A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Board approves variance for attached garage at 25 Coburn Lane, 3–2

July 23, 2026 | Hollis, Hillsborough County, New Hampshire


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Board approves variance for attached garage at 25 Coburn Lane, 3–2
The Hall of Fame Board of Adjustment voted 3–2 to grant a variance allowing an attached 24-by-32 garage to be built 17 feet from the side property line at 25 Coburn Lane. Chair Brian Major called the motion and the board deliberated at length over whether the lot’s topography and existing utilities created a hardship that prevented a conforming location for the garage.

The applicant’s representative told the board that other sites on the parcel were infeasible because of a steep drop, an on‑site well and a buried propane tank. "The hardship is there; there is no other place that we can put the garage on the property," the representative said, describing why the attached design and the 17‑foot setback were proposed. Board members who voted to approve the variance said the property’s layout and slope supported a finding of lot‑related hardship; the two dissenting members said the encroachment was large and expressed concern about precedent.

The board limited the approval to the facts of this property and added conditions. The findings require the applicant to maintain an existing vegetative buffer on the left (south) side between the new garage and the abutting residence and state that the board’s determination is tied to the lot configuration and topography. Voting records recorded ayes from Brian Major, Jim Melancho and Drew Mason and no votes from Cindy Robbins and Richard McMillan.

The board closed the hearing portion and made written findings to document why the variance met the local criteria for hardship and public interest balance. The applicant may proceed with permits subject to any building‑department requirements and the conditions the board recorded. The board said it will limit the decision to these facts to avoid expanding the ruling as precedent for other properties.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee