435 Hamilton Street  
Allentown, Pa. 18101  
Allentown  
Minutes - Final  
City Council  
Wednesday, May 18, 2022  
6:15 PM  
Council Chambers  
Roll Call  
7 -  
Present:  
Candida Affa, Cynthia Mota, Daryl Hendricks, Ed Zucal, Ce-Ce Gerlach, Joshua  
Siegel, and Natalie Santos  
Bill 13  
The Zoning Map is hereby amended to change the land area shown on the  
map entitled “Exhibit A”, having Tax Parcel I.D. Nos. 640636238192,  
640636345357, 640636348459, 640636444722, 640636447004,  
640636432866, 640636431821, 640636339796, 640636338629,  
640636625261, 640636415274, 640636115157, 640636108387,  
64063529480, and 640635181690, to be within the R-MH Medium High  
Density Residential District.  
Administration  
Sponsors:  
Ms. Cynthia Mota stated that the purpose of this meeting is to take public  
testimony on the possible adoption of an Ordinance amending the City of  
Allentown Zoning Code. The bill, Bill 13, proposes to change the zoning  
designation of six (6) parcels in the vicinity of South 6th Street and West  
Cumberland Street in South Allentown, from Residential - Medium Density  
(RM) to Residential - Medium/High Density (RMH). The petition comes  
from Fitzpatrick Lentz &Bubba, P.C. ; representing Yasin Khan Family  
Trust, equitable owner. The Public Hearing was advertised in the Morning  
Call and notices were appropriately posted. The proof of publication is in  
the file as are pictures of the posting; they are hereby incorporated into the  
official City Clerk’s record. The Petitioner will give the presentation  
to Council. The purpose of the meeting is for comments from the public on  
the proposal. Members of the public may give statements in support or  
opposition to the proposal. Time permitting, Council can ask questions, but  
we be also aware that the petition is on the Council agenda that follows and  
further discussion can take place there; and the Council meeting is  
scheduled to take place at 6:30 PM. The purpose here is for Public  
Comment. At the conclusion of all comments, the President of City Council  
will close the record and the matter will be deliberated and voted on at  
tonight's regularly scheduled City Council Meeting.  
Attorney Joseph Fitzpatrick stated that he represents the Khan Family  
Trust. The Khan Family Trust is the equitable owner under the agreement  
of sale or the property at S. Sixth and Cumberland. A lot of you know that it  
was the Montex Mill Site. It was a devastating fire there many years  
ago.The property has been viewed for a number of potential reuses.This is  
the furthest along that we seen an opportunity to develop a site that was a  
former industrial use.He was in front of them a couple of months ago with  
this proposal.It was prior to the referral of the Planning Commission.They  
had presentations of the Planning Commission meeting with city and  
Planning staff along with Public Works. The unanimous recommendation of  
an approval for this rezoning with the Planning Commission a couple  
weeks back.He went over the highpoints.The property is currently zoned  
RM – Medium Density.It appears from the zoning map and the  
ordinance that a portion of this is also in RMH with Medium Density/ High  
Density Residential. He stated that request is to do a number of  
things.They are not at the land development stage yet.They don't have  
footprint for the buildings that mean anything.They are trying to get a use  
that can be accommodated on this property that would respect the  
character of the neighborhood, that would be an advantage of the city in  
terms of having a beneficial use and a revenue stream. It also ties into  
existing zoning districts.The zoning map of the city indicates that the  
parcels north of Cumberland Street are zoned RMH (Medium High Density)  
and south of Cumberland are zoned RM (Medium Density  
Residential).There is a little bit of confusion going back some years that  
Ordinance #15085 purportedly rezoned the property as RM, but it is really  
unclear.It almost with this proposal that it doesn't matter.You think part of  
the is RMH and the balance of it is RM.The property is currently vacant and  
covered with debris because people like to dump there.It was the Montex  
Textile Mill and that Mill stopped operating in 1999 when the large fire  
occurred in 2005.The applicant proposes to have apartment buildings,  
approximately four.It is not a land development.They will attempt to comply  
with RMH zoning.They are asking City Council to consider this request and  
vote for the property to be zoned RMH which is in red on the exhibit in front  
of you.You should know that prior to 2013, this property was zoned BLI  
(Business Light Industrial).It has roots as a factory, it is a manufacturing  
facility.What they are asking tonight is uniform zoning of the entirety of the  
property holdings having been vacant for over 15 years is a beneficial use  
for the local owner such as Dr. Khan that is sitting here tonight.It is  
beneficial.All the property itself if you look at the tax map, you can see the  
property itself is 15 separate tax parcels and together it comes up to just  
shy of 5 1/2 acres. It is 5.33 acres. It has sat vacant and has been that way  
for the last 17 years.The proposal is to rezone the entire property to  
RMH.He does not want to belabor the positive outcomes for the  
neighborhood and the city. The zoning itself even though it has been  
several rezones and you take a look at the streets there to the north and to  
the west. You have some point dense zoning which is not what is keeping  
in the neighborhood to the east and south as you lead down to the creek.  
