A Redevelopment Plan for Rocky Point Park in Warwick, Rhode Island

This research project proposes a plan for the redevelopment of the former Rocky Point Amusement Park in Warwick, Rhode Island. The study first details the park's history and cultural value to the people of Rhode Island. It then defines and evaluates the environmental setting of the study area. Geographic information system (GIS) mapping is used to evaluate environmental constraints to determine the parts of the study area precluded from development and those where development is appropriate. A site survey also evaluates existing conditions of the study area. The property is next evaluated through the perspective ofland use regulations and political issues. Options for the redevelopment of the study area, including exclusively open space; lowand high-density housing; and a mix of parkland, housing and commercial uses, are explored. A concept for the redevelopment of the study area into a mixed-use village is then presented. The plan includes an open space network and areas for commercial, residential and transit uses. The development attempts to retain much of the historical character of Rocky Point while meeting modern-day needs. The final chapter of the project discusses implementation of the redevelopment plan. It estimates the impact of this plan, both to a developer and to the city. The fiscal impact includes taxes anticipated from the new development and public services for its residents. The cost of open space acquisition is estimated and the availability of funding resources is evaluated. Finally, the city's role in implementation is considered.


Rocky Point is For Sale
The property formerly known as Rocky Point Park is for sale for $10 million (DePaul, 1999). Since the 160 year-old amusement park was closed in 1996, developers have been eyeing the 125 acres of land for redevelopment. The potential is enormousthis is one of the largest vacant pieces of coastal land in Rhode Island. It affords magnificent water views. There are two sandy beaches and a pier on the property. But due to a number of environmental, economic and political reasons, the land has remained vacant for years. This is a critical time for this important piece of property. It is too valuable to remain vacant for long. While it does, there exists a window of opportunity to carefully plan for its future. This research project proposes a redevelopment plan for Rocky Point that incorporates planning and design principles that are appropriate for the unique characteristics of the site. The plan also respects the history of the property by keeping much of it as a public space, incorporating commercial and residential uses and providing public access to the waterfront.

Redevelopment Proposals
Several proposals for redevelopment of the former Rocky Point property have been made public to date Howell, 1997). They typically involve constructing hundreds of condominium units, duplexes and single-family homes. Some proposals call for selling some of the property that is unsuitable for development to the City of Warwick or to the state. So far none of the proposals have been anything more than concepts. Why is this the case?
As with any coastal site in Rhode Island, there are considerable environmental constraints to development. Wetlands, coastal features and unsuitable soils are strictly regulated. Their existence limits development and reduces the area suitable for building considerably. Perhaps more importantly, there are economic and political constraints to rebuilding Rocky Point. Years of fractious disputes between owners and creditors have resulted in increasing costs that must be recouped. Developers believe that in order for them to maximize their investment, the current zoning (single family, with lots ranging in size from 10,000 to 40,000 square feet) would have to be changed to allow for highdensity residential development. This is evidenced by the fact that no plans for development have been proposed that have conformed to the existing zoning requirements.
A change in zoning is not easy to acquire-there are several layers of city government that would review and approve any application. Further, any redevelopment of this landmark property would be difficult without public acceptance, and the public is unlikely to accept haphazard development on a site that for many has sentimental value (Wyatt, 1999). So far, the planners and politicians in Warwick have not reacted favorably to the conceptual development proposals for Rocky Point. What is needed is a plan that will balance the needs of the city, the owners and the public.

Essential Elements of a Redevelopment Plan
In order for a redevelopment plan of Rocky Point to achieve this balance, it must contain the following elements: public open space, at least along the entire coastline of the property; a mix of residential and commercial (retail) space; access to the commercial facilities and the open space by the general public; reuse of existing buildings, rehabilitation of the pier for public use; and design features that will make for a more livable community.

Access and Open Space
Rocky Point has been accessible to the general public since the 1840s.
Generations of Rhode Islanders have visited the park, not just for its amusements, but also to use its beaches, to fish from the pier or to get a glimpse of the wildlife, including seals and shorebirds that frequent the waters off the point. Because of its heritage, its outstanding value as a multi-use park, and its location in the sensitive coastal zone, Rocky Point should be developed in a way that maximizes public access and open space.

Commercial and Residential Uses
Rocky Point has a rich history of commercial uses. First as a location of steamship liner-sponsored picnics, later as an amusement park with a restaurant, ballroom, function hall, and the "world's largest shore dinner hall," entrepreneurs have taken advantage of the coastal location to lure customers from all over southern New England. In keeping with this heritage, Rocky Point should be developed as a mixed-use village, with commercial uses incorporated into a residential development and servicing residents of the village as well as visitors to the park.

Th e Pier
The pier at Rocky Point was an important part of its success. For years it was the only access to the property. More recently it provided a berth for pleasure boaters who frequented the Shore Dinner Hall's take-out window, and for the Bay Queen, a commercial cruise ship. The pier should retain these multiple uses and should also serve a new purpose as a transit node for Narragansett Bay ferry service.

Planning and Design Principles
Through proper site planning and design, a mixed-use development can be a better place to live and visit. A development at Rocky Point village should incorporate site planning and design principles so that it will fit harmoniously with the natural features of the site and encourage activities that promote a sense of community.

Mixed-use Village
With these essential elements in mind, the best use for this property, therefore, is actually a mix of uses. Rocky Point should be redeveloped as a village, with homes, shops and parkland. This mixed-use community will be a wonderful place to live, with beautiful views and easy access to natural beauty and commercial amenities. As it was for 160 years, it will be a great place to visit, by land or by sea, to shop or to recreate.
With the rehabilitation of the pier, it will also be a transit node that serves commuters to Providence, Newport and elsewhere.
Warwick' s Comprehensive Plan states, "a reuse of (Rocky Point) could utilize planned unit development, cluster development, and other techniques to best suit the large size and natural features of this site." (Warwick, 1995). This research project proposes to follow this advice. Envisioned is a planned unit development for Rocky Point that incorporates New Urbanist planning and design principles, areas of commercial development, cluster-style housing to maximize open space, and sensitivity to the outstanding environmental features of the land.

Objectives and Methods of the Study
This research project proposes a plan for the redevelopment of Rocky Point. The following six sections will lay the groundwork and then describe the plan in detail as follows:

Rocky Point 's History and Cultural Value
The study first discusses why this place is worthy of such a meticulous inquiry by detailing the park's history and cultural value to the people of Rhode Island.

