Council Minutes

March 7, 2006 Meeting Minutes

BETHLEHEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Tuesday, March 7, 2006 – 7:30 PM – Town Hall

1. INVOCATION
2. PLEDGE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL

President J. Michael Schweder called the meeting to order. Pastor Mike Leamon, of Calvary Wesleyan Church, offered the invocation which was followed by the pledge to the flag. Present were Jean Belinski, Karen Dolan, Robert J. Donchez, Joseph F. Leeson, Jr., Gordon B. Mowrer, Magdalena F. Szabo, and J. Michael Schweder, 7.

4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

None.

5. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR (for public comment on ordinances and resolutions to be voted on by Council this evening)

Bill No. 10 – 2006 – Zoning Text Amendment – CM – LTN Overlay District –
Martin Tower

President Schweder noted there will be a motion to remove from the Table Bill No. 10 – 2006 – Zoning Text Amendment – CM – LTN Overlay District – Martin Tower, that was tabled at the February 21, 2006 City Council Meeting. Accordingly, President Schweder said he would recognize at this time any individuals who wish to speak to the matter.

Board of Health - Replacement

Dana Grubb, 2420 Henderson Place, with reference to the Administrative Order appointing Diane Herstich to the Board of Health, queried who Ms. Herstich will be replacing.

Mayor Callahan noted Ms. Herstich will be replacing Eleanor Massi.

Mr. Grubb, asking if Mrs. Massi knows she is being replaced, said he spoke to her yesterday and she was not aware of it.

Mayor Callahan advised that he signed the letter thanking Mrs. Massi for her service.

Mr. Grubb, observing that Eleanor Massi served on the Board of Health for approximately 25 years, commented probably more so than any other Board of Health member she committed her time, energy, and talents to a variety of issues concerning public health in Bethlehem. Mr. Grubb, expressing his feeling that the devotion of Mrs. Massi should be on the record, enumerated that she served on the EMS task force, assisted in the hiring of a number of individuals for the Health Bureau, and has helped the City in many other capacities. Mr. Grubb said the City happens to have a member of the Board of Health whose attendance has been sporadic at best over the past six or seven years. Mr. Grubb thought it was a shame that people who served the community very well are not permitted to continue in that capacity while others who find it bothersome to attend the meetings and make the commitment to public health are allowed to continue to serve. Mr. Grubb said he wanted to bring to attention that Mrs. Massi is a real credit to public health in the City, and as of yesterday she had not received anything from the Administration thanking her for her service or notifying her that she was not going to be reappointed.

Bill No. 8 – 2006 – Zoning Text Amendment – Assisted Living Facilities and Personal Care Centers

William Scheirer, 1890 Eaton Avenue, expressed his understanding that this evening the Administration’s amendment to Bill No. 8 – 2006, Zoning Text Amendment – Assisted Living Facilities and Personal Care Centers, will be considered that will require that such facilities be harmonious with surrounding buildings in scale, design, and placement, and compatible with adjacent properties. Mr. Scheirer, expressing his opinion that it is too ambiguous, observed one person’s harmony and compatibility could be another person’s incompatibility and disharmony. Mr. Scheirer expressed his concern that the Zoning Text Amendment would allow the facilities on collector roads in RR and RS zones where garden apartments are not allowed. Mr. Scheirer exemplified that Holy Family Manor, which was unsuccessful in obtaining a variance to double its size, could sell a vacant part of their property to a related entity if it could meet the lot occupancy requirements on the rest of the property. The buyer could then as a matter of right open its own facility since the piece of land fronts on Spring Street which is a collector road. Mr. Scheirer remarked this would be a partial end run around the Zoning Hearing Board. Mr. Scheirer recommended that Council add the words “except on collector roads in zones RR and RS” to Section 11 of the Zoning Text Amendment for new subsection 1325.08 (L) (6). Mr. Scheirer noted that he talked to the president of the Mount Airy Neighborhood Association and she agrees with his statement.

Elizabeth Bell, 1318 Prospect Avenue, referring to the minutes of the January 17, 2006 City Council Meeting, noted the Zoning Text Amendment proposes to allow residential care facilities in residential neighborhood centers that are not RR. Ms. Bell, advising this is the present situation in West Bethlehem, explained there is a residential care facility in an RS residential district. Referring to the minutes of the three Zoning Hearing Board meetings at which the expansion of Holy Family Manor was considered, Ms. Bell pointed out one would see outlined very clearly the significant problems that the residential care facility has brought to the neighborhood, not the least of which is that it significantly tilts the character of the residential neighborhood to an institutional character, let alone problems with trash, trespassing, deliveries, and security. Ms. Bell asked that Council seriously consider tabling the Bill until it can be considered as part of the overall Zoning Ordinance.

Bill No. 10 – 2006 – Zoning Text Amendment – CM – LTN Overlay District –
Martin Tower – Eighth Avenue

Michael Perrucci, 2351 Washington Lane, commented he has been reading with interest the discussions regarding development of the Martin Tower site on Eighth Avenue involving Lou Pektor. Mr. Perrucci, affirming he also looked at Martin Tower for a considerable period of time and was interested in purchasing it, said what was not appreciated at the time was the possible rezoning of the overlay to allow this type of project that now currently may be there. Referring to newspaper articles last week, Mr. Perrucci noted Mr. Pektor was cited as saying he may have some difficulty financially in closing the deal unless the project was approved in such a way by the City. Mr. Perrucci notified the Members that he is at the Meeting to say, without interfering with Mr. Pektor’s contract, that his “group stands ready to purchase Martin Tower based upon the zoning that you’ve all discussed over the last several weeks.” Mr. Perrucci communicated that, if City officials would like his group to purchase the Martin Tower property and then go through the planning process before City Council approves the zoning, “we would also be willing to do that.” Mr. Perrucci informed the assembly that his group involves Joe Jacobs of Wexford, a $4.5 billion private equity fund, along with Mr. Fishbein and Mr. Gosin. Mr. Perrucci continued on to say that in the event there is some difficulty and Mr. Pektor and his group is not in the position to go forward “we certainly would be willing to close on that immediately thereafter, and in the event that his contractual rights have expired, and to work with the Mayor, the Planning Commission, and the City Council to make it a very spectacular project. Based upon the zoning that you’re talking about, we think that with those types of densities that we would bring in some of the nationally recognized planning groups that we’ve worked with at Beth Works to work with us on that to make the City proud of that particular project.”

