Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mitchell board denies outside-storage permit for Josh Frost, approves limited auto-repair with conditions
Summary
After neighbors and council members raised visual, safety and compliance concerns, the Board of Adjustment denied Josh Frost’s Conditional Use Permit for outside storage but approved a separate permit for limited automotive repair conditioned on a fenced area, a five-vehicle cap and cleanup before operations begin.
The Mitchell Board of Adjustment on (date not specified in the record) denied a Conditional Use Permit application from resident Josh Frost to use his property at 2499/4400 and Sixth Avenue for personal outside storage, but approved a separate application to allow limited automotive sales and repair with explicit conditions.
Neighbors and several council members told the board Frost’s site resembled a junkyard and raised public-safety concerns — including fuel, barrels and combustible materials — and criticized a plan to park semi-trailers as a visual screen. Planning staff characterized the filing as personal outside storage only, not commercial storage or towing; a prior towing business had been relocated, staff said. Frost told the board he planned a cold-storage building and said he would “do whatever you guys want” if the council required a fence. He acknowledged he did not have photos of cleanup at the hearing.
Councilmembers pressed Frost for measurable progress since a prior meeting. One councilmember said he could not support the outside-storage request because it failed to meet neighborhood standards. After discussion, Goldhammer moved to deny the outside-storage permit; the motion carried.
Separately, the board considered Frost’s application to operate automotive sales/repair and detailing at the same address. Staff explained the towing business would not remain at that location but that limited repair activity (oil changes and work on a few vehicles) would still require a conditional use permit. Council debated options including requiring a fence, limiting the number of vehicles staged for repair, and setting a timetable for neighbors to review progress.
A motion to approve the automotive permit carried with conditions requiring: construction of a fenced-in area; no more than five cars at a time in the fenced area for work; and that the permit would not go into effect until Frost brought the property into compliance with outside-storage rules. Staff said noncompliance would be handled through standard enforcement procedures, including cease-and-desist notices.
The board also discussed using a six-month or one-year follow-up to review compliance and invited staff to attach enforceable conditions to any permit. The action record in the transcript shows the board denied the outside-storage permit and later approved the automotive permit with the conditions described above.
What happens next: The conditions must be met before the automotive operations may begin; council and staff may revisit the permit if the site falls out of compliance.
