The Bethlehem Historic Conservation Commission voted unanimously to deny a certificate of appropriateness for razing most of the 100 block of East Fourth Street and abutting East Morton Street properties at the April 18 hearing held in the Rotunda.

Representing Lehigh SH Development I were attorney Joseph Bubba and architect Jason Lutz.

The targeted properties include 106, 110-112, 116, 118, 122-124, and 126 E. Fourth St. along with 111-113, 115-117, 119 and 119.5 E. Morton St. The applicants were seeking approval to demolish a series of single-family detached dwellings in order to construct a new infill mixed-use development on properties they plan to purchase. The replacement structure would be seven stories tall with apartments over retail and a ground floor parking garage. The front of the proposed new construction would face East Morton with the back facing East Fourth.

As they were built between 1890 and 1950, Historic Officer Jeff Long described most of the targeted buildings and a stone retaining wall along East Fourth Street as “contributing.” Long viewed the application as “inappropriate.”

Bubba and Lutz, along with Kevin Serfass from Serfass Construction attempted to convince the HCC that the buildings were dilapidated and past their useful life.

They provided an affidavit from James Jefferson, a principal of Morton Street Properties and Praxis Real Estate which own the properties. “Due to the age of the buildings, it would be impractical to properly revitalize these properties in a meaningful way that would make them competitive with new product in the market and have any return on investment,” Jefferson writes, “By merely renovating the buildings, I would suffer a significant financial hardship …”

Bubba tried to make a case that just because the houses were 100 years old, they do not merit the same scrutiny as a “building given some sort of historical characterization and significance.” Bubba quoted a source that described the neighborhood as a mix of steelworker’s residences. Muffled laughter followed when he added, “If you look at other areas, it talks specifically of something that the public might consider historical.”

Around a dozen attendees addressed the commissioners with a strong message to reject the project.

The first was Esther Lee, on behalf of the South Bethlehem Historic Society, adamantly opposing the proposal to demolish the neighborhood to construct a “cookie-cutter student tower” while Bethlehem is in desperate need of affordable housing, said Lee, while suggesting the existing houses would better serve low-income families.

“More and more families are being pushed out of the neighborhood as student housing comes in,” said Anne Felker, representing the Bethlehem Area Public Library. She and the library board were against the development that would abut the Southside branch.

Resident Anna Smith refuted the applicant’s claims of financial hardship and the dilapidated condition of the rental properties based on what they lease for and the city’s inspection requirements.

Another resident, Dr. Kim Carrel-Smith, argued the proposed development would “violate our district’s purposes and guidelines, not in a small way, but in a serious destructive way.”

“The history of the Southside is unique,” said long-time historic district supporter Bill Scheirer. “If this project is not aborted, what will be born is an alien force erupting from the midsection of South Bethlehem, a force that will eventually devour all of South Bethlehem,” he concluded.

Among those voicing opposition to the demolition were Connor Moriarty, Delia Marrero, Eric Frey, Seth Moglen, Dr. Al Wurth, and Connor Alexander.

Although not endorsing or opposing the proposal, Adrienne McNeil, speaking for Lehigh University, reported, denied any affiliation with the development and made clear her employer’s ability to house the school’s student population.

Vice Chairman Craig Evans noted the current owners had purchased the properties starting 2006 through 2015, “which allows for a considerable amount of time to have done some maintenance on these properties.”

Evans said, “We’re looking at a situation that we often encounter called ‘demolition by neglect.’

“As to being contributing, it was said that these were ‘steelworkers’ houses, and that was said with some degree of denigration. That’s what makes this a historic district. This is a district, not a building by building.”

Commissioner Seth Cornish weighed in with, “I have been steadfastly against demolition in our district for some time.” He made the supported motion to deny recommending a COA to demolish the structures.

The Bethlehem HCC is charged with the task of determining if new signs or other alterations to a building’s exterior would be an appropriate fit for the neighborhood in one of three designated historic districts.

Obtaining a certificate of appropriateness is only a first step for business owners and residents in a designated historic district who wish to make alterations to a building’s exterior. The commission’s recommendations are later reviewed, and then voted on by city council before any project is allowed to proceed.