Commission closes public hearing after months of competing wetland surveys for Grassy Road project

The Bristol Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission on Jan. 5 closed the public hearing on an application from H and T Holdings to remove earth within the upland review area for two dwellings on Grassy Road after extended testimony and public comment but postponed a final decision. The commission reported a voice tally of three in favor and two opposed on the motion to close and said it would take up a decision at its next meeting within the statutory window.

At the hearing, the applicant’s soil scientist, James McManister, described his field work and said he found a buried A horizon about 15 inches below the surface that indicated transported fill rather than native hydric soil. “When I dug my auger holes and shovel holes, I saw a buried horizon about 15 inches down and underneath that there’s moderately well‑drained soil,” McManister said, adding that the upper layer’s lack of hydric vegetation and redox features led him to conclude the disputed upslope “finger” is not a regulated wetland.

Neighbors, conservation advocates and a separate intervenor soil scientist disputed that reading. Michelle Rudy of Henderson Street, reading guidance from the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, said the intervenor’s membership in regional professional soil‑science organizations meets the state’s definition of a soil scientist and defended that expert’s findings. “The DEEP guidance document does state that a soil scientist certified by professional soil science organizations meets the definition provided in Connecticut’s inland wetland law,” Rudy said.

Friends of the Hoppers, a local conservation group that raised the wetland issue, presented maps and photographs showing skunk cabbage, springs and historic flagging they say corroborate the intervenor’s delineation. Group members warned that large‑scale earth removal shown in the applicant’s plans could damage groundwater and nearby wetlands.

City staff and commissioners pressed both sides for clearer links between the borings/groundwater elevations and the applicant’s proposed finished grades. A staff memo read into the record also raised a procedural point: the commission’s adopted wetland map is the starting point for boundary determination, and formal map changes require an application.

The hearing featured repeated requests by commissioners and the applicant’s counsel for the intervenor soil scientist (who was not present) to appear and be cross‑examined. Some commissioners argued that cross‑examination is essential before the commission rules; others said the commission had sufficient written material and site‑walk observations and preferred to proceed.

Commission members said they would consider the groundwater boring elevations relative to the proposed final grades and await any required attendance by the intervenor expert. The commission closed the public hearing and deferred its decision, giving staff and members time to review the written records and any supplemental elevations or testimony before voting.