Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Comprehensive Permit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers present 218‑unit comprehensive permit pre‑application; board presses on schools, sewer and traffic
Summary
Attorney Michael Resnick and the project team presented a pre‑application for the Collection at Lime Rock: a proposed 218‑unit development with 50% low‑ and moderate‑income units (109 LMI). Board members raised concerns about school enrollment impact, sewer capacity at Whipple Road pump station, traffic, and marketability of predominantly four‑bedroom units.
Attorney Michael Resnick presented a comprehensive permit pre‑application for the Collection at Lime Rock, a proposed residential development located on Lime Rock Road and contiguous assessor parcels. The team described a 218‑unit project in an R80 zone with 50% low‑ and moderate‑income (LMI) units, meaning 109 units would be set aside as affordable under state rules. Resnick said the applicant has prepared an extensive pre‑application packet that includes traffic, land‑use and fiscal studies and that they plan to file a letter of eligibility with Rhode Island Housing.
Engineer Joe Casale and traffic engineer John Shevlin detailed site constraints: portions of the site lie within FAA hazard/runway protection zones though the team said no structures would be proposed within the most restrictive portion; freshwater wetlands and buffers constrain portions of the site; and the Whipple Road pump station and downstream sewer infrastructure are already strained. Shevlin said his traffic study (data collection on Oct. 8) found 43 crashes over three years in the study area — mostly single‑vehicle crashes and rear‑end collisions — and that trip generation estimates for the project would add about 106 trips in the AM peak hour and roughly 125 in the PM peak hour. His capacity analysis found no intersections would degrade below level‑of‑service C with the project traffic under the modeled scenarios.
Board members expressed strong concern about school impacts: multiple members asked for the fiscal and enrollment impact analysis Mr. Joe Lombardo prepared (in the packet but not presented because he was absent). Members asked for clearer pro formas showing market rate vs. LMI pricing, and questioned the predominance of four‑bedroom units in the conceptual plan. Resnick and the team said they will supply the requested documentation prior to preliminary application, that the project is likely to include a variety of unit types, and that deed restrictions and a monitoring agent would enforce the affordability requirements if the comprehensive permit proceeds.
The board did not vote on the pre‑application; members requested additional technical materials (school impact analysis, soils testing, sewer mitigation plan and clarified pro formas) for review before preliminary submission.
