Municipal coastal program, town of Groton, Connecticut

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

*unwidpal Coastal Program
4 i
lb@vn of Groton, Connecticut,

-"TOE, 3 IM

now=

RECEIVED
2 7t4A-
D@ C 9 lopq
Dept.of Environmental Protectiol
*T11
........... Manning & Coord./Goastal Mngw.

I-F

HT
393
.C8
M86
1982

-4
;J

TOWN OF GROTON, CONNECTICUT

MUNICIPAL COASTAL PROGRAM

C>4;zl

Prepared by
Raymond, Parish, Pine & Weiner, Inc.
Hamden, Connecticut

September, 1982

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................... i

1. INTRODUCTION
A. Coastal Management Legislation .................................. I-1
B. Groton Coastal Area ............................................. 1-2

II. COASTAL LAND AND WATER RESOURCES
A. Natural Resources ............................................... II-1
1* Coastal *II-1
2. Geology ..................................................... 11-3
3. Shoreline Changes ........................................... 11-4
4. Topography .................................................. 11-5
5. Hydrology ................................................... 11-7
a. Surface Water ........................................... 11-7
b. Water Quality ........................................... 11-9
c. Aquifers ................................................ II-11
6. Wetlands ..................................................... 11-12
a. Tidal Wetlands .......................................... 11-12
b. Freshwater Wetlands ..................................... 11-15
7. Shore Types ................................................. 11-16
S. Intertidal Flats ............................................ 11-20
9. Shellfish Beds .............................................. 11-21
10. Air Quality .................................................. 11-22
11. Islands ..................................................... 11-24
B. Management Resources ............................................ 11-24
1* Coastal Hazard
2. Historic Resources .......................................... 11-25
3. Shorelands .................................................. 11-25

III.FACILITIES AND RESOURCES OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE ................. III-1

IV. EXISTING LAND USE POLICIES AND REGULATIONS
A- Current Plan of Development ...................................... IV-1
1- Description of Land Use and Current Plan of Development ...... IV-1
2- Conflict Analysis ........................................... IV-2
B- Current Zoning ................................................... IV-5
I- Description of Zoning ........................................ IV-5
2. Conflict Analysis ........................................... IV-5
C* Other Regulations and Plans ...................................... IV-8
1- Economic Development Policy Statement ........................ IV-8
2- Old Town Beach Study ........................................ IV-10
3- Wetland Statutes and Regulations ............................ IV-11
4- Flood Hazard Regulations .................................... IV-12

CONTENTS (cont'd)

Page

V. COASTAL ISSUES AND PROBLEMS
A. Water Oriented .................................................... V-1
B. Water's Edge ....................................................... V-1
C. Land Use .......................................................... V-2

VI. COASTAL POLICIES
A. Relationship Between State and Local Policies .................... VI-1
B. Coastal Waters ................................................... VI-1
C. Open Space and Recreation ........................................ VI-1
D. Residential ...................................................... VI-2
E. Transportation ................................................... VI-2
F. Commercial and Industrial ........................................ VI-3

VII.MYSTIC AND FORT RACHEL PLACE
A. Introduction .................................................... VII-1
B* Existing Land Use, Policies and Regulations-_.......,_ ...*VII-3
1. Existing Land Use ........................................... VII-3
2. Parking ..................................................... VII-7
3. Traffic ..................................................... VII-9
4. Plan of Development ......................................... VII-17
5. Current Zoning .............................................. VII-18
C. Issues and Problems ............................................. VII-18
D. Policies and Objectives ......................................... vii-28
E. Recommendations ................................................. VII-31
1. General ..................................................... VII-31
2. Traffic and Parking ......................................... VII-31
3. Revisions to the Plan of Development ........................ VII-33
4. Revisions to the Zoning Regulations ......................... VII-34

VIII.RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Non-regulatory Measures ........................................ VIII-1
B. Revisions to the Plan of Development ........................... VIII-2
C. Revisions to the Zoning Regulations ............................ VIII-4
IX. NEXT STEPS ..................................I ...................... IX-1

APPENDICES
A. Connecticut Water Quality Classifications and Standards

B. Biological Surveys of the Mumford Cove and Mystic River
Tidal Wetlands

TOWN OF GROTON, CONNECTICUT

PLANNING COMMISSION TOWN COUNCIL

John Cassidy Kenneth Barber - Mayor
Lewis Cornelius, Jr. Margaret Burbank
Sandra Deveau - Chairperson ROCCO Celtruda
Barbara Johnson Leon Goddette
Paul Plasse Mildred Hastedt
Verne Ray Charles Kosloskey
Paul vanDyke Walter Prescott
Jean Wood Lynda Royce
Philip Tuthill

PLANNING DEPARTMENT TOWN MANAGER

Mark Oefinger,AICP Planning Director C. Richard Foote
Robert Hust Environmental Planner
Paul Duarte Planning Technician
Anne Bowman Office Clerk II
Nicki Coope Office Clerk I
Charles Estabrooks Drafting Aide
Richard Gulick*
Susan Weldon*
*No longer members of staff. CAM ADVISORY GROUP

Jean Wood Seth Wakeman
Rocco Celtruda Bruce Brast
Peter Roper Robert Cushman
John Jacobus Edith Fairgrieve
Leonora V. Lewis Phil Glennon
Ralph Reynolds Frank Pisapia
David Campbell John Gallen
Albin Kayrukstis Joseph Fugere
John Krause William Spicer, Jr.
Mickey Weiss Peter Rotella
Paul D. Scully-Power

RAYMOND, PARISH, PINE & WEINER, INC. - Planning Consultants

Samuel W. Pine, AICP, Supervising Principal
Philip W. Michalowski, AICP, Project Coordinator
Wendy S. Johnston, Project Planner
Elizabeth McGrath, Environmental Planner
Deborah Parriott, Senior Planner
John L. Sarna, P.E., Traffic Engineer
Vera Albert, Research Librarian
Joseph Cellucci, Jr. Planner

Executive Summary

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Town of Groton's Municipal Coastal Program has been written in response
to the Connecticut Coastal Management Act (P.A. 79-535) which provided an
opportunity for coastal municipalities to write their own coastal programs.
The Town of Groton took advantage of this opportunity to address issues and
problems within the coastal boundary and propose policies and recom-
mendations -for their resolution.

In order to effectively address the issues, Groton's coastal program first
examines the coastal land and water resources in the area. The report
examines both natural resources and management resources in the area. The
natural resources include: coastal waters; islands; geology; shoreline
changes; topography; hydrology--both surface waters and aquifers and their
water quality; wetlands--both tidal and freshwater; the shore types, such
as beaches, dunes, bluffs; intertidal flats--the flat area between high and
low tides and generally devoid of vegetation; shellfish beds; and air
quality.

The management resources consist of coastal hazard areas--those areas which
are subject to 100 year tidal flooding; shorelands, developed shorefronts,
and historical resources within the coastal boundary.

The development of the issues in the coastal program was partly based on
the preservation of these sensitive resources, for example, the protection
of wetlands and water quality, the reopening of shellfish beds, but many of
the issues were concerned with providing opportunities for residents to
gain access to the coast.

Coastal Issues

In order to facilitate discussion of the issues in the coastal boundary,
they were divided into three categories--water-oriented, water's edge and
land use. Water-oriented issues include: the maintenance of navigation
channels; dredging and filling of the coves, reopening of shellfishing
areas; and preservation of water quality. water's edge issues include:
marina development, dock and piers, moorings, partially sunken watercraft
at the water's edge; beaches; visual and public access to the water;
erosion and waterfront land use. Issues on land, between the water's edge
and the 1,000 foot boundary include: the preservation of open space along
River Road; traffic congestion in downtown Mystic; the establishment of
walkways and bikepaths along the waterfront; the protection of land immedi-
ately adjacent to wetlands; the preservation of residential neighborhoods
from commercial expansion; preservation of open space at Bluff Point,
Sixpenny Island, and Haley Farm State Park; the problem of sewer outfalls
in the coves; the expected influx of tourists after the development of the
U.S.S. Nautilus Memorial in Groton; the problem of industrial discharge
into the coves; and the preservation of open space and establishment of
setbacks for new residential development adjacent to the water. The above
issues illustrate the diversity of concerns within the coastal boundary.

The development of the policies reflect this diversity as they address both
issues on the water and on the land.

Coastal Policies

Policies addressing the coastal waters in Groton include: encourage the
maintenance of existing navigation channels by the development of a mooring
system in heavy boating areas; upgrade the coves, rivers, and bays; and
Improve water quality by requiring new development adjacent to the water to
tie into existing sewer systems where available. Other policies cover such
items as: develop a timetable with the state to reopen marginal shellfish
beds; encourage the development of an overall plan for dredging and filling
of coastal'waters; and encourage control of marina expansion in heavy use
areas.

Policies covering recreation and open space include: preserve the open
character of the Mystic River; increase public recreational boating access
to navigable waterways; expand existing waterfront facilities for recre-
ation, especially beaches; encourage the creation of walkways and bikepaths
along the shoreline; encourage the development of the U.S.S. Nautilus as a
major high quality tourist attraction while minimizing adverse impacts.

For residential development, coastal policies include: encourage clusters
and setbacks for new residential development along the water's edge;
establish standards for new residential development along the water's edge;
establish standards for new residential construction that retain maximum
visual and physical access to the water; encourage new residential develop-
ment in existing developed areas; and retain the existing residential
character of "village" neighborhoods.

Commercial and industrial development is also addressed under the Groton
coastal policies. Policies include: preserve the existing character of
downtown Mystic; prevent the degradation of water quality where new indus-
trial development takes place within the coastal zone by reviewing poten-
tial discharge and containment of industrial waste through the coastal site
plan review process; encourage water-dependent industrial and commercial
uses adjacent to suitable waterfront areas.

The municipal coastal policies are in addition to the state policies spelt
ut in the Connecticut Coastal Management Act and in the Department of
Environmental Protection Policy Report No. 30. Once the Groton Municipal
0

Coastal Program is adopted, development in the coastal zone must satisfy
both state and local policies.

Recommendations - Non-Regulatory

These policies resulted in specific recommendations and actions that the
Town should follow. These recommendations include: encourage the harbor-
master, in conjunction with the Town, to develop a plan for a mooring
system along the Mystic River, and conduct a study to determine the maximum
number of land-related marina complexes that the area can accommodate;

protect sewer pumping stations to prevent f lows of sewage into the coves
during possible breakdowns in the system; develop a program to test septic
systems of existing developments along the shoreline to determine whether
any are leaking into the coves; develop a plan for dredging and filling of
the coves and monitor and study the ef fects that such activity would have;
acquire suitable sites for waterfront parks and/or beaches; encourage the
chairperson's committee to become involved in the planning and development
of the U.S.S. Nautilus'as a tourist attraction.

Recommendations - Plan of Development

As a second part of the development of the coastal program, an analysis was
undertaken to compare existing land use with the Plan of Development and
the zoning regulations. This method was used to determine whether changes
should be made either to reflect existing land use or to protect sensitive
areas that may be more suitable for lower density development-than they are
presently designated.

Proposed revisions to the Plan of Development include (see map) (1) the
designation of the area adjacent to the U.S.S. Nautilus as tourist com-
mercial, to reflect future development in the area; (2) the designation of
the shoreland area near the Odd Fellows property as moderate density
residential use; (3-6) the designation of an industrial area adjacent to
Thomas Road and the airport industrial complex; (4) the designation of the
southern corner of High Rock Road and Poquonnock Road to professional
office use; (5) the designation of the large tract north of Trail's Corner
to moderate density residential use; (7) the designation of the area north
of Lilly Lane and southeast of Fort Hill Homes to townhouse residential;
(8) the area east of Depot Road and north of Industrial Drive to be
designated moderate density residential to conform with the Fort Hill area;
(9) the designation of the area north of Mumford Cove Estates and south of
the railroad to recreation and open space; (10, 11) the development of a
new category-marine commercial/recreat ion-- for selected areas adjacent to
the water in order to encourage waterfront uses in the area(12). In
Mystic, expand the area currently designated waterfront design district to
include the commercial frontage north of Main Street, the existing marina
South of Fort Rachel Place/Water Street, and the railroad embankment. In
the first two instances, this will make the Plan of Development consistent
with present zoning and existing land use patterns.

Recommendations - Zoning

In addition to the changes to the Plan of Development, revisions to the
zoning regulations are also proposed in the coastal program. These
include: establish a new zone, tourist-commercial, around the U.S.S.
Nautilus in order to regulate the type of development in the area; the area
west of the Poquonnock River zoned commercial, CB-15, presently used as
single family development should be rezoned to reflect current use; rezone
Bluff Point State Park from industrial IC-40 and RS-20 to low density
residential; rezone the area along the west side of Mystic River north of

1-95 to large lot development to ref lect environmental limitations. The
area north of Lily Lane is moderate density residential and should be
reconsidered for townhouse residential.

In addition to specific parcels, proposed amendments to the zoning regu-
lations include: require greater setbacks from the water I s edge and
wetlands than presently exist in exchange for greater flexibility in siting
structures on a particular parcel; control of discharge of hazardous
materials and industrial waste from new industrial development in the
coastal zone.

The proposed changes in the Plan of Development and the zoning regulations,
together with the specific actions that the town should undertake, make up
the core of Groton's coastal program. Their implementation should result
in an effective management of the coastal area which will protect the
sensitive areas, and take advantage of Groton's coastal location by in-
creasing public access to the water, and enhancing the tax base through new
development in non-sensitive areas.

mmmmmm m MMM mm = =I m

R
a
CL
c
a
I
0
3

INTRODUCTION

A. COASTAL MANAGEMENT LEGISLATION

The importance of Connecticut's coastal resources and the need for a
comprehensive coastal resource management program was formally recog-
nized on June 29, 1979 when the Connecticut Coastal Management Act
(P.A. 79-535) was signed into law. This law, which took effect on
January 1, 1980, provided a series of policies, standards, and pro-
cedures to be used in making decisions concerning Connecticut's
coastal resources.

Connecticut's coastal management program was developed in response to
the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. The Federal act
states that "the coastal zone is rich in a variety of natural, commer-
cial, recreational, ecological, industrial, and aesthetic resources...
and that there is a national interest in the effective management,
beneficial use, protection, and development of the coastal zone."
Congress found that both the immediate and potential value of coastal
resources is important to the well-being of the nation, and that as a
result of "increasing and competing demands upon the lands and waters
of our coastal zone ... the Congress finds and declares that it is the
national policy to preserve, protect, develop, and where possible, to
restore or enhance, the resources of the nation's coastal zone for
this and succeeding generations."

One of the basic principles of the federal act is the importance of
state involvement in coastal zone management. Congress found that
"the key to more effective protection and use of the land and water
resources of the coastal zone is ... through the (state's) development
and implementation of the management program ... giving full consider-
ation to ecological, cultural, historic, and aesthetic values as well
as the needs for economic development."

This act provides grants to coastal states for the development and
administration of coastal management programs. Following federal
approval of a state's coastal management program, the federal govern-
ment will provide annual grants covering up to 80 percent of the cost
of the program administration. Connecticut's program was approved in
September 1980.

The Connecticut Coastal Management Act (CMA) has established a compre-
hensive coastal resource management program in which responsibility
for program administration is shared among both state and municipal
governments. The primary state agency involved in the program is the
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) which receives and
administers federal coastal zone management funds, and is also
responsible for monitoring, evaluating, and coordinating the overall
implementation of the program.

I-1

The coastal boundary extends from the limit of the State's jurisdic-
tion in Long Island Sound to a continuous line delineated by a 1,000
foot setback from the inland boundary of tidal wetlands, or the
interior contour elevation of the 100 year frequency coastal flood
zone, whichever is farthest inland.

The Connecticut CMA has established general policies for the coastal
area, along with specific policies concerning coastal land and water
resources, development, facilities, and uses within the coastal
boundary. In addition, the CMA provides definitions for each type of
coastal resource, and information on various adverse impacts which may
affect such resources.

The policies in the CMA, together with policies taken from other
existing statutes, make up the Connecticut Coastal Management Program.
These policies serve as a guide to planning, development, acquisition
and regulatory activities within the coastal boundary, and they
provide uniform standards and criteria for all activities subject to
the coastal program. These policies have been adopted and are
directly enforceable through the Coastal Program's implementation. The
policies are also used to determine the acceptability of projects
under coastal site plan review. These policies are collected in one
planning document issued by DEP entitled, "Coastal Policies and Use
Guidelines."

The Connecticut CMA, together with "Planning Report No. 30, Coastal
Policies and Use Guidelines," provides a framework by which coastal
resource management considerations can be incorporated into the
decision-making process at all levels of government, thereby insuring
the proper use and development of Connecticut's coastal area.

B. GROTON COASTAL AREA

As defined by the CMA, the Connecticut coastal area includes the land
and waters within the southerly and easterly limits of the state's
jurisdiction in Long Island Sound, and within the many municipalities
bordering Long Island Sound, including the Town of Groton. The act
further mandates that within the coastal area there shall be a con-
tinuous coastal boundary which encompasses the area most. directly
affected by the coast, its resources, and its natural processes.

The Connecticut CMA defines coastal resources as "the coastal waters
of the State, their natural resources, related marine and wildlife
habitat and adjacent shorelands, both developed and undeveloped, that
together form an integrated terrestrial and estuarine ecosystem."
Therefore, as defined by the Act, the coastal resources of the Town of
Groton include both natural features such as beaches and wetlands and
manmade features such as marinas and shipyards.

The Town of Groton's coastal boundary extends f rom the Ledyard town
line on the Thames River and extends south to the City of Groton line.
The coastal boundary then runs from the city line at Baker's Cove, and
runs north of the Groton-New London Airport and Bluff Point State
Park. The boundary includes the Poquonnock River north to Route 1,
and Mumford Cove (Groton Long Point is not included within the Town's
boundary). The boundary then extends eastward north of Haley Farm
State Park, and then parallel to the Mystic River, including Palmer
Cove, Beebe Cove, and the Village of Mystic, and northward to the
Ledyard town line.

-------------- ------

STONI"TON

Area within boundary
I&TIOn"I"

I
I
I
1 11. Coastal Land and
I Water Resources
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
I
I
I
I
I
I

COASTAL LAND AND WATER RESOURCES

A. NATURAL RESOURCES

1. Coastal Waters

The Long Island Sound estuary is located in a preglacial basin
which is approximately 110 miles long, and has a maximum width of
25 miles. This basin contains two submarine ridges, which
actually divide the Sound into three smaller basins. The central
basin is separated from the western basin by the Hempstead sill,
and from the eastern basin by the Mattituck sill, which is
located off Hammonasset Point. The Mattituck sill limits the
flow of tidal waters from the Atlantic Ocean into the central
basin, though Iome exchange does take place through a low point
in the ridge. The minimum elevations of the 2 Mattituck and
Hempstead sills are 10 and 20 meters respectively.

Long Island Sound is a large estuary in which saline water from
the Atlantic Ocean is diluted by fresh water from Connecticut's
rivers. This estuary is unusual in that it has two passages with
the ocean. The primary eastern passage is through the "Race"
between Fishers Island and Plum Island, while the western passage
consists of a restricted connection with the East River.

Fishers Island is of particular importance to Groton, since it
provides t@e town's shore with protection from southeast winds
and waves. In the Groton area the fetch, which is the unob-
structed area of sea surface over which waves are generated by
wind, is limited by Fishers Island to a length of approximately
four miles. In Groton, the protection provided by the itland is
strongest between Groton Long Point and the Mystic River.

As defined by the Connecticut CMA, the coastal waters of Long
Island Sound include the sound itself, along with its "harbors,
embayments, tidal rivers, streams and creeks, which contain a
salinity concentration of at least 500 ppm (parts per million)
under low flow stream conditions. There are also more specific
coastal water classifications, including nearshore waters,
offshore waters, and estuarine embayments. -

State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection, Shoreline
Analysis and Recommended Planning Process, 1979, p. 12.

U-S. Department of Commerce, Office of Coastal Zone Management, and State
of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection, State of Connecti-
cut Coastal Management Program and Final Environmental Impact Statement,
- _j_
1980, . 11-8.
3Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Shoreline Erosion,
41979, p. 56.
Ihirl - CO

LEGEND

H3
cl E-za@@SFE-Fan

IIt.

COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT
GROTON M WBOU@AP

Nearshore waters include the water and associated substrates
located between mean high water and a depth of ten meters. This
area is generally characterized by coarse sediments and a well-
mixed water column. Turbulence in this area results in unstable
substrate conditions, limiting the suitability of nearshore
waters for many marine organisms. Offshore waters are those
waters and substrates located seaward of the ten meter contour.
The offshore area slopes gently southward, and the water column
may be moderately stratified to well-mixed, depending on the
specific tidal currents and waves.

Estuarine embayments are defined as "protected coastal bodies of
water with an open connection to the sea in which saline sea
water is measurably diluted by fresh water including tidal
rivers, bays, lagoons, and coves." These embayments are usually
characterized by high turbidity and fine sediments, and may
contain submerged flats of eelgrass (Zostera marina). Due to
their small water volume, fine-textured sediments, and restricted
circulatio estuarine embayments are especially susceptible to
pollution. The Connecticut coastal area actually consists of a
complex series of estuaries, with many small embayments such as
Mumford Cove off the major estuary of Long Island Sound.

There are seven major estuarine embayments within or adjacent to
the Town of Groton. The Thames River is classified as an estua-
rine embayment, as is the small inlet near Military Highway and
Crystal Lake Road. The southern shore of the town basically
consists of a series of drumlins separated by bays or coves.
These include Baker Cove, which separates the airport from the
City of Groton, and the Poquonnock River. That portion of the
river north of the Penn Central railroad tracks is also clas-
sified as an embayment. Proceeding east, both Mumford Cove and
Palmer Cove are estuarine embayments, as is Beebe Cove. The
Mystic River adjacent to Groton is also an estuarine embayment,
including the small inlet near Buttonwood Lane.

The other coastal waters adjacent to Groton, such as the areas
off the Bluff Point coastal preserve and Groton Long Point, are
classified as nearshore waters. Beyond a depth of approximately
ten meters, the coastal waters off Groton are considered offshore
waters.

5Office of Coastal Zone Management and Connecticut Department of Environ-
mental Protection, Final Environmental Impact Statement, 1980, p. II-10.

Ibid., p. 59.

2. Geology

The composition and configuration of the Connecticut coastal area
is a result of both glacial geology and bedrock (preglacial)
geology. Connecticut's bedrock geology indicates that the state
can be divided into three major physiographic regions I consisting
of two highland areas separated by a central lowland. Groton is
located in the eastern highlands, where the belrock consists
primarily of folded and faulted metamorphic rocks. Some of the
major bedrock formations in the town include the New London
gneiss, which is found near the airport; the Mamacoke formation,
a biotite-quartz-orthoclase gneiss which underlies the Fort Hill
area and part of Bluff Point; and the Plainfield formation and
biotite granite gneiss, which are found in the central portion of
the town.

The most recent glaciation to affect the Connecticut coast was
the late Wisconsin glacier, which reached its peak in this area
approximately 18,000 years ago when it extended across Long
Island. The Ronkonkoma and Harbor Hill moraines on Long Island
represent equilibrium points where the southwaV movement of the
ice was offset by a regional warming trend. As the glacier
receded, the existing Long Island Sound basin filled with melt-
water, forming a freshwater,jake that was separated from the
ocean by the Mattituck sill. The basin remained a freshwater
lake until about 8,000 years ago when the rising sea level
changed it to a saline body of water.

As the glacier advanced across what is now Connecticut, till,
which is the unsorted and unstratified material transported by
glaciers, was deposited across the land. Much of this till was
deposited in drumlins, which are elongated hills in which the
long axis parallels the direction of ice movement. Drumlins in
the Town of Groton include the Bluff Point peninsula, Fort Hill,
and the hill between Palmer Cove and Beebe Cove. In general,
drumlins in Connecticutl1re thought to be most common where there
were pre-glacial hills.

Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Shoreline Erosion,
1979, p.
8Ibid.

9
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Long Island Sound: An
Atlas of Natural Resources, 1977, p. 4.
10 Ibid.

