Laserfiche WebLink
Hugo Planning Commission <br />January 259 1978 <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />JAMES BREVIG - cont. <br />Mr. Brevig stated a list of the many things he would be storing in the proposed <br />building, including many antique automobiles, personal autos, one 28' tandem car <br />trailer, one 20' tandem car trailer, and one camping trailer 281. Peltier quoted <br />ordinance 320-3(881) stating the maximum length of a recreational trailer is 200. <br />Mr. Peloquin considered the problems that could occur if Mr. Brevig decided to <br />sell. <br />Motion made by McAllister, seconded <br />recommend denial of the application <br />construct a 50 x 100 pole barn. Let <br />Commission review of these specific <br />1. 320-3, Bl <br />2, 320-3, B38 <br />3, 320-3, B81 <br />4. 320-4. F2 & 3 <br />5. 320-7. Subd C <br />by Peloquin, that the Planning Commission <br />by Mr. James Brevig for a Special Use Permit to <br />the record show the motion is based on Planning <br />zoningi t77 <br />- 1 : <br />> r -av <br />320-3.B1(paragraph 1) - The Planning Commission does not feel the building meets <br />purposes customarily incidental to those of the principal <br />building. <br />(paragraph 2) A use subordinate to the main use of the land. We don't <br />feel that it is customarily incidental thereto. <br />320-3.B38 - self explanatory <br />320-3.881 - We do not find antique autos listed in that section, and Mr. Brevig's <br />camper exceeds the 20' length limit specified <br />320-4. F2 & 3 - self explanatory <br />320-7. Subd C - self explanatory <br />Please refer to the Ordinance Committee report of January 100 1978 <br />Gillen stated that the Special Use Permit is for the building and not the hobby. <br />Greger said he would rather see a building that would blend in with the area. <br />Mr. Brevig stated that LaValle Excavating uses the same roads he would be using, <br />and that he had signed signatures from adjoining property owners stating their <br />approval of the building. Peloquin said that petitions have very little bearing <br />on the matter. <br />Motion made by Peloquin, seconded by McAllister, to amend the motion to include the <br />following: <br />1. Mr,.,Bmig already has a house and garage. <br />2. "a building is considered an accessory building. <br />3. A building of this size is not compatible to the area. <br />4. A building othis size should be in a commercial or industrial zone. <br />5. Could cause e traffic problem with additional comings and goings in resi- <br />dential area. <br />6. If at any time P use of this property ceases, the outcome could not <br />be controlled. <br />