Environmental Setting and Constraints
In order to determine Rocky Point's development potential the study defines and then evaluates the environmental setting of the study area. Geographic information system (GIS) mapping is used to evaluate environmental constraints to determine the parts of the study area precluded from development and those where development is appropriate. A site survey also evaluates existing conditions of the study area.

Regulatory and Political Setting
The study area is evaluated through the perspective of Federal, State and local land use regulations. The political issues involved with redevelopment of this site are also considered.

Redevelopment Options
Options for the redevelopment of the study area are explored with respect to the essential elements noted above. The options include exclusively open space, low-and high-density housing and a mix of housing, commercial (mainly retail) uses and open space.

A Redevelopment Plan for Rocky Point
A concept for the redevelopment of the study area into a mixed-use village is presented. The development is in accordance with the Warwick planned unit development overlay district and incorporates New Urbanist planning and design principles in laying out the mix of land use. The plan includes an open space network for active and passive recreation, and areas for commercial, residential and transit uses. The development attempts to retain much of the historical character of Rocky Point while meeting the modem-day needs.

Implementation
The final chapter of the project discusses implementation of the redevelopment plan. It estimates the impact of this plan, both to a developer and to the city. Development costs include those for land acquisition and land improvement. The fiscal impact includes taxes anticipated from the new development and public services for its residents. Where open space acquisition is proposed, the cost is estimated based on recent appraisals and on anticipated exactions from the developers. The availability of funding resources will also be evaluated. Finally, the city's role in implementation is considered.

A New Rocky Point
Someday soon, this scenic piece of property will be transformed. The land will be cleared and most likely, new buildings will be erected. The people of Warwick and of Rhode Island have a choice: they can allow the land to be developed in a haphazard way, perhaps as a high-density condominium complex with no public access, or they can insist on something better. It is hoped that this plan might serve as a blueprint for a commitment to a higher level of land use planning, especially for a place that means so much to so many.

Rocky Point's History and Cultural Value
Introduction Rocky Point has a long history as an attraction for Rhode Islanders. For nearly 160 years, it was a functional mixed-use development. Today, it is vacant and for sale.
There are no rides on the midway, the Shore Dinner Hall is padlocked shut, and the pier is broken in half, having been ravaged by years of storms. Rocky Point will be redeveloped eventually. Hopefully its redevelopment will respect the park' s long and varied history as a Rhode Island landmark. This chapter will recount this history and evaluate Rocky Point's value to the people of Rhode Island.

Recreational and Commercial Uses
First as a nice place to picnic for daytrippers, and later as a full-blown amusement park, Rocky Point has served as an attraction for recreational and commercial uses. With Rocky Point, it is difficult to clearly distinguish recreation from commerce; for the most part, recreation was a business for the owners of the park.
Rocky Point's history as a public attraction dates to the 1840s, when Captain William Winslow brought Sunday school classes from Providence to the property for weekend outings. Winslow eventually bought 89 acres of land around the Point in 184 7 and made a business out of transporting people in his steamboat to "Winslow' s Rocky Point" for shore dinners. With the addition of swings and a carousel, Winslow had the beginnings of an amusement park (Wyatt, 1999).
In the second half of the l 9 1 h century, shore attractions were hugely popular with Rhode Islanders. By 1852, Rocky Point had become the location of a competing resort, J.A. Littlefield's Hom Spring. Oakland Beach on Greenwich Bay and Crescent Park in East Providence were also competing with Rocky Point (Wyatt, 1999). To keep up with the other resorts, Rocky Point kept developing. It added a hotel, a vaudeville theater and an observation tower in the 1860s. Major league baseball was played at the point in the early 1900s, drawing crowds of up to 20,000. Food was always a major attraction of the park. Its shore dinners featured seafood from the bay and fruits and vegetables grown on the park grounds (Wyatt, 1999).
Hit hard by the hurricanes of 1938 and 1954, Rocky Point was rebuilt both times (D 'Amato, 1992). The park also weathered economic storms, riding out the Great Depression and many periods when attendance lagged (Wyatt, 1999). All the while, it kept growing and adapting to the fickle desires of the public. In recent years, commercial operations on the property included the amusement park, the zoo, the saltwater pool, the batting cage, the Cliff House Lounge, the Windjammer and Palladium function halls and the 4,000-seat Shore Dinner Hall. It should be noted that not all recreation was of a commercial nature; there was also free recreation. Many people took advantage of the sandy beaches for swimming and the rocky areas and the pier for fishing.

Residential Uses
Besides its commercial and recreational uses, Rocky Point has had a history of residential uses. Along with the hotel, in the 1860s owner Byron Sprague constructed a summer residence. Rock Cottage, which still stands on a ridge above the Shore Dinner Hall, was also built in the 19th century, and was used as a residence for park employees.
In 1984, owners of the park bought 29 acres ofland to the north known as the Rocky Beach community. On this land, 73 lots are leased to people who own cottages there.
Most of these houses are used as summer residences, but some are used year-round (Wyatt, 1999).

Important Events
Rocky Point has been the site of many events that are important contributors to Rhode Island History. Below is a sample.
• Rocky Point was the site of gatherings of Rhode Island Civil War Veterans for decades after the War (D ' Amato, 1992).
• In 1877, President Rutherford B. Hayes visited the park. He made the first presidential telephone call, to Alexander Graham Bell in Providence (D' Amato, 1992).
• Al Jolson and Providence' s George M. Cohan performed at Rocky Point's vaudeville theater in the mid-1800s (Wyatt, 1999).
• Stephen A. Douglas, campaigning against Abraham Lincoln in 1860, gave a speech at the park to an audience of thousands (Wyatt, 1999).
• George Bush was the second President to visit the park in 1989 for a campaign fundraiser at the Palladium (Wyatt, 1999).

Access to Rocky Point
Since its first use as a public attraction, Rocky Point was accessed by water. In fact, for decades this was the only way to reach the point. In the late 1860s, the American Steamship Company acquired the park. It ran ships to the park six times hourly. Rocky Point' s popularity resulted in competing steamship lines also trying to gain access to the pier. In a move to protect its investment, the American Steamship Company installed a device at the pier that deployed wooden spikes whenever a competing ship would attempt to dock (Wyatt, 1999).
The days of the steamship wars are long gone but until its closure, Rocky Point's pier was still popular. Scores of pleasure boaters would dock up to purchase chowder and clamcakes at the Shore Dinner Hall's take-out window. Also, Rocky Point was a port of call for commercial cruise ships such as the Bay Queen.
Rocky Point was also served by rail. Trolley cars served the park until they were replaced by "trackless trolleys" in 1948 (Wyatt, 1999). More recently the primary access to the park has been by automobile. This created headaches for local residents, as the local streets in Warwick Neck were never designed to handle the traffic volume that the park attracted. On some busy summer days, cars could be backed up to West Shore Road, making it difficult for locals to get to or from their houses. Parking for all these personal vehicles and tour buses was accommodated in dozens of acres of lots surrounding the midway.

