HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC - Appeal Letter 13502 Hamburger Lane
Baldwin Park,Ca 91706-5885 The Best Enterprise
626-813-8200 • Is A Free Enterprise-
'A
May 30, 2025
Meridian City Council
33 E. Broadway Ave.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Re: Decision to be reviewed: Case No. H-2024-0058
In the Matter of the Request for 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 with Business Hours of
Operation from 10: 30 AM until 1: 00 AM Sunday
Through Thursday and From 10: 30 AM until 1:
30 AM Friday and Saturday, Located at 5985 &
6037 N. Ten Mile Rd., by In-N- Out Burger.
Name and address of person Cassie Ruiz
seeking review: 13502 Hamburger Lane
Baldwin Park, CA 91706-5885
Dear City Council Members:
I. Introduction
In-N-Out Burgers ("In-N-Out") respectfully submits the following letter appealing
("Appeal") the City of Meridian ("City") Planning and Zoning Commission's ("Commission")
decision("Commission Decision") denying In-N-Out's application for a Conditional Use Permit
("Application") for a drive-through establishment as an accessory to a permitted restaurant
("Project") located at 5985 & 6037 North Ten Mile Road in Meridian, Idaho ("Property").
In support of this Appeal, In-N-Out has evaluated the feedback to its Application and
hereby submits the following proposed conditions and supplemental information, which
illustrate that the Project's compliance with the Meridian City Code standards, Meridian's
Comprehensive Plan, and original development plan for the Property.
A. Factual Background
In-N-Out intends to operate 3,886 square foot restaurant with indoor seating for 74 people
and outdoor seating for 46 people located at 5985 and 6037 North Ten Mile Road in Meridian,
Idaho. Because In-N-Out's business is renowned for its drive-throughs, a drive-through is the
essential element to the Project. As discussed in more detail below, operating a drive-through
within the City requires a conditional use permit in certain circumstances.
The Property is located in the C-G district, which permits the restaurant but requires a
conditional use permit for the drive-through. Within this C-G district are already several
commercial businesses including,but not limited to:
• Burger King operating from 6:OOam to 12:OOam on Monday through Saturday, and
7:OOam to 12:OOam on Sunday.
• Cafe Rio operating from 10:30am to 10:00pm Monday through Saturday, and 11:OOam
to 10:00pm on Sunday.
• Costco operating from 10:00am to 8:30pm on weekdays, with reduced operations on
Saturday and Sunday (9:30am to 6:OOpm and 10:OOam to 6:OOpm, respectively)
• Costco gas station operating from 6:OOam to 10:00pm on weekdays, with reduced
operations on Saturday and Sunday(6:OOam to 8:30 PM and 6:OOam-7:30 PM,
respectively)
Several nearby businesses including Dutch Bros Coffee, Caf6 Rio, Burger King, Swig, Slim
Chickens, and Firehouse Subs also operate drive-throughs. is the Project is ideally located near
important community pillars, including several public parks, churches and schools. In-N-Out
views the neighboring communities as important assets and hopes that many residents and
customers who frequent this area will become In-N-Out customers. In-N-Out takes pride in its
wholesome reputation offering a safe and clean space for families and friends to hang out and
enjoy a burger.
The Property is located within a larger shopping complex ("Shopping Complex"). The two
parcels involved here were originally proposed to house two individual businesses, rather than
just one. The Shopping Complex was proposed in two phases: (1) Phase 1, involving the
construction of a 166,000 square-foot Costco warehouse and(2) Phase 2, involving the
construction of 60,000 square feet of retail pads, 115 apartment units, and 162 residential homes.
Currently, the retail portion of Phase 2 of the Shopping Complex is nearly built out with only
three of 10 lots remaining to be developed. However, on a square footage basis, only 31,008
square feet of the originally contemplated 60,000 square feet(less by nearly half) has been built.
When the City approved the Shopping Complex's development application, the underlying
traffic impact study was a key part of the City's approval. Based on this impact study, the City
agreed that Costco shopping complex would require transportation infrastructure improvements
and even determined that a variance would help relieve traffic flow concerns. As such, the City
required that prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy, SH 2O-26/W. Chinden Blvd. be widened
to four lanes with signal/intersection upgrades from Tree Farm to Linder(1.5 miles); North Ten
Mile Road would be widened to 4 lanes from Chinden to Walmart(0.80 of a mile); and that
Page 2 of 21
signals would be installed at North Black Cat Road and West Lost Rapids Drivel These
improvements were developed after City Staff held several additional meetings to review and
discuss the Costco application with the Ada County Highway District("ACHD"), Idaho
Transportation Department ("ITD"), and the Community Planning Association of Southwest
Idaho ("COMPASS").2 These conditions of approval took into account significant traffic
increases expected by 2040 as detailed in the Communities in Motion 2040 Plan.3 Based on these
discussions and a detailed traffic study, the City approved the development with these specific
conditions so that the full buildout of the Shopping Complex—not just Costco—would be
supported. These required road improvements are complete. Currently, even with In-N-Out's
drive-through proposal, the Shopping Complex is still far below the size and density of the
original assumptions identified in the Shopping Complex's site and development plans.
B. Procedural Background
The Staff Report for this Application was issued on April 12, 2025. In-N-Out received the
Staff Report on April 15, 2025 shortly before the April 17, 2025 Planning and Zoning
Commission hearing ("Hearing"). In-N-Out was disappointed to see that City Staff did not
recommend approving the Application; however, because the Hearing was rapidly approaching,
In-N-Out was not able to work with City Staff to revise its Application, submit supplemental
information or draft mutually agreeable conditions of approval.
At the Hearing, the Commission considered In-N-Out's Conditional Use Permit
Application and public comments on the same. Ultimately, the Commission denied the
Application on the basis that the proposed restaurant location's hours of operation were not
compatible with the residential area to the west and determined that there were substantial traffic
concerns, including traffic conflicts that will have a negative impact on the north-south private
drive aisle that serves the surrounding commercial area. City's Findings of Fact, Conclusions of
Law and Decision& Order(Case No. H-2024-0058 In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile).4
At the Hearing, the Commission determined that In-N-Out was unwilling to "deviate
from its corporate plan,"that operational hours and other matters were "non-negotiable," and
1 See Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, H-2018-0004
(hlt 2s://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/PDF 10/c3 da 143f-7d0e-4bf7-al cb-
ac935d7407e6/147764), p. 7. Exhibit B.1.l.b.15., c.12.,
2 Id. at p.8.
3 Id. at p.11.
4 The Staff Report provides a"note for clarification" stating, "The notice of public hearing included
"extended"business hours of operation as the use was believed to abut a residential use and zoning
district,which would have limited hours from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm per UDC 11-2B-3B; however, upon
closer examination,prior to issuance of the staff report, Staff found the proposed use is actually
separated from the residential use/zoning by a 20 foot wide strip of commercially zoned land. Therefore,
business hours are not expressly limited by the UDC although they may be limited through the
Conditional Use Permit as a condition of approval for compatibility with adjacent uses. The staff report
clarified this matter in Section III.0 below and Staff also clarified it verbally at the public hearing. Any
references in the staff report to"extended"business hours of operation should be disregarded.
