"I'm extremely embarrassed that this is a failed project," he said at the time. "But I have to look beyond that and look at what is the next best use for that site without having 300 neighbors here."
That next best use, according to Atiyeh, was four three-story apartment buildings, totaling 102 one- and two-bedroom luxury apartments, with a monthly rental of up to $1,295.
Surrounding neighbors had a different view. Englishman Mark Blomfeld, a U.S. resident for the past seven years, complained, "We're being asked to take it on the chin because a previous business idea isn't quite what [Atiyeh] wants it to be." Bill Malkames countered, "Every property has to have a viable use."
Twenty-six exhibits and five witnesses later, the Zoning Hearing Board declined to give Atiyeh a variance that would enable him to market luxury apartments, with Ken Kraft in dissent.
Now, Atiyeh has a new proposal that needs no variance from the Zoning Hearing Board. He's proposing a 4-story, 125-bed inpatient drug and alcohol detox center, along with a psychiatric hospital and 46 parking spaces.
That psychiatric hospital will likely be full with Bethlehem residents who are apoplectic over Atiyeh's proposal. When it was just luxury apartments, Atiyeh's zoning request attracted Senior Judge Bill Moran, former Northampton County Council member Greg Zebrowski and City Council member J. William Reynolds.
Bethlehem's DCED Director, Joseph Kelly, has already stated, "There isn't much power to stop it, at least with the zoning laws." Atiyeh denies he is trying to pressure City officials into accepting his luxury apartment idea, but has coincidentally contributed $3,000 to Mayor John Callahan's campaign fund over the past year.
Atiyeh's plan is on the agenda for consideration by the Planning Commission on August 18 at 4 PM.
38 comments:
He is a real jerk off. Maybe Callahan should have it built on his street. Well Johnny I hope the campaign contribution was worth it because a lot of homeowners will have their houses on the market.
You are making the Allentown dream come to Bethlehem.
Thanks a lot!
and what, precisely, would you have callahan do?
If the use is allowed, its allowed. Game Set Match.
Didn't a famous famer once say he'd build a guarry if not granted building wishes?
Allentown should just annex Bethlehem. That would save a lot of time. Bethlehem is taking a slow motion trip to becoming a slum. Annexation would just speed up the process.
Atiyeh contributes to all politicians, D's & R's, he's as slimy as them and does not give a shit about anyone but himself / themselves...
The reason why Atiyeh has moved into the drug re-hab and work release business is because that is a business where people have few choices about what is next. His assisted living business is falling flat on its face, in the era of increasing supply and lower demand, with a ton of competition in every corner of the county.
His habit of hiring people off the street and paying minimum wages, no benefits and a lifespan of maybe 3 months on the job has earned him a reputation of being a senior slum lord. SO now he wants a chunk of court ordered re-hab business, because in this business people have no choice and he can get away with his filthy business practices. When was the last time you washed your hands Abe?
Trish
"If the use is allowed, its allowed. Game Set Match."
You are correct.
"Atiyeh contributes to all politicians, D's & R's, he's as slimy as them "
Angle took money from GEO when they wanted to move into the Slate Bel, and everyone had a fit, even though the County really had no say in whether they would come. He has also taken money from Atiyeh, who does want a treatment center. Whether it is Angle or Callahan, I think it is wrong for politicians to take money from people who want to do business with their municipality. Notwithstanding the First Amendment, it is illegal in some jurisdictions.
I also have to wonder about the fairness of the press, which likes to insist it is neutral. Angle's GEO contribution was big news, but $3,000 from Atiyeh to Callahan over a year gets no mention.
"and what, precisely, would you have callahan do?"
Refuse to take money from somebody who obviously wants something.
Callahan takes cash. This is hearsay of course, but very believable, especially after hearing a developer's slip of the tongue. I would welcome any legal investigation of this allegation.
So, Bernie, you would rather politicians accept money from people who live outside the areas they represent? You rail against unions quite a bit. You would prefer a national union dump money into local elections (like Wisconsin) to subvert the will of the local electorate? Isn't that what happened with Gracedale?
