Hollis board split on hardship, cites contractor accountability and alternative remedies

Board deliberation after public testimony exposed a sharp divide over whether the Farris family's situation constituted the legally required hardship for a variance. Several members emphasized that the pool could have been built in compliance with the permit and that permitting and inspection steps existed to prevent encroachments; they described the encroachment as a "self-produced hardship" caused by contractor error. One member said pursuing litigation or a lot-line adjustment should be tried before the board relaxes ordinance standards.

Other members were sympathetic, noting the pool is largely built and that removing or relocating it would be costly and disruptive. Jim Belanger, who earlier favored approval, referenced the property's split ownership of open space and the potential for the homeowners association to agree to a land conveyance. The board ultimately resolved that alternatives remained available and that granting a variance would not be appropriate under the ordinance's hardship standard.