[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6256317,"mediaKeyId","3156797-ccf0c97f9e36391e0829a932e0047e62","parentId",3156797,"title","Commission approves renovation at 35 Pleasant Street; approves modified roof break and window placement","audioSeconds",699,"startMs",2218000,"endMs",2917000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3156797-ccf0c97f9e36391e0829a932e0047e62&start=2218&end=2917","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3156797-ccf0c97f9e36391e0829a932e0047e62/thumbnail_2218000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6256317/Nantucket-County/Massachusetts/Commission-approves-renovation-at-35-Pleasant-Street-approves-modified-roof-break-and-window-placement","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6256317-0cd7df139b30bd1de9d4c198e0b72c63/orig.mp4?Expires=1771109470&Signature=c~GqIE1mNgHQZfcIecuWHz2WaJ9YZwFqGsqCKenci1stUQPS9-9wtQUeMcLZDwjL~hzoqvyftxIA6vdSYcnDYJxKHLwUFvSOE5cGWW5beERHLO4Bg-32bK~wFVq1PB-laEykC9oC8shDEoZ4BiWA8SyKuUelqpbOnYfB1NcyV2e~VS6KbQmtsujW4LYJzWfjgl7GvFE3G-9DrobuZ9P~YsWP37Qgs7yix8jusQE8arlYoP8aH-lPGGEqq6ILvUiJioj9t92hJmjfXhTlgTFz3XRj4P9xABmPxKdMeVrqksiPhfThqBq0qd9siKlmKRa0hjllpVWBGx9CriJf0Yy9vg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Town-County of Nantucket, MA","date","2025-04-30T16:00:52.833Z","article","The Nantucket Historic District Commission on April 29 approved an application for changes at 35 Pleasant Street, approving the applicant’s Option 2 design after revisions and debate over dormer and window details.

Applicant architect Ethan presented two design options that responded to earlier HDC direction to reduce the rear mass and make the addition visually subordinate to the original circa-1920s home. Preservation planner Holly flagged several concerns with applied details, noting that adding pilasters, a water table and certain window types would “create a false sense of history” and recommended the commission not adopt those additions. A preservation advisory group (Historic Structures Advisory) recommended Option 2 — the version that drops the rear plate height and “mimics the existing condition.”

What the commission decided: the HDC voted to approve Option 2, which includes the rear roofline break that reduces plate height and keeps the previously approved bay window. Commissioners asked the applicant to alter dormer detailing to remove excessive shingle side space and to use gray shutters. The commission also discussed a 32-light picture window; the final decision was to locate that window away from the Pleasant Street façade (approved on a side elevation) and to accept the applicant’s suggestion to adjust the 32-light to a smaller arrangement or ganged windows if needed to better read as a sun porch.

Vote and dissent: the motion carried on a voice vote; the minutes record that two commissioners — Angus and Abby — opposed the final approval.

Why it matters: the project alters a visible dwelling within the Old Historic District. Commissioners balanced preservation of character with the applicant’s desire for an updated design that integrates historic-looking elements in a modern renovation.

Next steps: the applicant will submit final details for staff review, including dormer refinements and shutters in the agreed color and the final window configuration for the 32-light area.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Nantucket Historic District Commission - April 29, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The HDC approved Option 2 for a renovation at 35 Pleasant Street, asking for several detailing changes and recording two opposing votes. The commission required reduced roof massing, relocation of a 32‑light window to a rear elevation, and dormer clarifications.","taxTitle","Nantucket County, Massachusetts","taxId",61456,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6256322,"Historic commission discusses new historic-determination form; members ask for clarifications before adopting",2872,186000,3058000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3156797-ccf0c97f9e36391e0829a932e0047e62&start=186&end=3058","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3156797-ccf0c97f9e36391e0829a932e0047e62/thumbnail_186000.jpg","/articles/6256322/Nantucket-County/Massachusetts/Historic-commission-discusses-new-historic-determination-form-members-ask-for-clarifications-before-adopting","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6256322-b5b2cca014e30ed6cb7568d0a6f1228e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771109470&Signature=FsXBl~mQ9rYHZ9SsT8vEeCLUml~yd4iYcEAi352srWmkN3BkDPH97yU5Ho2cSQ8ruohDoYw9198Qi0CY-z4YLhkKbdpT~B1jAlQnJBDR5kbFrBCN~CUk~EPGwodARtm~eOD-u~9uGrt1M0RQ4n9KWTakmI8B6w-f7S4DoY7Ukjc-kysjQp8ehAgJHO8mClSAyV7XygI7fY~7xZSvFvbuv2EB5kqyJwHHazQsNacGi~JdXyHfuqHNKM5Jr-fF86viTD2t43lm4E-uGdtAPWDDEXR1hDGkMcquIU7D0vIvRxYPpcX0kDZDwR55WRPI3yiELhxG7tbHc9FpTHRVU8nLtg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Nantucket Historic District Commission on April 29 discussed a new, standardized historic-determination application form intended to document why applicants request historic determinations and to allow staff to craft more precise letters for tax credits, building-code exemptions and grant applications.

Holly (preservation planner) described the form as intended to record “exactly what folks are asking for and why” and to replace years of boilerplate letters. She said frequent uses have included requests to document historic status for building-code exemptions, historic tax credit applications and Community Preservation Committee (CPC) funding proposals. Commissioners agreed the extra detail would be helpful to applicants and staff, but several asked for a short review period to suggest wording changes.

Commissioner Angus moved to adopt the new form but the chair asked to hold the motion so commissioners could submit minor edits. Holly told the commission the form would be used immediately if members approved it, and that staff prefer the more detailed information because it lets them tailor letters to the applicant’s stated purpose. Commissioners asked three clarifying questions that staff recorded for revision:
- Whether checking one or more reason boxes on the form would limit future uses of a historic determination (Holly said it would not; applicants could resubmit for another stated purpose),
- Whether the form would help the town comply with Department of Energy Resources (DOER) guidance about identifying which architectural elements affect a structure’s historic character (Holly confirmed the form will let staff indicate the specific elements covered), and
- When the form would be put into regular use; Holly said she would like to use it “ASAP” but accepted the commission’s request to circulate a final draft for a short comment period.

Why it matters: the form affects how property owners document historic status for regulatory exemptions and funding programs, and gives HDC staff more detailed evidence to craft determinations and letters.

Next steps: the HDC held final adoption to allow commissioners to submit edits to Ally (the chair) and staff; Holly will circulate a revised draft for a short review before the commission votes to adopt it for use.","The HDC reviewed a new historic-determination application intended to standardize staff letters and recordkeeping. Commissioners praised the clarity but decided to hold final adoption to allow edits and to confirm how a determination would be used across tax‑credit, building-code, CPC and DOER contexts.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6256327,"Historic commission approves town DPW’s new vehicle storage garage and salt shed with design changes",1610,3556000,5166000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3156797-ccf0c97f9e36391e0829a932e0047e62&start=3556&end=5166","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3156797-ccf0c97f9e36391e0829a932e0047e62/thumbnail_3556000.jpg","/articles/6256327/Nantucket-County/Massachusetts/Historic-commission-approves-town-DPWs-new-vehicle-storage-garage-and-salt-shed-with-design-changes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6256327-df5d2148372986675ec03df25960368c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771109470&Signature=IFM2m8K-aMw1VpQNry2j0EGbYtzSM9V~HVPQmtGlSkbromR3vdxf5F68ozNCOvE2b1-IRKh~DYLgaxzah1tFgHWJtwfSgoOs5awSJ2UxpdEoS9o-N5-TTbf0grDTPtG1z5Rsi8BRStc4TlFPfhI3NMZnYjX43q~qo8kJwfq7okeJrcaVYJ~XrX7ntB4l7kRmeFhpK0SZceQ-nLiqaGyy0x-D5sHNZ-PA~YPOT8AAZuiE9PAK1zoP5W0gM9WfuMvGN4cK3X8G25~ITwCb4xIOF65yFTVVY8vvFheeyDbcvdqA7ClL165782Nsq0EuEqh1FL~m6wI90xT7mlDwZ67QJQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Nantucket Historic District Commission on April 29 approved plans for a new vehicle-storage and maintenance garage and a salt shed for the Town’s Department of Public Works (DPW), following months of design review and revisions intended to reduce visibility and better fit the nearby industrial and airport-edge context.

