BethlehemForward@BethlehemNY.gov<\/a> within the past year. It was also posted on Facebook and Instagram. VanLuven said the announcement will also be posted on the town\u2019s website.<\/p>\n\u201cThe Town Board has listened carefully to the community\u2019s feedback \u2026 not just to what you\u2019ve been saying, but to the concerns behind those comments,\u201d VanLuven said in the announcement. He thanked the \u201chundreds\u201d of residents who attended meetings, submitted comments and participated in the process. \u201cYour input has been an important part of this review,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
In a separate email sent to individual residents on July 7 at approximately 4 p.m., Van Luven repeated his announcement and added further insight into his thinking. Colleen Scott, a Glenmont resident who has repeatedly spoken against the zoning code amendments at Town Board public comment sessions, said she and numerous other residents received that email. She believes it was sent to residents who had sent email comments to the Town Board regarding the zoning amendments.<\/p>\n
In that email, VanLuven reiterated that, based on concerns heard from the community, he and the Town Board are pausing the zoning code update this summer. He added, “This will give additional time for reviewing key elements of the Planning Board\u2019s proposal and for making recommendations this fall to respond to the themes we have heard.\u201d<\/p>\n
Van Luven went on to specify four issues in which he said he is \u201cparticularly interested in addressing, including traffic, open space, over development, and building standards.” On traffic, he said a Feura Bush corridor traffic study needs to be undertaken \u201cto better understand conditions today and identify potential improvements that could be undertaken in partnership with NYS DOT (Feura Bush is a State road).\u201d<\/p>\n
As for overdevelopment, VanLuven stated, \u201cWe need to lower density limits in the Low Density Residential (LDR) district to better reflect the limits that are in effect today\u201d<\/p>\n
For months, residents have voiced opposition to an amendment that would reclassify the town\u2019s residential neighborhoods as \u201cLow Density Residential.\u201d That change would modify the mix of single-family homes and multifamily units in new conservation subdivisions and allow for a higher housing density.<\/p>\n
Shortly before the town\u2019s July 8 meeting, roughly 30 residents in red shirts stood at Delmar\u2019s Four Corners for about an hour, holding signs opposing the amendments and waving as passing drivers honked in support.<\/p>\n
The group proceeded to the Town Board meeting, at which they gave the town a petition with about 1,400 signatures. The petition referred to the growing opposition across neighborhoods and asked the town to make decisions using \u201ccomplete local data, careful planning and a full understanding of their long-term impacts before they are adopted.\u201d It urged the town to undertake these studies before adoption.<\/p>\n
Once again, petitioners cited concerns with infrastructure strain; school overcrowding; public safety and emergency services; traffic congestion; and the loss of neighborhood character and open space.<\/p>\n
At the meeting, approximately 100 people in red shirts attended in opposition and about a dozen voiced their concerns, similar to those raised in the petition, during the meeting\u2019s public comment period.<\/p>\n
Glenmont resident Phil Stevens, who has been active in opposing the amendments, said, \u201cWe want to be involved in the process. We don\u2019t want to get back in September and have to start this process all over again.\u201d<\/p>\n
Stevens said the grassroots effort opposed to increased density will continue.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere\u2019s a pause, but we\u2019re not going to pause. We are going to keep getting signatures, talking to residents and moving forward,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
At the June 24 board meeting, some 400 residents wearing red protested the change, citing concerns about traffic safety and congestion, and about a change in the character of the neighborhoods along the Feura Bush Road corridor.<\/p>\n
In an interview, board member Thomas Schnurr said, \u201cIt was clear, hearing from many members of the public, we didn\u2019t have the support to move forward.\u201d He supported VanLuven\u2019s decision to pause the process.<\/p>\n
VanLuven said, \u201cAs I talked to board members there was a consistent theme I was hearing, so that\u2019s the direction we are going in.\u201d<\/p>\n
The supervisor said board member Maureen Cunningham, who had previously pushed to move forward with the LDR changes as recommended by the town\u2019s Planning Board, also supported the pause.<\/p>\n
In a written statement, board member David DeCancio said, \u201cThis is a step in the right direction. Our priority now has to be a transparent, deliberate, community-driven process moving forward.\u201d<\/p>\n
Both Schnurr and Van Luven, in interviews, agreed that the board\u2019s focus will be the LDR designation and definition.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s the LDR designation that is most unsettled at this point,\u201d Schnurr said. He added that the proposed amendments contain many \u201cpositive parts” such as streamlining the approval process.<\/p>\n
VanLuven said any changes will need to be assessed by the town\u2019s planning staff to determine whether they have implications for other sections. While announcing a \u201cpause,” he expects the Planning Department to use the next two months to \u201cpull together recommendations for the board and community, and not just wait and do nothing for two months.\u201d<\/p>\n
VanLuven is also anxious to adopt a new zoning code after changes to SEQRA law at the state level left a vacuum in municipal regulatory authority over residential developments. Those SEQRA changes removed SEQRA as a tool that municipalities may use to assess residential developments. As a municipality, the town can include those requirements in its zoning code, which the proposed amendments would address.<\/p>\n
VanLuven also said, \u201cWe need to come up with a proposal to address the problems we have been hearing [from residents].\u201d<\/p>\n
Both Stevens and Scott said they are \u201ccautiously optimistic.\u201d<\/p>\n
Scott said the concern about overall density remains. She noted the four variances granted this month by the town\u2019s Zoning Board of Appeals to a developer building a senior housing facility on Rockefeller Road in Delmar. She said this demonstrates why raising density by any number is problematic. The developer won its appeal to build a 90-unit senior housing facility, exceeding the current 68-unit maximum by 22 units.<\/p>\n
\u201cWith variances, you can get right back to the density we are concerned about,\u201d Scott said.<\/p>\n
Stevens said the ultimate goal is to keep the density at current levels, but to encourage \u201csmart growth” like building housing along main corridors in areas where transportation exists, such as Vista Technology Park near the Walmart or the Route 32 CDTA bus stop.<\/p>\n
Board member David DeCancio has spoken in favor of such a plan at prior meetings.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is not about stopping growth. It\u2019s about getting growth right,\u201d said DeCancio.<\/p>\n
While Scott is \u201chappy\u201d the board implemented a \u201cpause\u201d as residents requested, concerns remain about whether traffic studies will be conducted.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere\u2019s a real hesitancy to trust what\u2019s being said,\u201d she stated.<\/p>\n
Schnurr said he will advocate for conducting housing needs and traffic studies before moving forward with amendments. He said those studies cannot be completed before September. He noted that any traffic study would need to be conducted while school is in session to ensure a realistic analysis.<\/p>\n
But VanLuven, while supporting a traffic study, believes such a study has no bearing on density decisions. He said a traffic study will \u201cgive baseline information about the traffic situation today,\u201d but he disputed the fact that it would affect the LDR decision.<\/p>\n
\u201cNo study will say the proper density for LDR zoning, because all development carries different numbers of additional cars.<\/p>\n
\u201cA traffic study, in my view, is a parallel process that will get a better handle on what the issues are on Feura Bush Road so we can get a better handle on addressing the problems and anticipating future challenges that may be addressed,\u201d VanLuven explained.<\/p>\n
Stevens said to do traffic studies after amending the zoning code is the wrong approach.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s like planning for a bad Woodstock concert,\u201d he said. \u201cWhen Feura Bush Road, which we were told is at 85% capacity, is at full capacity, is a developer going to pay for a new road?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cResponsible, community-driven growth starts with Bethlehem-centric data that reflects today\u2019s realities and meaningful community input,\u201d DeCancio said. He also included considerations of infrastructure and respect for neighborhoods.<\/p>\n
VanLuven and Schnurr both thanked residents for their participation.<\/p>\n
\u201cI am grateful for the residents who made themselves heard,\u201d Schnurr said.<\/p>\n
\u201cI hope the people who participated come forward when the new code is considered in September,\u201d VanLuven said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe best decisions happen when the people who live with the outcomes have a meaningful seat at the table,\u201d DeCancio said.<\/p>\n
This story was updated at 2 p.m. to add comments from other meeting attendees.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"DELMAR\u00a0\u2014 In multiple announcements made this week, including at the July 9 Town Board meeting, Bethlehem Supervisor David…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":242251,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[153,155,154,744,139,79028],"class_list":["post-242250","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-bethlehem","tag-bethlehem","tag-bethlehem-headlines","tag-bethlehem-news","tag-government","tag-news","tag-spotlightnews"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/242250","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=242250"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/242250\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/242251"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=242250"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=242250"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=242250"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}