Raising money is a necessary evil for politicians. No one wants to do it, but if they want signs printed up, literature mailed, and viability in the mind of the public, they need money. Are the sums that these national blokes raise nauseating? Of course. It's repugnant and offensive. But donating money is tantamount to free speech, and if we believe in the Constitution (Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech..)we shouldn't pass any law against raising money from anyone who is a citizen of the United States. There are a lot of necessary evils in the practice of our representative republic (flag burning for one).
Campaign finance needs to be reformed. It would make sense for all contributions to be received through a central authority, and evenly distributed to all seeking office. Local elections, state elections, county elections and US elections would receive their own separate deposits, and those deposits would be doled out evenly to candidates regardless of political affiliation. Its the only way to have an even playing field and would curtail policy making from being purchased at the store.
Trish
"So, Bernie, you would rather politicians accept money from people who live outside the areas they represent? "
Atiyeh does not reside in Bethlehem. He is outside the area that Callahan represents. And yes, I would rather see pols accept money from people who actually live in the district. Russ Shade had such a proposal when he ran for state rep.
But that was not what really bothered me. What I stated is that Callahan was talking money from someone who wants something from the City. He should have had the sense to say no.
I understand money is a necessary evil and hear that argument all the time, but that's no justification for accepting a donation from someone who wants something. It is wrong, no matter who does it, whether it is Dent, Morganelli, Angle, Callahan or whomever.
Trish: No offense, but as Americans we shouldn't want a central authority collecting, distributing, doling out, deciding what and where money goes involving elections (or anything else for that matter). If the government ran everything and money went out to whomever ran, everyone would run (with limited accountability because of the sheer numbers of people running) and no one would contribute, because why would I want to give money to a central authority and have no idea who is receiving it.
Government can't solve our problems, Trish. When they try, the fail and fail miserably.
I did not say that the central authority should be a government entity. It shouldnt. Until the playing turf is level, our form of democratic government will continue to be plagued by those who buy whole lobster vs those that buy tunafish
Trish
You really sure it's allowed in that zoning district?
I'm not sure it is.
Many developers use this tactic. I’ve been to many meetings when a developer will present what doesn’t meet Zoning, and then present an alternative plan that technically meets it, but is clearly undesirable. Sometimes the new nonconforming proposal is actually a good one that simply wasn’t thought of when the ZO was adopted or, and a municipality is receptive to variances or text changes. Other times it still is rejected and the bluff is called: sometimes the developer really would build the alternative, but usually the alternative is less lucrative for their bottom line so they backtrack and develop Plan C. Either way, all ZO’s have “by right” uses, and if you own the property and it technically meets the language then a developer has the right to build. Not to be crass, but if you don’t like it then buy it. Words, have meaning ….at least until lawyers argue about it. I still find it interesting that Beth Twp had voted 4-1 that a prison was a treatment center, despite the ZOs definition of “a use (other than a prison…)”. That said, the elected/appointed officials have to have their eye on the long term results in deciding how hard to resist or negotiate, as once it is built it changes the character of the area for decades.
Regarding Trish’s comment, “Its the only way to have an even playing field.” Just yesterday I read an article that referenced “Arizona Free Enterprise Club v Bennett”. “Writing for the five conservatives, Roberts struck down this system: Because it was intended to ‘level the playing field,’ he argued, it was a violation of the First Amendment. ‘Laws … that inhibit robust and wide-open political debate without sufficient justification cannot stand,’ he concluded.” I am not saying that campaign finance (esp. higher office) is not a serious issue. I just point out that the current court would not support a “leveling” for the pure sake of “leveling”.
Regarding, Bernie’s comment, “that's no justification for accepting a donation from someone who wants something.” Going back to Bethlehem Twp, the perception is so blatant with developer Zawarski and Abe’s wife running for the governing Board, as well as who has contributed to Barnard. But, all one needs to do is look at any campaign finance report for higher office (D or R) and see the nature of buying “access” is part of the system (whether you like it or not). Even look at some of the big contributors to various “Tea Party” organizations (e.g., the Kochs, though they also gave to Dent).
I just loved the overall idea of your blog. Really impressed with the thought.
My deepest regards!
Trish, pretty much the system you envision is Marxism. The government touts "economic justice" as redistribution of wealth (in the form of entitlement programs), "social justice" as a means to control the distribution of services the government provides and who they choose to protect (hence no hate-crime charges against minorities against whites), and even "environmental justice" to place an even bigger burden on business to deal with the fringe environmental lunatics. Robin Hood also believed in his brand of justice, but all that really means that it's ok to steal and not earn. I never thought I would live to see the day that the concept of justice could be so perverted.