Redevelopment Rumors
Before Rocky Point closed for good in 1996, there were at least two times in this century when it was considered for redevelopment. Both of these came when business was lagging: in 1909 there were suggestions that the state should acquire it for a public park (Wyatt, 1999). In the 1940s, "tentative overtures were made to build residences on the property, .. . but soil tests showed it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to develop most of the land" (Wyatt, 1999: 17).

Bankruptcy and Closure
The changing taste of the public and the Rhode Island credit union crisis were two factors in the ultimate demise of Rocky Point Park. In 1990, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) seized the Bank of New England and called in a $500,000 loan on the property (Wyatt, l 995b ). Rocky Point apparently needed even more than $500,000. To meet its expenses and avoid bank foreclosure and auction, it borrowed $5.5 million at an annual interest rate of 15.5% from Fairway Capital, a consortium of lenders that included Arnold Kilberg of Providence (Wyatt, 1995b ).
The loan did not end Rocky Point's money problems. Within a few years the park was in trouble again. To avoid a foreclosure on a tax lien by the City of Warwick, the three corporations that made up Rocky Point (Captain Rocky, Inc., Rocky Point Amusement Park, Inc. and Kiddy Land, Inc.) filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in November of 1994. They claimed $9 million in debts from 145 creditors (Wyatt,l 995a).
Nevertheless, the park was open for business for the 1995 summer season.
In October of 1995, a reorganization plan was approved by a federal judge who authorized a restructuring of the debt and the creation of a limited liability corporation to take the place of the three bankrupt corporations. The plan allowed the new corporation to either operate the park or liquidate it and create a residential development on the land (DePaul, 1996). The owners chose the second option. On January 12, 1996, C.R.
Amusements, LLC was created. Concurrently, Moneta Capital, the owner of a 51 percent share of the park, announced that the park's assets would be liquidated (Wyatt,l 996a).
The closure prompted anxiety in many in Warwick: neighbors feared a highdensity condominium development in their back yards, the city expressed concern over access to the shoreline and the impact of a new development on schools, and Rocky Beach Residents wondered what would become of their valuable land (DePaul, 1996).
Newspapers reported that Moneta Capital was planning a 447-unit development of houses and condominiums at Rocky Point. An analysis by the City of Warwick, however, determined that the current zoning of the Rocky Point land allowed for roughly 160 houses and no condominiums. The City adopted a posture that it was willing to negotiate for public ownership of the shoreline in exchange for the higher density that the owners wanted (DePaul, 1996).
The 447-unit development never came to fruition. Since its introduction, several alternative plans have been floated. To minimize the effect on schools, a retirement community was suggested (Wyatt,l 996b). Councilman Carlo Pisaturo, whose Ward 5 includes Rocky Point, has also weighed in. Calling Rocky Point "a significant piece of America," (Broberg, 1996) he suggested a municipal golf course (Wyatt, 1996c). He also proposed a public bailout of the park to keep it alive. He said, "ifl can keep this park going for one season and get Michael Jackson to see it, I bet he'd write a check" (Polichetti, 1996).
Michael Jackson never saw the park. And Pisaturo' s plan to bail it out was rejected. Other maneuverings to force the park to stay open also failed, and the owners went ahead with their own plan, to auction off the assets of the park (Liberman, 1996).
Meanwhile, the City conducted a preliminary environmental assessment of the property and revealed that only 50 to 53 acres of the 125-acre property could be developed due to environmental constraints (Warwick, 1996). The City also had an appraisal of the property performed (Cooke, 1996a(Cooke, , 1996b The appraisal put a value of between $951,000 and $1,037,000 on the developable land (not including Rocky Beach) and $1.3 to $1.4 million on the undevelopaple shoreline (which was proposed for conservation land).
The auction of the assets went ahead on April 16 and 1 7, 1996, but there was a new twist in this already twisted tale. On the second day of the auction, officials of C.R.
Amusements announced that there would be a "Rocky Point Family Fair" that summer, featuring new rides that would be brought in and run by an outside vendor (Wyatt,l 996d). Rocky Point was not dead yet. However, the Family Fair lasted just two seasons.
By the end of the summer of 1996, redevelopment plans were again surfacing.
The most detailed proposal made public to date was introduced in May of 1997. It called for 232 condominium housing units. It also proposed to sell the Rocky Beach property to its tenants association and 54.8 acres of the property to the City for $1.5 million. The plan called for the access road to the park to be a private road for residents. Public access to the City-owned property would be via Rocky Beach Avenue (Howell, 1997). Again, this plan never made it beyond the concept phase.
In 1998, Kilberg filed for Chapter 7 liquidation of Rocky Point. A U.S . Bankruptcy Court judge subsequently ordered the property to be sold (DePaul, 1999). As of this writing, Rocky Point is for sale for $10 million. Developers continue to eye the property, but its high price and significant constraints to development have so far prevented its purchase.
Kilberg ultimately may have no say over the sale of the land. In late March, 2000, a federal judge ordered the U.S. Small Business Administration to become the receiver of Fairway Capital Corp. and Moneta Capital Corp. and has barred Kilberg from liquidating any of the companies' assets (Malinowski and Stanton, 2000). Moneta and Fairway were licensed by the government as Small Business Investment Companies (SBICs), with the authority to distribute loans from the SBA. The judge found that the companies had misused the money, paying some personal debts and engaged in prohibited real estate deals.

The Future
Rocky Point has had a colorful past. Any person who has lived in Rhode Island for more than a few years has a memory of the park. This past is important and should not be forgotten when the park is redeveloped. It is hoped that Rocky Point might be redeveloped in a way that respects its history. When, in the future, people visit the land they should not bemoan the fact that what they once loved is gone. They should rejoice that at least part of what was so special has been preserved.

Environmental Setting and Constraints
Rocky Point is not just a former amusement park. It is also a geographic feature.
One lot in the City of Warwick contains both of these entities. But this lot is one of 14 contiguous and nearby lots owned by the same party. This chapter will define a study area and thereby clarify what is meant by the term "Rocky Point." It will also assess the study area's important environmental features and constraints to development.

Study Area
The study area is located in eastern Warwick, Rhode Island, in the northern part of Warwick Neck (Figure 1). It encompasses shoreline of Narragansett Bay on its eastern and southern sides. The study area is approximately 15 miles by road to Providence and 6.5 miles to T.F. Green Airport. The intersection of the nearest commercial-strip collector roads, West Shore Road (Route 117) and Warwick Avenue, is 1.5 miles from the entrance to Rocky Point's access road.
The party known as "Saul and Co. (Ajax Financial)," formerly known as C.R.
Amusements, LLC, owns the land formerly occupied by Rocky Point Amusement Park.
It is listed in the City of Warwick's tax assessor's records as Plat 380, Lot 1. This party also owns 13 other lots in the vicinity of this lot: in Plat 380, Lots 3 and 281; in Plat 381, Lots 38,39,40 and 41;and in Plat 379,Lots 8,9,158,159,425,426 and 445 ( Figure 2).
All of this property, a total of 124.57 acres, is for sale for $10 million. Plat 379, Lots 9 and 159 contain single-family houses; the house in Lot 9 is vacant, the one in Lot 159 is Beach Community is in Plat 380, Lots 3 and 281 in the northern portion of the study area.

Topography
The study area consists of a wide variety of lowland and upland occupied by wetland, forest, field, coastal features and manmade features ( Figure 3). A ridge, up to 100-feet above sea level, divides the western third of the land from the eastern portion.
West of the ridge is a depression that contains wetlands that drain to the south and into the Bay. East of the ridge, the land slopes gradually down to the shore. The geographical feature of Rocky Point protrudes into upper Narragansett Bay from the bay's western shore. It features a rocky shore and rock outcroppings. North of the Point is a sandy beach that gives way to rocky beaches further up the shore. South of the point is a ten-to twenty-foot high manmade shoreline formed of fill and riprap. In the southwestern portion of the shore is another sandy beach.

Soils
The study area contains many different types of soils, according to the Rhode RIGIS lists four types of constraints to development due to the above-listed soils in the study area ( Figure 4). The north-south ridge and areas of shoreline are described as having severe constraints due to rocky or sandy conditions. West of the ridge, generally corresponding with wetland areas, and in the eastern, lowland portion of the site are areas of hydric soils. These soils have a water

Wetlands
Wetlands in the study area are found primarily in its western portion ( Figure 5).
According to RIGIS, in this area they consist of deciduous forested wetland interspersed with areas of shrub swamp, marsh and two small areas of open water. These wetlands are the southern terminus of a larger wetlands system that drains from north to south into the Bay. In the eastern portion of the site, only areas of the shoreline are classified as wetlands by RIGIS . The area of wetlands within the study area, calculated by using AutoCAD, totals roughly 841,605 square feet, or 19 acres.

Floodplain
As it is a coastal site, the study area has an extensive area of floodplain. Figure 6 shows the areas of 100-and 500-year flood. It also shows the area of coastal flood with velocity hazard. This is the area where there is the potential for damage due to wave action. Flood-prone areas include low-lying portions of the site to the east and south.
Floodplain, calculated using AutoCAD, accounts for roughly 1,787,681 square feet of the study area, or 41 acres.

Combined Environmental Constraints
By overlapping maps of environmental features, we may assess the combined environmental constraints to development of the study area. Figure 7 shows the resulting constraints. Note that soil constraints due to seasonal high water, bedrock and steep slopes are not included, nor is the 500-year floodplain. These constraints are not judged to preclude many types of development; some of these areas in fact have previously been developed. Also note that the figure indicates areas where some types of development are strictly constrained, but not necessarily precluded.
The combined constraints account for roughly 2,987 ,243 square feet, or 69 acres of the site. The constrained areas are primarily on the west and east portions of the site.
This leaves a area of roughly 56 acres with few environmental constraints to development. Land use in the vicinity of the study area is almost exclusively residential ( Figure   8). To the north is Highland Beach, a dense single-family neighborhood. West and south of the property are the lower-density neighborhoods of Warwick Neck. There are few commercial uses currently in Warwick Neck. Among these are two golf course country clubs, a handful of small marinas in Warwick Cove and a convenience store on Warwick Neck A venue. The Aldrich Estate, a mansion with acres of manicured grounds, owned by the Catholic Diocese and used for church purposes and private events, is just south of the study area. Commercial uses predominate on West Shore Road and Warwick Avenue, 1.5 miles to the north of the study area.
The study area is serviced by electricity, water, telephone and natural gas. There are no sanitary sewer lines in the study area. All structures are tied to individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS). There is, however, a sewer line that runs along Warwick Neck Avenue roughly 2,000 feet west of the entrance to Rocky Point. Warwick has plans to run a sewer line down Rocky Point A venue to the entrance to the park. Any high-density redevelopment plan for Rocky Point should include a connection to this system.
For discussion purposes, the study are can be divided into four distinct areas

The Former Amusement Park Site
The land that makes up Plat 380, Lot 1 was formerly a place of many uses. It was the site of the amusement park, the Shore Dinner Hall, the Cliff House Lounge, the Palladium and Windjammer function halls, the pier, the ball field and the saltwater pool.
Today, it is vacant and inaccessible to the public. What remains is an echo of its past.
This area is accessed from the comer of Rocky Point A venue and Palmer A venue.
The private one-way road into the property runs east then north along the coast, curves to the west, and exits onto Palmer Avenue, some 500 feet north of the entrance. The road encircles the park midway.
The former midway is a relatively flat area that is entirely paved (Figures 10-13).
The foundations of many of the former amusement park rides still stand, as do the shells of some of the carnival structures. Several buildings are also intact: the Cliff House in the southern portion of the midway, the Shore Dinner Hall to the east (Figure 14), and the Palladium/Windjammer complex ( Figure 15) to the north. On a rock outcropping high above the Shore Dinner Hall stands Rock Cottage, a house that is visibly in a state of disrepair. North of the midway is a paved parking lot, roughly 6 acres in size ( Figure 16).
East of this is a field formerly used for baseball ( Figure 17). The pier juts out into the bay, just south of the Point. It has been severely damaged by storms in the past several years ( Figure 18). Southeast of the midway is the site of the former saltwater pool. The pool has been filled; all that remains is the outline of its foundation. North of the access road, near the exit of the park, is the former landfill for the park. It is not known if the soil in this area has been contaminated with hazardous materials.  Should a developer demonstrate that a development plan is compliant with all applicable land development regulations and secure all necessary permits, building may proceed. However, in many cases, relief from one or more of the regulations is necessary to achieve a desired result; the developer must request variances or changes in ordinances from lawmakers or regulators. When this happens, the public may become involved to comment on the development. Any developer seeking regulatory relief would be wise to understand the politics involved in this process.
Because of Rocky Point's current zoning and its considerable environmental constraints, a change in the allowed land use for the property would almost certainly be necessary for any development to be feasible. Due to its size, potential impacts to the community, history and cultural value to Warwick and the state, a proposal for change in use for the land would likely arouse public interest.
To understand the hurdles that must be overcome to redevelop Rocky Point, this chapter describes the regulatory setting to which land in Rhode Island in general, and Warwick in particular, is subject. It also describes the political setting that will inevitably affect the fate of any redevelopment plan.