Page 3 of 21
that In-N-Out "made it perfectly clear that they're not willing to deviate from their standard
business hours."5 The Commission asked In-N-Out whether it was aware of other In-N-Out
locations with operating hours outside of In-N-Out's proposed business hours of operations. In-
N-Out acknowledged that some stores do close at midnight, and that In-N-Out was willing to
provide additional information regarding store operational hours and delivery hours, specifically
In-N-Out stated that operational hours were something it would discuss.6 While this response
may not have been a clear acknowledgement that In-N-Out is willing to accept conditions of
approval, it was certainly not the refusal that the Commissioners construed In-N-Out's response
to be.
As a result of the Commission's, City Staff s and public's feedback in response to the
Application, In-N-Out hereby submits additional material to supplement the record, including a
revised proposed site plan dated May 19, 2025 (Exhibit A), revised proposed landscape plan
dated May 27, 2025 (Exhibit B), updated queuing observations of the three existing Idaho stores
performed in May 2025 (Exhibit C), a proposed photometric plan(Exhibit D), and an
operational noise study(Exhibit E). This material is addressed in this appeal and included in this
submission. Since the Hearing, In-N-Out also met with City Staff to gather important feedback
necessary to address alleged impacts. For example, In-N-Out originally sought to operate from
10:30am to 1:OOam Sunday through Thursday, and from 10:30am to 1:30 am on Friday through
Saturday, with deliveries occurring between 2:OOam and 9:OOam. As discussed in its proposed
conditions of approval, In-N-Out now offers that it will operate only until 12:OOam every day of
the week, and that delivery hours will be restricted to 6:00am until 10:00pm.
Thus, this appeal serves two purposes. First, this appeal explains why the Meridian City
Council ("City Council") should reverse the Commission's decision because the Commission's
decision was legally insufficient and based on inappropriate considerations, given the limited
scope of the conditional use request at issue. Second, this appeal sets forth In-N-Out's proposed
conditions of approval, which are (a) consistent with the interdepartmental memoranda attached
to the original Staff Report, (b) address City Staff s incompatibility concerns, and(c) address a
number of concerns expressed by in public comment or by the Commission. Accordingly, In-N-
Out respectfully requests approving approval of its Application based on the based on the
information and supplemental material provided and discussed herein.
IL Legal Standards
A. Restaurants are permitted uses in the C-G District and only the proposed
drive-through's impacts should be considered.
Meridian's Uniform Development Code ("UDC") defines a restaurant as "the use of a
site for the primary purpose of food preparation, having a commercial kitchen and cooking
5 See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yLJuAXbeX4 at 4:06:00 (Chair Lorcher's
comments); 4:09:40 (Commissioner Rust's comments suggesting a continuance to create
conditions of approval for operational hours and other matters); 4:10:35 (Commissioner
Sandoval's Comments).
6 See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yLJuAXbeX4 at 3:32:00.
Page 4 of 21
facilities, and where meals are regularly served to the public for compensation."UDC § 11-1A-
L In-N-Out's proposed restaurant would be located in a"General Retail and Service Commercial
District"generally referred to as the "C-G" district. The purpose of a commercial district is "to
provide for the retail and service needs of the community in accordance with the Meridian
Comprehensive Plan." Specifically in a C-G district, there is the "largest scale and broadest mix
of retail, office, service, and light industrial uses."Id. at Table § 11-213-1.
Restaurants are permitted uses within the C-G district, meaning that "the use of land or a
structure allowed in a specific district as distinguished from an accessory or conditional use."
UDC § 11-1A-A (defining "Principal Permitted Use"). In the C-G district,business hours of
operation are limited to 6:OOam to 11:00pm only"when the subject property abuts a residential
use or district."UDC § 11-213-3(B).' However, when the proposed use does not abut a residential
use or district, there are no operational hour restrictions, unless imposed through a conditional
use permit as a condition of approval.
Drive-throughs, including stacking lanes, speaker and order areas,pickup windows and
exit lanes, are typically an accessory use, meaning the drive-through is "incidental and secondary
to the principal use and is conducted upon the same property." See UDC § 11-4-3-11(A); UDC §
l l-1A-A ("accessory use, nonresidential"). When a drive through is located within 300 feet of
another drive-through facility, a residential district, or an existing residence; separated by an
arterial street from any other drive-through facility, residential district, or existing residence, or
within an O-T zoning district, then a conditional use permit is required. Id. § 11-4-3-11.A.1-3.
Such is the case here. As identified in In-N-Out's Application and the Staff Report, In-N-Out's
new proposed restaurant location is within 300 feet of another drive-through restaurant(Caf6
Rio). Thus, the proposed drive-through is subject to conditional approval.
For the drive-through feature, In-N-Out must meet the specific-use standards outlined at
UDC § 11-4-3-1l(B), (C), and(D). Under UDC § 11-4-3-1l(B), In-N-Out must"identify the
stacking lane, menu and speaker location(if applicable), and window location on the certificate
of zoning compliance or the conditional use permit."8 UDC § 11-4-3-11(C) requires In-N-Out to
submit a site plan that demonstrates "safe pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation on the
site and between adjacent properties."In-N-Out must show that:
7 "Hours of operation. Business hours of operation within the L-O and C-N Districts 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. Extended hours of operation in the C-C and C-G Districts may be requested through a
conditional use permit. These restrictions apply to all business operations occurring outside an
enclosed structure, including, but not limited to, customer or client visits, trash compacting, and
deliveries. These restrictions do not apply to business operations occurring within an enclosed
structure, including, but not limited to, cleaning,bookkeeping, and after hours work by a limited
number of employees. UDC § 11-2B-3(B) (emphasis added).
s UDC § 11-4-3-11(B) also prohibits the use of speakers. As In-N-Out's proposed location is not
within an O-T zoning district, this limitation does not apply.