Connecticut Department of Environment al Protection, Shoreline Erosion,
1979, P. 9.

Another type of glacial deposit found in Groton is outwash, which
consists of silt, sand, and gravel deposited by melt water
streams from the glacier. Unlike till, outwash is sorted and
stratified, and serves as a highly productive aquifer. The major
glacial stream deposit in Groton is in the Poquonnock River
Valley, and includes the airport site, the Poquonnock Bridge
area, and the reservoir area.

3. Shoreline Changes

A shoreline is a dynamic land form which is constantly responding
to the forces of tidal currents, waves, sea level changes, winds,
and man. The changes that have taken place along the Groton
shoreline during the past 150 years are evidence of the strength
of these forces. These changes have taken place primarily along
the southern shore of the town facing Long Island Sound.

The configuration of the tidal wetlands at the southern edge of
the airport peninsula has shown a number of changes since the
mid-1800's. These changes have resulted both from the natural
processes of tidal currents and sedimentation, and from man-made
activities, such as the construction of the airport and the
building of mosquito ditches in the wetlands. The most substan-
tial changes have taken place at the southern-most tip of the
peninsula, where the tidal wetlands have receded approximately
500 feet since 1846. New inlets and tidal creeks have also
formed in this wetland system since the mid-1800's. The tidal
wetlands on the east side of the Poquonnock River have also
changed since this time, receding approximately 200 feet.

The Bushy Point barrier spit is one of the most dynamic landforms
in the town, having undergone a number of significant changes in
the last century. In the mid-1800's Bushy Point beach was
connected to the rocky Bushy Point Island, and thus was clas-
sified as a tombolo. A tombolo is a landform in which offshore
rocks, such as those at Bushy Point, are connected to the main-
land by a beach system or barrier sand spit. At this time the
tombolo was also located approximately 100 feet south of the
current barrier spit location. One of the major changes to this
area took place during the 1938 hurricane when the tombolo was
breached, thus forming a barrier sand spit which is separate from
the rocky Bushy Point Island. Though this breach still remains,
it has been filling in, and at present the water between the spit
and the island is very shallow.

The southern tip of the Bluff Point peninsula, which consists of
bedrock outcroppings, has not changed significantly since the
1800's. However, the wetlands on the eastern side of the penin-
sula have undergone some changes, with most increasing in size as
a result of the accumulation of sediments. The configuration of
the small noint onnn!;it-p T4;;1v;4Y-A Pn=A h- nlc- -1--A --A -

small sand spit has accumulated at the end of the point. There
have also been some minor shoreline changes on the eastern side
of Mumford Cove, and also in Palmer Cove. In some areas the
shore has receded slightly, and in other areas there has been
some accretion.

The West Cove area has also been subject to erosion, with some
areas losing approximately 200 feet of shore since 1840. The
southern tip of the Noank Peninsula has undergone both accretion
and erosion, and in 1883 portions of the peninsula were 300 feet
narrower than in 1940. There have been fewer changes along the
east shore of the Noank peninsula, though the configuration of
Sixpenny Island has changed significantly in the past century.-

4. Topography

The topography of the Town of Groton is extremely varied, and is
a reflection of the glacial activity that once took place in the
area. In general, the topography of the upland area north of
Interstate Route 95 is irregular and hummocky, while the lowland
area south of Route 95 contains smooth drumlins and level
floodplains.

The coastal area adjacent to the Thames River contains a number
of hills and some steep slopes. The developed portion of the
naval submarine base is relatively level, though to the north
there is a hill with a peak elevation of approximately 230 feet
m.s.l., and slopes approaching 30 percent. This area also
contains a small body of fresh water. known as Rock Pond, which
drains into the Thames River. South of Crystal Lake Road is a
drumlin known as Bailey Hill, which has a peak elevation of 244
feet m.s.l. The slope of Bailey Hill averages 15 percent, though
in localized areas the slope may be steeper or flatter. Other
than the Thames River, the only other body of water located in
this portion of the coastal zone is Goss Cove, which is located
near Crystal Lake Road.

The next portion of the town located within the coastal boundary
is the airport area. Much of this area is a glacial stream
deposit, and as such has relatively level topography. The land
south of Poquonnock Avenue, and the airport area, including the
freshwater ponds, is level and at an elevation of approximately
10 feet m.s.l. Most of this area is rimmed with tidal wetlands,
and there is also a pond west of Thomas Road. The only area
within this portion of the coastal boundary that shows some
topographic relief is the Trails Pond area. The land in this
area contains some low-lying wetlands around Plain Creek, and
then rises to an elevation of 110 feet m.s.l. This results in
some steep slopes of approximately 25 percent.

The coastal boundary encompasses the Poquonnock River, and
extends north to the southern edge of the Groton Reservoir. The
land adjacent to the head of the river is relatively level, and
at an elevation between 10 and 20 feet m.s.l. However, there are
some small hills with elevations of approximately 70 feet m.s.l.
near Buddington Road.

The entire Bluff Point peninsula, which consists of a drumlin, is
included within the coastal boundary. This typical elongate
drumlin has a peak elevation of 128 feet m.s.l., and slopes
ranging f rom 5 to 20 percent. Bedrock is evident along the
southern edge of this drumlin, where the glacial till has been
eroded by marine processes. Another feature of this area is
Bushy Point beach, a barrier spit which extends across the mouth
of the Poquonnock River. This spit is at an elevation below 10
feet m.s.l., and is connected to Bluff Point by a system of tidal
wetlands. Both the eastern and western sides of this drumlin are
edged with tidal wetlands and inlets.

The area between Mumford Cove and Palmer Cove, and extending from
Groton Long Point north to Fitch High School, is also part of the
Groton coastal zone. South of the Penn Central railroad tracks
this area is low and level, and contains many wetlands. North of
the railroad tracks is the southern edge of the Fort Hill drum-
lin, with elevations between 10 and 100 feet m.s.l. and a slope
averaging 10 percent. There is also a small hill with an eleva-
tion of 50 feet m.s.l. on the northwest side of Palmer Cove.

The land located between Palmer Cove and Beebe Cove is also part
of a drumlin. This land has a peak elevation of 110 feet m.s.l.,
and descends towards each cove at a slope of approximately 10
percent. The topography in the community of Noank consists of a
few small hills, with elevations ranging from sea level to 50
feet m.s.l. The land on the north side of Beebe Cove includes
Beebe Pond, which drains into the cove, and a number of small
hills.

Most of the land bordering the Mystic River south of Route 95 is
also part of a drumlin, known as Pequot Hill. Elevations in this
portion of the coastal boundary range from sea level to 100 feet
m.s.l., while slopes average 10 percent. This drumlin is not as
smooth and even as some other drumlins in the town, so the topo-
graphy adjacent to the Mystic River is slightly more irregular.
One feature of this area is a hill north of Starr Street, which
has a peak elevation of 100 feet m.s.l., and slopes of 25
percent.

The Mystic River coastal area north of Route 95 is characterized
primarily by steep slopes and irregular topography. In the
vicinity of the Mystic Oral School elevations peak at 150 feet
m.s.l.; and descend towards the river at a slope of 10 percent.

This hill also slopes down towards a wetland and creek which
flows east from Cow Hill Road into the river. The land rises
sharply on the north side of this creek, with a slope of approxi-
mately 50 percent. This steep, irregular topography is also
present on the west side of River Road. This area has a peak
elevation of 200 feet m.s.l., and then slopes down to the north
towards Haleys Brook.

5. Hydrology

a. Surface Water

Two important concepts concerning surface water in Groton
are watersheds and streambelts. A watershed is all the land
area drained by or contributing water to a stream, pond, or
other body of water. The Town of Groton may be divided into
six watersheds, with the surface water within each watershed
draining towards a different point.

Watersheds are an important hydrologic unit, and since water
travels through the basin, changes in one portion of the
watershed can also affect other areas of the watershed.
Thus, activities in the northern or central portion of * the
town may be well removed from the coastal boundary, but may
still have an impact on coastal resources.

As a result of Groton's coastal location, its watersheds are
complex systems, and consist of a number of major functional
components. These include:

� inland wetlands act as storage areas, also important in
recharging aquifers.

� lakes and ponds storage of fresh water, provide wild-
life habitat.

� streambelts transportation of water and nutrients.
. estuaries marine food production, act as a buffer
against storms.
� tidal wetlands nutrient production, storage of flood
water.

Streambelts may be defined as "environmental corridors of
land and water which follow the general stream courses, and
which contain many features with important bearing 'on
water-related aesthetic, recreati2@al wildlife, historic,
12 and land use aspects of the town." Ltreambelt lands
Town of Groton Planning Director's Office, Environment, Groton
Connecticut, 1972, p. 16.

TT-'7

include water courses and their banks, adjacent lands which
are subject to frequent overflow, associated wetlands, land
with other special environmental value, the shorelines of
associated lakes and ponds, ail other lands that form a
continuous streambelt system. Some of the important
functions served by streambelts include water supply, flood
control, water storage, groundwater recharge, filtration of
pollutants, and the provision of wildlife habitat.

Streambelts are one of the major components of watersheds,
and they are the major route by which surface water travels
through a watershed. There are six watersheds in Groton,
and portions of each are within the town's coastal boundary.

The first watershed encompasses most of the City of Groton,
along with a portion of the town adjacent to the Thames
River. Other than the Thames River, there are no major
streams in this watershed.

The 1.1nd from the Penn Central railroad crossing of Baker
Cove north to Route 95, and from Groton Heights east to the
Buddington Road area, constitutes the second watershed. The
major streambelts within this watershed include Plain Creek
and its tributaries, along with other tributaries to Baker
Cove. Trails Pond and Lake George are also included within
this streambelt system.

The third watershed is extensive, and in the northern
portion of the town includes all land between Pleasant
Valley road and Lambstown Road. To the south this watershed
narrows, but still includes the town's reservoir system and
the Poquonnock River. The streambelts within this watershed
include the Poquonnock River, Groton Reservoir, Poquonnock
Lake, Ponegnut Reservoir, Buddington Pond, Hempstead Brook,
Beaverdam Brook, Great Brook, and the Ledyard Reservoir.

The fourth watershed generally encompasses Fort Hill Brook
and its tributaries, such as Hatching House Brook. This
watershed extends from North Road on the west to Flanders
Road on the east, and from Mumford Cove north to Route 184.
Mumford Cove and its associated wetlands are also included
in the streambelt system within this watershed.

The area between Palmer Cove and Route 95, and from Flanders
Road to West Mystic, forms the fifth watershed. Eccleston
Brook and Fishtown Brook, which both drain into Palmer Cove,
are the major water courses in the streambelts in this area.

13 Ibid., p. 16-1 8.

The f inal watershed includes the communities of Noank and
West Mystic, while north of Route 95 this watershed extends
west to Flanders Road. The major streambelts in this water-
shed include Bindloss Brook, Haley's Brook, and Branch
Brook, which all drain into the Mystic River.

b. Water Quality

The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection has
adopted water quality classifications and standards for the
inland and marine waters of the state. Existing water
quality classifications and future goals for14 bodies of
surface water in the Groton area are as follows:

Existing Future Water
Water Quality Quality
Classification Classification Goal

Thames River Scc SBc
Baker Cove SB SB
Groton Reservoir &
tributaries AA AA
Poquonnock River SA SA
Mumford Cove SB SA
Palmer Cove SA SA
Beebe Cove SB SB
Mystic River SB SB

Class AA inland waters are of the highest quality, and
include "existing or proposed drinking water supply impound-
ments and tributary surface waters." Class SA marine waters
are described as "suitable for all sea water uses including
shellfish harvesting for direct human consumption, bathing,
and other water contact sports." Class SB marine waters are
"suitable for bathing, other recreational purposes, indus-
trial cooling and shellfish harvesting for human consumption
after depuration; excellent fish and wildlife habitat; good
aesthetic value." Class SC waters are described as "suit-
able for fi*sh, shellfish and wildlife habitat; suitable for
recreational boating and industrial cooling; good aesthetic
value." In addition, the subscript c indicates that the

14
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Connecticut Water
Quality Standards and Classifications, Approved 1973, Amended 1977; Per-
sonal Communication with Bob Hust, Town of Groton Department of
Planning, 5 November 1981.

river is suitable for cold water fisheries, especially fish
passage. The water quality standards for each of these
classes are included in Appendix A.

The Thames River, which forms the western boundary of a
portion of the town, iisone of the three largest tributaries
to Long Island Sound. The Thames River estuary extends
north from Long Island Sound for approximately 16 miles, to
the confluence of the Shetucket and Yantic Rivers at Nor-
wich. Though the river is a major tributary to Long Island
Sound, the volume of fresh water entering the river is small
in comparison with the volume of sea water, as evidenced
the location of the salt water/fresh water interface.
During the summer and fall when the fresh water inflow is
normally low, the salt wedge extends approximately two miles
up the Shetucket River and one mile up the Yantic River.
During the winter and spring when the volume of fresh water
entering the river is high, the salt water/fresh water
interface is generally located at Norwich. Thus, the salt
wedge extends north of Groton throughout the entire year.

Another estuary in the Groton area is Mumford Cove, which
has a number of water quality problems resulting from the
presence of a sewer outfall. The town currently pumps about
4 million gallons of treated wastewater into the cove each
day, and al9tudy is underway to evaluate the effects of this
discharge. The addition of this treated wastewater is
increasing the rate of eutrophication in the shallow cove,
and promoting the growth of seaweed. Other problems noticed
by the researchers and area residents include increased
turbidity, discoloration of the water, and an odor.
Increased siltation, which has resulted in poor circulation,
is also a problem in Mumford Cove. The town has been
ordered to discontinue discharging treated sewage to the
cove, so the current study is also analyzing alternative
solutions to the sewage problem.

is
onnecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Shoreline Erosion,
1979, p. 55.
16
U-S. Department of Transportation and U.S.Coast Guard, Draft Environ-
mental Impact Statement for the Location, Construction and Operation of
the U.s- cna-qt- ai,Ay-a New London Station, Research and Development Center
and Support Facilities in New London, CT, 1975, 1-62-64.
1% Mumford Cove: Disaster in the Making-P", New London Day, 20 October 1981,
P. 9-10.

Other coastal waters in the Groton area have also been
subject to various water quality problems. The airport
currently discharges treated sewage into Baker Cove, result-
ing in poor water quality and the closing of shellfish beds.
However, this area has recently been sewered, and when the
airport ties in with this system in the near future, water
quality in Baker Cove should improve.

The Poquonnock River, which is a Class SA water, was closed
to shellfishing between May and October of 1981 as a result
of a local hardw 19 e store fire which allowed pesticides to
enter the river. However, the natural flushing process
has cleansed the river, and the lower three-quarters of the
river are again open to shellfishing. 'There are still,
however, some problems with high coliform counts in a small
area at the northern end of the river. It is not known
whether these high coliform levels have a human source, or
whether they are from the water fowl in the area. Another
problem of the Poquonnock River is siltation, especially at
the mouth of the river.

Palmer and West Coves also have problems with siltation,
while Beebe Cove has poor water quality due to the Town of
Stonington sewage outfall on the Mystic River. Other
general water quality problems in the Groton area include
sedimentation due to road sanding and new construction, and
stormwater discharges into the area coves.

The Mystic River forms the eastern boundary of town and is
classified as a SB water quality estuary. Because of the
Town of Stonington sewer outfall discharge, future quality
is expected to remain. A number of shellfish concentration
areas exist in the river and its coves, but have been closed
to shellfishing due to poor water quality. The river has
good aesthetic, habitat and recreational value, and is used
considerably for a variety of recreational fishing and
boating purposes.

C. Aquifers

An aquifer is a rock, sand, or gravel formation which stores
and transmits ground water. There are different types of
aquifers, and those found in the Town of Groton include
stratified drift, bedrock, and till aquifers. Stratified
drift aquifers, which were formed by glacial activity, are
the most productive aquifers, and thus the most valuable as
a water supply source.

18
Personal Communication with Seth Wakeman, Chairman, Groton Shellfish
Commission, 6 November 1981.

Stratified drif t aquifers in Groton are found in the f lood-
plain and lowland areas where they were deposited by glacial
streams. The major stratified drift aquifer in Groton is in
the Poquonnock River Valley. This aquifer is located beneath
the airport peninsula and the western side of Bluf f Point,
and then extends north through the reservoirs and along
Great Brook and North Road to Ledyard Reservoir. other
stratified drift aquifers are located beneath the Eccleston
Brook-area, Haleys Brook, portions of the west bank of the
Mystic River, the Beaverdam Brook area, and the wetland area
north of Gungywamp Road.

6, Wetlands

a. Tidal Wetlands

Tidal wetlands in the Town of Groton include both designated
tidal wetlands and undesignated tidal wetlands. Undesig-
nated tidal wetlands, which include very poorly drained
soils of the Pawcatuck and Westbrook series, are classified
with freshwater wetlands on the state's coastal resource
maps. Designated tidal wetlands are those which have been
inventoried and mapped by DEP, and are subject to the state
Tidal Wetland Regulations.

Tidal wetlands, or salt marshes, are grassy coastal flood-
plains which contain, or are periodically inundated by, salt
or brackish water. There are four general vegetation zones
within a tidal wetland, with the zones determined by eleva-
tion and the frequency with which tidal IIlooding occurs.
From low to high marsh, these zones are: (1) the lower
slope, which is flooded daily and is dominated by salt marsh
cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora); (2) the upper slope,
which is primarily vegetated with salt marsh hay (Spartina
patens) and spike grass (Distichlis spicata) , and may be
f looded by high tides about ten days out of a month; (3) a
somewhat higher area which is inundated only during storm
tides, and which is dominated by black grass (Juncus gerar-
di); and (4) the transitional zone between the marsh and the
upland, which is f looded only during severe storms and
contains switch grass (Panicum virgatum).

4@9_
U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Coastal Zone Management, Final
Environmental Impact Statement and the Proposed Connecticut Coastal
Management Program, 1980, p. II-11.

Groton contains many tidal wetland areas along its coastal
waters, though most of these wetlands have been affected by
man's activities. Over the years some wetlands in the town
have been filled in, while mosquito ditches have been dug in
some of the remaining wetlands, disturbing the flow of tidal
water and other natural processes in the marsh. Despite the
adverse impacts of such activities, the tidal wetlands are
still an extremely important coastal resource, performing
the following vital functions:

(1) Marine Food Production - tidal wetlands are one of the
most productive ecosystems in the world; they have a
very high concentration of nutrients. Two-thirds of
all commercially harvested fish and shellfish depend on
the marsh estuarine system at some time in their life
cycle.

(2) Wildlife Habitat - tidal wetlands are important as
breeding, nesting, and feeding grounds.

(3) Flood and Storm Control - tidal wetlands serve as a
natural buffer, protecting upland and developed areas
from storm tides and absorbing wave damage.

(4) Recreation - tidal wetlands provide many opportunities
for hunting, fishing, birdwatching, etc.

(5) Pollution Control - tidal wetlands serve as an impor-
tant basin in which organic pollutants are chemically
and biologically converted into useful nutrients.

(6) sedimentation - tidal wetlands absorb silt and organic
matter, which otherwise would obstruct channels and harbors.

The northwestern portion of the town's coastal zone, which
borders the Thames River and includes the submarine base,
contains no tidal wetlands. Proceeding south, the next
portion of the town encompassed by the coastal boundary is
the airport area, which is rimmed with tidal wetlands.
Plain Creek and Baker Cove, which form the boundary between
the city and town of Groton, are both lined with a narrow
band of tidal wetlands. This wetland system also extends
northeast along a branch of Baker Cove, forming the north-
west perimeter of the airport. The southern tip of the
airport peninsula, which is bordered by Baker Cove and the
Poquonnock River, consists of a relatively large salt marsh,
totalling approximately 50 acres and containing a number of
mosquito ditches. There is also a narrow band of tidal
wetlands bordering the western edge of the Poquonnock River
as far north as the Penn Central railroad tracks. Two small
tidal wetlands are located at the head of the Poquonnock
River near Fort Hill Road.

Bluf f Point State Park, which contains the most extensive
tidal wetland system in the town, is also included in the
coastal boundary. There are four small individual tidal
wetlands along the western side of this coastal preserve,
bordering the Poquonnock River, while the southwestern
portion of the preserve consists of one large, continuous
wetland. This wetland includes approximately 125 acres, and
extends along the barrier beach spit at the mouth of the
Poquonnock River. There is also a narrow band of tidal
wetlands along the eastern side of the preserve, bordering
Mumford Cove. The Mumford Cove tidal wetland system also
extends north of the Penn Central railroad tracks for a
short distance, encompassing the lower reaches of Fort Hill
Brook, and also borders the east side of the cove as far
south as Bramble Road.

Palmer Cove to the east is also edged with tidal wetlands.
The lower portion of the cove is located between Groton Long
Point Road and the railroad tracks, and contains no wet-
lands. However, the land bordering the western and northern
sides of the cove is classified as a tidal wetland, as is a
small tidal pond located north of the railroad tracks and
draining into the western inlet of the cove.

Proceeding east, the next area of Groton which contains
tidal wetlands is Beebe Cove. There is a small tidal
wetland west of Elm Street and north of Brook Street, and
another along the north shore of Beebe Cove near the Fish-
town Road/Bank Rocid intersection. The small island in the
cove is classified as a tidal wetland, as is all of Sixpenny
Island. The Sixpenny Island wetland consists of approxi-
mately 35 acres, and contains many mosquito ditches, which
have hindered the natural tidal processes and reduced the
quality of this wetland. The area surrounding Little
Gilbraltar Road, which is north of Beebe Cove near the
railroad tracks, contains approximately 15 acres of tidal
wetland, with a number of other scattered wetlands located
along the railroad as far north as Buttonwood Lane.

Continuing north along the Mystic River there are some small
tidal wetlands adjacent to River Road just south of Route 95
near Bindloss Road, and also some north of Route 95 between
River Road and the river. A slightly larger wetland of 10
acres is located along the river by Haley's Brook, and
another wetland is located near the intersection of Route 27
and River Road.

In 1971, biological surveys of the flora and fauna of some
of Groton's tidal wetlands were completed by the University
of Connecticut. The university's Marine Research Laboratory
in Noank surveyed the wetlands of Mumford Cove, while the
Biological Sciences Group from Storrs evaluated the salt
marshes along the Mystic River. These wetlands were sur-
veyed for the presence of those plant species listed in
Connecticut General Statutes Section 22a-29 (Wetlands and
Water Courses) as being indicative of a wetland. These
surveys were taken from the Town of Groton's Environment
Report (July 1972) and are included in Appendix B.

b. Freshwater Wetlands

Freshwater wetlands in Connecticut are designated according
to soil type, with any soil classified by the U.S. Soil
Conservation Service as poorly drained, very poorly drained,
alluvial, or floodplain, considered a wetland. these inland
wetlands are protected and regulated under the Connecticut
Inland Wetlands and Water Courses Act.

Freshwater wetlands, like tidal wetlands, also perform many
important ecological roles. They are a major factor in
flood control, acting as storage basins and reducing flood
crests and erosive capacities. Another hydrologic role
performed by some inland wetlands is groundwater recharge.
The wetlands can also act as a natural pollution control
system by filtering out potentially harmful materials.
These productive inland wetlands are also important in food
webs, and- they provide habitat for a variety of wildlife
species.

The developed western portion of the town along the Thames
River contains no freshwater wetlands within the coastal
boundary. Proceeding south, there are some freshwater
wetlands near Plain creek and High Rock Road. Trails Pond,
the lower portion of which is located in the coastal area,
is classified as a wetland, as is some land along High Rock
Rock, Poquonnock Road, and John Drive. There are also two
freshwater wetlands north of Poquonnock Road on either side
of Filter Plant Road.

