[{"_1":2,"_122":-5,"_123":-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",[32,75,86,98,110],{"_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",6331749,"mediaKeyId","2309744-84b9a1b784b1b44cbff5a1f7f24c0861","parentId",2309744,"title","Zoning board upholds building commissioner: 59 South Shore use not deemed commercial","audioSeconds",6263,"startMs",1057000,"endMs",7320000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2309744-84b9a1b784b1b44cbff5a1f7f24c0861&start=1057&end=7320","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2309744-84b9a1b784b1b44cbff5a1f7f24c0861/thumbnail_1057000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6331749/Nantucket-County/Massachusetts/Zoning-board-upholds-building-commissioner-59-South-Shore-use-not-deemed-commercial","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6331749-626b4c64b6e4cfcbd0713a61d4e57dd4/orig.mp4?Expires=1771202628&Signature=Li~DwVUu-s7ce3UeEaFkz7FQm-g8lPwM952CT5QyDbnW1Yu~lQqfDgTUscBcRxgjPEZ6SkojKfAS7i-MixO9cKQocbdqs~v2FElitt8mN-lCMHqHgPieKkCIMLRTAdXaIrUlZV5mbEG-3MuO-NLO5z01hbls8mqNX8TFv1KxlzLFefYMhNH8oQkCdb2TWybfN-NZv8ch6Z0yzPKYryjkN~Uwqa8tYnOfEZjRDtAIQV97Tr~9Ac3AVBFIz25pGKGuZVGKXCg0L56eBU9jLvzM-PcusUcTG2nP58VUiHVrblchtxwrIFi48s1DlCbtplwgx2zSglm09DpThpl46L5M7g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Town-County of Nantucket, MA","date","2025-01-02T22:22:18Z","article","The Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals on Feb. 13 upheld Building Commissioner Paul Murphy's determination that the uses conducted at 59 South Shore Road do not amount to a prohibited commercial operation in a residential zone, after a contentious public hearing and a 3'to'2 vote on a motion to overturn the decision.

Neighbors and their counsel argued the house had been marketed and used as an event venue, citing a promotional video and police logs of noise complaints tied to a large September wedding. Dan Bailey, a land'use attorney representing neighbors who appealed, played excerpts of marketing materials and described police reports and prior large gatherings to argue the scale and organization of events went beyond what is \"customary, subordinate and incidental\" to single'family residential use.

The homeowners, Jamie and Liz Feeley, countered that the property is their primary residence and described most uses as family gatherings and occasional short'term weeklong rentals. Attorney Rick Bodette told the board the house lacks a permitted commercial kitchen and that catering is performed off'site, and he stressed that the town has no bylaw explicitly prohibiting private events or defining \"event\" in a way that would make enforcement straightforward.

Several neighbors described traffic, staging, equipment deliveries and other impacts around the large wedding; attendees described instances of trucks, security and overflow parking on nearby streets. Board members and town staff, including the building commissioner and licensing and health staff whose earlier internal meetings were discussed, noted there were noise complaints but no recorded noise ordinance violations and that the Board of Health had declined to adopt regulations in October following an earlier review.

After deliberations the board considered a motion to overturn the building commissioner's decision and to issue a zoning enforcement order directing the owner to cease using the property as an event space. The motion, made by staff member Billy (name on record), was seconded and put to roll call. The board recorded three votes in favor and two opposed; that margin was not sufficient under the board's supermajority threshold for overturning the commissioner. The board therefore left the building commissioner's determination intact.

The hearing produced no new town bylaw changes; multiple speakers urged that townwide regulation (for example a definition of \"event\" or numerical limits) be considered at Town Meeting or by the Board of Health to give clearer standards for enforcement. Members of the public and several board members said the case highlighted an enforcement gap between neighborhood nuisance concerns and the current text of the zoning bylaw.