Page 5 of 21
• stacking lanes have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways, drive
aisles, and the public right-of-way by patrons.
• the stacking lane has a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access
and parking, except that stacking lanes may provide access to designated
employee parking.
• the stacking lane is not located within 10 feet of any residential district or existing
residence.
• if the stacking lane is greater than 100 feet in length, In-N-Out's site design has
provided an escape lane.
• the drive-through is visible from a public street for surveillance purposes.
UDC § 11-4-32-11(C)(1)-(5).
More generally, under the UDC, all conditional uses must adhere to several Conditional
Use Standards. "In approving any conditional use, the decision-making body may prescribe
appropriate conditions, bonds and safeguards in conformity with this title [the UDC] that(1)
Minimize adverse impact of the use on other property; (2) Control the sequence and timing of the
use; (3) Control the duration of the use; (4) Assure that the use and the property in which the use
is located is maintained properly; (5) Designate the exact location and nature of the use and the
property development; (6) Require the provision for on site or off-site public facilities or
services; (7) Require more restrictive standards than those generally required in this title; (8)
Require mitigation of adverse impacts of the proposed development upon service delivery by any
political subdivision, including school districts, that provides services within the city."UDC §
11-513-6. The decision-making body, must"base its determination on the conditional use
permit" on the following findings:
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.
2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in
accord with the requirements of this title.
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.
4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not
adversely affect other property in the vicinity.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Page 6 of 21
9. Additional findings for the alteration or extension of a nonconforming use:
a. That the proposed nonconforming use does not encourage or set a precedent for
additional nonconforming uses within the area; and
b. 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.9
UDC § 11-513-6.
In-N-Out's proposed restaurant is permitted by right, subject only to design-related
standards outlined above. For the purposes of approving or denying In-N-Out's Application, the
City Council should only consider the proposed drive-through operation and its impacts, and not
the operation of a restaurant as a whole. Thus, any impacts that would arise from operating a
restaurant without a drive-through (e.g., noise from slamming car doors, vehicle headlights in a
parking lot pointed toward the Olivia residential development, building and parking lot lighting)
should not be considered for the purposes of evaluating the conditional use required findings,
approval, denial, or adopting conditions of approval. However, the City Council may consider
such impacts that arise specifically from operating a drive-through when evaluating these
matters.
B. Standard of Review
The City Council reviews Commission decisions under a de novo standard of review.
UDC § 11-5A-7(C) ("All requests for review of the action of the Director or commission, shall
require a de novo public hearing before the City Council as set forth in [UDC] Section 11-5A-6")
"A de novo review means `a trying of the matter anew--the same as if it had never been heard
before."'Marcia T. Turner, L.L.C. v. City of Twin Falls, 144 Idaho 203, 211, 159 P.3d 840, 848
(2007) (upholding a city council's decision to consider emails sent to the Council after a P&Z
Commission decision); see also Gilbert v. Moore, 108 Idaho 165, 168, 697 P.2d 1179, 1182
(1985). When the City Council reviews a decision under a de novo standard of review, it not
confined to the record made before the P&Z Commission and may consider new information.
Twin Falls, 144 Idaho at 211; UDC § 11-5A-7(D). The City Council is "not required to address
the P&Z Commission's findings or decision, nor [is] it required to find that the Commission
made a legal error or that its findings lacked support in the record." Twin Falls, 144 Idaho at 211.
The Council's de novo review has "the effect of removing the P&Z Commission's decision from
the record."Id. (citations omitted).
III. Proposed Conditions of Approval
In-N-Out understands that it is atypical for a conditional use permit applicant to present
its own conditions of approval without input from City Staff. However, In-N-Out presents these
proposed conditions of approval to show its good faith efforts to mitigate or resolve any alleged
impacts from its proposed drive through. In-N-Out suggests the following conditions of
approval:
9 City Staff determined, and In-N-Out agrees, that the conditional use requirement number nine
does not apply to In-N-Out's Application because there is no nonconforming use involved here.
Therefore, In-N-Out does not discuss this conditional use requirements in this appeal.
Page 7 of 21
1. All mechanical equipment on the back of the building and outdoor service and
equipment areas should be incorporated into the overall design of the building and
landscaping so that visual and acoustic impacts of these functions are contained
and out of view from adjacent properties as set forth in UDC 11-3A-12.
2. Food service hours of operation shall be from 6:00 am-12:00 am, seven days a
week.
3. In-N-Out shall provide pedestrian sidewalks along the western and northern edges
of the property connecting the public right of way between Lost Rapids Drive at
the southwest and N. 10 Mile Road at the northeast as shown on the attached
revised site plan dated May 19, 2025 .
4. Landscaping along the western and southern portions of the property shall be as
provided in In-N-Out's revised landscape plan dated May 27, 2025.
5. Routine ingredient deliveries shall take place between the hours of 6:00 am—
10:00 pm.
6. The primary delivery access for In-N-Out-operated delivery trucks shall be from
the driveway access via N. Ten Mile Road approximately 660 feet north of W.
Lost Rapids Drive. The driveway access via W. Lost Rapids Drive driveway
approximately 350 feet west of N. Ten Mile Road may be used when access to the
Lost Rapids/Ten Mile traffic signal is needed.
7. Parking lot lighting shall be designed with lighting levels in conformance to the
attached photometric plan.
8. Parking lot lights and signs shall be turned off after closing to the public, with the
exception of those lights necessary to maintain public and In-N-Out Burger
Associates' safety and security.
9. No stacking is permitted in outside travel lane serving as an escape lane; In-N-Out
shall install signage that notifies patrons to not block escape lanes or exits.
In-N-Out also agrees to all Ada County Highway District and Meridian Public Works
proposed conditions, as set forth in Exhibit F.
IV. Grounds for Appeal
As mentioned above, the City Council should reverse the Commission's decision for
several reasons: (1) the Commission's decision was legally insufficient under Idaho case law; (2)
the Commission made its decision based on considerations outside the limited scope of the
conditional use request; and(3) as shown by the record below, and in the supplemental
information discussed here, In-N-Out has met the conditional use required findings. These points
are covered more fully below.
A. The Commission's decision was insufficient under Idaho case law and should
be set aside by the City Council.
