Loading...
SP 77-08"-7 e y` �r ay ,s F v `/September 2, 1976 J' ±° 5P 7-7-d 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 Mr. Roger Stein 870 Pandora Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn. 55432 Fe: Second Accessory Building Dear Mr. Stein: TELEPHONE ( 612)571-3450 It has been brought to my attention that you are using your attached garage which faces Pandora Drive for parking vehicles. I have enclosed a copy of the building permit for your second garage which stipulates that you use the attached garage for storage only. I might add that the permit stipulates U at you remove the driveway facing Pandora Drive. Your neighbors agreed to waive a public hearing for a Special Use Permit with the understanding that the original garage would be for only storage (see attached photo copy). This item has apparently been overlooked since your garage was constructed in 1972. Would you please remove the driveway facing Pandora Drive and replace it with sod within a -reasonable time. If for some reason you feel you need to continue using the original garage as a garage, you may apply for a Special Use Permit for a second accessory building. This request is subject to the review and approval of the Planning Commission and the City Council. Our office will inspect the premises on or about October 28, 1976 to check for compliance. If you have any questions or difficulty in complying by this time, please call me or stop into City Hall to discuss this. Any questions concerning curb repair should be directed to Mr. Tom Colbert, Assistant City Engineer. Sincerely, RONALD HOLDEN Building Inspection Officer EH/mh ENC: 2 CC: Mr. Mr. Darrel Clark Tom Colbert PROPOSED: SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL RV,QUEST: Special use permit for a second accessory building. This permit will not require any additional construction. It would only allow the present hard surface drive off Pandora Dr. to remain. This originally was stipulated to be removed on the building permit. The garage door will remain as is in either case. The property owner can drive overlawn and use garage for car storage in either case!.! HOMEOWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF 870 PANDORA ADDRESS HOMEOWNERS APPROVAL DATE 860 Rice Creek Terrace 880 890 ,► ►� S 3 �7 910 .2 928 830 Pandora Drivei:.1?% 7 840 ►' " Wm®r) Z 12 , 841 -77 850 860 " 861 870 871 881 891 900 c*vei?%/o 901 PA Al&r?41 - %�.,, • ,11j I 910 911 830 Overton Drive �� y �� % ;���/ r; 2.'? '!� -meq e= 841 It 850 851 860 ,i it %.✓ - -� -77 861 " it '900 PX>V44A 921 0 560.3450 Cit Of 17rdleY ANOKA COUNTY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NE January 11, 1977 FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 Mr. Roger Stene 870 Pandora Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn. 55432 Rei Second Accessory Building Dear Mr. Stene: Thank you for your letter about your plans to sell your house. Please inform any prospective buyers to direct their questions regarding the driveway to our office. We will extend the action on this item until June 1, 1977, at which time we will expect that either you or the new owner will have begun one of the three alternatives mentioned in your letter. These -alternatives are; 1. Remove the present driveway. 2. Apply for a special use permit for a second accessory building. 3. Obtain a building permit to convert the garage into living area. (This would also require a side yard variance.) Sincerely, C` RONALD E. HOLDEN Building Inspector REH/mh CC: Dick Sobiech City of Fridley, Nnn. 6431 University Ave. N.E., Minneapolis, Minn. 55432 BURDMG PERMIT Date: Maw 26, 1972 Owner: _Roger__C.._ Stene Builder - Vmv-14n A— . -cd -Address __._...8.70_.Pandora Drive N.E, Address LOCATION OF BUILDING No. -87_Q Street ._P.andara Driy_e______ Part of Lot Lot Block _5 __ ____.._. Addition or Sub -Division _ Rrn n Corner Lot _..._,X Inside Lot Setback Sideyard Sewer Elevation To be Used as: Foundation Elevation __.._. DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING .-Ga r -age- Front 28' Depth —8t Height _10_ Sq. Ft. —804 Cu. Ft. Front Depth Height Sq. Ft. Cu. Ft. Type of Construction �_ Frame _ Eat Cost .