The Bethlehem City Planning Commission had a single case on its Dec. 10 agenda. It was to be a simple vote to pass a recommendation to council. But any change to the zoning ordinance may be contentious. The change concerned the adoption of the Student Housing Overlay.

The issue has already been thoroughly debated in the Planning Commissions August meeting. However, several parties still had much to say on the matter. To recap, the overlay would keep development of properties designated for rental by students to a limited area, mainly surrounding Lehigh University. The plan has been praised by homeowners on the city’s Southside, and decried by developers who see student housing as a money maker.

The proposed changes had been refined since August. Darlene Heller explained the precise sections of the ordinance that would be affected. One of the refinements was a stronger description of what existing student rental properties would be grandfathered due to their being in use prior to the ordinance change: “any preexisting property, regardless of location, would continue to have (accepted) non-conforming usage, as long as the owners keep up with (annual) inspections. Another change would be a requirement for an additional parking space, if five students occupy a property. Any number below five would not require an additional space.

Regular, non-student rental units would also be clearly described in the ordinance.

Heller said the ordinance “is intended to be proactive about future compatibility issues near campus.”

Comission member Matt Malozi disagreed, countering “it looks like it (the ordinance) is already there, Darlene.” He felt the overlay was expanding the reach of student housing, and asked if the effort was simply “attacking symptoms”, not the real issue of a lack of affordable housing in the city.

Planning director Heller countered, “We’ve given this a lot of thought, this is NOT our approach to affordable housing.” She said the city has been brainstorming about “softening the impact students have on family neighborhoods on the Southside”. She added there this a perception that the South Side could be like a small college town.

Malozi reiterated his concerns about using lines on a map to narrowly define an area.

Chairman Melosky called an end to the discussion, saying “We went over all this last time.”

Then it was time for public comment. James Bishop, a landlord, asked the commision to consider the long term affect the overlay could have on the city, questioning how relevant it might be in one hundred years.

Neighbor Tracy Pollard expressed neighborhood ‘s concerns of how the overlay might further increase the density of students in the overlay zone.

Chairman Melosky called for a motion to move the revised ordinance changes to council. The motion was made and approved. Melosky said he was “moved by the discussions and the multiple points of view.” He thanked everyone for the time they devoted to the discussions.