The Commission's one-and-a-half-page long decision does not meet the "reasoned
statement" standards outlined in Idaho's Local Land Use Planning Act ("LLUPA") or the case
law arising out of this Act. As a result, the Commission's decision is invalid and must be
overturned by the City Council.
Page 8 of 21
Idaho Code § 67-6535 requires that any"approval or denial of any application required or
authorized pursuant to [LLUPA] shall be based upon standards and criteria which shall be set
forth in the comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance or other appropriate ordinance or regulation of
the city or county."An approval or denial must be "in writing and accompanied by a reasoned
statement that explains the criteria and standards considered relevant, states the relevant
contested facts relied upon, and explains the rationale for the decision based on the applicable
provisions of the comprehensive plan, relevant ordinance and statutory provisions,pertinent
constitutional principles and factual information contained in the record." Idaho Code § 67-
6535(2). If a decision-making body"fail[s] to identify the nature of compliance or
noncompliance with express approval standards or fail[s] to explain compliance or
noncompliance with relevant decision criteria" in writing, the denial shall be invalidated on
appeal.Id. § 65-6735(2)(a).
Recently the Idaho Supreme Court reiterated that "[i]t is well established that LLUPA
requires a decision-maker to issue a written statement in support of its decision, setting forth the
relevant contested facts relied upon, and explaining the criteria and standards it considered
relevant." Veterans Park Neighborhood Assn, Inc. v. City of Boise, 564 P.3d 350, 364 (Idaho
2025) ("VPNA"). A mere recitation of portions of the record, rather than determinations of facts
disputed is insufficient under LLUPA.Id. citing Jasso v. Camas Cnty., 151 Idaho 790, 794, 264
P.3d 897, 901 (2011). When a decision does not measure up to LLUPA's "reasoned statement"
standard, it violates an Applicant's substantial right to due process.Jasso v. Camas Cnty., 151
Idaho 790, 792, 264 P.3d 897, 899 (2011).
The VPNA case involved Interfaith Sanctuary's request for a conditional use permit
operate a homeless shelter in Boise, Idaho near the Veterans Park Neighborhood. The matter first
went before the Boise City Planning and Zoning Commission which denied the conditional use
permit primarily because Interfaith Sanctuary had not created a security plan, and there would be
adverse impacts to neighboring communities, city-funded emergency responders like firefighters
and police, and Interfaith Sanctuary would not provide assurances that it would mitigate the
homeless shelter's adverse impacts on the community. VPNA v. City of Boise, 564 P.3d 350, 356
(Idaho 2025). Further, according to the Boise Planning and Zoning Commission, Interfaith
Sanctuary's materials did not provide enough information to allow the Commissioners to craft
conditions of approval. Interfaith Sanctuary then appealed to the Boise City Council which
reversed the conditional use permit denial. After this approval, VPNA brought a judicial appeal
which ended up before the Idaho Supreme Court.
The Idaho Supreme Court specifically found that the Boise City Council's one and one-
half page reasoned statement, and conditions of approval were inadequate even when referencing
nearly 40 hours of public hearing and thousands of pages of submissions. The Court noted that
the Boise City Council's decision offered only summary conclusions, but did not"attempt to
wrestle with any of the controversy." For example, the Boise City Council's decision offered the
blanket statement that"[c]onditions of approval will ensure that the shelter does not adversely
impact other property in the vicinity." But the City Council's decision stopped short of
explaining how conditions of approval would address concerns raised by VPNA and other
members of the public. The Court also criticized the Boise City Council for incorporating by
reference 30 conditions of approval to provide explanatory support for the Council's decision.Id.
at 368. While the Court agreed that it could read these conditions in concert with the reasoned
Page 9 of 21
statement, the conditions alone did not render valid the conclusory opinion by providing a clear
explanation or guidance demonstrating the facts that the Boise City Council relied on.
Similarly, in Jasso v. Camas County, the Court invalidated a Board of County
Commissioners' decision when the findings of fact were mere recitations of procedural history.
In that case, the Board of County Commissioners merely recited that a preliminary plat
application and reports were submitted, that expert and agency recommendations were made,
that fees were paid, and hearings were held. These facts were not enough to create the required
reasoned statement under LLUPA. 151 Idaho 790, 795, 264 P.3d 897, 902 (2011). Further, the
Board of County Commissioners' conclusions of law consisted of merely eight short statements
detailing the contents of the record(e.g., that a warranty deed and easement were included in the
application file; that an engineering report had been submitted and deemed complete). This
decision was both legally insufficient to withstand judicial review, and violated the applicant's
due process rights.Id.
The Commission's decision here is similarly inadequate. The Commission's findings of
fact here are not full sentences and merely list "Hearing Facts," "Process Facts," "Application
and Property Facts," and Required Findings per the Unified Development Code"with cross
references to the Staff Report. The Commission provided no explanation as to why some facts
were accepted as relevant, valid, or truthful, while others were disregarded. Indeed, In-N-Out is
not able to fully refute the findings of fact simply because it unclear which facts the Commission
specifically relied on. To refute each and every fact brought before the Commission by City Staff
and the public would result in a far lengthier appeal than this document.
In addition, the conclusions of law are not actually conclusions of law determining how
the UDC applies to the facts before the Commission. Instead, they are simply sentences
discussing that the Commission has power under LLUPA; an acknowledgement of the UDC and
Comprehensive Plan; an acknowledgement that the Commission considered comments from
agencies; and a statement that the Commission granted an order of denial. The conclusion of law
#4 even states that"[i]t is found public facilities and services required by the proposed
development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are
imposed."Decision, at 1. Yet, there are no conditions of approval attached, nor are there any
factual findings discussing governmental services outside of the record's contents.
It is difficult and nearly impossible for In-N-Out to fully refute the facts the
Commissioners relied on, and the conclusions made by the Commissioners simply because they
are no where to be found in the Commission's Decision. And even when reviewing the record,
In-N-Out must infer the facts the Commissioners deemed relevant. In-N-Out acknowledges that
there is no "particular form required, and no magic words need be employed,"to establish a
sufficient statement.Jasso, 151 Idaho at 796. But without a more detailed reasoned statement,
In-N-Out will be denied the opportunity to seek meaningful judicial review of any denial and
thus, In-N-Out's right to substantial due process will be denied should the Commission decision
remain in place. Id. Thus the City Council must reverse the Commission's decision.