Regulatory Setting
Land development in Rhode Island is regulated in several ways. Local ordinances and development regulations regulate land use, subdivision procedures, parcel size, road width and a host of other aspects of development. Because the study area contains freshwater wetlands and falls in part within the coastal zone, state-level regulations also apply. This section documents how laws and regulations will affect the way in which the land in the study area may be developed.

Comprehensive Plan
Rhode Island requires that all municipalities in the state prepare a comprehensive plan to be a general, long-term guide to the physical, social and economic development of be placed on smaller lots with shorter setbacks than allowed by the conventional ordinance in order to preserve some of the developable land for common or public use.
Minimum lot sizes may be made smaller as follows: in A-10 districts, from 10,000 square feet to 7,000 square feet; in A-15 districts, from 15,000 square feet to 9,000 square feet; and in A-40 districts from 40,000 square feet to 17,000 square feet. When the cluster technique is applied, the overall housing density of the development cannot change. The Under the section for Residential PUD, the ordinance specifies that these types of projects are "eligible for consideration within all residential districts" (p. 46). In PUDs, it is permitted to mix residential with retail and/or office uses. Commercial uses may occupy no more than 25% of residential gross floor area (GF A). Industrial uses are prohibited in these districts.
Any overlay district must be established by an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. For this to happen, a five-step process must be followed (Warwick, 1995): 1. A pre-application conference must be held with the planning department in which written and graphic plans must be submitted for review and comment.
2. The planning board must review the plan and recommend it for approval. The proposal must be consistent with the comprehensive plan and the development review regulations.
3. The city council must amend the zoning plat to establish an overlay district.

4.
A final site plan must be submitted to the building official, who then forwards the plan to the planning director for review.
5. The planning director must determine whether the proposal is in accordance with the zoning ordinance, the comprehensive plan and any modifications imposed by the city council, and must notify the building official of this determination. If there are any discrepancies, the plan must be brought into conformance.
Should a developer wish to alter the plan at any stage of this process, a new petition to the council may be required. An overlay district may be repealed by the city council if the developer has not received a building permit within one year of the zone change.

Development Review Regulations
Warwick's Development Review Regulations (2000), also known as subdivision regulations, establish the procedures that must be followed whenever existing building lot lines are adjusted, altered or changed and when new lot lines are created. The regulations specify three types of subdivisions: an "administrative subdivision," when lot lines are moved or lots not to be developed are created, a "minor subdivision," when five or fewer lots are created, and a "major subdivision," when more than five lots are created.
Also defined in the regulations is the "Land Development During the review process, the board may require the developer to provide public improvements such as streets, lighting, landscaping, sewers and drainage systems. It may require impact statements including documentation of environmental, fiscal and traffic impacts. Should there be a significant impact, the board may require mitigation. One type of mitigation would be for the developer to dedicate open space to the city. The board may also require performance and maintenance guarantees to ensure that the subdivision proceeds as described in the development plans.

Department of Environmental Management Regulations
The Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RID EM) regulates land development in several ways. The Freshwater Wetlands Act (1971) states that no freshwater wetlands shall in any way be altered without approval from director of the RID EM. Alteration is defined as "activities which occur within or outside of freshwater wetlands which impact their natural character, functions and/or values" (RIDEM, 1998a: 2). These activities include filling, excavating and diverting flow into or out of wetlands.
The director has the authority to deny approval should the alteration proposed not be in the best interest of the public. RID EM also regulates the installation of septic systems and sewers (RID EM, 1998b ), The Rhode Island Discharge Elimination System Regulations (RIPDES), enforced by RID EM, regulates runoff from construction sites when five or more acres of land are disturbed. When storm water runoff is directed into a storm sewer system or into waters of the state, a permit must be obtained. Under these regulations, a developer is required to implement management practices to control erosion and sedimentation (RIDEM, 1993).
Any project that will likely impact the quality of waters of the state and/or activities that will likely cause or contribute to flow alterations of these waters must receive certification from RIDEM (RIDEM, 1997). To receive water quality certification, a developer must demonstrate that the project will not cause a diminishment in the quality of the water and will not violate State water quality standards.

Coastal Resource Management Council Regulations
The Coastal Resource Management Council regulates land within 200 feet of any coastal feature and freshwater wetlands in the vicinity of the coast (CRMC, 1996). In the case of Rocky Point, its entire shoreline is a coastal feature. Currently, its pier, portions of the access road, the Shore Dinner Hall and the Cliff House are within the coastal zone.
Any modifications to these structures or new construction within the coastal zone will require assent from the CRMC.

Army Corps of Engineers
The for the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States. In many cases, permits or assents from CRMC and/or RIDEM will satisfy the requirements of the Corps.

Political Setting
Should any development plan conform to the development regulations and current zoning of the land, and be granted the necessary permits and assents from state agencies, there would be nothing barring a developer from implementing the plan. In the case of Rocky Point, however, it would be difficult to build a profitable development under the current zoning because of the $10 million price tag of the property and the land ' s environmental constraints. A change in the zoning ordinance would likely be necessary to increase the density of structures or change the use of the land. To acquire a zoning change, one must enter the political realm.
Zoning changes are granted by the City Council and are subject to approval by the Mayor of Warwick. According to Warwick Councilman Carlo Pisaturo, issues of impact on city services will be paramount to the council. These include snow plowing, street lighting, road maintenance, sewer services and perhaps most importantly, tax revenue and impact on schools. Developers will likely have to demonstrate that the positive impacts to the city will outweigh the negative impacts. They would also have to show that the development would conform to the city's comprehensive plan.
The council and mayor are also subject to scrutiny by the public. Any redevelopment of this landmark property would be difficult without public acceptance, and the public is unlikely to support development that impacts them negatively. Even if the developers can demonstrate a minimal impact, haphazard development on this site that for many has sentimental value would likely be met with resistance.
A developer of this site should be prepared to face public scrutiny. It would be wise to involve the public early in the planning process and to consider changing the plan to address the concerns of interested parties. Rocky Point will not stand vacant forever; it will be redeveloped. The challenge is to redevelop it in a way that meets the needs of the people who will use it and of those who will be affected by its impact. This option would also have no tangible return to investors; as public land, it would produce no tax revenue. While 125 acres would be a marvelous addition to a Bay parks system, the expense is high. Public money would be more wisely spent to preserve land that already has value as parkland, not on developed land that would have to be converted into parkland.

