Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation Tax Credit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Historical commission votes to support 89 Easton Street for state rehabilitation tax credit
Summary
The Nantucket Historical Commission voted unanimously March 21 to support a historic rehabilitation tax credit application for 89 Easton Street and to send a letter of support to the Massachusetts Historical Commission; the project is under construction and unchanged from previously reviewed plans.
Rita Carr, chair of the Nantucket Historical Commission, said the commission voted March 21 to support the repeat application for a historic rehabilitation tax credit for 89 Easton Street and to send a letter of support to the Massachusetts Historical Commission.
The motion, made during the commission's hybrid meeting, passed with recorded aye votes from Commissioner Clement, Commissioner Abby Demalina, Commissioner Angus McCloud, Commissioner George Butterworth and Chair Rita Carr.
Brian Lieber, a preservation consultant with Epsilon Associates representing the property owner William Murphy, told commissioners there have been no design changes to the project and that construction is underway. "There have been no changes to the project... it is in construction," Lieber said, adding that the structure has been lowered onto its foundation and work is progressing.
The commission's written action directs staff to transmit a letter of support to the Massachusetts Historical Commission on behalf of the applicant. Commissioner Demalina said she would write the letter of support as part of the motion's instructions.
Why it matters: State rehabilitation tax credits can offset the cost of preserving and restoring historically significant structures; a commission endorsement is a common element in the paperwork state reviewers consider. The property previously came before the commission and the current filing was described as unchanged from the last submission.
Background and details: Commissioners asked no substantive questions during the discussion and said the application materials were consistent with prior submissions. The project’s continued progress and the absence of external design changes were cited as reasons to repeat the endorsement.
Votes at the meeting: The vote on 89 Easton Street was recorded on the public transcript and is summarized below (full roll-call excerpt is in the commission record). The commission recorded no dissent on the motion to support and send a letter to the MHC.
Ending: The commission closed discussion on the item promptly after the vote and moved on to other agenda items.
