Lehigh Valley Developer Abraham Atiyeh, of Catty Holdings LLC, has dropped his appeal of Catasauqua's waterfront overlay district zoning revision.

"They basically no longer have a case against the borough," borough Solicitor Jeffrey Dimmich told The Press last week.

In a marathon June 18 session before the Catasauqua Zoning Hearing Board, Catty Holdings objected to the borough ordinance passed in April that allows apartment units to be constructed on the Front Street property owned, at the time, by FL Smidth. The borough passed the ordinance to allow potential developers of the land the borough intended to buy from FL Smidth to build high-end apartments on the property.

Prior to this new ordinance, apartments were only allowed as live-work units defined as an apartment above a commercial space.

Catty Holdings, owned by Abraham Atiyeh, objected to the modification of the rules because of the density of the apartments on the property. Catty Holdings owns property on Bridge Street and other parcels in the immediate area. Attorneys and Atiyeh himself argued that high-density housing would impact parking which is already a problem in this area of the downtown commercial district.

The number bandied about by Atiyeh and his attorney, William Malkames, was 192 apartments. That specific number had been brought up in a council meeting during discussions about a proposal from developer Weston Solutions Inc. that included a design for 192 high-end apartment units. However, it was revealed during the zoning hearing the ordinance revision that allows apartments without first-floor commercial units does not contain any changes to the existing density allowances already present in the zoning ordinance for that area of the borough.

"It was an oversight," Dimmich said. 'We asked for specific numbers, but none were ever provided and we needed to get the ordinance out so we could meet the developer's time frame."

That developer, Weston Solutions, has backed out of the deal, so the borough now owns the property without any agreements in place for land development.

"The density calculation remained the same as the original Waterfront Overlay District (WOD) which would be 84 total apartment units on the property," Dimmich said.

Once the lower number was revealed during the June hearing, Atiyeh became less concerned about a parking problem.

"Catty Holdings agreed that 84 units with appropriate parking would not unduly harm their property," Dimmich said. "At this point they really don't have an argument, so they withdrew their appeal."

Dimmich did caution that the borough council could pass a new ordinance increasing or decreasing the number of apartment units.

"If a new developer comes along and needs some changes to make a new plan work, council could pass a new ordinance to allow a project to proceed," he said.

No developer has come forward with a plan or a proposal for the property. No zoning changes will be made until a new plan is developed.