The ZBA heard a request for a variance from the owners of L-Town Garage, an auto service center, looking to rebuild on the same location after a major fire damaged their offices and work bays.
The January fire destroyed more than 75% of the value of the business. The commercial business had been allowed to operate in a residential zone III (multi-family residential), but according to Londonderry zoning ordinance 4.2.1, when damage exceeds 75% of the replacement value of the property, any past grant of a non-conforming use of the property is nullified. As a result, L-Town would not be allowed to operate a commercial business in this residential area.
Further, being in a residential III zone, the building would have to be set back at least 40 feet from the roadway. The current building is 25 feet from the roadway. Part of the variance request was to allow the building to remain 25 feet from the roadway.
Jacquelyn Phillips joined by her father Mark Phillips, made the case that they should be allowed to rebuild their business at its current 347 Rockingham Road location. For the immediate term, they are looking to rebuild on the same footprint.
She shared that since the 1950s the site has been used for commercial auto-related uses including sales and service, so rebuilding for that same use would not alter the character of the surrounding area. Nor would granting of the waiver negatively impact any abutter’s property value. She shared that failure to grant the variance would create an unnecessary hardship because the business will not be able to operate otherwise.
She also shared that due to a redrawing of the Manchester-Londonderry border in 1981, the property is roughly half in Londonderry and half in Manchester. Her contention was that this complicates other potential uses of the property. The Manchester portion of the property is zoned industrial.
During public comment, three residents voiced their support for granting the variance, highlighting L-Town Garage’s long-time presence in town, their history of contributing to the community and the hardship of not being able to operate their business.
Member Suzanne Brunelle noted, “It appears the lot is sufficiently large that you could move it back and comply. Is that true or not?” Phillips responded, “We could, but some of my understanding is this would require going into a full site plan which we’re not necessarily opposed to…we’re going to have to do a site plan [eventually], but we’re just trying to get our doors back open.” Phillips said that eventually they want to expand at the location but would like to plan that after they get the business running again.
In the end, the ZBA granted the variance on a 5-0 vote noting the unique special conditions of the property, the lack of negative impact to the community and abutters and the long-term existence of similar businesses on this property.