The board closed the public hearing and the determination stands as of Feb. 13. Any further enforcement or bylaw amendments would need to come from town departments or Town Meeting action, not from this single appeal.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals - February 13, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals on Feb. 13 upheld Building Commissioner Paul Murphy's finding that activities at 59 South Shore Road did not constitute a prohibited commercial use in a residential district, rejecting a motion to overturn the commissioner's decision.","taxTitle","Nantucket County, Massachusetts","taxId",61456,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6331742,"ZBA continues 43 Union Street alteration request after tree and neighborhood concerns; committee input requested",0,8907000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2309744-84b9a1b784b1b44cbff5a1f7f24c0861&start=8907&end=8907","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2309744-84b9a1b784b1b44cbff5a1f7f24c0861/thumbnail_8907000.jpg","/articles/6331742/Nantucket-County/Massachusetts/ZBA-continues-43-Union-Street-alteration-request-after-tree-and-neighborhood-concerns-committee-input-requested","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6331742-f80d58448c3c556b19ffa6a8137671f3/orig.mp4?Expires=1771202628&Signature=efL0PJH5br0B~W4bfOVykzDPv4GL-GImjAEKvSc8x2e3hDDq29~CIsgh0K1fO0Be2jZynKAe6z-TKJ~sB3Z9MKYbGX468iTWzh6V9dJKKhOPDYIGFj~dfMX~YLfh~~vXxu8wykR9cRjtDL0QEQEgR7soKDE5qFkdheMq7ZlXUoLXlk0j-1mYfEREvoUxLHEOgfoTSl2mIn60kQEpMN1Bu3T19EwErs8NpBM~YZaKTj9VgeK5VLRmqUI1NTKW0STSyM2N8kU11gU6iAu40bWUWUlsISzcUnhOQijn7lZXiUBwhFnlxOqF2MGUznUmVHh6-WhRqNOrgsLQckvR-dRQJg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Attorney Arthur Reed, representing owner Whitney H. Matthews, requested a special permit to raise or alter a preexisting nonconforming house at 43 Union Street. The proposal would keep the existing footprint but add vertical floor area within the same footprint; no excavation for a new foundation was indicated in the application materials presented to the board.

Multiple speakers raised concerns about the health and protection of a large town'owned elm and a substantial maple tree near the dwelling. Mary Longacre (Tree Advisory Committee) and Emily Molden (Nantucket Land & Water Council) urged the board to require protections for the town tree and to prevent root damage by restricting storage of materials, heavy equipment access on the lawn, and soil disturbance; they proposed a condition requiring verification by the town arborist that the tree suffered no damage before issuance of a certificate of occupancy.

Attorney Reed said no excavation is proposed and objected to language describing the tree as \"town owned\" where ownership is in a separate record lot, but he acknowledged no party wished damage to the tree. The board asked for the Tree Advisory Committee and the town arborist to review the construction methodology and proposed driveway/parking shown in HDC plans and to recommend mitigation measures. Given the committee/arbordist review was not yet complete, the ZBA continued the matter to March 13 to allow that input and to give neighbors and advisory committees a chance to submit recommended conditions.

","The ZBA continued a special permit request for alterations at 43 Union Street to March 13 after tree advisory members, the Nantucket Land & Water Council and neighbors raised concerns about potential impacts to a protected town elm and other mature trees; town staff will seek input from the Tree Advisory Committee and the town arborist.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6331744,"ZBA approves special permit for alteration at 9 Tawati Lane, finding changes not substantially more detrimental",347,7991000,8338000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2309744-84b9a1b784b1b44cbff5a1f7f24c0861&start=7991&end=8338","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2309744-84b9a1b784b1b44cbff5a1f7f24c0861/thumbnail_7991000.jpg","/articles/6331744/Nantucket-County/Massachusetts/ZBA-approves-special-permit-for-alteration-at-9-Tawati-Lane-finding-changes-not-substantially-more-detrimental","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6331744-b3768393cf7280e559160af91ef13ae3/orig.mp4?Expires=1771202628&Signature=if-BrJE7GarvI5a7ch4FKxHBqGA~k1KXHaHCPB7Ktf1ob28y8fCkRxjjxc5HxlQpCqoR5QXtEXJdL6mTdlyXx3LnqwHn2hUN-pr6MFZrmQQFlENU1OBaYpaapqBzhsVdevHn53v9Y3aEtLIKxcrl1WhxtIYOR8-nBAES14MpZ4KnaV9haJ7k7gxzKHla20cTGDSoSifTEailh5FLJtlTdBcLUAmNkaM8DqQXdYAmtyTJumpWYcsThlZIeGkFBupKVfAEjUWM3Zn0vMQDazEB5rxduDDBLdOHKLgTz-xP5TEekFualUHVNRZYE48W0HqlSffYlLqiY9D5xOL6IWYJcg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals on Feb. 13 approved a special permit to alter a preexisting nonconforming dwelling at 9 Tawati Lane (appeal/application 20-510). Attorney Sarah Alger presented the request on behalf of Daniel W. West: the proposal lifts and squares an existing house to place it on a new foundation and adds modest extensions while improving side'yard setbacks in several locations.