Chuck Nyul, 1966 Pinehurst Road, relating that over the past 20 years he has watched the City make zoning changes, asked if the zoning at the Martin Tower property is going to be changed because “they want it their way, or are you going to change the zoning because the City needs it changed for our way.”

Bill No. 8 – 2006 – Zoning Text Amendment – Assisted Living Facilities and Personal Care Centers

Mary Toulouse, 1528 West Market Street, stated she is the acting president of the Mount Airy Neighborhood Association, a group of residents on the West side of Bethlehem, and added that the paperwork to register the Association as an official nonprofit association has been submitted to Harrisburg. Ms. Toulouse said, on behalf of the organization and in support of its executive board, they urge Council to table Bill No. 8 – 2006 to allow residential care facilities in the RS residential area. Ms. Toulouse, enumerating the reasons, related the first point is the importance of comprehensive planning. Noting the City has repeatedly expressed its intention to revamp the entire Zoning code in the immediate future, Ms. Toulouse stated that the current proposal should be addressed in the context of the whole Zoning Ordinance and not as a separate piece. The second concern is about the ambiguity of the wording. She said the proposal could affect more people than the City anticipates. Ms. Toulouse observed experience has shown that words like harmonious are not specific enough, and inquired what exactly is a collector road. Turning to the third point, Ms. Toulouse asserted that communication on this issue has been poor and is one of the group’s greatest concerns. Ms. Toulouse, advising that the proposal comes basically as a surprise to the group, pointed out that the group attended numerous meetings with City officials and no one has ever mentioned the proposed Ordinance to them or sought input from them. Ms. Toulouse commented that the group feels dialogue needs to be open between City government and the neighborhoods. Ms. Toulouse stated that her neighborhood, as other neighborhoods, would welcome the opportunity to participate actively in a comprehensive review of the master zoning plan in which the inclusion of retirement and other community service facilities would be discussed. In the meantime, Ms. Toulouse said the group urges Council to table any piecemeal zoning measure.

James Heitmann, 1306 Prospect Avenue, a member of the Mount Airy association, said he would also like to urge Council, if not to reject these amendments to the Zoning Ordinance outright, to at least table the situation until there is further study. Mr. Heitmann said he agrees that, based on the Planning Director’s comments, clearly the issue of retirement planning and the demographics of the United States suggests this is going to be a need today and certainly a need for the future. Mr. Heitmann argued that to answer the questions piecemeal by making amendments to the Zoning Ordinance is not the correct way to approach it. Mr. Heitmann believed it should be done as part of a comprehensive planning process where the community has the ability to provide their input into what is going to serve the needs of the elderly and the needs of the community. Mr. Heitmann, stressing that the neighborhood is not against retirement communities, explained what they are concerned about is the further institutionalization of not only their neighborhood but other neighborhoods that are going to be affected. While observing that the amendments seem innocuous, Mr. Heitmann asserted they are going to have far reaching consequences, and added that would have been the case even if they had been proposed before the Holy Family Manor situation came up. Mr. Heitmann urged Council to table the matter for further study. Referring to the minutes, Mr. Heitmann noted that good questions were raised to which he does not think at this point anyone has a clear answer. Mr. Heitmann stated there is no urgency to the proposal. Reiterating his suggestion to table the matter, Mr. Heitmann requested that people get together to talk about what Bethlehem needs in an intelligent manner that will be suitable for the entire community and that will fit in with a comprehensive plan.

Bill No. 10 – 2006 – Zoning Text Amendment – CM – LTN Overlay District –
Martin Tower

Stephen Antalics, 737 Ridge Street, expressing that he respects the opinion of President Schweder and of Mr. Leeson concerning the proposed Zoning Text Amendment for a CM – LTN Overlay District at Martin Tower, said he has seen what happened at Five Points with the McDonald’s restaurant, the CVS drug store on the South Side, and the decimation of a historic landmark at Third and Adams Street that was the former marketplace which were rezoned indiscriminately. Mr. Antalics commented that President Schweder gave credible reasons for his reservations about changing the zoning of the Martin Tower area, and Mr. Leeson confirmed that. Mr. Antalics, remarking he is concerned with the insistence and energy with which Ms. Dolan is pushing the issue, expressed his opinion that he would defer to the wisdom of the board. Mr. Antalics asked if the candidates who were recently elected are willing to make public the donations to their campaign. President Schweder confirmed to Mr. Antalics that the information is available to the public in Northampton County. Mr. Antalics, asserting that Martin Tower does not fit there, stated the City has the power to fine the owners for code violations or else to take over the building by eminent domain, and questioned why the City is not assessing fines.

Bill No. 8 – 2006 – Zoning Text Amendment – Assisted Living Facilities and Personal Care Centers

Mary Pongracz, 321 West Fourth Street, expressed it is an impossible task for the City to have a comprehensive plan which she thought was idealistic. Ms. Pongracz asserted what is being heard is what has been heard many times which is that people want things but not in their back yards. Ms. Pongracz thought if the City is making a zoning change that will benefit the senior citizen portion of the community then the City is doing the right thing. Highlighting the fact that she lost two homes to eminent domain, Ms. Pongracz stressed she knows what it is like to be pushed out of her own home. Ms. Pongracz asserted that nothing will get done if there needs to be a new comprehensive plan before anything is done, and added it will not solve the present problems. Ms. Pongracz stressed it is Council’s prime concern to do the best for all the citizens in the City of Bethlehem.

Bill No. 10 – 2006 – Zoning Text Amendment – CM – LTN Overlay District –
Martin Tower

Dave Sanders, 69 East Goepp Street, communicated that Council is to represent the entire City and not just one developer. Mr. Sanders pointed out that any school teacher who can take a run-down mill and turn it into a great project has wisdom and will make the right decision.

6. OLD BUSINESS

Concord Public Finance - Fees

Mr. Leeson noted there is an outstanding claim pending from Concord Public Finance involving the City’s General Obligation Note that City Council enacted under Ordinance 4370 at the February 21, 2006 City Council Meeting. Informing the Members the information he had requested has still not yet been furnished, Mr. Leeson expressed the belief that under the circumstances it would be appropriate for him to turn over the documentation to the City Council Solicitor for handling, and to advise City Council how to proceed with the matter.

Mr. Leeson moved to turn over the documentation to the City Council Solicitor for handling, and to advise City Council how to proceed with the matter. Mr. Mowrer seconded the motion.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The motion passed.

7. COMMUNICATIONS

None.

8 . REPORTS

A. President of Council

None.

B. Mayor

Motion – Considering Resolutions as a Group

Mr. Donchez and Mrs. Belinski moved to consider Resolutions 8 B 1 through 8 B 13 as a group. Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The motion passed.

