Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Meeting Actions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Votes and actions at a glance: negative determinations, orders and certificates approved
Summary
At its Aug. 5 meeting the Harvest Conservation Commission granted multiple Negative 2 determinations for demolition, approved amended orders of conditions for two residences, and issued or reissued several certificates of compliance. Staff also reported enforcement activity and a zoning work‑group request.
Key formal actions taken Aug. 5, 2026 by the Harvest Conservation Commission (all items voted during the meeting unless noted):
• Negative 2 determination — 202 Route 28 (Map 11 Parcel T‑6): motion carried; approval allowed demolition within land subject to coastal storm flowage provided no adverse impacts to adjacent resources. • Negative 2 determination — 10828 (Map 10 Parcel L6), Bishop’s Terrace: approval limited to demolition of attached dilapidated structures; future lifting or foundation work must be returned to the commission. • Motion to continue — 18 Soundview Road (Map 26 Parcel L1‑6): continued to Aug. 19. • Motion to continue — 4 Millpoint Road (notice of intent): continued to Sept. 1 at applicant request. • Motion to continue — 11 Riverbend Road: continued to Aug. 19. • Approved — Amended Order of Conditions for 166 Bank Street (Map 23 Parcel M5‑2): amendment included invasive removal and native restoration and added an annual monitoring requirement (first report due Dec. 1, 2026). • Approved — Amended Order of Conditions for 25 Monomoy Road (Map 5 Parcel K1‑A8): vote carried; one commissioner announced an abstention based on a prior position. • Certificates of Compliance issued or reissued: 1 Shore Drive (issued); 0 Hiawatha Road/Windermere Beach Trust (issued with side‑letter planting/monitoring conditions); 2257 Route 28 (work not done, cleared from deed); 41 Bridal Way (reissued).
Staff also reported enforcement action (daily fines for an after‑the‑fact filing not yet submitted) and a zoning‑workgroup request from the zoning board of appeals to involve commission representation in a town zoning review.