There is an inland wetland of approximately 10 acres which
is located near Tower Avenue north of the airport, and which
supports a number of rare species. During the early spring
when the groundwater table is high most of this wetland area
is flooded. During the growing season the water table

20
Allen Carroll, Department of Environmental Protection, Developer's Hand-
book, N.D., p. 7.

lowers, until during the late summer standing water is
confined to one large pond, and a number of small ponds.
The rare species which are found on this property include
the state endangered osprey, and a wetland sedge which is
considered rare in both Connecticut and New England. The
rare sedge grows in shallow water along the edges of the
ponds, and is found in scattered, but dense colonies. Other
vegetation found in this wetland area includes speckled
alder, arrowwood, a variety of willows, sensitive fern,
spirea, and many species of sedges.

The southern portion of Fort Hill Brook, and its adjacent
lowlands, have also been identified as a freshwater wetland.
Approximately 1,000 feet east of this wetland is another of
40 acres, which drains into Mumford Cove and is the largest
freshwater wetland within the coastal area. There are a
number of other freshwater wetlands in the Haley Farm State
Park area, including one which drains into the western inlet
of Palmer Cove, and two which drain into the northern edge
of the cove near Brook Street. There is also a small
wetland near Marlin Drive which drains into a channel
leading to Mumford Cove.

There are two small freshwater wetlands on the western side
of Beebe Cove; one is located between Beebe Pond and the
cove, and the other is located near Fishtown Road and Center
Street. There are also two wetlands north of Beebe Cove,
including one located near Noank Road and Cedar Road, and
another approximately 200 feet east of this. Other wetlands
draining into the lower portion of the Mystic River include
one situated between Thomas Street and Irving Street, and
one extending from Orchard Lane towards the river.

Continuing north along the Mystic River, there are a series
of freshwater wetlands located just south of Interstate
Route 95. These wetlands are generally located between High
Street/Cow Mill Road and the river. In addition, there are
also two small wetlands immediately north of Route 95 near
Oral School Road.

There is also a series of freshwater wetlands between Route
95 and the Gold Star Highway. The largest of these include
streambelt land around Haley Brook, and land surrounding the
pond near the intersection of Route 27 and River Road.

7. Shore Types

The Town of Groton contains a wide variety of shore types,
including developed areas and an assortment of natural coastal

features. In general, the southern shore consists primarily of
natural features, while the Thames River and Mystic River shore-
lines contain both developed and natural areas.

Those areas with natural coastline features, such as beaches and
wetlands, do not necessarily consist of undeveloped land. Many
residential uses in the town, and even the airport, are located
adjacent to coastal waters and have a fringe of natural shore
types. An area does not need to be vacant or undeveloped in
order for the actual land/water interface to be classified as a
natural shore type.

As defined in the CMA, beaches and dunes include "barrier beach
spits and tombolos, barrier beaches, pocket beaches, land contact
beaches and related dunes and sandflats." Beaches have further
been described as moderately sloping shores composed of water
worked sand, gravel, or cobble deposits, or areas of sandy beach
fill. The beaches along the Connecticut coast have developed
under conditions of low wave energy, and as a result the beaches
tend to be narrow, generally less than 200 feet wide. The
beaches are often interspersed with headlands or rocky areas
which impede the littoral transport of sand, making "pocket"
beaches the most common beach type in the state.

Dunes, which*consist of a ridge of wind deposited (aeolian)'sand
positioned landward of the beach, support coastal grasslands
dominated by beach grass (Ammophila breviligulata). Large
aeolian dune systems are not common in Connecticut; most consist
of a !@pgle ridge elevated approximately 3 to 6 feet above the
beach. These dunes systems are not substantial enough to
provide the needed protection from salt spray for the development
of a scrub woodland. The most common vegetation along the dunes
in Connecticut is beach grass and poison ivy (Rhus radicans).

Rocky shorefronts are defined in the CMA as "shorefronts composed
of bedrock, boulders, and cobbles that are highly erosion resis-
tant and are an insignificant source of sediments for other
coastal landforms." Rocky shorefronts may include nearly verti-
cal rock cliffs, or gently seaward sloping rock and boulderly
lands, The rocky intertidal areas provide a sequence of habi-
tats, or zones, for marine organisms which require a hard sub-
strate for attachment. Marine invertebrates, such as barnacles,
limpets, or mussels, inhabit zones according to the frequency
with which they need to be inundated, while light intensity
governs the location of plants.
1
21
@_

U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Coastal Zone Management, Final
Environmental Impact Statement and the Proposed Connecticut Coastal
@ @nagem@ent P@rogra@m, 1980, p. 11-12.1

Another shore type occurring in Groton is classified as coastal
bluffs and escarpments. As defined by the CMA, these are "natu-
rally eroding shorelands marked by dynamic escarpments or sea
cliffs which have slope angles that constitute an intricate
adjustment between erosion, substrate, drainage and degree of
plant cover." These formations are located at the edge of
glacial drift headlands, and are composed of unconsolidated
bouldery/stony or sandy/gravelly soils. Along much of the Groton
shore these bluffs and escarpments have been modified, and are
defined as "bluffs and escarpments which have been temporarily
stabilized by erosion control structures (revetment, bulkhead, or
seawall) positioned seaward of the marine cliff or escarpment."

Some areas of the Groton coastline, especially along the Thames
River, have been classified as developed shorefront. This
category is defined in the CMA as "those harbor areas which have
been highly engineered and developed, resulting in the functional
impairment or substantial alteration of their natural physio-
graphic features or systems."

Starting in the northwest portion of Groton, the first area of
the town to be included in the coastal boundary is the naval
submarine base. From Crystal Lake Road to the northern perimeter
of the town, this portion of the shoreline, which consists
.primarily of docking facilities for naval vessels, has been
classified as developed, From Crystal Lake Road south to the
Groton city limits, the shoreline has not been classified on the
state's coastal resources maps. However, the Penn Central
railroad tracks, which parallel the Thames River, are a major
feature of this area. There is a narrow strip of land between
the tracks and the river which is lined with rocks, and which
supports some vegetation.

The peninsula on which the Groton-New London Airport is located
is formed by Baker Cove/Plain Creek and the Poquonnock River, and
is fringed by at least a narrow band of tidal wetlands along
these waterways. In addition, the Old Town Beach is located on
the eastern side of this peninsula. The shore of the river north
of the Penn Central railroad tracks is lined primarily with
residential uses, with some narrow strips of tidal wetlands and
other vegetation immediately adjacent to the water. The eastern
shore of the Poquonnock River, most of which is part of the Bluff
Point coastal preserve, contains a variety of shore types.

The northern portion of the western shore of Bluff Point contains
a few small tidal wetlands and one beach, while the remainder
consists of a very narrow strip of.sand and rocks between the

woods and the river. The southern portion of this western shore
consists of an extensive tidal wetland which extends into an
east-west oriented barrier spit across the mouth of the Poquon-
nock River. The northern side of this spit consists of a tidal
wetland, while the southern shore consists of a sandy beach and
the island at the western end of the spit has a rocky shorefront.
This barrier spit, which is known as Bushy Point and is 4,000
feet long, is one of the few remaining natural beach systems in
Connecticut. This spit contains no seawalls, groins, or jetties,
and is unaltered by man-made development.

This beach system extends east to Bluff Point, where the rocky
shorefront consists of bedrock exposed by marine erosion. The
entire southern tip of the Bluff Point drumlin has been clas-
sified as an escarpment, and includes scattered areas of rocks.
North of Mumford Point the shore is more level, and consists of a
narrow sandy beach. This beach is approximately 3,500 feet long,
and ends in a sand spit that extends into Mumford Cove. The
remainder of the eastern shore of Bluff Point borders Mumford
Cove, and consists of a narrow band of tidal wetland. The
northern portion of the eastern side of Mumford Cove also con-
tains a wetland, while the southern portion, which is adjacent to
the Neptune Drive residential area, consists of a sandy beach.
At the sou@hern end of Neptune Drive and Anchorage Circle the
shore has been classified as a modified bluff and escarpment.

The next portion of the town to be included in the coastal
boundary is the Palmer Cove area. The outer portion of Palmer
Cove, which is located between Groton Long Point Road and the
railroad tracks, contains a marina and docking facilities. Most
of the shoreline in this outer cove is lined with rocks, with
trees and other vegetation growing close to the edge of the cove.
The western inlet of the cove is in a more natural state, and the
shore is rimmed with tidal wetlands. The main body of the cove
is edged with tidal wetlands to the west and the north, while the
developed residential area on the east is lined with rocks. There
is also a small area of rocky shorefront, approximately 300 feet
in length, on the western side of Palmer Cove.

South of Palmer Cove and Groton Long Point Road is the Esker
Point Beach peninsula. There is a small beach on the western
side of this point immediately south of Groton Long Point Road,
while the remainder of the western side of the point, along with
the southern tip and a portion of the eastern side, are clas-
sified as a modified bluff and escarpment. The remainder of the
point consists of a sandy beach of approximately 4 acres.

West of Esker Point beach is a small residential area in which
the shore has been classified as a modified bluff and escarpment.
There is one small area of rocky shorefront near Noble Avenue,
but the remainder of West Cove is classified as a modified bluff
and escarpment. The southern point of the Noank peninsula
consists of rocky shorefront, and the nearby Mouse Island and
Whale State Rock are also classified as having rock shores. The
eastern side of the Noank peninsula, as far north as the railroad
crossing -at the mouth of Beebe Cove, is also classified as
modified bluff and escarpment. The southern portion of this area
contains a large marina for pleasure craft, while the remainder
consists primarily of residential uses, many with small docks.
many portions of this section of shore have been lined with
rocks.

The majority of the Beebe Cove shoreline has also been classified
as a modified bluff and escarpment, and contains areas of rock-
lined shorefront. Some of the northern edges of the cove contain
tidal wetlands, and all of Sixpenny Island has been classified as
a wetland, with the exception of one small segment of sandy beach
on the eastern side of the island. Willow Point, which is
located north of Sixpenny Road, contains some residential uses
and a marina, and is classified as a modified bluff and escarp-
ment.

North of the Mystic River railroad crossing is a 1,500 foot
length of shoreline which has been classified as developed. Uses
in this area include the town landing, marinas, and various
water-oriented commercial uses. Between West Main Street and
Starr Street land use is primarily residential, and there is
bulkheading along the river. The remainder of the shore south of
the Route 95 overpass is either lined with rocks or contains
tidal wetlands, while north of route 95 the shoreline consists
primarily of tidal wetlands.

a. Intertidal Flats

Intertidal flats are defined in the CMA as "very gently sloping
or flat areas located between high and low tides, and composed of
muddy, silty, and fine sandy sediments and generally devoid of
vegetation." These inertidal flats are generally less than 2,0 92
feet wide, and they serve a number of important functions:
they act as temporary nutrient traps; they can, on a limited

22
Ibid., p. II-11.

basis, filter out pollutants; they are a specialized habitat for
some marine invertebrates; and they provide vital feeding and
resting grounds for migratory shorebirds. Due to their lack of
vegetation the tideflats appear barren, but they support large
'populations of clams, crabs, and worms, which provide food not
only for birds, but also for fish. It is the many filter-feeding
invertebrates and micro-organisms which inhabit this area that
provide the important natural filtering process for cleaning
polluted waters.

There are three areas in Groton which contain intertidal flats,
and these are not extensive. One intertidal flat of approxi-
mately 4 acres is located on the north side of Bushy Point Beach
where the baymouth barrier joins the main portion of Bluff Point.
The other two flats are located adjacent to Bluff Point on the
western edge of Mumford Cove. One extends for approximately 800
feet along a small point of land, and the other intertidal flat
extends for 1,600 feet along a narrow band of tidal wetlands.

9. Shellfish Beds

As defined on the state coastal management maps, shellfish
concentration areas are those "geographic areas believed to
support and produce significant concentrations of shellfish that
are of commercial or recreational value; excluded are historic-
ally productive but presently inactive shellfish areas." The
major shellfish inhabiting Groton's coastal waters are the
hard-shell clam or quahog (Mercenaria mercenaria) , the eastern
oyster (Crassotrea virginica) , and the bay scallop (Aequipecten
irradians) , along with some soft-shell clams, or steamers (Mya
arenaria). The hard shell clam is a bivalve which lives close to
the surface in sandy or muddy substrates, while the soft-shell
clam burrows deep into the substrate, using a long muscular
siphon tube to draw in water and food. The eastern oyster
requires a hard substrate for attachment, as do young scallops.
Bay scallops, which tend to inhabit areas with beds of eelgrass,
are free-swimming as adults.

The shellfish beds in the Town of Groton are open only for
recreational shellfishing; no commercial harvesting is allowed in
town waters. Some clam and oyster beds are currently closed to
shellfishing because of poor water quality; however, scallops may
be harvested during the scallop season in any of the town's
waters, since the edible portion of the scallop consists of a
muscle, while the edible portion of clams and oysters includes
the digestive tract, where pollutants may be concentrated.

There are beds of hard-shell clams in the Thames River adjacent
to both the city and town of Groton. However, due to poor water
quality, the Thames River is closed to shellfishing. Baker Cove
is also a hard-shell clam concentration area, which is currently
closed to shellfishing as a result of the sewage outfall from the
airport's treatment plant. However, it is expected that in the
near future the airport will tie in with the new sewer system in
the area, after which the cove should open for shellfishing.

The Poquonnock River contains beds of hard-shell clams, along
with some eastern oysters and bay scallops. The river was closed
to shellfishing between May and October 1981 due to a fire which
resulted in the leakage of pesticides into the river. Except for
a small area at the northern end of the river, the Poqunnock
waters were re-opened for shellfishing in November 1981. The
area at the head of the river is closed to shellf ishing due to
high coliform counts in the water.

The hard-shell clam and eastern oyster beds in Mumford Cove are
also closed to harvesting. The sewage treatment plant located
north of the Penn Central railroad tracks discharges its treated
sewage into Fort Hill Brook, which flows directly in Mumford
Cove. The town has been ordered to find an alternative discharge
method, and thus it is expected that the cove may be open to
shellfishing within a few years.

Palmer Cove, which contains concentrations of both hard-shell
clams and eastern oysters, is open to harvesting. The southern
portion of the cove, below Groton Long Point Road, contains beds
of hard-shell clams, while the northern portion, above the Penn
central railroad tracks, along with the western-most inlet,
contains both hard-shell clams and eastern oysters. The central
portion of the cove, between Groton Long Point Road and the
railroad tracks, contains no significant shellfish concen-
trations.

Both Beebe Cove and the Mystic River are currently closed to
shellfishing as a result of the Town of Stonington sewage outfall
located in Mystic. Shellfish beds in the Mystic River include
hard-shell clams, eastern oysters, and some soft-shell clams.

10. Air Quality

There are four air quality control regions in Connecticut, with
the Town of Groton located in AQCR 41, Eastern Connecticut. The
Department of Environmental Protection operates an air monitoring
network with sampling sites located in each of these regions.
The pollutants monitored at these stations are as follows:

Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) - any solid or liquid
particle in the atmosphere; primarily a by-product of
qi-AtinnArv qniirnpq qiic-h A<, inrlii@_t-riAl f;4c-ilitiinc

Suf lur Dioxide (SOJ - a nonf lammable nonexplosive color-
less gas; primarily krom the burning of fuel.

Ozone (Oj - produced in the atmosphere by the reaction of
nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons in the presence of sun-
light; production is greatest at high temperatures.

Nitrogen Dioxide (NOJ - a corrosive, reddish-brown gas
which is a by-product of combustion.

Carbon Monoxide (CO) a poisonous, colorless, odorless gas
produced during combustion; is generally a localized problem
resulting from traffic congestion.

Lead (Pb) - primarily from the combustion of leaded gasoline
in motor vehicles.

Motor vehicl9j represent the most severe air pollution problem in
Connecticut. Carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, hydrocarbons,
and photochemical oxidants are all produced primarily by auto-
mobiles and other mobile sources. As a result, some of the most
severe air pollution problems in the state occur in urban areas
with heavy traffic volumes and problems with congestion.

The following air quality data has been taken from the 1978
Connecticut Air Quality Summary published by the Air Engineering
Section of the Air Compliance Unit, Division of Environmental
Quality, Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection.

The pr4ary annual standard for total suspended particulates is
75 ug/m . Between 1967 and 1978, the level of TS as measured It
the Groton sampling stations ranged from 24 ug/m to 102 ug/m .
A high level of TSP, such as the 102 ug/m measured in 1970, may
be the result of heavy construction activity near the sampling
station. TSP levels are also affected by the frequency of
southwesterly winds, which transport particulates from the New
York City area into Connecticut. During 1978, the maximum
24-hour TSP concentration . in Groton was 129 ug/m 3, whic@ is
substantially below the 24-hour primary standard of 260 ug/m .

The state maintains 15 continuous sulfur dioxide monitors, with
one located in the. City of Groton at Fort Griswold State Par@_
The 19711 annual. average of SO 2 at this station was 23 ug/m .
whil is in compliance with the primary annual standard of 80
ug/m . The maximuT 24-hour concentration of SO 2, as measured in
1978, was lil ug/m , which is within the primary 24-hour standard
of 365 ug/m

23Allen Carroll, State of Connecticut Department of Environmental
Prnl-=@+-4- n@,r-l- @1@ =-A---I- M n - 11

A new one-hour ambient air quality standard for ozone of .12 ppm
was established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in
1979. This standard is often exceeded in Connecticut, where
ozone levels tend to be high during the summer. In the City of
Groton in 1978, this standard was exceeded 27 times in five
months, with .19 ppm being the highest recorded value.

3
The primary annual standard for nitrogen is 100 ug/m Between
1973 and 1978, the NO 2 concentrations s measured At the Groton
monitoring stations ranged from 38 ug/m to 50 ug/m , well within
the designated standard.

There are nine carbon monoxide monitoring stations in Connecti-
cut, though none are located in the Groton area. However, at
least 95 percent of the CO emissions in Connecticut come from
motor vehicles, so the CO standards may be exceeded in any area
where there are problems with traffic congestion.

3
Lead, which has a quarter-year standard of 1.5 ug/m , is an
atmospheric pollutant resulting from the combustion of leaded
gasoline, This standard was not exceeded in the City of Gryton
in 1978, Yhere the quarterly averages ranged rom 0.29 ug/m to
0.66 ug/m , for an annual average of 0.48 ug/m@_

11. Islands

Islands are another coastal resource which are identified in the
CMA. Mouse Island, on which there are a number of houses, is a
rocky island located southwest of the Noank peninsula. Whale
Rock, which is located south of the peninsula, is also classified
as an island. Other islands in Groton include a small island in
Beebe Cove, and Sixpenny Island. The small island, which
consists of approximately 0.5 acres, and Sixpenny Island, which
consists of 35 acres, are both classified as tidal wetlands.

MANAGEMENT RESOURCES

1, Coastal Hazard Areas

The coastal hazard areas include those lands inundated during
coastal storms or subject to erosion as a result of the storms,
including flood hazard areas as defined in the National Flood
Insurance Program, (100-year flood).

In Groton there are no coastal hazard areas along the Thames
River; however the coastal hazard area extends over most of the
airport and extends along Birch Plain Creek and both sides of the
Poquonnock River. The flood hazard area extends around the
shoreline to Mumford Cove, Palmer Cove, and around Noank to Beebe.
Cove, and up the Mystic River to the Ledyard town line, encom-
passing Sixpenny Island and Fort Rachel Place.

For exact location of the coastal f lood hazard areas, see the
coastal resources map.

2. Historic Resources

There are a few historic and cultural resources in Groton's
coastal zone. The Village of Mystic is designated a historic
district, regulated by the Town of Groton Historic District
Commission, since January 1975. Within Mystic and Noank there
are several individual residences which have been placed on the
National Register of Historic Places. In addition, the villages
of Noank and Mystic have been placed on the register as historic
areas. The Mystic Art Association is listed by the town as a
Cultural Point of Interest as is the Noank Historical Society.
Historic Points of Interests in the coastal zone include the
Winthrop Mansion Foundation on Bluff Point, the Railroad Midway-
Round House, north of Bluff Point, the Clarke property, near
Noank, and the Village Green in Old Mystic. The U.S.S. Nautilus
has been nominated for placement on the National Register.

3. Shorelands

Shorelands are defined as those land areas within the coastal
boundary exclusive of coastal hazard areas, which are not subject
to dynamic coastal processes and which are comprised of typical
upland features such as bedrock hills, till hills, and drumlins.

Most of the town's coastal boundary is comprised of shorelands.
Along the Thames River the entire area is shorelands. Along Long
Island Sound the shorelands exclude the airport and the land
immediately adjacent to Birch Plain Creek, the Poquonnock River,
Mumford Cove, and Beebe Cove.

The major undeveloped shorelands are Bluff Point State Park,
Haley Farm, and portions of River Road. The remainder of the
coastal area is largely developed in residential or commercial
use.

I
I
I I
I Ill. Facilities and Resourc.es of
I National Importance
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

FACILITIES AND RESOURCES OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE

The coastal management act requires that Facilities and Resource Uses of
National Importance be given adequate consideration in the municipal
coastal program. This consideration means that the facility may not be
excluded from the coastal zone without reasonable grounds. These grounds
are defined as (i) may reasonably be sited inland of the coastal boundary,
(ii) fails to meet all applicable federal and state environmental, health,
and safety standards, or (iii) unreasonably restricts physical or visual
access to coastal waters.

The Town of Groton contains several natural resources of national impor-
tance. These include tidal wetlands, shellfishing areas, water pollution
control measures, air pollution control measures, federal navigation
channels and basins, and state-owned natural wildlife areas, all of which
are discussed in section II of this document, Coastal Land and Water
Resources. In addition the town contains a man-made facility of national
importance, the submarine base on the Thames River. There are no plans or
recommendations in the town's coastal program to exclude or restrict any of
these facilities or resources from Groton's coastal zone,

r
I
I
I
IV. Existing Land Use Policies
I and Regulations
IF
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

EXISTING LAND USE POLICIES AND REGULATIONS

The following analysis examines the existing land use within the coastal
area and notes possible conflicts with the Plan of Development and the
zoning ordinance. These are examined on a site specific basis in order to
determine where particular changes may be needed.

A. CURRENT PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT

1. Description of Land Use and Current Plan of Development

The current Plan of Development (POD) was adopted in November
1973 with amendments to March 1981. The plan recommends a
variety of uses within the coastal zone including varying density
residential, commercial, and industrial.

Residential areas in the coastal zone are designated low density,
moderate density, townhouse residential, multi-family, and rural
density. Commercial areas are designated general commercial and
professional offices. In addition, there are a few industrial
areas and parcels designated public facilities, recreation and
open space, and natural resources.

In addition, there are areas of public and semi-public uses which
include institutions and parks.

In the area along the Thames River, the developed areas are
composed of single family residential uses and the Odd Fellows
Home. There is one large tract of open space. The area is
designated for moderate density development except f or the Odd
Fellows Home which is designated recreation and open space.

In the coastal area north of the airport, the area is a mixture
of commercial development and some residential, plus the water-
shed area, north of Poquonnock Road, and some of the area is
designated recreation and open space. Further east, there are
tracts of industrial land around the railroad. North of the
railroad the land use is a mixture of residential -- single
family and multi-family -- and commercial. In these areas, the
Plan of Development conforms with the existing land use.

South of the railroad tracks and to the east of the Poquonnock
River is Bluff Point State Park, designated as recreation and
open space on the Plan of Development. To the west of the
Poquonnock River is the Groton-New London airport which is shown
as a public facilities area on the Plan of Development.

Along the Mystic River north of 1-95, there is some single family
development, designated a mixture of low and rural density and
natural resources on the Plan of Development. The Mystic Educa-
tional Center, designated as a public facility and a large

L E D
-- - -- - - - --- -- ---------- -- ------------ - - - - - - - -------

N
X

14@

.................

ryggp-

GROTON
CONNECTICUT EXISTING LAND USE 1980

recreation area shown as such on the Plan of Development, make up
the remainder of the land use in the area.

Further south along the Mystic River, the area is built up with
single family and two family development being the predominant
uses, along with the waterfront commercial area associated with
the Village of Mystic. In addition, there are some large areas
of open space. On the Plan of Development, most of the area is
designated low and moderate density with the exception of the
waterfront design district and a few areas of recreation and open
space.

South of Sixpenny Island and along the Long Island Sound, most of
the area is single family development, designated low density and
moderate density residential development. The major exceptions
to this are marina complexes, limited commercial areas within
Noank village and Haley Farm State Park.