And, as outlined below, it is not appropriate for the City Council to simply issue a more
detailed denial of In-N-Out's proposed conditional use. Instead, based on the credible, reliable,
Page 10 of 21
and substantial evidence already provided by In-N-Out at the Hearing, and provided here as
supplemental information, the City Council should approve this conditional use.
B. In-N-Out's Application meets each of the conditional use requirements.
1. In-N-Out's proposed location is large enough to accommodate the
proposed use and meets all the dimensional development requirement
regulations in the district in which the use is located.
The Property consists of two parcels, totaling approximately 2.2 acres. Other Treasure
Valley locations are nearly an acre smaller than this proposed location. The In-N-Out located at
The Village Shopping Center is 1.2 acres. The Nampa location is 1.4 acres. The In-N-Out
location in the Boise Town Square mall is 0.86 acres. Here, the restaurant itself would be 3,886
square feet, leaving the remainder of the Site (91,946 square feet or about 2.1 acres) available for
parking, queue stacking, an escape lane, landscaping, and family-friendly outdoor seating.
City Staff determined that the proposed use will comply with the dimensional standards
for the C-G District identified in Table 11-213-13. Drive through establishments must also comply
with the specific design standards set forth at UDC § 11-4-3-11. With certain design
modifications, which In-N-Out is agreeable to, the Project will also comply with § I 1-4-3-11, the
design standards for a drive-through establishment.
City Staff determined that the Property would not have "sufficient capacity to prevent
obstruction of driveways, drive aisles, and the public right-of-way by patrons."Decision, at 11
(marked as p. 84 in Department Report). Yet, City Staff also acknowledged that since opening
"activity at that location [the Meridian Village location] has decreased, resulting in reduced
stacking and impact on adjacent properties" Staff Report at § III.C.3(3).
Under In-N-Out's proposed plan,parking at the Property can accommodate 73 cars,
which far exceeds the UDC requirement that In-N-Out provide 16 parking spaces (one parking
space is required for every 250 square foot of gross floor area under UDC § 11-4-3-49). Further,
In-N-Out's site design shows capacity for 29 vehicles in the stacking lanes. After operations
normalize after opening, In-N-Out anticipates this capacity being sufficient to manage on and
offsite impacts. At its Village location, the maximum observed queue during a survey occurring
in December 2024 was 46 cars. The weekday dinner average queue for that location was about
30 cars. In response to Commission's concerns regarding traffic, In-N-Out Burger commissioned
an additional survey of its drive through queues at the Village, Boise, and Nampa locations
(attached hereto as Exhibit Q. The results of this study show that there will be sufficient
capacity at the Site. Each metric measured- average, 85th percentile, 95th percentile and max
peak queues - decreased from the original observations from December 2024. Specifically at The
Village, the results from the recent May 2025 survey yielded a decrease of over 20% in the
maximum observed queue to 34 cars and the weekday dinner average queue decreased by over
25%to 22 cars. It should be noted that these queue counts can be accommodated within the
proposed site without impacting the southernmost driveway access to the Site, nor the private
access road from West Lost Rapids Drive into the shopping center. Per the original Focused
Traffic Analysis provided with the initial application, the average queue for stores in comparable
Page 11 of 21
areas is about 27 cars, once restaurant operations normalize, which is accommodated by the
dedicated drive-through lane proposed in the Site Plan.
Should queuing exceed capacity, In-N-Out effectively implements overflow management
plans. Store associates are trained in directing traffic and managing vehicles in an orderly
fashion. As noted in the Hearing through public comment and reiterated here, the In-N-Out
location in Nampa is considerably smaller size, yet In-N-Out has proven to responsibly manage
car queues and crowds such that there is not spillover onto neighboring properties, drive aisles,
or other offsite locations.
2. In-N-Out's proposed location will be harmonious with the Meridian
Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of the UDC.
The Commission adopted into its Findings of Fact the Staff Report created for the Hearing.
For this required finding, City Staff wrote "the proposed infill development will not be
harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan in that the proposed use and 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."Decision, at 11 (marked as p. 84 in Department Report).
In adopting the Staff s findings, the Commission provided no references to the
Comprehensive Plan itself and instead offers a blanket statement about the incompatibility of the
uses. However, In-N-Out refutes this incompatibility finding. In-N-Out's proposed location is
harmonious with the Meridian City Comprehensive Plan and consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan's focus on private property rights. Comprehensive Plan, 3-3.
It goes without saying that Meridian in general, and the Ten Mile and Chinden Road area
specifically, is bustling with economic growth. Meridian's Comprehensive Plan
("Comprehensive Plan") highlights the importance of a vibrant, diverse, clean, safe, and secure
community in which to live, work, and thrive. As noted in the Comprehensive Plan, "Meridian
has seen a significant increase in population over the last decade and it is predicted to grow
another 52%between 2017 and 2040."Plan at 1-7. The City's economic goals and objectives
include:
• Promoting "business retention, expansion, and improvement programs";
• "Proactively recruit[ing] and attract[ing] new businesses to the area";
• "Capitaliz[ing] on the City's central location by promoting more tourism and
business growth along entryways and key corridors."
• "Creat[ing] positive, vibrant, and accessible commercial activity centers within the
community."
Comprehensive Plan, at 2-13, -14.
In-N-Out shares these values, making Ten Mile and Chinden an ideal location for its
business. In-N-Out's proposed location is nestled near several other successful businesses and
community gathering places, including Costco, several churches, and other restaurants. In-N-
Out specifically identified this location as desirable due to customer convenience, its proximity
Page 12 of 21
to In-N-Out owned and operated distribution centers (ensuring fresh delivery of ingredients), and
the location's high visibility.
In-N-Out is renowned for its workplace practices and paying its associates significantly
higher wages than industry standards. In fact, In-N-Out was recently named the number three
best place to work nationwide on Glassdoor's 2025 Best Places to Work, with reviewers
positively citing In-N-Out's company culture,pay, flexible hours,benefits, and ability to
advance in the company. Starting wage for store associates is $17.50 per hour and the average
associate makes $19.21 per hour, far better than Idaho's $7.25 minimum wage. In-N-Out also
prides itself in attracting, training, and retaining talented employees who often make In-N-Out
their lifelong company. This is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's Economic Excellence
goals which focus on increasing average income and stimulating economic investment in the
community.10 In-N-Out locations, on average, employ 95 associates per store, offering each of
them the opportunity to grow with the company should they so choose. These careers are also
diverse, offering both full and part-time positions.
This location also offers a thoughtful transition between residential and commercial uses.