1. Administrative Order – Diane Herstich – Board of Health
Mayor John B. Callahan appointed Diane Herstich to the Board of Health, effective until January 2010. Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,811 to confirm the appointment.

2. Administrative Order – Robin Beaty – Fine Arts Commission
Mayor John B. Callahan appointed Robin Beaty to the Fine Arts Commission, effective until February 2009. Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,788 to confirm the appointment.

3. Administrative Order – Ranjeet S. Pawar – Fine Arts Commission
Mayor John B. Callahan appointed Ranjeet S. Pawar to the Fine Arts Commission, effective until February 2009. Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,789 to confirm the appointment.

4. Administrative Order – Joseph F. Bacak, III, M.D. – Board of Health
Mayor John B. Callahan reappointed Joseph F. Bacak, III, M.D., to the Board of Health, effective until January 2011. Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,790 to confirm the appointment.

Mayor Callahan confirmed to President Schweder that Dr. Bacak is being reappointed to the Board of Health.

5. Administrative Order – Dennis R. Connell – Codes Board of Appeals
Mayor John B. Callahan reappointed Dennis R. Connell to the Codes Board of Appeals, effective until December 2008. Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,791 to confirm the appointment.
6. Administrative Order – Flexer A. Illick – Codes Board of Appeals
Mayor John B. Callahan reappointed Flexer A. Illick, to the Codes Board of Appeals, effective until December 2008. Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,792 to confirm the appointment.
7. Administrative Order – Bryan Ritter – Codes Board of Appeals
Mayor John B. Callahan reappointed Bryan Ritter to the Codes Board of Appeals, effective until December 2008. Mr. Mowrer and Ms. Dolan sponsored Resolution 14,793 to confirm the appointment.

8. Administrative Order – Patricia A. Kandianis – Fine Arts Commission
Mayor John B. Callahan reappointed Patricia A. Kandianis to the Fine Arts Commission, effective until December 2008. Mr. Mowrer and Ms. Dolan sponsored Resolution 14,794 to confirm the appointment.

9. Administrative Order – Timothy Wynn Fox – Fine Arts Commission
Mayor John B. Callahan reappointed Timothy Wynn Fox to the Fine Arts Commission, effective until August 2008. Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,795 to confirm the appointment.

10. Administrative Order – Dolores Yaschur Sproule – Fine Arts Commission
Mayor John B. Callahan reappointed Dolores Yaschur Sproule to the Fine Arts Commission, effective until December 2008. Mr. Mowrer and Ms. Dolan sponsored Resolution 14,796 to confirm the appointment.

11. Administrative Order – Linda Brown – Sister City Commission
Mayor John B. Callahan reappointed Linda Brown to the Sister City Commission, effective until December 2008. Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,797 to confirm the appointment.

12. Administrative Order – Jane C. Schaffer – Sister City Commission
Mayor John B. Callahan reappointed Jane C. Schaffer to the Sister City Commission, effective until December 2008. Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,798 to confirm the appointment.

13. Administrative Order – Deirdre Sumpter – Sister City Commission
Mayor John B. Callahan reappointed Deirdre Sumpter to the Sister City Commission, effective until December 2008. Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,799 to confirm the appointment.

Voting AYE on Resolutions 8 B 1 through 8 B 13: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolutions passed.

C. Public Works Committee

Mr. Mowrer, Chairman of the Public Works Committee, presented an oral report of the Committee’s meeting held this evening, March 7, 2006 at 6:00 PM in Town Hall on the following subject: Central Park West Development – Water Service.

9. ORDINANCES FOR FINAL PASSAGE

A. Bill No. 8 – 2006 – Zoning Text Amendment – Assisted Living Facilities and Personal Care Centers

The Clerk read Bill No. 8 - 2006, Zoning Text Amendment – Assisted Living Facilities and Personal Care Centers, on Final Reading.

Ms. Dolan, observing there seems to be some misunderstanding that the Bill No. 8 - 2006 came out of the Holy Family Manor expansion issue, pointed out that it did not and is the result of months of planning that predates the issue. Ms. Dolan, noting there is an urgency to the proposed Ordinance, stated the urgency is that there is presently “a hole” in the Zoning Ordinance since if someone wishes to build an assisted living facility they can do so by calling it a group home. Because group homes are allowed by the Federal government to come into a community, it has enabled assisted living facilities to be built, and they are being built at an accelerated rate. Ms. Dolan, continuing on to note City Council had asked if there was something that could be done, explained that the proposed Ordinance is an attempt to gain some control so that assisted living facilities could be sited in appropriate places and with ease of access. Stating this is an attempt to fix a problem and reiterating there is an urgency to the matter, Ms. Dolan expressed one has only to look at the number of assisted living facilities that have been built where there is agreement they are inappropriate. Continuing on to point out it could occur again in another neighborhood next week, Ms. Dolan highlighted the fact that it will not come before City officials because currently there is no language that regulates assisted living facilities. Ms. Dolan asked for clarification whether this would have any impact at all on the Holy Family Manor situation that she thought was a completely unrelated matter.

Darlene Heller, Director of Planning and Zoning, confirmed that the proposal was initiated separate and apart from any project or issue with Holy Family Manor. Ms. Heller continued on to advise that research on the proposal began last summer, and interns helped to collect information from other communities. Ms. Heller affirmed that a request was received from City Council in August to research it because there were interpretations from the Zoning Hearing Board that personal care or assisted living facilities could be covered under the existing Zoning Ordinance as a residential treatment facility; and, if that is the case, then they could go anywhere in the City and there are limited options to regulate them. Ms. Heller informed the assembly that the office does receive telephone calls from seniors on a somewhat regular basis asking about where new senior housing will be located, and what is available. Denoting the fact that seniors are told there are waiting lists, Ms. Heller stressed there certainly is a demand for the facilities that is believed will grow in the future. Confirming that the proposed amendments were approved by the Planning Commission last November and forwarded to City Council, Ms. Heller communicated it was not reviewed at that time due to Council’s involvement with Budget Hearings. Restating that the timing of the proposal is separate and apart from the situation involving the expansion of Holy Family Manor’s facilities, Ms. Heller observed it has been concurrent with the matter. Acknowledging there were some questions about the original proposal concerning the location of the facilities in Residential Districts, Ms. Heller asserted from the perspective of the Planning Bureau it is important to keep them in Residential Districts. She continued on to explain that as seniors look for alternative housing they want to stay close to their family, friends, shopping, doctors, be near bus routes, and they want to live where it is convenient in residential areas. Ms. Heller affirmed that, in the amendments before City Council this evening, provisions were added to help ensure that any future proposals would be in keeping with surrounding neighborhoods, such as location design and operational characteristics. The facilities must be compatible and harmonious with surrounding buildings with respect to scale, architecture, design, and building placement. The other provision is that the facilities would be limited to a maximum of 30 residential units. While advising it is not proposed that the uses be permitted anywhere in the RR Residential Zone, Ms. Heller said it is proposed that the facilities be permitted in RS and other Residential zones because garden apartments are permitted in all those other Residential Zoning Districts. Ms. Heller continued on to advise the amendment provides that the facilities be located on arterial or collector roads which is felt to be more appropriate for traffic.