Board members and staff reviewed site plans showing current side'yard measurements (approximate existing encroachments of ~5.0 to 6.9 feet on two sides) and the proposed condition (post'move setbacks of roughly 6.4 feet on both sides). Staff recommended finding the alterations would not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood under the relevant zoning provision (Zoning Bylaw alse 139.33). The board attached standard conditions: work must substantially conform to the board'approved site plan, the project must conform to any Historic District Commission approvals, no further expansion within the setback is permitted without additional relief, and any construction damage to Tawati Lane must be repaired.

The board voted by roll call to approve the permit under the finding that the work does not make the nonconformity substantially worse and that the proposal meets the special permit criteria.

","The ZBA granted a special permit to alter a preexisting nonconforming dwelling at 9 Tawati Lane (reduce apparent encroachment and add modest extensions). The board found the proposal would not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood and approved conditions tying construction to HDC approvals.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6331746,"ZBA continues 32 Monomoy short-term rental enforcement appeal while town counsel reviews litigation posture",1077,6843000,7920000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2309744-84b9a1b784b1b44cbff5a1f7f24c0861&start=6843&end=7920","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2309744-84b9a1b784b1b44cbff5a1f7f24c0861/thumbnail_6843000.jpg","/articles/6331746/Nantucket-County/Massachusetts/ZBA-continues-32-Monomoy-short-term-rental-enforcement-appeal-while-town-counsel-reviews-litigation-posture","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6331746-e32ce84cde446e5fb6dbd9b2585bab44/orig.mp4?Expires=1771202628&Signature=GzR20YUw57WwW0kMTJ49xc4V0aba28U7hqAVt6B7ctLGQgK82E4iGYd5HQ8PnfBIUPna4-MnP9Z6KL0TkTsvI5TOsztbAqjTPevShXQIreXAiyZK4OEwKFV6CGXMmhf8uxhIGXe~0lkjMbBbHnDZRbG4iRZVonu88ECvD~-8uQRfyOlqA3xa9OvQRspPwaqXs8V39dVroupqbUH7zsvjpuezSQRqWQmIPJx6Hz6UzpcBjiYriYXK52Noh1NlhzynjMDWZg3ZkHR~JNrHmNVOf4nPFmRQrgUS~4APRub56RGZjggh7zWVyYLAx7KFRKGPLFYdAhBsNz~N~Ha~dC-v3w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Neighbors represented by Anderson & Kreiger urged the ZBA to overturn the building commissioner's denial of enforcement for 32 Monomoy Road, arguing the house is used year'round as a short'term rental (no resident on site) and therefore is not an allowed principal use in a residential zone following the recent Ward v. Town of Nantucket court analysis.

Kristin Gugales, attorney for the abutters, told the board that the property has been made available for rent 365 days a year and that earlier litigation and admissions in the record showed no one has resided there since the owner purchased the property in 2015. Jeff McDermott, one of the abutters and appellants, described ongoing neighborhood problems including noise and trash and said the property is effectively commercial in use.