Single-family Homes
The current zoning of the study area (see Figure 24) allows for exclusively single- A mixed use village is reminiscent of the historical uses of the park, as it provides for residential, commercial and recreational uses. Under the PUD zoning overlay, even amusement park rides, such as a carousel, would be possible. PUD also allows for the rehabilitation of existing buildings for commercial, residential or both uses. A balance can be struck between many uses. A PUD will ensure that the most scenic land is preserved and that the appropriate land is developed. It will guarantee that the public will have access to the community to shop, recreate and use the shoreline. It will provide for a residential development that will have less impact on educational services than using the whole study area for residences since the tax burden will be shared by residential and commercial uses.

Conclusion
Rocky Point has, for nearly 160 years, been intensively developed for recreation, commercial and residential uses. This mix of uses is still appropriate for the site. There exists too much infrastructure to convert the land entirely to open space. To use it for exclusively high or low density residential property is also inappropriate because this would limit public access to the land and have no commercial uses, two of the outstanding features of the former park. Redevelopment of Rocky Point should be done in a manner that is respectful and reminiscent of its past uses, but that incorporates sound planning principles and meets modem-day needs. A mix of uses accomplishes these goals.

Mixed Use, PUD and the New Urbanism
Principles of the urban design movement known as the "New Urbanism" are appropriate to the design of a mixed-use village. The movement, active since the 1980s, aims to address many of the problems associated with "sprawl" patterns of suburban development that arose in the U.S. following World War II (Katz, 1994, Duany, 1991. Low-density development is seen as creating a fragmented society, damaging the environment and making people dependent on the automobile to go anywhere. New urbanists call for sustainable development patterns that are reminiscent of pre-war urban communities. A mix of housing, civic, recreational and commercial uses enables residents of a community to walk, rather than drive to a separate zone, to shop, work or According to Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, the ideal size of a village is 1.i mile from the center to the edge (Katz, 1994). This enables people at the outskirts of the development to walk to the center in less than five minutes. The majority of people, according to Duany, will drive to get to a location farther than a five-minute

A Redevelopment Plan for Rocky Point
This plan proposes a mixed-use development for the land in the study area. Under this plan, which utilizes the PUD and cluster zoning tools, residential, commercial, and recreational uses will co-exist. There will also be a rehabilitation of many of the existing structures, and provisions for water transit through restoration of the pier.
The method used for this plan first addresses the preservation of environmentally Once the uses for the land have been established, transit, utilities and demolition are addressed. Design, including New Urbanism concepts, will play an important role in this new development. For each component of the plan, design standards will be suggested that will foster an integrated look and feel to the village. The standards will also serve to encourage walking while accommodating automobiles.
Open Space/Public Use Arendt' s (1996) method of subdividing land calls for first identifying the most valuable land to preserve. This land typically has outstanding environmental features such as providing wildlife habitat, buffering coastal features and affording views of natural beauty. According to Arendt, "primary conservation areas" include unbuildable wetlands, floodplains and steep slopes. "Secondary conservation areas" are those parts of "buildable upland that are most sensitive environmentally, most significant historically, most scenic, or which possess unusual attributes that cause them to stand out from the rest of the property as areas that the average observer would miss most if they disappeared under new houselots and streets" (p. 41 ).
To identify primary and secondary conservation areas, we turn to the environmental analysis of Chapter Three. The composite map of Figure 7 shows the steep slopes, unsuitable soils, wetlands and floodplains. These areas are our primary conservation areas. Coincidentally, these areas provide the best parkland. This method of conservation has the added bonus of avoiding many regulatory hurdles. Under this plan, no wetlands will be altered and no buildings will be erected in the 100-year floodplain or in the 200-foot coastal zone. Assent from CRMC would be needed for improvements to the road and walking/biking paths, but since the road is already there, it is not anticipated that the assent would be difficult to secure.

Rocky Point Village
A mixed-use village is proposed for the area encompassing the roughly 50 acres of developable land in the former amusement park midway, the parking lot to the north and the Rocky Beach area ( Figure 28). This area will combine commercial, recreational and residential uses. A planned unit development (PUD), providing areas of mixed residential and commercial uses will be integrated with a cluster housing development to create a cohesive village in the New Urbanist tradition. Couutour Jnterwl: l 0 feet Somt:e: RIOIS, MIT,  Central to this development will be the rehabilitation of many of the existing structures. These structures, plus newly-constructed buildings, will house a mix of residences and businesses that will serve the residents of the area and visitors to the village.
The study area is appropriately sized to incorporate the New Urbanism principle that the walk to the center of the community should be no longer than lf.i mile. Figure 28 shows that the radius of village at Rocky Point is lf.i mile. This plan take advantage of the size of the study area to integrate housing, commercial facilities, recreation and transportation in a compact, walkable community.

Planned Unit Development
Between newly created mixed-use areas and the uses proposed in the existing structures, there is a total of approximately 14 acres of mixed-use land in the village.
Five existing structures are slated to be rehabilitated to reflect their former uses but also to accommodate new uses. Three, the Cliff House, the Shore Dinner Hall and the Palladium/Windjammer complex, are located at the edge of the midway, facing out towards the access road and the water. The carousel is located in the center of the former midway. The pool is located to the southwest of the midway.
The Cliff House was formerly a restaurant and lounge. The plan calls for the restoration of this use. The building sits high above the shore of Narragansett Bay, and offers unobstructed water views. It also features a patio facing towards the midway.
During the summer, the Cliff House would be a great place for al fresco dining, but would operate year-round. Parking for the Cliff House can be accommodated in the existing parking lot between it and the Shore Dinner Hall.
The Shore Dinner Hall once served seafood dinners to thousands in its cavernous hall. This type of dining is probably not viable today. However, even after the park closed, the ground-level take-out window, on the east side of the building facing the pier, was popular with visitors. The facilities exist to reopen the take-out window to serve foot, The carousel building, in the center of the midway, is an appropriate focal point and landmark for the village and as an area for a public space. This building could be restored to house a new carousel, or could perhaps be used as a gazebo for public events.
The open space around the carousel will be connected to the green area to the north by a boulevard with a green median. The saltwater pool was once a popular public attraction.
This plan proposes the restoration of the pool to be operated either by the city, by a private owner or by a residents association.
The boulevard between the carousel and the green in the northern part of the village will be the main street of the village. The area surrounding it dedicated to a mix of commercial and residential, and possibly municipal uses. It should contain street-level retail uses and be wide enough to accommodate parking on both sides of the street.
Additional parking and services could also be provided for in alleys behind the commercial structures. Sidewalks should be wide enough to encourage pedestrian traffic and the buildings should be built with shallow or no setbacks from the sidewalks. Upper floors of the retail buildings would be appropriate for residential units.