Ms. Dolan, focusing on collector roads, inquired about Thirteenth Avenue or Prospect Avenue.

Ms. Heller responded that the Comprehensive Plan identifies collector or arterial roads. Ms. Heller enumerated that, in the neighborhood of Holy Family Manor, Broad Street is an arterial street, and the collector streets South of Broad Street would include Market Street West of Thirteenth Avenue, Thirteenth Avenue, Lehigh Street, and Spring Street.

Ms. Dolan, while stating there is an urgency, commented that perhaps the question of arterial roads and collector roads should be reviewed. Continuing on to observe that regulations could be adopted in the future, Ms. Dolan pointed out that changes could be made to protect against the facilities being built in the absence of regulations but at the same time involve citizens in the process.

Ms. Szabo asked if residents of the Mount Airy neighborhood have received copies of the amendments.

Ms. Heller, replying that she spoke with several of the residents today, said they were forwarded copies of the original proposal and the amendments.

President Schweder, recounting that the issue was discussed months ago and commenting that a good attempt was made in trying to solve the issue, expressed it continues to be an ongoing concern of his that the City is doing too many things like this when what is really needed is to address the whole question of Zoning. President Schweder, observing that the Department, the neighbors in attendance this evening, and the Members of Council all want to get to the same point, inquired whether it would be possible to take one last look at the proposal over the next week or two to make sure that everything is covered that needs to be taken care of, and the concerns of the neighbors are eliminated. President Schweder highlighted the fact that residents are in attendance who have never been before City Council in the past, and have come to talk about real concerns that they are not sure are addressed by the proposal. He observed that readdressing the legislation in the future would require initiating the entire process again. President Schweder communicated he is not sure whether everybody has a comfort level with the proposal tonight.

Ms. Heller, confirming that the Bureau can review the proposal once more, expressed that any direction Council may have would be helpful. Ms. Heller, affirming that some additional provisions were added that limit the uses in Residential areas and create some protections, communicated if there is any area thought to be lacking or if there is something that is not addressed the Bureau would study it.

Ms. Dolan restated that arterial and collector roads may need some clarification.

Ms. Heller, affirming that the neighborhood where Holy Family Manor is located is zoned RS Residential, pointed out that garden apartments are allowed in that zoning district. Ms. Heller observed if there is the desire to consider limiting the use in the lower density residential areas that would be RS it could be an aspect of refinement of the proposal.

In response to President Schweder, Ms. Dolan expressed her respect for his comments and thought perhaps waiting two weeks would be beneficial to make sure that the residents are heard. Ms. Dolan said she wants to know that she is voting on something for which she is supportive.

President Schweder stated that, in the absence of objection, the Bill will not be considered this evening and will return to the Agenda in two weeks.

B. Bill No. 9 – 2006 – Zoning Text Amendment – Nonconforming Uses

The Clerk read Bill No. 9 – 2006, Zoning Text Amendment – Nonconforming Uses, on Final Reading.

Amendment to Bill No. 9 – 2006

Ms. Dolan and Mrs. Belinski sponsored the following Amendment:

That the following in SECTION 1, Section 1323.04 (a) (1) which reads as follows:

1323.04 Additions and Enlargements

A lawful nonconforming use or structure shall only be expanded if the following requirements are met:

(a) The total building floor area or total land area occupied by the nonconforming use or structure, whichever is more restrictive, shall not be increased by greater than [50] percent beyond the area that existed at the time the use or structure first became nonconforming.

(1) The [50] percent maximum shall be measured in aggregate over the entire life of the nonconformity. Therefore, for example, if a use became nonconforming in 1971 and was expanded by 20 percent in 1980, then one [30] percent expansion would be permitted today.

Shall be amended to read as follows:

1323.04 Additions and Enlargements

A lawful nonconforming use or structure shall only be expanded if the following requirements are met:

(a) The total building floor area or total land area occupied by the nonconforming use or structure, whichever is more restrictive, shall not be increased by greater than 35 percent beyond the area that existed at the time the use or structure first became nonconforming.

(1) The 35 percent maximum shall be measured in aggregate over the entire life of the nonconformity. Therefore, for example, if a use became nonconforming in 1971 and was expanded by 20 percent in 1980, then one 15 percent expansion would be permitted today.

Mr. Leeson, explaining his reason for opposing the Amendment, said when the City changes the zoning for a particular property, the property owner still has existing uses that then become nonconforming uses. Mr. Leeson expressed his opinion that the property owner should have the right to expand in a reasonable fashion. Mr. Leeson observed that, in other communities surveyed, it is not unusual to allow a 50% expansion of a nonconformity. Communicating his concern that reducing the percentage from 50% to 35% is further infringement on private property rights of individuals, Mr. Leeson pointed out the infringement begins with a change in zoning that creates a nonconforming use and then the ability of the property owner is further reduced to expand a lawful nonconforming use. Stressing this is too much of a concern in terms of forfeiture of private property rights, Mr. Leeson commented he feels uncomfortable with it. Mr. Leeson thought the 50% provision has worked well historically, and related he does not see a significant existing need in the community for the provision to change. Mr. Leeson restated that he feels more comfortable with the existing 50% provision and he will vote against the Amendment.

Ms. Dolan, observing that some communities have more stringent percentages such as 10% or 20%, thought as the City is growing and becoming more dense an existing nonconforming use evolving into a larger existing nonconforming use can be an infringement on neighbors. Ms. Dolan pointed out there is recourse for a property owner who felt that 35% was unfair, and then the neighbors would be notified. Ms. Dolan stated it should be ensured that there is some control over nonconforming uses and how they infringe upon property values and lifestyles of neighboring residents. Ms. Dolan said she will vote yes in favor of the amendment.