Ask England right now how producing an underclass of youth raised on entitlements is working out for them. We are getting there, slowly but surely.
12:21,
you missed my point east , west, north and south.
Campaign finance reforms are desperately needed. The current system does not work at all, unless you applaud the behavior of buying legislation, policy and ordinances.
I was not talking at all about entitlements
Trish
11:51, I believe the area is zoned institutional and that it would include a detox center as a permitted use.
Former Luzerne County Juvenile Court Judge Mark Ciavarella, 61, accepted nearly $1 million from a developer who built the detention facility, prosecutors said.
Does Abe know this guy?
Trish/brenda, most of your posts are all over the map, east, west, north and south.
To the immature anon poster who keeps using the backslash keystroke to name me "Brenda" and attack every comment I make on this blog:
SIGN YOUR NAME
but doing that would reveal your identity, and you cant do that because you are a petrified little weasel behind a computer screen whose only accomplishment in life is to anonymously bash other people. Putting your name to your opinion is way too scary for pathetic people like you...afraid of your own shadow and many more! It cracks me up that you are sooo fearful of retaliation, that I guess you cant sign your name. My advice to this loser:
GET A LIFE
Trish
i would say the same thing to 6:01. I have never suggested that Abe has broken any law, as you just did. If you want to make a charge like that and can't sign your name, don't bother posting here.
same o same o in the most corrupt administration bethlum has ever seen. how many people can this mayor sleep with?
and when the boys owned by the mayor approve it the rubber stamp council led by "what ever you want johnny" donchez will also approve.
Council would not even need to approve it. The only other approval needed would be planning commission.
Let me clarify, the only approval needed is the planning commission.
That is correct. Perhaps the Mayor figured he might as well take $3,000 from Atiyeh bc he does not make the call in this matter.
It the way politics has often worked in history. Not always as much at the local level (sometimes it is easy to refuse donations at the local level), but it happens. It's more so for Congressional races. Most R's will get a lot of business contributions, and most D's will get labor oriented. Even Rep. Dent. His top contributions for the current 2011-12 cycle are all business. In the 2010 race 45% ($1,092,300) were from business oriented PACs, and Callahan had 19% ($381,734) from PACs. This is not a critique, just a basic fact. Rep. Dent's reporting has been 100% transparent.
Decades ago, a political scientist Harold Laswell coined the phrase that politics is the study of the power/influence of "who gets what, when, and how." Access is a part of the game.
Bernie -- on the campaign contributions....
You're right. The only real solution is to remove all money from the equation by making campaigns publicly financed. It is absurd that campaign finance law sets up a situation where a politician is forced to raise money and criticized if he can't raise enough of it.......and then, also, is criticized for where it came from.
Nobody refuses campaign contributions. Maybe once or twice to make sure they're seen, but it doesn't really happen much. Sure, there's always somebody who turned down a Mendelson check and you can always point to one or two people, but it doesn't happen in any large scale.
That's why the reporting is important.
But a better system would be to entirely remove the money from the process. Public finance of all campaigns. That's the way to go.
Institutional, allowed by right, the Planning commission can't deny it either, only suggest things, it's a done deal.
Hows that 7 years of citizenship doing for you now? It was explained in the meetings that it was one of the uses that are "by-right" and you didn't listen, just got caught up in zabrowski's nonsense
It's a shame, maybe if they changed the zoning map when they were supposed to, it would be residential there... oh yeah wait, they STILL HAVE NOT DONE THAT...
The Planning Commission is responsible for getting the new Zoning Ordinance before City Council. They did not do it in a timely manner. It's a part-time job. They are too busy with life, theirs. Where is their interest in the city and its residents? Now they can eat crow for sitting on their hands, for years!
Te Planning Comm'n recommended the new ZO to City Council several months ago. I do not believe they dragged their feet. Moreover, if it had gone to City Council right away, there would not have been as much room for all the public input which did occur. Planning Director Darlene Heller did recommend several changes as a result of that input. Now City Council is doing its own due diligence. I do think this is being handled appropriately. I may not agree with everything in there, but have no objections to the process, which is rare for me.
orn
Post a Comment