pin with a 2 inch aluminum cap stamped PL511463-1 Thence S 89'51'33"E fora distance of 1000.97 feet to a found 5/8m inch iron pin with a 2 inch aluminum cap stamped PLS 11453,said corner being the Center-South 1/16th Cornerthe PQINTOF BEGINNING: Said parcel contains 8.480 acres,more or less. 11463 1520 VV.Washington St..Boise,ID 83702-Phone:208-488-4227 www.accu mtesurveyors.corn City of Meridian I Department Report V11. Exhibits 81 EXHIBIT MAP A PARCEL DE LAND L7]NO W P41N WE SE 114 OF THE SW 114 QF SECTION 31, T.31V., R.I E. B.M. ADA COUNTY—STATE OF IDAHO C—s SCALE: 7"=200' S 69'51 33" E 1063.47' I/16TH P.O.D- LEGEND w T000.97' r I L 1 L. BOUNDARY LINE °_ 3 ?lfK 'a o ----- SECTION LINE + z 3 I ' k2> 7.9I8fAC. ■ �c o z " PARCEL LINE IF SPHAL T ALUMINUM CAP O • P70UNO 5/8'IRON PIN. 010 PLASAC CAP, AS NOTED 348.9 , 0 IV ¢ 1 e F1W10 5/8"IRON PIN H1TH N 89 48'59" W 308.87 m y 1 4 w 2'ALUMINUM CAP, PLS 71463 0 • F041NO 112"IRON PIN, 64TN C2 C2 PLASTIC CAP. PLS 4725 N 75 O6'43' { 0 sEr 5/8"IRON PIN WN 94.39' f �I 2"ALUMINUM CAP, PLS 11463 1 0! P.D.B. PLWT OF OEQ'VNING 1 0 CALCULATED POINT 36 7 ____N 89 42 24" W__2490.40_ T.3NR.1_E_ L T I14 CORNER T 1 B SfC11ON CORNER E. LAKE HAZEL RD. iT.2N- R.1.E s-S.M. R !a• 6 LINE TABLE R.1 W.1 _I E. LJNE BEARING p15TANCE LLy- L1 5 BT51 33 E 62.50' �^ ACCURATE L2 N 89'S3'39" W S2.S0 "v tl 1 1 4C3 2 a9R520W.W i �fnSP CURVE TABLE 1520 W.Washim�lpn 5r_ IND 114F.25� Base,Idaho 8M2 CURVE ARC LENGTH RADIUS DELTA ANOLE CHORD BEARING CHOfiD LENGTH (208)488-427 CF lDT wu^n•.accuratesurveyors¢xn C7 122-44 478-50 14'43'21" N W2824 W f22.10' '1q NJ.n��G C2 133.61' 523.50' 14'37'23 N 82'2525'W 133.25' LAM DEC;2424 JO,724-244 City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ K. R-4 Rezone Exhibit(date: 3/18/2025) ACCURATE � y � SURVEYING $ MAPPING y 'Pt 0 c Job No.23-257 Description for Ike-Zane A parcel of land being a portion of the Southeast Quarterof the Southwest Quarter of 5ection 31,Township 3 North,Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian,Meridian,Idaho,being more particularly described as foilows; Commencing at the found 2 inch aluminum cap on a 5/8 inch iron pin stamped PLS 11463 at the Center-South Sixteenth Corner of Section 31,T_3 N-,R.1 E.,from which the found 5/8 inch iron pin with plastic cap labeled PLS 12459 at the Quarter Corner common to Sections 31&6 bears 5 00'15'54"W a distance of 1341-76 feet; thence N 89.51'33"W a distance of 1000.97 feet to a set 5/8"inch iron pin with a 2 inch aluminum cap stamped PL5 11463 and the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence 5 00'10'01"W for a distance of 334.54 feet to a set 5/8tn inch iron pin with a 2 inch aluminum cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence N 89'49'59"W for a distance of 3D5-59 feet to a found 1/2 inch Iron pin with a plastic cap labeled PLS 11463; Thence N 00'W 14"W for a distance of 334.40 feet to a found stone monument with a chiseled"X"; Thence S 89'51'33"E for a distance of 308.17 feet to a set 518"inch iron pin with a 2 inch aluminum cap stamped PL5 11461,the POINT OF BEGINNING; Said parcel contains 2.350 acres or 102,809 square feet,more or less. R J¢ 11463 1 1520 W.Washington St., Boise,IQ 83702•Phone:208-488-4227 www-accuratesurveyors.com City of Meridian Department Report V11. Exhibits 83 EXHIBIT MAP A POR710N OF LAND LYING IWTHfN THE SE i/4 OF 7N£ SW 114 OF SEC 770N Jr. T,3Y.. R.1E., B AI. ADA COUNTY—STATE OF IDAHO CHISELED X' 1N sTON£ S H9�1:33" F 1309.14' 30817' P.C.S. 1000.07' c-s SCALE: V'=200' S B951'33" E 3 i/167H It a n g o 2.360,EAC. 306.59" tl. ¢ H w IV 69 4959" W ❑a r u o❑ G7 a R 4 SECTION CORNER 1 f4 CORNEli 36 1 N 89 4_2_24" W_ 2490._40__L.,,jN, p,} 114 cc. 31 LEGEND 6 T E. CAKE HAZEL RD. r.zN. R 1.E B.M. s BOUNDARY LINE -- SECRON LJNE PARCEL LINE FOUND 2'ALUA41NUW CAP IN A5PHALT ■ FOUND 5/8"IRON PIN, WM PLASTIC CAP, AS MOVED FOUND MNU i1463 IRON PIN N114 ACLU'yam TH 2"ALUMINUM CAP, PLS • FOUND 14'IRON PIN, w7H SURVEYING & YAPPING PLAS77C CAP, PLS 4725 11463 s•:r•z5 O SET 518"IRON PIN ami5B.F..dah.83-2 , 2'ALUMINUM CAP, PL5 I7463 91F'OF �pP wwwaa0stesurveyon.00m . 488-4227 D.B. POW'CF BEGINNING ��AN J❑��G DATE,DrC MM J0824-244 City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ L. CPAM Exhibit(date: 3/I8/2O25) Fay t Adopted FUNFe Laud Uses Legend x ___ _ _ ______ ___ Fuiurc Land Uses --- - ------- CI1ywJt,- - Lnw prrr.Ily Rl:.5i FItinI rhndlUm Dtmsilyf2cnidcnlitil frrd-H di DunylyRasidcrrriA - Hiph Density Residenlicil — Commercial LdlfE•HAfiFL�- — -- - Ofrioe - IncludAw Live` Proposed Future Land Uses - C3al rows mlxea Ux�-N ht:.rt sand ® Mixed Us,-- Mixed Us-Regional — Mimad Use Nor-R%ide iid r Mixed Use-Interchange Ter Mile Spsci!ic - Low DonsiFy Employ:on`- ' Lifestyle Cerier — __ . -___High Density Employment # MiweG Employment E mixed Ue-•kf.siden[bl +-- - ------- -' ® Mlxr U Usp C.mmrxadcd SAKE HAIEL City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ VIII. ADDITIONAL NOTES & DETAILS FOR STAFF REPORT MAPS,TABLES,AND CHARTS (link to Community Metrics) A. One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Notes This data is automatically derived from enterprise application and GIS databases, and exported dynamically. Date retrieved notes generally reflect data acquired or processed within the last 30- days.Analysis is based on a one-mile radius from the centroid of the identified parcel. Parcel based data excludes certain properties and represents land as it exists now. Properties considered are only those with a total assessed value greater than 0(i.e. excludes most HOA area,transitional development, government, and quasi government facilities). The following values also constrain included property acreage to reduce outliers and non-conforming instances from distorting averages: R-2<5.0; R-4<2.0; R-8< 1.0; R-15 <0.5; R-40<0.25. Conditional Use Permits and Preliminary plat data likely include duplicate project submittals as they may be for the same project, approved at different times through multiple application types. Consider each independently or review prior application approvals. Some approved entitlements, and particularly older ones,may be constructed. Decennial population counts and household counts are based on the most recent Decennial Census. Current population and current household values are COMPASS estimates,usually for the year previous, and are based on traffic analysis zone boundaries(TAZ's). B. Mixed Use Analysis Notes This data is derived from enterprise application and GIS databases, and exported dynamically. Data considered for analysis are only those areas overlapping the overall Mixed Use boundary area. Mixed Use areas across arterial roadways are distinct, separate, and not considered as they do not meet the mixed use principles in the Comprehensive Plan(e.g.pedestrian safety, transportation efficiency, etc.). Mixed Use parcel areas may be greater or smaller than the future land use area designation boundary due parcel size,configuration,right-of-way, and other factors. Conditional Use Permits and Preliminary plat data likely include duplicate project submittals as they may be for the same project, approved at different times through multiple application types. Consider each independently or review prior application approvals. C. Service Assessment Notes This data represents existing conditions derived from our enterprise application and GIS database, exported through dynamic reporting. The system references the most recent available data from various sources, including sewer main lines, sewer trunksheds, floodplain, fire service areas and response times,police crime reporting,pathway information,existing and planned transit, roadway improvements, school and park proximity, and other resources. The tool provides context for project review,using multiple indicators consistently. Data from similar topics may vary based on different levels of review. The overall score is based on weighted criteria(not a ranked order), and the percentile score compares the parcel to others in the city(higher is better). This tool was developed as a City Council priority and outcome of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan. Scores,whether high or low, are just one data point and should not be the sole basis for decisions. D. ACHD Roadway Infographic Notes The Ada County Highway District utilizes a number of planning and analysis tools to understand existing and future roadway conditions. • Existing Level of service(LOS).LOS indicator is a common metric to consider a driver's experience with a letter ranking from A to F.Letter A represents free flow conditions, and on the other end Level F represents forced flow with stop and go City of Meridian I Department Report VIII. Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts ■ conditions. These conditions usually represent peak hour driver experience. ACHD considers Level D, stable flow,to be acceptable. The LOS does not represent conditions for bikes or pedestrians, nor indicate whether improvements: are possible; if there are acceptable tradeoffs; or if there is a reasonable cost-benefit. • Integrated Five Year Work Plan (IFYWP).The IFYWP marker(yes/no) indicates whether the specified roadway is listed in the next 5-years. This work may vary, from concept design to construction. • Capital Improvement Plan(CIP).The CIP marker(yes/no)indicates whether the specified roadway is programmed for improvement in the next 20-years. City of Meridian I Department Report VIII. Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts ■ E IDIAN;--- Applicant Presentation Mondt Meadows IDAHO, MERIDIAN Subdivision H 4 zoning districts-2 and R-10.28 acres in the proposed RPreliminary Plat consisting of 11 building lots (10 new and 1 existing) and 4 common lots on 4: 2.36 acres-R2: 8.48 acres-R Annexation of 10.84 acres of land from RUT in Ada Countydesignation from Medium Density Residential to Low Density ResidentialAmendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the future land use AZ, CPAM, PP0067 Mondt Meadows Subdivision-2024- Site Location PROJECT SITE SiteProject East of Meridian Road North of Lake Hazel Road and Future Land Plan Amendment to adjust to Proposing a Comprehensive Density Residential zoneProperty resides in Medium Use Map Zoning Map 2-R4-R development15 -is approved as an RSky Ranch to the south and west 4 Medium Density Residential-R2 Low Density Residential / -RProposed to annex and zone as Transition (RUT) in Ada CountyProperty is Rural Urban Sky Ranch ZoningUpdated 2-RApex 8-RApex 15-RApex 4-RShafer View Estates 2-4 / R-Proposed RMondt Meadows4-Proposed RShafer View Ridge 15-Approved R Schools ELEMENTARYMcPHERSONMARY VICTORY MIDDLE SCHOOLSCHOOLMOUNTAIN VIEW HIGH Project Site 2.3 miles–Mary McPherson Elementary School 3.8 miles–Victory Middle School 4.2 miles–Mountain View High School Emergency MERIDIAN FIRE STATION #7MERIDIAN FIRE STATION #4 Project Site 1.5 miles–Meridian Fire Station #7 5.3 miles–Meridian Fire Station #4 Services Proposed Site Open space provided: 1.15 AC4 @ 12%: 0.35 AC-R◦2 @ 8%: 0.42 AC-R◦Open space required: 0.74 AC0.85 AC)-(0.2837,000 SF -Lots from 12,000 family residential lots-10 single10.28 AC site Plan Related Projects Mondt MeadowsShafer View Ridge Roadways◦Pressurized Irrigation◦Water◦Sewer◦timeline for synergyExpect to construct on the same in near futureand preliminary plat to be submitted Shafer View Ridge Subdivision annex Public Utilities developmentsto future To and Through (not shown)connection To offsite water mainExisting 12” water mainProposed 8” View Drconnection offsite in E Shafer nd 2subdivision8” water main within the in S Sublimity AveConnect to existing 12” water main WATER INFRASTRUCTURE Public Utilities developmentsto future To and Through gravity mainExisting 18” gravity mainProposed 8” 8” sewer main within the sitein S Sublimity AveConnect to existing 18” main SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE Irrigation HG 3.44Supply from pondand retention Pump station all common & residential lotsProvide pressure irrigation stubs to Shafer View Ridge, and neighborsshared between Mondt Meadows, and retention pond, expected to be Construct irrigation pump station to propertyPipe irrigation water from headgate View DrHeadgate 3.44 north of E Shafer Improvements Amenities all common & residential lotsProvide pressure irrigation stubs to and retention pondConstruct irrigation pump station Pipe irrigation water from Headgate north of E Shafer View Dr Elevations Elevations Elevations Elevations Thank You! W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing continued from April 3, 2025 for In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile (H-2024-0058) by In-N-Out Burger, located at 5985 & 6037 N. Ten Mile Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2024-0058 A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment in the C-G zoning district within 300 feet of another drive-through facility, existing residences and a residential districts. The request includes extended business hours of operation beyond the 6:00am to 11:00pm limit, with hours from 6:00am to 1:00am Sunday through Thursday and 6:00am to 1:30am Friday and Saturday. 