Cluster Housing Development
Areas of exclusively residential uses will surround the commercial development.
Creative zoning options should be considered for these areas. Because so much land is proposed to be preserved, cluster housing is appropriate for this development. A New Urbanist-style development of single-family houses is one possibility.
It is proposed that all of the residential land in the village area be zoned A-15. By using the cluster technique, the minimum lot size becomes 9,000 square feet. The In keeping with the ordinance, we must deduct 20% of total lot area (0.2 * 31.5 = 6.3 acres) for roads. The remaining 25 .2 acres may then be subdivided into 9,000 square foot lots. This acreage can accommodate up to 122 house lots.
In this type of neighborhood, the small size of the lots is mitigated by the open space in the village and in the surrounding area. In the New Urbanist tradition, the houses would have shallow setbacks from the roads. Parking would be to the rear of the houses to emphasize the facades of the houses and to de-emphasize the garages. This development could incorporate a mix of architectural styles. Buildings should be situated to take maximum advantage of views towards the water and the conservation land.
The same principles of a mixed-use village would apply to a condominium development, attached apartment units, single-family houses, or a combination of all of these styles. The city would need to explore issues of density with alternate housing options, however.
The roads in this plan are laid out is a semi-grid pattern. The grid pattern, unlike the conventional suburban hierarchical road pattern, allows for a choice of routes through a development and a dispersal of traffic (Katz, 1994). The residential streets have sidewalks to encourage walking. The right-of way for the streets should be narrow, perhaps two 9-foot travel lanes to discourage speeding. Planting strips between the road and the sidewalk are encouraged. The plan shows that a walking/biking path from the end of Burnett Road will link the new neighborhood to Highland Beach. The city and developers might wish, however, to extend Burnett Road into the new development.

Water Transit
Under this plan the pier at Rocky Point will be rehabilitated and will be operated by the city or the state to provide alternate transit options for people who live in the development or nearby. The pier is accessible to and from the access road and the network of open space. It will be used by pleasure boaters who might, as in the past, tie up and visit the Shore Dinner Hall's take-out window. Also as in the past, the pier will accommodate commercial tourist ships. A new use for the pier will be as a commuter ferry service. Ferries proposed to run between Newport, East Greenwich and Providence could stop at Rocky Point with virtually no detour. Parking for commuters would be accommodated in the unpaved lot just south of Rocky Point or in lots adjacent to the Shore Dinner Hall and Windjammer/Palladium complex.

Utilities
As described in Chapter Three, Rocky Point is already serviced by water, electricity and gas. It will be relatively easy to extend the existing service to the newly developed areas. The property is not sewered, however. To accommodate the intensive use called for in this plan, sewers would be necessary. The nearest sewer main runs along Warwick Neck Avenue, roughly 2,000 feet to the west of the entrance to the park. It was installed to service the Anglesea housing development on Warwick Neck. According to Councilman Carlo Pisaturo, this line was designed to handle new development at Rocky Point. To transport sewage uphill to this line, a pumping station would be necessary in Rocky Point. Since the new development will necessitate excavations for new sewer, gas and water feeds, underground electric and cable lines should be considered as well.
Storm water that falls on the acres of paved surface of Rocky Point is carried either overland or through storm drains directly into the Bay, with no treatment. While new development at Rocky Point will likely result in a net increase in pervious surface in the form of lawns and vegetated areas, RID EM will require that a water quality certificate be issued prior to creating new stormwater discharges to waters of the state. Stormwater will likely have to be treated before being released into the Bay to remove suspended solids. Treatment may be accomplished by the use of a sedimentation basins. Where sedimentation basins are infeasible, centrifugal stormwater treatment structures might be used.

Demolition
Numerous foundations and up to 20 acres of asphalt in the development will have to be removed for this development. The Rocky Beach area contains approximately 70 small cottages, most of which are owned by individuals who lease the land from the owners of the Rocky Point parcels (an unknown number of the cottages is owned by the Rocky Point landowners). For redevelopment of this area, the cottages will need to be removed. In some cases, owners may choose to move their own cottages, but it is likely that many owners will abandon their houses, necessitating their demolition by owners of the property. Except for Rocky Beach A venue, the roads in Rocky Beach are dirt. Little removal of pavement would be necessary in this area. All areas proposed to be developed have previously been developed. Therefore, little clearing of vegetation will be required.

Conclusion
This chapter describes a scenario for a new beginning for Rocky Point. Under this plan, it will be a cohesive community that not only serves its residents, but its visitors as well. It will have private and public spaces, residential and commercial uses, recreational and transit uses, all within a short walk of each other. Rocky Point should be developed in this manner because it is appropriate for the site' s constraints and opportunities and consistent and respectful of its historical uses.
Perhaps more importantly, this type of development is appropriate for infill development in Rhode Island. Compact, mixed-use villages use land more efficiently than do large-lot, single-family subdivisions. More efficient infill development helps to

Implementation
This chapter addresses implementation of the redevelopment plan presented in Chapter Six. It estimates the costs involved with the improvements to the land in the study area. It addresses fiscal the impacts to the city with respect to tax revenues from the development and services the city must provide. It discusses sources of funding that could be used for the acquisition of open space. Finally, actions that the city might take to ensure the implementation of this plan are considered.
The presented figures give a rough estimate of the costs associated with implementation of the plan. A detailed plan would be needed (e.g. a physical examination of the conditions of existing buildings and a hazardous materials site assessment) to more precisely estimate the costs of implementation.
The implementation of the plan specifies different dispositions for the many lot in the study area. To simplify matters and to avoid the issue of having to negotiate with the Small Business Association, the several owners and the bankruptcy court over specific parcels, it is assumed that a developer implementing this plan will acquire the entirety of the land in the study area in a fee simple purchase (acquisition costs are addressed below). The developer will then sell off house lots that are not within the proposed village area, sell land to government or non-profit agencies for open space, improve the property within the village area and then sell those improved lots.