2. Conflict Analysis

a. Thames River, south of CrystalLake Road to Grove Avenue

Along the Thames River, the Plan of Development designates
most of the area as moderate density development. The
development of the U.S.S. Nautilus as a tourist area on the
Thames waterfront, is likely to have a major impact in the
area. It is therefore suggested that the area immediately
adjacent to the new development be designated tourist
commercial in order to reflect the future development in the
area. It should be noted that the attraction of the U.S.S.
Nautilus, is expected to generate new commercial development
outside the coastal boundary, along Route 12, so that the
Plan of Development designation of tourist commercial should
be considered for extension to this area. This designation
would be tailored to tourist commercial activities and
promote a high quality service area.

The area on which the Odd Fellows Home is situated is
designated recreation and open space. While it is expected
that the existence of the home will continue for the near
future, eventually this area may be developed for more
intensive use. It is therefore recommended that the Plan of
Development be amended from recreation and open space to
reflect this property's potential and to conform with the
surrounding area -- the new designation being that of
moderate density residential.

There has been some thought expressed to developing the
waterfront along the Thames River, between the River and the
railroad, as it could provide an opportunity for various
water-dependent uses which could take. advantage of the

availability of different transportation modes. The feasi-
bility of using this land for this purpose is beyond this
project's scope, however it should be reserved for future
consideration. One example of future use would be to
develop shoreline facilities for nearby marine or water-
related use development or expansion from the City of
Groton. However, the present designation of open space on
the Plan of Development, should be retained.

b. Birch Plain Creek to Poguonnock River

The Plan of Development indicates an area of natural
resources west of the airport. The existing land use is
presently a mixture of residential, commercial/office,
semi-public, commercial, and vacant property. The area is
zoned IA-40, CB-15, CA-12, and RU-20. The only sensitive
part in the area is the land adjacent to Birch Plain Creek
which is designated recreation and open space. The natural
resources designation on the Plan of Development west of
Thomas Road appears to be misplaced and should be changed to
an industrial classification along with other land adjacent
to Thomas Road, excluding the tidal wetland area. The area
at the northern corner of High Rock Road and Poquonnock
Road, presently designated moderafe density residential in
the Plan of Development, and zoned commercial, should be
considered for Professional Office designation.

The large tract north of Trail's Corner which is designated
natural resources, appears to be mislabeled since a natural
resource designation does not denote future land use desig-
nation. It is recommended that the area be changed to
moderate density residential on the Plan of Development,
while maintaining selected areas having severe resource
limitations.

The area designated as moderate density residential, located
south of the intersection of Tower Avenue and High Rock Road
should be redesignated to reflect current use and its
proximity to the airport industrial complex. Therefore, it
is recommended that this area be redesignated to industrial.

An area just north of the airport, on state property, is a
sensitive wetland area which will be considered for natural
resource designation.

C. Poquonnock River East to Mumford Cove

The area generally north of Lilly Lane and southeast of Fort
Hill Homes is moderate density residential and should be
reconsidered for townhouse residential. This would allow an

alternative form of housing at a density which is consistent
with the Fort Hill area.

The area east of Depot Road and north of Industrial Drive is
inappropriately designated open space because it has not
been slated for acquisition by the town. Therefore, it
should be designated as moderate density to conform with the
tort Hill area.

d. Mumford Cove East to Noank (Brook Street)

The area north of Mumford Cove Estates and south of the
railroad line should be redesignated from natural resource
to recreation and open space so that it is preserved as per
the original subdivision plan.

The large waterfront commercial areas, one on West Cove and
the other on the Mystic River side of the peninsula, desig-
nated on the current Plan of Development as general com-
mercial should be changed to reflect their relation to the
water. Therefore, it is recommended that they be redesig-
nated a new category, marine commercial/recreation. This
new category, marine commercial/recreation would be substi-
tuted for the existing marine recreation designation. This
designation would encourage water-dependent uses such as
marinas, commercial/recreational fishing and shellfishing
and associated marine equipment sales.

e. Noank (Brook Street) to Willow Point (School Street)

The area currently designated as waterfront design district
on Willow Point should be reclassified as marine commercial/
recreation, and the waterfront design district should be
eliminated as a designation in the Plan of Development, as
it is essentially a zoning designation.

f. Mystic/Fort Rachel Neighborhood

Refer to Chapter VII for a review of this area.

g. North of Mystic to 1-95

No changes recommended in the Plan of Development.

h. 1-95 to Route 184

No changes recommended in the Plan of Development.

B. CURRENT ZONING

1. Description of Zoning

The existing zoning regulations were adopted in March 1979 and
amended in April 1981. It should be noted that the Noank area is
independently controlled from a *zoning standpoint. The Noank
Zoning Commission controls this area while the Town of Groton
Zoning Commission controls the remainder of the coastal area
covered by this plan.

Residential uses are divided into single family, two family and
multi-family (as a conditional use). Commercial uses allow
entertainment and recreation uses, financial and government uses,
wholesale and retail trade, and personal services. In addition,
the waterfront district allows yacht clubs and marinas. Indus-
trial uses allow transportation and communication facilities,
food manufacturing, textile mill products, wood, paper and
printing operations, and chemical and metal production.

The coastal area along the Thames River is zoned R-12, single
family residential and RS-12, single and two family residential,
with one area zoned multi-family development.

North of the Groton-New London airport, much of the area is zoned
industrial with some commercial and residential zones at the
northern end of the Poquonnock River. To the east of the river
at Bluff Point State Park, the area is zoned RS-20, single family
development, while on the west side of the river at the airport,
the area is zoned IB-80, industrial and to the west of the
airport, IA-40, industrial.

The area along the Mystic River north of 1-95 is zoned RU-20, one
and two family residential, while south of 1-95 it is zoned
RS-20, single family residential. Further south on the Mystic
River, the area is zoned residential, one and two family homes
with the exception of the waterfront design district south of
Route 1.

The remainder of the coastal zone around Palmer Cove and Mumford
Cove is zoned residential except for two small areas zoned
waterfront commercial.

2. Conflict Analysis

a. Thames River, south of Crystal Lake Road to Grove Avenue

The development of the U.S.S. Nautilus will bring large
numbers of visitors to the area and will undoubtedly result
in new commercial development to serve such visitors. In
order to control the resultant development, it is

recommended that a new zoning classification, tourist-
commercial, be established that will regulate the type of
development that will take place in the area.

b. Birch Plain Creek to Poguonnock River

As discussed above, the area adjacent to Birch Plain Creek
is zoned IA-40. In order to protect the sensitive area
adjacent to the Creek, the zoning should be changed from
industrial to low density residential, for example, minimum
lot area should be 80,000 square feet.

The area at the northern corner of High Rock Road and
Poquonnock Road, presently zoned CB-15, should be zoned to
OMF (Office/multi-family) which allows both one and two
family housing, multi-family as a conditional use, as well
as professional offices. This concept is recommended so as
to centralize intensive commercial development within the
downtown area.

The small commercidl zone, CB-15, to the west of Poquonnock
River, north of the railroad, is designated moderate density
residential and its existing land use is a mixture of single
family development, a truck terminal, and a small park. It
is suggested that the area be rezoned residential, R-12, to
reflect the existing land use, the Plan of Development, and
to ensure that the zoning designation will not jeopardize
sensitive coastal resources.

C. Poquonnock River East to Mumford Cove

The northern section of Bluff Point State Park is zoned
1C-40 while the remaining area is zoned RS-20. In order to
ensure preservation of the state park, there are two options
open to the town. The town could create a zone of open
space and zone the entire park in this manner. However,
this could lead to some legal complications in the future,
not so much from zoning state-owned land as open space, but
the creation of such a zone may lead to attempts to extend
it in the future to other areas in the town. An alternative
solution would be to zone the entire area as low density
residential, in order to protect the area with the knowledge
that any development in the area would require a coastal
site plan review. Because no utilities exist and because of
the existence of sensitive coastal resources, a zoning
designation having a minimum lot size of 120,000 square feet
appears to be reasonable.

d. Mumford Cove East to Noank (Brook Street)

Zoning recommendations for this area will be forthcoming

after the entire Noank village is examined in a future Plan
of Development report.

e. Noank (Brook Street) to Willow Point (School Street)

The same treatment proposed for Bluff Point should be
considered for the Beebe Pond area.

f. Mystic/Fort Rachel Neighborhood

Refer to Chapter VII for a review of this area.

g. North of Mystic to 1-95

No zoning changes are recommended for this area.

h. 1-95 to Route 184

The residential RU-20 zone along the Mystic River allows
development on half acre lots. At present, the area is not
sewered and there are no plans to extend the sewer system to
this area, as the area has significant resource limitations
for small lot development. It is therefore suggested that
the zone be changed to permit only large lot development in
order to provide sufficient room for future leaching fields
from septic systems. This rezoning should minimize future
problems related to concentrated development. minimum lot
size recommended is 80,000 square feet.

General Zoning Changes

In addition to specific parcels, new requirements can be added to
existing residential, commercial, and industrial zones, Greater
setbacks from the water's edge and wetlands, requirements for livable
areas of buildings to be above the coastal flood hazard area, methods
of construction to be requited that can withstand strong winds,
maintenance of a percentage of open space to be required from the road
through to the water so that some visible access to the shorefront is
maintained, are examples of modifications that can be made in resi-
dential zones. In addition, commercial and industrial development can
be regulated through controls over waste disposal, runoff, parking
requirements as well as setbacks and open space conditions similar to
those in residential zones.

The coastal site plan review requirements of the Coastal Management
Act will be incorporated into the zoning regulations.

C. OTHER REGULATIONS AND PLANS

1* Economic Development Policy Statement

In June 1981, the Groton Town Council adopted the Economic
Development Policy Statement (EDPS) which identified several
goals, actions and policies which the town should pursue in order
to further its economic development. Some of these goals are in
agreement with the objectives of the coastal task force, while
others may result in a conflict of objectives which will have to
be resolved.

The basic conclusions which the EDPS cites are that if present
development trends continue, it is anticipated that local taxes
will increase at a rate of 10-12 percent annually in the foresee-
able future unless services are reduced. In addition, the report
adds that it is anticipated that total non-local tax revenue
sources will not proportionately maintain the same level of
increase as they have over the last ten years. Therefore, the
town will become more dependent on local tax revenue required.
The report concludes that this tax revenue will either be raised
from higher taxes and/or an increased net taxable grand list.

The report describes the town's overall goal as economic develop-
ment (including tourism, commercial and industrial) which will
strengthen the town's tax base, income base and job base. This
goal, the report adds, should be actively encouraged and fostered
by the town and its policy-making bodies.

In order to accomplish this goal, the report makes several
recommendations:

a. The town should determine the feasibility of developing the
39� acre Groton-New London Airport parcel identified as
surplus, and land immediately adjacent thereto into an
industrial area. The report notes that the area in the
northwest corner of the airport is highly suitable for
industrial development containing good access, stable
building material, utilities and rail transportation.
However, the area west of the airport which abuts Birch
Plain Creek and is zoned IB-40 (light industry) , the report
suggests, has little usage as an industrial area with
today's development requirements and environmental restric-
tions.

b. Tourist-oriented commercial activity (including recreation
and historical/cultural development) should be recognized as
an important part of Groton's economic base, augmenting
existing commercial activity and the town should encourage
its full development.

The report recognizes that the tourist industry in Groton is
becoming an increasingly large segment of the local economy
and, as a result, it is necessary that the importance of
this growing industry be recognized and developed properly.
The report adds, "there has been little effort on the local
or regional level to tie together tourist resources either
through the promotion of package tours or the development of
a central theme that would promote Groton as a primary
destination point for tourists."

The coastal management program encourages public access to
the coast and its resultant tourist trade. The promotion of
Groton as a tourist center can be encouraged under the
coastal program so that tourists will be drawn to parts of
the town other than Mystic, where tourism has resulted in
traffic congestion.

one suggestion by the coastal task force which echoes that
of the EDPS report is the promotion of the U.S.S. Nautilus
as a major tourist attraction. In addition, the coastal
task force suggested the establishment of a ferry service
between the memorial and New London. The EDPS report
suggests that the town should actively and aggressively help
to develop the U.S.8. Nautilus into a premier tourist
attraction. "It is recommended that a local committee be
established whose main function would be to ensure that this
attraction is developed in a way which is in the best
interests of the Town. This committee should, at a minimum,
represent the Planning, Zoning and Economic Development
Commissions and the Town Council."

The EDP report also has several specific suggestions for the
promotion of tourism. These suggestions are: establish an
economic development commission subcommittee whose main
responsibility would be the further development of the
town's tourism, recreational and historical resources;
develop a tourism development plan which would identify
'A local tourist utilization, identify their priority develop-
ment, spell out a town-wide promotion program, and identify
programs that would maximize economic benefits of tourist
resources; support the establishment of a National Maritime
Historic Park along the Thames River; support the regional
efforts of the Southeastern Connecticut Chamber of Commerce,
Thames River Development Corporation, and others in their
efforts to fully develop the region's tourist potential;
support the establishment of a submarine museum at the U.S.
Submarine Base in Groton at Goss Cove. In addition, the EDP
report suggests that the Town examine the feasibility of
intensifying the use and development of water-related
development along the Thames and Mystic Rivers

and the Sound in keeping with the Coastal Area Management
Program guidelines.

C. The future industrial and commercial development of the town
are of prime interest to the EDP report. The report recom-
mends that the town conduct a thorough review of all indus-
trial and commercial land use opportunities within the town
and make needed recommendations based on the policy state-
ment. The report adds that this review should be undertaken
by the Planning, Zoning, and Economic Development Commis-
-gions jointly. As far as new development in the coastal
zone is concerned, any new commercial and industrial devel-
opment would be reviewed by coastal site plan review and
thus would have to satisfy adopted coastal policies.

Recommendations in the EDPS that affect the coastal zone
include the following:

"The IC-40 area south of the railroad tracks in the Bluff
Point area is State property and not developable at this
point in time." As noted earlier in this discussion, the
area abutting Birch Plain Creek and zoned IB-40 (light
industry) may also be an area more suited to an alternate
use. "The IC-40 area north of the railroad tracks in Fort
Hill is presently being utilized, though not to its
potential. Limited expansion of this zone may be pos-
sible ... to provide a marketable, heavy industrial develop-
ment site."

d. As part of encouraging development within Groton, the EDP
report recommends the simplification of the permit process
and approvals from local government bodies. The report
suggests that consideration should be given to the consoli-
dation of agencies and commissions for W review and permit
procedures; and (ii) planning, zoning and wetlands. To the
extent that this may affect land use decisions within the
coastal zone, this recommendation should be of -concern to
the coastal program. As part of this recommendation, the
EDP report suggests that specific zoning regulations should
rely more heavily on performance standards as opposed to
those that are hard and f ast. Although these recommen-
dations were geared towards industrial and commercial
activities, they could equally be applied to development
within the coastal zone in order to regulate problems of
runoff and flooding caused by new development.

2. Old Town Beach Study

Linked to the encouragement of tourists is the issue of expanding

access to the beaches in the town, especially to the Old Town
Beach. This issue was examined in detail by a study conducted by
the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).
The DEP proposal suggested the construction of a 21 foot wide
bridge to provide pedestrian, bicycle, and emergency vehicle
access to the beach.

The town's open space component of the 1979 Plan of Development
is also in favor of such a proposal. "The State is...reviewing
proposals for a method for renewing access to the former Town
Beach on the airport property. The Town should take a strong
position in favor of regaining access to this beach." The same
plan also notes, "although the town owns several pieces of
waterfront property with sandy beaches, as does the State, in
general the access to the beaches and good swimming facilities in
the town is limited. Most of the unrestricted good beach areas
are located at the southern end of Bluff Point." The Plan of
Development proposes the use of selected areas of the reservoir
for swimming facilities, but for those who wish to swim from the
beach, good swimming areas are lacking.

As part of promoting the areas that are available, the Plan of
Development suggests that "increased publicity and awareness (of
the beaches) will help boost the town's image to visitors as well
as residents ... The preparation of a flyer with a map showing the
more important recreational areas could be placed at popular
tourist areas for free distribution to the public."

3. Wetland Statutes and Regulations

Connecticut has legislation for both tidal wetlands and inland
wetlands. The state's tidal wetland statutes, which have been in
effect for more than ten years, declare that many of Connecti-
cut's tidal wetlands have been destroyed by unregulated activ-
ities, and therefore, it is "the public policy of this state to
preserve the wetlands and to prevent the despoilation and de-
struction thereof."

In addition to the tidal wetland statutes, Connecticut also has
tidal wetland regulations, which became effective in August,
1980. Activities which require permits under these regulations
include draining, dredging, excavation, dumping, filling, erect-
ing structures, driving piles, or any obstruction of a wetland,
whether or not it ef f ects the tidal ebb and f low. The permit
procedure for such activities includes completion of a detailed
application, publication of a notice, and an optional public
hearing. The regulations include a set of criteria to be used by
the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) in making a
decision concerning an application for a regulated activity. The

criteria include consideration of: recreational and navigational
uses; erosion and sedimentation; fish, shellfish and wildlife;
circulation and quality of tidal waters; flood control functions;
and overall wetland quality.

To provide guidance to prospective applicants, the regulations
also include details on types of activities which are generally
compatible or incompatible. With certain restrictions, the
following activities are generally considered compatible with
tidal wetland preservation: the placement of small piers and
catwalks; placement of pipes and cables; stormwater drainage
structures; and the erection of water dependent industrial and
commercial facilities, Activities which are generally incom-
patible include: filling; excavation; the construction of shore-
line stabilization structures; the construction or repair of
tidal gates; the construction of commercial or industrial facil-
ities which do not require water access; and the construction of
water dependent facilities on fill.

The Connecticut statute governing freshwater wetlands, which was
passed in 1972, is the Connecticut Inland Wetlands and Water
Courses Act. This act defines wetlands as "land, including
submerged land, not regulated pursuant to Sections 22a-28 to
22a-35 (tidal wetlands) which consists of any of the soil types
designated as poorly drained, very poorly drained, alluvial and
flood plain by the National Cooperative Soils Survey." Under
this act, the following activities are allowed, as of right:
grazing and farming; a residential home for which a building
permit has been issued; boat anchorage or mooring; uses inci-
dental for the enjoyment and maintenance of residential property;
construction and operation of water supply facilities; conserva-
tion activities; and outdoor recreation facilities and activi-
ties, where otherwise legally permitted. Regulated activities,
which require an application for permit, include any uses other
than those listed as allowed, which involve "removal or deposi-
tion of material, or any obstruction, construction, alteration or
pollution of such wetlands or water courses."

4. Flood Hazard Regulations

Groton is a member of the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) , which is a program administered by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) to provide flood insurance to property
owners in participating localities. There are two phases in the
NFIP, the emergency phase and the regular phase. The regular
phase of the program is based on a Flood Insurance Rate Map
(FIRM) which shows the boundaries of flood hazard areas and
anticipated flood levels within them. The emergency phase of the
program relies on a less precise Flood Hazard Boundary Map (FHBM)
which shows the approximate boundary of the 100 year floodplain.

IV-12

Groton is a member of the regular phase of the NFIP and, as such,
has been issued a detailed FIRM. This map designates a base
flood (100 year flood) elevation of 11 feet m.s.l. for the
special flood hazard areas in the town.

To ensure eligibility for continued participation in the NFIP,
the Town of Groton has passed a floodplain management ordinance
as part of its zoning regulations. This ordinance establishes
policies and permit requirements related to land use and develop-
ment in those parts of the town designated as special flood
hazard areas. Some of the major requirements for activities in
coastal hazard areas include:

All new construction shall be located landward of the reach
of mean high tide.

All new construction or substantial improvements shall be
elevated on adequately anchored pilings or columns so that
the lowest floor is elevated to or above the base flood
level.

No fill shall be used as structural support for buildings.

There shall be no alteration of sand dunes which would
increase potential flood damage.

The placement of mobile homes shall be prohibited outside
existing mobile home parks and subdivisions.

Requirements for other, non-coastal flood hazard areas include:

All new construction and substantial improvements shall be
designed and adequately anchored to prevent flotation,
collapse, or lateral movement.

New construction or substantial improvement of any resi-
dential structure shall have the lowest floor, including the
basement, elevated to or above the base flood level.

New mobile home parks or their expansion shall have stands
or lots elevated on compacted fill or on pilings so that the
lowest floor of the mobile home will be at or above the base
flood level.

These regulations, which took effect in March 1979 with the
adoption of the zoning ordinance, are consistent with the regula-
tions of the National Flood Insurance Program.

IV-13

S.-

I
I
I
I
I V. Coastal Issues and Problems
w
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

COASTAL ISSUES AND PROBLEMS

A. WATER-ORIENTED

1. maintenance of Navigation Channels: Along the Mystic River, the
demand for mooring space has led to the encroachment of moored
boats into the navigation channels. A plan for a mooring system
needs to be developed with some identification of areas available
for moorings.

2* Dredging of Navigation Channels: A uniform policy to control
dredging and filling should be established for the Groton water-
front which examines the effects of dredging in different areas
and on several projects. The Poquonnock River, Mumford Cove, West
Cove and the Mystic River are all areas of concern.

3. Shellfishing Areas: Several areas in Groton are closed to
shellfishing because of sewage treatment plants in the area.
Baker Cove is presently closed to shellfishing but will reopen
after the airport is tied into the sewer system. The Poquonnocki
River has bay scallops and quahogs, and oyster grounds above the
bridge. However, the opening of the river is being slowly filled
by sand. Palmer's Cove has oyster grounds above the bridge,
however, the growth of eel grass is restricting the fishing
areas. West Cove is closed to shellfishing due to siltation.
Mumford Cove is closed to shellfishing due to the sewage
treatment outfall. Beebe Cove, off the Mystic River, is also
closed because of wastewater problems. There is no program to
test the sewer system or to tie shorefront housing into the sewer
system in order to control pollution. The reopening of marginal
shellfish beds should be discussed with the State, and
consideration should be given to a unified approach to dredging
the Town's coastal waterways.

4. Ferries: The establishment of a limited ferry service between
peripheral parking areas north of 1-95 and the Mystic Seaport may
alleviate parking problems in the area.

5. Water Quality: Due to siltation problems, there is poor water
quality in the public swimming areas at the existing town
beaches.

6. Thames River: The waterfront along the Thames River should
provide water-oriented commercial facilities if it is to be
developed.

B. WATER'S EDGE

1. Marina Development: Prohibit expansion of existing boating
facilities or new marinas or boat yards north of the Route 1
drawbridge, on the Mystic River. The Mystic River has a limited
capacity to accommodate marinas. On the Thames River, there is a
need for more public boat launch areas.

2. Docks and Piers: There should be consideration given to limiting
construction of docks, piers, bulkheads and fill on the Mystic
River to include only those improvements necessary to maintain
the existing shoreline,

3. Moored Watercraft: Partially sunken or sunken barges are moored
by the water's edge at the Fort Rachel waterfront create a blight
on the area. Unregulated houseboat development should be dis-
couraged, because of health and navigation factors. These craft
should be controlled.

4. Beaches: Access to town beaches should be publicized and im-
proved, especially to the old Town beach whose access was cut off
with the installation of the instrument landing system at
Groton-New London Airport.

5. Visual Access to the Water: Multi-family housing, including
condominiums, adjacent to the water blocks views of the
waterfront.

6. Public Access to the Water: Access to the waterfront both at
beaches and in built-up areas should be available to residents.

7. Erosion: Erosion of the shorefront and adjacent wetlands will
eventually cause property damage to buildings on the shoreline.
A buffer between construction and erosion areas and wetland areas
may prevent property damage and preserve wetlands.

8. Waterfront Uses: Some waterfront uses can overload inland
support systems such as boat trailers passing through narrow
streets over the summer.

C. LAND USE

1. River Road: The most frequently mentioned land use issue is the
conservation of the area along River Road adjacent to the Mystic
River. While several groups have advocated enacting a conserva-
tion zone, there are several legal problems with this approach as
it denies reasonable use of the land by existing owners. One
alternative is to zone for large lot zoning, but large lot
acreage must be justified by soil conditions, health standards
for wells and septic systems, etc. A second alternative might be
to zone the area for agricultural use, but this requires that the
land be both suitable for agriculture and that some potential
market exists.

2. Downtown Mystic: In order to relieve travel congestion in
downtown Mystic, several suggestions have been proposed.
Improved signage for parking in order to prevent traffic from
proceeding over the bridge while looking for a parking space is
one suggestion. Alternatively, running a mini-bus from 1-95 to

V-2

the downtown area may sufficiently alleviate traffic. Additional
recommendations will be developed as part of a detailed study of
Mystic and Fort Rachel Place.

3. Walkways and Bikepaths: Create coordinated walkways and bike-
paths along the shore.

4. Marshes and Wetlands: Amend the Zoning Regulations to prohibit
future building on tidal marshes. Regulate the use of land
immediately adjacent to tidal and inland wetlands.

5. Commercial Development: Commercial buildings in the Village of
Mystic should be prohibited from encroaching into existing
residential neighborhoods.

6. Open Space: Preserve the Fish Farm, Sixpenny Island, Bluff
Point, and Fort Rachel Place as open space. Establish conserva-
tion zones along Upper Mystic River and Poquonnock River.

7. Sewers: Create a septic system testing program along the shore-
front and require sewer connections for all properties adjacent
to the river where available. There should be some protective
device at sewer pump stations to permit retention during
breakdowns.

8. Nautilus Memorial: The development of the Nautilus Memorial, is
a high-priority concern. It will become a large tourist attrac-
tion, but parking is limited. Perhaps access by water and by
rail should be promoted.

9. Industrial Park: Development of the industrial park near the
airport should have some zoning regulations attached to prevent
any discharge of chemicals and bulk waste into the Poquonnock
River, and Baker's Cove.

10. Road Maintenance: Ensure that sand scattered on the road during
the winter to prevent skidding does not run into wetlands or
coves. The installation of retention basins would alleviate this
4A problem.
11, Residential Construction: Establish standards, such as providing
public access as a mitigating measure, for new residential
construction adjacent to the water, or require the retention of
as much visual access as possible.

12. Airport: Recommendations to expand the airport and to restrict
its expansion have been made. These conflicting policies have to
be resolved.

v-3

13. Setbacks: Setbacks for residential development adjacent to the
water have been suggested, in order to protect property from
severe storms and erosion.

14. Mixed-use Development: Groton's waterfront design district,
which allows mixed commercial and residential development, should
be expanded.

v-4

Nr- -
I
I
I
I
I V1. Coastal Policies
"Mor-
I
I
11

m
A

-M

'A
I
0
0
0
I
I
I
I

COASTAL POLICIES

A. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STATE AND LOCAL POLICIES

The development of the following policies for Groton's municipal
coastal program represent the goals and objectives for the future
development and protection of the coastal zone. They indicate the
special concerns and problems peculiar to Groton, but are in addition
to and complement the state coastal policies. They should not be
regarded as an alternative to the state program. For this reason,
policies that are covered by the state program are not included in
Groton's coastal program. Any future development within the Groton
coastal zone must satisfy both state and local policies, once the
latter are adopted.

B. COASTAL WATERS

1. Encourage the maintenance of existing navigation channels along
the coves and rivers to ensure access remains open by developing
a plan for a mooring system, and land-reiated marina complexes,
in heavy boating areas such as the Mystic River.

2. Upgrade the coves, rivers and bays along the coast so that they
can be better used for recreation and fishing, including prote-
ction against wastewater discharge and spills associated with
public sewer systems.

3. Improve water quality and reduce water pollution by requiring new
development adjacent to the water to tie into the existing sewer
system where available. Encourage a survey of existing sewage
disposal problem areas.

'J 4. Develop a timetable with the state to reopen marginal shellfish
beds.

5. Prohibit degradation of scenic views on the Mystic River and
other areas by offering incentives to developers in exchange for
preservation of views.

6. Encourage the development of an overall policy and plan for
control of dredging and filling in coastal waters.

7. Encourage control of marina expansion in heavy use areas, in
order to regulate traffic and other impacts on the land and on
the water.

B. Control houseboats to the greatest extent practical, strongly
discourage houseboat locations north of Route I on the Mystic
River.

C. OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION
1. Preserve the open character of the Mystic River by limiting
development in certain areas.

2. Increase public access to waterfront areas including recreational
boating and fishing access to the shore and navigable waterways.
Public and private development projects should be considered in
relation to this concept and encouraged to promote it.

3. Improve public use of the waterfront by actively pursuing new
facilities and expanding existing facilities for recreation,
specifically beaches, encouraging public access to the waterfront
in built-up areas, and requiring clean-up of derelict structures
and debris from the water's edge.

4. Encourage the creation of walkways and bikepaths along the
shoreline.

5. Preserve sensitive coastal resources such as tidal marshes,
beaches and dunes, bluffs, and the river's edge.

6. Encourage the development and maintenance, once developed, of the
U.S.S. Nautilus as a major high quality tourist attraction while
minimizing adverse impacts on the coastal area.

7. Encourage the state to maintain Bluff Point in the manner stated
in Special Act No. 75-45, and to discuss with the town any
modifications planned in the area.

D. RESIDENTIAL

1. Encourage clusters and setbacks for new residential development
along the water's edge, to protect environmental ly- sensitive
areas.

M
A 2. Establish standards for new residential construction that retain
maximum visual access to the water.

3. Encourage new residential development in existing developed
areas, so as to encourage development in areas serviced by
utilities.

4. Retain the existing residential character of "village" neighbor-
hoods, and the ratio of land in residential use in these areas.

E. TRANSPORTATION

Encourage the improvement of public transportation in the coastal zone
by bus, train, and ferry service.

VI-2

F. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL

1. Improve access to the Mystic area by encouraging increased public
transportation to the area.

2. Preserve the existing historic character of downtown Mystic.

3. Prevent the degradation of water quality where new industrial
development takes place within the coastal zone. Review poten-
tial discharge and containment of industrial waste and drainage
through the coastal site plan review process, to ensure com-
pliance with applicable federal and state environmental health
and safety standards.

4. Discourage the physical expansion of the Groton-New London
Airport.

5, Encourage economic development adjacent to the airport.

6. Give high priority and preference to water-dependent industrial
and commercial uses and facilities in existing developed and
non-sensitive shorefront areas.

VI-3

14& -
I
I
I
I
Vil. Mystic- and Fort Rachel Place
w-,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A

m
'A

0
'A
'A

0
'A 'A

,le

0
i
I

MySTIC AND FORT RACHEL PLACE

A, INTRODUCTION

The Village of Mystic and the adjacent Fort Rachel Place area exhibit
special features which warrant separate consideration in the Municipal
Coastal Program. These features include the historic character and value
of the area, the increasing pressure for waterfront development, the growth
and success of the commercial area and the resulting pressures for expan-
sion into neighboring residential areas, parking and traffic problems, and
the future potential of the largely undeveloped Ft. Rachel Place area.

The initial steps of the Mystic/Fort Rachel Place study were undertaken by
the Town in 1981, and included a detailed analysis of land use, building
conditions, ownership patterns, traffic and parking considerations, zoning
and Plan of Development recommendations. This process, combined with a
series of meetings with Mystic and Fort Rachel Place residents, resulted in
the identification of issues and problems in the area. The discussion of
the issues formed the basis for the creation of general policies and objec-
tives and more specific recommendations for the Mystic-Fort Rachel Place
area.

'A
'A

VII-1

rod
WIN
k

Aerial View of Mystic

Ob..
name;

-00,4*,%

."low
7-t
-qua

ferial View of Fort Rachel

EXISTING LAND USE, POLICIES AND REGULATIONS

1. Existing Land Use

The Mystic-Fort Rachel area is essentially a residential community
with a thriving commercial center and waterfront marina area. The
shorefront north of the Route 1 drawbridge is for the most part
private open space, and thus preserved in a natural state. The
riverfront, from just north of the drawbridge to near the Penn Central
railroad embankment is classified as developed shorefront, and con-
tains a number of marinas and docks, as well as other uses.

The coastal hazard area is relatively extensive north of Route 1,
encompassing most of the land between the river and the hillside west
of Pearl street and Grove Avenue. - To the south of Route 1, the
coastal hazard area becomes increasingly narrower; encompassing the
shopping and marina area east of Water Street in Mystic and the marina
area in Fort Rachel Place.

Most of the shorelands are physically separated from the waterfront
portions of the coastal area by a sudden rise in elevation (slopes
ranging from approximately 25% to as much as 90%) between Pearl and
High Streets north of Route 1 and west of Water Street south of Route
1. The residential portion of Mystic straddles this hillside to the
north and south of the shopping area, which lies between the foot of
the hillside and the river.

The residential portion of the community is largely composed of single
family homes, with a few multi-family houses, churches and a school.
Most of the residential area is within the Mystic historic district,
and the houses are generally well maintained and in good condition.
There are a number of vacant and large lots scattered throughout the
A'A area, which at some point could potentially be developed.
The Mystic shopping area is located on Main Street (Route 1) between
the Mystic River drawbridge and Bank Street and on Water Street north
of New London Road. There are approximately 70 stores in the shopping
area, including eight restaurants, numerous clothing, convenience and
food stores, and a variety of specialty shops. Many of the commercial
buildings have residential uses above them and there are two multi-
family complexes in the village center area.

The present use of Mystic is illustrated on the Existing Land Use Map
on the next page. The condition of buildings in Mystic as determined
by exterior inspection is contained on the Exterior Conditions map.

VII-3

lkftmv

'7-1

LJ__

lp,

_21

LEGEND
A;

MULTI-PANsLy Nousloo
1_4 FAMILY NOUSIMNI

moomfoo mimm
QSWIIIIIAL COMMUNCIAL
WAlIffH0U*a/*TomAax
yJ1. OFFICES
LN musTAusANTs
t MIXED RNSIDINTIAL/C01110HUNCIAL
LIGHT INDUSTRY
F@L WWWRAMUNT LAND AND FACIUVIES
Ew soul. Fusuc
MAXIMS COMMERCIAL
A VACA:Y LAND
VACA I STRUCTURB
p
UWE"" Noun
CAN 1:0ARY

THI 4A,

GROTON
EXISTING LAND USE MYSTIC

z
2
3 5
z
z z
z 3

2 2

z 2 9-
2 2 2 2i%
3

3'z

Z Z Z
3 1 3!
2- 7-
Z-

jP3 oil,

3 -
2 .2 LEGEND
2 2
12 ORMOUTION RUGURED
MAJOR REM"OUTATION
RECRUIR 0
al
PANOR RRHAMILMA"ON
40 REIGUIRSO
2. EXTERIOR PAINTIM2
PKGLURNO
F_j
000

LIXORL.LUNT

3 2

E TERIOR BUILDING CONDITIONS
3

'13
3
OR 10

Table 1

SQUARE FOOTAGE OF BUILDINGS BY CATEGORY*
Mystic/Ft. Rachel Area
July 1981

Square Feet**

RESIDENTIAL
Includes 161 structures used wholly or partially for
residential purposes 378,300

COMMERCIAL
Includes 26 structures devoted entirely or partially
to commercial use 89,500

RESTAURANTS
Includes eight establishments 29,400

OFFICES
Ten establishments inclusive of banks and real estate
offices 30,100

MUNICIPAL
Two structures owned by the Town of Groton 12,000

SEMI-PUBLIC
Three structures for community use 15,500

CHURCHES
includes three churches and two parishes 26,900

MANUFACTURING AND WAREHOUSE
One establishment 14,500

MARINE
Includes structures in use for both marine commercial
and marine recreational purposes 15,700

STORAGE
Two structures used only for storage purposes 1,600

UNFINISHED
Presently includes four structures undergoing a change
in use*** 28,900

*Refer to Existing Land Use Map.

**Figures rounded to nearest 100.

***Unfinished structures are vacant.

Source: Town of Groton Planning Department.

VII-6

Table 2

ACREAGE OF LAND USE BY CATEGORY
Mystic/Fort Rachel Area
July 1981

Acres

Residential 50.2
Residential/Commercial (includes restaurants) 3.3
Commercial (includes banks, offices and restaurants) 3.7
Municipal Facilities 6.1
Semi-Public Uses 6.2
Cemetery .2
Light Industry 2.2
Warehouse/Storage 5.5
Marine Facilities 2.3
Vacant (includes both private and municipal land) 2.3
Roads and Highways 13.7

Total 96.0

*Due to multi-use structures on certain parcels of land,
categories are inclusive of other uses where noted.

Source: Town of Groton Planning Department.

2. Parking

Parking in the study area includes both on-street and off-street
spaces, most of them controlled by time limits, parking fees, or
private ownership. It is not possible to determine the exact number
of spaces existing because some off-street areas are not available to
the public, and because some off-street and all of the on-street
spaces are not marked or physically laid out. An inventory of avail-
able parking however, identified about 300 existing spaces east of
Water and Pearl Streets which can be used with some restrictions, by
the public. This total includes about 60 on-street spaces. The
locations of these parking spaces are shown in Figure 1.

In order to determine existing parking patterns during the peak summer
period, a series of counts and surveys was made in August 1981. These
counts covered both parking accumulations - the number of cars parked

VII-7

(5
S T

Afws wb&mewrkMq surwff taken

&IMI 10ai1l76?.017a'U1710ad1nq alWS (supemsed hy pollce)
0 --*4
lmp@ Of*rkln,y
NL - no ll@nit
Note :,411 streets are two -way

Parking Aeas
VII-S

and the several locations throughout the day and duration the distri-
bution of length of time parking at selected locations. The results
of these surveys are shown in Tables 3 and 4.

The results of these surveys show a heavy use of available parking
space during daylight hours. The counts made at 12:00 noon, 2:30 PM,
and 4:30 PM showed space occupancies ranging from 72 to 82 percent of
the total space. The 10:30 AM and 5:30 'PM counts ran slightly lower.
When the accumulation is greater than 85 percent the area generally is
perceived to be full. The main parking lot had occupancies generally
over 90 percent during the higher count hours, and the on-street
spaces along West Main Street also were frequently more than 90
percent occupied. Saturday parking pattern in the August surveys were
reasonably similar to the weekday patterns.

The parking duration study made at the main (McGee) lot shows substan-
tial use by both short and long-term parkers. The composite distri-
bution for the four survey days shows that short term parkers; i.e.,
those observed only one time, represent 55 percent of the total number
of parked vehicles, but utilized only about 25 percent of the space-
hours used. Conversely, long term parkers; i.e., those observed four
or five times during the day, represent less than 25 percent of the
total parkers, but about 50 percent of the space-hours used * The
surveys at the curbs along West Main Street showed that most vehicles
are parked in compliance with the one-hour limit. Some parking of
between one and two hours was recorded, but very few long term parkers
were counted at the curb spaces.

3. Traffic

Traffic operations in the central area of Mystic are controlled
primarily by the physical restraints. The intersection of West Main
and Water Streets and the drawbridge over the Mystic River. The
signalized intersection of West Main and Allyn Street/West Mystic
Avenue is sufficiently distant from the central area so that it does
not have a direct impact on traffic conditions.

Both West Main Street and Water Street have varying curb-to-curb
widths. Essentially, they both provide one moving lane in each
direction, West Main Street has parking on both sides of the street.
Parking also is available at intermittent locations along the east
side of Water Street and on Gravel Street.

manual turning movement counts were made at the intersection of West
Main Street and Water Street on August 26, 27, and 28, 1981. Counts
were made separately for the hours of 9:15-10:15 AM, 11:30 AM - 12:30
PM, and 4:00-5:00 PM. The results of these three hourly counts for
the three days, and the average counts for the three hours, are shown
in Figure 2.

VII-9

TM M M M M M M M M M
able 3
Parking Accumulation

Number of Vehicles Parked
Parking Area P A PB P C PD PH/NL PE PF PY* Pz Pi PK PG Total Parked Total Percent
Total Spaces Vehicles Spaces of Spaces
87 29 49 12 22 16 9 6 9 19� 20� 14 Counted Counted Occupied

8-19-81 (W)
10:30A 78 8 27 10 (1) 20 (2) 9 9 1 2 14 (2) 18 (2) 12 208 292 71
12:OON 84 17 41 20 (2) 11 9 5 3 14 (2) 19 (2) 14 247 292 85
2:30P 79 17 38 18 (2) 14 7 2 4 12 19 14 234 292 80
4:30P 65 8 34 20(2) 11 7 3 4 10 16 13 201 292 69
5:30P 67 5 23 4 3 5 3 6 126 231 55

B-21-81 (F)
10:30A 79 6 31 18 (3) 6 9 4 6 16 19 14 218
12:OON (3) 292 75
2:30P 82 20 43 23 (3) 10 9 6 6 12 20 15 256 292 88
4:30P 81 19 41 22 (3) 12 8 6 6 13 218 253 86
74 10 36 24 11 7 5 6 14 197 253 78
5:30P 78 15 49 9 7 5 6 12 191 231 83

8-22-81 (s)
10:30A 71 9 30 a 9 5 4 i7 18 10 191 270 71
12:OON 79 11 31 12 9 4 9 18 18 13 214 270 79
2:30P 74 16 39 13 8 4 6 14 18 12 214 270 79
4:30P 74 11 38 14 9 4 4 17 20 10 211 270 78
5:30P 78 11 27 11 8 2 5 10 162 231 70

B-25-81 (T)
10:30A 78 9 33 14 8 2 5 14 17 13 203 270 75
12:OON 86 10 33 14 8 5 5 17 20 16 224 270 83
2:30P 82 22 39 11 8 4 7 17 19 11 230 270 85
4:30P 77 14 34 13 8 3 7 16 17 14 213 270 79
5:30P 71- 9 32 7 7 4 5 6 151 231 65

0 Notes: (2) Estimated number of vehicles parked throughout surveys
Counts made on 8-26-81
(3) Counts made on 8-28-81

TABLE 4A WEDNESDAY
8/19/81
VEHICLE PARKING DURATION SUMMARY VEHICLES PARKED
l0v30AMj 12.OONI 2.30PM 4.30PM 5.30PM AREA PA AREA PB

VEHICLES FIRST xxxxxxx is 1
PARKED AT xxxxxxx xxxxxxxx 12 0
lOv3O AM xxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx 13 2
xxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 16 2
xxxxxxxlxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx*xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 19 3
VEHICLES FIRST xxxxxxxx le 10
PARKED AT xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx 2 0
l2s00 NOON xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 0 0
xxxxxxxxfxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxx 4 0
VEHICLES F M T xxxxxxxx) 18 a
PARKED AT XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 5 2
2s3O PM XXXXXXXXYXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxxxi 2- 0

VEHICLES FIRST xxxxxxxxx 10 1
PARKED AT xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 9 0
4s3O PM

VEHICLES FIRST xxxxxxxx 3:3 2
PARKED AT
5z3O PM
TOTAL CARS PARKED 179 31

NUMBER OF SPACES e7 29

AVERAGE TURNOVER 2.06 1.07

SPACE-OBSERVATIONS 55

CARS PARKEDr
I OBSERVA. 97 22
2 28 2
3 15 2
4 20 2
19 3

179 31

TABLE 4B FRIDAY
8/21/81
VEHICLE PARKING DURATION SUMMARY
VEHICLES PARKED
10130AMI 12:OONI 2&30P" 4t3OPM 513opm AREA PA AREA PS

VEHICLES FIRST xxxxxxxx 15 1
PARKED AT xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx 12 0
10130 AM xxxxxxxx xxx xxxxx:xxxxxxxx) 10 1
xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXXA 22 1
xxxxxxxxixxxxxxxx:xxxXXXXXAXXXXXXXXNXXXXXXXxx 20 3
VEHICLES FIRST xxxxxxxx: 12 12
PARKED AT X) 2 1
12:00 NOON xxxxxxxx XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXXN 3 0
xxxxxxxx XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXXYXXXxxxxxx 1 3
xxxxxxxxlxxxxxxx
VEHICLES FIRST XXXXXXXX) 14 7
PARKED AT XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXX I I
2,30 PM XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXI a 2

VEHICLES FIRST XXXXXXXX) it 0
PARKED AT XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXXX a 0
4s30 PM

VEHICLES FIRST xxxxxxxxx 41 7
PARKED AT
5t3o PM
TOTAL CARS PARKED iso 39

NUMBER OF SPACES 87 29

AVERAGE TURNOVER 2.07 1.34
ix

SP4CE-OBSERV4TIONS 394 71
CARS PARKEDL
1 0 SERVA. 93 27
2 23 2
3 21 3
4 23 4
5 20 3 vii-ii

TABLE 4C SATURDAY
8/22/81
VEHICLE PARKING DURATION SUMMARY
VEHICLES PARKED
l0s30AMl 1230ON 2s30PMl 4sZOPM 3:ZOPM AREA PA AREA PO

VEHICLES FIRST xxxxxxxx 13 2
PARKED AT xxxxxxxx XXXXXXXX) 11 2
10s30 AM xxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX) 9 0
xxxxxxxx XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXX) 7 1
xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx)qxxxxxxxx)xxxxxxxx)xxxxxxxxx 31 4

VEHICLES FIRST XXXXXXXX) 16 4
PARKED AT XXXXXXXX)XXXXXX 0 0
12sOO NOON XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXXXXIXxxxxxxx) 2 0
XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXXX 3 .0

VEHICLES FIRST XXXXXXXX) 16 9
PARKED AT XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXX) 3 1
2s30 PM XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXX)Xkxxxxxx)( 3 1

VEHICLES FIRST XXXXXXXX) is 2
PARKED AT XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXXX 10 2
4 s 30 PM
VEHICLES FIRST XXXXXXXXI 31 4
PARKED AT i
3 1
TOTAL CARS PARKED 170 32

NUMBER OF SPACES 87 29

AVERAGE TURNOVER 1.95 1.10

SPACE-OBSERVATIONS 376 58

CARS PARKEDs
1 OBSEMA. 91 21
2 24 3
3 14 1
4 to I
5 31 4

170 32

TABLE 4D TUESDAY
VEHICLE PARKING DURATION SUMMARY 8/25/81
VEHICLES PARKED
10330AM 12sOON 2x30PMI 4sZOPM 52zopm AREA PA AREA PB
VEHICLES FIRST xxxx 26 2
PARKED AT xx xxx XXXXXXX) 7 2
10s30 AM xxxxxxx XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXX) 7 0
xxxxxxx XXXXXX.XX)XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXXY 25 2
xxxxxxx XXXXXXXXIXXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXI 13 :3
xx xxxlx
VEHICLES FIRST XXXXXXXX) 24 3
PARKED AT XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXX 3 0
12200 NOON xxxxxxxx;xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx :s 0
XXXXXXXX)XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX)l 4 0

VEHICLES FIRST xxxxxxxx 19 10
PARKED AT xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx 2 5
2330 PM xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@ & 2
VEHICLES FIRST xxxxxxxxx 16 1
PARKED AT xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
'4s5O PM

VEHICLES FIRST xxxxxxxx 40 3
PARKED AT I
5:30 PM TOTAL CARS PARKED 203 34

NUMBER OF SPACES 87 29

AVERAGE TURNOVER 2.33 1.17

SPACE-OBSERVATIONS 394 64

CARS PARKEDs
I OBSERVA. 125 19
2 20 a
3 16 2
4 29 2
5 13 3 VII-12
20:3 'A

These traffic volumes by themselves are not especially heavy, and the
intersection and the streets have sufficient capacity to accommodate
them. Traffic operations, however, are adversely affected by the
following existing conditions.

1. The drawbridge over the Mystic River is raised for several
minutes each hour to permit passage of boats. This creates
delays and long queues of waiting vehicles which, under heavy
traffic conditions, can take much of the following hour to clear
out.

2. Parking maneuvers and searching for parking on West Main Street
cause delays to traffic by requiring through traffic to stop
behind each such maneuver. The single moving lane in each direc-
tion does not permit bypassing park-maneuvering vehicle. This
situation also exists on Water Street, although to a much lesser
extent.

3. The single lane approaches at the intersection of West Main and
Water Streets do not provide separate storage areas for left
turning vehicles. As a result, the westbound to southbound and
northbound to westbound left turn movements subject vehicles
behind the turning vehicles to some delay.

4. Uncontrolled and random pedestrian movements conflict with and
tend to slow down the traffic flow. The result of these con-
ditions is a degree of congestion and delay, and a perception of
conditions being worse than they really are.

in order to determine the travel speeds and delays in the central
area, a series of time runs was made on West Main Street between Allyn
Street and the east end of the Main Street bridge. These runs were
made in the period August 19-22, 1981 at various times of the day,
using a car and a stopwatch to record the travel time, and delays.
The results of these time runs are shown in Table 5.

The results of these runs show that the moving travel times for this
section varied from just under two minutes to just under three
minutes; with average speeds of between 14 and 21 miles per hour.
However, the stop or delay times varied greatly, from a low of 10
Seconds to a high of 302 and 427 seconds for runs when the bridge was
up. Overall average speeds for the runs, including stop time, varied
from 9 to 18 miles per hour, except for the runs with the bridge
openings when they were reduced to 6 and 4 miles per hour.

vii-13

W165 T AWN S T WEST M41o

253 301 256

157

-972

W--STAf4lV ST. MCSrAlW,

251 263 24+

(hu %4

Of,

3m 406

WV5
294 1315 281 128

N
F
/elf
1%
%

207 /so

.rz
C@L7 .47 14,37 14

WRSTANIAI ST. WA'S7'AOhV

203 1 .3,9L5 1904 31,

T--

196 1963--@,

Ln
i.
S Lf 57 160@ 72- @50

.7 2.
306
223 220
X`

236 f 236 Z80
W'W SM997f SmZS7 2 7- 81

29 291
26 20

N
f
W.47-WX S7REEr 0-28. cf/ smle_&r 4MT

4:00 5 -700 PA4
E
873:: r-23-8-1
/6 til-

2 7-9 303
173
=2-3=0053

Manual Turning Movement Counts

VIT-16

The low travel speeds, even without considering the stop times,
reflect the congested conditions on West Main Street during these peak
times.

Table 5

Speed and Delay Survey Results of Test Runs

Time in Seconds

Travel Stop Total moving Net
Eastbound Time Time Time Speed Speed

8-19 1:30 PM 125. 10 135 19 18
B-21 12:15 139 427 566 17 4
8-21 10:00 112 17 129 21 18
8-22 12:47 126 83 209 19 11
8-22 4:30 123 150 273 19 9

Westbound

8-21 1:30 PM 114 302 416 21 6
8-21 12:35 119 53 172 20 14
8-21 10:00 AM 131 36 177 18 13
8-22 1:00 PM 132 48 180 18 13
8-22 4:30 PM 174 43 217 14 11

Distance = say 3500 ft.

4. Plan of Development

The current Plan of Development designations in the Mystic-Fort Rachel
area include high density residential (approximately 7,500 square feet
per unit) , moderate density residential (approximately 12,000 square
feet per unit), waterfront design district and public facilities.

Most of the community is classified as moderate density residential.
Existing uses in this area are generally consistent with the plan,
although many of the existing lots exceed 12,000 square feet in size.
A relatively small area in the Orchard Lane/High Street vicinity south
of Route 1 and Bank Street/Pearl Street vicinity north of Route 1 is
classified as high density residential in the plan. Existing uses in
this area include one and two family houses and a few scattered
semi-public uses. The waterfront design district encompasses the
shopping area south of Main Street (Route 1) , the waterfront marina
area east of Water Street and most of the Fort Rachel Park area.
Existing uses in this area encompass a mixture of commercial,
residential, semi-public and marine commercial uses.

VII-17

The main conflict between the plan of development and existing uses is
that the commercial uses on the north side of Main Street are classi-
fied as moderate and high density residential, rather than waterfront
design. In addition, although the concept is valid, "waterfront
design district" may not be an appropriate classification, since it is
a zoning designation. Thus, it may be appropriate to reclassify the
area, while retaining the existing purposes and definitions.

5. Current Zoning

The existing zoning in the Mystic-Fort Rachel area is generally
consistent with the Plan of Development. Residential districts
include RS-8 (single family; minimum lot size of 8, 000 square feet) ,
RS-12 (single family; minimum lot -size of 12,000 square feet) and a
small area at the outskirts of the village zoned RS-20 (minimum lot
size 20,000 square feet) . The residential district boundaries are
largely the same as the plan of development areas, and potential
conflicts include the over-size lots in the RS-12 zone and scattered
two-six family residences in both the RS-8 and RS-12 zones.

The Waterfront Design District (WDD) includes a slightly larger area
than included in the Plan of Development; in that the commercial
frontage north of Main Street and the marine commercial area between
the railroad tracks and Fort Rachel Place/Water Street are within the
district. Thus, the conflict between the existing uses and the Plan
of Development does not occur in terms of present zoning patterns.

C. ISSUES AND PROBLEMS

An identification of the issues and problems confronting Mystic and Fort
Rachel forms a basic component of the study, since proposals and recom-
mendations will be based upon the identified issues. These issues are
summarized on the Issues Map which follows this page. A number of issues
pertaining to Mystic and Fort Rachel were previously identified in Chapter
V of the CAM Report. These are incorporated here, with other issues
identified during an analysis of existing factors (land use patterns,
zoning, building conditions, physical characteristics, traffic and parking
and at public meetings. A Planning Factors Map is attached to identify
these conditions. A basic premise of this analysis is that development
pressures will continue to intensify oHer the decade. The issues are as
follows:

1. Permitting moEe intensive development vs. maintaining Mystic's
existing character:

As development pressures intensify, the existing character of the
village will be under increasing pressure to change. Policies con-
cerning the future role and size of the business area, the future of
existing residential areas, the use of and access to the waterfront,
etc., need to be adopted at this time in order to guide future develop-
ment.

VII-18

2. Potential expansion of the business area:

There is a question of how much, if any, expansion of the commercial
area is desirable, in terms of the impact on the nearby residential
neighborhoods, retention of the shopping area's existing character and
the ability to provide access and parking to accommodate an expansion
of the shopping area. The physical expansion of the business area in
the Groton portion of Mystic is limited on the east by the Mystic
River and to a large extent on the west by the steep hillsides above
Water and Pearl Streets. Thus, the pressure for expansion will
probably be to the north and south of the existing shopping area. To
the south, the area is zoned waterfront design (permitting the use of
shops as well as residences) and currently exhibits a mixture of resi-
dences, boat yards, and marinas. However, north of the commercial
area, along Gravel and Pearl Streets, the zoning and uses are essen-
tially residential. Irr addition, existing access and parking problems
indicate that changes in the street system and the creation of ad-
ditional parking would be necessary to accommodate a significant
expansion of the commercial area. (This would be difficult to achieve
because of the built-up nature and lack of vacant land close to the
shopping area.)

3. Preservation of residential neighborhoods:

As previously mentioned, potential commercial expansion will continue
to pressure surrounding residential areas, particularly to the north
of the shopping area along Gravel and Pearl Streets. There is a need
to weigh the demand and potential for commercial expansion with the
desire to preserve the nearby residential neighborhoods.

4. Future of Ft. Rachel Place:

Much of the Fort Rachel Place area is largely vacant and under-
utilized, offering an opportunity for water-related uses (see Planning
Considerations Map) . Because of topography (see Topography Map) ,
development may be difficult in places, although portions of the area
may be well suited for recreation and open space. Several alternate
development schemes for Fort Rachel Place were developed to explore
possible development patterns in the area. These schemes are included
with this section.

5. Traffic congestion:

Access to and through the shopping area is restricted by -the rela-
tively narrow streets and the lack of alternative routes. Congestion
is a problem, particularly in the summer, because of the large number
of people visiting the area. This situation is compounded during the
summer months by the Route 1 drawbridge, which is closed for five to
fifteen minutes out of every hour.

VII-21

6. Parking problems:

During the summer months, there is a lack of parking for visitors and
shoppers in the Mystic commercial area. This can result in motorists
using the nearby residential streets for parking or can discourage
visitors from stopping. The problem is exacerbated by the lack of
suitable nearby areas for parking lot expansion.

7. Waterfront access:

The shorefront north of the Route'l drawbridge is lined with historic
houses facing quiet lawns which cross Gravel Street and descend to the
river. This area (in private ownership) provides the only significant
visual access to the river in the village, and there is a need to
preserve it as open space. South of Route 1, existing development,
including multi-family housing (condominiums) , commercial uses and
parking areas, has blocked the view of and physical access to the
river. Thus there is a need to preserve existing vistas and explore
potential access points in conjunction with future development.

8* Future use of large lots and vacant areas:

There are a number of oversize lots (according to the zoning require-
ments) in the Mystic area, which potentially could be subdivided and
developed. Concentrations of large and/or vacant lots occur in the
vicinities of Mystic Avenue and Noank Road, West Main and Burrows
Streets, the Allyn Street connector, Cliff Street and Cliff Lane. The
future use of these lots needs to be evaluated in terms of the uses
permitted under present zoning, the desirability of this type of
development, and the maintenance of Mystic's historic character.

9. Vacant land created by new railroad alignment:

The new Mystic River railroad bridge alignment will create a spur of
riverfront land near Fort Rachel Place. This area offers excellent
waterfront recreation and access potential; however, it is currently
owned by the railroad and lacks direct access from public property.

10. The feasibility of a mass transit link between
commercial area and lodgings and Seaport for tourists:

The present traffic and parking problems during summer months could
potentially be eased by a bus route serving the Seaport, motel area
and downtown. This could, in addition to easing traffic congestion,
be beneficial to the commercial area by bringing more shoppers to the
area.

VII-22

- ------------

WATeR

ow
ON
STPEET

MY!5TiC RiVER

PLACE
[@'BTA I N'- EAS EM 6-@JT FORT
@NIECT-
Co
TO 14EW PAIZk, 21V
p " AtW PROPE12TI CS
WIT44

Mye5TIC RIVER

Z@j

RIVATO PPDPEIZn SS
1WIT44 WAT02FRONT
C2

STREE

FORMEe ?-IZ. PPIOKM'Y
FOIZMVR ze. FOIZ PARL/LAND AT MOCE ACCESSIBLE
IPIZOPMT), LOCATION MYeTIC RIVER
AITACHM) TO
PRIVA-M L&WID

46)

FOAT PAC$. OL PLpCe

SH IF

STPEET

12.12. PROPERTY EXCHAN440
FOR PAIULAND AT MOVE ACCE5515LE
FORMER ?-.IZ.
PROPERTY WCATION M1,15TIC; RIVE R
AITACHED TO
PRIVATE' LAND

ll* Marina development:

Expansion of boating facilities, marinas and boat yards north of the
Route 1 drawbridge would alter the natural shoreline in this portion
of the river. Further, the Mystic River has a limited capacity to
accommodate marinas. The amount of shoreland north of the Route 1
drawbridge is very limited. The public street is close to or adjacent
to the river's edge leaving little land available for development.
This relationship of street to water however produces excellent views
of the river and seaport which are now available to the general
public. Waterside development would at least partially eliminate
these views. The adjoining areas have been developed residentially
for many years and are included in an historic district. The narrow
street system and existing development pattern is incompatible with
the introduction of marine development in this area. Another impor-
tant consideration is water access. The navigation channel is located
on the Stonington side of the river. Extensive dredging would be
required to open the Groton shore to marina development which would be
incompatible with the sensitivity of the resource.

12. Sunken barges:

Partially sunken or sunken barges near the water's edge in Fort Rachel
create a blighting influence on the area.

13. -Traffic and parking problems in Fort Rachel:

The combination of narrow streets and numerous marinas and docks
without adequate on-site parking creates traffic congestion and
parking problems in Ft. Rachel, particularly during the summer months.
Access for emergency vehicles is severely hampered and residents
complain of cars parked in their front yards.

14. Need to insure high quality of building and
development:

Future development in Mystic that emphasizes high quality, in terms of
site layout, design and construction needs to be encouraged if the
existing character, remaining waterfront views and historic quality of
the area are to be maintained. This is of particular concern in the
waterfront design district, which encompasses the shopping area, the
marinas and Ft. Rachel Place.

15. Preservation of historic character:

Preservation of the historic character of Mystic is essential to the
economic health of the area, as well as being desirable from an
aesthetic viewpoint.

D. POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES

The following policies and objectives apply specifically to Mystic and Fort
Rachel, and are intended to complement the more general state of Connecti-

VII-28

cut and Town of Groton Coastal Area Management policies. The policies and
objectives for the Mystic-Ft. Rachel area incorporate (or adapt) a number
of objectives from previous studies and plans (including the Town Zoning
Ordinance and "A Plan for Mystic") which remain pertinent, in addition to
those resulting from the identification of issues and problems.

The River's Edge

1. The Mystic River's natural shoreline north of the Route 1 drawbridge
should be preserved. Future construction of docks, piers, bulkheads
or other structures should be limited to only those improvements which
are necessary to maintain or improve the existing shoreline.

2. Marina and boat yard development or expansion should be limited to the
riverfront south of the Route 1 drawbridge and should be controlled by
the ability to provide sufficient parking and other support services
on shore.

3. Future construction on the waterfront should be prohibited from
obstructing public views of the water, particularly north of Route 1
along Gravel Street, where unspoiled vistas currently exist.

4. The creation of coordinated walkway system along the riverfront,
enabling public views of the water, should be encouraged.

Commercial

1. Downtown Mystic should be maintained as a viable commercial, resi-
dential, and cultural area which serves the needs of the residents of
Mystic and the surrounding communities.

2. In recognition of the attraction Mystic holds for tourists, a limited
degree of high quality commercial development should be provided to
accommodate this tourist market; however, this should be secondary to
the primary role of providing services to area residents.

3. High intensity and bulk uses should not encroach into the surrounding
residential neighborhood.

4, A coordinated pattern of land uses which allows safe access and
movement of pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles through the commercial
area should be encouraged.

5. Structural rehabilitation, wherever feasible, should be encouraged in
order to preserve and enhance the historic and diverse qualities of
the Mystic area.

6. Architectural and site design which promote aesthetic qualities while
sustaining and enhancing the unique and historic qualities of the
Mystic area should be encouraged.

Mystic River Task Group, "A Plan for Mystic", January, 1977.

VII-29

7. Landscaping along Main and Water Streets should be
encouraged to enhance the attractiveness.of the shopping area.

8* Special consideration should be given to the area of water and land
interface, to encourage the preservation and creation of water views,
public access points and the preservation of the existing river bed.

Residential

1. New commercial/office activity should be prohibited from encroaching
into mystic's residential neighborhoods.

2. Clustering and setbacks for new residential development on the water-
front should be encouraged to protect river views.

3. Standards for new residential construction that encourage the reten-
tion of Mystic's historic quality and existing character should be
established.

4. Tourist-oriented traffic should be routed away from Mystic's resi-
dential neighborhoods.

Open Space and Recreation

1. Pursue the creation of public parks and waterfront access areas to
serve the residents of Mystic.

2. Pursue the creation of "mini-parks" in the downtown shopping area to
serve as attractive rest areas for residents and tourists.

Circulation and Transportation

1. Improve access to the downtown Mystic area by encouraging increased
public transportation to the area.

2. Explore potential methods of alleviating existing parking and traffic
congestion occurring during the summer months.

3. Encourage a circulation pattern and the provision of related facil-
ities (such as sidewalks, benches, and bike racks) which give priority
to pedestrian movement and bicycle travel in the downtown area.

4. Consideration should be given to establishing parking areas for
tourists adjacent to Interstate 95. In addition, the establishment of
a mini-bus system should be considered to shuttle people between
outlying parking areas and the Seaport, Mystic Aquarium and downtown.

VII-30

E. RECOMMENDATIONS

General

The recommendations contained in this section are summarized on the Recom-
mendations Map which follows this page.

1, The Town should pursue the acquisition and eventual development as a
park of the present Mystic River Bridge Railroad embankment, which
will become vacant when the proposed bridge realignment is accom-
plished. This proposed waterfront park would provide Mystic residents
with riverfront access for fishing and passive recreation. As part of
the park development, traffic access to the area might be limited to
pedestrians, bicycle and emergency vehicle access.

2. A pedestrian walkway along the river from the railroad embankment to
Main Street should be created. This walkway should include a combin-
ation of boardwalks, existing streets (particularly if automobile
access were par 'tially limited) and gravel or blacktop walkways. In
this way, the existing boardwalk at steamboat wharf, the walkway at
the art Association and portions of Water Street could provide the
base for the system.

Traffic and Parking

Given the existing conditions in the central area, and the expressed desire
of the Town not to change the character of the area, the option for making
significant improvements in traffic operations and parking are severely
limited. Widening of the streets, or the construction of a by-pass street,
are neither feasible nor desirable. Replacement of the existing moveable
bridge with a high level fixed bridge likeways is not feasible because of
the problems in con structing approach ramps. Eliminating the on-street
parking on West Main Street would increase the capacity of the street, but,
with the identified parking inventory shortage, these spaces would have to
be replaced. Furthermore, the two-lane section of the Mystic River bridge
would remain an capacity restraint.

There are, however, several measures which can be taken to improve traffic
?Perations and parking conditions in the central area. These measures
include the following:

1* Eliminate the parking spaces on the westbound approach to Water
Street. These spaces perhaps four of them - are located on the
north side of Main Street between Pearl Street and Water Street. They
have 15 minute parking limits. Elimination of these spaces would
permit a separate left turn lane so that the westbound through traffic
could continue without being blocked by left turn vehicles. It also
would make it easier for large trucks to turn in the intersection.
Finally, these spaces are actually within the intersection, which is
not in conformance with most standards, and may even violate state
regulations.
10

VII-31

i p! N
FT

VM or- ff*K

MwEer POMM
NeKoftwom -
LIMIr COMMENAL.
... ... EMOON ID EXIS?Igq
VATEKFW DeuGm

PrIVIS POLO. ID IN",
N WA1944;W AM

WON
4y, 11mm COMML

Impme siewp. Ar

1
R)AI) MATE^ PEPESTFAN WALKWAY
Au4 f4vinfoor

wxwaUr VE" DIMr

...... FT WEL

CMIAFMTAL MV
MATE WATMFPWr AMS
ITOIC-MRSIPEK UMM94 AM.
-Co"IATE M. WITH MMWq

it
AMURE MADAD AM - LOS
Fw, Rgamom

ACRES
tI

.7V

OROTO 310"
Copmacrocu MCOMMEADATIONS 0"TOM ftAN"MG DepawTowr

2. Eliminate the parking on the northbound approach to West Main Street.
There is a single parking space on the east side of Water Street near
Main Street. The adjacent spaces are continuous curb cuts. Elimin-
ation of this one spot will provide about 100 feet of cleared curb
which will permit two lanes approaching the intersection. Right turn
vehicles will not have to wait for left turn vehicles to clear the
intersection.

3. Install parking directional signs. The major public parking facility
is in the block east of Water Street and south of West Main Street.
There are entrances to this parking area from both streets, but
directional signing is virtually non-existent. Visitors to the area
must have a difficult time identifying and finding the parking areas,
and eastbound vehicles are likely to be across the river and into
Stonington before the driver can react. The signs should be the
standard green and white "P-arrow"- signs (D4, as specified in th6
Manual of Uniform Traf f ic Control-' Devices), and should be installed
not only at the entrances but also for blocks in advance to give
adequate notice to the drivers.

4. The parking areas could be rearranged for better utilization. The
choice spots immediately behind the stores should be reserved for
short-term parkers, while the all day and permit parking space should
be located further to the south. More parking spaces can be provided
in this latter area.

S. If the left turn lanes are installed (see items 1. and 2. above) at
the intersection of West Main and Water Streets, a system should be
set up to keep the inter section clear so that vehicles not headed
towards the bridge can get through the intersection to continue their
trips.

6. The Town should consider restricting automobile access to Fort Rachel
to residents, people with business there (e.g. those using the
marinas), emergency vehicles, etc. This might be in large part
accomplished through the use of strategically located signs.

7. The Town should make Water Street and Fort Rachel Place a one-way
loop. This would lessen the existing congestion and improve access
for emergency vehicles.

Revisions to the Plan of Development

1. Expand the area currently designated waterfront design district to
include the commercial frontage north of Main Street, the existing
marina south of Fort Rachel Place/Water Street, and the railroad
embankment. In the f irst two instances, this will make the Plan of
Development consistent with present zoning and existing land use
patterns.

VII-33

Revisions to the Zoning Regulations

The following revisions are suggested to the Waterfront Design District
(WDD) section of the Zoning Regulations for Sections 6.32 Design objec-
tives, 6.33 Permitted Uses and 6.34 Building and Development Standards in
the WDD. Sections underlined are new proposed language. Sections in
brackets ) are proposed for deletion.

Waterfront Design District (WDD)

6.32 Design Objectives

6.32(i) The Mystic River is the most vital element within the Waterfront
Design District and as such must be given primary consideration
in any proposed development. To this end, special consideration
must be given to the area of the water and land interf ace; the.
preservation and creation of views from public and other areas to
the water, and the preservation and integrity of the existing
river bank. Pedestrian access to the river's edge should be
encouraged from Main Street south to the railroad bridge.

6.33 Permitted Use s

Any residential, office, or commercial use, or mix of same, which
is consistent with the purpose and objectives of the Waterfront
Design District and which is not detrimental to the unique
character of the area is permitted in the Waterfront Design
District. Any use to be located in a new structure or any use
located in an existing structure that is either an intensifi-
cation of the use of that structure or will alter the exterior of
the structure shall be subject to approval of a Special Permit.
Intensification of use shall be defined as additional residential
units, additional employment, additional clients or customers,
additional floor space for sales or services or additional
required parking than existed 2rior to the application for a
Special Permit.

In granting or denying approval for a special proposed use or mix
of uses, the Zoning Commission shall evaluate the proposal's
conformance with the purpose and objectives as stated in Sections
6.31 and 6.32, and determine that the proposal will not be
detrimental to the use or value of adjacent properties.

6.34 Building and Development Standards

(a) The maximum height of any structure within the Design
District shall not exceed 25 feet except for every _10%
reduction in coverage below the permitted 65%, an additional
5 feet of height will be permitted up to a maximum of 40
feet.

VII-34

(b) In no case shall new construction at the foundation line be
located less than 25 feet from the Mystic River at mean
water level elevation. (New construction may project into
this setback a minimum of 10 feet, provided that it is a
minimum of 10 feet above the grade level.*)

(c) In no case shall new construction be located within 10 feet
(presently 6 feet) of any property line unless a party line
agreement has been properly executed and recorded.

(d) In no case shall building coverage exceed 65% of the lot
area.

(e) Multi-family residential units shall be limited to effic-
iency and one or two bedrooms and density of new multi-
family housing shall be determined by Section 5-2 for RMF
District except that there is no minimum lot size.

M A Certificate of Appropriateness shall be obtained as
required by the Historic District Commission regulations.

(g) Where the Planning Commission deems it feasible, it may
approve a site plan for a use which does not have direct
access from a Town approved road, provided that adequate and
safe pedestrian access is provided.

(h) The Planning Commission may waive any of the requirements
for off-street parking where it is demonstrated that exist-
ing parking facilities are available and adequate only in
accordance with provisions of 7.45* and may waive any of the
site design standard requirements of the Waterfront Design
District for any use where such waiver would be consistent
with the intent of these regulations.

U) Any lot created in a Waterfront Design district zone after
the effective date of this paragraph shall conform to the
requirements for an RS-80 zone as listed in Section 5.2.

(j) An applicant for a special permit shall demonstrate how the
proposed site plan achieves the objectives of provision of
pedestrian access to the riverfront and preserves visual
access, where feasible and appropriate.

7.45 Location of Required Parking Facilities

Required parking facilities shall be located on the same lot as
the building or other use which they serve except as follows:

*Delete.

VII-35

7.45-1 Because the WDD District is important to the Town's economy,
provides a local service and employment base, and because its
physical integrity and historic and architectural character must
be protected, and further because it is desirable to utilize
existing buildings as fully and as efficiently as possible and
because land area for parking within the WDD District is very
limited, required parking for uses within the WDD District may be
provided on sites other than the site which they serve provided
that:

(a) Said spaces are within 500 feet walking distance of the lot
or use which they serve and are within the WDD.

(b) Such spaces shall preferably be in the same ownership as the
use which they serve. However, evidence of a lease for such
spaces in a minimum term of ten years shall be acceptable.
Such lease shall be recorded in the land records of the Town
prior to the filing of the site plan in the land records.
Further, the obligation to maintain the required number of
spaces as set forth in Section 7.42 is not diminished by the
leasing option permitted under this section.

Planning Commission Review in WDD

Most uses within the WDD are subject to special permit and since this requires
referral to Planning Commission, this is an additional check on what happens.
also, if WDD is all within Coastal Management Areas then Planning Commission
reviews with certain exemptions. Certain revisions in 8.61-3 could clarify and
expand Planning Commission review to assure compatibility with planning and
design objectives. Suggested changes are as follows:

(a) Eliminate items (1), (2) and (3) from exceptions from site plan review.

To further clarify where Planning Commission site plan review is required in the
WDD or in any district, the following amendment is proposed.

8.6 Site Plan Review and Approval

8.61 Authority

Site plan review and approval by the Planning Commission shall be
required before any zoning permit shall be issued for any building or
use, or enlargement in size or other alteration of any building or
change in use of any building including accessory structures which
enlargement or alteration or change of use results in a more intensive
use of a property than 12rior to such action. More intensive use shall
include additional residential units, additional employees, additional
clientele or customers, additional floor space for sales or service or
additional required parking. No certificate of compliance shall be
given unless all construction and development conform to the plans as
approved by the Planning Commission.

VII-36

I
I
I
I Vill. Recommendations
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

RECOMMENDATIONS

A. NON-REGULATORY MEASURES

1. Encourage the harbormasters, in conjunction with the town to
develop an improved mooring system along the Mystic River, in
order to ensure safe public access along existing navigation
channels.

2. In order to preserve water quality in the coves, sewage pumping
stations should be protected to prevent flows of sewage into the
coves during possible breakdowns in the system.

3. The town should conduct discussions with the Department of Health
Services to develop a timetable to reopen shellfish beds in the
town.

4. The town, in cooperation with the Water Pollution Control Author-
ity, should develop a program to test septic systems of existing
developments along the shoreline to determine whether any are
leaking into the coves. Where feasible, inefficient systems
should be required to tie into the sewer system. In addition,
regular checks on septic systems to ensure reduced pollution,
should become standard procedure along the shoreline.

5. The town should actively pursue a plan to control and regulate
dredging and filling of the coves and coastal waters through
discussions with the Department of Environmental Protection and
the Army Corps of Engineers.

6. Enlarge existing waterfront access points in the town where
feasible by acquiring suitable sites for waterfront parks, and/or
beaches. The town should be constantly alert to any possible
sites that become available.

7. The Chairperson's Committee should become involved in the plan-
ning of the development of the U.S.S. Nautilus as a tourist
attraction.

8. The Town Planning Department should discuss any plans that the
Department of Environmental Protection may have to modify
existing land use at Bluff Point State Park and Haley Farm State
Park.

9. The town should hold discussions with the transit district in
order to provide transportation to coastal recreation and tourist
areas during the summer.

VIII-1

10. The waterfront along the Thames River between the railroad and
the river could be developed in the future for water-dependent
uses. The feasibility of using this land for such a purpose is
beyond the scope of this study, however the area should be
studied for future consideration.

11. The town should develop a waterfront identification program to
maximize use of waterfront areas.

B. REVISIONS TO THE PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT

1. The development of the U.S.S. Nautilus as a tourist area on the
Thames waterfront is likely to have a major impact in the area.
It is therefore suggested that the area immediately adjacent to
the new development be designated tourist commercial in order to
reflect the future development in the area.

2. The area in which the Odd Fellows Home is located is designated
recreation and open space. If this area is developed in the
future, it would provide an opportunity to help meet the demand
for residential development along the coast without causing any
adverse impacts on sensitive coastal resources. Therefore, it is
recommended that the area be designated moderate density
development.

3. The area west of the airport is designated natural resources, but
the only sensitive part of the area is the land adjacent to Birch
Plain Creek, designated recreation and open space. The non-
sensitive area should be designated industrial, along with other
land adjacent to Thomas Road, excluding the tidal wetland area.

4. The area at the southern corner of High Rock Road and Poquonnock
Road, presently designated moderate density residential in the
Plan of Development, and zoned commercial, should be considered
for professional office designation. This modification would be
consistent with the concept of centralizing commercial uses in
the downtown area.

5. The large tract north of Trail's Corner which is designated
natural resources appears to be mislabeled since a natural
resource designation does not denote future land use designation.
It is recommended that the area be changed to moderate density
residential on the Plan of Development.

6. The area designated as moderate density residential, located
south of the intersection of Tower Avenue and High Rock Road,
should be redesignated to reflect current use and its proximity
to the airport industrial complex. Therefore, it is recommended
that this area be redesignated to industrial.

VIII-2

LM Dm .= m m m
------ - --------- ------ ------ - -- --- --- ---------

71.
INf -- -,-K'
i14I

7. The area north of Lilly Lane and southeast of Fort Hill Homes is
moderate density residential and should be reconsidered for
townhouse residential. This would allow an alternative form of
housing at a density which is consistent with the Fort Hill area.

8. The area east of Depot Road and north of Industrial Drive is
inappropriately designated open space because it has not been
slated for acquisition by the town. Therefore, it should be
designated as moderate density to conform with the Fort Hill
area.

9. The area north of Mumford Cove Estates and south of the railroad
line should be redesignated from natural resource to recreation
and open space so that it is preserved as per the original
subdivision plan.

10. Two large waterfront commercial areas, one on West Cove and the
other on the Mystic River side of the peninsula, are designated
on the current Plan of Development as general commercial. A new
designation, marine commercial/recreation appears to be more
suitable, since it pertains to waterfront uses. The marine
commercial/recreational designation is defined as: Those uses and
facilities which require access to marine or tidal waters and
which cannot be reasonably located inland, including, but not
limited to: marinas, recreational and commercial fishing and
boating facilities, commercial finfish or shellfish processing
plants, waterfront docks, boatbuilding facilities, other com-
mercial-recreational uses dependent upon waterborne transpor-
tation, and uses which provide general public access to coastal
waters.

11. The area currently designated as waterfront design district on
Willow Point should be reclassified as a new category, marine
commercial/recreation.

12. In Mystic, expand the area currently designated waterfront design
district to include the commercial frontage north of Main Street,
the existing marina south of Fort Rachel Place/Water Street, and
the railroad embankment. In the first two instances, this will
make the Plan of Development consistent with present zoning and
existing land use patterns.

13. The following be added to open space land objectives in the Plan
of Development. Preserve tidal wetland areas as open space.
This designation qualifies the owner for special tax consider-
ations under PA-490 if land is maintained as open space.

VIII-3

Plan of development changes will be considered in the future for Noank
and the airport industrial area.

C. REVISIONS TO THE ZONING REGULATIONS

1. In order to control new development around the U.S.S. Nautilus
which is expected to become a major tourist attraction in the
coastal area, a new zone (tourist commercial) should be estab-
lished which will regulate the type of development in the area.

The following is proposed language for creating a Nautilus
Memorial Design District that will encompass the property cur-
rently zoned CB-15 along Route 12 and RMF along Crystal Lake Road
and also including portions of undeveloped property in the RS-12
zone.

Since it is important that the development of new zoning controls
for the main entrance to the Nautilus Memorial be coordinated
with the planning and design of that facility, this zoning
proposal should be considered separately from the remainder of
the CAM zoning recommendations. The designers and operators of
the Nautilus Memorial should be given an opportunity to comment
upon the district proposal. It will also be necessary to develop
design parameters for development within the District based upon
discussions with this group. Since this process is likely to
take longer than that remaining in the Phase II CAM Program, the
Planning Commission has determined it should be considered
separately and follow its own timeline for consideration.

6.8 Nautilus Memorial Design District

6.81 Purpose

The purpose of this district is to permit and control development
within the designated Design District which will protect and
enhance the primary entryway to the Nautilus Memorial.

6.82.Design Objectives

All development within the Design District shall be consistent
with the following objectives:

a. To ensure the creation of a high quality tourist-service
area linked thematically to the Nautilus Memorial.

b. In recognition of the attraction the area will hold for
tourists, major focus shall be given to those commercial
activities to serve the needs of the visitors to the
Nautilus Memorial.

VIII-4

C. To insure that high intensity and bulk uses do not encroach
into the surrounding residential districts.

d. Architectural and site design which promotes aesthetic
qualities and which will focus and improve the existing
commercial environment towards the uniqueness of the
Nautilus Memorial.

e. Coordination of a theme design to prevail throughout the
Design District.

f. Encourage the assemblage of smaller parcels into larger
units for commercial development.

g. Establish a design review committee to provide design
guidelines and assist in review of development plans to
assure conformity to overall design theme of the Nautilus
Memorial.

6.83 Permitted Uses

Any retail or service use, hotel or motel, restaurant, commercial
recreation, or mix of same, which is consistent with the purpose
and objectives of this Design District is permitted subject to
approval of a Special Permit.

In granting or denying approval for a specific proposed use or
mix of uses, the Zoning Commission shall evaluate the proposal's
conformance with the purpose and objectives as stated in sections
6.81 and 6.82, and determine that the proposal will not be
detrimental to the use or value of adjacent properties.

6.84 Building and Development Standards

a. Lot, yard and building requirements within Section A of this
Design District shall be:

Lot Area: 40,000 sq. ft.
Lot Width: 150 ft.
Min. Front Yard: 50 ft.
Min. Side Yard: 15 ft.
Min. Rear Yard: 15 ft.
Max. Building Coverage: 40%
Max. Building Height: 30 ft.

VIII-5

b. Lot, yard and building requirements within Section B of this
Design District shall be:

Lot Area: 160,000 sq. ft.
Lot Width: 300 ft.
Min. Front Yard: 50 ft.
Min. Side Yard: 30 ft.
Min. Rear Yard: 310 ft.
Min. Building Size: 25% of the lot area or 40,000 sq. ft.
whichever is larger. Commission will consider smaller scale
of development if no proposal per this section is received
by January 31, 1986.
Max. Building Coverage: 40%
Max. Building Height: 30 ft.

C. No land in Section B, the Nautilus Memorial Design District,
shall be subdivided so that any lot shall be less in area
than 160,000 square feet and the average lesser dimension of
any such- lot shall be not less than 300 feet. The Planning
Commission may approve the development of any lot with less
area or dimensions which existed in separate ownership at.
the effective date of this Section, and continuously there-
after, provided the Planning Commission finds that the
proposed development and its site plan are compatible with
the purposes of the Nautilus Memorial Design District and
conform to the requirements of Section A of this District.

I A S 9

Section A

RIMF-
.Section B.-
L14

2. The area at the northern corner of High Rock Road and Poquonnock Road
presently zoned CA-12 should be zoned OMF (Office Multi Family) which
allows one and two-family housing, multi-family uses as well as
professional offices. This revision has been referred to the Zoning
Commission for formal consideration and public hearing.

'J
R1
D
N. _RME

%
RU-20

R-1 2
RMF
CB-15 IA-4
IB-40

A-4
'S7.12?
f

CA-12
JA-- 40

NDE T
Z 0 N G
to TRUMBULL
-40
A; R PO R T
X

VIII-7

3. A small area to the west of the Poquonnock River is zoned commercial,
CB-15. Its present land use is single family development and a truck
depot. The zoning should be changed to moderate density residential
to reflect present development.

During the Phase II work, it was learned that a public hearing
concerning a similar zone change proposed in this area was conducted
and the owners of the property objected to a proposed change to the
present zoning designation. in light of this event it is felt that
the proposed coastal resource setback requirements in Revision 8
herein are probably adequate to protect the abutting coastal resource.

r
RS-2

dOV
.0014
D
RMF

CA-12

R-1 2
RMF
IA-
1840"
(30

TRUMBULL
-18-40 R P

VIII-8

4. The northern section of Bluf f Point State Park is zoned industrial,
IC-40. The area is not suitable for industrial development and is
part of the state park and should therefore be changed to low density
residential with a suggested density of 120,000 square feet per lot.

It is important for the local Plan of Development and Zoning Regu-
lations to reflect the Town's intended use of property. As Bluf f
Point is a critical recreation and open space resource within the
Town, its zoning should reflect that circumstance. The recommendation
should be broadened to include the southern part of Bluff Point State
Park which is currently zoned RS-20 to be included in a new RS-120
zone. Another option under consideration by the Planning Commission
is to designate the area an open space zone. When a determination of
which approach is most beneficial to the Town is made, it will be
forwarded to the Zoning Commission for consideration.

Lot, yard and building requirements for an RS-120 zone should be as
follows:

Lot Area: 120,000 sq. ft.
Lot Width: 300 ft.
Area/d.u.: 120,000 sq. ft.
Min. Front Yard: 50 ft.
Min. Side Yard: 25 ft.
Min. Rear Yard: 30 ft.
Max. Building Coverage: 5%
Max. Building Height: 30 ft.

OtV
+
0 0 "0 C9 41

1PO

V111-9

5. The area along the west side of the Mystic River north of I- is
zoned residential, RU-20, which allows development on half acre lots.
As the area is not served by the sewer system and there are no
to extend it to the area, the area should be rezoned to permit only
large 'lot development, for example 80,000 square feet in accordance
with environmental limitations and on-site septic systems. This
recommendation has been forwarded to the Zoning Commission for
consideration and public hearing.

The lot, yard and building requirements for a RU-80 zone should be as
follows:

Lot Area: 80,000 sq. ft.
Lot Width: 200 ft.
Area/d.u.: 60,000 sq. ft.
Min. Front Yard: 50 ft.
Min. Side Yard: 25 ft.
Min. Rear Yard: 30 ft.
Max. Building Coverage: 10%
Max. Building Height: 30 ft.

/* 11

Ir
cc
r

_N@

A
C
Is

s
ot
:
t only

_/_V

0
N N G T 0 N

6. The area north of Lily Lane and southeast of Fort Hill Homes is
moderate density residential and should be reconsidered for townhouse
residential. This would allow an alternative form of housing at a
density which is consistent with the Fort Hill area. This proposal
has been forwarded to the Fort Hill Community Development Committee
for reaction before being acted upon by the Planning Commission.

IF
J

CA-12

-N,
Ac
R S'2

9. CL

VIII-11

7. New development in the coastal zone@ should pay careful attention to
sensitive coastal resources. Therefore, additional safeguards should
be added to the zoning regulations requiring greater setbacks from the
water's edge and wetlands than presently exist in exchange for greater
flexibility in siting structures on a particular parcel.

A proposed Coastal Resource Setback amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
follows. It is felt that in those instances where the setback require-
ment renders a property unbuildable because of the additional require-
ment that this constitutes a hardship under the regulations and
therefore the Zoning Board of Appeals can legitimately remedy such
situations. However, in reviewing the zoning map, it appears that
these situations should occur infrequently and that this method
tampers least with the requirements of each zone classification while
providing a means of protecting the natural resource. This revision
has been forwarded to the Zoning Commission for consideration and
public hearing.

In the Phase I period of the MCP, it was indicated that areas adjacent
to Birch Plain Creek and Town Open Space (the Johl property) are zoned
industrial, IA-40. In order to protect the sensitive resources, it
was proposed the area should be rezoned to low density residential.

In reviewing this recommendation during the Phase II period and in
light of the proposed requirements of a coastal resource setback
requirement and with Town ownership of the Johl property, it is now
felt that adequate protection of Birch Plain Creek can be achieved
through the additional setback requirements proposed herein and with
existing regulations and coastal site plan review. Therefore, the
Planning Commission has determined that the existing zoning desig-
nations can be retained and the objective of protecting the sensitive
resources can be achieved through the adoption of the coastal resource
setback.

Proposed addition of Section 8.61-4 - Coastal Resource Setback
In addition to the requirements of Section 5.2 - Lot, Yard and Bkr@@@
ing Requirements by Zoning District, the following shall apply to all
the lots within the designated Coastal Area Boundary as shown on the
map entitled "Coastal Area Management Boundary" on file in the office
of the Groton Planning Department: No new building construction,
including minor additions to or modifications of existing buildings or
detached accessory buildings, such as garages, utility sheds, pools,
tennis courts or parking lots shall be permitted within 50 feet of any
tidal waterbody or watercourse or of the following coastal resource
areas: tidal wetlands, coastal bluffs, escarpments, beaches or dunes,
as defined by Chapter 444, Section 22a-93(7) of the Connecticut
General Statutes or shown on the map entitled "Coastal Area Management
Resource Map" on file in the office of the Groton Planning Department.
This Section shall not apply to Section 6.34(b) Waterfront Design
District or to water dependent uses.as defined by Chapter 444, Section.
22a-93(16) of the Connecticut General Statutes.

(7) "Coastal resources" means the coastal waters of the state, their
natural resources, related marine and wildlife habitat and adjacent
shorelands, both developed and undeveloped, that together form an
integrated terrestrial and estuarine ecosystem; coastal resources
include the following: (A) "Coastal bluffs and escarpments" means
naturally eroding shorelands marked by dynamic escarpments or sea
cliffs which have slope angles that constitute an intricate adjustment
between erosion, substrate, drainage and degree of plant cover; (B)
"rocky shorefronts" means shorefront composed of bedrock, boulders and
cobbles that are highly erosion-resistant and are an insignificant
source of sediments for other coastal landforms; (C) "beaches and
dunes" means beach systems including barrier beach spits and tombolos,
barrier beaches, pocket beaches, land contact. beaches and related
dunes and sandflats; (D) "intertidal flats" means very gently sloping
or flat areas located between high and low tides composed of muddy,
silty and fine sandy sediments and generally devoid of vegetation; (E)
"tidal wetlands" means "wetland" as defined by section 22a-29; (F)
"freshwater wetlands and water courses" means "wetlands" and "water
courses" as defined by section 22a-38; (G) "estuarine embayments"
means a protected coastal body of water with an open connection to the
sea in which saline sea water is measurably diluted by fresh water
including tidal rivers, bays, lagoons and coves; (H) "coastal hazard
areas" means those land areas inundated during coastal storm events or
subject to erosion induced by such events, including flood hazard
areas as defined and determined by the National Flood Insurance Act,
as amended (U.S.C. 42 Section 4101, P.L. 93-234) and all erosion
hazard areas as determined by the commissioner; (I) "developed
shorefront" means those harbor areas which have been highly engineered
and developed resulting in the functional impairment or substantial
alteration of their natural physiographic features or systems; (J)
"island" means land surrounded on all sides by water; (K) "nearshore
waters" means the area comprised of those waters and their substrates
lying between mean high water and a depth approximated by the ten
meter contour; (L) "offshore waters" means the area comprised of those
waters and their substrates lying seaward of a depth approximated by
the ten meter contour; (M) "shorelands" means those land areas within
the coastal boundary exclusive of coastal hazard areas, which are not
subject to dynamic coastal processes and which are comprised of
typical upland features such as bedrock hills, till hills and drum-
lins; (N) "shellfish concentration areas" means actual, potential or
historic areas in coastal waters, in which one or more species of
shellfish aggregate.

(16) "Water-dependent uses" means those uses and facilities which
require direct access to, or location in, marine or tidal waters and
which therefore cannot be located inland, including but not limited
to: Marinas, recreational and commercial fishing and boating facil-

VIII-13

ities, finfish and shellfish processing plants, waterfront dock and
port facilities, shipyards and boat building facilities, water-based
recreational uses, navigation aides, basins and channels, industrial
uses dependent upon waterborne transportation or requiring large
volumes of cooling or process water which cannot reasonably be located
or operated at an inland site and uses which provide general public
access to marine or tidal waters.

8. Preservation of physical and visual access to the water can be marred
by insensitive development. New development adjacent to the water
should be required to maintain a percentage of open-space through
amendments to the Zoning Regulations.

Upon further study in Phase II, it is now felt that this objective can
be achieved through use of the existing Coastal Site Plan Review
procedures and therefore no new revisions are proposed.

In the instance of the Mystic River Waterfront Design District, Design
Objective (i) should be broadened to encourage pedestrian access to
the river's edge from the Main Street bridge south to the railroad
bridge. This objective will provide a specific basis for pursuit of
the boardwalk concept.

A new Section 6.34(j) should be added as follows: The applicant shall
demonstrate how the proposed site plan achieves the objectives of
provision of pedestrian access to the riverfront and preserves visual
access, where feasible and appropriate. This language is contained in
Chapter VII.

9. In commercial and industrial uses, control of discharge of hazardous
materials and industrial wastes should be regulated under the Zoning
Ordinance.

The Commission felt this to be an important addition to the regu-
lations in light of the recent Johnson Hardware experience and its
resultant pollution of the Poquonnock River. It has been referred to
the Zoning Commission for consideration and is proposed to apply
town-wide.

Proposed addition of Section 8.61-5 - Hazardous Materials and Wastes

In addition to the requirements of these Zoning Regulations for
commercial and industrial districts, the following shall apply to all
parcels within the commercial and industrial districts within the Town
of Groton.

In addition to the information required as part of an application for
Site Plan Approval in Section 8.62 through 8.64 of these Regulations,

VIII-14

the applicant shall identify any hazardous materials or wastes to be
associated with the proposed occupancy and use of the property.
Hazardous materials are defined as any material included in EPA's list
of priority pollutants, or Section 3001 of the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (or Connecticut's Hazardous Waste Regulations,
whichever is in effect). If these materials or wastes are to be
present than the applicant shall present evidence that all applicable
permits and approvals from Federal, State or local authorities have
been or are in the process of being obtained. The applicant shall
demonstrate that the hazardous materials or wastes shall be contained
or managed in such a manner that these substances will not pollute or
degrade the natural resources, environment or ecology of the Town of
Groton.

At least, the following information shall be presented in satisfaction
of this section:

a. The amount and composition of any hazardous materials that will
be handled, stored, generated, treated or disposed of on the
property.

b. Provisions for treatment, storage and/or disposal of any
hazardous materials.

C. Distance to nearest natural resource.

d. Whether public sewer is available or proposed at the location.

e. Septic tank location, size and capacity, and/or sewage lift
stations, force mains and grease traps.

f. Expected types and amount of discharge to sewers, to the ground
and to surface water.

g. Provisions for stormwater runoff controls which will minimize
suspended solids.

h. Location of loading and unloading docks.

i. Provision for containment of any spills.

j. Location and description of outside storage areas and types of
materials to be stored.

10. Requirements of Coastal Site Plan Review should be incorporated into
the Zoning Regulations.

The attached language contained is extracted from Section 11 of the
CAM Act and defines the requirements and applicability of Coastal Site
Plan Review. It is meant to replace the existing Section 8.61-3.

These revisions will be held until the new State model exemption
regulation is received. The exemption section will be rewritten to
clarify that structures within the proposed 50' setback and the
Waterfront Design District remain subject to site plan review.

8.61-3 Coastal Site Plan Review

1. Applicability

The following site plans, plans and applications for activ-
ities or projects to be located fully or partially within
the coastal boundary as shown on the map entitled "Coastal
Area Management Boundary" on file in the office of the
Groton Planning Department and landward of the mean high
water mark shall be defined as "coastal site plans" and
shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 444,
Sections 22a-90 through 22a-114 of the Connecticut General
Statutes.

a. - Site plans submitted to the planning commission.

b. Subdivisions submitted to the planning commission.

C. Plans submitted to a planning commission for a planned
unit development.

d. Applications for a special permit submitted to the
zoning commission.

e. An application for a zoning variance to the zoning
board of appeals.

f. A referral of a proposed municipal project to the
planning commission.