Drew Patanoid, the town’s director of public works, and John Como of the project architect team presented the revised design for the 29,000-square-foot vehicle storage and maintenance garage and the adjacent salt shed. Patanoid said the site is east of the Nantucket Memorial Airport and adjacent to industrial properties, and that the structures would consolidate municipal equipment and increase storage capacity for materials the town needs to respond to winter operations.

Why it mattered: commissioners and preservation staff said the project is large but sits in an industrial portion of town with existing tall, non-shingled buildings. The HDC focused its review on massing, materials, screening and read-ability from public ways and nearby properties.

What the commission approved: the HDC approved the garage as submitted with changes requested in the meeting. Key elements captured in the approval were:
- Massing and height: the highest storage ridgeline was reduced during design review (commissioners noted the revised peak was reduced to roughly 30 feet at key portions), and the team separated the vehicle storage volume from a canopy area to break the façade’s scale. Commissioners accepted the overall approach to break the long building into differentiated volumes.
- Materials and cladding: the commission preferred the option that uses white cedar shingles for the administrative/employee building faces that face public view and recommended that the long vehicle-bay elevations use articulated shingle fields separated by vertical board/board-and-batten elements rather than plain, uninterrupted metal wall fields where visible. For the salt shed the commission approved wood board-and-batten siding as the preferred option (a metal-panel option was shown as an alternate). The HDC also required that any rooftop solar be reviewed as a separate COA application.
- Salt-shed height and function: commissioners approved a 30-foot-high salt shed (revised downward from initial submissions) to allow trucks to lift dump bodies inside the building and reduce salt runoff and environmental impacts. The HDC approved the salt-shed design with the condition that the cupola be removed (the commission rejected a decorative cupola as unnecessary) and that materials match the approved palette.
- Hardscape and landscaping: the commission asked the applicant to preserve and add perimeter screening and plantings resistant to road salt, to provide granite curbing and sidewalks where shown, and to consider adding shade trees in the administrative parking area if final parking counts allow it.

The commission approved the project by voice vote after the applicant agreed to the requested guardrails and to return to staff for a post-approval review of the final materials and rooftop-solar details. The DPW team told the commission they would file a separate Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for rooftop solar and provide a final site and landscape planting plan to HDC staff for post-approval review.

Quotes from the meeting included DPW director Drew Patanoid saying the larger interior volumes were necessary for equipment height and to maximize salt storage so the town can respond to back-to-back storms without running out of material, and architect John Como describing the massing changes: “We broke that volume so the canopy area on the left is stepped back about 5 feet and drops down to differentiate itself from the main mass of the vehicle storage garage.”