There is a natural terrain boundary for the property. He stated that he can  
answer question as can Dr. Khan, but they are trying to extend the RMH  
zoning that surrounds the property right now. We don't know there is any  
zoning relief necessary to develop the property if the zoning is changed.  
The intention is to avoid zoning relief and again, it had once been a factory  
then it was a fire and now it is a debris spewed lot. You would have brand  
new housing. He stated that he knows that they get it and already heard it  
once a month and a half ago. He would be glad to answer any question  
since this is a hearing and they allowed him to make the presentation  
without asking questions back and forth.He asked Dr. Khan if he heard  
what he presented, and would that be his testimony if he asked 50  
questions.  
Mr. Khan stated yes.  
Mr. Daryl Hendricks asked Attorney Fitzpatrick if he could tell him how  
many additional residential units will be authorized if this ordinance is  
adopted versus if it were to remain the same. It is his understanding that  
nine of these plots are currently designated as Residential High Density.  
This that correct? Attorney Joseph Fitzpatrick stated approximately that  
many. They don’t know because of the line change in the history of  
Ordinance #15085.It is approximately that much or more than half or  
currently that.  
Mr. Daryl Hendricks stated that it would not require any changes. If you  
know, how many additional units.  
Attorney Joseph Fitzpatrick stated that is correct. They don't have a land  
development plan. The proposal that Dr. Khan is presenting is 140 - 144  
for the entirety of the property.  
Mr. Daryl Hendricks asked if it was not adopted, what will it be at.  
Attorney Joseph Fitzpatrick stated that it is tough for him to answer the  
question because he does not know the exact acreage of the RM versus to  
RMH. He does not know how many units, but the real question is, do you  
have to bring streets in to accommodate housing and extend some of  
those streets for towns or row houses. The way it lays out, it does not lend  
itself to that. That is why they said they are trying to consolidate 15  
separate parcels.  
Mr. Daryl Hendricks stated that initially the plan was to build cottages.  
Single family units.  
Attorney Joseph Fitzpatrick stated that there was a failed plan to do  
something like that. That is not this gentleman's plan. It is just not feasible  
in this market from the standpoint of economics. He knows that is not a key  
zoning consideration. We all watched interest rates and we all know about  
supply chains.  
Mr. Ed Zucal asked if this was granted would it cause current residents that  
are there to be taken by eminent domain.  
Attorney Joseph Fitzpatrick stated that only Council can authorize eminent  
domain. He would advise Dr. Khan that he should not bother trying. No,  
they are not looking at any eminent domain.  
Mr. Ed Zucal stated that there are houses north of Cumberland. The way  
that red is cut out there it goes all the way down to Rye Street.  
Attorney Joseph Fitzpatrick stated that is all part of the 15 tax parcels.  
There is no thought whatever for eminent domain. To the extent it is a  
residential neighborhood. Older, advanced housing stock. Parking will be  
accommodated on the property. It is not going to be a street parking  
headache. he stated that he knows it is a concern.  
Mr. Joshua Siegel thanked Attorney Fitzpatrick for his presentation and  
stated that the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission believes it is consistent  
with the multi module transportation. It is on a major point of egress and a  
fairly significant road. He asked if the traffic study in the works. Any efforts  
to evaluate the impact that additional units will have on the roadways.  
These are fairly congested roads as they are right now.  
Attorney Joseph Fitzpatrick stated that internally Dr. Khan has an Urban  
Planner/Community Planner, Chris Brown who is on your Planning  
Commission. He has recused himself from the Planning Commission.  
With the engineers, those initial questions have been examined. As  
Council can understand, he is asking for a rezoning to allow uses that  
currently prohibit. A full traffic study has not been conducted because we  
don't know yet if we can do this property.  
Mr. Joshua Siegel stated that he wants to understand that there is an  
intention to conduct a full traffic study, considering a high amount of  
residential units obviously creates significant congestion. The intention is  
at least right now, as you described there will be four separate structures  
adding up to potentially 144 units in totality. Are we looking at apartment  
style structures a few stories tall?  