The proposed restaurant, located in a commercial C-G district, is also located near an R-40
district (high-density residential). The Comprehensive Plan acknowledges that high-density
residential districts are "typically located around or near mixed use commercial or employment
areas to provide convenient access to services and jobs for residents." The nearby R-8 district
(medium-density residential) is buffered from the C-G district where the proposed restaurant
would be located by limited office and the higher density residential district by a roadway, and
significant landscaping area. This ensures a gradual and appropriate transition between
residential and higher-density commercial uses. Given the proximity of the residential areas,
churches, schools, and parks, this location offers a central location for community members to
gather and enjoy an affordable fresh meal, in a clean family-friendly atmosphere. In-N-Out has
also discussed revisions to its Site Design with City Staff and implemented those in its updated
Site Plan to further improve the Site's safe pedestrian access and community connectedness.
Overall the proposed location is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's goals to achieve a
premier, evolving, livable, vibrant and connected Meridian. To the limited extent that the record
shows alleged incompatibility with neighboring land, such impacts can be reduced or eliminated
by In-N-Out's proposed conditions of approval. And to the extent that City Staff determined that
the proposed use is inconsistent with the Comprehensive plan due to excessive noise, traffic and
congestion, In-N-Out has provided additional information refuting these findings as discussed
further herein.
3. In-N-Out's drive-through 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.
10 https://meridiancity.org/community-development/planning/comprehensive-plan/premier/
Page 43 of 21
The Commission's Decision City Staffs' findings that the proposed In-N-Out location's
"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
...which will adversely change the essential character of the area. Each of these impacts is
discussed below.
a. Noise
First, it should be noted that In-N-Out's proposed location is already in a heavily
populated and trafficked area. Costco, with its many daily deliveries and hundreds of customers
per day, is of course a bustling location throughout most of the day. Carts rumbling, car doors
slamming, cars honking,people talking loudly, and the general machine noise that comes from
operating a warehouse with large HVAC systems, garage doors, parking lot maintenance are all
inherent to commercial development located in a C-G zone. This noise is consistent with the
essential character of a C-G zone. Adjacent to In-N-Out's proposed location, Ten Mile Road is a
main roadway and, with its arterial status, there is road noise from cars and truck traffic.
Additionally, there are several other drive-through locations, including Caf6 Rio and Burger
King, near In-N-Out's proposed location, which also have speaker systems. The noise that would
be generated by In-N-Out's drive-through is consistent with these uses.
Much of the noise identified during Hearing by the public and the Commissioners would
still exist for any permitted use allowed at this location. Animal care facilities, churches,
educational institutions, food truck courts, minor vehicle repairs and other permitted uses will all
involve outdoor conservational, car, and delivery noises.
That said, In-N-Out has heard the concerns of neighboring residents in the Olivia
Apartments and Townhomes and the residential area beyond. To the extent that noise concerns
remain, In-N-Out has completed and provided a Noise Study(attached Exhibit E) assessing and
discussing operational noise impacts. This Noise Study took measurements over the course of 24
hours and determined that the daytime (7:OOAM -7:OOPM) ambient noise level was around 67
dBA; the evening (7:OOPM-10:00PM) ambient noise level was about 71.9 dBA; and the
nighttime (10:00PM—7:OOAM) ambient noise level was about 67.3 dBA. The 24-hour CNEL
(community noise equivalent)was 67.5 dBA. This noise level correlates to a normal
conversation or a business office.11 In-N-Out's Noise Study considers noise related to drive-
through traffic, parking, amplified speech emanating from a speaker and considers its range
accounting for changes in topography. Even when modeling for operational noise and truck
deliveries, the Noise Study does not anticipate noise exceedances over this level of ambient
noise. Further the study illustrates that there will be no increases in noise that would be generally
perceptible to the human ear or otherwise result in disturbance to everyday speech and sleep
conditions. Exhibit E.
To the extent that the Commission and residents identified noise concerns, these are
likely to go unrealized given In-N-Out's thoughtful approach to its store operations. First, with
11 See Yale University Health& Safety, Decibel Level Comparison Chart, at
htips:Hehs.yale.edu/noise-hearing-conservation.
Page 14 of 21
respect to truck deliveries, In-N-Out has designed this project such that trucks may pull through
with deliveries. There should be little need for delivery trucks to back up, and thus, very little
need for backup beepers. Should the need to back up to the restaurant building arise, In-N-Out
owns, operates, and controls its delivery trucks and thus can set strict time parameters for when a
driver would be allowed to back up at the Site, effectively eliminating concerns regarding
backup beepers. And, as mentioned above, In-N-Out is agreeable to conditions limiting
ingredient deliveries to specific hours between 6:OOam and 10:00pm. Further, truck noise
associated with ingredient deliveries would generally occur, at most, once per day. There are
very few instances where trucks must deliver ingredients more than once per day, and more
typically, deliveries occur every other day.
Further, to take and receive orders, In-N-Out uses speaker systems that involve Manual
Volume Control and Ambient Noise Compensation. These speakers ensure clear communication
between the customer and the speaker, reducing the need for repeating orders. These systems
also adjust to ambient noise levels, resulting in an overall quieter speaker. In-N-Out maintains
control of the noise emanating from the Property by its manual controls. Further, In-N-Out
places its speakers accordance with operational manuals and best management practices to
ensure that these speaker systems are not a nuisance. This project was designed specifically
placing the speakers along the North Ten Mile frontage of the site near the existing noise and
activity of the five-lane arterial road. In-N-Out is also aware of the Meridian City Code
provisions prohibiting horns and sirens,building noises, audio equipment and more set forth in
Meridian Code § 6-3-6 and will comply with those code requirements.
Thus, operational noise is compatible with other uses, including the residential uses, the
commercial uses in the general area, and the intended character of the C-G district, and is
consistent with the essential character of the already industrialized area.
b. Traffic and Congestion
City Staff also determined that traffic congestion would be incompatible with the
character of the general area and would adversely change the essential character of the area. The
arguments that an In-N-Out location would cause excessive traffic and congestion were based on
anecdotal evidence presented by the public. In-N-Out reiterates that traffic generated by a
permitted use should not have been considered by the Commission in reaching its Decision. The
information provided below shows that a drive-through operation is a prudent choice for this
location.
It appears that the Commission incorrectly correlated increased traffic impacts with
drive-through queue impacts as a potential source for backup into public roads. However, the
drive-through queue will not back up into public roads, as discussed in the Traffic Study
presented to the Commissioners.
