Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Order of Denial Reasoning Statement for IN-N-Out Burger (CR-2025-0002)
CITY OF MERIDIAN REASONED STATEMENT, C�fIEPIDIANI-. FINAL DECISION,AND ORDER I D A H O Date of Order: October 14,2025 Application No.: CR-2025-0002(In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile) Applicant: In-N-Out Burger(Cassie Ruiz,Senior Development Manager) In the Matter of: Council Review of the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision of denial on the conditional use permit(H-2024-0058)for a drive-through establishment within 300 feet of another drive-through facility,existing residences and a residential district on 2.22 acres of land in the C-G zoning district Pursuant to testimony and evidence received at the public hearing before the Meridian City Council on September 9, 2025 and before the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on April 3 and 17, 2025 concerning Application No. CR-2025-0002 ("Hearing"), the City Council renders this Reasoned Statement, Final Decision, and Order. A. Undisputed Facts. The following facts are undisputed: 1. In-N-Out Burger ("Applicant" or"In-N-Out")wishes to construct and operate a drive- through establishment("Project") on property located at 5985 and 6037 N. Ten Mile Road in Meridian, Idaho ("Property"), as more fully described in the Department Report to the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission dated April 17, 2025 ("Staff Report"), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. 2. The Property is located in the General Retail and Service Commercial District("C-G District"). 3. The Project is (a) within 300 feet of another drive-through establishment, (b)within 300 feet of a residential district, and(c)within 300 feet of existing residences. Consequently, under the Unified Development Code of the City of Meridian("UDC"), a conditional use permit ("CUP") is required. 4. The Applicant applied to the City for a CUP for the Project in accordance with the UDC (Application No. H-2024-0058). 5. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission ("Commission")held a hearing concerning Application No. H-2024-0058 on April 3, 2025 and April 17, 2025. The Commission issued its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Decision, and Order("Decision") on May 15, 2025, denying the Applicant's request for a CUP. The Decision is attached hereto and incorporated herein. 6. The Applicant timely requested City Council review of the Commission's Decision in accordance with UDC section 11-5A-7 ("Request for Review"). The Request for Review is attached hereto and incorporated herein. REASONED STATEMENT,FINAL DECISION,AND ORDER Application No.CR-2025-0002(In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile) Page 1 7. Applicant's Request for Review also included proposed conditions of approval to mitigate or resolve potential impacts associated with the Project. 8. City Staff provided a supplemental memorandum to the City Council ("Supplemental Memorandum")to summarize the Applicant's proposed conditions of approval. The Supplemental Memorandum is attached hereto and incorporated herein. 9. The City Council held a de novo hearing concerning the Project on September 9, 2025. B. Summary of Testimony and Evidence. The following is intended to summarize the testimony and evidence received by the City Council. In making its decision, the City Council considered the entire record, including all testimony and evidence available to the Commission. 1. Testimony and evidence presented at the Hearing in opposition to the Applicant's application can be summarized as follows: a. The Project is, for all intents and purposes, located adjacent to the Olivia Townhomes and Apartments ("Apartments"). The Project and the Apartments are separated only by the north-south drive aisle ("North-South Drive Aisle")that serves the larger shopping center on the southwest corner of N. Ten Mile Road and W. Chinden Boulevard ("Shopping Center"). There are no other drive-through establishments in the Shopping Center that are as close to a residential district. The late hours and high volume of cars and customers patronizing the proposed Project will cause noise and disturb residents in the Apartments. b. The traffic impact study prepared by Kittelson& Associates, Inc. in 2017, prior to the opening of the Shopping Center("2017 Traffic Study"), is outdated and does not reflect current traffic congestion. Development in northwest Meridian has dramatically changed the nature of traffic in this area since 2017. c. The Project will exacerbate traffic concerns in the area. In-N-Out is known to attract a high number of customers. Traffic will spill out onto the North-South Drive Aisle; produce unacceptable traffic congestion at the intersection of the North-South Drive Aisle and the Shopping Center's east-west drive aisle north of Cafe Rio ("East-West Drive Aisle"); produce unacceptable traffic congestion at the intersection of the North- South Drive Aisle and Lost Rapids Drive; and produce unacceptable traffic congestion at the intersection of Lost Rapids Drive and Ten Mile Road. d. The Property will only be able to hold approximately 50 vehicles in the drive-through queue before the line spills out into the North-South Drive Aisle and blocks other commercial customers and residents from accessing the Shopping Center. The Property is not large enough for the Applicant's anticipated high-volume use. Queuing will not be contained on the site and will interfere with parking on the site. 2. Testimony and evidence in support of the Applicant's request at the Hearing can be summarized as follows: REASONED STATEMENT,FINAL DECISION,AND ORDER Application No.CR-2025-0002(In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile) Page 2 a. The Applicant states that the Project is compatible with the area because it is within a C- G zone, meets all City design standards, and does not require a variance. The Applicant asserts that this mix of uses in this location is what was originally intended by the City. Staff agreed in the Staff Report that the proposed development meets three of the eight relevant findings in UDC section 11-5B-6, subsections (5), (6), and(8). The Applicant stated it can satisfy the remining five findings. b. Large-scale commercial uses were intended for the Shopping Center. The Property is zoned for C-G, and the Apartments were intended to be a transition between the commercial uses and single-family homes. The Property is 2.2 acres; the other lots in the Shopping Center(with the exception of the Costco property) are less than 1 acre. This application proposes to combine two lots into one, which reduces the overall commercial density. The application also proposes four times the amount of parking required by the UDC for properties within the C-G zone. c. The 2017 Traffic Impact Study identified the public improvements needed to mitigate the impacts of the Shopping Center, and those public improvements have been completed. The Ada County Highway District ("ACHD") and the Idaho Transportation Department reviewed the Project and concluded no additional public road improvements or traffic studies were required. Moreover, the Applicant provided a 2025 Focused Traffic Analysis showing no additional traffic mitigation is necessary. d. The Applicant provided a written analysis of queuing volumes for the Project and at other In-N-Out locations in Idaho ("Queuing Analysis"). The Queuing Analysis shows that other In-N-Out locations, at the Village at Meridian, Boise, and Nampa, have been able to keep drive aisles clear, even though those sites are smaller than the Property(1.2 acres for the Village at Meridian; 0.86 for Boise; and 1.4 acres for Nampa). Moreover, since the Project will be the fourth In-N-Out in the Treasure Valley, the Project will have a lower customer volume in comparison to the opening of the Village at Meridian store. Queuing and on-site operations will ensure that drive-through vehicles will remain on the Property and not adversely impact neighboring properties. If queuing extends beyond a certain point, In-N-Out assigns store associates to stations in the parking lot to assist with queuing, emergencies, or customers attempting to exit. Additionally, store associates are assigned to park in spots that potentially could be blocked. e. The Applicant is offering several self-imposed conditions to reduce the potential impact on the community and neighboring properties. Those conditions include: (1)mechanical equipment shall be incorporated into the design so visual and acoustic impacts are reduced; (2) food service hours of operation will be from 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m., which is consistent with the operating hours of other drive-through establishments in the Shopping Complex (e.g., Burger King); (3) additional sidewalks to improve pedestrian connections; (4) additional landscaping to mitigate potential noise and light impacts; (5) delivery hours will be from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. to mitigate nighttime noise concerns; (6) delivery truck routes that avoid back-up noises; (7)parking lot lighting consistent with a photometric plan to reduce impacts on the Apartments; (8) lights to be dimmed or turned off after closing; and(9) a prohibition on any stacking in the drive-through escape lane. REASONED STATEMENT,FINAL DECISION,AND ORDER Application No.CR-2025-0002(In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile) Page 3 f. The Applicant completed a noise study, which took noise measurements over the course of twenty-four (24)hours, and determined that the daytime (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) ambient noise level was approximately 67 dBA; the evening (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) ambient noise level was approximately 71.9 dBA; and the nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) ambient noise level was approximately 67.3 dBA. The 24-hour community noise equivalent was 67.5 dBA, which correlates to a normal conversation. This ambient noise, including that from HVAC systems, vehicle traffic on the roads, and a drive- through with a speaker system, would exist for any permitted commercial use on the Property. This demonstrates that the noise from the Project would not be disruptive or substantially increase the existing noise. C. Standards Considered. 1. The City Council takes judicial notice of the Local Land Use Planning Act ("LLUPA"), codified at Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code. 2. The City Council takes judicial notice of the UDC, all current zoning maps, and the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 3. The standards set forth in UDC section 11-513-6(E), which concerns conditional use permits. D. Reasoned Statement. 1. City Council's decision is based on the following criteria, standards, evidence, and rationale: a. With respect to UDC section 11-5B-6(E)(3), the City Council is unable to make the required finding"[t]hat 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." The City Council is unable to make this fmding based on the following: i. While, as the Applicant states, the Project meets general City standards for a C-G zone, extensive testimony was received from neighbors that the Project's operation is not compatible with other uses in this specific neighborhood, because of its immediate proximity to the Apartments. City Council finds the testimony and evidence from residents who live in the vicinity of the proposed Project to be more compelling. Despite the proposed mitigation efforts, the increased traffic, noise, and glare from the Project will adversely impact the residential neighbors. As the 2025 Focused Traffic Analysis indicates, "The proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 2,457 external daily trips on weekdays, including 251 external trips during the mid-day peak hour and 174 external trips during the PM peak hour, and 246 external trips during the Saturday mid-day peak hour." This level of activity and number of trips next to a residential district will adversely change the essential character of the area. The operation of this Project, so close to the Apartments, is fundamentally incompatible with the neighboring residential use. REASONED STATEMENT,FINAL DECISION,AND ORDER Application No.CR-2025-0002(In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile) Page 4 ii. Though the Property is larger than other drive-through establishments in the Shopping Complex, testimony was also received that In-N-Out attracts a large customer base and that, despite the Property being larger than one acre, customer demand will likely exceed the capacity for the area and block the North-South Drive Aisle. The City Council City finds the testimony and evidence from the Project opponents to be more convincing. The record reflects that the Property is inadequate to accommodate vehicles with large passenger capacity (such as buses), or those instances where the drive-through queue exceeds 50 vehicles. The Applicant's response as to how it would handle drive-through queues in excess of 50 vehicles was unsatisfactory and unpersuasive; it largely centered on the notion that"we know what we are doing, and we will find a way to make it work." Even with the larger lot as compared to other lots in the Shopping Center, the likely volume of vehicles and customers going to and from In-N-Out will overwhelm the Property, and for this reason, the proposed use is not compatible with, and will adversely change, the character of the area. iii. The Applicant states that the 2017 Traffic Study considered all necessary traffic mitigation measures required for the Shopping Center as a whole, and those improvements have been completed. The Applicant further states that ACHD and the Idaho Transportation Department will not require a new traffic study and this Project would not require further mitigation. Project opponents argue that the 2017 Traffic Study and the Applicant's supplemental traffic analysis and queuing analysis are insufficient. Opponents testified that the nature of the area has drastically changed since 2017. City Council agrees that the 2017 Traffic Study is outdated and inadequately addresses current conditions. Moreover, City Council finds that 2025 Focused Traffic Analysis was limited in scope, and did not address traffic congestion on the North-South Drive Aisle or at the intersection of the North-South Drive Aisle and East-West Drive Aisle. The traffic study provided is inadequate to demonstrate that the operation of In-N-Out at the Property will not introduce a fundamental incompatibility with existing uses, and related traffic, in the general neighborhood. Traffic associated with the proposed use will adversely change the essential character of the area. b. With respect to UDC section 11-513-6(E)(4), the City Council is unable to make the required finding"[t]hat the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity." The City Council is unable to make this finding based on the following: i. The Applicant states that, per its noise study, the nighttime noise will not impact the adjacent residential district and that its normal business practices in conjunction with its proposed conditions will adequately mitigate any impact on properties in the vicinity, including lights and noise. However, City Council received more compelling testimony from Apartment residents that the North-South Drive Aisle traffic is mere feet away from the Apartments and the increased traffic will produce burdensome noise. As neighbors also testified, light, including store lights, emergency lights, and vehicle headlights, will adversely impact the residential area. Because the Project is extremely close to the Apartments, traffic from the Project will adversely impact residents—in the form of noise and unwanted headlights, in REASONED STATEMENT,FINAL DECISION,AND ORDER Application No.CR-2025-0002(In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile) Page 5 particular. Though the Applicant's analysis purported to show that noise would not be a significant issue, the analysis did not consider the high volume of cars driving by so closely to the Apartments, where a car may leave the queue every thirty-five (35) seconds until midnight. Nor does it consider noise above the average levels described in the noise study, i.e., deviations from the mean, such as abnormally loud noises periodically generated by passing vehicles, particularly late at night. Though another drive-through establishment in the Shopping Center(Burger King) is open until midnight every day, it is not twenty feet away from a residential district, as the proposed Project would be. Even with the conditions proposed by the Applicant, the proposed use will adversely affect residents of the Apartments. ii. The Applicant states that the queuing analysis and other information provided show that the Property is large enough to contain the queuing onsite. Several people provided observations of queuing at other In-N-Out stores in the area, indicating that the demand will exceed the capacity of the Property. Additionally, the queueing analysis showed that peak traffic would not exceed 46 vehicles 95% of the time, but this means that there will be times when the queue is longer than 46 cars, adversely affecting the North-South Drive Aisle and creating noise and lights that impact the neighbors the equivalent of 18 days out of the year. In addition to excessive noise and light affecting the Apartment residents, this introduces an unacceptable occurrence of added congestion on the North-South Drive Aisle, and likely the Lost Rapids Drive and Ten Mile Road intersection as well. Conditions proposed by the Applicant are inadequate to address these adverse effects. c. With respect to UDC section 11-5B-6(E)(7), the City Council is unable to make the required finding"[t]hat 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." The City Council is unable to make this finding based on the following: i. The Applicant provided a noise study indicating that the Project would not increase ambient noise. Project opponents testified that the noise and late hours (open until midnight) only twenty feet away from a residential district will interfere with residents' ability to enjoy their homes and sleep. City Council finds that Project traffic will be detrimental to the adjacent residents for the reasons considered above in subsection (b) regarding noise and vehicle headlights from a high-volume, late- night drive-through. 2. Based on the foregoing, and despite the mitigation conditions offered by Applicant, the Project does not satisfy the requirements for approval of a conditional use set forth in UDC section 11-5B-6(E). Because the City Council is unable to make the required findings set forth in UDC sections 11-5B-6(E)(3), (4), and(7), the City Council is precluded from granting a CUP for the Project. Moreover, because the City Council is unable to make the required findings set forth in UDC sections 11-5B-6(E)(3), (4), and(7), there is no need to consider the remaining subsections set forth in UDC section 11-5B-6(E). REASONED STATEMENT,FINAL DECISION,AND ORDER Application No.CR-2025-0002(In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile) Page 6 3. Pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6519(5)(c), the Applicant is advised that it could likely obtain approval if it proposes a restaurant without a drive-through. E. Order. Based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby denies the Applicant's request for a conditional use permit for the Project. F. Final decision. Upon approval by majority vote of the City Council, this is a final decision of the governing body of the City of Meridian. G. Request for reconsideration. Pursuant to Meridian City Code section 1-7-10, the Applicant may file a request for reconsideration within fourteen (14) days of the date of this final decision. H. Judicial review. Pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-652 1(1)(d), if this final decision concerns a matter enumerated in Idaho Code section 67-6521(1)(a), an affected person aggrieved by this final decision may, within twenty-eight (28) days after all remedies have been exhausted, including requesting reconsideration of this final decision as provided by Meridian City Code section 1-7-10, seek judicial review of this final decision as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. This notice is provided as a courtesy; the City of Meridian does not admit by this notice that this decision is subject to judicial review under LLUPA. L Notice of right to regulatory takings analysis. Pursuant to Idaho Code sections 67-652 1(1)(d) and 67-8003, an