Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Citizen seeks supermajority for historic demolitions; Finance Committee votes 'take no action'
Summary
A citizen warrant article would require a supermajority (two-thirds) vote by the Historic District Commission for demolition of structures 50 years or older; the Finance Committee voted to take no action and asked for more information and HDC input.
Hollis Webb presented Article 72 to the Finance Committee on Feb. 5, asking the town to change the Historic District Commission’s (HDC) demolition decision threshold from a simple majority to a supermajority for structures 50 years or older and to convert the current guideline into a binding bylaw.
Webb said the change "would require a two-thirds vote" and aims to protect Nantucket’s many older contributing structures, which he described as a fundamental asset for tourism and local character. Webb said he was not launching the article in response to a single recent demolition and that 50 years is a catchall to protect pre‑industrial and pre‑industrial-era homes.
Committee members asked Webb for data about how many demolitions are contentious and whether the HDC had weighed in. Mary Bergman of the Nantucket Preservation Trust told the committee a feasibility study found a five‑year average of about "35 demolition permits issued a year" on Nantucket, and she supported raising the standard to reduce appeals and preserve structures that could be repaired.
Committee members also raised governance questions: whether the HDC had been consulted (Webb said he had not spoken with a board member), how many HDC members must agree under the new rule (five-member HDC would require four votes under a supermajority), and whether changing the commission’s voting structure from the outside is the best process.
After discussion the Finance Committee considered a motion by Peter (seconded) to "take no action" on Article 72 — effectively recommending the status quo — noting the committee would welcome more data and an HDC recommendation. The motion carried by roll call with one recorded abstention.
The committee’s action means Article 72 remains a citizen warrant item, but the Finance Committee did not endorse sending a positive recommendation forward; the committee asked the proponent to provide demolition statistics and seek HDC comment for future review.