88 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : April 17 , 2025 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 4 PROJECT NAME : In - WOut Burger at Ten Mile ( H - 2024 - 0058 ) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name 1 3613 c 0 SLA n4 tr CoVlz L n 7� o WP 5 Ic OCX LpnL 2rv' n, !6j �cf60 4/ Lvs4 r lPirl 04CLAIJD �� t� lka ra 6 8 r rjtc�l civboyr, live � I i Gtr1 az 1vc w . U u 6 l , n 5�( 10 'Z1 � ✓ WROMA 9� \ o\ LA, L 12 )j `3 AV 14 �� �U ,�� PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : April 17, 2025 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 4 PROJECT NAME : In - N - Out Burger at Ten Mile ( H - 2024 - 0058 ) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name 01 jt� 4 J br � � � ► ' � 13 iAJ �- •�{S � � � i � Vet 9, 3wl 5 3C1 OC W LAOLCiZPkftxn N �i � Ir� l.5 ��_ fit` ►2. t t� �� J u 7 k�`l -6 6 35�( 1/ 41 Srrlt/ Pr -T ?P6Ll 7 3 Z S G✓ /1. N i'10i ) D2 To cb g 1 KI �lc,� � A r✓ y� D ELL to 0 LA) LO -5 T PA 11JPkWQc 10 f S � 11 C ` 43T6 Ow 12 y7 . 1�{> � t/f OTII 13 � �. � � �.5 � der � d la(n, LWQ bi � � � Lwj� 9=1W qz PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : April 17 , 2025 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 4 PROJECT NAME : In - WOut Burger at Ten Mile ( H - 2024 - 0058 ) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name 2 t) u� i K` dk 69 461 N ►30tticCO Ave 3 /V(ch cL 171c 41 41 r62 S- ?� Al Cevdell hArvt 4 n o re w - )L A4arit24 61rc�ner 6 5"9 0 4 malty to/ r,�y A/ o )Aw o Ctf�z m ukd v w J � cA o I o T P V � h ��`k �Ywnvj 1:7Cikt3I (h 10 Go 12 13 14 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : April 17, 2025 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 4 PROJECT NAME : In - WiDut Burger at Ten Mile ( W2024 - 0058 ) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name 1 t2 ( AJv Al << (mac �- Z� � 12- 2PSf � vS � a`P, �� s►� f � qn U 1 � 3 ut) CtA aL,w 4 Aw �� 5 6 11) 4 u } CX� n r 7 15 01 8 � - , i � 9 n� SVI N . C� I � sSec�n 10 11 12 / 13 L� r ��� 5 C)c y&s ,G(' Shc�� IO SHr to 14 �zt o N . s EA6LIFr ALIT �( � PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : April 17, 2025 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 4 PROJECT NAME : In - N - Out Burger at Ten Mile ( W2024 - 0058 ) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name 4 6 L 7 9 10 n AN ) P" �10�1 aversY 12 q1 , z S� ,) P) v covE, ILI 14 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : April 17 , 2025 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 4 PROJECT NAME : In - N - Out Burger at Ten Mile ( H - 2024 - 0058 ) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name A [ 4-P 2 WC, CW CIA c� e� S � 1ZN C 'tLCMT" ONG 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : April 17 , 2025 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 4 PROJECT NAME : In - N - Out Burger at Ten Mile ( H - 2024 - 0058 ) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name L /V Wa /fQ ,/ y rpV , d� �� � D ?3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : April 17, 2025 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 4 PROJECT NAME : In - N - Out Burger at Ten Mile ( H - 2024 - 0058 ) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name 1 , C 1 ✓1 dci ✓VL r ! 6G 4 (! Ukt4 2 �. V � c f) 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C��fEPIDIAN*,­, DEPARTMENT REPORT o Qa H o HEARING 4/17/2025 Legend r DATE: Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission Area of Impact F �- �= City Limits FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner 0 Analysis Ty_, + 208-884-55337177 - - sallen@meridiancity.org J @@ APPLICANT: Todd Smith,In-N-Out Burger TLRO 1 J. SUBJECT: H-2024-0058 ` ;' ' lia � In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile �@ 1. LOCATION: 5985 N. Ten Mile Rd.,in the NE '/4 of F1 Section 27,TAN.,RI W. -- - _E I. PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Summary Conditional use permit for a drive-through establishment in the C-G zoning district within 300 feet of another drive-through facility, existing residences and a residential district. The request includes extended business hours of operation beyond the 6:00 am to 11:00 pm limit,with hours from 6:00 am to 1:00 am Sunday through Thursday, and 6:00 am to 1:30 am Friday and Saturday. B. Recommendation Staff. Denial C. Decision Commission: Pending II, COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1•Land Use Description Details Map Ref. Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/undeveloped - Proposed Land Use(s) Restaurant/drive-through establishment - Existing Zoning C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial District) VII.A.2 Proposed Zoning NA Adopted FLUM Designation Commercial VII.A.3 Proposed FLUM Designation NA Table 2: Process Facts Description Details Preapplication Meeting date 10/7/2024 Neighborhood Meeting 7/15/2024 Site posting date 4/7/2025 City of Meridian I Department Report 1. Project Overview ■ Table 3: Community Metrics Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference Ada County Highway District Error! Reference source not found. • Comments Received Yes - • Commission Action Required No - • Access Driveway access to a private drive aisle along the west side of the site that connects to W.Lost Rapids Dr. ITD Comments Received Yes Note: See section IV. City/Agency Comments&Conditions for comments received or see public record: https://weblink.meridianciN.oLy WebLink/browse.aspx?id=367313&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX III, STAFF ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code (UDC) A. General Overview This property is designated Commercial on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM) in the Comprehensive Plan. It's located within the commercial area where Costco is located,which includes several smaller commercial pads around the perimeter of the development fronting on W. Chinden Blvd. and N. Ten Mile Rd. Multi-family apartments exist directly to the west of the site (south of Costco)across a 35-foot-wide driveway that provides access to the overall development via Lost Rapids Dr., a collector street between W. Chinden Blvd. and N. Ten Mile Rd. Table 4: Pro aect Overview Description Details History H-2018-0004(AZ,PP,CPAM,VAR—DA Inst.2018-079970),FP-2019- 0056 Acreage 2.22 acres B. History In 2018,the subject property was annexed as part of a larger development area consisting of residential and commercial property zoned R-40 and C-G and included in a preliminary plat.A development agreement was required as a provision of annexation,which governs future development of the property. The property was later included in a final plat as Lots 14& 15, Block 1,Lost Rapids Subdivision. C. Site Development and Use Analysis (Staff comments in italics) 1. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2): The proposed use aligns with the Commercial FLUM designation in the Comprehensive Plan. A restaurant is a principal permitted use in the C-G district,but a drive-through establishment requires approval of a conditional use permit(CUP)when the property is within 300 feet of another drive-through facility, a residential district, or an existing residence in accord with UDC Table 11-2B-3. In this case,the property is within 300 feet of another drive-through facility directly to the north(i.e. Cafe Rio), and existing residences and a residential district directly to the west(i.e. Olivia Apartments&Townhomes,zoned R-40). Single-family residential uses and zoning also exist to the east across N. Ten Mile Rd. but are separated from the site by a 5-lane arterial street. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ The C-G zoning district limits business hours of operation from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm when the property abuts a residential use or district; extended hours may be requested through a CUP. Technically,this site does not directly abut a residential use or district—there is a 20' wide strip of land between this site and the adjacent residential development and R-40 zoning district owned by Costco,zoned C-G. Although hours of operation wouldn't be restricted by the UDC in this instance per se,hours may still be limited through the CUP. The Applicant proposes business hours of operation until 1:00 am Sunday through Thursday, and 1:30 am Friday and Saturday.Although business hours are allowed to start at 6:00 am, the Applicant states the business won't open until 10:30 am. Deliveries are proposed to occur between the hours of 2:00 am and 9:00 am during non-business hours. The Applicant states trucks do not have to back up to deliver,which will avoid any back-up warning beeping. Note: When Costco was approved, deliveries were not allowed to occur between the hours of 10:00 pm and 5:00 am to minimize noise impacts to adjacent residential neighbors. Because this site is in such close proximity to residential uses to the west, Staff does not recommend approval of extended hours of operation beyond those allowed in the district,in accord with Comprehensive Plan Policy#5.01.0117 below. "Minimize noise, lighting, and odor disturbances from commercial developments to residential dwellings by enforcing city code."(Comprehensive Plan Policy#5.01.01F) If the CUP is approved,the Commission should specify allowed hours of operation and if deliveries are allowed after-hours as proposed. 2. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): Development of the site shall comply with the dimensional standards of the C-G district in UDC Table 11-213-3. Staff has reviewed the proposed plans and building elevations and they comply with these standards. 3. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3): Drive-Through Establishment: The proposed drive-through establishment is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11,Drive-Through Establishment. All establishments providing drive-through service are required to identify the stacking lane, menu and speaker location(if applicable), and window location on the site plan. The proposed site plan depicts stacking lanes and service locations as required. Only one (1) menu board and speaker is proposed; two (2) umbrella stands are proposed for weather protection for employees to take orders remotely farther down the drive-through lane. The site plan is required to demonstrate safe pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation on the site and between adjacent properties. Sidewalks exist within the street buffers along Lost Rapids Dr. and N. Ten Mile Rd.A pedestrian walkway is proposed from the perimeter sidewalk along Ten Mile to the main building entrance in accord with UDC 11-3A-19B.4; another walkway is proposed from the building entrance to the north. If approved, Staff recommends a minimum S'wide sidewalk is provided along the west side of the site alongside the north/south drive aisle for pedestrian safety. At a minimum,the plan is required to demonstrate compliance with the following standards: 1) Stacking lanes have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways, drive aisles and the public right-of-way by patrons; The site plan indicates capacity for 29 vehicles within the proposed stacking lanes. While this would typically be sufficient, Staff is concerned it may not be sufficient for this constrained site. These concerns are informed by ongoing traffic issues in the area and operational challenges observed at the In-N-Out at The Village at Meridian. There, during the extended City of Meridian I Department Report 111. Staff Analysis ■ period following its opening—and potentially still during peak times—vehicle queues exceeded site boundaries, spilling into internal drive aisles that serve parking for the broader development. In that case, the impact was mitigated by lower parking demand due to the area not being fully built out, and the absence of overflow onto a public right-of-way. Since its opening a year and a half ago, activity at that location has decreased, resulting in reduced stacking and impact on adjacent properties. While the addition of a second location may help distribute customer traffic, the proposed site presents greater risk due to its proximity to residential uses,public right-of-way and other high-traffic commercial uses. Vehicle queues may obstruct key internal drive aisles used for on-site parking, the access driveway off Lost Rapids, and potentially the adjacent public right-of-way(Lost Rapids Dr), compounding existing circulation and safety concerns. Many letters of opposition have been received from area residents and patrons of adjacent commercial uses attesting to the traffic and congestion issues in this area and concerns the proposed use will only exacerbate these issues. 2) The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking, except stacking lanes may provide access to designated employee parking. Approximately 400 feet of the stacking lane is a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking; however, Staff is concerned stacking will extend from this area and block circulation lanes needed for access and parking internal and external to the site during peak hours. If approved,parking spaces nearest the stacking lane along the west boundary of the site should be designated for employee parking only. 3) The stacking lane shall not be located within ten(10) feet of any residential district or existing residence; The stacking lane is not located within 10'of any residential district or residence. The nearest apartment building is approximately 80 feet from the stacking lane. 4)Any stacking lane greater than one hundred(100) feet in length shall provide for an escape lane; and The first 170+/-feet of the drive-through has a double stacking lane, which transitions to a single stacking lane with an escape lane for the last 230+/-feet up to the pick-up window, meeting this requirement. 5) The site should be designed so that the drive-through is visible from a public street for surveillance purposes. The two (2)pay windows are located along and are visible from N. Ten Mile Rd.for surveillance purposes. The applicant shall provide a six-foot sight obscuring fence where a stacking lane or window location adjoins a residential district or an existing residence. The site is separated from the multi family development to the west by a 2-way drive aisle so this requirement is not applicable. Restaurant: The proposed use is also subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11- 4-3-49 for restaurants, as follows: Parking: At a minimum,one(1)parking space shall be provided for every two hundred fifty(250) square feet of gross floor area. Upon any change of use for an existing building or tenant space, a detailed parking plan shall be submitted that identifies the available parking for the overall site that complies City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ with the requirements of this title. Based on 3,886 square feet of gross floor area for the proposed restaurant, a minimum of 16 vehicle parking spaces are required; a total of 73 spaces are proposed, which meets and exceeds the minimum standard. D. Design Standards Analysis 1. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): "Require appropriate landscaping, buffers, and noise mitigation with new development along transportation corridors (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc)." (Comprehensive Plan policy#3.07.01 C) i. Landscape buffers along streets Street buffers are required to be provided with development per UDC Table 11-2B-3 based on the street classification with landscaping per the standards in UDC 11-3B-7C. A 35 foot wide street buffer was installed on this site along N. Ten Mile Road, an arterial road and entryway corridor, and a 20 foot wide street buffer was installed along W. Lost Rapids Dr., a collector street, with the subdivision improvements as required. Additional buffer width is proposed with development of the site ranging from 7 to 11 feet along N. Ten Mile Rd. and 22 feet along W. Lost Rapids Dr. with additional landscaping. ii. Parking lot landscaping Perimeter and internal parking lot landscaping is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8. Planter islands are required to be placed at the ends of rows of parking to delineate and guide traffic movement within the parking area,prevent cross space driving, and to reduce the visual impact of long rows of parked cars.If approved,planter islands should be added at the ends of rows of parking that abut the southern driveway for the site. iii. Landscape buffers to adjoining uses Landscaping within buffers to residential and/or non-industrial uses is required to comply with the standards of UDC 11-3B-9C.No residential uses adjoin the site (the residential apartments to the west are separated from this site by a driveway); therefore, a landscape buffer is not required. iv. Storm integration Storm drainage is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-18. v. Pathway landscaping Landscaping is required to be provided along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C.No pathways are proposed or required within the site. 2. Parking (UDC 11-3C): i. Nonresidential parking analysis As noted above, a minimum of one(1)off-street parking space is required per 250 square feet of gross floor area for the proposed restaurant.Based on the 3,886 square foot building, a minimum of 16 spaces are required.A total of 73 parking spaces are proposed, exceeding the minimum standard by 57 spaces. ii. Bicycle parking analysis A minimum of one(1)bicycle parking space is required for every 25 vehicle spaces or portion thereof per UDC 11-3C-6G; bicycle parking facilities are required to comply with the location and design standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C.Based on the proposed City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ number of vehicle spaces (i.e. 73), a minimum of three (3) bicycle spaces should be provided. A total of four(4)spaces are proposed, which meets and exceeds the minimum standard. 3. Structure and Site Design(11-3A-19) Architectural character: Buildings are required to be designed in accord with the City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual(ASM). The conceptual building elevations included in Section VILE appear to comply with these standards;final design is required to comply with the non-residential design standards in the ASM. Site design: Extend or improve streets, drive aisles, cross access easements or similar vehicular and pedestrian connections provided from adjacent properties.No cross-access easements or driveways exist to this site from the adjacent property to the north. A 5-foot wide sidewalk exists along the west side of the lot to the north adjacent to the north/south drive aisle from W. Lost Rapids Dr. If approved, Staff recommends a sidewalk is also provided on this site along the north/south drive aisle for pedestrian safety and access to from the north and from the sidewalk along W. Lost Rapids Dr. For lots with frontage on a public street, a minimum of 30%of the buildable frontage of the property shall be occupied by building facades and/or public space. The proposed site design meets this requirement along N. Ten Mile Rd. with only a drive-through lane between the building facade and the public street but does not meet the requirement along W. Lost Rapids Dr. Parking lots: For properties greater than two(2) acres in size,no more than 50%of the total off-street parking area for the site shall be located between building facades and abutting streets. The proposed site design meets this requirement along Ten Mile but does not along Lost Rapids. Pedestrian walkways: A continuous internal pedestrian walkway that is a minimum of five(5) feet in width is required from the perimeter sidewalk to the main building entrance(s)for non- residential uses. The walkway should be distinguished from the vehicular driving surface through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete, or bricks and have weather protection (including,but not limited to, an awning or arcade)within 20 feet of the all customer entrances.A pedestrian walkway is proposed from the perimeter sidewalk along N. Ten Mile Rd. and along the northern boundary of the site to the main building entrance. If approved, the pedestrian walkway along the northern boundary should connect to the sidewalk required along the western boundary of the site;and all walkways that cross vehicular driving surfaces should be distinguished as noted above. "Consider needed sidewalk,pathway, landscaping, and lighting improvements with all land use decisions." (Comprehensive Plan policy#6.01.02D) E. Transportation Analysis 1. Access (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-3H-4): Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.01.02E focuses on minimizing access points to arterial streets by implementing strategies like cross-access agreements, access management, and developing frontage and backage roads, while enhancing connectivity between local and collector streets. Access for the site is proposed via two(2)full-access driveways from the north/south drive aisle that exists along the west side of the site,which connects to W. Lost Rapids Dr. Direct access via N. Ten Mile Rd. is not proposed or allowed. This is in accord with the above noted Comprehensive Plan policy. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ The Applicant submitted a traffic analysis focused on the Ten Mile&Lost Rapids area, included in the public record. In short,the analysis states the proposed queuing capacity for 29 vehicles will provide sufficient storage capacity to accommodate vehicles observed at 18 other In-N-Out establishments once operations normalize. An overflow management plan is identified,which will be implemented when drive-through lane overflow occurs and will extend the available queuing area by an additional 21 vehicles to accommodate approximately 50 vehicles on-site. The plan extends the queuing area by closing the southern access point and re-purposing 14 parking spaces along the site's western boundary. This modification limits access to a single entry and exit driveway at the northwest corner of the site. While Staff doesn't necessarily disagree that the proposal should be adequate once operations normalize, Staff is concerned about the impacts to internal drives and adjacent public right-of-way and associated public safety in the interim if vehicles stack beyond the boundary of the site. ACHD has indicated that no additional improvements are required to the adjacent streets. 2. Sidewalks and Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): Sidewalks and parkways are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. Detached 5-foot wide sidewalks exist along N. Ten Mile Rd. and W. Lost Rapids Dr abutting the site.No parkways are proposed or required. F. Services Analysis 1. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-15): Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided as set forth in UDC 11- 3A-15. 2. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): Storm drainage is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-18. 