Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Parcel Sale topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Groton council to halt sale of Central Boulevard and Island Avenue parcels
Summary
At an Aug. 3 public hearing the city of Groton heard strong resident opposition to selling five jointly owned parcels, with the Town of Groton Conservation Commission asking the city to resolve recorded ownership and procedure questions before any invitation to bid.
Mayor Ruskin opened a public hearing Aug. 3 on whether the city should proceed with the sale of five vacant parcels jointly owned by the city and the town of Groton. The city presentation described a 1968 foreclosure acquisition, a 1966 sewer assessment of $2,923.73, and a recorded agreement that gives the town an 85% interest and the city a 15% interest in the parcels.
Speakers representing neighbors and local commissions pressed the council to pause the sale until legal, title, and environmental questions are resolved. Thomas Olsen, speaking for the Town of Groton Conservation Commission, asked the council to “defer issuing an invitation [to] bid until these procedural and ownership questions have been resolved” and requested a written legal opinion, confirmation of the town council’s approval, a current title report and an independent appraisal.
Neighborhood speakers raised repeated concerns about flooding, wetlands and buildability. “Please keep these properties as they were intended as open space,” resident Betsy McCauscher told the council, citing national data on wetland decline. Former town councilor and judge Thomas McCauscher said the deed language shows a single parcel that would require subdivision and outlined likely costs of surveys, wetland delineations and legal work; he implored the council, “Do it for the 10 year olds,” when arguing to preserve the land for future generations.
Several residents, including Nancy Shaw, described wildlife and long usage: “I am opposed to this wholeheartedly,” Shaw said, noting her driveway crosses one of the parcels. Multiple speakers said at least four of the lots do not meet R‑5.1 minimum lot sizes and that building them could be infeasible or legally constrained by wetlands regulations.
The city presentation also noted FEMA elevation requirements for living space in the mapped flood zone, and that EPA retention requirements could apply to the Island Avenue parcel if development exceeds one acre. Several commenters suggested a rigorous environmental assessment and updated mapping before any sale is considered.
Mayor Ruskin closed the hearing after receiving letters and emails from residents with both viewpoints; the council will consider the record and further committee discussion. The hearing closed by unanimous vote and the council recessed before starting its agenda meeting.