Attorney Joseph Fitzpatrick stated that ultimately that is in the city's hands  
too. That is the range that is estimated. He stated within permitted zoning.  
He stated that he thinks that they can find it very attractive. Preliminary they  
will be three story buildings so they won't be soaring up above.  
Mr. Joshua Siegel stated conceptually speaking, where will you consider  
connecting these units to the actual roadways. You have S. Sixth and S.  
Fifth, where will you perceive it. You are already at and the existing zoning  
around it is consistent of what you are requesting. It is essentially bringing  
it inline and making it congruent with the rest of the neighborhoods, but he  
is curious from a standpoint on how people are going to exit or enter this  
perceived or proposed structure or units.  
Attorney Joseph Fitzpatrick stated that the corner streets on Sixth and  
Cumberland are the keys and he thinks there is an access. It is incoming  
and off Cumberland. No new streets, just an extension of what is there.  
Ms. Cynthia Mota asked if there were any questions from the dais or  
comments from the public.  
Mr. Ken Laudenslager, 721 Cumberland Street, president of the Fairview  
Neighborhood Crime Watch, stated that they object to the rezoning. The  
area north of Cumberland Street has always been there since the early  
1920s and is medium high density. Anything south of Cumberland, is  
single homes. We are talking along Seventh Street. Cumberland and  
Sixth both end at this intersection which are dead end streets. We cannot  
handle any additional traffic now. It is difficult now to go through it with  
parking on both sides. Cumberland and 10th and Cumberland going down  
to Eighth up to Lehigh. On the map on the west side, it came out in the  
parking lot then it was an insert. It was all against private properties, single  
homes. Now, you are going to go and put a three story building in your  
backyards. It is going to put a negative impact by putting additional  
children into Jefferson Elementary which is hard to handle as it is. Crossing  
guards are at Eight and Wyoming and Eighth and St. John. These people  
are going to be crossing before that. When were the polls for single  
housing and cottages that Mr. Hendricks brought up several years ago.  
The proposal came to the Crime Watch first and we approved it. He stated  
that they were in agreement with it. When it got in front of City Council that  
is when the change was made to the whole area to Medium Density, not  
Medium High Density. Look at the map. The other part it goes over and  
comes up and comes back. That is Cumberland Street. That is when the  
Medium High was reduced to Medium. The majority of this property has  
always been medium density once it changed to Business Light Industrial  
before the Allentown Zoning was in effect. This proposal not only ruins the  
neighborhood aspect south of Cumberland Street, it is also impacting the  
school district and it will be excessive traffic on Sixth Street. Cumberland  
Street can handle a little more traffic, but then again, you have a stop sign  
at Eighth and a stop sign on Sixth. Already, we have speeding going right  
passed his house all the time. There are kids playing on this street. Now,  
you want to increase the traffic. That is a bad idea. Fairview Crime Watch  
strongly recommends that you do not approve this zoning change.  
Ms. Cynthia Mota thanked Mr. Laudenslager and asked if there were any  
other comments from the public.  
Attorney Joseph Fitzpatrick stated that he absolutely respects the viewpoint  
of the neighbor. As a homeowner and a representative of a community  
organization, but the fact is, this has been a vacant debris spewed lot for  
17 years. He stated that 22 years ago, it was an active Textile Mill and had  
employees coming and going, trucks coming and going, having docks  
taking materials in. He stated that they cannot dispute the gentleman's  
concerns. They bounded with Trout Creek, steep slopes east and south,  
and while some people came in with some brainy concepts of the past,  
they haven't worked. At least you have a local resident and a business  
person here who is pursuing this. With all respect to the gentleman that  
spoke, it is a dense neighborhood. They have IG Institutional General one  
block north of Good Shepherd with employees coming and going and a  
huge parking deck and ambulances and so forth. It is a busy area. Nothing  
is going to happen here and we have a gentleman saying can we have the  
next step up to zoning. The property is already partially zoned this way.  
We can comply with the city's ordinance. It was a factory not so long ago.  
Ms. Candida Affa asked what was the reason again. They approved the  
cottages. They liked the cottages. Is it financial reasons? She asked if  
Mr. Khan owned the property when it was considered for the cottages.  
Attorney Joseph Fitzgerald stated that he had nothing to do with that  
project.  
Mr. Khan stated that it was a totally different party.  
Ms. Cynthia Mota asked if there were any other questions from the dais.  
She stated that she would like to close the record and the matter would be  
deliberated and voted on tonight at the regularly scheduled City Council  
meeting. She asked if there were any other questions from the public.  
Enactment No: 15809  
ADJOURNED: 6:38 PM