3. Utilities (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-21): All utilities shall be installed at or below grade in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances.All development shall be connected to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems,unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Service stubs were provided to this property with development of the subdivision. Comprehensive Plan Policy#3.03.03G requires that urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks, and water and sewer utilities. Additionally, all utilities for the proposed development must be installed in accordance with the standards specified in UDC 11-3A-21. "Support infill development that does not negatively impact the abutting, existing development." (Comprehensive Plan policy#2.02.02C)—Based on the above analysis and the public testimony received, Staff believes the proposed development will have a negative impact on adjacent residential properties. Concerns include deteriorating air quality from vehicle exhaust while cars idle in line for service, and noise generated outside acceptable hours for areas next to residential uses. Additionally, the proposed development will most certainly increase traffic and congestion in an area that is already strained, further exacerbating existing transportation challenges. As of the date of this report, 146 letters ofpublic testimony, mostly in opposition to the project, have been received and are included in the public record. City of Meridian I Department Report 111. Staff Analysis ■ IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Meridian Planning Division Staff is not recommending approval of the proposed conditional use permit; therefore, conditions of approval are not included. If the Commission wishes to approve the request, the project should be continued to a subsequent hearing date for Staff to prepare conditions of approval for consideration by the Commission. Other agency comments may be accessed in the project file in the public record. Copy and paste the following link into your browser: hggs://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=367313&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX V. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use(UDC 11-5B-6E) The Commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Stafffinds the site is not large enough to accommodate the proposed use and comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11, which require stacking lanes to have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways, drive aisles and the public right-of- way by patrons,per the analysis above in Section III. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Stafffinds the proposed infill development will not be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan in that the proposed use and extended hours of operation will negatively impact abutting existing residential development, area residents that live nearby traveling on Lost Rapids and patrons of other commercial uses in the area due to excessive noise, traffic and congestion. 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Stafffinds the design and operation of the proposed use will not be compatible with other residential and commercial uses in the general neighborhood, due to noise, air quality and transportation impacts, which are already challenging in this area and will be exacerbated with the proposed use as discussed above in Section III, which will adversely change the essential character of the area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Staff recommends denial of the proposed use as Stafffinds the proposed use will adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. Stafffinds it is not practicable to develop conditions of approval to adequately mitigate these adverse effects absent fundamental changes to the proposed use. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools,parks,police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal,water,and sewer. Stafffinds the proposed use can be served adequately by essential public facilities and services as required. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Stafffinds the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Staff finds the proposed use will be detrimental to persons,property and the general welfare due to excessive production of exhaust fumes from vehicles idling in line for extended periods of time, noise, traffic and congestion based on the analysis above in Section III and letters of testimony received from the public included in the public record. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Staff finds the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any such features. 9. Additional findings for the alteration or extension of a nonconforming use: This finding is not applicable. 10. That the proposed nonconforming use does not encourage or set a precedent for additional nonconforming uses within the area; and, This finding is not applicable. 11. That the proposed nonconforming use is developed to a similar or greater level of conformity with the development standards as set forth in this title as compared to the level of development of the surrounding properties. This finding is not applicable. VI. ACTION A. Staff: Staff recommends denial of the proposed Conditional Use Permit as discussed above in Section III,per the Findings in Section V. B. Commission: Pending City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Action ■ ' 1 I a - y_ I, W T-Wt� = G �G r Z Icy - - YY•l.ilL.lili �"'^.t..•�._ _ J k',.#f�_ "_�.",E'i�j7 Illill .-. aliq • 1■IYII I �f I ' �■lr�►,,, ` � is N ���■ t - ����f+ '1. teat ■• �� � �' .�r ♦ olw - ;— ■:.: ��rn �1111wt! ICI � �, n:� _ � : ■ ulmul 'r �11111111111111!11111111111111 CHIN DEN 111111.111111'111111111 nC' ` Elllli Illlli IIIIIIIIr=�I, �___....- ■�ql■w rl � ■■ n111■ __ 111 �IIIIHII■:lnllr 1 n�1■1111■i �_-� 1■1 r r-n11111111111� --�--.�■ � .Illr •� pin.__nnr■uur■iiln �..::' ° 4/a.�� �iiiiiiiii•�■�r�'�+y��t --- : A sa : I■aranua IS H; long ! nn■n■nn�—xy a�� :�■!nlon ♦at;Qi Intl ltj�r•uun '- ilrulrr■��r rI■ru � _Q�I'Illy`��.!i� - 11■Ilnr■I 1■ �pllll■Ilrl� �r�1■111 Ilill�lll>�(,1i�+!f���:��.�� :�:„Ilnlii,l�� ii I+�f,i' I �iilllfgl■�`� �IIIUI Q S.� �ILa�Y:.e--ml s�•. �• .�.unaaln..= pp uil� r r 1/ nuu iilnm°�I:.I, 1�.1 it - •■ '� a�r�r�uull Z Illln�1111 •V�p�- .airi!ism. p W Inns nial�u, �. �rnr IId1 111► N ...I ■■Iflrr .r =..■.:.qr J ouuYlll Q� w I iRi► FI !!■a111 �r tns l.nrq� 71Iau■:w�ii lw�H!! ■ •■Doan■■� Diu m■ ����m.! � i1f11 n -ail %,�/`]■wnlruo��� tonal-- !,!! I ...■ n■+� ®n �rIo■I�, 11 • -- .�onto sunrl■\ism !!p r-� �xliri� -� ,! Z lli=p��::■ �iNf•.-�liuo■ono■ " y41nn*����,,ii�lrin,� t, .arrrr I:C ■.■■'■! �Amllr►�/�r�!!! iiliel iuiiin■°;111 a •m=` �ppi al � �iill � � � ■alnn lna■■■rlinl '• ■■r■■■� 1n11111 Ong ME■Iillr�r0 inn! nun w n1► r,!•....•..1 fl Illlr, Iwnll ��inn nn ■m � Innis�Iu1n 1 nnnnml uw nnm 11„'' noon iamm�iann■run onq�II IIFIPIIIILI��.� - _ iris n..r rrnl Ills ism!- _=�=_m' �IIO��rn■■ Illlllllll w■ rr ■.. — _ w �Ol1 1■�� r� 11111�--� n' i�'lli��l1_p == w-_ � � 111111111 w-iR■■■■■! ■■rlii .., i�,Illilia nuaa� ■. a txneaapo +� �- =- N - � _ : !i■!■ice/�\I�J�OR �-�J r� I,iy� "„' Irali it �■� o �"` - - n:CIII r - to .ulnm� 1� :•�t YC�rr�ll i i�� 1I ■ ��� �LF A, •..II Cf/i l f a.= •nFln.w l �,� ■r1/ssf�� �� i1.Al!l-1.13.'�J nrlll� � nuulllll�rmuun `u.a.wnn� �u. IIII -Allulll.. nu= _rllllll■nnu� 1 11■�• ,ni9T_�_ -num amn. ��_/ul Ia!■ =t :Ili= o -_Iln-nu.. _ Inalnli�Tniu►/�i �,7'IA/INIn�i1111r lil IIIIIIi= �Illlu r - --- 1,1■■r1111 r.■In. �• a 1■�A-1111111111r� ! �;tll�l+�.Illllm� .. _ i -p- ,IIm111r rEnnl'1►�♦e�`I■�■ memo Illglll ♦ � C -i �- \IIII��p1iI1111111.rlrl1111 rr1 111111 IIIIIIII F'�-'�'"' . l rI11■■Illa.�agjj ♦ ♦��rII+II :::.a.p►1111f/till + C_ �n1.n.�nui■ 1•l+`lr 3�iiiiiiiiiii�At4i �� . ..1!, Lnllll In11 1111111// ••rnrry I�rlglntl/ur Qf IIII► �.• 1 r!■ - • .nniluluuun \\�Ar rr /rumni► r'ji.1■ull.n,r Inlr` lint V -�;ri, ••■ �■ -::n1Y lun ar q1 a ,t!irj •'� ■unYll,i°W *ram 1 IIIII� J�... .. :.. !!!1- ■■ Uliir:C l R � �4p1�-�--� .r.�.. IIEIIIIInn\-� W� ..■111r ! ♦♦.glom n1A\0" Imo►`:��iaL nu=r r r -!a nnllnrn.._-\a_' ..!ll// I! .qm a■1 Illnnl=. �Ilrll nlltly:=� ad •. � ar riiiiiiiiiii:Z 111111 IIII�i Vr��7 .mn lllir; I nw Yrir►1--:e nllnn�l"11 ..1111� r N � ♦ ri nmrrnea r YY:111 ♦f - • rN h nImma:, Innn,ul _■sQ�� GIIIIi1 I■1 n now IEllmun mm�� Eu nu r� • -- J— 111111111� � ♦�� mr•�•����m�r:� � rnnu.� Z�iiililr7�na un nisi u■••••�. ay ♦�qll�/'\�■I iE�=�a--11�aaa A■�;fit - . - . logo koff �inn►� w 1.pp� �Ii y�tlaup i��lllnij V .■nn C:� • •.nul i�:.■nn num IIIp1,�� nlia :a1n..�' unmr'�a■lOaa lour winsiiii.W' ■run==r ` l •inulrl■:tl I- :il11 ■Inl.Sl• err/rl'rl EEnq!+'' r IIIrIP �� ■lllOallan■■lllrtlal�� v..r�.� - ■r1 ■ uuu Ilann� ern..■■.•.��Ifl IIIIIr\ �' :.m nnlnn ■unu..Rw nr Inml ,unmr nlllnnmiuf u1r1 nnilidl!/'irr p o nnurr�'��fjnw nlrrl� m uu unm■i,m=C f_ a �1 a: � 11 ,.,�lnlprrn unnnnn Wrq�- �� nnunn nor IIII.-roll O - -■ a. rw _ r�:: ' ■ :-Iln1E� yt m i■Euua'1lr■1111■1 ... ennllinultl� � �. �J_DI,/n Iln■■m aglrlrgll�••• - nne.f■nlr�_l % �� ►irr /ri/i1\ r- �•-. . C 1, ( aalala- frrinl IIIF- � - �^..� �:Ili■■ice/♦\ - 1111!'Inn ' IIIIIIII�"„' �■IIII�� -anF\ ■RIrIHl i� IIIAIAIr111111r - lIIIELlII� IIIIIIIIIlllll_ IIn1��, - - it■U6pp1irill e��l?WI��■IIIIIIIII FROR ,is 111111111 numunu■7 nllnlmll %/Illn f'I ��lr=��: - Yl_IIr nnA V - . - �+�aw•,rtanl trot �w��r� _ ■� �■� rrarar f i�� .._.- '`r11 `■lift����e� •,, • . '• • '_ r err- : S, . � •11111wL f ra•• �■ ■ =nil��fi r ��ia�cs��_� 1 I#1 �,+" ' ��1� �, •• Irl..iiuu�uur\f� �� 1/ �r��7�� C:nINDEN_ .o5g Ilpll, n 11111irEAnuua ��unn.Anmgy iPu= •II .a:..� 11' Inll119_-11111111 PI■111 1111lIIA 1I�,��■ .■11111.■H■IAI- ,•�� u nuum_;:Irinln ,tin- mli g •-■non nl■m'r' �!r l: �_ • T 1�L un nw� I�unmfrnl�l I�ru w' . _film I,ik nn= .�n�nu■„ f■ - --mm.anlrr Irl! G 1+In1�,= n■!r _ - u„nur0 11111 .• - allunr-lilniil moll�noon� � IER YI r■g1a11U■IIIIn►�• III y■ la Illa�Ilrnlll r�tl111pp1 IIIIIIII � !�jw���� 1' ..♦l• rr1.■np nnN. `R�� urmn w ■ ==W=p�'Illlllui uii �. - — � >s r.'::5:' In � P t •• ♦ �{\� p�IIIrr nq .�:- Imo■■■..un\�y V rmnral��N1Q milli -__r.rrl I!u ::�- `�"!r `� '^nn inn nm rly.•a rnnrra.4�rrrlru.n � ■ Q 11i1�i -:+.�1 r,�� :- i11E1 uq�::` 11��~ I-1�lnnllllllmul�l\►��i nuu11►►*����iiiil W Ii �■�-Y■-: (� r��-.`�...■.w :�.anllllln\\ar!!!■-�I• ii i11 Em Elrl\�,�w�j11111 Q /il`=�rl. IIII�' �� -�.alnlllrrn.. Ca -_-" f-■fi Yn _ • lllrr will' 111111 IIII �� 7-llnnl`�. Inn rnnn m■■ V -� .lrrn lllrr; nn11M - � IIII ' ♦+ rrUlIAI F:1 nnuuul Q �11■!I1111► rllElm nE111111rlIIIIIIII Illllllli YY:III � ral��r♦rrrii111 J EI■11■ilr■ IlAll rril IIIIIIIIIIIIIEIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ti� I iri liEa ral■lalar�• • J � 3 giflllll��,Into ri.�liriiiiiii;i;_=_=_� ml• .nrrruuia ate■■.. rn■ •p� fa 1■� �� onnl- Inlm►. _'`_ ■■ �Iluir�C urr �"�I ■unruun:/'�i■■u ■■■1+0• ♦n\- �♦!-Illn\ ■rl rill. Irnm 1=__ anl►��■ _•ip♦♦anll�rir I.1,:�,.Inin lunrn:nm ■■■1 r r / �♦ - p =. 1 �■ 7 CIIC��Y�\+-�■ �llll, . iraln■rralll■-■nr,rl_- 1uuAh• miin -V +c i;'t !■ ■lua!���•• .nuar I.^:■nn num I nm■:_r 1 r1 '.t �m11sO Nr+ !� p lun noel ■ulun n- -ua■n-"� �l4lr � pay n��!!!!■�?ran-.-p tin■■lilt tll :unln:.� *:��:I�:! ,�rrrni � . S=rlrl!!!!� �•IIIrIP- � ■lllalarrrd■■111■nn:►��E nuu uum�'�r.n.�■ �IJs!>>eulrlA`' , -1�11nr W::lu r= numil.rr11■munun,rurarn 1111111 ■11.11► :1:1[lfllllnlllo I,ai Nnanaa■!r!t� y"�N\ J r = unanu���i/nu mn�%■n mr �i�� IIIIIIIII!!011li__- ttmlnnrlrtluuu■nmn--1p �_- _ _J� , n �..�.�rrrll�•�-.�;I��r+1.rn+ � ��- ��__1IJn�1♦1►����IlrI1xI1I1lI1YI1I1nlnIuI1r1Y 1 3I1r r1 a�NI..NE naaimnain 11rn11 0 rnnuI■rr E1l1'I1111m111111■1iI iu��►. �= ••• -_ aun:nnnrtl_ _� oo _ ram/�1'�ilrn I I n� -- - ,r- �- . ■ - Iii11Ilrnl p- ..'1111' •• Pull 1 I Z' v7e= a. ra-!�i =n■rri�Ia\I 1 IIIIEn11A lIr111H. { ■IIII.1 I nn nn I 1� \q!