Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Third Party Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Conservation commission selects CHA to peer‑review Hot Meadow Street application
Summary
The Inland Wetlands and Watercourse Agency voted to select CHA to conduct a third‑party peer review of application CC‑2602 (200 Hot Meadow Street) and will forward the fee estimate to the Board of Selectmen for adoption by resolution.
The Conservation Commission (acting as the Inland Wetlands and Watercourse Agency) voted April 7 to select CHA to perform a third‑party peer review of application CC‑2602 for 200 Hot Meadow Street and to forward the selected firm and fee estimate to the Board of Selectmen for resolution.
The commission reviewed two proposals received by town staff after the March 17 meeting deemed the Hartford South project a potentially significant, large and complex activity that triggers a third‑party review. Staff said both firms responded to the scope of services; commissioners noted prior satisfactory work by Barton & Loga/B&L on past applications but favored the lower‑cost proposal.
A commission member moved to select CHA to conduct the peer review of application CC‑2602 and forward the fee estimate to the Board of Selectmen; another commissioner seconded the motion. The motion passed on a voice vote. The transcript records the two fee proposals as “24” and “17” (the commissioners discussed a roughly $7,000 difference), but the proposal documents in the town packet should be consulted for the exact fee amounts and currency.
Next steps: town staff will execute a contract with the selected firm and ask for the reviewer’s report within 15 days of contract execution (staff indicated a desire to receive the review no later than May 1 to preserve the May 5 public‑hearing schedule). The fee and contract will go to the Board of Selectmen at a special meeting for adoption by resolution.
Because the applicant pays for the third‑party review, staff recommended selecting the lower fee if scope and qualifications were comparable. Commissioners said prior performance and scope detail were part of their consideration.
Authorities referenced: the project was earlier characterized at a prior meeting as a significant activity requiring third‑party review and will proceed through the town’s standard review and Board of Selectmen resolution process.
Ending: Staff will finalize the contract with CHA and the commission expects the peer review to be completed in time to support the application’s May public hearing.