In-N-Out provided a detailed traffic study that came to the following important
conclusions:
• Based on the Ganddini Group's analysis, it is not anticipated that In-N-Out's
proposed use will negatively impact the intersection of Lost Rapids Drive and Ten
Page 15 of 21
Mile Road. Data show that intersection queuing has only a five percent
probability of being exceeded during a given time period.
• This location has been specifically designed to accommodate large crowds such
that they enter and exit the location efficiently. This Property, consisting of two
parcels, is significantly larger than other Treasure Valley locations, which have
proven to operate efficiently and without traffic impacts to neighboring
properties, and contains significantly more drive through queuing. This location
will also be operated with three grills, to ensure consistent queue service. In all In-
N-Out locations, once queue lengths reach the menu board and speaker box,
associates are directed to take orders via wireless handheld ordering systems
allowing orders to be processed sooner and ready by the time the vehicle reaches
a pickup window. At all times, locations are monitored by a camera system so that
management-level employees can control and assist with queue management.
• The two proposed drive-through stacking lanes are quite long, and data show that
the proposed queuing capacity and additional site vehicular storage are sufficient
to accommodate even the largest crowds for peak business, and contain patrons
within the footprint of the In-N-Out location's boundaries.
• As In-N-Out continues to expand throughout the Treasure Valley, Idaho in
general, and in neighboring states, customer demand distributes more evenly
across numerous stores. This trend has been observed and confirmed through data
shown at multiple In-N-Out locations. In-N-Out stores located in the same city
typically have a symbiotic relationship where multiple stores work together to
serve customers more efficiently, resulting in shorter queue lengths over time.
There is no evidence, outside of anecdotes, that operating a drive through will create
congestion on public roads. While the public's insights here are important, anecdotes and
hypothetical concerns are not equal to the data and studies that In-N-Out has performed, not only
in preparation for this Application, but in choosing this location in general. Indeed, this shopping
complex was designed recognizing traffic congestion in this area, as discussed above. These data
show that increased traffic and congestion in the area directly attributable to In-N-Out's
proposed drive-through operation are unlikely because expanded area road systems and light-
guided intersections can adequately distribute traffic. To claim now that the project cannot
support In-N-Out's traffic or circulation belies the data that City Council unanimously adopted
with the original Costco shopping complex application. Further, ACHD was intimately involved
traffic planning for In-N-Out's Village location, and offered significant feedback during that
proposal. In-N-Out notes that ACHD offered no comments here besides those providing routine
comments that In-N-Out must comply with its policies for any future work within the roadway
right-of-way or related matters. It is telling that ACHD "determined that there are no
improvements required to the adjacent street(s)."12
12 Letter from Matt Pak, Development Services Planner, ACHD to Todd Smith, In-N-Out Burger
(Nov. 1, 2024), at 1-3.
Page 16 of 21
The above-discussed factors show that In-N-Out's proposed drive-through is compatible
with the neighboring C-G district, uses beyond the immediately adjacent districts, and does not
negatively change the essential character of this area. Thus, the Council should find that this
conditional use requirement is met here.
4. In-N-Out's proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the
approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the
vicinity.
The Commission incorporated City Staffs' findings that the proposed In-N-Out location
will "adversely affect other properties in the vicinity of, and thus denies the proposed use."
Decision at, 12 (marked as p. 85 in Department Report). But neither City Staff, nor the
Commission identified measured data supporting this finding and also failed to offer any
potential conditions of approval to mitigate their concerns, and In-N-Out's proposed conditional
use necessitated more discussion than this abbreviated response.
First, since Commission determined that there would be adverse effects in its Decision
and Order(notably, only that "hours of operation are not compatible with the residential area to
the west" and that there would be "substantial traffic concerns, including traffic conflicts"
Decision, at 2.C.1.), it must consider whether conditions of approval and adherence to those
conditions of approval could mitigate or eliminate those adverse effects. City Staff presented no
proposed conditions of approval to Commission. And although the Commissioners did question
whether conditions of approval could mitigate these effects, the Commissioners ultimately
determined that they would not explore this discussion and summarily denied In-N-Out's
conditional use application.
To the limited extent that the Commission identified these potential impacts, the
proposed conditions of approval discussed above mitigate such concerns by keeping In-N-Out's
operating hours and practices consistent with those already existing in the C-G district, including
housing, Costco, and several other drive-through establishments. In-N-Out's proposed conditions
of approval ensure during the evenings, residents will not be disturbed through additional noise
and visual impacts beyond what already exists near these residential uses, and what would exist
for any permitted use. And, as discussed above, there is no true incompatibility related to traffic
impacting the north-south drive aisle that serves the surrounding commercial area. But, to the
extent that such impacts are predicted, they can be mitigated by In-N-Out's proposal to direct site
access via certain routes when specific conditions are present. Therefore, the City Council should
find that In-N-Out's proposed use will not adversely affect property in its vicinity when it acts in
compliance with In-N-Out's proposed conditions of approval.
5. In-N-Out's 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.
City Staff determined that In-N-Out's location will be adequately served by essential
public facilities and services. All In-N-Out locations are designed with police, fire, and
emergency services access in mind. In-N-Out anticipates no school impacts. Public Works and
Page 17 of 21
transportation agencies (ACHD and ITD) identified no adverse impact to roads and no need for
additional infrastructure beyond what In-N-Out identified in its Application, specifically its site
plan. Further, these matters were already taken into consideration during the design of the
Shopping Complex, as discussed above. Thus, City Council should find that this conditional use
requirement is met.
6. In-N-Out's 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
The Commission incorporated City Staff s findings that the proposed In-N-Out location
"will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be
detrimental to the economic welfare of the community."Decision, at 12 (marked as p. 85 in
Department Report). In-N-Out agrees and reiterates that there are not excessive additional public
costs associated with the proposed development. As evidenced by the record, transportation,
school, and environmental agencies and entities offered no comments illustrating the need for
additional public services. To the extent that Meridian Public Works requested general and
specific conditions of approval for water and fire hydrant easements, specific water and sewer
development standards, and similar, In-N-Out accepts these suggested conditions of approval as
workable within its site design and will work with Meridian Public Works to meet these goals.
Thus, the City Council should find that this conditional use requirement is met.
7. In-N-Out's 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.
City Staff found that In-N-Out's proposed use will involve conditions that will be
detrimental to persons,property, and the general welfare based on excessive exhaust fumes and
traffic congestion. Because traffic was addressed above in Section IV.B.3, these points are not
repeated here.
a. Air Quality
With respect to air quality, In-N-Out's proposed location is already in a heavily populated
and trafficked area. During the Hearing, Commissioners noted the high likelihood that another
drive-through restaurant would likely be developed in this location if In-N-Out did not develop
here. Any other restaurant and/or drive-through would likely have similar air quality impacts,
and many permitted uses, including food trucks operating from diesel generators or minor
vehicle repairs would also involve idling motors contributing to air quality issues, perhaps to an
extent greater than In-N-Out's proposed use.
The agency charged with air quality regulation, the Idaho Department of Environmental
Quality, offered no comments or recommendations regarding air quality concerns. In fact, United
States Department of Environmental Protection Agency("EPA") air quality data show that Ada
County as a whole has good to moderate air quality, with most days with unhealthy air quality
likely being attributable to factors like wildfire and weather-driven inversions common in the
Page 18 of 21
Treasure Valley.13 The graph below, showing EPA data, confirms this fact. It is unlikely that
operating this drive-through creates the excessive fumes needed to tip the Meridian's scales to
unhealthy to hazardous air quality, such that the general welfare would be put at risk. Thus, air
quality impacts do not render the proposed drive through detrimental to persons, property, or
general welfare by excessive fume production.
Daily AQI Values,2015 to 2025
Ada County. ID
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
2015110■IIIm1m ■�■1 II NIE III■ 11m■ Is I I■■1� ■�■11�
2016 1�1-M1■MI I III I I MIII III IIII II�1■II■MII11
2017 1111111 IN -mm111■11 II II111 1111 1 � ■ 111m■I IN
20.1, NNIMMMIN20 �I�I �•IME�I���IIII IIII■ 1110 10110 I Or'� =�11'I�
2020
2021■II ■�I�11•��I�I■II■I II 11 1 I■III��■In 11 ■I■
2022 11 In
I I■ ■���I■�Jill,
I I I I Im ■l ME I
■I I■
20231�■ ■■ ■III 1 I 111 1 I I I m�■ ■I IIII lmi 11
202a1■II ■�■11■IIII IIII IIII IIIII ■MI mm � IN
20251�■III■� 11111111111
AQI Category
1 Good(<=50 AQI)
Moderate(51.100 AQI)
Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups(101.150 AQI)
1 Unhealthy 051-200 AQI)
1 Very Unhealthy(201-300 AQI)
1 Hazardous(>=301 AQI)
Source:U.S.EPA AirData<htlps:Nwww.epa.gov/air-data>
Generated: May 21.2025
b. Light
In-N-Out has prepared a photometric plan, included here as Exhibit D, to reflect the
proposed lighting levels of the property associated with the In-N-Out development. As shown ,
the light impacts from In-N-Out's drive through are minimal. Further, any commercial retail user
developing this site will have light impacts, as any such user would have similar parking lot
lighting for safety and operational purposes, in conformance with the UDC's lighting mandates.
As is customary with all retail uses, parking lot lights remain on at night during business
operational hours and, except for the minimum security lights for public safety and security
purposes, parking lot lights and lighted signs would be turned off upon closing. Similar lighting
13 See EPA, Air Now Interactive Map of Air Quality and archived information,
https:Hgispub.epa.gov/aimow/index.html?tab=3; Boise State University, Air Quality and Smoke,
https://www.boisestate.edu/research-hcri/resources-hazards/air-quality-and-
smoke/#:—:text=Another%20cause%20of%20poor%20air,air%20quality%20reaches%20unhealt
by%20conditions; Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, Regional Air Quality Plans and
Reports, https://www.deq.idaho.gov/air-quality/regional-air-quality-
reports/#:—:text=Air%20quality%20in%20the%20Lewiston,report%20available%20at%20this%
20time.
Page 19 of 21
is installed for all of the existing commercial uses, including the access road lighting abutting the
residential uses to the west.
Further, In-N-Out's site plan shows that vehicle lights, when waiting in the drive-through
queue, are not pointed toward residences. Vehicle lights are instead pointed toward Ten Mile
Road, and eventually hidden behind the In-N-Out store. Only when vehicles exit the drive-
through lane will vehicle lights be pointed toward the residences. And, as shown in In-N-Out's
landscaping plans, In-N-Out has proposed landscaping that minimizes such impacts. Thus, the
alleged light impacts from operating a drive-through do not render the proposed drive through
detrimental to persons,property, or general welfare by excessive glare or light production. In-N-
Out's proposed lighting plan ensures that pedestrians and employees remain safe during
nighttime hours.
8. In-N-Out's proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or
damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of
major importance.
City Staff found that the proposed location"will not result in the destruction, loss or
damage of any such features."Decision, at 12 (marked as p. 85 in the Department Report). In-N-
Out agrees and reiterates here that there are no natural, scenic, or historic features at the Site that
will be impaired or impacted by any future construction or operation of an In-N-Out location.
Thus, City Council should find that this conditional use requirement is met.
V. Conclusion
As set forth here, and supported by substantial evidence in the record, In-N-Out has met
the required findings for a conditional use permit outlined in UDC § 11-513-6. And, as shown in
its site plan, will comply with all necessary design standards outlined in the UDC. In-N-Out has
repeatedly demonstrated that it operates its Treasure Valley restaurants responsibly and has kept
its promises to efficiently manage its restaurants. In-N-Out has cultivated good relationships with
neighboring landowners and government agencies providing services to In-N-Out, as evidenced
by those individuals who spoke in In-N-Out's favor during the Commission Hearing. These
conclusions are supported both in anecdote from government officials and data presented here by
In-N-Out.
Thus, In-N-Out respectfully requests that the City Council reverse the Commission's
denial of In-N-Out's requested drive through conditional use permit, and approve In-N-Out's
construction and operation of this drive through.
Respectfully submitted this 30th day of May, 2025,
Cassie Ruiz, Senior ve pment Manager
Attachments:
Exhibit A: Meridian Revised Site Plan Dated 5.19.25
Exhibit B: Meridian Revised Landscape Plan Dated 5.27.25
Exhibit C: Updated Queuing Observations May 2025
Page 20 of 21
Exhibit D: Exhibit Photometric Plan
Exhibit E: Operational Noise
Exhibit F: Public Works
Exhibit G: ACHD Project Memo
Page 24 of 21