2. Exemptions (Note: State model language exemptions to be
reviewed and incorporated by Town in this section.

Under the authority of Chapter 444 Section 22a-109(b) of the
Connecticut General Statutes, the following uses, structures
and activities are exempt from review except that in the
instance of properties regulated by Section 6.3WDD,
subsections a, b and c below shall not be exempt f rom
coastal site plan review:

VIII-16

a. -Minor additions to or modifications of existing build-
ings or detached accessory buildings, such as garages
and utility sheds except in instances where Section
8.61-4 is applicable;

b. Construction of new or modification of existing struc-
tures incidental to the enjoyment and maintenance of
residential property including but not limited to
walks, terraces, driveways, swimming pools, tennis
courts, docks, and detached accessory building except
in instances where Section 8.61-4 is applicable;

C. Construction of new or modification of existing on
premise fences, walls, pedestrian walks and terraces,
underground utility connections, essential electric,
gas, telephone, water and sewer service lines, signs
and such other minor structures as will not substan-
tially alter the natural character of coastal resources
or restrict access along a public beach;

d. Construction of an individual conforming single family
residential structure except in or within 100 feet of
the following coastal resource areas as defined by
Section 22a-93(7) of the Connecticut General Statutes;
tidal wetlands, coastal bluffs And escarpments and
beaches and dunes.

e. Activities conducted for the specific purpose of
conserving or preserving soil, vegetation, water, fish,
shellfish, wildlife, and other coastal land and water
resources; and

f. Gardening, grazing and the harvesting of crops.

3. Coastal Site Plan Contents

A coastal site plan shall include a plan showing the loc-
ation and special relationship of coastal resources on and
contiguous to the site; a description of the entire project
with appropriate plans, indicating project location, design,
timing and methods of construction; an assessment of the
capability of the resources to accommodate the proposed use;
an assessment of the suitability of the project for the
proposed site; an evaluation of the potential beneficial and
adverse impacts of the project and a description of proposed
methods to mitigate adverse effects on coastal resources.

VIII-17

4. Coastal Site Plan Action

The board or commission reviewing the coastal site plan
shall, in addition to the discretion granted in any other
sections of the Connecticut General Statutes or in any
special act, approve, modify, condition or deny the activity
proposed in a coastal site plan on the basis of the criteria
listed in Chapter 444 Section 22a-106 of the Connecticut
General Statutes. Further, pursuant to Connecticut General
Statutes section 22a-106(e) the reviewing commission must
find that the proposed activity is consistent with all
applicable goals and policies of section 22a-92 and
incorporates as conditions or modifications all reasonable
measures which would mitigate the adverse impacts of the
proposed activity on both coastal resources and future
water-dependent development activities.

Revisions to the Waterfront Design District in Mystic are contained in
Chapter VII. These proposals have been forwarded to the Zoning
Commission for consideration and public hearing.

VIII-18

I
I
I
I IX. Next Steps
m
11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I .
I

NEXT STEPS

This document has developed and described specific policies, recom-
mendations, and land use regulations to help guide future development and
preservation of the Town of Groton's coastal area. The Town I s land use
commissions, departments, and legislative bodies must now move ahead with
implementation of the program by executing the necessary measures outlined.
While previous sections of this report provide a framework for good manage-
ment of the coast, there are some specific items which require further
detailed study. The following items are identified for future study:

1. The need for an adequate Town beach site with suitable access, park-
ing, water quality and shoreline conditions has been evident for years
and identifying such a site is of major concern to the Town. Speci-
f ically the issue of suitable access to the Old Town Beach on the
Poquonnock River, improvements to the New Town Beach at Bluf f Point
and the search for new areas should be studied intensively.

2. The Noank Village peninsula, which has many unique characteristics and
issues, should be examined in more detail concerning its future land
use.

3. The shorefront area north of 1-95 along the Thames River warrants
further study as possible development for marine-related uses and
possible use as a dredge material containment area.

4. A feasibility and impact study of an area in the Town or City for
siting of a Resource Recovery, Waste to Energy Facility to help meet
area solid waste disposal needs.

5. A study of the possible use of the abandoned Mystic River Railroad
Bridge embankment for recreational waterfront use.

6. A study of the Birch Plain Creek estuary system concerning impacts of
the Town and City development on the ecology, hydrology and biological
productivity of the system.

7. Development of a Bluff Point Management Study and Program.

8. Study the feasibility of establishing a linear park along the Thames
River in an attempt to link the Nautilus Memorial with Thames Street.

9. Study the feasibility of establishing a linear park along the Poquon-
nock River from Route 1 to Bluff Point.

10. Develop a comprehensive inventory of all public water access points
within the Town and their present and future value as public access
areas.

IX-1

I
I Appendices
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

I
I I
I
I
I
I APPENDIX A
CONNECTICUT WATER QUALITY
CLASSIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0

INLAND WATERS
CLASS AA
Existing or proposed drinking water supply impoundments and tributary surface waters.
(See Notes 9. 10, and 21)
1. Dissolved oxygen 75% saturation, 16 hours/day-, 5 mg/l
at any time.

2. Sludge deposits - solid refuse None other than of natural origin. (See
floating solids. oils and grease - note 8).
scum

3. Silt or sand deposits None other than of natural origin ex-
cept as may result from normal
agricultural, road maintenance, con-
struction activity or dredge material
disposal provided all reasonable con-
trols are used. (See Note 6 and 8)

4. Color and turbidity 'None other than of natural origin ex-
cept as mav result from normal
agricultural. road maintenance. con-
struction activity or dredge material
disposal provided all reasonable con-
trols are used. (See Note 6 and 8)

5. Coliform bacteria per 100 mgl Not to exceed a median of 100 nor more
than 500 in more than 10% of samples
collected. (See Note 11)

6. Taste and odor None other than of natural origin.

OH As naturally occurs.

8. Allowable temperature increase None other than of natural origin ex-
cept when it can be demonstrated that
cold water fish spawning and growth
will not be impaired. (See Note 17)

9. Chemical constituents (See Note 4)

(a) Phosphorus None other than of natural origin.
(b) Sodium Not to exceed 20 mg/I

COASTAL AND MARINE WATERS.
CLASS SA
Suitable for all sea water uses including sbeflfish harvesting for direct human consumption (ap-
proved shelffish arms), bathing, and other water contact sports: may be subject to absolute
restrictions on the discharge of poUutants: authorization of new discharges other than cooling or
clean water or dredged materials would require revision of the class to Class SB (See General
Policy 5) which would be considered concurrently with the issuance of a permit at public hearing.

1. Dissolved oxygen Not less than 6.0 mg/l at any time.

2. Sludge deposits - solid refuse -
floating solids, oils and grease -
scum None other than of natural origin (See
Note 8)

3. Silt or sand deposits None other than of natural origin ex-
cept as may result from normal
agricultural, road maintenance, coa-
struction activity or dredge material
disposal provided all reasonable con-
trols are used. (See Notes 6 and 8)
4. Color and turbidity None other than of natural ori., n ex-
cept as may result from n,,rmal
agricultural, road maintenance, con-
struction activity or dredge material
disposal provided all reasonable con-
tro13 are used. (See Notes 6 and 8)
A secchi disc shall 6c visible at a mini-
mum depth of I meter. SAb - criteria
may be exceeded..(See Note 14)

5. Colfform bacteria per 100 nil Not to exceed a median MPN of 70 and
not more than 10% of the samples shall
ordinarily exceed an MPN of 230 for a
5-tube decimal dilution or 330 for a 3-
tube decimal dilution. (See Notes 3 and
12)

6. Taste an d odor None allowable

7. pH 6.8 -8.3
8. Aflowable temperature increase None except where the increase will not
exceed the recommended limit on the
most sensitive receiving water use and
in on case exceed 83 degrees F or in anv
case raise the normaf temperature of-
the receiving water more than 4 degrees
F. During the period including July.
August. September. the normal
temperature of the receiving water shall
not be raised mom than 1.5 degrees F.
unless it can be shown that spawning
and growth of indigenous organisms
will not be significantly affected. (See
Note 19)

9. Chemical constituents None in concentrations or com-
binations which would be harmful to
human, animal or aquatic life or which
would make the waters unsafe or un-
suitable ror fish or shellrish or their
propagation, impair the palatability of
same. or impair the waters for any other
uses. (See Note 4)

CLASS SB
Suitable for bathing. other recreational purposes, industrial cooling and shellfish harvesting for
human consumption after depuration; excellent fish and wildlife habitat, good aesthetic value.

1. Dissolved oxygen Not less than 5.0 mgl I at any time

2. Sludge deposits - solid refuse - None except for small amounts that
floating solids, oils and grease - may result from the discharge from a
scum waste treatment facility providing ap-
propriate treatment. (See Note 8)
3. Sand or silt deposits None other than of natural origin ex-
cept as may result from normal
agricultural. road maintenance, con-
struction activity or dredge material
disposal provided all reasonable con-
trols are used. (See Notes 6 and 8)

4. Color and turbidity A secchi disc shall be visible at a
minimum of I meter. SBb - criteria
may be exceeded. (See Notes 8 and 14)

5. Coliform bacteTia per 100 ml Not to exceed a median value of 700
and not more than 2300 in more than
10% of the samples. (See Notes 3 and
12)

6. Taste and odor None in such conccnirations that would
impair any usages specifically assigned
to this claw and none that would cause
taste and odor in edible rish or shellfish.

7. pH 6.8 - 8.3

8. Aflowabic temperature increase None except where the increase will not
exceed the recommended limit on the
most sensitive receiving water use and
in no case exceed 83 degrees F or in any
case raise the normal temperature of
the receiving water more than 4 degi
F. During the period including July.
August and September, the normal
temperature of the receiving water shall
not be raised more than 1.5 degrees F
unless it can be shown that spawning
and growth of indigenous organisms
will not be significantly affected. (See
Note 19)

9. Chemical constituents None in concentrations or com-
binations which would be harmful to
human. animal or aquatic life or which
would make the waters unsafe or un-
suitable for fish or shellfish or their
propagation. or impair the water for
any other usage assigned to this class.
(S@e Note 4)

CLASS SC
Suitable for r1sh, sheflrnh and wildlife habitat. suitable for mc, ational boating and industrial
cooling, good aesthetic value. (See Note 13)
1. Dissolved oxygen Not less than 5 mg/I for more than 6
hours during any 24-hour period and at
no time less than 4 mg/ 1. For cold
water fishery, SCr_ not less than 5 mg/ I
at any time. SCc - 6 mg/ 1. (See Note
15)
2. Sludge deposits - solid refuse None except for small amounts that
floating solids, oils and grease - may result from the discharge from a
scum waste treatment facility providing ap-
propriatC treatment. (See Note 8)

3. Sand and silt deposits None other than of natural origin ex-
cept as may result from normal
acricultural, road maintenance. con-
siiuction activity or dredge material
disposal provide@ all reasonable con-
trols are used. (Sm Notes 6 and 8)

4. Color and turbidity None in such concentrations that would
impair any usages specifically assigned
Note 8)
to this class. (See I

5. Coliform bacteria per 100 ml Not to exceed an average in any 30-day
period of 5000 nor exceed this value in
more than 20% of the samples collected
during the period. (See Notes 3 and 12)

6. Taste and odor None in such concentrations that would
impair any usages specifically assigned
to this class and none that would cause
taste and odor in edible rish or shellfish.

7. pH 6.5 - 8.5

8. Allowable temperature increase None except where the increase will not
exceed the recommended limit on the
most sensitive receiving water use and
in no case exceed 83 degrees F or in any
case raise the normal temperature of
the receiving water more than 4 degrees
F. During the period including July.
August and September, the normal
temperature of the receiving water shall
not be raised more than 1.5 deerees F
unless it can be shown that spawning
and growth of indigenous organisms
will nnt he sianificnnflu (C--

binations which would be harmful to
human, animal or aquatic life or which
would make the waters unsafe or un-
suitable for fish or shellfish or their
propagation, or impair the water for
any other usage assigned to this class.
(See Note 4)

NOTES
These notes include additional criteria, and
supplementary information to insure proper interpreta-
tion and use of the criteria.

1. These criteria do not apply to conditions brought 5. The discharge of radioactive materials in concen.!
about bv natural causes. trations or combinations which would be harmful to
2. Class D and Class SD waters are considered un- human, animal or aquatic life shall not be allowed. In no
acceptable. cast shall the Alpha emitters in a surface water exceed a
3. All sewage treatment plant effluent shall receive dis- concentration of 1000 picocuries per liter.
infection before discharge to the surface waters with the 6. Reasonable controls may be defined by the Com-
exception or discharges to the following streams for missioncr on a case by case basis or the Commissioner
which disinfection shall be required only during the may require that it be affirmatively demonstrated by any
period from May Ist to October Ist. person or municipality engaged in such activities that all
Housatonic River (north of 1-95 Bridge) reasonable controls will be or are being used.
Naugatuck River 7. The minimum average daily flow for seven con-
Quinnipiac River (north of 1-95 Bridge) secutive days that can be expected to occur once in ten
Farmington River years under natural conditions is the minimum flow to
Pequabuck River which the standards apply except when a stream is
Connecticut River (north of 1-95 Bridge) regulated to result in low flows below that level in which
Hockanurn River case the standards apply to the absolute low flow
Willimantic River resulting from such regulation.
8. Except within designated dredged. material disposal
Shetucket River Z
Quinebaug River areas, waters shall be substantially free of pollutants that:
Thames River (north of 1-95 Bridge) (a) unduly affect the composition of bottorr fauna; (b)
It is recognized that the coliform bacteria criteria may unduly afJfect tl@e physical or chemical nature of the bot-
not be met on the above streams during the period when tom; and (c) interfere with the propagation and habitats
disinfection of sewage treatment plant effluent is not re- of shellfish, finfish, ard wildlife. Dredged materials
quired. dumped at approved disposal areas shall not pollute the
The degree of treatment and disinfection shall be as waters of the State and shall not result in. (a) floating
required by the Commissioner and shall be consistent residues of any sort, (b) release of any substance,
with the health standards as established by the State biological or ch;mical constitutents which may result in
long-term or permanent degradation of Water Quality
Department of Health.
4. The waters shall be free from chemical constituents Standards overlying or adjacent to the dumping grounds,
in concentrations or combinations which would be harm- (c) unintentional dispersal of sedliments outside a mixing
ful to human, animal or aquatic life for the most sensitive zone enclosing the designated dump points; and (d)
and governing water use class. Criteria for chemical con- biological mobilization a;d subsequent transport of toxic
stituents contained in the "Quality Criteria for Water" substances to food chains.
published by the Environmental Agency shall be con- 9. Waters reserved for drinking water supply may be
sidered and used as guidance. in areas where fisheries are subject to restricted use by state regulations. local or-
the governing considerations and approved limits have dinance, or by the property owner.
not been established, bioassays are necessary to establish 10. Proposed drinking water supply intakes and im-
limits on toxic substances, the recommendations for Poundments and tributary surface waters identified in
bioassay procedures contained in -Standard Methods for the long range plan for management of water resources
the Examination of Water and Wastewater" and the prepared and adopted pursuant to Section 25-5b of the
application factors contained in "Quality Criteria for Connecticut Statutes shall be adopted as Class AA.
Water" shall be considered. For public drinking water 11. Section 25-26 (a) of the Connecticut General
supplies, the raw water sources must be of such a quality Statutes imposes an absolute restriction on the discharge
that U.S. Environmental Protection Agency limits as of sewage to such waters. The Coliform bacteria criteria
defined by the Safe Drinking Water Act (Public Law for "none of human origin" may be waived if the source
93-523). or state limits if more stringent, for finished is outside the state and similar requirements are not im-
water can be met after conventional treatment. posed by an adjacent state or if the source is a result of
recreation in the water (i.e., swimming) which is not
restricted by the state.

12. Coliform bacten:a'criteria are intended to provide a 19. Upstream of the mouths of the Housatonic River,
standard for coliform data evaluation and are related to Connecticut River, and Thames River, the allowable
the probability of contamination by undisinfected temperature increase shall be consistent with the cor-
sewage. High results may be due to soil bacteria or responding Inland Waters Class.
bacteria from the feces of warm blooded animals which 20. Sample collection, preservation, handling and
are not of sanitary significance. High results should analysis should conform to "Standard Methods for the
therefore be investigated by sanitary survey.or other ap- Examination of Water and Wastewaters", 14th Edition,
propriate means to confirm the cause. Fecal coliform
(i.e., coliform organisms from the feces of warm blooded American Public Health Association, New York, New
anim@ls). may be useful as a secondary indicator. York 10010. The following references may be used where
Although the reliability of f@cal coliform analysis is not they contain applicable laboratory methods.
yet.adequate to use as a standard, it is desirable that cor- (a) "ASTM Standards", Part 23, Water, Atmospheric
relation data be generated. The Region I Office of the Analysis, 1970; American Society of Testing and
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has suggested Materials, Philadelphia. Pennsylvania 19103.
criteria for fecal coliform data evaluation. Such criteria (b) "Methods of Chemical Analysis of Water and
should be considered only as a guideline and can be found Wastes". Environmental Protection Agency Water
in Appendix A. Quality Office, Analytical Quality Control Laboratori,
13. The existence of Class C or SC waters shall not be 1014 Broadway, Cincinatti, Ohio 45263.
considered a reason for allEhorizing a new discharge that (c) Any later edition of the above references or any
would not maintain the receiving waters as Class B or SB other different but equivalent methods approved by the
waters if the receiving waters were of such quality. Commissioner.
14. The use of subscript b in Class Sb is intended to -71. Treated backwash water from public drinking
identify those areas where natural conditions or con- water treatment plants may be authorized for discharge
ditions which cannot be expected to be appreciably back to Class AA waters from which the raw water was
altered by the control of discharges may preclude drawn subject to the approval of the Conimissioner of
bathing. It may also be used in Classes Bb and SBb to Health or to Class A waters downstream of a raw water
designate areas in the immediate vicinity of treated intake on reservoir provided, the backwash water is
sewage outfOs where bathing is not advisable. treated to a level which may be considered clean water
1,5. Th, c use of subscript c in Classes Bc, Cc, SBc and and which in the judgment of the Commissioner equals
SCc is to identify areas suitable for cold water fisheries, or exceeds the qualit y'of raw water from which it was
especially fish passage. drawn.
22. Conditions which exist in the water in part due to
16. The use of subscript s in Classes Bs and Cs is to man's normal uses of the land shall not be considered un-
identify areas suitable for cold water fisheries, including natural. Thus the meaning of the word natural is not
fish.spawning and growth. limited to only those conditions which would exist in the
17. Physical obstructions such as dams, which prevent water if drained from pristine land.
cold water fish from reaching an area suitable for spawn- 23. Watercourses which are contained in drainage
ing and growth, shall not be considered a valid reason conduits or pipes and which are not assigned a specific
for not meeting the criteria. class are considered to be of the class of the stream seg-
18. There shall be no point source discharge into any ment to which they discharge.
natural lake or pond or tributary surface waters which
will raise the phosphorus concentration, of the receiving
surface waters, including phosphorus contained in
suspended matter to an amount in excess of 0.03 mg/l.
For the purpose of this note the impoundments listed in
Appendix B shall be considered natural lakes or ponds.

I
I
I
I
I

APPENDIX B
I BIOLOGICAL SURVEYS OF THE
MUMFORD COVE AND MYSTIC RIVER TIDAL WETLANDS
I
(taken from the Town of Groton Environment Report
I July 1972)
1
1
1
1
.I
I
I
I
I
i

BIOLOGICAL REPORT

ECOLOGICAL UNIT NO. 63

MUMFORD COVE

Wetlands Survey of the State of Connecticut
Marine Research Laboratory
Universitv of Connecticut
Noank, Connecticut 06340

BOTANY

The following plants included in Connecticut Public Act 695 grow in
Ecological Unit 63:

high tide bush Iva frutescers, var. oraria
sea lavender Limonium carolinianum
salt-wort Salicornia europaea
black grass Juncus gerardi
spike rush T-leocharis rostellata
bulrush Scirpus robustus
chairmaker's rush Scirpus americanus
spike grass Distichlis spicata
switch grass Panicum virgatum
salt meadow grass Spartina patens
salt marsh cordgrass Spartina alternifIcra
tall cordgrass Spartina pectinata
bent grass Agrostis palustris
cattail Typha latifolia, T. angustifolia

These additional species also typical of saltmarsh plant communities were
noted in this unit:

reed Phragmites communis
sea-side goldenrod Solidago sempervirens
terrel grass Elymus virginicus
sea-rtyrtle Baccharis halimifolia
sweet glae Myrica g1le
marsh mallow Hibiscus palustris
orach Atr plex patula
rose Rosa palustris
poison ivy ih-us radicans
Turk's cap Lilium superbum
blue verbena Verl@e__na hastata
bayberry Myrica pennsylvanica
marsh fern Dryopteris ' thelpteris,
swamp-honeysuckle Rhododendron viscosum
maleberry Lyonia ligustrian
water hemp Tc-nida cannabina
sedge Carex stricta
red chokeberry Pyrus arbutifolia

ZOOLOGY

These marshes are similar to others along the eastern end of Connecticut's
shoreline in their relative freedom from adjacent residential areas. The

following fauna were noted at the time of our visits during the quiet
winter months:

Mammals
white tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus
cottontail rabbit Sylvilagus floridanus
meadow vole Microtus pennsylvanicus

Birds
belted kingfisher Megaceryle alcyon
mourning dove Zenaidura macroura
fish crow Corvus ossifragus
mallard Anas platyrhynchos
black duck Tn-as rubripes
black-crowned night heron Nvcticoras nycticorax
nute swam Cygnus olor
black-capped chickadee Parus atricapillos
song sparrow Melospiza melodia

molluscs
softshelled clam Mya arenaria
eastern oyster Crassotrea virginica
quahog Mercenaria mercenaria
Atlantic ribbed mussel Modiolus demissus
Atlantic bay scallop Aequipecten irradians

SUMMARY

The extensive wetlands in this unit qualify for protection under
Connecticut Public Act 695. The low concentration of adjacent residences
has resulted in clean and picturesque marshes which should be especially
useful to shy faunal species and to flora which are most readily displaced
due to disturbed environments. Two rather small but well-sheltered
estuaries lie within this unit, and marshland is well distributed around
them. The establishment of a park along one estuary could help to protect
the area from further development.

Derek G. Helmboldt
Francis H. Wolife
Michael Wm. Lefor
June 10, 1971

BIOLOGICAL REPORT
ECOLOGICAL UNIT NO. 65

MYSTIC RIVER

Wetlands Survey of the State of Connecticut
Biological Sciences Group
University of Connecticut
Storrs, Connecticut

BOTANY

The marshes along the Mystic River support the following species of plants
listed in Public Act 695 as salt marsh indicator species:

high tide bush Iva frutescens var. oraria
sea lavender Limonium carol'inianum
spike grass Hstichlis spicata
switch grass Panicum virqatum'
salt meadow grass Spartina patens
salt marsh cordgrass S. alterniflora
salt marsh grass S. pectinata
black grass Juncus gerardi
rush Scirpus americana
swamp grass Agrostis palustris

The following indicator species, not listed in the Act, were also present:

seaside goldenrod Solidago sempervirens
terrell grass Elymus virginicus
arrow grass TPi-glochin maritima
reed Phragmites commuis
marsh rose Rosa palustris
groundsel tree Baccharis halimifolia
marsh mallow iiibiscus palustris
orach Atriplex patula
poison ivy Fhus radicans

ZOOLOGY

A rich avifauna was also present:

sparrow hawk Falco sparverius
eastern belted kingfisher Megaceryle alcyon
turkey vulture Cathartes aura
red-breasted merganser Mergus serrator
American coot Fulica americana
great black-backed gull Larus marinus
mourning dove Zenaidura macroura
canvasback Athva valisineria
bufflehead El-a-ucionetta albeola
mallard Anas platyrhyncbos
mute swan Cygnus olor
herring gull Ta-rus argentatus

Invertebrates
Atlantic ribbed mussel Modiclus demissus
blue crab Callinectes sapidus
quahog Mercenaria mercenaria

Mammals
meadow vole Microtus pensylvanicus

Although some filling has taken place in the past, we did not notice any
serious disturbances of the marshes in this unit. These wetlands support a
fine variety of plant and animal life, and are well worthy of preservation
under Public Act No. 695.

Michael Wm. Lefor
Derek HeImboldt
Francis H. Wolfe
March 1971

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.. I
I
I
I