Test one, two, three. >> Good evening. Welcome to the Reier Zoning Board of Appeals meeting for November 19th. Could we all rise and salute the flag, please? To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it
stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Roll call of the members. Mr. Lemina >> here. Mr. Lopes is absent. Mr. O'Brien >> here >> here. Mr. Pelton >> here. Miss Pratt alternate member
>> here. And Chairman Tucker >> here. >> Here. Quorum is present. One item on tonight's agenda. That's the application of Jonathan Hartman, 78 Woodland Road, requesting a variance of section 1716260F1, that no accessory structure shall occupy
more than 10% of the rear yard to enable the appellant to raise the existing garage and construct a 24T x 26 ft two-car garage at 78 Woodland Road. >> Good evening, council. State your name and address for the record, please.
Uh, good evening, chairman and members of the board. My name is Nancy O'Neal. I am an attorney located at 14 Proctor Avenue, and I represent the applicant in this matter, Mr. Jonathan Hartman of 87 Woodland Road. As set out in the applicant support letter of uh November
12th, 2026, which I hereby incorporate by reference into this uh presentation, the applicant is proposing uh the reconstruction of the existing freestanding garage structure on the property uh so that the structure uh may be modernized. Uh and I have an image here of the
currently existing uh garage. So the proposal is to remove um the stated garage structure and replace it with a slightly larger garage that would support uh the storage of two passenger vehicles. I am aware that there is uh some concern that commercial vehicles uh
would be placed in the garage. That is not the case. Uh this garage would be utilized uh for everyday uh passenger vehicles. So this is a very simple and non-impactful uh proposal. So the existing garage uh has a footprint of 13 1/2 ft uh by approximately 21 1/2 ft.
The proposed garage uh would have dimensions of uh 24x 26 ft with the expanded portion of the garage uh being located within uh the existing rear line uh of the structure which I can show you here. uh it would be located between the
existing rear portion of the garage structure uh and uh the rear of the 78 Woodland Road structure. Uh so this footprint was deliberately uh designed to minimize the impact on adjacent properties. uh the proposed height of
the garage 15 feet as well as the proposed setback of the garage rear setback of the garage which is 7 uh.4 ft are allowed by the ordinance. So the impact of the garage on adjacent properties is minimal. The requested variance relates to rear lot coverage of
the reconstructed garage. Um and this added coverage has been purposefully cited uh towards the 78 Woodland Road uh residents to minimize impact on neighbors. Uh so in summary, the request tonight is to reconstruct uh an existing aged garage and replace it with an
attractive functional structure that has been specially designed and cited uh to minimize neighborhood impacts. So this new structure will improve appearance of the property, restore the function of the existing garage structure and increase off- streetet parking available in the neighborhood uh which would in
turn uh reduce parking congestion. Oftentimes I come before uh this board to request a reduction in parking requirements. I'm doing the opposite here tonight. Uh the request is to add a new off- streetet parking uh an increased parking availability and for these reasons we would respectfully
request uh that the variance is granted and we're happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. >> Thank you. Seeing that this is a public hearing, I will ask are there any proponents? Anyone in favor
kindly step up to the microphone, state your name and address for the record, please. There you go. >> I'm not too good with the uh technology. Uh my name is John Barrett. I uh live at U 34 Woodland Road. I've been in the
same house there for 78 years. I know um all of the um abutters in the area. Um I uh am the builder of record if um if this goes through and uh if you have any
questions that um you know you may need that are technical I can I can answer them. I just wanted to um u uh say that uh I am in favor of the building of the garage. Thank you. >> Thank you. Are there any other
proponents? Seeing and hearing none, I'll close that side of the hearing. Are there any opponents? Anyone opposed? >> Hello. >> Good evening. State your name and address for the record, please. >> My name is Carol Healey. I live at 51 Flint Street.