On-and Off-site Improvements
This estimate is based on improving the property to the point where individual lots in the new village can be sold. It includes all costs associated with demolition, road construction and installation of the required utilities. Table 1 lists the estimated costs associated with on-and off-site improvements.
Demolition costs are for the 20 acres of pavement in the midway and north parking lot, the numerous foundations and structures in the midway and the 70 cottages in Rocky Beach that will likely have to be demolished. From the site survey it is estimated that the total area of buildings in the midway is 50,000 square feet and the 70 cottages are approximately 500 square feet each. Therefore, the total building area to be demolished is roughly 85,000 square feet.  (Fassihi, 2000). This equates to $5,240 per acre. At this rate, the 66 acres at Rocky Point would be worth $345,840. Other properties have been more costly, however. On Aquidneck Island, a 50-acre farm was purchased for $615,000 ($12,300 per acre) (Martinez, 2000). Also, 36 acres of forest in Portsmouth were purchased for $1.5 million ($41,666 per acre) (Martinez, 2000).
Based on these figures it is difficult to precisely estimate the value of the Rocky Point open space. Some of it is along the shore, some is wetland. The former landfill is also in this area. Virtually all of the land is undevelopable. For purposes ofthis project we will assume a price of $20,000 per acre for the open space land, for a total of $1,320,000.

Property Within the Village
The value of property within the village is estimated assuming the property is improved and ready to be built upon, or already developed. In the plan of Chapter Six it was calculated that there could be roughly 122 house lots at 9,000 square feet each in the village. There are roughly 14 acres of mixed-use land in the plan. When we subtract 20% for roads, the plan can accommodate the equivalent of 54 more mixed-use lots at 9,000 square feet each (some lots may be larger, but the ratio of size to price is assumed to be constant be demolished due to its visibly deteriorated condition, it could also be considered for rehabilitation.) The three buildings total $1,466,620 in assessed value. These properties will be made more valuable when the property is rezoned and sewers and new roads are added. However, their current condition could well have deteriorated after being vacant for several years, thus lowering their values. It is assumed, therefore, that this figure is their fair-market value.

Total Revenues
Under this scenario, the total revenues from the development and sale of the property would be $329,440 + $1,320,000 + $10,560,000 + $1,466,620 = $13,676,060.

Site Acquisition
The fair-market value for site acquisition is addressed last because this price is dependent on the costs of improving the land and the revenues expected from selling individual parcels.
As discussed, the Rocky Point property has been on the market for $10 million since May of 1999. As of this writing, the Small Business Administration (SBA) controls the assets of Fairway Capital Corp. and Moneta Capital Corp., the majority owners of the land. Under these circumstances, the SBA will likely have influence over the sale price.
For purposes of this study, the sale price is estimated to be the fair market value of the property assuming that it will be zoned to accommodate the development described in Chapter Six and also considering the substantial costs necessary to improve the property.
The appraisal done for the city in 1996 (Cooke, 1996a)  found the market value of the lots to be between $15,000 and $17,000 each for a total of between $951 ,000 and $1,037,000. The appraisal noted that the estimate does not take into account the cost of sewers or the removal of hazardous waste, if necessary.
To assess the value of the unimproved land in the village area, we again assume that there are 176 lots at 9,000 square feet each. At a price of $15,000 to $17 ,000 per lot, the value of the land in the village area is between $2,640,000 and $2,992,000.
The market value of all of the land in the study area is therefore the value of the land and buildings in the village area plus the values of the open space land and the house lots to be sold. It is estimated to be $2,992,000 + $1 ,466,620 + $1 ,320,000 + $329,440 = $5,778,620. Using the lower figure for the land in the village, the total is $5 ,426,620.
In comparison, the total assessed value of all the land and buildings in the study area (not including the Rocky Beach Cottages) is $6,437,720. At least $500,000 of this assessment is for buildings that are proposed to be demolished, such as Rock Cottage, all the concession stands, ticket booths and the House of Horrors. A value of between $5.4 and $5 .9 million therefore seems reasonable for the land in the study area (a value of $10 million does not seem reasonable).

Return on Investment
If we assume the property can be acquired for $5.4 million, improved for $2.4 million and then sold for a total of $13 million, the return on investment would be 63 %.

Fiscal Impact
The fiscal impact to the City of Warwick of the proposed development includes the tax revenue from the property minus the cost of services the city must provide to the development. Table 2 shows the tax revenue calculations.
We will assume that there will be 122 houses averaging 2,000 square feet in size.
The assessed values of land and buildings are proposed to average $225,000 each, in between the pricey houses to the south and the more moderately-priced houses to the north. It is also proposed that mixed commercial and residential uses occupy approximately 50,000 square feet in new and existing buildings on the equivalent of 54 9,000 square foot lots. per student is therefore $6,421 per student (additional education funds came primarily from the state). The residential tax base does not pay for all of the school services.
Commercial and industrial uses supplement the funding. Therefore, under the current tax structure, on average, new residential property not balanced by new commercial or industrial development will be a net drain on city coffers. However, residential development with houses that are assessed at values substantially higher than the average assessment contribute more in tax money than the educational costs for the children from those houses. Our development is an example of this.
According to the U .S. Census (1990), there was a citywide average of0.34 students per household (11 ,379 students I 33,352 households). (In the census tract to the south of Rocky Point, the ratio was 0.31. In the tract to the north it was 0.39.) Using the citywide ratio, there would be 42 students from the 122 houses in this development.
Apartments might contribute another ten students. The total annual education costs to the city for these students would be $333,892.
When compared to the revenues for education of $486,003, there would be a net gain in revenues to the city from taxes used for education. For other city services, it is assumed that the value of services will be roughly equal to the tax revenue for services although the businesses might need more services for trash collection, for example.
Overall, however, it is not expected that this development will consume more in services than it pays in tax money.

Funding Sources
The acquisition of the open space can be accomplished by funding from the state, the City, non-profit organizations or a combination of both. A $50 million dollar state bond referendum will be on the ballot in November (Sabar, 2000). This money would be

Warwick's Role in Implementation
The city can play an important role in ensuring that Rocky Point is developed in a manner that is appropriate for the site. The best way to accomplish this is to preemptively rezone the property so that it might be able to accommodate the PUD described in Chapter Six. To acquire open space the city can work to secure the funding and negotiate with developers over donations of open space in return for higher development density.
Finally, it can expedite the process of permitting a development plan so that work may begin soon and a substantial investment in this property will have a reasonable return.