Commission denies contractor storage yard application after board had denied related mining permit

5855658 · August 11, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The planning commission denied a conditional use permit for a contractor storage yard without prejudice after the county board denied a related mining permit Aug. 5; staff recommended denial without prejudice to allow future temporary storage applications.

The commission on Aug. 11 voted to deny conditional use permit COCU25‑0012 for a contractor storage yard on property owned by Mule Ear LLC because the related mining permit (CMP25‑00001) had been denied by the Board of County Commissioners on Aug. 5.

Senior planner Cody Sachs informed the commission the mining permit had been denied with prejudice on Aug. 5. Staff recommended denial of the contractor storage yard application without prejudice, reasoning that contractor storage yards are typically temporary and the applicant could reapply in the future if another eligible project required on‑site equipment storage.

A commissioner moved to deny COCU25‑0012 without prejudice; the motion was seconded and the voice vote carried. Staff explained that a denial without prejudice allows the same application to be filed again, with the applicant responsible for advertising and mailing fees and neighbor notification. The commission recorded the denial and noted the board’s earlier decision on the mining permit.

What happens next: Because the denial on the mining permit was with prejudice at the Board level, the property’s ability to host a related mining operation is restricted; the contractor storage yard application is denied without prejudice, allowing reapplication in the event of another, different temporary project within the year.