And uh I do want to say I have known the Hartman family for many years. we've always gotten along. Um there's never been any issue as far as the proposed structure that they want to build. I don't think it's congruent with the
neighborhood. It's oversized and we do know that because it was it's on appeal. Um the the structure would literally go from the property at 78 Woodland because it's
there's renters there from that house to my house. There would be no green space. It would just be building building building. It would just be one row of buildings, house, garage, house. And I
also um have concerns about the the um oil trucks if there is possib possibility of an oil truck parking there. The other issue I have is that the um
it's it's very close to my home and I think the there was mention of the height but I don't know if that height of that structure was from the bottom to the point of the roof but I'm because I'm not a proponent of the structure at
all. I wouldn't mind if Mr. department wanted to fix his current garage, update that and modernize that with with the figures with the dimensions that it has cuz that I think is grandfathered in. It's oversized as is. But I am against
this new structure and I do have some pictures myself. I don't know how I would show. >> Are the pictures any different than what they presented with the >> Yes. >> Okay. There's pictures of where it would
actually be. His house and my house and the lot of land we're talking about. It would just be a row of construction. There would be no green space. I don't know because sometimes it's difficult to picture something with dimensions rather than seeing the actual
um buildings. >> Okay. There are two pictures for the lot that's adjacent to his house on Woodland Road that do not pertain to this. >> No, I I put those pictures in because that's where the tenants park. That's a
lot that he owns which is 60 by 80 ft. So, >> okay, >> there's parking, plenty of parking there. That which brings me to the other point. He's not adding parking. He's taking away parking because it's going
to be a two foot a two twocar garage. So there's no parking then in from that structure to the corner and you cannot park a car in the driveway. That was also a letter from Mr. Damrosio that you
would be able to park a car in the driveway. The driveway is going to be 9 ft. A a car is bigger than 9 feet. A compact car is longer than 9 ft. So there's it's not a it's not a uh benefit to the neighborhood for parking uh the
way it it's there's just not a benefit except to to um the Hartman family. They don't live there. They rent it out. There's no reason to have a twocar garage there. >> Okay. Anything else?
>> Not that I can think of. >> Are there any other prep um opponents? Anyone else opposed? Kindly step up to the and state your name and address. >> Uh Richard Healey, 51 Flynn Street. I'm the owner of record on the property. Um
the the garage as proposed is it's it's too low. If you look at it and you look at the pictures that were submitted, the two trees that are on the pictures, the garage goes almost from tree to tree. So you're
basically losing a large amount of property. the house that is behind the house that's on the opposite side of the street which is the Flynn's house. I know they'll probably have difficult if this if there were any cars there like parked in front which is kind of the way
that they're saying maybe on the on the current on the driveway that is proposed she would have difficulty backing out of her yard anyways. Um but it's just the proposed structure is if I'm right on the dimensions is 624 square ft. The
current structure is 273 square feet. So it's not that they're proposing a slight increase in square footage. That's more than twice the size. So and that whole neighborhood is it's summer cottages.
It's like a you know it's a kind of small family neighborhood, summer cottages, whatever. And you're talking about putting in a structure that will basically, as Carol said, go from it would be house on the corner, building in the middle, house on the other
corner. So there's no it it would just be like it'd be pretty tight. So you're talking, you know, more like uh East Boston housing versus Oak Island housing. Um, and the the foundation
is the foundation of the of the proposed structure is actually wider than the foundation of Carol's House. I mean, it's it's a bigger it's a pretty large structure what they're talking about. So, that's that's all I have to say. Thank
you. >> Are there any other opponents? Please step up to the mic. State your name and address for the record, please. Good evening everybody. >> Good evening. >> I I'm here twofold. One, >> name and address for the record. First,
>> Patricia Galuchcci, 11 Putnham Road, Rever Master. >> Thank you. >> I'm here on behalf of my sister who was the director Butter coming out of the garage. if they were backing out, they
would have to back towards her driveway and pull out. So, she signed a letter with her in a letter. >> Unfortunately, we could not accept a letter now because it has to be a week in advance as the per the policies. If
she was here, we could take her testimony, but having a letter is irrelevant. >> We can't accept it because it has to be a week in advance of a meeting. So it can be verified. >> Well, that's news to her.
Is there another meeting to be held? >> Nope. This is it. >> Oh, okay. >> Are you also? >> No. Well, I am in regard that it's my family home right next to it and born and brought up in Ok. >> If you want to speak on your behalf as
an opponent, you're welcome to do that. You cannot accept the letter. That's >> Should I read my name? You already did, but you stated your name and address, so that's fine. >> Okay. So, that being said, I want to say I'm lifelong Oak Island resident. I have
good feelings about Jonathan. He's a good person. My main concern is he it's a rental property. And why would you guys want to give a variance for what reason?
like what's the benefit? There's a law in place that says you can't do this. You can't put a garage on the side of your house. He has plenty of space on Woodland Road, his 60 by 80 lot of land that would look aesthetically nice. Go
out to a bigger street than a little paper street practically. Why would you approve that? I would like to know what's the reason that somebody would be saying, "Well, that's okay to do that." >> Okay, you'll hear the testimony of other
people speaking on that. Um, you will hear something on that. >> Okay. And um what I want to say that garage would definitely there's already a crowded parking spot going on. People
have three, four, four homes. I mean, three or four cars to each home. You can't even turn the corner at 5:00 when all the cars are home. So, you would be removing one more space for
people to park by him putting another driveway in. forget about his existing one that I'm 77 years old and I never saw a car in that driveway or the garage in 77 years that have been around. So
that's not even considered a space, but next door would be a space. Um it's oversized for the lot. We're we were batted through the years as being the worst place in Oak Island. People
are picking up their homes and creating nice furniturees. It's a different environment. And now we're going to be going higher and bigger and crowded, making it look like a mess. Um,
my family's home would have no sunlight. That would block the whole sunlight of that home. >> Are you referring? Now, this is where I'll speak. And I I I was trying to not speak tonight, >> but you're talking Nancy Flynn. So,
that's the Connor lot that goes and looks out to the marsh. >> Yes. >> How could a 15t garage, which by a matter of right, the height is not in front of us cuz they have the right to build 15 ft. But the house is is the same height as what that garage is going
to be. So, I don't think it's going to block your sunlight for Nancy cuz >> the garage is down by where the parking lot is for her and she has ample parking space at that home. >> Wait a minute. What do you mean? >> The garage is opposite her to her driveways, correct? For for NY's home.
