WATERVILLE -- A study showing how the Gilman Street School project will affect the surrounding neighborhood is fatally flawed and councilors should not use it to defend a decision to approve or deny it.

That was the opinion resident Lawrence Bloom issued to city councilors Tuesday night as they discussed the study, whose results were released earlier in the day.

"If you want to vote 'yes' for it, vote 'yes' for it, but don't take cover in the study," Bloom said.

Developers Collaborative of Portland wants to put 33 affordable apartments in the former school and renovate the building to historic standards as part of a $9 million project. Neighbors are concerned how the development will affect the area in terms of noise, traffic, home values, population density and related issues.

The Planning Board has approved a site plan for the project with conditions, including that councilors approve a zone change that would allow 33 apartments, as opposed to the 28 allowed under current zoning. The council is scheduled to take a final vote on the change Tuesday.

Bloom had recommended an impact study be done; the firm Renaissance Planning Associates conducted that study and partner Sarah Flaks addressed the council Tuesday.

She said study results showed the project probably would not hurt housing values, that values could increase as a result of it, and that how the apartments are managed will be key in how the neighborhood is affected. She said there would be an incremental increase in traffic in the area.

"Basically, we found that the development is likely to generate an additional 74 people -- 73 to 74 people, and the impacts are likely to be incremental in the neighborhood," Flaks said.

But Bloom said the study used census figures from 2000, and he did not even live there then. He said he understood that there was not a lot of money to fund the study; but to be more accurate, someone should have counted vehicles, interviewed neighbors and used current numbers.

He also took issue with the study's geographical description of the neighborhood -- 35 acres extending to Messalonskee Stream in the west, part of North Street in the north, Pleasant Street in the east and Winter Street to the stream in the north.

Bloom said he was "blown away" by that description.

"It is a huge area," he said. "The larger the area that you're studying, the less the impact."

He said he expected the study to focus on the 25 or so existing homes abutting the school and situated across the road from it.

The atmosphere turned tense when Councilor Charles "Fred" Stubbert Jr., D-Ward 1, told Bloom that he clearly was looking for the study to say the project would harm the neighborhood.

"No," Bloom replied.

"Yes, you were," Stubbert retorted.

Stubbert then asked Bloom whether he had any common sense and whether he realized houses closest to the school would have the most impact from the development. Bloom said he took offense to Stubbert's claim that his (Bloom's) motives in asking for a study were to get a negative report.

"If I insulted you, I'm sorry, but we have to put up with it, too," Stubbert said.

Councilor Stephen R. Aucoin, D-Ward 7, and Mayor Paul R. LePage disputed Bloom's claim that 80 percent of the data used for the study are obsolete because the numbers are eight years old.

"While it's not perfect data, it is the data that we're working with," LePage said.

Neighbor Peter Madigan said he didn't think there would be much of a traffic increase.

"I would be more concerned with my neighbors who have to deal with the car lights coming in and out of the parking lot," he said.

Judy Silver agreed with Bloom that the neighborhood does not extend to Pleasant Street. She said neighbors got together for a block party several weeks ago and determined that the proper boundaries of the study should be the area around the school.

"The bottom line is that we are a neighborhood and it is important to retain that feeling of closeness and friendliness that we have, and a project shouldn't change that," Silver said.

Councilors assured residents that any decision may include conditions pertaining to issues that concern them, including lighting, landscaping, signs and trash receptacles.

Resident Ave Vinick said he supports the project, the city needs affordable housing, and he is most concerned about what will happen if the building remains vacant. He thanked everyone who worked on the project, including neighbors.

"I think it's an opportunity for us to go forward," he said.