►rl�n RI■atl,i��p IIIIIIIIIIIIIIr_ 7 Ennllen� hlnllll3En ' ,I j►loss/1� Wes" Amm�mni��-11 nllrnnll l v��r177/Ilrq l Jr' �a .r Yl Clnr me I B. Service Accessibility Report PARCEL R5330761510 SERVICE ACCESSIBILITY Overall Scare: 28 27th Percentile Description Location In City Limits GREEN Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains < 500 ft.from parcel GREEN Floodplain Either not within the 100 yrfloodplain or > 2 acres GREEN Emergency Services Fire Response time < 5 min. GREEN Emergency Services Police Nat enough data to report average response t,rne RED Pathways Within 1/4 mile of current pathways GREEN Transit Not within 1/4 of current or future transit route RED Arterial Road Buildout Status Ultimate configuration (#of lanes in master streets GREEN plan) matches existing (# of lanes) School Walking Proximity Within 112 mile walking GREEN Either a High School or College within 2 miles OR a School Drivability Middle or Elementary School within 1 mile driving GREEN (existing or future) Either a Regional Park within 1 mile OR a Community ParkWalkability Park within 1/2 mile OR a Neighborhood Park with' GREEN 1/4 mile walking Report generated on 03-31-2025 by MERIDIA%sallen City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 1 00 C. Site Plan(date: 12/19/2024) €Y „3a a s g a sus sa 0 2 e a "s sa@e$ A s oe d 3 [ �43AAgc 6 GA CA NII.` 53 ggy F 5 y k o U eat a.'. 1 F �w 1 € RE 433 3 F&kST�w Z �, m qq 3v F s� d Z W:` &' r Z4yNEH a R IN H,R W� �cg § S a A a Y g4 S 4:: "' 6 8 F d a @ a 3 3 5 n s c d°s g n adoP W -.r � a s 4� a cac 5 ,ar W. 5 mg =§ _ a 8 s 3 e` R 9d y S t 4 y a e a 5 d 9 W N Q GAS' '�, 4 :: ��a 1y c h 2 y 3 a 7 a Y° g I e §:FI @' ea s>q g a 3 s a8 s��6 4§ss 5 a `'a:4 _ 'm 9 e� e�'s W E F e a a= I W e:nel a 4 $ A S�°ae"' 8l a c .$'s 3 3 V Z N-2 d E S 75 S 5 7 d d 5 ��na ❑¢ W C7_ mid �� A $ 7 ❑ O❑ 6 0 °�� ZQ❑ e � OVOli .w w rt.......................... me 3 ...�.. ...................,.... ......i...::.�::. :.: .. ..... ......;:>::::.. ins I LU AL a.��°� 3aea• ®E3� --- - yk 9 a Y Y _ �4s f E• � �o�Ca • a�.t S o a orn - Foe Oj V r r4 Z City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 1 01 A Landscape Plan (date: 2/21/2025) 3 0 Wz 0 J ggg n s a� �g5aa3agr gg gus' z 'sa LU W CL 9 k o % 8 Pa ° 0 z z � g +. Uga Lum Ww 0 IL- �w m~� FZm ms Opz 00 Z4� z�w z � w t ' T— .� l � ca E� lot- - 4 O PH a (, O City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 102 Bgggg z g a Bill Z i + � t + + 4 + i + � � i + + + i �+ i i i i + i® a �3 •a �s� �~ o 0 0 0 o o 3 0 0 6 0 6 0 z,•• P�,�, W -iW g sFlF-a � a ff a gg Win z o y 6 go 6 ill m Z o o g0a1 � e avow '- A � a ,� - - -T11w N31 N - ...................... _ I I p Z � --- :.-.:---------:: - -- ------------- -- --- 6 -- - ............... -- - ....... _- �z u__ ..................... ..................................�.. .... a ...-........................ ........ ............. ............................... .... . i ... 1 sa R \ 3�3i,+ :4444 00 mai ilW Z/. Z City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 103 E. Building Elevations (date: 9/18/2024) ❑1 'NVIC J2 A (Q] 3�IA N31 N '3 CW9 N3CNIHD MbMS) Oda m SNOUVA313 Al JVNIAPAW12 ;Jp - g a gil��� � � 5�$gg•� g � a® � ��� °(= � � �� ij lii� _ I �---- --- -i'� w1 El w g @e t �e� 8 4e�8ai0_x3n..S € ee R 9 � a dele w Y00000 12JEJE 000 00 12Z1 9�14g Tii4 131§gldl s d F --, F e ' ° 1 e . w •d I I I� - W:I=: rw. c EI El "' by LL � y II Q "¢ -_ Z0Ewl j `a o z at- id zo El L--� wT -- y F w x� Q LL Zo I El 1 aw Z rr rr —J II III 's u3 II� FS rill Iml 1 1 j� I� ssI� q9 yyIIR�R IF�F YO City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 104 2 s QI NVICIDJAN (Qb 3JIW N31 OZ0 az, SN011V 113 A2JVNIAHA3 Jd Z � mg3 a �� sQ @^ a w ill @ € a g a @gi 9 R 9 ITII ❑0000 000 000 00 00®©®❑ �61r, ICI:,I�Ir,l�l �� I� I� I I Isl I I I Lmj ZI �] ii Z I I I%I z ------------ I p g :f LL P 4 o-° II �' rr C� i II ii i I I \ II �l ii II liA I II - 1 � _ - =t 4 j I i ��, �I, � 9 9 I I a III$ I{Q �� I I � L_________I_ I� c g g a u a� _ -J City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 105 E IDIAN;--- Applicant Presentation Incore values originally set by Harry and Esther many years ago. Out, and she holds to the firm foundation and -N-and President of InSnyder, is the owner LynsiHarry and Esther’s very own granddaughter, •operated, we do not franchise.Out Burger location is 100% privately owned and -N-Every single Inowned business. -Out is still a family-N-location in Baldwin Park, InMore than 70 years after Harry and Esther opened the very first •Out has not only grown as a company, but we have built a family. -N-InBaldwin Park, a small quiet suburb in Southern California. Since then, Out Burger was founded in 1948 by Harry and Esther Snyder in -N-In•not just a company, but a member of the community. So, Who Are We?Out’s history is important to who we are today and to what makes us -N- INSTRONGER, SAFER AND BETTER PLACES TO LIVE.ASSISTING ALL COMMUNITIES IN OUR MARKETPLACE TO BECOME 3.ASSOCIATES.EXCELLENT TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR ALL OF OUR SETTING AND COMMUNICATIONS EXIST, AND TO PROVIDE ORIENTED ATMOSPHERE WHEREBY GOAL -PROVIDING A TEAM2.WHEREBY THE CUSTOMER IS OUR MOST IMPORTANT ASSET.FOR A PROFIT, AND A SPOTLESS, SPARKLING ENVIRONMENT PROVIDING THE FRESHEST, HIGHEST QUALITY FOODS AND SERVICES 1.OUT BURGER EXISTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF:-N- COMMUNITY BENEFITS OF A NEW INTHE WHOSOEVERS (SUBSTANCE ABUSE HELP)ST. LUKES HEATH FOUNDATIONFAMILY ADVOCATE PROGRAMBOISE RESCUE MISSIONTRAFFICKING COALITION-IDAHO ANTIIDAHO YOUTH RANCHTO ORGANIZATIONS IN THE STATE OF IDAHO SINCE ENTERING THE STATEGIVEN OVER $160,000 OUT BURGER HAS ALREADY -N-INOUT.-N-LIFELONG CAREER WITH INCOMMUNITY YOUTH WILL LEARN THE VALUE OF AND BE REWARDED FOR THEIR HARD WORK AND SOME MAY CHOOSE TO PURSUE A OPPORTUNITIES TO ENTER STORE MANAGEMENT AND MOVE TO CORPORATE SUPPORT POSITIONS. LEVEL RESTAURANT JOBS, ALONG WITH ADDED -INCLUDE NOT ONLY ENTRY LEVEL RESTAURANT JOBS, BUT WILL ALSO MORE SKILLEDWE PAY THE HIGHEST HOURLY WAGES OF ANY EMPLOYER IN THE QUICK SERVE RESTAURANT CATEGORY. NEW JOBS CREATED WILL BEST EMPLOYER OF ANY TYPE TO WORK FOR.RD COUNTRY TO WORK FOR AND THE 3OUT IS A HIGHLY REGARDED EMPLOYER, RECENTLY RANKED BY GLASS DOOR AS THE BEST RESTAURANT IN THE -N-IN–NEW JOBS OUT RESTAURANT INCLUDE:-N- WITH THIS SITE. HE FACT THAT WE DO NOT ABUT RESIDENTIAL ZONING THE PROPERTY ABUTS A RESIDENTIAL USE OR DISTRICT.” STAFF NOTED TLL BE LIMITED FROM 6:00 A.M. TO 11:00 P.M. WHEN G DISTRICTS SHA-C AND C-BUSINESS HOURS OF OPERATION WITHIN THE CRETAIL, OFFICE, SERVICE, AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES.” S “LARGEST SCALE AND BROADEST MIX OF G ZONE A-G. THE CITY CODE DEFINES THE C-THE PROPERTY IS ZONED CTHE SITE WHEN TEMPORARY PEAKS OCCURTHE SITE PROVIDES SPACE TO EXTEND THE DRIVE THROUGH QUEUE WITHINCODE WITH 73 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED PROJECT PROVIDES NEARLY FIVE TIMES THE PARKING REQUIRED BY CITY OUT LOCATIONS-N-LOT SIZE OF ALL IDAHO INPROPOSED SITE IS OVER 2 ACRES IN SIZE WHICH IS NEARLY DOUBLE THE OUT WOULD OPEN-N-HIGHWAY 16 EXTENSION IS EXPECTED TO BE COMPLETED BY THE TIME IN, AND THE SAME DISTANCE ON LINDER RD. COULD SEE A 15% DECREASE.REDUCTION% TEN MILE RD. BETWEEN USTICK RD. AND CHINDEN BLVD. COULD SEE A 30MCMILLIAN RD. AND FRANKLIN RD. ON BLACK CAT RD. BETWEEN 20% DECREASE IN TRAFFIC -THE HIGHWAY EXPANSION COULD CREATE A 10G (REPORTED BY BOISE DEV):EXPECTED TRAFFIC REDUCTION ON TEN MILE ROAD STATING THE FOLLOWINON TO STAKEHOLDERS DISCUSSED THE AN IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT HIGHWAY 16 EXTENSION PRESENTATI 1) THAT THE SITE IS LARGE ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED USTHE CITY ON SITES AS LARGE AS 2.2 ACRESFEW IF ANY COMPARABLE DRIVE THRU FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS OPERATE IN-SPACES WOULD REMAIN IN USEPLAN TAKING 15 SPACES, 58 OVERSTACKING. WITH THE SITE PARKING IS 73 WHICH IS MORE THAN 4 TIMES THE REQUIRED PARK-PLAN PROVIDED SHOWS THE WELL OVER 52 CARS CAN BE QUEUED ON SITEOVERSTACKLANE PROPOSED. THE AVERAGE WAS 30 CARS WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DRIVE THROUGH DAYAND THE WEEK AXIMUM OBSERVED QUEUE AT THE VILLAGE WAS 46 CARS THE STACKING LANES ARE SUFFICIENT BASED ON OBSERVED DATA. THE M-UFFICIENT FOR THIS PROJECTTHIS SITE IS VERY LARGE FOR DRIVE THROUGH USE AND IS S--ACRES .2 ACRES AND BOISE IS ABOUT 1 ACRE AND NAMPA IS 1.4 THIS SITE IS 2.2 ACRES WHERE THE VILLAGE AT MERIDIAN STORE IS 1-OUT RESPONSE:-N-INBY PATRONS, PER THE ANALYSIS ABOVE IN SECTION III. WAY-OF-ISLES AND THE PUBLIC RIGHTACKING LANES TO HAVE 11, WHICH REQUIRE ST-3-4-SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS LISTED IN UDC 11OSED USE AND COMPLY WITH THE CITY STAFF FINDING: LOCATED. AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE USE IS E AND MEET ALL THE DIMENSIONAL 2) THAT THE PROPOSED USE WILL BE HARMONIOUS WITH THE MERIDIAN COCONGESTIONXCESSIVE NOISE, TRAFFIC AND RAPIDS AND PATRONS OF OTHER COMMERCIAL USES IN THE AREA DUE TO EIVE NEARBY TRAVELING ON LOST ABUTTING EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, AREA RESIDENTS THAT LLL NEGATIVELY IMPACT PLAN IN THAT THE PROPOSED USE AND EXTENDED HOURS OF OPERATION WIIOUS WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE : STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED INFILL DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT BE HARMONCITY FINDINGACCORD WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS TITLE. MPREHENSIVE PLAN AND IN INL BE NO CHANGE EXISTING IN LEVELS OF SERVICE CONGESTION AND THE PROVIDED TRAFFIC ANALYSIS CONCLUDED THERE WILAND TRAFFIC ANALYSIS TO REFUTE THE CLAIMS OF OUT HAS GATHERED OBJECTIVE OBSERVED DATA IN QUEUE ANALYSIS-N-IN-THE STAFF FINDING IS UNSUPPORTEDENERATES EXCESSIVE NOISE OR TRAFFIC CONGESTION. THE STAFF MAKES THIS FINDING WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE THE PROJECT G-ENFORCING CITY CODEORS OF COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS BY THE POLICY STAFF CITED STATES: TO MINIMIZE NOISE LIGHTING AND ODENSIVE PLAN HOWEVER WE DO COMPLYCITY STAFF SUGGEST THE PROJECT WILL NOT COMPLY WITH THE COMPREH-STAFF REPORT ACKNOWLEDGES THATTHE–G ZONE HERE -THE OPERATING HOURS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE C-S THIS FINDING CANNOT BE MADETHERE IS NO EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT SUGGEST-:OUT RESPONSE-N- 3) THAT THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE WILLR DOUBLE STANDARDTHE CITY FINDING IS INCONSISTENT WITH CITY CODE AND IS AN UNFAI-COMMERCIAL USES ALONG ARTERIAL STREETS.G CENTER THE SURROUNDING DRIVE THRU AND G ZONE, EXISTING SHOPPIN-THIS PROJECT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE C-GER KING AND OTHERS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. THERE ARE SEVERAL SIMILAR DIVE THRU USES SUCH AS CAFÉ RIO, BUR-NTER APPROVAL INCLUDED DRIVE THRU USES ON THE SITEG AND WAS THE OVERALL SHOPPING CE–THE PROJECT SITE IS ZONED C -. THE FOLLOWING FACTS DO:THE STAFF REPORT PROVIDES NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT ITS CONCLUSION-OUT RESPONSE-N-INESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE AREA. ILL ADVERSELY CHANGE THE WITH THE PROPOSED USE AS DISCUSSED ABOVE IN SECTION III, WHICH WEA AND WILL BE EXACERBATED TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS, WHICH ARE ALREADY CHALLENGING IN THIS ARTO NOISE, AIR QUALITY AND RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES IN THE GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD, DUET BE COMPATIBLE WITH OTHER STAFF FINDS THE DESIGN AND OPERATION OF THE PROPOSED USE WILL NOCITY STAFF FINDING: TER OF THE SAME AREA. AND THAT SUCH USE WILL NOT ADVERSELY CHANGE THE ESSENTIAL CHARACARACTER OF THE GENERAL VICINITY IN THE GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND WITH THE EXISTING OR INTENDED CHBE COMPATIBLE WITH OTHER USES 4) THAT THE PROPOSED USE, IF IT COMPLIES WITH ALL CONDITIONS OF POINTVIEW PRIOR TO THE STAFF REPORT MAKING THIS A MOOT FEEDBACK OR NOTE SIGNIFICANT DESIGN ISSUES DURING THE PROJECT REONIGHT AND ODDLY DID NOT SUGGEST ANY DESIGN STAFF ELECTED NOT TO PREPARE ANY CONDITIONS FOR CONSIDERATION T-OUT RESPONSE:-N-INPROPOSED USE. DAMENTAL CHANGES TO THE APPROVAL TO ADEQUATELY MITIGATE THESE ADVERSE EFFECTS ABSENT FUNRACTICABLE TO DEVELOP CONDITIONS OF AFFECT OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY. STAFF FINDS IT IS NOT PROPOSED USE WILL ADVERSELY STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE PROPOSED USE AS STAFF FINDS THE PSTAFF FINDING: ADVERSELY AFFECT OTHER PROPERTY IN THE VICINITY. THE APPROVAL IMPOSED, WILL NOT 7) THAT THE PROPOSED USE WILL NOT INVOLVE ACTIVITIES OR PROCESSETHE CITY AND THOSE PRESENTLY WITHIN THE SHOPPING CENTER.WOULD DENY VIRTUALLY ALL OTHER DRIVE THRU USES IN THE STAFF CLAIM OF IDLING CARS IS NOT SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE AND-OF SERVICEWITH THIS FINDING CONCLUDING NO CHANGE IN LEVELS THE TRAFFIC STUDY AGAIN DEMONSTRATES THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT -OUT RESPONSE:-N-INTESTIMONY RECEIVED FROM THE PUBLIC INCLUDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORDVE IN SECTION III AND LETTERS OF OF TIME, NOISE, TRAFFIC AND CONGESTION BASED ON THE ANALYSIS ABOG IN LINE FOR EXTENDED PERIODS DUE TO EXCESSIVE PRODUCTION OF EXHAUST FUMES FROM VEHICLES IDLINPERTY AND THE GENERAL WELFARE STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED USE WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO PERSONS, PROSTAFF FINDING: KE, FUMES, GLARE OR ODORSWELFARE BY REASON OF EXCESSIVE PRODUCTION OF TRAFFIC, NOISE, SMOPROPERTY OR THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF OPERATION THAT WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO ANY PERSONS,S, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND 1)CENTER THAT ARE ALSO WITHIN 300 FEET OF RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTSG CODE AND WITH PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DRIVE THRU USES IN THE SHOPPINOUT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY DRIVE THROUGH -N-THE PROPOSED IN7)THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SHOPPING CENTER USES6)AT THIS LOCATION AT THE TIME THIS STORE IS OPENLE HIGHWAY 16 EXTENSION WILL CONSIDERABLY RELIEVE TRAFFIC ON TEN MI5)ADJACENT ROADWAYSD EXISTING LEVELS OF SERVICE IN THE INTERSECTION AT LOST RAPIDS ANOUT WILL NOT RESULT IN A CHANGE TO TRAFFIC -N-THE PROPOSED IN4)OPERATION GIVEN IT DOES NOT ABUT RESIDENTIAL USESG ZONE HOURS OF–OUT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE C -N-THE PROPOSED IN3)ALLOWED USESG ZONE AND ITS –OUT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE C -N-THE PROPOSED IN2)SHOPPING CENTER PLAN AND APPROVALOUT STORE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ORIGINAL -N-THE PROPOSED IN C E IDIAN�-- Public Presentation(s) 12: 36 PM Tue Apr 8 • • • » 15% 0o G weknowboise.com j lww- NOW I "Ilk . y „ w '} Wi IN. It TtNI • 41� � , _ , 1 , � � � ` ~ � ; ` NNII l i 1 •� l 1 I MINI Ac t , CoSlm .�y '. n 1 , INN -Is NJ 1 dr S WIF IN IN , , j 1 , tow � � ~ y _ _ - 12: 36 PM Tue Apr 8 • • • » 15% 0o G weknowboise.com j lww- NOW I "Ilk . y „ w '} Wi IN. It TtNI • 41� � , _ , 1 , � � � ` ~ � ; ` NNII l i 1 •� l 1 I MINI Ac t , CoSlm .�y '. n 1 , INN -Is NJ 1 dr S WIF IN IN , , j 1 , tow � � ~ y _ _ - C E IDIAN�-- Public Presentation(s) In- N -Out Burger (Ten Mile & Lost Rapids) H-2024-0058 In-n-Out Burger at Ten Mile - CUP Review of: Focused Traff ic Analysis Presented to Meridian Planning and Zoning Bob Hough 5876 N Vicenza Ave Meridian, ID April 17, 2025 Distribution of submitted comments: Hard copy to Planning and Zoning Commissioners Electronic copy (PDF) to meeting AV staff and Commissioners Page 1 H-2024-0058 April 17, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commissioners: This information is submitted in response to the request for a conditional use permit for an In-N-Out Burger business, to be located at Ten Mile and Lost Rapids, in the Chinden & Ten Mile Mixed-Use Development. The Focused Traffic Analysis submitted by the applicant in support of request H-2024-0058 is focused on the following: 1 . The traffic flow at the intersection of Ten Mile and Lost Rapids 2. The traffic flow through the proposed In-N-Out Burger business In a letter dated February 4, 2025, Todd M. Smith states: "The traffic analysis demonstrates that the construction and operation of the proposed In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile and Lost Rapids will not create any significant traffic impacts to the surrounding roadways, ... ". However, the traffic analysis of the surrounding roadways does not include analysis of the the roadways inside the Development. The increased traffic due to the construction and operation of the proposed In-N-Out Burger will obviously impact the roadways inside the Development. The roadways inside the Development include the access roads, intersections, and driveways used by customers and employees of businesses in the Development. The following pages identify the choke points, congestion areas, and hazardous left turns that currently exist. Mitigation of these problem areas is not realistic. The expected volume of increased traffic due to In-N-Out Burgers will significantly and negatively impact traffic flow on the roadways inside the Development. Outside the Development, the increased traffic flow from In-N-Out patrons will negatively impact resident and guest access to homes and the Keith Bird Neighborhood Park. In conclusion, the traffic analysis supporting the H-2024-0058 request greatly understates the impact of the In-N-Out Burger traffic on the customers, neighbors, and other users of the Development. For these reasons, my wife and I, and many residents of the Bainbridge, Cadence, and Olivia living communities do not support the H-2025-0058 request for a conditional use permit. Thank you for your consideration. Page 2 H-2024-0058 April 17, 2025 - � A�lAriklr fy ► P .-; . I- R-1 "r � I-1 D-1s +n i r I � � • D-2 W J - J— W . D-31 D-4 / _ "• ' I 7 I r I • D-5 Site Al R-2 IOSTRAPID SpR — — — — — -- — 1-3 ,. R-1: Access Road connecting Ten Mile Rd and the Development R-2: Access Road connecting Lost Rapids and the Development 1-1: Intersection of Ten Mile Rd and the R-1 Access Road 1-2: Intersection of R-1 Access Road and R-2 Access Road 1-3: Intersection of Lost Rapids and R-2 Access Road D-1: Driveway to/from Costco parking, Southernmost access D-2: Driveway to/from Cafe Rio, et al, parking area onto R-2 North or South D-3: Driveway to/from Olivia apartments D-4: New Driveway to/from In-N-Out Burger D-5: New Driveway to/from In-N-Out Burger 6 Legend QStudy Intersection Figure 2 Project Location&Study Intersection Map 931di1 In-N-Out Burger(Ten Mile&Lost Rapids) Focused Traffic Analysis 4 19787 Page 3 H-2024-0058 April 17, 2025 Existing Traffic Flow Problem Areas R-1 - Access Road connecting Ten Mile Rd and the Development. • One inbound lane and two outbound lanes • High volume entry to Development from Ten Mile Southbound traffic • Outbound left turn lane must cross three lanes on Ten Mile Rd and merge with northbound traffic. Hazardous. See 1-1. R-2 - Access Road connecting Lost Rapids and the Development. • High volume traffic access road for patrons from Ten Mile and Lost Rapids • Natural congestion point because high traffic volume • Provides driveway access to and from several existing businesses, including Mountain America CU and Burger King • If the In-N-Out Burger Overflow process is not in operation, this Access Road could become blocked to through traffic because of cars queued to enter In-N-Out through both In-N-Out driveways. 1-1 - Intersection of Ten Mile Rd and the R1 Access Road. • Left turns permitted, both inbound and outbound. • Left turn outbound requires Ten Mile to be open both North and South. Creates queue of cars waiting to turn. Hazardous because cars must cross three lanes of traffic from two different directions. • Cars turning right block view of Northbound traffic on Ten Mile to Left turning cars on R1. 1-2 - Intersection of R1 Access Road and R2 Access Road • Significant congestion point • Stop signs North and South, but not inbound from Ten Mile - causes congestion because North/South traffic has to wait on inbound traffic from Ten Mile 1-3 - Intersection of Lost Rapids and R2 Access Road • High volume intersection with one stop sign • Cars exiting the Development must wait for Lost Rapids traffic both directions • Primary entrance for In-N-Out patrons from Ten Mile D-1 - Driveway to/from Costco parking, Southernmost access • Not usually congested, waits for R2 traffic before merging • Would be impacted by increased In-N-Out Northbound traffic on R2 D-2 - Driveway to/from Cafe Rio, et al, parking area onto R2 North or South • Single Driveway for these businesses • Would be impacted by In-N-Out Northbound patrons on R2 D-3 - Driveway to/from Olivia apartments • Would be impacted by In-N-Out patrons leaving INO parking • Traffic on R2 Access Road does not stop • Olivia residents have alternate driveways to enter/exit premises D-4 and D-5 - New Driveways to/from In-N-Out Burger • Natural congestion points due to traffic from all directions - no stop signs • D-5 is open or closed depending on management of overflow traffic Page 4 H-2024-0058 April 17, 2025 C E IDIAN�-- Public Presentation(s) April 7, 2025 TO: Meridian Planning & mooning ATTN: Chris Johnson RE: Presenting My Findings Regarding the In-N-Out Burgers Application Process DISCUSSION: 1 would appreciate being considered to speak for the allowed 3 minutes and permission to distribute 2 pages of notes to interested participants. i will bring copies of my handout for the public and request you provide copies to the Planning & Zoning Commission for their review & discussion at our meeting on April 17, 2025 at 6:00 pm. I have spoken with Gary Moore of SLC, Utah who puts in all the Burger Kings in Idaho. I was hopeful he had a non-compete clause in his contract. He shared that he had included that clause but it was denied by the Gasser Family Business (I believe Trevor Gasser). Moore elected to proceed with that location at Ten Mile near Chinden. David Turnbull of Brighton Corporation sold the perimeter properties to 4. the Gasser Family Business (pronounced Gasser) while Brighton proceeded to Develop Bainbridge (with a team of builders.). We now have 573 homes in Bainbridge. Brighton also created the gated community of Cadence, with 162 homes and the Olivia Apartments (115 Units), adjacent to the Costco property in this Mixed Use Project. The 2017 original "Overall TIA" which was used by the by the Ganddini Group, Inc. makes no mention of these additional units in their 91 page Focus Traffic Analysis dated January 21, 2025. I am hopeful to help Gasser find a more suitable location for the proposed In-N-Out Burgers and secure a compatible tenant for the North Ten Mile/ Chinden location. Thank you in advance, Bainbridge Subdivision Homeowner 5876 N Vicenza Avenue Respectfully, Meridian, ID 83646 208-866-8594 Dianne Hough, Realtor dianne@amherst-madison.com EXCERPTS FROM THE 91 PAGE GANDDINI REPORT SUBMITTED TO PLANNING & ZONING. (Page 1 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The project site is located within the approved and nearly built-out Chinden&Ten Mile Mixed-Use Development["Overall Development"] .Traffic impacts and mitigation for the overall development were previously evaluated in the Transportation Impact Study Chinden&Ten Mile Mixed-Use Development (Kittelson &Associates,September 2017) ["Overall TIA"). The Overall TIA considered development of a 166,000 square foot Costco Wholesale warehouse and gasoline station.60.000 square feet of retail pads, 115 apartment dti elling units, and 162 single-family dwelling units.The project site is located in area designated as shopping center,which includes restaurants,within the Overall Development plan.therefore, the Overall TIA adequately considered development of the project site with the proposed land use. 166,000 Sq Ft CCSTC13 plus gas station is mentioned 60,000 Sq Ft of retail pads of which the subject property belongs 162 Single Family (Dwelling is now known, as the Gated Community of Cadence 116 Apartments and amenitles now known as Vli,�ia BUT WHERE ARE THE 573 HOMES OF BAINBRIDGE AND THE LOTS BRIGHTON SOLD TO GORY BARTON HOMES FOR DEVELOPMENT? ALL OF THESE HOMES AND APARTMENTS AND CADENCE USE THE 4 ENTRANCES TO COSTCO BUILDING, COSTCO PARKING AND GAS STATION. (2 OFF CHINDEN, 2 OFF TEN MILE, PLUS EAST AND WEST LOST RAPIDS.). AGREEING WITH A