Town staff informed the board that the town is a party to related litigation and that Town Counsel (not present) had been involved; staff recommended obtaining the town's legal position before the ZBA issues a decision that could conflict with ongoing court proceedings. Given the involvement of Town Counsel and the pending land court status, the board voted to continue the appeal to its March 13 meeting to allow counsel to advise the board and to align with the related litigation schedule. Staff noted the ZBA action deadline for this appeal falls on April 3.

The continuance preserves the abutters' appeal while allowing the town's legal team to advise the board on the best procedural path forward in light of the related Ward litigation.","Neighbors appealed enforcement at 32 Monomoy Road, asserting the property functions exclusively as a short-term rental; the ZBA continued the matter to March 13 to allow town counsel to participate and because the case is tied to pending court litigation (Ward v. Town of Nantucket).",{"_33":111,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":112,"_41":113,"_43":114,"_45":115,"_47":116,"_49":117,"_51":118,"_53":119,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":120,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":121,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6331748,"Board grants 3-month continuance for South Skonset appeal; applicant to sign action-deadline extension",436,511000,947000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2309744-84b9a1b784b1b44cbff5a1f7f24c0861&start=511&end=947","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2309744-84b9a1b784b1b44cbff5a1f7f24c0861/thumbnail_511000.jpg","/articles/6331748/Nantucket-County/Massachusetts/Board-grants-3-month-continuance-for-South-Skonset-appeal-applicant-to-sign-action-deadline-extension","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6331748-f260f10be59b3919d715617c3083e555/orig.mp4?Expires=1771202628&Signature=Myr213y5xm19Mv0gn8DXX17T0XkqPydIzlUMdhYELjmL~w10ATEdmGXTb-znqrvjxcr~W9RHbNlNkrQwToudViyuLe9md9jM85a19SoeWI0zLSKgv8u9co4o7kLSqJHrAznAzAp0cyzmMXjw08nD7c2mx1STa45Wzy20NxqWI6o54QH6zJ5diOjuaxQCU6QIC0Mqv4GRheh~qNu06zgiMmwOOibk1VJprA0Ha5RCfafvG~-OVxXHfZfxw79GyhUuTi-2AalsKv3b3Mky9nmbS8Zq9AKKoCbnyMbnXyM6neUI-c~OxrKqYedXuRmT9Nez-llbjbNCFKfPD7nTrm5~gg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","At its Feb. 13 meeting the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals granted a three-month continuance, to May 31, for the appeal filed by South Skonset Neighborhood Association LLC (matter listed as 12-24). Attorney Steven Cohen, representing the applicant, told the board the owner intends to file an application with the Planning Board for a multi-component development (MCD/MCD-like process) to resolve zoning questions raised by neighbors.

Cohen asked that the ZBA keep the appeal pending while the Planning Board consideration proceeds. Counsel for Danielle de Benedictus (owner) said she had been working with neighborhood representatives and with Cohen; she confirmed the owner would voluntarily apply for the Planning Board permit while \"agreeing to disagree\" about whether that review is required. Town staff noted the current action deadline was March 31 and Cohen agreed to sign an extension through May 31 so the board's deadline would align with the requested continuance.

The continuance motion was made and seconded and the five members present at the dais voted in favor; the board recorded an affirmative roll call. Staff said the extension form would be provided to the applicant to sign and return.

The continuance preserves the neighborhood'initiated appeal while the parties pursue a planning permit route; if the Planning Board were to decline jurisdiction or the MCD did not proceed, the ZBA appeal would resume.

","The ZBA granted a three-month continuance to May 31 for an appeal concerning properties marketed as the \"Summer House\"/beach bistro, while the applicant agreed to sign an extension of the board's action deadline.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Zoning board upholds building commissioner: 59 South Shore use not deemed commercial

ZBA continues 43 Union Street alteration request after tree and neighborhood concerns; committee input requested

ZBA approves special permit for alteration at 9 Tawati Lane, finding changes not substantially more detrimental

ZBA continues 32 Monomoy short-term rental enforcement appeal while town counsel reviews litigation posture

Board grants 3-month continuance for South Skonset appeal; applicant to sign action-deadline extension