Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and experts urge halt to large-scale earth removal near Hoppers Birch Pond Preserve
Summary
At a Feb. 9 hearing, residents, conservation volunteers and independent experts warned that HNT Holdings’ proposed excavation at Grassy and Ambler Roads risks fragmenting core forest, drying Madison Spring and harming water quality in Birch Pond; the zoning commission continued the hearings to March 9 for more review.
Chairman White opened a public hearing Feb. 9 on two related applications from HNT Holdings seeking permits for large-scale earth removal and a site plan for two new dwellings on lots bordering the Hoppers Birch Pond Preserve.
Friends of the Hoppers and dozens of neighbors opposed the proposal, saying that removing as much as 50,000 cubic yards (the applicant earlier cited a higher estimate of 149,000 cubic yards that was later reduced in the redesign) would fragment a core forest, alter hydrology and threaten wetlands and springs that feed Birch Pond. Michelle Rudy, speaking for Friends of the Hoppers, said the group intervenes under the Connecticut Environmental Policy Act because the proposal is “certain to unreasonably impair or pollute the state’s air, water, and other natural resources.”
The opposition relied on two independent technical presenters. Alexandra Mark, a soil scientist who performed wetland delineation, showed flagged wetlands on-site and described how the applicant’s grading would merge three subbasins into a single basin, sending substantially more surface water to a finger wetland and increasing erosion risk. Mark told the commission there is no stabilization plan in the application that adequately explains how steep excavated slopes (she said the applicant anticipates slopes up to 64%) would be stabilized or where stockpiles would be held.
Brian Neff, a groundwater and surface-water hydrologist, said he incorporated data from four recently drilled wells into groundwater‑flow models and concluded that the proposed excavation would lower the local water table and likely cause Madison Spring and nearby wetlands to go dry if excavation proceeds as currently proposed. “My professional opinion,” Neff said, “is that Madison Spring and the surrounding wetland will absolutely go dry if that proposed mining occurs.”
Speakers for the Friends of the Hoppers also described ecological loss: Scott Heath, an environmental manager introduced as expert testimony, said the preserve supports interior forest bird species that are dependent on an unfragmented ‘‘core forest’’ and that the development would convert core habitat to edge habitat. Eric Madsen summarized results from an expert letter that estimated the project area would eliminate roughly 6 acres of core/edge forest within the city-owned preserve and flagged potential impacts on ridgeline connectivity.
Residents raised fiscal and infrastructure concerns as well: Jan Gatzuras noted that Birch Pond was dredged in 1996 at a cost of $800,000 and questioned who would pay for remediation if sedimentation increases. Several homeowners described narrow local roads — including Grassy and Amber/Ambler Roads — saying heavy truck traffic for hauling sand and gravel would harm pavement, create safety problems on steep curves and increase noise and dust for nearby properties and trailheads.
The applicant’s attorney, who told the commission wetlands agency approval had been granted, argued the parcels are privately owned, buildable and that the proposed redesign reduces earth removal from an earlier 149,000 cubic yards estimate to roughly 50,000 cubic yards. He told commissioners that the lots are in an R-40 zone, can use wells and septic systems, and that the application is required only because material must be removed beyond the 400-cubic-yard-per-year allowance per lot. The applicant acknowledged outstanding staff requests, including a $4,000 peer-review deposit for a traffic report.
The commission did not close the hearing. Commissioners moved to continue the public hearings on the related applications to the March 9, 2026 zoning meeting to allow additional reviews, peer-review funds and further evidence to be supplied. Chairman White noted the applicant had granted the necessary extensions.
What’s next: The applications will remain under review; staff told the commission they will coordinate peer-review of the traffic materials and forward outstanding site-plan comments. The commission scheduled the continued hearings for the March 9 meeting.
