The Saint John Board of Zoning Appeals voted 3-0 on June 4 to grant a developmental variance that allows 23 outdoor storage lots at a property addressed as 9550 Hart Street. The applicants were identified as John and Pam Groen, with Pam Groen acting as agent.
During public comment, a property owner across Hart Street complained that runoff from the subject property had historically drained onto their land and asked why additional buildings would mean more water onto their property. The speaker said the developer had removed a ditch and installed a culvert and that additional development would increase runoff onto their parcel. The complainant said, “They’re gonna be putting more buildings on there. More water is gonna be coming onto my property.”
Town planning staff responded that the larger site plan — which the speaker and staff said had been approved by the plan commission in 2021 — included engineered drainage reviewed by the town’s consulting engineer. Staff advised the complainant to pursue the drainage issue with Building and Planning staff rather than the Board of Zoning Appeals, because the BZA’s jurisdiction is the zoning variance request.
Planning staff explained the history: the original site plan approved some buildings (staff referenced 14 buildings approved in 2021) and the current variance request is limited to outdoor storage stalls (23 lots) adjacent to the railroad right-of-way. The applicants told the board the storage stalls are intended to meet demand for storing boats and campers and to locate outside storage away from residential yards.
After staff presentations and public comment, a board member moved to approve the variance, reciting the variance findings required by the zoning code (that approval would not be injurious to public health and would avoid practical difficulties). The motion was seconded and the board voted 3-0 to approve the request.
The BZA noted that drainage and stormwater concerns are typically addressed during site-plan engineering and permitted through the town’s building and planning processes; the board directed the complainant to follow up with town staff for specific engineering and drainage remedies.
No remonstrance letters were received on the record for the variance, and staff confirmed the applicants had followed public-notice procedures for the hearing.