STUDY DONE IN 2017 CALLED (OVERALL TIA) DOES NOT GIVE AN ACCURATE PICTURE OF 2025. THE CONGESTION IS FORMIDABLE. OF ALL THESE ENTITIES, BAINBRIDGE SUBDIVISION AND THE OLIVIA APARTMENTS ARE THE MOST NEGATIVELY EFFECTED WITH AN IN-N-OUT ON THAT CORNER. THE OLIVIA RESIDENTS ARE NOT HOMEOWNERS. THEY RENT OR LEASE THEIR DWELLINGS. IN ADDITION, THE NEW FAST EDDY'S CHEVRON IS NEAR COMPLETION. IT WILL BE HEAVILY USED BY CONSTRUCTION TRUCKS COMING OFF THE FREEWAY AND HEADING NORTH TO CHINDEN TO DELIVER GOODS TO THE BOON IN CONSTRUCTION TO THE WEST AS WELL AS IN STAR, MIDDLETON, NAMPA NORTH AND NOW EMMETT. I KNOW THESE AREAS ARE NOT YOUR CONCERN BUT AS MERIDIAN RESIDENTS — IT EFFECTS OUR QUALITY OF LIFE. PLEASE GIVE OUR CONCERNS SOME CONSIDERATION AS YOU EVALUATE THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT. EXCERPTS FROM THE 91 PAGE GANDDINI REPORT SUBMITTED TO PLANNING & ZONING, (Page 1 & 2) SCOPE OF ANALy"SIS The study area consists of the following study intersection and roadway segments most likely to be affected by the proposed project Studv intersection • Ten Mile Road at Lost Rapids Drive Study Roadway Segments • Ten Mile Road north of Lost Rapids Drive • Teri Mile Road south of Lost Rapids Drive • Lost Rapids Drive west of Ten Mile Road • Lost Rapids Drive east of Ten Mile Road AS SUGGESTED ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT, THE SCOPE OF ANALYSIS IS TOO LIMITED BY ONLY EVALUATING THE TWO STREETS THAT BORDER THE SUBJECT PROJECT. By definition, Ten Mile is a primary corridor that moves traffic North to Chinden a few blocks and South to the Freeway access and miles beyond. Lost Rapids is a narrow neighborhood street running East and West across now a very busy Ten Mile and through two subdivisions namely Loscha Falls and Bainbridge. The main entrance to Bainbridge is west of the Costco on Chinden. Both Chinden and Ten Mile have shown considerable traffic increases over the past 5 years since we bought our home in Bainbridge. WHILE IN-N-OUT WOULD LIKE TO CAPITALIZE ON THAT GROWTH, IT WOULD BE ENCROACHING ON A NICE NEIGHBORHOOD, FILLED WITH FAMILIES AND LOTS OF ACTIVE CHILDREN, THE BLENDING-IN OF CADENCE HAS BEEN A BLESSING FOR BAINBRIDGE AS WE ALL ENJOY WALKING OUR DOGS IN OUR SPACIOUS PARK. BETTER SUITED FOR THIS LOCATION WOULD BE A SERVICE LIKE AN ORTHODONTIST OFFICE OR POSSIBLY AN EMERGENCY CARE FACILITY. TO BE FAIR, LAST OCTOBER BAINBRIDGE CONDUCTED AN EMAIL SURVEY OF OUR MANY RESIDENTS REGARDING IF THEY WANTED AN IN-N-OUT AT THAT CORNER. 42% OF OUR 573 HOUSEHOLDS RESPONDED WHICH IS A FAIR REPRESENTATION. THE RESULTS WERE 90% AGAINST AND 10% FOR. CADENCE HAS IT'S OWN HOA AND I HAVE BEEN MADE AWARE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN QUITE ACTIVE IN NOT WANTING THE IN-N-OUT BURGERS SO CLOSE TO THEIR GATED COMMUNITY. WE ALL WANTED TO BE HEARD THEN - AND WE ALL WANT TO BE HEARD NOW. C E IDIAN�-- Public Presentation(s) 36%: 36% I I I -----------------------�I I � I � I � I � I � I I I I I I I I 10%1 10% I I � I I I I I I I 26%i 26% I I I U. I L I -- - - - - -- - - - I I Q I W I I H I � I � I � I � I � I I I � I � , I � I I Site I I I I � I � I I I � , I 25% I I I It _ I 49% 2% ---------- -------------------------------4 49% 2% I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I e37% 1 37% Legend -,*--10% Percent To Project -o*-10% Percent From Project Figure 6 Project Trip Distribution g31dii1 In-N-Out Burger(Ten Mile&Lost Rapids) Focused Traffic Analysis 15 19787 r 0 W J _ 2 v_ Z LU s `a s s S ,� 2f Site t i LOST RAPIDS 4 R Legend QStudy Intersection Figure 2 Project Location &Study Intersection Map In-N-Out Burger(Ten Mile&Lost Rapids) Focused Traffic Analysis 4 19787 C E IDIAN�-- Public Presentation(s) — y Chinden Blvd _ aC'.• .. 'I..:rs, ..F - ._ ma�-ft 1. r -E !� � '-s = � sa`�. « r _I fll gattl'r Ni'iMrt'r ,•: ' -�-�ri JCD a .� Costco � NHtr[r'itl� r�. •� j` Keith Bird' apt ■ • 1 / ,. .. • .I 1 � ' y�py.' Heros �� —ti far - S'• • fr •,., 1. f . rk Or- A r.1 'Y — vk mink" I The Club at SpurWing Fred Meyer 0, WIT M ... rs Rockharhor Church Cookie Cutters Haircuts O for Kids-Meridian HolyApostles0 Catholic Ch z Target esa Foods T � , n n a (H° A �rleroes Park ww 0 Yes RockyMount,g - P u b l i c Comments High Schaal . Charles F.McDevitt Youth sports Complex .Jo (Mapped w/Address) WalmartSupercooter0 v Q ss Centenn Tin Roof Ta v Yes Burn The Boats Tattoo .: W Mc1.Aillan Rd W McMillan Rd - ,; W McMillan Rd W M n Rd W A/`"tlan Rd -- W McMillan Rd W McMiAan Rd i®Albertson yam..H-0 � a � � - - � � v 9 � - 0"° F Y � � Total Comments Submitted a p 0 g 65 Yes / 26% 9 0 9 v 182 NO / 74% Q 0 Q 0 5 z settlers Pam HERITAGE Home HERITAGE 0 Improvement .i.•.r'I,._ Ustick Rd 7- g U0,11,Rd E Jvmk Rd GROVE r■� _ Ustick Rd Ustick Rd 3 Trader Joe's 'c �pI.De n a _ vps N° o a Lakeview Golf Course Tully Park Boise Co-op in the . VillageatMeritlian - Chick-fill z CleanPup Mobile Q - Dog Grooming _ ss Revved Up Motorsports v a The W Che L. ° .Du Rite Nursery.Q. Grant's ®Idaho Pizzo Company nY wcnerry Li, Wcherry Ln Neighborhood Grill A Kahoo?z Steak a m y - 0 &Alehcuse v Al berlsons Market Street g a Meridian Middle School Yes Western Idaho a 0 N0 ° Fuller Park a Meridian High School 0 O O Blue Cross of Idahc `T Yes W Pine Ave W Pine Ave W Pine Ave McRdian E Pine Ave E Pine Ave E Pine Ave Ten Mile 0 Urban Air Trampoline Christian Church - and Adventure Park' V's BarbershopTen - a Mile Creek Meridian ' Franklin Rd --- ,ni qd Franklin Rd O Franklin Rd=- Franklin Rd n EFrankliPRd EFrankl In Rd Ling&LoLue's® EFranklin Rd m Meridian Speedway Asian Bar and Grill _ F Boise/ Storey Bark Park - o Meridian H I Journey scheels 0 - Children's a Hampton Inn& Museum of Idaho 0 Suiles Boise-Meridian -way Center - ESU-Meridian Topgolf Boise®� Saint Alphonsus Urgent 0 The Home Depot 0 9 Go:Oile!A=Nbps I, Wahon, F.amily�° Cinemarkf:, Kayb—d.MrtcU[a Map data 02C25 er W Tree Crest PS '' t Mgt o a a W Bay O8 n m 0 a -a z St Lukes on AP""r"'r"n""w - ""`"I."""r Dct''e z S z NCranrini yy Cloverdale ID' _ a ail rr Rocket ExprLS m WfGfiin'den Blvd ?OW=MIAIM�HWy zs m $ a Motztli Mexican Tar pYe Costco Gas Station 0 m W Silver Rjver St�wSllver River st NJoya E W'54"r River Ln O /ry The Kids Dentist n a c' .c z _ Valley Curb&Landscape V m m m W Everest Ln W Everest U a w Everes[SI � � �v p M W Everest St z >, a N " A QYesld_,Baror Sawtocth Network A Willow Creek Elementary 7Q Solutions t g s �/'r"�"tclesale v E# o LJJ/ W Sonny Cove St n m v Cator K9 Q w Svnny cove 51v V ///"�7�N aAR Cafe Rio Fresh - _ Y �SWgcvL� Modern Mexican a H� L� wGrand Teton p T sue, 2 v WLnst Rapi�r _ W L°.sr No 6ff Fuel 4• -4 ram `Lost RaP�spt- P d , Olivia Apartments �knr W Tango Creek❑r fey Larry Ln m N p Yes - _ r—�, �, R Townhomes W Tango Creek St �"7an9°ct m �o 0 3 r - V N° y a' Sim P9o." 7 x Q � .. 7 _ :� Keith Bird j `m� p� = A AakTransport n a x N 1 Legacy Park. V m r Sig p v a v a a g y _ m / PRT WLostRapids0r h'GiadeCrE-k a WGradeCr o�v erui of n �""--�— W Glade Creek St W Vanderbilt nr — us Cf t 3i Latter...ID {_ W Han Q x wQn A 9laak _ �rrd Ave 0 NO 0 v p� 19 o . NT Paw Pro Cafe 4 O W Ma v No � N0 � v T w Paawxriots Events� w Hungry�� Lochsa Falls Park� nen Creek No N +'._"Ave - t/ � .. p 90 i Meridians v for �� ? o { W�agje Mot ig© Pleasant View p Heroes Park w L r ids St r Vanderbilt Dr a Rapids St (�yes Q mi N G Elementary School 7 N0 q �`P v w_, - __. .. W Ladle Rapids St hors2ti s' °`Ytlard Crk 4 m h A W Gondolapr Ottomotive* W Anatole St N Joy y W n W Anatole St v zle Cree wMaltabr. NVeIrcelfiway a �p+L 3 ? z �C'o Root Crk St W Kristy Belle Photography °ooid b W Ravenna Sri o� Q Y,esvenno St 3°� Root Crk$t W 0 z s H`Cedar Gr`9 a z m z a a 2 W Cedar Grave St W CeC q [y a m 7 m W Cedar Grove St r • cj N schin way Ca sP N z y ° F �aa� �' a '' i° $ Ave° W DitchCrer Pub t i c G-olon m��e i t s W Ditch Creek St 3 z N Black m a W Philomena Dr c 0,Winona F_Latta,RN (Mapped w/Address) h Phrlomena Cl t° W Divide Creek S[ N Arezzo Ave ti W WePD°t St Pawspital O 2 W Divide Creek St W Wapoot St + Animal Hospital W Wapoot dr z `:T I r no g og Academy a V W Milano or Dental Care at Verona W Wapoot Dr Limited Are a Submitted Treasure Valley A N Bolsena Ave ® Milano Dr W Kelly Creek br I Photo Booth Selway Kell • 7 Yes / 4% W Daphne St Walmart Sup ercenter y Creek P W Daphne Sr ark rA Nl ppga 174 NO r SS o 3 ° W Apgar Creek Dt W Apgar Creek Or • / 96% Mister CarWashQ P9 } Sh D ayrre Lewis 0 t z - oa Idaho Real Estate ° � Panda Express� c x Tin Roc z g �g W McMillan Rd W McMillan Rd W McMillan Rd W McMillan Rd W McMillan Rd W McMillan Rd W McMillan R[ z L—on aral z Broken YolkCafe.Q. Automated m SRM Arms O c. i - Equipment Solutions _cony Canal t m Bridgetower West 0 a N78alduccr St 7�n `, ®Rudy's Pub&Grill Hunter Flernen lary v ost n School n v No p W Quo7tais Dr w urea st Google�My Maps Q Yurbi Wood W Quinr 'N salerco? c Photography 2 P Hunter Y Kids w Astonte St R 0 a K"beerdshortcars N%Pcoaffi2025Go- - y Chinden Blvd _ tC'.•' .. 'I..:rs, ..F — ._ . �ma -ftZA 1. r - �r ti r _...C11rn[ eel �� li°iitslm"[f I.p,' D iC . .. � i`�_-11Y'�' ?.�Y�i� ! , �iii ReiF+i e`Ir." .� `— m. � e.• if 1 r['E � Fry I� � � 31N�M�`•`!}`? h4 G I. [P '� • 1• C. jf yy costco m�rl Keith Bird' 1 . rk 1I Heros Pa rk 11 oil I � s ■ C E IDIAN�-- Public Presentation(s) f In - N - Out Comments to Planning & Zoning Commission Good evening. My name is Brick Oliver and . l . live on West Silver River Lane, in the Cadence at Bainbridge subdivision in Meridian . I yam , the elected President of the Cadence at Bainbridge HOA , Tonight, lam here to represent the :165 homes and their owner/occupants . that.. Iive in our � community. Cadence at Bainbridge is an age qualified 55+ gated community. There must be at least one 55 + . homeowner; other household members must be over 18 . Our neighborhood is located west of Costco and the Olivia apartments, across Lost Rapids from Bainbridge and the Keith Bird Legacy Park and along the ` 'g y g -P�a�� side of Chinden Blvd . The association understands that drive throughs require a conditional use permit . And . in fact, this location is no stranger to drive throughs . Currently, there are . 7 approved drive throughs , Key Bank Swig Dutch Bros Firehouse. subs Burger King Mountain America Credit Union Cafe Rio And in addition to the In - WOut application, we've been notified of another drive-through , Pollo Loco, that has started the process , The In - WOut proposal had come up at some of our HOA meetings and, eventually it became a pretty .hot topic . Many of us participated in the phone meeting with a representative from In � W Out last Fall . It was obvious then that this was a very bad and unpopular proposal . I felt that before I could properly represent the Cadence residents, I needed to know how they felt about the proposal to build an InmWOut restaurant that will essentially become an integral part of our larger residential . neighborhood . 50, a survey was sent to every household . In discussing the survey results, it's important to note that many of our residents reside elsewhere for parts of the year. Also, some responses represented individuals and some represented the household . There were 3 questions : 1 . Do you support the proposal to allow In - WOut to build a drive-through restaurant the corner of Ten Mile and Lost Rapids ? ? . 2 . Wiil you be attending the P &Z meeting, . currently scheduled for April 3 at 6 PM ? 3 . Will you . be speaking at the P &Z meeting on April 3 ? also asked for Comments . Point 3 : Incompatible . In - WOut will impact our neighborhoods with noise and fumes from all of the automobiles that will come to the site . In - WCIut operates from 10 am to 1 : 00 am . This is unacceptable directly adjacent to residential properties . Costco has limited hours for deliveries and operations . In - WCIut 's business will bring noise, fumes and disruption that is incompatible with the neighborhood and will change the character of Bainbridge , Cadence, Silverleaf and Irvine Meadows . 2 . TGiat tGie [p) roposed use will POe G, armonious uyi% h the V� ericlian corrnprehensive plan and in accord wish tGie requirements of tGAs trifle . cannot speak to this . 