Next steps: the DPW will proceed with final construction documents. The HDC’s approval requires follow-up staff sign-off on material samples, final screening/landscaping, and a separate COA filing for solar panels.","After multiple revisions, the commission approved the Town of Nantucket’s proposed vehicle storage and maintenance garage and a 30-foot salt shed at the Shadbush Road site, with conditions on materials, height and screening.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6256331,"Historic commission backs limits on LED speed/message signs proposed for town bylaw",1405,655000,2060000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3156797-ccf0c97f9e36391e0829a932e0047e62&start=655&end=2060","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3156797-ccf0c97f9e36391e0829a932e0047e62/thumbnail_655000.jpg","/articles/6256331/Nantucket-County/Massachusetts/Historic-commission-backs-limits-on-LED-speedmessage-signs-proposed-for-town-bylaw","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6256331-b1d505a108ffe686450f461984b5bd20/orig.mp4?Expires=1771109470&Signature=dxX0AePeIuXrjsnimpeE5H8myCUSPJrHGxETLOhsfR4WjrNGb~3UX-HuB~b00eJOAd2YfUh53lpQBxU3uNb3UBsZpYwMXMZqyLiVw7mVZQ1NFQTfiD0JcVQOiwMaMicj~P-YJKEysrXr3kPkIzARwVmkbGEIwXvYb-UHiue6t6t1HVSMBJzh39Y6ZwCxfchQaYeyEmq3LUdzl5ytHZc9tG9zfzCiPvEGl13YenHYK627wkWs6VSeEuKqe6MP7CTlrPOUhYwT3D8VO2~oliwuaWR5WV2Fj32JDS-c9QNa89YYYHcTF1i8zo0gACV0rOXtJCftytMH6OKhcvNjD03q~A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Nantucket Historic District Commission on April 29 voted to support a proposed Article 71 amendment that would allow LED traffic-control devices and portable changeable message signs on town-owned ways, while asking Town officials to add limits on size, quantity and placement procedures.

Commissioners said the amendment as written would create a broad exception to the town’s current bylaw protecting the historic character of roads, and that voters approving the article at Town Meeting should expect guardrails to reduce visual clutter. Sign Advisory Committee chair Chris Young, who presented the amendment to the commission, said the proposal would allow speed feedback signs and portable message signs but currently “has no limitation. In other words, they’re basically saying that LED signage ... are now going to be allowed. There’s no limit to the quantity, to the size, to the reason.”

The commission’s motion of support asked the sponsor to accept several changes before or at Town Meeting: limit individual speed-feedback units to the minimum size defined by the Massachusetts Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) (cited in the draft as 24 by 30 inches for speed-limit-type signs); cap the total number of LED devices island-wide (the draft suggested a population basis of one sign per 5,000 residents, which commissioners discussed as a possible metric); and require that signs placed on state roads be counted against the town-wide total. Commissioners also urged clearer identification of which town department or official would authorize installations so residents would have a named point of accountability.

Why it matters: proponents say LED speed devices and changeable-message signs improve safety and let the town communicate temporary road and construction conditions. Opponents worry unconstrained LED use would erode the roads’ historic visual character and create intrusive, redundant signage. The commission noted the select board’s earlier comment that placements should consider neighborhood character and be aimed at “increasing vehicular and pedestrian safety on a case-by-case basis,” and asked for that standard to be turned into enforceable language rather than advisory commentary.

At the meeting, commissioners volunteered additional guardrails they want considered: a size restriction for speed-feedback displays matching MUTCD minimums; explicit language requiring placements to be justified by documented safety need; a requirement that a town traffic planner or DPW official present evidence and siting rationale for each installation; and an option to treat the new allowance as a pilot with a sunset or review date so voters can reassess impacts. Several commissioners suggested measuring permit capacity by area (square mileage) rather than only population, so distributed needs in low-density parts of town win appropriate consideration.

Sign Advisory Committee chair Chris Young said he planned to speak for the amendment at Town Meeting and welcomed the commission’s suggested limits. Young told commissioners he had notified town administration so they were not blindsided and that he had not yet reached the traffic planner (Mike Burns) but expected municipal staff representation at Town Meeting.

The commission’s endorsement is advisory to Town Meeting voters; it does not change the bylaw. The Article 71 amendment must still be voted on at Town Meeting, where residents will consider the final text and any floor amendments.","The Nantucket Historic District Commission voted to support a proposed Article 71 amendment that would permit some LED speed-feedback and changeable message signs, while urging size, quantity and process guardrails and clearer responsibility for placement.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commission approves renovation at 35 Pleasant Street; approves modified roof break and window placement

Historic commission discusses new historic-determination form; members ask for clarifications before adopting

Historic commission approves town DPW’s new vehicle storage garage and salt shed with design changes

Historic commission backs limits on LED speed/message signs proposed for town bylaw