owner of private property that is the subject of a final decision may submit a written request with the Meridian City Clerk for a regulatory takings analysis. IT IS SO ORDERED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, on this 14th day of October, 2025. Robert E. Simison 10-14-2025 Mayor Attest: Chris Johnson 10-14-2025 City Clerk REASONED STATEMENT,FINAL DECISION,AND ORDER Application No.CR-2025-0002(In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile) Page 7 Mayor Robert E. Simison City Council Members: IDIAN - �� Luke Cavener, President I Liz Strader,Vice President Brian Whitlock Doug Taylor John Overton Anne Little Roberts August 28, 2025 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor& City Council FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate City Planner CC: City Attorney, City Clerk RE: In-N-Out Burger—CR-2025-0002— 5985 N. Ten Mile Rd. This is a de novo hearing where the City Council decides all issues of fact and law anew. Thus, the issue before the Council is whether to grant the Conditional Use Permit(CUP) for In-N-Out Burger's proposed drive through, not whether the Planning and Zoning Commission erred in its decision. This supplemental memo will focus on In-N-Out Burger's proposed new conditions; it is intended to supplement the staff report prepared for the Planning and Zoning Commission, which has not been revised. The Applicant submitted a CUP application (H-2024-0058) 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, which was denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission on May 15, 2025. The stated reasons for denial are as follows: The hours of operation are not compatible with the residential area to the west and there are 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 (see required Findings for more information—pp. 11-12). In response to discussion at the Commission hearing, the Applicant submitted additional material to supplement the record, including a revised site plan, landscape plan,updated queuing observations of the three (3) existing Idaho locations, a photometric plan and an operational noise study. A change to the business hours of operation are also proposed from 10:30 am until 12:00 am every day with delivery hours from 6:00 am until 10:00 pm. Finally, the Applicant proposes conditions of approval that they will operate within in an effort to mitigate or resolve any impacts from the proposed drive-through on adjacent neighbors and the public (see p. 8 of the Applicant's narrative). The proposed photometric plan depicts light trespass beyond the boundary of the subject property to the west—it's unclear if light trespasses on the adjacent residential property or just the driveway in between the properties. In order to comply with the outdoor lighting standards in UDC 11-3A-I IC.2, the effective zone of light shall not trespass on abutting residential properties. The noise study finds that noise levels would not result in a 3 or 5 dBA (A-weighted decibels) increase above the measured daytime, evening, nighttime and 24-hour CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) ambient during both operation and delivery activities. The traffic study submitted by the Applicant does not anticipate the proposed use will negatively impact the intersection of Lost Rapids Dr. and Ten Mile Rd. —additional information was provided by the Applicant on this topic. No changes are proposed to address the traffic concerns, including traffic conflicts, that will have a negative impact on the north-south private drive aisle that serves the surrounding commercial area—the internal driveways were not part of the traffic study submitted for this development but were part of the traffic study done with the Lost Rapids development in 2018. A traffic study was not required by ACHD or ITD. Changes to the site and landscape plan consist of enhanced landscaping within the western perimeter buffer of the site to ensure privacy, reduce noise and soften ambient light adjacent to the residential uses to the west. These changes include increased tree density to provide continuous canopy coverage with overlapping foliage extending from 6 to 20 feet above the finished grade with additional shrub density with dense to semi-dense leafy plantings to enhance the visual and functional experience of the place. A sidewalk was also added along the west and north perimeter boundaries of the site for enhanced pedestrian access and connectivity. Lights from vehicles waiting in the drive-through queue will not be pointed toward residences; however, lights from vehicles exiting the drive-through will be pointed toward adjacent residences. Landscaping is proposed to minimize these impacts. Minimum lighting for public safety and security purposes will be utilized on the site at night after the business closes. In order to approve the request and overrule the decision of the Commission, the City Council must determine the updated application meets the required Findings for a conditional use permit in UDC 11-5B-6E. If the request is determined to the meet the Findings, Council should consider including the conditions proposed by the Applicant as conditions of approval of the CUP along with any other conditions or modifications determined appropriate by City Council. Alternatively, the City Council may wish to continue the project to a later date in order for Staff to draft appropriate conditions of approval. The staff report prepared for the Planning and Zoning Commission omitted conditions of approval. EXHIBIT A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT �E DEPARTMENT REPORT REPORT HEARING 4/17/2025 Legend DATE: (Continued from: 41312025) M Project Location � 0 Area of Impact ` �I TO: Planning&Zoning Commission = City Limits " L.-=r FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner O Analysis �y.P = , 208-884-5533 sallen@meridiancity.org - - APPLICANT: Todd Smith,In-N-Out Burger - --' SUBJECT: H-2024-0058 i�@ In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile � � LOCATION: 5985 &6037 N. Ten Mile Rd.,in the NE F. ' � � '/4 of Section 27,TAN.,R1W. Note for clarification: 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 111.C 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. 1. 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: Denial II. COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1: Land Use Description Details Mal)Ref. Existing Land Use(s) Ed11111L.. Vacant/undeveloped - Proposed Land Use(s) Restaurant/drive-through establishment - City of Meridian I Department Report Description Details Map Ref. Existing Zoning C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial District) VII.A2 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 Table 3: Community Metrics Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference Ada County Highway District No mitigation required by ACHD • 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.meridiancioy org/WebLink/browse.aspxTid 367313&dbid 0&Mpo Meridian00t 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:Proiect 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. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 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 cast across N. Ten Mile Rd. but are separated from the site by a 5-lane arterial street. 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 45.01.01F below. "Minimize noise, lighting, and odor disturbances from commercial developments to residential dwellings by enforcing city code."(Comprehensive Plan Policy#S.OI.OIF) 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 11-2B-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 City of Meridian I Department Report 11I. Staff Analysis 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 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 City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 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 II- 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 with the requirements of this title. Based on 3,886 square feet ofgross 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 11-213-3 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. In. 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. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 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 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 VII.E 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 fagade 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. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis "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. The Applicant submitted a tra zc 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-I5): 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, City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 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 92.02.02C)—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 of public testimony, mostly in opposition to the project, have been received and are included in the public record. 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: https:llweblink.meridiancioy org/gebLink/Browse.aspxTid 367313&dbid O&Mpo MeridiggCioX V. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use(UDC 11-511-6E) 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. The Commission finds 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. The Commission finds 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. 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. The Commission finds 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 City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments&Conditions 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. The Commission finds the proposed use will adversely affect other properties in the vicinity and thus, denies 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. The Commission finds the proposed use can be served adequately by essential public facilities and services as required. 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. The Commission finds 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. The Commission 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 the many 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. The Commission 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: The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on April 17, 2025. At the public hearing_ the Commission moved to deny the subject CUP request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing: City of Meridian I Department Report V1. Action a. In favor: Todd Smith,In-N-Out Burger(Applicant): Robin Sellers: Shawn Sunwell b. In opposition: Wade Ramsey Bainbridge HOAI_ Brick Oliver(Cadence HOAI_ Bri Jones(Olivia Apartments): Diane Hough: Jon Wheeler: Bob Hough:Val Daigle: Don Dalton_ Bill Beve: Shawn Sherman: Clayton McCormick: Pat Catenzero: Diane West: Mike Gallenstein_ Steve Lozano: Jeff Wertz: Becca Gulden_Robyn Sellers: Jonathan Walker:Robin Friehling: Shawn Sundwall; Maritza Gardner: Lindsay Poyserr Michael McCallisterr Dale Dranev_Brian Henszel: Joseph Minor: and James Ferguson C. Commenting: Giancarlo Ganddini d. Written testimony: See public record C. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. Traffic generated from the proposed use and on the adjacent roadways. b. Access to the shared driveway between the proposed development and the Olivia Apartments. C. Hours of operation d. Lights,trash, loitering and noise from the development. e. Analysis in the focused traffic study f Impact on property values g= Safety of the kids playing at the surrounding parks crossing the street to the proposed use and additional traffic generated from the proposed use. 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission. a. Hours of operation b. Focused traffic study findings C. Proximity of the proposed use to the multi-family development 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None C. The Meridian City Council heard the Applicant's request for City Council review(CR-2025- 0002)of the Commission's decision on the CUP on September 9, 2025. At the public hearing.the Council moved to deny the subject City Council Review request. 1. Summary of the City Council public hearing: a. In favor: Cassie Ruiz. In-N-Out Burger: Giancarlo Ganddjni_ Sean Sunwall Tom Wilkerson_Mark Vickery_ Conrad Brinker:Paul McLaughlin_ Steve Barbie:Walt Gasser b. In opposition: Steve Elliott representing Bainbridge HOA: Bill Beve: Brian Haenszel- Steve Lozano: Elwood Cleaver: Brick Oliver(Cadence HOA)_ Jonathan Walker- Clayton McCormick: Derek Bender:Nancy Meyer: Dianne Hough:Pat Catanzaro- Adrienne Weatherlev_ Andi McGuire C. Commenting: Robin Sellers, Economic Development Coordinator for City of Nampa Justin Lucas,ACHD: Diane Dwyer d. Written testimony: Many letters of testimony have been received that are included in the public record C. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen f Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. Opposed to this location for In-N-Out Burger due to existing traffic congestion in this area from Costco and several other drive-through and businesses in the development impact to adjacent residential uses and safety concerns of children in the area: b. In favor of the proposed use and request for the CUP to be approved- C. Would like the In-N-Out Burger to be closer to his residence so he doesn't have to bicycle far for safety reasons; City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Action d. Belief that the north/south driveway along the project's west boundary can't handle any more traffic and safety concerns for bicycles- C. Concern due to vehicles idling while waiting for service' f. Safety concerns due to increased traffic in an already busy area. opinion this isn't the right location for In-N-Out_ g= Impact of business operations at the location in Nampa h. Impact of the proposed use on traffic on Lost Rapids Dr. i. Light pollution, safety issues,traffic, children's safety traveling to and playing at the nearby park, against proposed location j. Comments on the Applicant's queue analysis and reference to the Idaho Supreme Court Case 451027 Veterans Park Neighborhood Assoc. Inc.vs. City of Boise and Interfaith Sanctuary Housing Services. Inc. k. In favor of the proposed use due to the desire for more fast food options in this area:the proposed use will create much less traffic than Costco does: 1. In-N-Out is a good community partner and should be supported- m. What is the City prepared to do to remedy issues if this is approved? n. Opinion the proposed use is appropriate in this development. o. Opinion the proposed use is too close to adjacent residential uses: p. Existing traffic congestion within the development,which will ereatly increase with the proposed use, and traffic impact to the adjacent residential neighborhood and associated safety concerns: 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by City Council: a. Concern pertaining to vehicles stackjng across the southern access driveway and measures that could be taken to prevent that:preference for the northern access driveway to be ri&ht-out only for vehicles exiting the drive-throu h- b. Timeframe in which other locations were self-contained after opening and didn't encroach on adjacent properties: C. The use is too intense next to residential uses and will have a negative impact on existing residences; d. Opinion the size of the lot can't accommodate the proposed use- C. Opinion the findings listed in UDC 11-5B-6E for a CUP have not been met—based on testimony from the Applicant. Staff and from the public,the proposed use constitutes a more intensive use during peak times than a typical drive-through restaurant with an average of 2.400 daily vehicle trips per day. It has an unusually high trip generation extraordinary stacking needs and a regional draw that demonstrates an intensity of use that's incompatible with the proximity of existing adjacent residential uses:this use would be more suitable in another location- £ Opinion the size of the property is too small to accommodate the use due to the demand of this successful restaurant: the use will have a negative impact on the adjacent residential uses to the west: concerns about the noise, air quality and transportation impacts in this area: concern the 2017 Traffic Impact Study doesn't reflect current conditions—a lot has changed since that time:the proposed use would negatively impact other properties in the vicinity- i Concern pertaining to the large volume of traffic that will be accessing the site via a private drive,which isn't a fully built out street,and the opinion the proposed use is too intense next to a residential district. h. Not in favor of the proposed location due to incompatibility with existing residences and traffic impact to Lost Rapids Dr.- i. Opinion the proposed use and development plan meets the required findings to Brant a CUP and that if the proposed drive-through isn't eranted,no drive-through should go here. 4. City Council change(s)to Commission recommendation. City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Action a. None City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Action VII. EXHIBITS A. Project Area Maps (link to Note for clarification: 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 111.C 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. Project Overview) 1. Aerial M Legend Project Locations„ 0 Area of Impact Analysis yea 4'.40 #l�1' « a.»:.:.. MAR wows ISO 1 City of Meridian Department Report VIL Exhibits _...,;..���� ��::'.�� " � . ��'• Imo♦ �`' p��� �a;11n ���II III�tl■ , � �' "r�=J-�nuA,��J� you■••4.p � �•••�� �a►= - -- ,•r--�CHIND.EN I Me]memo numuglllllllllllf(pi ',�Vuunuuwq p... ilia eC i11111n1i. =■non.Illlu: =. nn:.11.11 1111 =..111■.1.: �:� n1.1....■.IIn■����� mml:IIIIIII■ /_:■ ..i I�.■r.n.Y Wnp1♦��fi���1 Nell IIIII.n111111 w autr"`"''fi ■• ■.nn.11-■■■■11 ♦if 1 �IIIIIIn1 nn �- nunna.•�����.��� • IIIO I ��is 1 nu n.mul►u.►�i•f��tA o .n......for, � .- =� p:=� Q 1111 mwnul.�i�...nu -�iuumo���aA'„ .III ' ... .:. I�. .r f NYN.a►�i�'1 a nisi'�=••�1 :•• .: ■nuw111y�1►I'r... I(Nnwnnf►�.•• U �ii- ..►, ■ inn uni:: �i� a ♦►� W qq_`=...■.. :::.uuiuul�=r :::111►� ��uu.Nua►, 1111=� �� �..YIIIIInY... CC\III, i f Q♦,j1q Y ........ �/I \•t ���IOI 0t11►�i� ::/IIIft • •��Pv Z U . .IIIII IIIII. ♦ .1 I Y.a � W ■■ ��� ��►��`�j N a r��IIIII .:1 f �.nq�• J noon 11 aw unn/• pf J ♦ ����aruull • in I1 nunnn.��,► u 1 ■wnuuo.li n■Ip f� C /• �♦ •CUl nu np D �.IIIr ••IIIII\ I Z Q.. CL.u.N r111111.\nu ��� I�iiiiliu�����011�♦a7 1�- W iii i MIlII jB.'among I .NIII'II►��nn �: H nunllm■..wu ����11 IIIIIII►�� ua1'ur 1 NIIII..IIII N.Y.Y.. _ ��.111111111 IYllr■■..Sol 0 i1NIr..U' _ �I. 'I/Ilill\1 1 11111111111.f/:.IInRV a _ It• � :•,,11DaIIIuIIII1II II I. at -�' nn u�Yitlnur SERIES n nl�i 1l1=s �.111111 vun uHE u•. =_�o tl:all 21111171 Ii _. ♦ ��s ON IN t?nulunnm9 I_J A an an anan CHINDEN �' ' uuuuptpinnnn .nnl.mn.. ,.■ • nanl.anon - (IIIIIII -nmm.. nn'a uum num� — nm uuu moon=�iuunn� uii9e__ :un..num muu nnnm� rr • e un nm� =_�� unumiL 1 =hln1 UIV =�ci5 in w�-nl�l: I.l.1.IrY.nnl. nt-ntlnn. ����t�lll.11111111 C7 .� __ lr..r.I10 nr111.�1�jQ1Y� 11��I11111111111:(IIIIIII ��II)IIOt111 Illlltll� ��������1 f\ ..I..r.l.....■11 �� ♦�I� .111111111 nu �- . :::::. �n�r��•�a �ounw■n��1'��aa.���1/ ►♦�.G_ nu mmu.\ •1.p�Or .nu.0��j 1f /II � p►IIIN.111 •..• C �l �.w1Y1.��♦r� p on. :.^ 1111 unn11111.1I •.n ��a qi1►'=�•:In III. :�:: :����i munllluuni ��•h■ Inuub►1N a �i _..►I��. 4� alb I�i� nunul� :. W moon t" y mn uni:: b aggl o■ unaau.N♦i:.. 111111 1111 i" 'iiuun_C�%I I\. Gum In11►aim:= �' :::III �riiii::l IZl num ut.■ U i •mat nY1: Iann unn�_I::1: FI ..■III ' -• �qom J uuuutll . IIIII IIIII►• IIIIIIn unud111iunlli ! I/IIIIIII C,1111► IIIII i tlj1����1 \1111 n■■1111p m ♦♦ ; 1r1111111i♦./m1\ r: Z ..IP NII 1 wnu q\ A.11f �:i ',Qn1111'� 7UI11►. i. W ••�a11=.11 - avnn'_. :iii♦f� �Ulr, IIIIIAli- IN ►�:I�\,116 •.. I • - • nm►: >11 ♦ • _ I ..�:: BEER • ■war."e= dIl nnu. =::iiii: IIIIIi a1►�G IIIIn .: 1 111•u . ....... •••••• ► � � :m - r I •nnnluu'�n ll.pin■NI w nua►/gym nu loon nnnnn mu nnnnpl.lq J�:: I .Ia..■■..IY UIII � .■ uuwwu :.'.. ���/IIYI� -(, 1 • I�-....Mono lll).� „" IIIII�� alpplr.