Mrs. Belinski, advising she co-sponsored the amendment so that it could be brought before City Council for a vote, stated she is inclined to agree with Mr. Leeson and will be voting against the amendment.

Mr. Mowrer, expressing he agrees with Mr. Leeson as well, thought more flexibility is needed and added he will vote against the amendment.

Voting AYE on the Amendment: Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Schweder, 3. Voting NAY on the Amendment: Mrs. Belinski, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, and Ms. Szabo, 4. The Amendment failed.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 9 – 2006: Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 6. Voting NAY: Mrs. Belinski, 1. Bill No. 9 – 2006, hereafter to be known as Ordinance 4373, was declared adopted.

10. NEW ORDINANCES

None.

11. RESOLUTIONS

A. Revising Engineers' and Electricians' Civil Service Rules and Regulations

Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,800 that revised the Engineers' and Electricians' Civil Service Rules and Regulations to include Section III F. Examinations, Paragraphs 5 and 6. This Resolution supersedes Resolution 14,724 passed by City Council on November 1, 2005.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolution passed.

B. Amending Reporting Date from January to July – Insurance Coverage

Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,801 that required the Administration to report to City Council, in writing, the types of insurance coverages maintained by the City, the amount of such coverages, the name of the insurance company, the name of the insurance agent and/or broker, if any, the cost of such coverage, with such report to City Council to be not later than the second Monday in July of each year. The resolution requires that at any time upon a change, modification, addition, and/or deletion of the insurances obtained and maintained by the City, howsoever arising, the Administration shall immediately report to City Council as to such changes; and the Administration shall arrange for periodic reports to City Council, in writing, on the progress and status of any and all legal matters threatened and/or pending affecting the City.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolution passed.

C. Approving Use Permit Agreement for Public Property – American Association of University Women – 2006 Book Fair

Mr. Mowrer and Ms. Dolan sponsored Resolution 14,802 that authorized the execution of a Use Permit Agreement between the City and the American Association of University Women, Bethlehem Branch, for use of the Memorial Pool Building for the 2006 Book Fair for the time period March 20, 2006 to May 1, 2006, according to the terms and conditions of the Agreement.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolution passed.

D. Approving Use Permit Agreement for Public Property – St. Luke's Hospital and Health Network – 2006 Boutique at the Rink

Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,803 that authorized the execution of a Use Permit Agreement between the City and St. Luke's Hospital & Health Network for use of the Municipal Ice Rink for the 2006 Boutique at the Rink for the time period April 8, 2006 to May 21, 2006, according to the terms and conditions of the Agreement.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolution passed.

E. Approving Records Destruction – Police Department

Mr. Donchez and Mr. Mowrer sponsored Resolution 14,804 that authorized the disposition of the public records of the Police Department, as listed in Exhibit A, according to schedules and procedures for the disposition of records as set forth in the Municipal Records Manual approved on July 16, 1993 and Resolution 13,076.

Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolution passed.

Motion – Considering Resolutions as a Group

Mr. Donchez and Mrs. Belinski moved to consider Resolutions 11 F through 11 K as a group. Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The motion passed.

F. Certificate of Appropriateness – 825 East Fourth Street

Mr. Mowrer and Ms. Szabo sponsored Resolution 14,805 that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to hang a lighted sign at 825 East Fourth Street.

G. Certificate of Appropriateness – 728 East Fourth Street

Mr. Mowrer and Ms. Szabo sponsored Resolution 14,806 that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the storefront window at 728 East Fourth Street.

H. Certificate of Appropriateness – 353 Broadway

Mr. Mowrer and Ms. Szabo sponsored Resolution 14,807 that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to install an awning and window signs at 353 Broadway.

I. Certificate of Appropriateness – 14-18 West Third Street

Mr. Mowrer and Ms. Szabo sponsored Resolution 14,808 that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to renovate the facades at 14-18 West Third Street.

J. Certificate of Appropriateness – 15 East Fourth Street

Mr. Mowrer and Ms. Szabo sponsored Resolution 14,809 that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to install signage and construct a handicap ramp at 15 East Fourth Street.

K. Certificate of Appropriateness – 832 East Fourth Street

Mr. Mowrer and Ms. Szabo sponsored Resolution 14,810 that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to install signage at 832 East Fourth Street.

Voting AYE on Resolutions 11 F through 11 K: Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 7. The Resolutions passed.
12. NEW BUSINESS

Committee Meeting Announcements

Chairwoman Szabo announced a Community Development Committee meeting on Tuesday, March 14, 2006 at 7:00 PM in Town Hall on the proposed new Article 1162 – Municipal Waste – Preparation, Collection, Handling, Disposal, and Nuisances.

Chairman Leeson announced a Finance Committee meeting on Wednesday, March 15, 2006 at 4:00 PM in Room 504 on transfers of funds, budget adjustments, and the proposed Ordinance concerning intermunicipal transfer of funds.

State Court Ruling – Trash Hauler Licensing Fees

Mrs. Belinski, with reference to an article in the Morning Call last Saturday, noted the headline was “Lehigh Backs Down on Trash Hauling Fees”. Mrs. Belinski explained that Lehigh County dropped an appeal of the State Court ruling that stripped the County’s ability to impose an administrative fee on trash haulers. Noting that administrative fees include licensing, Mrs. Belinski asked what is the City’s position on the ruling. Mrs. Belinski, further pointing out that Lehigh County could have been forced to return $2.67 million in back fees collected from 1997 to 2005, said the case was appealed to the State Supreme Court and the trash haulers won. Mrs. Belinski, restating her question is what is the City’s position on the matter, asked is the City legally able to collect fees for trash hauler licenses.

John Spirk, City Solicitor, advised the Superior Court ruled that State law preempts the ability of a City like Allentown from that sort of licensing and collection but did say that the city could, however, license and regulate the containers used to dump trash into the trucks. Attorney Spirk continued on to say “we were watching to see what would be the result when Lehigh County appealed to the State Supreme Court and they didn’t.” In further response to Mrs. Belinski, Attorney Spirk restated there is a State statute that seems to regulate that licensing only for the State to be done on a State-wide basis. Upon registering and licensure with the State, that would preclude, according to the Superior Court, municipalities from getting involved. Attorney Spirk continued on to note Lehigh County also argued in the case that they should be allowed to regulate and inspect the various collection receptacles and that was not precluded by State law. The State Superior Court said the receptacles could be regulated but not the vehicles because that is reserved for the State. Attorney Spirk repeated that the City did not do anything because it was waiting to see what would happen when the Supreme Court heard the full case, but Lehigh County did not pursue it.

Mrs. Belinski inquired whether the City is still going to charge haulers a license fee to haul trash.

Attorney Spirk responded that the City received correspondence from haulers to draw its attention to the cases. Attorney Spirk continued on to say the City will have to consider its options legally in light of Lehigh County’s not appealing the case.

Mrs. Belinski pointed out the issue is especially pertinent at this time in light of the fact that there will be a discussion about the City’s waste hauling system at the Community Development Committee meeting next Tuesday.

President Schweder expressed his assumption as it now ruled the City cannot charge haulers a license fee.

Attorney Spirk explained the State Superior Court is the precedent right now unless further litigation is commenced with the willingness to take the case to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Attorney Spirk affirmed as it stands now the City is bound by the decision.

Removing from the Table Bill No. 10 – 2006 – Zoning Text Amendment – Establishing CM-LTN Overlay District – Martin Tower Site – Eighth Avenue

Ms. Dolan, asking whether there have been any new developments related to the financial situation in regards to the Martin Tower development, and noting she also has questions about pedestrian safety, was informed by Christopher Spadoni, City Council Solicitor, that Bill No. 10 – 2006, that was Tabled at the February 21, 2006 City Council Meeting, must be taken off the Table in order to pose the questions.

Ms. Dolan moved to take Bill No. 10 – 2006, Zoning Text Amendment – Establishing CM-LTN Traditional Neighborhood Overlay District – Martin Tower, from the Table. Mr. Donchez seconded the motion.

Voting AYE: Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, Mr. Mowrer, and Ms. Szabo, 5. Voting NAY: Mrs. Belinski and Mr. Schweder, 2. The motion passed.

The Clerk read Bill No. 10 – 2006, Zoning Text Amendment – Establishing CM-LTN Overlay District – Martin Tower Site, on Final Reading.

Ms. Dolan noted one of her hopes is to see changes to pedestrian safety in what is one of the worst intersections for pedestrians in Bethlehem that is at Schoenersville Road and Eighth Avenue. Ms. Dolan recalled that at the City Council Meeting on February 21, 2006 she asked if Mr. Pektor and his group could look into some possible pedestrian improvements as part of their development plans. Ms. Dolan asked whether or not consideration was given to pedestrian improvements.

Lou Pektor, developer of the Martin Tower project, responded subsequent to Ms. Dolan’s request that has been done, and the Traffic Planning and Design company, traffic consultant, has been asked to look at the current conditions and possible solutions. Mr. Pektor advised that Rob Hoffman, of the company, is in attendance at this evening’s meeting to talk about a logical approach to get people safely across from Martin Tower to the park without having to ask PennDot to do extraneous changes.

Rob Hoffman, of Traffic Planning and Design, handed out a schematic of the corridor. Mr. Hoffman explained that, for the pedestrian accommodations planned for the corridor in conjunction with the improvements for the Lowe’s project across the street, from Union Boulevard to Eaton Avenue the traffic signals are being upgraded with an exclusive pedestrian phase. Mr. Hoffman informed the assembly that means when a pedestrian pushes the button it will stop traffic on every approach and a walk indication will be given to pedestrians so they can safely cross in any direction at the intersections. Turning to the concern about pedestrians walking North of Schoenersville Road to the park, Mr. Hoffman explained a solution is to have an exclusive pedestrian phase at Eighth and Eaton Avenues. While affirming that currently there are pedestrian restrictions at the five point intersection located at the City’s compost facility, and at Schoenersville Road and Eighth Avenue, Mr. Hoffman noted there is presently an exclusive pedestrian phase at the Schoenersville Road and Illick’s Mill Road intersection. That area combined with the exclusive pedestrian phase at the Eaton Avenue intersection located at the front of the Martin Tower building allows pedestrians to cross to the West side of Eighth Avenue, proceed to Schoenersville Road, and then to Illick’s Mill Road to cross as directed.

Ms. Dolan observed that pedestrians could then access the ball fields, the ice rink, tennis courts, and swimming pool. Mr. Hoffman replied yes.

Ms. Dolan, recalling that Mr. Leeson had asked Mr. Pektor to find out whether or not he could be granted an extension by the building owner until all of the planning components have been completed, asked if that was reviewed.

Mr. Pektor, replying in the affirmative, said the response from the owner’s chief counsel was “there was no chance in hell that we’d be given an extension.” Mr. Pektor continued on to advise that he went back to the real estate personnel who reiterated there would not be any chance of an extension.

Ms. Dolan, recalling the Bill was Tabled at the February 21, 2006 City Council Meeting because the Members wanted to know whether or not Mr. Pektor could get this done or not, said she does not want to see the development project jeopardized.

Mr. Leeson, stating he has always been in favor of the project and of the design change, said the question in his mind was the roadmap on how to get to the end point everybody wants to get to that is to see the Martin Tower property developed. Mr. Leeson, explaining he would have much preferred to see the project go through the Planning Commission process, communicated his assessment after careful reflection is there is an opportunity on the table of a ready, willing, and able developer to move forward who he acknowledged has a good track record with the City. Mr. Leeson continued on to express his belief that it is good municipal planning from a long term perspective when major development projects come to the City in connection with a zoning change to support when appropriate the zoning change but link it to a successful land development process and execution of the developer’s agreement. Mr. Leeson observed that, regrettably, Council is faced with the difficult choice of forcing that issue on this project with the prospect of perhaps losing an opportunity to see the project move forward promptly. Mr. Leeson said that is a choice he is not prepared to miss on behalf of the citizens. Mr. Leeson further stated he acknowledges also interestingly and encouragingly the words of another prominent and highly respected developer who is in attendance tonight, Attorney Perrucci, who apparently is ready, willing, and able to step in should Mr. Pektor’s group not be able to put this project together. However, Mr. Leeson expressed he also knows the vagaries of the marketplace and dealing with the international firm from India that owns Martin Tower, as well as the uncertainties of the turnaround time if Mr. Pektor’s project does not go forward, and the uncertainty that the international company might deal with someone else. In reading The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Leeson said there seems to be some element of turmoil in the marketplace and ownership with respect to Mittal Steel. Mr. Leeson observed that, if the project fails, even if Mr. Perrucci is ready to step up to the plate, he is not so sure that Mittal Steel would act promptly enough in order that the project would be saved. Mr. Leeson continued on to point out that, if it took an undue amount of time for that to happen, interest rates and market conditions could change and the City might end up not getting anywhere with anyone. Mr. Leeson reiterated that is a risk he is not willing to take in behalf of the citizens. Mr. Leeson explained that, under the circumstances, being a supporter of the project and of the change in the zoning, he voted to take the Bill off the Table so there could be a discussion of the issue because it is that important, and also to hear what are the latest developments. Mr. Leeson stated that, under the circumstances, in order to save the project he is going to support it, although for the reasons expressed he thinks there are better ways for the City to conduct planning and development.

President Schweder asked if Ms. Dolan plans to offer amendments.

Ms. Dolan replied not at this time.

Mr. Donchez expressed his appreciation for Council’s taking the matter off the Table this evening. Mr. Donchez thought the project has an excellent developer who has done an excellent job with projects in the City. Mr. Donchez stated that he supports the project and the proposed Zoning Text Amendment for the Overlay District. Mr. Donchez, agreeing with Mr. Leeson about the uncertainties of the market, pointed out there is a $250 million project at hand that is a very important project for the City and for Lehigh County. Mr. Donchez expressed the hope that City Council will pass the Ordinance this evening.

Mrs. Belinski recognized Mr. Antalics.

Stephen Antalics, 737 Ridge Street, said he finds this very troublesome. Highlighting the fact that the Bill was brought up under New Business, Mr. Antalics asked why were the parties here.

President Schweder informed him this is the appropriate time during the City Council Meeting for the Members to discuss the matter, after Council had done away with all of the other business before the Members. President Schweder advised that at least a week ago he made Ms. Dolan and Attorney Spadoni aware that this would be the appropriate time. President Schweder notified Mr. Antalics the motion is acceptable under New Business.

Mr. Antalics communicated it would be interesting if Members of Council are willing to save him the work of public record to tell the citizens now what developers made contributions.

Ms. Szabo said she is very upset because of the way the entire matter has been handled from the start. Ms. Szabo affirmed she voted to Table the Bill because she heard from Attorney Broughal that this may not be the plan that is presented to the Planning Commission. Referring to the recently built Wawa gas station project on Easton Avenue, Ms. Szabo highlighted the fact that evoked the point made many times in the past that City Council has to make sure “that a Wawa gas station never happens again.” However, Ms. Szabo stressed “years go by and we still haven’t done anything about it.” Ms. Szabo denoted her fear and that of other Members of Council is that how a project is represented at the outset, over which City Council has no control afterwards, is not what will be presented at the end. Ms. Szabo advised that two days after the February 21 City Council Meeting she talked to Ms. Heller at a Lehigh Valley Planning Commission committee meeting, and laid out her feelings about the matter. Since that time, Ms. Szabo stated she has heard nothing. Ms. Szabo said she was hoping, since there were so many questions and there is a time limitation, Members would have sat down and talked about the matter with the Administration and everybody concerned and come up with some answers to the questions. Ms. Szabo stated she wants “a guarantee that we’re not going to have a Wawa situation.” Ms. Szabo questioned why there cannot be a document drafted enumerating the problems and some possible changes suggested.

President Schweder stated he will be voting against the Bill. President Schweder noted that in the Morning Call newspaper article the day after the last City Council Meeting the Mayor suggested that if people in Bethlehem were interested and concerned about the project they should notify the Members of City Council. President Schweder informed the assembly he did not receive one telephone call, e-mail, or letter in support of the project, although many people raised concerns about it. President Schweder concluded the reason why people would not speak up on the project is because no one knows what this project is, and no one will know. President Schweder, with reference to comments of a former Member of Council, pointed out that Council always talks about what it finds unacceptable through the process but when there is a chance to do something about it too many people take a punt. President Schweder enumerated past issues that were unacceptable including the appearance of Walgreen’s at Linden Street and Macada Road that was bemoaned by several Members of Council versus the appearance of the Walgreen’s in Hanover Township because the Township stood up and required that the façade look different. President Schweder continued on to enumerate the discussions about assisted living and nursing homes in places where they do not belong. President Schweder asserted the residents who live in the Easton Avenue and East Boulevard neighborhood should be asked how they feel about what happened in the process during which they were told there would be an Eckerd Drug Store but instead a 24/7, 12 pump Wawa gas station was built. Further, President Schweder highlighted the fact that the City’s Steep Slope Ordinance was changed, there was to be a high end restaurant and a medical office building at the end of Cherry Lane and I-78 but instead a cut-rate motel and a Waffle House restaurant was placed there. President Schweder highlighted the fact that again tonight residents talked about the system being broken. Affirming there have been discussions for years that the system does not work, and there is a Zoning law that does not work, President Schweder asserted it is compounded time and time again by doing things such as are being done tonight. President Schweder remarked he wished those Members who are voting for the Bill tonight would tell him exactly what it is they are voting for because he assures everyone here that no one does.

Mrs. Belinski, saying she agrees with President Schweder, pointed out that Council has been told before the Trojan horse stories. Mrs. Belinski, communicating she is worried about the high density in the area, remarked she was told there is no way the Bethlehem Area School District can handle the increased number of students who would come to Nitschmann School. Mrs. Belinski stated she will be voting no.

President Schweder, noting that Mr. Mowrer and he attended the Historic and Architectural Review Board meeting held on-site at a property at Broad and Main, advised he asked the Historic Officer if the plans for the building are still to be a restaurant on the first floor, and residential above that. President Schweder informed the Members that, according to the Historic Officer, those plans are no longer what the project will be.

Ms. Szabo observed the greatest handicap is that, when any zoning is granted, if Council wants to make changes it cannot because the matter is grandfathered. Ms. Szabo pointed out that is how Wawa slipped through because it went by the former rules under someone else and there is no control over the new project whether or not it is desirable. She emphasized that any changes have to go back through the whole process.

Voting AYE on Bill No. 10 – 2006: Ms. Dolan, Mr. Donchez, Mr. Leeson, and Mr. Mowrer, 4. Voting NAY on Bill No. 10 – 2006: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Szabo, and Mr. Schweder, 3. Bill No. 10 – 2006, hereafter to be known as Ordinance 4374, was declared adopted.

13. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR

Board of Health

Dana Grubb, 2420 Henderson Place, stated that he believes Diane Herstich is a good choice for the Board of Health. Mr. Grubb communicated that his family knows better than most Ms. Herstich’s interest and abilities in nursing because of the assistance she provided to his mother in 1984 when his father was dying of cancer. Mr. Grubb said his only concern was that the wrong person was being replaced on the Board of Health.