— 3.6.42.12 To be Completed — 1 year Stipulations: Property owner guarantees existing house is 30 feet from the property line on the east side and with the proposed construction it would be 26 feet from the property line. He would allow the City to go on his property and remove the tree if the City puts in a storm sewer to drain Pandora and Able- She g=gr, agrees o removg the driseway to the existing garage onto Pandora and sod the area and onlv use the existing garage for storage. Provide a hard surface drive to the proposed garage. In consideration of the issuance to me of a permit to construct the building des above I agree tq do the proposed work in accordance with the description above set fob and in compli� all provisions of ordinances of the city of Fridley. i 1.82 State In consideration of the payment of a fee of $ ] 5 - 04 , permit is hereby granted to M7:._ Roger Stene to construct the building or addition as described above. This permit is granted upon, the express condition that the person to whom it is granted and his agents, employees and workmen, in all work done in, around and upon said building, or any part thereof, shall conform in all respects •to the ordinances of Fridley, Minnesota regarding location, construction, alteration, maintenance, repair and moving of buildings `Within the city limits and this permit may be revoked at any time upon violation of any of the provisions of said ordinances. ding inspector CLARENCE BELISLE NOTICE: This permit does not cover the construction, installation for wiring, plumbing, gas heating, sewer or water. Be sure to see Rho Building Inspector for separate permits for these items. 41 We, the undersigned property owners, of the area around Pandora and Able Street, hereby waive the requirement for a public hearing and approve the plans of Mr. Roger C. Stene, 870 Pandora, to build an attached garage, 28 feet by 28 feet, facing Able Street and using the existing garage as a storage area. "')162"ka _ September 2, 1976 kaw 8431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY. MINNESOTA 55432 TELEPHONE (812)571-3450 Mr. Roger Stein 870 Pandora Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn. 55432 Re: Second Accessory Building Dear Mr. Stein: It has been brought to my attention that you are using your attached garage which faces Pandora Drive for parking vehicles. I have enclosed a copy of t�he�building permit for your second garage which stipulates that you use the attached garage for storage only. I might add that the permit stipulates that you remove the driveway facing Pandora Drive, Your neighbors agreed to waive a public hearing for a Special Use Permit with the understanding that the original garage would be for only storage (see attached photo copy). This item has apparently beeli overlooked since your garage was constructed in 1972. Would you please remove the driveway facing Pandora Drive and replace it with sod within a reasonable time. If for some reason you feel you need to continue using the original garage as a garage, you may apply for a Special Use Permit for a second accessory building. This request is subject to the revieir and -approval of the Planning Commission and the City Council. Our office will inspect the premises on or about October 28, 1976 to check for compliance.. If you have any questions or difficulty in complying by this time, please call me or stop into City Hall to discuss this. Any questions concerning curb repair should be directed to Mr. Tom Colbert, Assistant City Engineer. Sincerely, RONALD HOLDEN C Building Inspection Officer Fri/mh ENC: 2 , CC: Mr. Darrel Clark Mr. Tom Colbert ' , t ' •C 1. 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 November 24, 1976 Mn. Roger Stein 870 Pandora Dfiive No,thea6t 1=r.idtey, Minnesota 55432 Re: Second Aeces.so,.y Bui&ting Veac Mn. Stein: TELEPHONE ( 612)571-3450 Nea ty three month6 have passedsince I wrote to you on Septem- ber. 2nd, regarding the %emovat o4 your driveway. At that time, I asked you to either remove you,. driveway (a condition o6 the Bui eding Permit jor youA second garage in 1972) , or appty Son a Special Use Permit 6or a .second accessory bui tiling . you were requested to either reptaee the dni.veway with .sod with- in a reasonabte. gime (by October. 28, 1976), or make proper appti,- cation as mentioned. It is now November 24th, and I beet that ampbe time has been a2Cowed to eompty. Would you ptea6e contact our o66 ice within ten (10) days and .in- 6orm us o S which route you choose to pu us ue. Sincene.2y, zoa F RONALD E. HOLDEN Buitding In6pec tion 066.icer REH:.ik cc: Richard Sobiech Darer Ctank i T uR. Rcgej: SteAn .' ✓ #70 Pandcna flAive Nontheaat F►u.dtei4,* Minnezota 55432 Re: Se�cnd. Acceaacity &ifoling Leat Mk. Stein Neatty thnee mc►ttha have pasted e.i.nce I waote to you o is � n best 2rd, neganding ,the ne,no ,at o6 yc m drt iveway. At t"v, , I asked you to ei-thet nemovwe ycu4 dtivemvy (a. conditio o6 .the BuijcUng Permit Aon yeut aecond gc:tage in 19172), of ap y Set. a �L Spec.iat We Pe.Amit 6jn. a eecoM accea4oAy build�.ng. You wAe nequea.ted .to eithn.:teplaee the dnivemaay with God with- ii a sea sonabte tim l by OctobeA 28, 1976) , o!t woke pet appti.