Groton — How much of the Fort Rachel Marina property along the Mystic coast does the public have a right to access?

That question is at the heart of an inquiry the town has been pursuing for more than a year, but remains unresolved.

The town’s attorney, Eric W. Callahan of Suisman Shapiro, who has been researching the issue, found public coastal access exists on a portion of the property at 44 Water St., up to the pavilion area, and the town has the right to install coastal access signage there. The access is recorded in a 1992 easement.

Callahan said whether or not public access extends beyond that — as far as to the railroad tracks on the south end of the property — remains inconclusive.

He researched historical documents regarding the existence of a potential public highway running across the property from Water Street to the railroad tracks, which could point to additional coastal access for the public, he said in a memo to Town Manager John Burt.

But Callahan said he found conflicting information, with indications both for and against the existence of such a highway, and cannot definitively say whether or not it exists.

After Callahan updated the Town Council last month, town staff reached out to the marina owner to discuss the possibility of the right of way existing and increased coastal access to reach the peninsula with a scenic view, Burt said. But the property owner — who said he is concerned about safety and private boat storage — is not interested in expanded public access, according to Burt.

With negotiations with the property owner to work out expanding public access now off the table, several other options are available to the town, Burt said.

He said the town could pursue a resolution to the question of the potential right of way through a court action, or on the opposite end, officially remove any legal claim to it. The town also could continue to study the issue and hope new information will eventually come to light to answer the question, he said.

Steve Karlson, president of BLP Marine, which owns Fort Rachel Marina, said the owners were aware when they purchased the property in 2010 of the 1992 public access easement signed by a previous property owner, and they support public access. He said the marina has always worked with the town on improving the area.

But he has concerns about expanding public access beyond the point recorded in the easement. He said, for one, the area is just a gravel driveway, but his primary concern is safety.

“We’re a working boatyard,” Karlson said, adding that the marina has large equipment and hydraulic trailers that come in. He added that, unless the marina is running equipment, it usually doesn’t stop people who go beyond the public access point.

However, “Private customers keep their boats there,” he noted. “We want to make sure they have some privacy down on the docks.”

The town previously commissioned a proposal to redesign the signage along its Mystic coast and add way-finding to connect the disparate coastal access points into a trail and make it clear where the public does or does not have the right to walk. The plan is currently on hold until the question of public access at Fort Rachel is resolved.

In his earlier research, Callahan found no recorded public access at the Power House condominiums, a key property linking parts of the Mystic coast, Burt said. He said the town is working on the design of a potential boardwalk along the property and plans to pitch the idea to the property owners in the future and ask for permission to install it. He said Friday that a meeting is set up for this coming week to discuss the potential boardwalk with the condo association.

The research into the Fort Rachel property was more complicated, Burt said. Callahan said in his memo to Burt that his research shows that, before the Civil War, the town’s selectmen sought to construct a road across the property to the railroad tracks, but it is unclear whether the road was ever built and formally accepted by the town.

He added that “Maps and/or information about the Property prepared by persons other than the Town suggest a road might have existed in the late 1800’s/early 1900’s. References within the chain of title dating back to the late 1800’s make reference to a 'private' right of way.”

He also pointed out that the town’s Public Works does not maintain a public road on the property.

The Day's David Collins has written a series of columns about coastal access along the Mystic River. Mystic resident Richard Fitzgerald, who has advocated for public access along the Mystic coast and said addressing the issue of access should not be delayed, said the state’s coastal access plan from the 1990s shows public coastal access at Fort Rachel.

The state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection’s Connecticut Coastal Access Guide says that “The public has the right to pass and repass over this property,” in accordance with a 1987 site plan and Coastal Area Management site plan.

The town’s Assistant Planning Director Deb Jones said the Planning Commission later in 1992 formalized public access on the property through an easement, when the then-owner sought approval to add a building with some non-water-dependent uses, such as offices, to the property. The easement defined public access on the Fort Rachel property as up to the pavilion and allows the town to install signage in that area.

The Town Council is expected to pick up the discussions of coastal access next month. Burt said he will formally update the council on the discussions with the property owner, likely at the council's Committee of the Whole meeting on Jan. 12.

“The Town Council and town staff are committed to preserving and expanding public access to the coastline, while working within the legal framework," Burt said.

k.drelich@theday.com