Deputy Director of Economic Development

Mr. Grubb said he is saddened to hear that the Deputy Director of Economic Development will be leaving the City. Mr. Grubb stated he has the utmost admiration and respect for Laura Burtner who is extremely competent and very well qualified to serve in that capacity. Mr. Grubb stressed what is most disturbing to him is that in a period of a little more than four years the City is looking for its fourth Deputy Director of Economic Development. He suggested there is an even bigger problem in the Department, and that something should be done about this continuing brain drain in the Department. Mr. Grubb, asserting that Bethlehem is not being served well when many talented and qualified people continue to leave the service of City government, observed it has been a trend over the past five to six years. Mr. Grubb highlighted the fact that many of the people in the Department with whom he had worked are people of high quality and integrity with tremendous work ethic and dedication. Mr. Grubb said he philosophically poses the question why are they all leaving.

Northampton County Council

Robert Pfenning, 2830 Linden Street, with reference to a meeting last Thursday at the Northampton County Council of the legal and justice committee, said Councilman McClure noted how extremely civil the Bethlehem City Council Meetings are.

Pennsylvania Gaming Congress

Mr. Pfenning informed the assembly that today he attended the second annual Pennsylvania Gaming Congress in Harrisburg. On one of the panels that dealt with gaming and zoning issues was Mayor Callahan and Mr. Krauss, general counsel of Las Vegas Sands. Mr. Pfenning noted that one of the members of the panel indicated that legislation will be introduced in Harrisburg to reinstate section 1506, the local zoning control issue versus State control issue. In addition, a question from the audience was directed to Mr. Krauss about what are the implications of any zoning issue delays on the local level in terms of implementing the gaming industry. Mr. Pfenning reported that Mr. Krauss’ response was that he really could not comment on that because currently Las Vegas Sands is in a quiet period because Mr. Edelson and a number of other people are unloading a good portion of their stock in Las Vegas Sands that would bring Mr. Edelson’s control from the 80% range down to the 62% range approximately. Mr. Pfenning continued on to say Mr. Krauss noted that originally under section 1506 people would go to the Gaming Board Commission, get their license, and deal with zoning and development issues at the State level; however, now, basically it has returned to the way things are with both the State licensing and local zoning. Mr. Pfenning added the investment panel mentioned how the Lehigh Valley was going to be considered, and that Bethlehem would be a destination casino. Mr. Pfenning said the opinion of someone from the gaming industry with whom he had a conversation was that Bethlehem was a sure bet to get a casino license.

Sycamore and Maple Streets – Speeding Cars

Chris Perrucci, 1816 Sycamore Avenue, expressed his concern about the speed of travel of cars on the street, and pointed out there is no stop sign at the corner of Sycamore and Maple Streets. Mr. Perrucci, highlighting the fact that there are a lot of young children in the block, advised that a lot of neighbors have voiced concerns about the speed of the traffic in the area that sometimes reaches 50 or 60 miles per hour. Mr. Perrucci made a recommendation that a stop sign be placed at the corner of Maple and Sycamore Streets for the purpose of the safety of the young children in the neighborhood.

Francis Donchez, Police Commissioner, while advising the Department will look at increased enforcement there, explained that State law prohibits placing a stop sign for speed control and PennDot requires a traffic study. Police Commissioner Donchez continued on to explain there would have to be a certain number of accidents before a stop sign could be erected. Police Commissioner Donchez restated that he will look at increasing enforcement and a traffic study will be done.

IR District – South Side – Casino Proposal

Bruce Haines, 65 West Market Street, encouraged those Members of Council who just voted to reject the CM-LTN Overlay at Martin Tower for a residential project in the City to apply the same standards when it comes time for voting about whether the casino would be zoned into the IR District on the South Side at the site of the former Bethlehem Steel Corporation property. Mr. Haines asserted it should go through the same five months planning process that Mr. Perrucci was so willing to go through to buy the Martin Tower property. Mr. Haines, stating that the City of Bethlehem has the impact study from the Las Vegas Sands but it was not presented to Northampton County, said for some reason the Las Vegas Sands is refusing to release such a study while every other proposed casino project is willing to do so. Mr. Haines encouraged the Members of Council to pursue why, and what is it that the Las Vegas Sands is attempting to try to hide from the citizens.

Zoning and Dog Ordinances

Dean Bruch, 555 Spring Street, communicated that other communities the size of Bethlehem all have to have similarities in their zoning and inquired about comparing Bethlehem’s to other communities. President Schweder, advising that is done, highlighted the fact that Council looks at zoning ordinances of other cities for comparison.

Mr. Bruch asked if the Ordinance pertaining to dogs has been completed. President Schweder confirmed to Mr. Bruch that the matter has been corrected.

South Side – Casino Proposal

David Freeman, 555 Spring Street, said since December 21, 2005 he has desired to get the local impact report of the applicant of the casino proposed on the South Side at the site of the former Bethlehem Steel Corporation property. Mr. Freeman advised he met with Tony Hanna, Director of Community and Economic Development, who told him he had a copy but was not allowed to give it, and he filed a Right to Know request. Mr. Freeman added that other applicants throughout the State had no problem letting him look at the local impact reports for their licenses at the County level and he reviewed those in December. Mr. Freeman said finally today after the Morning Call had a driver drive a copy back he was able to look at it for the first time. Mr. Freeman informed the assembly that yesterday he drove to Harrisburg at his own expense to find out that the only local impact report that was not available was the casino proposed for the Beth Works site on the South Side at the site of the former Bethlehem Steel Corporation property. He continued on to say that was specifically because their legal counsel had not given permission for them to release it. Mr. Freeman remarked if one listens to Mr. Abboud the reason they were not allowed to release it was because they were concerned that the citizens would know where they are going to put their security cameras. Mr. Freeman stated he found it ironic that, after looking at the 400 page document today for the first time, in which probably about three-quarters of a page was blacked out so he would not know where the security cameras were, “we’ve waited this long for this process to take place.” Mr. Freeman asserted the thing that is really missing in the impact statement is the economic impact to Bethlehem. Mr. Freeman said none of the things that Mr. Donchez asked for in his covenant are in the report. While acknowledging it was a preliminary look at 4:00 PM, Mr. Freeman advised “we still don’t know how many jobs, we don’t know how much money they expect to make there, we don’t even know the very simple facts that everyone of these reports which I’ve looked at clearly demonstrate.” Mr. Freeman, expressing the hope that Mr. Pfenning is wrong, stated he hopes the Members of Council actually have a decision to make with respect to zoning, and it is not taken away from the City. Mr. Freeman encouraged the Members “to start to look at these facts and to find out that the numbers and the facts are still not there.”

14. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m.