>> Yes. >> Yeah. So, the sunlight's not going to affect her home. >> It would be half of it would be right directly into her living room. We already we went out and walked it half of that garage and I was under in the
impression it was higher than 16 feet. >> It's 15 feet. 15 ft. It can't extend 15t. >> And and secondly, the 9 ft into it from the street to the garage. Am I correct that it's 9 ft?
>> Same as the distance of the house. They're not going. It's actually a little bit more. park a car there if >> you nobody said you can park a car there. I don't know where they're getting that >> because that's what's going to happen. It's already happening. And I hate to bring it up. The oil trucks go home to
their second home on occasions, not regularly. They park on Woodland Road and on Oak Island Road. And when you're coming around, you're trying to turn by two trucks. That's been ongoing for years. What's going to change that?
That's not going to happen on View Street that they come home and park and if one of their family members is living in the house, it's a rental property. I don't see any reason. What's What would be the reason that he needs a twocar
garage for a rental property? >> Whether it's rental owned, we cannot say anything about that because it's a home. >> Well, you can when you're thinking to overrule the rule, >> but no, it has not. We deal with topography, shape of the land. We have
nothing to do with if the owner >> then what would be my argument then? >> There's you'll hear about that because other people will speak. Um but so what your opposition was that you you feel that there should be no car parked in a
9- foot driveway, which I totally agree. So that's one part of your opposition. the opposition of the height which we have no control over because it's 15 feet and that's as a matter of right. Um parking of commercial vehicles on View
Street I have no control of that but I didn't think you could park a commercial vehicle in a res >> temporarily I have to say doesn't do it overnight but they call or they have meeting. >> Yeah but that's something I think you could call the police for that is not in
in operation. Do you want to do that? Do you want to live like that? >> No, I don't. You know, I live in Oakland, but I'm saying we don't have control of that. The board of appeals has no control over. >> I'm bringing it up that it's a concern because they do do that. >> And the only thing I can tell you is how
to address your concern, you would have to call the police because it's not under the purview. It's not under the purview. >> We could prevent that by not allowing that garage to be built other than the one the existing garage. Nobody has anything against that. That's right
across from my sister's house. >> Okay. So, your opposition is noted for that. Are there anything else? Because we have to continue on with the hearing. >> Let me just quickly look here. But I would say that I'm concerned of
the aesthetics of Oak Island. Overall, I'm a proud Oak Islander right now and I would like to keep it that way. >> Great. Thank you so much. Are there any other opponents? You've you've already spoken. So unless
you have if I see that you you are saying what he wrote, we'll have that addressed by the attorney as members of the board. We will ask that question about the 9 foot driveway. >> Yeah, he mentions it three times. >> We we will have that addressed by members of the board.
>> Chairman, there is a letter email on file from Mr. John Mimolo of 67 Woodland Road in opposition. And that's on Woodland Road, correct? And his concern was the oil trucks as well. Am I right? I believe so. Okay.
Does any members have any questions? >> Uh, yes. I have a question. Uh, could you tell me what the proposed height of the garage doors are going to be? So, I have an elevation of the garage here. The proposed height here would be
10 ft for the door. Um, which is a standard size uh for a residential garage. Um, I understand that a pickup truck is about 8 feet. Um, so with a rack or an antenna, 10 feet would be a standard height. But all that being said, there's absolutely no intention of
parking a commercial vehicle or an oil truck. Um, this garage would be uh exclusively for uh passenger vehicles. >> Can you press the button just so that you're on? Thank you. >> So, I think it's important um to make sure that they are not going to be doing
um mechanic work, commercial mechanic work in this garage. So I just want to um find out what's a hardship uh to build like two car garage instead of one car garage in there. >> Um so this this is a very narrow lot. Um
there's a currently a garage there. It's a nonfunctional garage. Um what is proposed is to reconstruct it and to just expand the footprint slightly. Um it's actually very small even for a twocar garage. Um so the the impact to the neighborhood from the structure
would be minimal. It's cited so that it's close closer to the house than the abuing property. The difference actually between the the existing footprint location and the location of the new garage. It's it's 4 in um closer to um
the rear property line uh than the current existing structure. And the uh required rear yard setback uh for a garage is two feet and we're at seven and a half feet. Um so the actually the rear yard setback um as well as the height are both compliant here. Um and
the difference in terms of impact would really be uh 4 in which is a dimminimous um dimensional uh change here. >> Okay. Um, I have some concerns with that. I'd like to
make sure if this were to pass that there's restrictions placed on the the garage that no commercial vehicles would be allowed in the garage that and that door you couldn't put two cars in at once. So, it's going to be one car would have to be a permanent left in it and
then the other one could traverse it. But having the width of that garage, you couldn't have two cars going in at the same time. By no means, I don't believe. Cuz this the the width of the garage is the garage doors, I believe, is you're
talking 12T 12T. >> 12 foot. >> Yeah. So 12T >> to have a two bay garage. I mean, it would be one car. You could put fit two cars in there, but you could only have one traversing in and out.