��.11111111111111a �IIIIIII - • - o Me%Inn\Iiili-1110�n�.rlllll■ - u:51nr■nw I 4. Planned Development Map Legend Project Location Area of Impact ��- T City Limits — Planned Parcels - O Analysis J � F L_ a M® --- f<- 0 FRIG HIH J 77,11 SIB ® pp lS City of Meridian Department Report VIL Exhibits B. Service Accessibility Report PARCEL R5330761510 SERVICE ACCESSIBILITY Overall Score: 28 27th Percentile Criteria Description Location In City Limits Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains < 500 ft.from parcel Floodplain Either not within the 100 yr floodplain or 3 2 acres Emergency Services Fire Response time < 5 min. Emergency Services Police Not enough data to report average response time Pathways Within 1/4 mile of current pathways GREEN r Transit Not within 1/4 of current or future transit route RED Arterial Road Buildout Status Ultimate configuration (#of lanes in master street= 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 Park within 1 mile OR a Community Park Walkability Park within 1/2 mile OR a Neighborhood Park within EN 1/4 mile walking 6 Report generated on 03-31-2025 by MERIDIAMsal en City of Meridian I Department Report VIL Exhibits C. Site Plan(date: 12/19/2024) gV;Va@.4 a adds S a�3 sk g ,y wQn gg :' Nagai-all f 3., pI Y�g'e®S�g€@g o I L 13 1 €a.a_�a ga s a €- s � a as � H �P HH 3 v o l�ya°��<��� s� � d � y � � Z is ?a a 8 9 a3� � 111 �° 1 Z ' •�€ i ROOM 2 ^59a "0 1 9' s$ S a Via! € allWg WpA, �a 'BUR iswfn 'BUR 8 k' 3Qa >u�s f IakiAll, UZ [ Hh "k € -- �€a 11111 MIQo10 as oaaaS 3a51�e: 6 3 's� gg�y m� Aw.s y moo Oo� A': as d_ (1$LLg�I 19f1d) �F d d0l� �11W N31 N oil d a z �o 0 ........ ... -fib ..p w w a a a i sA s a F Ua a a 5I a a 8 . Y o — — $0 FY r Z r City of Meridian Department Report VIL Exhibits A Landscape Plan(date: 2/21/2025) z U ism 2 _j W % Za p Z 0 W(1) az z L) 0- w2 M ;3" ------------- F3 Z4 CS 3111 0�t� Z` City of Meridian Department Report V11. Exhibits � ® r a Gi si ai ti C3 t3 e= ^ Q A a 7 a } t } t } } tt tt4 tt t44 } t �4 } tt t tt$ $ o O ZZ ! ! > eeveveeveee o000o e o ppLLJ LLI z V W W Z oil I fli a@ " g o 34 w 190 a ® ® $ ®®® Mz - HIP g 8 s �z'8 It 0 CIVO!i � � � � 3 a TIN N31'N I'M a tea.. .. .....- MT � •-' � � :I Ili — ,,�T �`\I � - -a --- .. 3 I •-'i W 5 E5 t I I > �-a ®HP9 g n � 1 a nH C��4444 00 Eg � I I R. a z Z; City of Meridian Department Report VIL Exhibits E. Building Elevations(date: 9/18/2024) QI NV1QN3W (G'd 31IW N31 N 18 (W9 N3aNIHD M OMS) w",, O.� ss SNOIldn313 AdVNIWP3Nd p _ cd ° Igo �___________ Nil I k is s e n a k i y !•Fed m i m Gag 3 I 1 Hill 6 a x��000 00o OOO �� 6@: m3sai3:b " rr II ill\ `.I hp N , Ell � I fEl -�` f I I j fsl �l Lmj TI IIElii II 3l "I®r lel o- 0 w Z/ liflim -- 1I ill I it o Z I o00 �o II J§ I w§ Ell al &da, LL_J w y., � I e LL 3I s Iml I a;I 3 e@ City of Meridian Department Report VIL Exhibits DWI s al NVI(IId3W (Od 31IW N31 N Q CWS N3GNIHJ M OMS) OZ% gg SNOUVA113 Al IVNIW1332ld __ p _ " Jill, lot 11MI a 3 € � � I I I E ® I I Eli I N I� 110111U a i I Its w �yye q 3 c ® gi ig¢ ii a 3�3� 1Wig 1. i go ?4 0 1 11101 Rig N 1i6 ? 4� l�ME $ f w � 11 ll'111�AM ',1F1e y00000 000 0®0 00 00o©o©�v�lg; I�a;lsl�:l� IT j11 II I 4 tt I I II LL i i o I ii I w A I ` ZO it p s I Zo — ii Z i I II I ii _— - 4.:: sl ii II U ii iw r ii _JJ I • w; Nw .� Z% rr II III IIEl l 61 - ---- wl - - a '�4.1 ------------ 3 _ City of Meridian Department Report VIL Exhibits COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C Y L E IDIAlr , DEPARTMENT REPORT HEARING 4/17/2025 0 Legend DATE: Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission :Area of Impact J += City Limits - r FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner O Analysis 208-884-5533 sallen@meridiancity.org PON APPLICANT: Todd Smith,In-N-Out Burger � �@ -E T 11"1 i SUBJECT: H-2024-0058 ITE u �' ® In „' �E -N-Out Burger at Ten Mile LOCATION: 5985 N. Ten Mile Rd., in the NE '/4 of t� 1 Section 27,TAN.,R1 W. FF 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.meridianci �.org1WebLink/browse.aspx?id=367313&dbid=0&repo=MeridianQU 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 11-213-3. 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.O1F below. "Minimize noise, lighting, and odor disturbances from commercial developments to residential dwellings by enforcing city code."(Comprehensive Plan Policy#5.01.0IF) 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 11-2B-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 III. 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 I 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 I 1-3C-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 offour(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 I1-3A-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 of public testimony, mostly in opposition to the project, have been received and are included in the public record. City of Meridian I Department Report III. 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: https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=367313&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiV V. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use(UDC 11-513-6E) 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 IIl,per the Findings in Section V. B. Commission: Pending City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Action ' 1 1 1 � • t. 1' i4 will 14�� � - '. ���-� -� �1■ -•_ • y i n ii�rti � � ,�1, 1����i _ ■� ■ ufn siu 0 �'�Illl*11 i .�AIAIA. 11i■# iL LU INN 1��i111P � ■■flu ' � � •� a CH1INDE'N .OI.aOlaaaAr� u Illua nnln i — e Ilaal■NI.IA.. � our!moon_ n1 n1u = rbuna111n1 111111 `� nn milli i m�nlN - lfiniuil 7ruuuuwnp nlm �" ■ � � �■annnn mm� +s�11I 1. ,1111111f11f1 NIII a L'.I� l 1nnnII fufR l Silll 1111 Ron . 1 CC^+ la�� +f i■i■iIN, ■♦ + r i N7 - ll■nOfil�'• t H = -a N I ininnn a►Ir t_►�lllwl I ... nn■In1Ai 11111 11 s \Aur f � 1 Man V 1i11 �p�i�1 • ■ p SS: 1 11 im 11l\ �it i I�IPiiig11i1 ��a■1n Illiiii 11 1�-.r+r����� �� ■•■�■nw1111ni C=i ii■�1� �1 Iinlfgll;� �R;NI Q �=m1� ..�■■• •i■nnluirn... ■■m a� • ru=n1 p fi nnl° :►lose. 1 � l �IIBI ill .W.'I 111 ►f� �►�� �� hfiun J an nI �S 'wing J Iw 1 H 11 i err!■irrri�• r�I11 m vlwm r! e � niip n1 .nnnum s .nu . • ■onnlirn a� r illnllllf�l I i1 �♦tn ♦�■■i■■ .y iii>a/ �n 1�f111r1i�\,!_ Ii11 IIII. Z � ��■ il1ll ■:�inri nurfl■`nm :•■� r r Iiir■■liirll■■a fi■rrli■_ iiiii�� ��Irini ��� W =�-■S .non�: om num :I/nn r.�� 1111i - f AWiq' l�Inn 111n1 ■iiriln■�i1� �•ii�iii� III�Il �iili � � � �i11111n+�Il um IIIu��noon .fr■.'■� Iliwin ri/1■IInO�ri llirrn nm1 uu ■■...■■. f1 IIIIIIII nianl ��*nu■r®n m m unul nnllur nil nnuii;.;jfi noon Illnwn un■■afrm .p in 1n1 i 1 111111111 !I=�Iliunnr,niN'11111 :r�• l 1= qr iyllll Illlli[.` ■1 inns frgi111111�••• - C Ii1M �i°°I�� a nimis• munnllnu� ■■LL .'�"� '- um1n1.�'�iiA.'lll_�n�nuAolu� r - l__�_rr nnrrs 1f1� — a■ram� �'� all P Man +■IIJ Itilia o 1■ an / •�� -.... r ■ n1iA� A�� r� L� CHIND.EN- ��-yy� nu■■monvuuun Ip1 Illllllllj� .IIIIIIIiI II II'111111111 ■u■nrrunn■U m ��1��1a�• nlll€ Allllr 111■Illr 11111111`` /1111111 Illr_ �[Illlll■nf■1■- I,.r.r��1.1.�:./ fII1H.rII11F OIIIIIII �1 tl =--tl Y--,--,= ._W Irlrirll 1111111 A ar1197 i .-Illrlli in■n1 nrn[u■nr�l� lnul rnV ��I rn. • - oilimmillimTullill��� 7■nnnm nnu ■Il .rnwl 1lnur- n■ rrnnlr .•��,�;Yuwumin-Illlnu 'i""�I„ noun o ■ _--i runnllr■1r111r •� i11■r■ J�nw ounrmlf-nlI■11 �4 unn noon^ R� 1 ; o�lnirn■■■,u� R y _ xl ■ = ry haw rrnnw■■p li +� ' I =�,Illlllllr lrn l ��r �. �--••:••��nq� p r I..ruma r►�+r d4��{►\I =p�111■1.RI - �\ m1■nrnul\�1 s+aa _�■/milt■��i�d♦Ih#�: Imo' ,•r . \ ply Inillll unfllllll[III •alun !�rnruuU nr! -■�q unlluiuluuur,rl\��r1lr �punnu► s'y=Iruunln e 11■111/1 ■ri1 •r►• �■ ��/Im u111 rr r0 ,f■Q a •'�rlrllnlnur'w' !� 1 1111 /-... rr ..■ ###1 r■■ 11 U//r11r/rr■��■ R• ■ t•I� ' .rr rr r ull■11■r r W o■errs w■ 1111,111110 rj [rlllnr\� /�'Y rLr► 1111 . �.rlllllllrrr- . r�� ■11/� #in 111111 11■►�� ■-lunar `:I■ 1\i; yGum n1111��� p_„�W� :■p11► 1� �� ,igfrrnlnlun�Z V C-7 .ll4/,Iq■■ �1uu our►1 �e IIID 1--1 4umnnr H, rnlnr wilow 1, ■■llrl ► _ e rH#lvlllr nn_�J nnnllnl IIII ■1!1 11111►� IAllll„ IrIfu111,1111■111 Illllllh� Il■■lll J\ ■J 1111■IO.�„1/\ l■r� lit logl \rrrl■rl►�j .�^. ■oat*ttirr C�:�� a� t�41nA1/11�r,Ol■l Ii: Z;� /lurp rlln � /�,- / �,wnu qr\I �s t[ . �•\�lll//111 /loll► r .II1111r s`atlq-■ll /r ■ill■■ ill n■a ttD`■ ��Br ���l/r/,\��/■//■1�1. W rlr■1': - _ • - o nni. -r -+ I i!♦*Iirlo�l�•i�uilli ��/ �:r°' •• nun I:. ■nnu■ II w 1.-I■ +�1/n111s► ♦ -■I11r . O..um now.C►nlrr■ =r ��nlB� �♦ p rr11r ri- �Illllll'!11 R11f■■ nil I ■rr■1l1/■ -,rn■n • I�f/■■II Ila��llllU - it111■l1[ Is . qj ■Inm !.� r ■-111111'■ ■/llrrrlllr■■■nllllrr+' ■■'■■ �' w ■,Irin/1.■ll�l[unuwn noon nulr Iurinls ern.■.....�fl IIIIr1■ .■nil/rul ��inm 9:141, Jim■nr} nunl runny, nannnluul uu1 nnuull■1 Ir► .JG IIIIPIIIIA!Illlr f1 rr�_■ If I'1■Illnrn lnnnn,n/lilt �► �� nrlruln rvne - 111��.1,111 O - r a■ ■.. -_ ■ 1■u= rr1Y�� • fir■_„n■■■ur�lulu Ir■11...� mnnuunr :�:: ■ �_�IpIII t!! a1111nu1 rgyi11111a--• nnumnnn f/i /Il/l1\� ,� ,L ■ p 1, \,/uI� IIIP- D - �=r1-1-�- ■�lnrirl.�� nrnunrn- 1111- ` mlrum ' hlrlllll-,��"_IAI■■, 1,■nP� ■an`rrrn:��■ Illlrlmunu - nurlrrin� inniPunn c llll/�a'. iutlrlrfl�iii i���I��1�ruunmr ■ urliunuri mm�lllw ,111■l►f' ��rr C��: - - tl■CllernuAr. 11 rrnrn � i+ _ ■�_ a-_ uilrr i .. 13. ■�iq► �nm"`i ullillli"ui _ I�rii I C!Ii r O �� � iri''' '11■*ll a +a �fr Inns ■■r • �,■2� ,i -�lAll,!` a�Gi9�Cs�Ca�.�, l'i-■ ■ .`��. ��+r-I DE ad' nuna1111111111f1�j IIII1111TI n1111111U ■unanmrnr —€ Is unlmr ,■m m r of,ur `1I1,��. i:::1�:n�i Ir SIR �•n3200 ,, • 11111111 - mlan ■nror- ORIONL-_- u f■.■ ■■ i non - 7 r ■rr11n1 Illnl�'{��' . Ilrr■■lli •nnu pnull 1,I1 r■� runnw umnr y i'�rll r■r 111m1F-u,l■11 r rnunnr noon #' C iiiuii elii ► # slI{��' p' IlllllfORION ,r r T :■ 'i14 aaa r +nrunna*�►'►• err 111 +��`� ` Im onmu\ N :�li/1O1n ♦N�♦ -� �wlr - untlll unnlllllnrl •urrn. ffmillion �1�r Affuml Tit ■■ ■■11 1■■. y milln/Il ♦■11lIIOO111/�Q IIII�i�:. C■'11�/i'r - /1■l mll `rqj� 1'[n11111111mr1 \Ijti�r \ ��lr[umnn°���ddrYL/ (;;� 1 1 -�#�v.r ■1■ :�� rr�#1 �I o■ � t� ONION -► A 1 � rllll■Ilil o■11 ■ ■ luu ou\'0� r.•• _r. -1111 ••. �• ••.gl,lflbb. ■l��� ••■11'1 1 r �f q l IrAl rn .r,I■ j�: Cr/um nm '° � ■■ �. • rmmrr..Z:■■r 11111 1111 �, ? lilnnr-. � � ..■III rUunmm�1-1■n Lllllr�IIPI V� -i .IIID rllll■ IIu1n 11rO► -.r IIY:I f t1 Z' IIIu■mun1l■�11►11► /nI �mnulluar1111itmiliiliii�ii„. � - r■r■■■nIirl1 J\►r • nic�,♦'�►grItrlrr n►•'J_�■ qn■unlri �"' .► �- ��1■ uu■// / �t nnu n►. ruir.�r+tt:+■� I Ilr■♦-�w ♦��:�gllll\ `/i■i\■i1/i■i1 11. ±• iii5iit iiiii a+au nPPp�■�■ �Irnlul1lfrr):��a.i-n1=■■u IrJl l�l r.`{-i:::�:1:::r:�r ro�♦"�:wool ma ► rnu von ns q■►'■ II:I ■.�. tiro■urr11■ uiTi:; ?/ y muf�`��y�/riniy!► • I�■■■ our :: nwr •:.■lrn noon-►Inw■ ■ r` �ilnuu►� ■M. - �\ �■ �p■un only ■moil -un[I 11■■Ii 1 iiin . s �a�r-�■■■■fl■��illo riri ii/�r`I/ /: •'.11� -unm '14�ur■.�� ...