- -.;; cation as mentioned. It is row Notembet. 24th, and I So el that ample time has been attomd to comply. Wcutd you pteaae contact oux c66.ice within tem (10) and ;in- �- Sincenety,' RONALD E. HOLVEN &,itding Inape tion 066ic.ek REH:tk cc: Wchartd Seb.iech Aannet Oank oma. I December 31, 1976 City of Fridley 6431 University Ave. N. E. Fridley, Minn. 55432 Re: Second AccessorrBuilding Dear Mr. Holden: Do to certain conditions pertinent to our family, our home,will be put up for sale shortly. When I list the home I will make it clear to the Prospective Mls listing agent that the buyer will have these alternatives. 1 - Remove present driveway 2 - Apply for a special use permit for a second accessory building 3 - Contact Frildey City Hall regarding conversion of second accessory building into additional living space. Sincerely, Roger C. Stene RCS/is '560-3450 citcyOf ridle ANOKA COUNTY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NE January 11, 1977 FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 Mr. Roger Stene 870 Pandora Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn. 55432 Re: Second Accessory Building Dear Mr. Stene: Thank you for your letter about your plans to sell your house. Please inform any prospective buyers to direct their questions regarding the driveway to our office. We will extend the action on this item until June 1, 1977, at which time we will expect that either you or the new owner will have begun one of the three alternatives mentioned in your letter. These alternatives are; 1. Remove the present driveway. 2. Apply for a special use permit for a second accessory building. 3. Obtain a building permit to convert the garage into living area. (This would also require a side yard variance.) Sincerely, RONALD E. HOLDEN Building Inspector PMVmh m Dick Sobiech MEMO TO: Richard Sobiech MEMO FROM: Ron Holden, Building Inspector MEMO DATE: May 4, 1977 REGARDING: Existing 2nd Accessory Building at 870 Pandora Drive N.E. (Roger Steen -Owner) I have made several attempts in the past year to settle the problem of an existing unapproved 2nd accessory building (attached garage) at 870 Pandora Drive. The owner, Mr. Roger Stene, has been difficult to contact at times, but always has returned my calls and correspondence. Recently, Mr. Stene was given a list of neighbors who would be contacted if he were to pursue the Special Use Permit alternative. He hoped to "test the sentiment" of the neighbors affected before applying. Over two months have elapsed since he was given the list and he hasn't made application to date. I called and left word with him to contact me. I drove by and took a picture as a record for the file that the driveway has not been removed to date. (Removal of the driveway was the other alternative given to Mr. Stene.) -�2 )44, RON HOLDEN Building Inspector RH/mh 49� �Jloi� HMO TO: 0 Darrel Clark 0 Hank Muhich 0 1 Bagstad 4,es Chesney 0. 7 SUBJECT: MW NO.: HATE 3 MMO FROK; Nasim M. Qureshi City Engineer -Director of Planning SIGNATURE DATE SIGMTURZ QLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — JULY 131 1977 Page 9 e Ms. Gabel showed concern for the elevation of the house in relation to the proposed deck/patio• She wanted to know if it would encroach on the neighbor's privacy. Mrs. Evans explained that they weren't really close enough to anyone to encroach on their privacy. Ms. Gabel asked what the dimensions were of the lot. Mr• Boardman indicated that the lot was 165 feet from the back lot line to Benjamin Street. Mr• Bergman wanted to know what Mr• Evans planned to do with all the buildings — single car garage and oversized double garage. Mr• Evans indicated he had two cars, one boat, two snowmobiles, and other normal miscellaneous items that needed storage• MOTION by Mr• Peterson, seconded by Ms• Gabel, to close the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. The Public Hearing was closed at 9:00 P.M. MOTION by Mr. Peterson, seconded by Mr• Storla, that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council the approval of the request for a Special Use Permit, SP 477-07, Andrew R• Evans: Per Section 205.051, 2A, of the Fridley City Code, to allow the construction of a second accessory building, a 271, x 24" attached garage, on the East 167 feet of Lot 7, Auditors's Subdivision No. 92, the same being 6040 Benjamin Street N•E• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• 3. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP t77-08, ROGER STEVE: For retaining the use of both existing attached garages, and.to permit an existing drive to his original 12-1/2 ft x 22 ft garage to remain as is, per Fridley City Code, Section 205-051, 2, A, *, located on Lot 1, Block 5, Brookview Terrace Third Addition, the same being 870 Pandora Drive N.E. *Please note that when the permit for a second attached garage was issued on May 26, 1972, it was stipulated that the driveway to the original garage be removed, and the original garage be used just for storage. MOTION by Mr• Bergman, seconded by Ms. Gabel, to open the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. The Public Hearing was opened at 9:04 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — JULY 13, 1977 Page 10 Mr. Boardman pointed out that the main thing that should be brought out was that in 1972, when a Permit was granted to build an additional garage in the rear yard, it had been stipulated that the original driveway was to be removed and the area filled in and landscaped. The permit also stipulated that the original garage was to be used for storage only. He went on to explain that the petitioner was now before the Planning Commission for a Special Use Permit that would enable him to use both garages and both driveways. Mr. Stene explained to the Planning Commission that he was aware of the fact that'he hadn't complied with the stipulations of the Building Permit that had been granted in 1972. He told them that his original intent, when he built the new garage was that he planned to put a print shop in his home. He said that since that time he had almost gone.out of the Printing business and he doesn't plan to finish the original garage into a workshop as he had previously intended to do. He said that now he preferred to use the original garage as storage for material he sells out of his home. He indicated that the material is drop shipped at his home from the Manufacturer. Mr. Stene went on to explain that the City had advised him of the violation four days after he had parked his third new car in the original garage. He talked to Ron Holden of Fridley City Hall to find out what he had to do to resolve the problem. He said he had been informed by City Hall that he would have to apply for a Special Use Permit in order to legally continue using the original garage/driveway. He quoted to the Commission exactly what he had been told by City Hall: "Request for Special Use Permit for second accessory building. This permit will not require any additional construction. It would only allow the present hard surface drive off of Pandora Drive to remain. This was originally stipulated to be removed on the Building Permit. The garage door would remain as is in either case. The property owner can drive over the lawn and use the garage for car storage in either case." Mr. Stene showed the Planning Commission a copy he had of the original Building Permit. He also presented a petition that had been signed by his adjacent neighbors approving of his current intention. He indicated that only two of the neighbors wouldn't sign the petition, one was an employee of the City and he was not permitted to sign the petition and the other person lived directly behind Mr. Stene and he had refused to sign. Mr. Stene showed the Planning Commission a picture of his house as it currently appeared- He informed the Commission of all the articles he needed all the additional space for — three cars, two boats, six bicycles, snowblower, lawn mower, and other miscellaneous items. He said he really wanted to be able to park all his cars inside rather than having them parked outside. He cited many incidents of vandalism that had occurred in the past years. He said he had had at least $5,000 worth of vandalism done, primarily to his vehicles. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING = JULY 131 1977 Page 11 Mr. Langenfeld pointed out that Mr. Stene had been required to remove the driveway to the original garage in 1972 and that he had not removed it. He wanted to know if by this request Mr. Stene was trying to make right his violation. Chairperson Harris said that he felt the intent of Mr. Stene was to rectify the violation. Mr. Stene said that he wanted to be at peace with the neighbors and with the City"and that he was willing to do whatever was necessary to rectify the matter. He especially wanted to have some type of peace with the neighborhood in hopes that possibly some of the vandalism would stop. Mr. Bergman wanted to know if Mr. Stene planned to leave the garages exactly as they were. Mr• Stene said that there would be no construction involved: Mr. Langenfeld wanted to know why Mr. Stene had posts in his front yard. Mr. Stene indicated that after having ten "yard jobs" done last year he decided to have the posts installed. He -said that it had cost him close to $1,500 to repair damages done by the ^yard jobs". He said he felt better {and safer} having the posts present. He indicated that he took pride in keeping his yard nice and he couldn't figure out why someone wanted to keep ruining it. He said that he had even had his Home Owner's Insurance dropped by one Company because of the unusual amount of damages and vandalism claims they had to cover. Ms. Gabel wanted to know what type of business Mr. Stene was operating out of his house. Mr. Stene indicated that he sold ink rolls. He said he had put a print shop in his basement and operated it for 12 years. He said when he had put the second garage on, the original garage was primarily used as an access to the Printing Shop, plus storage. With his decision to take a new course of employment, Mr. Stene decided on the particular course of employment of selling ink rolls. He said that he did have to keep some inventory but that the total space utilized in his house was an area 1-112 feet by six feet. He indicated that he would primarily use the garages for storage. He said that he wouldn't be using the garage as any business venture. He indicated that there would be no workshop or office put into the garage. He said he would basically use the garages as storage for his personal belongings. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — JULY 13, 1977 Pace 12 Mr. Langenfeld asked if Mr. Stene stored goods for resale in his house. Mr. Stene estimated that he stored approximately *750 — $1,000 worth of inventory.for resale in his house. Mr. Langenfeld wanted to know why Mr. Stene had not done'as the stipulations had required. Mr. Stene said that he had not been prepared to finish the original garage at the time he built the additional garage. He said that there seemed to be too many other things that seemed more pertinent to him than removing the existing driveway. He said that he wasn't sure of which direction he planned to go with his future and since he had decided against having the workshop, he just never got around -to removing the driveway. MOTION by Mr. Peterson, seconded by Ms. Gabel, to close the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. The Public Hearing was closed at 9:22 P.M. Mr. Langenfeld read the definition of a Home Occupation that came out of the Code Book 205.02 because he felt that the Commission first had to determine if a home occupation did exist. Chairperson Harris indicated that at present there was a business in existence; however, he was not sure if there had been a business venture in the past. MOTION by Mr. Bergman, seconded by Mr. Peterson, that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council the approval of the Request for a Special Use Permit, SP 177-08, Roger Stene: For retaining the use of both existing attached garages, and to permit an existing drive to his original 12-1/2 ft by 22 ft garage to remain as is, per Fridley City Code, Section 205.051, 2, A, located on Lot 1, Block 5, Brookview Terrace Third Addition, the same being 870 Pandora Drive N.E. Mr. Bergman said that even though Mr. Stene had been in violation of a previous Building Permit, he felt that Mr. Stene had a reasonable request. Mr. Langenfeld wanted to know if there was any ordinance to curtail home operations. Mr. Stene said that he had been confronted at the time that a semi -truck had jack-knifed in that intersection. He had been told at that time that a home operation/business would not get involved in anything involving color TV, nothing that involved a lot of traffic The pointed out that Beauty Shops did not violate -the ordinance and that for sure his business did not generate as much traffic as a beauty shop}, and that a home business could not result in any offensive noise to the neighborhood. He said that any construction equipment had to be stored in an enclosed building and that an 18 x 24 sign was allowed but could not be directly lighted. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — JULY 13, 1977 Page 13 Mr. Langenfeld asked if any insurance company had denied him coverage because of his home operation- Mr. peration. Mr• Stene said that he had never been cancelled by an insurance company because of his home business. He said that his business was not even large enough to require a fire extinguisher. He said that he indeed had fire extinguishers, but he did so mainly for his own safety and peace of mind. Mr. Stene apologized to the Commission for not compling with the previous permit. UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously - 4. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP 177-09, SHERWOOD JORDAHL: Per Section 205.051, 3D, of the Fridley City Code, to allow the construction of a double bungalow in R-1 zoning {single family dwelling units}, on Lot 6,v Block 2, Spring Valley Addition, the same being 1441-1443 Rice Creek Road N.E. MOTION by Mr. Peterson, seconded by Ms. Gabel, to open the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. The Public Hearing was opened at 9:33 P.M. Mr. Boardman indicated that the petitioner was requesting a Special Use Permit to enable him to build a double bungalow on an oversized R-1 zoned lot. He said that the petitioner met all the code requirements as far as lot size, etc. but that he needed the Special Use Permit to allow a double bungalow on a R-1 lot. Mr. Jordahl showed the Planning Commission a plan of the double bungalow indicating a few changes that had been decided since the drawing up of the plan. Mr. Peterson asked if Mr. Jordahl would be living in part of the double bungalow. Mr. Jordahl indicated that he would be living in part of the proposed double bungalow. Mr. Herbert Hart of 1450 -64th Avenue NE voiced definite objection to the constructing of a double bungalow on that lot. He said he had brought his house five years prior after spending previous years in a double bungalow. He didn't like the idea of the constant turnover that went with rental property. He said that too many times people rent the property that are basically undesirable. He felt that rental property completely surrounded by single family dwellings was a bad idea. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — JULY 13, 1977 Page 14 Mr. Langenfeld asked if Mr. Hart was still in objection if the double bungalow was owner occupied. Mr.Hart said that owner occupied would be better but that he still opposed. In answer to an inquiry from the audience, Mr. Jordahl said that the double bungalow would be in the $90,000 range. He said that there would be approximately 1,000 square feet on each floor. Ms. Karla Larson of 7528-75 Ave NE pointed out that a $90,000 home would have to indicate that a reasonably stable family would have to live in the other part of the double bungalow since the rent would have to be in an awfully high bracket. Chairperson Harris wanted to know if all the property in the area had been developed or built on. Mr. Boardman explained what existed near the lot in question. He went on to discuss where all the homes near the lot in question were located. Mr. Bergman asked if Mr. Jordahl owned the property. Mr. Jordahl said that he did own the property. Mr. Langenfeld asked if Mr. Jordahl planned to make the double bungalow his permanent residence. Mr. Jordahl said that he hoped to make the house his permanent residence. He said that he and his family liked the area and that they would like to be able to builda home that would help pay for itself. Chairperson Harris asked if it would be feasible for Mr. Jordahl to build a single-family dwelling. Mr. Jordahl said that he wanted to build a double bungalow and did not want to have to,consider building a.single-family dwelling. Mr. Langenfeld wanted to know if it would cause Mr.. Jordahl an economical hardship if the request was denied. Mr. Jordahl indicated that it probably wouldn't cause an economical hardship but he felt.it would be easier and better if the request was granted. 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 TELEPHONE ( 612)571-3450 August 2, 1977 4, '> Roger Stene 870 Pandora Drive N.E. Fridley, Mn 55432 Dear Mr. Stene CITY COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN NOTICE RE: SP #77-08 On July 25, 1977 the Fridley City Council officially approved your request for a Special Use Permit with the stipulations listed below. Please review the noted stipulations; sign the statement below, and return one copy to the City of Fridley. If you have -any questions regarding the above action, please call the Community Deti�e loprrE�rri Office ce a t 5%'i 3450. JLDJde Sti pr.ilati ons: None Sincerely, �L— RROLD L B 'ARDMAN CITY PLANNER Concur with action taken. We, the undersigned property owners, of the area around Pandora and Able Street, hereby waive the requirement for a public hearing and approve the plans of Mr. Roger C. Stene, 870 Pandora, to build an attached garage, 28 feet by 28 feet, facing Able Street and using the existing garage as a storage area. Oo d� qO Wh.. <)' j 0 C57 C?o 0 - f �� I - � V-)') - lc� 7f d�er J`o-, � A Z- &/ Pan. SOA 4,44, a