>> Um the other restriction would be that um that's been done in the past is that the door cannot open more than a 9 ft wid um path and that being that if you put a 10-ft garage door that you have
some a foot of a garage door still hanging. So, even 10 ft, you're not going to get an oil truck in there cuz oil trucks are well over 11 ft tall for one. Um, I'd still like to see that if it's a 10-ft
footprint on the garage that the door be restricted to 9 foot in height. Um, and from what I can see, that shouldn't be a problem based on a a um being at a residential garage.
The other concern was that there was raised about the residence being a rental. Am I to believe that this is going to continue to be a rental or is the will it be occupied by a family member? Because I've heard that there's a family
member moving in there, family members vehicle they want to put in there. Um, so I'd like to to get that just answered. The other thing is parking. I think in your um dissertation that there's parking at the driveway. There
can't be parking of a 9- foot driveway. And if it's a garage, you can't block that driveway because you could get a ticket. They could ticket you for it. You can't block a driveway. Um so that being said, um
that's just a the a laws. I mean, I don't think that there's anything that would have to do that. Um, the height being 146 or it's still something that doesn't
come in front of the board of appeals because the height is not they're not requesting the height. Um, the sideyard, the the rear yard, the 7.4. So, the footprint of the building is not going closer to your home because I was
concerned about that, Carol. It's not going closer from what I see. Um, and even the sideyard going towards the ex the other lot because the other lot's totally separate. So, they're not combined lots. They're we have to deal
with the the lot just like yours and then your neighbor that the lots are defined. that that's what we have to base our um decisions on. So that lot is something that we we're not even going to be talking about that that could be
something down the line that they someone could propose. As you know, Oak Island is proposing a lot of things. There's a lot of changes in Oak Island because I live there. There's a lot of increased usage in apartments that people have put in. There's now this
so-called accessory use that people can do and that's happening throughout Oak Island. It's happening on my streets. There's town houses now on Arcadia Street which we were we had to oppose other things and now they're putting town houses. So, the community is
growing. There's not much we can do about that unfortunately. Um, I am not a proponent of the expansions, but it's something that definitely is happening and there's not much we can do because some of it's being done as a matter of
right. Doesn't have to come in front of the board, doesn't have to come in front of the city council. Um, but with that said, is there any other restrictions that or concerns that are being raised by the board?
about if this were to pass and we have to make a motion to approve with the restrictions that I have requested along with that there's no pl what is it habitation or plumbing um
that can be put in there. I think the only thing that's um we would allow is a faucet for a hose. Um and that's been our standard restrictions going on several properties. Is there anything
else um to the clerk? >> Just the standard conditions. >> Yes. >> The conditions as proposed if approved by Chairman Tucker were as follows. One, garage shall not be used for commercial vehicle parking. Two, the height of the
garage door shall be restricted to 9 ft in height. And three, the garage shall not be used for habitation. In addition, the zoning board of appeals has standard conditions as follows. If the rights authorized by this variance are not exercised within one year of the date of the grant of this variance, the
right shall lapse. This variance shall not be valid until the appellent has recorded this variance in the Suffach County Registry of Deeds and submits document recording numbers and dates to the city clerk and building inspector of the city of River and the appellent must receive site plan review approval prior
to applying for a building permit. >> So is there a motion to approve with this restrictions that was stated? >> Motion to approve. >> Okay. As for a roll call, please. Shall the zoning board of appeals grant the relief requested subject to those
conditions? Mr. Lemina, >> yes. >> Yes, Mr. O'Brien. >> Yes. >> Yes. Mr. Pelton, >> yes. >> Yes. Miss Pratt, >> yes. >> Yes. And Chairman Tucker, >> no. >> No. The variance has been granted. There's no further business. >> No further business. Our next meeting
will be on December >> 17th. So, happy Thanksgiving to everyone.