\, 7 � _■■■■■■P ,.11lal•-- � rl1�:::;::::�:::S"■..1.r...::-•Y �oily numb �n■ram■'���Sf�9�IIi1■ ` �� -�■l■■■I W.:n1 �� nwu'1� �■rnrin 111111�IIIIII► �1:]Pnnnullr Irul Mlnlnrll■ Ir �P\CK' J•. ��s lllllll l -rinru rnU\�r�nr nnuu,rnnuE i1��u'f _Py ���lun:��_nilmeul Prinnn unr■run unrJ,■r p noun■mil, jjj��j''' 111/�_.lu//.. llllllllllA' a■ ■ 1, ' , ■'I h,w 1■lrulr lgll nnl,■m,r e- I +• �■.■/1■Ir� � ��� a1n11►1 i\7■.r f, '111111■C �� Ilrnrumi I IIIU �� .:Ll��1 Gig 1__��Illlllllli►�t Il,Ipla • Ir■I� 1 I Z' in1= -r1�1.rr�. ■rlir[i�%i\ � ■■■Illlnl C Illllla I OOI w' 1•••,I 1 llevil ai'PP►Mnt: nnnunmm t r � it nnnllui.: II • W� �� ulrirlfrflui�iii w fu-11�- mnnm �, ' I��III/rl.•+ 111 IPnnllnn rannml Ulna II/1 I r �r■ !y - '' ■ai�iiR [1 �� no�111rm■ f f r. it If 1 B. Service Accessibility Report PARCEL R5330761510 SERVICE ACCESSIBILITY Overall Scare: 28 27th Percentile Location In City Limits Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains < 500 ft. from parcel Floodplain Either not within the 100 yrflaodplain or > 2 acres Emergency Services Fire Response time < 5 min. Emergency Services Police Not enough data to report average response time LIRED mm Pathways Within 1/4 mile of current pathways [GREEN Transit Not within 1/4 of current or future transit route I RED T Ultimate configuration (#of lanes in master streets ,arterial Road Buildout Status s GREEN plan) matches existing (# of lane School Walking Proximity Within 112 mile walking GREEN Either a High School or College within 2 miles OR a M 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 112 mile OR a Neighborhood Parkwithin GREEN 1/4 mile walking Reps-+generated on 03-31-202z by h4ERIDIA%sallen City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits C. Site Plan(date: 12/19/2024) b e „. E 4 Ong? 6 3 s B 5 gg 6 v d G 8a Eck Z !!Rimxa € 3 511 n"ass W 9 m ',��, 11 � g € o N W € §€k o o sgi ' a 9a a s - n�s' s a'€S "' �.W to §€ A 8 O m i t 3 5§§c� d 5 ab @ . till a„ $ W s>wd g F a 5 a 5s s 4 as{ + ak y 9��# see� � �kA g"$ 5 a €3 Ig �' aaas s'� a ass d�''k $' HK Igo1s1 1 m a�€; �1� s �" r�,sa� bua 1°1 - �ga igl��0,5 p:p p:p p;p p�p:pp:p p�p:pp:p;p4i z 8@ 49 a m@ i € S 5 S S S S E d S 8 ❑ �a� $�§a� y�y �Rill° °�5 3�§ � s �4 z F s�� Ski`ce3�� ��� s �� s* ¢ 11,e€��s��1111a ill1G{'a11 - �4�ff€� ��$i� � ��� �&� z�a8�4 y�- ��o !� .. w $e;, z g' aF a � I$1 1 f 5 1 s e ec 1F��.�a �-?�S sge€a 4��oil g�� �a s C7_ W� q g s �W m� iw poa 0 p a3N1S"31191d) avow E-11A N31 N I:t - I Z�a „ ............. — E� _ LIE �w- I —FI n , a e mom \€ 4 8 "a P £� g 1 _ o�a or•. - w i .�¢W'° x i { i Z/ City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits A Landscape Plan (date: 2/21/2025) SO- 1. k U I III II IIIII I k & �� fL s I1J En ❑Z o Lu. WJ �_ m~� + Fz� Daz Zao yew E�.. ik ----;� 061 o — ga L � ,6 0 p Atli- z , ' oil m�a ©m City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits � � r $ $ $ z �+ � CL c z �q. H 0 E7- LLI e � a ¢ g F.n. l W oz ji cc W� jlS; a gg i gg 3€€�g���g ~?"� HE P 5 avoa i I H _$ �3111N N3L N o � . .err-�r,.�.., ._ ".. I � .j'.•i w tl ��t hV k 33a e eCm:wD � ei I k f -Oc TO City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits E. Building Elevations(date: 9/18/2024) �W - 01 NVKmj3w d w— Os, 20 SNOI LVAIIA Al JVNINIIA2Jd ;O W gg £ 5 — g RINI, I N , 11111 OIDW Jim a g sy�w y l Ui HP 4 4z x e$s ON-Hi3 HN Y00000 121LIE 0©0 - ;..r_________ El i ---------I-- �� ICI I lal i � I i � I Ial III III I '. .sl II � I ` ' Ti t—r 3 n. Ian El I� II I RI �. al F— '$ y_ Zo El wi 7 wa — � I y i II I I I �w 5w -el � lal LL ZO I � lal I I II^ I } a I I $ wk I.I I B i Iml I I� II i I fdl I II �; n� s• e� City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits QI `NVIa1213W (Cj2 3jIW N±L N '8 W O.` SNQ1 VA113 A2JVNIAHI3 Jd ;p _ IMF s $ dl Ali NMI E A i G � j a Ipill x00000 000 000 00 0o®o®®ws61r; II7;1�1 iKi lu I• ILL ja 4 I ^�I u— I I J I i Iwl i I I �• I i ICI I ii jj -- 1���II I• " f�l I �.. Ir��j r —— 1 ,I'., 71- 6 II 17 O Hi ii TIF zO z iui O sl Z/ — ii _Z �� i� II ,,,� • Isl I d o ICI IT •�I � I ' � b I � I ry l I II I ' a II I • I I � II I I li L ---I I s= -a u - a� City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits CITY OF MERIDIAN f IDIAI`�:=-- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW C AND A F! DECISION& ORDER 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. Case No(s).H-2024-0058 For the Planning& Zoning Commission Hearing Date of: April 3 and 17,2025 (Findings on May 15,2025) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 17,2025, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 17,2025,incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 17,2025, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 17,2025,incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the"Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65, Title 67,Idaho Code(LC. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 1 I Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has,by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian,which was adopted April 19, 2011,Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 4. It 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. 5. That the City has granted an order of denial in accordance with this decision,which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2024-0058 IN-N-OUT BURGER AT TEN MILE Page I [74] upon the applicant,the Planning Division of the Community Development Department,the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning &Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 1I- 5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The Applicant's request for Conditional Use Permit is hereby denied as presented during the hearing on April 17,2025,for the following reasons:The hours of operation are not compatible with the residential area to the west and there are 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. F. Judicial Review Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-652 1(1)(d),if this final decision concerns a matter enumerated in Idaho Code § 67-6521(1)(a), an affected person aggrieved by this final decision may,within twenty-eight (28)days after all remedies have been exhausted, including requesting reconsideration of this final decision as provided by Meridian City Code § 1-7-10, seek judicial review of this final decision as provided by chapter 52,title 67, Idaho Code. This notice is provided as a courtesy; the City of Meridian does not admit by this notice that this decision is subject to judicial review under LLUPA. G. Notice of Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis Pursuant to Idaho Code §§ 67-6521(1)(d) and 67-8003, an owner of private property that is the subject of a final decision may submit a written request with the Meridian City Clerk for a regulatory takings analysis. G. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of April 17,2025 "Exhibit A" CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2024-0058 IN-N-OUT BURGER AT TEN MILE Page 2 [75] By action of the Planning&Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 15th day of May ,2025. COMMISSIONER MARIA LORCHER, CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER JARED SMITH,VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER BRIAN GARRETT (ABSENT) VOTED COMMISSIONER JESSICA PERREAULT VOTED COMMISSIONER MATTHEW SANDOVAL VOTED COMMISSIONER SAM RUST VOTED COMMISSIONER(VACANT) VOTED Maria Lorcher, Chairman 5-15-2025 Attest: Chris Johnson, City Clerk 5-15-2025 Copy served upon the Applicant, the Planning and Development Services divisions of the Community Development Department,the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By: Dated: 5-15-2025 City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2024-0058 IN-N-OUT BURGER AT TEN MILE Page 3 [76] EXHIBIT A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C��fEFIDIAN�_ DEPARTMENT REPORT HEARING 4/17/2025 Legend DATE: (Continued from: 4/3/2025) Project Location Area of Impact I �I TO: Planning&Zoning Commission City Limits T QAnalysis Y FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 �~ --- - �n sallen@meridiancity.org APPLICANT: Todd Smith, In-N-Out Burger , �-• J °t r SUBJECT: H-2024-0058 In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile '�` A � LOCATION: 5985 &6037 N. Ten Mile Rd., in the NE - L 1/4 of Section 27, TAN.,R1W. � I Note for clarification: 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.C 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. 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: Denial IL COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1: Land Use Description Details Map Ref. Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/undeveloped I - Proposed Land Use(s) Restaurant/drive-through establishment - City of Meridian I Department Report Description Details Map Ref. 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 Table 3: Community Metrics Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference Ada County Highway District No mitigation required by ACHD • 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:llweblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/browse.aspx?id=367313&dbid=0&redo=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: Proiect 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. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis [78] 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 11-213-3. 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. 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 S: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#5.01.0IF 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 City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 79 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 5'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 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 City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 80 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 II- 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 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. City of Meridian I Department Report 11I. Staff Analysis 81 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 number of vehicle spaces (i.e. 73), a minimum of three (3) bicycle spaces should be provided. A total offour(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 fagade 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. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 82 "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 6.01.02B 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. 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 I I-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 1I- 3A-15. 2. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): Storm drainage is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC I I-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, City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis [83] 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 of public testimony, mostly in opposition to the project, have been received and are included in the public record. 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: https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIBrowse.aspx?id=367313&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX V. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use (UDC 11-513-6E) 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. The Commission finds 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. The Commission finds 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. 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. The Commission finds 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 City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions R 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. The Commission finds the proposed use will adversely affect other properties in the vicinity and thus, denies 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. The Commission finds the proposed use can be served adequately by essential public facilities and services as required. 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. The Commission finds 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. The Commission 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 the many 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. The Commission 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: The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on April 17,2025. At the public_ hearing,the Commission moved to deny the subject CUP request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing: City of Meridian I Department Report Vl. Action 85 a. In favor: Todd Smith.In-N-Out Burger(Applicant): Robin Sellers: Shawn Sunwell b. In opposition: Wade Ramsey(Bainbridge HOA); Brick Oliver(Cadence HOA); Bri Jones(Olivia Apartments); Diane Hough; Jon Wheeler; Bob Hough; Val Daigle; Don Dalton: Bill Beve: Shawn Sherman: Clayton McCormick:Pat Catenzero: Diane West: Mike Gallenstein; Steve Lozano:Jeff Wertz: Becca Gulden;Robyn Sellers: Jonathan Walker; Robin Friehling; Shawn Sundwall;Maritza Gardner; Lindsay Po ser; Michael McCallister: Dale Draney:Brian Henszel; Joseph Minor; and James Ferguson c. Commenting: Giancarlo Ganddini d. Written testimony: See public record e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. Traffic generated from the proposed use and on the adjacent roadways b. Access to the shared driveway between the proposed development and the Olivia Apartments. c. Hours of operation d. Lights,trash, loitering and noise from the development. e. Analysis in the focused traffic study_ f. Impact on property values g_ Safety of the kids playing at the surrounding parks crossing the street to the proposed use and additional traffic generated from the proposed use. 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. Hours of operation b. Focused traffic study findings C. Proximity of the proposed use to the multi-family development 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Action [86] VII. EXHIBITS A. Project Area Maps (link to Project Overview) 1. Aerial Legend �. � +h n ` Project Location j �, • AhRYR1�i3���IM s ra is° + IIM .. Area of Impact 2 �w7w011:� O Analysis .■rp i ■gs po ntt� ;� *„► �' tmn �'"3�, r dl -z::-�.: r:- 1, ♦ �klA�srrl .� 4„i `� �: � �' i a•+•Pa4y#,-. �'— � yrux_. rr+w� pyre#•e �rv`'Hla.- _ o r • a rex, +mnrt�'uxn 3i � .Mt1 Illllill �a':® - R' [ racy+lie rxdic -a xpk#k9 tn061- — Il I# �. '� �7 !I INV" e, a•� � T ICI ,sl lal4k'�R#-RTI���-1 !tl!F91ka •RavY !r, �r x Arrr R�ir pa)FA / a x perlreV het �i rR#RRRRIIRM a • i alb m al 01 ♦�.�iMJAW �kR e!7 1+ Y�-.s{r tFR�! 4.4a. ItlRR'J5lRRa� �f.fi ie �� 11f •x.f IR r `tAGA87elxor [y,� r Rab I'NR#Raa#lM.tq`■°YI41na kifklRR�>f.. # #YkE ; - s i op�RItlAM rpkR x+RR.! ` -• !PICaRllR6i lC 7 xi■ RI€tERR7!tt .a. N�RaI s�+'1llsk '�'* a ,�oya'IsrQGPlp&r IPS a:'Ot Pa^r"U. tlMEG r rpr #kRRk■klealw - RRR Akatlaa a oo .M. rxr�. . x�p�s 1ad19. .�!tkA�M!Sxpr"!*t!1l:leaa.+Ilr'llt + . . Agkil R Fl ;a eAum _ MARNl4 +rl'�.� lop +e..kkkk. r�a#R#+ `RlRiRk■#R#R�'�/�[i'+'dRRR# kqP•��ffik! �r�, 4* Er1+F!!R 7R#4RR i b 'Hp�AA.7Rr7 A7rsl ♦ �# ,� ♦ #sate v e +`✓',.e■ak '''RlRUti•wb:ia14fA6 Joe 1 J'il'Re •r La else:sC� .��;-�' Is��•"kdralalafr,'R S.w#Pak911 __ ---__ •a'. +14!#R#Fisi rl.R'#Ir##kp it I r •a 1.,, f:t�d�aAsxxk•a f►ae .�qyy�. �. °1 IM i1,1ARItk:FFEiR 3�#�Irsi�4Mtl r � m iAgila 'IAIde■lfsi•w .NR'!R#a� F+A gilkka MMP iY ai tlsdY9lrAaNJRRfs w4a lR➢EsfiR'afY ._r# Imo'±= ...�lkttm !*Rl4e►�1=_ roF�+Gp#R.>,R MR �sRARpnlll q �le5a 11rP'a a all7r' III, _ ..-. �° �Al :.•NrI sa�z9ltlI rr 2. Zoning Map Legend Project 0 Location I R-2 Area of Impact e % RUT 0 Analysis ^ � R-8 C-C C-N R°15 Tr r�r� f LiL L=P�� E RUT "i'' ' C-C R=8 RII' m WA F � ICI - c-c I � I C-G R I R-15 City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 87 login MIR —`i7nu ulmnly� o`� „a I Ir C JII all /r i� � ■ `'ei'• C�r111►� Ra• innni■war ■' nlnu■[ ■r■ a� CH�INDEN 1 _Illlln,I�'111111111 ¢nr■�►■ul!■■� m IIII!■ /1111111 Ilm� �1111i1i irO1■� 11■1�• 1I111IT is • e -lllilli■11■11 . i ,�. =1 n■ IOV =■ all: -i■1 ■i..r ..... mq �'nnnlll:nnlr 1■l uun3. nut■ ■u1►�nw p a lu■n/u■poll �.�(1-1111111111P nlmr�iiulnl? ��� -�:• U/1■■Ir■■IAIIIIr ■p;-,pliil■IIIAIi Ilil�Ol J41AMtfl11 11111111- ��/f �I/ U 1f+� 1!■/r■■rl■■r■uF/��"1� aJ lyn nmm�■■■ ♦y ♦ �Illllllu nn l ��� �� � ::'.'.:�Inri A : I■aum/a�►i:++ �♦ ■ ��111rr rill �■ i.,y : I■unur■ �NIryI ,,,� ■��� r �!i■IIII unn11r1111Iy��unMr 9 noun# �♦ 4n� Q.rl IIIII�r == I r ■ .-- :I/ wi 1 ur!■i1111111111f••'rl\,+f1!rr �piiOrlii ♦ ■g1lr {N IUi'.21 C ��\�■Ul 11i11 HrI Mi rrlrn RI• ♦*r�411 1 qq � ■r.��. r.■rAll■Inn p..1�1��11•I� ��wI1I A ♦■i Ej11111 CI ♦r _►r1�i� mi ,■ ..mR1i11■n..__-_r'+�, uu� r ►nu �:/i■I� • J :: R lrirrunn � 111111 llll►�(„�r ��Ann11f �■IIII II nm nr111 ��_.� � ..p11 + �i1►Ilm F:! rllrli!allw� �� ni■■ 1■n■r - r:IIIII�IH ■�nrl - • rr/allll J r-J ruuuul ..Q rlll IIII I!IIII n nlunlrumnni mm�l� inIIIIIIIAr a - on ■ii r++r w� `pRr' liilllll o 1 - �#r■r�■ , n!■r r+A■. m '... me- Nimmons■- I Z�IIin17 ■n■■■ni wnu■q� n■++�rrr!■: ♦I� `".Ignl'l�a r W rirr 4 w■'-a■■ I _ • - e �mp. it ■!i*`■ Ili. �r1■F�\ _ \I .n■r'� ■ �!R ■n■r■!■ +•I� ■ Y,+� vlJnn ■■i41v O 11 :ms nr■ =1 n1 Ir��: t1I■nnl� • -mIn ■■i■n■1�:Irnu■ -■ � our # =nm..� +uun. ■nni/• ■nnm■ ■Inm__■' I�tlrlll Ilan iiiin ■ ' ■ .bnllrpl IAf I■ . a,Al� lnul■ •••• A►� nnn■ ■ ■nnnum.. umn■ • ■rll■uunun■ unnl■nulr uI1nIC �ru■■■■■■ III IIIIIII _.In r■unii. s ■ num�lu■1 r� }n„nmunuc ui el ■Innirll■I'11► ::nnuiii ��■mn nulw�Irm■m unmlul,lm �1 !.--■ IA 'IIII■■urn Uo■■ng1111iv��■ �� nnuluminl .�. ,�111�■■fl■II� O - ■ a. ... - nnuumnn . ry IIIIIII� r1111► . �1■ riniu■■■'�r!■IIJIrII ■ nnlvnrnna -� r r I rI1 oaf \J��\i■�11 �/+�■IIIi■.■■i O■iRR1111�■ ■I - nnwnnl p'.1111- �_*InlJi. �a1■\ I - ';I �..��-Ii■■■■'\I�\ Illnlnn {IIIIIII_,,,,'' IIIIIII ■!l1l111r■��■IIIIIAI/111111/ - 1111{IIi11� Illlllllallll_ r - - e ■1lU6■1'11�1��111■n■r■Ir111111f 1 unumni nlnunml Miss - - his CIIrr■n u� I 1in il11s�, ��0+1�.are ���■ - '�yL�y�=��+Iran■ �■�I�f�■1 ir . +•m farll11�1��L■1 .Inu loom 1. - Ua,> l� ■IIr�11�� �•� r �~ ■ S • ' • i■r. IIIr .'a{ 1 r■r\! �■ ■���■1/ _ � 1=-Ilur►r!'� �esax:ara.� l'—� �fiM � _��it - }�r, 111.1 nlri1i11111,� ��' rt• ���'■�.' �ntNDEN - �■ mnnn■n� nAAn�►-� IIIII■ Ilrlr1111n/ III,II. anmrsunnlrj awn -r . �.■ ■.�■.,. n11'Ilnlllll -(IIIIIII ! mom Illlllm ■111■!■IA►In I ■11tI o-nunm -II■Ilnl ►nIT � mu__ i �-m■m■rwm � I R> ■ ■� i � ,nl•_ruin Ink nn7 +!■■ nu! �= IA /i1/UAIr11111YBf/���'. Imo pnulr IRII nuuts 111 IIII- C un�mu ::. unmu■■■nm • • _ uw■■ � mm,11 loan � I1= -.- lulrnw unu■�i r.`A1111 r li.nuip iijpOl �rgpgnnr unnn � fs�w C� wls� .�*v I ni■n■nr rllail�9��i ♦■R► t7 11p �nr■n■r■■■. � 711111111n nir As �•#�##�# Ina ++ �i a1 i■■ a. li/■■nuuRlZ t. 6yt1 - I■in■■nlf►1 r+ ��■ � �►�Ilrr nI1 ��p�� �I■(Ilion♦'�+ ►lfti H .�.. � _w► -'� imAn unn1111UI1 •aum ��♦AR�im ■ ■ :,� l� I•!•In111111111uu1�1\ �sr■r i�punrlli►>•ro��4n ILI JIIi�YAri b lit� �o ONE _ry�11 ■ a■Ur■Q : IJOIJiiar�#r■ r1n1 / r -w- V 111�-`..■��■w,■ :.■rrllllllln•U Il`�I, o■III I��41iUlr Itf���r -IIII ems:` �� ■r■rIn■IIn■■..�■1. r••-�- ��■IrI� 1! 14111 11111 IIII lilnnl�. ♦Ilnn nnl �■ ..�111► 4 :�r ►rinun F:! rll■n■a■w■ V i �nm nor. lion■ Inn ■n 11f ► ► �� rrrhnn J mnn,ul + 1 IIIIII 11111 in nn111 1lIIIAIIII Illllllr rn■Ilr /r JI1 ,.`tom mnullllnlll■lu1101111111111_■1■' ■In■n � ::�*#■■■unrrl, four mir++ O m iJlllllll�' nnnl■ _ .■■rr■un■■ �Ilnn11n1 ►►n ■JII ■ inn ■r■a++i*r' r z.�n1■u�� num i■ lllAun7n1�an :r, r a■mr■■ wm r �rlar Iliriil\�� �rym►1■■ -rl/■ii .�.■ ��I jp■■i-------- Miss nm u!r . . . J ■.n■ - ■ .alai ..■!rr■In ■ Iru■l�� �■■inr =z� I�■■■ - C■:: anuR .Ol ■■■imrn■Gmn■ J -un n � �innl■ irO1 # .a���n■■IIII■ A : ■p pp■ nli�Ii OR■■ran■nuir■inrulr■--•g unm a �Ia 'nor q�_■�'■IIIr A■nA1I + 11 I■ ■�all9 �r III/11■ ■= /i■■r■■air■■ ■■■■■ir■■' II ni u►"' A■■nur. 9�1111r " ?�N -l�l■■I■W•poi -= nuui'11■Ill■mn■■m n ■ ■unn■i %rI 111 nnnlnn: yin .■anm■ NmnifIlll Jr tt J' ,u, ��■nArr runty �m■rr■..: 1 - ■ :♦run�`�� ---1"f � Ira.-:rinrnin,IIn!