Mystic — An attorney has advised the Town of Groton that it cannot post public coastal access signs at the Power House Condominiums.

Eric W. Callahan, whom the town hired to research the matter, said he also is looking into a similar situation at nearby Fort Rachel Marina.

At issue is how much of the coastline on the Groton side of the Mystic River is accessible to residents and visitors and where the town can place coastal access signs.

Resident Richard Fitzgerald has been advocating for the town to replace coastal access signs that he said used to stand at the sites.

Groton Town Manager John Burt said the town's records do not show public access except for a small portion of the Fort Rachel site. Without an agreement of some sort regarding public access, the town can’t post signs there, he said.

The Day's columnist, David Collins, recently has written a series of columns about the issue of coastal access at the sites and others along the river.

Burt said that without clear indication there is public access, the town cannot place coastal access signs on the Power House site at 15 1/2 Water St.

Power House Condominiums

Callahan researched whether public access rights existed on the river side of the Power House to link trails at the Mystic Museum of Art property to the north and the Randall's Wharf property to the south.

Callahan said at a recent Town Council Committee of the Whole meeting that the Power House property owner received approval in 1988 to build a dock on the condition that it provide public coastal access. But the dock never was built, so no public access easement was ever recorded.

He also analyzed if the public could walk from Water Street through the Power House property to get to the river.

He said that when the Power House was built, the owner needed an easement for Power House residents to cross another property to access the Power House property. But the easement does not say the public can walk through to access the coast.

He said that in 1990, when the Power House sought a variance from the town to build balconies, the state wrote in a letter that the site did not have public access. The state recommended that the town condition its approval of the variance on public access. But despite the state's recommendation, the town did not require that public access.

Representatives of the Power House declined to comment.

Fort Rachel Marina

Callahan said he is continuing his research on Fort Rachel Marina at 44 Water St. The town has confirmed access on a small portion of the Fort Rachel property to the gazebo.

But the question is how far it extends.

Some people contend that public access extends as far south as the railroad tracks, Callahan said.

A deed mentions a highway running north and south, and Callahan is analyzing exactly what that means.

"We haven’t finalized our review so we’re in the process of trying to understand what the highway means, whether it's public or whether it still exists," Callahan said.

Fort Rachel Marina Manager Don Sargent said the site has a fixed dock, which is a public right of way, and a small boat ramp for kayaks or small dinghies, with public access signage in place for both.

In addition, he said, joggers come to the property and tourists walk through to take a picture or look at the view.

"We’re OK with that as long as they’re not loitering or walking on the physical docks. We have had issues with that in the past," Sargent said. He said the marina wants its customers to be allowed some privacy without people looking at their boats. He also said it's a safety issue as kids have been caught trying to jump off the docks into the river.

Questions of access

Fitzgerald called the recent legal opinion "negative."

"Only Groton condo owners can benefit from blocking Mystic Coastal Access while the other 38,500 Groton citizens and countless tourists cannot enjoy access because of this blockage and the signs missing on state paid for, authorized and sanctioned Coastal Access shown on 1990 and 1991 plans," Fitzgerald said.

The 1991 document entitled "Groton Coastal Access Points" mentions a proposed dock that calls for public access at the Power House. It states that Fort Rachel "has no specific location for public access" and that in accordance with 1987 site plans, "The public has the right to pass and repass over this property."

Both sites are listed on the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection's Connecticut Coastal Access Guide.

DEEP Senior Coastal Planner Dave Kozak said that when the department developed its coastal access guide in the 1990s and then published the online map, it did its best to coordinate with municipalities to only list sites that provide public access. But he said the municipalities are the ultimate arbiters of whether a site has public coastal access and the state will remove a site if the municipality proves no such access exists there.

He said the state's database notes that, according to site plans approved May 19, 1987, "the public has the right to pass and repass" over the Fort Rachel site.

But Groton Assistant Planning Director Deb Jones said a 1992 town approval refined the easement to be a smaller public access area.

Kozak said the database notes removing a statement concerning the "proposed dock" at the Power House because, according to Groton staff, it never came to fruition.

Meanwhile, Burt said town staff met with Power House representatives to discuss potential access options. He said the staff is working on options to present to its board for its consideration.

Burt said the town has replaced all signage along the river — including adding a sign at Park Place — where access has been verified.

During discussions following Callahan's presentation at the Feb. 25 Committee of the Whole meeting, Councilor Aundré Bumgardner said it's important to ensure the public has "as much unfettered public access to the water as possible."

He added that the town should "keep on digging as much as we can" since the information goes far back and given the importance of offering true public coastal access to the public.

Burt said the town staff would have wanted nothing more than to have found easy and full access.

Town Mayor Patrice Granatosky said she didn't hear any opposition to coastal public access expressed by any councilor and there is no conspiracy to prevent access. She said the council is trusted "to do what is legal and proper for the townspeople, and that's what we're trying to do."

Proposed new coastal access signs

Meanwhile, the town is envisioning a future redesign of the overall system of coastal access signage along the Mystic River to make coastal access sites more visible and easier to find, town officials said. The plan includes "landmark signs," which would be placed at key locations, that feature a map and a ship's knee "to pay homage to the village's wooden shipbuilding history" and wayfinding, according to the Mystic Coastal Access Plan.

"The plan seeks to coalesce all the public access points and easements into a unified Coastal Access Trail, with clear, unifying wayfinding, so all users may easily take advantage of this amazing public resource," the document states.

"We intend to work with the property owners that have easements over their property for coastal access in the best way possible to implement this program," said Planning and Development Director Jon Reiner. The town also would reach out to the property owners without easements to see if they are interested in allowing access.

Burt said his draft Fiscal Year 2021 budget does not include funding for the signage since the town is still sorting out access issues.

The Town Council postponed a vote on the design and concept of the signs until its April 7 meeting. The Council wanted to allow the attorney to finish his analysis of Fort Rachel and is also discussing getting public input on the look of the access markings, Burt said.

Burt said the main purpose of the plan is to have a set design for eventually better marking access.

"Since we are actively seeking further access, I expect the exact access routes/points to continue to change over time," he said.

k.drelich@theday.com