A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

HDC allows one visible roof plane to be painted flat black for solar, contingent on easement concurrence

December 30, 2025 | Nantucket County, Massachusetts


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

HDC allows one visible roof plane to be painted flat black for solar, contingent on easement concurrence
The Nantucket Historic District Commission on March 10 approved, by voice vote, a limited color-change request allowing a visible roof plane on a contributing structure to be painted flat black so rooftop solar panels will blend with the roof. The approval was explicitly tied to the property’s preservation-easement conditions and the applicant’s representation that the easement holder (NPT) was amenable.

Tobias, the applicant’s agent, said the paint is intended to make panels less visually intrusive from a particular keyhole view on Orange Street. Staff and commissioners noted that the structure carries a preservation easement and that past painted-roof approvals had involved noncontributing structures or special circumstances. Commissioner Holly (staff) reminded the board that NPT’s written concurrence would be necessary to resolve any conflicting easement language.

Commissioners debated precedent: some cited prior painted-shingle cases during the pandemic and two earlier examples the board had accepted; others urged caution and recommended a test patch or limiting the change to only the single, visible roof plane. Ray and others said black roofs have been a condition in the commission’s solar guidelines and that a flat, non-gloss black was the intent.

After discussion the commission moved to allow the applicant to paint only the visible roof plane flat black to meet the earlier consent conditions for black roofing to match the solar panels; the motion included a requirement that the finish be flat (no gloss) and that the applicant confirm easement-holder concurrence. The approval was framed as narrowly scoped and contingent on subsequent confirmation of the easement holder’s support; if NPT later withholds concurrence, the paint authorization would need to be revisited.

The commission asked staff to record the decision, note the limited scope (single plane, flat finish) and to document any concurrence or objection from the easement holder in the application file.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee