Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hdc Meeting Roundup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nantucket Historic District Commission approves routine COAs, holds several large new‑build proposals
Summary
At its Jan. 6 meeting the commission approved multiple routine certificates of appropriateness — including fences, sheds and minor as‑builts — approved a 6‑foot cedar fence with planting conditions and a vehicular gate for Dukes Road with setback and planting requirements, and held several large new‑dwelling applications for revisions.
The Nantucket Historic District Commission met virtually on Jan. 6 and moved quickly through a packed agenda of applications for historic‑district approvals.
The commission opened with a procedural announcement that the meeting was being recorded and reviewed public‑comment procedures before unanimously approving the agenda. Staff said the commission will shift its old‑business meeting hours to 4 p.m.–7 p.m. later this month.
Members approved multiple routine COAs: changes of siding, small dormer and shutter‑color requests, separated pergola approvals and a handful of minor structures, with conditions or exhibit language where commissioners asked for clarifying details. The board approved a demo/move‑off request for an older dwelling and several small accessory structures after confirming outreach and advertising requirements had been met.
On more substantive items, commissioners approved a 6‑foot cedar board fence at 6 Daffodil with vertical boards, a Type‑2 cap and alternating planting to screen the run; the applicant (Luca, the property owner) told the board he would plant cypress and other native material to soften the run. The board also approved a pair of vehicular gates at 2 Dukes Road on the condition the gates be natural‑to‑weather, moved back to the setback line shown in an Exhibit A and accompanied by plantings to integrate the gate into the rural streetscape; commissioners and Dukes Road residents had objected to placing a conspicuous white gate at the road edge.
Several larger proposals drew more scrutiny. New‑house proposals at 53 Nobadeer and at 7 Orange Street prompted extended debate over ridge height, fenestration and whether proposed gambrel massing or unusually composed bays would compete with adjacent historic buildings. In both cases the commission voted to hold the applications for revisions and requested clearer, scaled elevations, cross‑sections and alternatives that reduce visual massing and better respond to adjacent historic structures.
Public commenters and commissioners repeatedly urged applicants to submit side‑by‑side streetscape perspectives and to add explanatory Exhibit A drawings where a condition is required. Several motions directed applicants to return with revised drawings, and staff was asked to confirm elevation certificates or other survey information where floodplain adjustments influence ridge heights.
The commission scheduled its next meeting for Jan. 13 and said changes to the meeting schedule would be announced then.