3 . TG�at the design, construction , opera'Clon and maintenance �mill Poe co mpatiW fitG� � tG�er uses in the general neighhovhoad and ufith the en'UsUng or intendecol character of me general Vicinity and that such use vjill not adversely change the essewdal character of the same area . The In - WC) ut is not compatible with other uses in the neighborhood and is will adversely change our neighborhood . 4. TGiat the proposed use, if it complies with all condlUons of the ap [p) ro val irtvaposed , will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Parking anywhere near this site will be impacted . Also, there will be fast-food trash left behind everywhere . So That the proposed use will be sevved adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection , drainage structures, refuse disposal , water, and sewer. The In - Grout traffic will spill over into already busy public streets . The existing configuration of turn lanes on Chinden Blvd and W Lost Rapids should be deemed inadequate . 6. That the proposed use will not create encessive ac doftlonal costs for public fac oulities and services and will not he detrimental to the economic welfare of the communityo In - WOut 's hours of operation will be detrimental to the community. 7 . That the proposed use uj ll not involve ocImflo es or [mocesses, materials, equipment and co nd 'o Uons of o�p) te erardon hat esV;�ill to) e t e detrimnta o any persons, p rrope ky 0r the ge " 0ral uyelfare by reason of encessive production of traffic, noise, smolte, fumes, glare or odors . In � WCiut will bring excessive traffic, noise, fumes and odors to the neighborhood . C E IDIAN�-- Public Presentation(s) IDT Highway Safety Dashboard Data Ten Mile / Chinden Area , 2020 - 2024 ( Reported as Significant) 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Chinden 10 Mile 2 7 7+ B+ 5+ Chinden Tree Farm 2 * 5+ 0 4+ 1+ Chinden Business 0 0 6+ 5 * 1 + Ten Mile Business 3 0 _ 6 * 6 * Ten Mile Lost Rapids 4 6 * 4+ 5+ 6 * Suspected Injury + Serious Injury # FATALITY 0 Zero or no data 2020 Costco Opened October2020 k� • 2024 • s A • 2023 • O C E IDIAN�-- Public Presentation(s) IN AND CUT LOST RAPIDS Friona kathy dalton < daltonkathy58@yahoo . com > o <comment@meridiancity. org > Date Today at 4 : 47 PM Dear Meridian Planning �. and Zoning and City 151?0 /9 J /,/)/4 Council members , 00 My name is Kathy Dalton , and I am writing to express my profound concerns regarding the proposed In - N - Out Burger location on Lost Rapids/Tree Farm Road . This location presents significant health and safety risks to my family and our neighbors , particularly impacting vulnerable senior citizens and young children . My husband and I , both in our seventies , reside on Lost Rapids/Tree Farm Road , along with our son , daughter- in - law, and three grandchildren under the age of ten . Our quiet residential neighborhood is currently conducive to the children 's active lifestyles biking , scootering , and playing at nearby Keith Bird Park . The construction and operation of an lnmN = out Burger restaurant would drastically alter this environment , introducing rm significant increases in traffic congestion , noise pollution , and pedestrian traffic . These changes pose a direct threat to the safety and well - being of our grandchildren , and negatively impact our own quality of life . The increased traffic volume alone creates a serious safety concern , particularly for young children navigating the area on bikes and scooters . While we appreciate the popularity of InmN - out Burger, having grown up with the restaurant in California , we firmly believe this specific location is unsuitable for our - - - ° A - - " ° - I - - - - - - - ' g - ems- - resioenuai communny. ne potential negative consequences significantly outweigh any perceived economic benefits for our neighborhood . we strongly urge you to carefully consider the impact on our families and community before approving this proposal . we respectfully request a " NO " Vote on this lnmNm ut Burger location , We would welcome the opportunity to discuss our concerns further. Sincerely Don and Kathy Dalton 4057 w Lost Rapids Dr C E IDIAN�-- Public Presentation(s) 1 April 7 , 2025 TO : Meridian Planning & Zoning ATTN : Chris Johnson RE : Presenting My Findings Regarding the In - N - Out Burgers Application Process DISCUSSION : I would appreciate being considered to speak for the allowed 3 minutes and permission to distribute 2 pages of notes to interested participants . I will bring copies of my handout for the public and request you provide copies to the Planning & Zoning Commission for their review & discussion at our meeting on April 17 , 2025 at 6 : 00 pm . I have spoken with Gary Moore of SLC , Utah who puts in all the Burger Kings in Idaho . I was hopeful he had a non - compete clause in his contract . He shared that he had included that clause but it was denied by the Gasser Family Business ( I believe Trevor Gasser) . Moore elected to proceed with that location at Ten Mile near Chinden . David Turnbull of Brighton Corporation sold the perimeter properties to the Gasser Family Business ( pronounced Gosser) while Brighton proceeded to Develop Bainbridge ( with a team of builders . ) . We now have 573 homes in Bainbridge . Brighton also created the gated community of Cadence, with 162 homes and the Olivia Apartments ( 115 Units) , adjacent to the Costco property in this Mixed Use Project . The 2017 original " Overall TIA " which was used by the by the Ganddini Group , Inc . makes no mention of these additional units in their 91 page Focus Traffic Analysis dated January 21 , 2025 . I am hopeful to help Gasser find a more suitable location for the proposed lln - N � Out Burgers and secure a compatible tenant for the North Ten Mile/ Chinden location . Thank you in. advance. Bainbridge Subdivision Homeowner 5876 N Vicenza Avenue Respectfully, Meridian , ID 83646 208 - 866 = 8594 Dianne Hough , Realtor dianne@amherst® madison . com EXCERPTS FROM THE 91 PAGE GANDDINI REPORT SUBMITTED TO PLANNING & ZONING , (Page 1 ) BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The project site is located within the approved and nearly built-out Chinden & Ten Mile Mixed- Use Development [ "Overall Development" ] . Traffic impacts and mitigation for the overall development were previously evaluated in the Transportation Impact Study Chinden & Ten Mile Mixed-Use Development ( Kittelson & Associates, September 2017 ) [ "Overall TIA" ] . The Overall TIA considered development of a 166 ,000 square foot Costco Wholesale warehouse and gasoline station , 60 ,000 sgtaare feet of retail pads , 115 apartment dwelling units, and 162 single-family dwelling units . The project site is located in area designated as shopping center, which includes restaurants , within the Overall Development plan ; therefore, the Overall TIA adequately considered development of the project site with the proposed land use . 166 , 000 Sq Ft COSTCO plus gas station is mentioned 601000 Sq Ft of retail pads of which the subject property belongs 162 Single Family Dwelling is now known as the Gated Community of Cadence 115 Apartments and amenities now known as Olivia BUT WHERE ARE THE 573 HOMES OF BAINBRIDGE AND THE LOTS BRIGHTON SOLD TO CORY BARTON HOMES FOR DEVELOPMENT ? ALL OF THESE HOMES AND APARTMENTS AND CADENCE USE THE 4 ENTRANCES TO COSTCO BUILDING , COSTCO PARKING AND GAS STATION . (2 OFF CHINDEN , 2 OFF TEN MILE , PLUS EAST AND WEST LOST RAPIDS.) . AGREEING WITH A STUDY DONE IN 2017 CALLED (OVERALL TIA) DOES NOT GIVE AN ACCURATE PICTURE OF 2025, THE CONGESTION IS FORMIDABLE , OF ALL THESE ENTITIES, BAINBRIDGE SUBDIVISION AND THE OLIVIA APARTMENTS ARE THE MOST NEGATIVELY EFFECTED WITH AN IN - N - OUT ON THAT CORNER . THE OLIVIA RESIDENTS ARE NOT HOMEOWNERS . THEY RENT OR LEASE THEIR DWELLINGS . IN ADDITION , THE NEW FAST EDDY' S CHEVRON IS NEAR COMPLETION . IT WILL BE HEAVILY USED BY CONSTRUCTION TRUCKS COMING OFF THE FREEWAY AND HEADING NORTH TO CHINDEN TO DELIVER GOODS TO THE BOON IN CONSTRUCTION TO THE WEST AS WELL AS IN STAR , MIDDLETON , NAMPA NORTH AND NOW EMMETT. I KNOW THESE AREAS ARE NOT YOUR CONCERN BUT AS MERIDIAN RESIDENTS _ IT EFFECTS OUR QUALITY OF LIFE . PLEASE GIVE OUR CONCERNS SOME CONSIDERATION AS YOU EVALUATE THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT. EXCERPTS FROM THE 91 PAGE GANDDINI REPORT SUBMITTED TO PLANNING & ZONING . (Page 1 & 2) SCOPE OF ANALISIS The study area consists of the following study intersection and roadway segments most likely to be affected by the proposed project: Studv Intersection Ten Mile Road at Lost Rapids Drive Study Roadway Segments • Ten Mile Road north of Lost Rapids Drive • Ten Mile Road south of Lost Rapids Drive ■ Lost Rapids Drive west of Ten Mile Road • Lost Rapids Drive east of Ten Mile Road AS SUGGESTED ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT , THE SCOPE OF ANALYSIS IS TOO LIMITED BY ONLY EVALUATING THE TWO STREETS THAT BORDER THE SUBJECT PROJECT . By definition , Ten Mile is a primary corridor that moves traffic North to Chinden a few blocks and South to the Freeway access and miles beyond . Lost Rapids is a narrow neighborhood street running East and West across now a very busy Ten Mile and through two subdivisions namely Loscha Falls and Bainbridge . The main entrance to Bainbridge is west of the Costco on Chinden . Both Chinden and Ten Mile have shown considerable traffic increases over the past 5 years since we bought our home in Bainbridge . WHILE IN - N - OUT WOULD LIKE TO CAPITALIZE ON THAT GROWTH , IT WOULD BE ENCROACHING ON A NICE NEIGHBORHOOD , FILLED WITH FAMILIES AND LOTS OF ACTIVE CHILDREN . THE BLENDING - IN OF CADENCE HAS BEEN A BLESSING FOR BAINBRIDGE AS WE ALL ENJOY WALKING OUR DOGS IN OUR SPACIOUS PARK , BETTER SUITED FOR THIS LOCATION WOULD BE A SERVICE LIKE AN ORTHODONTIST OFFICE OR POSSIBLY AN EMERGENCY CARE FACILITY . TO BE FAIR , LAST OCTOBER BAINBRIDGE CONDUCTED AN EMAIL SURVEY OF OUR MANY RESIDENTS REGARDING IF THEY WANTED AN IN - N - OUT AT THAT CORNER , 42 % OF OUR 573 HOUSEHOLDS RESPONDED WHICH IS A FAIR REPRESENTATION , THE RESULTS WERE 90 % AGAINST AND 10 % FOR . CADENCE HAS IT ' S OWN HOA AND I HAVE BEEN MADE AWARE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN QUITE ACTIVE IN NOT WANTING THE fN - N - OUT BURGERS SO CLOSE TO THEIR GATED COMMUNITY , WE ALL WANTED TO BE HEARD THEN - AND WE ALL WANT TO BE HEARD NOW . TO : MERIDIAN CITY PLANNING & ZONING April 7 , 2025 FROM : DIANNE HOUGH DISCUSSION I FEEL IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION TO UNDERSTAND THE MANY ACTIVITIES IN OUR COMMUNITY PARK . IT SUPPORTS ACTIVITIES FOR NOT ONLY OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BUT OTHER COMMUNITIES AS WELL . Best, Dianne Hough , Homeowner 5876 N . Vicenza Ave Meridian , ID 83646 ( 208 ) 866 - 8594 PHOTOS OF PARK ACTIVITIES ON MARCH 26, 2025 AT 7: 10 PM PAGE 1 PARKING LOT WITHIN THE � " r5 PARK. THERE ARE :v . " r 24 SPACES + 2 HANDICAP . , 4 THIS NIGHT THE OUR PARKING LOT IS FULL & VERF WIN 0 LO G . WHEN IT IS SPORTS SEASON WE WELCOME SUCH THESE ACTIVITIES ON 2 NIGHTS PER WEEK . F _ Ir r . All Pi I t • DOG TRAINING AND MASTER TRAINING IS IN SESSION ! f '. i• t.+ , < FLAG FOOTBALL TEAMS . o AT PRACTICE f PARK ACTIVITIES CONTINUE ® PACE 2 FURTHER THOUGHTS : THIS NIGHT OUR PARK IS HOPPING WITH ACTIVITY ! ( MONDAY, APRIL 7T" ) . WE HAVE THREE FLAG FOOTBALL TEAMS GOING ( SMALL, MEDIUM AND LARGE ) PLUS A GIRLS LE CROSS TEAM PRACTICING PLUS DOG OBEDIENCE TRAINING . ( IT RAINED EARLIER SO EVERYTHING IS WET ) OUR PARK IS ALIVE AND VIBRANT . IT CREATES SUCH A FEELING OF COMMUNITY & BELONGING . WE DO NOT WANT TO LOSE THE VERY ACTIVITIES THAT HELP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WORK ! MAYBE AT SOME POINT WE COULD DEMONSTRATE TO THE MERIDIAN P & Z HOW NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS COULD WORK , SO MANY OF THEM SIT IDLE , I AM GRATEFUL THAT OURS IS LARGE AND BEAUTIFUL AND BRINGS OUR NEIGHBORS OUT TO PLAY/ OR WATCH AND MOST IMPORTANTLY - ENJOY ! C E IDIAN�-- Public Presentation(s) A~ xe- r b d t i � p '* V.t� f 1 � I � it 10CN . f i� . I F I I �1 1 io ) 4 e�+ , •:�� {,mow,+,. ''�-�-" our