■■ n nn■■mm unyttll I ■,rm■��nnA■� i... ��� min►�i }t1y.unm■■',rnuJ1111 ... �_ nnnm �r�I�f.Rllln I""•'I II' l��� Illl llllll�r�,f�p■111■■wl►i ■r■rillgll�■■■ -_ IIiII► I #�`Z• �r�-Ii■/rllrall>• 1 �IInII♦ 1 N r.I 1'� Ip ll\ a ll11fl1r i��p IIn111n11111/= 7 �■II■11�,� Wes' -_ {ul■t►111f1'iiiii_111=���nlln�= ■ n■ some ■1 � B. Service Accessibility Report PARCEL R5330761510 SERVICE ACCESSIBILITY Overall Score: 28 27th Percentile Description Location In City Limits Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains < 500 ft. from parcel Floodplain Either not within the 100 yrflaodplain or > 2 acres Emergency Services Fire Response time r 5 min. Emergency Services Police Not enough data to report average response time Pathways Within 1/4 mile of current pathways GREE Transit Not within 1/4 of current or future transit route LRED1 Arterial Road Ruildout Status Ultimate configuration (# of lanes in master streets GREED plan) matches existing (# of lanes) School Walking Proximity Within 112 mile walking 1GREE1 Either a High School or College within 2 miles OR a School Drivability Middle or Elementary School within 1 mile driving GREE (existing or future) Either a Regional Park within 1 mile OR a Community ParkWalkability Park within 1/2 mile DR a Neighborhood Park within 1/4 mile walking 61 report generated on 03-31-202z by MERIDIAHl sal en City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits [89] C. Site Plan(date: 12/19/2024) q r aag - br} d d kR 6 b 0 ;�o "s �g WOLLI INLU OL SH R�jl NaN s ? €g LL § k�Smss a 2Fa 43s Z~ Lu ��@ asp gas � : � � s• � an c '��€ a�� §; � §4�a'Y 5 5 T=$'s3s C.)Z i k "� a d d s[a �' a e§€a g a €c ❑�a�s�;'�����ar'��a�4 G�G G�a a�€'s •- -" �f&ff e a �, �p '� z�i���' i�x°� F 5��Eu€�a€ES 6§t OC o u :: , @ aF a fb1 g "c w L)_ s �W m� 5 n'O hi Q 0 4 6 0 �d ZQO r \`.-_` d� UU�kIS"JI,9ld) s CIVCitI _ E31 A N711. NLl v 8 �$ I. { i z r r € • k �6 I 4 I7I722 u� !' 3 e LLJ ME 8 _h - - .riC �I �g44ad4 P��z r e' 4 Ay 1 w a • I _ __ r, O. r — City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 19-01 D. Landscape Plan (date: 2/21/2025) s s Y; a6 8 g pp g gg g 3 a gg s a � a ',`s o Z O LU w og a W U , � IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIP' g 0 R o CL mo Z ,,, . . . �. .. Z U 5 W U) oz 0 L� Ww 0 IXM :3"I mz Fzm wog Opz Z¢a ?�s o — t-+ al a M •. p Z2 � e 'J7 r =d L . p K .L- Oil 1. g $g AA- o City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits El r i i F ii i � 3 n m o E& HZ dd o 0 0 0 6 o d a o " a o o o a o a _y,Sl. W � ; mow LLI O e i a U Qd ova Lu a ®oo e a . 9 Beo p 3 3 � 3ga Z Vol � 0P. 0 g c $ H i s 1 Fie C]y I P �a !_ - w ��IW N31 N H11 o z — Z 12 --------------- w 411111� ®E3 ¢ LL I-1 u i Jg pq MOD N I IT � � J All I� I I ij� 3 sg Nw = a 4i City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits [92] E. Building Elevations(date: 9/18/2024) 0} PVt IQPJWY Q2d TIM Nil N 99 „ Oaf `6. SN011VA313 X. JVNIAIIA2Jd a ZIP NN � Sm °�g�gw e @ a @ p2 p II �ja�3; z urn s �, g � � 3 9gffi�ep ,_, 3 ` II ii IIIIN -d diflL El Y00000 000 0©0 00 00®DDOws�l§ff "I:�I�I ��I �J: r { 3 W� I� jIS ICI 91 El- 115 II 44 VVIA - �I 11 i I a _q �I I II I .�W- II ji II i i ICI II I EM - o-e y_ Z'O K, -ill ` o Z 1 o00 1 o '.'� a u iy ww II �I II ff I I I r N. i � 'mod � • LL awe el Z NJ� rr Li 3 k, El I a, — Is FT- 131 I,{ �i II a v€ o I"I I ;� 5• + B6 City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 93 F'nw s, QI `NVIGI2i3W (0] 3jIW N SNOI VA113 A2JVNIAHI3 Jd g p _ Z�8 3 4 pip INN I NNH I IS Hill Nil, Hui ; illmI�� : , R 1, � �� az'.�� `s 0 .15m 11 '1 j` -- 1C00000 000 000 00 ®o®©oos6lj; I�Ij;l�l .l?I 11 la I• ILL Is —�I ^�I u_ II -FF I i I=I j I I I w w j II II I 4, I I r I H I �O ti e LLl Iwl II^ I _ jj Ii�I I II I sl ?o T el ICIL Fz 0 I II I II I I a I Q z I H I r; 4 I - -- I 11 — Idl I°r l ----------I I _ I I qT { g---`-- — n W �l ig � x � �L• _� �� e� City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 94 13502 Hamburger Lane Baldwin Park,Ca 91706-5885 The Best Enterprise 626-813-8200 • Is A Free Enterprise"" 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. • Caf6 Rio operating from 10:30am to 10:OOpm Monday through Saturday, and 11:00am 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 10:00am 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 (https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/PDF10/c3da143f-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 § 11-IA-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 § 11-4-3-11(B), (C), and(D). Under UDC § 11-4-3-11(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 § 11-5B-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 § 11-4-3-11, 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 § I 1-4-3-49). 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, 951h 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. to 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:OOPM) 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 https://ehs.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 Ell I ■�■I I I II■ 11m■ Is insi� ��0III 2016 1�1—�I�M1II III II Mill III IIII I1�1■s1mml111 2017 —2018 _M1��II���II II 111 I'm II I �■ I 111�■ 20191■ 1��—��0=M1mm11 Imimmimiii II ■1�� �1 ■ 1 Mill I1 Mimi 2020W-I�I��� �I■I I III 1011 I ■ 0 M I M I 1■ 1 2021 I ■mI�=m�imimmimi 11 1 lmmimm■ ■I MIN 2022 in20231�■IM■� � 1��1�11 IIII limm�mI�IIIII 202410l1 ■IMIl■1110111I 1111 iIIIINMI 1■ ■ 20251=11 11■M11111111111 I II I I I I II 11 AQI Category 1 Good(<=50 AQI) Moderate(51.100 AQI) 1 Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups(101.150 AQI) 1 Unhealthy(151-200 AQI) 1 Very Unhealthy(201-300 AQI) 1 Hazardous(>=301 AQI) Source:U.S.EPA AirData<ht1ps:Nwww.epa.gov1air-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, 2 25, 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 13502 Hamburger Lane Baldwin Park,Ca 91706-5885 The Best Enterprise 626-813-8200 • Is A Free Enterprise"" 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. • Caf6 Rio operating from 10:30am to 10:OOpm Monday through Saturday, and 11:00am 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 10:00am 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 (https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/PDF10/c3da143f-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 § 11-IA-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 § 11-4-3-11(B), (C), and(D). Under UDC § 11-4-3-11(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 § 11-5B-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 § 11-4-3-11, 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 § I 1-4-3-49). 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, 951h 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. to 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:OOPM) 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 https://ehs.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 Ell I ■�■I I I II■ 11m■ Is insi� ��0III 2016 1�1—�I�M1II III II Mill III IIII I1�1■s1mml111 2017 —2018 _M1��II���II II 111 I'm II I �■ I 111�■ 20191■ 1��—��0=M1mm11 Imimmimiii II ■1�� �1 ■ 1 Mill I1 Mimi 2020W-I�I��� �I■I I III 1011 I ■ 0 M I M I 1■ 1 2021 I ■mI�=m�imimmimi 11 1 lmmimm■ ■I MIN 2022 in20231�■IM■� � 1��1�11 IIII limm�mI�IIIII 202410l1 ■IMIl■1110111I 1111 iIIIINMI 1■ ■ 20251=11 11■M11111111111 I II I I I I II 11 AQI Category 1 Good(<=50 AQI) Moderate(51.100 AQI) 1 Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups(101.150 AQI) 1 Unhealthy(151-200 AQI) 1 Very Unhealthy(201-300 AQI) 1 Hazardous(>=301 AQI) Source:U.S.EPA AirData<ht1ps:Nwww.epa.gov1air-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, 2 25, 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 Exhibit A-Meridian RevisedY Site Plan dated 5.19.25 II ENQu —a ,.x,Ea,. L d Q i nwu•ox�a., ®�"Rx<a P.Bw,.0 Tilixxox�� o I I � •�II I I �� .. ��. i !► ;=gin �x »w.x«... 1A9 � na me ,y o� I a I r�E per �o � I I I .I xN — _— I C£NERALxNOTESx^�E s — 111 s r�„ � nna,ewczxn ._o,ea uertz,ox � I w __{. zusnxv ory z«c c o x x,u. svx auu w.. IR. IN � n n cl} A oxA�«=2ZwE._,za,,..,�xcn,x..,"..�,...a 41 „ .I' I � I n I I —r za»a s I,n.4 f �xr II ti� 7�I I' Z a � 'I 7 I Z I 1, I A � «_,o �x�. a ffi Ix "II .v .9j r "sR ,,SHEET INDEX OF CITY ENTIREMENT DRAWINGS IN IN r 0 aio°n cm — , W. LOST RAPIDS - - (PIRL'.STRE DRIVE 'INGERI"E da.g`o SOI ro A- o"'R'°"R "`MSL IN-N-OUT BURGER a CITY ENTITLEMENT J ENGINEERING INC `pe oc 6985 AND 603T N.TEN MILE ROAD AAs°a1,as $�1���1'�` — _ NEW SITE PLAN IW-W-OUT 0 Qr1[]tlf�p sb a a FIa� MERIDIAN,ID 83646 RUR66R s errocz vouo 0T' — � � � C90.0 Exhibit B-Meridian Revised Landscape Plan dated 5.27.25 I PLANTING LEGEND I I II I �x,xcox snE.�.srox.n<.., O< Ir PE,—« w,nm r: , O xxo— aumoE�rox �x.xx�s O 4 �r.NEnsE.:x N .n 0 CONSTRUCTION LEGEND s.a��r�xxm ,�oxmo 3,xµm mm�m�,xnx xw.oux,Ex=w�o�oa.n c�xxmx�xusx mnu>c�....u,�E�xmua� �nmooExoa �wEwn��xr.,� ,xm�Ao,ox -------- --- r— LANDSCAPE BOULDER LEGEND a c. © sc,ucx mo.c. «ee lx.N1+LE9GPLx� II' amnr ' 3F•x' rnwam,em Encswo ® MExsru ewEsmum �H, eaua moa«-,1�mirxnEsanoxs C ,��LL /�\ •/ I • a axaxa mme+a,ne awe Onm urcxicnwxrt,sd wx,ExoEMsoxwox sauw mo.c. «,u m.wnesa.cxa V 4 I rx.exar,em evrxE c suusxuwEx 0 I. W uxoecME.—Twt—l—EMEHr. ®ux ¢wrn�ce xueua�unasx saww mo.c. «n mMxca[sPuxc ' aEucEMExT(mtounxva I — LANDSCAPE REV LEGEND sxx x:Es,:Exo sort o�mexvxoxrooxoexim Lu I ro I � � xx�,ro„,.srExoxsrt..xoo�s� �-r —f v� I ' swmwxw II �� N 'in 'A;f oxz.E<xo os,s.E `emu W E AGRONOMIC SOILS REPOST �. — —_— — --- ___ �uEcoxruwusson,vox E,xEx "£• TREE ooiBARR ER RISE—Bro BARRIER: x�p"sosOxuumnmMio wirwPox�o�iaws mx�io, ' © � w.cmxsruu nsruLm¢noorawuEwma W. LOST RAPIDS DRIVE BRANDON PETRUNIO&ASSOCIATESINC. „, PLAN VIEW su:E, �aa ..ox x�srweuEr.aururm�oxs�re v`A nasL IN-N-OUT BURGER CITY ENTITLEMENT E.,,,�.yin D—LGPER INN euBBER mod:ri R.. M �J EN�GINEEIN G,INC E Fog 5985 AND fi037 N.TEN MILE ROAD MBDAGEBaNE g 1 1 j�� � MERIDIAN,ID33B4fi LANDSCAPE PLANTING E UEE IN-N-OUT ��, �, PLAN LPP.1 _BURGER PNpue.eza e,as.,� �,s.r� .O.x,r Exhibit C - Updated Queuing Observations May 2025 Table A Summary of May 2025 In-N-Out Burger Drive Through Queue Surveys Observed Queue Length(Vehicles) Mid-Week Lunch Mid-Week Dinner Saturday Lunch Saturday Dinner Survey Site Period(11a-2p) Period(5-8p) Period(11a-2p) Period(5-8p) Boise Average 18 18 20 25 85th Percentile 23 22 28 32 95th Percentile 25 24 30 33 Maximum 27 30 32 35 Meridian Average 17 22 20 30 85th Percentile 22 28 24 32 95th Percentile 25 31 26 33 Maximum 29 33 28 34 Nampa Average 16 17 14 23 85th Percentile 19 20 18 30 95th Percentile 20 23 21 32 Maximum 21 28 24 35 Source:Surveys conducted on Thursday,May 1,2025 and Saturday May 3,2025. g7dii A OAI w. El W1 0 W2E .ox so w wx saso z m..O M F s —Ij IF SlE M 0 OA2 @90 A Statistics Description Symbol Avg Max Min Max/Min Avg/Min Off Site CaIcs + 0.1 fc 0.4 fc 0.0 fc N/A I N/A ISITE LIGHTING I + 1 3.9 fc 1 9.3 fc 1 0.0 fc I N/A I N/A BUILDING LIGHTS + 11.3 fc 28.6 fc 0.6 fc 47.7:1 8-J Exhibit E OPERATIONAL NOISE STUDY IN-N-OUT BURGER RESTAURANT PROJECT 5985 and 6037 N. Ten Mile Road Meridian, Idaho 83646 PREPARED BY: eridian 860 Hampshire Road,Suite P Westlake Village,CA 91361 Consultants www.meridianconsultantsllc.com MAY 202 5